European Invasion

What’s Worst for Whites? The Jewish Principle That Explains Stabby Somalis and the Mud-Flood

/13 Comments/in , /by

Its night-life. That’s what London used to be known for. Nowadays, London is known for its knife-life. In October 2025, a White man called Wayne Broadhurst was stabbed to death in London by an Afghan Muslim. His murder was completely ignored by Britain’s political elite and provoked no anguished commentary in the mainstream media. In April 2026, two Jewish men have been stabbed but not killed in London by someone reported to be a Somali Muslim. Britain’s political elite have immediately responded with outrage and the mainstream media are full of anguished commentary about poor persecuted Jews. The Jewish law minister Sarah Sackman has portentously intoned that “An attack on British Jews is an attack on Britain itself.”

A Hebrew hammers the White West: Jews hate Christianity because it represents White Europe (image from the Guardian)

In fact, an attack on Jews is an attack on dedicated enemies of Britain. And Sackman knows that perfectly well. Her close colleague Lord Hermer, Britain’s “anti-fascist” Jewish attorney-general, enthusiastically participated in lawfare against British soldiers that was later exposed as based entirely on lies. Hermer and Sackman are still overseeing lawfare against soldiers in the Special Forces. In other words, they hate Britain and have always sought to undermine the welfare of British Whites.

There’s an irony in the knife-attack on the two Jews in London that will go completely unremarked in the mainstream. The attack was created by Jews themselves, because they are directly responsible for the flooding of Western nations with alien and unassimilable groups like Somalis, Afghans and Pakistanis. Those three groups are both non-White and Muslim, so what’s not to like for Jews?

White costumes for an anti-White legal elite: Sarah Sackman, Shabana Mahmood and Richard Hermer (image from Wikipedia)

As enemies of Britain, Jews have imported non-White Muslims as footsoldiers in the Jewish war against the White West. In other words, Jews imported Muslims to harm the White and historically Christian majority whose ancestors they blame for millennia of undeserved persecution. And you don’t have to take my word for that. No, take the word of Jews themselves. Here’s the Jewish “peace activist” Uri Avnery explaining why Jews love Muslim immigration:

As is well known, under Muslim rule the Jews of Spain enjoyed a bloom the like of which the Jews did not enjoy anywhere else until almost our time. Poets like Yehuda Halevy wrote in Arabic, as did the great Maimonides. In Muslim Spain, Jews were ministers, poets, scientists. In Muslim Toledo, Christian, Jewish and Muslim scholars worked together and translated the ancient Greek philosophical and scientific texts. That was, indeed, the Golden Age. How would this have been possible, had the Prophet decreed the “spreading of the faith by the sword”?

What happened afterwards is even more telling. When the Catholics re-conquered Spain from the Muslims, they instituted a reign of religious terror. The Jews and the Muslims were presented with a cruel choice: to become Christians, to be massacred or to leave. And where did the hundreds of thousand of Jews, who refused to abandon their faith, escape? Almost all of them were received with open arms in the Muslim countries. The Sephardi (“Spanish”) Jews settled all over the Muslim world, from Morocco in the west to Iraq in the east, from Bulgaria (then part of the Ottoman Empire) in the north to Sudan in the south. Nowhere were they persecuted. They knew nothing like the tortures of the Inquisition, the flames of the auto-da-fe, the pogroms, the terrible mass-expulsions that took place in almost all Christian countries, up to the Holocaust. […]

Every honest Jew who knows the history of his people cannot but feel a deep sense of gratitude to Islam, which has protected the Jews for fifty generations, while the Christian world persecuted the Jews and tried many times “by the sword” to get them to abandon their faith. (“Muhammad’s Sword,” Scoop, 23rd October 2006)

Avnery’s pro-Muslim, anti-Christian attitudes have been completely mainstream among Jews for many decades:

But the central Jewish role in Muslim migration will not be discussed in the anguished commentary about that stabby Somali in London. Whilst slathering Jews with sympathy and sycophancy, the mainstream media will not ask why Britain has so many Somalis. That very interesting question has a very simple answer. Britain has so many Somalis thanks to the little-known Barbara Roche, an intensely ethnocentric Jew who served as minister of immigration under the dedicated shabbos-goy Tony Blair:

A Semitic supporter of stabby Somalis: the migration-maven Barbara Roche unfolds the “British story of migration” in 2011

The most incredible revelations [about New Labour’s conspiracy to open Britain’s borders] concern Barbara Roche, a little-known MP who was immigration minister between 1999 and 2001. During this period, she quietly adopted policies — with Mr Blair’s approval — that changed the face of the UK. […] Like [Jack] Straw, Blair was careful never publicly to mention the rising number of immigrants from India and Pakistan who could now enter Britain. Nor did he consider how to provide housing, schools and healthcare for an additional 300,000 people arriving a year.

Least of all did either of them question whether the immigrants would have any effect on the lives of the British working class. (Nine years later, a report by the Migration Advisory Committee found that 23 British workers had been displaced for every 100 foreign-born workers employed here.)

Could this chicanery get any worse? It did — with the appointment of Barbara Roche as Junior Immigration Minister. Blair’s only instruction to her was to deport bogus asylum seekers. But Roche wasn’t playing. In her first conversation with a senior immigration official, she was candid: ‘I think asylum seekers should be allowed to stay. Removal takes too long, and it’s emotional.’ Even the word ‘bogus,’ she maintained, created a negative feeling.

‘It was clear Roche wanted more immigrants to come to Britain,’ recalled Stephen Boys-Smith, the new head of the immigration directorate. ‘She didn’t see her job as controlling entry, but by looking at the wider picture “in a holistic way” she wanted us to see the benefit of a multicultural society.’ Jack Straw never openly contradicted Roche — it simply wasn’t worth the risk of alienating the Labour Party. So she set to work on a speech, in which she outlined the advantages of reducing controls to immigration and portrayed asylum seekers as skilled labour. She didn’t discuss what she was going to say with Straw. […]

‘Well done, Barbara,’ Blair told Roche soon [after the speech]. Despite its controversial content, her speech passed relatively unnoticed. But migrants quickly grasped its importance and passed the news on to their friends and family across the world. Labour was letting more people in, they told them, and — unlike other European countries — Britain would provide benefits and state housing. […]

One of Roche’s legacies was hundreds more migrants camped in squalor in Sangatte, outside Calais, where they tried to smuggle themselves onto lorries. News about the new liberalism — and in particular the welfare benefits — now began attracting Somalis who’d previously settled in other EU countries. Although there was no historic or cultural link between Somalia and Britain, more than 200,000 came. Since most were untrained and would be dependent on welfare, the Home Office could have refused them entry. But they were granted ‘exceptional leave to remain’. (Conman Blair’s cynical conspiracy to deceive the British people and let in 2million migrants against the rules, The Daily Mail, 26th February 2016)

The man arrested for stabbing the two Jews in London is reported to be a 45-year-old “born in Somalia who came to the UK ‘lawfully as a child.’” In other words, he’s one of the Somalis imported into Britain without any kind of democratic mandate or any kind of consent by the White majority. Since his arrival, he has enriched Britain in a typically Somali way: he has a “history of serious violence and mental health issues.”

Two sides of the same Cohen

Barbara Roche flooded Britain with low-IQ, high-criminality Somalis like him because she thought it would be good for Jews. She didn’t want to help Somalis: she wanted to harm Whites. In short, she wanted revenge on Whites. And again, you don’t have to take my word for that. No, take the word of Roche herself. In 2001, she told a Guardian interview that her “parents were part Spanish, Portuguese, Polish and Russian [Jews], and she had entered politics — she still emphasises this today — to combat anti-semitism and xenophobia in general.” In one speech in 2000 she was clearly gloating about her ability to open Britain’s borders and harm the White majority. She was the proud descendant of Jews who had been insulted more than a century ago by a xenophobic White Briton. Note how she begins this section of her speech with a blatant lie:

Britain has always been a nation of migrants. There were in practice almost no immigration controls prior to the beginning of the 20th century. The 1905 Aliens Act was a direct response to Jewish immigration and it is difficult to deny that it was motivated in part by anti-Semitism. Major [William] Evans-Gordon, an MP, speaking in support of the legislation, said: “It is the poorest and least fit of these people who move, and it is the residuum of these again who come to and are let in this country[…] Hon[ourable] Members [of Parliament] opposite do not live in daily terror of being turned into the street to make room for an unsavoury Pole [i.e. Polish Jew].”

I expect Major Evans Gordon would be spinning in his grave if he knew that their descendant would not only be Immigration Minister but would be standing before you today making this speech. (“UK migration in a global economy,” Draft Speech by Barbara Roche MP, Immigration Minister, London, 11th September 2000)

Roche’s Jewish lie about Britain being a “nation of migrants” echoed an older Jewish lie about America being a “nation of immigrants.” But Jews don’t smoke their own supply: those lies aren’t peddled in Israel, whose firmly closed borders and determinedly Judeocentric laws reflect the true meaning of “nation.” The word comes from the Latin verb nasci, meaning “to be born,” because a nation is bonded by blood, by shared ancestry, religion, culture and language. In that sense, Britain, America, France, Australia and many other Western countries have ceased to be true nations, because they have been flooded with alien and unassimilable non-Whites by their treacherous, Jewish-controlled elites. Israeli politics is governed by the principle of “What’s best for Jews?” Western politics is governed by the principle of “What’s worst for Whites?” But those two principles are in fact two sides of the same Cohen: Jews like Barbara Roche believe that what’s worst for Whites is simultaneously what’s best for Jews.

22 Dead Goyim vs Two Dead Jews: the mud-flood matters only when it harms Jews

That explains why Jews have imported millions of Muslims and other non-Whites into the West against the will of the White majority. Even as they imported those “natural allies,” Jews demonized White opposition as racist and xenophobic, drafting and imposing harsh laws to suppress White resistance and intimidate Whites into silence. Non-Whites have been murdering, raping and exploiting Whites for decades, but that was seen by Jews as a feature, not a bug, of non-White migration. Now that their “natural allies” are turning on them too, Jews are posing as innocent victims and demanding more power and privilege. They’re also pumping out risible lies. Here is the proudly homosexual and intensely ethnocentric Jew Jonathan Sacerdoti addressing gullible goyim in the cuckservative Spectator:

Jews represent the freedoms and values of the West, not because we exist freely thanks to them, but because many of those values are actually ours, embraced and adopted by Christianity and wider secular society. That is why these enemies of civilisation hate us so much, and why their attacks on us are actually just one small part of their broader attacks on the entire West. (“Why Can’t the West Defend Jews?”, The Spectator, 15th December 2025)

Jonathan Sacerdoti, a proudly homosexual and intensely ethnocentric Jew

In fact, the true “values” of Jews are ethnocentrism and authoritarianism. That’s why Jews have attacked and undermined Western “freedoms” like free speech, free enquiry and free association. The hugely celebrated — and highly over-rated — Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza would have been murdered for blasphemy by his fellow Jews if he had been unable to seek refuge among gentiles in seventeenth-century Holland. In the twenty-first century, Holland is like the rest of the West: Whites there have the freedom to consume the most revolting forms of pornography, but not the freedom to investigate and speak the truth about racial differences. Realism about race is “hate speech,” you see. And who invented the concept of “hate speech”? That very interesting question was answered more than seventy years ago by a clear-sighted Catholic priest called Father Leonard Feeney:

SHOULD HATE BE OUTLAWED?

Most Americans, hearing this question, would answer promptly, “Yes, by all means, hate should be outlawed!” Their eagerness to reply can be accounted for all too easily. During the last decade and a half, they have been pounded with a propaganda barrage calculated to leave them in a state of dazed affability toward the whole world. Those advertising techniques that are normally used to encourage Americans to be choosy in matters of soap and toothpaste are now being enlisted to persuade them that there is no such thing as a superior product in matters of culture and creed. On billboards, on bus and subway posters, in newspapers and magazines, through radio and television broadcasts, Americans are being assured and reassured, both subtly and boldly, that “Bigotry is fascism … Only Brotherhood can save our nation … We must be tolerant of all!”

The long-range effects of this campaign are even now evident. It is producing the “spineless citizen”: the man who has no cultural sensibilities; who is incapable of indignation; whose sole mental activity is merely an extension of what he reads in the newspaper or sees on the television screen; who faces moral disaster in his neighborhood, political disaster in his country, and an impending world catastrophe with a blank and smiling countenance. He has only understanding for the enemies of his country. He has nothing but kind sentiments for those who would destroy his home and family. He has an earnest sympathy for anyone who would obliterate his faith. He is universally tolerant. He is totally unprejudiced. If he has any principles, he keeps them well concealed, lest in advocating them he should seem to indicate that contrary principles might be inferior. He is, to the extent of his abilities, exactly like the next citizen, who, he trusts, is trying to be exactly like him: a faceless, characterless putty-man. […]

As surely and securely as the Jews have been behind Freemasonry, or Secularism, or Communism, they are behind the “anti-hate” drive. Not that this movement represents the fruition of Talmudic doctrine. The Jews are advocating tolerance only for its destructive value — destructive, that is, of the Catholic Church. On their part, they still keep alive their racial rancors and antipathies. Their Talmud, for example, still teaches that Christ was a brazen impostor, and gives an unprintably blasphemous account of his parentage and birth. And as the Christmas season just past should have taught us, the Jews, for all their Brotherhood talk, have not in the least abandoned their resolute program to make all acknowledgments of Christmas disappear from the public and social life of the nation.

The secret of the Jews’ success is, of course, that they can practice such private hate while promoting public “love,” and not be accused of inconsistency. For, as always, they are running the show mainly from behind the scenes. They get their message across by means of co-operative Gentiles. And there are probably more such Gentiles now available — both the willing kind and the kind willing to be duped — than ever before in history. As a further good fortune, the Jewish directors of America’s entertainment industry can now guarantee that one Brotherhood spokesman, well-placed (e.g., behind a microphone or before a television camera), is able to influence Americans by the millions.

And the Jews’ campaign is succeeding. We have every reason to be alarmed at its success. American Catholics, even those not actively taking part in the tolerance talk, are now kept in line by the omnipresent threat of being accused of hate, bigotry, and intolerance. (“Should Hate Be Outlawed?”, The Point, edited by Fr Leonard Feeney, July 1955)

In 1955 the Catholic Father Feeney was exactly like the Catholic Michael E. Jones in 2026. Father Feeney correctly recognized that Jews hate the Catholic Church, but he did not understand that Jews hate the Church because she is White, not because she is Christian. The great Catholic writer Hilaire Belloc might not have made the same mistake. As he once said: “Europe is the Faith and the Faith is Europe.” That’s why Belloc would have utterly opposed immigration into Europe by Muslims and other non-Whites. He would also have been utterly unsurprised to see Jews organizing such immigration, propagandizing for it, and punishing White resistance to it.

Belloc would also have been unsurprised to see Jews cynically play the victim when their own policies rebounded on them. That stabby Somali in London who attacked Jews will now be exploited by Jews to increase Jewish power and posture about Jewish victimhood. He didn’t kill anyone, but he will receive far more attention than Mohammed Ismail, the Somali who murdered three Whites in Sheffield in 1960, and than Mohamed Noor Iidow (sic), the Somali who raped a White woman to death in London in 2021.

As in America, so in Australia: a few of the Jews who worked to end the White Australia policy

Right across the West, countless Whites have been murdered, raped, beaten, robbed and otherwise harmed by the mud-flood of mass migration overseen by Jews. But, as noted, the  harm done to Whites is a feature, not a bug, of the mud-flood. And now that the mud-flood is belatedly harming its creators, Jews are playing the victim and wailing that “Jews don’t feel safe anywhere,” that “Jews live in fear in 21st-century Britain,” that “Britain’s Jews no longer feel at home,” that “Ireland’s Jews have never felt lonelier.” But none of this wailing is accompanied by any honesty or self-criticism. Jews don’t excel at honesty and self-criticism. Instead, they excel at self-pity. Here’s Jonathan Sacerdoti again:

Britain’s Jews are quietly preparing to leave the country

I sat in the synagogue where I grew up last night, waiting to interview Colonel Richard Kemp, the retired senior officer of the British Army who served for nearly three decades across Northern Ireland, the Balkans, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. Our conversation would end a service marking the transition between Israel’s Memorial Day for its fallen and its Independence Day. A British Jew and a British Colonel, in a room full of emotion, pride, and more than a little apprehension, after a week in which multiple arson attacks on Jewish-linked sites have taken place in London. There was an uncomfortable sense of the fall of Rome in the air. […]

At the dinner afterwards, intended to celebrate Israel’s independence, the tone across the room was not celebratory in any simple sense. The conversations were sober, even heavy. People spoke to me openly about decline, about Britain, about the condition of Jewish life here. And, strikingly, they spoke about contingency plans. Where they might go. When they might leave. What threshold would trigger that decision. What was most unsettling was not necessarily the content of these discussions, but their assumption. They spoke as if departure were not hypothetical, but eventually necessary.

I could have built a life in Israel. I can see it clearly enough to know it would have been a good life. Many British Jews share that sense: Israel is not merely a refuge of last resort, an ‘insurance policy’ against catastrophe. Over its decades of existence, it has become something far more substantial. It is a functioning, dynamic country with its own culture, strengths, and tensions. It is a real alternative life, not just a theoretical escape from danger. […] And yet most of us chose Britain. Not by accident, but deliberately. This is the path we continued, the society we invested in, the place where our lives took shape. Britain has offered opportunity, stability, and a sense of belonging that is not easily relinquished. It is our home. We want it to be our refuge. (“Britain’s Jews are quietly preparing to leave the country,” The Spectator, 22nd April 2026

Yes, those Jews “deliberately” chose to live in Britain. And deliberately chose to flood Britain with Muslims and other “natural allies.” And deliberately chose to demonize Whites as racists and xenophobes for resisting that mud-flood. After all, don’t forget that “Welcome the Stranger” is an unshakeable Jewish value! But the mud-flood has now begun to harm Jews too, so they’re “quietly preparing” to flee to Israel, where that unshakeable Jewish value of “Welcome the Stranger” has mysteriously failed to apply for so many decades. In fact, there are only three unshakeable Jewish values. I mentioned two of them above: ethnocentrism and authoritarianism. Here’s the third: hypocrisy. Unfortunately for Jews, Hebrew hypocrisy is becoming more and more obvious to more and more goyim.

Remigration Demonstration 2024: A Gathering of Identitarian Forces in the Heart of Europe

/6 Comments/in /by

From Arktos

Remigration Demonstration 2024: A Gathering of Identitarian Forces in the Heart of Europe

by Andrej Sekulović

Andrej Sekulović
Aug 03, 2024

Andrej Sekulović argues that the new youth of Europe is determined to defend its ancestral heritage against the onslaught of mass immigration and liberal insanity.

It’s completely inappropriate to see ourselves, in the nostalgia of despair, as a rearguard, a last outpost, that struggles with panache for a lost cause. No, we have to see ourselves as the vanguard of the resistance, whose lucid spirit exudes a certain optimism.

— Guillaume Faye, Why We Fight

Clouds were hovering over the city which was once the proud queen of Central Europe, an occasional raindrop falling from the sky on an otherwise warm summer day. Once the heart of an empire, Vienna was known as the home of knowledge, art and culture. It was also at her gates that the ferocious hordes of the star and crescent were stopped a few centuries ago by the common efforts of different European armies. If once Vienna mirrored the multiethnic composition of the Austro-Hungarian Empire as one of its two main centres, it currently mirrors in a more sinister way the inclusive politics of those who are at the helm of the European Union, reminding us of the great demographic replacement that we, as Europeans, are facing in our homelands. The old and majestic architecture, reflecting the rich past of the city, is contrasted with the ugly small fast food stands with “exotic” food prepared by Middle-Eastern, Turkish, Albanian and other migrants, the “new Europeans” of a darker variety walking on the streets, the women in hijabs, and the obligatory rainbow flags hanging here and there from windows and buildings.

But there is more to this city. It still has some of the authentic European strength left. The “progressive” leftists and multiculturalists, who would like to see Vienna and the rest of the old continent turned into some kind of an egalitarian multiracial utopia, were reminded once again on Saturday, July 20th, that they are not unopposed in their endeavours. On that day, Identitarians from all over Europe took to the streets of Vienna. They showed to the public that they will not idly stand by as their homelands are being flooded with the “diverse” masses of the third world, while their people are being poisoned by the perverted egalitarian globalist agenda. A crowd of determined and proud European patriots gathered in the centre of Vienna to attend this year’s Remigration demonstrations, organised by the Austrian Identitarian community, whose most recognisable representative is Martin Sellner. Many of the activists were armed with the symbolic plain yellow or black flags, reminding everyone that censorship and repression are very much alive in the supposedly democratic “freedom-loving” European Union, whose leaders and policymakers pride themselves as the guardians of freedom of speech and champions of human rights.

While the Greek letter Lambda, which shone from the shields of mighty Spartans in the days of the youth of our civilisation and was adopted in our age by Generation Identity, was banned in Austria, the activists of the movement still stand under their flags, fighting their own metapolitical and cultural Battle of Thermopylae. Symbols and names can be banned, but the idea lives on and manifests itself through the actions of the youth of Europe. The prohibition of symbols that are an important part of our heritage, history and culture because they are supposedly adopted by the “far right” is nothing new. They ban everything that they perceive as a threat to their hegemony, with no regard to historical importance. We can only “keep” those parts of our heritage that don’t jeopardise the liberal order.

Still, the resistance is growing. It cannot be stopped by the efforts of those who are brainwashed or bought by the globalists. It seems that with the help of social networks and alternative media, the Identitarian and right-wing ideas are steadily moving in the direction of what, for lack of a better term, may be called the Overton window. The Identitarian movements are marching forward in defiance of all the persecution and censorship. The ideas that were once only whispered about are now making their way into the “mainstream” political conservative discussions and are being more openly discussed by a growing number of people, from conservative politicians to well-established commentators, online and in “real life”. A good example of this is Tucker Carlson talking about the great replacement. This shows us that the Identitarian tactics of metapolitics are working. The metapolitical right has pierced the bubble of “mainstream discussion”, and the Identitarians are bringing this metapolitical change to the next level, as the things that were once considered “hard right” are now being normalised within the broader right-wing and conservative circles, which means that they are also becoming the subject of the general public discourse.

This year’s Remigration demonstrations in Vienna are a good example of this. In the first half of the 2010s, when the organised Identitarian activists first gained attention as a movement, at that time mostly operating under the name of “Generation Identity”, and became known through their street actions and community-building efforts, their ideological rhetoric was more moderate. They would rarely, if ever, publicly speak directly about “racial issues” or use the term “white” when identifying themselves in terms of their ethnic background. They would tactically rather use the more acceptable term “European” when advocating for the preservation of their ethnocultural heritage and identity. But the metapolitical struggle is changing this. When Remigration demonstrations took place this year, we could hear the well-known slogans of the Austrian and German Identitarians, such as “Europa — Jugend — Revolution” (Europe — Youth — Revolution) and “Wiederstand” (Resistance) being chanted by the assembled sons and daughters of Europe. We could also hear them chant repeatedly not only “Save our Nation — Remigration” but “White Lives Matter” as well.

Continue at Arktos

To burn or not to burn? Reflections on the burning Irish refugee centres

/5 Comments/in , /by

Every nation likes to be best in the world at something. As things stand, we Irish Potato Niggers are world leaders in burning refugee centres without hurting anyone. Nobody comes even close to us. The prize for burning refugee centres with refugees inside goes to the Israelis, of course, but that is not a spórt we want to indulge in.

Does burning refugee centres reduce the inflow of refugees?

Yes and no.

In the local and short term, yes, absolutely. There have been thirty-odd badly damaged refugee centres. None of them have had any refugees moved into them – yet. Only a handful of people have been arrested or charged with arson. One almost gets the impression that the Gardai are reluctant to investigate such fires: they dislike the refugees even more than the rest of us. The four fires in the Coolock refugee centre were quite possibly set by the Gardai themselves, as a hint to government that they disagree with migration policy and strongly dislike their Commissioner, the notorious Drew Harris.

In the national sense, the record breaking, non-lethal arson attacks have happened at the same time as record-breaking numbers of refugees and other foreigners are coming into the country. Since the start of this year alone, refugee numbers are up by 60% or so. The government issued 250,000 social security numbers to charming, hard working foreigners in the last year. These are insane numbers:There are only 4 million Irish ethnics in the country. A quarter or more of all residents are foreigners.Ten more years of this? Do the math!

If we take each burnt refugee centre as 200 residents, we have only reduced refugee accomodation by 6,000: a small number compared to the inflow. Just to match the flow of refugees, nevermind general foreigners, we would have to quintuple the rate of burnings. That’s a lot of firelighters and thick toxic smoke from modern building materials. Count me out, boys.

Numerous people urged me to burn our local refugee centre, including serving, uniformed members of the Garda Siochana. I declined: Ten minutes with a catapult could disable a building (windows and roof slates) without endangering human life through toxic smoke. That’s not endorsement or encouragement, just safety advice.

While burning refugee centres is 100% successful in the short term, peaceful protests are unfortunately 100% unsuccessful, so far. (There are some ongoing peaceful protests, and it is possible they will be successful. Let us pray.) If you want to see how they deal with our peaceful protests, look what they did in the Newtown MountKennedy in Co Wicklow. Coked up lunatics with English accents and Garda uniforms just wade into the women and children with truncheons and pepper spray. When the road is clear, the bus drives in with the jeering, gloating Darkies inside. It’s the oldest trick in the book, and the Old Testament God, whatever his name is, was a big fan of the procedure.

Two other tactics can work sometimes.

The spiritual Leprechaun factor. The modern Leprechaun is a jovial character: all booze and pots of gold. But the old style boyos were potentially lethal. It was long a tradition not to disturb trees or destroy “fairy forts”. It was held that lots of grim misfortunes would befall you, including death. In Clonmel, the town that whipped Cromwell’s ass back in the day, there was a Traveller’s site. They had the use of the field next door to rún a couple of ponies, one of the positive sides of traveller culture that has not yet been exterminated. There were some fairy forts ón the site.

Guess what our Pretty Boy Minister for Refugees Roderick O’Gorman decided? Let’s take the field away from the travellers and house a thousand single male refugees ón it, right next to where the travellers live. This was deliberately designed to antagonise everybody in Clonmel. Why didn’t they leave the travellers their little field and put the refugees 200 yards away in the next field?

Andrew Anglin has mentioned the concept of “cartoonish evil”. For some reason, they often go out of their way to do things in the most unpleasant and culturally inappropriate way possible. Is it to hypnotise us into a sense of despair and inaction?

There were numerous burnings of equipment and beatings of staff, but the preparations went ahead. They bulldozed the fairy forts. Then there was an accident. A weight of a couple hundred kilo fell nine or ten feet from a forklift. The site was badly organised. Someone was under the weight when it fell. The MSM are silent about it, but the word online is that someone is dead. Oh well. Sometimes that happens when you mess with the fairies….But the project is ongoing. Will the fairies strike again?

Legal threats: There are two types of threats: criminal threats and legal threats. A criminal threat is when you tell the guy you will slice off his ear if he doesn’t stop renting his property to refugees. Obviously this writer does not endorse that. A legal threat is when you threaten legal action, and it’s perfectly legal.

For example, here’s a true story. A certain businessman had a property which he wanted to rent for refugees in the Dublin suburb of Finglas. Five other businessmen visited his house. They were wearing masks, possibly to prevent infection by Monkey Flu. Or possibly as an expression of their sexuality. You’ve heard of LGBT+? Here’s LGBT+MM.(Masked Men)….

Either way, wearing masks is perfectly legal. They engage the potential refugee landlord in general Potato Nigger chit chat: the weather, the State of the Nation, Brit agents in the government, homosexuals in the Hierarchy…Then they get to the point: “The return ón investment ón refugees in your Finglas property will be lower than you think. We have some alternative suggestions as to what you could chose to do with it.”

The guy thinks it over, agrees with them, and the conversation ends in a friendly fashion. No crime reported, no crime committed. The system does not have the resources to protect all it’s hired helpers. Once the hired help are made aware of that, eyeball to eyeball, right ón their own doorstep, with their own cute children in the house behind them, many will prudently choose the path of least resistance.

“Wouldn’t it be great if it was like this all the time?” as Van Morrison sang.

Have you heard his recent album? Openly anti vax, anti Cranky Tribe and pro truth. It will chase your blues away, if you have them. Almost the only Irish/Ulster Scots artist with a functioning pair of cojones. A Jewish newspaper gave it a great review: “If you’ve ever wondered what the Protocols would sound like with a sax accompaniment, this is for you!”

As the Orangemen say: No Surrender! Ulster (and Connacht, Leinster and Munster) says No!

Great-Replaced: Half of Newborns in Belgium Have Foreign-Origin Mothers

/24 Comments/in , /by


First bar: births in 2020 by origin of the mother. Second bar: women of childbearing age by origin. Orange: native Belgians; blue: Belgian citizens of foreign origin; grey: foreigners.

The Great Replacement is a “discredited conspiracy theory,” but it also an empirical reality, wherever governments and agencies deem fit to publish the relevant figures.

France has long been loathe to publish such statistics, but neighboring Belgium — which has a similar history of recent immigration — is not so circumspect. The Belgian Federal Bureau for Planning recently published a highly interesting fact sheet on the national origin of mothers in Belgium.

The figures for 2020 show that Belgium now has a historically-low total fertility rate of 1.58 per woman. Of these, barely half of births (52.3%) are to native Belgian mothers. The rest are more-or-less evenly split between mothers who are Belgian citizens of foreign origin and foreign mothers.

Fertility rates differ drastically by origin, with native Belgian woman at a mere 1.38 and foreign women at 2.05 (48.5% higher).

Belgian citizens of foreign origin have a fertility rate of 1.58, suggesting a convergence of birth rates over time. Admittedly, interpretation is difficult as it is unclear what is included in this category. What proportion of these are Italian-origin Belgians (significant waves came from 1945 onward, now numbering around 450,000)? What proportion are Arabs or Congolese with Belgian passports? We don’t know.

Proportion by origin and age of women of child-bearing age, (orange: native Belgians, blue: Belgian citizens of foreign origin, grey: foreigners).

The replacement of the Belgian population will only ratchet up over time. Significantly, among 15-year-old girls, foreign-origin Belgian citizens and foreigners outnumber native Belgians more than two-to-one!

One struggles to find any previous examples in European history of population substitution on this scale. Probably one has to go all the way back to the Indo-European conquests circa 5000–4000 years ago.

The Belgian statistics are frustratingly unclear concerning the national origin of mothers in Belgium. “Citizens of foreign-origin” and “foreigners” indiscriminately include southern Europeans, eastern Europeans, Middle-Eastern Muslims, and Africans. There has been substantial European immigration to Belgium from Italy, Romania, and elsewhere.

It seems highly probable that European-origin mothers will have lower fertility rates than Africans and Muslims, though conceivably the latter converge somewhat in fertility with the natives over time.

Figures from the Belgian Statistics Agency revealed that in 2021 the proportion of native Belgians had fallen to a mere 67.3% of the population (from 74.3% in 2011 and 81.8% in 2001). The collapse of native Belgians is real, drastic, and ongoing.

Among Belgian citizens of foreign origin and foreigners, 48.3% are from neighboring or other EU countries and 51.7% from non-EU countries (mostly from the Maghreb, Turkey, and Black Africa). The proportion from non-EU countries has increased, being 38.4% in 2001 and 47.6% in 2011.

Thus, foreign-origin people in Belgium make up one third of the population, about evenly split between Europeans and non-Europeans. I suspect non-Europeans make up about a third of births in Belgium, similar to France.

Whatever one makes of all this, the Belgian population is being irreversibly transformed beyond recognition within a single lifetime.

The consequences for the native population have often been dire. In France, recent figures show that foreigners (not including citizens of foreign origin) make up 7.6% of the population but are two to four times more likely to commit crimes such as theft, sexual assault, and murder:

This does not even factor in French and Belgian citizens of African or Muslim origin. During a trial of the French-Jewish pundit Éric Zemmour for “hate speech,” the Socialist politician Jean-Pierre Chevènement came to Zemmour’s defense. He testified that as interior minister he received a daily list of crimes in France and most of the criminals had African or Muslim last names.[1] Note that Chevènement was Minister of the Interior from 1997–2000! The situation is no doubt even more stark today.

Beyond the decline in social capital and well-being, there are also plenty of signs the population change is leading to a collapse in any common values within the society. A recent poll by the respected agency IFOP found that 65% of young Muslim high-schoolers in France considered that “the norms and rules” of Islam “are more important than the laws of the Republic.”

The right is often faulted for being alarmist on immigration. Part of the reason for this is that the consequences of these trends take time to become apparent but also have tremendous momentum. The most extraordinary political courage will be necessary to hold back the tide, let alone roll it back. In any case, wholly preventable ethno-religious conflicts among Europeans, Blacks, and Muslims will continue to be facts of life in Western Europe for the foreseeable future. There is every likelihood these problems will worsen and, if nothing is done, will indeed become overwhelming.

[1]Éric Zemmour, La France n’a pas dit son dernier mot (Rubempré, 2021), p. 127

Germany Rises as ‘Eurostan’ Looms Closer

/72 Comments/in , , , /by

The new ‘Eurostan’ in the making: Countries impacted by the migrant crisis

The writing is on the wall. The old Germany of our Christian ancestors is in the process of being destroyed. And after Germany, Europe is the target.

The EU, as we all know who have eyes to see, has now become the United States of Europe in all but name — an undemocratic and despotic confederation of states without borders whose primary aim appears to be White Genocide — the slow and systematic destruction of the white indigenous people of Europe by means of uncontrolled mass immigration and mongrelisation.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been the main force behind the ongoing destruction of the Europe of our ancestors, the Europe of traditional values firmly rooted in its Christian ethos.

Under Angela Merkel’s auspices, Germany has heard its death knell. It has seen its great cities with their shimmering Gothic spires, and its peaceful towns and villages nestling in the green countryside, invaded by well over a million uninvited guests from lawless lands who have turned their nation into a multicultural zoo. German women are being raped and sexually assaulted literally every day of the year by migrants. And still Frau Merkel sits there smiling complacently amid the ruins of her country, making no attempt to turn back the tides of mounting terror. Read more

Science and the Suicide-Cult: The Irrationalism of Richard Dawkins

/53 Comments/in , , /by

The basis of science is the same as the basis of life: pattern-recognition. Even plants recognize patterns in the weather and the attacks of insects. The difference between scientists and trees, or scientists and sharks, is that scientists use reason and method, not instinct and other forms of biological automation.

Mathemodels of reality

Scientists try to identify and understand patterns in the world by creating patterns of their own: they perform experiments, they model and analyse data using mathematics, trying to create symbolic patterns that behave like real ones. Astronomy is the paradigm of this endeavour. There was sufficient regularity and permanence in the heavens for the ancients to predict lunar and solar eclipses. Ptolemy had an effective mathemodel of the solar system in the Second Century A.D.; Copernicus put forward a better one in 1543; Newton refined and expanded it in 1687. The power of Newton’s mathemodel was confirmed by the successful predictions it made: there were undiscovered planets out there. Neptune was mathematics before it became matter.

Stale pale male Charles Darwin

Biology proved much more difficult than astronomy and other branches of physics. The great pattern of evolution escaped the notice of Aristotle before Christ and Linnaeus long after, and when Darwin and Wallace recognized it in the nineteenth century, their description was linguistic, not mathematical. Their logic was good and their evidence substantial, but evolutionary biology didn’t become a proper science until it had a solid foundation of mathematics. Stale pale males like Ronald Fisher (1890–1962) and W.D. Hamilton (1936–2000) built mathemodels of biological systems that behaved like the real thing and made good predictions. Indeed, biology turned out to have a mathemodel of its own: the three-dimensional double helix of DNA carries a two-dimensional genetic code, which synthesizes proteins, evolves, and protects itself from error in ways that are illuminated by the human mathemodel of information theory.

Digital Dawkins

As Richard Dawkins puts it: “The essential difference between classical Darwinism (which we now understand could not have worked) and neo-Darwinism (which does) is that digital genetics has replaced analogue.” Dawkins will need no introduction. He’s much more famous than Fisher or Hamilton and a much better and clearer writer than his late rival, the Jewish Marxist Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002). Dawkins’ line about Darwinism comes from the lecture “Science and Sensibility,” which is collected in a new book of his called Science in the Soul: Selected Writings of a Passionate Rationalist (Bantam Press 2017). I’ve enjoyed the book and it’s reminded me again both of what I admire about Dawkins and of what I deplore.

Powerful pattern: The DNA double helix

Read more

Born in Britain: Mass Immigration and the Twilight Zone

/44 Comments/in , /by

If you think that the recent attack by a Black terrorist in London says anything about the harm done by mass immigration, then think again. A great liberal intellectual called Matthew D’Ancona has crushed such racist nonsense with these lines in the world’s greatest newspaper:

As we now know, the attacker, Khalid Masood, was British, born in Kent and brought up as Adrian Russell Elms. His story is one of radicalisation, the question being when and how he embraced extremist Islamist ideology: the path that led him to an act of murderous violence has nothing to do with immigration. (The Brexiteers’ immigration promises are unravelling fast, The Guardian, 27th March 2017)

“Nothing to do with immigration”: A Black terrorist

See? The terrorist was born here. He was 100% British. Immigration had nothing to do with his terrorism. Somehow the concept of second-generation immigrants is far too complex for these intellectuals, so that the ill effects of policies in place for 50+ years can only be discussed within the context of recent immigrants not born in the UK.

Voila! Crime, terrorism and academic failure by second-generation immigrants have nothing to do with immigration. Believing their own propaganda, these intellectuals imply that second-generation immigrants have been entirely shaped by mainstream British culture, so that the cultures immigrants bring with them to the UK are completely irrelevant. It’s the same with personal traits like IQ: Mental ability has nothing to do with the ethnic/racial/religious heritage of immigrants after the first generation. Whatever their performance, it is due to having been born in the UK, with low performance likely due to White racism. It’s like saying that Masood would have been born in the UK even if his parents had stayed overseas. Read more