Featured Articles

Marjorie Taylor Greene Exposes the Jewish Billionaire Trio Backing Thomas Massie’s Primary Challenger

/1 Comment/in , /by

In the aftermath of Israel’s Gaza genocide, some of the richest Jews in America have united to crush the one Republican who dared say no to their blank check, turning Kentucky’s May 2026 primary into an existential referendum on whether any anti-Zionist can survive in a Jewish-dominated political order.

Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), who resigned from Congress in January 2026, ignited controversy on March 31, 2026, when she identified the billionaire donors backing former Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein’s campaign against Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and accused them of prioritizing a foreign country over American interests. (Other TOO articles on Massie.)

“You know who has not been tested? His opponent. His opponent that is literally propped up and funded by three Jewish billionaires,” Greene said during a virtual fundraiser for Massie that also featured former Rep. Ron Paul and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY). “Now look, I’m not anti-Semitic, I don’t care what people’s religion are, but these three billionaires that are funding this opponent against Thomas Massie don’t even live in Kentucky, they’re not eve-, they don’t have a home in his district. And their loyalty is to Israel, not the United States of America.”

Greene continued with an urgent call to action: “So I think what’s extremely important for people to understand is you need to donate some money. You need to donate some money on the MassieMoneyBomb.com because this is a fight for America first. This is a fight against a foreign country, against foreign interests, and against foreign money. And it’s that type of foreign money that has already bought off most members of Congress.”

The three donors Greene referenced are the same ones identified by the Washington Examiner: New York hedge fund manager Paul Singer, who contributed $1 million to the anti-Massie super PAC MAGA KY; Florida hedge fund manager John Paulson, who contributed $250,000; and the Preserve America PAC — primarily funded by Nevada casino mogul Miriam Adelson — which contributed $750,000. None of the three donors live in Kentucky.

Massie has characterized the effort as a “DC-funded hit job.” The Massie fundraiser raised over $351,000 in its first 24 hours, driven by more than 3,200 small donors. The MAGA KY super PAC, run by Chris LaCivita — who co-managed Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign — had spent $1.56 million in just 38 days on television and digital advertisements opposing Massie by early August 2025. By late March 2026, CBS News reported total MAGA KY spending had grown to approximately $2.7 million, while a super PAC linked to the Republican Jewish Coalition had directed more than $2.8 million toward the race. RJC CEO Matt Brooks had said earlier, “Like Trump, we are committed to the defeat of Massie.”

The involvement of the Republican Jewish Coalition alongside these massive outside donations makes one thing clear. The effort is not about Kentucky values but about enforcing unconditional loyalty to Israel. Who are these three Jewish billionaires, and what are their political priorities?

1. Paul Singer

Paul Elliott Singer, born August 22, 1944, in New York City, contributed $1 million to MAGA KY — the single largest individual donation to the anti-Massie campaign. Forbes estimates his net worth at $6.7 billion as of 2025. restart

Singer founded Elliott Associates in 1977 with $1 million in seed capital. The firm grew into Elliott Management Corporation, which managed approximately $72.7 billion in assets as of December 31, 2024. Elliott has long been described as a “vulture fund” — its model involves buying distressed sovereign and corporate debt at steep discounts and pursuing aggressive litigation for full repayment. The most notorious example was Elliott’s 15-year legal campaign against Argentina over defaulted sovereign bonds, which ultimately extracted full repayment.

Singer has been among the most significant funders of neoconservative foreign policy ventures. He was FDD’s second-largest contributor from 2008 to 2011, donating $3.6 million to the hawkish think tank focused on Iran policy and pro-Israel advocacy. He serves as Chairman Emeritus at the Manhattan Institute, per the Elliott Management website, and donated more than $1 million to AIPAC’s United Democracy Project in recent election cycles.

Singer describes himself as a libertarian-leaning conservative but has consistently backed interventionist foreign policy. He was a major fundraiser for George W. Bush and heavily funded Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign. He donated $1 million to the anti-Trump Our Principles PAC during the Stop Trump movement before eventually reconciling with Trump and donating $5 million to his super PAC in 2024.

 

2. John Paulson

John Alfred Paulson, born December 14, 1955, in Queens, New York, contributed $250,000 to MAGA KY. Forbes estimated his net worth at $3.8 billion as of August 2025.

Paulson founded Paulson & Co. in 1994 with $2 million and one employee. He became a household name in finance for executing what author Gregory Zuckerman documented in his book The Greatest Trade Ever — shorting subprime mortgages ahead of the 2007-2008 financial crisis. His firm earned $15 billion that year, with Paulson personally pocketing roughly $4 billion.

Paulson served as one of Trump’s top economic advisers during the 2016 campaign and hosted a record-breaking fundraiser on April 6, 2024 at his Palm Beach mansion — the “Inaugural Leadership Dinner” — that raised $50.5 million for Trump’s presidential campaign, which Trump called “the biggest night in Fund Raising of ALL TIME.” Paulson himself stated: “This sold-out event has raised the most in a single political fundraiser in history.”

Paulson’s Israel-focused philanthropy has grown substantially in recent years. In 2023 he committed $27 million to Hebrew University of Jerusalem to build the Paulson Bar-El Building for Computer Science and Engineering, and in January 2026 his foundation added another $19 million, bringing his total commitment to Hebrew University to $46 million — one of the largest donations the university has ever received. Hebrew University awarded Paulson an honorary doctorate in June 2024 in recognition of his philanthropic contributions.

The most politically charged element of Massie’s campaign involves the late Jewish sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Paulson’s name appears in Epstein’s black book. In a September 2025 Newsmax interview, Massie named Paulson directly: “He’s a hedge fund manager and a major donor to the Republican Party, a major donor to the speaker of the House, a major donor to the president’s campaign, and he’s in Epstein’s black book.”

3. Miriam Adelson

Miriam Adelson, born October 10, 1945, in Tel Aviv during the British Mandate, contributed $750,000 via the Preserve America PAC, of which she is the primary funder. Bloomberg’s Billionaires Index puts her net worth at approximately $40 billion, while Forbes estimates $32–35 billion.

Born Miriam Farbstein to Jewish parents who fled Poland before the Holocaust, she served as a medical officer in the Israeli military before becoming a physician specializing in addiction treatment. She married Sheldon Adelson, the founder of Las Vegas Sands Corp., in 1991 and after his death in January 2021 assumed control of the family’s business and philanthropic empire, including majority ownership of the Dallas Mavericks.

The Adelson family has channeled more than $600 million into Trump’s three presidential campaigns and other Republican causes since 2015. In 2024 alone, Miriam contributed $106 million to Preserve America, her pro-Trump super PAC, eclipsing even the $75 million contributed by Elon Musk to his own PAC. Miriam and Sheldon Adelson were jointly instrumental in pushing Trump to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights during his first term.

At a White House Hanukkah reception on December 16, 2025, Adelson took the podium and publicly encouraged Trump to seek a third term — a move barred by the 22nd Amendment. She told the crowd she had spoken with attorney Alan Dershowitz about the constitutional question and concluded, “We can do it, think about it.” Trump then announced to the crowd that Adelson had promised “another $250 million” if he runs again in 2028, prompting chants of “Four more years.”

The campaign against Massie represents a broader pattern of pro-Israel donor networks targeting anti-war voices within the Republican Party. Massie has been targeted primarily for opposing U.S. military aid to Israel, voting against Trump’s reconciliation bill, and leading the push for full release of the Epstein files.

This is not the first time Massie has faced this pressure. In the 2024 cycle, AIPAC’s United Democracy Project launched an ad campaign against him, announcing an initial $300,000 TV buy on Fox affiliates statewide. UDP spokesperson Patrick Dorton declared the group was “shining a spotlight on Tom Massie’s atrocious anti-Israel record.” Massie pushed back, telling supporters that “the AIPAC super PAC just bought $300,000 of ads against me because I am often the lone Republican for freedom of speech, against foreign aid, and opposed to wars in the Middle East.” FEC filings reviewed by The Intercept placed UDP’s total verified expenditure against Massie at approximately $167,000. Voters were unmoved: Massie won his May 2024 primary with roughly 76 percent of the vote, defeating two challengers and declaring on election night, “AIPAC, your smear campaign on this American has backfired.”

May 19, 2026 will deliver the most honest test we have seen. Israel’s ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza, which the entire world saw via livestream, may have finally produced a growing anti-Zionist current among Republican voters in the United States. The question is whether the growing anti-Zionist sentiment can stand against Jewish billionaire money. Should Massie lose, the defeat will expose a brutal truth: American politics functions as a Jewish oligarch playground where elections are mere theater.

Dumber and Plumber: Leftism as Suicide-Cult for Whites and Self-Service Racket for Non-Whites

/6 Comments/in /by

Dumb and Dumber is an American movie about a pair of idiots who create chaos and disaster. Teletubbies is a British children’s program about a group of brightly dressed humanoids who emote rather than articulate. I’ve never seen either the movie or the program, but over the years I’ve learned what they’re about and what the characters look like. That’s why I thought of them both when I saw a proud female plumber win a by-election for the Green Party in the heavily enriched English city of Manchester.

The dumber plumber: Hannah Spencer and some Teletubbies (images from Wikipedia)

The plumber is called Hannah Spencer. She dresses brightly, emotes rather than articulates, and is determinedly d-u-m-b. Her dumbness is part of why she emotes rather than articulates. That is, she doesn’t base her politics on reason and reality, but on her own feelings and on the insatiable greed she shares with so many other leftists. It’s the greed to feed her narcissism. You’d know she’s a narcissist even before you knew her politics. There’s not just the bright clothing but the long blonde hair too. And there’s an irony there in her hair.

Here’s some of Hannah Spencer’s dumb emoting about the mud-flood and non-Whites preying on Whites: “We’re all human, but some people have been exposed to a lot of misinformation and it’s making them really angry.” For Spencer, the truth about non-White pathologies is “misinformation.” Yes, we are all human, but we’re not all human in the same way. And humans compete with each other in all manner of ways. For example, has Hannah Spencer ever asked herself why White women like her have hair and eyes of many different and attention-grabbing colors, while non-White women don’t?

Icy prehistoric Europe

It’s a very interesting question, after all, and the answer says a lot about the very different evolutionary paths followed by White women, on the one hand, and non-White women, on the other. But those differences explain why Hannah Spencer will never have pondered the question. Curiosity about H.B.D. – human bio-diversity – is taboo on the left. Leftists don’t ask the questions because they don’t like the answers. Although Spencer will flaunt her long blonde locks, she will never have asked herself why she has them or about the possible implications they have for her narcissistic, reality-denying politics. Essentially, the much wider variety of hair-color in White women arose from sexual competition. As the anthropologist Peter Frost has explained, there was a surplus of women in icy prehistoric Europe competing for the attention of men who were dying at higher rates on long, dangerous hunts. That’s why the women evolved attention-grabbing hair and eyes. Much though feminists would hate to admit it, this is yet another example of how women’s bodies have literally been formed by the male gaze and male preferences.

But it isn’t just hair- and eye-color that differs between Whites and non-Whites thanks to the distinct environments we’ve evolved in. Our psychology is different too: Whites are more individualistic, non-Whites like Pakistani Muslims more collectivist. Here’s another question that Hannah Spencer has certainly never asked herself: What do dark-haired Pakistani women in her constituency think about her beautiful blonde hair? They’ll be jealous, of course. Sexual competition between women hasn’t ended with mass migration from the Third World. No, it’s increased. But there’s also a taboo on the left about discussing the jealousy non-White women feel towards White women. And a taboo about discussing the lust non-White men feel towards White women. The jealousy and the lust have the same roots: the greater sexual attractiveness of White women, thanks both to their more colorful hair and eyes and to their paler skin (which, as Peter Frost has also explained, is another potent sexual marker).

Devout Muslim Mothin Ali and infidel whore Hannah Spencer (video from Twitter)

Mothin Ali and his chaste wife in a niqab (image from Reddit)

The jealousy and the lust are very harmful to White women. Particularly the lust, because it’s expressed as rape and sexual harassment. There’s more irony in a video from the election campaign of Hannah Spencer cavorting with uncovered hair behind Mothin Ali, the deputy leader of the Green Party. Ali is a devout Muslim whose wife wears the full-body covering known as the niqab. By his standards – and the standards of thousands of other Muslim men who voted Green in Manchester – Hannah Spencer is an infidel whore ripe for rape. Yes, for White men Spencer is signalling: “Come and woo me.” For non-White men she’s signalling: “Come and rape me.” But non-White Mothin won’t condemn Spencer’s unseemly cavorting and uncovered hair. He doesn’t want any premature revelation of a fatal fact: that leftism is a suicide-cult for Whites and a self-service racket for non-Whites. Instead, he announces in the video that “The Green Party is where the party’s at!” and chants “For Hannah Spencer!” as ethnicky music wails in the background. Muslims may be in-bred and stupid, but they’re quite cunning enough to exploit the narcissism and naivety of White leftists.

Clannishness, corruption and cousin-copulation

Like the Muslim rape-gangs that have been hard at work in Manchester for decades, Muslim in-breeding is another topic that the Green Party refuse to ask questions about. Again, they don’t want to hear the answers. Okay, “we’re all human,” as Hannah Spencer said, but when one human group conducts cousin-marriage for generations and another human group doesn’t, this will result in some interesting differences. Lower average IQ in the cousin-copulators, for example. And higher rates of genetic disease. Higher clannishness and corruption too. But the Green Party are eager to exploit the clannishness of Muslims in Britain, which is why they issued leaflets and videos in Urdu, not English, as they campaigned in Manchester. The Greens are a leftist party, after all, and leftists believe in power, not in principle.

By supporting Mudzone and the mud-flood, the Greens are following the Orwellian path already taken by Labour. The name of the Labour Party has been a lie for decades and the name of the Green Party is rapidly becoming a lie too. Just as the Labour party has abandoned the White working-class it was founded to defend, so the Green Party is abandoning the natural world it was founded to defend. Under their gay Jewish leader Zac Polanski, the Greens are talking much less about Gaia and much more about open borders. Soaring population means soaring pollution, but so what? Power is what matters to leftists, not principle, and Polanski thinks that more non-Whites will be good for his leftism. They’ll certainly be bad for British Whites, which is another reason for Polanski to want them. And they’ll be bad for both for British gays and for British animals, which is another irony that Hannah Spencer didn’t recognize as she pursued the votes of dark-haired and in-bred Pakistani Muslims in Manchester.

Dog-Lovers for Dog-Haters

As you’d expect, Spencer is a firm fan of the LGBTQIA+ community and an ardent animal-lover. In particular, she’s a dog-lover. She once campaigned against a greyhound-racing track in Manchester and told one interviewer: “I was saying: ‘Look, do you know how badly these dogs are treated?’ A lot of people didn’t know. That track got closed [in 2020], which felt massive.” Greyhound racing is a White sport, but has Spencer ever campaigned against halal slaughter, the cruel Muslim practice of cutting animals’ throats without stunning them first? Of course not. Like all mainstream leftists, Spencer is a devout believer in two core dogmas: first, that all humans are the same under the skin; second, that Whites are innately villainous and non-Whites innately virtuous. That’s why the left don’t challenge non-White misbehavior and crime. Indeed, they both excuse and encourage it. Like countless other Greens, Spencer is a dog-lover and gay-worshipper who works on behalf of dog-haters and gay-whippers. Muslims regard dogs as unclean and homosexuality as an abomination. Blacks mistreat both dogs and gays at higher rates than Whites. After all, cruelty to animals and homophobia are central to many rich and vibrant non-White cultures.

That’s yet another taboo topic to the Green Party, which is attracting more and more votes from narcissistic Whites and stupid-but-cunning Muslims. The Whites and Muslims are abandoning the Labour party because of its genuine support for Israel’s military massacre-machine and its pretended opposition to Third-World migration. On the so-called right wing of British politics, there’s a parallel re-alignment under way as Whites abandon the Conservatives and embrace Reform. The Conservatives richly deserve to be abandoned, but Reform don’t deserve to be embraced. It’s more and more obvious that Nigel Farage intends to betray White voters just as thoroughly as the Conservatives did. Like blonde Hannah Spencer and her dark-haired Muslim supporters in Manchester, there’s a fascinating anthropological – and evolutionary – contrast between one Black candidate for Reform and prospective White voters in Southampton.

Treciaus Chitsika and Traitorous Farage

The Black candidate is called Treciaus Chitsika and is a woman, although that’s not obvious either from her name or from her face. Farage and Reform would call her “British,” but in fact she’s trans-British. That is, she’s as genuinely British as a “transwoman” is genuinely female. In other words, she’s not British at all. She’s from Zimbabwe and looking at her face I thought “Homo erectus.” Yes, she reminded me that Blacks interbred with distinct species of humans inside Africa, just as Whites and Asians interbred with other distinct species of humans outside Africa. Blacks have cognitively significant genes that non-Blacks don’t. And vice versa. I’m happy to acknowledge that Treciaus Chitsika is human, but she is not human in the same way as Whites are. Accordingly, she does not belong in a White nation like Britain, let alone belong on the ballot here.

By promoting non-Whites like Treciaus Chitsika, Nigel Farage has proved that he is a traitor in the same way as the so-called King and Queen of England, Chuck the Cuck and his wife Camilla. I’ve already written about the narcissism of leftism, but I haven’t mentioned how it takes different forms in Whites and their ethnic pets. The narcissism of White leftists involves demonstrating their universalist virtue by promoting non-Whites; the narcissism of the non-Whites involves accepting that promotion by Whites as no more than their due. You can see both forms of narcissism in this photo of Queen Camilla with Selina Brown, the Black women she chose as “the UK’s first National Reading Hero” and presented with “the inaugural Queen’s Reading Room Medal”:

Camilla and her she-rilla, the “National Reading Hero” Selina Brown (image from BBC)

The White woman Camilla is looking pleased with herself for promoting a Black woman, while the Black woman Selina is looking pleased with herself for being a Black woman. It’s yet another example of how leftism is a suicide-cult for Whites and a self-service racket for non-Whites. We have traitors at the top in the West and removing them will be an essential part of restoring the West.

My Little Dog and Two Black Burqas

/8 Comments/in , /by

 A few months ago, I was walking my dog in the city and out of the corner of my eye I saw someone dressed in black recoil at my approach. I looked up and to my left to see two women in black burqas looking down at my dog from where they were standing a few steps away. I was annoyed by their posture of feigned horror, obviously at my little dog’s presence, but apologized anyway for inconveniencing them. Why? I’m not sure. They chose not to acknowledge my kind gesture anyway. I am civilized to a fault, I thought. I felt sorry for the women hidden beneath their burqas who were unable to appreciate a little dog.

I encountered a story a while ago that when the Muslims conquered Zoroastrian Persia in the 7th century A.D., they made the Zoroastrian Persians bring their dogs out of their houses and then slaughtered the dogs in front of their owners. The Zoroastrians had revered their dogs, who served as the “locks on their doors” protecting their homes from intrusion. In the wake of that encounter with these Muslim women I decided to look into the story I had heard, to see if it was true and consulted my research assistant Grok, X.com‘s AI robot, to see what was known about the Muslim animosity toward dogs. I had read somewhere the Hadith teaches that an angel will not come into a house with a dog in it. I had heard that, to a Muslim, a dog was impure. I had heard that, to a Muslim, a dog was filthy.

I looked at my dog who did not appear to be impure in any way that I could determine and he wasn’t filthy. I looked at him again and saw an instinctively innocent angel who was loyal to me. I’d done little to earn his loyalty, but he had gifted me anyway. It was a dog’s decision, and I am happy my little dog has made that decision in my behalf. When I asked Grok, my research robot, about the Zoroastrian and Muslim feeling toward dogs, this is the text Grok generated for me:

[Grok research snip]

The unique role of a dog in Zoroastrianism:

In Zoroastrianism, dogs hold a uniquely elevated status as one of the most beneficent, clean, righteous, and spiritually powerful creatures created by Ahura Mazda (the Wise Lord). They are praised for their loyalty, vigilance, intelligence, and innate ability to ward off evil (daevas or demons). Harming a dog is treated as gravely as harming a human in the Avestan scriptures.

This reverence for dogs is one of the most distinctive features of Zoroastrianism compared to many other ancient or neighboring traditions. It reflects the religion’s emphasis on asha (truth/order), purity, and compassionate stewardship of creation.

During the Muslim Arab conquest of Persia (Sassanid Empire) in the 7th century (roughly 633–651 CE), the invading forces and subsequent Muslim authorities deliberately targeted Zoroastrian cultural and religious practices as part of asserting dominance and promoting Islamization. Dogs, which held a sacred and highly revered status in Zoroastrianism, became a specific point of cultural conflict.

Spiritual and protective role of a dog in Zoroastrianism:

To a Zoroastrian, a dog’s gaze is considered purifying and capable of driving away evil spirits. This belief underpins the ritual of sagdid (“dog-seeing”), performed after death: a dog (ideally a “four-eyed” one with spots above its eyes) is brought to look at the corpse. This verifies death, contains demons of decay (Nasu), and protects the soul. Celestial dogs also accompany the soul across the Chinvat Bridge (the bridge to the afterlife) and ensure safe passage into heaven.

Zoroastrian Scriptural basis for favoring dogs:

The Vendidad (part of the Avesta, especially Fargards/Chapters 13, 14, and 15) devotes extensive sections to dogs, detailing their care, types (house dog, shepherd dog, stray dog), and the severe punishments for mistreating them. Ahura Mazda declares the dog “self-clothed and self-shod, watchful and wakeful,” born to watch over human goods and receive food from humans. Helping or harming a dog is repeatedly equated with helping or harming a person. Zoroastrians are commanded to feed dogs (ideally before feeding themselves) and assist stray dogs.  avesta.org

actical and ritual importance:

Traditionally, every Zoroastrian household should feed a dog daily. In extreme cases, a dog could even substitute for a second human in certain rituals. Dogs receive funeral rites similar to humans in some traditions. The concept of ihtiram-i sag (“respect for the dog”) remains a living value among many Zoroastrians, especially Iranian communities.  zoroastrians.net 

Dualistic context:

Zoroastrianism divides animals into beneficent (good, created by Ahura Mazda) and khrafstras (evil creatures of Ahriman). Dogs rank among the highest of the good animals—sometimes even above the cow in later texts—because of their protective role in the cosmic struggle between good and evil.

What did Muslims do to Zoroastrian dogs when they conquered Persia in the 7th century?

Note that Islamic tradition itself is not uniformly hostile to dogs — the Quran mentions them positively in places (e.g., the story of the Companions of the Cave), and Prophet Muhammad reportedly spared certain useful dogs after initially ordering a cull.

However, the dominant cultural attitude that spread with the conquest emphasized dogs as impure in daily and ritual life, especially in contrast to pre-Islamic Persian reverence. Over the following centuries (8th–13th and beyond), as Iran became majority Muslim, the Zoroastrian view of dogs largely disappeared from mainstream society, surviving mainly among the dwindling Zoroastrian communities and the Parsi diaspora in India. This episode is often cited in Iranian nationalist and Zoroastrian historiography as one example among many of cultural erasure during the transition from the Sassanid to the early Islamic period.

What happened to Zoroastrian dogs?

Declared unclean (najis):  After the conquest, dogs — especially the highly revered “four-eyed” dogs (those with spots above the eyes, used in the sagdid death ritual) — were proclaimed ritually unclean under the new Islamic religious framework. This directly contradicted Zoroastrian teachings in the Vendidad, where dogs were considered pure, protective, and almost equivalent to humans in spiritual value.  worldhistory.org

Persecution as a tool of subjugation: Historical accounts and later Persian/Zoroastrian traditions indicate that persecuting dogs became a deliberate method to break Zoroastrian (and broader Persian) cultural identity. The profound Persian love for dogs was well-known, so attacking this practice was a symbolic and psychological blow. Dogs that were not strictly utilitarian (e.g., guard dogs, hunting dogs, or herding dogs) faced particular hostility.  facebook.com

Ritual disruption: The important Zoroastrian funeral practice of sagdid (having a dog look at the corpse to ward off demons of decay and confirm death) was effectively suppressed or discontinued in many areas as Zoroastrian institutions declined and exposure funerals were restricted or replaced.

Broader context: While there is no single recorded mass extermination campaign targeting every dog across Persia in 7th-century primary sources, the shift in religious norms led to widespread mistreatment, killing of non-working dogs, and social pressure against keeping or revering them in the traditional Zoroastrian way. This occurred alongside the gradual decline of Zoroastrian fire temples, rituals, and overall population through conversion, taxation (jizya), and occasional violence.

[end Grok research snip] 

Muslim treatment of dogs in the United States?

I love my dog. I feel toward my dog the way Persian Zoroastrians feel toward their dogs. I know most Americans feel the same way about their dogs as I do which is why I’ve written this missive. Be aware of our cultural differences with Muslims who were brought to the West not to assimilate into our culture but to rule over us by implementing their own Sharia laws which they have tried to do everywhere they have settled throughout their diaspora history. It is wise, given these tumultuous times, to acquaint yourself with their history.

When Muslims first began to drive taxis in the city, occasionally a Muslim would refuse to take me and my dog in the taxi. As time passed, this happened less often, but the two burqas indicate that the sentiment still prevails among them.

Keep your dogs close. Keep your families close. Keep your friends close.

Most Muslims are not educated to their history so they will relive it. They are in the free world as they raise their hands to destroy it. We must rise above the fray and help them enter modernity without breaking their heads against it which is what their traditions insist they do.

  • Praying by the hundreds in our public streets curtails our freedoms.
  • Self-flagellating en masse in public is an exercise before an attack.
  • Dictating the food we eat is a command, not a request.

We must protect what we have that is sacred to us, including our dogs, and not let the things we hold sacred, be profaned. If we achieve an understanding with the ancient Islamic religion and its adherents we might embrace them, but if we fail to convince them civil war and conquest is not in their future, we must deport them. We have created modernity, and it is truly a paradise. We call it the free world. Most everyone else wants to live in the free world of the West.

Muslims threaten freedom wherever they find it, while we have historically struggled to preserve it. Preservation is the only option the free world has, now that Muslims live in our midst.

If they have legally immigrated to the United States, perhaps they can stay, if they adapt to freedom and modernity, and join us in the preservation of the paradise we have created — or they can go home.

The decision is theirs. They are free to make it. For now.

Richard Faussette © All Rights Reserved, March 31, 2026 word count 1,630

Postcards from the Empire: Postcard from 1967, Part 2

/5 Comments/in /by
Review of Sports Illustrated, December 4, 1967 issue. Those who experienced living in the U.S. in the 1960s know that mainstream sources of information were very limited then. We walked across the room to change the TV channel, and our choices pretty much consisted of the local CBS, ABC and NBC affiliates along with PBS, which was mainly for the upper crust.

The local and national news broadcasts were similar in content, especially the three national shows. Lots of Americans grumbled about liberal bias but there was nowhere else to go. Then as now, corporations, NGOs, foundations and the federal government poured money into “mainstream” and left wing media and publications, while the right wing press was mostly underground and very difficult to find.

Postcards from the Empire is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The same liberal bias was reinforced by the weekly magazines such as Time, Newsweek, Life and Look. When it came to sports, Sports Illustrated was the undisputed king, having started in 1954 and by 1967 had a weekly paid circulation of three million. The initial issue in 1954 had a circulation of 350,000, showing that SI had substantial backing from the get-go as well as establishment approval.

The cover of Sports Illustrated’s December 4th, 1967 issue

SI’s only semi-serious competitor was Sport magazine, which ran from 1946 to 2000 but was always second fiddle to Sports Illustrated. The Sporting News, owned by the Spink family of St. Louis, was another weekly, but concentrated mostly on baseball for much of its existence before being bought by corporate interests, which fairly quickly ruined it by turning what had been a serious publication into worthless fluff. What’s left of Sporting News (the “The” in its title was dropped in 2002) is now online and read by just about nobody.

Sports Illustrated similarly declined in recent decades. Its circulation fell and it eventually went from a weekly to a monthly, and stopped printing altogether for a while in 2024 but its present owners claim that the print issue will continue.

The question is, does anyone care? SI was known for its photography, its generally high-quality journalism (albeit always echoing the mainstream liberal party line of the time), and its annual swimsuit issue, which came out each year while much of the country was in the midst of the worst of winter weather. Which model was going to be on the cover was always a matter of great interest, as were all the models, featuring beautiful girls wearing seemingly less each year. Models like Heidi Klum, Cheryl Tiegs and Christie Brinkley were propelled to fame after appearing in SI’s swimsuit issue.

But the leftist radicals eventually destroyed SI, just as they did everything else in society. Within recent years, SI’s swimsuit issue has featured old women, fat women, trannies and men, which fast-tracked the publication’s already quick descent into irrelevance.

So looking back through the pages of an old Sports Illustrated is much like opening a time capsule, a look at an America that is now long gone, but not forgotten by those who experienced it. I have a number of Sports Illustrateds from the 1960s and ‘70s and if the interest is there I will continue to feature these brief looks back in time.

The cover of the December 4, 1967 SI shows a drawing of a basketball court from roughly the free throw line to the basket along with five stick-type players, two wearing red and three wearing blue. It cost 40 cents. Three of the stick figures are White, the other two Black. Even though the stick features have no other identifiable features including no facial features, SI was careful to represent their race.

And of course, spoken or unspoken – perhaps written or unwritten is a more apt way to put it – race has always been extremely important in the way it’s portrayed to the general culture, the mass consumers of sports, entertainment and politics.

In 1967, Whites were still 88% of the U.S. population, and were generally shown in that ratio in advertising, movies and television. In 2025, the White population is now estimated at just 58%, and Whites, especially White men, have been all but eliminated from most forms of media, all part of The Great Replacement supported by the entire regime outside of a few dissidents in Congress and segments of the alternative media.

The 12/4/67 SI is thick with advertising. The weekly feature found in the front of each issue called “Scorecard” doesn’t begin until Page 17. Scorecard featured a short, usually not serious, look at various stories from the previous week. This issue starts off by quoting an Argentine leftist, Juan Jose Sebreli, who believes football (soccer) “educates the masses for passivity, for nonaction and for non-participation in public life,” adding, “Mussolini, Hitler and even the senile Petain were promoters of sports, and their example has been followed by most of today’s world leaders. Monopolistic, capitalistic and fascist regimes use it as a means of psychological control of the masses by means of conditioned reflexes.” Ah, the obligatory Hitler reference, something that hasn’t changed in the intervening 58 years.

But there does seem to be a connection between sports fanaticism and having little to no interest in politics. Rooting for sports mercenaries – who now make upwards of $60 million and more per year – and the cities they supposedly represent is a safety valve form of pseudo-tribalism that actually diminishes real tribalism, especially among Whites who thanks to the anti-White Caste System in sports (think DEI if you don’t know what the Caste System is yet) have been well trained to root and cheer for Blacks over their own kind.

There’s a mountain of direct and indirect evidence to support the reality that DEI came to sports in a major way just as the Permanent Cultural Revolution was fully implemented in 1968 and thereafter. To cite just one example, here are the athletes who have appeared on the most SI covers: Michael Jordan (50 covers), Muhammad Ali (40), LeBron James (25), Tiger Woods (24), Magic Johnson (23), and Kareem Abdul Jabar (22).

After Scorecard, some of the weekly featured articles were about the New York Giants, Yale defeating Harvard in their annual football matchup, a preview of College Basketball 1968, a car race in Daytona Beach, and a speedboat race at Lake Havasu, Arizona.

There was a weekly wrap-up of college football results from the previous week, and a column on Bridge by Charles Goren. At the back of the magazine was “For the Record,” a small print summary covering the week’s news in basketball, boating, football, handball, harness racing, hockey, horse racing, motor sports, and track and field. The right hand column displayed “Faces in the Crowd,” notable athletic achievements by mostly young people, a few of whom later became famous athletes. “The 19th Hole,” letters from readers, always occupied the last few pages of each issue in between the endless pages of advertisements.

The most interesting article to appear in this issue was titled “A Step to an Olympic Boycott,” by Jonathan Rodgers. About 200 people had recently attended a meeting of the Western Regional Black Youth Conference at a Baptist church in Los Angeles, for the purpose of deciding whether or not to call for a boycott by Black Olympians of the upcoming 1968 Summer games in Mexico City.

Reported SI: “The workshop was an orderly one, although outside the church a bloody fracas erupted between militant Black Power followers. . . and a group of self-styled Communists.”

The workshop was organized and led by Harry Edwards, a then 24-year-old part-time instructor of sociology at San Jose State. If his name sounds familiar, it’s because Edwards, now 82, has been publicized and praised time and again by the corporate media as a militant agitator on behalf of Blacks, or Negroes as they were still called in SI. It wasn’t until early 1968 that the term Negro was dropped, seemingly overnight, and replaced with Black and later African-American, though that seven-syllable tag never really caught on like Black did and still does.

Whether Edwards was an outright communist like some of those engaging in skirmishes outside the church isn’t clear, but there’s no doubt that he was very militant, although he doesn’t seem to have ever been criticized by anyone in the establishment. Curious how that works, isn’t it? Among others quotes, Edwards says of Black athletes and the Olympics: “It’s time for the Black people to stand up as men and women and refuse to be utilized as performing animals for a little extra dog food. You see, this may be our last opportunity to settle this mess short of violence.”

Harry Edwards, now in his 80s and still at it

For a “performing animal,” Edwards seemed to have attained a position of privilege even then at the age of 24. He was a center on San Jose State’s basketball team, then went to Cornell and obtained two advanced degrees and was working on his Ph.D. at the time of this issue of SI.

As it turned out, there was no Black boycott of the memorable 1968 Mexico City Olympics. But the most remembered event to this day was when two Black U.S. sprinters, John Carlos and Tommy Smith, who had finished first and second in the 200 meter sprint, looked down and raised clenched fists in the air while the national anthem played. Harry Edwards, the life-long militant who was always embraced and promoted by the system he was supposedly fighting against, played a large role in bringing about Carlos’ and Smith’s act of protest.

Tommie Smith (center) and John Carlos (right) after receiving their medals

Looking at the advertisements and comparing them to today is always instructive. The majority of the ads in the 12/4/67 SI featured a picture of the product being pushed. When people were shown they were invariably White, usually young or middle-aged, well-dressed and looking complacent but not giddy unlike today when Whites are rarely seen in advertising and when they are they are often shown acting orgasmic after biting into a hamburger or candy bar.

The car ads are always fun to look at, cars like the Toronado with its cool name and looks. The headline for that one is “Toronado. Built for leaders, not followers,” with a picture of White man about 40 years old in a suit standing beside a burgundy colored Toronado.

1967 Toronado

Sports Illustrated in late 1967 was still geared primarily to middle class White sports fans, mostly men. That was reflected in the articles and ads. But the article about Harry Edwards and the proposed Black boycott of the Olympics was an important harbinger of what was to come as the Permanent Cultural Revolution was fully unleashed in 1968, perhaps still the most fateful year in American history.

Postcards from the Empire is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Postcards from the Empire

Serving the Interests of Jewry: Behind Argentina’s Latest Move Against Iran

/3 Comments/in /by

Argentine President Javier Milei formally designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization on March 31, 2026, placing Buenos Aires squarely alongside Washington and Tel Aviv in their escalating confrontation with Iran. The decision drew praise from Israeli officials and condemnation from Iran, which dismissed the move as a capitulation to American and Zionist pressure.

Yet Milei’s action should not be understood as a dramatic departure from recent Argentine foreign policy. It represents instead the logical culmination of a strongly pro-Israel trajectory that began under his predecessor Mauricio Macri — who designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization in 2019 and deepened security cooperation with Tel Aviv — and has now reached its most exaggerated expression under Milei.

Understanding this trajectory requires excavating the complicated history connecting Argentina, Israel, and Iran across nearly eight decades of diplomatic maneuvering, terrorist violence, and contested narratives.

Early Relations

Argentina recognized the State of Israel in 1949, establishing formal diplomatic ties that would persist through decades of political upheaval in both countries. Argentina hosted Latin America’s largest Jewish community, concentrated heavily in Buenos Aires, which gave the relationship a domestic dimension absent in other South American nations.

But Argentina also served as a refuge for Nazi officials fleeing European justice after World War II. SS officer Adolf Eichmann lived in Buenos Aires under an assumed identity until Mossad agents abducted him in May 1960 and transported him to Israel for trial and eventual execution. The operation, conducted without Argentine knowledge or permission, provoked a diplomatic crisis. Buenos Aires filed a complaint with the United Nations Security Council, which passed a resolution declaring that Israel had violated Argentine sovereignty.

This pattern of Israeli unilateralism and Argentine protest would repeat throughout the following decades, establishing a template for relations defined simultaneously by cooperation and tension.

The Dirty War Years

Argentina’s military dictatorship from 1976 to 1983 produced its own tense dynamics. The junta waged a punitive campaign against leftists, dissidents, and perceived subversives, kidnapping, torturing, and killing an estimated 30,000 people. Jews were overrepresented among the victims. According to human rights organizations, Jews comprised between 5 and 12 percent of the detained and disappeared despite constituting less than one percent of the national population, suggesting that the junta disproportionately targeted the Jewish community.

Israeli relations with the junta nonetheless remained functional throughout this period. Cold War imperatives placed anti-communism above human rights considerations. As revealed by declassified British Foreign Office documents, Israel continued arms sales and military cooperation with the Argentine government even as reports of atrocities mounted, with Israeli military exports to the junta estimated at between $700 million and $1 billion. Democracy returned under President Raúl Alfonsín in 1983, who prosecuted members of the junta for their crimes while maintaining stable relations with Israel.

The Menemato

Carlos Menem subsequently assumed the presidency in 1989 and immediately reoriented Argentine foreign policy toward the Western camp. A Peronist of Syrian extraction who had converted from Islam to Catholicism, Menem sent warships to join the American-led coalition in the 1991 Gulf War, making Argentina the only Latin American country to contribute forces to the coalition. He cultivated close ties with Washington and, through that relationship, with Jerusalem. It was during this period of Western alignment that Argentina experienced the two deadliest terrorist attacks in its history.

On March 17, 1992, a suicide bomber drove a truck packed with explosives into the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, killing 29 people and wounding 242. Two years later, on July 18, 1994, another truck bomb destroyed the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association building, killing 85 and injuring hundreds more. The AMIA attack remains the deadliest terrorist incident in Argentine history.

Argentine investigators, collaborating closely with Israeli intelligence, eventually concluded that Iran and Hezbollah orchestrated both attacks. The official narrative, affirmed by Argentina’s Court of Cassation in a landmark 2024 ruling, held that Tehran ordered the bombings in retaliation for Argentina canceling three contracts that would have provided Iran with nuclear technology — pressure meant to coerce Buenos Aires into reversing course. Interpol issued red notices for six Iranian officials at Argentina’s request, among them Ahmad Vahidi, who commanded the Quds Force at the time of the 1994 attack and has since risen to lead the IRGC itself.

However, investigative journalists like Gareth Porter have challenged the evidentiary foundation for these accusations. Porter has pointed to the procedural chaos that plagued the investigation from its inception, including missing evidence, recanted testimony, and abandoned leads. He has argued that the case against Iran rests heavily on testimony from defectors with questionable credibility and intelligence assessments that have never been independently verified. Porter has noted that the original investigation initially focused on a “local connection” involving corrupt Argentine police officials before abruptly pivoting to the Iranian theory under pressure from Israeli and American intelligence services.

In 2004, an Argentine federal court declared the original investigation null and void, finding that police and intelligence officials had deliberately sabotaged the probe by paying a key witness $400,000 to fabricate testimony implicating Buenos Aires police officers. Judge Galeano was subsequently impeached and later jailed for his role in the cover-up. The truth of what happened in 1992 and 1994 remains contested to this day.

The Kirchner Interlude

By the time that damning judicial ruling arrived, Argentina had already entered a new political era. Néstor Kirchner took office in 2003 and, together with his wife and successor Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, governed Argentina for 12 years. The Kirchner administrations pursued a markedly different approach to the AMIA case and relations with Iran.

On January 27, 2013, Cristina Kirchner signed a memorandum of understanding with Tehran establishing a joint “truth commission” to investigate the bombing. Critics — including the Argentine Jewish community organization DAIA and special prosecutor Alberto Nisman — denounced the agreement as a betrayal of the victims and an attempt to shield Iranian suspects from accountability. Kirchner and her supporters argued it represented the only realistic path toward answers given Iran’s categorical refusal to extradite its citizens. The memorandum never entered into force: Argentina’s Congress approved it, but Iran’s parliament did not ratify it, and Argentine courts subsequently declared it unconstitutional.

The controversy reached its explosive climax in January 2015 when Alberto Nisman, the special prosecutor who had spent a decade constructing the case against Iran, was found dead in his Buenos Aires apartment with a gunshot wound to the head. He died the day before he was scheduled to present evidence to Congress allegedly demonstrating that Kirchner had conspired to cover up Iranian involvement in exchange for favorable oil agreements.

Nisman’s death was initially classified as suicide. It was subsequently reclassified as murder. No one has been convicted. The case remains Argentina’s most infamous unsolved crime.

Macri and the Pro-Israel Pivot

The scandal cast a long shadow over the final months of Kirchner’s presidency. Mauricio Macri defeated the Kirchnerist candidate Daniel Scioli in 2015 and immediately reversed course on Iran policy. Within days of taking office in December 2015, Macri’s Justice Ministry withdrew the Kirchner government’s appeal of a court ruling that had declared the Iran memorandum unconstitutional, effectively killing the pact and restoring Argentina’s unilateral pursuit of the AMIA case. On July 18, 2019 — the exact 25th anniversary of the AMIA bombing — Argentina’s Financial Information Unit formally designated Hezbollah a terrorist organization and froze its assets, making Argentina the first country in Latin America to do so without distinguishing between a “military wing” and a “political wing.” The unit stated that “Hezbollah continues to represent a current and active threat to national security and the integrity of the financial, economic order of the Argentine Republic.”

Milei as Macri on Steroids

This pivot established the foundation upon which Milei would build. Javier Milei campaigned as a libertarian radical promising to slash the state, dollarize the economy, and align Argentina unambiguously with the United States and Israel. He has described himself as philosophically Jewish and has expressed interest in converting to Judaism. He has pledged to move the Argentine embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a symbolic gesture that would place Argentina among a tiny handful of nations recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the contested city.

The IRGC designation represents the most dramatic manifestation yet of Milei’s orientation. By formally labeling the Revolutionary Guards a terrorist organization, Argentina joins a bloc that includes the United States, Canada, Australia, the European Union, and several other governments. The designation carries practical consequences for any IRGC-linked individuals or assets operating in Argentina and signals Buenos Aires’s eagerness to participate actively in the American and Israeli pressure campaign against Tehran.

Far from being a sudden policy pivot, this designation marks the ultimate intensification of a pro-Zionist trajectory that has characterized Argentine foreign affairs for decades. In his eagerness to sanction the IRGC, Milei is signaling clearly to world Jewry that he is their most steadfast and loyal servant in the Latin American theater.

 

Jailed for Putting Up Legal and Truthful Stickers on Lamp Posts 

/9 Comments/in , /by

For American readers what I am about to write about the mother country may sound unbelievable, but, incredibly, it is true. In 2024, a young signpost maker and father of one called Sam Melia was jailed for putting perfectly legal stickers on lamp posts.

The leader of the Hundred Hands campaign and activist in a group called Patriotic Alternative, the then 34-year-old had designed a series of anti-immigration stickers to call attention to the fact that the English will soon be a minority in their own country and that Pakistanis have a tendency to groom and rape English girls. It was determined that the stickers were perfectly legal, if “extreme,” an assertion which makes you wonder if England is genuinely governed by the rule of law.

However, Melia had a jokey Hitler poster in a garage which he used as a gym during Covid, and his wife owned a copy of a book by Sir Oswald Mosley, the leader of the British Union of Fascists in the 1930s. Accordingly, it was decided that Melia must be motivated by a desire to “stir up racial hatred.” He was found guilty by a partially non-White jury and the judge made it clear that he would make an example of him.

One of the results of this Soviet-like show trial and imprisonment has been Melia’s poignant, fascinating and inspiring prison memoir Legal, Truthful, Guilty: Diary of a Political Prisoner. Beginning with the details of the “crimes” and the trial, Melia takes into the frankly jaw-dropping world of the English prison system. The first thing we realise is just how corrupt it is. The “screws,” though there are some good ones who are sympathetic to Melia’s plight (away from his pregnant wife and young daughter), seem to be, in effect, rather lazy people. They are perfectly content to permit the prisoners to run the prison, to develop their own hierarchy and even to sell drugs, as long as the situation doesn’t get too violent.

Socially skilled, and probably more intelligent than most of the prisoners on his wing, Melia is quite adept at climbing this hierarchy – in which the new currency is “vapes” – but, alas, they keep moving him to different wings or different prisons, so he has to start the process all over again. We also discover that almost everybody on the sex offender wing is Muslim but non-Muslims can, and do, sign up for special Eid feasts.

As a political prisoner, and one hoping for early release, Melia is subject to regular Maoist struggle sessions with a male social worker who is so deeply indoctrinated with Woke and so lacking in the ability to think that he and his type are concerned that Melia “thinks Black people aren’t White Britons.” The preceding, stresses Melia, is a genuine quote and he proves this by publishing the correspondence. Their aim is to “re-align Mr Melia’s mindset.” The chap from the anti-terrorist group “Prevent” concludes that Sam is no threat to anybody, but the torture of struggle sessions – in which Sam is logical and the man with power insanely tries to make Sam accept that black is white – must continue. At one point, the authorities are so cruel that they declare – though eventually change their minds – that his children cannot visit Melia in jail as his anti-Woke ideas might somehow lead a toddler and a baby into terrorism.

Melia’s story made me realise, more clearly than ever, how prison turns men into children. Having almost no agency, the slightest bit of power becomes extremely precious to your sense of self-worth and the smallest things matter hugely. Melia occupies his time making match-stick models and takes a massive amount of pride in them. Prisoners try to brag about their worldly success by displaying expensive tracksuits in their cells, just as children would show off their expensive and sought-after toys. You have to be careful, though, because some people in prison, like angry children, will destroy “anything nice.” The prison’s “mob” tends to control the canteen and uses this power to steal food for its members, such that ordinary prisoners are told that the hamburgers to which they are entitled have mysteriously already run out.

Melia muses that the problem with the British is that they are “coddled, fat, pacified and outwardly happy”, and the British are unlikely to seriously fight to get their country back until that is no longer the case. However, his memoir attests to just how self-defeating the system is. Melia is now regarded by many on the nationalist right as a political hero. He has been subjected to terrible psychological suffering – including a year on licence in which he was banned from all political activity and had to tell the authorities with whom he socialised as he was barred from meeting or contacting “far right” people – but the result is that he is more galvanized and prominent than ever.

Having read his book, I was left with many questions: How can they be so cruel? How can they be so unreasonable? My conclusion was that these people – so heavily invested in the regime – probably feel a bit like Eastern European government workers in the 1980s. On some level they know that something is about to change and it must not be allowed to change because, as happened in East Germany, the people will not easily forgive them for being the cowardly agents of a decadent tyranny.

My interview with Sam Melia can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me6vvWoUzL4&t=1s

White Lives Matter

/23 Comments/in /by

Realistic Fiction on Replacement Immigration

Ayo, my name Jessica, I’m the po-po. Well… not all the time tho! Some days I’m more like a policeman, dependin on how I’m feelin that day. Shit, what it matter anyway? Same damn uniform, right?

My job is to sit there and dig through all the papers our services snatch from them right-wing nutjobs. All damn day I’m neck-deep in straight hate. It’s heavy, fam, real emotionally taxin.

Good thing I got trained up proper tho. Them IDF folks — they the pros at handlin terrorists — come through regular and school us. And then we got Mrs. Sickberg from the Jewish Center for Stoppin Extremism. She pull up and talk that talk about hate, antisemitism, racism, all that intolerance shit. She know it too — her grandma got gassed at Auschwitz, so she ain’t playin.

Last time she came through she was breakin down this “tikkun olam” thing. I ain’t catch every piece of it, shit complicated, but from what I got it’s like: heal the world, fix it, flip it right-side up. She say the world fucked up right now, upside-down, and her people the only ones God picked to straighten it out. Without them? Humanity cooked. Done. She straight said: “Y’all goyim just supposed to do the best y’all can to help us.”

That shit fire me up, make me feel like what I do actually matter. Help me peep through all the slick games these terrorists be runnin. So yeah — that wild-ass White Lives Matter document y’all ‘bout to read from some dude in Montreal? That’s just Tuesday for me. Now that Canada in the USA, CIA slid it over ‘cause we the experts on this type crazy.

I ain’t even know what this crackhead tryna say, but it damn sure ain’t got nothin to do with how shit really is. Immigration goin smooth as hell. Ain’t no crime wave. Everybody — Black, White, Brown, whatever — gettin along just fine. We out here headin straight into that New World Order where everybody gon live peaceful, eatin good, vibin.

Best part? You can get any damn food you want now, from anywhere. My momma’s Irish colcannon potatoes, Tunisian shish kebab, Indian tandoori chicken, or my pops’ Nigerian kapenta and chambo — it’s right there at ya finger tips, bruh. That’s worth a lil inconvenience when you mixin folks from all over the globe, all different races and civilizations. Ain’t been no major fuck-ups. I would know… I’m the police. Sometimes policeman… depend on how I feel. Long as I’m feelin good, what it matter?***

White Lives Matter

While shopping in downtown Montreal, I stumbled upon a crowded St. Catherine Street. Thousands of West Indians were marching to the sound of drums and no-border music. Women in traditional costumes and tall, bare-chested men contorted themselves on the pavement, spellbound by the frenzied rhythms. White smoke spurted over the dancers as they followed the floats, swaying. Police officers formed a protective cordon around this wild crowd that penetrated the heart of the city like a giant phallus.

I thought to myself as I walked downtown that I had nothing on the surface against Blacks and Third World immigrants in general. But I wondered if it was right for us to open wide to them the doors of our home. That’s a lot of people, 50,000+ immigrants a year for a territory of 8 million people. Proportionally, that’s much more than the immigration to England, France, or Germany. Congolese, North Africans, Haitians, Chinese, Latinos, Indians, and others. To this number must be added Syrian and Libyan refugees, not to mention Sudanese, Somalis, Afghans, Palestinians, Iraqis, and other unfortunate people who are fleeing the wars we are waging on their countries for bogus humanitarian reasons. And that’s not counting the illegals who have been coming in freely since Governor Carney opened the borders of the region of Quebec and Montreal declared itself a sanctuary city. We don’t realize it right away, the invasion is insidious, until one day we wake up as a minority in our own country.

Arriving in front of the Ogilvy store, in the middle of this ebony-Black crowd, I felt like an intruder who surprises a couple making love. Feeling completely out of place, I was shaving the walls, my head down and in a hurry to leave this place invaded by people who don’t have the same smell as my own kind, and who, to tell the truth, make me uncomfortable.

I thought of the hundreds of Black people who invade the pool on hot days. I once had the misfortune to ask a White lifeguard why the silhouette on the safety sign at the entrance to the pool was brown. She curtly replied that if I had looked harder, I would have seen the sign with a White silhouette on the other side of the lifeguard booth; lucky she told me, because placed where it was, no one could see it. “Quebec last time I checked being a White country though,” I replied, “the posters should normally reflect that reality, don’t you think?” She turned her back on me visibly offended, and I left to change without saying a word. I could see that it was useless to insist; that this girl of my race had willingly accepted that foreign populations were taking over our land. Five minutes later, as I was getting dressed in the locker room, a tall, White six-footer came up to me and told me that I would be banned for life from the pool if I ever made another comment like that. I didn’t answer him, and left with a heavy heart knowing that I would never set foot in that sport’s center again. As a White man, I didn’t feel like I belonged there anymore.

It’s not the first time this has happened to me. Last year, I was kicked out of a coffee shop I had been frequenting for a long time for alleged racism. I had dared to put a new waiter of Arab-Berber origin in his place because he had been insolent with me when I placed my order and during his service. The person in charge, a small effeminate White man, never even asked me why I had reacted that way, he immediately assumed that I was racist, and that was the only possible explanation.

And then, as I continued to walk downtown, I remembered that internal revenue official who gave me a hard time when I had to get my tax return corrected. It’s no fun being served by these people. You are dealing with strangers who are not of your race or ethnic group and therefore have no affinity with you. Being from a different culture, they are not always easy to understand because they do not speak and reason like we do. In the interest of egalitarianism, many of these people are hired not for their skills, but for the colour of their skin. The department has quotas to meet in order to ensure that diversity is respected. What does not help is that these employees, parachuted into our midst without our consent, by hostile elites, have it in their heads, because of woke propaganda, that Whites are responsible for all their problems. As soon as they are in a position of power, they don’t hesitate to treat us like shit, forgive my language, but there is no other way to describe what I felt when I came into contact with this civil servant who treated me with the arrogance and condescension of those who despise you and who feel stronger than you.

My old mother came to mind. When I visited her in the Long-Term Care Center where she was to stay at the end of her life, she sometimes complained about the Black people who looked after her. She felt uncomfortable with them. At the end of her life, she would have preferred to be cared for by her own people. Who could blame her, I thought? In the midst of this West Indian parade, I understood exactly what she meant. Birds of a feather flock together, it’s a law of nature that applies to all races and ethnic groups.

I told myself when I arrived at the corner of McGill and Sainte-Catherine that, in the interest of diversity, the systematic employment of people from the Third World in positions of greater or lesser importance was a serious mistake. This policy will lower the general level of competitiveness of the state. The populations with which the authorities intend to replace us come from failed countries that are not going anywhere. The average intelligence quotient (IQ) of sub-Saharan populations, for example, is about 70, and that of North Africans, 85. With an average IQ below 100, it is impossible to run a modern country like ours. In fact, a drop of only a few points in the average IQ lowers the gross national income by several points. The influx of foreign workers also lowers wages; it is a simple matter of supply and demand; under these conditions, the labour market becomes an employers’ market. Furthermore, these economic migrants all vote for those who bring them in by the plane full. And at the rate they are arriving, the natives will soon be in the minority and never able again to elect a government that represents their interests. Moreover, the social charges increase considerably, as many of these unskilled workers, unable or unwilling to find a job, end up on welfare, which represents a significant improvement in their living conditions, but an equally significant deterioration in ours. These combined factors result in an increase in the cost of living, poverty, debt, social tensions and crime, and a consequent decrease in the level of health, life expectancy, trust, and the sense of ethnic belonging, an anthropological need that makes people of the same ethnicity or race feel confident and happy to live together.

The “sociostat” is out of whack, nothing is going right.

As I arrived at Simmons store where a crowd of West Indian onlookers was waiting for the parade, I thought this was predictable. In the market for natural selection, peoples, races, groups, individuals compete with each other. The strongest prevail and dominate the weakest. It is a law of nature written in our genes that the culture of diversity will never change.

Then, in the midst of this rant on replacement immigration, I bumped into a tall Black man with his back to me. He turned around and looked at me awkwardly, giving me a few friendly pats on the shoulder to let me know in his own way that everything was fine, that I had nothing to fear from him and his people, and that I was still at home. I had the unfortunate impression that this gentleman, knowing full well what was going on, was uncomfortable for me. But this little pat on the back that was meant to be reassuring made me even more anxious. I actually had everything to fear from this home invasion, that fell upon us without warning. If I hadn’t decided to go shopping downtown that day, I would never have realized that there were so many West Indians in Montreal.

Finally, alone, far from the tom-toms and the crowd, sitting on a bench in front of the Mary Queen of the World Cathedral, I asked myself if I was not a racist, if I was not a bad Christian, if I should not voluntarily give up my place to these good people, out of charity, as Jesuit Pope Francis Bergoglio invites us to do. Jesus said, “Love your neighbour as yourself.” Now, my neighbour of the Third World would also like to live in a modern country like mine, free from need and misery. Why not give him a turnkey solution? To each his turn. And then, when all the races will be one, when there will be no rich people, no religions, no nations, and no borders “men will finally live of love and there will be no more wars or injustices… my brother,” sang Raymond Lévesque… that happy fool.

I left on these dark thoughts. I hesitated to continue my reflection. People say so many bad things about people like me who don’t think the right way. Then I told myself that I had no reason to give them my country out of love; that I was neither a racist nor a bad Christian, but a guy who was rooted in reality and who cared about loving his ancestors and defending his family, race, culture, country, and civilization. A people or a person who respects himself does not voluntarily commit suicide out of charity or fear of being called a racist. A people or a person who respects himself takes his rightful place and defends it against those who seek to destroy it in order to achieve their impossible goals.

I was pretty pumped: No one voted for this fiasco. No one asked our opinion, Governor Carney. You and the donators who run the Canadian state forced it on us, whether we like it or not. Diversity isn’t our strength, Mr. Carney, it’s our weakness. Before we were strengthened, we could walk around town without fear of being robbed, raped or stabbed; before they were politized to the left, judges and police enforced the law, criminals didn’t get off with a slap on the wrist and victims got justice. The White race mattered as much as any other race. The majority ruled as it should in any self-respecting democracy and candidates applying for any position were hired for their qualifications, not for the sake of parity. We could walk around the city without fear of being robbed, raped, or knifed; there were no garbage cans and filth here and there and our walls were free of graffiti; men didn’t marry men; girls didn’t practice cunnilingus on an industrial scale; they made children instead of having a pet, they didn’t think they were men, they didn’t assert themselves by voluntarily making themselves obese; we didn’t mutilate our bodies with tattoos. and piercings in order to look like a Christmas tree; we said “sorry,” “please,” “after you,” “thank you,” “hello,” and “goodbye” to each other; our public schools were much better than they are now, efficient, clean, orderly, and above all racially and ethnically uniform; we didn’t teach students, almost before they learned to read and write, the art of sodomy and masturbation and we didn’t make them believe that they could choose their sex! We used to look down on delinquents, fat people, and sexual deviants. We didn’t hurt them, but we made sure they didn’t encourage younger kids to copy them. It was common sense. Now we do the exact opposite: we encourage the majority to imitate these tiny minorities that are used as wedges to divide and breakup White societies. What was considered a sin becomes a virtue, the normal becomes abnormal, the good becomes evil. It’s really the world upside down. We’ve come a long way, Mr. Carney, since you enriched us with diversity.

My thoughts went to Jews like George Soros. You have to hate how Jews like him use their power to destroy our race and civilization. An army of Jews and their non-Jewish vassals of the ilk of Starmer, Carney, and Macron have been engaged in anti-White and anti-Western activities for decades. They dirty our traditions; falsify our history; flood us with migrants from the Third World; inflame minorities against us; pervert our morals with pornography and a host of other such filth; push drugs, abortion, pets, zoophilia, pedophilia, gay marriage, feminism; destroy by guilt our identity and pride. Given all this, it would be absurd and cowardly NOT to hate Jews like Soros, one of the kingpins of this anti-civilization onslaught.

Since our disconnected elites will persist in the same suicidal policy, without our consent, I decided to take matters into my own hands in my own living space. I am at war, you understand, a low-key war for now, an information war that does not include any verbal or physical violence, but a war nonetheless. And if the current socio-political situation worries you, dear brothers and sisters, I advise you to follow my example in whichever way you see fit. It is no longer time to stay in your corner, waiting for a miracle. Our only chance to win this war is to unite and fight back. Left to our own devices without the support of our “elites” trapped in their psychopathic ambitions, if we want to survive in the countries of our ancestors that we love above all else, this is our only way out.

When I finally arrived home, I was totally liberated, detoxified, red-pilled. I had sorted out my confused ideas about the current demographic and social situation. From now on, I will do everything in my power to make sure my people win this fight. And nobody will stop me. They can ruin me, call me an antisemite, destroy my reputation, throw me in jail, torture me or kill me, I will fight to the end.

In this defensive war—and I stress the word “defensive” because we didn’t seek it—that we must wage to keep our hard-won place, those who love each other the most will triumph. It’s a simple matter of common sense.

***

 CIA ain’t waste no time — sent that supremacist-ass fool straight to Rehabilitation Camp down in Miami. That anti-terror squad of the Islamist Region of New York that grabbed him? They found forbidden books stuffed in the walls, floors, even the damn ceiling — no cap! They pulled a little bust of that devil General Lee too. If after a whole year this hard-headed terrorist don’t get right in the head, they gon execute him… for his own good, like the IDF does to those awful Palestinian kids. We ain’t got time to play with these radicalized racists. The Globalist New World Order marchin forward… and ain’t nobody stoppin it!

Special Police Constable Jessica Jess Murphy-M’Bouli
Davos Department of Thought Control