Featured Articles

Bob Carr on the Australian Jewish Lobby

/8 Comments/in , /by

The following are excerpts from an interview with Bob Carr, former Australian premier for New South Wales—the largest state in Australia and home of that nation’s largest city, Sydney. Carr, 77, served as premier from 1995 to 2005, and then later as Foreign Minister (2012–2013). He is a member of the Labor Party, which leans center-left in politics.  When in office, he supported efforts to reduce immigration into Australia; he was also a defender of Julian Assange.  Early in his career, Carr supported Israel but his views shifted over time as he learned more about the situation in Palestine.  Recently, he took part in the pro-Palestine “March for Humanity” in Sydney (August 3), in which between 100,000 and 300,000 people took to the streets to protest the genocide in Gaza.

The Islamic news channel OnePath Network interviewed Carr, which aired August 22.  The discussion focused primarily on the situation in Gaza, the Australian Jewish Lobby, and the practical politics of dealing with a potent political adversary.  It is a strikingly honest discussion by Carr, perhaps the most open and explicit by any major Australian leader.

The following are highlights from the 40-minute interview (in full here).  The Islamic interviewer is unnamed, apparently by intention.  I note here that I used an auto-transcription process to generate the following text, and so there are some slight deviations in wording (but not meaning) from the actual video.  Notable in Carr’s language is the use of ‘Jewish’ rather than simply ‘Israeli’; it is a small but significant shift in emphasis that gets closer to the heart of the problem.

*****

OnePath:  Today, we are joined by one of the most experienced figures in Australian politics, former Australian Foreign Minister, and the longest-serving Premier of New South Wales, the honorable Bob Carr. Thank you for being with us, Bob.

Carr:  It is my pleasure to be with you and talk to the community.

OnePath:  Today, Bob, you are recognized as one of the strongest critics of Israel in Australia and an advocate for Palestinian rights. You have been famously photographed among those who led the historic march, the March for Humanity across the iconic Sydney Harbor Bridge. Early in your career in 1977, you co-founded Friends of Israel in the Labor Party with Bob Hawke, earning you a reputation, as you know, as a respected friend and ally of Israel. What was the specific moment in your career when your perspective changed?

Carr:  I think it was gradual, reflecting me getting to know Palestinians and their stories. Because none of us in the seventies knew a Palestinian, or knew the story of a Palestinian family, or knew what the massacres that were part of the establishment of the State of Israel were. We didn’t know that back then. That was not on anyone’s mind, not even the educated person in the Western world. We were blind to that story. And one of the simmering concerns that undermined any faith I had in the State of Israel was the spread of settlements.

About the late 1990s and early 2000s, it was pretty clear that the settlements were serious. And they would, at least, hinder the establishment of the Palestinian state, and it appears they were intent on preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state, despite all the assurances we received from the spokespeople of Israel. And today, even as we speak, this is being confirmed through explicit statements from members of the Israeli cabinet that these settlements will prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.

OnePath (3:10): Yes, that is interesting. I want to take you back to the time when you were the Foreign Minister of Australia [in 2013], when the United Nations wanted to hold a vote to upgrade Palestine’s status to a non-member observer state. The Prime Minister at that time, Julia Gillard, wanted to follow the United States and Israel, but you objected and succeeded in securing an abstention from the vote.  In your memoirs, you later asked whether the Labor Party’s reliance on donations from the Jewish community had shaped its stance. How significant was that moment for you in obtaining the abstention, and what did that experience teach you about Australian politics?

Carr:  The big thing it taught me is that promoting Palestinian rights at a time when it was considered a dangerous opinion was really like pushing against a half-open door.  Because when I tested my opinion with the Parliamentary Labor Party, after Julia Gillard made it clear in the Cabinet that she would not change to alter our vote in the General Assembly [to upgrade Palestine’s status], when I tested it in the party caucus, I found that they feel the same way as I do toward Israel and toward its contempt, its almost hidden contempt, for the two-state solution.

The majority of the Cabinet agreed with me that Australia should not oppose this resolution in the General Assembly to upgrade the status of the Palestinian delegation. It was interesting what was said around the cabinet table, when they were saying, instead of abstaining from voting, why don’t we vote Yes? Why don’t we vote Yes? But this was considered a risky opinion when I was arguing against the Prime Minister’s wishes, who was my boss; but the big lesson from that is that the ordinary members of parliament, whom I hadn’t yet asked for their opinions, had reached the same position I had. The support for Israel was very shallow, and people like me started questioning the entire settlement expansion process.

OnePath (5:47):  As you know, in the United States, lobbying groups like AIPAC hold big sway over politicians through donations and funded trips to Israel. You have previously spoken about a similar influence of the Israeli lobby here in Australia. Based on your experience and knowledge, how deep is this influence, and should Australians be concerned?

Carr:  I think Australians should be concerned.  I have said, and I am recorded as having said, that the Israeli lobby—I believe the [term] ‘Jewish-Israeli Lobby’ is more accurate, because that is the term used by AIJAC [Australia Israel and Jewish Affairs Council]—the Jewish-Israeli Lobby in Australia is a foreign influence operation.  It is designed to place Israel’s interests above Australia’s in its foreign policy.  No one else has such a well-funded operation. No one else, no other country, has an operation with offices in every Australian capital city.  No one else organizes donations to try to raise their influence, like the Jewish Lobby in Australia does.

Now, this is simply a fact of life, and I recorded it in my diary as Foreign Minister, and it has never been contradicted.  …

And the model for the Jewish Lobby is what happens in the United States.  If any member of Congress or the Senate expresses a view criticizing Israel or sympathizing with the Palestinian cause, you can guarantee that someone will receive funding from pro-Israel supporters to run against them in the next primary  And the person they find to run against the incumbent, he might be someone who has never expressed a view about Israel and Palestine, but there will be a well-funded opponent.

Now, I remember years ago, I had a meeting with someone from the Jewish Lobby in Washington who spelled this out to us.  He explained to us… For a group of us, who were considered supporters of Israel, as we were at that time, this is how they operate.  And if there is anyone, even in a remote Rocky Mountain state, or in a state with an insignificant population like Montana, any member of Congress who departs from the pro-Israel line can be guaranteed of having a well-funded opponent in the primary elections.

OnePath (8:45):  In the Australian context, how does this affect democracy?

Carr:  Oh, it’s a distortion of democracy because instead of considering the priorities and interests of our foreign policy, we are swayed by taking the desires of the Jewish community into account.  And they are very explicit that they… I mean, if there is the slightest departure, they will immediately seek a meeting with the Prime Minister to present their case. The prime ministers from the Liberal side—Malcolm Fraser was one of them—have confirmed this. Certainly Kevin Rudd confirms that. When he made the decision to kick out two Mossad agents in the Israeli embassy in Canberra, because Mossad, in an operation in the Gulf states, used someone holding an Australian passport to complete its mission, Rudd protested.  And he was completely justified in doing so, and he expelled a couple of Mossad agents.  There was an immediate request from the leadership of the Jewish community in Australia to speak to the Prime Minister.

So the Lobby conflates their desires as a community with the making of Australia’s foreign policy, and I think people have only now just woken up to the sheer bravado and arrogance [of this]. They say, “Hang on, how dare you?”

I mean, I used to get this response all the time as Foreign Minister.  For example, and I like to be specific, here is a concrete example. As the Foreign Minister in New York for a meeting with the General Assembly, I issued a statement expressing opposition to the latest surge in Israeli settlements. And I got a request relayed thru Bruce Wolpe, advisor to Julia Gillard, to meet “the community,” to discuss this, referring to the leadership of the Jewish community.

And I told him, “No.” The opposition to the expansion of settlements is based on the fact that they are plainly illegal under international law. We oppose them in line with the policy of our like-minded allies, our partners—except for the United States, which does not use the word ‘illegal’, but at that time, used the word ‘illegitimate.’

So, I thought it was simply impertinent of the Jewish community to say, “Oh my goodness, the Australian Foreign Minister has expressed opposition to the expansion of settlements. We need to get him on line.”

OnePath (11:47):  Have you received any criticism for expressing this particular opinion?

Carr:  […]  I will not be silenced. I was not silenced when, as a premier, I agreed to a request to present a peace prize. It was not awarded by me, but by the University of Sydney, to the esteemed and respected Palestinian speaker—Hanan Ashrawi. And suddenly, there was a bullying campaign by the Jewish Lobby to force me, as the Premier of New South Wales, to pull out from the event.

Now, I had given my word that I would do it. I thought it was something that would support Israel’s interests, because it would be an award and acknowledgement for a Palestinian who supports a peaceful road toward Palestinian statehood.

It wasn’t good enough for them. That wasn’t enough. So they launched a campaign of petitions and lobbying. I received a phone call from a prominent figure in the business world asking me why I was doing this—as if talking to representatives of the Palestinian people was abnormal behavior.  She was able to have conversations with left-leaning Israeli politicians, but somehow it was considered out of bonds for me, as the Premier of New South Wales, to speak with [Ashrawi] and present an award, an award that was not given by me, but by the University of Sydney.

And they got Catherine Greiner, who was a member of the committee that awarded the prize, to pull out from the function. And Lucy Turnbull, who was then, I believe, the Deputy Mayor of the city, pulled out.

And I just said, “I will not pull out.” I gave my word that I would present this peace prize. My commitment is taken seriously by a large Arab-background community, in New South Wales, indeed in Australia. And also by a small Palestinian community. How would it be if, after giving my word, I succumbed to lobbying from another community and turned my back? It would have been appalling. I stood firm. …

OnePath (14:28):  You are also a man of integrity. You have been very outspoken about Gaza, even comparing the scenes to Holocaust-like scenarios. In response to your comments, Alex Ryvchin from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry described your views, and I quote, as “shameful and utterly despicable.” He said that you show deep contempt for members of the Jewish community. [Ryvchin in a video clip:] “Look, it’s shameful and utterly despicable, showing his deep contempt for members of the Jewish community, especially its leadership.” How do you respond to comments like these? And do you still stand by your statements?

Carr:  I stand by them absolutely, and they have grown stronger since I said them.  Evidence of war crimes has accumulated, especially the use of famine against civilians. The analogy I used was a reference to the Warsaw Ghetto. The starvation of men, women, and children, the starvation of civilians, has been confirmed, has been confirmed. …

OnePath (16:28):  Are you saying it’s genocide?

Carr:  Yes. Yes. If you destroy eighty percent of the people’s housing, if you cut off their supplies of food and medicine, if you increase the targeting of civilians, you will allow and live with it and consider it collateral damage.  If you do not allow drinking water, if you flood the camps with polluted water, causing the spread of diseases, if you do not allow access to medicine and food even for children or pregnant women in the hospital, what other word can you use?

What other word does the dictionary give us? What is another word you can find in the thesaurus, beside the planned murder of a people?

It is what the Convention against Genocide means, genocide, which was drafted and lobbied for by a very determined survivor of the Holocaust in Poland [the Jewish lawyer, Raphael Lemkin, in 1944].  This is directed against civilians, destroying their homes, and making them live in unsanitary conditions in tents. I can’t believe what additional evidence would be required for people to say, “If you do this to a people, to a population of two and a half million, it can only be described in terms of genocide.”

OnePath (18:20):  You previously said that the Israeli Lobby was able to stop even routine criticisms of settlement expansion, and I mentioned the settlements. From your perspective and understanding of the situation, how damaging do you think Israeli settlement policies are to the freedom and future of the Palestinian people, and what do you think the public needs to understand about this issue?

Carr:  […]  I started to worry about this type of settlement a quarter of a century ago. Australian Jews, who support Israel, reassured me, saying: “Don’t worry. Don’t worry, Bob. If there is a peace settlement, those settlements in the West Bank will be dismantled quickly. The Israeli people urgently want a peace deal.”

But now we know we were being lied to, when Netanyahu told me when I was in his office as Foreign Minister, that he wants a two-state solution.  And he had just given a speech a few days earlier supporting it.  He was lying. The plan all along was to use the settlements to block the possibility of establishing Palestinian sovereignty with the support of the world community in the West Bank. […]

With reports circulating that they [Gazans] will be offered the option to live in Libya or South Sudan, I ask the Israeli Lobby, I ask the supporters of Israel, can you put yourselves in the minds of [a Palestinian] family?  Their house was blown up. They left most of their belongings behind. They are embarking on a journey, perhaps on foot, because they cannot afford to rent a truck, toward a future in a tent.  Imagine how that would be. Where is the humanity of the people in the Jewish Lobby in Australia? They haven’t uttered a word of criticism about the behavior of the Israeli Defense Forces, not a word.

OneStep (23:18):  Recently, Australia took a bold step in its desire to recognize a Palestinian state. Despite the many conditions surrounding this recognition, it represents a major shift in Australia’s official stance.  Netanyahu came out to criticize Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese for his decision, and directed criticism at him on platform X, quoting: “History will remember Albanese for what he is; a weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned the Jews of Australia.”  You have met Netanyahu in person. What do you think of his comments?

Carr:  Well, even the Israeli Lobby, even the Jewish Lobby in Australia, say they have not been abandoned by Prime Minister Albanese. It’s an absurd smear, without any basis of evidence. And it’s shocking to say that, as it says everything about Netanyahu and nothing about Anthony Albanese…

Albanese should be granted the status of a hero, and I believe the Australian people will grant him that for standing up and branding this as wrong.  I think the reaction of Australians, including, interestingly, some Australian Jews, is that saying this about our Prime Minister is simply wrong. Even the Jewish Lobby in Australia does not support what Netanyahu did. […]

OneStep (29:40):  You are a former journalist, and we have seen some media outlets harshly criticize the Labor Party’s recognition of Palestine. Some of the headlines we’ve seen recently from The Australian, “A shameful day for Australia.” The Daily Telegraph says, “It’s a slap in the face.” Is the Australian media partially responsible for fanning division in the face of genocide accusations in Gaza?

Carr:  Yes. Well, the one thing I can say with confidence is that those media campaigns to defend Israel are not working. This doesn’t work. Public opinion has shifted. The majority of opinions support Albanese.  The same media sources that are trying to rally support for Netanyahu over our government, over our Prime Minister, were defending Peter Dutton and supporting his election as Prime Minister in the May elections. It had no effect. There are unified shifts in favor of the Labor Party in every state, in every electoral district across the country. […]

OneStep (37:22): Given the international arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu due to the alleged war crimes he committed in Gaza, should he come to Australia, do you think Australia should seek to arrest him if he comes here?

Carr:  We have no alternative but to arrest him. It is our obligation as a signatory to the treaty. And look at America, America did not sign the treaty. America does not believe in an international criminal justice system. We do. We have signed. We will be obligated to arrest him.

OneStep (37:55):  Do you think it’s time for Australia to impose some sanctions on Israel in response to what you and others have described as genocide in Gaza? And if so, what form should these sanctions take?

Carr:  If a state knowingly commits genocide, uproots civilians, sends them on death marches, reduces the population to walking corpses, expresses satisfaction with the death of Palestinian babies, and allows the IDF to shoot children, then how do we deal with that? Do we deal with the perpetrators of this like a normal nation with normal diplomatic contacts? I don’t think we can.

And I believe it is better to start by evaluating diplomatic options, including sanctions, and discussing with like-minded countries how to revise our relations with Israel, given Israel’s pursuit of an open, unabashed, and arguably proud policy of genocide against this exposed, vulnerable, and wretchedly weakened civilian people.  […]

OneStep:  Mr. Bob Carr, thank you very much for your time.

*****

All in all, a remarkable interview, one not likely to get much coverage in the US or Europe.  Carr comes across as a man who, after decades of trying to understand and compromise with the Jewish community, finally figured out, at age 77, that they are largely incorrigible liars, manipulators, and exploiters of human suffering for their own benefit.  Those of us who have spent years studying the Jewish Question are not surprised in the least, but it is encouraging to see that at least one major political figure is now willing to speak some words of truth.

Naturally, I take this as good news.  It certainly seems as if, for the Jews, the wheels are coming off the buggy.  And not just in one nation, but rather, for the first time in history, in the whole world—at once.  This could spell a radical, large-scale shift in non-Jewish and White attitudes toward Jews in general.  There is reason for hope.

Remember, if there is one lesson from history, it is this: It’s not “the Zionists,” not “the Israelis,” not “the globalists”…it’s the Jews.  And their time is quickly coming to an end.

Thomas Dalton, PhD, is the author or editor of some three dozen books on the Jews, Judaism, and the Jewish Question.  All his books can be found at www.clemensandblair.com.  See also his personal website, www.thomasdaltonphd.com.

 

Review of Gideon’s Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad

/4 Comments/in , /by

Gideon’s Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad
Gordon Thomas
St. Martin’s Griffin, 1999

3460 Words

I am wholly unqualified to assess Gordon Thomas’ 1999 work Gideon’s Spies as a history of Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad. Not only did I know little about the topic going in, but, given the murky and sensitive nature of the subject matter, I must assume that Thomas could publish only what the Mossad allowed him to publish—leaving out information that could harm or embarrass the agency or Israel itself. Further, given that people who work for intelligence agencies are by definition professional liars and conspirators, there is no way of telling how much of Thomas’ reporting is true. Sure, he does due diligence with his research and often reports events that can be verified through multiple sources. But when he secures interviews with Mossad agents, active and retired, or when he relates events that only this or that particular Mossad agent could have experienced, was he always given the whole truth? Who knows?

What I am qualified to assess, however, is the book’s readability and its value as non-fiction. In both cases, Gideon’s Spies succeeds well enough for an endorsement. It’s tightly written, suspenseful, evocative, and in parts utterly fascinating. Unless you possess secret information because you are A) a Mossad insider, B) an intelligence community expert, or C) an enemy of Israel that Israel hasn’t managed to kill yet, you will learn a lot from this book and walk away with a more realistic understanding of human nature. At least that was the case for me. As for a discourse on the just or unjust nature of Israel’s occupation of Arab lands or of Zionism itself, that is beyond the scope of this review. So is assessing the justice or lack thereof behind the Palestinian cause against Israel. My goals for this review are not so noble, nor so grand. Instead, I wish to summarize the main points of the book, retell some of the juicier bits for your enjoyment, and describe in detail newspaper magnate Robert Maxwell’s relationship with Mossad, which Thomas covers extensively. Maxwell, as most of us know, was a Mossad operative and the father of Ghislaine Maxwell, the former associate of the late Jeffrey Epstein, whose ghost has been in the news a lot recently.

Wanting to give us a feel for a typical Mossad operation, Thomas begins by relating the agency’s connection with the accidental deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales, and her lover Dodi Al-Fayed in 1997. Mossad had been grooming one Henri Paul, the assistant chief of the Paris Ritz Hotel, as a potential informant since many notorious individuals passed through his hotel. Surveillance had shown him to be quite venal in his interactions with the Paparazzi, often violating hotel policy by allowing them to photograph celebrity guests. He also had a drinking problem and a tendency to pop pills when stressed. In short, he was corrupt and vulnerable, which, according to Mossad psychologists, would make him an ideal mabuah, or gentile informer. A Mossad katsa, or field agent, could easily use this damaging information to persuade Paul to let them keep tabs on whatever foreign dignitary, international terrorist, or arms dealer happened to stay at the Ritz on any given night. Thomas suspects that nonstop pressure from the Mossad spooked Paul and caused him to spiral deeper into pills and alcoholism. Whether this led to Paul’s driving drunk in the wee hours of August 31, 1997, slamming his hotel’s Mercedes into a concrete pillar in a Paris underpass, and killing himself and his famous passengers is anyone’s guess.

But, as with almost everything about the shadowy Mossad, it’s within the realm of possibility.

What follows in Gideon’s Spies is episode after episode which reveal beyond all else the ruthlessness, duplicity, and meticulousness of the Mossad. Explosions, assassinations, kidnappings, political intrigue, sexual entrapments, false identities, tapped telephones, dangerous undercover missions in the dead of night—it’s all there. This is real “spy vs. spy” territory, but the Mossad gives it its own sociopathic dimension. It’s basically Machiavelli meets the Old Testament. For instance, Mossad often incited disturbances or planted black propaganda in Arab countries not to fend off a certain threat but simply to sow distrust among the Arabs. They would also “kill both sides,” an expression coined by senior Mossad spymaster David Kimche. In the 1980s, the Mossad aided the Kurds in revolting against the Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iranian regime, while simultaneously supplying arms to Tehran. Did they have good reasons to do all this? Or were they simply getting bored in Tel Aviv? When TWA flight 800 crashed in 1996, killing 230 people, Mossad’s division of psychological warfare (Hebrew acronym: LAP) blamed it falsely on Iran or Iraq. The FBI wasted many man-hours sussing that one out.

And remember Richard Jewell, who in the same year saved lives during a bomb attack at the Atlanta Olympics and then was labeled a terrorist? Right away LAP planted the lie that he had learned his bomb-making skills in Lebanon, thus piling on the poor man’s persecution. “Divided, we rule,” was the philosophy of 1960s Mossad director Meir Amit. His people did not spurn opportunities to divide their perceived enemies, which according to Thomas could be anyone at any time.

Former CIA director William Casey once compared his agency to the Mossad thusly:

A nation creates the intelligence community it needs. America relies on technical expertise because we are concerned to discover rather than secretly rule. The Israelis operate differently. Mossad, in particular, equates its actions with the country’s survival.

More colorfully, Casey referred to 1980s Mossad general director Nahum Admoni as “a Jew who’d want to win a pissing contest on a rainy night in Gdansk.” Of course, this is the same CIA which was responsible for Operation Mockingbird, MK Ultra, and selling crack cocaine in America’s inner cities in the 1990s. So we should take Casey’s words with a big grain of salt.

Thomas doesn’t exhaustively compare the Mossad with intelligence agencies from other countries, so it remains unclear whether Mossad was or still is more ruthless or duplicitous than its competition. Probably not. But according to Thomas, the Mossad may be the world champion of meticulousness. Its operations tend to be extremely well rehearsed, its agents extremely well prepared, and its eyes everywhere.

In the run-up to the Six Day War in 1967, there was either a Mossad katsa or an informer inside every Egyptian air base and military headquarters. There were no fewer than three in the General High Command headquarters in Cairo, staff officers who had been persuaded by Meir Amit. How he had done so had remained his closely guarded secret.

Thanks to the Mossad, Israel knew exactly where and when to strike the Egyptians. Amit was assured of the war’s outcome before the first shots were even fired.

Here Thomas describes how a katsa had to prepare for a secret mission inside Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 1990:

A dialect coach sat with him for hours, listening to him repeat the Sufi’s patois. Already fluent in Farsi and Arabic, Shalom quickly grasped the dialect of the tribesmen. Every night he was driven to a different part of the Negev to sleep, never more than dozing, then move to another place to avoid the instructors he knew were hunting him. Discovery would almost certainly mean his mission would be either postponed for further training, or assigned to another katsa.

As would be expected, Thomas gives us the blow-by-blow of Mossad’s 1960 kidnapping of Adolf Eichmann in Argentina. It was masterminded by Mossad’s longtime deputy director and Nazi hunter Rafi Eitan, whose cutthroat attitude was apparently still legend at Mossad headquarters when Gideon’s Spies was published. This was the man who hunted down and executed the Palestinian terrorists who murdered Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. John le Carre based the central character of his novel The Little Drummer Girl on Eitan.

Eitan also greenlit the treachery of US-born Jewish traitor Jonathan Pollard, who, as a naval intelligence officer, handed over more than a thousand classified documents to Israel in the mid-1980s. Pollard was arrested and given a life sentence in 1985, but was released in November 2020. After the Gaza War began on October 7, 2023, Pollard took to the internet to passionately report on the Israeli forces’ suspiciously slow response to the attacks, which allowed over a thousand Israelis to be killed or taken hostage. It’s almost as if they knew of the attack in advance and then let it go on for hours in order to drum up a casus belli for a war which has now taken between 50,000 and 80,000 Palestinian lives and ethnically cleansed nearly 2 million people from Gaza.  Would the Mossad be cold-blooded enough to do such a thing? Based on my reading of Thomas and my assumption that the worst of the agency had been kept from him, I would have to say, again, it is within the realm of possibility.

Another telling episode was the 1961 spat President John F. Kennedy had with Israeli president David Ben-Gurion. Kennedy was naturally opposed to Israel acquiring nuclear weapons since he wanted good relations with the oil exporting countries in the Middle East. Thus he insisted that the International Atomic Energy Agency regularly inspect Israel’s nuclear facility at the Dimona settlement in the Negev Desert. This infuriated Ben-Gurian, who instructed a Democratic fundraiser named Abraham Feinberg to turn the screws on Kennedy. “Make the putz understand the reality of life,” he told Feinberg. This Feinberg did, and not for the first time. When Kennedy was running for office, Feinberg had offered him half a million dollars, telling him that, “We are willing to pay your bills if you will let us have control of your Middle East policy.” This time around he warned that an inspection at Dimona would cost him Jewish financial support in the next election. Nevertheless, Kennedy stuck to his guns.

Even more galling, when inspectors came to Dimona with weeks’ prior notice, the Israelis had rigged the place to look like it wasn’t producing nuclear bombs. And the inspectors, who could not speak Hebrew, fell for it. Rafi Eitan was behind this sleight of hand, as well the smuggling of fissionable material out of a nuclear material processing company in Apollo, Pennsylvania, whose owner and chief executive were, predictably enough, also Jewish.

(Recently unredacted files reveal that this brazen theft happened under the nose of CIA counterintelligence chief James Angleton, who may very well have the Mossad’s mole in the agency. Thomas, of course, had no way of knowing this when he wrote Gideon’s Spies, and mentions Angleton only sparingly.)

So does this add up to the Mossad assassinating John F. Kennedy? To say that they would have been cold-blooded enough is no great shakes because any intelligence agency would have been had they found Kennedy sufficiently annoying. How many times did the CIA try to assassinate Fidel Castro? But did the Mossad have the wherewithal at the time to do it? I would say yes. They had katsas everywhere in the United States, with at least one monitoring the White House. Finding some ideologically damaged radical (or radicals) to pump out long-range shots at the President’s motorcade in Dallas doesn’t seem like a stretch for a perspicacious reptile like Rafi Eitan.

Yes, but did they do it? Unfortunately, Gordan Thomas doesn’t give us enough information one way or the other. You will have to go to other sources to answer that question. The evidence may be circumstantial, but it’s not beyond the realm of possibility.

As for Robert Maxwell, it went down like this. In 1984, Maxwell (born Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch), who owned the English Mirror newspapers, became the Mossad’s most well-connected sayan, or Jewish volunteer, in England. He was overbearing, impetuous, arrogant, bombastic, abrasive, and accustomed to high living. Yet he was a schmoozing genius and had access to some of the most influential men on the planet. Unsurprisingly given his daughter’s future behavior, he was obsessed with sex and was described by one of his senior reporters as “a sexual monster with a voracious appetite for seducing secretaries on his staff.” He also laundered his papers’ pension funds to a Mossad bank account so adroitly that he left “fraud investigators awed by his skilled duplicity.” Such skills enabled him to broker a deal between the Mossad and the KGB which laundered the profits of an Israeli company called ORA during the Iran-Contra affair. When Eitan needed someone to sell rigged surveillance software to intelligence services across the globe, he went to Maxwell. Maxwell also doxed Mordechai Vanunu, the whistleblower technician who revealed Israel’s nuclear weapons facility at Dimona. Vanunu was in hiding when the Mirror published a large photograph of him and smeared him as a fraud. This led to sayanim and katsas in England finding him, sexually entrapping him, and taking his drugged body back to Israel where he was questioned, tried in secret, and imprisoned for 18 years. 11 of those he spent in solitary.

Despite treating Maxwell like a king in Israel, the Mossad made sure to bug his hotel rooms and keep him well supplied with food, drink, and prostitutes. They obtained video footage of him in all sorts of sexually compromising positions. Things got frosty as Maxwell’s financial difficulties increased. Not only was he unable to pay back loans from Israeli investors which allowed him to purchase his newspapers, but it was revealed that he had skimmed some of ORA’s profits for himself. With characteristic chutzpah, Maxwell then demanded the Mossad not only pay back his pension fraud money, but also that they free Vanunu so Maxwell can publish an exclusive interview with him in his struggling newspaper. If the Mossad refused, who knew what damaging secrets this big-mouthed newspaper magnate could spill? Yes, he stupidly made that threat to Mossad director Nahum Admoni. It was allegedly at that point when the Mossad had decided that Robert Maxwell had to go.

According to Thomas, in November 1991, they had a katsa lure Maxwell to Spain and then to the Canary Islands via his yacht, the Lady Ghislaine. While at sea, two men in a dinghy boarded the vessel, overpowered Maxwell, and injected an air bubble into his jugular, killing him almost instantly. (You will read about none of this on Maxwell’s Wikipedia page.) Despite his ignominious demise, the Israelis gave him highest honors at his funeral at the Mount of Olives. While Thomas mentions neither Ghislaine Maxwell nor Jeffrey Epstein in Gideon’s Spies, the notion that either or both could have worked for the Mossad in some capacity is, again, not beyond the realm of possibility.

Believe it or not, I am leaving out some of the best parts of Gideon’s Spies. These include Mossad’s connection to the 1981 attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II (no, they didn’t do it), the idealistic young Arab mabuah that they so coldly betrayed, the raid on Entebbe affair, the Mossad’s collaboration with BOSS, the security apparatus of Apartheid South Africa, as well as the agency’s numerous high-profile failures and embarrassments. One particularly ghoulish contretemps occurred in 1984 when the Mossad attempted to smuggle ousted Nigerian minister Umaru Dikko out of England. The man was discovered in an airport hangar unconscious in a crate. Cooped up beside him was an Israeli physician with “a syringe in his hand ready to increase Dikko’s drug intake. There was an endotracheal tube in Dikko’s throat to stop him from choking on his own vomit.” Furthermore, the spy-vs-spy wrangling in Africa became, shall we say, spicy during the latter part of the Cold War. The Mossad’s rivalry with CSIS, the Chinese intelligence agency, was especially vicious.

Thomas reports:

For three years, Mossad waged its deadly war of attrition against the CSIS over the length and breadth of Africa. There was no mercy on either side. When a CSIS hit team ambushed a Mossad katsa in the Congo, they fed him to crocodiles, filming his last moments in the water and sending the footage to the local Mossad station chief. He retaliated by personally firing a rocket into the building from where the CSIS operated. Three Chinese were killed.

Despite being a thrilling read, Gideon’s Spies sheds little light on some of the burning mysteries of today. Aside from the Mossad’s potential connection to the Kennedy Assassination or Jeffrey Epstein, many of us would also like to know whether they were behind 9-11, as Wyatt Peterson recently claimed. I also explored the Israel-9-11 connection a couple years ago at Counter-Currents, as well as transcribed Carl Cameron’s banned Fox News coverage of it from December 2001. Unfortunately, none of this circumstantial evidence can be found in Gideon’s Spies. Given its publication date, it’s unlikely that it would be.

Throughout, Thomas maintains a measured respect for the Mossad that does not jeopardize his journalistic integrity. He’s not anti-Semitic, but nor is he servile to Israel or Jews. He may betray a slight pro-Israeli bias, but it’s nothing beyond the pale for a mainstream journalist in 1999. He’s also perfectly willing to expose all that is ugly, cruel, dishonest, and frankly sleazy about the Mossad. He would have to, being their biographer, despite what respect for them he may hold. In the 1990s, former Mossad operatives Ari Ben-Manashe and Victor Ostrovsky had each published books revealing insider details which severely damaged the agency. For example, Ostrovsky alleged that the Mossad had actually plotted to assassinate President George H. W. Bush in 1991. Could Gideon’s Spies have been a Mossad attempt at damage control? Who knows? Again, it’s not beyond the realm of possibility—especially considering that Thomas weirdly ends his book not with a proper conclusion but with the prediction that with all its failures, the Mossad is always one SNAFU away from having a new director general appointed. Was this uncharacteristically soft landing a way of humanizing the Mossad?

My reading of Thomas however leads me to one rock solid conclusion—that Israel is not and never was an ally of the United States. From the very beginning, it was monitoring Americans and stealing from Americans. Thomas reports:

In a report to the Senate Intelligence Committee, the CIA had identified Israel as one of six foreign countries with “a government-directed, orchestrated, clandestine effort to collect US economic secrets.”

And not just economic secrets. Military secrets, computer secrets, nuclear secrets, sexual secrets, any secrets, really—all of it was on the table. Perhaps the most telling evidence of Israel’s perfidy—worse in my opinion than the attack on the USS Liberty—was how the Mossad knew damn well that the 1983 attack on American marines in Beirut was going to happen. They were supposed to inform the CIA and didn’t. Even worse, they were live monitoring the bomb-laden vehicle as it plowed full speed into Marine headquarters, killing 241 service members. According to Victor Ostrovsky, a Mossad officer callously said afterward of the Americans: “They wanted to stick their nose into this Lebanon thing, let them pay the price.”

Now, to be fair, no one should resent the Israelis because the Mossad is good at what they do. Gordon Thomas certainly doesn’t, and good on him for that. I am sure the CIA has done some nasty things to Israel as well. I have no doubt the CIA bugs and monitors Israelis every chance they get—in the US and abroad, in embassies, and in Israel itself. Of course, they should. Further, if the Israelis ever have something worth stealing, I sincerely hope the CIA would filch it as remorselessly as Israel has filched from the United States. I’m sure that law and ethics are little more than fanciful luxuries in the cutthroat world of spy vs. spy. Therefore I am willing to give wide latitude to the Mossad. But when billions of dollars move in only one direction in the relationship between America and Israel, that’s when we should start resenting the Israelis. It’s one thing to lose your secret stuff to talented spies; that comes with the territory when you run a country. It’s something else entirely to lose your secret stuff, while getting your pocket picked, while listening to your pocket-picker whisper sweet nothings about how he’s your greatest ally, while this same pocket-picker wants you fight his battles for him, while this selfsame pocket-picker is willing to smear you as a Nazi if you dare run your mouth about any of this.

It doesn’t take a hardened anti-Semite or anti-Zionist to see how abusive and one-sided this relationship is. And although I’m sure this wasn’t Gordon Thomas’ intention, this is the conclusion one cannot help but draw after reading Gideon’s Spies.

A Jewish Oligarch’s Plot to Control Spanish Populism

/7 Comments/in /by

In the shadowy corridors of Spanish politics, few figures wield as much soft power as David Hatchwell Altaras. The Madrid-based businessman has worked systematically to infiltrate the Spanish right. As the liberal international order buckles under the weight of its own contradictions, Jewish elites like Hatchwell are working tirelessly to ensure that the emerging nationalist movements remain firmly within the Zionist orbit—a process that threatens to water down genuine European nationalism while preserving Israel’s strategic position in a multipolar world.

The Making of a Zionist Operative

David Hatchwell’s rise to prominence in Spanish politics was no accident, but the product of generations of careful planning. Born into a family that had dedicated itself to the rehabilitation of Jewish influence in Spain, Hatchwell inherited both the financial resources and institutional networks necessary to shape the Spanish political scene. His father, Mauricio Hatchwell Toledano (1940-2011), laid the groundwork for this transformation through decades of patient work in normalizing Spanish-Jewish relations after the death of Francisco Franco in 1975.

The elder Hatchwell arrived in Spain in 1964, just as Franco’s regime was entering its final phase. Rather than simply establishing a Jewish community, Mauricio understood that a lasting Jewish influence in the Iberian Peninsula required constant engagement with Spanish institutions and the cultivation of pro-Jewish sentiment among the broader population. His founding of EXCEM Grupo in 1971 provided the financial foundation for what would become a multi-generational project of political infiltration.

More significantly, Mauricio Hatchwell spearheaded the historic Sepharad ’92 initiative that helped repair tense relations between Spaniards and international Jewry. In 1992, on the 500th anniversary of the Jewish expulsion from Spain, Mauricio Hatchwell commissioned what he called “the most beautiful facsimile ever produced, no more, no less” of the medieval Alba Bible. This 15th-century manuscript, created through Jewish-Christian collaboration, became a powerful symbol of a rapprochement between the two faiths.

On March 31, 1992, at the Pardo Palace in Madrid, Hatchwell presented copies of the Alba Bible facsimile to King Juan Carlos I of Spain and Israeli President Chaim Herzog. This ceremony marked the moment when King Juan Carlos formally revoked the 1492 Expulsion Edict and welcomed Jews back to Spain.

Hatchwell’s Use of Corporate Power to Advance Jewish Causes

David Hatchwell has continued in his father’s footsteps by using his current position as President of EXCEM Grupo by leveraging vast financial resources and international connections to influence Spanish politics. His business portfolio, spanning real estate investment trusts, venture capital operations, and international consulting, has created multiple vectors for political engagement. As Chairman of OurCrowd Iberia, Hatchwell has facilitated Spanish investment in Israeli startups while also looking for opportunities to “invest in Spanish tech companies seeking to bring additional leaders from the local ecosystem onto the OurCrowd platform.”

Hatchwell also chairs Fundaciòn Hispanojudía, a non-profit organization focused on raising awareness about Jewish heritage and cultural traditions in Spain. He finalized a $40 million project to house the Museo Hispanojudío in Madrid by securing a 30-year lease on a historic building for $20 million up front to cover rent and taxes, while allocating another $20 million for interior remodeling. This deal has paved the way for the establishment of the “first major Jewish museum in Spain and the Iberian Peninsula,” according to The Times of Israel.

Instead of relying on state funding, Hatchwell tapped into an international pool of private donors to fund the initiative, which is designed to celebrate Jewish history and Sephardic heritage, foster cultural dialogue, and serve as a global center for Jewish identity within the Spanish-speaking world.

Hatchwell’s Outreach to the Spanish Right

Hatchwell’s most notable achievement has been his concerted efforts to project Jewish influence within Spain’s right-wing scene. In doing so, he has transformed what could have been genuinely nationalist parties into reliable instruments of Zionist foreign policy. His public defense of the populist right VOX party in 2019 exemplifies this strategy. When accusations of antisemitism were launched against VOX, Hatchwell provided crucial cover by personally vouching for party leaders Santiago Abascal, Iván Espinosa de los Monteros, and Rocío Monasterio in a post he published on the website of Action and Communication on the Middle East (ACOM)—a pro-Israel organization based in Spain.

Hatchwell co-founded ACOM in 2007. For its part, ACOM has achieved a remarkable 85 legal victories against the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement in Spanish courts. ACOM’s most significant triumph came in September 2022 when Spain’s Supreme Court ruled for the first time that BDS is discriminatory and illegal for public institutions to support.

Hatchwell has made it a point to co-opt the burgeoning populist movement in Spain and make sure that it does not take an antisemitic turn. ​​“I have the pleasure of knowing Santiago Abascal, Iván Espinosa de los Monteros and Rocío Monasterio of VOX personally, and I want to say loud and clear as a Spanish Jew that VOX is NOT an antisemitic political party,” Hatchwell affirmed in his defense of VOX on ACOM’s website.

Hatchwell praised the party’s “unwavering support for Israel” and their willingness to confront “true far-rightists and neo-Nazis.” The intervention proved crucial in convincing international Jewish circles of VOX’s philosemitic credentials, where doubts lingered because of Spain’s long-standing association with antisemitism.

The transformation of VOX under Hatchwell’s influence is particularly striking given Spain’s historically strained relationship with Israel. VOX leaders have since made pilgrimages to Israel, meeting with Likud party officials and strengthening ties with Netanyahu’s government. In December 2023, VOX representatives visited Israel amid the Gaza conflict, with party leader Santiago Abascal posting on social media that VOX had “strengthened its close ties” with Likud. The visit focused on “stopping radical Islam” and defending “European values”—kosher populist rhetoric that perfectly dovetails with Israeli strategic objectives.

Hatchwell’s Zionist Protégé in Madrid

One of Hatchwell’s most significant alliances is with Isabel Díaz Ayuso, the rising conservative star of the establishment Partido Popular (People’s Party) and current President of the Community of Madrid. Díaz Ayuso is an unapologetic defender of the Jewish state. Earlier this year, during an event commemorating the Holocaust, she proclaimed that Israel is “the first and most important frontier of the free world” and “the only democracy in the Middle East.”  Díaz Ayuso went even further, declaring “if Israel is not safe, none of us will be.”

The partnership between Hatchwell and Díaz Ayuso has proven both strategic and enduring, spanning cultural initiatives and international business forums. Their most visible collaboration, the 2022 Madrid and The New Middle East Summit—organized by Hatchwell and inaugurated by Ayuso—positioned Madrid as a central platform for investment and as a bridge connecting Israeli and UAE investors with the Spanish-speaking world.

Under Hatchwell’s influence, Díaz Ayuso has positioned Madrid as a pro-Israel alternative to Barcelona, a city known for supporting the BDS movement. In February 2023, Barcelona Mayor Ada Colau announced the suspension of all relations with Israel, including ending the city’s 25-year twinning agreement with Tel Aviv. Colau alluded to what she described as Israel’s “systematic violation of Palestinian human rights.”

At the time of Colau’s attempt to rupture ties, Díaz Ayuso was in Israel. She used her visit to directly contradict Barcelona’s position. “Barcelona did something that is a big mistake and that doesn’t represent the whole of Spain and it does not represent Madrid,” Díaz Ayuso asserted. During her meeting with Israeli President Isaac Herzog, Ayuso specifically told him that “Ada Colau’s decision to break with Israel does not represent either Catalonia or Spain.” The president of the Community of Madrid added, “Our country is a welcoming country and, in particular, the Community of Madrid is a welcoming country.”

From Francisco Franco’s Rejection to Zionist Embrace

The transformation Hatchwell has achieved becomes even more remarkable when viewed against the backdrop of Spain’s historical relationship with Israel. Francisco Franco’s regime consistently refused to recognize Israel, viewing Jewish influence as connected to Freemasonry and communism. Spain only established diplomatic relations with Israel in 1986, as a condition for joining the European Economic Community, and even then maintained strong support for the Palestinian cause.

This historical antipathy stemmed partly from the legacy of the 1492 expulsion, when Ferdinand and Isabella’s Alhambra Decree forced Spain’s estimated hundreds of thousands of Jews to convert to Christianity or face exile.

Ironically, Franco attempted to establish diplomatic relations with Israel in 1948. However, Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion rebuffed Franco’s diplomatic overtures due to Spain’s previous ties with National Socialist Germany. Thanks to the activism by Hatchwell and other key actors in the Spanish Jewish community, Spain has been quickly moving in a pro-Israel direction in recent decades.

The main obstacle in the way of the Zionization of Spain is the current government of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, which officially recognized Palestinian statehood in coordination with Ireland and Norway in 2024 and has taken steps to implement a comprehensive arms embargo against Israel.

Hatchwell’s Spanish operation must be understood as part of a broader European phenomenon that this author has previously detailed. The rise of Zio-populism—an Israel-friendly form of nationalism—is affecting all European nations, Spain included. While many short-sighted political activists will make the proverbial Faustian bargain with Zionist forces under the assumption that they will be granted leeway to implement nationalist policies at home, such unholy deals come with many unforeseen consequences. For one, such arrangements are primarily designed to advance Israeli interests, namely, the imposition of measures to restrict immigration from Islamic countries and other polities with migrants who tend to be hostile to Israel and the broader Jewish community.

That said, other non-White migrant groups hailing from countries sympathetic or at least indifferent to Israel—India, Nigeria, and Kenya—will be allowed to migrate with ease, much to the detriment of Western countries’ demographic core. Therein lies the problem of forging such pacts. Jewish oligarchs don’t care about maintaining homogeneous native populations the way nationalists do. In fact, they enjoy multiculturalism, so long as the golems they import don’t end up turning against their masters.

Broadly speaking, Hatchwell’s political project reflects a broader recognition among Jewish elites that the liberal international order that served their interests so well in the post-war period is beginning to fracture. As American hegemony weakens and multipolar alternatives emerge, maintaining Jewish influence requires adapting to new political realities and cultivating relationships with and eventually subverting rising political movements such as right-wing populism.

Hatchwell and many of his fellow Jewish compatriots are catching on to this trend and quickly insinuating themselves into the budding nationalist reaction to the failed globalist consensus. The primary task of nationalists on both sides of the pond is to reject the infiltration of Hatchwell and his ilk and make populism the sole domain of the Aryan man.

Tiers of a Clown-World: From Threats of Throat-Slitting to Lucy in the Sty

/5 Comments/in , /by

I have hope for Tom. I have no hope for Brendan. They’re both puppets of Frank, but Tom’s strings seem much looser than Brendan’s. That’s why I hope he’ll break free one day. Who am I talking about? I’m talking about the Trotskyist libertarians Tom Slater and Brendan O’Neill, who are both puppets of the Jewish sociologist Frank Furedi. As Trotskyists and libertarians, Tom and Brendan have always thought and written with a mixture of delusion, dishonesty and deceit. But Tom shows worrying signs of beginning to see the truth.

Open Borders = Closed Mouths

For example, Tom has written about the very significant and disturbing murder of Asad Shah, which Brendan and Frank have always studiously ignored. Asad Shah was a heterodox Muslim who was engaged in theological debate by an orthodox Muslim called Tanveer Ahmed in Glasgow in 2016. Tanveer said that Asad had committed blasphemy. Asad said that he hadn’t. The debate was resolved in decisive — and typically Islamic — fashion when Tanveer stabbed and stomped Asad to death. It was what I call a meteor murder, one of those that flash through the headlines and then disappear for ever from the leftist media. Meteor murders disappear like that because they reveal the toxic truth rather than reinforce leftist lies. The toxic truth revealed by Asad Shah’s murder was that Muslim immigration is very bad for free speech in the West.

The hero and the heretic: Tanveer Ahmed is celebrated by British-based Muslims for murdering Asad Shah (ghazi = hero, kazzab = liar)

As libertarians, Frank Furedi, Tom Slater and Brendan O’Neill are passionate supporters of both free speech and open borders, so they can’t admit that open borders inevitably result in closed mouths. Instead, they dishonestly pretend that Muslims and other non-Whites would adore free speech if only Western governments abandoned “multiculturalism” and championed the glorious values of the Enlightenment. The murder of Asad Shah explodes this libertarian pretence and dishonesty, which is why Frank Furedi and Brendan O’Neill have always completely ignored it. To his great credit, Tom Slater broke that silence and wrote a long article about the murder. He emphasized its ominous significance and deplored the lack of attention it has received. But he still refused to admit that the murder was a direct product of Muslim immigration, not of “multiculturalism.”

Importing Pakistani pathologies

If he’d set the murder in its full context, he would have found it much harder to do that. So he didn’t. Asad Shah belonged to the small Ahmadiyya sect, which is regarded as blasphemous by mainstream Muslims like Tanveer Ahmed. That’s why Ahmadiyya are persecuted in Muslim countries like Pakistan, whose government has banned Ahmadiyya from even calling themselves “Muslim” and whose mainstream Islamic sects literally preach murder against the Ahmadiyya.

Astonishingly, when Pakistanis come to  Britain, they bring Pakistani culture and ideas with them. Fancy that! Yes, Pakistani Muslims retain their devotion to the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) rather than embracing the Enlightenment (Piss Be Upon It). In Pakistan, which literally means “The Land of the Pure,” you demonstrate your devotion to Muhammad by killing anyone who disrespects him. That’s why Pakistani Muslims built shrines for two martyr-murderers, Ilm Ud-Din from the 1920s and Mumtaz Qadri from the 2010s, who killed blasphemers and then nobly submitted to execution by the authorities. In Britain, the Pakistani Muslim Tanveer Ahmed saw no reason to abandon this venerable tradition of killing blasphemers. As the snappy saying goes in Urdu: Gustakh-e-Rasūl kī ek hī sazā, sar tan se judā! — “For insult to the Prophet, there is only one punishment: cut the head from the body!” That’s why Tanveer Ahmed stabbed and stomped Asad Shah to death, then calmly accepted arrest, trial, and life imprisonment. Now that he’s in jail, he basks in the adulation and respect of other British-based Muslims who share his perfectly orthodox and respectable views about the need to slaughter blasphemers.

Handy Hindi head-chopping hints: a mainstream Muslim maxes the mojo of Mohammadism (image from OpIndia)

Who could have seen that coming? Anyone with any understanding of Islam and Third-World migration, that’s who. There are also deep-rooted traditions of child-rape and political corruption in Pakistan, so — surprise, surprise! — Pakistanis in Britain effortlessly out-perform the White natives in raping children and rigging elections. Third-World immigration is very bad for the West and for free speech, which is why Frank Furedi and Brendan O’Neill have said nothing about the horrific murder of Asad Shah. To his credit, Tom Slater said a lot about the murder of Asad Shah but failed to admit the truth: that Muslim migration, not multiculturalism, was to blame.

Rapturous applause for violent threats

And now Tom Slater has done it again. He’s written about another highly significant free-speech case and has again failed to admit the truth. Indeed, I don’t think he even sees the truth, because his libertarianism warps both his perceptions and his judgment. Here is some of what he wrote:

What a difference a jury makes. The acquittal today [15th August 2025] of Labour councillor and trade unionist Ricky Jones, after he called for far-right protesters’ throats to be slit at an ‘anti-racist’ demonstration in north-east London last year, reminds us why 12 ordinary men and women are an infinitely superior defence against illiberalism and overly harsh punishment than any ‘enlightened’ judge.

Last August, at a Stand Up To Racism rally in Walthamstow, in the wake of the anti-migrant Southport riots, Jones picked up the mic to denounce ‘disgusting Nazi fascists’, adding ‘we need to cut their throats and get rid of them’. He ran a finger across his neck for dramatic effect. A clip of his speech, which naturally received rapturous applause from the crowd, went viral, and he was charged with encouraging violent disorder.

To say that people were locked up for saying much less after Southport is an understatement. Racist memes landed some people in prison. But there was no serious prospect of Jones’s violent rhetoric being acted upon. There were no fascists in attendance to knife: the Walthamstow protest was called in response to rumours of a far-right demo that mysteriously never materialised. He also argued, apparently successfully, that he never intended those words to be taken literally and even edited them out of a clip he later posted. Unless you believe that rash, stupid words should result in a lengthy spell in prison, then this can surely be the only correct, proportionate, liberty-protecting decision. If only we’d seen more of them amid the post-Southport mania.

The reason we didn’t is that, unlike Jones, many of those nabbed for speech-related crimes last summer pleaded guilty. Had Northampton childminder Lucy Connolly — convicted of ‘stirring up racial hatred’ and sentenced to 31 months for posting on X, ‘Set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care’ — pleaded not guilty, she may well have been spared prison, too. That she remains inside while Jones has just walked free isn’t so much two-tier justice as it is two-tier legal advice. Not to mention two different offences — Jones’s charge of encouraging violent disorder, notes free-speech lawyer Preston Byrne, is a ‘narrower conduct offence that’s harder to prove’. Still, whether it was wise counsel or sheer bloody mindedness on his part, Jones’s decision to leave his fate in the hands of a jury of his peers, rather than some jaundiced, imperious beak, may well have made all the difference here.

This raises uncomfortable questions about the Southport speech criminals, many of whom pleaded guilty under the not-so-wise guidance of their duty solicitors. Hoping for leniency, many have ended up doing longer stretches than even violent criminals. Connolly received a heftier sentence than one Philip Prescot, an actual Southport rioter. He was part of the mob that menaced the town’s mosque. We might also ask why Jones, while remanded in custody at first, was later granted bail, while Connolly was not, piling yet more pressure on the defendant. (“The Ricky Jones acquittal shows us the wisdom of juries,” Spiked, 15th August 2025)

Leftist judge Rosa Dean, a Diversity and Community Relations Judge (DCRJ) who promotes “diversity and community engagement in the judicial system”

Slater talks about “uncomfortable questions” but fails to ask one very obvious “uncomfortable” question. What would have happened if Lucy Connolly or any of the other White “Southport speech criminals” had pleaded “Not Guilty” and appeared before the same judge and jury that acquitted the Black leftist Ricky Jones? The question is obvious and so is the answer: Connolly and Co would have been found guilty by the same jury that acquitted Jones. The judge would then have taken great relish in sentencing her or them to a long stretch in jail. We know for certain that the judge, Rosa Dean, is a partisan leftist and there are entirely credible estimates that the jury was at least half non-White. Slater praises the jury for its “wisdom” and for making the “correct, proportionate, liberty-protecting decision.” Contra Slater, the overwhelming likelihood is the jury had no interest at all in “liberty” or free speech. Instead, it was merely protecting one of its own. If someone not of its own, like the White right-winger Lucy Connolly, had appeared before it, then it would have delivered the opposite verdict: “Guilty!” rather than “Not Guilty.”

The Dumbfounded and da Delighted

Do Slater and other libertarians disagree? Then I simply ask them to consider this obvious scenario. Suppose that Salman Rushdie goes on trial after a future British government introduces a law protecting Muslims from blasphemy and offence. Suppose further that the trial takes place in Bradford or some other heavily enriched city and that, by the vagaries of jury selection, Rushdie faces a jury composed entirely of orthodox Pakistani Muslims. What would the jury’s verdict be? It would certainly be “Guilty.”

Black murderer, White victim: the acquitted O.J. Simpson and his wife Nicole Simpson (image from Netflix)

And what would the verdict be if the jury happened to be entirely White instead? It would probably — but not certainly — be “Not guilty” (we can’t be certain because many White leftists pander to Muslim hatred of free speech). The law has never been perfect and never will be. But the law is much less reliable and objective in racially and religiously mixed societies. We saw that very clearly way back in 1995, when the Black O.J. Simpson had a mostly Black jury and was wrongly found not guilty of murdering his White wife Nicole Simpson. In the wider society, the verdict dumbfounded Whites and delighted Blacks. We saw it again in America when the White Derek Chauvin was wrongly found guilty of murdering the Black George Floyd. Whatever the racial make-up of the jury in that case, the jurors had no doubt that Blacks would react with fury and violence if Chauvin was acquitted.

Lucy in the Sty with Crime ’Uns

In Britain, something similar has happened: the Black Ricky Jones has been given an easy ride and found not guilty; the White Lucy Connolly has been strong-armed into pleading guilty and given a harsh sentence. Yes, the toxic truth about the acquittal of Ricky Jones and the imprisonment of Lucy Connolly is that they reveal the two tiers of a Clown-World. There is two-tier justice in Britain, because the leftist Clowns who are currently in charge treat non-Whites with maximal lenience and Whites with maximal harshness. The current Attorney General, Lord Hermer, is an “anti-fascist” Jew who loudly proclaims his devotion to the “rule of law.” In other words, he’s an anti-White authoritarian who believes in the rule of leftist lawyers like himself, not the genuine and impartial rule of law. Hermer and the shabbos-goy Keir Starmer personally oversaw the destruction of fair trials after the Southport riots in 2024, encouraging the courts to treat White defendants with maximal harshness and minimal delay. Accordingly, the non-criminal Lucy Connolly was quickly condemned to the pig-sty of jail not because her words posed any threat of inciting violence, but because she’s White and leftists like Hermer disagree with her politics. In 2025, Ricky Jones has belatedly avoided the pig-sty of jail not because his words were any less intemperate or unacceptable than Connolly’s, but because he’s Black and leftists like Hermer agree with his politics.

The Black and the White: acquitted Ricky Jones and imprisoned Lucy Connolly

It’s as simple — and as septic — as that. Clown-World believes in free speech only for its pets, not for its pests. Libertarians like Tom Slater and Brendan O’Neill claim to believe in free speech for everyone. That’s why libertarians like Slater and O’Neill should ask themselves why Clown-World is so much in favor of non-White immigration. Are the Clowns blindly and blunderingly undermining their own power by importing vibrant Third-World folk? Or do the blindness and the blunders happen elsewhere? The answer is obvious. The acquittal of Ricky Jones has just bawled that answer again. Like Tom Slater, I’m pleased by the acquittal. Unlike Tom Slater, I’m pleased because I understand the acquittal means. It was another glaring example of two-tier justice and will be another boost for White nationalism.

Britain has witnessed harsh punishment for a White mother who issued a swiftly deleted cry of anger and easy acquittal for a Black barbarian who issued threats of throat-slitting. And more Whites have woken to the truth: that Britain’s traitorous elite hates Whites and loves injustice. This being so, one conclusion follows swiftly and surely: that traitorous elite needs to be toppled and its ethnic pets need to return to the Third World.

Are the English Finally Fighting Back Against the Invasion?

/22 Comments/in , /by

English people don’t generally fly their national flag. Flying the national flag shows a need to assert yourself; it implies that you are under threat in some way and that you must mark your territory and rally the troops. Twenty years ago, when I was at university in Scotland, you’d see Scottish flags everywhere. Scotland is a small, relatively poor nation that was long ago subsumed into an England-dominated union. Of course Scotland must assert itself. England, by contrast, was secure in its own importance as the dominant nation in an empire that once ruled a quarter of the globe. You relatively rarely saw the Union Jack (the British flag) in England, let alone the St George’s flag of England.

But since the British government has deliberately allowed England to be invaded since New Labour began a de facto left-wing revolution in 1997, you have started to see more and more England flags dotted about. (The government allowed the invasion because it wishes to signal its adherence to the “marginalised” and push down the wages of English workers who decreasingly vote Labour.) The English, understandably, feel under threat: their territory is being invaded, entire areas of large cities such as London or Birmingham are, in essence, Pakistani enclaves, traditional English liberties are crushed with anti-free-speech laws to protect the Black and Muslim clients of the Labour Party, at least 25% of people in England are not White let alone ethnically English and the capital is now majority foreign. England has fallen, just as it once did to the Danes.

The Empire is long behind them and the English are realising that they, like the Scottish, must rally the troops around the flag and assert themselves if they are to survive at all. The Anti-British government of Keir Starmer is, as far as I can see, an accelerationist regime. Since 1997, the destruction of the traditional England has involved clever salami tactics, for the traitor Tony Blair was nothing if not a political genius. The transformation was too slow and too subtle for there to ever be a serious reaction.

Starmer is far less intelligent than Blair, as are those that surround him. He has made it clear to the working-class English, those who still believe in the nation, that he hates them. For getting upset about the massacre of three little girls by an ethnic-Rwandan in 2024, they are nothing more than “far right thugs” who must be jailed for their emotive tweets, even if they are immediately deleted. But if, during the process, a Black Labour councillor incites the murder of the rioters to a crowd then he is given bail (unlike Lucy Connolly, who posted an anti-immigrant tweet) and then found not guilty after the jury are directed by an openly Woke and pro-diversity female judge.

Two-tier Keir has given us two-tier justice; the Labour government despises the English people. But to continue the acceleration, “migrants” (young South Asian and African men) are permitted — hundreds of them a day — to cross from France and be processed for asylum even though France is a safe country; akin to the US accepting refugees from Canada. With nowhere else to put them, they are placed it hotels; often quite nice ones. This has meant that, very suddenly, scores of completely White towns in the shires have experienced the joys of diversity: young migrants hanging around schools and raping teenage girls; they’re not veiled, after all.

This has led to protests and riots outside “migrant hotels” with the state making this much worse by having police chaperone far-left “counter-protestors” — assorted Woke mutants with purple hair brought in to scream about how “racist” everyone is. In Nuneaton, in the Midlands, where a schoolgirl was raped, the crowd was so infuriated by them that they were literally run out of town, with the police — now widely seen as an anti-British enforcers anyway — desperately trying to protect them.

The St George’s flag was a common sight at these protests, one of which has worked: the migrant hotel in Epping (north of London, teenager raped) has been shut down. However, it appears that this set off, on about 16th August, “Operation Raise the Colours,” an idea which spread via Twitter and social contagion.

To assert that it’s England, a group of men started putting up English and British flags on lampposts in Birmingham, specifically in the White area of Northfield. This spread to Tower Hamlets in London, which is overwhelmingly Bangladeshi and where you’ll frequently see Palestine and Bangladeshi flags. To make things worse, and to make it absolutely clear that, for the authorities, England is conquered and its ideology is Woke (as symbolised by the rainbow flag, allowed to fly everywhere), Birmingham Council, which is bankrupt and can’t collect the rubbish, promptly sent in workers to remove flags, while leaving Palestine flags well alone, naturally. Tower Hamlets Council, making it clear that they are a Bangladeshi enclave, made it plain any flags (actually only British ones, though) would be immediately removed, and they were.

But, naturally, this only galvanised the campaign and underscored the point it was making; parts of England are held by foreigners and the White traitors who collaborate with them (Labour and pretty much all of the political class) to dictate to the true English. And the English must fight back. Elsewhere in Birmingham, a mini-roundabout was painted with the St George’s Flag. This was promptly removed with the anti-British BBC referring to it as “vandalised,” which it doesn’t when rainbow flags are painted in public. This led to online jokes about how potholes will be filled in if you paint them with the St George’s flag and bin bags will be collected if they are marked with the same.

Now, however, there was little stopping this outbreak of English patriotism; this mass-marking of territory. Lines of lampposts all over the country suddenly had the St George’s or Union flags flying from them. Farmers sprayed their sheep with red crosses, to be seen from motorways and country roads.

The left were put in an impossible situation. English patriotism is sufficiently popular that they can’t admit that they hate it and fear it. They want to control it; it’s allowed, occasionally, if there’s football. But spontaneous and uncontrolled, it is deeply frightening to a paranoid, authoritarian, internationalist state that despises everything about England, including the average English working man (he is a “far right thug”). Some were moved, aggressively, to say it represented an aggressive act by the “far right;” they were presumably aggressive due to the cognitive dissonance: “I hate the English even though I am one; I mustn’t but I do.” All of this is happening in a context in which serious people, such as the independent Member of Parliament Rupert Lowe, are discussing the forced remigration of immigrants.

Could England be waking up before it’s too late? I hope so. Has Starmer caused this by bringing about “too much, too soon” and openly showing his contempt for ordinary English people? Yes, he has. We can only hope that, as the summer passes and it gets colder, this “reaction” by the ordinary English against thirty years of psychological abuse by their government and its purple-haired, Karen Stasi does not fizzle out.

Exerting Pressure on Migrants in Ireland to Leave

/12 Comments/in /by

Am suffering a slight shock: for the first time I saw some Africans in one of the local villages. Looks like they are settling in. I made sure to drive slowly and let them see that I had an unwelcoming expression ón my face…If we withdraw the common courtesies of life, the message will be very clear. And when the first Africans came to Dublin 30 years ago, I used to cross the street to greet them and shake their hands in welcome. Lots of us did. But not any more.

No foreigners hurt in Ulster ethnic cleansing. In Dublin Lumpen Proletariat teens are switching to attacking foreigners, possibly including people not actively abducting children or displaying a bad attitude. The media is under-reporting the attacks: they have only specifically mentioned a handful, but the Indians alone claim 50 of their guys have been beaten. Foreigners noticing change in attitude from Irish, and some foreigners talking about leaving. Huge numbers of Irish, including MSM journos, making foreigners feel uncomfortable in non-violent comments ranging from super polite and very friendly to vulgar, abusive and threatening. The pro-refugee crowd are increasing their mentions of Hitler and fascism and trying to ban a local festival celebrating Irish language, heritage and culture.

Ethnic cleansing, Christian style? Tall tales from Ballymena and Moygashel, Dublin and Drumshanbo

Israelis do their ethnic cleansing with hatred, starvation, torture and massive bloodshed. Ulster’s Christians are doing their ethnic cleansing without hurting a hair on any foreigner’s head and without sectarian or racial hatred.

“There’s not one person in Ballymena has a racist bone in their body” announced a cheerful Ulster lassie on Irish radio. She and her family were on their way to a mostly peaceful demonstration, which segued into a carefully targeted and entirely peaceful destruction of possibly several dozen houses of Roma Gypsy rape gang-related properties.

The issue was—yet another!—gang rape of a young teen girl by foreigners: Roma Gypsies in this case. Two are in custody in the North, but rumour has it that some of the gang have found state accommodation in the South..

No foreigners were physically injured in any way. Ulster Prods have a long track record of burning unwelcome Taigs out of their areas but in previous ethnic cleansings, they have killed and injured people. Not this time. Nobody killed, nobody even injured. Practical Christianity. (Dozens of cops were reportedly injured, but this is purely a compensation and extra holidays scam)

The worst thing that MSM showed us was a foreign woman who climbed into the attic with her children while remigration enthusiasts smashed up the ground floor of the house. They made no attempt to go upstairs and did not set the house on fire. Upsetting for her, nó doubt, but not a hair on the foreigner’s head was touched.

The mostly peaceful protests involved beautiful women wearing balaclavas taunting the police. When the cops announced on their loudpseaker that they were going to use force to disperse the crowd, the crowd cheered! When the water cannon opened up, lots of little groups dispersed in all different directions to go to pre-selected houses to encourage the residents to remigrate. A crowd in one place is easy for the cops to handle, but when that crowd splits into a hundred groups and goes in a hundred different directions?

Filipinos avoided trouble by putting up their flag and the bland statement—Filipinos live here. One Filipino house did get damaged, but locals apologised for the misunderstanding and the Filipinos graciously accepted the apology. They haven’t moved back so far. A source said that hundreds of foreigners have left Ballymena.

In Moygashel, the Bonfire Association got global attention for the funniest bonfire topping: a rubber dinghy full of refugees. MSM journalists barely could speak the words: all the refugees depicted were people of colour. Moygashel is a small place and they must enjoy the publicity. They are probably planning next year’s bonfire already.

The Moygashel boys are equal opportunity mockers and clearly do not have a racist or sectarian bone in their bodies either. Last year, they burnt models of a Sinn Fein and a Unionist politician in a police car. What could be more inclusive and non-sectarian than that?

Bonfires are a part of the Pagano-Christian tradition. Before the man from Galilee made fun of the practice of human sacrifice, the Celts, as well as the Israelis, probably used fire for this purpose. Country people still pronounce it the old way—bone-fire. Ulster Prods like to live up to their reputation as being good workers. For the normal resident of anywhere else in Ireland or Britain, a fire a couple of yards wide and high is plenty big enough. Not for the Ulstermen! MSM sources say that the highest bonfire was 68 metres high, but a source in the town of Larne claims their bonfire was “the highest manmade structure in Britain or Ireland” which, if true, would put it at 200 metres or more. … Either way, they are so hot that you must stay hundreds of yards away. Houses have to board up their windows to avoid heat damage, but the residents of these houses are enthusiastic about the “bone-fire”.

One very significant slogan on the Moygashel bone-fire: Veterans before refugees.

Veterans means veterans of the armed forces. Lots of Ulstermen have served. They know lots of other veterans. The Ulstermen have a great track record when it comes to successful mutiny in the British Army: they did it in 1913—the Curragh mutiny. It was all hushed up, of course.

A big mutiny would be difficult to organise. But a temporary mini mutiny of a hundred or so serving British soldiers is surely feasible. Rock up to the local refugee hotel, arrest everyone in a cheerful, friendly way, cuff them together in a long line and march them through the town to a local politician’s house. Return to base and act perfectly normal. If there’s any pushback, the officer commanding simply laughs and says: “Yes sir, that was my mistake. I misread the orders. Must be the PTSD from my time in Afghanistan. But all’s well that ends well. Nobody was hurt, the refugees got to stretch their legs and see the area and the locals loved the parade. Best not to make a fuss about it, sir, don’t you think?” A very British mini-mutiny.

Ulster Orangemen have been the blood-crazed attack dogs of the British deep state for centuries, on and off. But what happens when the attack dogs turn on their master? They love their flags, the union with the neighbouring island and the institution of monarchy. But the current Royal family is widely regarded as gang of degenerate perverts. Prince “Randy Andy’ and his Epstein visits are well known. And let’s not even start on the revoltingly evil—but technically Catholic—Jimmy Saville and his friendship with a certain very prominent Royal. “A nest of vipers” is how one Orangeman described them. The Orangemen are loyal, but they are not loyal to the Windsors. … Is it time for a dynasty change in the UK?

There are some signs that Ulster cops are sympathetic to thevibrant remigration enthusiasts. A couple of rubber bullets were fired, but didn’t kill anyone. In the old days it was quite common for them to kill people in demos. One MSM report says a cop had his hands in his pockets while a bunch of lads set fire to the Derry/Londonderry railway tracks a few yards away.

A few weeks after the protests, the first ever Gay Pride march was scheduled for Ballymena. In the early morning, someone sprayed the parade route with slurry, leaving the streets inches deep in liquified animal manure. Very smelly. The shopkeepers of Ballymena were out early scrubbing the streets clean. Two young lads have been arrested by the police in connection with the slurry. The cops have been arresting people since the protests stopped. If they are going to jail everyone who was on the protests, they will need several large new prisons.

Africans are contributing to the multicultural gaiety by having Union Jack parades in Gormanstown, Co. Meath. Flying the Union Jack is all very popular in loyalist parts of the North, but in the South it is the height of rudeness. (When Trinity College Dublin flew it at the end of WWII, a boisterous crowd tore the flag down.)

Are our Hiberno- Africans so stupid they do not know this? Perhaps they think they are actually in the UK: we all speak English, many worship UK football teams and UK soap operas.

But even ants understand the friend/enemy distinction. The Africans know fine well that flying the British flag in Ireland is an insult to us Irish. They are deliberately insulting us. Who put that idea in their heads?

For those hoping for lots of speedy, cheerful Remigration, the MSM liars at the Journal.ie and Irish radio offer highly amusing quotes from various foreigners. If true, expect to see a gradual and then a sudden flow of foreigners out of the Emerald Isle. Many have acquired Irish passports and will no doubt attempt to flee to other Anglophone countries.

Faisal, from India, is following his Pakistani doctor wife around the world. Ireland is friendlier than Australia, he said on radio, but the Australians don’t administer savage beatings to foreigners on the streets..

Many cited the Dublin Stabbing Riots of 2023 as the turning point when the Irish stopped being friendly.

“Women and their teenage daughters began to side-eye me on Dublin streets,”

This is great news! This means that even the feminists have hopped aboard the Remigration train!

Many said that they felt afraid and were considering leaving the country.

A GP from Trinidad and Tobago, who wants to remain anonymous, said that he and his wife, who is also a GP, have lived in Ireland since their early twenties; they are Irish citizens, but he says the couple are now considering leaving Ireland.

It seems that they never felt the need to devote some of their time to helping their compatriots back in poverty-stricken Trinidad. Perhaps now is a good time for them to move home?

The man said the couple were recently racially abused by their neighbours when they asked them to lower the volume of music after 1am on a Sunday.

One couple came to Ireland as they wanted to “experience life in a high trust society. Instead, they feel terrified to leave their home.”

Ah yes. Well, it was a high trust society. But that was before the foreigners came.

It seems like there is a totally leaderless psychological warfare operation against our surplus foreigners. All types of people are putting their shoulder to the wheel, in all sorts of social settings.

“A local man browsing in a shop that I sometimes work in told me that I was ‘lucky to be working here’. A man sat down next to me on the bus and began to murmur at me that this was his country, and tried to provoke me to attack him. He followed me around the bus murmuring threats in my ear.”

Notice how delicately the message was delivered: murmured into his ear. Up close and personal, but very relaxed.

Rúairí also said that while having a drink in a bar in Mayo with a friend recently, someone played The Lion Sleeps Tonight on the stereo and men at the bar shouted slurs and laughed.

Great tune. Isn’t it amusing that even whistling a tune with an African reference will be construed as a threat?

It’s noteworthy that even Irish people who are friends with foreigners are joining in the effort:

He says that some of his friends have begun mentioning the Great Replacement conspiracy theory.

Isn’t he lucky to have such honest friends?

Foreign women are, of course, more fearful than the men.

Johanna said: “I feel like I constantly go around town with an undercurrent of strong anxiety and paranoia, watching my back, bracing for the worst.”

This month. while walking down O’Connell Street in Dublin with her boyfriend, two men passing muttered “get out of our fucking country”.

That’s probably a slight misquote. The lads probably said ”Get the fuck out of our country”

Another reader, Taz, said the racism he experienced at work and where he lives in Dublin made him feel “scared and powerless”.

“I was told to fuck off to my country by an elderly man,” he said.

Again, probable misquote. The old guy would be more likely to say ”Fuck off to your own country”

On public transport, a man stood on his foot and wouldn’t let him move; the man told him he had a problem with the reader’s “chocolate face”.

Our beloved Garda Siochana are, to their eternal shame and disgrace, following orders to enforce the Plantation, but they are also encouraging foreigners to remigrate.

He said he does not feel supported by Irish officials: “I feel they are not doing anything. I’ve never felt like they can help me at all.”

Another reader who lives in Dublin said he is constantly harassed by groups of teenagers, something he feels the authorities do not take seriously.

This writer has made numerous formal complaints to the Gardai about various crimes. Believe it or not, the response from the cops included: smirking, insults, threats of arrest and death, open boasts of the cops’ involvement in illegal activities, including murdering other cops and drug dealing and, of course, almost total inaction on the crime reported. It is wonderful to hear that many cops are responding in a similar fashion when foreigners complain that someone insulted them or hit them a few slaps. The cops cannot be accused of being racist: they are treating the foreigners with the same contempt they show us natives. In fairness to them, as many as ten percent of Irish cops will respond in a professional manner to a report of a crime.

The Lumpen Proletariat youth, mothered by feminists, trained by the sacred screens of phone and TV, motivated by easily available vodka, cocaine and mind bending vapes, are also doing their part to encourage remigration. This highlights the only advantage mass immigration has brought to Ireland. In the old days the Lumpen Prole teens would launch savage unprovoked attacks on peaceful people like you and me. The leftists would make excuses for them. Now the Lumpen Proles are starting to target foreigners and the leftists are terrified.

Kids using electric scooters at high speed throwing bottles and stones on people of colour is frustrating,

A reader who lives in the midlands said that every day before leaving his home, he prepares himself to expect the worst from Irish people.

“I no longer smile nor am I friendly, I am always on the edge ready to defend myself, this has affected my mental health and I no longer want to live in this hostile unfriendly country,” he said.

Sounds like someone has taken the hint...

Some Dubliners are taking things to the next level: Two Indian chaps were very badly beaten — nearly killed — in the last two weeks. The first beating made national and international headlines and much criticism. (An Irishman suffering a similar beating would typically be almost completely ignored by the MSM). The second beating of an Indian was given much less publicity. The Indians say 50 of their people have been beaten recently, but most of these attacks are unreported by the MSM.

The publicised incident involved a prosperous looking crowd of middle-aged Irish people urging on a bunch of teenagers who were bashing the unfortunate chap’s head into a convenient lamppost. They had stripped him naked from the waist down. They emphatically told a do gooder lady who asked whether the man had been behaving badly near a playground. MSM repeatedly said that the man was “totally innocent” but they admitted that his walk from his home to the Hindu temple happened to pass by a playground.

Some might argue that this action is in some way unChristian. But the man from Galillee was very specific about what to do with people who interfere with children: tie a millstone around their necks and throw them into deep water. He and his crew also reportedly entered a Jewish temple and whipped everyone they could get their hands on. Executions and whippings are punishments that Jesus encouraged.

Dr Santosh Yadda, a data scientist, described another attack: The teens came from behind, stole his glasses, asked if he wanted the glasses back, broke the glasses in front of him and then started hitting him, resulting in fractured bones, cuts and three or four painkillers a day.

This seems to have been an unprovoked attack on a man minding his own business on an evening stroll. Such attacks are wrong, unChristian and possibly even counterproductive.

Despite the beating, Dr Yadda still loves us and wants to stay: “I love the Irish people. Irish people are the best.” The journo specifically asked him if he is he going to stay in Ireland. “Definitely. ..I have concern only about these teenagers.” He says that the supportive attitude of his ethnic Irish co-workers is the reason he intends to stay. He predicts that the teens who attacked him will get off scot free, even if the cops bother to find them. “They know they will not be punished…” He advises Indians to always go out in groups and avoid eye contact with people.

The liberals created laws to give special privileges to anyone doing crimes before their 18th birthday. They have their identities hidden permanently, for example.

On RTE’s Morning Ireland news show, journalist Shane McIlhatten is clearly mocking the suffering of the brown man. He reports on Lakhmir Singh, a taxi driver who was beaten up at night by two passengers, presumably ethnic Irish, though it is not stated. Singh states that he will definitely never drive a taxi at night again. McIlhatten then says in an amused tone of voice: “Another person with a newfound fear of the dark is Dr Tymur Salman.” Only women and children have a fear of the dark.

Dr Salman was born and bred in the town of Navan, Co. Meath. His father was also a doctor there. The other day, while buying groceries at night, a ten-year-old boy shouted “Mr. Curryman” at him. Another boy did impressions of Apu, the unpleasant Indian from the Simpsons.

As a result, Dr Salman feels that it is too dangerous for him to walk the streets at night. A delicate flower indeed. Might remigration be a solution for him?

Priyanka Borpujari is a journalist and PhD student who has decided to “make Ireland her home”. She sounds like she has access to some good research on racial differences, not just at skin level but at cellular level. Is she a reader of TOO? She admits that she didn’t get worked up when the Lumpen Teens killed a Croatian chap or when the cops supposedly attacked some Africans, but only when one of hers was hurt.

“So perhaps in a way, we are all tribal in our bones, that our cells wake up only when “one of us” is attacked.” You don’t say. Maybe she should apply for a research grant to study the topic.

The same lady accuses the Lumpen Teens: “For non-Irish and non-White people like me who have made Ireland our home, there is nothing we fear more than teenagers, who can get away with any form of racist attack.”

In fairness, the Lumpen Teens have been getting away with savage — but non-racist — attacks on ethnic Irish for decades. It’s only very recently that they have started attacking foreigners. For twenty years since the darkies started trickling in, there has been a loose Lumpen Prole/Foreigner alliance. The Nigerian, Pakistani and East European have often provided drugs, prostitution and hitman services to ethnic Irish criminals. Some well-organised Irish criminals have benefitted directly from the billion Euro refugee accommodation scam. If the Lumpen Prol/Organised crime/Foreigner coalition is falling apart, this can only be a good thing.

A Bombay homosexual (“15 years living in Ireland”) was possibly exaggerating when he claimed on radio that in Dublin’s Heuston train station, “everybody” was staring at him with hate in their eyes. Significantly, they were also making their hands into fists. It sounds like the commuters were trying to make him afraid, which is technically a criminal offence. Perhaps he should report it to the cops?

He also claimed that a drunk woman wielding a knife chased after him when he was walking through Kilmainham. Kilmainham is where the Brits shot the leaders of the 1916 Rebellion. Indians are making maps of unsafe areas in Ireland. They should add Kilmainham to the list.

Indians are pretending to be surprised and outraged, of course. The MSM are stressing attacks on Indians, but surely the Pakistanis and Nigerians are also getting beaten? Perhaps the explanation is that while the Indians are happy to play the victim card, the manly Pakistanis and Nigerians reject this tactic. If you are the boss of the local Paki rape gang and the local teens and pre-teens launch a humiliating, but non-fatal, attack on your family, publicising the attack would lower your status and expose you as a father unable to protect his family.

Indians have colonised several parts of the world: Mauritius, Natal province in South Africa, Fiji They know that the locals will object. They already have their plans in place. They are lobbying our politicians to include extra compulsory education on the many benefits that foreigners have brought to Ireland. Other Indians are boasting on Reddit forums about how their new housing estate in Dublin is 95% or even 100% Indian. Our useless fat politicians issue 2,000 legal work visas every month to Indians and the same again to Brazilians. And who knows how many UK Pakistanis drive across the open border unnoticed and find sanctuary with the Kebab Shop Brotherhood? Every village in Ireland has a Paki fast food place.

On Telegram channels, a guy boasts that they were expecting some foreigner to break into their flat. They were prepared. They gave him a “Dublin hello”, which seemed to involve hitting him on the head with a stout stick until he stopped moving, judging from the photo of a dead-looking African man. Not a word about the incident on the MSM. Possibly a disinfo fake: who would incriminate themselves by posting this online? But possibly true. In Ireland you can kill someone legally, as long as you held the belief that they were a threat to your life or to someone else’s life, even if that belief is obviously false and no reasonable person would believe that you were threatened. Perhaps the guy is very sure of the legality of his actions?

Attacks on foreigners can be divided into two types. Type A: A foreigner caught in some despicable act and suffering injury while resisting a perfectly legal citizen’s arrest, after a proper investigation of the facts, in a civilised and Christian fashion in accordance with Irish law, Gaelic custom and the 1937 Irish constitution.

Type B: A foreigner minding his own business attacked because Lumpen Prole teens want some cheap thrills and a soft target.

It is to be expected that the MSM will minimise mention of the former and maximise the publicity given to unprovoked Lumpen Teen attacks. There were frontpage headlines when a six-year-old Indian girl was hit in the face and told to go back to India by a group of five 11-year-old boys. This story, which is quite possibly not true at all, comes from the girl’s mother, Anupa Achuthan, a nurse in Waterford.

Meanwhile, the pro-refugee crowd are desperately flogging the fascist Hitler horse. In Sligo, 100 people, including an evil English feminist well known to this writer and a deranged US Jewess carried insulting signs saying “The only good fascist is a dead fascist” and so on. This was in reaction to a Sligo Says No rally of 200 or so, whose bland purpose was simply against Government policy.

Not one black or brown person was at the “anti-fascist” rally. Numerous Africans and brown Asians observed the Sligo Says No rally with a relaxed and friendly attitude. A slim, elegant young African woman with her equally pretty Filipina friend watched the speeches with interest from a riverside cafe. No doubt they miss the sunshine and customs of their home countries, and our rally has encouraged them to think of remigration. The Christian flavour of some speeches probably resonated with them. A middle-aged lady spoke of constant sexual propositions and harassment from brown men. This possibly also resonated with them. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Perhaps brown woman jealousy of brown man lusting over our (much more beautiful) White women could be a powerful force for remigration?

The Sligo Says No rally went up to the gates of the massive new development of refugee apartments (200 car spaces) that overlooks the Abbeyquarter residential area. The refugees will be able to observe the habits of the locals from their high-rise windows. The locals were happy to see the march.

Fascists and Jews mingled happily at the Remigration rally. Perhaps they weren’t actually real fascists or real Jews: One handsome, stylishly dressed youngster flipped a Roman salute to the terrified anti-fascists. His goodlooking girl cooed approval. (Roman salutes are not illegal here, and there are great photos of Catholic bishops and Irish politicians doing it in the 1930s.) A burly, tanned and confident looking chap wore a sports shirt with the words ISRAEL and an image of a howling wolf. There was no blood on the wolf’s fangs, so perhaps we can deduce that he is one of the many Israelis who want an immediate ceasefire and peace with their Palestinian neighbours?

Local politicians repeated the fascist allegation. One leftie (Pat Fallon, Sligo Leitrim Congress of Trades Unions) even complained about anti-Muslim blasphemy referring to the chant: Allah, Allah, Who the fuck is Allah? Some years ago, we voted in a referendum to remove the offence of blasphemy from the constitution. We can be almost certain that Fallon supported this. But now he is offended by it…

In the town of Drumshanbo, there is a gang of three lunatics: A trans person, a non-Gaelic speaking pagan witch and a leftie. The footsoldiers of globalism. They have busied themselves putting up posters with a Hitler theme. They claim that an upcoming nationalist festival will be a opportunity to celebrate the well-known Austrian artist, vegetarian and Zionist collaborator. They got hundreds of musicians to sign a petition calling for the festival to be banned. Prominent signers include Christy Moore and the notorious Kneecap. The campaign worked: the Drumshanbo venue cancelled. This was slightly surprising — the same venue held an illegal Covid gathering, back in the day.

Luckily, another venue is available, somewhere near Castlebar. Details available at the last minute, to avoid problems. The publicity of the cancel campaign has no doubt worked to increase ticket sales…

The Mise Éire festival is to celebrate the Irish language, culture and heritage. It will, God willing, take place on August 23rd. It features a host of Remigration enthusiasts, writers, artists, musicians and speakers of the dear old Gaelic. It’s priced at an eyewatering 50 euros with over half the 750 places already sold. (50 x 750 makes 37,500 bucks. Who knew there was that much money in nationalism?)

Will it be banned? Or will it be the best free speech gathering ever? Watch this space. See you there. Beir bua!

 

Professor Griff, Public Enemy, and the Precarious Black–Jewish Partnership

/3 Comments/in /by

When Kanye West, more popularly known as “Ye,” recently released a song titled “Heil Hitler,” it was not the first time a hip-hop artist’s rhetoric strained Black-Jewish relations. In 1989, Professor Griff of Public Enemy made antisemitic claims in an interview that set off a media firestorm and reopened deep, historical tensions between the two communities.

Born in 1960, Richard Duane Griffin, known as Professor Griff, rose to prominence as a key member of Public Enemy, one of the most influential rap groups of all time. As the group’s self-proclaimed “Minister of Information,” he fused a commanding stage presence with pointed political commentary, helping to make Public Enemy both critically acclaimed and socially disruptive.

Griff’s role extended far beyond lyrical contributions. He developed the group’s stage routines, managed its armed-guard “Security of the First World” (S1W) dance unit, and infused its message with Afrocentric themes. Public Enemy’s sound and style were unapologetically abrasive and confrontational, quickly becoming the soundtrack for a generation of Black political protest. Albums like Yo! Bum Rush the Show (1987), It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back (1988), and Fear of a Black Planet (1990) revolutionized hip-hop’s sound and challenged its audience to think politically. Songs such as “Fight the Power” became early hip-hop anthems, embedding Public Enemy’s defiant style into the very fabric of the genre.

While Griff was less visible than frontmen Chuck D and Flavor Flav, his creative input was indispensable. His spoken-word interludes, authoritative stage presence, and conceptual vision for S1W gave Public Enemy one of the most distinctive performance identities in the hip-hop genre. But as the group’s influence grew, Griff’s offstage rhetoric would spark one of hip-hop’s most damaging controversies.

The fallout began on May 22, 1989, during an interview with The Washington Times reporter David Mills. Griff asserted that “Jews are responsible for the majority of the wickedness in the world” and claimed he could “prove” their wickedness. He accused Jews of controlling American institutions, pointed to their dominance in the jewelry business, and went so far as to say that “if the Palestinians took up arms, went into Israel and killed all the Jews, it’d be all right.”

These remarks did not appear in a vacuum. Griff’s views were heavily shaped by the Nation of Islam’s ideology, particularly the teachings of Louis Farrakhan, and by material circulated by the NOI’s historical research department. He drew directly from The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, which argued that Jews dominated the Atlantic slave trade, and from Henry Ford’s The International Jew.

The backlash was immediate. Jewish organizations, mainstream media outlets, and music critics condemned his remarks. Public Enemy’s once-radical posture was now a liability. Chuck D initially tried to defend Griff but eventually relented to mounting pressure. On June 19, 1989, he announced Griff’s removal as Minister of Information for failing to represent Public Enemy’s program. Less than two weeks later, under unrelenting public and industry scrutiny, Chuck D announced the group’s temporary disbandment.

By August of that year, Public Enemy had reformed and reinstated Griff in a reduced role as “Supreme Allied Chief of Community Relations,” but the arrangement was short-lived. The mounting public pressure on the group proved overwhelming. The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith lodged protests with CBS/Columbia Records, which distributed Public Enemy’s albums.

Walter Yetnikoff, head of CBS, sent a memo to his executives urging them to “pay more attention to what their acts were saying with regard to matters of ethnicity.” Jewish leaders across the country condemned Griff’s remarks, the national media erupted, and even longtime allies distanced themselves. Russell Simmons, co-founder of Public Enemy’s label, reportedly dismissed Griff as “a racist stage prop.” By the end of 1989, Griff was permanently kicked out of Public Enemy.

Despite the damage to his reputation, Griff re-emerged in later years, continuing to champion Black empowerment while rarely retracting his earlier views. In June 2020, he appeared on Nick Cannon’s “Cannon’s Class” podcast, where both men engaged in a discussion about Jewish power and Semitic identity. Cannon endorsed Griff’s claims concerning Jewish power, calling him a “legend” and proclaiming, “you’re speaking facts.” Cannon’s conversation triggered the predictable backlash from the usual suspects, with groups like the ADL, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the American Jewish Committee, and regional Jewish federations denouncing his remarks, ultimately pressuring ViacomCBS to cut ties with him.

In 2025, Griff remains active through lectures, interviews, and social media, appearing on programs such as “The Carl Nelson Show” to discuss Black music and history. While his recent rhetoric has been less inflammatory than in 1989 or 2020, his continued association with controversial ideas keeps him relevant in debates about antisemitism in hip-hop.

The fallout from Griff’s remarks cannot be understood without examining the broader history of Black-Jewish relations in America. Historically, these communities forged important alliances, particularly during the Civil Rights movement, when Jewish leaders and organizations lent significant support to Black activists. Yet beneath the surface, the relationship has always been precarious.

As this author has previously mentioned, Black-Jewish relations in modern America have been marked by repeated clashes despite earlier civil rights solidarity. From the 1968 Ocean Hill–Brownsville school crisis to the 1991 Crown Heights riots, from the Nation of Islam’s rhetoric on Jewish influence to high-profile disputes over Israel and Palestine involving figures like Tamika Mallory, Marc Lamont Hill, and Black Lives Matter, these episodes have exposed deep and persistent fault lines in this presumed alliance.

At some point, as political priorities realign, Black Americans may find themselves overlooked while other potential golems—Indian migrants in particular—are cultivated to serve the agendas of those in power. As new minority groups rise to prominence, Professor Griff’s legacy stands as proof that the Black-Jewish alliance has always been tenuous, and its future may lie in obsolescence rather than renewal.