General

A Zionist Jew embraces universalism. For the West.

A very clear case of thinking in terms of what’s good for the Jews. No concern with the interests of White majorities throughout the West. No mention of a need for Israel  to adopt universalism for the benefit of humanity.

My New UnPopulist Article on How Nationalism is Driving the Growth of anti-Semitism on the Right

Nationalism has a longstanding historical connection to anti-Semitism, and the link between the two in the US today should not be surprising.

 | 

NA

Today, the UnPopulist published my article “Nationalism Is Driving the Neo Right’s Virulent Antisemitic Turn.” It builds on my earlier Volokh Conspiracy post on the same topic, and also on 2024 National Affairs article “The Case Against Nationalism” (coauthored with Alex Nowrasteh). Originally, Alex and I were also going to coauthor this new article. But, after seeing my draft, Alex said he had little to add to it, though he very much agrees with the thesis. I am nonetheless grateful to Alex for his help in thinking through this topic, and for insights derived from his extensive expertise on it. Here is an excerpt from today’s article:

American conservatism has been rocked by the rise of “Groyper” antisemitism within its ranks, roiling both official Republican Party organizations and some of the right’s most influential intellectual organs….. Even now, the debate over this issue has largely overlooked the source of antisemitism’s rise in conservative circles: the political right’s increasing turn towards nationalism.

Nationalism doesn’t just historically correlate with bigotry—it consistently drives antisemitism and other racial and ethnic prejudices. Indeed, nationalism intensifies preexisting antisemitic impulses. To the degree that today’s conservatives decide to embrace—or even just make peace with—nationalism and dispense with the universalist liberal principles of the American Founding, they will find it difficult to impossible to stem the spread of antisemitism in their midst….

In October, Politico published an explosive report disclosing a selection of vile antisemitic and pro-Nazi messages from leaked group chats written by leaders of Young Republican chapters and various state GOP politicians and staffers. Later that month, Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts mired his organization in the controversy when he publicly defended prominent far-right podcaster Tucker Carlson—a longtime promoter of antisemitic ideas and conspiracy theories—after Carlson conducted a fawning interview promoting Nick Fuentes, an even more notorious antisemitic influencer who openly defends the Nazis….

The recent resurgence of right-wing antisemitism is rooted in the conservative movement’s turn towards nationalism. It is no accident that it emerged at the same time as the political right—led by Trump—has increasingly defined American identity not in terms of universal liberal values but in terms of ethnic and racial identity. Many in the movement privilege native-born white Christians over other groups—and often even privilege “heritage Americans,” defined as those (primarily whites) who can trace their ancestry in the U.S. over many generations all the way back to the Civil War or earlier.

Nationalist political movements—defined here as those that hold that the main purpose of government is to advance the interests of the nation’s dominant ethnic group—have a long history of antisemitism and other bigotry….

A movement that exalts the interests of the ethnic and cultural majority and believes that these interests are the true foundation of the nation is inherently prone to viewing ethnic and religious minorities with suspicion and hostility. That may be especially true of minority groups with a large diaspora in many countries, a history that is perversely used against them as a reason to doubt their allegiance to the nations they live in.

These prejudices are exacerbated by Jews’ disproportionate success in the commercial and intellectual worlds. Nationalists tend to believe such disproportionately successful minorities are encroaching on the rightful domain of the majority group. Such suspicion is heightened by the zero-sum worldview shared by most nationalists, under which one ethnic or racial group can only gain at the expense of others. Thus, if Jews are disproportionately successful, it must be at the expense of the ethnic majority.

Resentments are heightened by nationalists’ historic predilection for conspiracy theories. If the ethnic majority has been denied its supposedly rightful position of dominance, nationalists readily assume that the cause must be some nefarious plot.

Later in the article, I explain how the best antidote to nationalism is embracing the universalist principles of the American Founding:

In his resignation statement from the Heritage board, Robert George urged Heritage to be guided by the principles of the Declaration of Independence, especially the idea “that each and every member of the human family, irrespective of race, ethnicity, religion, or anything else; … is ‘created equal’ and ‘endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights.'” George is right. Unlike nationalist movements focused on ethnic particularism, the American Founding was based on universal liberal principles…..

In his General Orders to the Continental Army, issued on the occasion of the end of the Revolutionary War in 1783, George Washington stated that one of the reasons the United States was founded was to create “an Asylum for the poor and oppressed of all nations and religions.” Other leading Founding Fathers—including James Madison and Thomas Jefferson—expressed similar sentiments.

Washington sounded a similar theme in his famous 1790 letter to the congregation of the Rhode Island Touro Synagogue, in which he avowed that the United States has “an enlarged and liberal policy,” under which “All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship,” and that the U.S. government “gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance.” America, he emphasized, went beyond “mere toleration” of Jews to granting them full equality. It could do so because American identity was based on universal liberal principles, not ethnic or religious particularism.

As noted in the article, there is also troubling anti-Semitism on the far left (which I previously wrote about here). That in no way justifies the right-wing nationalist variety (and vice versa).

Piers Morgan grills Nick Fuentes on Jews, the Holocaust and Hitler.

JTA: Piers Morgan grills Nick Fuentes on Jews, the Holocaust and Hitler. Did it pay off?

The British anchor’s interview took a different tone from the one with Tucker Carlson that has divided Republicans.

Another conservative media personality with links to mainstream culture has interviewed Nick Fuentes, the avowed white nationalist and antisemite whose rising popularity and recent chummy interview with Tucker Carlson has fractured the Republican Party.

The British commentator Piers Morgan hosted Fuentes on his YouTube show “Piers Morgan Uncensored” Monday, for a two-hour chat. Morgan, who considers himself a free-speech absolutist, told viewers he decided to interview Fuentes in order to understand his views better.

“It doesn’t make a lot of sense to spend all this time talking about Nick Fuentes, but not actually to Nick Fuentes,” Morgan said at the top of his YouTube show. He told his guest, “People are talking about you in a more mainstream environment than you may be used to.”

It was the same justification that Carlson gave for hosting Fuentes on his own show, an interview that was soon defended by the head of an influential conservative think tank and has led to a splintering of the GOP between those who want to expel Fuentes and his followers, and everyone else.

Morgan’s Fuentes sit-down came the same day that Sen. Chuck Schumer introduced a resolution rejecting Fuentes and his rhetoric that drew support from Senate Democrats as well as a range of Jewish groups. The resolution also condemned Carlson for not pushing back on Fuentes when he hosted the streamer.

In his interview, Morgan took a decidedly more contentious stance.

Morgan is a prominent tabloid TV personality, former CNN anchor and onetime Donald Trump admirer who leans into lurid exchanges with controversial guests and who morphed from a supporter of Israel after Oct. 7, 2023, into a vocal critic of its campaign in Gaza. In the interview, he frequently sought to push Fuentes on his views about Jews, Hitler and the Holocaust.

“It’s your lack of humanity and compassion for people about things like the Holocaust, about slavery, it’s that that people find so contemptible,” Morgan told Fuentes. “And I don’t understand why you need to do that.”

He appeared to move the needle on Fuentes when his guest agreed with Morgan that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust — a fact Fuentes has regularly questioned on his own show.

“I’m open to believing the official narrative,” Fuentes told Morgan, claiming he was mostly interested in opposing Holocaust denial laws of the kind that have been passed in some European countries.

“In many countries it’s not even legal to talk about it. And that’s really where my interest in the Holocaust begins and sort of ends, to tell you the truth,” Fuentes said. “Can you imagine if in the United States they said, ‘The number of Palestinians killed in Gaza is 100,000 and if you don’t say that, you’re going to jail’?” (On this issue the two men found some common ground, as Morgan also said he opposes Holocaust denial laws.)

Fuentes, who earlier had insisted, “I don’t hate any Jews,” also offered, “I really think that every death is a tragedy.” Yet he didn’t maintain an aura of decency for long, doubling down on his past comments that Hitler “was really f—king cool,” as Morgan grew increasingly indignant.

“You think Hitler was really f–king cool?” Morgan asked Fuentes. “Yes, and I’m tired of pretending he’s not,” Fuentes responded — paraphrasing a scene from the movie “Joker,” a popular text for young right-wing men, in which an unapologetic Joker is interviewed by a talk-show host about his homicidal activities.

Calling Morgan “a boomer,” Fuentes offered insight into some of the reasons behind his popularity: a new generation of young people who have no connection to the Holocaust and aren’t interested in memorializing it. What’s left, he said, is a broader sense among Gen Z that Jews and Israelis weaponize the memory of the Holocaust to their “political benefit.”

“Just play that, antisemitism and Holocaust, you can do whatever you want and defend all your actions,” he said, over objections from Morgan. “That’s the part people are getting upset with.”

Though he is a staunch Israel opponent, Fuentes told Morgan that his own hyper-nationalist vision of America — one in which white Christianity would reassert its dominance and immigrants would be expelled — sees some kinship in modern-day Israel.

“In Israel they have my politics,” he said. “If they had their way, it would only be Jewish people.”

Morgan later took to social media to deem the interview a job well done.

“I urge you to watch it in full, to understand the Fuentes phenomenon,” the anchor wrote on X, “and see him held to proper account.”

Shocking! DEI Corruption at the SBA, USAID

“Widespread Misconduct”: Trump Admin Orders All Beneficiaries Of Nation’s Largest DEI Program To Surrender Financial 

The Small Business Administration has ordered all 4,300 firms in its 8(a) “socially disadvantaged” program, which receive no-bid federal contracts, to turn over their financial records, including general ledgers, bank statements, payroll files, subcontracting agreements, and other internal documents, by January 5 or face removal from the program.

SBA’s crackdown on one of Washington’s oldest DEI initiatives follows mounting evidence that some 8(a) firms have become a major pipeline for fraud, pass-through schemes, and artificially inflated contract costs.

Late last month, Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute and the investigative journalist who broke the Clinton Cash corruption story, published a report exposing the cronyism and corruption inside the 8(a) program, where pass-through firms handed bidless contracts on silver platters while quietly outsourcing the real work to major consulting companies.

For years, DC insiders have exploited a federal DEI contracting program that provides windfalls to Beltway elites. This open secret isn’t about helping the downtrodden; it’s about bagging no-bid paydays. The SBA’s 8(a) program is long overdue for reform,” Schweizer wrote on X.

There was also a recent U.S. Treasury Department investigation into $9 billion in small-business contracting, amid alarming concerns from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and others about rampant fraud and abuse in preference-based programs. In other words, meritocracy will return under the Trump administration.

Everyone in the DC consulting world understands how the game works: set up a compliant 8(a) “small business,” win the no-bid award, and let the big consulting firms do all the work.

8(a) was DC’s best-kept secret – until journalist James O’Keefe blew the lid off the DEI program. O’Keefe went undercover and captured video of an individual linked to ATI Government Solutions bragging about keeping $65 million of a $100 million contract while subcontracting out the work.

Several firms, including ATI, have since been suspended. Native American tribes whose names were used in pass-through schemes are also under increasing scrutiny.

SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler said there is mounting evidence that minority contracts had become “a pass-through vehicle for rampant abuse and fraud,” especially after the Biden administration raised the target for contracts “set aside” for minorities from 5% to 15% of all contracting dollars.

“We’re committed to thoroughly reviewing every federal contract, contracting officer, and contractor — while working alongside federal law enforcement,” Loeffler said.

Such reports “have raised questions about widespread misconduct within the 8(a) Business Development Program, adding to years of credible concerns that the program designed to serve ‘socially and economically disadvantaged’ businesses has become a vehicle for institutionalized abuse at taxpayer expense,” the SBA wrote in its letter to the 4,300 “disadvantaged” firms.

Schweizer hinted at the 8(a) reforms needed:

Last week…

DEI mandates have proven to make the government more dysfunctional and more costly. It’s time to end the madness and “Make Meritocracy Great Again.”  

Rotherham – Scam? Half-Truth? Truth?

Nick Griffin has an excellent blog. Interesting that the  problem has shifted more to other immigrants, like Africans. Notice that, like Tobias Langdon, he singles out Dennis MacShane, the Israel-first, Rotherham last Labour politician representing Rotherham.

Vital Questions Over a Powerful Film Trailer

A powerful trailer for a film about the grooming scandal is doing the rounds on social media. It’s called Rotherham and, judging by the trailer clips, it certainly doesn’t pull any punches. Indeed, it looks like a film that could have made a huge difference for the better if it had only been made and released twenty years ago.

As it is, there are some questions we have to ask:

First, is it ever going to be made as a full-length film? The trailer is a fund-raiser, asking for donations to help get it made. This is somewhat odd to say the least. For a start, would-be producers, Unhinged Labs, seem to be totally new. Unheard of, and with a newly established social media presence which is still all-but invisible.

Where have they come from? Who is involved? Where have they developed the skills, got the equipment and found the actors to make such an important but very ambitious effort realistic?

At present, it isn’t. This isn’t made with real actors, it’s AI-generated. The girl is voiced by a posh southerner, not a working class lass from Rotherham. The dad’s accent wavers, but is basically Sean Bean. The angry man in the pub is a Londoner, not a Yorkshireman.

Second, if by chance this is a genuine plan and not a scam, why haven’t they simply teamed up with one of the individuals or organisations who, in recent years, have sought to ‘own’ the grooming issue? Regular readers will know I have no time for Tommy Robinson, Nigel Farage, Lawrence Fox, Ben Habib, etc, but if you really wanted – and had the capability – to make a film on the grooming scandal, you could approach any one of them and they would bite your hand off to help.

They all have the contacts to get proper funding, and they would all (with the exception of Farage if the intention is to hammer Muslims rather than the British state) relish the extra publicity they’d get for helping make it happen.

So one must ask: is this trailer may be a simple scam. Make a dramatic trailer, put it out, ask for money, grab the cash, disappear. Unless or until we see some solid evidence, perhaps interviews with the production team, this has to be a very real ossibility.

Third, this could be genuine. If it is, it could be a tremendous film. Without a doubt, the girls or Rotherham and so many other places deserve to have their stories told. Not just once or twice, and by mainstream TV companies which tiptoe round the issues, but by independent and fearless teams who refuse to pull any punches.

Only when this has been done, over and over again, will the horror and evil of the whole scandal sink deep enough into the public psyche that parents and future generations of girls will be so aware of the danger that they are protected from it.

But we could still only get the half-truth. Probably the version of reality preferred by those vested interests who are trying to push Britain into civil war.

The VITAL Character in the Whole Rotherham Story – Marlene Guest

ANY film about Rotherham and the grooming scandal which doesn’t feature the absolutely crucial role played by the late Marlene Guest and the BNP in exposing and fighting the whole thing. would be a LIE and a grotesque distortion of the truth.

Marlene was a LibDem campaigner until she gave up on them over their cowardly refusal to take up the growing evidence of racist grooming of young white girls by Pakistani gangs in her home-town. She joined the British National Party and became a super activist, candidate and all-round tireless heroine.

When the Muslim grooming scandal broke and the Labour Party’s South Yorkshire Police & Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright denied any knowledge of the matter, it was Marlene’s documented evidence that proved him a liar and forced him to resign in disgrace.

She had spent years campaigning on the matter, writing to him as head of Children’s Services, speaking at meetings in his local pub and leafleting the streets around his home.

While 1,200 young girls were abused and gang-raped in his constituency, immigration-loving Denis MacShane was so busy campaigning for Israel and against ‘antisemitism’ that he never even noticed what was happening in his own backyard. This needs to be in the film, or Rotherham will miss the mark.

Marlene also played an important role in the downfall in 2012 of Labour criminal tax-thief Denis MacShane (whose real name is Josef Denis Matyjaszek. As the town’s MP from the institutionally anti-English Labour party, he had claimed that not a single one of his constituents had ever raised the grooming issue with him.

“I am shocked and saddened that the BNP has won its three-year campaign to destroy my political career as a Labour MP,” said MacShane.

Marlene won the highest ever vote by a BNP candidate in the subsequent Parliamentary by-election coming thir and beating the Tories.

Marlene faced not just official apathy,but wall-to-wall hostility. Death threats, police harassment, smears and lies. The BNP fought whole election campaigns on the issue, the local team which Marlene helped to build putting out tens of thousands of leaflets, constantly speaking with parents and victims.

While the Powers That Be were still refusing to accept that we were in any way right. Marlene was in touch with dozens of families and victims. One young teenager had become pregrant after being repeatedly raped, but had had a miscarriage.

The remains of the baby were in medical storage, but the utter scum at the top of south Yorkshire Police refused to order the DNA test which could lead to at least one of the vile predators being brought to justice. They hid behind the excuse that the investigation they claimed to be running could not afford the £500 test fee.

My £500 ‘Fraudulent Payment’ to a Grooming Victim

Marlene came to me and asked if I would pay for the test, from the fund I had set up to use the surplus from my European Parliamentary travel and attendence allowance for good causes. Rotherham, of course, is not in my North West constituency, so this should have been paid by Andrew Brons, our MEP for Yorkshire.

Brons, however, had reneged on his promise to set up a similar fund, because he was worried that the Eurocrats would deem this improper use of these funds. Actually, he was right about that, I was in the end accused of fraud for having given thousands of pounds of that month to good causes, rather than spending the money on myself.

The chief investigator literally admitted that, had I spent the money on flash hotels, champagne and prostitutes (as per the habits of most MEPS) everything would have been in order. As it was, the internal tribunal found me guilty of fraudulent use of EU funds and made me repay thousands of Euros from my own money.

Among the payments I made for which I was punished was the £500 I gave to Marlene so that she could pay for the DNA test to be done privately.

The result – which confirmed the girl’s allegation against the abuser – at least made possible the successful prosecution of one of the paedophile rapists. This set something of a precedent and helped begin the process whereby the police and courts did finally take some action against the grooming gangs.

I reiterate the fact that Marlene endured terrible pressure and constant worry and fear in order to drag the scandal into the light. She was an elderly widow, living alone at an address known by every grooming gang member, hate-filled/Muslim-vote-grabbing Labour councillor, and bent copper in the whole rough town.

If this film is made and doesn’t feature Marlene and the BNP, it will not be a true account of what went on.In that case, the odds are that it will be a sensationalist piece of war propaganda. That’s not what it should be; it should set the record straight, hammer the Powers That Be for their criminal failure, honour the courage of the the victim,s and to warn the future.

Let me be very blunt: The grooming gangs back then were overwhelmingly Muslim, but it was never all Muslims. Yes, their community should have done far more to stop it – but so should ours!

Today, a very significant number of the criminals and perverts still molesting and raping young girls are Muslim, but others are Africans from Christian or animist backgrounds, still others are Roma from Eastern Europe.

If Rotherham is made and it fairly shows what happened in that town back then, it could become a classic in grass-roots, resistance film-making. But if it focuses on what long-term resident members of one community did twenty years ago, it could lead people to fail to see that the perpetrators today are largely from other immigrant communities – and that they tend to operate in smaller groups, or alone. That could leave potential victims unaware of how this crime has mutated and, to a very significant degree, ‘changed hands’.

On a different angle, a true film about Rotherham woud have to put those terrible events in the context of the far wider grooming scandal. This should include the way in which South Yorskhire police pressured Channel 4 not to show an important documentary exposing part of the scandal.

The political police openly did so on the grounds that it could help the BNP win council seats – when many of our local campaigns in places such as Rotherham, Keighley, Bradford, etc were specifically on this issue, and the refusal of the authorities to do anything about it.

Who Most Deserves Hatred and Punishment?

Everyone should remember too that only a MINORITY of the Pakistani community were ever involved in the grooming and the rapes. I have always believed that the guilty ones — that minority — should have faced execution.

But the ENTIRE police forces of South and West Yorkshire, the ENTIRE BBC, and the ENTIRE political elite (with the exception of Anne Cryer in Keighley and MacShane’s successor Sarah Champion) were guilty of helping the official cover up. Not one of THEM has ever faced a trial for that crime, let alone a single day in prison.

If this film is made, and makes people hate anyone, let it make them hate the ‘respectable’ members of our community who betrayed all those girls. Judging from the clips in the trailer, though, that may well not be the aim.

These potential pitfalls could be avoided completely – and the inevitable questions about authenticity and good faith answered – by one simple move by Unhinged Labs. They just need to get in touch with me, and involve me as an (unpaid) expert consultant.

I can put them in touch with local BNP veterans who knew Marlene and were involved at the time, as well as giving them the benefit of my own first-hand experience.

My advice to anyone impressed with the trailer, in the meantime, is don’t give them a single penny, unless and until I tell you that it’s a genuine effort with a realistic chance of being made.

I really hope that this film venture is genuine, and that it is made. And that it pulls no punches. But I also hope and pray that it lands punches on all who deserve them, that the messages that come out of it include the duty of the men of our community to stand up and do the right things, and that it finished with a full-screen dedication:

“In memory of Marlene Guest — who fought so hard for the abused girls of her Rotherham. RIP”.

Nick Griffin Beyond the Pale is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Excerpt: Mark Wauck: The Art Of No Deal

Good blog…

Mark Wauck

This is the day after. The day after Trump sent his chosen Jewish Nationalist cronies, neither of whom has a clue about the real Russia—a real estate lawyer from Manhattan and his own son in law—to Moscow to do a deal with Vladimir Putin. OK, why do I note that Witkoff and Kushner are Jewish Nationalists? We know that they are because of their role in support of the genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and their interest in real estate deals both in Gaza and elsewhere in the Middle East, using Trump’s leverage as POTUS. The relevance to Russia is that the war on Russia is fundamentally an Anglo-Zionist war of revenge—Money Matters—just as the US or Anglo-Zionist wars in the Middle East and elsewhere are fundamentally Jewish Nationalist wars. Here’s how Doug Macgregor put it yesterday, without using my chosen term, in conversation with Danny Davis:

So, someone needs to tell [the Euros], “Shut up. Sit down. Here’s the answer.” That is what President Trump should do. But he’s not doing it. Now, we can speculate on his donors, the people that really control him, and I think that Witkoff and Kushner are very representative of those donors and their desire to keep this war going with Russia.

But they’re not legally legitimately in charge. Hell, they don’t even hold appointments in the administration. They’re not part of the State Department. And if Trump and Rubio can’t come to an agreement, then he should fire Rubio and put somebody else over there that understands what the hell’s at stake. It is our relationship with Russia that counts.

Trump can either help manage this and control it and drive it in a positive direction, or he can do what he’s doing right now. Worry about the optical illusion that he wants to create. Send Witkoff and Kushner over there to help him create good optics for him.

Here’s Mac talking about how a mission to get Bin Laden turned into a 20 year war in Afghanistan. After naming the usual Neocon suspects like Paul Wolfowitz and Scooter Libby … Remember the seven regime change wars in five years that General Wesley Clark told us about? This is where it started. And then came Russia, the Big Enchilada. These people are insanely hubristic:

“The political leadership in Washington had gotten to W and convinced him, well, [Afghanistan] is a sideshow anyway, boss. We just need to keep the lid on there and we’ll go to Iraq next. I mean, you can’t make this stuff up. And in retrospect, I’m sure several historians will dissect this and you’ll eventually get something reasonably close to the truth and they’ll all say, “How could anyone have ever reached these conclusions?”

The history of post Cold War America is essentially the history of Neocons using America’s military for purposes that had little or nothing to do with US national interests. The Neocons were acting as agents of a foreign power, or for non-American interests. For those who don’t recall what Wesley Clark said:

In September 2007 Clark’s memoir A Time to Lead: For Duty, Honor and Country. In the book Clark alleged that during a visit to the Pentagon in the autumn of 2001 after 9/11, a “senior general” told him that the Office of the Secretary of Defense had produced a confidential paper proposing a series of regime change operations in seven countries over a period of five years. He had made the allegation a number of times in public and media appearances in 2006 and 2007. The book also described a conversation Clark had with Paul Wolfowitz in May 1991 after the Gulf War, quoting Wolfowitz as lamenting the non-removal of Saddam Hussein, but also telling him that “…we did learn one thing that’s very important. With the end of the Cold War, we can now use our military with impunity. The Soviets won’t come in to block us. And we’ve got five, maybe 10, years to clean up these old Soviet surrogate regimes like Iraq and Syria before the next superpower emerges to challenge us…”.[135]

I repeat all that because it’s the background to the mission to Moscow. The Russians—I guarantee you—are fully aware of that background, and much more. They know exactly who they’re dealing with and who Witkoff and Kushner represent. The easiest way to get at what transpired is to quote two short passages from a longer article by Larry Johnson (Negotiating in Moscow on the Negotiations):

The media is reporting that the core agenda was the updated U.S. peace framework, which emphasizes:

  • A potential ceasefire and de facto border recognition, possibly involving Ukrainian concessions in the Donbas region to meet Russia’s territorial demands.
  • Security guarantees for Ukraine, coordinated with European allies like France.
  • Broader steps for implementation, including front-line adjustments and restrictions on Ukraine’s military capabilities.

Putin reportedly agreed with some elements of the proposal but reiterated Russia’s non-negotiable positions, …

… Putin indicated that the negotiation process is being conducted through professional channelsexplicitly pointing to Lavrov and the Foreign Ministry as those leading the work on possible peace arrangements. He stressed that he is regularly briefed by Lavrov on these discussions, including on US-drafted peace ideas that Moscow says draw heavily on earlier Russian proposals.

While Putin was meeting with Witkoff and Kushner, Sergei Lavrov held warm bilateral talks with China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi. Lavrov’s absence from the Witkoff/Kushner meeting was a clear signal from Russia that the foundation for actual negotiations was still not in place. Putin’s goal was to explain — politely and firmly — what Russia’s fundamental positions are with respect to settling the war in Ukraine.

Read that carefully. I haven’t the least doubt that Witkoff was hoping to be able to do some general sort of “deal” with Putin. It was the same “deal” that has been offered to Russia before, this time in slightly altered wrapping, but just as unacceptable to Russia. The Anglo-Zionist plan for a “ceasefire” and only “de facto recognition” of the new realities in the Russian zone are a transparent subterfuge for not really ending the war. It’s a “deal” that is only temporary and would be easily broken. What it is not is a legally binding treaty, which is at the top of the list of Putin’s demands.

I also don’t doubt that Witkoff once again attempted to present carrots to Putin, to sweeten a deal that Putin doesn’t want. The primary carrot is, of course, “sanctions relief”. The Anglo-Zionists are trying to extract concessions from Russia—Russia should accept a temporary cessation of hostilities that only strengthens its enemies, and renounce any binding settlement—in exchange for the withdrawal of illegal and ineffective sanctions. Putin has already made his position on sanctions clear: The sanctions are illegal. America is welcome to do the morally and legally right thing by scrapping its sanctions regime, but Russia can live with the sanctions and will certainly not give up anything of value in return for America returning to the rule of international law. To do so would be to implicitly grant a degree of legitimacy to America’s lawless hegemoniacal actions, and that is unacceptable to Russia, because Russia knows America is quite capable of returning to its sanctions. Russia demands to be treated as a sovereign equal in the light of international law. Nothing less.

But even more fundamentally, Putin made it clear that he isn’t interested in any sort of “deal”. He wants a fully spelled out and legally binding treaty settlement. Recall the two draft treaties that Putin presented to the Anglo-Zionist West in December, 2021.

Continues…

ANN’S 1-STEP GUIDE TO SAVING NORTH CAROLINA

Forget blue states, Mr. Trump. Save the Tarheels!

Although the media are not typically interested in helping Republicans win elections, they seem awfully concerned that Donald Trump’s immigration raids in Charlotte, North Carolina, could hurt the GOP’s electoral prospects. The New York Times reports, for example, that the raids “brought one of the Trump administration’s showiest crackdown strategies into a purple state … creating a rare test of one of his core priorities in fiercely contested political territory.”

Hold it right there. A purple state? When did North Carolina become a purple state? The state of “Senator No” (Jesse Helms) and other staunch conservatives like John East?

Here’s a clue! From 1900 until around 1980, North Carolina’s foreign-born population was less than 1%. Today, it’s 15% — and that’s not including third-generation immigrants. The immigrants are mostly Hispanic and Asian, groups that block vote, 70% to 30%, for the Democrats.

In Mecklenburg County, where Charlotte is located, 65% of new residents were born outside of the country. Talk about a sanctuary: The Mecklenburg County Sheriff, Garry McFadden, is a Black man who not only thinks “Black Lives Matter,” but also “Illegal Alien Child Rapist and Murderers’ Lives Matter.”

Ignoring ICE detainer requests — and common sense — he promptly releases those accused of committing such minor and inconsequential infractions as car theft, drunk driving, rape, child molestation and murder onto the streets, never to be heard from again. [ATTENTION SEN. MARK KELLY: Sheriff McFadden’s underlings are being forced to comply with illegal orders!]

Arguably, the state isn’t turning blue because enforcement of immigration laws has been too aggressive, but rather because it’s been nonexistent.

The Times quoted “moderate Republican” Edwin Peacock III — because he agreed with the Times — saying the GOP is in BIG trouble if these Charlotte raids continue. This is classic Republican math: We’re losing 10 cents on every apple we sell. To make up for it, we’re going to have to double our sales.

At least when California flipped from Reagan country to The Poop State, it wasn’t Californians’ fault, but resulted from the evil machinations of Carter-appointed District Court Judge Mariana Pfaelzer [Jewish] and Democratic Gov. Gray Davis (later recalled — but not soon enough) [Davis refused to appeal Pfaelzer’s decision].

North Carolina, by contrast, is being destroyed by some people’s greed. Following in the footsteps of their slave-owning forebears, the state’s biggest employers demand cheap labor, and they don’t care what they’re doing to the country. Their grandkids will be living in Uganda — but they can make a pile NOW.

With all the money employers are saving by hiring low-wage illegals, they have lots of money to lavish on politicians — and the politicians are happy to accommodate them. (See amnesty-happy Sen. Thom Tillis and former Rep. Renee Ellmers.)

Sure, the employers’ taxes will go up. They aren’t paying illegals enough to live on, so somebody’s got to subsidize all that cheap labor. But taxes are paid by everybody, whereas the profits go only to the illegals’ bosses. (It’s estimated that “undocumented immigrants” cost North Carolina taxpayers several billion dollars a year.)

The immediate pain of mass third world immigration is borne not only by the state’s taxpayers, but also by its little girls.

For years, North Carolinians for Immigration Reform and Enforcement (NCFIRE) has been keeping lists of illegal immigrants arrested in the state only for sex crimes against children. (August seems to be a banner month for child rape, with 169, 131 and 107 assaults on children in 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. What is the harvesting season for soybeans, corn and sweet potatoes?)

We always hear about the “valedictorian” illegal alien or the one — featured on the Times’ front page this week — arrested by ICE while flying to have Thanksgiving dinner with her family.

The Charlotte raids produced tales (probably apocryphal) of illegals “approached or arrested” while “putting up Christmas decorations,” or helping with a “church cleanup.” NBC, CNN, The Hill and the Times all reported on the (unnamed) church guy and the Christmas decorations guy.

But none of these news outlets, nor any national media, ever got around to mentioning this illegal: Francisco Marquez Martinez — despite the fact that he was a 38-year-old married man who preached at his church and provided Winston-Salem, North Carolina, residents with cheap lawn care.

As Marquez Martinez was mowing a family’s lawn one day, it began to rain, and he asked to come inside the house. The two daughters, ages 8 and 12, home alone, declined, telling him to stand under the outside awning. Whereupon the illegal forced his way in, chased the 12-year-old to the bathroom and raped her in the tub.

But it’s all worth it, as long as North Carolina farmers can make an extra buck!

I guess it’s fine for Trump to send ICE agents to the blue states, even though they want to become third world hellholes. Illegals can travel, a fact well-known by everyone killed by an illegal alien truck driver who got a commercial driver’s license from Gavin Newsom’s California.

But I’d really rather he round up illegals in North Carolina, so maybe we could have a shot at preventing this “purple state” from becoming California.

COPYRIGHT 2025 ANN COULTER

Diversity is our greatest strength in Minnesota

Watch: Somali Enclave Standoff; ‘No English, No Women On Camera’

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

In a tense street encounter captured in Minneapolis’s Somali-dominated Cedar-Riverside neighborhood, filmmaker Nick Shirley attempted to interview residents about life as Muslims in America—only to face demands to delete footage, refusals to speak English, and claims that women can’t appear on camera, highlighting the cultural chasm.

Shirley’s video, part of his documentary series probing U.S. migration impacts, shows him approaching locals in the area dubbed “Little Mogadishu,” asking “What’s it like being a Muslim here in the United States?”

The clip, shows a man insisting “I’m not speaking English, only ONE Somali language.” Another echoes, “I’m not speaking English.”

When Shirley asks, “Can women speak on camera?” the response is blunt, “No.” 

The footage, filmed amid empty storefronts, captures the enclave’s insularity, raising assimilation alarms in a diaspora resettled since the 1990s under refugee programs.

This standoff exemplifies the “Somalification of America” Trump advisor Stephen Miller has decried, turning elections into “clan rivalries.”

Minnesota’s 100K+ Somali population surged under Obama-Biden, fueling Dem dominance and electing Ilhan Omar amid feuds.

But as we’ve also detailed, it’s bred fraud. Feeding Our Future’s $250M COVID heist saw Somali-led nonprofits indicted, while child care and autism scams bilked millions—Rep. Kristin Robbins fuming: “We’re at the tip of the iceberg.”

Trump’s recent Temporary protected status termination branded it a “hub of fraudulent money laundering,” with gangs “terrorizing” and billions missing.

It’s hardly integrating into America when the mayor of Minneapolis feels the need to conduct speeches in Somali.Jacob Frey’s recent Somali speech—“This is our city”—drew “pandering” blasts.

In a recent Newsmax segment, ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons discussed President Trump’s push to revoke TPS for Somalis in Minnesota amid the allegations of widespread immigration fraud, including marriage scams, visa overstays, and forged documents uncovered in DHS’s “Operation Twin Shield.”

Lyons emphasised that deportations could target cities like Minneapolis or Philadelphia, emphasizing ICE’s focus on removing those who entered under false pretenses, fueling reported panic among Somali and other Muslim migrant communities as stricter enforcement looms.