Charlottesville Antifa and their supporters at the University of Virginia and the Prosecutor’s office have finally gotten a little piece of what they deserve.

After seven years of specious lawsuits and criminal charges against dozens of men who dared to stand up to Antifa, the corrupt local government, and the University of Virginia (UVA), one judge has finally seen through Charlottesville’s campaign of lies.

On August 22, Judge H. Thomas Padrick finally dismissed the charges against Jacob Joseph Dix, a dashing 29-year-old truck driver from Ohio. Mr. Dix had been accused of “burning an object with intent to intimidate”—an absurd application of an unconstitutional law that only exists to harass Whites—for taking part in the tiki-torch procession on UVA’s campus on August 11, 2017.

At Mr. Dix’s trial June 4–6, his lawyer Peter Frazier convinced 8 out of 12 jurors to vote not guilty, resulting in a mistrial. This was a stunning outcome, given the bigotry and ignorance that prevails in Charlottesville. It speaks to the weakness of the prosecution’s case and the competence of the defense.

Before the trial even began, the case was in trouble. Both the original judge and the Albemarle prosecutor’s office (“Commonwealth’s Attorney” in Virginia’s propagandistic terminology) had to step aside for (highly likely) conflicts of interest.

Henrico County prosecutor Shannon Taylor was brought in. Ms. Taylor is currently running for Attorney General of Virginia. More on her later.

The Nature of Political Trials

Before I get into the details, you should be aware: as with all jury trials, the facts don’t really matter. Especially in political trials like that of Mr. Dix. What matters is lawyers’ ability to drive their points home to the jury. The point of a trial isn’t to scientifically determine the truth. It is to see which side is more convincing.

We haven’t gone so far from the old “trial by combat.” The only difference is that the winner isn’t the better swordsman, it’s the better wordsmith. Many jurors feel that whoever is more convinced of their own rightness will speak better and therefore must be in the right.

This is dangerous, because “liberal” careerists (like Shannon Taylor or Albemarle prosecutors Jim Hingeley and Lawton Tufts) are supremely convinced of their own rightness. They have no trouble making brazen and unfair attacks against a defendant because they are not of a philosophical disposition that cares about truth or rightness. They take the system’s morality as an assumption and fight for it.

That’s the way it is. There’s no point in hoping for more discerning juries or more fair-minded prosecutors. This is the game, and we have to play by their rules. Fight fire with fire.

With that in mind, let’s examine the key rhetorical points of each side.

The Defense

Defense lawyer Peter Frazier destroyed the credibility of the prosecution’s key witness, malicious Antifa ringleader Edward (“Emily”) Gorcenski. He took a strong moral position and argued clearly and effectively. He is responsible for the case’s eventual dismissal. There’s no doubt his overall framing won the case.

Emily G.’s Twitter photo, August 2017

He did so by arguing five main points:

1) The state has no evidence of malicious intent.

2) The defendant said things protected by the First Amendment; he didn’t hit or attack anyone.

3) The cops didn’t arrest anyone for carrying a torch. They didn’t tell anyone that carrying a torch was illegal, because they themselves didn’t think it was.

4) The statute does not even apply to the allegations.

5) Antifa was at fault. The planners tried to keep the march secret to avoid Antifa attacks. This is proven by the May 2017 tiki-procession in Charlottesville carried out by many of the same people. That one was secret. No antifa came. No violence happened.

Mr. Frazier cannot be commended enough for his excellent handling of the facts and his skill at cross-examination.

Antifa Goon Wrecked in Cross-Examination

I recently obtained the trial transcript—and it’s no surprise that the mainstream media did not report the details of this trial. Antifa ring-leader Edward Gorcenski was brutally humiliated in cross-examination. I winced reading it.

It culminated in this electrifying exchange:

[Frazier]: You saw him for about five seconds in the dark seven years ago and you’re here to say in court that this is that man?

[Gorcenski] Yes. It was lit. It was lit by street lights. It was lit by torch light. To the best of my knowledge that is that person.

[Frazier] Based on what you’ve read on the Internet.

[Gorcenski] Based on what I saw on the Internet. Based on what I investigated. Based on the news reports that I have read that this is that man. [my emphasis]

[Frazier] No further questions, Judge.[1]

The entire case is hearsay! The prosecution’s primary witness could not even say that he SAW the defendant there. And this case made it through multiple motions to dismiss, it had the first judge thrown off for conflicts of interest, it had the whole Albemarle prosecutor’s office thrown off for conflicts of interest, AND STILL it went to trial! Albemarle County Virginia is a bloody joke. Totally abusive. Outrageous.

How about we put the prosecutors and their moneymen and the whole UVA administration on trial? That would actually be fair.

But that was not the only humiliation. There’s more. MORE! Gorcenski admitted to releasing the time and place of the tiki-procession to “maybe four or five” journalists.[2]

He also admitted to being an FBI informant:

[Gorcenski] There was a lot going on that day, and, in fact, the FBI had contacted me that day and we had talked about the rally as well.

[Frazier] The FBI contacted you?

[Gorcenski] Yes.[3]

He claimed that this was merely “because as a media organizer the goal was to get the community message out.”[4] But it’s obvious from the rest of his testimony that his real goal was to ensure that his political enemies were denied their right to free assembly.

Frazier also confronted Gorcenski with this Tweet that he wrote just four days before the tiki-procession:

“Biological essentialism is a fascist vector, and fascism must be crushed. Fascism is an act of first violence and violence is justified to stop it.” Edward Gorcenski (Emily G.) on Twitter, August 7, 2017[5]

So he defines another position—that biology is central to who we are—as “fascist” by its very nature, and thus, violence is justified against people whom he deems to hold such beliefs.

It is thus fair to deduce that Mr. Gorcenski’s intent on August 11th was to attack his political enemies. And furthermore that his contact with the FBI and with the media was for the purpose of inciting his Antifa comrades. It would not be the only example of Antifa-FBI collusion.

This argument could have been made more aggressively if the judge had allowed other Gorcenski tweets to be entered into evidence, for instance:

“One story that hasn’t been told about #Charlottesville is how our intel networks dramatically outclassed both the alt-right’s and the cops’.” August 19 2017

Ok, so yes. Antifa is engaged in extrajudicial mass-surveillance of its political enemies. It does the dirty work that even the FBI cannot be seen doing.

At another point in the cross-examination Gorcenski very nearly admitted to trying to manipulate the prosecutor’s office for his own political ends:

[Frazier] I said can you explain why at no point in any of those discussions [with the police] that you didn’t—that you didn’t mention Jacob Dix?

[Gorcenski] Yes, I can explain that. The case—the Commonwealth Attorney indicated to me that— 

[Frazier] Which Commonwealth Attorney

[Gorcenski] The previous Commonwealth Attorney for Albemarle County, Robert Tracci indicated to me—

[Prosecutor]: Objection—

THE COURT: Sustained[6]

Very interesting. So Gorcenski was lobbying the former prosecutor to bring charges against his political enemies? Was he also lobbying the current prosecutor, the one who actually brought the charges?

Yes! He didn’t say so in court, but he has elsewhere. On a podcast Gorcenski bragged that he had convinced the prosecutor to bring these charges against people like Mr. Dix.[7]

I’m gonna go ahead and suggest that this is yet more evidence for my theory that Antifa, UVA and the Albemarle County prosecutor’s office conspired to bring these fake and evil prosecutions. And that the prosecutors are covering it up.

Let’s keep reading!

[Frazier] You didn’t mention Jacob Dix’s name to those police any time, did you?

[Gorcenski] I can’t recall if I did or did not. At one point I submitted a dossier of evidence to UVA PD that included some of the people that had been identified in the torch march. I do not—

[Frazier] Not identified by you.

[Gorcenski] Not identified by me, but just general. Some of them identified by me, but some of them generally. And I don’t recall off the top of my head whether or not Jacob Dix was in there. But if I were to guess—

TAYLOR: Object—

[Gorcenski] —I would say that he was not.[8]

Prosecutor Taylor then objects to her own witness for being “unresponsive.” LOL. That’s not why you objected, you liar! Your witness was too responsive. He was giving away the game! He was accidentally revealing an extrajudicial espionage operation by Antifa to push the courts into prosecuting political enemies.

Why do these judges always have to interrupt when things get interesting?

Edward Gorcenski’s disastrous testimony ruined the case. The defense decided against even calling a single witness, because they were so confident that the jury would see through it. And, despite the media’s lies about the Charlottesville 2017 tiki-procession, their confidence was justified. Eight jurors voted for acquittal.

Prosecutor Taylor is now running for Virginia Attorney General. Much of her campaign propaganda focuses on her record of “fighting extremists.” She even included footage of the tiki-procession in a campaign ad.

She must have known that she choked at trial. She sent her underlings to Mr. Dix’s motion-to-dismiss hearing, knowing all was lost.[9]

Like all politicians in democracy, she didn’t care about doing the right thing. She wanted to put Jacob Dix in prison to further her political career.

The Defense’s One Weak Concession

There is one part of Mr. Frazier’s rhetoric that I must respectfully critique. In his opening statement, he excused Antifa for discovering and leaking the time and place of the tiki-torch procession. This leak was the only reason that any conflict happened in the first place. As usual, the Alt-Right tried to keep the event secret to avoid Antifa harassment and violence. As had happened many times before.

Speaking of the “left-wing counter-protesters” (i.e., Antifa), Mr. Frazier said of Antifa:

Word got out and they posted it on a leftwing website saying, hey, something’s going down at UVA tonight, organize, let’s—let’s counter-protest. … That’s a classic counterprotest and they did it specifically because they knew the torch demonstration was coming. And, again, God bless them. Like they are totally allowed to do that.[10]

I can only assume that he said this as a rhetorical concession. “See, I’m a fair guy, I’m playing fair.” In a just country, this would be a good stance. Perhaps even today with some jurors, this might work. I do not doubt Mr. Frazier’s good intent, I only criticize this tactic, because it gives away too much to an evil and immoral prosecution.

It is not Antifa’s “right” to be spies and traitors. That’s what this person was. They treacherously worked their way into a position to find where the protest would happen. They then published that information with the intent that violent thugs would attack us. Their purpose was to deny us the right of free assembly.

And given Mr. Gorcenski’s revelations about his contacts with the complicit FBI and the media, who is to say that one of their agents did not leak that information to Antifa?

This would fit the pattern. When Antifa shows up, there is a fight. When the Alt-Right shows up, there is not. This has been going on for years. To suggest otherwise is obviously untrue. This needs to be drilled into people’s heads—especially jurors. Antifa is a malicious and terroristic nationwide gang. Anytime they exercise “their rights,” it is only ever to strip everyone else of theirs.

If it had not been for that—for Antifa’s violent history—we would have simply announced the torch-vigil openly and invited others to counter-protest. We did just that in April 2017 at a protest at the White House (against Trump’s bombing of Syria). Of course, masked Antifa goons stalked us, screamed at us, threatened us, and attacked us. So sorry if we didn’t send them an invitation to the torch-march a few months later.

That people have to arrange secret protests is only because of the U.S. government’s toleration of this domestic terrorist group. Those are the criminals. Antifa, its corporate backers, and the authorities who make it impossible for Americans to demonstrate openly, because they make it impossible for us to meet Antifa’s force with justified force of our own. In a fair fight—or even in a rather imbalanced one—Americans beat Antifa scum.

This has to be repeated. It is not good enough to skirt around the Antifa problem. You have to confront it head-on. It starts in rhetoric. Then the courts. Then the streets. That progression mirrors the personal preparation required: first in spirit, then in mind, then in body.

The Prolix and Mendacious Prosecution

Edward Gorcenski’s awful testimony wasn’t prosecutor Taylor’s only problem.

Her argument was trash. At least in terms of logic. There is no point in discussing her laborious and twisted reasoning. Her only strategy was to flood the jury with confusing and even contradictory facts and then bamboozle them with word-tricks—typical of politically motivated, careerist prosecutors.

Her closing argument centered on one line: “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.”

This was a good argument for her, because it could easily trick the jury. She was essentially saying “rights have limitations,” as if that could somehow prove the defendant guilty. She talked about how you can’t scream “fire” in a movie theater. Duh. Everybody learned that in middle-school. Her goal was to attack a position that no one on our side ever took, and thereby to dupe the jury. It was a strawman argument.

Contrary to her claims, no one on our side was arguing that “free assembly” and “free speech” allow you to form a mob, mask up, carry weapons, and scream death-threats outside someone’s house. The defense was not arguing that or anything like it. In fact, the only people who have ever done that are… oh right. Antifa.

No, Shannon, you disingenuous harpy. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. In fact, it provided for its own dissolution. Because the founding fathers—not being like today’s hack-politicians who worship “the Constitution” as immutable—were modest enough to assume that it would not last forever.

However, in the modern (frankly, Jewish) interpretation—the Constitution IS INDEED a suicide pact. Just not in the way that Prosecutor Taylor meant.

It is a suicide pact for White Americans.

To wit:

1) The U.S. government’s multi-billion-dollar domestic espionage apparatus makes a mockery of your Fourth Amendment right to “be secure in your possessions” and free from “unreasonable search and seizure.” This apparatus is controlled by, and run primarily in the interests of, American Jews.

2) The citizen is forced to pay for endless, undeclared wars, which—since 1945 alone—have killed tens of millions of people with whom Americans have no quarrel. These wars—including now the ones in the Ukraine and Palestine—are big fat milk cows for often-Jewish financiers and cynical war profiteers. They are justified and promoted by the press, lobbyists (AIPAC, JINSA) and “neoconservative” paid hacks in the elite media (Max Boot, Michelle Goldberg, Jennifer Rubin, Bret Stephens) and in the Biden administration (Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, Ukraine war architect Victoria Nuland). It should go without saying that Jewish influence is heavy in all of those areas.[11]

3) We are also forced to pay for millions of racial aliens to settle in our homes, murder our sons and rape our daughters—while powerful Jews and their gentile lackeys live in luxury in New York, DC and Los Angeles. Jews have been instrumental in bringing this about.

4) Cops and soldiers kneel while Jewish-corporate Antifa riot and beat and kill people. Conditions in the streets have been set by Jewish influence on police policy, favoring Antifa and criminals and brutalizing normal people.

The Constitution’s only purpose today is to support and justify Jewish rule.

This cannot be undone by going back to the values of 1776. The emphasis on individual rights and freedoms has led to the domination of money and greed. It has ripped our people away from their inborn sense of community and responsibility to others. It has crippled us in our fight to regain our own freedom. It has degraded our moral sense.

Americans’ attachment to this long-dead Constitution is inexcusable. The fixation on money, greed and personal comfort has become outright satanic.

We need a new constitution that puts community first—racial community—and individual freedom second. That is the socialist way. And it should not be hard to convince people of that in this supposedly Christian country.

This Jewish-dominated political order of bribery and blackmail must be destroyed. There is no alternative.

Happy but not Satisfied

Judge Padrick’s dismissal is too little, too late. He should have taken responsibility and dismissed the charges months ago. The fact that this politically motivated charge ever got to trial is itself an outrage.

If Americans are ever going to free themselves, we have to learn from this. While we should be happy for Mr. Dix, we should not be satisfied. This outcome was not good enough. We demand more.

The fundamental problem in our country is not a lack of arguments, but a lack of moral conviction. Like political prosecutors, we all need to be uncompromising. No defensive remarks, no apologies, no concessions. Stake out the moral high-ground and force them to assail you there.

You need to internalize that. It isn’t your political opinions that are “racist” and “repugnant.” It’s the Jews’. They are by far the most powerful faction in American politics. They are therefore responsible for the deplorable condition of our people and our country. For all the murders and wars and fentanyl and money-scams and depression and hopelessness.

You didn’t do that. They did. And worst of all, by censorship, doxing and intimidation, they have avoided having to answer for their deeds.

Jacob Dix should be commended for having the guts to see this through to the end. Peter Frazier should also be commended as the first lawyer in Virginia to step up and do the right thing. And do it well. That took the kind of bravery that far too few people have shown. Getting the case dismissed was a small, but important victory.

The next trial is that of Augustus Invictus on October 8 through 11. If you are interested in helping him and the other Charlottesville defendants, you should donate to the Free Expression Foundation. You could mention that you would like your donation to prioritize filing subpoenas against Antifa and their UVA backers.

For anyone to be brought up on charges for standing against those powers is an outrage. The whole U.S.-Jewish power-elite is evil. Antifa is evil. Charlottesville is evil.

In a just country, Jacob Dix would not be on trial, but Edward Gorcenski, the UVA gang of pseudo-academics and liars, and the Albemarle County prosecutor’s office, most especially that corrupt sneak Jim Hingeley and his attack-dog, Lawton Tufts. And also their money-backers, billionaires Sonjia Smith and George Soros and Soros’ lapdog Tom Perriello.

And ultimately, that is our goal. Not to beat these monstrous prosecutions. But to put the prosecutors on trial.

Gregory Conte is an activist on behalf of the White Race and is the author of Sieg Heil: German for Beginners.

[1] Dix trial transcript pg 183, 11 to 21, emphasis added.

[2] Ibd. pg 149 line 20 to 152.

[3] Ibd. pg 148 line 1 to 6.

[4] Ibd. pg 152 7 to 8.

[5] see also Dix trial transcript pg 175 line 22 et seq.

[6] Dix trial transcript pg 180, line 19 et seq., emphasis added

[7] see here. 46:56 in podcast transcript, 53:00-53:20 in audio.

[8] Dix trial transcript pg 181 line 9-21, emphasis added

[9] Dix motion to dismiss hearing transcript, August 22, 2024, pg 2

[10] Dix trial transcript pg 24, 13-15, pg 25 line 8-11.

[11] On Jewish neoconservatives: see Kevin MacDonald, “Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement.”

It took only a few weeks for the authoritarian instincts of Sir Keir Starmer, Britain’s new leftist Prime Minister, to erupt from him like so much pent-up lava scorching its way through the country’s towns and villages. Violent criminals have now been given early release in their thousands from the UK’s overcrowded jails to make way for working-class Whites who wrote slightly emotive tweets about mass immigration as part of the widespread disorder, understandable fury and fear, sparked by an ethnically-Rwandan teenager stabbing three little girls to death at a Taylor Swift-themed holiday club in July. Working-class protestors against this terror were condemned as “far right thugs” by “Two-Tier Keir” — a nickname referring to the fact that Whites are treated far more harshly and dealt with far more quickly than Labour’s foreign or educated clients.

With the riots, Two-Tier Keir’s motives were obvious but they are far less obvious with regard to his proposed banning of smoking outside pubs. This is what makes the policy, overtly a matter of improving public health, all the more pernicious. It is dressed up as something noble — a logical extension of the banning of smoking in pubs which began in 2007 — but, as with everything that emerges from the Labour Party, it is no such thing. It reflects paranoia, Machiavellianism and plain leftist resentment.

As all the businesses around them collapse into Middle Eastern kebab shops, money-laundering “Turkish Barbers” and garish “nail salons,” the pub remains the last bastion of English culture and specifically of White, working-class English culture. It is a place where ordinary English men and women can congregate and exchange notes converse about how Two-Tier Keir is destroying their country — creating a kind of Anarcho-Tyranny, in which traditional crime is not policed but “thought crime” is dealt with quickly and punitively in order to demoralise and control the population. The proles can express their genuine views in such a place; away from the prying eyes of New Labour’s politicised police who gleefully spy on their tweets and Facebook posts.

As such, the pub is dangerous: it is a breeding ground for discontentment and dissent. Banning smoking in the vicinity of pubs will keep working-class people, many of whom smoke, away from The Royal Oak and The Jolly Farmer, and industry leaders agree that it will lead to pubs closing down. So, pubs will shut down, meaning that working-class discontentment is easier to monitor and, so, repress. This all makes sense because, as I have explored in my book Woke Eugenics, leftists are very high in mental instability and in negative feelings. This makes them paranoid — meaning that, for them, there is every motivation to stop working-class people from freely exchanging views.

As I also explore in the book, mental instability is robustly associated with Machiavellianism; the desire for power and control over others. This logically follows as if you experience the world as a frightening and hostile place then you will want to take control of it. The pub represents a lack of control: people get tipsy or drunk and lose their inhibitions to varying degrees. They might, in this alternative state of consciousness, make remarks that incite others to be critical of the Labour Party and immigration and the various way in which Labour is destroying all that was ever good about Britain — high trust, free speech, low crime, impartial public bodies, sound public services — in order to crush dissent. Pubs are therefore a danger, so it is better if they are shut down.

The pub also makes working-class people happy. They can relax after a long day with a few beers and some cigarettes with their friends and other like-minded people. But why would Labour want them to be remotely happy? It is far preferable that they are depressed people who see life as meaningless and lose the will to fight to improve their lot; unlike people who are anxious. Proneness to anxiety is something which strongly characterises leftists. It follows that working-class people need to be isolated and lonely so shutting down the pubs is clearly an excellent idea.

Also, it should not be forgotten that there is something quite profound about English pub culture. In going to the pub, you are not merely having a drink. You are participating in a ritual in which your ancestors participated all the way back to the Middle Ages, with some pubs being hundreds of years old. This link to the past is reflected in pub names that refer to pre-industrial England, historical events, English kings and noblemen, English folklore and long-dead national heroes: The Jolly Farmer, The Royal Oak (when the future King Charles I hid in an oak tree to escape the Roundheads), The Old King’s Head, The Foley Arms, The Green Man, and The Duke of Wellington. As English writer Sean Gabb has argued, you achieve a revolution by cutting the connection to the past. This leaves people confused, lacking in a clear identity and, so, more open to being brainwashed.

Leftists are anti-traditionalist. They feel that they are of low status and therefore must fight against an oppressive culture. And because they are neurotic, and they resent anything that is symbolic of the traditional hierarchy or culture. These must be torn down so that they can attain power. Pubs are a symbol of the old, pre-multicultural England; a rallying point, a reminder of what was. They need to go.

Finally, leftists, being unstable, are unhappy and resentful. Pubs involve people having fun and being happy. If you are bitter and unhappy, there is little worse than seeing other people enjoying themselves. “How dare they enjoy themselves! What about my suffering?” they Narcissistically think, with Narcissism being a way of coping with intense negative feelings. So this is yet another reason why pubs must shut down.

And it’s nothing to do with health. We are evolved, in effect, to be farm labourers in a context of food scarcity and we are now sedentary. Consequently, we will get fat. Tobacco, unhealthy as it is, is an appetite suppressant. Get rid of it and, as we have seen over the last 40 years, working-class people, who tend to have relatively poor impulse control as I have explored in Woke Eugenics, will simply get fat.

Labour are the New Cromwellian Puritans: bitter, resentful, power-hungry, mentally unstable, humourless, virtue-signallers. They may have shut down theatres but even Cromwell’s Puritan Interregnum, between 1649 and 1660, didn’t close the pubs. . . .  Ultimately, of course, the English were pushed too far by the Puritans. There was a counter-revolution and the Two-Tier Keirs of their day were publically hanged, cut down (in some cases while still alive), castrated (with their testicles burned before their Puritan eyes), disembowelled, beheaded, and drawn and quartered   . . .

Part 1 of “To Burn or Not to Burn”

Most of this information comes from MSM or from the wonderful world of the Spider’s online web. Perhaps none of it is true, and it is all a psyop….

It is very likely this article will be read by Irish Police (Gardaí Siochána), and it should be clearly stated that this writer does not condone, encourage, facilitate or do any act, word, thought, emotion or prayer which in any way could be construed as inciting either hatred or violence. The deliberate intention is to encourage people to laugh and seek positive solutions.

Big, dramatic fire in the midlands town of Longford. Residents had to run for their lives. Very little media coverage. The Garda Press Office gave no reply when asked if the burnt out residents were ethnic Irish or non-Irish. This tends to suggest they were non-Irish. This is the first EVER anti-foreigner fire directed at a building with people actually living there. Luckily nobody was killed or injured, buíochas mór le Dia. Isn’t it just as well the foreigners are good at running? It is very significant that there was zero comment from the politicians about this, although it would have made an excellent “think of the children” moment for them. Was it Noam Chomsky who said something about the threat of a good example? The non-lethal Longford fire of 2024 will be written about in future history books.

The MSM tells us everyday that the Israelis have burned or bombed ten, or twenty or two hundred refugees or international aid workers. The “On The Ditch” website recently stated that several planes packed with ammunition for Israel flew over Ireland. Two top politicians — the suspiciously named Simon “the Nose” Harris and the equally dubious Michael “the Nose” Martin — claim to know nothing about it. The burning question asks itself, in the most pro-Palestinian country in Europe: If Shlomo can get the Yanks to donate incendiary devices to burn two hundred refugees alive and get standing ovations in the US Congress, maybe Paddy can do it too? If we play our cards right, we could probably get the US taxpayer to pay for it…

There is a lot of resentment in the Irish Defence Forces of Israeli involvement in killing Irish peacekeeping soldiers in Lebannon. The Garda Síochána have earned a place in Jewish history books by being the first police force ever to arrest and charge a Rabbi (Father of ten Londoner  John Abraham) for the crime of foreskin chopping while not being a doctor.

The Camfil fire in a Dublin industrial estate is more puzzling. Another spectacular fire, seen by hundreds of thousands of people. The web rumour mill says there are a lot of data centres in that estate. Another theory is that it was an Amazon fulfillment centre. The website of the company (camfil.com) claims they are innocent makers of air filters and extraction systems.

It’s possible they were planning to flip the building for refugee use. With any fire in an insured building, one must be aware of the possibility of insurance fraud. Perhaps the owners set it on fire themselves, and that will allow them to refit it for refugees, and claim compensation for the fire? Silverstein would be proud of them! A so-called socialist party in Dublin had a debate at a conference last year asking: Is it OK to burn dáta centres? Was it the lefties?

A decent sized fire at the — empty — former Augustinian priory in Ballyboden, Dublin. Rumour has it this was a potential refugee site.

Next to the River Liffey, in the centre of Dublin at Merchant’s Quay, a more direct approach was taken. A large group of foreigners had been squatting the property. A group of unmasked men, some with noticeable beer bellies, went and threw them out, with a little bit of roughing up. MSM reported very briefly on it, saying that a couple of men had to go to hospital, but did not mention any refugee angle. Apparently, the owner of the property hired a few lads to throw the darkies out. It’s technically not an anti-refugee thing, just a financial disagreement. Most remarkable that the beer bellied men did not mask their faces. They must be very sure of their  ground, and why wouldn’t they be?

It seems that Gardaí took a loooong time to get there, even though Garda HQ is five minutes away. Gardaí who want to turn a blind eye to evictions of foreigners have an excellent and true excuse: “We are very understaffed, and the crimes you report are unlikely to lead to any serious injury. We will get to you after we have dealt with more serious matters.”

Rope Games in Cork city centre. An Indian student chap is walking down the street in broad daylight when an ethnic Irish man sneaks up behind him and starts hitting him with a rope. The Indian moves away and takes a photo of the Irishman. He issued a statement claiming that he felt upset and scared. Bad idea! This will only encourage future copycat Rope Man attacks. There was no mention of a noose or a knot on the rope, so there’s no suggestion of hanging or anything.

This is possibly a false flag psyop of some kind, but if not, Rope Man no doubt has a perfectly reasonable explanation, in the highly unlikely event that the Gardaí bother to find him and ask him:
“Oh, I was just having laugh. Messing. Slagging. No harm done. Traditional expression of Irish culture, protected by the Constitution, EU law and the Good Friday Agreement.”

The fact that Rope Man was unmasked tends to show that this was just jolly japes. No harm done, and none intended. Traditional Irish proverb: “If you can’t take a joke, why don’t you go back to where you came from?” An Irish judge has determined that this specific phrase, while it is very rude, does not meet the threshold for criminal speech, in a case brought by a ethnic Nigerian against an ethnic Dublin bus driver.
In Northern Ireland, not one but two Protestant churches have been burnt. Traditionally this would suggest a Catholic/Republican attack (or a devious Brit/Mossad false flag operation). The first burning was a central location and it was reported that fifty percent of the congregation were foreign. An angle grinder was used to remove a steel grid to allow better access for burning. As the radio newsreader smirked, not much damage was done. It was possibly unwise for the MSM to taunt the burners on the lack of burn. The next church burnt, in a more prosperous looking area, was badly burnt. Nobody was hurt or injured, buíochas mór le Dia.

Some Catholic sites (LifeSiteNews and Catholic Arena) have noted a trend of burning churches in France, North America and elsewhere, supposedly for ideological reasons: Islam, feminism, abused boys or just plain old satanism. It’s possible that these Belfast church burnings are not related to the migration thing, but just part of a general Judaeo-Satanic church burning programme, cleverly using the migration issue to slip in a few discrete fires. Insurance fraud is an ever present possibility, and what better time to burn your own church than when there is a wave of attacks on migrant accommodation?
Over 3,000 people (including eight Black British soldiers) were killed in a variety of locations and with various methods in the NI conflict. Possibly thousands of buildings were destroyed or damaged. No-one was ever killed inside a church and no church — of either side — was ever destroyed. Some people were killed on their way to or from church, because of the practical advantages such an kill zone can offer. But destroying a church? Not once. It wouldn’t be Christian…

The burning of two Christian churches is a historic occasion. It probably hasn’t happened anywhere in Ireland since the Royal Navy bombed Dublin in 1916.

There have been almost no claims of responsibility for anti-migrant attacks. This is in contrast to the time of the Troubles. Mostly, even after appalling, senseless attacks, one side or the other would claim responsibility, possibly with some apology for civilian lives lost. The Merchant’s Quay eviction of foreigners is the only case of people claiming credit: there’s a slightly beer bellied gentleman online vaguely hinting about it.

(One of the very few incidents in the Troubles where there was NO claim of responsibility was in the killing of a NI policeman named Harris. The media said the IRA did it, but the IRA never claimed responsibility. That man’s son was also a Special Branch NI policeman, and is the current, and deeply unpopular, head of the Gardaí. Pure cohencidence folks, move along now, nothing to see here. But for further details you could check out Mícheál’s research at freepress.ie. Caveat Lector! As rabbit holes go, it’s pretty rabbity. You will need a strong stomach and nerves of steel. There is reference to the unusual death by fire on a boat on the Shannon of a very brave, honest, ethnic Irish lady cop. RIP.  Deep State. Say no more. And whatever you say, say nothing.)

In Ballina, Co. Mayo, they have a very diverse set of tactics. Diversity is our strength, don’t you know? The hotel is hosting both refugees and regular tourists, and seem surprised that they are being attacked. Here’s what they say:

“These incidents include the breaking of windows with rocks and pellet guns. damage to water and gas mains pipes, blocking of entrances, stopping tourists to ask for identification, rocks being thrown at staff members, verbal abuse of staff, the threatening of both staff and suppliers, abuse of animals and an attempted arson attack.

“The protest camp also attracted a considerable amount of anti-social behavior including the aiming and firing of fireworks and lasers on tourist accommodation rooms, late night roadside drinking, burning of tyres, loud music and litter.

“On Saturday the protesters reinstated a campsite and a fire on the public roadside.

“It is the view of the hotel that it can not be allowed to continue due to the non-peaceful nature of incidents attracted by the previous camp.

“While we respect the rights of protesters, we also would like to highlight the rights of our staff to attend work without harassment and make a living for themselves and their families.

“We ask that the ability of tourist guests, club members and international protection families to use the hotel and leisure club facilities are not blocked and is respected.

“If you have a booking to stay with us here in Ballina and feel apprehensive about staying due to the protest camp, we offer free cancellation and apologies for any inconvenience in finding new accommodation.

“Management of Twin Trees Hotel and Leisure Club.”

The careful reader will notice that there is absolutely no mention of the cops in this statement. Why not?

If you have cheap phone calls to Ireland, you can see the potential here for a bit of armchair activism. Call them up and make enquiries about booking a room. Tell them you’ve heard rumours about the refugees, and quiz them on the details. Obviously, don’t incite hatred or violence, as that would be a criminal offence here. But you can certainly ask if any of the refugees are convicted criminals, or if they come from ethnic groups with a tendency to violence or if they smell bad.

It’s quite possible that the hotel employee will be ethnic Irish or European, and in that case, you can certainly have a bit of good natured banter with them. Christians from Kerala and the Filipines will also enjoy anti-refugee banter.

This could work by email as well, but direct voice impact works better.

There seems to be a strong Jewish involvement in the refugee thing, which is surprising. As is well known, there are very few Jews in Ireland.  Alan Shatter is the notorious evil mastermind of migration, and he was boasting the other day that he has just come back from seven weeks in the US. What was he up to?

Jewish school teacher, Mr Simon Lewis (pro-refugee, pro-trans, anti-Christian, etc.) claims that what starts as civilised online discussions about education policy often ends with the Christian Irish person asking him: ”Why don’t you fuck off back to Israel and kill some Palestinian babies?”

Good old Harry Crosbie, well known Dublin businessman and highly respected member of the Jewish community, was complaining on Joe Duffy’s RTÉ radio show. Apparently, there have been repeated attacks on his wife’s cafe in the Canal Docks area, and it has even had to close on occasion.

Several alleged eyewitnesses confirm his account. One talks of four balaclaved youths aiming and firing illegal fireworks directly at a crowd outside the cafe. Extremely dangerous, and equivalent to attempted murder. If they shouted slogans in support of the Palestinians, perhaps their actions would be covered by the Geneva Conventions on warfare? Harry supports the Israelis, so his wife’s cafe could, potentially, be seen as a legitimate military target. Or perhaps it was just an accident caused by the fog of war, like the Jewish-American protesting the Netanyahu government killed by the IDF?

Another eyewitness describes youths with wetsuits swimming in the canal, climbing out, climbing onto Crosbie’s roof, damaging guttering and chimneys. The youths were reportedly very abusive, but everyone was very careful not to mention what they said.

There seem to be two types of incident: simple damage to property and intimidation versus serious attempts to kill and injure people. Perhaps the perpetrators are different?

Two possible explanations (not justifications):

1.These kids grew up with almost non-stop violence on TV, and that’s not even counting what’s online. Monkey see, monkey do.

2. The lads have been radicalised by reading all this crazy conspiracy stuff on The Occidental Observer and Unz.com.

Meanwhile, at Thornton Hall, north County Dublin, on some of the finest agricultural land in the country, they are preparing refugee accommodation for 10,000 people. A fifty-year-old woman was arrested for threatening behaviour and obstruction. When big strong policemen are arresting little old grannies, because the men are scared, it is a sign that the system is about to collapse under the weight of public mockery.

To conclude, would you like to hear the story of the very first burning of an (empty) refugee property in Ireland?

Fadó, fadó, fadó(a long time ago), in the days before Covid 21, in the lovely village of Roosky on the banks of the mighty Shannon, there was a little hotel that wanted to be a refugee centre. But the hotel’s neighbours did not want it to transform into a refugee centre.

A fire happened in the little hotel. It was a very very, very tiny little fire. It was one of the tiniest little fires that were ever lit in the whole history of man and fire. The dark-skinned foreign gentleman who was working security did not ring the fire brigade or the cops when he noticed the fire. The first thing he did was ring his boss, some kind of greedy half-English atheist businessman. Only after ringing his boss did he ring the fire brigade. The MSM bigged it up as a shocking racism thing. Roosky residents suspect it was simple insurance fraud.

And that’s the end of the story of the little Hotel who wanted to become a big refugee centre.

Nothing in this article should be taken as an endorsement, encouragement, facilitation or admission of any illegal acts, words, thoughts, feelings or prayers. Just having a laugh, officer…
Beir Bua!