Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Are you a far-right-wing extremist, racist, anti-Semite against genocide of your own race and nation?

Opposed to mass immigration to Europe? You must be a psychopath too.

The far right is on the rise across Europe as a new generation of young, web-based supporters embrace hardline nationalist and anti-immigrant groups.

So says the Guardian in an article headed by a photograph of the psychopathic mass murderer Anders Breivic. In support of its contention the Guardian cites:
Research by the British thinktank Demos for the first time examines attitudes among supporters of the far right online. ... they persuaded more than 10,000 followers of 14 parties and street organisations in 11 countries to fill in detailed questionnaires. ... [the survey] reveals a continent-wide spread of hardline nationalist sentiment among the young, mainly men.
See how the Guardian employs intellectual sleight of hand to link the beliefs of a broad section of the population, namely "the young, mainly men," about which the Guardian author offers no information at all, with attitudes expressed only by members of unspecified "parties and street organisations."

As the "parties and street organizations" are unidentified, we really have no idea who the Guardian is talking about.

Are they goose-stepping neo-Nazi groups, skinheads, BNP guys with raised fists, blokes wearing swastika armbands or with "fuck-off" tattooed on their foreheads, with whom the Guardian wishes us to identify all young European males? Or are they just ordinary young people, the sort of folks who might vote for the UK Independence Party?

And what, exactly was this "hardline nationalist sentiment" that was expressed by members of unspecified organizations in unspecified countries?

Well, for one thing, the Guardian tells us, they are "Deeply cynical about their own governments and the EU."

Wow, how dreadful. They're probably climate warming skeptics, which as everyone who reads the Guardian knows means they are actually climate denialists, aka holocaust deniers and rabid genocidal anti-Semites. Yeah, we definitely don't want to believe anything they do.

And then there's:
their generalised fear about the future [which] is focused on cultural identity, with immigration – particularly a perceived spread of Islamic influence – a concern.
Sheesh. What dreadful people. And "fearful of the future." How irrational. We only face WWIII, enslavement by a plutocratic elite that owns all the politicians that count and plans to cull the World population down to 5% of the current number.

As for folks who care about their cultural identity -- "hardline nationalism" in Guardian-speak, obviously they must be a bunch of racially motivated cultural supremacists. I mean, why else would they object to a Muslim politician in Britain, a member of the last government, in fact, calling for the takeover of Parliament by Muslims?

Can you think of anything worse than seeking to preserve your own culture?

If you're a Guardian reader, evidently not.

Then the knock-out punch:
We're at a crossroads in European history
the Guardian quotes Emine Bozkurt, a Dutch MEP
In five years' time we will either see an increase in the forces of hatred and division in society, including ultra-nationalism, xenophobia, Islamophobia and antisemitism, or we will be able to fight this horrific tendency.
Here we have a central tenet of the Guardian, lib-left, political-correctness-police mentality. If you are not for the destruction of your own race, culture and religious tradition, you're an ultra-nationalist, xenophobe, (xenophobia is illegal in Europe, by the way) Islamophobe and anti-Semite. (But on what evidence is the assertion of anti-Semitism based? None, actually.)

Oh, but here's another zinger in case your struggling to rise from the canvas after that below-the-belt charge of anti-Semitism:
The report comes just over three months after Anders Breivik, a supporter of hard right groups, shot dead 69 people at youth camp near Oslo.
There you are: condemned through association by contemporaneity. (But at least you're clear of the anti-Semitism charge: Breivic is a Zionist.)

Or are we to suppose that most Europeans, over two-thirds of the population, that is, are Zionist nutters and psychopathic killers like Anders Breivik just because they happen to share Breivik's opposition to mass immigration?

Then, taking another shot at linking opposition to the genocide of the European peoples with anti-Semitism -- in case you were'nt suckered by the first shot -- the Guardian quotes Thomas Klau from the European Council on Foreign Relations:
As antisemitism was a unifying factor for far-right parties in the 1910s, 20s and 30s, Islamophobia has become the unifying factor in the early decades of the 21st century.
So there: the Guardian has you labelled.

If you oppose genocide by mass immigration and top-down forced multi-culturalism, you must be an Islamophobe, which is just like being an anti-Semite, which means you're no better than a neo-Nazi, goose-stepping, moron, skinhead punk with multiple body piercings.
Put shortly, the Guardian is a purveyor of lying bollocks, which is to say, BBC-style state-inspired propaganda, which is not surprising since the Guardian is owned by the Scott Trust which is headed by Liz Forgan, a former Managing Director of BBC Radio.

Clever innit. The state now runs the "radical" press.

Or put another way, the Guardian equates democracy with racism, facism, Nazism, anti-Semitism and hatred of the religion of Islam about which most native Europeans know nothing and care nothing, other than that it not dictate the law of their country or result in the extinction of their own race and culture.

Again conflating democratic opposition to genocide by mass immigration with Islamophobia, the Guardian then states:
... parties touting anti-immigrant and Islamophobic ideas have spread beyond established strongholds in France, Italy and Austria to the traditionally liberal Netherlands and Scandinavia ...
Bloody lying fools.

There ARE too many immigrants in the UK', say seven in 10 Britons (Daily Mail headline August 10, 2011).

Nothing there about Islamophobia. The Brits just don't like being replaced by people from elsewhere as the majority have already been replaced in the City of Leicester, in many London Boroughs and in other large urban communities.

In Birmingham, Britain's second largest city, English children in primary school are not only outnumbered by children of immigrants, they are not even the largest single ethnic group.

That's genocide.

To be quite clear, here's Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term "genocide":
... often [genocide] refers to a coordinated plan aimed at destruction of the essential foundations of the life of national groups so that these groups wither and die like plants that have suffered a blight. The end may be accomplished by the forced disintegration of political and social institutions, of the culture of the people, of their language, their national feelings and their religion. It may be accomplished by wiping out all basis of personal security, liberty, health and dignity. When these means fail the machine gun can always be utilized as a last resort. Genocide is directed against a national group as an entity and the attack on individuals is only secondary...
And the process of displacement will continue unabated even if immigration were to cease now, because the immigrants are more fertile than the aging British and other European populations.

Appreciative immigrants to the UK (Source)
What's more, Europe's immigrant communities are not free of those with a settler mentality. Some are in no doubt about the possibility of racial, political and religious conquest.

Allowing mass immigration to Europe amounts to a policy of genocide. And according to the Guardian, the liberal left, and the political-correctness-enforcement agencies, opposition to genocide by mass immigration is racism, haulocaust denial and extreme-far-right-wingism. Or as the picture with which the Guardian headed its article is intended to convey, if you are opposed to genocide of your own people, you are a psychopathic nutter like Anders Breivic.

But then the Guardian's seems always to have been soft on genocide, whether perpetrated by the ex-Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or the new Union of European Socialist Republics.

During the 1930's, Malcolm Muggeridge, the Guardian's correspondent in Russia, submitted eye-witness reports from the Ukraine of state-imposed mass starvation, the Holodermor, which killed six to ten million white Christians, but  as Wikipedia relates, these articles were published only in an expurgated form, without identification of the author.  


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Great piece. It most certainly is genocide and it's incredible how those on the 'left' act as cover for those behind it.

    It's interesting how Demos has morphed from its Marxist roots. It now boasts Several LibDem and Tory MP's, a Financial Times Assistant Editor, a BBC trustee, a BBC presenter and a couple of LSE professors as members of its 'Advisory Council'.

    I'm sure you'll scoff (which is fine) but the representation of a single eye in the logo gives the (Luciferian/Masonic) game away.


    On the subject of occultism I've a new post which barely scratches the surface but is something of an insight into the bigger picture.


  3. Ooops. Forgot the Demos logo link.


  4. "I'm sure you'll scoff ..."

    No, I am sure that there were excellent reasons for Jack Kennedy's eloquent condemnation of secret societies, and it is hard to believe that he did not have, among others, Skull and Bonesmen like the Bushes in mind.

    Someone in Parliament should introduce a private members bill outlawing from Parliament members of secret societies and societies representing foreign powers, e.g., Con/Lib/Lab friends of Israel.

  5. And I'm sure that you are right that there are organized forces intent on "reprogramming" humanity.

    Investigating these forces, revealing their connections, motivations and instruments of influence and control is certainly very well worthwhile.

    My own impulsive inclination is to yell bollocks at the pompous asses who spew the rubbish that is supposed to be the new wisdom.

    Both responses have merit, I believe, and for me, hooting derision at the risible rubbish that passes for education today is more fun than delving into the dark recesses of the masonic mind and its manipulations.

  6. The Guardian long ago gave up its independence as my own story clearly demonstrates. Its job is to re-channel protest down avenues that are acceptable to the UK establishment elites and their intelligence/security apparatus. It plays the “Don Quixote role” of encouraging people to rage at “General Pinochet” and other similar type issues that are thousands of miles away and don’t reflect on the UK elites or its security apparatus, whilst maintaining silence on key issues closer to home. The security apparatus knows that caring people will protest issues of concern; so the Guardian’s role is to divert that protest down avenues acceptable to the MI5/6 complex and the elites they serve.

    Incidentally on Tuesday evening I bought another Cell phone to replace the one destroyed that I referred to on the Murray blog. When I returned home I found that it was re-routing all my incoming calls to somebody else’s voicemail. So I took it back to London Drugs where had I purchased it and showed it to the sales clerks. They were amazed and after discussion with TELUS were able to resolve it. They told me they had never seen this happening before – but then they have probably never sold a phone before to someone who has been targeted by the CSIS/MI* complex either. If you want another example of the high ethical standards adopted by Canada’s security apparatus Google in - Dr. Porter/SIRC/National Post

  7. Rod,

    Your assessment of the Guardian's Don Quixote role is very well put. It is a role that the media, in general, and most of those so-called "public intellectuals" play.

    I guess in the case of the public intellectuals, they wouldn't get the coverage that makes them public, if they didn't play that game.

    As for Telus, they always seemed to provide lousy service!

  8. Telus didn’t destroy two of our computers over the summer, and nearly a third one as well; nor was Telus involved in making my old mobile/cell inoperative since it wasn’t with them. However, I do take your point – as we have complained twice in writing to their CEO – Telus is involved in tapping my landline for CSIS, and I think illegally without a proper warrant. Unfortunately what I think it all shows is that our intelligence/security apparatus has outlived its shelf life as presently organized; that is if we want our children to live in a democracy. As you may know Colin Freeze of the Globe & Mail has recently written that many believe the SIRC is too easy on CSIS and is “failing to exercise the aggressive review necessary to safeguard civil liberties”. Just what I have been saying!!

  9. Excellent stuff. Shared.

    1. Michael, thanks.

      Re-reading this some months since it was written, I am shocked once again to realize what a vile and destructive agent of propaganda the Guardian has become.