[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Articles © Rae West 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018.   v. 23 January 2018
Click for Truths about Judaism History, Chronology, Information about Jews

 NEW ARTICLES:     Was Hitler an Agent?  SOON - PROBABLY TODAY!  | Is Lipstadt a Covert Counter-Mossad Truther?—and Other Puzzles: Trump | US 'Education' | Race Wars | & Battles | D Irving | Thugs | Experts | M Hoffman | Movies | Lessons | K MacDonald | Man-Made Races | M Mathis | A Hitler | A Kemp | J Peterson | Holocaustianity | T Malthus]   |  Five More Excavations From the Rabbit Hole SOON   |  Three More Excavations From the Rabbit Hole   |    Was Early Christianity Hijacked by Jews?  |   Jewish Nuclear Exit Strategy  |  Jo Cox, Jews, Invasion, Housing  |  'Migrant Crisis'  |  Donald Trump vs Jews  |  Jeremy Corbyn  |   Simpleton Jews, Worthless Whites, Parasites and Prey  |   BBC, Syria, one Jewish source  |   When the Gentiles Awake  |  Real Flynn Effect  |   Money in the Bank. Nothing in the Head  |  Flat Earth Promotion; Why? & 'Jew Shock'  |  New View of Suffragettes & Blaming Women  |  Tell the Truth about Jews  |  62 People Rule the World?

 ARTICLES 2012 - 2015:   Two Tiers of Money: Understanding Money, Banks, Jews, and Varieties of Capitalism  |   Kevin B. MacDonald  |  What Shall We Do With Synagogues?  |  Parasitism  |  Scientific Nationalism  |  Nuclear Scepticism and Revisionism  |  Jewish Murders & Mass Murders  |  Jew Process  |  Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkeys?  |  Luke O'Farrell - One Man's Journey to 'Anti-Semitism'  |   Holohoax - Evil of Lying  |  Napoleon and the 19th Century  |  Eugenics  |   Campaign Against Arms Trade  |  Some Notes on Population  |   Jewish Plans for White Genocide  |   Taboos about Jews  |   'Facism', 'Rascism', the 'Borjois', and the Need to Understand the Jewish 'Single Standard'  |   RamZPaul on 'White Privilege'  |   Irving on Himmler  |   NEW WHITE REFORMATION & Modern Techniques of Image Fakery, Event Fakery, Crisis Actors  |   Jewish Control of Money. And Deliberately Missing Economic Theory. Two tiers of money.  |   Paper Money: Incentive for Harm, and Warrant for Genocide  |   Straws in the Wind & Mental Drag   |   How Jews Use Blacks  |   Protocols of Zion and the Case of the Absent Genre  |   Inappropriate Politeness  |   How White Is White Violence?  |   Reparations to Whites  |   Jews 1: Jewish Liars, Trolls, Nudgers, Reputation Managers  |   Jews 2: Jews and Unions  |   Jews 3: Jews and Fake Information  |   Jews 4: Jews and Wars Considered as Jewish-Run Cock Fights  |   Jews 5: Jewish Hate for Whites - Examples

 2012-2016 GUIDE FOR THE POLITICALLY PERPLEXED (another file, to save space):    Jewish Lies and Deceptions.   | evolutionary theory of Jews.  

 FULLER INDEX to all articles (at the end)    Click here


[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Some ‘memes’ from the last few years of Internet...

... “Kek!”—the confident call of Pepe the frog, adopted by the people of the once-new land of Kekistan as their emblem. Kekistan's history includes frog-God ‘Kek rain’ inundation mythology, and a period subservient to Kikistan as mercenaries and slaves. Now Kekistan is endangered by the suffocating forces of Cuckistan and Normistan, secretly paid by Kikistani organised crime syndicates, whose undeciphered motto is “Gd chosen” and whose sinister tribal chant is “Nat sea”. (Information on iconography from the Bibliokek Nationale)....

Is Lipstadt a Covert Counter-Mossad Truther?—and Other Puzzles

Written by Rerevisionist   10 April 2017 - 15 September 2017

The theme of this long piece is, yet again, Jews—identifying and disentangling their influence, and the deeper issue of identifying their collaborators, puppets, and eventual possible outcomes of these groups.
    Many Internet sites have been correctly accused of being crypto-Jewish, or written by trolls, or written by professional spooks, or just ignorantly biased to Jews. People unused to Jewish analyses may like my soft introduction, my own extremely incomplete list of 'joff' websites, Jews-off-the-radar, with my reasoning. I've tried to explain in what respects they are wrong, incomplete, dishonest, and evil. Many are shills for Jews, large numbers are scared to discuss Jewish wire-pulling, many are paid by Jews or Jewish pressure groups. By this time, virtually all political parties are subservient to Jews. And conversely, here's my intermittently-compiled list of 'jadar' sites, with brief comments—some a bit unkind, where I think I've found covert Jew biases. Sites like these are the most likely to convey hard and shocking and novel views, and I encourage novices to browse—your life, literally, is at risk if you are not Jew-aware. These sites may be subject to attacks of various types: the least toxic attack is full censorship—the complete lack of mention in Jewish and Jewish-puppet sources, which include all 'mainstream' print media, all mainstream TV including British, German and French TV, all government departments excepting a few leaks and forced replies to questions, and a proportion of Internet information. Looking at my lists of websites, bear in mind that my opinion may turn out to be wrong; I don't monitor websites all the time. And remember websites can vanish, change policy, be taken over, or otherwise change.

    Jews continue full-on with their established post-1945 schemes: these include lying about the Holocaust™, lying about other historical events such as Jews in Russia/ USSR, promoting large-scale immigration into disenfranchised white countries
. And media deceits, false flags and paid 'demonstrators'; pushes for other people to fight wars, and continued financial frauds and manufactured debts at the expense of non-Jews. There are no indications—or perhaps the very slightest—that Jews will change, or learn to modify their attitudes, and nothing which begins to address their full range of activities.

[Links to sections (below) of this article:   Donald Trump?   |   US Education   |   Race Wars   |   Race Skirmishes   |   David Irving. Penguin Books, Lipstadt   |   Mobs. Assassinations   |   Expert Witnesses. Civil Servants. Public Inquiries.   |   Michael A Hoffman   |   Movies and Jews   |   Jews. Lessons from Europe, USA, Russia   |   Kevin MacDonald's Occidental Observer   |   Man-Made Races   |   Miles Mathis   |   Hitler an Agent?   |   New Observer Online   |   The Jordan Peterson Effect   |   Jews, Roman Catholics, and 'Holocaustianity': Applying Lessons Learned from Jews   |   Malthus   ]

    It is instructive to live through a time like this, at least for the luckier ones. These events often seem unbelievable, in the way many events in history now seem incredible. A section at the end of this article draws conclusions from lessons learned by Jew-aware people over the centuries. I hope many of my readers will include themselves amongst the aware. I've gone back: to the inventions of Christianity and Islam; the use of covert thug armies; Jewish perversions of legal and scientific events, such as companies, military imperialism, and prolonged propaganda wars; and the conditions in human societies which allow aggressive parasitism to root and grow and propagate genetically.

Donald Trump?   My piece on Donald Trump (written December 2015, before his election victory) lists some of the worries Jews could be expected to have about Trump, including the ‘Mexican wall’, Trump's experience with tall buildings (and therefore 9/11), Jewish control of money and debt, Jews and middle east wars, including all the countries around Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya and Syria predominating, undeclared issues such as wars in Africa and Jewish control of Saudi Arabia. Arguably, Jews are most concerned with concealment of nuclear frauds (too science-based for most commentators), the Holocaust™ fraud, and the failing Jewish media (as concealments, of e.g. history of Jewish atrocities, and e.g. Jewish plans to dump the USA, get more difficult).
    The obvious question is to what extent Donald Trump is just another Jew or crypto-Jew. It's obviously impossibly early to guess his final achievements. But it seems clear that—after a running start—he will not act as vigorously as was hoped. But he's made some changes to the ambience of US politics: his speeches actually mentioned the destruction and chaos after the Jewish war against Iraq, and the destruction and chaos of the Jew-funded ISIS thugs. War against Iran seems to have been replaced by war against the even tinier North Korea [Note: 8 Aug 2017: the Jew-controlled BBC seems to have announced North Korea has a 'nuclear weapon' or payload, or something; they have also announced or claimed that North Korea has some sort of missile—in both cases with no technical details. Possibly these are two items in a pre-war checklist, to be the start of yet another Jew war—I hope not, but I imagine Jews are getting excited at the thought of blood, like hyenas], though as far as I know Trump hasn't publically discussed the North Korean non-Jew central bank, or removing the Federal Reserve from Jewish control. Even after a century, many Americans still haven't worked out that the USSR was run by Jews, supplied by Jews outside Russia. This may help explain continuing anti-Russia agitation, a long-term Jewish favourite. Most Americans don't seem to understand that Putin, Jewish or not, has an inherited problem with Jews.
    Trump has had video coverage of discussions with US brass, probably all of them war criminals, who look a sheepish lot, uneasy in their uniforms, looking like people running large-scale dangerous load trucker outfits. Trump by comparison seems a golden-haired presiding Zeus.
    It's impossible to be sure whether attacks (Gas?? Cruise missiles??) trumpeted in the Jew media even took place, such is the frequency of false flags and rarity of any sort of punishment. It's impossible to be certain about events such as the Georgia I-85 bridge collapse. It's impossible to be certain whether police action will finally focus onto Soros-funded groups (I haven't checked the documents; I assume other people have): 'Welcome the stranger' and other fake invaders-as-friends groups, Black Lives Matter, By All Means Necessary, 'Pussy' groups, Femen, Antifa, LesbianGay etc groups with their absurd 'pronouns'.
    It's also impossible for outside observers to guess the true state of mind of Americans, given the Jewish control over reports: there must be some Americans who've worked out what's been happening since 1945.     Investigations of Jew frauds promise to be non-existent; but who knows? What about Jews in the opium wars (might get Chinese support), Jews in USSR and Ukraine, the 'Liberty survivors given new life by Internet, the Gulf of Tonkin? And as financial mysteries get peeled and exposed, what about Jewish deliberate waste to add to government debt so Jews collect interest? Maybe faux demonstrations in places like Berkeley are encouraged to increase police overtime charges and add to city debt? Chicago points the same way. I believe more people are waking up to these things—Charlottesville strikes me as misjudged, just as 9/11 seems now to have been too easily seen through. Issues such as debts being nominally supplied to pension funds—always an encouraging remote topic to allow frauds to slip in. I even hope swindles with currencies, inflation manipulation, selective financial attacks on countries, and interest control will move back into discussion, raising people like Henry George and Major C Douglas and Henry Ford from hibernation. But it will be a long time before reparations to Russians, Ukrainians and Europeans, and Jewish victims elsewhere, are enforced.

    Anyway: to summarise Trump so far: He has done nothing to expose the Holohoax fraud. He has done nothing to reimburse Americans for the 9/11 fraud. He has done nothing about other enormous frauds: nukes, NASA, AIDS, (and the US education system) being examples known to me. He doesn't seem to have done anything about Jewish news media, as per his campaign speeches; perhaps he's just waiting for the media to collapse, and for education on race and population and real economics to grow. He seems to have done nothing to reverse the Jewish policy of giving the votes to as many aliens as possible. He seems to have done nothing about Jewish drug, porn and prostitution activities, and trafficking in people and organs. I can't tell if he's doing anything about the US empire, and its costs, doing so much for Jew interest payments. Or about possible mass inflation: US frauds are so huge (H Clinton supposedly embezzled 100s of billions of dollars for Haiti, for example) that the era of worthless dollars may approach, as in hyperinflations in, say, Hungary, Germany, and Zimbabwe. But Trump has said he'll close the 'Global Warming' scam; I'd guess this may be because all the burden falls on white countries, with India and China ignored. This may be part of a reindustrialise the USA policy. A recent White House memo shows Trump is still taking on the entire 9/11 fraud, which must annoy selfless people who have studied it for years. But Trump has shown—or seemed to show—lack of enthusiasm for the Holocaust fraud, Perhaps because of family interests in east Europe—or perhaps cracks are growing in the Jewish 'community'.
    I'm not in a good position to assess Trump's personnel choices: there's a limit to what one man can do, and many of Trump's selections seemed good to me. And of course, let's be honest—he has to work against centuries of covert Anglo-American-Jew alliances. It's a lot to ask.

[Start of article]

US Education with unlimited Jewish paper money
  Jews love government debt, since they get interest, and it's counter-intuitive to 'goyim' who hate personal debt.
  So spending increases. Salaries go up, buildings are replaced unnecessarily, staff multiply, there is constant inflation in nominal status, with full professors, various assistant and adjunct professors on a huge scale.
  The Frankfurt School ('New School of Social Research') in New York, and LSE (London School of Economics) were pioneers, issuing low grade PhDs, as pretexts for further 'professional research'.
  Poor-quality courses inflate both in numbers, and poorness of standards, which drop to a level necessary to attract low quality pseudo-students. Women's studies and race studies are obvious examples with negative intellectual content, but history, 'liberal arts', religion and sciences such as psychology, sociology, food sciences, and simple reading/writing, have trended down, however poor the quality was in the past.
  Jewish social engineering increases: courses are weakened, female students and black students and even illiterate illegals are shoehorned in by Jews.
  Jewish paper money exerts a total stranglehold over funding: Jews control all research, and all intellectual frameworks, so that true views of religion, Jewish history, power politics, the Middle East, media studies, are choked away, leaving the ground free for junk academics, who are indistinguishable from non-academic ideologues—Barbara Spectre, Noel Ignatiev, Lipstadt, Professor Evans, Melissa Click, Eric Clanton illustrate some of the types.
  Jewish networking ensures unintelligent Jews are given positions that equity does not entitle them to. The system becomes choked with uncreative plagiarists.
  This sort of thing seems more or less worldwide: see e.g. Cambridge University's official website.
  Some towns—New York and London are examples—are overburdened with Jew 'teachers' at all levels. It's agonising to visualise the interminable bullshit of these ridiculous and ignorant pre-medieval ideologies.
  Medical hacks push pills, diets, give feeble advice on diabetes, smoking, vaccination, and what have you. Media studies courses say nothing serious about media. Black African education is pitifully feeble. A vast mid-range of indistinguishable types want careers like English vicars, with guaranteed income for little effort apart from propaganda output.
Lipstadt and the US Education System   The 'Six Day War' gained 'Holocaust' mythology momentum from all the Jewish media from (say) 1967, when Lipstadt was about 20. 'Holocaust' inventions apart from immediate post-war 1945ish claims are newer than many people think; the similar perpetual victim lies had been made since before 1900, but were rather vague. Lipstadt's book Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory (published 1993; available online) was published a few years before Internet (and hardware improvements) began to spread public awareness of the 'Shoah Business' hoaxes beyond a fairly small circle reliant on paper publishing.

      Several notable revisionist events, which already seem dated, happened before Lipstadt's book: Arthur Butz's The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against The Presumed Extermination Of European Jewry, (1975) was one. Did Six Million Really Die? (1974), uploaded by Ernst Zündel on his Zundelsite.com, sparked a Jewish group in Canada to take legal action in 1985 and 1988, which included defense testimonies by David Irving in 1988, and Fred Leuchter on gas chambers 1988, also in 1988. The prosecution testimonies were outstandingly feeble, and in fact laughable, under the precision fire of the attorney Doug Christie. In France, Rassinier, Bardèche and Faurisson might be regarded as a failure, since their work culminated in the censoring Fabius-Gayssot Law of 1990.
      At this point, enter Deborah Lipstadt. She appears to be a 'Professor' at Emory University, in the deepish South. I've read that Emory is listed 20th in the USA—with that absurd pseudo-precision of which the USA leads the world; and 3 of 5 of its 'notable alumni' are/were in sport. Probably the Jewish paper money fraud funds Biblical fundamentalism in large parts of the USA, a policy similar to the Jew-annotated 'Scofield Bible'. (Are Americans really so stupid they can't understand the simple idea of 'evolution'?) Anyway, presumably Lipstadt's whole life has been bounded by the confines of Talmudic absurdities, which she has never had the wit or curiosity to investigate. (I've just noticed an online upload, ADL-EOTR.pdf, a 1988 typed report, 'EXTREMISM on the RIGHT', the sort of thing that Lipstadt can be expected to have in her small library. I can't entirely recommend it, as it's an unnecessarily vast file.)
      (Historical parallel: Church of England vicars, guaranteed a lifetime's income after a few years amateur scribbling on Greek, Latin, and philosophy, had a similar life, with a few simple tasks and Sunday sermons; no wonder they were mostly worthless, though (let's be fair) they did produce Malthus, Gilbert White of Selborne, Cox (of the orange pippin apple) and the twiddly hazel discoverer. Just as now, what progress was made was outside the church; railways, ships, clothes, telegraphy, for example. I suspect the move to the professionalisation of society had the same source.)
      Lipstadt would seem to have had a non-nutritious diet based on a small shelf of Judaic books. One of the disappointing aspects of thinkers of every type is their plateau: having found their level, they will not go on to tackle distant mountains, or even nearby hills. Presumably Lipstadt was and is this type, and must have been outraged, from her viewpoint, at doubters. She is part of the spread-out network of Jew supremacists distributed around the world, all anxious to tell lies about Jewish mass killings in Armenia, and the Ukraine, and the USSR, and Jewish financial frauds, and wars attributed to the USA in (for example) Korea and Vietnam, and science frauds in medicine and biology and in particular nuclear physics—all the carefully-hidden crime of the network, and most of it anti-white. And most of it ignored by the disgrace of the US education system.
      'Professor' Lipstadt has played her minor part in dilapidating what there is of the American education system. Could she be a covert truther? On the face of it, this sounds incredible. And yet her book could be interpreted in that light. It was published a few years before public Internet started its growth—like convolvulus filling up Jewish backyards, to more-or-less quote David Irving. The book went some way to advertising such people as Zündel, Leuchter, and Robert Faurisson, and predecessors—Harry Elmer Barnes, Paul Rassinier, Austin App, Ditlieb Felderer, 'Richard Harwood', Arthur Butz, F J P Veale, and many more. (Veale's Advance to Barbarism... seems to have prompted many other similarly-titled camouflage books, by Jews such as Martin Gilbert). It's true many formidable critics were not included: for example Wilhelm Stäglich. Some, for example Carlo Mattogno and Jürgen Graf, may have been too late for inclusion. Wilmot Robertson (of Instauration) was certainly in time for inclusion, as were other Europeans. Lipstadt's book seems to have sold as few copies as it deserved, but it, or extracts, became a handy reference source for some inquirers as Internet and search engines expanded.
      Many Jewish race supremacist sites masquerade as serious political websites, and are a serious threat to the spread of truth. Lipstadt of course is a part of this movement, which will get no sympathy here: like specially-bred invasive poisonous dwarf plants, devoted to a fantasy world of Chief Rabbis and Seders, and systematic lies about wars and frauds, they need examination and removal. Their systematised denial of Jewish mass murders in Armenia, Ukraine, the USSR and Europe, among many other incidents, marks them as truly disgusting worldwide enemies of decency.

[Start of article]
Type Seven C 16 Dec 2017 Youtube comment
Bob Smith I don't like Muslims either, but there is a major concept that you are missing. It is Jews who let the hostile third-world savages flood into White countries. The Muslims didn't let themselves in. Third world Muslims do not control the immigration policy of White Western nations. Jews do. Use your brain. The reason we have weak borders in every single White nation is because of Jewish subversion. Jews are also responsible for all of the anti-White rhetoric that floods our news media, popular culture, academia, social media, music, movies, TV shows, etc. Jews control ALL of those things. Jews have been purposely destroying White genetics and White culture in White nations for decades. Jews are destroying you right now. Think of Islam as the 'gun', but Jews are the ones holding the gun. Wake up, naive sheep.
Jews and fake refugees
Undeclared Race Wars: the Armies Line-Up   This piece is sparked by Denial, a fairly new Jewish propaganda film. Following Archibald Ramsay, I'll refer to the Jew supremacist war, primarily against whites, as the 'Nameless' or 'Undeclared' War. The line-ups are taking shape: whites in particular are waking up, almost entirely because of Internet. It's difficult to judge non-whites: my impression is that blacks are generally clueless, and (for example) know almost nothing about Jews in Africa. Muslims have a complicated relationship to Jews, including the likelihood that Islam was a Jewish-promoted mimic designed to use them as rather brainless thugs. The white Internet world includes awareness of occupied regimes at differing levels—Canada, USA, UK, France, Germany, Poland, Hungary, Russia, China, Japan—sayanim trolls and liars, inadequate education systems, the 'British' Broadcasting Corporation, Common Purpose 'graduates' and the US junk media, for example the 'failing New York Times'. All this is familiar enough to wide-awake people—for a refresher course, try my primary file on the history of Jews—everything from history to the present day, money systems, media propaganda, and wars.
      This is not to say all, or even most, whites understand what's happening. There are many small lights of evidence getting through, in widely differing fields: the Fed scam; the way government debt, owned by Jews, grows to pay them more interest—until it's offloaded in one of their financial frauds; historical events—Liberty, 9/11, the Holohoax, mass killings in the Jew-run USSR, the US revolution—just a tiny sample; religious frauds, medical frauds, housing frauds, military and weapon frauds and wars; payments for thugs and fake demonstrators; the Jewish part in unelected nonwhite invasion; sex trafficking; damage to the family; damage to education. As yet, few people have grasped the big picture, but if Internet illumination increases, awareness must increase with it, unless censorship is successful.
      Interlude: The Nameless War (book title by Captain Ramsay, 1952) is as good a name as any for a process which he dates from 1290, with Edward I's expulsion of Jews. It was a war between Europeans and self-styled Jews. Jews had a different model of their nation, not the cities and territories which seem natural to Europeans, but spread amongst other peoples, secretly in communication, functioning like patches of rot, growing, changing, contracting according to the fortunes of their hosts.
      Cromwell, Napoleon, Balfour, Lenin, Stalin and Roosevelt may be taken as six of the most significant figures, all puppets in one way or another of Jews. The discovery of the Americas was a parallel development over most of this time, as were developments in all aspects of travel and communication. The very first World War was between Britain and its thalassocratic empire, and France under Napoleon, aiming east across the Mediterranean. Until recently, most whites lived much of their lives in white surroundings wherever they were; it was easy to sell the idea of wars by country, although it's obvious enough that subdivisions by race are equally likely to provide causes for wars.

      A simple genetic basis underlies all this: the predecessors of Jews micro-evolved in the presence of writing, and of cities, as a human variety or strain or breed—secretive, fanatical, parasitic, united among themselves while hostile and deadly to any human opponents. It was a remarkable change in humanity, relying on population densities far above those in normal animal societies without language. Provided other populations were divided into groups by the necessity for specialisation, and were able to create goods, but could not spy on the whole of their populations, the possibilities opened up for systematic deception. Simple fanaticism, as a primary impulse, induced protective mimicry, language and collective networking as behaviour-effectors, sensitivity in detecting differences between other groups, and severe training of the young, including the death penalty for informing non-Jews.
      As Jews would point out if they were honest, there was a simultaneous genetic micro-evolution, notably with whites, as they developed in their geographic strongholds, and needed mutual trust to work on their specialisations. Europe is unusual geographically in its divisions and natural barriers: unlike areas liable to invasion, this may have produced a feeling of security and low suspicion of strangers in its inhabitants. Whereas vast open areas of desert, steppe, grassland were more obviously vulnerable to attackers.
      The result in the previous five or so millennia seems to have been war between rather isolated specialist types, experts in their fields—sometimes literally—with no option but to trust other specialists, versus inward-looking fanatical uncreative types starting from ghettoes, sending out parasitic tentacles to any group that shows evidence of control over creativity. But this is not a very satisfactory analysis. Many white groups are isolated, pioneers and individualists and hermits and explorers representing extremes which are rare in other genetic types. Rather than trust, indifference and isolation and quarrelsomeness and small-group bonding (as in soldiers operating in small groups, academics in their small specialisations, administrators in companies and governments, groups of captious and unimportant critics) seem characteristic of many whites. The persistent refusal of groups who know about Jews (on men's rights, alternative physics, teacher critics, business and finance workers, anti-vaccination groups, police groups, 'veteran' groups, legal experts, video directors, scribblers for news and agencies, printers, people querying religions...) to share information is a very significant damper on Jew awareness. Kevin MacDonald, who didn't consider the possibility whites becoming a minority until fairly recently, as he stated in a Youtube, is just one person manifesting the success of the Jewish compartmentalisation strategy of blanket secrecy.
      It's well worth understanding the Jewish attitude that “In the Beginning was the Word”. From a technical or scientific viewpoint, this is simple nonsense. In fact it shows a belief in spells, incantations, and recitations, but only as a force against people. It is pragmatism in the Jewish sense: truth is what people can be made to believe, even if it's not true. It's probably the reason that Jewish films and media are full of lies: it's a genetic tendency in Jews to try to deceive. Watch Youtubes of 'SJWs' or 'Antifa' or 'BLM' protestors or Soros-funded bare-breasted Jews: screaming simple slogans, yelling 'let him go' to police with arrestees, making their claims of Nazi or KKK or Mooslim depending on what they're told. It's only now, with forensic techniques, that their simple collective repetitive lying is weakening. Watch these groups when someone says "We have a video"—you can almost taste the genetic dismay, as a cuckoo might feel if a nestling fought back.

      So we have an undeclared war between a fanatical group, inbred, with verbal deception combined with a perception of powerful rivals vs scattered groups of multi-skilled people deficient in cohesion. There are many examples of loose alliances between the two main rival groups. As with fights between different species—anaconda vs jaguar, mongoose vs cobra, buffalo vs crocodile, strangler figs vs trees, aggressive ants vs monkey bands—the outcome is in doubt. It may in fact have no end, in the way that predators and prey can oscillate in numbers indefinitely.
      Simple genetic model of Africans: For countless generations, what evolved into human beings must have had minimal ability to think, plan, predict. And Africa has ecological systems which combine an easy climate with difficulties—fast-growing deadly insects, animals, parasites; and little defensive space from competitors. Any human evolution in Africa would have faced such conditions. I'd like to suggest the well-known phenomenon of blacks looting stores in the USA with no apparent understanding that the items had to be made, shipped, stored, paid for, may be genetic, a pattern established over hundreds of thousand of years, described as "gib me dat" combined with "chimping out".
A comment (in The Occidental Observer) described blacks and sports, and a hard-to-describe mental outlook, an immediacy 'grounded in the here and now', unconcerned with the future or anywhere else in the present, people for whom today really is 'the first day of the rest of your life'. Blacks avoid problems. Whites solve problems. Jews cause problems is a simple formula. But there's a difference in learning: whites, when a problem (which may be invented by other parties) has been solved, are programmed to stop, relax, be calm. While Jews seem to be permanently, unendingly, tirelessly on the lookout for damage to do.

[Start of article]
Skirmishes: Jew-Controlled Race Riots   Another Buried Issue: controlled manipulation is characteristic of Jews; 9/11 is at this time perhaps the best-known example.
      The events of August 13th, Charlottesville, VA ('Right' meeting—contrasted with Jewish so-called 'left'), omission of comment on landmark destruction, Richard Spencer—from nowhere, a nominal leader— and Kessler, the Virginia Governor a Jew, the disallowing of legally-guaranteed Free Speech, white police forcing whites in contact with 'Antifa' and 'Black Lives Matter', the apparently staged road crash, Jewish media—including the BBC—sloganised comments) were clearly planned
      It's worth noticing the absurd 'BLM' paid campaign—blacks kill each other disproportionately. And I think 'Antifake' must have been puzzled, watching the white police drive white freespeechers amongst them, with minimal protection. Probably the Jews paying for Antifake's drugs, or their minimum wage, expected Antifa retards to hit out dangerously, and/or lethally, becoming patsies in legal action or Jewish clampdown or whatever.
      It's only Jewish media control that obscured the fact that such actions in the USA have been routine for years. Let's look at a few events, usually named 'black riots' by Jew-naive whites.
      Harlem, New York. Started July 18 1964, lasting almost exactly a week, apparently arranged by a 'Bill Epton'. Researchers might like to examine the validity of the triggering event, the outcomes in terms of selective property damage and long-term effects on the area, and of course Jewish plans and gains.
      then Watts, in Los Angeles, 11-16th August, 1965.
      then Detroit, 23 July 1967, also lasting a week, with selective damage.
      and Los Angeles, April and May 1992, sparked nominally by a Rodney King video. Here's an Instauration report, June 1992 which however soft-pedals Jews.
      Researchers might extend their news burrowings to 1863 ('New York Race Riots'), 1926 (Harlem), 1943 (Harlem). With modern techniques of evidence collection—such as Youtube, if it is allowed to continue—better pictures ought to emerge of events such as Ferguson. Not 'Jewish lightning', but rather 'Jewish multiple lightning strike storms.' And this is just a part of activities in the USA alone.

[Start of article]
David Irving. Penguin Books, and Lipstadt   David Irving rose (or was propelled) to fame in 1963, on the publication of The Destruction of Dresden, published by William Kimber & Co. (Established 1950; then I think in Wilton St, London). David Irving found Lord Cherwell's archives at Nuffield College. Cherwell (real name: Frederick Lindemann) was an adviser to Churchill. Online videos show David's ecstasy, when he was given the key and full access to these records, which he searched, as through an Aladdin's cave, as source material for what became his first four books.

Click for Irving's 'Action Report', which now seems hosted by www.breitbart.com, his more-or-less daily survey—much of it from Jewish online 'news' sources, including, for some baffling reason, absurdly discredited rubbish of the Reuters, Times, Jewish this-and-that type. Be aware that controversy has shifted somewhat to eastern Europe, just as the gas chamber fraud moved behind the 'Iron Curtain' of the Jewish-controlled USSR, as lies about Germany started to rise. Facts about the USSR have been slow to emerge, but will presumably continue to surface. Irving is somewhat entangled with claims about eastern fronts; see his information on Himmler. Nikolai Tolstoy's Victims of Yalta (1977) blurb says repatriation of Soviet citizens (sic) was 'one of the most appalling episodes of World War Two'; Solzhenitsyn's Two Hundred Years Together (2002, in Russian) helps illustrate how Jewish censorship retards historical honesty.

      Let's examine Irving's Dresden and that date, 1963, more closely. Note that Dresden deals with whites fighting whites. The sort of material in Other Losses, and in Robert Conquest, and in Hellstorm, was yet to come, at least to the general public. By comparison, Dresden was a minor matter. In 1963, Bertrand Russell had discovered American atrocities in Vietnam, though he missed the Jewish control aspect and things like the Jew York Times. To this day despite the Gulf of Tonkin incident being widely believed to be a fraud, there have been few if any recommendations of investigation and punishment. Another important issue may be the 30-year rule on secrecy of UK archives; certainly 1933 archives held secrets, which would have to be managed. Looking at the 1963 American Jewish Yearbook: its principal concern is 'race relations', NAACP and race mixing (not of course for Jews), Jewish populations in Greater Washington, Baltimore, Detroit, and Miami (75-80,000). There is little mention of the Vietnam War, so lucrative to Jews, or paper money, or the small matter of Kennedy's murder (22 Nov 1962). Its clear that publicity for Dresden coincided with concealments in the Jewish publicity industries.

David Irving books
      David's other books included Accident. The Death of General Sikorski (1967) and The Destruction of Convoy PQ17 (1968). Irving (and Cassell Publishers) was sued for libel by Capt Jack C. Broome in October 1968, and the PQ.17 case was heard in 1970. Irving lost £40,000, despite the fact that (according to a Youtube of a talk given by Irving) he was told he "need not fear the outcome" since "three firms of lawyers held the view that passages based entirely on documents" [would not be libellous]. This of course could not have been a promising outcome from a law case. But he later easily won another libel case, I think vs Gitta Sereny and the Observer, a newspaper owned by the Guardian.
      There have been other war-related disputes, though certainly most would never get to court. An example is The Minister and the Massacres (1986) by Nikolai Tolstoy, on Croats and others sent to their deaths in the USSR. A lawsuit in 1989 was held before a jury: a problem with jury trials is that the jury's reasoning is not published.
      David Irving's 'watershed' (his word) was the publication of Hitler's War (1977), after which 'buckets of slime' were verbally poured over him, along with outbursts of violence. He fought back by legal action, protests to publishers and newspapers and governments, and setting up his own publishing company—and then had problems with printers being warned off printing his books, and with distribution and bookseller difficulties—it's not difficult to imagine the activities characteristic of Jews. On legal actions, try the search engine on Irving's website fpp.co.uk, for "Irving vs" though by far the majority are the Penguin/Lipstadt case.

      All this culminated in his lawsuit for libel against Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books, publishers of Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory (1993), because St Martin's Press, publisher of his book Goebbels: Mastermind of the Third Reich, breached his contract, as a result of Lipstadt's book. An odd fact is that Lipstadt hadn't even heard of Irving when she compiled her book; she shoehorned material in, as instructed. Note that Penguin books has a long pro-war propagandist history, extending from before the Second World War.

Some links in date order from David Irving's website, fpp.co.uk (all open in new windows) –
    An account of a talk by Lipstadt in Australia, in July 1994: the famous $1,000 challenge over her fake claims over the Auschwitz 'gas chamber'.
    Irving's September 1996 'Statement of Claim' against Lipstadt and Penguin Books. Penguin must have decided to contest this. There followed a number of "Preliminary Hearings", which I presume were confidential to the court; Irving spoke of them in a Youtube video of one of his talks, I think recorded in Alabama. David said one of the reasons for Lipstadt's silence was contained in the words 'Kol Nidre'; 'her lawyers warned her she might be arrested for having sworn a perjured affidavit on her Discovery'.
    A mysterious "research report" provided to Lipstadt confidentially ('don't let this fall into the wrong hands') by Canada's Simon Wiesenthal Centre. (October 1996). Part of the discovery process. http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Discovery/DL/0500.html
    500 word summary of Irving's case, required 'under the new Civil Procedure Rules': (1998) http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/docs/summary.html.
    Gray's suggested list of points in dispute: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/issues020300.html.
    http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/transcripts/index.html are the daily trial transcripts, January-April 2000, spell-checked and corrected by Irving. These are a bulk download, i.e. a long file. There's also a drop-down menu, by day number, but unindexed.
    David's edited version of the trial verdict: http://www.fpp.co.uk/trial/judgment/Lipstadt_judgment.pdf. At the bottom of page 2 is David's amusing and bemusing list of errors in the Judgment of Tuesday 11th April 2000. He is a documentary historian!
    David Irving explains the fight so far. http://www.fpp.co.uk/ActionReport/AR19/items/recent.html July 2000 account, after the trial, before the appeal.
    Rather typical online diary entry, Aug 1st 2004. Irving trying to recover personal and archive materials from Jews. http://www.fpp.co.uk/ActionReport/AR26/RadDi1.html
    Items on the 'ineffably gullible' Professor Richard Evans: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/experts/Evans/, who hadn't even heard of Albert Speer.

Parts of the Jewish Establishment
Wolfson College, in west Cambridge, England is a graduate college—its President is, or was, Richard Evans. It seems to be pretty much all Jewish, something like a RADA training ground for the theatre of Jewish frauds. (There's another Wolfson College due north of central Oxford, also for graduates).
Although Richard John Evans sounds Welsh, several generations of 'Jews' have entered Britain more or less covertly, and name-changing of course permits many nests of crypto-Jews to remain hidden. It's entirely possible Evans is one such. Someone with Miles Mathis' skills might muse over this possibility.
Irving's site (www.fpp.co.uk) and books face some censorship. Amazon has discontinued a list of Jew-truth books, notably on the holocaust™—probably part of the ongoing fraud, which seems to be aimed at creating yet another Jew-written religion.
Youtube has been removing some videos, for example my fashionably-titled video on Eric Hobsbawm, the Jewish pseudo-historian JEW SHOCK: (((Historian))) (((Eric Hobsbawm))): (((Russian))) Revolution-Jewish Evil (((Communism)))
Establishment churchmen form another branch of the Establishment, such as it is. The connection is with their ridiculous Jewish-authored works. Allow me to quote PaleoAtlantid (April 29, 2017):
    It has been said before but needs repeating; all the mainline Christian denominations, not only the formerly conservative RCC, have made a knowing and willing alliance with evil. Most of these churchmen really are monsters, they care nothing for the birthright of European infants or the peace and security of those elderly Europeans and the working class who bear the brunt of immigration.
    These elite ecclesiastics can retreat to their lavish palaces while we and our kin are subjected to displacement and dispossession in our homelands. Lands our ancestors have inhabited, sweated, fought and died for thousands of years. This is the thanks we get from these ungrateful bastards. Clearly they couldn't give a shit about us. Well, these clergymen and their supporters in government have by their actions forfeited any legitimacy. Why are Catholics and Lutherans in Germany still paying the Church Tax? Time to kick these bishops in the butt, or where it really hurts, in their wallets.
    Readers might like my own detailed description, written at the time, with daily notes and courtroom commentary, the trial text of which is unaltered apart from removing line numbers and a few attempts at corrections, which I abandoned. Irving was plagued by legal irregularities, but I've tried to present an observer's view.

Repercussions from the trial. Before Internet, this trial would have been swept aside, remaining only as footnotes in Jewish-controlled books, newspapers, and TV junk. It was overshadowed a year or two later by the 9/11 false flag/psyop. Youtube started in early 2005. In each case, there has been an immense flowering of comment; and the equipment available to ordinary consumers has opened up astonishing possibilities of exchange of information and analysis. At present (2017) Jewish-run outfits are obviously puzzled what to do. Google for example, with difficult-to-challenge vast data storage, still runs patently false stories—look up 9/11, for example. But it doesn't yet ban true material. Youtube is fairly good on 'alternative' stuff. Of course there are rumblings—EIG's buying up of webhosts, for example. I won't even attempt to predict what will happen.
      Holocaust Revisionists and ordinary skeptics have shot up in numbers. The three-month case allowed Londoners, and overseas visitors, to meet and exchange notes. A good example is Lady Renouf, charged up with newly-acquired activist knowledge. Through the barrage of propaganda, a lot of people noticed Lipstadt never said a word. Legal critics must have increased, and there must be more awareness of law as an empirical practice, bearing a similar relation to idealistic jurisprudence as manufacturing and marketing technology does to science. I would hope naive people who parrot about 'inalienable rights' and 'freedom' and their 'proud war service' and 'democracy' will receive delayed-action shocks. All this of course is only for readers; film/video of court cases in not permitted in the UK. Which allows scope for the Jewish film industry.

Questions for Lipstadt. The following three suggested questions are taken from David's website (July 12th 2017) for a South Africa radio phone-in:-
• “Professor Lipstadt, is it true that you were ordered to swear an Affidavit on your Discovery, that you did then Swear that Affidavit, and is it true that your lawyers consequently told you that Mr Irving might have proof of relevant documents which you had illegally and fraudulently withheld from your Discovery, and that for that reason your lawyers cleverly advised you not to go into the Witness Stand, as that would expose you to an immediate prosecution for perjury, and four years in prison? Was that the actual reason for your silence?”
• “Professor Lipstadt, is it true that at the public meeting in Atlanta which opens the film, Mr Irving actually challenged you to show the audience the document you had just told them untruthfully that you have in your possession, and he offered you $1,000 cash if you could do so.”
• “Professor Lipstadt, Is it true you were not awarded your costs at the end of the main trial? Isn’t that unusual? How much were those costs (answer: about $13 million). — The British publisher, a co-defendant in the libel action, was awarded their costs.”

Is/was David Irving a crypto-Jew Agent?   I personally don't think so. But there are several reasons people might think so:–
Hitler's War has many passages which can be interpreted as anti-Hitler, attributing malicious motives to him;
Irving makes gentlemanly assumptions on the conduct of the war, which seem to ignore some realities, for example that 'we' were 'honour-bound' to support Poland, despite the obviously unrealistic basis for the pledges. He thinks it outrageous that Churchill issued his 'advance to the coast' order, without informing 'our French allies'.
David Irving seems to assume WW2 was a standalone event, without factoring in the Jewish attitudes of a continual policy against whites, irrespective of who they were. It's now known for example that non-white invasion was a Jewish policy since at least the end of the First World War. And that the policy of 'nuclear weapons' was started before the Second World War.
His statements about killings of Jews based (as he admits) on one admittedly highly suspect document) in the east seem to ignore the possibility that Jews were moved east, and 'worked' there, just possibly wiped out by Stalin, in case they might have favourable comments about Berlin. As far as I know, Hadding Scott's "Talking Frankly" about David Irving, A Critical Analysis of David Irving's Statement on the Holocaust (CODOH, May 2016) is the best-known account of such doubts, including the likelihood that Irving was maltreated. Here's some material (too long for here) You fools do not think. ... you DON'T ASK RELEVANT QUESTIONS. ... You don't ask the obvious question: "What is the German Wehrmacht doing with a jewish staff running its headquarters in Latvia? in Jews in Russia and eastern Europe by Indrek Pringli illustrating doubts.
The lack of USSR/ eastern European records, if indeed they were ever kept—Irving's archival research in Moscow was mostly into captured German information (Conquest and Bacque and others helped with this).
Miles W Mathis (see later) and others have speculated on possible Jewish family entanglements of the Irving line.
David displays a rather regrettable tendency (in my view) to flatter people undeserving of flattery; such as the late Donald Cameron Watt, Arthur Schlesinger, and other 'historians'. If this is a mistake, it's one I try to avoid.

David Irving continues to uncover: he registers his surprise at the late recognition of the threat of Jews to Germany—formally listed in a 1935-1936 target list as 7th, behind Freemasons, the Catholic Church, Conservative reactions, and others. (See Youtube on 25 questions Q & A Himmler recorded 24 Aug 2013, at about 22 minutes, on Heydrich's papers in Moscow. Until 1937 or 1938, when Jews started assassinations, the "Gestapo and SS were hand in glove with Jews."
      This suggests to me that Hitler was encouraged because he was moderate—many Germans, facing the Jewish 'Communist' threat, and awareness of Jewish actions in WW1 (e.g. Warburg brothers advised both President Wilson and the Kaiser; Jews promoted the entry of the USA into the war), must have wanted far more serious action against Jews. The partial list (full list to be in Himmler, when it is published) suggests the problem was how to deal with collaborators of Jews—assuming the Catholic Church was in hock to Jews. And Irving—as with almost all non-Jews—probably was underinformed as to the utterly horrific situation in the USSR and eastern Europe; there were Jews from Germany fighting there—who knows what odd events transpired.

[Start of article]
Early Christianity and 'Thugs'—Does this passage from Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire remind you of other Jewish activities?
... The archbishop [Ambrose], who refused to hold any conference or negotiation with the instruments of Satan, declared, with modest firmness, his resolution to die a martyr rather than to yield to the impious sacrilege; and Justina, who resented the refusal as an act of insolence and rebellion, hastily determined to exert the Imperial prerogative of her son. As she desired to perform her public devotions on the approaching festival of Easter, Ambrose was ordered to appear before the council. He obeyed the summons with the respect of a faithful subject, but he was followed, without his consent, by an innumerable people: they pressed, with impetuous zeal, against the gates of the palace; and the affrighted ministers of Valentinian, instead of pronouncing a sentence of exile on the archbishop of Milan, humbly requested that he would interpose his authority to protect the person of the emperor, and to restore the tranquillity of the capital. ...
Notes on Thugs, Mobs, Myrmidons, and Mercenaries.   Notes on Assassinations.   As we learn powerful lessons from today's Jew-controlled world, we can translate these lessons to the past, and perhaps understand it better. Or perhaps for the first time.
      I've described the Thuggee cult in my file of Jews, as an example of a well-researched secret parasitic cult. 'Mob' is an abbreviation (which annoyed Dr Johnson)—Brewer's Phrase and Fable says it's an abbreviation of mobile vulgus, Latin for 'the fickle crowd'. ‘The term was first applied to the [ordinary] people by members of the Green-ribbon Club, in the reign of Charles II.’ 'Mobile' (pronounced something like 'mobilly') is translated as easily moved, changeable; it obviously might apply to rented or hired groups. Let's see how this might apply to covert Jewish puppet groups of the past.

Note on leaders: whenever a large group of people is necessary, in practice there are a few leaders, simply because it's impossible for most followers to find out what's happening. This is as true with religions as with armies and with corporations and bureaucracies and secret groups. The traditional lie has been that (for example) low ranks in armies and navies know what they're doing. In fact, of course, they often don't, as the simpletons in the US and UK armies and navies prove: they just obey orders, for example acting as ferries in co-operation with people smugglers and their boats. Similarly with religions: Jews rely on an army of ignorant Jews to carry out Talmudic plans; so do Catholics and all the rest. And with secret groups: many Freemason/ Common Purpose types need to be told they are 'leaders'. Many people don't seem to see that chanting mobs of rented masked Antifa or SJW types do NOT have any real beliefs—which is why they support the most absurd contradictory positions, for example supporting child rapists, because, in this case, Jews like Soros want to force nonwhite immigration. At the other end of the scale, many people seem to imagine that (say) Churchill, Stalin, Woodrow Wilson, Reagan, Thatcher, Nelson Mandela were genuine leaders. In fact they were all puppets of Jew finance.

Here are a few examples of Jew-controlled thugs in action:-
Sicarii Dagger-wielding murderers who relied on confusion to escape
• Jewish Ritual Murder I recommend Arnold Leese on this topic. There must however be censored medieval sources of information
• 'The Haymarket Martyrs', USA Chicago, USA, May 4, 1886: Chicago policemen vs eight foreign ('German speaking', i.e. probably Jewish) 'anarchists'. An online 'revisionist' story concerns Timothy Messer-Kruse, curious to investigate courtroom events, for six weeks.
• Jews in Czarist Russia
• Jews and the Boer War
• Jews, suffragettes, white feathers
• Jews in Cable Street, London
• Yagoda, Beria, Kaganovich
• 1960 Cato Manor, in Durban, and Sharpeville Massacres

My very incomplete assassinations list. Jewish Murders and Mass Murders (2013 - yes, I wrote that in 2013!)

There is a policy of this sort in South Africa now (see Jan Lamprecht on this) and of course Palestine. Projecting this attitude back, it seems clear enough that many sackings, battles, and so on were essentially thugs seizing assets. Obvious enough, but deliberately hidden by jargon.

Ramsay's Nameless War has examples of manufactured funded mobs based on Jewish actions in the past, in England, France, Russia, Germany, and Spain.

[Start of article]
Expert Witnesses.   Civil Servants.   Public Inquiries.   Pseudo-Authentication   An interesting byway presented by many legal cases is that of the 'Expert Witness'. When David Irving prosecuted Lipstadt and Penguin, Kevin MacDonald was called as an expert witness. But Rampton said "No questions", to MacDonald's visible surprise. A good witness, in the pragmatic sense, is one who confirms whatever the establishment wants: they provide a shield and justification, for fluoridation, vaccination, BSE, AIDS, or whatever. Many decisions on (e.g.) insecticides are made by civil servants who didn't really have much idea what they were talking about. This conforms to the Jewish idea of law: once the propaganda has swayed the simple goyim, there's no turning back—from Pearl Harbor, or a fictional sea attack off Vietnam, or some lie about holding hands up and black violence—no further negotiation is allowed, if Jews think it's in their interest.
      And of course Jews have the 'Kol Nidre' get-out clause—the 'Board of Deputies of British Jews' for example must make non-Jewish judges sigh. (Another technique is simply not to call serious witnesses to testify, as in the joke enquiry chaired I think by Kissinger into 9/11.)

[An older link, 2012-ish Public Inquiries into Wars

[Added 1 July 2017] In Britain, Sir Martin Moore-Bick appears to have been selected to lead the Grenfell Tower fire public inquiry—Grenfell Tower having a similar fingerprint set to 9/11, with property development implications combined with Jewish policy on non-white invasions in Europe. I would hope a team of competent Internetters and architects/ lawyers/ and people with inside knowledge will be able to report on this.

[Start of article]
Bertrand Russell on 'Amalekites'
Russell had very little serious awareness of Jews, but in his book Power discusses 'The moral code towards enemies', with the Old Testament unsurprisingly leading. After a list of killings for 'their abominations', Russell selects the story of Saul, who annoyed 'the Lord' by being insufficiently thorough—he left Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, along with some animals. (Russell quotes Deut vii 1-4., 14 and 1 Samuel xv 8-11; though without saying what happened to Agag.)
Russell, like most Victorians, had no grasp of the genetic evolutionary roots of human impulses. He thought all tribes were more or less the same, and destined to go through similar stages, from primitive savagery to full mature civilisation. I think he believed the Old Testament was characteristic of all pre-Christian peoples. Anyway; the story of the Amalekites evidently is part of the verbal universe of recent Christianity.
Note: Jews seemed to regard 'The Lord' (as the translation has it) as only an intermittent presence, one of many—the others are never mentioned—doing his rounds like an inspector, being irritable, annoyed and verbally violent.
    It's curious to compare this 'G-d' with the Christian God, as developed after centuries of philosophical mastication. Compare early and late 'Superman' Comics: the first Superman, like the Jewish 'Lord', could (e.g.) run as fast as an express train, and jump long distances, and see with special specs. The refined Christian God was supposed to exist everywhere, see everything, and know everything, including the past and future.
Michael A. Hoffman II   As with Hilaire Belloc, Michael A Hoffman is a convinced Roman Catholic, though of German extraction rather than French. Hoffman believes (for example) the Ascension of Jesus Christ is necessary to Christianity. He believes (another example) that Conversion is a definite mental event. Also as with Belloc, this gives him an interest in Jews, in, I think, a traditional sense, i.e. not Khazars, or for that matter other possible convert groups. The downside is that judgements on such things as paganism, authentic Catholicism, God in the flesh, 'the Occult', Babylon, usury, and so on appear to be based circularly on the starting-point 'Faith'. Anyone who sees 'sacred' texts are fiction, on similar emotional bases to patent medicines for the soul, and/or Sunday school and job and cult recruitment appeals, with unsuccessful attempts at sciences and math and language, cannot, I imagine, have sympathy for portions of these books.
      This is very unfortunate: the world needs a guide to the freakish world of aggressive inbred parasites, mediated by the Talmud. A handbook of Jewish strategies and tactics, with real-world examples, would be very valuable. Many examples float around Internet—pre-emptive announcement of some crime, so the goyim can't say they weren't warned—returning to past triumphs to show how wonderful they are—murders of critics—group unity in lying—avoidance of censuses and other statistical fakery—ensuring bureaucratic support for crimes is reliably Jewish—but I know of no key historical handbook for decoding Jew crimes by interpreting Jew media.

BUT Hoffman is interested in the past: Jews of the last few centuries may have different ideas—we can't assume that past writings are a guide to present activities, especially since conditions have changed so much: think electronic money, the possibility of huge population movements, far easier than before, and information movements. Unfortunately I don't think his work is as helpful as it ought to be.

Interestingly, Hoffman is aware of the idea of race wars; in fact, I remember first reading the idea of the World Wars as white population reduction wars in his writings. I doubt if this can be Roman Catholic doctrine, though. Note that his books are to be paid for: I can't blame Hoffman, but this means the material he considers of most value is least likely to spread through cyberspace.

Hoffman's website is Revisionist History®: beyond the gatekeepers. His books include a reprint of Talmud Tested by Alexander McCaul, 'The Victorian Eisenmenger'. It's disconcerting to find McCaul starts his list of weekly pieces with this: SALVATION IS OF THE JEWS. Amongst all the religious systems existing in the world, there are but two deserving of attentive consideration, and they are both of Jewish origin, and were once exclusively confined to the Jewish nation. They are now known by the names of Judaism and Christianity; but it must never be forgotten that the latter is as entirely Jewish as the former. ...   It seems Hoffman's venture is to convert Jews to Christianity. This may be a long job! But the plain fact is that Hoffman is still psychologically dependent on Jews, as his Roman Catholic Church has been for all its life, and this raises the suspicion of Jewish money influences over the whole life of the Churches.

      Hoffman's own books include: Judaism Discovered: A Study of the Anti-Biblical Religion of Racism, Self-Worship, Superstition and Deceit (1100 pages; I don't know the word count), and a shorter version, Judaism's Strange Gods (400 pp). And Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not. And the most recent The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome, "Softcover, 723 pages. Illustrated with 42 rare photos, many in color. Comprehensive index." This history is in part a study in the laboratory of human delusion where five or more mutually contradictory beliefs are held by the papists; where monk Martin Luther's Augustinian Superior General is a leader of the Cryptocracy; where the Kabbalah and Talmud are advanced by pontiffs known to consensus history as Judaism's toughest adversaries, and where the primordial malignity of Pharaonic Egypt becomes the secret religion of the robber Church of Rome, which usurped the genuine Catholic and Apostolic Church of Dante, Aquinas, Francis of Assisi and Anthony of Padua.

      Michael A. Hoffman has his serious online review of the movie Denial, on CODOH's site inconvenienthistory.com. Hoffman concludes, unlike most 'mainstream' reviewers in the Jewish media, that 'the imps of contrariness have seen to it that Denial rehabilitates Irving. ... Denial gives new impetus to World War II revisionism... alerts curious minds to the existence of a substantial body of dissent, going so far as to feature Mr. Irving's website on-camera, as well as the covers of his books'.
      Michael Hoffman notes the failure of Lipstadt to say anything to anyone apart from her circle of 'experts', and notes the absurdity of her 'survivor' remarks—none were called, because all were liars, as had been established in court in Canada. But he doesn't discuss the subtle ways deliberate distractions are inserted into films: David's website's online section (at this time of writing) lists online reviews of the film—search for Denial, with a capital D—all more or less hostile to Irving—surprise!—including (just one example) Rampton's son, described as an 'arts journalist'. Irving's 'Online' section lists four lies—#1 Irving's father not returning after 1945; #2 & #3 Lipstadt claiming to have a blueprint of a gas chamber; #4 Lipstadt shown as claiming there was no libel, when four instances of libel were proved, but not a fifth. I've already seen Youtube comments confidently asserting that Irving's father left his family, and that he's a joke. These may have been planted, but clearly that's the object.
.       Spielberg allegedly helped fund the lawyers: but in a world where Jews can dip trillions of dollars without audit, I'd guess such attributions are aimed at naive lovers of rubber sharks, caricature Germans, and smelly outhouses.

An important claim from Hoffman is that Lipstadt in effect called for a Jewish 'holy war', jihad-like, against Irving, by comparing him with an Amalekite. Here's Hoffman's account on the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust website; August 28th 2016. ... Deborah Lipstadt's ominous categorization of David Irving as an "Amalekite." In Judaic theology this is tantamount to calling for his extermination (irony of ironies). In the talk at the Real History gathering, I give examples of Palestinians who were labeled "Amalek" by Israelis and then murdered. Hence, I accuse Debbie the Darling of Human Rights "Holocaust" activists, of being guilty of incitement to murder. ...'

[Start of article]
Movies and Jews   Looking at the long century of 'Movies'—cinema and video; many young people don't know about silver halide emulsion techniques, or the invention of sound recordings—is a distressing experience for those who hope for ideals such as beauty and truth. The Hebrew century has bequeathed indifference to ideals on what would be an heroic scale if there had been anything heroic about it. With the simplicity of fanatical race supremacists, 'chosen by G-d', they lie and grab. Others may think about justice, fairness, what makes a decent life; not them. Their influence is evil and far-reaching: freedom, inalienable rights, pride in war service, they work for their money, Goddamn Russians, war whores...

    'Denial' is of course just another Jew propaganda film, in a line from, say, Eisenstein. Irving is perhaps over-polite—having a green-screen backed Mr Ugly cast as him is an insult–but everyone experts actors to be prostitutes. The courtroom scenes—judging by the trailer—are in no way accurate. The Lipstadt material has to be misleading to pretend just another Jewish liar is a heroine. (Maybe there was some casting clash: the woman finally selected replaced another. I wondered whether at any time the parrots considering 'they are chosen by G-d' ever wonder why G-d made them so fvcking ugly. This sort of thing is a problem with Islam, too: if Allah will provide, why grab the benefits provided from whites by Jews?)
      It's fascinating and depressing to see Jews still control of the official narrative, just as the Jesus myth still influences people who ought to grow out of it. And in control of funding, something of an irrelevance, since Jews can print money ad lib. The underlying theme is that Jews were victims, not the truth, which is they caused vast numbers of deaths. Even the title of Denial is fake; Irving's prosecution of Penguin Books & Lipstadt was of alleged libel, most of which was proven. Denial is in the same portfolio as Justice at Nuremberg, Gentlemen's Agreement, various Eichmanns, Sophie's Choice, Schindler's List, Captain Corelli's Mandolin.
      There seems (at present) no odium attached to actors, who in any case, to get into actors unions, have to undertake to follow Jew rules—be non-'racist', to insist on absurd racial quotas, and so on. I suppose it's saddening to be a prostitute, but even more saddening to be an unemployed prostitute.
      I'm unlikely to watch this film, though—as someone who was there—I'd be interested to see how accurately, if at all, the courtroom and site of the Royal Courts of Justice were shown. My notes would be too burdensome. Hare, the scriptwriter, seems to be a Jewish Hampstead playwright, used to big subsidies, small sets, and equally small slices of life. No doubt there will be nothing about legal machinations to obscure the truth, the framing of laws to favour Jews, and the influence of money. Many Jews like law precisely because it offers scope for frauds: note the joke that, if the law exists to make things fair, the USA, with huge numbers of lawyers, must be very fair. Some of these people are acted in Denial, of course. Anthony Julius, author of a jejune work on literary 'anti-semitism', for example.
      Another existential difficulty with film is the absence of the unpredictability of the actual events. In real-life courts, "What will he say to that?" is a natural question, which actors doing their lines cannot (in my experience) simulate. Though Rampton's rather transparent train-of-thought derailing interruptions may be easier to act.
      Many people believe, I think wrongly, that 'Holocaust Denial' is explicitly illegal in many countries. It's easy to see why the real situation is less clear-cut. Consider the city of Kotragar in central Asia, completely destroyed by Jews before under Stalin. This event was kept very secret: in fact, I just made it up. Would Jews want legal penalties against anyone discussing "Kotragar"? Obviously not; they would want it to remain hidden. This sort of thing explains why laws on censorship are vague; many crimes have been hidden, and vagueness is necessary for concealment: there must not be something analogous to the Roman Catholic 'Index Expurgatorius'.

      The court transcripts are online (I believe this is true for Zundel's trials too) so online burrowing is fairly easy. This is my website's material on Irving's libel trial.

[Start of article]
Jewish World Plans: Wars, Religions, Lies.   Examples of Induction from Europe, USA, and Russia   What can students of Jews do? Some hints—
Remember the Jewish Continuist mindset. This is a mixture of their own secret personal information; more or less mythical history; and stories for consumption by 'goyim', mostly untrue and lachrymose. There are also, inevitably, huge gaps and omissions, necessary for any group with a specialist mindset concentrating only on exploitation and parasitism. It's a strange combination, but has been terrifyingly effective. Try to remember Jews are likely to perceive events as a continuum. Don't be surprised if anti-white policies crop up continually and over long periods of time. Don't be surprised if anti-European policies continue indefinitely: propaganda against Germany, for example, two wars against Germany, non-white parasites forced into Germany, Jewish control over a supposed European Union, and so on. You may think World War 2 was 1939-1945 or some variant; Jews think it was one small interlude. You may think the Black Death was an isolated event; Jews don't. To quote 'RoyAlbrecht' (Occidental Observer, 2017-09-17) ‘.. we are dealing with an enemy that eats, breaths, sleeps and sh!ts murder theft and mayhem upon those it has labeled the enemy. ..’
Stories, Parables, Tales. Jewish writings contain large numbers of stories, mostly in standardised format: consider for example Esau, selling his birthright 'for a mess of pottage', Moses bringing 'tablets down from a mountain', 'waters which were under the firmament' separate from 'the waters which were above the firmament'. These short-term memory textual chunks may be a genetic bias in Jews, accounting for their supposedly high verbal IQ. Certainly many Holohoax fraudsters issue their lies in prepackaged chunks.
    I've included some articles on my site by 'Arch Stanton', describing technical Talmudic actions, but like many Americans he doesn't seem weaned from Jewish 'Jesus' stories.
Plans and Stratagems Made From Mnemonic Stories. The repetitive style of Jewish activities is often, perhaps always, based on predetermined stories.
    • Repeat ordering of goods of some sort; then a large order; then skipping off without paying. One example is an Australian cash fraud, where a bank got used to receiving unsorted notes from a Jew; another is a South African story, of large orders to several suppliers, accustomed to smaller orders—followed by departure to Israel; another is an account in H.A. Lane.
    • Another is the financial system of secretly funding opposite sides in wars—eventually the warring sides are likely to find they are fighting with the same weapons.
    • Another is of course secretly funding one side, with some Jewish aim in mind: Japan was funded to fight Russia, because Jews hated the Tsar. Britain and France were funded to ruin China, to foist opium onto it. Britain was funded against South Africa, to get gold and diamonds.
    • Another is medium-term (100 years?) actions against some aspect of life of host populations. Controlling their land and food; controlling their banks; acting with would-be elites; perhaps inventing a new religion or attitude or 'saint', from race mixing to Quakers to Churchill. These actions may include, at the present time, use of puppet front men—think Mandela, Obama—rentacrowd fake demonstrators with printed signs, usually in English, fake academics and writers, and crisis actors.
How Jews Operate.
(1) Jews spread as a layer across many societies. It's a different model of a national group. Understand that—and note that isolating these groups from each other will help.
(2) Jews know whites often operate in separate groups, of experts, careers, skills, clubs. Connecting them together may help.
(3) Jews aim to control other groups; they may hide behind non-Jews, change their names, learn local languages and manners, etc). 'Doxxing', monitoring synagogues etc may counter Jew control.
(4) In each white group, Jews try to bar debate if possible: white teachers for example may understand Jewish tampering, but never talk about it. White doctors know about Jewish frauds, but don't discuss them. White police may come to understand Jews. White military types may know about Jewish violence and wars. White businessmen know examples of Jew fraud, but don't talk about it. White media workers know Jews tell lies, but never discuss it. White university administrators know about Jewish money and maybe the Fed. White historians and archaeologists know there are many documents, monuments, artworks that Jews want to destroy. Whites in finance ... etc etc. Be aware of this possibility and try to counter it.
(5) Jews try to occupy the top of important power structures: all US government departments are led by Jews, for example. Obviously, this must be opposed.
Jews can't publically celebrate themselves. They can't write autobiographies of frauds, crimes, warmongering. Try to imagine an honest Jewish 9/11 biography, or honesty from Neocons. For all time, their lives have to be secretised. Vanity though must surely tug e.g. the Rothschilds to record their triumphs against goys somewhere, however risky. Perhaps this doesn't matter; but perhaps it does, and it's worth bearing in mind the potential weapon against Jews.
Jew collaborators can't celebrate themselves, either. Consider simple Russians who had no option but collaborate with Jews for GULags, against Germany, and against Russia itself. And simple Americans, used as mass murderers in South America or South-east Asia or the Middle East. Jewish Bolsheviks, propagandists, and industrialists must keep quiet: the Federal Reserve and Jew York Times, nuclear and vaccine frauds, block their way. Neither set of people can be honest.

[Start of article]
Is The Occidental Observer's Kevin MacDonald a Covert Agent?   The Occidental Observer is here; it has a well-established academic image, evidently intentional, and with a quarterly publication, and a bookstore (6 titles at present). The centrepiece and main man is Kevin MacDonald, known for his series of books, including The Culture of Critique, dating from 1994-2002. His 2004 monograph of three essays, Understanding Jewish Influence: A Study in Ethnic Activism, is published by The Occidental Quarterly.

It's obvious enough that pressure is being applied by US Jews against Americans' First Amendment rights, in the same way it has been applied in Europe to try to censor information about Jews, notably of course on the 'Holocaust', where the Jewish strategy is clearly to keep repeating lies, particularly to young people, in the hope of quieting criticism. In fact, it's this Jewish policy that helped convince me that Christianity was imposed by Jews in the same way, about 2,000 years ago, by repetition of tribal scribblings. It remains to be seen whether this will succeed, but unquestionably there's a chance, and a new Holocaustianity religion may trap the world, perhaps for thousands of years. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Youtube have yielded under pressure, but not at all completely. Metapedia.org seems to have been victim of a hostile takeoever, though, typically, details are sparse: Rightpedia.org seems to be doing its best to replace it.

As I type, the previous three TOO pieces have been Doused and Denounced (by Ray Wolters; on Sociobiology), Brave New Britain: Vibrant Enrichment in Manchester and London (by Tobias Langdon, on two (false flag) attacks), and 'Heaping Up Its Own Funeral Pyre': Britain, Islamic Terrorism, and the Cult of Pacifism (by Andrew Joyce; same subject, with absurd claims of pacifism). (Joyce has written well on pogrom revisionism and world war revisionism, though on inspection not originally; however, his work on Jew-owned shipping after 1945 and unelected black immigration I think was his own. His piece on the Empire Windrush is revisionist work at its finest. But Joyce hasn't understood the depth of Jewish corruption: he really seems to think 'depth and intensity of fame' is an independent variable). Wolters' piece is on 'biologians' vs 'culturalists'. However, he doesn't identify Jews as the moneyed force behind censorship in human genetics studies, making his article more or less worthless. Other recent articles condemn Islam, but go to great lengths to avoid mentioning the Jews who, as one, promote Islamic immigration on a huge scale. There have been commenters, drawing attention to the moderator's selective bias (there seems to be just one mod, proud of doing his work for nothing). A good example of a resident troll is 'David Ashton' (this is the name of an official sociologist, I think, but the commenter denied being that person) who invariably promotes a pro-Jew viewpoint, typically of Jew lies or Jew money frauds. Another good example is 'Pierre de Craon', who invariably promotes what he thinks is a Roman Catholic view—such as, recommending prayer.

One crucial idea of the site is that whites are 'pathologically altruistic'. I think it's fair to say this is misdiagnosis on a Himalayan scale: after all, during WW2 whites fought each other, and other races, white white weapons, probably more lethally than in all previous history.
      (A recent posting is on Dresden, though this is more of a focal point than an examination of the entirety of the vicious cruelty of the Jewish Second World War.
      Here's a disallowed very blunt comment to The Occidental Observer from me, on 'US Heroes': (2 Dec, 2016) I have some difficulty not laughing at this rubbish. A heroic mustached pilot in cowboy boots bombing defenseless rural civilians… an 'alpha male'? I doubt the comment is serious—considering the anachronisms; it's probably a Jew puppet piece, inserted in case American whites start to grow up and understand who their real enemies are, and have been. Jews love 'fallen friends' being celebrated by simpletons: they get their deaths and their money, and do their best to get another stream of vicious simpletons. Surely MacDonald is old enough to have heard of US war crimes?
      Here's another disallowed comment (August 10, 2017) ... the ridiculous idea that whites are ‘pathologically altruistic’ when they do what Jews say. ... nobody mentions the similar policies visited on the Koreans and Vietnamese – heavy bombing, firebombs, napalm etc. This of course is a result of Jewish media control. I wonder whether this site’s failure to mention such things is temporary, waiting on further long-outdated ‘revelations’, or a permanent feature?
      Another non-reported issue is financial fraud and corruption: 2 Dec 2016, on German nonwhite invaders getting much more than Germans: Bear in mind that Jews print money and control central banks, so the more debt a government accrues, the more payments Jews get. They're so used to this, it seems natural to them. I think this is part of the reason why handouts for invaders are assumed legitimate by the Jew filth. They're accustomed to it, and can't understand that there are limits to parasitism. It's the reason why some MPs and EU people etc assume invaders are 'entitled' to benefits: Jews get them, why not some selected goyim untermensch?

MacDonald's well-known books were published from 1994-2002 (print-on-demand paperbacks available more recently). The site lacks any science—Holocaust, NASA, 9/11, nuclear issues, climate change, some medical issues such as AIDS, fluoridated water, vaccines. It seems to lack any supplementary expertise in religion, having no contributors dealing with Talmudic material in particular, and Jewish Yearbooks and networking, but also Roman Catholicism (much less Russian Orthodoxy).

There are many other issues: not much on BLM and similar organisations based on statistical lies; nothing on supporting (((US))) wars, presumably to bankruptcy; nothing on US bases, NATO, EU and its Jew 'elite'; nothing on Jews in law, junk media, data storage and destruction, archives. Nothing on the impact of (typically) Jews on Africa. Even the comments are low on Jews: a recent piece on Sweden and Swedes blames women, whites, media, kindergartens, virtue signalling—without seeming to realise the whites are paid—and so on, but nothing on Jews in the EU, Jews controlling Jewish jobs and media. Nothing on current bankruptcies, media collapses, the Mexico 'Wall', and other Trump-inspired topics. Instead: Plato, ancient Greeks treated at the naivest level, whites and 'hunter-gatherers' as though that determines the entire environment in pre-history.

Why I think Kevin MacDonald and the Occidental Observer are Controlled Opposition is a long piece by Miles Mathis, expressing considerable skepticism. For example: ... So you see how MacDonald is spinning you. He tells you these half-truths, leading you to his solution: discrimination against Jews! He is acting just like the ADL wants him to act, saying all the wrong things at all the right times. He is leading you toward discrimination as the answer and away from enforcing existing laws as the answer—just as the big boys want it. ...
      The deepest problem with the MacDonald approach is insufficient analysis of Jewish power. Jewish power goes back millennia—I have emails from people whose comments were banned, agonising over issues pre-dating 1776. Without such material, the site is hollow; as one illustration of this weakness, consider Bertrand Russell's Jew-unaware comment, 'the entire American nation is on trial' (written 1970, of the Vietnam War). This attitude is common to Americans, under the deluge of Jew lies, but is not appropriate to a supposedly intellectual organisation. The facts the 1960s New York Times, fifty years later, is still more-or-less functioning, under more-or-less the same Jews, and that Kissinger is not executed or jailed, is an indictment of the US way of life. A ridiculous piece by M. Jaggers (31 June 2017) on the decorum of the US government—probably the most crooked regime in the whole of world history—points to the same message. MacDonald's site says nothing deep on Jewish crimes outside the USA. I doubt if Mathis's crit is true in detail; Arthur Butz for example was not sacked from his university, which seems to show some criticism of Jews slips through. But Mathis might as well be correct.

[Start of article]
Breeding and Artificial Races: An Essential but Suppressed Distinction.   'Artificial Selection' applied to Peoples   Discussions of race, despite frantic attempts by Jews at suppression, are increasing. And human genetics is an important subject. Just a few notes.

I'll call 'Artificial Human Races' such races as have been produced by human intervention. Modern African blacks are one example: without white intervention, presumably their populations—their expansion being the highest ever recorded—would have remained at pre-industrial levels. If that intervention were to be withdrawn, presumably there would be pressure downwards on their populations. These are a question of numbers, but there may be genetic changes. Another example is south Africa's 'coloureds', widely supposed, correctly or not, to have been fathered by Jews on helpless black women. And of course Jews must count as artificial, influenced by reading and writing and mental processes. In fact it seems possible that newly-bred populations of 'Jews' could be produced by intensive exposure to Jewish Talmudic books and practices. And Moslems must count as an artificial race, bred under Quranic influences with young mothers and the acceptance of four 'wives' and rape of some unaccompanied girls.

As must usually be the case in any science, genetic studies in human, animal, and plant life start with the study of outstanding, striking, odd, or repeatable phenomena: polyploidy in wheat, selection of horses or dogs for strength, for digging, for controlling sheep, simplish pencil-and-paper tests. In genetic theory, presumably dominant genes for striking malformations are noticed first, rare recessives and hard-to-detect or microscopic minor oddities later. But mental and temperamental characteristics seem to be the most difficult to pin down genetically. I think this explains why Jewish parasitic behaviour—if that's what it is—has escaped much scientific attention until recently. It's in the same class of phenomena as psychopathy and schizophrenia. At present, I can think of no successful attempts to identify inheritance patterns of (for example) self-deception, or the ability to tell convincing lies. Nobody knows how the brain works; and there are serious doubts over how DNA works; so possibly the best techniques for the present would be the old pre-DNA methods. Meanwhile, there has been detailed work on animals, particularly small animals such as insects. There seems no doubt that new, very striking, evolutionary patterns of parasitism have been found. And if insects can do it, there seems little doubt people could do it.
      If I may, I'll adopt a Jean-Henri Fabre-style description of a possible situation. Imagine a situation where a population's skill enables it to live in large groups, and have some control over a large hinterland—towns, food, transport, water, specialisation—but not be able to communicate face to face with anything like all the members. Then outgroups could interweave into the system and live a parasitic life, consuming what surplus there might be. Not unlike maggots of specialised parasitic insects feeding on blood from a proportion of the population. And counter-evolution on both sides might well lead to increased camouflage and behavioural mimicry.

Complicated animals, with vast amounts of DNA, bring related issues: any specialised or exceptional animals seem likely to not reproduce their special characteristics. It's all very well for geneticists to say that (e.g.) siblings "share half their genes" or whatever claims they make, but if the unshared genes are important, they won't pass on their special characteristics. The number of possible different children of just one couple is astronomical, but I haven't seen any analysis of the results of this. It's notable, although of course kept secret, that Jews' and Muslims' inbreeding leads to vast numbers of defective offspring, as an example.

There are great problems surrounding human evolution, mostly as a result of inventiveness: human beings can do things other animals can't, including of course talk and listen. Sanskrit, written Chinese, cuneiform languages and all the rest must have had some genetic impact; certainly African tribes which only had oral languages seem to be far behind. Jews in the USSR killed off as many educated Russians as they could: I believe this Jewish behaviour to be genetically-caused, but obviously Jew brains need invention of and/or recognition of enemies, combined with secret planning and aggression. Possibly some sort of tests (perhaps along the lines of pencil and paper IQ tests, or reaction time tests) could be devised, though to date as far as I know anything of that sort would be unfunded.
      Other problems—here's a scattering—include (1) since bacteria, viruses, fungi, amoebas, insects can evolve enormously quicker than big animals, how come devastating plagues aren't much more common than they are? (2) Is there a free-floating instinct of (say) curiosity, as cats are said to have an instinct to hunt, independent of hunger? Does such an instinct pop up and grip some subject in the mysteries of croquet, big marrows, football results, winemaking? (3) Is there a dominant, or recessive, hostility instinct, needing enemy recognition and verbal and behavioural cunning? (4) Do Jews move around in a way analogous to prey animals, faster than the prey, and without homes—just temporary residence in Lodges, Meeting Houses, Synagogues, Shtetls? (5) And remember that only a part of any organism's genes are passed on, in sexual reproduction—probably as a stabilising mechanism: children can be very different from their parents. I'm not sure anyone has really modelled the way the vast number of genetic combinations leads to a 'gene pool', though I expect such genetic variations as have shown up in the immense past probably correspond, more or less, to variations which happened to survive.
      It's important to realise that Jews have detailed views on genetics. So do most societies, but usually their object is to keep stability, rather than breed selectively. Jews have a tendency to be fanatical about other races: they want them to be damaged and weakened. They love abortion and sexual perversions and risky large-scale medication and poisoning—for others. They pass laws forbidding information on race numbers and race mixing and inherited diseases to be published. They profess to believe in 'biology denial'—and it's amusing to see people like Justice4Men&Boys and Jordan Peterson completely baffled by Jewish media liars. Jews seem to breed for group fanaticism—virtually not one single Jew speaks out about Jew corruption of any sort. It seems analogous to the way sheep collect together, and many fish form shoals. And analogous to some animals which behave analogously, by playing dead, for example.
      There are plenty more possibilities: for example, were temple prostitutes money-makers, and did they lead to the idea of maternal descent? Did Jews evolve from shorter-lived races in such a way as to make extreme gargoyle-like old age likely, for example by avoiding risk? Such, in the words of J B S Haldane, is the present position of Western civilization. There has been a complete failure to integrate into its intellectual structure the scientific ideas which have furnished its material structure.

It's probably true that human races, being biologically young, are not yet in dynamic equilibrium, in the way that other species and their enemies have come to some sort of permanent balance. Even the most efficient predators haven't eaten all their prey; and even the most efficient parasitoids haven't killed off all theirs. BUT we are looking at creatures with shorter lives and longer development times and few intellectual capacities. I don't know of any other creatures than man which parasitise their own species. But that doesn't mean there aren't any. Researchers trying to predict the future should look, not at parasites as they are now, but at the full evolution of parasites, including cannibalism, and including the very beginnings of parasitism leading up to their present-day adaptations. The human races are relatively young, and there may be fairly simple insights, from nature, suggesting actions to avoid catastrophes.

[Start of article]
Miles Mathis and his Internet Intellectual Gold Rush. Is Mathis an Agent?   Miles Mathis's website is justifiably popular. He is wide-ranging, including original science hypotheses (mostly physics and chemistry) and his own art, including unflattering commentary on the art industry—I don't think anyone else has identified very high auction values as a possible international money-laundering device.
      His revisionist identification of genealogical research as an historical research tool is very refreshing in a world of intentionally misleading abstractions such as capitalism, feudalism, nations, classes, political parties, left, right... His emphasis moves to individual biological units and their connections, of indisputable importance. His abstractions involve families of spooks and 'intelligence' workers, and financiers and Jews; less so military and legal evolutions and revolutions. There's a possible source of error here: his confidence with surnames looks over-confident to me. Anyway, the box (below) is my overview, at about October 2016. He has found a new goldfield, and has collected very many nuggets.
      In an analogous way that photographers and cinematographers played a large part in whistleblowing NASA and 9/11, Mathis draws lessons from his portraiture experience, generally involving close inspection of facial details, plus the shapes, sizes, and orientations of human bodies. And he takes advantage of computer image processing to adjust contrasts, gammas, colours and so on, work which would take hours using silver halide techniques. I'm unsure how reliable this work is; or if he has ever worked from retouched, pasted and painted photographs. Mathis has a theory that some online jokers have attempted to damage his work by promoting weak methodologies and absurd comparisons. He takes in the cinema; for example, Triumph of the Will had tens of thousands of extras, arguably making it a fake.
      On Feb 16 2017, he uploaded Hitler's genealogy, with excursions into the Beer Hall Putsch fake, and all the other big NSDAP names Jewish, including Goebbels (as a 'gay' actor), Himmler, Hess, and Eichmann, and such people as Moses Hess, and Eva Braun's possible twin. (Mathis likes finding twins—they allow image manipulation. Let's hope cloning doesn't become popular).
      And on April 8th 2017, he uploaded his 29-page Vladimir Lenin is Another Fake (updated from 21 June, 2016). 'In addition to Lenin being part of the Russian aristocracy, and the 'Russian Revolution' being a tame affair faked by Eisenstein later, the Romanovs were not murdered and Kerensky was still alive and living in the USA. 'If Russia [sc. USSR] had been a success, we would have expected to see the same thing happen in England, the Low Countries, Spain, etc., with the royals completely phased out. But instead of a raw and ravaging Communism, we have seen Monarchies fronting and co-existing with soft-sold Socialisms–in which theft by the upper classes can be better hidden. Besides, the American experiment has been far more successful than any other, and we can expect the Futureworld to be built along its lines, not the lines of Europe or Russia. It is here that the most wealth is vacuumed from the middle and lower classes into the upper class. The Russian plan didn't allow for that, since the middle and lower classes had little wealth to steal. Once the treasuries had been plundered, the only wealth in Russia was natural resources. That wealth is fantastic, but it isn't as fantastic as the plunderable wealth in the US, since the US has both the natural resources and the human resources that can be easily taken. To achieve that taking, all that is necessary is an all-enveloping propaganda state, by which the populace is conditioned to disempower itself.'
      Miles Mathis writes extensively on the USA's history. Miles Mathis on Watergate is (so to speak) typical of his style, though many of his pieces include faked deaths—his John Lennon piece is convincing, and might provide an introductory path to Mathis on JFK—exciting piece on JFK's murder being faked, MLK, Abraham Lincoln, Charles Manson. I'd not be surprised to find legal journals have discreetly-worded articles on how faked deaths might be administered. He is not a full nuclear revisionist, but at least has the idea, and is less likely (I'd guess) to be suckered into account of US nuclear 'secrets' being sent secretly to the USSR by Jewish spies. Other secret material sent to the USSR is of course another matter.
      Other notable updated papers (all May 2017) include Was Napoleon Jewish?, Martin Luther King and fake black liberation, and new papers include Richard Spencer Jewish agent, and JFK a homosexual.

woody guthrie social critic
Mathis finds actors noteworthy, very likely because he seems to have awoken to the use of actors in propaganda when he investigated the faked Abraham Lincoln assassination: he'd of course noticed Booth was an actor, but disregarded it until his reconsideration. Booth spoke Hebrew and—this is just my guess—may have said "Sic semper tyrannis" rather than something like "Oy vey, look vot I done."
      Mathis is fearlessly revisionist: the sample piece below includes: Hambro's son Charlie ... was involved in the Bank of England "bailout" of Slater Walker Bank in 1973, by which the treasury was looted of billions of dollars by these bankers. As with the later US bailouts, we are told the looting was a "financial lifeboat" that "saved the financial system from collapse", but that is all bollocks. It was just a grand theft in plain daylight, with no cover but these media lies. In fact, it had been done before. Charlie learned it from his grandfather, who "saved" Barings Bank in a similar managed collapse in 1891. ...
      And Mathis looks at the uses of mass media: Jack London (absurd queer), Mark Twain (rich globetrotter), J K Rowling (spook and puppet head of writing group; hypocritical incidentally in encouraging non-white immigration, but not into her big house—and claiming actors in the films were all British, when many were Jews); Ewan MacColl (fake name, fake folk, part of death penalty removal for ordinary people), Woody Guthrie (Jew fake), Ned Kelly (fake armour; probably to discourage Ozzie secret aristocracy from being acted against, since even the dreaded Kelly failed), Boy George (gender bender Jew in Hampstead house).

      Mathis takes some numerology seriously, in my view correctly, since it allows signals in newspapers in any language to be read. And he's shown one way for others: Is Ken Livingstone a Jew, for example? Or 'Bomber' Harris? Or George Galloway? Or 'Professor' Evans? What about John Dewey? Paxman? Attenborough? Pilger? In fact, he seems to have founded a school of similar writers, which is rare for revisionists: Gandhi–Was the Fakir a Faker? is a detailed examination, by 'daddie_o', of Gandhi (and Nehru, and Jinnah) and their wealthy backgrounds and London Inns of Court entanglements.

There are a few revisionist discoveries admitted by 'paid historians': the 'Donation of Constantine', the changes in the 'Lord's Prayer' not to forgive debts, the Roman Catholic Church's action against the Templars, some little-known Amendments to the US Constitution. Miles Mathis has single-handedly outstripped them all. Is he an agent himself? He does get a bit frenzied over 'Nazis' and 'fascism'. But I think it's very unlikely.

More on the stellar exponent of revisionism, Miles Williams Mathis, dependent on the unprecedented access to documents by Internet—books, monographs, news items, biographies, photos—which even the best libraries of the past couldn't match. Internet permits families to be checked for distinctive signs of Jew tampering, biographies to be compared and checked for absurdities, intersections detected between organisations, and so on. Perhaps unexpectedly, the Jew-patrolled Wikipedia is a fertile source for data mining of biographies. An interesting possibility is that monarchs and dynasties may be checked for Jewish infiltration. Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck appear to be Jewish or Jew-controlled pretenders, and the 'Windsors' Jewish, in England, for example. This technique is well-adapted to smallish groups—families, aristocracies, leaders—but less useful for large-scale events, such as wars, invasions, and anything large-scale. If records will be published giving information on corporations, armies, large industries, governments and so on, no doubt data mining could lead to huge advances in understanding. Mathis supplements (1) Biographies with (2) visual clues, derived from his portrait painting, as to facial and body similarities and sizes, and related issues of photo fakery; and (3) organisational procedures and promotions in legal, military, aristocratic family, and intelligence structures. So that—just three examples—Charles Manson, bearded and in prison, is impossible. And the Tate killings were a fake. And the Dresden bombing (or at least photo(s)) were faked.

Examples, from Mathis' site in Oct 2016: occult.pdf Bacon, Dee, Cromwell, and others, and conflicts between landed aristocrats, merchants, bankers, and proto-scientists, with possibly faked documents and specially promoted belief systems (millennarians, puritans...), where 'occult' means something like 'secret intelligence' though Mathis tends to regard all the people as 'spooks', and the aims change over time | French Revolution a first-class re-evaluation the 'Revolution' as a device to fleece the French Roman Catholic Church | Was Napoleon Jewish? looks at France, Poland, Austria, Egypt, and other aspects of Napoleon which may have been misrepresented | Salem witch trials pieces together the probably true story. Hawthorne looks back at Bostonians (and the East India Co), plus Thoreau (1817-1862), and Walt Whitman (1819-1892) | Lincoln is a terrific reassessment of the 'assassination' by an actor in 1865, and Custer of Custer in 1876 | Marx (as far as I know, one of the best pieces on Marx) looks at wealthy industrialists (often of course 'Jews') misleading radicals, as does Labour Party, Noami Klein, Naomi Wolf | Trayvon is on race wars, which Mathis seems to think are not real—he doesn't seem to sense the intentional Jewish prompting. | Taxes is a paper on deliberate lies about servicing interest payments. | Nash.pdf looks at the manufacture of Jewish intellectual 'heroes', in this case based around the film A Beautiful Mind, and fake science, fake economics, and fake prizes and awards. I'm not claiming all his work is correct or original; but it's a relief to see head-on revisionism. | Here are two pieces on planted horror/distraction stories: Sharon Tate and O J Simpson. On June 2016 Mathis posted Lenin and the 'Russian Revolution'. At the time of writing, Mathis is looking at the beginning of the 'American Revolution': Who Was George Washington?.]

I've sometimes wondered if Mathis might himself be an agent: his output is so huge one has to wonder if he was handed bundles of papers and photos and documents by some elderly intelligence crook, fatigued with the effort of deception. He writes Everyone knew that there must be someone behind this cardboard cut-out, someone capable of making real decisions. Half-heartedly we have thought to ourselves that maybe it was Hoover or Kissinger or Greenspan or Cheney, as the case may be, but have never felt satisfied by this. Could Mathis be hiding the Rothschilds, for example? Perhaps it's the fate of Jews to keep their secrets beyond the columbarium, to be as lost to history as the builders of Avebury and Stonehenge?

Extract from a Miles Mathis piece, to illustrate his style. (Reformatted from pdf to HTML).

Roundell Palmer | Arnold Palmer
The first is Roundell Palmer [grandson of 1st Earl of Selborne-RW], the second is Arnold Palmer. Any family resemblance?]

As Minister of Economic Warfare, Palmer selected Sir Charles Hambro [d. 1963], his City colleague, to direct Special Operations. Hambro, of an old British/Scandinavian (Jewish) banking family [Hambros Bank, now Societe Generale] had been a powerful director of the Bank of England working with Montagu** Norman to install and nurture the Hitler regime in Germany and to found the Swiss-based Bank for International Settlements (with several Nazis on its board), through which Nazi loot and SS funds would be used for post-war objectives.

[Miles here: Hambros Bank was known as the diamond bank for its connections to South Africa and the big diamond traders there (all Jewish, of course—Rhodes, Rothschild, Oppenheimer, DeBeers, etc.). After the war, Hambros Bank was one of the top three banks in Europe. Hambro's mother was a Stuart and his grandmother was a Gostenhofer. So these people were not Danish. In fact, the name Hambro was changed from Levi in the late 1700s. That link is from Geni.com, where it is admitted. {Notice that the Hambro pages are managed by a Rhodes.} These Levis link them to Karl Marx and the Philips family. The name Hambro comes from Hamburg, where the family lived before Denmark. These Hambros were also related to the Morgans. Hambro's son Charlie was sent to live with the Morgans in New York City during the war. Charlie was involved in the Bank of England “bailout” of Slater Walker Bank in 1973, by which the treasury was looted of billions of dollars by these bankers. As with the later US bailouts, we are told the looting was a “financial lifeboat” that “saved the financial system from collapse”, but that is all bollocks. It was just a grand theft in plain daylight, with no cover but these media lies. In fact, it had been done before. Charlie learned it from his grandfather, who “saved” Barings Bank in a similar managed collapse in 1891. Charlie's nephew Peter Hambro worked for Hambros Bank until it was absorbed, at which point he went to work for discount house Smith St. Aubyn. Note the name there, which came up my paper on Harry Potter and also above in the ancestry of Gary Player. Hambro then went to work for bullion house Mocatta and Goldsmid. What they don't tell you is that the Hambros probaby are Goldsmids. See here where Hambro's Levi ancestors are also Goldziehers, a variant. As it turns out, the Hambros are also related to the Normans. See Montagu Norman above. That explains their connection. Of course, through the Stuarts, the Hambros are also related to the Palmers. Also to the Townshends, etc.]

The Special Operations Executive was officially disestablished after the Nazi surrender. But Roundell Palmer insisted that its personnel, assassination capabilities, assets, and intelligence arrangements be continued underground in Western Europe, in a quasi-war against the Soviet Union.

The new “intelligence community” was managed from the Privy Council, from the permanent government apparatus that ran the Cabinet and Foreign Office, from White’s Club, and from the Mercers’ haunts and the City board rooms, regardless of elections or political parties. The very existence of MI6, the British Secret Intelligence Service, was not officially acknowledged until 1994

Since writing all the above, Mathis has written a piece on Benito Mussolini (published 14th Sept 2017), showing Mussolini was a Jew, whose Jewish mistress was part of a series of Jews from Venice and the east, and the Jewish Jagiellon dynasty. The 'March on Rome' was no doubt a fake—and his acting a fake—and the bodies hanging upside-down image a fake. Mathis understandably wearies with the details of WW2, including fake jailings (cp. Hitler's supposed jailing of a Rothschild) and fake campaigns and real or alleged assets in Africa.
      Mathis is certainly loosening the logjam, working his one-man campaign against the legions of Jew-subservient hacks, who are trying to lash together the creaking timbers.
      What a pity his technique can't be applied to the characters used by the Biblical 'Yeshua freak' Jew-subservient types doing what they can to rot the USA's intellect. It's also a pity it's hard to apply to Chinese and Japanese (and other) languages, for westerners. What information on Chinese 'Communism', and post-1945 Jewish 'elites', and trade and technology, might be unearthed, assuming they have genealogical info! Whether something similar might work in Africa, and southern America (including Mexico), and Arab countries depends (I'd guess) on availability of genealogies.

[Start of article]

David Irving on the late appearance of Jews in SS target lists. Another Irving video is Did Germans Build the Wrong Air Force?
Was Hitler an Agent? – Was Hitler a Jewish Agent?   This idea has started to surface seriously, and ought to be taken seriously. People brought up with the conventional propaganda of the West naturally enough find the idea ludicrous. I was one of these, and occasionally was quite impolite to exponents of the idea—most of whom, however, as far as I know, weren't incredibly convincing. I don't know about Russians or east Europeans, or people in the Pacific 'theatres' of war.
      It has long been part of the propaganda battle that Hitler was funded by bankers. This dates mostly from the period when the NSDAP—National Socialist German Workers' Party, remember— was described as "left wing". And at the time Hitler was widely credited with huge and successful reforms. I believe a British politician during what was called the 'National Government' in 1930s Britain first redescribed the NSDAP as "right wing", probably to the annoyance of non-Jew-puppet Conservatives.
      Another part of the propaganda battle is that Germany wanted to take over the world, despite its small size. This seems to be a permanent feature of Jewish propaganda; much the same was said of Vietnam, Iraq, even North Korea.
      This Hitler-revisionist view is (I take it) based on the idea that Jews form a nation, as a layer across the world, in detailed networking communication with each other relying, now, on computer information and spying; and supported by Jewish localised propaganda—BBC, German broadcasting, US media, as just three examples. In this way national opinions are controlled, with of course the possibility for local hostility, wars, and so on. Soros's activities in eastern European countries illustrate one version of this. Jews in the US, controlling media aimed at US blacks, illustrate another version—at present, stirring up anti-white violence such as rapes and murders, while simultaneously controlling 'news' to pretend it doesn't happen. Another example is media control in Germany, causing German self-loathing—but also media control in Britain, inducing white British self-loathing. Can we transfer this model to the case of Hitler?
      The Suppressed Importance of Hungary. Germany and Austro-Hungary were on the same side in the 'Great War'. Hungary, in the eastern Austro-Hungarian Empire, was in fact larger than Austria, and nearer Russia. The Hungarian Soviet Republic (of Bela Kun and other names; mentioned by Churchill in 1920) failed (and caused Jews in Hungary to move out, contributing e.g. to fake nuclear science, and other frauds, and leaving festering hatred of Jews in Hungary). But perhaps its most important result was caution over Germany: Jewish bankers must have paused, and it may be that Hitler was chosen as a moderate, and then watched. Remember Jews had a long history of invading Germany, and also that Germany had only recently been unified (in 1871; certainly with Jewish involvement) and was a leading economic power. The ramshackle Jewish nonsense of 'Communism', and supposed common ownership of production and distribution, if it had convinced Germans, may have worried Jews: "Oy veh, the goyim may get something out of this, which we can't allow..." Lenin or his scribblers had a revised theory of 'Revolution', that they'd expected it in industrial countries, but, surprise, it just happened in backward Russia. And certainly when Hitler came to power, many Jews were jubilant.
      Presumably, whoever controls Jewish world policy aims to maximise deaths of rivals and profits from them, taking into account their power structures: deaths of skilled rivals taking precedence over less skilled; easier profits preferred to difficult profits; and so on. Here are just some examples needing re-examination:–
Who decided Germany/ Austria/ Hungary has lost the 'Great War'?
An obvious question is: were the heavily Jew-influenced talks at the 'Treaty of Versailles' intended to lead to more wars, from which Jews intended to benefit?
What events after the 1916 stalemate prevented Germany's peace terms being accepted? How was Germany (after not being invaded at any point) come to its collapse?
German debts (1920s hyperinflation) were allowed to be removed by inflation. How come they were allowed to slip out of debts, when others didn't?
Why is there no overall reckoning of the First World War?
Why did Hitler kill Brownshirts ('Night of the Long Knives')?
What exactly was the point of the 'Nazi-Soviet Pact'?
Some white nationalist sites show machine-gunners, tanks firing, and so on. BUT in all these cases soldiers were fighting other soldiers; there was no direct Jew involvement at all. What possible point could there be in whites fighting each other?
Could Hitler's repeated peace offers have been intended to keep up the indignation of Germans against the 'Allies'?
Was Dunkirk permitted to keep up the British strength, so that they were strong enough to attack and defeat Germany?
For that matter, was German rearmament encouraged with a view to future destruction?
Many white nationalists favour the invasion and attack on the USSR. But Russians were victims of Jews; what sense did it make to kill ordinary Russians?
After (and for that matter before) the 'Great War', WW1, many Germans became Jew-wise. After the failure of a Jewish coup in Germany and Austria/ Hungary, a new party, supposedly for the Arbeiter/Workers, may have been made up; Miles Mathis skilfully paints a picture of this possibility—after some name-changing, wealthy Jews fronted the party, and gave it plausibility with Mein Kampf and spurious jailings and negotiations with past German leaders.
It's possible that the German invasions of eastern Europe and the USSR/Russia involved covert pro-Jewish activity, notably in Poland, Latvia/Lithuania, Estonia as well as Russia.
Very possibly, the natural-enough focussing on national battles enabled the Jewish interest to be left entirely undiscussed. And it was/is easy to distract from: 'German' money sounds localised, even if completely Jewish; 'French' army sounds national, even if partly Jewish; 'British' Empire sounds British, even if the finances were Jewish and transferable to the USA; from the point of view of nations, the Second World War sounds like a self-contained event, with a start and an end—but the Jews saw it as just another event in their continuum, not special, just another Jew promotion like fake news, faked 'Holocaust', faked money-making illnesses, faked money, other attacks against whites, attacks to control blacks...
3 Jewish powers
Before and during WW2, some people were aware that Jewish power ruled the USA, Britain, and the USSR, behind the scenes. Could Hitler have made a fourth?

Here are a few Internet comments presenting this revisionist view of Hitler (my edits/spelling). Many are testable, at least in principle.
Oona Craig: The issue of whether Hitler was a genuine warrior against Jewish Tyranny is vitally important. If Hitler was genuine, we the goyim have hope that our European peoples can give rise to genuine leaders. If Hitler was a Jew who was used by the Rothschilds to lead Germany into ruin, we the goyim ... have a much harder battle to fight.
[Evidence that Hitler was a genuine opponent of Jews:] Jews always commemorate the deaths of their covert murders of opponents ... their "Hamans." [RW: But they also pre-advertise them] Von Stauffenberg wanted Hitler dead...and Alan Dulles seems to have been dancing a little Purim-type dance by relating the tale of von Stauffenberg's assassination attempt in his book, Germany's Underground, Allen Dulles, 1947, and the movie Valkyrie. It is significant that out of so many incidents in WW II, Dulles chose to dwell on von Stauffenberg. The plot goes directly to the issue of Hitler's true intentions for Germany. It would seem, therefore, that Hitler was a genuine opponent of Jews. (Other possible examples: Aviator celebrates their usurpation of the Howard Hughes empire; Apollo 13 their NASA Hoax. Oliver Stone's JFK - financed by Israeli Arnan Milchan - is a Purim-style gloating over the de-capitation of the "Haman" JFK.
[Evidence that Hitler was a Rothschild agent:] Hitler's staff was full of crypto Jews like Canaris and Richard Gehlen. It may have been that Hitler, despite his dealings with Jewish central bankers, had gone off-script and was pursuing his own aims. I don't know what to make of Rudolf Hess or Operation Paperclip....layers upon layers of deceit surround WW II. An argument for surmising that Hitler indeed was a Rothschild agent is Hitler's refusal to incorporate Vlasov's army of disillusioned Russian soldiers into the Wehrmacht despite the pleas of his generals. Hitler knew that Germany was "scripted" to lose. THAT is why Hitler refused to use the million-man Russian army that Vlasov offered to the Germans to help rid Russia of the Jewish Bolshevik parasites. That is why Hitler destroyed the German army by attacking Russia in the dead of winter. THAT is why Hitler let the British troops be evacuated from Dunkirk. THAT is why Rudolf Hess was held in prison until he died after flying to expose Hitler's perfidy to the Clivedon set whom Hess thought were allies. Hess was kept imprisoned his whole life for trying to expose the Rothschild-Churchill-Clivedon-Hitler Hoax. Rothschilds and their Judeomasonic flunkeys don't start wars until they control ALL sides. The Rothschilds made a secret pact with the Japanese Bankers/Royal Family prior to the war to eliminate the land-based Samurai class. Hiroshima/Nagasaki was "land clearance." Rothschild puppets Putin and Trump are conspiring for WW III.
Zekerias Varg: (Finnish?) Hitler and NSDAP were installed to get the war to put the nations in debt and to create a reason to create the structures for global government. Do you think that Wallenbergs did not know what the Warburgs and the other financiers of Hitler did? You have to get some knowledge about Kreuger, and to search and educate your self about the BIS bank, the ?france minister and so on. All government shills claim Hitler was the hero, but he was just a collectivist as all other pawns. Without Hitler no Israel. Just study the transfer agreement, the false flag crystal nacht. Study the Warburg Bank of Hamburg, in control the whole time. The MEFO bills, the Bank of England, IG Farben and the clearing agreements, the credits via Bank of England. It will be quite evident that the puppet regime of Germany from 33-45 was a bank operation in the agenda of the land of sand in 1948, to get the power structure for NWO that will be manifest under agenda 21...
Ger Tzedek: [I'm aware this is a Jewish expression] Something has changed. Too much information around. They no longer can do whatsoever they want. They wanted more wars for Israel, to defeat Syria, broken doors for invaders in Europe, Hillary, UK in EU, the vast riches of Russia. All that is not happening.
    Germany mainly lost because Japan didn't attack the Soviet Union. The absolute majority of German casualties throughout the war happened in the eastern front. The only influence that West had in the war was by feeding Soviet Union whatsoever they wanted. West was humiliated too much by Germany alone. Coming from Eastern Europe, I was taught that 95% of the war was fought between Germany and Russia. Actually Soviets were right with this one.
    Also, Hitler alienated the population in the occupied areas. I am not talking about the Poles, who were alienated no matter what. In Soviet Union the population initially welcomed Germans big time. That changed after Germans behaved cruelly with the local population. This is the number one mistake. [RW: This evades the false-uniform issue of Jewish 'partisans' - but:] They made other mistakes, plenty. Like letting go Brits in the Battle of France. Or stopping for 3 days in front of Moscow, giving Russians precious 3 days to recover. Or stupidly insisting in Stalingrad. If you look at the map of the southern extent of Germans, they were ever so close to the Caspian. Should they get there, they would have won the war by simply stopping the Soviet fuel, while getting so much fuel for themselves. At that point, no amount of Allied fuel would have saved Soviet Union.
    Another big mistake that Germans did was with weapons. They insisted in new tanks that took forever to put to production and had no effect in the war, besides propaganda. They could have mass-produced one simpler tank model. Then there was this very efficient gun that Hitler stupidly stopped the production on a whim. He paid the price for that whim.
barkingdeer: [Once you see Jews took over Russia as the USSR, and when you realise that the Fed was established in 1913, just in time for WW1, and of course that the English Civil War (so called) established the Jewish Bank of England, you have most of the puzzle pieces. In addition, 'Saudi Arabia' seems to be a Jewish fief; and Castro in Cuba was a Marrano Jew. It’s possible Hitler was a plant, too, financed to keep out Germans (& Austrians, & Hungarians, & Poles) who wanted serious revenge for WW1. -RW]
    You got all that right. Except, judging from his financial sources during his rise to power, his poor management conduct during WW2, the fact that his own generals tried to kill him at one point and the way it all turned out, with the destruction of the German army, the massacre of millions of German civilians, the ruin of its cities and infrastructure and the advancement of the Jewish state in Palestine it’s much harder to say Hitler was not a double agent all along. It isn’t as if we never see that sort of thing. Look at Obama and remember – the first rule of war is treachery.

[Start of article]
New Observer Online newobserveronline
CAPTIONS LEFT: German Girls Must Cover Arms and Legs to Appease Syrian "Refugees" | MI6: Iraq War "Inextricably Tied" to Israel | South African President Blames Whites for Electricity Blackouts | The Ignored Atrocity: Katyn | German Govt. Promotes Interracial Sex | Far more Whites Killed by US Police
CAPTIONS RIGHT: Manchester Bombing: "Refugee" Terrorist Family Arrested | Only 7% of "Refugee" Invaders Working in Germany - And Even Those are in "Made-up" Jobs | Germany Spent €20 Billion on Invasion in 2016 | 6.6 Million Nonwhites on Europe's Borders: Secret German Government Report | Sicily G7 Summit Proves Invasion Can be Controlled: No "Refugees" Allowed While They Meet
New Observer Online   newobserveronline.net is race-based, and has articles taken from official sources in the USA, and from many European countries. These articles, and their facts and figures, are as accurate as any figures can be expected to be from such sources. The New Observer articles have been resistant to critical attack, since they simply explain in plain language what the official polices are.

      This is Arthur Kemp's publishing site. His book March of the Titans might have had an impact similar to that of H G Wells's Outline of History about a century ago—an overview of white history through the ages—though Jewish media control would make that an unlikely event. Wells's book, after the First World War, caught the popular mood—what had happened to all peoples during human history? It included then-recent discoveries in anthropology and archaeology; it gave everyone "a fair crack of the whip". It did not, however, include the finances of warmongering.

March of the Titans has a primary theme, that civilisations and cultures depend on populations, in other words their race. Change a population, and the culture changes.

The New Observer has a large range of print-on-demand reprints, mostly of out-of-copyright English-language books on race and culture which have been suppressed by the hostile 'politically correct' Jewish-bank-funded elite. They include once-popular white (or in fact white by default—there was no reason to bother saying they were white) books on Egypt, Greece, and Rome, explorations, and newer scientific investigations of race and heredity.

The captions (right) give an idea of the range of topics of the New Observer. Note for example the 'German' government's promotion of interracial sex, a theme of Jew supremacists. And there is some truth in it: it's reported that ugly white women in Sweden (think: Angela Merkel?) have sex with immigrants in their expensive holding areas. Here are links to typical articles:

Austria: New Refugee-Invader Sex Attack Covered Up
3.5 Million Invaders in Europe 2013-2016
US Holocaust Museum to "Only" Get $54 million in Taxpayers' Money
Black Organizations in USA and Hypocrisy

I'm not certain the New Observer Online archives are intact: after quite a search I have not relocated the piece 'German Govt Promotes Interracial Sex'. Or on black African Presidents, supposedly in historic meeting with Obama: I think all had had assassinations, fake elections, billions in white bank accounts, etc. And I couldn't find an amusing article on non-whites using hair straighteners, dangerous whitening products, nose jobs, Korean eye operations (as in PSY's New Face). From memory, there were good short articles on Israel's huge wall, on the Israeli with high-end computer equipment threatening Americans (and who was not extradited), mentally ill 'transgenders', and Gore saying in 2006 that we have ten years to save the earth.

A huge problem with the simple comparisons of GNP with population IQs is of course that the tables and diagrams ignore the effects of other countries, and of course Jews. Black Africa has problems which are probably insuperable, but Jews taking mineral wealth, making money from wars, imposing huge debts for expensive weaponry, and supporting black tyrants, are another burden. This is becoming obvious to many people: Britain, and most countries in Europe, have had unwanted immigration, with accompanying huge net financial burdens, and this is mostly the work of Jews—something fairly easy to check with Internet, though censored from the all commercial and governmentally-supported media. The truly amazing repulsiveness of many Jews—think Barbara Roche and Peter 'Sutherland' for example—helps add a frisson to such reports.
      I'm not personally happy about New Observer's innocence over central banks and Jews, subversion of black countries, false flags and fake science, and all the rest. But it's an evidence-based site, and as more such material is found, I doubt it will be unmentioned. So I doubt the New Observer is a false flag operation, a belief supported by what may be financial problems—they seem to need donations.

[Start of article]
The Jordan Peterson Effect   An odd-in-parts Miles Mathis piece The Mandela Effect is Mathis on an 'Intelligence' operation to persuade people that collective false memories are common: the name is taken from a supposed Mandela funeral, and the 'Berenstain Bears' 'children's book' being an example of the 'effect'. Another Mathis piece suggests Richard Spencer 'looks like a mole'—not literally—Mathis gives abundant evidence (and intricately detailed other material, including Jews in the CIA and even Lysenkoism, the Stalinist genetic thing, Lysenko revealed as a Jew) that Spencer is not a white supremacist, but agent in training. (Mathis doesn't say Spencer is a Jewish supremacist, however; the Jewish rule is "don't mention Jew race supremacism").
      Anyway, the point here is Jordan Peterson, a 'clinical psychologist' at Toronto University, is shown as heroically embattling fanatics over the ridiculous genetic pronouns thing, another Jewish manufacture along similar lines to 'same sex marriage', 'rainbow' sex etc. In my view his defence of free speech is staged—see the outdoor videos on youtube. Peterson reminds me of R D Laing in the 1960s: a typical anecdote is: patient comes to visit, with depression; Laing asks what types of joke he likes; they crack jokes; after half and hour (or 20 minutes—with fame, the charges go up) the session ends, patient complains etc. Psychology is not a science, but is at the empirical stage; with luck, someone who's had experience can find more useful things to say and do than someone with experience only of normal people. Hence my single quote marks. Peterson says he likes Dostoievsky, always a handy cultural object. He also somewhere confuses 'Mandela' with mandala, possibly intentionally; Jung of course is another handy quotee. And Peterson is careful to not be 'anti-semetic'; again one has to wonder how intentional the error is.
      For people who haven't yet noticed, there's quite a long tradition of psychobabble concealment of real word frauds. From a few years ago, here's 'Brainwashing' a US invention to hide US war crimes in Korea and here is Milgram and Zimbardo—Jewish phony psychology and this is without starting on Freud.
      In such cases, it's always difficult to assess the situation, given the amount of concealed evidence. However, Peterson's involvement with drivellers such as Camille Pagliacci (oh—Paglia), and his uninvolvement with the Jewish finance of education systems, and e.g. his Internet links, suggest he's just another spotlit figure, destined to fade. Just as, for example, Milo Yiannopoulos seems to have been faded out, possibly through drawing attention to Jewish sex with children, which Jews are still reluctant to advertise publicly. Peterson may be a Jew himself—there are plenty of Jews in Scandinavia—ask the Swedes.
      Note another thing: legal entanglements seem to be yet another method by which the public are kept cowed. Mathis's work exposing the Manson/Tate fraud illustrates the sort of thing. If Mathis is right about Spencer, the at-one-point advertised legal hassle over Whitefish, Montana and 'Tanya Gersh' (reported by a Jew in the Occidental Observer) Richard Spencer and Tanya Gersh is a fake, presumably intended as a money-maker.
An interesting aspect of Peterson is his suggested promotion of an online University, presumably something like the Open University. It certainly seems technically possible. A practical problem would be assessment and marking and grading: experience with Asians suggests tracking substitutes is a big problem. If someone can arrange online courses on Jew awareness, from school to university entrance, to university exit, that would be impressive. Such a scheme could be entirely outside conventional parameters, in a similar way to Mensa and Professional Development exams. J101 is long overdue. Perhaps viva voce exams, live voice chats over Skype, might be tried.
[Since writing this, I noticed a Youtube, uploaded 29 July 2017 by 'Psyche Matters', entitled 'How Hitler was Even More Evil Than You Think', which appears to settle debate on Peterson.]

[Start of article]
A Jewish-English dictionary: translating what Jews say into what Jews mean:
Antisemite: Someone Jews hate
Antisemitic canards: Indisputable truths
Black African leader: Jew puppet
Child Refugee: Middle-aged African sponger
Equality: Favoritism
Freedom: Depravity
Tolerance: Debauchery
Freedom of speech: Shut up!
Hate speech: Words Jews hate
Holocaust: The holy milk cow
Holocaust denial: Blasphemy!
Race: Something that doesn't exist
Racist: A White person
Liberal: A useful idiot
Liberalism: Useful idiot farming
Social justice: Cultural Marxism
Civil rights: Run-up to multiculturalism
Multiculturalism: Nation wrecking
Feminism: Home wrecking
Gay marriage: Society wrecking
Gay rights: Disease propagation
Youths: A mob of violent Blacks
Hater: Rightist
Rightist: Hater
Conspiracy theorist: Someone who's on to Jews
Right wing extremist: Anyone Jews don't like
Left wing extremist: Jew hireling
Organizer: Jew-funded Clown
Protestor: Jew-funded Clown
Justice: Jewish perfidy
Injustice: Resisting Jewish perfidy
Zionism: Scheme for Jewish world rule
Our Government Policy: Jewish Policy
Republicanism: Jew rule
Democracy: Jew rule
Communism: Jew rule
Republicans: Shabbos goy
Democrats: Shabbos goy
Gentile: Non-human
Goy: Contemptible non-human
Professor: Overpaid liar for Jews
Negro (schwartza): Sub-goy
Christian Zionist: Imbecile
Notes on Jews, Roman Catholicism, and 'Holocaustianity'   At present, there is insistent pressure to force previously white countries to take non-whites; and there has been for years. There are population explosions in areas ignored by paid media hacks; and some genuine refugees from Jewish proxy wars. But modern techniques need skills out of the range of low-IQ populations. (I'm not saying 'IQ' is everything). For example, modern water supplies need constant wariness: searches for leaks, spillages, and other damage. Electricity needs constant generation. Roads need maintenance. There seems a chance that food, utilities, repairs will decline—populations may end up sheltering in ruins, living in filth, half-starved.
      However, not everyone is concerned: let me try to explain one possible reason why not:–
When the Roman Empire fell, Christians (e.g. Augustine) 'took no interest in saving civilization or expelling the barbarians or reforming abuses... but [preached] the merit of virginity and the damnation of unbaptized infants. ...' My best guess is that groups who felt some security—such as Christians, as they grouped after the fall of Rome—did not worry, as they felt opportunities were being shaped for them. They may even have welcomed huge declines for others.

      My best guess is that Christianity, an extension of Judaism, co-operated with Jews: Jews wormed their way into the hierarchy, as today. This was covert, and not unannounced, and denied. But consider-
  1 'Pagan' (and 'heathen') means country-dweller. The Church became a huge landowner. In effect, there were urban money handlers; the rest of Christian countries was largely dominated by the Church, which must have had financial systems to buy land—probably by Jews. This side of the Church is largely hidden; when have you seen commentators on Church money during the Middle Ages?
  2 The condemnation of 'usury' by the Church seems to have been pure hypocrisy, since they accepted Jewish money. Probably the Church kept the monopoly for Jews.
  3 The Church was violent and persecuting: any person or group trying to break out (consider Peter Waldo, for example) faced severe penalties and death.
  4 Depending on taste, you, the reader, may consider that heresies were taken seriously and debated thoroughly. But probably Churchmen were concerned primarily with their power and income. When the storms passed, the heretical points at issue became almost impossible to remember.
  5 Many Popes were Jews, and no doubt Bishops.
  6 At many times, the Talmud was burned. This is presented as a response to shock at the contents. But of course this had the effect of removing Judaic material and making criticism impossible.
  7 The Church had a 'sanctuary' system. It seems unlikely this was for the benefit of criminals; more likely—as in North American cities now—it provided a safe space for Jewish fraudsters.
  8 The Church sometimes needed toughs: they could pay the ones they wanted from 'charity'
  9 The Church educated its own successors, for example by teaching them
  10 Don't imagine the Church and Jews operated on a small scale. Usury with lifetime earnings penalties, wars, armies and land grabs, huge taxes, engineered bank and repayment crashes, depressions, famines, genocides...
      Presumably there must have been intermittent battles with aristocrats and farmers and miners and child-rearers and makers of buildings, shipping, carts, bridges, and all the rest of it. Between them, at intervals, Jews and churches must have picked on promising new targets.

I'm saying the entire history of the Roman Catholic Church has been misunderstood!: the Jewish (and/or other money component) has been ignored—as it has in the official history of the last few centuries.   This is important, because it helps explain the continual drumbeat push for 'Holocaustianity' by Jews. Fanatical Jewish liars—Spielberg, Jewish media, even Church of England, Roman Catholic church, people like Lipstadt, 'Hollywood', are promoting 'Holocaustianity', with fictional 6 million replacing the one fiction of Jesus. With monuments, fake saints, fake shrines, and all the rest of it.

Protheseology. I'd like to suggest a new word, a neologism to cover the real function of 'political correctness' and Jewspeak.
    Everyone knows what 'teleology' means: it's a mistake around the 'purpose' or 'end' of something. Why did God make trees? - So man had building materials. Why do rabbits have white tails? - So hunters can get a good shot. Why is a moon up there? - To give a bit of light at night. These are teleological arguments.
    'Protheseology' is a deliberate mistake around 'intention' or 'aim' of speech or conversation. Why is racism bad? - Because Jews won't admit they think they're a race. What is a conspiracy theory? - Anything that may lead to discussing Jews. What is a fascist? - Someone who might mention Jews in a politics discussion. Islam is nothing but peaceful! - Jews at present are forcing Muslim immigration. In each case, the intention is to bias the discussion towards what Jews all think is their interest. Protheseological arguments all have in mind a bias; usually these arguments are made by Jews and their puppets, and usually learned parrot fashion. Thus: It is better that a hundred guilty men go free, than one innocent man be jailed - an example of protheseology: the speaker means they want dangerous men set free—a common Jewish ploy. This is not a very happy neologism, though I like the pun with prosthetics. But perhaps there's something better?

I had intended to discuss evolution of human characteristics: for example, I incline to think the idea of 'Logos' was translated from Judaic languages, and may have indicated that Jews thought persuasion, lies, deception were primary, unlike the Greeks and Romans. They may have got the idea from Egyptian or Babylonian writing on walls: huge, commanding, impressive, unreadable. It may be the case that whites have a tendency, an instinct, to take interest in discrete topics—everything from growing vegetables to playing croquet, from working with fire to collecting silver. It may be that parasitism, secrecy, cunning, lies, hate are mental characteristics, some dominant, some recessive—perhaps simpler than seems possible at present. Maybe memories work differently—some recalling insults, others lessons, others triumphs.

A Plea for Talk We (arguably!) need to get people from everywhere: Tokyo, Hong Kong, Russia, Czech Republic, England, USA, etc. to talk openly and without fear about the Jewish community. Perhaps using their tactics back at them, instead of being defensive: promote Jewish women/Black guy marriage and babies on a daily basis, use terms like "Jewish racists", Jewish supremacists "Jewish KKK", Jewish slave owners", "Jewish child molesters", Jewish white collar crime", "racist Jewish controlled mainstream media", "racist Talmud and Kabbalah", etc. Daily, so it becomes ingrained in peoples' minds not to trust them, then we can start getting control of the real estate, the commodities, the weapons, books, publishing companies, cable TV, movie theaters, etc.

Don't Think Small! The World is Ours     Part of Jewish technique is to narrow people down, put them in small boxes. So, learn to think on a large scale: for example, it occurred to me the Independent newspaper in Britain was set up just to get war with Iraq. If you print money, you can invent a newspaper! And you can invent entire TV channels, and movie outlets. Remember everything they show you is arranged and scripted and edited. Don't be impressed by fines and penalties, which sound high, but in comparison with crimes have practically no effect. Think of government debt the way Jews do, but draw the opposite conclusions from them. When you see an advertising campaign, remember someone planned it all; don't be impressed, don't think it was your idea. When you see Jew militarists wanting a war talk of 'our' policy, consider if it actually is. Consider the Jewish 'nation' as a thin layer spread over the world: if you were them, would you consider arranging wars between as many of these nations as you could? Think of Stalin, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Hitler; could they all have been carefully placed? If you owned news outlets round the world, and public opinion survey companies, why not invent stories for different parts of the world, in their own languages? On a large scale, try to analyse possible false flags: are they really that difficult to arrange? try to understand human impulses—presumably Jews in action are fired up, full steam ahead, as they plan frauds. Try to imagine material that has been deliberately cut out: for example, facts behind the numerous outbreaks of what Jews call 'anti-Semitism'. Try to grow some ideas up—don't be like Christian South African old soldiers who believe in Noah's Ark. Remember the obscurity of much of the past: what did Washington, or Lincoln, or Macaulay, or Wilde, or Augustine really know?

Always Remember This One Thing!—They Started It.

[Start of article]
Thomas Malthus's Essay on the Principle of Population Revisited
Thomas Malthus's 'apparatus for destroying happiness', the limits to human population imposed by food supply in the face of fast human breeding—with elaborations such as geometrical and arithmetic progressions—was regarded as a leading European political philosophy.
Five or six things at the back of my mind struck me:
  • Malthus's essay and further versions had little to say about wars, despite famines and other hardships during and after Napoleon. Why omit that?
  • Overpopulation is a bourgeois myth—1970 or so expression by some 'left wingers' or 'Marxists'
  • Overpopulation as an issue discussed (in the Jewish media) apparently seriously and worryingly. Ehrlich (not the scientist) was a typical name. Contraception advice was to be free etc, but of course coloured invaders were inexplicably omitted.
  • 'Baby Boomers' as a Jewish name for post-1945 white population cohort. In fact this 'boom' was more or less mythical, though Americans in sheep fashion continue to use the expression. This of course in retrospect was obviously Jewish manipulation, just as Jewish brightly-coloured magazines carry population and race messages.
  • Note the complete elision of population concerns in the mass media, after Jews decided to flood white countries with immigrants. Non-Jews started to realise population growth in Africans is probably the biggest population problem the world has ever had, but Jewish-funded groups ignore this—at least in public demonstrations, while building walls in Palestine.
  • A dismissive remark on Malthus in a 'history' volume by the Jew Eric Hobsbawm. I can't be bother to find the exact wording, but it was, roughly, Malthus was not an important thinker.
So what is going on here? Of course the truth is simple: Jews have sufficient stranglehold to direct wars: population figures are largely under their control. Modern wars with technology supplied by whites (“pathologically altruistic” in case you wonder) and other backup technology control populations. And there's suppression of discussion of post-war facts: not just deaths, but absence of children of dead people, and weaknesses causing premature deaths.
Black Lives Matter and other Jew-funded hate groups. Whites are sometimes bewildered that blacks accept the demonisation of whites without evidence, and in opposition to a lot of evidence, though many still haven’t worked out that Jews are arguably responsible for 'white' crimes which they should attribute to Jews – slavery and foreign wars being obvious examples. BUT the demonisation through information control is more or less the same as Jewish demonisation of Russians and Germans and Koreans and Vietnamese, and Iraqis, Libyans, North Koreans etc. If some black punches some white, it follows Jew propaganda, just as much as Brits and Germans fighting each other, Americans bombing Afghans...
      Just as the Jewish systematic lying about the Holohoax (and about genuine Jew mass murders) must lead thoughtful people to reconsider the past of other religions, so must systematic Jew lies about wars lead to re-examination. It's clear enough that England was involved in the greatest number of wars in Europe over the last 4 or more centuries, though the beneficiaries, Jews have so far not been identified. I'd suggest the reason for Hobsbawm's dismissal of Malthus is simply that Jews have covertly been responsible for more wars and famines than anything that could be called natural. In fact, I'd suggest the reason that Malthus was hyped and promoted was precisely because he misdirected people from Jews' roles in the 'French' Revolution. [- Added 11 Aug 2017]

Food of course is only one limiting factor in any population, human or otherwise. Another is habitat. Giving housing to nonwhite invaders is a Jewish trick related to Malthus. If housing is supplied, human populations may well go up; 'studies show' this is a Jewish phrase. Subsidised housing, at the expense of the white indigenous populations, is something Malthus would recognise, though in his time there was very little equivalent. [-Added 5 December 2017]
HTML, reading, writing, images, videos, thinking 2017-06-15 00:06 © Rae West.   Apologies for unintentional harsh wordings or misconceptions.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Jews as usurpers: amusing modern example.
Left: 'Tutankhamun' mask. Right: faked orientalised version (ITV, 2016)

Three More Excavations from the Rabbit Hole.
[1] Wars of the Roses.
[2] The Real Meaning of Usury.
[3] Genetics and DNA.

Written by Rerevisionist   6 November 2016

[1] Wars of the Roses. Jews as Usurpers.
I'm prompted here by a new and remarkable piece by Miles W Mathis, Henry VII: Another Jewish Invasion of England, which makes the case for the Wars of the Roses being essentially staged, as a precursor to the change in the monarchy from Plantagenets to Tudors. This pushes back revisionism from Cromwell's wars and invitation of Jews (c. 1642-1651; Jew admission legalised 1656) back nearly two more centuries (c 1455-1485; Plantagenets replaced by Tudors, 1485).
      Henry VII seems something of an oddity: David Starkey, in a minor piece of revisionism, established that his death was kept secret while arrangements were made behind the scenes. Henry VII was conspicuously absent from the plays attributed to Shakespeare; Edward de Vere had been personally damaged financially by Henry VII. The several pretenders were 'outed' by an MP, I think in the 1930s, pointing out they were part of Jewish infiltration.
      'Tudor' was a Welsh name, written typically as Ty-dwr. Mathis, by careful examination of what is published about marriages and families, considers that the island of Anglesey is a key to these events. Note incidentally the English-sounding name, Anglesey. The Welsh name is given as Ynys Môn, though I have not investigated the starting-points of these names. Anglesey is mentioned in Julius Caesar—one of his economic reasons for invading England was wheat, from Anglesey; plus tin, lead, cattle. (This is from memory). And note the geographical position: Anglesey has a mild climate (the Gulf Stream helps), and has naturally sheltered harbours. Without going into detail, which in any case I don't know, sailing ships for preference need sheltered harbours, landmarks in a literal sense to demonstrate they're on the right course for the area they want, consistent but not overpowering winds ('trade winds') more or less behind them. And not too many rocks and sandbanks and unknowns. (during the British Empire, at least one 'passage' was a state secret). These are technical details, and I'm assuming Anglesey must have fulfilled them. Hilaire Belloc wrote on the likely landing-place(s) of Caesar, based on his personal knowledge of sailing, and this sort of thing is needed to assess Anglesey. Mathis's hypothesis is based on evidence that Jew traders in largish numbers lived in Anglesey. His novelty is showing the likelihood that the Wars of the Roses were staged: Lancashire is near enough, and Yorkshire to its east. Many people have noticed the 'wars' were exceptionally polite and gentlemanly; most people living there had no idea there was a war. Some people have assumed this was typical of the time, and that more recent wars show a descent into barbarism, as of course they do. But the horrific 'harrying of the north' in England 300 years earlier suggests, what is perhaps obvious, that there was little violence because it wasn't needed.
      Bear in mind that when the Tudor dynasty started (or usurped), the Americas were not yet discovered; Anglesey was on the edge of the world. Rabelais and the general westward movement of civilisation or 'civilisation' was in the future. And bear in mind that Anglesey may have been important as a shelter and bolt-hole and supplier of money; wheat presumably could have come from the entire surrounding area, not just the island itself.
      I will not repeat Mathis' conclusions here, not wishing to steal his thunder. But it's an important new idea in piecing together true history. Mathis seems to have noticed things which escaped British historians: the onlooker may see more of the game. His paper on J K Rowling suggests the same thing: millions of people in London have been to King's Cross and Euston, seen the new British Library and London University buildings, and felt familiar with cafés and offices and shops and traffic. But these are just the façades—built equivalents of political puppets and their movements and sideshows—the real work is done secretly behind closed doors.

[2] The Real Meaning of Usury. And Over-Lending.
Many people think 'usury' simply means interest payments. This is probably intentional misrepresentation. Let me quote (from my piece on 'Jews') from The Merchant of Venice:
And if the sums are not repaid on time
Then, as forfeit, they would take everything;
All that the man has earned in his lifetime...
In other words, usury is the practice of seizing everything of a debtor if he defaults. The plot in The Merchant of Venice of course revolved around Shylock wanting a death penalty for Antonio's default for a loan on his argosies, which were believed to have sunk.
      Interest is not the important issue; the aim must have been to seize property. How this worked in practice must be difficult to establish: if The Merchant of Venice is to be believed, the debt was personal—others were not permitted to pay the debt, or, presumably, supply money for assets of the defaulter. But the point here can be made by considering the present century or two. Now, paper money is under Jewish control; the greater the debt of a country, the more interest is expected by Jews. This of course is the reason they build up debts. At the present time, all the costs for nonwhite immigration into white countries are added to debts of the white inhabitants, into the indefinite future, preferably on an unpayable basis. Science and technology frauds are enormous. Over-lending seems to be an unremarked aspect of all the times when Jews had power. Consider, for example, castles: how many castles were really needed around Wales in the 1400s? How many country houses were needed in England, after Cromwell, in the 18th century? How many Cathedrals and churches were needed? Albania (according to Wikipedia) had by 1983 a total of 173,371 bunkers. Taking a long view, the system seems to have been to make loans at high interest, and encourage overspending; seize assets and ruin defaulters, and usurp elites, usually by a divide-and-rule process.
      The traditional Roman Catholic objection to usury may not be what it seems. The origins of Christianity are very likely insistent Jewish repetition, and the use of faked scriptures: think of the promotion of 'Holocaustianity' now, with six million Jews' deaths being equivalent to the crucified Yeshua, and professional liars like Weisel and Weisenthal to the Gospels and the rest. I'd like to suggest the thundering rejection of usury was only aimed at the faithful, the naive and scared 'goyim'. Economic power in this way being divided between the Church and Jews, the Church, no doubt for a price, using religious authority to allow Jews to practise usury with no competition. Jews would of course ignore Papal bulls.

[3] DNA and Biological Junk Science. Genetics and 'Jews'.
'DNA testing' at least in its commercialised form relies on DNA being broken into fragments which happen to have repeats of a sequence. The more repeats, the slower the migration in something like gelatine, when driven by a small electric current. This is analogous to analysing a DVD by looking for repeats of 4 characters in the bit stream, then tabulating them. Or, more understandable but less accurate, getting the 'fingerprint' of a book by counting the number of occurrences of 'the' on each line, and drawing a bar on a graph for 0, 1, 2, 3 etc appearances. (Not a very good analogy; I can't think of a better one). The point is that it has no connection with the living thing that it came from.
      Now, biological science is in censored chaos, as the works of Harold Hillman and others show. Compounded errors of interpretation of techniques have built up a house of cards. In short, DNA analyses are suspect, and depend on repeatability: if techniques repeat, even if their basic assumptions are wrong, at least that's an empirical result. But of course there are practical issues: the idea that Jews have distinct DNA for example is dear to the supremacist fantasies of Jews, and any problems will be concealed, as in other examples of Jew frauds. It's of some concern that Professor Alec Jeffreys, who works or worked at Leicester University, shares his place of learning with a 'Holocaust' fraud outfit.
      In practical terms, it's of enormous public interest that human genetics should be understood. The whole basis of practical Jewishness depends on mothers, and yet it's obvious that infiltration by marriage, while helping concealment, also halves what 'Jewish' DNA there may have been. At present, there are serious suggestions that Jews should move into China by intermarriage. (Hilaire Belloc: [A Jew] began life with a German name in Hamburg. ... no doubt if he had gone to Japan the Japanese would be telling us that they had known him as a worthy Japanese gentleman...bearing the honoured name of an ancient Samurai family.) No doubt there's some selection by personality type: it's unlikely that (say) Rupert Murdoch, spending a lifetime telling lies, would be attracted to an honest non-psychopath, for example. I've attempted to discuss these issues with people supposedly competent in genetics, but of course at present they are far too cowardly to do this.
Click here to e-mail

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

The Colosseum as it is today. No Christians were ever thrown to lions there.

Was early Christianity Hijacked or Invented by Jews?

Written by Rerevisionist   17 August 2016. Updated 12 Dec 2016, 7 Jan 2017, 25 June 2017
Notes on Islam, Quakers, Marxism, and the United Nations added to the end of this article

This is an idea new to me, and perhaps genuinely new:– It's clear to intelligent people that Jews, once they've decided on some lie or other, stick to it, seemingly forever. Projecting this characteristic backwards in time, we start from the consideration that Christianity took centuries to become established. That time might have been used by Jews to change the whole of the ideas and beliefs of Christianity, and pretend it was Jewish all along. Jewish plagiarism and dishonesty are commonplace; I've tried to write a brief examination of this possibility, kept short to reduce opportunities for timewasters.

Here are a few starting-point puzzles:–

  • Why did the Bible, when it was finally printed, include the 'Old Testament'? Why not just have Christian material? (I'm agnostic about the Latin (Roman Catholic) and presumably Greek (Byzantine) versions; for all I know the 'Old Testament' might have been treated as inferior, or consisted of different books).
  • [Many people have difficulty with the previous sentences. Hoping to be clear, I'm saying the 'Old Testament' and 'New Testament' may have both been utterly irrelevant to early Christians. If early Christians used their own written material, it may have had just their own material—beliefs across the Roman Empire, and new ethical beliefs (for example, peace across the Empire). I'm pointing out that Jews are chronic liars, and, if they sensed a new important movement, may well have tried to control it—and inserting their own rubbish would seem natural to them. Remember they had a few centuries to adjust history, and we're living through something similar now. Jews have no hesitation in manufacturing fake history, as the present day proves, and there's no reason why they shouldn't have done this to profit from early Christianity]
  • Early Christianity seems to have been named after the Greek word meaning 'illuminated' or 'golden', in a similar sense to 'the light of the world' or 'bright spirit'. Hence the chi-rho and fish symbol. No 'Jesus' character whatsoever.
  • The Romans appear to have had the idea of amalgamating and collecting together parts of extant religions from their part of the world, with the intention of psychologically unifying their unstable empire. Sensible enough, and perhaps a precursor to the idea of 'conversion', which must have seemed a new outlook to tribal peoples.
  • Much of the ancient world survives to this day: consider the etymologies of the days of the week (European names for sun, moon, Tiw, Woden...), Roman names for months (Janus, Februa, Mars...), the letters of the alphabet, the numerals, the word amen, geographical and place names, Greek and Roman mythologies and constellation and planet names. Many shared to some extent with Sanskrit and Into-European roots. Why would a Roman-empire wide religion not be made up of such elements?
  • Constantine's genuine or supposed conversion in 312 A.D. is of course about three centuries after the supposed birth of 'Jesus Christ'.
  • Evidence of such things as the faked 'Holocaust' and faked attribution of the 9/11 demolitions is impressive proof to people now that Jews are persistent liars; they will never stop lying.
  • Evidence shows Jews have no scruples in manufacturing or destroying evidence.
  • Evidence shows Jews may claim to have invented or originated anything considered desirable. Modern evidence shows Jews, if they lied to claim to have taken part in establishing Christianity, will lie more, claiming progressively more influence over the past.
  • Whether ancient 'Jews' are related to modern 'Jews' is a controversial question; but the same written 'laws' and stories can reasonably be supposed to affect populations subject to them in similar ways. Ancient 'Jews' must therefore be suspected of being persistent liars, too.
A popular religion, perhaps Roman-slave-based, or perhaps more generally based, which professed to enlighten people, might reasonably be expected to include elements from Roman, perhaps with other tribal and national elements. There might (for example) have been books of Persian beliefs, of Babylonian beliefs, of Egyptian beliefs, of Greek beliefs, of Roman beliefs, and other long-established written sources. No doubt with then-modern Christian material, showing why they were wrong or obsolete or unenlightened.

I'd like to suggest there may have been a process, over several centuries, in which Jews made up their own stories about 'Jeshua', also known as 'the Christ', or 'Jesus Christ', and insisted upon them in their Jewish group way, redefining 0 A.D. as a starting-point for their own purposes. Three centuries is about the length of time taken for Jews to take over England, then the USA, and invent and promote bogus histories, so the time scale seems plausible enough. Imagine if world history over the last few centuries had been output by the ADL in the USA, Lenin, Spielberg, Tarantino and Barbara Spectre: it would be a tissue of lies, and probably stylistically resemble Jewish film-scripts.

I've put here a small sample of the evidence that Jesus never existed.

In short, I suspect the 'Old Testament' progressively was forced into Christianity, despite having no connection whatever with the origins of Christianity. And the 'New Testament' itself was Judaised, replacing genuine early Christian works.

Here's Wheless's book Forgery in Christianity which lists assorted plagiarisms and forgeries in the early church, based on writings which survived, or allegedly survived. Emmett Fields dated the end of US free thought to January 2, 1920: ... that was the time of the big Palmer Raid. From that time on, the Federal Government waged relentless war against religious liberty. But Wheless does not think of the possibility of systematic Jewish forgery or adaptation from their own mythologies. The idea is reinforced by plenty of modern examples of bogus religions fostered by Jews, including many aspects of the Reformation, Quakers (see Miles Mathis' excellent new piece on George Fox), Mormonism, and Christian Science.

This idea probably ought to be most important in the USA, which has large numbers of more or less fundamentalist types, probably only possible in a relatively rich (or heavily subsidised) society, with heavy Jewish control over information. Some Americans think the Bible was written in English; some think there was an ark, built of wood from an American tree; some like the Scofield Bible; some can't understand evolution; some think that Jews were chosen by a God. These people are a danger through their stupidity and inertia, and their inability to help with anything useful in the world. It's unlikely they will change, since they have found a mental niche which they find comforting. But I would ask as many people as possible to view their material with the skepticism which is necessary with modern Jews.

REPRISE... same idea, different wording
After a few tests, I realise many people can't understand the new view of the New Testament I'm making. So I'll retry...

[1] Bear in mind that Jesus NEVER EXISTED; see abundant material on this point. The 'Acts' are not a historical record. The 'Gospels' are self-contradictory and ridiculous.

Put this together with
[2] Jews, today, TELL LIES ALL THE TIME.
These are joint, collective lies, which persist over long stretches of time. And clearly have intention behind them. Motives include promoting wars, getting the Fed for Jews, changing propaganda schemes to face new enemies or to work for new wars for Jews, continual statistical lies on e.g. black crime, retrospective lies for example on the history of the Soviet Union, and the history of science, with a view towards skewing things to what they evidently think are Jewish interests.

So we have this hypothesis
[3] I'm saying the NT was just another set of Jewish lies.
Not stories, not history, not an honest attempt at a record. But purely for Jewish aim(s). Perhaps heading off an early religion in the Roman Empire, which looked likely to form a new composite religion. I won't name it, as that will confuse people. Jews may have seen this, and thought "Oy vey, we can make money from this" or "Oy veh, God chose us to lead these stupid goyim" or "Oh vey, papyrus is cheap these days & we'll hire Greek scribes to write out our stories" or "We are the experts in official religion, so we're entitled to tell lies" or all four. So they wrote a whole set of stories, based around 'Yeshua', almost as Spielberg composed his absurd films, Weisel orated his 'Holocaust' lies for a lifetime, or Jewish 'historians' of the holohoax orchestrate and embroider their lies. The main point was to get them out, published, available to be forced onto people; further detail could come after. After a few centuries of intimidation and/or repetition and/or bribery and/or selection of fake leaders, they added the OT to the NT to reinforce their claims. This time frame is similar to e.g. forcing Jewish history over whites for the last four centuries or so.
      I've seen the argument that US Jewish-controlled 'Universities' now all accept the Bible as reliable—'proof', since even Marxists accept this. But of course if the whole thing was a Jewish set of stories, they would be likely to support it, whatever the evidence.

NOTE THAT it doesn't even matter if there was a genuine, new, morally original figure, for example Lucius Calpurnius Piso. All they had to do was put forward their own lies and—provided there was sufficient promotional push and destruction of opposition—Piso would be forgotten. Jews often do this; for example, the leading physicist over the last few centuries was Newton, so Einstein was manufactured as a substitute. To take a totally different example, the Beatles were one of the most influential music groups of the 20th century. If Jews started a promotional myth that 'The Bagels' were the best ever, with their famous 'Abbey Schul' and 'Light Blue Double Album' achievements, who can tell whether this would be accepted in 300 years' time?

NOTE THAT persecution of 'heretics' is always attributed to Christians. But it is exactly the same policy that Jews follow: think of the absurd legal policies on such things as 'hate speech', when used of any non-Jewish criticism of Jews; and 'racism' accusations as a crime or misdemeanour by any group, accept Jews. I'd suggest all, or most, persecution of 'heretics' was in effect by Jews. And ditto with censorship and destruction of books, however innocent or instructional. Books were fairly freely available during Greek and Roman times, and it's therefore likely works on paganism, or true history, or Jewish lies, or Europeans and Africans and Asians, would have been destroyed by Jews. Because of the obscurity of early Christians, intelligent people will be cautious; online sources claim the first fifteen Popes were Jewish, but this turns out to mean that some organisation in Jerusalem is claimed to have had 15 leaders in about 100 years, presumably 'Jews'. Even the title and meaning of 'Pope' isn't clear.

NOTE ALSO that the Bible uses many techniques which show in Jewish films. For example, scene-setting and opinion-setting. Many Jewish films start with fictional stuff on how actress X is the most beautiful woman in the world, collecting her beauty award, and gasped at by big crowds. In the same way, the 'Jesus' figure is supported by miracles, impossible events, epigrams supposed to suggest wisdom, marvels, scatterings of enemies, etc etc. Rather oddly, this feature seems to be the basis of many people's reaction, which is that the Bible is full of reliable and accurate material—something like the opposite of the truth.

AND NOTE that the Catholic Church of course was fronted by non-Jews, most of the time, but they had their own views on what issues mattered, leading to interminable cryptic disputes. No doubt the Roman Empire's collapse was helped by such rented people diverting assets away from the state, and away from ordinary people. A situation recognisably similar to the present day.

If you see my point, I'd welcome serious comments. I'd particularly welcome comment on Churches post- about 500 AD, and interactions between Jews and non-Jews, and on e.g. money - Gold? Silver? Paper money promotion? And the invention of Islam, and the Khazar issue. And of course promotion of wars and invasions, as parallels with modern times. Discoveries of new territories and the corresponding increases in ease of travel. Venice? Trade routes? William the Conqueror, Cromwell, Napoleon, the Reformation, Renaissance, Thirty Years War, 20th century .... Any insights, based on the idea that the Bible was a Jewish promo job; what were they trying to promote, in different eras? There may well be insights waiting to be seen and outed! [Added 21 Sept 2016)

ANOTHER NOTE: The New Testament does not mention Christianity at all—understandably, as the Church did not exist at the time. Only the fictional Jesus/Yeshua. So if some other religion (say, Mithraism, or Gnosticism, or RomanEmpirism, or Anythingism, or pan-Paganism, or revivedBabylonism) had emerged, the NT could be used against them, so Jews could muscle in. They may have prepared stories, later dropped, to plan for these eventualities—in the same way modern 'Jews' prepare media campaigns against Germans, Vietnamese, whites, Iraqis, Moslems etc. [Added 22 Sept 2016]

Unlike all other animals, man has detailed language, and has knowledge by description, as philosophers say, or used to say. Knowledge by acquaintance is (arguably) simpler—just a matter of senses and memory of nearby things and events. But knowledge by description has the feature that it may be incorrect. People may believe things which are totally wrong, misleading, inaccurate, or whatever. How are they to know whether they're being lied to? A good case can be made for credulity being partly genetic: maybe some people are naturally gullible. This is not an issue which arises much with animals: parent birds, for example, teach their offspring about food, dangers, flying, and so on; but they can be fooled by cuckoos and artificial bird calls. So there is a lot to be said for young children believing what they are told. But if scepticism and logic and curiosity vary genetically, it must be possible for different patterns to develop: some populations are naturally more cynical and cunning than others.
      The Khazar hypothesis (that so-called 'Jews' were a mass conversion, with no genetic connection with Jews) is more credible than many people like to believe, because the fanatical elements in judaism—expulsion or deaths for nonbelievers, more children for their priest caste, discreet killings of non-members, firm belief based on zero evidence—would feed back over the generations to produce a Jew-like population.
      I'd like to suggest Christianity had a similar genetic effect over many generations, making populations move over to credulousness and away from logical thought. My online chats with believers incline me to think so. 'Holy Scripture', from people who don't know what 'Holy' means, or that 'Scripture' can mean any writing, is used as a magic incantation. 'The Lord Jesus' seems to be treated as an awe-inspiring suggestion, though 'Lord' and its variants is a name for a landed aristocrat subsidiary to a king, and 'Jesus' is just a Latinised Jewish name. As with Judaism, killings of heretics, insistence on repeated fairy tales, penalties for critics, must have a long-term effect over many generations. The same must apply to Islam. It seems possible to me that Christianity had the good luck to be optional, unlike the monolithic fanatical tribal 'religions' of Jews, Muslims, and many others. That is to say, it had a specialised caste with no definite power over non-Christians, so that experimenters, philosophers, and others could exist, if not flourish.

At present, there's a gulf between people who, though recognising the difficulties, see that scientific thought and logical debate must be the way forward; and a vast mass of believers in emotional assertiveness, unevidenced misinformation, and wishful thinking.

SECOND REPRISE... same ideas, reworded
Here's a review of a little-known but forceful small book on Jesus as a myth.

A longer and more detailed book is Prof. G A Wells' The Historical Evidence for Jesus (1982; published by Prometheus Books in the USA). Neither of these authors, Robertson or Wells, has any concept of 'Kosher' forces which successfully agitated for, then imposed, 'Jesus Christ' on top of early Christianity, which, if it even existed as a genuine non-Jewish movement, had no place for a 'Yeshua'. Prometheus Books is an arm of the 'skeptics', US people funded by Jews; Wells would not have been published, had he been Jew-aware.

archibald-robertson-jesus   Review of   Archibald Robertson: Jesus: Myth or History?

Valuable, Condensed, Thorough, and Little-known Measured Criticism of 'Jesus' Considered as a Genuine Personage. Helps Pave the Way for Future Understanding.
  Review by Rerevisionist, Jan 7th, 2017
I have a copy of this book, in the original small-format red hardback of the 'Thinker's Library'. First printed 1946, second edition 1949. Most Thinker's Library volumes were bound in brown, with black printing, and with a one-colour on white dust-jacket in their Watts & Co. house style. There are other editions, some, I think, more or less pirated; or perhaps the copyright situation isn't clear. Whether these are accurate, I don't know; for interested readers I'd recommend an original copy, just in case.

The contents are more or less chronological, with Chapter 1 containing Christian writings, Chapter 2 writings by everyone else—with some overlap—and Chapter 3 leaping forward to post-Reformation times, no doubt because criticism of the Bible in the Middle Ages is difficult to find. I'd guess Robertson—British son of a theologian in Durham, and impeccably public-schooled and degreed—absorbed much of the material in his father's house. I haven't found any supposed texts showing the existence of Jesus, not found in Robertson. (The book has a fairly detailed helpful index).

My view is that, at the time of the various commentators, nobody influential appreciated the fact the Jews, who were, presumably, behind the Jesus promotion, seem to have a genetic tendency to lie—something which may go back to the days when language was still developing, in the remotest depths of time. Much as visual camouflage would not have evolved until sight had developed, modes of use of language could not predate speech. It's now clear that Jews have an exceptional tendency to lie—this may be compared to some creatures which lie [pun not really intended!] rather than fly, when in danger. Before the days of technological aids, such as writing, and, now, photographs and fingerprints and videos etc etc etc, convincing liars must have been hard to detect. It's now plausible that Jews made up the 'New Testament' as a Jewish fantasy, or film script, or advertisement, or promotion of a Jewish 'hero' aimed at gullible goyim. It's what they do. People who describe Christianity as a 'Jewish Trojan horse' are no doubt correct.

The idea that there was a ferment of religious ideas in the Roman Empire may also be untrue. It's now known that Jewish strategies include defaming and subverting and critiquing rival societies; it's entirely likely the supposed unease leading to religious change was a Jewish manufacture.

The remaining problem is how Jews could have done this; they didn't have the Federal Reserve to print them endless money. They may have had the ear of prominent Romans. They may have used unreliable, dysfunctional, disgruntled people to spread the world, much as non-Jewish 'Marxists' now, and in the past, often fit this description, and often co-operate in treachery which is mildly profitable to them.

A modern question which may occur to the reader is why a Jew-based publishing house should risk subverting their racial group with a serious presentation of the idea of the non-existence of 'Yeshua'. There have been alternations in self-images of Christians, and I'd guess their feeling was that Christians in 1945 were a bit too independent. The story of Jewish collaborators through the centuries hasn't begun to be described yet.

THIRD REPRISE... similar ideas, reworded
• Did Saul/Paul Exist? Did Saul/Paul exist, or was he/she/they a fake script? Treating the tedious 'epistles' (which preceded the 'Gospels') as genuine or faked doesn't really matter. The advertising and promotional aspect is the important thing.
• 'Early Christianity' as presented by Wikipedia. Wikipedia, the guaranteed easily-available source of US-Jew-approved deception, says Early Christianity was the 'period of Christianity preceding the First Council of Nicaea in 325. ... typically divided into the Apostolic Age ... until Nicea'. This is of course absurd—as though Christians would say, I'll know what I believe when a council I've never heard of makes its ruling. But it is all 'Jewish'. Wikipedia has no entry for 'primitive Christianity', propbably a useful phrase to refer to beliefs before Jews intervened.
• Peacism, Peacists, and Menache Peacst. Let me try again to get the concept across to the brainwashed.   Imagine the world develops, somewhere, a new movement:- Peacism, wanting Peace, willing to talk about peace, made up of debating groups, with many attitudes to peace. Suppose a belief system develops, which might be described as a religion; it doesn't really matter. The people call themselves Peacists, talk about Peacism, regard Peacism as an important part of their lives. Peacism, if it's lucky, spreads, irregularly; 'Peacism' becomes a part, if a small part, of life in its corner of the world. "I am a peacist!" is said, here and there, and arouses various reactions—indifference, amusement, hostility, interest. There may be some Peacists who become well-known. The doctrines of Peacism lead to poems and jokes about it, achievements and commentaries and practical effects, donations, converts, de-converts, meetings, songs, buildings. Books appear. Anyway: that's Peacism.
      The thesis I'm making is based on the facts about 'Holocaustianity', a religion based on pure fraud in which all Jews at the present time are united. Advertising, deception, bribery of pseudo-academics, control over media, legal controls and all the rest of it are probably known to readers here. What, drawing lessons from 'Holocaustianity', might have been the stages in the invention of Christianity as it is now perceived?
      'Peacism' and 'Peacists' have some ideas as to what they believe. Now suppose a group with influence and absurd ideas about themselves see this new group, and want to colonise it, much as they might want to rule a new country. Although they have had no interest in Peacism, slowly a new name will be made up and promoted, let's say Menache Peacst. Slowly, but increasingly, the works of Menarche, the miracles of Menarche, the sayings of Menarche, the travels of Menarche appear in booklets, books, talks by odd-looking men, and so on. An ever-growing flood of words, attributed to Menarche Peacst, drowns out the original Peacists, in spite of their protestations and indignation. The Peacst is praised, Menarche is praised, the life of Menarche is written about by scriptwriters—even though Menarche never existed in fact. A Darwinian process means that stories about Menarche Peacst grow some appealing aspects, and shed some absurdities and errors. In a few hundred years, the original beliefs of Peacism are all but lost, and any books or documents are destroyed ruthlessly by Peacst followers, anxious to remove evidence, and wanting to remove all trace of the genuine beliefs of Peacism. For 'Menarche Peacst' read 'Yeshua Christ'—translated as 'Jesus'—where the opinions of early Christians are effaced by the intruded Jewish fake, so much so that almost everyone assumes unthinkingly that Christians, who started originally as 'golden' or 'enlightened', are synonymous with 'Jesus Christ'. By this stage, collaborators can be bought, and are likely to have a similar temperament: it's curious to see how Roman Catholics, to this day, are uncreative and derivative, with a parasitic outlook similar to Jews, combined with a guarded and defensive feeling of superiority.

• Islam as a Jewish Project. Interesting possibility. Early Christianity, the Bible, Islam, Marxism and the United Nations has some musings.

• Quakers. Miles Mathis suggests very convincingly that Quakers were encouraged (.e.g. by Cromwell) and were probably crypto-Jews, starting of course with Fox..

• Marxism as a Project. I owe to Miles W Mathis the attitude that 'Marxism' was a manufactured set of beliefs, plagiarised or made up by Jews, designed to support what they think are their interests. The Communist Manifesto, for example, was plagiarised. For Jews, notably absent in creative impulses—no art, buildings, food, clothes, literature to speak of, inventions, science; only their traditional low-grade viciousness mediated by lies—it is essential to parasitise non-Jews. Jews presumably instinctively panic when thwarted, as parasites must act imperatively if they see their food and shelter being taken away.

• The UN as a Jewish Project. Another possibility (which only occurred to me today, reviewing a book by Alex Comfort. When Jews and their subordinates/ collaborators/ puppets won WW2, they busily started to spread an appropriate religion, based partly on 'anti-racialism'. Some musings on the UN.

Here's a page with essentially the same theory, earlier than mine, with Rome and Alexandria as two rival city ideological battlegrounds. The Jewish Creation of Christianity by Donny Darko, apparently in Hungary.
Click here to e-mail

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

'Lords of the Nukes' - very long video, including full nuclear revisionist material since the Second World War

• ‘Nuclear Bombs’ Exit Strategy: Watch Jews Continue Lying!

Written by Rerevisionist   1 July 2016

For the first time, as far as I know, an online source has acknowledged the existence of nuclear skepticism. I'm assuming it's a Jewish source; it has all the fingerprints.
This is The Daily Bell. It's listed by similarweb as #150,000 worldwide, #45,000 in the USA (it's English language). For comparison, the nationalist/ race aware news site New Observer is #75,000 globally and #44,000 in the USA.

I've copied (below) the meat of the Daily Bell article, which as it admits, was largely taken from the entries in
(long filename because, historically, this was site-grabbed from an online forum).

I don't want to go into detail; there will probably be many more similar articles on the web. Let me just note a few things, and give a few sample links --
  1. Nuclear power is not discussed. Probably because it's very much a live issue, and without much of the emotional baggage of horror attributed to 'nuclear bombs'. The likelihood it's a huge fraud, mostly Jewish, like the 'Holocaust' fraud, must of course be avoided by the controllers of Jews.

  2. APS-13 Antennae of 'Little Boy' Fake
    Jews in 'nuclear weapons' for example the Jews running the Manhattan Project, and Jews involved in spy scams (Rosenbergs v McCarthy, Pollard and Vanunu etc) are not mentioned... lots of money, lots of fakery, lots of concealment of Jewish crimes in the USSR.
  3. A Jewish fingerprint is the invention of phrases which it's hoped by repetition in the controlled media will take hold of the stupid goyim. 'Directed history' is an example here: they don't want to say Jewish lies. For example, the Holohoax will probably be described as 'directed history' with passive implications it was e.g. the military that imposed it.
  4. Imabari and the antennae of Little Boy (video over to the right - or Little Boys, since there were at least two!) and the tram service in Hiroshima and the working of the Norden bomb sights and no doubt other things were discoveries by 'FirstClassSkeptic'. Typically of Jews, actual pioneers and discoverers are not credited.
  5. Jews are never identified by Jewish hacks: for example 'Laurence' is described as a 'Communist', not a Jew. The part played by Jews in generating fears of the USSR, to keep Jewish mass murders hidden, are of course unmentioned.
  6. Distracting and alarmist stuff seems natural to Jews. There's no evidence for a death penalty for truth-telling, any more than there was for survivors of the Liberty. But of course steps were taken to completely censor Japanese news, European news and US news.
  7. More plagiarised stuff ... yawn.

The online article of 29 June 2016
Consider what we ["we" is the Bell article] have already uncovered just by scrutinizing the Internet and looking for evidence of "directed history" regarding the initial atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

  • The dreaded mushroom cloud presented by the Hiroshima memorial is actually a photo of Hiroshima on fire.
  • A squadron of 66 bombers was directed to Imabari. in the early morning of August 6 (666) - the morning of the A-bomb - but Imabari. had been bombed already, twice. This bombing squadron might have fire-bombed Hiroshima instead.
  • Initial reports in Japan were that Hiroshima was firebombed. AP filed the same report.
  • In the aftermath of the explosion, Hiroshima (and Nagasaki) look no different than Tokyo after it was firebombed.
  • In Hiroshima numerous buildings are standing along with erect tree stumps.
  • Limited trolley service was revived in Hiroshima after only three days.
  • The Hiroshima bank at the epicenter of the bomb is fully functional and can be seen
  • Predictions of endless radiation poisoning for thousands of years proved untrue. Today, Hiroshima and Nagasaki's radiation levels are normal.
  • Outdoor shadows and other dramatic evidences of the Hiroshima bombing seem to be faked.
  • The initial American reporting on Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs came from Wilfred Burchett and William L. Laurence. One was a communist (Burchett) who hated America and reportedly ended up on the Kremlin's payroll.
  • The other was secretly a paid employee of US armed forces. He was the man who rode with the crew to witness the nuke dropped on Nagasaki. His report on the attack is painful to read for all the wrong reasons.
  • Laurence was also the only reported to cover the development of the atomic bomc, see the initial bomb testing (from 20 miles away) and to report from Nagasaki. In other words, only one reporter, paid by the US war dept, provided the entirety of the initial civilian narrative for the testing of nuclear devices and then bombing of Nagasaki. Just one. It was roughly the same at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Reporters were not allowed to visit.
  • Military officers were asked to exaggerate the injury count. (See Crawford Sams interview below.)
  • Hiroshima and Nagasaki were apparently shut down for months. There was no influx of Western reporters. The nuclear narrative was developed by the Pentagon from what we can tell.
  • It was immediately made a crime punishable by death in both the US and Japan to discuss nuclear attacks and the technology that created them. (“The restricted data clauses of the US Atomic Energy Act specifies that all nuclear weapons-related information is to be considered classified unless explicitly declassified, and makes no distinction about whether said information was created in a laboratory by a government scientist or anywhere else in the world by private citizens.”)
  • As for Little Boy, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, photos show it seems to lack the necessary antennas to function.
  • There were apparently several Little Boys of various sizes, not just one.
  • The narrative surrounding the dropping of the Hiroshima bombing is reportedly inaccurate. “Levers” were “pulled” to drop the bomb, but the automatic system did the job.
  • The automatic targeting system itself was an inaccurate device that reportedly might drop bombs miles from where the pilot hoped to deliver them. The odds that both bombs ended up delivering effective blasts are surprisingly low.
  • The Nagasaki bombing narrative was confused for decades. The story kept changing. Even the pilot was misidentified. The crews were switched.
  • The photos of the Nagasaki mushroom cloud are suspicious. They appear to be composite images with cloud cover inserted to ensure that identification of Nagasaki is impossible. Other Nagasaki photos appear fake.
  • One of the two famous and supposedly identical photos of the Nagasaki mushroom cloud includes the wing of a plane, presumably the Enola Gay. But there were no windows over the wing of the plane. The photo is fake.
  • For events of such magnitude, there are surprisingly few eyewitness accounts of the actual blast. Many eyewitness accounts start the day after the blast or during the firestorm. Only a few Japanese survivors have stepped forward to become regular "faces" of the blast.
  • There don’t seem to be any civilian photos of either mushroom cloud taken by Japanese civilians or even military facilities. This one HERE looks evidently faked.
  • Much of the Western Hiroshima narrative regarding the blast was developed by a single Jesuit priest who, along with other Jesuits, had survive at the epicenter of the blast through the intervention of the Virgin Mary.
  • The eyewitness accounts of the blast itself have a repetitive and artificial quality to them, at least the ones we read. One doctor claims to have treated 2000-3000 injured on the first day.

There are other disturbing elements to the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombings, and if you are interested, you can see more documents calling many elements of the attacks into question HERE.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Jo Cox MP

• 'Jo Cox', Jews in Britain, 'Brexit', Middle East Wars & Making Money from Invader Housing

Written by Rerevisionist   19 June 2016

'Jo Cox' and her supposed murder gives a good opportunity to survey the connections between political parties, false flags, Jewish money, Jewish wars, and the 'European Union'.

Here are a couple of good shortish pieces on 'Jo Cox': The Occidental Observer and New Observer Online. The first looks at 'Jo Cox' as an MP: her disgusting indifference to rapes of white girls in her constituency, perhaps to keep Moslem votes; and her careerist opportunism, apparently expecting a lifetime career in light oratory, and air travel to places needing platitudes. That's between promoting bombing of innocent people. The second points out that there are many murders: none get the slightest sympathy unless they appeal to the 'New World Order' mob. Examples include the two Greek 'Golden Dawn' candidates who were apparently murdered by a motorcycle killer, Kriss Donald, and whites in South Africa. And may include George Galloway, attacked by a Jew, though of course this may have been a calculated fake.

Youtube on 'crisis actors' as a profession! About 25 mins. Worth watching.
It's impossible to trust the media: there are amusing Youtubes about Cox—bogus 'police' turning up aimlessly at some street scene, inconsistent witnesses, and family members reading from scripts (as everyone does after murders). The fact is she was just a whore of Jews, a puppet spouting slogans, a paid ignoramus. This relatively highly-paid 'work' is competitive: there are vast numbers of such people, more or less indistinguishable and untalented—no wonder they fight like rats in a sack. Nobody expects women to be technically competent, and women MPs exploit this psychological fact. I can find no evidence Cox had plans for helping third world countries: what sort of society can low-IQ countries be expected to aim for? What technologies are appropriate? Are there resources enough? Can exploitation be ended? Can they be supplied with water? Can arms suppliers be fended off? Can their populations survive?—simple questions the social justice warrior ignores. Men can do all that.
      Some observers compare these people with Mrs Jellaby, from Dickens, and her small group. Or an earlier fictional character, Lady Bountiful. I thought perhaps a better comparison was missionaries: modern American missionaries seem to be the worst, considering their work done if they hand out a gift and get some sort of apparent verbal consent to their nonsense. But another comparison occurred to me: gipsies, who have a similar evolutionary path to Jews. Along comes the Romany, offering a sprig of herb, or a lucky charm, or mass invasion as a terrific benefit. With a back-up technique of snarling imprecations at anyone spurning her generous offer.

People who take an interest in the world must know by now that Jews controlled mass murder in the USSR, mass financial frauds in the USA, and mass post-1945 frauds and wars around the world. (When I refer to 'Jews', to save time I don't always put the word in quotation marks). An obvious question is: did 'Jo Cox' think she was a Jew? I'm agnostic on this question; some Internet burrowers might like to try to find out; Certainly plenty of 'Jews' have popped up in support of her, and apparently used her as a money-making vehicle. The figures seem doubtful to me; approaching a million pounds?—I'd guess this is a polite way of referring to Jews 'donating' paper money to sundry fraudulent charities. However, her policies are all directly Jewish. Well; there was some suggestion she supported Palestine, though, if she suggested the Palestinians should get their land back, I may have missed it.
      Agnostics may like to be reminded that the Royal Family is Jewish; the Archibishop of Canterbury is Jewish; the BBC is laced with Jews, including Dimbleby, and is often directed by a Jew; Parliament is full of Jews, in both Houses; the Speaker is a Jew; of Party leaders, Cameron is a Jew; Corbyn is a Jew, as were both Milibands; the printed media, such as they are, are Jew-owned; the 'Holocaust' fraud is a Jewish scam; both world wars were Jewish; all major companies are Jewish; the Attorney-General is Jewish; women leading the campaigns against men and the family are Jewish. Even 'Intelligence' heads have been Jewish. And this is nothing new; people who think the BBC, press, etc are less trustworthy than before, are wrong; it's just that the observers have woken up to their surroundings. These things are all traceable to finance; the obvious source is the Federal Reserve of 1913, always controlled by Jews, but of course there are similar Jewish outfits in Europe.

False Flag Theories. From a few years ago: Political Murders: Moro, Palme, Lindh, Gaitskell, Kelly is a survey of some political murders (Europe only; Jews in Africa and other countries are a far more horrific story). The point is: what motives are there? Fakeologists (not 'fakeologist' himself!) can do some careful analysis here: to weaken nationalists? Reduce opposition to Jewish central banks? Stir up hatred? Disarm populations, with fake gun atrocities? Remove non-Jews? Just remove difficult people? Remove opponents of puppets? Remove political leaders and replace them with pliant puppets? Instal entire organisations, such as Freemasons? – I think the 'Cox' false flag is the first I've seen claimed to be intended to stop an election, or change its result. There's some evidence this happened in the past, for example to remove Gaitskell and John Smith from the so-called 'Labour' Party in Britain.

'Brexit'. This appears to be a serious issue; certainly a lot of money is involved, and a lot of fraud, and continuations of the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan to mongrelise Europe. But, given that Britain is dominated by Jews, and that Jews all seem to favour invasion of white countries by low-IQ nonwhites, it's possible that on leaving the EU, Britain might be invaded by millions of Turks, sub-Saharan Africans, Middle East victims of Jewish wars. In other words, it may be worse. Or invasion may continue as before. Since London is an important financial centre, there seems to be nothing to stop Jewish policies from continuing. This is very sad, since obviously Europe ought to discuss problems and issues that affect the continent, just as other geographical groups should. Naturally the Jewish media say nothing on this issue. Personally, I'd vote to leave. But it's a difficult decision.

Jewish 'Money', Barracks and Hotels, and Payments to Invaders. One motive for encouraging invaders is to try to vacate the areas near Israel. Another is to mongrelise white countries. But another issue is the use of housing as a money-making scheme, at least while the system lasts. If invaders can be packed into cheap housing, or for that matter in unwanted hotels, they can be milked of rent, but only if the system hands out rent to them. With the paper money system, this is easy. Jews have practised this policy in the USA for at least 70 years with blacks, who are expected to spend their lives working for Jews. These rents and other expenses cannot be paid from current expenditure: the taxation would be impossibly high. Hence inflation, and rising debt. Probably the plan is—when the system collapses—that Jews will leave, pretending they've been persecuted. Anywhere; here are a few extracts from quotations illustrating some of the points.
June 19, 2016: A "refugee" is now the word used for anyone who wants to live in a White country. Not a refugee from war. Huge numbers of people do not recognize the change in definition, or even know that it has happened.

May 24 2016: You could raise an army of 200,000 men and pay them $200,000 to clean out everything from Sweden to Italy for cheaper than Merkel's 100 billion gift to scum. You could also give $50,000 to every white European baby born and have 2 million children to 'stimulate' the economy. Somehow, when $100 billion was needed they found it—for the enemy.

January 18, 2016: Hundreds of German workers have been laid off as ruthless capitalist hotel owners rake in millions of euros by converting their buildings into 'asylum centers' and establish regular incomes from the taxpayers, an investigation by the German Einprozent organization has found.

June 7, 2016: Its about time somebody brought this invasion into perspective by mentioning family reunion, this is why Merkel's million illegals so claims to have is really closer to seven million, it has all been planned by these illegals they only selected countries with family reunion plans. In Sweden they have taken 163,000 plus illegals of which only 494 have found jobs, they don't want to work its all about free houses and benefits, but our weak leaders just won't accept this.

June 6, 2016: The American Salvation Army is as much in the refugee resettlement business as the rest of the non profits. They build apartment complexes in the US where illegal alien women live with their children. The illegal alien women pay a tiny 30 percent of their welfare check while Americans pay most of their income in rent or mortgage payments or live under the motorway near the complexes where the illegal alien woman live in the Salvation Army complexes. [Note that the Red Cross build these things; so do the Lutherans in the USA].

May 23, 2016: ... these migrants aren't coming to Europe to work, they're coming there to get on the dole, period. ... this article doesn't take into consideration all the other services that these migrants will use or need, like healthcare, police and fire, school for their kids, and incarceration that will sharply raise the cost of their stay. ...

May 23, 2016: ...if you spend welfare money at the grocery store or the doctor's office, most governments will count that spending as part of the official 'Gross Domestic Product', even though you aren't producing anything. Therefore illiterate migrants who can't find jobs are going to make the OFFICIAL gross domestic product bigger, because governments count their spending money they didn't earn to buy things without producing anything to sell in return... they will draw labor and capital away from production oriented industries such as manufacturing and agriculture, and toward service oriented industries such as retail and health care. Consequently the ACTUAL gross domestic product, which is to say the total value of all goods produced in the nation, will decrease even as the OFFICIAL gross domestic product is increasing.

2016: The Rabbinical Council of Victoria, Australia, who have unanimously called on the government to observe Australia's obligations under international law and to show compassion to these most vulnerable people. ... have never uttered a single word of criticism of Israel's refugee policies.

June 9, 2016: I was very surprised by the revelation of Malcolm Fraser's jewish ancestry. Most of us attributed his arrogance and haughty demeanor to his membership of the pastoral elite. It all fits together, there are probably many more leaders of White nations who could easily qualify as Israeli citizens, New Zealand's John Keay is one.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Detail (below) from a 2015 site for 'Jews' in Britain promoting immigration into Britain, and all other white countries, but not into Palestine.
www.supportrefugees.org is (or was) the 'Jewish' site pushing immigration of fake 'refugees' (that site may of course disappear).
Sept 2015: copy of 'Jews' uniting to force immigration



Written by Rerevisionist   22 Nov 2015

« Jewish site promoting immigration into Britain
Jewish site promoting immigration into the USA
Jewish site promoting immigration into France
Just one of many Jewish sites promoting immigration anywhere... but not Israel
Remember: bombing of north Africa and the Middle East is supported mainly by Jews.

Mediterranean invasion

Mediterranean invasion
Many people still haven't grasped the fact that so-called 'Jews' are behind the push for large scale invasion by incompatible low IQ males, only, plus later chain migration of huge families and relatives and others, into white countries. Examples of Jews include Job Cohen in Holland, Barbara Spectre in Sweden, Ervin Kohn in Norway, Anneta Kahane (and Merkel) in Germany, Gregor Gysi in Germany, Ronit Lentin (and Shatter) in Ireland, Gerald Kaufman in England, Soros in the USA, all Jews, all push for unlimited nonwhite invasion into those nations. A century ago, Emma Goldman, Bela Kun, Lenin &c were analogous figures, working for Jewish power under such pretexts as 'progressiveness', 'anarchism', 'communism'. Here's a significant US site, Refugee Resettlement Watch, looking at the problem, mainly in the USA, but also Europe.

Here's a long-term overview:

[1] Why does it matter? It is important because facts about 'Jews' have been suppressed. You have been lied to; so have your parents; and your parents' parents, back for centuries. It's time to stop this secrecy.
[2] So-called 'Jews' distinctive feature is a collection of old writings. The 'Talmud' is one such. it's about the size of a few volumes of the old paper 'Encyclopedia Britannica'. Click the link to find out more. It is very long, and very disgusting.
[3] Modern so-called 'Jews' probably have nothing to do with ancient Jews by blood. A tribe was made to follow the Talmud belief system. Either way, the instructions on beliefs made them genetically fanatical, and tribal—they follow what's sometimes called 'ethnic nepotism', supporting each other at the expense of everyone else, with violence, cunning, theft, lies, often setting other groups against each other. They have inbred for at least a thousand years.
[4] Their total numbers are of course not certain; perhaps about the same as the number of Irish plus the number of Danes. Even if they were normal they could have had influence, in the way other nations have. Their hateful activities have made European countries expel them, many times.
Revisionist Work Now - US Civil War Example
('Alden', May 15, 2017, Occidental Observer)
[The Confederates' Secretary for War was a Jew]... ‘Start with the confederate treasurer Judah Benjamin. Read everything you can about him and then check out the books in the bibliography. Even the most secessionist southerners didn't start the war until they were assured of money from the British bank Benjamin worked for.
    There is a theory that the Rothschild bank was behind the abolition movement. We borrowed the funds for our revolution from France and France borrowed that money from the Frankfort bankers including Nathan Rothschild.
    So after the Napoleon wars the Rothschilds looked for another war to ferment and funded the abolition movement with the Old Testament puritans of New England as a front.
    Economic historians look on the civil war as a northern take over of the iron, coal, lumber and forest products such as resin, tobacco, rice, cotton, sugar and dozens of excellent warm weather ports from Baltimore to Galveston.
    Jews would be far more interested in an economic take over instead of slavery and constitutional arguments about secession.’
[5] Historical examples of Jewish influence include Cromwell's war which installed Jews in Britain; the impoverishment of Britons in the 18th century; Napoleon's wars of theft, funded by Jews; Opium Wars against China; the US Civil War, fought over the issue of 'greenbacks'; the Boer wars; the 1905 war between Russia and Japan, because Jews hated the Russians; the 'Great War' where information in both Germany and Britain was controlled by Jews; undisclosed agreements to fund the coup by Jews in Russia, misnamed the 'Russian Revolution'; and secret funding of Churchill to start the Second World War by terror bombing of Germany.
[6] At present, paper money is the root of their power (since the Federal Reserve in 1913). It is not coincidence that World War was started in 1914. Control of money allows governments to be at the mercy of lenders. And allows Jews to buy up, own and control news sources, education, propaganda, lawyers; and weapons factories, and other profit-making industries.
[7] European readers, east Asian (largely Chinese and Japanese), and blacks need to understand that Jews hate them in a visceral, instinctive, inbred, but hidden way, just as some animals wish to harm others by stealth.
[8] Arabs and Semites have long experience of Jews: Islam is based on Jewish attitudes, while allowing conversion, so this is not surprising. Spain and Portugal, and parts of eastern Europe, have been invaded by Jews and Muslims. They have a tradition of co-operating where there seems to be loot. And a tradition of hatred where there is no loot.
[9] 'Jews' are inbred to have a visceral hatred of whites and any other races they perceive as different from themselves. It's not true they are motivated only by money: the fake money they control at present is used to exploit and exterminate rivals, so far as this proves possible. The mass slaughter of whites in Ukraine and Russia, and the debasement of the survivors to near-animal levels, is one clear example. There are many other examples of their obsessions, false-flags, corruption, murders, propaganda campaigns, and warmongering. Plus their pretence of victimhood of which the most pervasive example in our times has been the 'Holocaust' fraud. This has given rise to the myth of 'pathological altruism'—ask the Germans and French in their occupied countries, and Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, Russians how altruistic whites are. 'Pathological altruism' is a mis-diagnosis, perhaps for something along the lines of carrying out orders for what are (or seem to be) authority figures.
[10] It's claim the situation now is new: previously, invader were not presented with housing, food, medicine, money. In fact, it's the same pattern: Jews either looted other people themselves, or, for preference, did it through third parties—thugs, armies, or detachments of some sort, for example in the opium wars. Now, Jews are legally permitted to steal from countries—and they hand loot to invaders. It's indirect theft, in place of direct theft.

In 2007, a British Ministry of Defence thinktank identified 70 alien groups, and predicted war between whites and invaders. Here is Nick Griffin in 2008 discussing a collapse-of-Rome scenario.
[10] 'Immivasions', 'undocumented migrants', Africans in Europe, nonwhite invaders, South Americans in the USA, wars and atrocities to generate, or to be beneficiaries of, refugees. So-called 'Jews' hate whites so much they seek to ruin any white country; so far they have been successful, mainly due to bribery of collaborators. Slowly, truths are emerging—often through Internet. Official media such as the BBC have clearly suppressed information on boat and flight routes, people traffickers, advice given to 'migrants'—which destinations to go for (not getting out at e.g. Cyprus with no benefits; not registering in any other country than Germany, so the supposed first country in Europe is Germany; being shepherded for miles in large groups). And how much they paid—or who, for example Soros, paid worthless paper money as funding to traffickers. Other information suppressed is: what the 'migrants' have been offered: Houses? Cars? Sex? Chain migration? Non-reporting of crime? Another media suppression is the obvious fact that Syria is right next to Israel—and Israel offers no refuge for Syrian refugees!
'Lord Dubs', of the 'Labour Party', in the 'child refugee' fraud, welcomes so-called 'child immigrant' invaders to Britain. Dubs thinks he's a Jew, and is part of the propagandist anti-German and anti-white Jewish thrust. Unfortunately the House of Lords has many so-called Jews and collaborators. The 'Labour Party' is one of many organisations which are largely Jew-controlled, just like the 'Conservative' Party, The Democrats, the Republicans, the United Nations, the 'Church of England', the 'Bank of England'.
[11] As regards the Anglosphere, mostly USA, UK, ANZ, Jewish policy appears to be to first corrupt what elites there were or are; second, to mix whites with low IQ invaders to produce low level masses.

Here are a few relevant videos:
Barbara Spectre, a simpleton who thinks she's a Jew, probably a puppet of other Jews, in Sweden. Short extract
Account on this site of Coudenhove-Kalergi to show how long this policy has been followed; since the 1920s or earlier.
Jews claim the Islamization of Europe is a good thing. This is an Occidental Observer article of Nov 2015, with comments.
How Jewish advertising agencies put their race messages across. Here's a composite selection of anti-white messages which US whites put up with.

A few things taken from Internet:–
Mexico Mexico It's obvious that the yids are ramping things up on all fronts. The never ending ridicule of white males in the media, the elimination of the US's Southern border per the orders of the faggot puppet in blackface who occupies the White House*, the streams of shit-peoples into Europe, the black and now latrino incidents happening on college campuses across the US, the "black lives" matter "movement". I could go on for ten paragraphs listing these tools of war being used against whites.

The mainstream media will play down certain types of "attacks" on the third world garbage animals, the proxy soldiers for the jews, if they don't fit a certain mold. They don't want whites to wake up or get ideas. They will play up other attacks if they can make the stories fit the mold. You can bet when they finally get the spics riled up enough to riot here in L.A. for example, any whites who fight back will find themselves the center of stories that present them as instigators, kooks, vile racists who represent the bad old days, among other claims that will have no basis in reality.

From personal experience, I can tell you that the media ignored whites here in L.A. back in '92 who grabbed guns and stood fast to protect their families businesses and property from the black and brown scum who were out doing what they do best. It was OK for the media to show "courageous" Korean shop owners doing so (believe me, the Koreans were doing the right thing, but what the fuck are they doing here in the US, really?). But the media was intent on not giving whites any ideas, so most outlets ignored armed whites. If they could have completely ignored whites who did the same during the Katrina debacle they would have ignored them too. But they couldn't in such a small area.

I should point out that during the '92 riots here in L.A., more taco benders from may-hee-co, guatamalturd and el stinkador salvador were arrested than blacks. And they didn't have the superior numbers to blacks that they have now. The jews have two large armies in the US now, blacks and hispanics, never mind the afreakans and other turd world dung that have been hauled in for decades. The jews have over-played their hand as usual, because these people will never unite, even if a full scale war breaks out against whitey, which is what the zhids are going to try to do. In the end I believe whites will win out, but it is going to be bad and bloody. Many have pointed out that we can't vote ourselves out of trouble in the US or Europe, and they are right.
*Obama's real name appears to be Barry Soetero; it's truly bizarre that a half-Jew, half-Arab—the two most ruthless persecutors of African blacks—should be regarded as 'black' in the USA. With a fake birth certificate (and not qualified as a US citizen), and 'married' to a man, and yet treated as as serious politician! In centuries to come, if civilisation persists, people will marvel that such a thing could have happened.

Reality Check: Gaza is still occupied. Includes information on the UN. And Jews shooting at Gaza boats, bombing the airport etc, proving that such activities are routinely carried out by Jewish liars. 2 mins 20 sec
Good article by NorthernTruthSeeker on the truth about the 'migrant crisis'.
NTS Notes: One thing that I must clearly point out about this "crisis" is that these so called "refugees" are absolutely not as they seem.. Most are in fact migrant WORKERS that up until the time when Libya was destroyed by the criminal NATO attacks of 2011 were blocked from flooding into Europe via the Mediterranean Sea...
      It is a fact that few want to talk about that Muhammar Ghadaffi did in fact have agreements with the European Union to BLOCK illegal migrants from using Libyan ports to illegally migrate across the Mediterranean to southern European nations... That agreement of course ended with the illegal war against Libya and the subsequent murder of Ghadaffi himself... Now these migrants have been flooding into Libya from the sub-Saharan backward countries they come from in horribly overloading boats in passage across the Mediterranean Sea to ports in Europe... We see the consequences of the folly of NATO destroying Libya with this flood of refugees that is not only NOT stopping but in recent months has been accelerating...
      It is also a fact that the media overlooks the obvious that these 'refugees' are absolutely NOT Syrian.. The majority that are shown in this video that are overwhelming European countries are black. Syrians are absolutely NOT black! This proves again that these migrants are exactly what I am claiming.. Illegal Sub-Saharan Black migrant workers! They have no business in Europe and if they do want to immigrate to European nations there are absolutely proper immigration authorities and channels to do so.... Jumping on overloaded ships and falsely claiming to be "Syrian refugees"? I don't think so....

royalbrecht [November 22, 2015 - 5:59 pm. The Occidental Observer]
... Police states are here to stay. As the non-white population expands so does the police force. The days are gone where Jews are the unseen movers behind every thing bad for Europeans. Tolerance is not the solution when Jews are passively and aggressively annoying. Building fences to keep Jews contained in concentration camps is an idea that is just beginning to take root and the implementation of which is only a matter of time. Exportation of non-whites and sterilization of Jews is not only politically "envision-able" but very practical. The future looks more optimistic than ever. Hungarians despise Jewish-Satanism and live for the day when their bounty of spiritually enriched children will repay the Jews for their millenniums of repeated criminal subterfuge. The golden age of Hungary is being reborn as we speak.

A south African retraces his steps to learning about Jews
ex South African
Just for the record, so that this fact about the Saatchi brothers [who also advertised Margaret Thatcher, to get British assets into Jewish ownership] does not get lost: the advertising arm of Saatchi & Saatchi had a long record of involvement in handling the election campaigns of the late South African traitor president F.W. de Klerk and his National Party. Google "Saatchi & Saatchi F W de Klerk" for some detail. I, who was there, experienced it as propaganda that contributed toward softening up the mindset of the whites, preparing them for capitulation.

One person who is giving lots of money to NGOs promoting the invasion of Europe is business man [and convicted felon 'Jew'] George Soros. He has given over 11,000 million dollars so far.

philip [December 2, 2015]
This invasion is well financed and well organised. This is not possible for it to be just a spontaneous phenomenon. If it was a natural happening we would see men, women and children not just young and healthy males. Has anybody any idea who wants to destroy the White Race? I would like to know that. I am worried for Europe and for Germans in particular because they are in the centre of Europe. I see the majority of Germans are resigned and frightened to open their mouths and act for fear of being called racist that it is almost unbelievable, For sure Hitler is turning in his grave thinking what cowards he left behind.
It's well known to people who follow this sort of thing that Jews hate whites and have a long-standing policy of getting rid of them - whether by wars (Cromwell and Civil War, Napoleon and Europe-wide war, 'Great' War, Second World War), mass starvation (Ukraine), GULags and working to death (Russia under the 'USSR'), promotion of contraception and 'queer' sex (post-1945 Jewish version of feminism), high taxes of whites (after the Jewish 'Bank of England' prices shot up; death duties and war ruined the English aristocracy; income tax since 1945), deliberate damaging of education, professions; promotion of nonwhite immigration (post-1945, including benefits system extended to nonwhites), the use of fake 'immigrants' as currently seen, and promotion of 'humane' ideologies working against whites (no death penalty but long term expense, education control, race relations frauds, 'human rights' - but not in Israel; Welby, Jewish Archbishop of Canterbury); media onslaught of anti-white material. The are plenty of websites - though not as many as there should be.

alliance between Jews churches jew-funded pressure groups war-mongers hosuing and benefits frauds
The current Jewish Prime Minister, Teresa May, as I type this, wants more invasion; this of course parrots Jewish policy for all white countries.

The Pamphlet cover design is by Churches Together Merseyside Region. Includes the usual falsehoods about 'asylum seekers' etc. And prayers for peace, though not for Jews to stop bombing. Includes: Pope St John Paul II [sic], Archbishop Justin Welby [sic; Jewish], Anglican Bishop of Manchester David Walker, Phil Jump, 'Regional Minister for the North Western Baptist Association' etc, a former President of the Methodist Conference, and these groups: Asylum Help, Asylum Link Merseyside, Merseyside Refugee and Asylum Seekers Pre and Postnatal Support group, foodbanks and 'advice pantries' at St Vincent's Church & St Margaret's Church, Support for Wigan Arrivals Project, Leigh Asylum Seekers and Refugees Support, Regional Asylum Activism project, Churches Together in the Merseyside Region, Merseyside Refugee Support Network, Red Cross, Refugee Action, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Liverpool Justice and Peace Commission, Credit Unions 'managing your money as refugees', Church Credit Champions Network, Local Authorities, Local Charity and Voluntary Services, Citizens UK, Positive Action in Housing, The No Accommodation Network, CAFOD, Jesuit Refugee Service UK, Christian Aid, City of Sanctuary, Places of Welcome. liverpoolasyluminfo.org.uk

From Instauration, December 1976, quoting Frank Hercules 1972:
The Indian refused to submit to bondage and to learn the white man's ways. The result is that the greater portion of the American Indians have disappeared, the greater portion of those who remain are not civilized. The Negro, wiser and more enduring than the Indian, patiently endured slavery; and contact with the white man has given him a civilization vastly superior to that of the Indian. The Indian and the Negro met on the American continent for the first time at Jamestown in 1619. Both were in the darkest barbarism. There were 20 Negroes and thousands of Indians. At the present time there are between 9 and 10 million Negroes and 284,079 Indians. The Negro has had the good sense to get something from the white man at every point where he has touched him....

It's important for revisionists to get a feel for mass movements of people, not only deaths, which provide a simple guide to suffering: the Roman Empire, for example, is supposed to have imported absurd numbers of slaves. Just as deaths in (e.g.) the Indian famine are not reported by Jewish-dominated officialdom, nor are many population movements. An example from my notes is Sir Robert Thompson, who devised the hamlet idea of moving 5 million people at gunpoint in he late 1950s/ early 1960s in Vietnam - the largest forced movement of people outside the Communist world. Presumably the Queen knighted this person, no doubt following orders without the faintest idea of what was involved.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]
Donald Trump Republican Presidential candidate

• Donald Trump vs Jews

by Rerevisionist 25 December 2015

Internet hosts Youtubes from US TV. Thirteen (at present) Republican Party Presidential candidates for November 2016's election are online, on their own and with various interviewers. I've highlit, in yellow marker, Jewish issues (below) which seem unrecognised by Trump. Of course, he has to handle these issues with very great care.

US TV has had an insular history, cut off from most of the world, and amplified by Jewish control, like the dodo before their islands were invaded by competitors.
    There are extraordinary bad TV interviews: they really are garbage. 'Wolf Blitzer' amused me with his blank eyed fanaticism; a silly Englishwoman seemed unaware that 'the Holocaust' is a fake; Bill Maher looks like a mummified Goebbels, but without German honesty; an infant called Kurt Schlichter says Putin is a 'bad guy'. Most Americans have no idea of their history. The USA never had a Jewish creation like the British 'Labour Party'; unless you count the failed IWW. Jews just took over both the Democrat and Republican Parties, after their 1913 Fed coup. Woodrow Wilson was the Jews' biggest American success, I'd guess, in terms of world destruction. Just as the coup in Russia was their biggest success in Europe and European Asia. I was working out what is so repulsive about these TV presenters, going through their routines like caged animals. Of course they are not primary parasites, like Warburgs, Schiffs, Eatons, Rothschilds or whatever, deciding who to assassinate, who to supply with weapons, which country to ruin, which puppets to play. They aren't even secondary parasites (flies around garbage). They are agents for secondary parasites—no surprise the American public is baffled by their coded phrases and flaring hostilities and Orwellian switches of allegiance.

Jewish Media and Commentators elide over war crimes—Jews in Armenia, Russia/the USSR, Ukraine, Jewish profits from south east Asian wars, Jews wanting and getting wars in Europe, Jews wanting and getting wars in the Middle East, Jews wanting and getting wars in Africa, Jews and the Fed, AIPAC. Lying seems to be encoded into the gene pool of Jews, maybe as a result of the Talmud being unleashed in Khazaria more than a millennium past. But this does not appear to be the case with Trump; who, in his speeches, shows dislike and distaste for Jewish lies.
    Maybe this is connected with his work: a talk by a man in a silly little cap explaining that G-d thinks a building should not fall, is no substitute for a structural engineer. Actual example of Trump's is Mayor Koch's incompetence and Central Park's skating rink: "Way over budget - I get it done in four months with plastic pipes and one pour of concrete". Another example of Trump's insistence on detail is his account of a UN building to be refurbished, there the supposed project manager knew nothing of New York steam.
    Jewish Media. Trump has talked of the failing New York Times, the Boston Globe losing $1.3 Bn, the dishonest pieces all written by the same people, the Wall Street Journal, NBC, the Des Moines Register ('stupid newspaper that is frankly going down'). He's good on black crimes kept hidden, distortions on figures: "you said 5000; it's 12,000!" "It's just one guy [shouting] ... throw him out; tomorrow they'll say protestors, but there was only one. Escort him out very nicely..." They don't quote all the polls; just one small one will do even if all the others show him far in the lead. And Trump turned Obama's TV off in disgust. And he hasn't even mentioned the cue screens to Obama's left and right.
    We have to wonder if Jewish media agitation against Trump is serious. Trump is surrounded by Jews and has family conversions, and the New York property market is Jewish. So is the money supply. Maybe it's just a false dawn, as happened with Obama's lies. It seems unlikely; but who knows? Trump himself says he uses just his own money, and that his TV appearances attract huge interest from advertisers which TV networks like—it's easy to believe advertising interest in the other candidates' speeches is something like zero.

Obama (or whatever his name is), the US 'President'. Trump doesn't spare him—no wonder Americans applaud. Obama is incompetent. He's a danger to America. (Trump might have included the rest of the world). Obama won't mention radical Islamic terrorism. With Trump, "there's going to be real change—but not Obama 'change'". Trump will be a unifier, unlike Obama. Poor Obama makes jokes about his faked birth certificate, never mentions his Jewish mother—perhaps with good reason—and even claims to believe in moon landings, and the Global Warming/ Climate Change/ carbon scam, though I'd guess these are more a genetic inability to understand physics than serious assent.
    Here are a few of Obama's statesmanlike African triumphs (taken from NewObserverOnline) with 50 African 'Heads of States' put there by the ZOG 'west' and CIA: Equatorial Guinea's "president" Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, who has shot almost all his opponents. There is no freedom of the press, the country's one television station is government-run, and clean water is scarce. He is Africa's longest serving dictator after seizing power from his uncle and mentor (who used to hang regime critics from the capital's street lights) in 1979. Equatorial Guinea is one of sub-Saharan Africa's biggest oil-producing countries | Another "honored guest" was Burkina Faso's Blaise Compaore [who] came to power in a bloody 1987 coup which left his predecessor Thomas Sankara dead. Sankara had taken power alongside Compaore in another coup four years previously. | "President" Biya, most noted for being the only candidate in elections in Cameroon, in 1984, was the only candidate and won an amazing 99.98 percent of the vote. | "President" Jammeh took power in a military coup in 1994, and in the intervening decades has maintained power by violence in Gambia.

Hillary Clinton looks like the American Merkel, promoting invasion (with Mexico rather than Turkey) and making the USA a mess.
    Trump on illegals: "We have no idea who these immigrants are .. Our country is a dumping ground. They are laughing, bringing drugs, bringing crime, rapists". Trump hasn't yet realised Jews WANT these things. But at least he's part of the way. The Jews running the so-called 'Democrats' are showing the same signs of urgency as Merkel with her 'communist' east German/ Bolshevik roots. Trump says he's a leader, but Hillary Clinton is one of the worst Secretaries of State EVER under Obama ... her stupid policies .. Libya, Egypt, Syria ... all her life in politics.. After what she's done she shouldn't even be allowed to run...'
    Some people wonder if Trump has been deployed to wreck the Republicans; let's hope he doesn't get forced out.

Trump leads in almost all the polls. "I've spent less money, and I'm in first position [of Republican candidates]." He fills stadiums with supporters—something the others, in common with I think all ZOG politicians worldwide—is there a single exception?—cannot do. Trump: "I'm leading in all states. We're being eaten away. But we have to get going. ... if we don't get it right this time .. I think this is the most important election in the modern era ..." "A lot of people know we've reached the crossroads ... It's got to happen in the next ten years ... at the George Washington level."
    Trump jokes about Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz and the others. Trump has Hispanic and black supporters, and gets them up on stage, admittedly in a slightly contrived way. And there are small numbers of registered Republicans in both those ethnic groups.
    Hillary Clinton appears to have little chance of winning IF Trump gets whites out to vote, and IF voting fraud is kept down. White voters have to turn out in their states to get the 'winner take all' electoral college votes. The three highest-vote states are California (with 55 votes), Florida, and New York State. The entire USA has 540 votes; California's 55 of 270 is a high proportion. In 2012, Obama's team and the Jewish propaganda, in California, got his group 7.845 million votes; Romney got 4.84 million. The total California population estimate is 37.68 million, so allowing for age etc it's clear not even half the voters turned out. [uselectionatlas.org figures]. Non-Hispanic whites (i.e. whites) are estimated as 40% of the total, about 15 million of all ages. Clearly, there have to be white voters prepared to turn out to get the 'electoral college' votes.
    Mixed race voters never seem to be discussed, presumably because of the Jewish suppression of facts on race. If many 'blacks' become more honest about part-white ancestry, this might have significant effects.
    Elections of Senators, and Representatives to the House of Representatives, are of course another issue.

Trump's Message #1: Praise for Ordinary Americans. Jewish treatment of workers has three prongs: violence (wars, vicious repression); propaganda (endless drivel, 'pilpul' etc); and legal and financial entanglements. But I think Trump's appreciation is probably genuine: building a huge successful hotel needs architects, engineers, truckers, fitters, designers, and many of these people work hard. "They are great people, smart." Talking to buildings, and commanding them to obey the Jewish narrative, doesn't work.
    Trump says he likes 'veterans'; he doesn't seem to know quite a few commit suicide, go mad, or are war criminals; and he seems naive about the Jewish links with the Second World War, Vietnam, etc. He says his TV speeches bring so much advertising revenue that the networks ought to give to some homeless vets. In my opinion, his misunderstanding of Jewish control of the USA shows in his military talk: "I will make America great again" (Not realising American power is used by Jews for their own purposes, not America's). "I am the most militaristic person... I'm going to make America so strong nobody's going to mess with us.." (Showing he hasn't understood the huge reach of American power, with bases all round the world—paid for by borrowing from American future taxpayers). Possibly Trump has sat in with Jews, laughing at goyim deaths and warmongering and their money frauds. I don't know.
    Trump dislikes illegal immigrants—they are, after all, illegal. He wants a wall, and indeed could not only build it, but make Mexico pay. Trump doesn't seem to realise this is a long-standing Jewish policy: not much to do with cheap labor, which could be dealt with by contracts etc, but rather to do with flooding with nonwhites, and adding to lucrative debt to Jews. Before Internet, most whites were not aware of this covert policy, and had no idea that most invading 'migrants' live on public money.

Trump's Message #2: The Art of the Deal Trump (fortified by his Apprentice TV series) is well-known for his book The Art of the Deal. He takes this very seriously, including the game-theory idea of unpredictability, and spotlights and tries to discredit diplomats and back-room types, very probably rightly, in view of the huge unaccounted 'foreign aid' deals.
    When Trump says an Iran deal was one of the worst deals ever, or that he will make Mexico pay for the border wall (or lose business on a huge scale), he's breaking new ground. Maybe Jews uneasily remember that Germany decided they saw no reason to pay Jewish money-changers in the 1930s, or that Gadaffi was working on a gold currency, or that North Korea does not have the burden of a Rothschild central bank.
    On the Iran deal, there's an aspect which hardly anyone understands yet: the almost certain fraud of nukes, naturally, like all big frauds, Jewish. Maybe Iran is exploiting their position: they might be about to reveal that nukes don't work, never worked, and Netanyahu is therefore a little unwise to threaten the world with the 'Samson Option'. I don't know; but it's possible, as the costs of the deal are offloaded onto Americans, but not Jews. Trump is nuke naive, but this could change. He might find his militarisation cheaper than he thought. His whole stance on not caring if Japan has 'nukes', since after all Pakistan and others supposedly have them, suggests an exit strategy to me: he may know perfectly well the whole thing is a sham, and want to stop the colossal waste of money.

Trump's Message #3: Militarism. Wars are better avoided; great power deters, in his view. "I'm militaristic .. but you have to know what to do". This seems to be a Christian view: the Jewish view (see the entire 20th century) is aggressively pro-wars and conflicts, especially if they offload the deaths onto others. Jews love inventing enemies: at present Russia and Syria seem to have taken over from Iran, as Iran did from Iraq, Egypt, Libya, and so on. If Trump is serious, it is possible the world might enter a period of peace. We are now so accustomed to Jews promoting war, that it seems inevitable and natural and unavoidable. But perhaps people aren't as warlike as Jews like. This could go either way: Jews like militarism, and if Trump, as in the Second World War, builds up the USA as an unsinkable aircraft carrier against most of the world, we may get endless new wars. Trump has started to say he was asked about NATO, and replied that it's obsolete, since the Soviet Union no longer exists. (He is quite amusing on full-time, lifelong, 'students' of Nato who fail to notice what it actually does). Trump seems not to—but may well—understand the Jewish basis for the 'Cold War'. Does he understand NATO is a front for Jewish power? Does he mean he's militaristic in the wrong sense, i.e. supporting insane Jewish warmongering? It's impossible to know, but he seems not to have any particular anti-Russian feeling, which sets him apart from Jewish kneejerkers.

Important Things About Trump Which May Worry Jews ---

    Experience with tall buildings. Trump's architects and structural engineers must have tipped him off as regards planes flying into skyscrapers: an obvious hazard. So Trump should have information on demolition, and 9/11. To date, Trump professes to believe 9/11 was caused by Muslims in planes; and that the 'dancing celebrations' were Muslim, not Jews, despite the clear proof. If Trump became President, reports about early warning systems, and radar, and interceptions, and the powers of the Jews in control in 2001, would be forced upon his attention. There's no sign Jews will stop lying about 9/11, as with the much older 'Holohoax'. (Saved version of an ADL file).
    Money. Trump seems to have a high opinion of banks; they do "a good job". Trump must have had huge loans for his buildings, printed by the Jewish money-printing machine. And he must have awareness of the US budget deficit, also Jewish-generated, since Jews lending paper or e-money to central government expect interest at face value—a huge return.
    But there are huge problems. One uneasy problem here is China: can they call in the huge debts owed to them? Refuse dollar payments? Is this why Trump wants jobs for Americans, and manufacturing moved back to the USA? And for that matter pollution diminished in China? I don't know, and the incompetent interviewers wouldn't dare ask anything intelligent: watch Barbara Walters, for example, on his helicopter, his hair, and his penthouse. Will countries start to refuse dollars, as Gaddafi did? Will Trump turn his attention to the Federal Reserve, or ask questions about missing gold from Fort Knox?
    Yet another example is the US budget. Trump comments that the budget disaster 'flew through' with no debate because of lobbyists, donors, and special interest groups. The Fed has such a huge disproportionate leverage it's not difficult to trace the likely sources of rubber-stamped budgets.
    It has to be said that Trump has (as far as I know) not produced a detailed plan for the USA. Let's hope his advisors will be Jew-aware.

    Dissent in the different Jewish crime syndicates.   Internet has led to an unprecedented awareness of Jews and ZOG regimes. So Trump may notice unprecedented divisions between the various Jewish factions: medical frauds, education frauds, military frauds, money frauds, propaganda frauds. For example, however much they hate whites, whites seem to be the only people able to innovate and run things. Another obvious example is Muslims: there's an absurd opposition between the idea that Muslims caused 9/11, and that Muslims should be allowed free immigration. Jews and Muslims have often enough historically, been allies against whites (and blacks). Yet another example is the obvious hypocrisy of trying to promote nonwhite immigration with no criminal sanctions for whites, but not in Israel.
    Nuclear Weapons. Nuclear Power.   Of course Trump believes, or says he believes, nuclear weapons exist, and thinks there are nuclear holocaust possibilities, though he seems immune to claims that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and therefore ought to be bombed by Americans. He also ridicules Iran's 'right to self-inspect', which of course is a mistake, if the traditional post-Hiroshima story is true. The idea of faked nukes is still new to most people (look at www.nukelies.org or watch the long Youtube Lords of the Nukes for evidence). I'm told some US military or intelligence people know the view is correct (and are irritated that Americans didn't seem able to think of it). I hope such people will contact and discuss the issue with Trump. It may help him understand oddities such as Pollard and Bowe Bergdahl.
    Trump on Iraq Wars.   Donald Trump recognises the Weapons of Mass destruction (WMD) was a propaganda lie. He says Iraq cost $2 trillion, left a lot of wounded warriors, oh—and also wrecked Iraq. He doesn't seem to have understood that Jews WANT chaos in the middle east, and want war. War is profitable to them IF you keep out of the way, can make and profit from expensive equipment, and can force people to pay. The US debtor nation owes money largely to Jews at the Fed. If goys die, the Jews tribal religion tells them not to care. Trump said "Our country's been losing for so long ... we lose every single war!" He hasn't understood—yet—that special interest groups can profit from a nation's losses. Trump often says "We should keep the oil - to the victor the spoils of war". But if Jews make more money controlling oil themselves, they may not be interested and will make no attempt to follow such a policy.
    "We shouldn't have been in Iraq. ISIS [appears to be a Jewish-run outfit of mercenaries and criminals] got the oil. Iran got $150 billion." Trump was almost unique in opposing 2nd Iraq war. All this suggests Jewish groups were pro-war.
    In the same way, Trump says Iraq and Iran have been fighting 'my whole life'. This is an exaggeration. However, he seems unaware that the war could have been made to happen by a greedy, hostile minority, intent on causing instability.

    At present, 'American' wars are Jewish, with costs offloaded onto US taxpayers, low ranks of US and other troops, and 'goy' soldiers and civilians of many nations. Maybe Trump wants wars and threats to be American, rather than Jewish. This must make perfect sense to Americans who understand the Jewish issue.

    Trump on Muslims, Syria, Saudi Arabia, ISIS.   "Mr Trump, what would you do to remove danger?" "We should declare war on ISIS .. bomb them, bomb whoever backs them .. ISIS are crazy .."  Saudi Arabia funds terrorism; they make tremendous money by selling oil. Saudi Arabia make 1 billion dollars a day. They should pay us for defense.." Trump has not been told that Jews run the House of Saud. Jewish interests may make money from Arabia, and also make money from weapons, all at the expense of Americans. The situation must be complex, but Trump and his advisors may make discoveries like that.
    Trump on China (and Mexico and Japan).   Trump talks about 'our' deficit or the 'US' deficit with China. $500 billion a year, he estimates. While the US and others are using up vastly expensive and profitable equipment in a primitive country, the Chinese on the other side of mountains are extracting minerals, for example the 'rare earths'. Trump is baffled by this. But, if there is Jewish banking in China, again, Jews, including those who intermarry with Chinese, enrich themselves while damaging non-Jews in the USA and other countries. Maybe he'll notice?
    Trump on Control of Materials: Oil? Food? Water? Pipelines? Transport?   As far as I know, Trump hasn't referred in any detail to such things. But it is arguable that Jewish policy has been to gain control of raw materials: this after all was Jewish policy in the 19th century. He may know about oil, where reserves (Saudi Arabia etc), concealed reserves, quality of reserves, and new discoveries (Mexico?) are all more or less speculative. There's scope for blockades, possibly on a huge scale.
    Education.   Trump opposes 'Common Core', and dislikes huge graduate debt. But these things are soft targets, rather obvious defects. Trump probably has not looked at the hypothesis that Jews want junk education for whites. And also Ivy League education for Jews, without having the wit to understand its poor quality. Much of US education from 1945 has been intentionally bad. If Trump's rapacious mind forays into these regions, serious reforms may result.
    Jewish Books, Holidays, Ideas, Freakishness.   With Internet, many texts (for example the Talmud in translation) are freely available. Possibly Trump's advisors will tip him off about Palestine, Talmudic obscene fanaticism, its history in Russia, 'Russian' (read: Jewish) oligarchs after about 1990. And the effects of Jews on Biblical studies, and the fundamentalists of the United States.
    False Flags, Psyops, and Other Lies With Intent.   Trump, as far as I know, has been conventional in his views on Pearl Harbor, the 'Holocaust', 9/11, Paris, and probably most such fakes; after all, he's been very busy with his life and work. But there must be some suspicion that he will get wise to such things. They are not that far removed from techniques used in advertising; he may learn fast. He may piece together Israeli laws - not comments, but actual Knesset-endorsed laws - forbidding settlement in Israel of Muslims, forbidding 'same sex marriage', forbidding race mixing, and so on. He may find who was behind 'Sanctuary Cities'. And 'gun control'. And why JFK is hardly mentioned. And if software developers object to getting $5 billion for an Obamacare website that doesn't work. Maybe he'll awake to the 'Holocaust' fraud, and be enraged.

Important Things About Trump Which May Worry 'Gentiles' ---

    Trump's Advisors (June 2016) are largely Jews   They say you can judge a man by the company he keeps. So here is a short list of Trump's closest supports and advisors: Michael Cohen (Ashkenazi Jew), Gil Dezer (Ashkenazi Jew), Michael Dezer (Ashkenazi Jew), Alan Fishman (Ashkenazi Jew), Alan Garten (Ashkenazi Jew), Michael Glassner (Ashkenazi Jew), Jason Greenblatt (Ashkenazi Jew), Carl Icahn (Ashkenazi Jew), Charles Kushner (Ashkenazi Jew), Jared Kushner (Ashkenazi Jew), Yael Kushner [née Ivanka Trump] (Orthodox Jewish convert), Richard LeFrak (Ashkenazi Jew), Corey Lewandowski (Eastern European and/or Ashkenazi Jew), Stephen Miller (Ashkenazi Jew), Sam Nunberg (Ashkenazi Jew), Stewart Rahr (Ashkenazi Jew), George Ross (Ashkenazi Jew), Phil Ruffin (Ashkenazi Jew), Felix Sater (Ashkenazi Jew), Allen Weisselberg (Ashkenazi Jew), Steve Wynn (Ashkenazi Jew), Lara Yunaska (Ashkenazi Jew). Can you spot the pattern? (From 'Just ice' in www.theoccidental.observer.org)

Important Things About The USA Which May Encourage Trump ---

    Military and Intelligence Unrest   Green Light? (Not my site. May or may not be on target)

Note on Roger Stone a 'real political operative' according to Trump, 'a patriot fighting Communism round the world'—except no doubt where it was or is Jewish. We see a blond man, with a receding chin and probably fake tan.
    Stone has a website, stonezone.com from which we gather that Stone worked with the campaign to re-elect Nixon. (I couldn't help noticing that 'Milhous' is wrongly spelt 'Milhouse' on this supposed expert's site). He also advertises a book ('co-written with Mike Colapietro') on LBJ killing JFK—only fifty years too late, and no doubt omitting the Jewish factor. 'Stone has been profiled in the Weekly Standard, The New Yorker, and the Miami Herald. Mr. Stone has written for the New York Times Sunday Magazine, The New York Times Op Ed page and for Newsmax.com, Breitbart, the Huffington Post and the FOX Opinion page. He has appeared frequently on FOX News.' Wow. He seems to be one of Trump's entourage of Jews, part of the fake of modern democracy, and no doubt a participant in war crimes and the destruction of many nations. Trump said "Drudge is a great guy"

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Corbyn fake Lenin-style poster

• Jeremy Corbyn: Just Another Jewish member of the Criminal Conspiracy.

Written by Rerevisionist   15 Dec 2015


Taken from my longer article on Jeremy Corbyn

• Corbyn is just another simple-minded tribalist, putting what he's been told are 'Jewish' interests above those of all others. In this summary, the items in red are my interpretation of Corbyn's imagery, presumably intended to update the 'Jewish' lies of the last few centuries—from as far back as the time of Cromwell, or even earlier.

'Criminal Conspiracy' because the 'Labour Party' does not in fact take into account the views of whites. From a Jewish viewpoint, the British 'Labour Party' (founded in about 1900) was vaguely similar to the NAACP in the United States; neither organisation was ever intended to perform their claimed tasks.

Contrary to the opinion of many alternative commentators, there are some differences between the British Conservative and Labour Parties. Roughly speaking, the Conservatives are controlled by rich Jews, while the Labour Party is controlled to act for the mass of Jews. On the 'Labour Party', consider its failure to investigate the 'Great War', the BBC's indifference to truth, the absence of any action on financiers, the 'National Government', their Churchill worship, the Jews in trade boards after 1945, the indifference to killings of everyone except Jews, the present-day funding of invaders and lack of help even for people who contributed for life. The official view of the Labour Party is expressed by Wikipedia: '... a centre-left political party in the United Kingdom. Growing out of the trade union movement and socialist parties of the nineteenth century ...' In fact it was Jewish, and entirely different from broad movements for equity and fairness, which of course have never been Jewish policies. It had the useful function of providing a 'scapegoat': "What a world it's become"! bemoaned an academic Kingsley Amis character. Aristocrats, churchmen, upper middle classes have largely been victims of taxation, but have not had the insight to investigate to where their assets disappeared. The 'Labour Party' provides a perfect cover.
    But the overall Jewish feel is very likely a primitive genetic thing: they hate every goy, but notably whites, whose achievements they cannot emulate. Hence the planned destruction: world wars, local wars, depressions, non-white immigration, anti-white family legislation, support for crime.
    At present, Cameron is a face of rich Jews. Note that Scotland is one of the few countries that never expelled Jews. Cameron is part of a tradition shared with Balfour, of the Agreement, a wealthy Scot who thought the vast hecatombs of the Great War were balanced by the new invader state of Israel. But Labour had a problem after Blair, with Jack Straw and others, flooded Britain with vastly expensive non-whites. The experiment with two Jews, the Milibands, was fortunately unsuccessful. There must have been a behind-the-scenes operation to pretend Corbyn is new and original; the voting process was clearly rigged, and for example was cheered on by the Jew Dimbleby, with a December 2015 BBC Question Time with presumably paid actors hooting for Corbyn.

    • Corbyn maintains the pretence that '9/11' was not a Jewish action within New York. There seems to have been a collective Jewish decision to keep lying about 9/11: Google 'ADL 9/11 denial' for an absurd online document. (Version saved on this site)
9/11 was obviously planned to make new wars in the Middle East. Corbyn allows doubts about Afghanistan. But is happy that Iraq should be ruined, because it could damage 'Jews' and their oil interests and land grab in Palestine. Presumably he wants Iran destroyed, but as yet neo-cons have failed. It's difficult to judge Iran, because of the supposed nuclear issue.

    • Corbyn maintains the fraud of the 'Holocaust'.
This of course is a major source of money, but primarily of censorship.
Whether this will continue remains to be seen. Corbyn wants to deform education with lies if he thinks 'Jews' benefit.

    • Corbyn maintains the fraud of nuclear weapons.
This is a new issue to most members of the public.
Briefly, Corbyn has to pretend to abolish nuclear weapons; his CND background is useful here. If you're new to the revisionist nuclear issue, try nukelies.org

    • Corbyn wants immigration from Africa, both north and sub-Saharan, and maintains the fiction that these hordes are Syrians. he does not mention Israel's wars in the Middle East.
'Jews' have a policy of race replacement in white countries. (See e.g. Coudenhove-Kalergi the Barcelona Accord, Birdwood's Longest Hatred). Corbyn follows this policy on auto-pilot. HOWEVER there's evidence now that Europeans are beginning to fight back. Probably Corbyn will modify his position, perhaps under the pretence he's a 'reformer'.

    • Corbyn claims to be opposed to the death penalty. The 'Jewish' purpose is obviously to damage white countries (by releasing violent criminals; 'Jews' did the same thing in the Jewish coup in the USSR). And it's to allow third-world dictatorships, and attacks from the First World.
Obviously Corbyn says nothing about 'Jews' invading Palestine, and the mass murders there; the object is to retain stolen land, which he presumably, in his superstitious stupidity, imagines is 'Jewish'. He has a minimum of mock sympathy for Palestinians, to pretend he has a policy. On 'Jews' campaigning against the death penalty, except for themselves, see e.g. my book review of a 1960s book.

    • Corbyn says nothing about paper money (controlled mainly by the Federal Reserve, which prints unlimited amounts). He implies the scam can continue forever, despite the inevitable inflation in years to come.
Corbyn does not mention 'National Debt' which is selectively a sort of 'Jewish' tax. Most people don't realise that 'Jews' make money from loans to central government; they get interest on their junk paper! Jews WANT more debt. Corbyn is either too stupid or too dishonest to mention this important issue.

    • Corbyn, as a parasitic 'Jew', has no idea of the realities of such things as buildings, medical education and equipment, manufacture and transport and disposal of things. This explains his ridiculous faith that unlimited immigration can automatically be housed, fed, and so on.
All his life he's had paper money, and does not have the intellect to understand real costs of anything. As the expression goes, he's never done an honest day's work in his life.

    • Corbyn, as far as I could tell, says nothing about 'private funding', a euphemism for 'Jews' buying public assets with worthless paper.
He doesn't mention, or says little, about Common Purpose, the secretive 'post-democratic' group that arranges corrupt secret deals.

    • Corbyn's view of 'socialism' is that of almost all 'Jews': they think the USSR was 'socialist'. When he says 'socialism works!' he means a clique of 'Jews' in an undeveloped country, supported with Jewish money from outside, can be turned into a huge investment slave-camp.
Corbyn may have been pushed in the hope the truth of the USSR has been forgotten. He can wave his red flag, hoping people will forget 'Jews' organising mass murder, with the support of the 'west'. Whether this will work, now that Internet provides some freedom of discussion, remains to be seen, but it certainly looks as though it was part of the push behind him.

    • Corbyn's 'Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer', John McDonnell, may not be a Jew; who knows.
However, he says nothing about debt, currency reform, processing the huge debt, the costs of militarism, and the related massive frauds.
[ Start of 'Real Jewish Studies' piece | Recent Articles (=Top of Page) | Truths about Judaism ]

• Simpleton Jews, Worthless Whites, Parasites and Prey

Written by Rerevisionist   16 June 2016

Jews as Simpletons
The seed of this article was a series of comments (appended to my Amazon reviews) by 'Marco Buendia', probably a Jew with a fake name, something habitual enough with Jews. 'Marco Buena' is a troll of the most tedious type. What grew the seed were comments on my reviews of books by Bertrand Russell. It was obvious 'Marco Buena' had no knowledge of Russell. So why would he make soothing noises about Russell, plus hostile remarks, so far as 'Marco Buena' was capable of making focussed statements, on my reviews of Bertrand Russell?
      The clue came to me, very indirectly, from Ludovici's Woman: A Vindication of 1923. Ludovici was Rodin's secretary; this is Rodin of 'The Kiss', and of course other sculptures. Ludovici noticed that, before Rodin became famous, Rodin's studio was empty of female visitors. But as his fame spread, their numbers increased. Ludovici's explanation was that women have an earthy nature: money, power, yes; but discernment, taste—no. Detection of power is evolutionarily useful; taste, intellect, new perceptions, less so. None of these women could detect, from their own resources, whether Rodin was an artist, or not.
      And the same must apply to the sayanim, hasbarat, or whatever the genetically-programmed liars call themselves. They're not interested in creativity, or intellect, or finely-argued explorations. That would be like a cuckoo interesting itself in principles of nest architecture. What Jews want is something like an Index Librorum Prohibitorum in reverse—titles and authors which are Jew-approved. To take a few examples more or less at random: what is the enlightened person to think of Arthur Koestler, a once-popular author? Well, he was a 'Hungarian Jew' [good], but he wrote on the Khazars [bad]. So the Jewish verdict is: bad. What about Benny Hill, part of a TV team making infantile smut? Well, he thought he was a 'Jew'—so, good. How about Colin Firth? He was in an infantile film about an ineffectual monarch—but it supported Jews. So: good. What about J M Keynes, the famous economist? Keynes knew about Jews and the money system, but said little if anything about it, even though the 'Fed' immediately preceded the 'Great War'. So the Jewish verdict: good. What about Tarantino, who is, or is said to be, the director of an insulting disgusting film related to the Second World War? Well, he conforms to what almost all Jews think is in their interest. So: good. The process is so simple! My initial puzzle is solved. Bertrand Russell was for most of his life a useful idiot, entirely unaware of Jewish malevolence. So: good. It's true that towards the end of his life he trod on a few toes—JFK murder, 'nuclear weapons', Vietnam War—but these were controlled by 'friends'. 'Marco Buena' was simply working from his script. Similar principle to Jews' opinions on Boas, Freud, and Adorno as explained by Kevin MacDonald.
      An advantage of the Jewish mindset is that it's so very, very, simple. Others may agonise over justice, truth, equality, fairness and so on, but Jews ignore all that nonsense—they just grab what seems to benefit Jews. Should Jew actors support the 9/11 fraud?—Of course. Should Jews support Holocaust liars?—There's money in it. Of course! Should Jews keep Jewish sex offenders in Israel? Of course! Jews see the academic world as desirable, but large numbers of them are stupid; should they shout about each other, fake genuine work, write absurd books?—Of course! They manufacture ridiculous views on many subjects, as a disguise for their hatred for whites. Good teaching is difficult—so they pretend. A practical example is laws on secrecy: is there some way to balance legitimate information against legitimate secrecy? Most people would agree some privacy is important, for example; but secrecy opens various possibilities for covert violence and secret powers over others. Anyone who watches Jews 'debate' such issues will notice that their sole concern is getting more information out of non-Jews. Fake expertise by Jews is a serious problem: mimicry and forgery have led to astonishing events, from water fluoridation and faked disease, and media campaigns of lies lasting for generations, TV campaigns with faked events, to unqualified people in the US Supreme Court and Presidency.

Worthy Whites
The genetic micro-evolution of whites has not, yet, as far as I know, received anything like the attention it deserves. Europe is unique among continents in having geographical barriers—seas, islands, mountains, snow, rivers—which to this day influence the entire area, on the principle that 'good fences make good neighbours'. And Europe has abundant life, to be exploited, without enormous effort and risk. Dangerous areas need caution—Borneo's 'long houses' were needed in areas of wild jungle life. Whites have evolved specialist groups in farming, building, clothing, water navigation and so on. Such people must concentrate, and exclude other activities from their minds. Watching a video of men supervising hard disk drives in a Google installation, showed me how similar they are to shepherds, vigilant for hours on end. Perhaps this type of evolution helped steer whites away from the Jewish and Muslim monomania for single 'holy' books. But these Europeans must implicitly assume that other groups have the same interest in working together on the great jigsaw of life. And genetic inheritance and selection must bring gene pools into a rough balance with their environment. Note that traditional economic theory in Europe tended to believe that smallish specialised groups would work together—though the mechanism, for example the 'invisible hand', was vague.
      How fixed is behaviour? Looking at garden birds or insects or for that matter plants, their behaviours remain the same over fantastically large numbers of generations. The problem is that it's invisible: you can't the biology that operates them. And yet, time after time, it stays constant. From an evolutionary point of view, this makes perfect sense: the structural mechanisms have to work, but what the device does is equally important to keep it alive. There must be some co-evolution between new developments and their control. It's perfectly possible that psychopathy is as fixed as the mechanisms which keep lungs and heart operating. The brain and its operation is not understood; maybe its effects are as much predetermined as autonomic reactions.

Whites Have Genes Too
Jews arguably have inherited parasitic genes—refer to this, then return: Jew parasite evolution. Personally, I'm a determinist: repeatability seems part of nature. Whether this is true or not, genetic causes must apply more or less to other races. Whites tend to be fixated on local problems, and need to be good at obeying orders—essential where many people take part in complicated activity which they don't fully understand. But here they are vulnerable to mimics posing as leaders. But Jews seem to operate on a simple instinct of greed and manipulation. If so, they can subvert and steal and harm. And head the world to disaster.

Specialisation and its Discontents
Other specialisations must have included reading and writing, and drawing, sculpture and ceramics; these are identifiable in ancient Egypt and Greece, in mediaeval guilds, to today. And military and police skills: wrestling, boxing, archery practice, sword fencing, firearms practice. Any type of specialisation may, presumably, be perverted away from its fairly natural uses: at the present day for example, visual skills are often used in misleading advertising, false flag creation, technological faked claims. All this, as is fairly well-known, opens up the possibility of an entire culture being parasitised, though many members may not be aware of what's happening. Even a group with an aristocracy, evolved to optimising all the component groups, necessarily dealing with the many and varied groups which a complicated society must have, is vulnerable. Some sort of hierarchy, of 'obeying orders', is likely to develop, especially in complicated projects, and can be subverted. Jewish history proves that a fiercely-fanatical network, sharing same genetic type, can be a serious or fatal menace to a society of specialists. This might be deduced from military, engineering, and business models in which concentrated attacks, thin ends of wedges, can lead to victory, demolition, market share, and what not. The Kevin MacDonald idea (whites as liable to pathological altruism) clearly does not apply to some white groups. Read true information on white war crimes under Jewish direction if you seriously think whites are 'pathologically altruistic'.

Worthless Whites
      I suggest Jews used controlled violence on an ever-larger scale, possibly driven by instinct. At the city, small-scale level, the cases of Leo Frank (USA) and Jack the Ripper (UK) and of course many examples throughout Europe show how Jews established de facto immunity for Jewish violence, probably by application of propaganda, bribery, and thuggery. It's curious to see the BBC (run by Jews) fascinated to this day by the Jewish Kray thugs (they are reported to have paid £30,000 for a deathbed interview), and by the Jewish 'Jack the Ripper'. On a large scale, in the world since about 1600, Jews fomented civil wars in England, France, and the USA. Possibly Jews in the USA, for example 48ers after 1848 (deplored by Hitler as pretending to be German) were behind the so-called Civil War in the USA. The 'Great War', the Jewish war in the USSR, and the Second World War, and many other wars—Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia; Africa; Iraq, north Africa, Middle East—showed similar patterns. In each case, vast numbers of whites and others were sucked in, so the allocation of blame (or praise, if you like war) isn't simple. It's an important question as to whether aggression is genetic and inherent in whites, or men, or all people, or all animals for that matter; or whether the genes for specialist activity in whites were exploited. To this day, many US veterans have raped, murdered, butchered, and burnt alive people about whom they knew nothing, and still know nothing, as an outcome of unremitting lies. Americans have ruined and wasted countries around the world.
      I'd suggest there's an equivalent, among whites, of the relentless fierce narrow-mindedness of 'Sayanim', is groupings which are themselves specialist and parasitic. A perfect example is the Church of England in the 1800s. Until about 1850, half the entire output of Oxbridge graduates went into the C of E. Their net contribution to intellectual life was, if anything, negative; and their net economic contribution was negative. While the Victorian world developed, in both good and bad ways, archbishops, bishops, and vicars stayed much the same. They were the BBC broadcasters of the time, issuing their official messages on Sundays. Arguably, a modern equivalent is the Professoriat, with the odd combination of strutting self-confidence, built on the shifting sands of imposed Jewish opinions. So far Professoriats have been buttressed by the power to weed out underlings bringing disagreeable truths.
      All this is obvious enough to anyone who has witnessed the post-1945 expansion of universities. But (and I may be wrong here) some of the Professoriat are feeling restless, in the way vicars who (one example) led to women's deaths in childbirth by opposing contraception. In a world in which war deaths must total at least 100 million per century, and false flags and other hoaxes, such as the 'Holocaust', are obvious enough to any researcher, and democracy is mostly a sham—shouldn't these people perhaps do a bit? Make a bit of effort? I think I do detect signs that some professors are starting to rise above the New York Times viciousness. This may only be a result of the Jewish anti-white attitudes; but at least it's something when whites, who have been brainwashed by Jews for at least a century, show signs of stirring. Some are aware that their ivory towers are built on fragments of hell for which they were not responsible, but which they ignored. Another seed for this piece was a set of comments by 'David Ashton' in the Occidental Observer. I was unable to find out who 'David Ashton' is, though he seems to live in Britain. He was unable to understand that 'Comrade Corbyn', 'Phony Tony Blair' and Harold Wilson were all following Jewish policies. However, if he works at it he'll perhaps understand why (for example) Corbyn worries over 'nuclear weapons', and over the Jewish policy of supporting mass invasion by Moslems. Other typical issues are Jewish funding for barracks-style housing for invaders, rents to be paid by the state—i.e. 'paid' by Jewish debt. If the debt it used to support health or pensions or education, if Jews decide to leave they will leave a mess of huge unpayable bills. Even economists may be starting to understand this sort of thing. Typical comment: I used to believe all this BS about the bugaboos being a big economic benefit to Europe because these reports came from PhDs in institutes, think tanks or from the government. I couldn't understand it but because a PhD said it I believed it. And then Thilo Sarrazin came along and made it plain: Migrants make Germany dumb". ... 70 percent of the Turkish and 90 percent of the Arabic population of Berlin live off the state and are were not fit for much other than 'fruit and vegetable selling'.

Parasites and Prey Over Many Generations
Let's try to consider some long-term consequences of this clash, which ultimately derives from the characteristics of populations in Europe, and those of populations in Asia, their larger neighbour, where they reacted over many centuries of city life. Many people are aware, from nature, of predator-prey relationships. Birds may eat worms, and if worms become rare, bird populations fall, allowing worms to become more common. Parasitism is more mysterious: liver flukes, mistletoe, and tapeworms illustrate a few types. Careful observers may notice these things, because animal lives are so much shorter than human lives. Though impossible to observe by individuals, there is every reason to suppose similar oscillations will occur over hundreds of generations—however long genetics take to operate. We could be set for thousands of years of attacks by, from the white point of view, united psychopathic obsessives. And the process might be transmitted technologically: it is likely Talmudic writings were transmitted to Khazaria, starting the present 1,000-year part of the cycle. Who can say whether (say) Japan, or Russia, or Turkey might convert to some variety of Judaism, and start a new variant of parasitism?


[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Just 1 liar in England used by Reuters & BBC for Syria News article from 2012. The BBC used just one Jewish source for their propaganda on Syria.

Rerevisionist Interesting propaganda expose - the BBC quote some liar, just one person, living in Coventry. Supplied to them by Jewish-run Reuters. The object is to sucker Americans into bombing the near east, probably Iran via Syrian airspace. Note the way the ridiculous source of the misinformation is kept hidden - analogously to what happened in the promotional campaign to invade Iraq, with e.g. an old amateur PhD dissertation, and lies about babies by some official's daughter.

Interesting multilingual quarter-hour video. [The sound has been muted].

The BBC has an entire listening post in Caversham, near Reading, with people spending their working lives listening to foreign broadcasts; possibly these days it's digitised, maybe with word recognition etc. It shows what contempt they have for the suckers, that they broadcast the most amateurish lies and deception. Remember Orwell based his 'Ministry of Truth' on the BBC.

Exorcist I pointed out several instances of "faked" Libyan uprising news film footage on the British Democracy Forum. In one instance the video I linked to was quickly "pulled" from YouTube. Thanks to Rerevisionist for finding and posting this. In assessing the veracity of "News", particularly film footage, people should start off with the assumption that everything they are told by the media is a lie with an ulterior motive and the film footage is faked. In the overwhelming majority of cases further investigation confirms this assumption.

More propaganda on Syria, Iran etc to give some idea of media behind-the-scenes machinations.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Matthew Gould Jew cyber
Matthew Gould. Alleged to be 'Director of cyber security and information assurance at the Cabinet Office' (of David Levita Cameron's 'British' regime).
    I doubt this race-based tosser in his silly hat has any competence in computers. Probably his role is to enforce censorship of Jewish crimes.


Written by Rerevisionist   23 Nov 2015

Let's survey the 500-year war by Jews. The dynamic has been: Jews in a small area squeeze money from locals, get a reputation for shrewdness, and intermingle with a different elite close by. When their general theft, dishonesty and incompetence becomes clear, the same trick is repeated. The two most recent huge successes were (1) the coup in Russia in 1917, after which Jews used Russians and their raw materials ruthlessly, leaving a hollowed shell and a devastated and degraded population. And (2) the coup in the USA, with the Federal Reserve (1913) and 50 years later the murder of Kennedy, buoyed up by the myths of the Holohoax and of (in my view) nuclear weapons.
    The internal stresses of parasitism are immense: vast fortunes are wasted on Jewish propaganda in all the media, in the education systems, in misplaced and harmful projects. Huge numbers of what in effect are collaborators work in TV networks, movies, 'news' sources, pseudo-sciences such as NASA, the 'AIDS' fraud, nuclear frauds, drug frauds, vast military campaigns of cruelty unprecedented in world history, secret military operations in Africa and south America, and endless legal and police waste. The fantastic nonsense of Jew-promoted migrations (but not into Israel) is another huge burden. It's not at all clear that survival is possible.
    But Jew-awareness is not as unusual as many observers think: there have always been critics, many of them shrewd, though Jewish mopping-up operations have dimmed their work and their voices. Britain during and after Cromwell had critics; both the French and British were aware Napoleon was funded by Jews, as was Wellington; in each case, amid the wreckage, intensive propaganda was used to silence such people, and to ally with and fund their opponents. The disaster of the 'Great War' was largely the product of the funded simpleton Balfour; the next world war was largely arranged by Churchill, with the Jew-funded Stalin, and Jew-funded American and 'American' politicians. There must be a wealth, if that's the word, of personal, family, business, military, and state involvements with Jews. I've been told that, today, 35% of British voters say they would not knowingly vote for a Jew.

      Now let's try to survey the world as it is now:
    The population issue seems likely to result in population crashes on a colossal scale: I doubt whether Africa's huge population, plus its future likely increase, can ever be brought to any level of wealth.
    Jewish greed, and the Jewish desire to control money in all countries, and their permanent need for violence and hate and repression of intelligence and education, show no signs of abating.
    Thus far, Jewish lies have had an almost monopolistic field. Nothing has countered them. It is possible this will change, with Internet; one has to hope so, and indeed Internet is new to human life, just as television was new about sixty years ago. This must have a weakening effect on collaborators who previously operated with almost no risk. For example, Lyndon Johnson in the USA and, earlier, Clement Attlee, would have had their policies exposed in a way impossible at the time, had Internet existed.
    It is to be expected that Jews will continue to identify, fund, bribe, and blackmail, as usual. The question is: can the process continue, now that the world is running out of wealthy states to parasitise? There seem to be signs of reaction: Hungary, Norway, Iceland, Australia, Canada, the USA, for example, even occupied Germany, although largely inert, do have well-informed clusters and groups. Military and 'intelligence' groups have had a long run of secret, almost unchallenged, cruelty and viciousness; it is impossible to sample their opinions, but there must be some change there, pending the takeover of Jewish money. The huge increase in false-flag mercenaries suggests a sea-change in the way force is applied.
    Years of criticism of the obvious fraud of the 'Holocaust' will force more people to reconsider their attitude to their assets and their countries' assets. Why should be fleeced by Jewish liars? And why should they not get their assets back? Why should they continue to pay out for unbacked money? Why should 9/11 criminals, war criminals, thieves of Palestinian lands, Liberty perpetrators, remain out of jail?
    The common-sense dynamics by which organisations grow may reverse; as one Jewish lie or contemptible piece of cruelty falls, a momentum must build up, in the way discredited groups fail.
    Jewish supremacy brings a number of lessons: (1) Secrecy and shameless lies work. (2) Groups of people working together are more effective than lone heroes or advertised figures. (3) Co-operation across nations is highly effective. (4) Violence as practised by Jews works. (5) Spying as practised by Jews works. (6) It is essential to keep Jews out of public posts.
    Technological changes include: (1) DNA work. Israel is claimed to use DNA tests to identify Jews. Perhaps these will have to be introduced in countries facing Jewish immigration. (2) Nuclear work. It seems likely nuclear weapons were a fraud all along. This will no doubt be kept secret until some opportune moment. (3) Weapons now have hugely enhanced flying capabilities, navigation capabilities, intercommunication (as in the 9/11 controlled explosions), though I doubt that explosives in terms of energy release are as great as nuclear propaganda has implied. Though it will be good to keep out of their way. (4) Communications seem obviously better, including machine translation, though it's hard to judge the use of ciphers and encoding.

It's tempting to try to summarise the effects of Jews so far, and their vast cohorts of fellow-travellers. Do the latter expect their lectureships in nothing, their listless propaganda, their election-rigging, their shrieking on-line trolling, their pretence that fake doctors with photocopied diplomas are competent, their ignoring of immigrant crime, their unquestioned access to funding, to last forever? Some clues must be provided by an honest examination of past wars, disasters, and ruins. Perhaps someone might face this daunting and unpleasant task.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]



Written by Rerevisionist   9 Nov 2015

The 'Flynn Effect', named for James R. Flynn, is an exotic oddity, found in some hothouses in academic woodland glades. The general idea is that people are 'getting smarter', as evidenced by increasing scores on 'IQ' tests, ever since they were invented in 1900-ish—a splash of colour in a world in which intellectual decline seems clear enough. The official binomial nomenclature of 'the Flynn effect' dates from 1994, when The Bell Curve was published; or so Flynn said himself in 2006, in Scientific American. Flynn states that Reed Tuddenham was the first to present convincing evidence, 'using a nation-wide sample', of IQ gains over time. And that the label "Flynn Effect" was not coined by Flynn, although he noted the possibility in 1981.

Flynn says he's a moral philosopher; he has never administered IQ tests, or if you prefer, 'IQ tests'. Flynn's notes or comments were appropriated; if this was unfair, he doesn't (as far as I know) say so. It seems Tuddenham asserted in 1948 that 'US soldiers' had made a 14-point gain between the First and Second World Wars—the 'nation-wide sample' being north American. Similar observations have been made elsewhere, subsequently. Flynn in effect says since that time, there's been another 15 points or so added.

(But there is a rather obvious possibility that pencil-and-paper tests, slack administration and desire for results, the whole ambience of IQ tests, and their status—intellect vs simple mass soldiers—explains the whole shift.)

Flynn now proposes, in a video dated February 2013, 'an interpretation that eliminates paradoxes.' During the 20th century, 'our minds altered dramatically'. In about 1900, people faced a concrete world; they avoided abstractions. If we take three categories—1 classification; 2 use of logic on abstractions and universals; 3 taking the hypothetical seriously, plus 12 years of formal education—we see that only 3% in 1900 worked in 'cognitively demanding professions'. They were not on the verge of retardation. (This may be a counter to the idea that sub-Saharan Africans and other blacks measure IQs of about 70, regarded as mentally retarded).

Flynn was partly borrowing from written quotations from earlier people reacting to what they saw as 'dumb' questions: What do a crow and a fish have in common? How would you feel, if you woke up black? The same sort of reaction that blacks gave when they saw maps: what about variations in terrain? (My wording). Flynn seems entirely assured that, for example, farming is simple, without abstractions. And that modern education deals in abstractions; he quotes exam questions (not answers) from, I think, Ohio. I doubt whether this is true: American history for example has endless dubious examples and hardly any generalisations—such as, who gained from this?

Flynn correctly enough sees no political progress up to our time: he gives four examples of lies which influenced people: the Maine false flag, the Lusitania war bait, the supposed attack by Vietnam on the US 7th Fleet, and Saddam Hussein who 'hated Al Qaeda'. Flynn omits, or doesn't know about, Jews and slavery, Jews and the Opium Wars, the Boer Wars, Jews and their hatred for Russia, Jews and mass killings in the USSR, the fake 'Holocaust', Jews and 9/11—but of course even moral philosophers have to eat.

The real Flynn Effect will occur when large numbers of people finally grasp the part played by so-called 'Jews' and their collective tribal viciousness. When that happens, people will look back and marvel at the present lack of intelligence. Was there ever such a world?

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


Written by Rerevisionist   13 Nov 2015

Caught in a long traffic jam, we scanned the radio spectrum for information, and found local BBC radio; three car pile-up, plus Rod Stewart, who appeared to have been interviewed by the BBC disc jockey, or whatever they call them these days. I doubt Stewart actually called into some office falsely labelled 'Your BBC'; both sides must use more audio equipment than almost anybody. He's appearing live for a celebration of the Second World War; 2015 = 1945+70. Stewart has no time for critics of the supposed heroes of yesterday. Presumably he imagines Churchill was a hero of Britain. I vaguely wondered if technology is now at the stage where singing voices can be synthesised: one of the oddities of the 9/11 fraud was reportedly a mimicked voice of a mimicked victim, flying in a mimicked plane.
      The number of stars who speak out on issues such as peace and war, and in particular Jewish-related lies, is tiny: I can only think of three offhand—Robert Vaughan on the Vietnam War, Brigitte Bardot on Muslims, and Eric Clapton on immigration, and I doubt any of those mentioned the Jewish connection. Perhaps some media-aware person might look at other times and places, and include the opposite phenomenon of support for wars and crimes and frauds: I doubt if it's a coincidence that Kipling, the anti-German grubby writer, was given a Nobel Prize for literature, just as Nobel Peace prizes for Kissinger and Obama, a century or so later, raised a few laughs. Hollywood awards, and Pulitzers, and Time 'persons of the year', of course point the same way.

Later: a comment in The Occidental Observer on Eric Hobsbawm, a phoney I think supported for life at the LSE (here's a recording of Hobsbawm on 'The Russian [read: Jewish] Revolution. Here's a review of one of his books). The 'extreme leftist' left something—an estate of about £2 million, I'd guess largely made up of one or more houses in north London. The serious and genuine historian, David Irving, has of course no such accolades, except in the sense that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Keith Richard is reported to have a personal fortune of a couple of hundred million US dollars. Maybe he has a private drug farm.

'Property porn' is a category of TV programming riding on the back of 'the property ladder'—I wonder how these things will show up in, say, a century. Possibly, by then, house ownership will have dwindled to nothing, after owners will be fleeced by taxes in the way English aristocrats lost heavily after the Great War. Possibly, as in Germany, vast numbers of people will rent for life. One porn show has a chap living in an engineered shipping container, made to float, moored for £5,000 a year, with his living space big enough for a table with four chairs. Another has an oversized imitation bathing machine which may, or may not, float. Others have what I've seen described as 'architectural masterpieces in places no-one wants to live'—apparently influenced by modern public buildings with vast internal spaces, like the British Library. These are sometimes enlivened by implausible PC 'couples'. None of these people seem to have any possessions to fill their spaces—how nice it would be to see a banqueting hall, or music studio, or library, or lab, or debating room, in these 'award-winning' spaces. None of the figures for costs seem remotely plausible. An aim of these shows is I think to raise no questions as to whether permanent inflation, or Jewish-pushed permanent immigration of unemployables, can continue. (It occurs to me a variant is the Antiques Roadshow with numerous dim people interested only in auction valuations, and pretending to be pleased with small valuations, and Fiona Bruce, a reader of other peoples' scripts, like an old whore trying to entice doubtful clients into her hidden world of lies and blackmail).

Watching a Youtube of Andrew Brons, ex-BNP member, who was elected to the European Union for 4 or 5 years: I was moved to make an irritated comment—he lectured in politics or public administration or something at the level of modern universities; and now has first-hand experience of the EU, and a pension of what might be a hundred or two hundred thousand a year. Yet he seems to know nothing of how the EU is funded (clue: paper money), or how it formulates and pushes its secret and hugely expensive, and unaudited, policies.

waste of money
“£100 million pounds a year of your money”—Jonathan Bowden
I noticed a report that Cohen, head of the BBC (or something), has been moved out, or left. Who knows the truth of these items? He was reported to have earned, or at least been paid, £300K a year for the lie factory.

Could it be that whites are genetically over-specialised, any specialisation being an activity which needs continual practice? Leaving openings for parasitical tightly-organised groups to discover weaknesses, and get to work in society's interstices exploiting them?

Bill Gates is supposedly the richest man in the world, and supposedly has decided to embark on charitable giving—possibly therefore the biggest private charity in the world. I wonder if there's a single person who will claim he has well-thought out schemes, for example to think out, design and implement schemes to bring improvements to the vastly-increasing population of Africans?

Is Donald Trump any good, or just another false dawn? Kevin MacDonald hopes so. But many people point out there's a continual outflow of money to Jewish 'think tanks', pressure groups, things like AIPAC and the 'Southern Poverty Law Center'. And there is no outflow to TheOccidentalObserver.  Or to David Irving.  Bradley Smith of CODOH is puzzled that whites with private money do not fund serious Holohoax work, since (he claims) whites collectively have more money than Jews. A more impressive instance is Norway's 'sovereign wealth fund' mostly from oil, 'forecast to be worth $1 trillion' soon. Nobody can doubt the impressive ability of large groups of people to waste vast amounts of money; but there are surely enough interesting possibilities to be explored—Harold Hillman's work comes to my mind, obscure though he is.

I'm told BHT Billiton is the world's largest mining company. Based in Australia, it has been accused on several occasions of transferring assets to European royal families, at far below their worth. I hadn't previously thought of royal families as tax dodging schemes, though it makes perfect sense—secrecy, lingering traces of respect, entourages of money handlers. And probably more secure than obscure islands.

The Charity frauds and hoaxes are an interesting part of post-1945 life. They need detailed analysis; probably they are a way to (i) offset nominal tax rates for corporations (as in tax-deductible charity organisations), and (ii) provide money for propaganda, mostly anti-white. Compared with the trillions of paper money printed, so-called charities are minor, though the totals appear huge. I'll believe they are serious when people of the Bill Gates type fund serious science (Harold Hillman being an example known personally to me), or serious social science (of the David Duke, David Irving, Green of Migration Watch type), or practical stuff (such as aid to whites, recompense for victims of 'American'—read 'Jewish'—wars, genuine help for Africans), or consideration of massive Jewish evils such as mass killings in eastern Europe and mass killings in Vietnam, the Holohoax and 9/11. Until then everyone intelligent will know they are just another part of the world of liars and phonies.
Here's confirmation  [I don't vouch for the details] by Sadho Ram – 02 Dec 2015
By now you must have heard that Mark Zuckerberg along with his wife Priscilla Chan has pledged to give away 99% of his estimated USD45 billion in Facebook stock to charity. Basically, [the story is] Mark is giving away enough money to fund one of the world's biggest charities for the next 45 years. Instead, he is funding his own. Here's how:

The vehicle for his beneficence will be the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative LLC, a family-run foundation that he controls and through which he will maintain control of Facebook for "the foreseeable future." Which basically means: Mark Zuckerberg will transfer ownership of his Facebook stock without paying capital gains taxes. He will also benefit from the possibility that his foundation will live beyond him, with his heirs and their heirs at the helm, untouched by estate taxes.

A Facebook PR, while confirming to BuzzFeed News, said that the initiative is structured as an LLC [Limited Liability Company], and not as a charitable trust. Which means that unlike a charitable trust, which is compelled to spend its money on charity, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, LLC will be able to spend its money on whatever it wants, including private, profit-generating investment.

It's truly agonising to see such people as the historian David Irving desperate to fund his books; while superficial fakes such as 'Jew' Simon Schama get fortunes from the BBC. The money and borrowings from the future going to propaganda are astounding and disgusting. Many of the opponents still don't understand why this happens; something like fifteen years ago, activists in Britain were surprised that a woman called Stanko was given £3 million for a propagandist department about women. They have no idea of the determination of Jews to wreck their lives.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Gardner flat earth

• Flat Earth Promotion: Why is 'Flat Earthism' Being Pushed?

'Jew Shock'

Written by Rerevisionist   16 Nov 2015   &   29 Feb 2016; Youtube note 18 July 2016

'Flat earth' theory appears to be promoted at present, for example on Youtube. These seem to be mass-produced (same sounds, same images, similar voice-overs, similar logos, similar lies; reminiscent of many mass-produced Jewish junk propaganda campaigns). Why is this? Here are a few unflattering notes (2011) on the Flat Earth Society in England: Flat Earth Society notes. Their forum deleted some comments of mine on the 'Holocaust' fraud; I can't take them very seriously as skeptics/sceptics or thinkers.
    www.flatearthsociety.org's site leans heavily on A hundred proofs the Earth is not a Globe, by William Carpenter, published in 1885. According to my notes, the International Flat Earth Society was founded in 1888.
    I met the late Ellis Hillman, who was (I think) President of the Flat Earth Society. His background was geology; he knew about earthquakes, underground rivers, and also Wegener's Theory which students were told definitely was nonsense. He'd been Mayor of the London Borough of Barnet, and on the LCC, and GLC. He also was President of the Fairy Society, and founded the Lewis Carroll Society. He wrote a book on 'Underground London' which he told me he would never have started if he'd known how much work would be involved. His motive appeared to be simply to keep an open mind.
    The US group of the same name seems to lean on Biblical 'evidence' rather than science.

My previous contact with such ideas was Martin Gardner's book Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science (1957; an earlier version was In the Name of Science, 1952). Chapter 2 is 'Flat and Hollow', and lists in laconic style Gardner's New York Public Library findings: Voliva, from Zion, Illinois, believed the earth is flat, with the South pole round circumference, based on Biblical and common-sense pre-Newton arguments. Capt John Cleves Symmes, who retired after War of 1812, thought the earth is five concentric hollow spheres with water flowing through polar holes. Cotton Mather in 1721, had similar beliefs, 'taken from an Edmund Halley essay of 1692'. Marshall B Gardner, in 1913, Aurora, Illinois, had a hollow earth theory. Cyrus Reed Teed, in 1870 said we live inside a hollow space, with nothing outside. Germany has a 'Hohlweltlehre' theory. And no doubt there are other theories.

I've met one flat earth believer, whose name I'll spare, who thought gravity was an effect of the flat earth accelerating upwards at 32 feet/sec/sec. Apparently because after one year the earth would move at the speed of light.

Why should non-round earth theories be promoted now? I don't have a definite solution; here are a few possibilities: 
Copyright may have lapsed on some works
It's an intentional distraction from serious matters—timewasting at a dangerous time
Maybe a money-making attempt at sales?
Maybe training for unemployable Jewish liars, spam sites to see how they get on?
Possibly aimed against NASA; could it be someone's little joke against 'infirmative action' and/or NASA's black head?
... Added a bit later: possibly to do with NASA's absurd 'space station'? Possible connection with 'Eric Dubay'? 'Jeranism', apparently Dave something from New York, is another 'flat earther'; probably part of the cunning scheme of discrediting critics of NASA by showing themselves, or acting, as idiots.
Could it be a psychological test for conformity? Maybe to see the effect of multiple online people saying gee, I sure believe in a flat earth now?
An anti-Christian fundamentalist move to ridicule some US Protestants? Jews certainly fund many of the ridiculous loud-mouthed clowns in the USA, to simultaneously discredit whites, Christians, and scientific evolution. Why not expand this to flat-earthism?
More dumbing-down to make people, well, dumber?
Perhaps a nuclear science issue, to try to show up incompetence in nuke skeptics? What seems to be a joint Youtube by 'Eric Dubay' and Edmund Matthews may be intended to suggest, because Dubay seems to be a flat-earther, that nuke skeptics aren't competent. If so, it's playing a risky game by drawing attention to the issues. On the other hand, NASA has done something very similar. I haven't watched carefully enough to check on possible misdirections and planted mistakes.
      [I was amused to see this comment in eurofolkradio.com on 18 Aug 2017, after a chat with A C Hitchcock was posted online: Davy of old England [anonymous nickname; very few posts] West is a crackpot. He promulgates the idiocy that nuclear weapons are fake, they don't exist, that nuclear power is a fraud and the world is flat, and a whole slew of phuctardery. This lie suggests, as might be expected, that the promotion is part of the defence of nuclear frauds]
Something to do with Antarctica; I like the idea that Jews are planning a mass move to a splendid underground Antarctic city—with nuclear power heating.
  Possibly the flat earth idea is from the Quran. It may be the push is to try to normalise the garbage of Islam, and pretend it was a leader in science, which of course is a tendency amongst 'thinkers' funded via Jews and their Arabs.  

The conventional view is backed by evidence from the moon (curved edge shown by foreshortened craters, and curved shadow), the sun (sunspots), Jupiter (bands of cloud, Red Spot). And day/night, seasons, pillars in Athens and Alexandria with different shadows, constellations different in the hemispheres, and so on. But there are some apparent problems: why should the moon and sun be very nearly the same apparent size, and the moon always show more or less the same face to earth?

Common Errors
Puzzles based on flat maps. For example, people are so used to one form of map—Americas in the middle, north up, Europe right, Asia left) that they can't understand the shortest path from New Zealand to South America is east. Another example is equal area projections: some maps show unfamiliar shapes, but the areas are constant.
Puzzles based on gravitation. It's natural enough to expect people upside-down from any location on earth to fall off. Tides are another puzzle; the successful correlation with solar and lunar regularities is not explained very well. The cycloidal nature of the moon's motion relative to earth puzzles many people.
Puzzles based on refraction of light over long distances. Wet air is denser than drier air. There have been legal challenges of light along canals—Alfred Russel Wallace was a victim of this.
Puzzles based on air movement and mixing and the vacuum of space. People think of vacuums as sucking, not as air pressure pushing.
Puzzles based on unfamiliarity (or, less politely, ignorance). Eclipses, meteors and meteorites, comets, phases of planets, tides, local tidal effects, and winds blowing around the earth are common sources.
Optical puzzles. A good example is the photographic 'proof' that the sun is nearer to earth than clouds, where the sun is so much brighter than cloud cover that it appears normal on a photo.

Maybe in a few centuries confused-looking old men in sky-blue suits with obsolete logos, calling each other 'astronaut', will emerge from NASA buildings, as from an ancient monastery, the guardians of treasured moon relics, such as fossil wood.
Some readers might like my summary of the life work of Martin Gardner, who helped establish much of the detail of the US 'Skeptics' movement, both when it made sense and when (usually under Jewish influence) it was used as a pressure group.

'Jew Shock'

by Rerevisionist 29 Feb 2016

'Jew Shock' is an expression first used on Internet by 'History Reviewed Channel' on Youtube, videos from a man brought up in Rhodesia and (after age 15 or so, after a probably Jew-inspired crime) in South Africa. I'd guess the phrase comes from the title Future Shock of a 1960s book.

His video Jew Shock: When Whites Go Wonky!' is largely autobiographical. When people, usually through some personal experience, realise the system did not work as it should, they explore the world for explanations: in his case, hollow earth theory, and the long-exposed-as-faked books of T Lobsang Rampa. He looks at topics from abortion law to UFOs, and illustrates with opinion surveys on the percentages of people who believe topics from whether the government can be trusted to the J F Kennedy murder. If this is Jew Shock, it's the reaction of people who have not yet discovered anything about the Jewish cryptocracy—rule by secret groups. Whether the topics are fed to people (as with ridiculous gender stuff, trans etc, homosexual marriage, clearly the result of international action), or whether they are the result of genuine curiosity, or whether this happens anyway (as with the rise and fall of heresies), is debatable. A good example of Jew Shock in this pre-informed sense is H G Wells's short book Mind at the End of its Tether: Wells, writing during the Second World War, thought the world was beyond anyone's understanding, and a new species must evolve to deal with it. Wells knew something was wrong, but had no real grasp of the worldwide Jewish problem.
    If the author of 'History Reviewed Channel' is right, interest in strange topics (such as the flat earth idea) is a serious attempt at philosophy, rejecting official opinion as suspect, and returning to the basics of personal perceptions and memory. He said it's good news: Whites are DISCONNECTING from the Jew World Order. Its time to dump it.

'Jew Shock' in the most obvious sense, would mean the impact that the discovery of Jewish actions has on individuals. A perfect example is Belloc's 1920s account of the First World War:
The Great War brought thousands upon thousands of educated men (who took up public duties as temporary officials) up against the staggering secret they had never suspected—the complete control exercised over things absolutely necessary to the nation’s survival by half a dozen Jews, who were completely indifferent as to whether we or the enemy should emerge alive from the struggle.
The 21st century so far, largely because of Internet, must have more examples of Jew Shock than ever before. I hope the various experiences, in everything from methods of animal slaughter and control of farms, to housing and building policies, to offers of freebies by Jews to aliens, to educational policies and military policies and propaganda and entertainment—I hope these varied experiences will join up together into a full understanding of the Jewish problem.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


• A New View of the Suffragettes
Stormfront Jewish feminists
[Image from here]
Names given (from Wikipedia) are: Bella Abzug | Kathy Acker | Rachel Adler | Larisa Alexandrovna | Gloria Allred | Shulamit Aloni | Rebecca Alpert | Pauline Bebe | Mayim Bialik | Malke Bina | Hanne Blank | Lisa Bloom | Judy Blume | Daniel Boyarin | Susan Brownmiller | Judith Butler | Aviva Cantor | Naomi Chazan | Judy Chicago | Ruth Dreifuss | Hedwig Dohm | Andrea Dworkin | Eve Ensler | Amy Eilberg | Jane Evans | Sandy Eisenberg Sasso | Susan Estrich | Susan Faludi | Merle Feld | Shulamith Firestone | Betty Friedan | Sarah Michelle Gellar | Ruth Bader Ginsburg | Ilana Gliechbloom | Emma Goldman | Elyse Goldstein | Lynn Gottlieb | Blu Greenberg | Tina Grimberg | Charlotte Haldane | Nina Hartley | Tova Hartman | Judith Hauptman | Dorothy Ray Healey | Susannah Heschel | Anat Hoffman | Brenda Howard | Sara Hurwitz | Paula Hyman | Elfriede Jelinek | Erica Jong | Elana Kagan | Roberta Kalechofsky | Michael Kimmel | Lydia Rabinowitsch-Kempner | Naomi Klein | Gilah Kletenik | Edith Konecky | Barbara Kruger | Anna Kuliscioff | Michele Landsberg | Paulina Lebl-Albala | Lori Hope Lefkovitz | Gerda Lerner | Amy-Jill Levine | Ariel Levy | Fanny Lewald | Rosa Luxemburg | Frederica Sagor Maas | Shelby McCabe | Hana Meisel | Annie Nathan Meyer | Haviva Ner-David | Martha Nussbaum | Margit Oelsner-Baumatz | Tillie Olsen | Judith Plaskow | Letty Cottin Pogrebin | Rachel Pollack | Katha Pollitt | Virginia Postrel | Sally Priesand | Trude Weiss-Rosmarin | Tamar Ross | Muriel Rukeyser | Danya Ruttenberg | Sheryl Sandberg | Zalman Schachter-Shalomi | Rosika Schwimmer | Drorah Setel | Alice Shalvi | Mendel Shapiro | Sandy Eisenberg Sasso | Susan Sontag | Daniel Sperber | Annie Sprinkle | Gertrude Stein | Gloria Steinem | Sandra Steingraber | Elana Maryles Sztokman | Yona Wallach | Wendy Wasserstein | Trude Weiss-Rosmarin | Naomi Weisstein | Ruth Westheimer | Naomi Wolf | Elizabeth Wurtzel | Diana Yoel | Lauren Shay Kaufmann
Blaming Women for Wars

Written by Rerevisionist   16 Nov 2015   &   29 Feb 2016

In September 2015, I anti-reviewed Simon Webb's Suffragette Terrorism on amazon.co.uk; my point was the book seems not worth buying, since the hypothesis that Jews might well have been terrorists seemed not to have been examined, something that Webb confirmed. I'd previously assumed the traditional view of the suffragettes was true; I'm grateful to Webb for suggesting to me that it is probably false. The link (above) includes some of the replies from Webb; I won't repeat them here. However, here are a few extracts:

From my anti-review:
This book has accounts of outrages, typically from 1909 to early 1914—explosions and/or arson in barracks, churches, libraries, and public buildings. I'd ask serious historians to consider the hypothesis that these explosions were carried out secretly by Jews, leaving behind false flag tokens—books, letters, planted 'clues', written notes, things supposed to be part of the lives of white ladies.
    Why the hell would anyone want to do something so repellent? I think probably part of the motive was to make people feel nervous and worried and apprehensive: in short, to make them follow the authorities. The feeling must have been: What could happen next? Certainly when war 'broke out', as the evasive phrase has it—in fact, Britain declared war—the suffragettes made peace with Lloyd George. And there was a newspaper campaign suggesting men needed war, civilisation was jaded and dull, battle was a cleansing influence.
    Jews had a history of bomb throwing; consider 1905 in Russia. It's hard to believe genteel Englishwomen were skilled in the use of the then-new dynamite; unlike so-called 'anarchists', a code-word for Jews from eastern Europe. And the targets—churches (Christian artefacts are hated by Jews), libraries (full of non-Talmudic material, hated by Jews), splendid public buildings and country houses (evidence of white skills, hated by Jews), and barracks (white soldiers—hated by Jews), make sense as part of a Jewish campaign.

Here's a naive remark by Webb [presumably a 'Jew']: '... no responsibility for these two attacks was claimed by the WSPU, it is hard to know who else could have been to blame. The suffragettes were the only terrorist group operating in Britain at that time.' Note the phrasing: 'no responsibility was claimed'; note that no evidence seems to have been found, either.
From Webb's book (quoted from www.heretical.org):
The amount of money coming into the Women's Social and Political Union [WSPU] from rich donors is quite simply staggering. Cash receipts for the year 1913/1914 totalled £46,875. This approximates in modern terms to perhaps £3,750,000. Of that enormous sum, less than £50 came from the fees paid by new members. A number of donors were giving over £1,000 a year to the organisation and the only people who decided what this money should be used for were Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst.
A few specimens from W. Black (later deleted):
W. Black [presumably a 'Jew'] says: 24 Oct 2015 18:32:27 BDT
Our Nazi lunatic is almost certainly referring the Houndsditch Murders and Siege of Sydney Street, which were both quite a lot later and involved Jews only peripherally in that they possibly met in a house owned by a Jew and, in Houndsditch, were robbing a Jewish jeweller when disturbed by the police. All the individuals concerned were Latvian Anarchists. The identity of their leader, known as 'Peter the Painter', is still disputed.
W. Black says: 26 Oct 2015 01:49:29 GMT
Of course newspapers are a primary source. They're both contemporary and original.
By Simon Sheppard (2014). Trying to show feminism was the cause of the 'Great War':
The suffragettes' alacrity in forming an alliance with the government on the outbreak of war. Both forming 'unholy alliances' and speed of response are feminine traits. On 8 September 1914 Christabel Pankhurst returned from exile in Paris and immediately gave a speech, not on suffrage but on "The German Peril." Led by Christabel, militant suffragettes quickly became enthusiastic advocates of the war. Copying Admiral Charles Fitzgerald with his initial group of thirty women, they became active all over Britain in "White Feather Brigades," handing white feathers to any man in civilian clothing with the intention of shaming him into enlisting. So fervent were the suffragettes that demobbed soldiers, soldiers on temporary leave, civil servants and boys were presented with this symbol of cowardice. In 1916 Emmeline Pankhurst crossed the Atlantic to urge American support for the war and also visited Bolshevik Russia in 1917 with a similar objective.
From T T Rogers, commenting in amazon.co.uk:
The first question that arises is: 'Who?' No doubt we will be expected to accept the official explanation at face value, and those who question it will be condemned by the likes of Mr Webb as 'tin-foil hat conspiracists' or 'Nazis' or 'anti-Semites', or whatever. In Webb World, we goyim must never question anything, and must always accept the official coffee table explanations trotted out by half-wits from plastic 'universities' and fake think tanks. Which is not to say the official explanation (as and when it comes) will be wrong. Sometimes the authorities do tell the truth, but in amongst the verisimilitude we will also have to put up with the usual Semitic-feminine hogwash, packaged for the brainless masses: 'Rest assured, goyim, most Muslims condemn this sort of violence', 'Immigrants contribute to the economy', 'We must all stand together and hold hands in peace and harmony', 'We are all human', etc., etc., ad nauseam.

Mr Webb publicly supports the wars that lead to atrocities such as those that have occurred in Paris. He supports Zionism, and does so openly. See, for instance his Twitter account (no longer active) at https://twitter.com/simonwebb54. Anyone who looks at that Twitter account can see clearly why Mr Webb is so quick to use terms like 'Nazi' and 'anti-Semite'. He is vested in the issue of Israel and Zionism. He believes in national-socialism for Jews, but (I would assume) not for ethno-Europeans. The former position is perfectly respectable. The latter position is a big no-no.
Well look what we have here:

Jews calling for war by white people against Moslems? Goodness, who could have thought that? Mmmm.... I wonder why Jews might want to flood Europe with Moslems and lobby us into pointless wars with Moslems? I'll have to think about one. I'm not nearly as bright as Mr Webb, and I'm sure he can tell us. Maybe we're fighting for 'freedom', 'equality' and 'human rights'. Not to mention 'democracy'.
    I suppose, being a dumb peasant goy, I should just ignore all this difficult thinking stuff and start watching crap TV again and reading crap books by our 'betters', like Mr Webb.

The 'new view' (I do hope others have noticed this before; surely someone must have?) is that suffragettes were used as cover by Jews in false flag operations, particularly in 1914, after the Federal Reserve in the USA was established, to promote war. After all, what did Emmeline Pankhurst know about world politics and wars? Why go the USA to agitate for their entry into the 'Great War'; why go to Russia after the Jewish coup?

• Blaming Women

The piece above discusses the suffragettes, and the possibility they were used as 'useful idiots' in the way screaming 'activists' have been paid by Jews for years, to support some Jewish fraud or other. For example, the 'Holocaust' fraud has been supported for decades by simple Jew-funded clowns. A good example of 'Holocaust' fellow-travellers is George Galloway, of Scotland.
    Something similar applies to women, and of course a divide-and-rule policy that splits groups down the middle can be very effective. Bertrand Russell gave an anecdote: two elderly spinsters, in a train passing warships in port, saying what a pity that the battleships are not active. Simon Sheppard's heretic site attributes the First world War to suffragettes, despite his site hosting a highly articulate Jew truther. In the same vein, I noticed a claim on Internet titled Why Women DESTROY NATIONS/ CIVILIZATIONS—and other UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS. A similar expression is 'feminazi'. There seem to be items of evidence called in support, such as 'Stockholm Syndrome' and Feminists vs Nationalists, where 'feminists' oppose nationalists and support aliens raping white women (and incidentally Americans raping Vietnamese and other women). All of these abnormalities are of course explained by the hypothesis that Jews fund and support these attitudes, usually with front women who are obviously insincere. The life of this particular divide-and-rule strategy is limited—partly because hireling funded women can't be expected to debate well, and partly because of the unrealism—why should normal women want war, if they get involved themselves, at all?

Michael Buchanan's political Party in Britain, Justice for Men and Boys (also known as J4MB), attempts to counter 'feminism' as the Jewish media have shaped it. None of these people have the slightest awareness of Jewish power; it's very sad to watch Buchanan debate with female actor presenters working from scripts, who have no interest in truth.
      Here's a comment of mine to a J4MB Youtube, of Erin Pizzey: It amuses me she [Pizzey] thinks women should have the right to stay at home and not work. Why not men? However, at a deep level, Pizzey appears to be part of the problem. She says (no details) she was brought up in a 'communist country' - I'm guessing she is, or thinks she is, a jew, from the USSR or east Germany, perfectly entitled to move to another host country. Communism was (and is) a Jewish movement. All the feminists in the USA are Jews. Jews hate whites; feminism is just a small part of the anti-white movement (in law, money, discrimination, propaganda, BBC, parliament, academia, forcing nonwhite invasion - May, Cameron, Corbyn, Milibands etc are Jews). If you don't understand this, you'll never see what's happening. Note the fact that Jews started the slave trade (and immigration into England) is not mentioned. Note the first planted question about 'fascism', which Pizzey does not analyse. Note the comment on 'feminist' websites, taking money, paying salaries to themselves etc. Note the absurd comment on women's 'survival strategies' = taking money; white 'working class' males get nothing. Note men assuming they may die 'for their country' meaning, in practice, for Jew policies, as in WW1 and WW2. big-lies.org/jews/ ..... Buchanan messaged me saying comments like this will be removed. It's his choice. But if he doesn't face facts, he'll get nowhere. His group seems to host videoed meetings now, with guests from overseas: it's grimly funny to listen to and watch the parroted slogans and uncomprehending half-truths.
[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


• Tell the Truth about Jews

Written by Rerevisionist   3 Jan 2016

Autobiographical Notes. Details of my personal awakening to this influential but tiresome part of modern life. This sort of life experience must be fairly common, with widely divergent detail of such Jewish activities as showed through the scrim. But detailed biographies seem to be rare. In modern times, it's a genre pioneered at book-length by David Duke and John Tyndall. Others (Solzhenitsyn, George Lincoln Rockwell, Eustace Mullins ...) illuminate other facets of the truth

After the Second World War, of which I had no experience, my miscellaneous memories up to about 18 include three (or so) schools, the introduction of domestic TV (with BBC as higher status), queuing for my coloured coronation mug, a very snowy winter, coins from many different countries, a mysterious radio comment that anyone from the Empire could move to Britain, the Cuba crisis and several Aldermaston marches. And the Kennedy murder. And a war in Vietnam. I was taught, and told, virtually nothing about Jews. Israel had been established in 1948. My father, although quite a serious Methodist, had little idea of Jews, though he insisted the British public had been told the Nuremberg trials were conducted under the strictest legal procedures. I think I have a memory of 'Max', probably a Jew who fled Hungary in 1956. An incident (before "the eleven-plus" exam) that I remember was a black from Kingston, Jamaica, addressing a class, presumably as some race-awareness thing; I don't think anyone asked a question. From ten to seventeen, attending a magnificent Gothic Revival Victorian school building, still with something of the flavour of the classical tradition about it, my political awareness extended only to nuclear weapons.

1963? Aldermaston/ London CND march

      I avoided history as a subject, partly because the textbooks were clearly unimpressive, and partly out of a feeling that sciences were important and ought to be understood. There was a definite male-female divide on school subjects ('arts' vs 'science'). At the time, immigration was noted as a minor topic: Pakistanis in Henley, others in Reading (where Mary-Ann Lenighan was raped and murdered years later). I recall being irritated that someone surnamed Rose was able to get out of 'assembly' - a daily religio-legal-bonding process of hymns and announcements, and Biblical readings on such odd subjects as giving one's body to be burned but nonetheless not having sufficient charity. I had no idea that exemptions for so-called Jews were common and could see no special reason why anyone should miss the meeting. Looking back, I suspect a Newman, a Pontin, and someone with surname beginning with S, were Jews. The teachers (including in religious instruction lessons - as I recall mostly Paul's journeys, with nothing in the way of evidence) probably knew nothing of the subject, and, even if they did, would say nothing. Naturally, the private beliefs of so-called Jews were secret and undiscussed. There were a few refugees, real or supposed, but naturally no background information was forthcoming. I remember a pupil, probably 17 or 18, called Saunders-Singer, standing for a local council; no doubt some Jewish arrangement. A local lecturer was a communist, in the technical sense, reading Engels and Marx, thinking 'primitive communism' was leading-edge anthropology, and having stood as a Communist party candidate. His son I think was a lifetime 'communist'. I have no idea if either knew the Jewish connections. The only horror stories I can recall were the supposed 'melting eyeballs' of Hiroshima, and a few accounts supposedly about Japan and Nanking, now known to be Jewish lies; all the wartime atrocities throughout Europe, Russia, the Far East, Africa were almost completely censored.

Enoch Powell
BBC TV 1969. Frost on Friday. Rigged audience.
University expansion at the time (1965-1968) was, or seemed, considerable; and it was subsidised, though I don't think grants to students were very generous. I'd guess, looking back, the buildings were funded by loans from Jews, and of course the details of the subjects taught would be Jew-controlled. For no very good reason I went to Leicester. On balance, I think this was the most disappointing experience of my life: instead of free discussion and the exhilaration of meeting intelligent people, both like-minded, and others who were interestingly different and stimulating, most of the students were ordinary and unintellectual, and the lecturers nothing very special. I was dissatisfied with the courses, which struck me as isolated from the past and lacking anticipation for future possibilities. It was years before I knew much of the newly-built biology labs would be taken up with fake science. There were, unbeknown to me at the time, cryptic Jewish groups and activities. 'Freshers' groups included films of Eisenstein's black and white 'Russian' material. The 'Student Union' must have been partly Jewish: I wondered how students could have time for such things as running 'entertainments' and the university newspaper, Ripple, when they were supposed to be studying. I had no idea that Student Union 'Presidents' were a sort of fake revolving-door between universities and other educational institutions. There was an 'anti-racialism' society. 1967/68 was in theory an interesting time, including some student activism: I recall a large, excited meeting, after Enoch Powell's famous 1967 speech, but with complete suppression of any critiques of immigration. There were ineffectual activities over the Vietnam War; very likely these would be identifiable as 'controlled opposition' now. Paperbacks appeared by people like Cohn-Bendit on 'obsolete Communism', as though 'Communism' was a quaint system overdue for change. Someone in the university called 'Hans Greenfield' was whispered about; he was a 'complicated character'. It was years before I understood these events. I travelled (with friends) and happened to be at the 1968 Chicago Convention demonstrations (we stayed in). I didn't know there were 'New York Jews'. I watched the 'moon landing' on 625-line British black and white TV; even then I was struck my the fact that the images were not consistent with the moon's low gravity.

Bertrand Russell had a great deal of intellectual influence on me: his 3-volume autobiography was published in consecutive years, and most of his older books were available easily enough. I thought he might have things to say on mathematics and logic, and followed on some of his leads on such varied topics as detective stories, philosophy, styles of writing, the Manchester Ship Canal, the New York Times, Augustus John, and China. I hadn't known, until vol 2 of his Autobiography, that anyone had had doubts about the First World War. It was more than forty years before I thought to question whether newspaper and newsreel reports of British mass enthusiasm to go to war were, in fact, reliable. This sort of thing of course is typical of any censored topic, notably the Second World War. Revisionist works existed, but were hard to find and easy to ignore, with observation, persecution and prosecution waiting to be deployed. Distribution was difficult: as far as I can remember, I didn't hear of Did Six Million Really Die? until Internet. About ten years later, the National Front was easily swept aside by the unified media.
spoof eye of jews
Spoof 'Private Eye' cover, showing traditional Jewish activities
The attempts at comment were progressively smothered legally; there must have been frantic activity by Jews behind the scenes, particularly in Parliament, notably to encourage immigration. Despite a few signs, like very many people, I had no idea that Jews had developed a policy of white race replacement: in my case, full realisation was after the year 2000. All the political material I was aware of was either traditionally socialist (H G Wells, for example) or what I would now recognise as Jewish, such as the 'New Left Review'. I had no idea about such issues as Jews in the east end of London, 'Jack the Ripper', and Cable Street.
      My interest in Russell led me eventually to his book of essays War Crimes in Vietnam and to follow (as far as I could) his War Crimes Tribunal on Vietnam, which despite his name was mostly carried on by others, in view of Russell's great age. Ralph Schoenman, Noam Chomsky, and Isaac Deutscher were three of the big names; at the time I wondered vaguely why there were no British names, and why Kissinger, for example, was not probed; I but didn't carry the speculation further. (Deutscher wrote a flattering, i.e. Jewish, life of Stalin. I have sometimes met people who were influenced by Chomsky into studying 'linguistics', which now appears as just another Jewish pseudo-specialisation; I wonder if 'linguistics' worked for them?) My dislike of atrocities, and the BBC's persistent covering-up, left me with a lifetime's hate of the BBC and its zombie liars. But I had no grasp of why they should do this, or why some people like to insist that newspapers are a 'primary source'. I was left with a lifelong impatience of simple people who have no sense of media lies.

For something like 25 years, 1970-1995 (with interludes for writing books on the new exciting home computers) I followed up various lines which I'd now count as 'revisionist'. I briefly met David Adelstein, a supposed LSE radical in the 1960s, who contributed a chapter to Student Power, a Penguin book which had a couple of interesting essays, and appeared to be a serious selection of meta-essays on education and society, though of course with no Jewish content; and Elaine Unterhalter, from South Africa, daughter of a supposedly-Jewish lawyer, who seemed to seriously believe that nonwhite immigration into London had no effects and could continue indefinitely. At the time, though not naive, I simply was not aware of the Jewish habit of convincing straight-faced lying, or of the infiltration of Jews into academic 'centres of excellence', or the entrenched anti-white fantasy world of 'Jews'. At this time there were 'riots' in Soweto (=South West Township, near Johannesburg) and Unterhalter stated that blacks at the LSE (+London School of Economics; a Jewish outfit) would joke about being the Minister of Finance or whatever; no silly nonsense about democracy, by the presumably 'elite' blacks. I did start to sense the corruption of universities, however.
    [ A bit of Googling, out of curiosity, found Unterhalter is or was at the Institute of Education, in London, now part of University College London, which was probably founded as a supposedly rationalist but in fact Jewish outfit in the 19th century. It has 11,00 staff and a 'combined income of over £1 bn'. It claims, I fervently hope without real basis, to be 'Number 1 for Education worldwide'.
    As an example of the odd atmosphere of UCL, I recall a party/social event including an Italian young woman pregnant by a black, a male anthropologist who fathered a child in some victim group, a young woman whose parents (Storr) were both something like psychoanalysts, someone called Jakov Lind who'd had a novel published on post-war Europe opposing passports, a doctor skirting around the topic of Marx being a Jew, the editor of the Ham and Hi being a Jew, replaced by another Jew; a long TV evening called 'Shoah'; a locally-produced play supposedly based on the death of Verwoerd in South Africa; Maurice Papworth, author of Human Guinea Pigs, not allowed to claim to be a Consultant; an exhibition of menstrual cloths at the Serpentine Gallery; and assorted other things: at the time I couldn't identify the Jewish undercurrents.
Professor Unterhalter
The IOE's 'turnover' is given as about £75m. Getting for half this sum is 'tuition fees'; about a third is grants and contracts. The ways research is arranged and directed are kept secret, much like the BBC. However, there's no shortage of Jewish influence: the general pattern is to set some sort of acronymic target, presumably at a date as remote as is dared, plus hefty budgeting. For example, there's a target by which all but 20% young children will learn to be 'confident readers'. There is a careful omission of race; nobody mentions that low IQ children cannot, and never will, read confidently. Other omitted material is Jewish, too: nothing on Talmudic education's viciousness; nothing on invasions of black countries by Jewish-run mercenaries, after the Kissinger fashion; nothing on the whether it's even possible for low-IQ blacks to run anything like a modern society. Nothing on 'poverty' in any serious sense. Nothing serious even on science—only a PR-style acronymic group, STEM—parasites aren't interested in the world outside their niche or 'silo'. Nothing on rape of white girls in Israel. Comparative stuff only on education—a favourite device for evading detail: 'Unterhalter on girls' education and gender equality'. Here's a comment from a Youtube (LIDC panel discussion 'Beyond Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) — a new development agenda?') including 'Professor' Unterhalter on a panel of mostly, or perhaps all, Jewish 'experts': [ Published on 13 Oct 2014] Unterhalter is a Professor of Education and International Development at the Institute of Education, University of London. She was the lead author on a rigorous literature review, commissioned by the Department for International Development (DFID), which focused on girls' education and gender equality. The central research question that the review set out to investigate concerned the kind of interventions that research evidence suggests can lead to an expansion and improvement in girls' education. It also considered evidence on the relationship between an expansion and improvement in girls' education and a deepening of gender equality. No prizes for guessing whether Jewish lies (Cromwell; Boer wars; Fed; Palestine; 'Holocaust'; 9/11 ... ad infinitem) will be taught. Google and listen to the snowfall of prattle. Can this absurd garbage continue? ]

Evans with Lipstadt at the 'Oxford Union'. Lipstadt, a pathetic Sunday School type, a ridiculous gullible nonentity, clinging to her childish rubbish, isn't the problem, really. It's scum like 'Professor' Evans, the rented prostitute types, turning out lies, ruining scholarship and integrity, and turning their backs on victims of wars; these are part of the real evil filth.
This was the era in which Jewish money led to increased penetration of well-concealed Jewish absurdities: Steven Rose and his fake biology; subservient liars such as 'Professor' Evans, later Professor of Modern History at (I think) Cambridge; widespread frauds in physics and biology and economics; promotion of nonwhite invasion of white countries.

It's worthwhile to examine and understand the 'methodology' here.
1. An important aspect is money: typically an organisation is fed with money from its secret central source, the spiders of filth hidden in their lairs. Everyone else, of course, has to work for it—the curious combination of supposed beneficence with extortion for others is generally part of the package.
2. Another aspect is slow growth and eventual takeover: in this example, the odd unscientific practices of the 'Institute' were only incorporated into UCL in 2013, presumably to suggest it shares whatever 'excellence' universities are believed to have. This of course is more or less part of the 'long march through the institutions'.
3. But it could never work without verbal propaganda—'wording technicians' constructing a list of phrases to avoid awkward facts.
4. 'Analysis' of the world is subdivided by subject to conceal Jewish activity. Any possible reform or desired outcome is elided away by verbal constructions. One of these of course is sheer output, the torrent of lies and drivel approach.
5. Note that, at any one time in the last few centuries, Jewish policies have switched and changed: at one point the facts of Jews and black slavery have to be hidden; at another, trumped-up charges against beef industry are being made; during the 1930s, anti-German propaganda was fed to the USA; at the present time, TV and film are full of mixed-race activity; Donald Trump is being attacked by Jews, and Europe is under deliberate attack. Jews' activities as the decisions are made need to be understood in this way.
6. At present there are many frauds, mostly fuelled by what I hope is exceptional money and administrative power: the 'Holocaust' fraud, 9/11, AIDS, NASA, charity frauds, insurance frauds, nuclear and medical frauds, concealment of facts on race and crime, people and organ trafficking, and so forth. Generally, Jewish groups must know about these things; probably things like the Jew York Times help orchestrate the Jewish line.
      Anyone studying the modern world needs a grasp of all these processes, to understand (for example) peace treaties and their foundations for future wars, the purported and real functions of organisations such as the United Nations and World Bank, the motives behind legislation, and the operations of news collecting, censorship and distribution, and 'think-tanks' and their propagandist public relations. A good example is the way the Holocaust myth was invented, and made use of, and is obviously intended to replace truth—as a cuckoo does its best to eject eggs and offload its costs onto hosts. Another example is the assembly of 'neo-cons' by Jews in the USA.

I discovered Hilaire Belloc's book The Jews. I found that newsreaders (and IBM salesmen) were actors, in the technical sense of having been trained as actors. I saw a play in Hampstead on the murder of Verwoerd, though I had little information on Jews' influence in South Africa. I heard of a girl, made pregnant by a Jew, who then refused to have anything to do with her. I heard of someone who would never marry anyone not a Jew. I noticed Doris Lessing's books (and met one of her characters). I met a medico who seriously thought he was descended from the Naphthali tribe of 4,000 (or whatever) years before, and thought his medical textbook of the accumulated knowledge of a few centuries was overpriced. I spoke to 'Professor' Shula Marks, a lecturer in SOAS, the 'School of Oriental and African Studies', and wondered how such ordinary Jews get appointed to academic posts. I spoke with a 'Rabbi', who told me Judaism was 'the most logical religion'. I heard about a dynastic Jewish marriage in South Africa between the owners of Servus and Marks and Spencer. I spoke with someone called Nick Roditi, who was featured in a newspaper as controlling a vast number of investments from a heavily-locked office in Hampstead. The connections between gold, the Boer Wars, and Jews were partly revealed to me by Hilaire Belloc. So were such things as manufactured Jewish surnames, and the tendency of Jews to name-change. I remember a Professor Potter, at Sheffield, part of a Jewish family, who I think specialised in the Reformation; his accounts that I saw had no mention of Jews, and I think this is probably almost unconscious: as with law, Jews study history with their specific psychological impetus, and no doubt it is a motive for studying the subject in the first place. Just as they may study language with advertising and propaganda motives in mind.
      Looking back, the failure to mention Jews' activities seems astonishing: even people treated as outspoken (the Mitfords, Shockley, Enoch Powell, H J Eysenck, Thatcher, J Philippe Rushton, Richard Lynn) said nothing about the issue, and indeed tied themselves in knots discussing 'Nazis' and what have you. The absence of speculation on such people as Rupert Murdoch and Robert Maxwell and Richard Desmond; and the Dimblebys; and the Labour Party's homosexual Australian 'politician' Peter Tatchell; and paedophiliac Harriet Harman; and Thatcher's connection with Jews in Finchley; and Jews in the family-harm industry;—all this is truly something remarkable.
      And of course this aversion from truth applies to techies and scientists, disappointingly. A bit of luck led me to contact Ivor Catt, a fellow science sceptic, who was the first person I met to have amassed doubts about 'HIV/AIDS', which I now see as a 1984 fraud by Jews. Catt knew a number of dissidents, and I spent a lot of time on Harold Hillman's ideas (see my write-up) and Phil Holland's, and on people investigating legal and anti-family policies, though none of them as far as I know noticed the Jewish connections. Most of these people had reached their personal plateau, and, though keen to have their own material examined, had no interest in other peoples'. However, in my case, these things only came together after the first decade or so of the Internet era. I collected revisionist books where possible; later, Amazon made this process much easier. But I wasn't happy to leave speculations in limbo. I noticed the 'socialist' Tony Cliff's real name was Ygael Gluckstein, wonderfully described as a 'middle-class Jew'. With Harold Hillman's notes, I pieced together Steven Rose's story, a 'scientist' employed at the new Open University, who regurgitated all the fake discoveries of biological research; I found he was keen on killing off large numbers of people if a Jewish state - like the USSR - would result. I found much the same with the 'historian' Hobsbawm. I noticed that Susan Greenfield, a media 'star' of the time, responsible for dubious biological work, was married to a Professor of Chemistry who was furious about the supposed 'Holocaust', but never mentioned the involvement of science with weaponry.
      There are plenty of analogous issues, many of them providing new insights, and opportunities almost for controlled experiments. Good examples are cases where vested special-interest groups stick firmly to some opinion, even when it's highly likely to be wrong: fluoride in water, the true Shakespeare, Margaret Mead's spurious 'research' in Samoa, Marco Polo, the common name of the Great Pyramid, the look-say teaching of reading, and NASA's hoaxes illustrate the sort of thing.

The Internet era dates from about 1995. Hardware since then has advanced at quite a phenomenal rate: hard disks, solid state storage, underwater cables, optical fibres, computer chips, memory, displays, software packages, online maps and photos, chatrooms, online stores and ordering and payments, and on-demand printing. There is a gap in software: computer models of the genetics of parasitism, family strategies, group secrecy, race mixing, and similar topics, barely exist. Nor do economic models explicitly include Jewish 'money' and Jews as an interest group, in a similar way to a nation or transnational corporation.
      1997 was roughly the date I found the 'Holocaust' was a fraud, at age of 50 or so: my 1997 essay (plus a 15-years later update) is here. This does not suggest intellectual precocity and breakneck progress. Anyway, I contacted David Irving, and did my best to help out in early 2000 at his libel trial against 'Professor' Lipstadt. I contacted, but never heard from, Gerald Fleming, one of the heavily-promoted supposed Jewish Holocaust experts: I found he'd been working in the audio-visuals group at (I think) Surrey University, at Guildford. NASA's sceptics gathered momentum at about this time; I made some, but not a huge amount, of investigation into their frauds. The Jewish race agenda took me longer. I worked out from South Place Ethical Society the connection between 'rationalism', and Jews concerned, but only concerned, with anti-Christian propaganda. The Public Records Office, known chummily as 'Fort Ruskin', was headed by a Jew—with some influence over the entirety of irreplaceable historical records of Britain.
      Only about ten years after the start of Internet I first heard the ideas of nuclear scepticism, notably as regards nuclear weapons, and as far as I know started by Roger Desjardins in Canada. The forum started by Jesse Waugh lasted a year, from March 2011, and attracted a small number of very highly competent people. I began to see through CND, Professor Rotblat (Bertrand Russell fawned over him; Rotblat must have laughed), Frank Barnaby, Jeremy Corbyn, and so on.
      At about the same time, the BNP (British National Party) began to attract greater attention: it supported Churchill and a Spitfire in its campaigns; and suppressed all accounts of Jewish paper money, though this was not announced until years later. Although Griffin spoke well, his censorship or self-censorship could not produce a complete, balanced worldview. Some people then in the BNP were competent: I saw Jonathan Bowden coaching people on how to reply to questions of the "Are you a racist?" type, and regret not feeling empowered to video him. Arthur Kemp was an impressive speaker; in happier and more scientific times his March of the Titans might have become a white history rival to Wells's Outline of History.
      Suppressed, rare, foreign, old, single-issue, magazines, and other reading material appeared online. Did Six Million Really Die?, Birdwood's Longest Hatred, a version of Russell's Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal, and Solzhenitsyn's 200 Years translated into English (in part?) turned up in websites. Jews and slave trades, Jews and the Opium Wars, Jews in US government, Jews as revealed by the Talmud, and Jews in history are also found in newly-uploaded material. Often a practical problem is simply not being aware that material is out there, waiting to be read or viewed.
      Solzhenitsyn's description of Jews slaughtering 'bourgeois' Russians after 1917, and replacing them with Jews, is an example of the type of information available freely for the first time. And rational critiques of Jews are becoming available; I hesitate to say 'for the first time', but this is true for very many people. For example, as it becomes known that Jews ran the Soviet Union by occupying all the important posts apart from selected puppets, an obvious question is "What did they actually achieve?", and the obvious answer is almost nothing—all the technology was copied and stolen from white countries: electrification, railways, radio, hydro-electric power. They couldn't even invent battery chickens. The Jewish tradition of joint parasitism is not well adapted to modern conditions. It is reminiscent of faked qualifications in medicine sold for $10 in Pakistan or the Philippines. Competence and honesty seem incompatible with Talmudic attitudes. Another issue is fractional reserve banking: piecing together the net effects of unscrupulous money power, with costs of currencies and amplification by multiple loans, is a new topic to economists, and of course because it shows them up as very incompetent, can be expected to show defensive 'professional' denial, just as historians of the 'Professor Evans' type will probably spend the rest of their lives telling lies. Jewish-controlled publications are showing signs of adjustments: the Occidental Observer says that someone called Harold Meyerson was dropped by the Washington Post—possibly for writing about Jews as separate from whites, a faux pas in public discourse. This sort of thing is not new: Jews are anxious to avoid evidence of parasitism, and this must be the reason for fakery, mutual promotion, elbowing out of whites, and issuing prizes. Einstein, Freud, Maslow, Boas, Kissinger, Obama illustrate some aspects of this. People are beginning to feel Jews are represented by such 'thinkers' as Barbara Spectre and 'Professor' and 'Historian' Noel Ignatiev, and currency manipulator Soros who continues the long tradition of Jews from Hungary.

Vastly increased flows of information have allowed opportunities for serious research: Do Jews own the media? Do Jews run countries? What effect did Jews have on the World Wars? What is the real history of the US Civil War? How come ridiculous ideas such as 'same sex marriage' all appear within a short space of time? What's the story with Churchill College and Wolfson College of Cambridge? Do Jews run the European Union (EU)? What effects have Jews had on national legal systems? Why the legal penalties for historical enquiries? How much money do Jews make from wars?
      Some of this effort, though probably vanishingly little, may come from Jews: Maurice Pappworth regarded himself as a Jew, and took a serious ethical line on medical experiments. I knew Cecil Helman, a doctor who took alternative medicine fairly seriously. I remember being told (by a woman, in Atlanta, Georgia) of a Jewish organisation continually propagandising for Jews: she said "No novelist could describe it". But the omens promise very little.

Another approach to Jews is theological, treating 'Judaism' as a religion. Roman Catholics and Moslems both have specific reasons to study Jews. Rationalists don't have those specific interests and often can't or won't understand the importance of the Jewish tradition and the way it is expressed by genes. At the start of the first Iraq war, I saw a banner 'Hampstead Communist Party' in a hall; I doubt whether many people at the time would have identified a Jewish link, or links with the media of the time. It's only in retrospect I see the significance of E J Hobsbawm, or the organophosphate insecticide issue, or John Pilger, or the truth about Churchill, or nuclear scepticism.

Genetic theories of Jewish behaviour (see discussion) are in their infancy. But the sociopathy, unblushing lies, thoughtless grabbing whatever the consequences, and the very tight and extreme group feeling, suggests a group micro-evolutionary history. Anyone who sees regularity and predictability in phenomena will find predestination (but not prediction) credible, and the persistent way Jews carry out their actions, seemingly forever, must lean thoughtful people to a genetic theory of behaviour. For example, I've just noted Cameron, Jewish Prime Minister, on being notified of floods in northern England caused by badly-maintained rivers, clearly cares nothing for this, and certainly looks like a genetically-programmed organism which cares nothing for 'goyim'. Similarly, nonwhite crimes against whites are ignored.
      Genetic determinism must apply to 'Christians', or 'whites', too. It's entirely possible the long-term highly-specialised honing, and intense focussing of Jewish cuckoo-like behaviour, will overcome genetically more varied types, then collapse after the removal of creative types. In a similar way to fluctuations in predator-prey ratios, and with added systematic variations in genetics of survivors. I hope not; but it seem possible.

If I may present an analogy to the present time, may I suggest windows looking into a collected items of evidence, the windows being blocked with accumulated grime and filth. Droplets from one source and another fall on the windows: perhaps 'Holocaust' dismissal, 9/11 evidence, the Liberty, truths about the Federal Reserve, Talmudic material. More droplets fall; some join together; others penetrate to obscure corners. But eventually there's a downpour; streams run together with a unified cleansing effect. Our age is like the discovery of an internalised mental America, a new nation, but with the peculiarity that it has spread covertly across, and penetrated into, many nations. Rumours of mysterious landscapes, and strange behaviour, and unexpected buildings, will come, we may hope, into sharp illuminated focus.

It's my motive for encouraging free discussion of the Jewish problem. With the proviso that secrecy may be needed during the discovery processes, and the correction processes.
[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

• Do 62 People Own Half the World?

How Many People Make a Controlling Elite? is often asked. Here are a few comments and a conclusion.

voerioc 06 Mar 2012
Yes, it [Jewish power] is not unlimited. But you don't need unlimited power to control the world. With only 10.000 guys in power places, you can control a country quite easily.
      And when you look at famous people, they stay in place during a very long time. So, there is not so much people in politics or in the medias, etc... In France, we have got just 3 different presidents since 1981 (Mitterrand, Chirac, and Sarkosy). And 70 % of famous politicians have been the same since 1990.
      My opinion is that it is much easier to control a country or the world with a nation (so, jews) having 12 millions people, than with just hundreds people (the Illuminati theory).
      Probably that Jewish leaders consider many of their fellows citizens as useful idiots. But that's not our problem. Many jews are relays of the will of Jewish leaders. They also believe totally that they are superior beings, and that all non jews are just cattle. They actively participate to our enslavement, and also to our elimination through race mixing. And so, they are enemies.
      So, of course, we have to work to make the average jew come back to reason. But our primary goal is to make their tyranny stop.
rerevisionist 08 Mar 2012
Very well-written, voerioc. You've included the numerical aspect and I think you're correct - Jews are *not* a "scapegoat". [Or helpless victims]. They really are a wordwide threat and menace.
      Another thing is unelected hierarchies which are related to government: EU officials; police and their chiefs; lawyers and the heads of the legal system; educators and the people changing education systems; 'think tanks' aiming at policy changes; controllers of the state media - the BBC is the British example - and of art and culture; controllers of spying and listening; heads of the medical system; people controlling housing; people controlling movements of population - customs etc; civil servants in control of departments - war and peace, domestic policies; religious leaders; people in control of records and archives ... Many of these people are in power for life, and almost unaccountable, and irremovable. Very many of them are Jews.
      It's disappointing that even such rather obvious material is all but unknown. It would be fairly simple to find organisation charts for many organisations, and mark Jews in them; less easy to check whether they do in fact behave as the anti-white Darwinian theory predicts. For example, the Speaker of the House of Commons [Bercow] is a fake 'Jew'. Speakers have the power to prevent some views being heard, and generally slanting debate, and I think arranging what potential legislation comes forward. Has he used any of these powers? Another example - statistics of crime, immigration, and population. The anti-white theory predicts that figures for crime by immigrants and Jews will be concealed, figures for immigration will be minimised, and figures for total population numbers will be made unavailable; are there, in fact, Jews in these state organisations who do these things? Even such fairly obvious assessments are not available, despite the vast number of supposed 'social scientists' out there.
    [Note added June 6 2017: an online article by Incogman ('Figuring Out the Big Scam Against Whites') recounts statistical fraud in which US Hispanic Crime figures were put in with white figures, to understate Hispanic crime].

26 Nov 2014.
The link below, How 'Sayanim' 'Jews' Operate, holds a copy of just one page, including photos, from a website explaining current Jewish methods. It cannot be expected that it will be entirely truthful, obviously; in particular, the sources of the myths and lies and policies cannot be expected to be revealed, even if known; nor can the true intentions, as opposed to the overt claims. But it's a useful shock antidote to the sleeping-draught which many people still suffer under.

Link to How 'Sayanim' 'Jews' Operate

Jack Robert ... I have come to change my stance on this recently when an Oxfam report has shown that 62 people have the same wealth as the rest of the world and a great book I would recommend is capital by Alan PIckety, it shows income inequality and how the rich have a higher return on capital than the GDP of a country. People's views have are being skewed to problems on the media not in society.
rerevisionist I doubt if this can possibly be true. There are about 190 countries in the world. You're saying 62 people own one-and-a-half countries each. It's simply not credible. Jews are keen to pretend individuals rule; in fact 10,000 Jews in a country can control it. 2 million Jews can presumably control the world, not 60 people. Or at least Jews can if they keep quiet and behave sensibly, neither of which they're doing.
Jack Robert ... the Koch brothers ( they got ill gotten gains from WWII and the Russian war), the banking industry, the Rothschild family, Standard Oil (Rockefeller), the corporations do run the countries that is why you have policies that don't help the individuals in the countries and just keep the status quo of elitism and place peoples attention on the problems. Basically you get austerity and the banks get a bail out and the corporations get a tax break and QE, so the report says 62 people, but they have other lobbyist and vested interests that over lap with other people and countries.
rerevisionist True about corporations, assuming they do what they're supposed to. But I think there are hidden assumptions in Oxfam, for example about shareholdings and holding companies. If you take one country, say Italy, it doesn't seem credible that one person owns most of what's there. Maybe the assumption is that value now = value if there were upheavals such as inflation, war or mass depression. Or maybe there's a confusion between capital value and day-to-day costs. If someone can contribute a clear, brief summary, I'll include it here - rerev.       BUT in my opinion Jews are keen to pretend individuals rule. It takes attention away from tightly-organised groups behind the scenes. And distracts from the idea of a war distributed among many countries, not the well-known model of wars as events between geographical groups.

Histories, stories, personal applause, glory, awards and so on are intentionally directed to individuals, to direct eyes and brains away from behind-the-scenes groups. Napoleon built up—or had built up for him—a huge bureaucracy in France. British seapower in 1880 seemed unchallengeable and of course had huge supporting industries: coal, shipyards, dry docks, docks, guns. The USA has its Pentagon and a large proportion of the entire US production effort. The British electoral system needs huge numbers of people to arrange vote swindles. Ownership is not the same thing, but is obviously related; and control of any big company, city, and organisation must presumably need many people, each with local control. So I side with voerioc in thinking the small numbers controlling everything idea (including the 'Illuminati') cannot work. I think it's deliberately hidden.
21 January 2016.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

 ARTICLES 2012-2015 

Two Tiers: Key to Understanding Money, Banks, Jews, and Varieties of Capitalism

Written by Rerevisionist 1 Dec 2012

two tiers of moneyI aim here to try to clearly distinguish between

[1] The printing of money,
[2] Jews and central banks,
[3] Banking as a business (and 'fractional reserves'),
[4] The two-tier system,
[5] Forms of capitalism.

These issues are usually deliberately confused

[1] Printing money:  Money was, traditionally, something genuinely scarce and valuable like gold, silver, copper and iron, with local variations such as shells, stones.  There are debates on the meaning of 'value', for example that water is of infinite 'value' to life, which I won't discuss here, beyond noting that these debates of course occur.  In Victorian times, gold sovereigns, silver florins and so on were in circulation.  We now have money which is of little intrinsic value: coins made of common metals, plastic cards, paper. Security printing is specialised work and of course has to keep ahead of forgers.  These new types of money have the backing of states or other powerful groups.  If the state withdraws its support, they become worthless: for example, in Soviet Russia, Tsarist roubles became worthless after the Jewish coup. A less dramatic example is general inflation.   All this is obvious enough and familiar to many people.

[2] Central Banks, and the Federal Reserve in the USA, are usually privately-owned; the actual owners may be impossible to ascertain, and their records kept secret indefinitely.  The presumption here is that the owners are, or mostly are, Jews.  This claim is based on historical evidence and various types of inference from behaviour.  Traditionally, governments borrowed money at interest.  This makes sense when the borrowings are of genuinely scarce assets.  Paying interest on paper money is essentially a fraud: paper money costs almost nothing.  This should be what is referred to as 'money as debt'.  There is virtually no risk in central banking.

[3] Banking as a Business:  It's important to try to distinguish what I'll call 'genuine' banking, banking as a business.  If a Victorian worthy inherited a large sum, he might found his own bank.  He would lend at interest, probably to a stream of characters of uneven reputation and skill.  It would be his job to get repayments, decide whether people with large debts should get more, try to encourage depositors, and to establish trust in his cheques, and so on.  There is absolutely no guarantee that such a business would thrive.  If his cheques and book-keeping prove acceptable, and there are liberal legal limits on his lending, we have the 'fractional reserve' system.  This is something like 'traditional capitalism' as it appears in economics textbooks. Small competitive banks are vulnerable to various types of attack, such as panics, and rumours, and clearly central banks have a huge advantage over them.

[4] Two Tier System: It's absolutely crucial to understand that we have here a two-tier system.  The issuers of money have entirely different attitudes from normal banks, and normal people.  From the central bank viewpoint, inflation is good, and wars are good, because they offer more large-scale opportunity. They then print more money, and get more interest, provided their currency is accepted.  If governments waste money, that suits them.  If they can exchange their paper or electronic entries for any real assets—houses, businesses, utilities, colleges, factories, newspapers—they benefit; they've got them for nothing.  There are obvious hazards here: wars may be lost, for example.  But usually it's not their problem.

M3 money supply figures not collected by Jews The two-tier system means they have money in superabundance: any central bank therefore has huge power.  If they choose to support any special group, that group will thrive.  Historically, news suppliers and distributors (e.g. books, newspapers, Reuters, theatre, film, TV, advertising) have been points of attack by Jews against hosts, but control over education (primary, secondary, syllabuses, teachers, apprentices, universities), and control over law-making and law enforcement (parliaments, judges, police) have been and are important.  As a simple example of the two-tier system, consider Google or Youtube.  These needed large amounts of equipment and expertise to set up, mediated my money, ultimately in Jewish hands.  The technical people are in their hands, though they have some power of fighting back.  Modern credit card money is in a similar position, with huge electronic networks of machinery and buildings, dominated by central banks.  Modern political parties are in a similar state, since central bank money can be used to swamp any opposition.

[5] Varieties of Capitalism:  The Marxist view, for want of a better phrase, is that money power rules the workers, who have to sell their labour for as much as they can get, usually, according to Marx, not much.  Normal businesses take risks, and may close.  But here again the two-tier system is crucial. Anyone who is in favour with money issuers may get unlimited, easy funding, even if it is economically irrelevant or counter-productive to host communities.  It may be deliberately damaging—harmful products may be produced, Freemasons and similar secret groups supported, absurd laws passed, murderers may be freed, child abusers protected, drugs deliberately allowed to circulate, education dumbed-down, whole populations planned to be wiped out  The two-tier system extends internationally: if it's decided to close shipyards or coal fields for example, it's simple enough to fund people to damage them, even if there's no good reason for them to go.  Thus the BBC praised 'red Robbo' at his death, presumably because he helped international shipbuilders to make more money by closing shipyards.  Jews can easily control exchange rates between currencies they control.  Money can be filtered down to the European secret Common Purpose group whose 'graduates' can collude in (for example) new demolition and building projects.

P T Jenkins Theory of Monetary EconomicsThe two-tier system has to be understood.  It isn't inevitably harmful: if Jews had amused themselves building country estates, collecting art, donating to good causes, or taking realistic interest rates, it wouldn't have mattered.

But, probably because of their fanatical tribal ideology, this has not happened: any number of wars, any amount of destruction, suits their blinkered outlook.  I suspect the Vietnam War—more munitions used than the entire Second World War, millions of deaths—was purely a money-making opportunity.

Many people puzzle over Germany in the 1930s being 'capitalist': the point is of course the central bank or banks worked in the interests of Germans rather than taking from them, leaving 'capitalism' in its more genuine sense.  Trade Union leaders in Britain must be puzzled that Miliband is their 'leader', since they don't understand the Two tier system which promotes, 'educates', supports by their media, such people.  I put 'leader' in quotes because Miliband is no more a leader than Churchill was: they are puppets who have adopted a view secretly circulated between Jews.

Barbara Roche ugly fat racist
Barbara Roche:
Ugly, fat, racist
It's one reason for their superficial self-confidence: normal people might strive to balance things, to think of the future, to value community spirit, and so on; they are mutually brainwashed.  It's simply not credible that barely-sane old bats like Specter, Roche, Lipstadt, Berelowitz have a carefully-thought out view of societal optimisation and a detailed vision of the future: they are just fanatics, like the Board of Deputies of British Jews.

There are, inevitably, complications: there's an intermediate layer, chosen for the ability to work hard, or self-deceive: politicians, people nominally in control of utilities, businesspeople who arrange buy-outs, media controllers, may end up with a few million. They are paupers in comparison with the concealed controllers, and often embittered by receiving 'only' the equivalent of a Jewish minimum wage, for their subservience.

Remember the 'two tier money system'.  It's one key to the world as it is now.

Let me add the words of '77GSlinger' from Youtube: I have been saying this about the fed for years now. It is obvious they printed quadrillions of untold dollars and gave it to the members of their tribe, so now after 100 years of stealing from all of us through tax slavery, they own everything
And let me add typical detail taken from Internet. This is on 'dollar imperialism' (Read: jewish control, mainly over the USA) as applied here to South America and minerals, though not their money and other control:
    Speyer and Co., the great Jewish banking house, in 1903, gave Mexico her first twelve and a half million-dollar loan. They acquired by this transaction all oil concessions in Mexico. Rockefeller, Morgan, Jacob Schiff and the other great Jewish financiers followed suit and thus almost all the natural resources of Mexico fell into Jewish hands. Bernard Mannes Baruch, the National City Bank under Jewish management, and Guggenheim, the Jewish copper magnate, became the real masters of Mexico.
    In 1906, the same world conquerors obtained monopolies over Nicaragua's national income from customs and excise and also over her railways and shipping lines.
The banking house of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. was one of the founders as well as chief financier of the Panama Canal Co.
    The major part of Cuba's industry is controlled by the Guggenheims.
Bolivia was turned into a colony of 'dollar imperialism' by Speyer and Guggenheim, who exploited the zinc mines.
    Since 1935, thirty-five percent of the potassium nitrate and ninety percent of the copper industry of Chile is in the hands of the Guggenheim and Morgan Trusts.
    In Peru, the copper mines are in the hands of the Seligmans and Goldschmidts.
    Lord Melchett, under his original name of Mond, controls the nickel industry of Canada. Out of a total of thirty billion dollars which constitute the national assets of Canada, a total of three billion is in the hands of the Jews.
    Foreign trade with China was organised by the Morgans and also by the National City Bank and, of course, by Kuhn, Loeb. Later, the International Banking Corporation, led by Edward H. Harriman the railway king, and Isaac Guggenheimer, began the economic 'exploitation' of China. Schiff, Morgan, Kuhn, Loeb, and Harriman made fortunes out of railway construction in that country.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

The work of Kevin B. MacDonald

Written by Rerevisionist 18 Dec 2012

May I suggest a new attack point for nationalists—and everyone concerned with the truth.

Most readers here will have heard of Kevin MacDonald, whose print-on-demand books are available e.g. on Amazon.  The Culture of Critique (1998) is the best-known, as far as I know: it deals with Jewish activists in 20th century America, including psychoanalysis, 'leftists', the Frankfurt School, and 'the New York intellectuals'.

His other books include A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy(1994) on the real or perhaps mythical long-term history of Jews, including segregation from, and competition with, goyim and eugenics.

His 1998 book Separation and its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism discusses the way anti-Jewish feelings have been provoked in host communities, and then exploited by Jews; and the self-deception of Jews in their writings and behaviour.

I have no idea what his MacDonald's sales figures are, but there's no question he's been a great catalyst in the process of Americans becoming Jew-aware, something like a modern Martin Luther figure.

His books are cautious and belong to the opening phase of Internet publishing.  MacDonald accepts for example the probably fictitious accounts of Jewish ancient history; he takes the fraudulent 'holocaust' seriously; and he doesn't like the Khazar theory.  He doesn't cover a wide range of subjects, really, either.  He mostly shies away from scientific and financial fraud.  Much of the power of his books comes from the listings, page after page, of Jewish names, with their activities.

It doesn't say much for British nationalists that there is no equivalent book relating to Britain; and I'd guess the same is true in France, Italy, and Germany in particular, where post-Second World War influences are overpowering.

We need ideally a cheap single volume book dealing with new information on Jewish influence in finance (especially).  This is crucially important, because the two-tier paper money system gives Jews overwhelming financial power, able to buy out and influence pretty much anything.

Media control is essential to keep up this system; and of course it's international, so Jews can carefully watch events in multiple countries, and provoke wars or at least aggressive behaviour, and control systems such as the EU, which is clearly modelled on the Jewish-controlled USSR, still well within living memory.  Jewish frauds, which are many, should be identified, not discreetly hidden, as at present.

Other important subjects include:

  • Jewish misinterpretations of history, notably of course the Second World War and the vast anti-white atrocities
  • Jews and the legal system.  We need to examine Houses of Parliament, and the occupation of important positions in the legal system, and the legal education system.  Pressure groups and anti-British 'think tanks', and the BBC and Jewish-owned media, typically apply pressure for laws.  Often these are passed, then implemented in anti-white and anti-British ways.  All this should be illustrated with many examples.
  • The offloading of costs onto whites.  This of course is very clear in the USA, which funds Israel to rather incredible extents.  A typically undiscussed example is of the level of genetic problems with Jews, which as far as I know are largely offloaded onto the British taxpayer.

There are many examples of Jews and 'goyim' collaborating, often without the latter necessarily understanding what's being done.  The NUS, NUT, and other unions illustrate the sort of thing.  The deliberate dumbing-down of education may be another.

This may seem 'irrelevant' to many people, conscious that time is passing and possible disasters are unfolding; but I'd argue it's clear that there are huge numbers of ordinary people who need, whether they know it yet or not, such information in a clear and accurate form.  Such a book or books should ideally be entirely factual and properly referenced, whilst being readable.

MacDonald's books are not online, though there are some sample chapters.  This is the usual pattern; David Irving puts his books online, on the theory that people who like them prefer to physically own and handle their copies.  Kindles and Nooks and other devices are new, and already influential; new books have to take them into account.  Very long books may be easier on Kindle than on paper.  It's not yet clear whether pictures will be displayable cheaply and effectively, but probably printed books and displays will resemble each other.  Indexes may become less important—computer searching may replace them.

Note that print-on-demand publishing does away with the warehousing problem of books.  It also allows more frequent updating—new editions could be produced almost daily.  Mistakes can be corrected without having to pulp books or stick erratum slips in them.  I don't think it's particularly cheap—Amazon's discount must be huge, and mass market books will I suppose still be printed and bound in the usual way.

Individuals who like truth therefore have new prospects for publishing.  I hope a new genre of serious Jewish research will flourish.

Notes added in 2015: MacDonald's reasoning is largely based on evolutionary selection pressures. But interpreting human development in this way has difficulties: after all, all creatures face huge range of problems and challenges food, warmth, injuries, illness, shelter, aggression, whatever. For example, some people are puzzled by the idea that northern Europeans are 'reputation-based': a person who is heroic, skilled, or honest may be preferred above another person who is simply part of the same clan or group or family. If this is true, how come dishonest crooked Jews have been allowed power? One point to be made here is that control of the media allows almost unlimited power to control perceptions: Jewish pornographers, billionaires, war criminals and so on have their images shaped by media and, from a longer viewpoint, teaching. Many people are simply not aware how deeply their views on Churchill, Hitler, Stalin, Eisenhower, Nero, Jesus, Ho Chi Minh... are a result of deliberate propaganda.
Probably genetics affects, and is affected by, 'lifestyle'. Theoreticians think of work, and the distribution of types of people needed; and they think of climate and general geographical conditions, and try to identify population characteristics that match—plump and fatty people in frozen areas, other type able to combat heat in hot areas, still others who live in high altitudes with thin air. Probably the resulting lifestyles leave a genetic effect: 'Jews' seem now to favour 'shtetl' type lives, cramped together in groups, interior dwellers liking lecture rooms, unable to understand other groups who like freedom, an outdoor life, and adventure. Black looting may be a form of 'race consciousness' or 'racial memory'. Mongols seem to be most happy living in vast spacious areas, rather than tower block buildings.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

What Should We Do With Synagogues?

Written by Rerevisionist 1 Dec 2012

What should we do with synagogues?I note the general lacklustre eye turned upon mosques in this country by Britons. The question of synagogues hasn't had much attention. May I suggest a few pointers--

When Jews took over in Russia, churches, icons, and people were destroyed. It seems only fair that the same treatment should be returned. Therefore it seems reasonable that most synagogues should simply be destroyed, or converted into useful buildings.

However, this would be unfair, in the sense that their contribution to enrichment might be forgotten. So I suggest synagogues occupying what were British buildings should be turned into museums.

The exhibits might include, among many others-
* Extracts from 'religious books' including material on lying to the goyim, on treating goyim women as prostitutes, and on child sex.
* Exhibits of financial frauds to take money from goys
* Exhibits of the Russian royal family, possibly including plaster casts of the smashed skulls and other remains
* Exhibits of Jack the Ripper, to show the Jewish contribution in the East End
* Exhibits of 1930s famines—perhaps tasteful photos of Ukrainians eating human remains after their food had been taken
* Some 'Holocaust' exhibits, illustrating the fraud and the money obtained
* Information about Jewish organised crime
* Exhibits from Armenia, possibly with genuine exhumed human remains
* The positive contributions of Jews, after scientific frauds have been removed. Maybe a small souvenir postcard could be made.

Added two years later:–
After the people in Whitefish [small town in USA] vote down this absurd, jewish-supremacist proposal, they need to appoint a select committee and appoint it the task to make a thoroughgoing review of the jewish Tanakh and Talmud and decide if judaism is a religion that promotes genocide. If it is found to promote genocide, they need to outlaw the practicing in public of all forms of jewish supremacy and pass a law banning the sale of all Torahs, Talmuds, Mishnas, Gemarahs, Zohars, and Siddurs or any other book that incites genocide against non-jews. If requested, I am willing to provide expert testimony to the committee.
    'Debbie' comments in the Occidental Observer, November 2014]

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


Written by Rerevisionist 3 Jan 2013   |   Expanded 3 March 2016

Parasite [Note added June 2013: Eustace Mullins' short 1967 book The Biological Jew is one of many booklets/ books on this censored topic. It's worth noting that the EU-related Coudenhove-Kalergi's father wrote against 'anti-Semitism', and that in 1933 the son jointly wrote Gegen die Phrase vom jüdischen Schädling (Against the Phrase 'Jewish Parasite').]

Link to new 2016 article on Jewish evolution out of the development of cities - a convincing overview of evolution of a sub-race. Note that the written word, when forced upon populations, can affect their evolution; very probably this is what happened to the Khazars, and for that matter Moslems and others.
Added 6 Mar 2017: An interesting parallel to physical parasitism (i.e. not affecting mental processes): strangler figs kill trees by both smothering their foliage to cut off light, and forming a dense network around the trunk, sucking nutrition from the tree. Eventually the tree dies, leaving a hollow cylinder, with strangler fig around it. Banyan trees are an example. Could this offer a parallel to the killing-off of cities and nations?
Added 19 Oct 2016: 'Dry Rot' as analogy with Jewish strategy
'Dry rot' is a fungus evolved to feed from dry wood. Dry wood cannot be attacked by simple fungi, which need water and some nutritional essentials to dissolve food, grow, and eventually fruit. The 'dry rot' fungus has evolved long thin strands, which can direct water to the target, dry, area. Something similar happens when Jewish contacts act across long distances. An historically-recent example is the takeover of Russia by Jews in the 1917 'Russian revolution'. Jewish money, and fake money of the Federal Reserve and other sources, fed arms, propaganda, ammunition, and money into Russia, from New York, London, and no doubt elsewhere. This enabled Jews, acting more or less as in the Protocols, to parasitise Russia.

Let's try to examine the idea of 'parasitism'.  Every organism needs nutrition, and in well-evolved life many organisms feed on other organisms. Most (e.g. human beings eating cattle) are not usually regarded as 'parasitic'. In nature, it's usually easy enough to identify what's labelled a 'parasite'; it's some creature (or perhaps fungus etc) which lives at the expense of another creature.  It may be fatal, eventually; ichneumon flies and wasps inject eggs into caterpillars, and their larvae eat the caterpillars until ready to pupate.  (This is often seen in cabbage white caterpillars, which—if they aren't killed by insecticides—die, with little yellow fly/wasp cocoons festooned outside them).

'Parasitism' involves damage to the 'host' which is disproportionate: fleas, for example, which can only eat blood, need methods to penetrate skin and delay blood clotting, just for tiny quantities of blood: the damage they do is analogous in human terms to thieves, lawyers, or what have you who may inflict a lot of damage in exchange for their smaller gains. A spectacular example is the Rafflesia flower, the biggest flower that exists, which draws nourishment from other plants' roots. When damage doesn't happen, the forms of life aren't usually counted as parasitic: bacteria in the gut often have little net effect.

Some parasites, such as tapeworms, and liver flukes, aren't generally fatal; they feed from the host, and breed, in effect, using properties of their hosts' excretions.  Occasionally we have symbiosis, where what might otherwise be a parasite helps its host: lichens are joint organisms; the large blue butterfly's larva is fed, by certain ants, with their own pupae, in exchange for a sugary excretion; greenfly may help plants get protein in exchange for the glucose they synthesise; nitrogen-fixing bacteria in some plant roots, for example.

Parasitism of course resembles predator and prey relations, except that predators kill and eat their prey.  There is another resemblance with parasites: in neither case is the prey usually wiped out.  If this happened, the predators or parasites themselves would die out.  Cuckoos for example in birds, or malaria parasites, don't manage complete parasitism, no doubt more by luck than anything else.

Some interesting examples occur—or allegedly occur; biologists need sensational stuff to live, as much as journalists—amongst social insects, such as ants and some bees.  To repeat Dawkins, repeating other writers, a rival species of ant has individuals that make the same sounds as ants in a nest, seek out the queen, saw her head off, and take the place of the queen; the invading species' eggs are cared for by the ants and displace them. This at least is the version I gathered: 'phorid flies' which make ants feed their females by threatening the queen in some way—several species seem to have been introduced into the USA against fire ants, an earlier introduction.

The idea of 'mimicry' is important in parasites where they are not carried internally.  (In that case, what they look like doesn't matter).  Often mimicry is protective: a harmless fly may look like a wasp, with bold colours, and presumably on balance survives better.  Cuckoos lay eggs which mimic those of host birds.

If we extend this idea to human beings, there are points of comparison, but also of course differences.  No other animal has anything like the learning capacities of human beings, though in my view these are easy to exaggerate.  And, as it turns out, technology enables communications, and moving around of matter, to be enhanced incalculably more than the simple biological basis of a creature responding to close-up, direct stimuli—speech, commands, observation, effects of light and sound—and moving physical objects—food, useful objects etc.

Parasitism in people is therefore much more complicated than in the rest of nature. For one thing there is a time element largely missing in nature.  Human beings remain powerless for many years; nobody in unviolent times would call a normal child a parasite (apart from the Jewish Freudian, Erich Fromm; and Anthony Ludovici on 'the beloved parasite') though if a normal child dies young, in effect, it is. There must be powerful mechanisms to prevent infanticide in human beings; if there were even a 1 in 10 chance of a child being killed in a year by a parent, few children would arrive at adulthood. In fact, it's possible human beings are weaker than, for example, chimps, by a factor (it seems) of 3 to 6, because very strong adults might be too dangerous for children over the long period of their growth. I'm told a man on steroids can have the strength of (say) four men, and possibly this is within evolutionary range; maybe there were genetic advantages in being less strong than chimps? If these mechanisms can be exploited, other groups may be able to parasitise human communities, and it seems likely that any mechanism in any group could in principle be exploited.  A productive old person's total life is not in total parasitic.  At present, Londoners are parasitic on the work of Irish labourers who built their sewage system in the nineteenth century, and Indians parasitic on British engineers who designed their cities.

Because of human creativity, it may be difficult to confidently detect a parasite, since someone may be an ancestor of someone who later turns out to be a creative type.

The ideas/beliefs issue is probably the most important as regards human beings.  This is because people are physically somewhat similar: the difference between an extremely strong man and a feeble woman is large; but it is nothing compared with the difference between an informed person and someone entirely uneducated.  And groups of people can have mutually-reinforcing effects, which is why in-groups can exist, and secrecy, lies, deception and so on can be hugely important.  This is out of the reach of modern science: the brain is not understood, nor is learning, except as it is observed empirically.  This is why advertisers may be as good or better at prediction than psychologists.

Since it's not possible to be scientifically precise, the following comments and comparisons aren't to be regarded as established; they may change with circumstances, though it's impossible to be sure.


There are interesting possibilities here.  Jewish groups rely on mimicry of their hosts: changes of name to resemble their hosts, imitations of other languages, keeping quiet about hostile beliefs, temporary alliances on a belief basis, pretence of caring about matters of some host groups, adopting conventions on clothes—all these are entirely typical.

Here's an extract from Hilaire Belloc on the 'marvellous ability' of Jews to mimic other groups. ('Mimicry' is not his word).

Lower-class people often feel they must mimic upper castes, probably throughout the world.  I'm told Indians sometimes get adopted as Brahmins, by imitating their manners, eating vegetarian food, and so on. I wondered if The Midwich Cuckoos (science fiction, soon after 1945) was a science fiction attempt to work through the concept of an intruded group of like-minded aliens. There is some comment on The Hobbit (film) in The Occidental Observer site: the baddies are obviously and clearly hostile: they threaten, attack, look, feel, sound, dangerous.

kissinger teddy bear
A German group wondered about Jews in Europe and speculated that they had evolved to look harmless, like teddy bears: who would imagine that Henry Kissinger is more of a mass murderer than Hitler, or that Cameron and his half-witted cabinet want white British people to disappear?

Here's a link to the piece on Jews as parasites evolved from generations of town-dwellers. (Highly recommended: well-written. Opens in a new page).

'Secondary' or 'opportunistic' parasitism is an interesting possibility (mentioned in an Occidental Observer piece). Once a caterpillar is paralysed, or a tree parasitised by mistletoe, or cattle parasitised by larvae growing under the skin, or a creature made sick by some biological attack, there are opportunities for other parasites to feed in their turn, if they can find some way to do this.

Symbiosis between parasites and subsets of hosts are rare in nature: all ant workers and drones obey a parasitic new queen, but this occurs because the control mechanisms are fairly simple and inescapably compelling—maverick ants which fight back seem never to exist. However, the hugely increased learning capacities of people allow many variants of this process: Janissaries, forced labour, captured populations, unwilling allies, and forced impregnation, are possibilities. And undeniably such mechanisms are exploited by Jews, possibly in a genetically-determined way.

Behavioural Traits

I've read (I have no idea if it's true) that some species of chameleons have status depending on stink glands: the smellier, the higher status.  And that other species of chameleons, which pay no attention to smells, achieve high status simply by their ordinary behaviour. This may be analogous to Jewish behaviour in seeking out rich, high-status females, who inspire caution and fear in their own groups.
      Something similar is possible among human beings because of their elaborate belief systems and past learning.  One parasitic style of behaviour is to mimic powerful leaders and leadership characteristics.

This is easier with foreigners; there are lots of examples of foreigners becoming (or being made into) leaders (Napoleon wasn't French; Stalin wasn't Russian; many, if not all, British monarchs were foreign; many inhabitants of India preferred Britons to other Indians) partly because the locals couldn't combine, partly because the foreigners had some superiority, but partly because they ignored the local pecking order behaviours.  The USA is largely controlled by Jews, and this is certainly in part because their behaviour looks like leadership.

This in my view partly explains the success of fanaticism.  Nineteenth century theorists regarded fanaticism as self-defeating in the long run; and this may be true. But in the short run fanaticism has advantages.  It leads to unified behaviour: groups of Jews, groups of Muslims, gullible UAF types, fundamentalists, soldiers who have no real idea what they're doing, MPs who follow their party orders, have simple-minded views, but they can be very effective in a group, just as packs of animals all following the same impulse may work better than packs which in effect debate and dispute.

There must be situations where the best style of behaviour is simply not clear; genetic variation perhaps contains a record of the range of decisions by earlier generations. These may not work in future: if 'aliens' visited earth, who could know the best reaction?

There's a case for studying law or medicine or history or oratory to benefit a community (or the world), but people whose only interest is (for example) law, in the hope of benefiting their group or making money, has a more powerful motive to study.  In contrast, people with a wider view have a much more difficult job of trying to understand and balance different groups and issues.

When you see some hideous Jewish woman blithely saying that white girls deserve all they get, or a Jewish political party leader saying things completely the opposite of their party's supposed stance, or a BBC Jewish hack scribbler saying every country should welcome criminals; don't imagine there must be a process of thought behind it. It may simply be an innate genetic reaction to the external stimulus.

Extended Parasitism 

I can't think of any analogy of such 'escalation' in the animal world; I'm not sure there's anything comparable in nature, though possibly spores and bacteria, which can settle on and eat food substrate, might be seen as similar. I wonder if bee drones, which fly around between hives of worker bees with their queen, are a product of a long evolutionary process, and might be regarded as a small superior caste keeping the others under surveillance.

But in the human world, another type of extended parasitism occurs where parasitism is extended over large numbers of people.  The paper money aspect of Judaism is a good illustration.  These cases involve large numbers of allies of Jews, 'useful idiots', people who are bribed or threatened or prevented from knowing relevant truths.

I don't know if there's an official expression, among people such as Dawkins, for the sort of thing I have in mind.  Because of extended communication between minds, parasites can multiply and extend, and may indeed need to do this to survive.

An obvious example, which would certainly be censored by Dawkins and most official geneticists, is Jewish behaviour in such things as the 'Holocaust' fraud. In order to keep their money flowing in, they have, or act as though they have, no option but to buy up media, influence 'historians', hire thugs, control people high up in political parties, make up their own parties, and so on.

It's easy to see how this sort of behaviour could become genetically implanted, over many generations, until it is a fixed characteristic of such a group, so that the members feel an overriding moral imperative to parasitic behaviour. The possibilities of language and oratory and mythologies, the invention of writing and methods of duplication such as printing on paper, the formation of specialist castes preaching the same thing ad nauseam, all suggest genetic reinforcement as critics and skeptics are killed off, successful parasitism rewarded, and opponents killed off.

Group Evolution

As we've seen, because of the possibilities of learning, variation within human groups gives possibilities which don't occur in most species, unless you count social insects, whose roles are however claimed to be firmly determined.

Kevin MacDonald is the de facto leading theoretician here, though there are quite a few sociobiologists of the sort quoted by Dawkins.  These latter however are usually optimists, speculating on the spread and decline of 'altruism' for example.

Kevin MacDonald in my view isn't completely accurate on whites.  It certainly appears true that whites have been infinitely more inventive than any other group, and clearly this may be related to physical conditions: in Europe we have winter, and any group not planning for winter is liable to starve, unless it can successfully parasitise other group(s). And per contra, groups without natural defences must have banded together for group defence, and for group raiding, without time for luxuries such as civilised behaviour. If medieval London had been planted in the American plains, or Asian steppes, or in Africa, presumably it would have been picked clean by migrating hordes.
      Possibly the deep genetic impulses of Jews derive from something like this. There are accounts of Hibaru existing in mountains overlooking plains, and acting as raiding parties; perhaps this tribalism was codified, and eventually transmitted to an entire nation, the Khazars.

However it seems just as true that planning, agriculture, storage etc. needs people who are plodding, dull, and able to tolerate long periods of boredom, possibly just follow orders.

There are plenty of whites with little intellect.  It wouldn't surprise me if this is sex-linked; certainly it's impressive how few women are able to understand or test hypotheses.  MacDonald seems to overstate the benevolence of whites as a result.  His website censors discussion of the Vietnam War: gum-chewing low IQ whites hardly able to speak their language raping Vietnamese women, technicians dropping bombs on defenceless villagers, don't figure in his world-view. And of course they are helped to ignore these things by the Jewish media, which never mentions them until an anti-white cause presents itself.

Jews, gipsies, thugs, may have evolved as groups of specialists. A largely city or state which is stable is likely to have castes or groups which inbreed; one such group may be fighters or security enforcers. But a far smaller specialist group could evolve, perhaps directed by the written word: their expertise may allow them to dominate a far larger group, many of whom are weak in those specific skills. We have an analogy of a functioning complex creature with an animal which can be attacked by far smaller creatures: specialist microbes, blood suckers, worms, attackers of vulnerable parts—the head, heart, nerves, spine.
      And also they might be unable to survive without parasitism: perhaps this explains why Jews are so fanatical, in such activities as bombing defenceless towns, propagandising over entire lifetimes, doing everything possible to support Jewish frauds, destroying all signs of resistance—driven by inherited terror of being isolated without anyone to squeeze sustenance from.

Perhaps some mathematical treatment on the lines of input-output analyses might be applied to the natural world. For example, invasive competition may be summarisable in a relation between levels of fighting and aggression and distribution of species and subspecies. There may be lessons from invasive species—flatworms, crayfish, giant snails, knotweed.

And perhaps some proofs might be found of necessary actions to retain and improve civilisation against threats.

Baker's book on race (reprinted recently by Arthur Kemp) examines reproductive strategies around the world, quoting anthropologists, and I think concluded these strategies were sound, tending to replicate the spread of qualities in these tribes and groups, usually by ensuring mating between all the different types except those considered undesirable or those who genetically were too weak.

My guess is that sexual reproduction itself is an evolutionary device to allow incorrectly-copied DNA to be removed.

Medically-Caused Parasitism ought to be mentioned here, the result of medical discoveries feeding back into the genetic structures of races and groups.
      A good example is the discovery of the structure of insulin, and the discovery of techniques for extracting it from animals, or synthesising it chemically, or by genetically-modifying simple organisms. The result has been a steady increase in numbers of diabetics. There has also been an increase in deliberate confusion over the issue—inventing 'type 1' and 'type 2' to muffle the fact that non-production of insulin is lethal. It's imaginable there might be societies with (say) 20% of the population unable to make insulin, and a whole support network of industries and distribution and treatments, and careers and propaganda structures, with accompanying shortages in every other part of that society.
      A more general example is population explosions, where medical and technical knowledge—cleaner water, more food— combine to enlarge populations in ways which the populations themselves were unable to invent for themselves. The result appears to be a mismatch between the genetics of the population and their abilities.

Added December 2014. Youtube Comment by 'blackacidlizzard':–
Denial of an objective reality is a survival strategy which works only for a parasitic organism.

The hunter must learn how projectiles fly and blades cut, he can not tell the universe to change gravity or shearing resistance to suit his needs. The farmer must learn what causes his crops and livestock to grow or to die, he can not demand of their cells that they replicate by historical necessity. The steelworker must learn how metals are joined securely, he can not demand they hold together to satisfy the proper narrative.

Only the useless, the taker, the unproductive, can flourish in denial of reality, for he does not demand that the arrow hit the deer, he demands that he be fed by one who did heed reality, and struck his target. He does not demand that manna fall from heaven, he demands his manna from the hands of those who know best where it comes from. He does not demand the steel stay together, he simply demands to be paid even when it collapses.

Reality is a necessity for the productive, lest nature give fatal consequence, and falsehood is a necessity for the parasite, lest the productive cease to sustain his life with their labor.

Denial of limits to growth is an effect of the Jewish parasitic mind-set. Their emphasis on money shows the same mind-set. Parasites unconsciously expect things to be available to them:- their only skill is to remove assets, by whatever means. They can't create. Expecting them to solve problems about population growth and quality, and resource limits and supplies, is like expecting rats to carefully plan their food suppliers, or tapeworms to ponder the activities of their hosts.

Added 3 March 2016. Examining 'Wars' Between Differing Genetic Mixes and Races of People

General Levels of Aggression As I've tried to suggest, there may be useful things to say about propensities to argue and dispute. Maybe whites do too much of this between themselves, for example.
Threats as a Distinctive Human Perception Because language allows transmission of any comprehensible idea between people, human beings must be almost unique in feeling threats from other people and other situations. No doubt birds in huge flocks, and fish in shoals, and animals within sight of each other, can transmit fear signals. But human beings being told (for example) that nuclear bombs from Communists can kill all life on earth—this sort of thing must be part of being human.
The Division Between Controlling People and Controlling Nature ... ... Is another example of natural behaviour that has been neglected by geneticists and ethologists. There is simple enough material on 'pecking order' in animals, and on long-term observations, but there doesn't seem to be much to explain how the evolution of enhanced mental capacity of human beings. It seems clear enough that 'learning', however it works, involves specialisation; and one such specialisation may be evolved tricks in controlling other people, the distinction between manual work and crafts and technical skills, and between controlling people. And it seems clear that sociopathy, and confidence tricks, and indifference to cruelty could be enhanced in some groups, just as dog breeds vary, as a result of artificial selection.
Language and Books as Part of Human Artificial Selection My own belief is that books, notably religious books where there is intense reinforcement of messages and widespread teaching and preaching from them, have an effect over time on populations. Probably the effect has been ignored, or just understated. After all, without trying to interpret such figures, only a 5% change in any characteristic per generation, for 10 generations (perhaps 200-250 years), yields a 60% change. This process may be relevant to the Khazar theory (Arthur Koestler's version is conversion around 740 A.D.) and to the genetics of Moslems (Quran composed earlier).
      Even people who dislike the Khazar hypothesis might find this a convincing argument:
      David Duke: Isn't the genetic record pretty clear that if you look at the core genetic similarity they have a lot in common with Semites yet at the same time they definitely have a different genetic signature than Semites and that's because they've been separate from the other Semites for thousands of years and they've had a very endogamous [i.e. breeding inside] breeding pattern.. accentuating the Jewish stereotype?
      Kevin MacDonald '.. in all the data ... hard to find any psychological trait that's not influenced by genetics ... personality.. intelligence.. ethnocentrism..'

Genetic Variations in Populations & Selective Attacks by Parasites More examples of this line of thought. Apologies for the repetition; I'm trying to get the ideas across.

I do hope a significant proportion of American whites wake up to the sheer evil of the Jewish parasites, liars, and warmongers. In my view, whites have evolved to be diverse in their occupations, and many of these need technical skill, patience, endurance, childrearing, and so on. They are not adapted to oppose a tight extremist corps of liars and parasites, of the sort indicated in your article, experts in deception and concealment. Please, please wake up to the threat from Jews.

I think Jews are inbred, and their instinct is simply to cunningly attack and kill anyone they see as rivals. I don't think it's intellectual; they are like some races of dogs which are dangerously violent. Time and time again you see the same spitting violent filth from them; Jewish academics, soldiers, thugs, 'businessmen', lawyers all follow this model. It may be that multiple generations exposed to Talmudic filth has had that effect, with continued selection for aggression, secrecy, violence, parasitism: they are analogous to a group of people who has been exposed for many generations only to pornography and violence – would you honestly expect such a group to be well-balanced and normal? . . . The results of their behaviour are simply not within their mental framework, any more than a bull-baiting dog or chick-killing cuckoo can plan its future.

Parasitism can be seen in Jews who are supposed to be policy-makers, but seem to just follow their genetics of hate and attack. Cameron in the UK, Merkel in Germany, Soetoro ('Obama') in the USA, for example, all seem unable to understand that 'medical treatment' needs trained, skilled, and educated personnel. They seem to think medical skill is simply waiting out there. Africans seem to think electricity and food supply themselves. These are the attitudes of parasites, assuming hosts will supply it. It's a similar idea to Moslems saying "Allah will supply".

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Scientific Nationalism

Written by Rerevisionist 8 Jan 2013

scientificI'd like to suggest a catchphrase: 'scientific nationalism'.  As we all know, there's a divide.  Some people, who are Jew aware, want to provide evidence for Jewish maleficence, and spread it and invite more research into it.  Others, who are also Jew aware, consider the best policy is stealth: the public would be too shocked at the truth.  I prefer the former, but there's no doubt that many people, after a century of propaganda, will be unable to analyse Jews sensibly.

May I suggest that we call the J-educators 'scientific nationalists'.  Not all the time; just a phrase for occasional use.  It's partly a riposte to the Jewish phrase 'scientific socialism': in that case, the only science was adding up the paper money/ e-money accruing to Jews, and the only socialism the group interest of Jews.  I remember some African leaders, or puppets, beaming in the 1960s as they praised 'scientific socialism'....

Let's just look at the idea of imitating Jews.  This seems unlikely to be a workable policy.  Consider Jewish activity over the last 60 years: pro rata, putting the British population at (say) four times the 'Jewish', Jew mimicry would need four different 'holocaust' frauds, one twin towers insurance fraud every fifteen years, one major financial fraud each year, bombing a defenceless country (say) every five years, assassinations as regular events, entire control of every information medium, science frauds in every field of weaponry, health, and so on. That seems simply not feasible.

However, may be a cut-down version is feasible: after all it's only the Jewish 'elites' that run the frauds, such as profiting from paper money.  It would appear to be possible to remove Jewish influence from finance by some well-planned coup, perhaps involving a combination of physical restraint, legal action, and technical control over what is now 'money', followed by careful long-term investigations and punishments.  Maybe London could become a non-Jewish financial power.  It's hard to see how such actions could be carried out, in the current climate, except in secret.  Ordinary democratic politics would be irrelevant.

However let's discuss democracy and political parties, and their attitude to information.

[1] Social science.  Kevin MacDonald has trail-blazed in the English-speaking world, but there are huge gaps to be filled. Examples:

  (i) According to MacDonald's competitive model, Jews would be expected to damage education as much as possible, in alliance with temporary allies: thus Gove [UK Minister of Education] would be expected to direct money to Jewish schooling, insulate it from any criticisms that they are racist and tribalist, direct money to Jewish educational think-tanks etc, and force goyim to pay as much as possible, and get education as third-rate as possible.  This is an hypothesis, testable, like any scientific hypothesis, subject to problems of evidence etc.  'Scientific nationalism' should investigate.

  (ii) My best guess, again an hypothesis, is that Jews made a fortune from US wars, notably in the Vietnam War over about 20 years.  Probably the whole point of it was to make money; there was, arguably, no military point at all, and very likely negative effects.

  (iii) Looking at national economies, an obvious hypothesis is that, if Jews can make a few billion, they are perfectly happy to cause many billions of damage.  Scientific nationalists should of course research into such things.

  (iv) Religions.  The deliberate asymmetrical attacks on Christianity by Jewish media (and this includes promotion of sexual weirdnesses) ought to be researched.

[2] Science and technology.  At present there is a moral deficit in technologists: if Jewish paper money is dangled, they scramble like dogs for it.  This has been the situation since some time before 1945.  In fact during the Second World War a Jewish Rothschild spy was allowed to gather information on such important subjects as radar.  In my opinion the entire nuclear weapons industry was a fraud.  (I'm aware this is controversial).

Smaller scale frauds include NASA, AIDS, fluoridation, many computer schemes, and much of biological science.  It's my hope technologists may recover some self-respect; for years they simply accepted the situation with rather childish credulity.  My website big-lies.org has material on all these issues; and I'd draw attention to Ivor Catt, the computer chip designer, quoted on my site with permission, who wrote on technicians and weapons frauds and Weinstock, mostly 1960s-1970s.  Anyway—it's perfectly obvious scientific nationalism ought to get involved.

These are issues a bit remote from most peoples' lives.  When it comes to ordinary voting, people unhappy with the Jewish parties of 'Labour', 'Conservative', and 'Lib Dem' will increasingly be offered nationalist alternatives.  However some of these are bound to be Jewish-controlled.  (My personal belief is that the IRA is a Jewish front; just to show that many people will simply be unaware of the possibility of Jewish-controlled fronts).  So probably any serious nationalist candidate will be faced by a fake nationalist candidate for the same seat.  The job of scientific nationalists will be to point out the fakes.

Anyway; 'scientific nationalism'.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Nuclear Scepticism and Revisionism

Written by Rerevisionist 17 Feb 2013

Oppenheimer and Groves enjoy their joke
Robert Oppenheimer, Jewish fraud. And simple soldier Groves, who signed the checks for the 'Manhattan Project'. Posing around what is obviously not the aftermath of an atom bomb blast.

"Have you heard...?"
"Without commenting on the truth or otherwise, have you heard the idea that nuclear weapons are a fraud?" – is a question I've put to assorted people: bookshop owners, market stall people, waiters, 'socialist' stall holder useful idiots, people in theatres, etc. (Click Youtube, right). So far, I haven't met a single person who has heard that idea.

Nor had I, until 2008, when I happened across a facebook comment, that someone in Youtube claimed nuclear bombs were a fraud. I had studied when young (among other things) physics, and was aware of 'splitting the atom', fission, fusion, H bombs, cobalt bombs, strontium 90, and all the rest. So the claim seemed absurd. On the other hand I was aware of mass lying: among other events the Vietnam War and the 'Holocaust' which by then I knew was a fraud. At that time Youtube videos had a maximum length of ten minutes; so I decided to take a few minutes out of my not-very-busy schedule to look.

In fact the video, by JW, is good, but not remarkably good—it's about twenty clips of 'nuclear explosions', probably from Youtube, run consecutively with a voiceover. JW shows one of the clips contains a reversed (negative) colour image in just one frame, which can only have been inserted by intentional fakery. The video's importance was as a seed—it was a seminal thing as far as I was concerned. I poked around on Internet and found forum comments on the topic; the earliest were from a Canadian, Roger Desjardins, who so far as I know is, as he himself claims, the 'father of nuclear skepticism'.

And I found that
[1] Films of nuclear tests (pretty much as 'released' to the unfortunate US public) were available on DVD.
[2] Some birth-year greetings cards typically for the 1950s had newsreels from the time including nuclear material.
[3] There are cheap DVDs of the Second World War, which of course near the end have material on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
[4] I had, and no doubt many others have, VHS material, some including nuclear designers, people like Penney, 'the father of Britain's H Bomb' and so on.
[5] And of course there are books and magazines from the time, which of course can be destroyed, but can't be retrospectively edited.
[6] Worth adding fictional stuff: there's a junk film by Spielberg, the notorious Jewish liar, including Harrison Ford at a supposed nuclear test; and a BBC computer-graphic version of what was supposed to have happened at Hiroshima.

Anyway, I put up videos of my own, from January 2009 (see Rerevisionist Youtube channel), two based on old newsreels, others edited from films available on DVD. And in the course of time JW started his own forum, NUKE LIES, with himself as head moderator. This (and it's hard to believe) was early 2011; these things move slowly. That forum attracted some very good contributors, including NUKELIES himself, me as rerevisionist, FirstClassSkeptic from middle USA, voerioc from France, mooninquirer who started as a NASA skeptic, exorcist late in the year who also started as a moon inquirer, Sorensen731 from Spain, and many more; plus of course trolls. JW's website details included his home address in New York, and I suspect he may have been threatened. At any rate the forum disappeared completely one day after almost exactly one year. However I'd site-grabbed it, and restored it; which, believe me, took some work. It's now in a static version on nukelies.org pretty much unaltered, including the fatuities of trolls, frozen in their lies and stupidities. I've added more material on other subjects; big-lies.org is my umbrella site.

I don't want to go into detail here. Try
[1] Hiroshima as a myth; you have no idea how tedious it is when someone says "Har har tell that to the Japanese" as though we wouldn't have thought of that. This is a bunch of articles on supposed blasts, radiation, bomb aiming, propaganda, Japanese accounts, films, the 'mushroom cloud' etc which show the traditional story is wrong.
[2] Material on back pedalling—a lot of events now are people trying to slip out of the story, without admitting it was a fraud. Ward Wilson is an example of the most ridiculous garbage being presented as reasons why nukes in the hyped sense aren't usable.
[3] Material on the actual supposed test sites, though there isn't much—it's amazing how obvious things can be missed.
[4] Do it yourself—buy DVDs showing supposed tests and go through them, ideally with software that does single frames.
[5] Look at the material on Lookout Mountain labs where they made US propaganda films—their output was larger than Hollywood's. Another video is Edgerton, Germeshausen, and Grier a film faking corporation.
[6] Possibly most important is material on the 'Manhattan Project' and the politics; readers of this site will understand that Jews did not want Stalin's USSR to be challenged, so the claim it had 'H bombs' was important to Jews. Just one example of reconstructing what must really have happened.
[7] Mordechai Vanunu is especially important here as a part of the nuclear hoax: the idea being to 'reveal' that Israel had nukes, but also not to officially announce it, because this might have led to problems with USA official policy.
[8] This youtube Lords of the Nukes is 3 and a half hours, in high definition. It's in talk show audio format, with many clips, drawings, site grabs and stills which cover nuclear weapons and nuclear power as hoaxes, science frauds, politics, and the methods of disinformation. Recommended if you want a long revisionist session. Best downloaded as it's a long file.
[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Jewish murders and mass murders

Jewish Murders and Mass Murders

Written by Rerevisionist 17 Feb 2013
Here's a small sample of deaths attributable to Jews, though not as yet by many official historians. Or by Jews and accomplices. This list, linked with typical comment in this site, is intended for people new to the topic; I'd encourage people to do their own research, and also try to balance that with murders by non-Jews:

Before Modern Times

Murders prompted by Jewish attitudes were certainly widely believed to have happened, though this thread in mass beliefs has been censored over the last few centuries. The 'Black Death', expulsions of Jews from cities and principalities and kingdoms, deaths such as Marlowe's, were linked to Jews. As revisionism picks up speed, such events and cases will (I hope) be re-examined. There must have been related events, such as Jew-promoted royal pretenders, no doubt with associated murders. And the larger-scale deaths caused by wars promoted by Jews, I think mainly through frauds related to money funding various groups of thugs, adventurers and so on, which reached an apex from 1913 and is still continuing.

Ritual murders

In modern times, Arnold Spencer Leese, of Lancashire, was as far as I know the main author (and reviver of old books) on this topic.

Murders of Eminent Individuals

Spencer Perceval 1812 (Prime Minister)
Castlereagh 1822
Abraham Lincoln 1865
Alexander II 1881
I haven't attempted to assess Jewish murderers claiming to be 'anarchists'. But note (e.g.) 1894, Sadi Carnot's murder in France; 1897, Empress Elizabeth of Austria; 1897, Antonio Canovas in Spain; 1900 King Umberto, in Italy.
President McKinley 1901 assassinated by Leon Czolgosz in New York, described as an 'anarchist'.
1903-1913 33 murders (or 'assassinations') of political figures including 1907 Nikola1 Petkov of Bulgaria, 1909 Fehmi Effendi of Albania
Stolypin 1911
1913 King George of Greece.
Archduke Franz Ferdinand (June 1914) & Jean Jaurès (July 1914)
Rasputin 1916 ('British' secret service claimed to have murdered Rasputin, of peasant background, and who didn't want war. He had the ear of the Tsar and Tsaritsa)
T E Lawrence 1935 ('Lawrence of Arabia')
Lord Moyne 1944
Franklin D Roosevelt 1945
General Patton 1945 [Note added May 2103: Patton's assassin supposedly identified posthumously 'new book' reviewed in Daily Telegraph]
Louis Slotin 1946 (nuclear physicist)
John Maynard Keynes 1946 (economist)
Bernadotte 1948 (in Palestine)
Forrestal, 1949 (United States Secretary for the Navy)
Stalin 1953
Povle Bang-Jensen of the U.N. in relation to evidence about Hungary in 1956
J F Kennedy 1963 ('the most risky organised Jewish action to that date' to get L B Johnson in power)
Pope John Paul I (died September 1978, about a month after his election). Entirely possible this was part of the long war of Jews against Christianity. There must presumably be revisionist examinations of this event, no doubt plus assorted spoilers, timewasters, liars to muddy the water.
John Lennon and others 1980
Hugh Gaitskell 1963, Aldo Moro 1978, Olof Palme 1986, David Kelly 2003, Anna Lindh 2003
John Smith 1994 (British leader of the 'Labour Party')
Diana Spencer 1997
Robin Cook 2005 (British Foreign Secretary)
Danny Jowenko 2011 (Controlled Demolition Expert)

Some Ship Sinkings-Related to Jews

USS Maine [1899. Excuse for US interests in Cuba, Philippines etc] [Note: Good piece on the Spanish-American War of 1898 here http://www.tomatobubble.com/span_am_war.html (Tomatobubble; date December 2014]
RMS Titanic [15 April 1912. May have been dual-purpose: insurance fraud claim on crippled 'Olympic' which would need preparation to make it sink. Plus another plot: removal of several rich males opposed to the Federal Reserve] (Added 2014-06-23)
RMS Lusitania [7 May 1915. Bait to get USA into First World War]
HMS Hampshire [5 June 1916; killed Kitchener]
SS Arandora Star [2 July 1940. Italian and other prisoners of war]
French Fleet [20 July, 1940. Churchill's order]
Bismarck [May 1941. Sunk while attempting to surrender]
MV Wilhelm Gustloff [30 Jan 1945. 9,000 drowned] (Added 2014-06-23)
Cap Ancona [3 May 1945. German ship bound for Sweden]
USS Indianapolis [30 July 1945. Left unprotected from Japanese torpedoes. Probably related to Hiroshima and Nagasaki frauds]
USS Liberty [June 8, 1967. Attacked in the Mediterranean by Jews]

Jewish False-Flag Atrocities to Start Wars, Gain Money, Disarm Populations, Promote Anti-White Racism etc

Just a sample:
Jews in Poland provoking Germans
Churchill terror-bombings begin in Germany
Liberty attacked by Israel in the hope of US war with Egypt
Two UK mass shootings 1987 (Michael Ryan in Hungerford) and 1996 (Thomas Hamilton, Dunblane)
1996 Port Arthur in Tasmania resulted in Australians being disarmed
2001: 9/11 demolitions used to provoke gullible Americans into wars with Muslim countries
2012 'Batman' cinema shootings
Late 2012 Sandy Hook faked to try to disarm Americans
2013 Switzerland shooting

Jewish Mass Murders

Here's a sample of mass deaths attributable to Jews, or Jews and other groups. Again, I encourage people to do their own research. My best estimate is that deaths per head by Jews outnumber all other groups:
Atlantic Slavery
General anti-white and anti-black Organised crime | Drugs, blacks | Eddie Bernays and fluoridation | Holohoax fraud
Yad Vashem, Palestine
Southern Africa

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Jewish murders and mass murders

Jew Process

Written by Rerevisionist 10 April 2013

Green Arrow commented recently about the need for 'due process' before the future termination of the politicians and others who are deliberately wrecking our country, which prompted me to write this brief overview, because many so-called nationalists (for example on the BNP site), are either unaware of, or wish to conceal, the parts played by Jews.

Hence 'Jew process' as a homophone, which, like quite a few similar-sounding pairs, means its opposite.

Without repeating evidence in detail, let us survey Jewish influence in the twentieth century.  The Boer War and the British alliance with Japan, which led to the defeat of Russia by Japan, are both connected with Jewish finance, as of course was the start of the First World War in 1914.

Many people are by now well aware that the USSR was established in 1917 and then run and controlled by Jews, relying on money from the 'west', on slave labour lines, under the strictest secrecy, to strengthen the USSR militarily, needless to say using the inventiveness of western companies.

Note that, without Jews, it is unlikely that such a system could ever have started: no other countries, after the disaster of the First World War, developed such a system, and therefore it seems likely that, without Jews, the mass murder of Russians and outlying nationalities would never have happened.

Another essential 1930s component was the increasing influence of Jews in the USA.  Most people know now, that the 1913 Act establishing the Federal Reserve allowed Jews in effect to print unlimited money.

The effect was muted until 1916, when the British decided to crush Germany.  The Balfour Declaration gave so-called 'Jews' a homeland in someone else's territory.  After the US entry into the War, against President Wilson's avowed policy, the US economy was virtually controlled by Bernard Baruch and other Jews.  Without Jews, and the influence of the USA, Europe would not have been devastated further after 1916; some arrangement would have to have been made.

By the 1930s Germans had become aware of the malevolence of Jews, and tried to do something about it.  Note that Jews might have come to some sort of accommodation, but instead chose violence, financial swindles, and so on, essentially in my opinion buoyed up by a few rich but utterly irresponsible Jews.  The media domination of Jews was in effect paid for by their control of paper money.

The amazing thing really is that, with Jews virtually controlling the USA and the USSR, and Churchill (who was bribed to verbally attack Germany), nevertheless Germany, about the size of Texas, countered the murder machine attributed to Stalin, probably keeping Europe relatively safe, at least up to the present.  Again, without Jews, the huge area of Russia and the Ukraine, Poland, Hungary and so on might have developed peacefully, the way things seemed to be in about 1900.

Churchill declared war in 1939, on an obviously phoney pretext, but the USA did not enter until 1941; pretty much a re-run of events from 1914 to 1917.  Everyone reading this piece will be aware of the barrage of propaganda then, and subsequently.  This includes omissions—millions of Germans starved by Eisenhower, for example (a 'Swedish Jew'), millions of peasants in Bengal starved by Churchill, probably millions of Chinese.  The six million myth was promoted largely by Russian Jews.

Controversially, maybe, Jews invented the atom bomb myth.  Up to 1945, physics was a mundane part of science, mostly engineering-related; this myth made physicists seem 'like supermen', and naturally they went along with it.  Note that, yet again, without Jews the vast, almost incomprehensible waste of money could have been used for something useful.

Jews achieved more of a stranglehold in the USA with the murder of Kennedy, which would almost certainly not have happened without Jewish interests being involved— Lyndon Johnson becoming President.  His policies—damaging US family life, notably of blacks; trying for war with Egypt by the false-flag crime of the USS Liberty; dropping bombs on Vietnam, probably as a money-making exercise; devaluing money so that Jews could benefit from their paper money monopoly.  All these events were largely or wholly tied in with Jewish activity.

More recently, I hope many readers are aware of the push for coloured immigration into white countries, and the fact that Jews were behind this.  I won't list names—I'll leave this for sceptics to check.  Ditto with wars against Iraq and in the Middle East, and the push for more mercenary wars against Iran and North Korea, and the involvement of Jewish banks.

Anyone who is a serious nationalist—or in fact any serious humanist who wishes for the world to develop better, or anyone wanting real progress and a humanly-worthwhile future—must recognise that, per head, Jews are the biggest threat to survival and the future that there is on our planet.  Their idea of 'due process' has been murder, lies, theft, and bullets through the head.

Here is a final word from Mary Thomas at the Occidental Observer:

White Americans fought their German brothers during the world wars, and then GAVE the Jews a country of their own, and to thank us they give us the genocide of the white race. The evil I'm talking about here, the betrayal of the good will of decent whites here in America who NEVER MEANT ANY HARM WHATSOEVER TO THE JEWS—the evil is beyond my imagination. As we head into the cannibal's pot, you can BET that we're going to take the Jews down with us. Trust me, when whites figure out what has happened, there is going to be hell to pay. The irony is that we loved and admired the Jews.

I can't imagine that ANY of our major problems could have gained any traction whatsoever if not for Jewish influence. Abortion, feminism, porn, affirmative action, massive immigration -  you can rattle off the things that are tearing us down and behind each and every one of those issues you will find malevolent Jewish interests.

But it takes a bit of intelligence and research to be able to put it together in your mind. I had NEVER had anything but admiration for Jews my entire life. At one time I had totally accepted that the Jews WERE a superior group and that they DESERVED to be the new mandarin class. I was a liberal for most of my adult life. Then came the bailouts of 08, and I started digging and reading, and I was shaken to the core when I realized that the entire thieving elite was above the law.

I sincerely wish that I did not know the things I know now, because the information causes me great emotional pain. But it is what it is, and the truth cannot be denied.

Mary Thomas considers domestic American issues, ignoring overseas adventurism of the USA, and the influence of Jews on American wars. She also doesn't mention Palestine. All of which strengthen her case. And note that races vary; some may well be more violent than others—it's a matter of evidence. Perhaps someone would care to statistically compute external deaths per head of racial groups.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Anti-white racism - immigration into white and only white countries
Enoch Powell: a cowardly figure. He never spoke about Jews in the world, and their policy for immigration into white countries. So he was a safe surrogate target for Jews.

Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkeys?   Self-Flattery, Anti-White Insults, Jews

Written by Rerevisionist 25 April 2013

I like to use chatrooms now and then, to test the views of ordinary people. I was struck by the phrase 'cheese-eating surrender monkeys' for the French. Many people believe the Germans are cruel; some believe they are cowards—I remember seeing a group of drunk British in a pub saying the Germans were 'wankers', for losing a war; they probably had no idea of the opposition forces. The Belgians are often regarded as boring—for example by BBC dimwits who've never heard of the Belgian Congo atrocities. The Spanish are regarded as cruel; they have a phrase, translated as 'black legend', for this view of them. The Germans, according to H J Eysenck soon after the Second World War, regard the British as deceitful and infinitely cunning and untrustworthy—'perfidious Albion'. George Galloway said English food was rubbish and England grey and dull—and he said this just after the Second World War, a life and death struggle, which Galloway himself professes to believe was worthwhile; after all, Britain doesn't now speak German. (No country conquered by Germany ended speaking German).

There are related self-flattering opinions which don't bear close scrutiny: Napoleon's achievements were those of a single Great Man; Our descendants fought, suffered and died for freedom; How unthinkable that the French could save Europe; 1968 was a disaster (many people still have no idea about genocide in Vietnam); The Gold Standard and Sterling were British triumphs; The Western USA was settled by adventurous, independent types.

Obviously, all groups are likely to have views of other groups that they know exist. To try to be analytic, whole groups may meet whole groups, as in migrations, or at borders during population growth, or wars, or kidnappings and slavery. Or small groups, including single people, may go into other groups: the result may be friendship or attacks or rapes, or exploitation. Some feuding groups behave better to strangers, than to people known to them. Arabs seems to have specialised in kidnaps and slavery, in particular taking males of a youngish age so much of the upbringing is done for them, and using them as janissaries. Nobody seems to point out Jews, in recent centuries, had a similar money-based policy of bribing useful idiots—think President Wilson, many American puppets, Nixon, Clinton et al; Heath, Livingstone, Benn, Thatcher, Blair are British examples.

I've sometimes wondered if English is unique in its large vocabulary of dismissive, insulting, and divisive expressions, often mutated from previously objective descriptions—blackguard, villain, vandal, idiot, worker, bugger, fool, clown for example—of which only 'blackguard' seems vague in its origin. Thus for example 'bugger' seems to be derived from 'Bogomil'—Christian heretics who were accused of sodomy to encourage others to make war on them. But probably this verbal thing is fairly universal. Bertrand Russell wrote '.. Such organizations [i.e. large ones] always involve... sentiments of aversion: fear, hatred, contempt and so on.'

Many of the denigratory expressions seem to have been used to promote wars, by divide-and-rule, or for increased unity, and must therefore have been imposed top-down. At a more cerebral level, some plays attributed to Shakespeare, at the time of war with Spain, are highly nationalistic; Chauvin wrote to try to unify France; Hegel and other Germans wrote to do the same for what became Germany when the small states unified.

At the present time, Jews control the media and are in an exceptional position to insult any group, and manufacture their own versions of truth: Schindler's List illustrates their obvious anti-Germanism, but the same sort of thing applies everywhere: the Japanese were switched some time after 1945 to hard-working allies; the Vietnamese, having allowed Jewish weapons firms to make a fortune, go virtually unmentioned—trash films such as Stallone as 'Rambo', 'Apocalypse Now' based on Conrad on central Africa, 'The Deerhunter'—have no mention of Vietnam's history, customs etc. Russians barely appear, and of course Jewish atrocities are never mentioned—'Doctor Zhivago' is a painful series of lies. Italians are shown as violent crooks. These are films: in Britain, we are somewhat spared Jewish American TV, where even unpromising material, like Chechnya, gets bogus Jewish TV low-budget trash.

Similarly, the British are often shown as decadent poofs or white spongers, ordinary Americans as violent small-town hicks, eastern Europeans as Tarantino-esque scum...

My impression, taken from for example Brewer's Phrase and Fable, and Roget's Thesaurus, is that, relatively, this is something new: Roget says 'Dutch' was at one time the British expression for anything outlandish and foreign; and mentions the French word meaning 'frog'. However, it is generally agreed that newspapers, fake photographs, radio, films and TV are unequalled for arousing dislikes and hate.

I'm writing this piece to try to get people to snap out of this frame of mind. Or at least pause and question. What do you know, realistically, about the Chinese, the Iranians, the Brazilians, the Hindus, Americans of the Adirondacks, Cossacks, north Koreans? Are judgments of the French, Germans etc, and Iraqis, Iranians etc, often based on wartime propaganda, likely to be true?

And to consider people who have, so far, been given a free pass; obviously I mean Jews, who have subverted legal systems to try to make criticism of them impossible. The fragmented laws against the Holohoax are one illustration; the fact that the Talmud's evil is almost unknown is another. We are offered the claim that things are 'the same': Gordon Brown said 'all religions are the same', which is preposterous nonsense. A pitiful John Cleese Youtube implies that to be anti-Jew is like being against Dagoes or Belgians. Obviously some sort of true, objective judgement of Jews must replace these parrot-cries.

Some years ago, the Oxford English Dictionary was legally attacked, for using the verb 'to Jew', meaning 'extortionate usurer, driver of hard bargains' among other things, though of course this is a pale shadow of the truths of mass murder, slave trading, and thefts. The OED weathered this attack, perhaps surprisingly. I'd like to suggest a reintroduction of true Jewish facts into general discourse. How about 'as evil as Jews'? 'As worthless as a Jewish Nobel Prize?' 'As racist as a Rabbi'? Münchhausen Syndrome replaced by 'Jewish syndrome' to describe the absurd inflation of their modest abilities. 'What do you call a paedophile Jew?'—'An MP!'

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Jewish murders, mass murders, frauds

Luke O'Farrell: One Man's Journey to ‘Anti-Semitism’

(Here's O'Farrell's piece on his 'awakening' to the Jewish problem in 2005)

Written by Rerevisionist 27 April 2013

Browsing heretical.com, the website of Simon Sheppard, who was jailed among other things for trying to expose the Anne Frank fraud in his local public library, I noticed a statement that Luke O'Farrell, Sheppard's fellow-prisoner, had taken time off after one hundred articles. I'd read Luke before (though never met him, as far as I know); a site-grabbed version of heretical.com of 2001 has no mention of O'Farrell; this and other evidence suggests O'Farrell became Jew-aware between about 2001 to 2005. O'Farrell's last piece is dated 2008, so the 'time off' message is five years old. His pieces were uploaded usually at 7- or 14-day intervals, I think in the USA too, judging by the spelling. NB the email address on the site, ofarrell at heretical.com, didn't work when I tried it.

He's an interesting writer; his sources are credited—usually so-called 'quality' journalism, including Jewish newspapers, plus Internet material, and online photos. He looks for Jewish money and racial influence and politics, in the Blair/ Brown era of 'Labour' politics and Cameron's 'leadership'. He is good on biological science, and on 'liberal' mass media criticisms. And he's good on coining metaphors and making comparisons:- 'corruption follows Jews the way flies follow an elephant with diarrhea'.

It interested me to see his changing views, for example as he reinterpreted Ken Livingstone and Private Eye and George Galloway. And, as with most people, there are points he hadn't yet picked up on; in my opinion—which may be wrong—he doesn't seem to know the Khazar theory of 'Jews' as descendants of nomadic predators; he hasn't realised 9/11 and 7/7 and many other events were false flags; he understates intervention in (for example) Africa, where Jews unquestionably prompted military action to get control of minerals at least since 1900; he doesn't smell a rat—or another three-letter word—about Ireland; he thinks Jews have gold, not realising the legalistic use of paper money and e-money is the modern substitute; he hasn't traced the fortunes spent on 'defence'; he's unaware of science frauds, such as 'AIDS' and nukes, and the corresponding 'dumbing down' of education. And no doubt there are many other, as yet secret, frauds of Jews and their collaborators awaiting exposure. A good example is Idi Amin, who may have been activated by Jewish frauds, and who may have been attacked in the press as a result.

Rather than attempt an overview, I'll link to some of his articles here (they open in a new window; and I'm assuming the site heretical.org will remain online) to illustrate his voyage of discovery:-

• 17 Feb 2005   Dr Strangeloathing—How I Learned to Start Thinking and Hate the Jews   [Awakening, he says, after noticing the hypocrisy of 'Rabbi' Neuberger—supporting race mixing, but worried about Jews marrying 'gentiles'. Then extending into corruption, politics, journalism, crooks, and the movie about Christ by Mel Gibson. Neuburger also appears in 7 Oct 2005 Freedom of Screech: Non-white Cuckoos in the White Nest on statistics warped as regards foreigners in the NHS and other aspects of Jewish anti-whiteness]
• 24 March 2007   Vulture Culture — Fool 'Em to Rule 'Em   [Article on 'Holocaustianity' as a new, imposed Jew-invented religion.]
• 17 Feb 2008   Joyim for Goyim   [Jewish permanent attack on free speech. The new Jew at the Foreign Office, David Miliband on 'supporting democracy abroad'. Includes Stephen Lawrence and phonies: Richard Stone, Ken Livingstone, Lee Jasper, black hate criminals.]
• 28 March 2005   Letter from Japan   [Short article in effect of Japanese revisionism of World War 2 and the US occupation, and increasing race pressure on Japan. Note: www.jiyuushikan.org is the relevant Japanese revisionist website]
• 25 June 2006   Olly's Folly   [Oliver Cromwell and the readmission to Jews into Britain. As revisionism spreads, knowledge of the part played by Jews will extend back in time and more deeply across the world. Britain became important as the New World was opened up. The Great Fire and Bank of England followed...]
• 29 Dec 2005   Jews as Dull   [Dullness of Jews and their uncreativity]

hate crimes excluding jews
Genuine photo of 'hate reporting' leaflets, arranged in a window. Note: absolutely no mention of Jewish hate—traditional Talmudic hate of whites and Christians. No encouragement to report Jews. No mention of Muslim sex crimes, probably because Jews want to encourage them.
Added Aug 2016: A website report-it.org (Registered 2010; Dec 2012 address registered as: Zone 8.19, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ, UK) is a site supposedly to 'Stop Homophobic, Transphobic, Racial, Religious and Disability Hate Crime'. The Jewish 'Hate Crime' industry has been set up with public money so that no evidence is needed. It's heavily 'incentivized' in the US sense: the intention is to pay for reports, though I'd warn possible liars that Jews are noted for discarding persons once their usefulness is over.
• 19 Dec 2005   A Louse in Wonderland: "White" Rabbis and non-white Savages   [Account of 'Cyril Harris' and Jewish Marxists in South Africa—Suzman, Slovo, Kasrils; and Jews in Australia promoting Muslim thugs and violence]
• 19 March 2006   Divided We Stand - Jew-Blighted We Fall   [Charlene Downes murder contrasted with   [alleged] suicide bomber. John Prescott Nigerian employee Housing Association fraud, and Nigerian NHS fraud, both 2006. ... controversy about NuLiebour selling honours for cash. If you look at the donors—"Sir" Ronald Cohen, Andrew Rosenfeld, "Sir" David Garrard, "financier" Barry Townsley, "Sir" Gulam Noon, Chai Patel—and the man who arranged the donations, "Lord" Levy, you'll see a very obvious but completely undiscussed pattern. A Jew is selling knighthoods and peerages to Jews and Asians in a White-majority nation. And [alleged] nuclear secrets to Israel. Interesting claim that emphasis is on Palestinian non-whites to pretend Jews are white as parasitic camouflage]
• 9 April 2006   The Joy of Genocide - World-Wide White-Out!   [Aaronovitch]
• 24 Sep 2006   Free to Obey - Our Days of Whine and Noses   [Just a few of anti-white attacks, including at schools. Plus Menachim Begin and the King David Hotel]

•10 Apr 2005   Masters of Unreality   [television as medium for spreading lies through medium of deceitful language]
• 26 Sep 2005   Twilight of the Goulds - Jewish Lies about Race are Crumbling   [Gould, Lewontin, Kamin, Rose, Diamond]
• 10 Dec 2006   Enoching on Heaven's Door   [Black violence - white lawyer killed. Trevor Phillips. Idi Amin. Black African one party dictator Hastings Banda]
• 4 Nov 2007   Brain of Terror. [Ingenious parallel between human races and human languages. There is only one language—the human language. Vile linguistic bigots may try to pretend that English, Chinese and Navajo are somehow separate "languages", but they merely reveal their own ignorance and stupidity. Far more unites these three meaning-delivery systems than divides them. They all use vowels and consonants, they all have ways of referring to the past, present and future, of expressing negation and hypothesis, of capturing the world and its complexities. The differences between meaning-delivery systems are so small, the similarities so vast, that we can reach only one conclusion: Language does not exist.]

• 15 Jan 2006   Three Parasites and a Funeral   [comparison of parasitic worms, which attack eyes or brains, with Jews - 'Jews have taken over the sense-organs of White societies and made us blind to the huge threats of mass immigration and non-white crime.']
• 28 May 2006   Bongo in Congo   [Evidence of black savagery by comparison between countries - Congo wars and Britain]
• 26 Nov 2006   String 'Em Up! Puppets, Politics and the West's Dance of Death [Jews evolved in pecking order sense, to love oppression and violence; whites are dangerously individualistic (a view resembling Kevin MacDonald's). O'Farrell gives many examples of Jewish uncreative arrogance and brutality, and white uneasy co-operation for gain; British politicians, lawyers and so on, in positions where they can inflict damage.]
• 8 July 2007   When Puss Comes to Dove   [Predictions of violence inevitably resulting from Jewish liars promoting immigration into white countries]
• 23 Dec 2007   Heil-Hound On Their Track ... the Resurrection of Race Realism   [wolf; chihuahua; border collie; Afghan hound; St Bernard; corgi—conclusive proof that races exist, and can come into existence in a short time]
• 10 Feb 2008   Ave Sharia!   [Comparison of the Church of England with an island-dwelling creature, safe from predators... until now. The ineffectual and hypocritical Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, is quoted. NB he has been replaced by Welby who has Jewish ancestry.]

• 14 March 2005   Tortured, Beaten, Burnt Alive   [Japanese benefits/ Professional ethnics Yasmin Albhai-Brown and Trevor Phillips. Muslim voting fraud, violence, drugs/ Kriss Donald (aged 15) ignored by the Jews-media]
• 1 June 2005   Hell's Bells   [rap words and low IQ and psychopathy]
• 28 Jan 2007   Brother-Pluckers—Black Packs and Racist Attacks   [Trevor Phillips, Keith Vaz, Sentamu, plus race and religion attacks in Africa and India]
• 2 Sep 2007   Doc Croc [Long piece on hypocrisy and self-promotion of Jews and blacks and collaborators: Ken Livingstone's crocodile tears over 'lucrative' slavery; half-Jew Bob Geldof and self-promotion; Kriss Donald and Mary-Ann Leneghan and atrocities ignored by the Jewish media; Ruskin as seriously concerned humanitarian vs Marx; South Africa violence and Zimbabwe's dead babies; all outcomes of Jewish 'liberalism']

• 10 May 2005   A Scream of Jewish Hate   [Review of Ursula le Guin first published 1968; she studied under the pseudo-scientist Boas]
• 1 July 2005   Red, White and Jew   [Midwich Cuckoo and comparison with Imran Khan - lawyer for Muslims; Kamlesh Bahl sacked from Law Society]
• 16 Sept 2007   The Apostle of Jostle   [review of Piers Morgan's 'diaries' including Jews - Gove, Aronovitch, 'Denis MacShane' - and avoidance of attacks on whites]
• 21 Oct 2007   Pieces of Hate   [Catholic Father Leonard Feeney on Jews and their dupes and one of their campaigns, against 'hate'; down to the Jews behind NuLabour in Britain and the neo-cons in the USA]
• 18 Nov 2007   Poison for Goys   [Stepford Wives, Rosemary's Baby, Boys from Brazil as white males against white females. Interesting material from Wikipedia on Robert Harry Inglis, Henry Goulburn, and Edward Sugden, opposing Jewish emancipation in 1830, partly because Napoleon had been funded by British Jews. Modern equivalent of fraud, murders, and rapes by immigrants]

• 13 Jan 2008   Ethnic Invasion and the Crisis of Chrysocracy   [Covering-up of anti-white crime by the BBC. Mugabe, Peter Hain, race-traitors Tony and Cherie Blair, Willie Nagel, Isaac Kaye, JPMorgan Chase. 'Chrysocracy' suggests rule by gold; perhaps it's more like 'papyrocracy'?]

• 27 Jan 2008   Sharks in the Dark - Biting Whitey in Feminihilism and Finance   [How 'feminists' censor even very violent attacks on white women. And material on Jews hiring politicians to further Jewish interests.]

• 10 Jun 2005   With Respect, Mr Galloway - You're a Paki-Loving Left-Wing Lunatic   [Voting fraud and Muslim corruption. Galloway's 'Respect' party as a possible agency for opening eyes of whites. However, a Youtube of George Galloway speaking (at the 'Oxford Union') titled something like Are You Racist, George Galloway, shows him stating explicitly about half way through that all the 'heroes' who helped him go underground in South Africa were Jews. He even named some: Dennis Goldberg, 'Albie' Sachs. 'Joe' Slovo, Ruth First—see below.]

• 16 Sep 2007   The Apostle of Jostle   [Descriptions from Piers Morgan's 'Diaries' of logocentrics, including accounts of Blair, Aaronovitch, Gove, 'MacShane' (real name: Matyjaszek or Mateusek etc), Jewish evasions, lies, and hypocrisies.]
• 9 Dec 2007   Programmed for Pogrom - You can't say that, it's true! [List of repulsive Jews in British financial politics including Sternberg, Phillips, Pollard, Richard Stone, Levy, Abrahams, Mendelsohn, Triesman, Green, Cohen, Abramovich; another Green, Ecclestone]
• 16 July 2006   Spiv and Let Die: Kikocracy is Kakocracy   [Michael Abraham Levy, 'Lord Cashpoint', who funded Tony Blair and appears to have been his controller; when this was written, Levy had just been arrested. Also e.g. Andrew Rosenfield, Barry Townsley and Sir David Garrard]

O'Farrell (real name Stephen Whittle) wrote: I don't believe that I'm alone in the journey I've made over the past five years [i.e. from 2001-ish] from sympathy for Jews to fully-fledged anti-Semitism. He is right: 'Exorcist', a Briton who joined nukelies' forum in January 2012, told me that until recently he'd been entirely unaware of Jewish influence. I've just noticed a French activist, Hervé Ryssen (real name Hervé Lalin) who writes on Jewish frauds and indecencies. Here's a PDF download translation into English by Carlos Whitlock Porter as Understanding the Jews, Understanding Anti-Semitism. There must be vast numbers of such people.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Lessons from the 'Holocaust' Fraud: The Evils of Lying

Written by Rerevisionist 6 June 2013

The 'Holocaust' fraud, (or Holohoax, Holoco$t, LOL-ocaust) was started before Nuremberg, but took some years to be developed by TV and other then-new media. At the time of writing, it's been the dogma of 'Holocaustianity', Michael Hoffman's name for the official post-1945 ideology. No official historian or journalist or broadcaster or churchman (as yet) has stood against it. This of course is a tribute to the power of paper money, the root of Jewish power. But it's also only possible because 'Jews' think (or rather feel) in a herd. What do (names taken from a few at hand) Michael Gove, Margaret Hodge, Jack Straw, David Cameron, both Milibands, George Soros, Menachem Begin, Isaac Deutscher, Michael Grade, Michael Lyons, Susan Sontag have in common? The lesson of the 'Holohoax' is that they will tell lies for money; not just occasionally, not intermittently, not now-and-then—but permanently, for life.

The psychology of the 'Jewish' race is a product of their history. Assuming the Khazar hypothesis, their evolution (in the relatively minor, racial variety sense; not full-scale evolution) must have been affected by the spread of the Talmud and similar material to Asiatic Europe. Human beings, unlike animals, change their own environments, and so affect their own evolution: recently, air travel has affected population genetics, medical science ditto, and, further back, books must have had their effect. After (say) 1000 years, say 40 generations, the sorts of pressures described by Kevin MacDonald must have caused undeniable genetic changes. Telling lies to outsiders is simply taken for granted by this race. Centuries of preferring life in squalid little groups - taking orders from fools who are unable to separate words from reality, and prefer written slogans to careful analysis, and who are terrified their flock will one day start to ignore them, leaving them nothing - have left ineradicable genetic traces. Note that 'Jews' presumably had continual leakage out, of people not happy with the narrow lifestyle. And note also that the written fanaticism must have attracted psychopaths, liars, and vicious types: the 'Russian Revolution' illustrates how the high end of the psychopathy bell curve must have been topped up.

Franklin Ryckaert June 19, 2015 TheOccidentalObserver

One of the most remarkable traits of Jews is that they never ascribe anti-Semitism to any fault of the Jews themselves. Jews are always completely "innocent", therefore anti-Semitism must be something entirely irrational. This is the typical attitude of psychopaths. Says the Wikipedia article about Guilt (emotion):

"... Individuals high in psychopathy lack any true sense of guilt or remorse for harm they may have caused others. Instead, they rationalize their behavior, blame someone else, or deny it outright..."

A small ethnic group, highly inbred, may very well be collectively psychopathic.

There is no excuse for Jewish misbehavior and lack of conscience. They behave the same in societies that tolerate them or that persecute them. Psychopathic behavior is encouraged by their traditions. Reading the Talmud is like reading a "Handbook for Psychopaths".

Goldhagen describes anti-Semitism as a "devil". Other Jews describe it as a "virus", never as an understandable reaction to their own misbehavior. As true psychopaths, the idea of any guilt of their own is unthinkable to them.

Let me amplify. Most people follow their herd beliefs, and if Talmudic stuff appears from nowhere it would have the effect of condoning killing of people who don't accept it. There may therefore have been quite a dramatic effect on khazars as the 'jews' doctrines took hold. This would feed back into actual genes.

From nowhere, a primitive nomadic tribe suddenly had the written word imposed onto it. It was their only media exposure. Its stories, attitudes, phrases, beliefs etc would permeate them; their original folk beliefs would be diminished and probably erased. Abraham, Moses, Jericho, Cain and Abel, slaughter, sacrifice, King David, 'the temple' would dominate their mentality. They'd be told ad nauseam that the highest wisdom is to kill the best non-Jews. They'd be told to be sly, secretive, contract-breaking, liars—as of course would be necessary when meeting any other people—and would practise pilpul and all the rest. The rabbi caste would be told they are chosen by God, all-wise, worth a fortune, and entitled to genocide out of existence towns and populations they didn't like. They would be likely to believe this out of self-interest and pride. They would twirl live chickens round their heads, celebrate supposed victories, mutilate boys. I would guess that many young people, and entire families, who dissented, would simply have been murdered: there was no police system to stop this. Like 'honour killings', it would be institutionalised. Or they might be ostracised, sent out to a likely death. In only a few generations hair-trigger fanatics could be bred. This is what I meant by the introduction de novo of Talmudic teachings.

What are the effects of lying? It seems likely that any more-or-less homogenous group would have been damaged by persistent lying. Any group members who lied about (e.g.) food needed, or clean water or using-up of resources would usually damage their group. Liars in everyday, mundane matters would cause indignation or retribution, and presumably be squeezed out. Correlatively, however, most people would be credulous, believing what they're told, since many generations would have made this the best policy. Children would learn consistent lessons from teachers, parents, and contemporaries.

But in the modern world, there are plenty of examples of lies: lawyers impose non-disclosure clauses, preventing awareness of incompetence in medicine. Newspapers and broadcasts are full of lies and distortions. Wars, housing, and so on are lied about. There are entire knowledge-islands of lies: immigration, JFK's murder, the 'Liberty', NASA, 'AIDS', 9/11 are just a few examples. In all these cases, there was/is heavy Jewish involvement.

The biggest disaster of the past few centuries has been the success of Jews in seizing the paper money and credit systems of Europe and the USA. The resulting ability to fund corrupt groups, with sufficient disguise and cushioning for concealment, has led to endless harm. To take a computer analogy: it's as though rootkits have been introduced into these countries' operating systems, so that legal, moral, and other considerations are secretly redirected to secret Jewish-controlled groups.

Many people have learnt the formula: Jews do what's best for Jews. This fits the Holohoax case - any amount of denigration, insults, lying about the USSR and USA, is automatically accepted by them to make money. As the Holohoax starts to crumble, there will be ever-increasing awareness that Jews, all of them, every one of them, in an unholy union, will unblushingly lie, on the most serious subjects.

But the instinctive, inbred racist tribal solidarity of 'Jews' has a further effect, which has not been generally noticed. What do unrestricted immigration, non-reporting of black on white crime, disbursal of funds to violent groups, enforcement of poor quality education, selective housing of non-Britons, insistence that medical professions must not check qualifications, causing loss-making wars in a general sense, all have in common? They all damage white people. Whether this can be said to be deliberate is questionable, like wondering if homosexuality is inborn. If it's genetic, Jews will automatically clot together, to decide instinctively on actions which will cause harm.

Whether easy-going white credulity will be replaced in time by firm retribution, remains to be seen.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

revisionism of 1800-1900

Projecting Revisionism Backwards: What Can We Learn From Napoleon and the Nineteenth Century?

Written by Rerevisionist 18 June 2013

The Victorian era is of course outside living memory, but enough survives: family stories and memorabilia, Gothic revival buildings and brick suburbs, old newspapers and adverts, the railway era—to make it feel familiar to Britons: Sherlock Holmes, music halls, Bradshaw's Railway Guide, horse races, Henley Regatta, Wisden, Dickensian pubs with fires and crowds of people, Harrods catalogue, the Great Exhibition, industrial towns which were villages a generation or two earlier ...

The Napoleonic era, the first half of the nineteenth century, has slipped out of most people's consciousness: starving people while the navy blockaded Napoleon, battles against Napoleon, old soldiers with amputated limbs, redcoats, aristocrats running things ...

Now, every serious person reading this site will be aware of revisionism over the last 100 years: the Fed, in the USA, the war against Germany, deliberately prolonged for two years, the Jewish coup in Russia which, perhaps for the first time, showed how dispersed financial power based only on laws (fiat currency) could take over an entire country, the reaction by Hitler, and the post-1945 consolidation of the new religion of 'Holocaustianity' (including Kennedy's murder to put the Jew Johnson into power), which still (2013) rules much of the world, and which has caused immense suffering with worldwide wars, and immense frauds of the NASA type and also (though this is still controversial) the 'Cold War' and nuclear frauds.

To see how we got to where we are, let's push the process of revisionism back to the 19th century, and see what we find; and compare it with 20th century events.

Here's a much longer piece on the theme of revisionist discoveries to the 19th century, based on a mediocre remaindered book by Paul Johnson (Napoleon, 2002). It's rather British-centered, not saying much about 1848 for example. Here, let me pick out some revisionist highlights and comparisons:

* The 'French Revolution'. Looking back, it's easy to see how this was done: France was rich, and therefore had surplus - not everyone had to work all hours. It had intellectual traditions: Roman Catholicism, Voltaire, Rousseau, Chauvin. It had an ineffectual monarch. All that was needed was serious opponents making sound points (modern-day socialists, NOT the Jewish red counterfeit, come to mind). The funded movement - funded presumably by Jews - included traitors (today's ugly anti-woman 'feminists' and ugly 'reds' illustrate), people who wanted personal influence they felt they'd been deprived of (some modern whites illustrate), and many ordinary career and employment minded people ('Common Purpose' and trade unionists etc illustrate). The result was hyperinflation and chaos.

* Napoleon as a Great Man and Soldier of Fortune. This myth and variations was propagated all through the 19th century. In fact, his role was to grab money from small kingdoms in Europe. A short-term policy which predictably (if you do the sums) led nowhere. The pretence he worked on his own as a sort of power of nature is echoed in myths about Lenin, who of course was just a Jew slipped money from abroad. A better comparison with Napoleon may be Trotsky, energetically leading his bands of killer Jews. In both cases, the mythology was needed to hide the truth, and many versions were emitted, for example the 'toy soldiers' accounts of uniforms, regiments etc; the romantic man of action; the man with an inconceivable genius for detail.

* Rothschild money. The best-known event is the post-Waterloo coup at the London Stock Exchange - sales of government stock followed by buying back when the news of Wellington's victory finally arrived. Presumably some, or many, patriotic English families were ruined, but there is, as far as I know, not one single novel of the time dealing with this, which gives an idea of the power of censorship even then.

* British supporters of Napoleon. Clearly, there was considerable support for Napoleon, probably from recipients of Rothschild money. Despite the fact Rothschild had funded Napoleon - an issue brought up in Parliament - Jews were increasingly favoured. As an example, Lord Holland did his best to ensure generous treatment of Napoleon in exile, and led the campaign for his body to be returned to France in 1840. So far as I know, he made no effort to return any of the stolen bullion from Europe's cities. Napoleon was treated in the opposite way to Hitler - every effort was made to praise him.

* Jewish 'emancipation'. Throughout the 19th century there was pressure, for example by Lord John Russell, to encourage Jews (the rich variety). Even the language—'removing disabilities'—shows parallels with today's phrases—'minorities' (when whites are a world wide minority), 'deprived' (of people being given British assets far in excess of anything of their own). There was removal of accounts of Jewish ritual murder. There was concealment of Jewish intermarriage.
      A suppressed aspect is the possibility of revenge: Jews had been expelled typically 300-400 years earlier from many European states; it's likely some more-or-less fantastic revenge was nurtured.

There's plenty more, including the debasement of military honour so that theft and rape were barely remarked on. And there are very suggestive points which 'social scientists'/ 'historians' to their eternal discredit have avoided: population issues; power struggle theories with interlocking subsets of people; facts about money; the influence of the human lifespan - 1848 and other events suggest a 50-year interval while forces gather and manoeuvre; whether societies affluent beyond a certain point start to decay.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


Written by Rerevisionist 22 June 2013
hydrocephalus eugenics? eugenics?
A shortish piece on 'eugenics', and how it is that entirely legitimate concern for health and welfare has been demonized by Jewish propagandists.

[Added 7 Dec 2016:] Here's a relevant website, eugenics.net, one presentation of the truth. John Glad's Jewish Eugenics (published 2011) examines the historiography of 'eugenics' though understating Jew propaganda in falsifying the truth.

Let me first try to present the 'Holocaustian' view, which I'll illustrate with a 2007 BBC4 1-hour TV programme Scientific Racism: The Eugenics of Social Darwinism.

I'll ignore the usual ludicrous soundtrack, as though black Tasmanians had echo chambers; the ludicrous visuals of cane-cutters; the heavily cropped black and white photos, etc; and the inability of the scriptwriter(s) to understand that science does sometimes produce new knowledge, making older procedures—such as measuring skulls and faces—seem, to the uncomprehending, obviously silly.

Here are the main topics of the BBC piece, with my critical notes in square brackets:

[1] Starts with the Namib desert, and what was then German South West Africa. Includes Shark Island where 3,500 Hereros and others allegedly were killed in 1900-ish. [The point here is to introduce Germans; and the phrases 'concentration camps', and 'foreshadow the Nazi period'. And per contra NOT to mention British concentration camps and deaths of Boers in the Boer War]

[2] Material on Tasmania. The Tasmanians, total numbers several thousand, famously were known to the Victorians to have have died out. The Governor, British of course, produced a poster showing hanging as a penalty for whites who kill blacks, and also for blacks who kill whites. [Tasmania is about the size of Ireland; it's entirely unclear why such a large space should have been so difficult to share, but programmes of this sort are propagandist, not factual. The hack voiceover actress dismisses the mixed-races-getting-along as obviously absurd, in stark contrast to the holocaustian official view]

[3] Governor Eyre and Jamaica was a notorious event. [John Stuart Mill, a sympathiser with the blacks, gets no mention—the idea is to pretend there was unanimity. Eyre was legally cleared, but this apparent legality is not explained]

[4] Slavery abolitionists (white, British, Christian) get quite a few mentions. [The point here is to pretend all slave-owners were white, and slaves black, omitting the parts played by Arabs, Jews and black Africans. Many abolitionists were viewed with suspicion by their contemporaries, since their incomes came from white kids dying in coal mines, but this is not in the programme. The link with then-new steam power, which reduced dependence on labour (for the people who owned it), is also unmentioned]

[5] Christianity is generally ridiculed, of course an automatic part of the Jewish agenda. [One of the talking heads suggested the 'Adam and Eve' story was the basis of the obviously absurd 'all men are brothers' idea, presumably unaware of the race material in the Bible]

[6] There's a supposed change round about 1850: Carlyle is mentioned on negros; an obscure surgeon, Knox, wrote a 12-chapter book on races—Saxons, Jews etc, [Probably Knox was inserted because he allegedly said 'race is everything', distracting attention from the same quotation from the more famous novel by Disraeli. On Disraeli, click to read Michael Hoffman on Disraeli's omission of collaborators with Jews.]

[7] Darwin and Social Darwinism. [Poor Herbert Spencer, the inventor of sociology, is described as an 'engineer', maybe to avoid the correct attribution of the phrase 'survival of the fittest' to him. Steve Jones, a media geneticist, makes a fool of himself on Wannsee, no doubt as a bit of easy money].

[8] 'Imperialism' is introduced without definition at some point. There's nothing on India's constant wars and multiple languages, or the horrors of the Mogul Muslim invasion. However Lord Lytton and famine and celebrations of Victoria's accession; in the 1870s in mentioned; and 1880s, and 1890s. Total deaths: 30 million. [The figures must be suspect. And we're invited to believe there was enough food in Madras' docks to feed ten million people. Note that the early famine is ascribed to cash crops and El Niño; maybe they were shy of 'global warming'. Of course the more recent Bengal famine is omitted—that was in the Second World War, though, so that's OK]

[9] The Scramble for Africa 'killing literally millions'. Of course African history is absurdly garbled. [The net effect of whites has been to multiply the black population I'd guess 400 times. Incidentally the 'basters' are mentioned; many African coloured have names like Joseph, Moses, etc, and there's a censored belief that Jews having sex with blacks caused this. There's a short story on this theme by Doris Lessing]

[10] Immigration into the USA and someone 'notorious' called Davenport. [Immigration of 'Jews' into Germany, a never-ending flood which caused enormous concern in Germany, is not mentioned]

[11] Someone called Michael Burleigh, apparently author of a history of the Third Reich, was a talking head. [His function was to pretend there were gassings. There is also the word meaning race-hygiene; after the First World War, some German women were impregnated by black troops used by the French...]

Let me note a few other omissions: the Napoleonic Wars accounted for something like four or five million dead Europeans. Who knows how many little-known ethnic groups were wiped out? There's nothing on Jews making money from Napoleon; Jews making money from slavery; Jews and Jackson; Jews making money from opium in China; the US civil war and the greenback connection; minerals and the Boer War; white deaths in both world wars; the biggest 20th-century atrocity, the mass murder of Russians.

It's worth noting a characteristic of Jewish propaganda: it is vague, irrational, concerned with simple endless repetition, much like an ingratiating and wheedling salesman, indifferent to truth, perhaps as a result of near-total isolation from the rest of the world for centuries, so that checkable facts were rare. (Consider: Friedman? Freud? Chomsky? Trotsky? Marx? Derrida? Einstein? Susan Sontag? Hobsbawm? Oppenheimer?) The TV subject is supposed to be eugenics; most of the programme is utterly irrelevant to that topic, in order to push the Jewish agenda. Eugenics is a coining meaning 'good genes' or possibly 'good race' (Latin, gens); at the time, genetics was not well understood, although there were polices in Europe on permitted marriage, and empirical evidence from plant and animal breeding, and anthropological information on mating arrangement around the world, many of them soundly based to preserve their gene pool structure. Having two parents permits genetic defects to be bypassed, to some extent; it seems likely the whole mechanism of sexual reproduction evolved in effect to permit complex gene structures to persist indefinitely, at the cost of each individual having quite large numbers of defects. Many genetic problems result in unviable offspring, but many are non-lethal.

There's an odd tendency, which must be a result of media propaganda, to avoid questions of heredity. If someone can't make insulin, without medical science they would die; but with insulin injections, genetic diabetes can spread; already we have primary school children injecting daily. Sickle-cell anaemia seems to be a taboo subject (the cells are malaria parasite resistant, but not very good at carrying oxygen), where discussion of the influence of malaria on human genes is unmentioned.

Why would anyone object to studying this and acting on the findings? Let's first look at the Jewish propagandist anti-eugenics view, and then at a related belief-system, originating (I think) with Bergson's book Creative Evolution.

Why do Jews insistently oppose and malign 'eugenics'? (The title of the BBC4 thing is 'Scientific Racism: The Eugenics of Social Darwinism' typically conflating various mispresented ideas). To Jew-aware people, the answer is obvious: the 'sacred' books of Judaism insist Jews are a supremacist 'master race'; they are encouraged to damage goyim. (Watch someone called Black in the video talking of a 'blond master race'—something he falsely claimed Galton and others wanted). There are countless examples of wars fomented by Jews for money; they support fluoridation; they support Muslim heroin traffickers; they want inferior education for others; they deliberately promote inferior people on race grounds; they support sex with little children; they like to offload their costs onto host communities; they tell lies to make money from non-Jews; they support freeing of dangerous criminals; they encourage white miscegenation with deliberate lies. Of course, the opposite policies apply to 'Jews'. Opposing sensible genetic policy is a good example of their rather comical 'chutzpah'. Another reason is that Jews historically are inbred (e.g. 'Tay-Sachs Disease'), and a side-effect is to produce a relatively high proportion of defective children; if the costs can be offloaded onto goyim, so much the better.

I've been quite surprised to see articles in nationalist sites of the 'creative evolution' type, in which the authors, such as H Millard, seem to predict 'supermen', men able to fly, of unlimited strength, and what have you. This seems unlikely to ever be remotely true: babies and children will need food and water to assimilate and grow, learning will take many years, they will be subject to illness and diseases and accidents, and the basic engineering must persist; the body parts will be similar to now. Maybe it's the influence of American comics, where 'mutants' occur without even one generations, to speed up the storyline; maybe it's something Biblical or to do with uniforms; maybe it's just Jewish racism reappearing; maybe it's just lack of education leading to absurdities not being detected. I've even seen it suggested new human races will emerge within fifty years!

Eugenics is intended to improve people down the generations, or keep up a standard. In Bertrand Russell's words: [just as Malthus's] difficulty was overcome by birth control, so [the doctrines of Darwin] will be overcome by eugenics. People will still remain people. Racial supremacy is in fact a jewish ideology. The deliberate ridicule of master races is partly to hide jewish supremacism. And partly in the hope that whites and others will if possible be ill, damaged, stupid, uneducated and so on: they WANT their rivals to be illiterate, addicted, uncontrolled, violent. The unthinking furore, screeching and yelling, surrounding eugenics is just another trick against goyim.
      On Malthus: Malthus predicted misery into the indefinite future, as human population swelled to the limits imposed by food production. This idea is presented as his sole idea, Malthus's future book accretions being presented as 'useless verbiage'. But maybe he developed his ideas further: because, if Malthusian principles apply to all human populations, presumably either wars are inevitable, or some form of joint controls would be needed, if endless famine is to be avoided. An obvious point, which Jews of that time and later may have censored—it's not clear how long the Jewish anti-white ideas have been fermenting, so it's impossible at present to say.

Here's a facebook exchange, late December 2014:
...Depopulation and Agenda 21 in detail...
Raeto West: With respect, 'depopulation' is not the same as 'eugenics'!
Judith Ann Hitt: The ultimate result is the same therefore would you not classify them as one in the same?
Raeto West: The aim of eugenics is to try to improve people. Of course there's debate about what this means. But there's no implication that populations should be removed: an ideal or optimum population is something else. You've been taken in by Jewish liars, whose aim is to kill off anyone they decide to hate. If they succeed, it's perfectly possible the world will mostly consist of backward, stupid, uncreative etc populations.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

CAAT logo

'Campaign Against Arms Trade' Revisited

Written by Rerevisionist 30 June 2013

CAAT had an unmarked shack-like building in Goodwin Street, north London, where I went to see them in the 1990s. They appear to have moved since then. They were mostly young women, all with PCs and phones, though there was also an amiable Oxbridge male who chatted, and struck me as a bit ineffectual—not unlike me in fact. I have a copy of Death on Delivery, a CAAT 1989 paperback in my arms/ weapons revisionist library, which I'll paraphrase bits from. At the time I had no idea nukes are probably a fraud, something CAAT still, in 2013, haven't got round to checking; and I wasn't very skilled at separating out strands of thought which are often confused.

CAAT is Britain only—I mean it campaigns against British arms trading. Are there lessons from this organisation? It seems rather low-profile; my own website gets more page turns than theirs. And there's an institutionalised feel, as with AIDS, cancer research, well-digging for Africa, third-word poverty; some of their people have worked for years in related activities: ' ... active in the peace movement for more than 40 years ... extremely concerned that various sectors of the military-industrial complex seem to be "beyond the law" ...'

[Miles Mathis makes a shrewd comment on the comment by Eisenhower—a noted war criminal—warning against the 'military-industrial complex'. He thinks it may be misdirection against the CIA. (And one might add the NSA )]

Looking back, their material had pervasive weaknesses, analogous to much post-1945 white angst. One weakness was the uncertain factual basis. Their own table gives British arms sales only about 4% of world sales; with USA and USSR (the 'Soviet Union' was still just about alive). Suggesting much of their effort had no effect. Thatcher is a hate figure, promoting unethical sales, but her role in selling assets to paper money types is unmentioned. There's much emphasis on sales to the Third World—but if they had no arms industries themselves, of course the sales will go there. Significantly, about a half of all third world arms imports went to the Middle East (Iraq, Egypt, India, Syria, Saudi Arabia) where 'regional arms races, conflict, and superpower rivalry have served to keep business brisk'. Note the missing elephant!

A related problem is the reliance on shock stats, as of course recommended by propagandists: "if you can't find a shocking statistic, look until you find one." In an effort to situate weaponry amid world trade, I came across a statement that if there were NO third world weapon imports at all, their huge debt would diminish—can you guess by how much?—just 20%!

From a revisionist view, the 'intense superpower competition for global supremacy during the Cold War and the power vacuum left by decolonisation..' from my viewpoint is largely hollow. Jews controlled the USSR and increasingly tightened the vice on the USA. They probably made money from arms and in my view dropped more bombs on Vietnam than during the entire Second World War just to make money. CAAT has no comprehension of such possibilities. It also has no real idea about debt: they know the USA had debt at the time—after Nixon dropping gold, and under Reagan's 'star wars'—it was building up; so was Third World debt. The underlying paper money/ fiat currency is unexamined by CAAT.

The details of deaths—30 million claimed in wars since 1945—ignores white deaths in wars and of course under Jews in the USSR; and abortions. Typically, only third worlders count. And incidentally it's perfectly possible that machetes killed more than hi-tech weaponry. These countries' 'leaders' appear to be slipped paper money, then use it to support their own armed forces—in the same way they like a national airline, they want national armies etc, in Africa, Asia, South America, and so on. A slight degree of blame is given to these people, who no doubt are paper tigers, but not much.

I have to conclude, as I did with activists looking into nukes, and wind power, and money/poverty, and medicine, that these people don't have much idea what they're doing. Pity.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

white population alarm logo

Some Notes on Population

Written by Rerevisionist 4 July 2013

I'll try to show here that there's been a fairly systematic campaign to minimise the lethal effects of war; a propaganda campaign, run I'm afraid by the usual suspects. Some of my remarks were suggested to me by an actuarial book on demography, pointing out that influential writers have their impact on populations; media control can have the same effect.

Let's look at the First World War's effects on European populations and the age pyramids:
For Britain, war losses 'touched virtually every household ... and nearly every family was diminished by the death in combat of a father, a son, a brother, a cousin, or a friend'. ... Losses in continental Europe and overseas were similarly severe .. estimated that 9.45 million died in military action including 2 million Germans, 1.8 million Russians, 1.3 million French and 723,000 British or Irish. ... we must include ... the large number of injured who subsequently died, ... civilian deaths and the births lost as a result of the disruption caused ... by the war. .. in Britain almost 60 per cent of war deaths were in the age range 20–9 ... In France the population was 'mutilated like a living organism: the age pyramid shows this injury to its flank, like an axe blow'
That account doesn't mention the 'Influenza Epidemic' after 1918; this was designed to conceal the large numbers of deaths from food shortages, contaminated drinking water, enfeeblements caused by the years of war. What's not often noted is the effect on the USA:
... most estimates put the number of migrants from Europe as a whole during the period 1800–1930 at some 40 million, a phenomenon of such magnitude as to produce economic and cultural change at the global scale as well as profound social consequences in the countries of origin. A major part of this emigration was, of course, absorbed by the USA
While the steep decline in emigration marked by the First World War itself was temporarily reversed after the end of hostilities, [white European] emigration never regained its former momentum
Now the Second World War:
The Second World War was traumatic and destructive in so many well-known ways for much of continental Europe and had massive demographic consequences in terms of lives lost, population redistribution and labour shortage. The post-war years, however, were to contain a number of surprises which confounded much of the pre-1939 pessimism about demographic trends.
That's all the book says; post-war deaths in central Europe are not mentioned. After all, everyone knows the Second World War was a 'good' war, apart from a few renegades who consider world-wide destruction was a huge price for supporting cult racist parasites and murderers. There's no discussion in that book of white emigration to the USA after 1945, not even of Jews being selectively given 'refugee relief'. But, in stark contrast to the present illegals situation, there were huge restrictions on population movements.

There were baby booms after both wars, as everyone knows ... or were there? After death and destruction and chaos, and with rationing and rebuilding (for the lucky ones), why would people rush to have kids? I haven't done any comparative calculations, but I suspect the 'baby boom' idea may be a Jewish-media myth. A baby boom was pretended to have happened in Britain after the First World War; at least for a time. However, single women in those days, and of course there were huge numbers, couldn't think of having children. In fact, a war about twenty years later was ideal for removing another swathe of young men. There was certainly a belief in a 'baby boom' after 1945; Bertrand Russell said (TV interview) people were confident, despite the 'atom bomb'; just look at the number of babies! And (e.g.) a 1947 newsreel item singled out Swindon as a high birth rate place, with film of babies, and shops selling baby clothes etc, but with no actual evidence. I'd guess the same happened in the USA. It's not as easy as it seems to check up: 'crude birth rates' don't allow for rates per fertile woman, with some age allowance, for example, and may be doctored to avoid mentioning blacks, Jews, people overseas, immigrants etc. Statistics in white countries are compromised; figures for immigration, race, unemployment, benefits, weapons, and what have you are all doubtful or non existent or unreliable. However it seems undeniable that birth figures dropped in the 1930s, and fell after 1965. The 'baby boom' may be a myth; there may not have been even replacement-level births The fall after 1965 due to the 'pill' and abortions is real enough though.

Let me give here a possibly related quotation (from Bertrand Russell, 'Science and War', a lecture reprinted in The Impact of Science on Society, c. 1947:
'Modern warfare, so far, has not been more destructive of life than the warfare of less scientific ages... Until recent times, pestilence almost invariably proved far more fatal than enemy action. ... Sennacherib ... the Peloponnesian War ... Syracuse.. Carthage.. France 1792 to 1815, in the end suffered compete defeat, but ... not ... anything comparable to .. Central Europe since 1945. ...'
Even supposedly serious writers on the effects of wars ignore important historical examples, such as the Thirty Years' War in Europe, and the death toll when the Moghuls invaded India, or famines as side-effects of war. I'm suggesting that war casualties are deliberately understated, and the effects understated; and note that the Fed in 1913, plus Baruch; and Roosevelt and Churchill; and numerous 'communist' Jews promoting immigration all had their reasons to understate white deaths.

It's perhaps worth noting another effect of Jewish influence: most people by now are aware of Jews, the Fed, Balfour and the entry of the US into the First World War, as it was christened—or perhaps judaised?—in 1916. And the decision to aim for the Second World War (Churchill's expression, I believe) by means of secret Jewish action, for example 'Polish' atrocities against Germans forcing Hitler to invade Poland. The note the escalation of the Vietnam War by the Jew Lyndon Johnson from about 1963, the likely significance of that war simply being to make money for war profiteers. Note the timing - three sets of long wars by 20-plus years. Ideal to remove white males from the population, and to demoralise and debase the survivors

A related issue is the failure to allow for the costs of children. Many Jewish media articles present white kids in a negative way, or put down to being scroungers, many don't see the long term outcome. It's been a policy of sorts at least since the 1920s to present kids as messy, annoying etc. Bertrand Russell noted that the 'fount of affection' of mothers in the USA seemed to have dried up; but then he wasn't Jew-aware. He thought in all previous eras children were liked and wanted, though his evidence (a bit of Shakespeare) wasn't very impressive. However, there has been little or no public debate on the issue of the costs, in the broad sense, of the next generation. Or of educating children to be parents. And this is intentional; it's to avoid discussing immigrant costs.
Extracts from 'The Changing Population of Europe', edited by Noin and Woods, 1993, part of the deluge of EU propaganda; other books say a lot more, for example, mentioning deaths in the USSR in the 1920s. Most of the authors in Noir and Woods are geographers: it's worth noting much of the impetus behind the EU was by academic geographers, who generally have little idea of biological or technical realities, or even simple things such as the effects of hot climates, but enjoy drawing lines on maps.
(On the related subject of suspect population figures see Are world populations exaggerated?)

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

'Jack Straw' and Jews

Jewish Plans for White Genocide

Written by Shaunantijihad 11 July 2013

The enemies in our Government attack Muslim countries and murder their women and children. They then bring the Muslim men here, who cannot be deported because it "breaches their human rights", even after they rape and kill White girls, which presumably is the plan. Weaken Muslims and destroy White people's lands at the same time.

Transfer the US military technology to Israel (created as a result of the largely false flag cold war between the Jew run USSR and the Jew run USA) in order to create an advanced military Jewish State whilst genetically lobotomising all surrounding nations, and eventually the world.

Jewish Satraps will then occupy positions of power in all these lesser nations to keep the goyim under heel, preferably turning them into a lower IQ, part Negro Untermenschen.

Murdering all the above average intelligence Whites in the USSR did not result in the hoped for "nation of White niggers", though no doubt it did have a devastating effect upon the goyim populace. I suspect it did not work in that case to lower mean IQ because the survivors of the Jewish run genocide were not genetically inferior or stupider than those murdered, they were merely uneducated and illiterate peasants.

However, the new plot to use the Negro gene to lobotomise the White race will be successful if it continues. One only has to look at some South American nations that are mixed Caucasian (Spanish), Negro and indigenous Mayan etc to see the intended result. Mean IQs of mixed race people seems to be in the mid-80s.

[ Note on human races, and mixtures of races, by Rerev: Jewish money controls most 'science' research. They have done everything possible to conceal facts about race, including suppression of information on race mixing. T Teo (2004) The Historical Problemization of "Mixed Race" ... (pdf file; free download) has information, and hints at the vast concealment by Jews, and the tame controlled scientists, of the literally vital secrets of mixed human races. Note that the article has little scientific basis. 2017-12-09 ]

Yes, it's a plan. It is happening simultaneously in all White Western nations. They started here when the Empire Windrush docked in London. The boat had about 490 Negroes, only 10 or so of whom were female. That pretty much shows their intentions. The consequences you can see all over London, Birmingham etc.

The job of the Jewish media is to celebrate this genetic destruction as "modern" etc and "anti-racist" and such until we are defeated.

Genetic defeat is permanent—for all time. That's what we face.

When you see details like this one following, see it in the context of the larger plan and it makes more sense:–
A foreign criminal who was jailed for his part in the London riots has used human rights laws to overturn attempts to deport him. Derrick Kinsasi was jailed for 18 months for burglary and theft from a branch of Comet during the August 2011 riots. But his lawyers have successfully argued that sending the criminal, who has no wife and no children, back to the Democratic Republic of Congo would 'breach his rights to family life' under the Human Rights Act. ... [presumably Jewish] immigration judge Nathan Goldstein said the 21 year-old could stay in Britain, because to remove him had 'echoes of exile'. Kinsasi told the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber that he came to Britain with his brother in 2002 to claim asylum. He was refused, but was granted 'exceptional leave to remain' ... [etc].
Anyone new to this idea is invited to check it for themselves when new information about populations comes to their attention. Not just genetic matters, but anything with potentially harmful effects. Could fluoridation of water be Jewish-promoted? What about intentions to damage wild-life in a country? Are killer doctors and nurses often Jews? What about destruction of old books, with assumptions about life and morals which contradict post-1945 officially-pushed views? What about films and TV and other media, where the storylines and subplots are more-or-less false and propagandist? Why should attempts be made to disarm whites while arming Jews?

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Can't get much more taboo than a swastika

Taboos about Jews

Written by Rerevisionist 3 August 2013

Bradley Smith founded the one-subject website forum CODOH (Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust) about fifteen years ago. Recently he spoke for an hour on Chicago-based Deanna Spingola's online radio show. (The episode was advertisement-free). His autobiographical material included the fair sex, the rather less fair race, and, near the end, a plaintive comment: "Why don't we discuss Jews? The rest of our society is guilty of co-operating with Jewish censors... It's us, it's not them, we're the ones who have the numbers; in the end we have the money; how much money does it cost to publish reviews? The spirit among those of us who are not Jews is wanting.. where are the people willing to speak the obvious? .. Elie Weisel can tell lies, that dead Jews underground can spurt their blood in geysers for months! Yet even universities accept him as a speaker. ..."

Nearly a century ago now, Hilaire Belloc's unique book 'The Jews' included a similar query; Chapter 6, The Cause of Friction on Our Side contains Belloc's criticisms of 'gentile' behaviour. He attributed the silence to 'the avowed purpose of personal advantage'—'This disingenuousness, ... lack of candour on the part of our race in its dealings with the Jew—a vice particularly rife among the wealthy and middle classes (far less common among the poor), extends ... to [the study of] history.' This was not a universal attitude; in the nineteenth-century some Frenchmen, and many Germans (including Wagner) discussed Jews publically, as Belloc knew. There must have been comment in Russia, Poland, Hungary and other Slav nations. After 1917, Belloc thought Jewish Bolshevism would force the subject to be discussed in depth, fully, by about 1940—which turned out to be the opposite of the truth.

It seems fair to regard this silence, which dates at least from the time of Cromwell, as a taboo (thanks to Captain Cook for the word!) Discussion is felt to be dangerous, risky, offensive to sacred or religious interests, tempting fate, socially unacceptable—what used to be described as "not done".

I'd like to attempt here to survey control over opinions: how has this taboo been introduced and enforced?

Let's start with children: at first sight, it seem likely that all taboos are instilled into children. Because they might chat about anything that attracts their attention, but don't, surely prohibitions are drummed into children? And there is some truth in this: many people spend their whole lives horrified by swear words, unable to discuss sex, afraid to talk about death, unable to say "If you exist, God, strike me dead!" and so on. Complaints to TV companies were mostly about swearing, and maybe still are; not a very rational attitude to a mere flatus vocis. Taboos in the original sense seem to have been largely to do with words. A rabbits used to be called a "coney", rhyming with honey, but the word fell, or was driven, out of use. According to my Latin dictionary, 'penis' meant 'tail' in Latin, and maybe it was an evasive word with the Romans: perhaps in a thousand years time, serious text-books in Chinese will talk about 'dicks'. And conversely people saying "Jumping Jesus" or "By Our Lady" as "bloody" show some decline in religious belief. Possibly Islam has or will have a similar pattern.

However, children are bounded by their senses, no doubt for sound evolutionary reasons. They cannot see things far away, or far back in time, or in the future. Just as no European in the middle ages knew about Manhattan Island, or what people did at stonehenge, or what electrolysis was. Also children can't know of things that are invisible: laws and ownership patterns and obscure belief systems and the way inventions work, for example. And there are other barriers, such as languages and formulas. The human mind is powerful, but liable to be deceived and misinformed and distracted by immediate surroundings. Let's distinguish between everyday, practical knowledge—being polite, eating breakfast, speaking whatever language is used, doing whatever has been learned, avoiding dangers—and everything else–abstract information, general beliefs, attitudes, worries and concerns, codified religions. Each of these has power entanglements—parents, teachers, members of larger groups such as governments and tribes, all have their own outlooks.

Simple, direct, everyday, matters known to everyone include bodily functions, which often lurk in swear words: one of the witnesses in the Trayvon Martin case described the killer as a "creepy ass cracker"; the US Jewish media have given us 'asswipe'. There's a general tendency for once-neutral words to be downgraded: 'toilet' used to have elegant suggestions, 'bathroom' is the US version. This is rational enough: it's hard to imagine even the most libertarian-minded of libertarians advocating the right to shit in the streets, as in India, though maybe Freudians will make it their next campaign. Sex is obviously likely to be a taboo topic, because it's intermittent, and has personal aspects; women have to be discreet to try to avoid unwanted attention, for example. Doggers and promiscuous holidaymakers have de facto separation from everyone else.

Indirect examples of taboo-type evasions include other bodily features: respectable Victorians were supposed to dislike references to 'legs', and to recommend that books by unmarried authors should not be side by side on bookshelves. The relatively difficult idea of death follows this pattern: hence expressions like 'passing over', but also solemn reminders like tombstones, memorials, and memento mori. Foods and clothes are hedged about with taboos which vary over time.

Control over beliefs involves parental, friend, enemy, legal and police actions, including learned reactions ('conditioning') as types of 'belief'. At one time, having a bastard child could result in eviction from rented property, and other serious problems; a 'git' or 'get' expresses the feeling to such people. When the legal effects vanished, so did the stigma. Another example is the introduction of universal 'education' into Britain; children might play truant, and it took an entire generation of school board examiners and fines before there was general acceptance of going to school.

We're interested here in deliberate systematic long-term control of information, and the effects of this on societies. Lies tend to be more successful when they involve more abstract things which are remote, invisible, and hard to understand. And the likelihood of censorship depends on how important such intangible structures of ideas are to interested groups. Lies of the sort Orwell described in Spain—battles which never took place— succeed if there are few channels of communication; this is the reason for Jewish control of purchasable media, and keeping the visibility of control low. It also explains the efforts to muddy the water on such issues as democracy, finance, and war.

Let's survey historically important examples of information control. Christianity provides many examples, including the setting up of Canonical books, and the almost complete destruction of rival heresies and advocates of paganism. (It's possible that if they'd been less censorious, Christianity might ultimately have been stronger). Near our day, we can still find lingering traces of attitudes enforced by Christians: there used to be fines, 'one day's wage of a milkmaid', for non-attenders at church on Sundays. I still remember peoples' unease at not going to church on Sundays, partly a lingering apprehension of now-vanished punishments. In fact it may be possible to deduce the aspects of systems which are regarded as important by the hierarchy of censorship: for example the level of abstraction seems important in Christianity: atheism used to be regarded as unspeakably evil. But the question of the existence or otherwise of a genuine historical Jesus seemed only rarely to surface. There's a relationship with ideas which are taken for granted: G B Shaw, a once-famous writer, described a meeting with a flat-earth believer, who raised emotions which even an atheist couldn't. Similarly most people have assumed that one man has only one wife, and vice versa.

The power of Roman Catholicism declined at the Reformation (or 'Protestant Revolt'), but there was a long preliminary interval, marked particularly by new translations of the Bible. In Britain the process of seizing assets and keeping on a hierarchy with different beliefs went uncomplicatedly. 'A discredited organisation was fleeced without sanctimony or humbug' according to Hugh Trevor-Roper/ Lord Dacre. In the rest of Europe, it didn't happen easily. There is a parallel with the Jewish situation now: a smallish uncreative group, spread over many countries, with its own language and habits, and an artificially privileged financial situation, and a propaganda system distributing standardised messages, controls sufficient individuals to hold onto power. Lives of saints crossing the Irish sea on tombstones have been replaced by corpses spouting geysers of blood.

In Britain, Elizabethan censorship was harsh: Harrington's book on the Commonwealth was proscribed; anyone found with a copy would have his house levelled, be executed himself, perhaps with his colleagues. There were plenty of writers anxious to assert the then-new consolidated more-or-less national monarchies were ordained by God. Most countries have no monarchy now, but Britain still has taboos around the subject. Stage censorship was thorough: the 'Shakespeare' plays were at one period intensely patriotic, in effect against Spain, the modern debased equivalent being Hollywood's pro-Jewish material. Stage censorship ceased in the 1960s, no doubt because theatre audiences were tiny compared with film and TV viewers.

The New World led, after a time, to a tremendously enlarged range of ideas—as enlightening as the discovery of new types of animals and plants. I suspect that free discussion tends to accompany such periods, just as surrealism tends to accompany periods of danger and terror. The Ancient Greek world, if it was anything like as it was presented in the past, may have had sceptical discussions largely as a fashion.

Let's briefly look at a few other subjects liable to the taboo of self-censorship. One is violence: many soldiers will not discuss their experiences; many Americans never discuss atrocities in their wars; many news reports censor violence. In each case lessons and warnings can be lost. Another is surveys of large groups: many people at present will not say women have been disappointing in their intellectual achievements, or the same with blacks, however good the evidence. People will often avoid, through what is, or looks like, politeness, certain subjects: Bertrand Russell's friends avoided discussion of nuclear weapons.

The behavioural part of self-censorship results from a small army of events. It's impossible for anyone to know everything about laws, so taboos arise if something similar to the dangerous thought was known to have been penalised. To take specifically Jewish-related topics: If you mention Jewish race fanaticism, maybe there's a law against it? Could something a parent or relative said about Jews be slander? If you try to find out about paper money and Jews, could this be an official secret? Are you allowed to point out that someone is a Jew? What about the early days of Israel and murders of Britons: is that a military secret? Looking at American education, and text-books written by Jews, is it libellous to criticise them? Is it legal to insist a supposed 'survivor' reveals his sources? Can people enquire why, given the vast wealth of control of money, Jews continue to damage and exploit without the slightest sign of slowing down? Most people go along with their herd because of vague fears. Self-censorship by non-specialists happens in radio and TV, local and national papers, forums, chatrooms, schools, universities, Mensa, small publications; everywhere.

Bear in mind that taboos have been different in the past; there will come a time when the current stuff seems quaintly obsolete, and the emotions almost impossible to take seriously.

Inevitably, this must take time: it's certain that many people are incredibly ignorant, with absolutely no idea about 'ZOG' and its implications. Belloc, nearly a century ago, said their deception must stop, and yet, still, nobody points out that the 'American' neocons are Jews, or that all the Fed chairman candidates are Jews. Many people have heard of the 'bell curve', the so-called 'normal distribution'. Similar distributions can hold over time: at first, very few people understand the issue; then numbers increase, until just a few stragglers remain. We're still somewhere not far from the start of the curve.

Let's try to make a rational answer to Bradley Smith's comment. Some people still believe in the unique hardship and misfortunes of Jews, and their descent from Biblical tribes, with sacred texts, and of course to the non-credulous these issues can only be resolved by evidence. But there is also a fear of future problems, and in view of what happened in the USSR this is a serious matter. Do people who want open debate in fact have the numbers, and have the money? It's uncertain how much money-based power Jews have: if they succeed in killing off or silencing opponents, it may be wise to keep quiet. It depends on assessments of Jewish power, and in view of the severe censorship, certainty isn't possible yet. But I'm inclined to think the takeover of Russia relied partly on the backwardness of Russia, and partly on the financiers being thousands of miles away. Both these factors apply much less now; Jews are arguably less able to disappear, leaving their ruined dupes. I suspect the cumulative evidence from immigration, history, wars, and analysis of paper money and frauds will come to influence very many more people. And, waiting in the wings, are frauds in science and technology—NASA, AIDS, fluoride, biology, nuclear issues, 9/11—awaiting objective assessment. The Internet has played a terrific role, and effectively isn't even twenty years old. And there are signs that the vast numbers of supporters must shrink: propagandists, trolls, liars, party apparatchiks, senators, congressmen, MPs, lying journalists, fake charities, spurious peace and amnesty groups, pressure groups, fraudulent industries, mercenaries, advertisers etc, must at some point be too expensive. So, despite the chaos and horrors of the last century, I permit myself some hope.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

facism and rscism

'Facism', 'Rascism', the 'Borjois', and the Imperative Need to Understand the Jewish 'Single Standard'

Written by Rerevisionist 6 August 2013

sandwich boardsandwich board
Sandwich boards
The photo shows a collection of 'useful idiots' in 2009, at Sharon Wilkinson's first appearance as a BNP (British National Party) Lancashire County Councillor. The crowd entered the public gallery, and chanted for a few minutes, before leaving to collect their ten pounds and no doubt go for a drink. This sort of thing is a common occurrence in Jewish-related activity, and it's not by chance that the fake left usually can't understand, spell or even pronounce their scripted words. Let's investigate. I'll use the misspellings to indicate the sloganistic usage.

Let's trace this attitude back in time. I'll select 1941, about the time of the 'surprise attack' on Pearl Harbor and the USA's joining Churchill's and France's European war. Here's part of an exchange of letters on would become the Second World War between two British men, Bertrand Russell and Gilbert Murray, each regarded as a first-class scholar at his peak:–

Gilbert Murray: ' ... it was not quite clear what the two sides were: e.g. some people said it was Communism or Socialism against Fascism, others that it was Christianity against ungodliness. But now, as far as ideas are concerned, it is clearly Britain and America with some few supporters against the various autocracies, which means Liberalism v Tyranny. Bertrand Russell: 'I quite agree.. The issue became clear when Russia turned against us [i.e. Hitler-Stalin pact: Russell thinks of 'Russia', in fact the Jewish-controlled 'Soviet Union', as one of 'us']... etc
Despite the fact Hitler had made it perfectly clear (but in German) that he opposed Jewish money-power, the two quoted above simply have not the slightest clue what was happening—as equating Stalin with Socialism, and the USSR with Russia, and the absence of anything on Japan and Italy and the NSDAP programme and Poland, prove.
    By 1945, Russell's understanding of fascism (by then twenty years in power) is illustrated by this comment in his autobiography: I said to them [British Embassy officials in the USA]: 'You will admit this is a war against Fascism. And ... the essence of Fascism consists in the subordination of the legislature to the executive. ... Now... you are the executive and I am the legislature and if you keep me away from my legislative functions... you are Fascists.' The disaster of WW1 and Italy's dissatisfaction and change of sides, and the problems of Italy, are simply unrecognised by Russell. He was of course not alone; I pick him as a perfect example (I've studied his life and work) of someone either not Jew-aware, or, more likely, who has learned to suppress any overt comment on Jews, despite the facts that his grandfather was a significant part of the movement to empower Jews in Britain; and he had personally witnessed New York Jews start to wreck Russia. And yet—nothing.
    If you're interested in Russell, read this detailed piece Bertrand Russell: Dupe of Racist Jews.

Russell's legalistic evasive formula is still absolutely typical of academic attempts to examine 'fascism' in countries dominated by Jews. Naturally, it has no predictive or explicative power at all. However, there's another parallel interpretation of 'fascism' of the same age and longevity; which is something like 'gang violence'. Russell thought Julius Caesar and Napoleon were 'fascists', for example; and he thought Mosley, who wanted to avoid a Second World War, was thuggishly violent.
    Another example: George Orwell's review of No Orchids for Miss Blandish (1939; I wonder if this was intended to inspire sadism, a sort of bookish Tarantino?) includes this passage: 'Several people, after reading NO ORCHIDS, have remarked to me, 'It's pure Fascism'. This is a correct description, although the book has not the smallest connexion with politics ...' That book (written by an English or French author, not an American, presumably for money) has sordid murders and cruelty 'and much else of the same kind', and clearly disgusted Orwell—'a header [i.e. headfirst dive] into the cesspool', he wrote. Orwell was a dupe; he had no idea of Jewish mass murders, and was happy to ascribe sadism to fascism.
    More on Orwell as a useful idiot here

Veale's Advance to Barbarism (1953, and later editions) gives an idea of the censorship in Britain (and no doubt the USA, and wartime violence):
There was no official prohibition on expressions of opinion [during WW2] as such, but persons who ventured to express opinions which the authorities deemed might hamper the war effort were put in prison without a trial or even without a specific complaint against them.
Veale was entirely Jew-unaware, motivated by humanitarian impulses; he pointed out that in 1961, C P Snow's lecture Science and Government included:
'.. March 1942 Mr. Churchill's War Cabinet had accepted the plan laid before it by Professor Lindemann by which 'top priority' as an objective for air attack was in future to be given to "working-class houses in densely populated residential areas."
This mental structure has remained extraordinarily intact for ninety years until the present day, as a result of control of the media and 'education', with the bulk of populations in the 'west'. Even quite well-informed persons, such as Frank Ellis (lecturer in Russian, and immigration realist) are this type. Paul Wilkinson (1980s) is (or was) the same type, with a bibliography of books that he regarded as 'technical analysis' of fascism, which prove to be just the usual stuff. It's terrifying that such ramshackle analysis could stay around for such a long period.

Probably the media underpinning is the fact that Jews are terrified that other groups might use Jews' own technique, and unify solidly against them. The potential power of cohesive groups is always minimised: Alexander, Caesar, Christ, Mohammed, Luther, Cromwell, Napoleon, Gustavus Adolphus, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Lenin, Mandela, even the present Queen of the United Kingdom, are presented as very exceptional and abnormal individuals. The large numbers of anonymous supporters behind the scenes go unmentioned. If cohesiveness cannot avoid being mentioned, it is attacked, usually in a mouth-frothingly red-faced vicious way. Hence parrot cries of 'Fascist'—and 'racist', which also implies large groups of similar united people.

The conclusion is that 'facism' is a chant against non-Jews who oppose Jews and Jewish violence, even though they may not know it. Jewish violence in Russia in 1905, Jews in Hungary, Jews in the USSR, Jews in Ukraine, Jews in Palestine, and Jewish funded surrogates and patsies—in South Africa, in Korea, in Vietnam in Iraq, the USAF, are not called 'facist'. But much any opponent or concerned person is.

This is Leon Trotsky's 1930 work, "The History of the Russian Revolution", from which shown above is a passage. The last word['s] ... Latin transliteration is "racistov", i.e., "racists". This work here is the first time in history one will ever find that word.
    Thus an Internet quotation on the etymology of 'racism'. In fact the word 'racialism' preceded it, though of course before the Jewish coup in Russia it did not have the same connotation that Trotsky required, viz. opposition to Jewish policies dealing with forced movements of races.

That's the emotional meaning; as with 'fascism' there's an evasionist meaning, but this is complicated. Religious or fanatical Jews regard all other people as infinitely inferior; so of course there's no theoretical reason to distinguish between them (except maybe the females, for sexual purposes). Hence the insane Boasian idea in the USA promoted by 'anthropologists' that race does not exist: from the point of view of people 'chosen by g-d', nobody else matters. But of course race does exist, and 'rascist' is a chant against such people, notably if they unite in some way against Jews, even if they don't realise it.

Here's an unedifying exchange, on Amazon, related to a book review of mine; the respondent may think he or she is Jewish; note the astonishing chutzpah in denying the most racially-aware group that ever existed is 'racist':–
Chancery Stone says: Jews are a racist cult? How so?
Rerevisionist says: How so? Are you serious? Please don't waste my time - it's taken me about a minute here
Chancery Stone says: Absolutely serious. If you think they are a "racist cult" give us some evidence. Or is evidence too time-consuming for you when prejudice is so cheap and easy?
Rerevisionist says: Well - why don't you read up a bit about Judaism? Can you read?
Chancery Stone says: And that feeble attempt at deflection means you do indeed have no evidence to offer, just prejudice.
Rerevisionist says: What it means is that either you're a liar, or a fool. I don't know or care which.
Chancery Stone says: What it means is you know you're cornered, with no actual evidence to offer, and the best you can do is chuck out some irrelevant juvenile insults, which are as intellectually sound as your prejudice. I rest my case...
Rerevisionist says: Dear Mr Stone. please for ONCE in your worthless life MAKE AN EFFORT. You are trying to discuss jews but you clearly KNOW NOTHING ABOUT JEWS or JUDAISM. I don't want to waste time on a fool like you: I'll just say, for the last time, DO SOMETHING FOR YOURSELF. Find out for yourself. Read. Check. You have been lied to and are either too stupid, or have some vested interest, in remaining ignorant and befuddled. It's YOUR problem, not mine. I hope this is clear enough and that you take some action to remedy your ignorance.
The conclusion is that 'rascism' is a chant against anyone who either recognises the obvious fact that races exist and differ; and/or who recognises that Jewish religious ideology claims Jews are a very very special race indeed. No wonder the screamers look a bit puzzled.

Double Standards and the Jewish 'Single Standard'
'Double standard' is an expression that seems to have started with reference to sex. Women can have children, and are otherwise somewhat different from men. Presumably this should result in different treatment; 'double standard' is a technical-sounding phrase to try to counter this obvious fact.

There is, arguably, a characteristic in most whites which makes them receptive to ideas of fairness, equity, even-handedness, and so on. If A accepts that A and B are on an equal footing, then if A treats A and B differently, there is indeed a 'double standard'; A can be called a hypocrite. BUT it is ESSENTIAL to see that if A does NOT accept that A and B are on an equal footing, there is no 'double standard': it's just a 'single standard'. What A does is good, what B does is bad. An observer may accuse A of hypocrisy, but A's single standard doesn't accept that as a criticism.

Many people are amazed at the breathtaking hypocrisy of Jews, as they tell lies, defraud, and so on, over years, decades, and centuries. It's just a single standard: We will grab what we can at any cost.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


RamZPaul on 'White Privilege': more Jewish Swindlespeak. What about 'Jew Privilege'?

Written by Rerevisionist 16 August 2013

RamZPaul, an American (Ramsey Paul?), makes short, witty videos, which he uploads onto his own popular Youtube channel. His videos alerted me to another phrase which Jews try to push into circulation, helped by the dull deadweight of the Jewish media. This is 'White privilege'.
This video (below) was made after recent Trayvon Martin demonstrations; viewers will know the controlled media barely reports black-on-white murders, however vicious, but instead picks on legal cases for political reasons. Thus Trayvon Martin, misrepresented as a little boy, shot by a Hispanic he attacked, in what looks like a trespass. (Stephen Lawrence in Britain shows the same process, except that there are no Hispanic dupes).

RamZPaul on White Privilege That video is nearly four minutes. RamZPaul points out that someone, I think a Jewish mouthpiece with a megaphone (see below; short video), talks about "you white people", despite the Jewish lie that there is 'no such thing as race', and it's all a 'social construct'... so how can they be 'white'?
Jewish liar

'Your guilt is not enough'. No comment on Jewish guilt, of course! RamZPaul invents a counter-slogan: 'Check your white contact', i.e. meaning if you don't like whites, go away. [I'd suggest "Jew privilege" might be a better slogan!]

The implication of 'white privilege' is that if you're white, like all whites, you have it easy. RamZPaul talked of his grandparents in Indiana, who worked hard but didn't have enough to eat, and had no shoes in summer. (On a wall here I have a photocopy of a newspaper, of March 1946. An item says: There are 10,000 Liverpool children absent from school every day, most of them because they lack clothes or shoes, declares Mr. H. V. Clark, headmaster and city councillor.)
Here is another RamZPaul video
RamZPaul on 'Elysium' A review of a film, Elysium, which he says is set 1,000 years in the future, showing events after white flight to (I think he says) a Martian space station, where they speak English, presumably with an American accent. It's supposed to show illegal immigrants trying to get into it; the promise being multicult paradise. RamZPaul puzzles over the fact that Los Angeles is shown as a mass of graffitied slummy Spanish-speaking violence; surely if illegals are desirable, in 1,000 years L.A. should be wonderful? He makes two points:

The immigration debate (insofar as a debate has ever existed) is that all people are equal: it's a modern religious item of faith. RamZPaul produces a few counter-examples. And

'White privilege' is presented as a kind of unfair advantage that all white people get, appearing from nowhere, inexplicable; "it's like we're hoarding it, and it's not fair ..."

It's typical of RamZPaul that he doesn't try to generalise, for example by looking at Jewish-run Hollywood or Jewish-run US TV over time. It's left to the audience to pick up other pieces of the puzzle. Anyway—next time you hear of whites refused benefits, denied housing, thrown out of work by the Jewish political parties, not getting medical treatment they paid for all their lives, getting third-rate education, or being dismembered in a foreign war, remember they have 'white privilege.'
On the subject of Jews forcing abnormal word usage into English, here's another Youtube set I happened to notice, Damsel in Distress.

Damsel in Distress in video games
I don't know whether the scriptreader believes she is Jewish, though I'd take a big bet. Note the barefaced absurdity of the physical strength claims, and, in passing, the inability to get a grip on technical matters, which of course tend to be irrelevant to propagandists. And the indifference to violence. And the use of the rare word 'trope', torn from its literary use. I suppose we should be grateful we aren't showered with Yiddish constructions.

Note: 'Swindlespeak' is a word coined by Lady Michèle Renouf.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

David Irving on Heinrich Himmler

Written by Rerevisionist 30 Aug 2013

David Irving video on Himmler Just a short note. David Irving's ten-venue speaking tour in Britain is almost over; he is following it by a guided tour around sites (such as Sobibor) in eastern Europe. He's now 75, and seems as energetic as ever. He's keeping up-to-date with printing technology; he has print on-demand copies available for many of his books, and translations into many languages; and a presence in e-books. His subject on this tour was Himmler's life and death, in five parts--

1 Chester Wilmot's radio broadcast on Himmler's alleged suicide;
2 Himmler's death in the 'specially prepared house';
3 Himmler's youth and adulthood, until his death aged 44;
4 Information on shootings in the Reinhard camps;
5 and Himmler's part in the bomb plot against Hitler.

David Irving's book on Himmler is "about 80% finished". I made a video (and edited, titled, incorporated photos in it) in a location 'somewhere near Manchester'; people new to Irving might like to check what you see, against the Jewish media version. It's about 100 minutes long.

There were no rentathugs, perhaps not for want of trying: a mole released venue details on Internet, but had been provided with a gay bar in Manchester; just right for his Cameronian mates...

Extract from Endzog

David Irving Threatened By Jewish Thugs - August 16, 2013
The transnational Jew rag 'The International Business Times' recently carried a report by Kike correspondent Dominic Glover (isn't wonderful how the hebes' appetite for grand larceny on a global if not cosmic scale means that they will steal everything including our Christian and European names?) wrote a sordid little article, and I mean little because to extract anything longer than a text message from the modern 'reporter' would be to strain the poor fellow awfully, in which he threatened to set a bunch of nasty Jewish street-thugs on the famous Second World War historian David Irving if he dared, DARED, to express his freedom of speech and his academic right and duty by giving a talk in HIS OWN COUNTRY (or at least in what was his own country before the total Jewish takeover) about Heinrich Himmler, the much maligned, demonized and defamed member of the German leadership who drew the short straw and ended up supervising the concentration camps which contained Jews amongst other inmates; criminals and threats to national stability, morality and security.

Camps in which Jews who had to be taken off the streets of Germany lest they did any more damage than they already had to the German people remained for one reason or another during the Second World War after the Rothschild-controlled 'British' government refused to let them into Palestine. Of course as many of us now believe International Jewry, who controlled the war propaganda units and the media and of course since the war Western education, and who ran both of the Zionist agents Churchill and Roosevelt through Bernie 'the fixer' Larouche, wanted the Jews to remain in the camps so that they could create the Holohoax by ensuring that all acess routes to them would be bombed towards the end of the war in order that Hollywood film directors like Billy Wilder and Alfred Hitchcock and English shabbas Goy Richard Dimbleby could lie through their faces while filming piles of dead emaciated victims of typhus, victims of their own cunning who they could claim were all Jews who had been gassed or murdered. How convenient then for top US five-star general and Jew Dwight D. Eisenhower to arrive at the Buchenwald camp with faux-human lampshades possibly flown in from a Hollywood effects department to create for once and for all the Holohoax myth. ...

... the second like the first world war was provoked by the Jews and untold millions of Germans alone were murdered or starved to death during and after the Second World War by the forces instigated by the Jews. We need a historian for the German side to work all this out, but taking into consideration only the deaths of Germans in and after this war, those figures easily outnumber the number of Jews who died.

... So much has Britain been redesigned and re-arranged that only a party like the German NSDAP or nazi party can sort out the problems we have and eventually restore our mores and values. ... in David's younger days it would have been enough to have left the good Jew alone and brought legal sanction to bear on the subversive elements, had that been done we would not be in the position we are in now. But now our economy, government, banking, political parties, immigration policy, education, the legal system, policing, corporations, food supply, entertainment, fashion and to a growing extent sport is solidly in the hands of the Jews ...
I added a Table Talk Youtube - 40 minutes - of Questions & Answers & other material following Irving's Himmler talk. youtube.com/watch?v=TNUEcQgItkw

Interesting to listen to a first-rate researcher and raconteur; and I inserted segment numbers and short descriptions - useful for reference.

There are a couple of unimportant mistakes - Martin Gilbert as Gilbert Martin, and E J Wicks misspelt, I'm told.
I just noticed Irving say Lord Alfred Douglas was sued for criminal libel by Churchill, for saying Churchill had made a fortune from the Battle of Jutland. Maybe Lord Alfred Douglas wasn't quite as languid as his image suggests.

Off topic, Lord Alfred Douglas (the original Dorian Grey) in fact played a significant part in the exposure of Jews by revealing the Amsterdam synagogue message to Cromwell, offering money when Charles was killed. So Lord Alfred Douglas wasn't just a pretty (and then ugly) face. (From memory - I'm fairly sure this is right. NB Michael Hoffman claimed I think in 2014, that the exchange of letters is an invention or forgery. The British Museum at one time had these documents, or something like them, on display under glass; I remember them, probably in the 1970s. However, they do not appear on the British Museum website. Possibly they were destroyed. But I'd guess cameras were widely-enough available to ensure there is evidence somewhere).

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

A NEW REFORMATION & Modern Techniques of Image Fakery

Written by Rerevisionist 2 September 2013. Updates 20 July 2016.

We Are Living Through a New Reformation
Many people reading this site are aware that 'false flags', including secret provocations, have been used to justify wars, both to people who want to profit, and to the commanders and mercenaries paid to do the work. The US's war with Spain, for Cuba and the Philippines, was sparked by the 'Maine' being blown up; Japan's War with Russia was funded and no doubt started by Jews; the First World War appears to have been deliberately sparked by murders; Jews in Poland forced Hitler to act, a perfect excuse for another war; Palestine was invaded; the US knew Pearl Harbor was on the way - See this new in Feb 2016 view of Pearl Harbor as a US false flag bombing - another excuse; there were border incursions in Korea; the Gulf of Tonkin; and US actions in unfortunate counties in Africa, Asia, and south America. Jews in the USA and in the USSR were in a perfect situation to rig up events, or just make them up, with media control. Iraq was invaded on pretexts. I've listed below some visual effects. The techniques of course have been getting better and better.

In my opinion, we're now in a situation analogous to the time of the Reformation. The Catholic Church had an international operation, with its own language, its own promotion and career system, land and asset ownership, and constant streams of money. It had a (for its time) worldwide propaganda system, adapted to both illiterates and people who could read. Such events as the Black Death had shown its pretensions to practical usefulness were empty; and explorations and experiments showed how much more there was to the world than the Church's restricted outlook allowed. But its tentacles were so extensive it took centuries to cut down its power. There were wars, and, even more so, chaos as mercenaries invaded territories bringing enormous destruction. There were people like Wycliffe, propagandists of the type of Luther, heretics and martyrs, local rulers like Henry VIII, all playing their parts.

In our time, and for a few centuries, Jews have been a similar growing international tight clique, operating alongside local elites, analogously to the Church, and with its own huge propaganda system. For example, the Holohoax has stories exactly parallel to martyrologies in Catholicism. Another example: the Jewish media output of stories is similar to monks in the Middle Ages producing book after book on miracles of saints. However, it's obvious now to thinking people that 'ZOG' is corrupt, in the sense that it has vastly overextended in a criminal way into regions it should have left alone. Cutting down 'ZOG' is necessary, but, if the Reformation is anything to go by, may take centuries. It may not even be obviously successful: the Church of England, and the English state, took over lands and assets, and the money outflow was staunched: aristocrats were enriched, the clergy changed their views a bit, and very likely ordinary people were somewhat, but perhaps not much, better off.

So it looks as though we can expect a few centuries in which Jewish liars will work overtime, and vast numbers of people will still believe what they are told. Probably there will be wars between blocs of people, some too brainwashed to be able to change, others not caring one way or the other, and looking for security or money. Yet others will simply be caught up in vicious wars. There may be the economic versions of wars—hyperinflation, starvation, poverty, decay of towns into filth and dilapidation. There may be unexpected alliances, in ways designed to replace Jewish control, perhaps worldwide rather than Europe only. There may be the equivalent of burnings at stakes for blasphemy. There may be a final loss of patience with Jews. There may be odd new quasi-religious cults, as happened during and after the Reformation. Perhaps groups believing evolutionary or race heresies, that wars improve people's genes, or races should be forced to mate, or Rothschilds should be made into holy relics, or anyone with forbidden books is Satanic. Part of the persuasion process will be frauds; do please look out for false flags in the news. So far these new fakes have been surprisingly amateurish (see photos); maybe they can't get the staff; who knows. But bear in mind we may be in for a really long haul. There isn't the slightest sign that Jews will develop any sort of normal honesty or conscience.

Modern Techniques of Image Fakery
Woolwich picture fake
Black 'actor', shopper, black bus, red hands (Woolwich, London)
Syria picture fake
Oops! Where's the wound under the 'bloody' shirt? (Syria)
Boston explosion picture fake
Amputee Actor tries to remember his lines(Boston)

Computer generated image of talking womanIndividual processing of single pixels (for example, typically cyan or green to leave faces unaffected) is hugely powerful. Green screens allow entire backgrounds to be replaced. CGI (computer generated images, including moving faces and objects) have been used for years in the cinema.

There are of course also photoshopped still images, a descendant of retouched photos. ('Photoshop' is just one image processor, but the name is in generic use). My advice is to take this stuff calmly; it's the way it is now amongst the liars and frauds. Forewarned may be forearmed. Here are a few pioneer debunkers.

Simon Shack (pseudonym?) is a sound engineer living in Italy, within sight of the Vatican. His website is September Clues and he has exposed numerous 9/11 frauds—computer graphic simulations of the towers and airplane strikes; the 'vicsims', i.e. simulated victims; the elaborate hoaxes involved in interviews, both with officials and with supposed members of the public. The technology was, of course, available in 2001.

Here's an account on fakeology.com by Markus Allen (not the Marcus Allen of Nexus magazine, who is a long-term critic of the faked NASA moon landings)

Youtube: Truth about Syria on the Truth about Syria, a well-made video, including actors, and what he claims are fake bodies and so on, apparently sourced from videos in Arabic. Well worth the few minutes to get up to speed with controlled information, though Markus Allen's main interest is marketing.

This link is an online talk about nuclear issues. (Click for 200 minute mp3 file; which is long!). Most of the initial doubt about nuclear weapons was prompted by oddities in the films, which were made available on DVD years after the event. http://www.nukelies.org has discussions from 2011-2012.

'Ab Irato', of fakeology.com, says he was triggered into action by 9/11 truthers, including Simon Shack. He's good on Canadian psyops and has identified convincing signs of fakes in the Canadian printed press, generally used to push some cause or law. He does not include the Jewish element, however, including the Holohoax, so it's not impossible his work is controlled opposition or part of an exit strategy, or even part of a publicity stunt.

Youtube on 'crisis actors': 'realism in live training events', 'role-play actors', 'disaster dramas', 'Starr Waggons' specially equipped for actors. About 25 minutes on this semi-secret, low-profile activity. Worth watching.
July 17, 2016 On Obama's acting skills: I owe it (personally) to Miles Mathis for opening my eyes to the role of actors in frauds, the more direct, but much more perishable, equivalent of written frauds. Mathis wrote an excellent piece on Lincoln's alleged assassination, drawing attention to John Wilkes Booth as an actor: a stage bang, a loud declamation (in Latin), followed by a theatrical leap, down what turns out to be an impossible drop. And of course we have 'crisis actors'. Thinking about it, I recall being positively shocked when I found in about 1975 that BBC news announcers, and, for that matter, even IBM salesmen, often had acting training. But there's a problem: Jewish actors are often, in my humble opinion, not very good. It finally occurred to me that genuine acting means trying to feel what it's like to be another person – or indeed a ghost, king, thug, emperor, 'vampire'. But I think Jews are always acting the part of Jews; it’s not really acting at all.

May 27, 2016 Those two TV ads [Italian one, showing boring Italian male shoved into a washing machine, emerging as a supposedly thrilling black; and a Chinese one, the other way round, otherwise almost identical] are all but identical – same setting, behaviours, actions. Incredible. NB for people who haven't seen them, youtube has several sites showing US (or rather Jewish) TV ads which portray whites as wimps etc, and blacks as wise, knowing etc. The black actor Morgan Freeman is riding (or has ridden) that wave. [There are many youtubes with anti-white ads, no doubt by Jewish advertising agencies.]

1898 false flag image USS Maine at Havana Going back in time, here's a 50-minute TV programme aired in 1999, at the end of a session of studio discussions each evening, corresponding to the supposed moon landings of 1969. Colour photos, and b/w TV footage, were used in the fakes, as were studio sets of several types.
Youtube: Moon Landing NASA fraud (five parts). A considerable amount of photographic evidence.

Visual evidence for the so-called Jewish 'holocaust' obviously dates from about 1940-1945, and is mostly black-and-white and mostly under Jewish control. A good site to comb for fakes on this subject is http://www.codoh.com, the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust.

Illustration: older technology. A lithograph of the 'Destruction of the U.S. Battleship Maine' in 1898. The explosion occurred in Havana harbour. The U.S.A. used the explosion to declare war on Spain, and 'acquired' the Philippines, Guam, Puerto Rico, and commercial control of Cuba. From Chicago Historical Society; reproduced here from Brian Catchpole's 1968/1976 A Map History of the Modern World.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Jewish paper money issue

Jewish Control of Money.
And the Missing Economic Theory of Macrofinance

Written by Rerevisionist 14 September 2013

This piece is prompted by a short article by 'Kasredin' published on the British Resistance site, on interest rates. 'Kasredin' gives standard economic textbook material on interest as the 'price of money'. I'd like to suggest Kasredin got about three-quarters of the story right; but the remaining quarter is of crucial importance in understanding economics for about the last hundred years.

Like 'Kasredin', I loathe the BBC's truth evasion; here's a piece reviewing a book by a typically feeble BBC hack, Robert Peston and his junk book Who Runs Britain?

However, 'Kasredin' hasn't understood the way paper and plastic [and electronic] money is manufactured. It's now exactly one hundred years since the Federal Reserve was invented; many Americans still think the Fed is a governmental organisation - they don't know it's a privately run outfit. Similarly, most people in Britain have no idea the 'Bank of England' is not a state organisation, but is run privately. Full details are a carefully-hidden secret, but of course Jews own and run it.

Occasionally parts of the truth leak out - as examples, debts for the Second World War were only recently paid by Britain to USA-dwelling Jews; and stories of palettes of banknotes sent to Iraq have vaguely surfaced. People may have been puzzled by the racist Jew nominally in charge of education in Britain, Gove, giving £2 million to Jewish-supporting thugs, and may have wondered where he got the money; probably not from putting in some overtime teaching evening classes on Jewish beliefs!

In the academic world, it's striking that there's a complete absence of theory on the way people who control money have their own agenda.
    Ordinary economics is constructed from a few ideas: and simplified ideas can be misleading, but may be a lot better than nothing. The way supply and demand vary with price (one goes up with price increase, the other goes down) makes sense at a commonsense level; so does marginal utility - the idea that absolute values of utility are generally less relevant (and less measurable) than changes to the current positions of 'utility' of food, water, transport, whatever. 'Comparative advantage' generalises this sort of view to large geographical groups, and to customs unions. Fixed and variable costs are conceptually simple enough. Marginal costs of production give an explanation of profit maximisation points. 'Gresham's Law' (bad money drives out good) attributes the status of 'law' to the fact that most people hold on to more valuable types of money. The 'Quantity Theory of Money' tries to relate inflation or deflation to the amount of money and its rate of circulation. More sophisticated maths applies to (for example) the idea that VAT (a tax on 'added value') is neutral; it is supposed not to affect competitive situations, and the 'proof' uses calculus.
    Surely some adept theoretician out there can find some fairly convincing model of behaviour of paper money issuers whose desire is to maximise?

M3 money supply figures not recorded by Jews However there's simply no discussion of what might be called macrofinancial analysis. People understand (for example) that profit can be made by mass production techniques, and that for example Robert Maxwell and Richard Branson and Richard Desmond based their fortunes on (respectively) mass production of academic yearbooks, vinyl records, and pornography. But people don't understand even the simple mechanisms of large-scale control of money.

Jews have historically made fortunes from funding weapons, controlling countries' money, getting hold of national assets and so on. These activities are vastly important as we can see from Syria, now. I'd guess - there are no figures - about a quarter of the GNP goes on money to Jews, in advertising/ promotion/ support for political parties, influencing all media, corrupting the police and legal and educational systems, paying for thugs; and generally supporting anti-British measures put in place by Jews.

On the whole I approve of the concept of money; there's a lot to be said for it, provided a group is able to support it. It gives blunt solutions to problems which otherwise could continue forever without resolution. But, as with legal systems, it needs a certain amount of honesty in its administration. Nobody, probably, expects powerful people to be completely free from abuse. But when things go beyond a certain point in dishonesty, unfairness, and cruelty, then some sort of reformation is needed. This is the situation we are in now.

It is vitally important to grasp that these people are NOT horrified by waste, in the way normal people are. A new war is wanted?—'money' is instantly made available. The legal system disburses money for tens or hundreds of thousands of freakish cases, from immigrant murderers and absurd race cases, to corrupt family lawyers and ridiculous legal aid cases—normal people are horrified; but THEY make money, now and in future, from these things. Why are fake charities encouraged; why do organisations continue for years, obviously not achieving their supposed aims; why are there expensive 'investigations' which achieve nothing, and 'researchers' in worthless 'think-tanks'? Why are borders not enforced, and aliens paid out of what are claimed to be taxes, but in fact of course are paper money controlled by Jews—so the effect is to offload costs of housing, health, crime &c onto future whites? A huge debt worries ordinary people, when they think about it; but the highest levels of the present money system positively encourages it, because from their viewpoint it's profitable, and does damage to the host society.

Another important issue, counter to most people's learned intuition, is housing. Most people think of housing shortages, rent, mortgage burdens, long-term payments for most of their lives, and perhaps the possibilities of eviction or repossession or homelessness. Not positive feelings. BUT with paper money, Jews can simply buy up such assets: if immigrants flood in, they are regarded as a source of payments from the taxpayer, now and in the future, and also of damage to their societies. Jews regard such things with pleasure.

Let me quote from an earlier piece of mine:

Two Tier System: It's absolutely crucial to understand that we have here a two-tier money system. The issuers of paper money/ e-money have entirely different attitudes from normal banks, and from normal people. From the central bank viewpoint, inflation is good, and wars are good: they need more money, and get more interest, as long as their currency is accepted. If governments waste money, that suits them. If they can exchange their paper or electronic entries for any real assets — houses, businesses, utilities, colleges, factories, newspapers — they benefit; they've got them virtually for nothing. There are obvious hazards here: wars may be lost, for example. But usually that's not their problem.

The two-tier system means they have money in superabundance: any central bank therefore has huge power. If they choose to support any special group, that group will thrive. Historically, news suppliers and distributors (e.g. Reuters, newspapers, TV, film) have been points of attack, but control over education (primary, secondary, syllabuses, teachers, apprentices, universities), and control over law-making and law enforcement (parliaments, judges, police) have been and are important. As a simple example of the two-tier system, consider Google or Youtube. These needed large amounts of equipment and expertise to set up, mediated my money, ultimately in Jewish hands. The technical people are employees, with some power of fighting back; I'd guess the relative objectivity of Google is due to obstinate employees not being happy with full Jewish censorship. Modern credit card money is in a similar position, with huge electronic networks of machinery and buildings, dominated by central banks. Modern political parties are in a similar state, since central bank money can be used to swamp or buy out any opposition. This seems to me a difficulty for schemes (such as Western Spring's) of buying up enclaves of housing: they may spend hundreds of millions on purchases, but in principle the Jewish adjunct to the state can simply print vast amounts of paper and hand them out, free, to groups of aliens, to wreck any such communities.

Varieties of Capitalism: The Marxist view, for want of a better phrase, is that money power rules the workers, who have to sell their labour for as much as they can get. Normal businesses take risks, and may close. But here again, the two-tier system is crucial. Anyone who is in favour with money issuers may get unlimited, easy funding, even if it is economically irrelevant, or harmful. It's not an accident that British supermarkets are owned by Jews, for example. It may be deliberately damaging—harmful products may be produced, Freemasons and Common Purpose and similar secret groups supported, absurd laws passed, murderers may be freed, child abusers protected, drugs deliberately allowed to circulate, education dumbed-down, whole populations planned to be wiped out. The two-tier system extends internationally: if it's decided to close shipyards or coal fields for example, it's simple enough to fund people to damage them, even if there's no good reason for them to go. Thus the BBC praised 'red Robbo' at his death, presumably because he helped international shipbuilders to make more money by closing shipyards in areas like Britain. Jews can easily control exchange rates between currencies they control. Money can be filtered down to Common Purpose whose 'graduates' can collude in for example building projects.

The two-tier system has to be understood. It isn't inevitably harmful: if Jews had amused themselves building country estates, collecting art, donating to good causes, or taking realistic interest rates, it wouldn't have mattered much. Similarly, legal system where there is an attempt to be even-handed are a different matter from the system now, where groups manipulate the system in what they think is their own interest. And similarly, a genuine global order or European Union could be beneficial, though, now, there is a bogus system arranged mainly to benefit Jews and their temporary allies.

Try to think yourself into the frame of mind of Jewish issuers of paper (or plastic, or electronic) money. Most people of course have had a life of worrying about money. If they were offered the chance to run the system, I doubt their first thought would be: great; now I can kill people I don't like, carry out genocides, destroy the education of the horrible goyim, waste money on fake projects while controlling all the advertising; flood unwanted immigrants where I want, and give all my mates money to run their own big businesses and lawyers to make sure they keep it. And yet this is what Jews have done. It's no coincidence that as well as supermarkets, oil companies, banks, property companies, news media, computer companies are fronted by Jews. When they go for a loan, they get it. Probably the same is true of weapons and fake reconstruction projects: Halliburton is no doubt run by Jews, mostly in America; you don't even need to check.

If there are any serious economists in Britain, which I doubt, they should try to work out the effects of control of money. For example, these people love inflation, because it means each year they get more interest. They love waste, because borrowing goes up and they get more interest. They love 'buying' public assets, because they can put the prices up later. They love campaigns to affect share prices, because then they make more money than from useful production. Probably their panic when some small country handles it own money is because they fear visible competition, in the way that revolutionary USA was hated by the British elite: if Libya, Syria, Iran, North Korea manage to do well, they provide a lesson which Jews are perfectly happy to destroy by genocide.

It's something completely different from Kasredin's economics textbook account, where ordinary people fight for money and keep going and succeed, if they're lucky. Probably people of this sort keep much of the everyday world going: farmers, builders, drivers, some teachers, planners, people in distribution and construction and utilities, and the rest. But they are ever-increasingly squeezed by taxation and by public assets being sold almost invisibly; the white world is feeling the pinch.

It's perfectly possible that fairly simple sociological 'laws' would make their activities much more understandable than now, so that, for example, when Jews want war, the underlying mechanisms would be obvious, rather than, as now, mysterious. I do wish academics, or more likely independent writers, would attempt to face the issue of private control of legally-defined money, just as in centuries past the powers of priests and of monarchs were discussed, and then cut back.

Comment from 'anonymous'; but note that credit is discussed, the Gresham-like laws of paper money are not:-
This is one of the most important articles posted on this site - and it deserves to be read and re-read. Rerevisionist's concept of the two-tier system is key towards understanding the power we are dealing with. The two tiers are both quantitatively and qualitatively different.

In the bottom tier, we have the power of money as we conventionally understand it: the power of hard cash (or increasingly, intangible money in bank accounts) to buy things, services, provide loans, pay off debts etc... This is the activity of money that everyone engages in when - for example, buying goods from a supermarket (if I buy German chocolates, for example, I am empowering Germany with my funds, - or at least the workers and shareholders of that company who are probably German...)

In the top tier, we have the power of credit - that is, the power to supply and withdraw enormous amounts of funding to an organization / economy - and thus, to effectively determine its fate. It is this power that lies behind Rothschild's famous quote to the effect that:
    'Give me control of a nation's money, and I care not who makes its laws.'

This is a power that far surpasses the power of the bottom tier - for even a highly profitable firm will find itself in difficulty if its credit lines are cut off. Entire nations can be brought to their knees by the concentrated withdrawal of capital (as we have seen in various financial crises), and likewise, others can be raised to prominence by infusions of it. He who controls the central bank, controls the money supply, and he who controls the money supply, controls the economy. And in our materialistic era, he who controls the economy rules political and social life.

Approximate Quantification:
A point which people may be missing is not just the fractional reserve thing.

There's also the lending to governments (or anyone else). If paper money or plastic etc costs a lot less than the nominal value, an apparently small interest charge is magnified hugely.

Example: Government wants to borrow £500M owing to waste, funding thugs, investing in climate change frauds, or whatever.
Cost of £20 banknote = (say) 20p each. Interest charged to the Chancellor = say 4%. This means each £20 note handed to the exchequer has 80p per year interest charge. (This is 4% of £20).
However each note costs only 20p.
So the actual interest is 400%.

In effect, an order is placed for security printers, for notes worth £500 million; say 25 million £20 notes. The cost is 25 million x 20p, i.e. £5 million. So the security printer gratefully hangs on to one hundredth of the notes his company prints; the others go to the government, and each year there's interest of 4% of the loan, £20 million.
And yet the cost of the entire print run was only £5 million!

Update by 'henrythefifth'
Rev, your article has correctly identified and explained the control the jewish banking usurers have on the money-supply and credit-creation/ withdrawal of many nation states including Britain.

However, your example above isn't quite right. The private banks/Central Bank don't lend actual bank notes and coins to the government at interest; the government issues this money debt and interest-free minus a small printing/minting charge; this is what's known as seigniorage.

The banksters actually lend digital computer-screen money to the government (business, citizens for that matter) for no cost, well, very minimal administration cost. In your example the 4% interest charge would be a 800% return rather than a 400% return for the banking criminals as they are just transferring money and money they don't really have on a computer screen with no cost.

Dear Reader–
If you're interested in economic theory, perhaps you'd like to consider the maximisation of returns to the legal supplier of paper or electronic money? It could be a genuine breakthrough in working out what happens in the world.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Fiat money pushes Jewish destructive urges

Paper Money: Incentive to Harm, and Warrant for Genocide

Written by Rerevisionist 15 September 2013

Norman Cohn's negligible book 'Warrant for Genocide' was probably written in job-application mode; it's an empty work supposedly discussing the 'Protocols of Zion', and it's the sort of thing that still leads to promotion in the corrupt academic shadow world. I remember chatting with a student about it, many years ago. Of course, plenty of Britons had died, some in unpleasant ways - drowned in freezing sea, burnt to death on bombing raids, blown apart by bombs. But obviously Jews were specially singled out. A nasty topic, and one felt sympathy, not knowing at the time that it was a money-making fraud and Jews had murdered many many millions. I'll borrow from the title, though 'warrant' isn't quite the right word. I'm pointing out that paper money, or 'fiat' money in the general sense, can amplify destructive behaviour such as Jews display, nudging them into more destruction and evil.

I was mulling over the problems Jews have in disposing of paper money. It is worthless, except as a legal document; if laws change, it can fall. And they know this more than anyone, certainly more than people in the lower tier of money use. Maybe the Rothschilds have nightmares in which they are removed and replaced; it wouldn't surprise me. On the principle of bad money driving out good, they presumably seek to offload and replace the paper with genuine assets: property, productive industries, valuable products of the past, plus of course media control to hide their activities.

But property is itself dependent on law: if the title deeds are torn up, they may lose their assets. So what follows from that is they prefer changes which they think are in their favour, and which are hard to reverse, or, preferably, irreversible. I think this is one clue to their love of assassination and war. If they can disable or permanently destroy rivals, their paper money has at least made its mark. Similarly with white genocide: ruined populations will probably never recover. Probably also their liking for forcing prostitution where possible on weak countries: black Africans, Russians and Vietnamese being three examples. At a smaller-scale level, it helps account for their love of bombs, damage, demolition, and cultural destruction.

An exception may be if they can find some fortress or stronghold; it wouldn't surprise me if money given as 'aid' is being used to construct new towns in for example the cooler parts of India. There's a tradition of Jews hiding away - many country houses in Britain were and are Jewish, out of reach of Russians, Germans, Africans, and others.

Note: some people may not understand the bases for these comments on Jews. The best authority known to me - in fact, almost the only one - is Michael A. Hoffman, who has single-handedly described and analysed the Talmud and other compilations. He has also rediscovered writings and authors who otherwise are censored into oblivion: Eisenmenger is one. (Eisenmenger wrote in Germany, surveying Jewish practices; Hoffman has published on DVD a scanned-in copy, in the original Gothic face. He has also reprinted an English translation, The Traditions of the Jews, apparently about 40% of the entire original text). Hoffman has also located other writers, including someone called Alexander MacColl about whom I've been unable to find little. (This obituary may be of MacColl, a Gaelic and English theologian and speaker. MacColl was the author of A Working Theology, but this short work has little on Jews). Hoffman uses the word 'Judaics' to refer to the people who call themselves 'Jews', on the grounds there is no evidence for any actual connection.
Comment by ConnalOakesHolt
Probably the single most crucial development to happen in Europe since the issuing of the Reichmark, is Hungary's expulsion of the private bankers. [Note: August 2013- Rerev.] Yet we hear nothing about it in the media. Well no surprise there. Though even if the tactic is to ignore this development in Hungary and impose measures covertly from other nations that trade with Hungary, at some point in the near future Hungary will be either the Rothschilds' nightmare made flesh, or it will have been destroyed via other countries that simply stop trading with her. In the way that the South was defeated in the American civil war when Britain ceased to purchase cotton from them.
    There is of course another factor to consider, and that is the exchange rate mechanism. How does a potential visitor to another country, in this case Hungary, exchange their currency prior to travel if the banks refuse to play ball, which I'm sure they will? There may be other countries willing to barter with Hungary in exchange for goods, but for how long?

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Victorian seaside and Jewish influences

A Day Out: Straws in the Wind and Mental Drag

Written by Rerevisionist 18 September 2013

Time for a break. Let's drive to the seaside. Here we are, at their park n ride. It has an obsolete global-warming wall display (absurdly, right next to plaudits for a local hero, who died years ago breaking speed records in his fossil fuel vehicle).

This town flourished in Victorian times, and up to the 1930s; it still has some of its spirit. Here and there are black and white or sepia photos showing beaches crowded with what now seem overdressed people, all of course whites, native to Europe. It has a significant shopping street, with wide streets, iron pillars supporting external glass protection against rain, and arcades as well as shops, some dating from the era in which local entrepreneurs could build up their very own department store. There are a few buskers. There are some beggars; all of them white. The average age of the people is high.

In conversation with the owner of a very long-established bookshop; I'll call him P. P tells me of a local jeweller, who saved by not being insured; over the years he'd reported a number of break-ins. And yet he never took out insurance. P told me he took years to work out what happened: a fraud officer told him he was operating an income tax scam, pretending he'd lost stock and selling it for cash. We agreed that was clever; and both of us are naive about this sort of thing. I told him there must be a fantastic degree of immigrant-related fraud. He recounted another story: an investigative unit into social security fraud had been closed, despite costing only a few hundred thousand, but saving, ooh, hundreds of billions a year. (Europe is showing signs of inflation psychosis: when Germany had hyperinflation, it's reported that people lost track of numbers; they might report their ages as ten million. I think P was exaggerating; but no doubt he was on the right lines).

So I thought: let me tell P how it is. I pointed out Jews want to cause damage, and it's deliberate policy. Did he know Cameron is a Jew? - Er, no. Does he know paper money is a Jewish racket, as in the Fed and the Bank of England? - Er, no. Did he know about the Talmud? - Er, no. I went on to explain the myth of the 'Cold War', the obvious fact the US could have bombed Cuba, and so on, though of course I might as well have been explaining the periodic table of elements, and its relation to ions, to some mediaeval monk. I left him puzzling over his gas bill and the intricacies of competitive oligarchies and their strategies.

Then a visit to a sidestreet fish and chip place - I'm not sure if the word 'restaurant' is accurate. These have quite a history including entrepreneurial types inventing trawlers, and gas- and electricity-heated frying equipment. The EU deliberately killed off a lot of the fishing; and the law killed off many such shops on grounds of smell, just in time for so-called Indian restaurants to come in. Anyway, here, the average age of the clientele must have begun with a 6 or 7, and they were largely female, after the workings of selective male mortality. Interesting to muse over the total immersion in propaganda of these rather naive people, with their very selective narrow-focus cunning.

I chatted to a person who seemed to be a woman tramp, who told me she has an Open University degree. I asked her if she'd heard the idea, without commenting on whether it's true, that nuclear weapons are a hoax. No. What about Churchill's ancestry? And his advisor Lindemann being a Jew? Eisenhower's death camps? No. Shakespeare authorship? No. A vague memory came to me of a pencilled message on a wall: 'sociology degrees - take one!' with an arrow to a wall-mounted roll of paper...

Evading rain, I found myself attending to a radio, temporarily interrupting shop muzak. The bloke was nervously reading out a carefully-prepared press release, on the great advantages of a government scheme for the region. They would give several hundred million pounds - the exact figure hardly matters; it could anyway easily be exceeded - for several hundred - 400? - new 'homes' which would even bring in jobs! The wonders of paper money. I couldn't help thinking of Arthur Kemp's praise for a tiny white enclave in South Africa; and Western Spring's projects, apparently wanting about the same sum, but to be paid for by lifetimes of income made from work, the remnants of heavy taxation on income, and taxation on spending too, and taxation on anything else feasible. It's perfectly obvious Jewish control of fiat money has to be removed.

Musing on the general effects of immersion in propaganda, looking at the shoppers, and their somewhat illusory generous-spiritedness, it's painfully clear that deceit works in many ways; one is by hiding evils committed by people's own groups. Jewish media kept Eisenhower's death camps secret for about fifty years, but there's no anxiety by most people to factor this into their minds. This is a weakness in The Occidental Observer's website, with its idea whites are genetically benevolent. Here's a short quotation from I F Stone's 'Hidden History of the Korean War', 1950s: 'A napalm raid hit the village three or four days ago when the Chinese were holding up the advance, and nowhere in the village have they buried their because there is nobody left to do so. This correspondent came across one old woman, the only one who seemed to be left alive, dazedly hanging up some clothes in a blackened courtyard filled with the bodies of four members of her family.' That (only a tiny sample of what happened) was more than fifty years ago. The Occidental Observer never mentions anything like that, despite the fact many living Americans know about it, and in fact participated in genocide and rapes.

That is war, at least as practised by Jews. I'm uncertain if whites are so inherently psychopathic as Jews; very likely not. I was amused a few days ago to see a piece on the British resistance site trying to resurrect the Jewish divide-and-rule 'class war' thing, as though blokes grumbling about work and pay constitute 'war'. That isn't war, sonny.

Anyway, I'm thumbing through a recently-bought second hand book, which is a Penguin Special, dated 1965, on 'The Crisis of India', by Ronald Segal, aged about 32 at the time, having spent one trip in India, and presumably thinks he's a Jew. It largely has information on taxes, income, 'estate duty', expenditure, international economic aid, foreign business investment... Out of interest I looked at the adverts in the back, for other Penguin books; and most or all the books were by Jews. Sanctions Against South Africa is one; Segal is listed as having convened 'The International Conference on Economic Sanctions against South Africa'. There's the Berlin airlift - the USSR of course was Jewish run and this must have been some rigged-up event. There's a book by someone called Behr on Algeria; the blurb says almost nothing about Islam. It interested me that Algeria and French evil were promoted in the Jewish media, while atrocities in Vietnam were kept secret, except as an exit strategy at the end. Were Jews involved in promoting war against French settlers? We find a study of Cuba by Scheer and Zeitlin, 'two young American scholars', who, one must assume we are invited to believe, had full information on what happened around Cuba, despite the fact that records are kept secret for decades or centuries. It's fascinating to see the way 'Communism' is attributed to Asians, most of whom would of course have no interest or idea in Manchester cotton mills and British workers insofar as Engels and Marx portrayed them. No doubt they were struggling against Jewish-run America. It's quite funny to read of 'Communist imperialism in South East Asia', as conveyed by the Jew York Times, compared with the facts.

On the total immersion of propaganda, it's fascinating to see the advantage that narrow Jewish race fanaticism has. The traditional view of westerners, and very possibly orientals too, is that the world is best understood by some sort of honesty in debate, coupled with understanding and speculation. But how much simpler to be a fanatic! A serious university investigation into religions is difficult, and needs a wide survey of human hopes and fears and possibilities. The Jewish approach—all non-Jews are scum—is refreshingly simple. What about human relationships? Well—non-Jewish women are all whores, non-Jewish children are sex objects, non-Jewish men should be killed. Again, refreshingly simple! What about history? When Jews were allowed access to universities, what an opportunity to suppress unpleasant facts, to tell lies about long-term rivals, and to distort events; how much more simple than trying to tease out truths, and how much more instinctively satisfying to psychopaths! It must have been similar in London's East End; just keep quiet, and let Jack the Ripper disembowel women! They're all whores, after all! The stupid goy police can do nothing against us, God's chosen! Jewish psychology research for years has been in such topics as how to persuade goyim to accept immigrants; and the Milgram experiment is an anti-white thing, for example. Jewish IQ research of course is purely interested in making goyim as stupid as possible. Jewish politics is simple, too—just tell lies about anything that might advantage the smelly goys. Jewish economics and economic history never mentions Jewish leverage points—the worthless money used to make further money, the bribery and corruption, the militarism, the selective training of more Jewish liars. Jewish broadcasting is about the views of their leaders. And what an advantage fanaticism gives when it comes to everyday life: students of law, considered as a method for dispensing justice, may well find it dull; but when it's thought of as a way to defraud, there's a real motive to get to work. Medical science can be studied as a way to help people; how much more exciting as a money-making scheme! News work may be dull; how much more thrilling, how much more worthwhile, to lie, promote your own tribe, spend your life putting out biased anti-white stuff! Surely the stupid goyim will never notice the most absurd lies, such as that there is no such thing as race!

Anyway, the sun's out here. The sea isn't visible as it's under mist, but the Victorian pier with its suggestion of engineering skill and unimportant pleasures can be seen.

When there was rapid inflation in the early 1970s, people talked of 'fiscal drag' - 25%, say, of new higher figures automatically pulled in more money, at least in a numerical sense. For want of a better phrase, why not consider 'mental drag', the way people cannot update to take in new information? We have a long long way to go.

Recently talking to University educated middle class types, I'm struck by the brick wall in their minds when you get onto the subject of immigration & don't mention the Jews!
    They say there's always been immigration & don't see any negatives. When they hit 50 I bet some if not all will find it difficult to get work. Already I have met students with degrees who can't get anything but a part time semi skilled job, they're already taking second place in the job queue.

The standard way to remove phobias, for example of spiders, is to first, expose the person to tiny spiders a long way off; explain the habits of spiders; and slowly progress to normality. Presumably this works removing Jewish discussion phobia. Though there's something to be said for the blunt approach, too, which I try to use.

I had lunch with a woman today and we discussed, inter alia, why African poverty and general failure seem immutable. I pointed out that low average IQ and high testosterone levels undoubtedly were huge contributory factors. She quite literally broke out in a sweat and gasped 'I don't want to discuss this any more'. The depth and effectiveness of the programming is astonishing.
    Incidentally, she made numerous telephone calls afterwards among the relevant circle complaining about my bigotry and how devastated she was. She also, and this is interesting, blatantly lied about what I actually said.
Agree about treason, but I don't put this dupe in that class. It's the likes of Alan Shatter, the "Irish" [sc. Jewish - rerev] Minister for Population Replacement who are the traitors to me.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Update added Aug 2017: Simple genetic model of blacks: For countless generations, what evolved into human beings must have had minimal ability to think, plan, predict. And Africa has ecological systems which combine an easy climate with difficulties—fast-growing deadly insects, animals, parasites; and little defensive space from competitors. Any human evolution in Africa would have faced such conditions. I'd like to suggest the well-known phenomenon of blacks looting stores in the USA with no apparent understanding that the items had to be made, shipped, stored, paid for, may be genetic, a pattern established over hundreds of thousand of years, described as "gib me dat" combined with "chimping out".
Update added Dec 2015: Dr. E. Michael Jones discusses his piece "Soros or Cyrus: The Violent Legacy of the Black/Jewish Alliance." Jewish support for the Civil Rights Movement [Harlem Renaissance, NAACP, Gunnar Myrdal of An American Dilemma, 1944] was an attempt to turn black Americans into revolutionaries. When that project failed in the late 1960s, the CIA and Hollywood went to work producing a series of "blaxploitation" films [Shaft, Superfly] promoting criminal behavior and sexual promiscuity among black youth with the goal of destroying the already weakened black family. The militarization of the USA's police departments and the creation of a black "lumpenproletariat" are part of a divide-and-conquer strategy by the likes of George Soros and including Trayvon Martin, Ferguson, 'Black Lives Matter', proxies in Syria.  (Click to play; 48 mins audio 1 min music intro from Renegade Tribune )
Jones's interpretation may be subtly wrong: the NAACP (='National Association for the Advancement of Colored People') was not 'supported' by Jews: it was established, set up, and run by Jews, just as much as the 'ADL' (='Anti-Defamation League') was Jewish, and had its own aims, unrelated to 'Dafamation'.

How Jews Use Blacks

Written by Rerevisionist 15 November 2013.   Supplements Dec 2014 and Nov 2015, Dec 2015, Apr 2016, Aug 2017.

A south African on Jews and African blacks. (Click to play; 11 mins)
Update Added December 2014: Colin Flaherty became well-known in 2012, with his book White Girl Bleed a Lot: The return of racial violence and how the media ignore it which seems to have been published by WMD, though www.wmd.com clearly seems to be part of the Jewish media. This may explain why Flaherty seems never to raise the issue of Jewish censorship, though he must know of Jewish media ownership and Jewish attitudes. White Girl Bleed a Lot says it's based on internet research since 2010; his website seems to have started in 2007, and Youtubers email videos and video link to his site. His 'Flaherty Communications' started in 1993.
    Update April 2016: About a dozen videos by Flaherty banned by Youtube.
    The point of Flaherty's information is to simply list violent black-on-white crimes and incidents, and in passing comment on such things as official classifications by race (Jews omitted?/ Hispanics called 'white' when the aim is to inflate white crime figures) and selective media reporting, so that murdered whites are ignored, just as happens in South Africa. And similar events in education (black history lies) and politics and law ('Bronx juries', 'snitches and stiches', 'positive discrimination' of badly-qualified blacks).
Figures for Youtubes of Black crimes in USA with number of 'views' and starting date. These sites were found just by simple looking around; there are others.
Marlend Xhafaj
Crime Watcher
Colin Flaherty
ExposingThe KnockoutGame  
Joined 29 May 2009
Joined 22 Mar 2010
Joined 12 Oct 2010
Joined 22 Jan 2011
Joined 25 Jun 2011
Joined 29 Oct 2011
Joined 20 Dec 2011
Joined 17 Jan 2012
Joined 19 Mar 2013
Joined 18 Feb 2014
    The aim results from what may be the Jewish genetic hostility to whites, and the Jewish genetic tendency to cunning attacks to divide and rule. Blacks are exposed to fake history and generally led to believe whites have and do oppress them. (Jewish ownership of cheap high-rent housing is not mentioned). Rap music, gun use and so on are encouraged though in a way ideally targeted only at blacks. It's not very different from Jewish propaganda aimed at whites when Jews want war: when the US was in Vietnam any amount of mass murder and cruelty was justified by the Jewish media, and to this day there are whites who still don't understand this. In the Second World War, US comics were regarded as almost bestial [beast-like], targeted in the same way. The novelty here is that Jews are targeting a population which shares news space with the other population. This isn't like Germans and Britons, Americans and Japanese etc etc.
    Anyway, Flaherty has a popular approach and has been (as far as I know) infinitely more successful than others publishing statistical analyses with careful breakdowns of figures. But at the price of omitting the Jewish controls behind the scenes.
    Update: Dont Make the Black Kids Angry is Flaherty's follow-up book, published 1 March 2015. A lot of material on the US school system, such as it is. With emphasis on media liars and school administrator liars. But his youtube hit rates, at the time of writing, are not very high.
Jews and Blacks in the USA: added November 2015. 'I've heard it said that blacks growing up in northern ghettos saw only five whites the Irish cop, the Jewish landlord, the Jewish grocer, the Jewish social worker and the Jewish teacher. The Chosen had a nice, profitable racket ministering to the poor. No wonder blacks turned on them. What did the Chosen really think—that the blacks didn't know the Jews made money from their poverty?' (Instauration, Oct 1989). Note the omission of the 'Fed': Jews made money from blacks from the control of paper money, and the things it can buy.

Norway - Jewish publishing - immigrant violence Two state funded Norwegian media figures claim that white Norwegians deserve to be victims of crime at the hands of non-white immigrants. - was a story on several websites over several days. The book (see the cover design) title means Uninvited Guests.

' ... Arild Opheim and Elin Ruhlin Gjuvsland are longtime 'journalists' and hosts for the far-left taxpayer funded NRK. This is Norwegian State TV and radio [i.e. presumably their equivalent of the BBC]. Two years ago, two illegal aliens from North Africa broke into their house. They were attacked and robbed. ...' is a typical summary. It's not stated whether the authors are Jews, though it seems likely - Opheim for example looks like Oppenheimer. Their book appears to be published by a conventional (i.e. Jewish-controlled) publisher; its title appears not to be new, but recycled from music or some other source. In view of the Jewish inclination to tell lies, I'd guess the whole incident may have been invented. However, here, let me repaste two commenters' remarks, then comment on their common misunderstandings:-

Commenter 1 Racists! As Elin put it, she came dangerously close to buying the theory "that immigrants are just coming here to exploit us, that we have to make sure that there won't want be too many of them, and that we're going to be overpopulated with certain nationalities in fifty years." She'd begun to worry that thanks to lax immigration policies, there was "going to be massive crime so that we're not safe in our own city." In short, she was on the brink: "I thought: 'Damn it, is this going to turn me into a racist?'"

Pause for a moment and ponder that statement. "I thought: 'Damn it, is this going to turn me into a racist?'" Note, especially, the implied definition of "racist" - namely, someone who has a realistic understanding of current criminal statistics, of reasonable demographic projections, and of the less-than-noble motivations of many "non-Western immigrants."

But Arild and Elin's story ends in victory. To be sure, Elin admits that she's more scared now than before about her children's everyday security. But, she affirms triumphantly, "we haven't become racists." Au contraire! Thanks to those men who climbed in their window, physically abused them, and threatened their lives, she and Arild have become first-class dhimmis. As they wrote in their op-ed, they now agree with what one of their uninvited guests told them:

Yes, we are getting what we deserve... . We're getting what we deserve because of Norway's, and Europe's, immigration policies. Because they're too strict.

Yep, you read that right: Europe's immigration policies, which have transformed the continent in the blink of an eye, are "too strict."

Let me just mention Elin Krantz, a murdered Swedish woman. An analogous case. And Michela Eklund. And a video 'Mix It Up'.

Commenter 2 "Amy Elizabeth Biehl, by all accounts a talented, intelligent woman, arrived in South Africa in 1993 as an exchange student on a Fulbright Fellowship and was continuing her Ph.D. studies in political science at the mainly Black University of the Western Cape. She left Stanford, where she had received her earlier degrees, for South Africa with anti-racialist political objectives in mind. She wanted to fight apartheid, which she passionately opposed, and accordingly spent much of her time registering Black voters in South Africa's first all-race elections, scheduled for April of 1994, which would hand over political control of the country to its Black majority.

Biehl would have acknowledged, openly and proudly, that she was working against her own race and on behalf of another race, the Black race. That was the principal ideological source of her now celebrated idealism. She wanted to fight White "racism"; she wanted to help its supposed Black victims.

On August 25, 1993, Biehl was driving three Black companions through Cape Town's Guguletu Township. A mob of toyi-toying supporters of the Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC), fresh from a raucous political meeting, attacked her car, pelting it with stones and smashing its windows while shouting "One settler, one bullet," a PAC slogan popular among South African Blacks, "settler" being a synonym for a White South African. Biehl was struck in the head with a brick and, bleeding heavily, dragged from her vehicle. As she tried to flee, stumbling, across the road, she was surrounded by a throng of Blacks who repeatedly kicked, stoned, and stabbed her. The fatal wound, among many, came from a knife, buried to its hilt, that entered under her ribs and ended in her heart.
Four of Biehl's assailants, from among the dozen or so who attacked her, were arrested and convicted, but in July of 1998, in the wake of apartheid's demise, they were released from prison, on the ground that the motive for her murder had been political. The killers had believed that her death would help end apartheid, Desmond Tutu's Truth and Reconciliation Commission concluded. She was, as the Commission further observed, simply a representative White in the wrong place at the wrong time. As one of the killers testified: "We were in very high spirits and the White people were oppressive; we had no mercy on the White people. A White person was a White person to our eyes."

Amy's father, demonstrating how thoroughly he shared his daughter's anti-racialist convictions, shook hands with her murderers and encouraged their release. Peter Biehl told reporters: "We hope they will receive the support necessary to live productive lives in a non-violent atmosphere. In fact, we hope the spirits of Amy and of those like her will be a force in their new lives." Two of the freed killers were, however, subsequently accused of rape, a common pastime in the "New South Africa," and have since fled prosecution; Amy's parents selflessly assumed the White man's burden and befriended the other two. Doubtless Amy herself would have befriended her father's killers, had he been killed by a Black mob instead of her. Such is the nature of anti-racialist idealism: It thrives on the most outrageous violations of normal human loyalties."

-"It was the television reports that got to me. I remember very clearly watching the ABC News reports on the trial of the men who had stoned and stabbed Biehl to death as she begged for her life. The courtroom was packed with the relatives and friends of the accused, who had to be admonished by the judge over and over to maintain order during the proceedings. The ABC newsman focused on one dramatic event during that day's testimony. As a witness for the prosecution described in detail Biehl's begging while a knife was being driven into her chest down to the hilt, the black women in the crowd began to laugh and perform a mocking ululating while a few performed mock begging motions. The black men yowled in glee and the entire courtroom broke out into hysterics as the black crowd mocked this white girl's final moments."

Jewish fake news involving blacks
Typical U.S. TV Jewish 'news': spokesman reads his lines, running through his script, incidents chosen as examples: Ferguson .. New York City .. Baltimore .. and now Charleston .. the President [Jewish puppet, Obama] .. violence against African Americans...
Both commenters have misunderstood the dynamics. It's important they should be understood:-

[1] Do the authors of 'Uninvited Guests' really believe what they say? Jews are possibly the most tribal and race-minded group of people on the planet. Obviously, their motivation is to wreck Norway. There's no suggestion they want the Jews who control the media, and the Jews printing money, and the Jews making absurd laws, to give what they have to foreigners, to whites, to blacks, or to Norwegians. In particular, they are not offering Israel to immigrants. They only want to be generous with other peoples' lives and countries. Arguably, this is genetic, and a grossly hypertrophied instinctive reaction: they simply can't help being hostile to their hosts, even if the result will be a disaster for possibly both.
(2) In the Biehl case, the commenter says 'she would have acknowledged, openly and proudly, that she was working against her own race and on behalf of another race, the Black race.' This is not true. Jews think of themselves as a race, specially chosen by God, or G-d, or Jehovah. They hate white races. Her motive was to encourage blacks to kill whites, even though this would wreck their country.

What Biehl implicitly said (no doubt in an American Jewish accent) was something like this: "Look, I hate whites. I want them all dead. What they did to us, oy vey. Some of them even had the chutzpah to fight us after we murdered tens of millions of them! I want you blacks as allies! Obviously I don't think you're equal to us chosen people. Don't get the wrong idea. In fact, we know perfectly well you're no competition! We want to offer you lifetimes of work (at minimum wage) and steal your lands so we can make fortunes out of you! We want to introduce what we, laughingly, call 'democracy' here! We know you can't understand the issues, that's why! We've used the same formula before. So be a nice bunch of inferior blacks and help us get rid of real whites! That's why I'm here being given a lot of money by American taxpayers and Jewish 'trusts' to study you simple folk and call myself doctor! We want apartheid gone - but of course I'm not going to campaign in Israel to get rid of their racist policies! I'm not going to campaign against Jewish rabbinical racism!"

He's a link to a video of a Jewish TV news report; it shows (1 minute in) what seems to be a Jewish teacher in New York City, punched by one of a mob of blacks. Most blacks identify Jews as whites, as a result of Jewish media control, of course. Also as a result of Jewish media control they have been taught - if that's the right word for a mental diet of Jewish violent junk TV, film, cartoons etc - and slogans such as 'black lives matter' - that whites have deprived and exploited them.

Knockout - The Game of Punching Out Random [sic; this means white] Strangers

So here we have (if the TV piece is true) a manipulator manipulated. Exquisite irony. Perhaps he'll be damaged for the rest of his life, a bit like tens of thousands of white South Africans, except that they were murdered.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Protocols translations

Protocols of Zion and the Mysterious Case of the Missing Genre

Written by Rerevisionist   19th November 2013

The debates about, and the organisation, of Jewish plans must have needed secret meetings: synagogues, masonic meeting-places, Rothschild mansions, ghetto hovels, rooms at Bilderberger hotel get-togethers, the Pentagon, editors' offices, homosexual clubs in the USA: all no doubt hosted such plots. There would be no published minutes, and very likely no minutes of any kind; but probably there would be oaths, and secret documents in Hebrew. There's plenty of scope for imaginative reconstructions. The only work of this genre known to me is the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Personally I like the theory that they were a summary jotted down by the Tsarist police, or supplied by some informer. However, there must have been precursors - 1789 ('French Revolution'), 1848 (European Revolutions), and of course earlier still. Just as buildings need drawings, plotters need plans. The Frankfurt School Jewish material, certainly authentic, is strikingly similar.

Literature of this sort, including plays, is of course suppressed, at least in the English language: there are 18th and 19th century writers, for example Peacock and W H Mallock, who make a vague stab at conspiratorial discussions; I would guess France and Germany should have more—it wouldn't surprise me to learn that Mozart's operas had Jewish references, and Goethe's Faust. Jew Süss is a modern novel based in the 18th century.

Needless to say, perhaps, the Jewish media has endless junk programming about traditional enemies (all types of whites - surly, vicious Germans, effete French, harmless English buffoons, Slav murderers), plus enemies of the moment - Arabs, Iranians, Cubans, whatever. And friends who can be used, typically at present blacks and hispanics.

This is a hint or suggestion, a seed which I hope will flourish, growing into schools of serious artistic reconstruction of events such as the Jewish coup in Russia. If it's any help, here's my one-act play on the decision to invent the 'atomic bomb' hoax: Oppenheimer, Groves, Slotin, Spaatz get together in 1945.


[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Inappropriate Politeness

Written by Rerevisionist 5 Dec 2013

Just a short note suggested by a 1948 book, available on Internet as a long PDF download, The Tragedy of Anti-semitism, presented as an exchange of letters between A K Chesterton and Joseph Leftwich; published by Robert Anscombe.

These two met, or met again, as officers fighting in Somaliland and Abyssinia. It's interesting to read of such then-recent issues as the Marconi Scandal, Bernard Baruch in the USA, Nesta Webster's books notably on the French Revolution, racial types and the effect or otherwise of education on them, the British Empire, the UNRRA (supposedly for Refugee Relief), Zionism and Palestine, and the extermination of Jews (insisted upon by Leftwich), between two men, neither very bright, both victims of intensive propaganda.

There are ten rather dull chapters and a maximum of rather forced politeness. At this distance, it is easy to spot Leftwich inserting traditional Jewish lies and their modern equivalents. However, my point here is that Chesterton (brother of G K Chesterton) 'fought' (in the modern, industrialised war sense) the Germans and Italians without the remotest investigation into their case. Where is his book 'The Tragedy of Anti-Germanism'? Where is his unbiased examination of the justice of war against Hitler? Why does he assume that Jews fighting for Britain were 'gallant and distinguished', whereas William Joyce 'did his country abominable wrong'? Chesterton isn't easy to analyse, as of course the entirety of British media and the BBC were against him. He might have asked Germans for their account of the genesis of the war, if he could speak German; he might have asked the German embassy, if he could have found anyone uncowed; he might have used German press cuttings, rather than British, if he could read German. But he probably had no easy way of finding out how the most recent war was provoked. He was one of the 'sheeple', but this expression is misleading; a better animal analogy would be something like one of the cocks in a cock fight, or one of the dogs in bear-baiting. It's a pity Chesterton wasn't a more forceful and intelligent character.

Footnote: reading a piece by Kevin MacDonald on receiving the 'Jack London Prize', I see he said: " ... I greatly admire Jews as a group that has pursued its interests over thousands of years ..." which (apart from the probable mistake, the omission of the historically recent money scam, and the assumption the 'spectacular success' will continue) shows a similar overbalancing on the side of politeness.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Vietnam invasion

How White is White Violence?

Written by Rerevisionist 5 Dec 2013

A short note suggested by many consciously white authors, such as the evolutionalist Kevin MacDonald, and a host of online commentators on white races. An evolutionary view is that whites, because of the need to survive in a rather unfriendly world of cold dark winters and irregular crops and hardship, evolved inventiveness, foresight, co-operation where needed, and teaching of children. They are therefore decent people who are instinctively reluctant to reject newcomers, since there's a long-established unconscious feeling that the non-humanised world can be fatal to them. And they keep pets, and feel romantic attachments.

Whatever may have been the case in the vast stretches of time of the remote past, the last century showed that many whites are perfectly capable of sadistic behaviour. Here's some information on Vietnam giving some information. The First and Second World Wars and Korea (where every single village was bombed by white Americans) shows that the truth is not so simple. Many Americans have no idea of their involvement in mass murders and genocide. The Jewish-controlled media censor it, since they are solely concerned with tribal affairs. I would guess that in perhaps fifty years there will be exhibitions of old snaps taken by GIs in Vietnam, raping women, disembowelling children, and so on, in New York Jewish galleries. In my view, the US veteran organisations and so on would do better to be honest, since truth has its own momentum and value. The question here is: How much of white violence is white? To what extent was Kissinger and the Fed controllers and other Jews responsible, considered separately from the career Generals and USAF operators and the simpleton GIs? That's the important question when considering Jews, war, and the future of the USA.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

GULag hell Trotsky Lenin

Reparations to Whites from Jews, for Vast, Possibly Incalculable, Damages

Written by Rerevisionist 5 Dec 2013

At some time in future it is fairly likely (not certain) that assessments will be made for damages by Jews. Obvious examples include the 9/11 fraud, Vietnam, Iraq, Israel and so on; going back in time, the extortions fed by 'Holocaust' lies are another example; general financial fraud stemming from Jewish control over issue of money, as well as smaller frauds (but still huge by the standards of individuals) are another. Science frauds are equally fairly likely to be exposed and investigated.

Going back in time, aristocracies (British, French, German, Russian) since the time of the French Revolution might awaken to possibilities of restitution. So might descendants of workers, peasants, victims.

There will be a tendency to think in terms of money; but by then it will certainly be clear that money is a variable and uncertain standard, and I'd suggest that assets will have to be taken back from Jews on huge scale. After all, they know perfectly well their fiat money is worthless, and use it whenever possible to get hold of assets of all types.

Judging by the experience of Iceland, investigators will not at first seem very qualified for the job. But they will soon learn and accumulate good people.

Assets are one thing, and lives another. Since Jews have shown no hesitation in mass killings, and more and more terrible facts about the USSR are likely to be discovered in future, suggestions will be made to kill or remove upper tiers of Jews. It's impossible as far as I know to predict what will happen. Personally I would favour strong surgical irreversible action.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


Jews 1: Jewish 'Sayanim' & Liars, Trolls, Nudgers, Reputation Managers, Parasites

Written by Rerevisionist 5 Dec 2013

A newish aspect of mechanised verbal person manipulation is 'reputation management', yet another pseudo-profession hanging from Google, which still maintains its supremacy, no doubt based on Jewish cheap money and non-Jewish skill. The technique hangs from the first page of Google results; post more and more material, adjust the wording, and after a time the target site sinks. If some undesirable item shows up here, people may pay to depress it; just the second page will often do. It's still there, but less obvious. This may be called 'reverse optimisation'. Free sites like 'Twitter' can be loaded with favourable items competing for search engine space. Corrupt lawyers, people caught in flagrante delicto, various types of failure, can, with luck, be displaced from the follow spotlight by subsequent planted messages. What might previously have relied on letters to editors or lunches and gifts instead scents the world of binary electric charges. The same technique is applied to more serious matters.

'Sayanim' is a modern adaptation of the plural of what is presumably an older word, sayan. It's supposed to mean more or less unofficial assistants, dotted around the world, to Mossad, itself supposed to be Israeli.

Here's a glimpse into the fervid world of these pre-scientific liars: Sayanim & Hasbarat.

And here's an insight (three pages, lots of information) into the 'James Randi Educational Foundation' which poses as a 'skeptics' group. In fact, it accepts Jewish rubbish as true, relying on unimportant material (dowsing, ESP, second sight, creationism, homoeopathy, cold reading...) for its staple diet of attacks. There are many similar and analogous sites, all of course without commentary on Jewish history and activity. I removed 'spoonbending' from my list as Uri Geller thinks he's a Jew; presumably 'Randi' is careful what he says about that.

Their techniques include trolling and simple lying. Many 'controversial' sites are Jewish fronts; with practice and intelligence, these aren't hard to spot: whatever the topic, whatever the relevance, Israel, Jews, the 'holocaust', pop up, wearyingly unaccompanied by truth and accuracy. Often the point is to promote some current Jewish mania: homosexual sex, war against Syria, trying to disarm Americans, etc. Many comments to would-be controversial sites are of this form: they weaken and damage their parent sites, but the moderators are often not competent to query them. The BNP website is an example of poorly-weeded commentary, though it's a bit unfair to single it out.

These are verbal equivalents of fake image processing: subsidiary to the really big liars, but real and present. Most of the examples above are from 2012; since then, there's been publicity for Hasbarat, presumably with a different plural ending, and meaning something like 'helpers'. There seems to be an inferior grade of liar who, judging by published comments, are paid peanuts for their 'work'. Like the unexpected phone calls: "Can I speak to the owner. My name is James. ..." 'hasbarat' are easily recognised after a bit of practice.

Possibly, as time moves on, 'truth adulteration' will be seen as a marker of the 20th century, just as adulteration of food was widespread in the Victorian era.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


Jews 2: Jews and Unions

Written by Rerevisionist   6 Dec 2013

Just as there's a simple image projected for Jew-controlled political parties, so unions usually have a simple message for their members. And most members seem not to question their unions: Why do they never seem to get anything? Why are they losing jobs overseas? What's happened to all their dues?

The theory I'm suggesting here, to be tested in the world, is that Jewish control of finance is easily enough to buy 'leaders' of unions—'leaders' in quotes because their role is to obey orders. This of course may have economic effects, and these can and should be studied. (See ... Deliberately Missing Economic Theory above (click back-arrow to return here) for the parallel in 'high finance'). One obvious point is that Jews straddling several countries can play with unions in those countries. Suppose, for example, as happened in the 1930s, that there are deemed to be too many ships. A secret agreement may determine who gets the orders, and who doesn't. This seems to have been a standard post-war pattern in all white countries. As an example, the BBC gave prominence to the death of 'Red Robbo', someone who had damaged the British car industry and whose role looks like that of someone paid to wreck the industry. Earlier, the BBC gave prolonged coverage to coal miners' strikes at the time of Thatcher, with, of course, no information at all on the technical details of coal. In such cases, a serious researcher ought to tease out Jewish influence.

Another point is control at a union level of beliefs. In the UK, the biggest union by membership appears to be 'Unite', once called 'Unison'; its membership includes a miscellany of not very educated workers in not very important, but often subsidised, public sector jobs and pseudo-jobs. The NUT (teachers), NUS (students), NUJ (journalists) all have, or often had, Jewish 'leaders' who of course are groomed, like MPs, for their roles, generally anti-white, anti-white education, anti-white rights, housing, everything. The union rule books all prohibit serious discussion of topics recognisable as Jewish related or to do with Jewish frauds. The actors union, 'Equity', has the same policy. These things are far easier to check than they were before Internet; any serious researcher ought to spend time checking them. And they might check the obviously race-based unions - incredibly, black lawyers, black police etc are permitted unions.

The analogous situation applies to people who don't regard themselves as workers: the Civil Service, the secret Common Purpose organisation based on the Communist Party, University Teachers' organisations, Church of England clergy, the Army, the General Medical Council, the BBC, the Bank of England, employees of whatever the 'Crown Agency' is now called, police and prison staff, all have assorted rules and traditions, worth studying for their Jewish-influenced absurdities.

And of course there are groups where Jewish influence is simply bought: news agencies were bought out long ago; newspapers ditto; radio and TV later; advertising agencies typically follow a Jewish agenda, for example intentionally including mixed races and immigrants.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


Jews 3: Jews and Fake Information

Written by Rerevisionist   6 Dec 2013

A short note, not on the Jewish controlled media (newspapers, BBC, radio, books), but on the more subterranean organisations which work to publish lies and channel money to issues believed by Jews to benefit them, mainly of course, at present, by damaging whites.

These are worth investigating for several reasons known to me: (1) Monitoring and auditing is not very competent; there are too many charities and there may be little income in checking them; (2) They are not subject to Freedom of Information enquiries, so information can be hidden; (3) Their objects can be very vague; (4) For political reasons, they can get away with race based activities. (5) They give the appearance of being non-profit, when in fact almost all of money they get never arrives at the supposed destination(s).
    The trick is to try to identify their overall activity: for example, I read a summary of a charity - it arranges for immigrants to receive housing and money at the expense of locals, gets public money, and is classified as non-political. I read of another which poses as an educational charity, but caters only for genetically defective Jews.
    'Think tanks'
A good source here is the so-called Frankfurt School of German Jews. Click the link to find lists of targets. These include attacking the family, promoting abortion for whites, corrupting the legal system to introduce uncertainty, and several other things. Many nominally independent think tanks are Jewish funded, often via immigrant boards of the poorly-qualified, and their work consists of publishing and promoting Frankfurt-style objects. Many campaigns which get a lot of Jewish media publicity are backed by organisations of this type: for example the 'look say' method of reading (to damage young children's education), fluoridation campaigns (to damage drinking water), campaigns to free dangerous criminals, race-based campaigns such as the Stephen Lawrence 'Trust', campaigns for paedophilia and pornography, campaigns to selectively house immigrants, and so on.
    Here's just a very small amount of reading material: reviews from the 1960s to 2000s of Koestler: Hanged by the Neck (Jewish campaign against capital punishment when whites are victims), British Race Relations (included here in a group of reviews removed by Amazon), a race campaign by the 'Race Relations Board' to promote unwanted immigration, L Dominelli: Anti-Racist Social Work, a Social Services campaign to pretend blacks aren't racist, and an account of 'The Stephen Lawrence Enquiry', on pressure group policing.
    Educational and Research Foundations
The main points of educational 'research' at present are (1) To pretend there are no difference between people especially races, (2) To hide any serious evidence on education, (3) To leave Ivy league/Public School style organisations alone except as regards Jewish funding, (4) To prevent children/ pupils/ students from developing critical thought and independent judgment.
    So, for example, research into race is effectively banned, and evidence is never produced. When did you ever see photostats or copies of written efforts by black children, for example? They are kept secret because there are terrifying implications for the future of illiteracy and innumeracy, and of fathomless ignorance.
    Fake 'Skeptics' Groups
I've looked at these above (see e.g. notes on the 'James Randi Educational Foundation'. The object here is to feed an official line, while pretending to follow free thought and truth-seeking agenda. It's curious to see the brittle self-confidence of the people paid to post in these junk forums.
    Political Change Promoters (including Sex)
Worth noting, as a specific part of the Frankfurt School, is promotion of abnormal sex. The recent (late 2013) promotion of 'same sex marriage' in many countries (12? 20?) is clear proof of international behind-the-scenes activity. This is part of the Jewish agenda, which it shares with Islam, to reduce and remove the age of consent, so any children can be buggered and raped. It's curious to see supposed feminists saying nothing about these schemes. And it's curious to see Archbishops and politicians saying nothing about anal sex, despite its risks, but Britain's Jewish Prime Minister, David Cameron, has made no attempt to establish an inquiry.

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


Jews 4: Jews and Wars Considered as Jewish Cock Fights

Written by Rerevisionist   6 Dec 2013

Considering the psychology of fights... At the start of the First World War, there was mass exultation; many young people rushed to join up. Or so the story goes; the media said so. But of course the media are not unbiased: the Jewish media then had a long tradition of insulting Russia, and a shorter tradition of insulting Germany. Fast forward half a century; consider the USAF and young American killers let loose on peasants given no option but try to fight back. The media (under of course full Jewish control) keep activities censored as much as in eastern Europe after 1945. To this day naive people discuss whether the USA 'won' or 'lost' in Vietnam. I found a comment on domestic.com about Vietnamese as 'dangerous animals'; I had an email about destruction of villages, 'fun at the time'; I saw a TV thing, probably BBC, a 'veteran' saying he 'never liked the Vietnamese'. Anyway, in modern wars, most of the people had little idea what they were fighting for, though the defenders were probably more clued up: for example the Germans had faced declarations of war by Britain, twice. My best guess is that the Vietnam 'War' was purely to make money for Jews (just as Johnson bombing the Liberty was Jewish). Hence the huge expensive bases, the leisurely winding-down, the tonnage of bombs (more than the whole of the Second World War), the drug and prostitution sidelines, the loss of aircraft to be replaced, and no doubt the currency control by Jews.

The Jewish tradition was to supply credit to both, or all, sides. This sort of investment is far larger than mere small beer investments. (Many people, for example George Bernard Shaw, thought wars start when interest rates are low, though without identifying a convincing reason). After the Federal Reserve, paper credit could be extended more or less ad lib; the effects would be felt later, as the currency became less and less valuable. In effect, it's a modernised form of corn clipping, with dead 'goyim' providing the decorative background.

Cockfights are arranged with trained birds, preened and fed, fitted with metal spurs. The amused spectators watch them slice each other up; not that different from gladiators, or from two Africans, each armed with a car axle, forced to fight. Tens of thousands of U boat sailors died; tens of thousands of allied pilots; and these figures are nothing compared with the hecatombs in eastern Europe. No doubt to Jewish amusement, and bets on the side.

Let me repeat a crucial point here. Most people in the Christian tradition consider war is a last option, a grave decision, something not to be undertaken lightly. They refuse to believe business people want to make money from war. From some online comment: 'Both Haig and Churchill must have known they were sending men to their deaths. It's a tough decision.' The point is, the Jewish attitude is unambiguous: the goyim are animals and deserve death, theft and prostitution. For Kissinger, for Churchill, for neo-cons, it is an easy decision which they favour: goyim get killed, Jews make money!

Maybe there will come a time where every few years a secret lottery will take place to pick a territory, and declare war against it (if anyone still bothers to 'declare war'): New Zealand? Texas? Algeria? Kyrgyzstan? Sumatra? Uruguay? Zambia? to be made an outlaw. For a few years any bombing, shelling, strafing, plunder will be permitted. If this sounds crazy, is it any crazier than allowing a clique of Jews to do much the same thing?

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]


Jews 5: Jewish Hatred for Whites

Written by Rerevisionist   1 July 2014

Some sample quotations and claimed quotations, to illustrate the hatred of Jews for whites. This is usually well-hidden; gullible people tend not to believe such things, which is a good reason for researchers, historians, Biblical and Talmudic scholars, to collect evidence and also list approved Jewish stratagems, such as 'kill the best'. (This may have been done in the past, perhaps by isolated 19th century thinkers; or by, for example, Germans. If so it's been buried). If you know about e.g. Deuteronomy, the Talmud and annotations, bibliographies on Jews, and the Quran perhaps, why not co-operate on a compendium of Jewish malice and its techniques? This would certainly cast light on present-days Jewish policies. Please!
The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone—its ideologies and inventions—which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of of life itself.
    – 1966 Susan Sontag (seems to be a genuine quotation. Sontag knew nothing about science, however. But she must have known about Kissinger's Jewish wars—such as in Vietnam—where chemical warfare 'upset the ecological balance').
"Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races.. .... as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves."
    – 1982. Israeli Prime Minister and murderer Menachem Begin, allegedly in a speech to the Knesset. (There's considerable dispute over the authenticity of this speech. But I haven't seen anyone point out that it presumably was in Hebrew, and recorded in print, and is therefore very unlikely to be verbatim English! On balance I'd guess this is a genuine translation).
The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists. Of course we expected bewilderment from people who still think of race as biology.
    – 1992 Noel Ignatiev, in some obscure probably defunct Harvard waste of paper. (This seems to be the only famous quotation from Ignatiev. It seems to be genuine, part of the phoney Jewish Boasian 'science').
'There is no place in Europe for ethnically pure states. That's a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition it into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states'.
    – 1999. 'General Wesley Clark', whose real name appears to be Wesley Benjamin Jacob Canne Nemerovsky. (A genuine statement from a bomber).
I don't like [white men]. I want them to be a lost species in a hundred years
    – 2008 Y Alibhai-Brown, I think not a Jew. (From Uganda, and expelled by Idi Amin, though instead of returning to her country she was unfortunately allowed into Britain).
"The English are hardly worth saving as a race"
    – 2009 Attributed to Jack Straw, a Jewish politician. (Straw was part of the group responsible for forcing unwanted immigration into England. Whether he actually said this seems doubtful; there is something similar in Hansard, but, frankly, who cares).
hate crimes excluding jews
Genuine photo of 'hate crimes' taken in a window of a Jewish hate office ('hate incident reporting centre') 10 Sept 2015 in Southport, England. Note there is no mention of Jewish hate—Talmudic hate of whites.
I think there's a resurgence of antisemitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned how to be multi-cultural, and I think we're gonna be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe has not yet learned how to be multi-cultural. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the center of that. It's a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multi-cultural mode, and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role, and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.
    – 2010. Barbara Lerner Spectre. (Unquestionably genuine; there's Israeli TV to prove it. The words may not be hers, or course).
'We still nurse a sense of homogeneity and difference from others, and that's precisely what the European Union should be doing its best to undermine'.
    – 2012 'Peter Sutherland'. (Perhaps the ugliest, fattest and most unsavoury Jew ever. Seems a genuine quotation).
"To feel and even think that the white race is inferior in every conceivable plane is natural, given its history and current documents. Let the white race perish in blood and suffering. Long live the multicultural, racially mixed and classless ecological society! Long live anarchy!"
2014 George Soros displays his loveable soul in computer translation in Nya Dagbladet, Judisk miljardär bakom stöd till invandrargrupper Publicerad 9 maj 2014. ('Jew billionaire behind support for immigrant groups'. As far as I know the original Swedish was genuine).

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

  — DETAILED INDEX: ARTICLES IN BIG-LIES.ORG/JEWS —   .. when I get round to them!...

 2012 GUIDE TO THE PERPLEXED:   A standalone linked page, recommended for intelligent people who are new to analysis of Jews. Not exactly BEGINNERS, but close enough. I've seen many painfully silly misunderstandings, by perfectly normal people. Sometimes I've been moved to add them here, often using the original wording, plus my decoded explanation. So it's IMPORTANT! Learn to decipher the endless stream of code words, lies, insults, and misleading phrases, pushed continuously by Jewish media and commentators and their puppets. Roughly sorted into topics and buzzwords.     Started 6 Dec 2012

 NEW ARTICLES (newest first):
Did Jews Hijack Early Christianity? 17 Aug 2016
[ It's clear to intelligent people that Jews, once they've decided on some lie or other, stick to it, seemingly forever. Projecting this characteristic backwards in time, we consider whether the centuries Christianity took to become established might have been used by Jews to change the whole of the ideas and beliefs of Christianity, to pretend is was a Jewish idea all along. Jewish plagiarism and dishonesty are commonplace; here's a brief examination of the issue. Kept short to try to head off the inevitable timewasters and misunderstanders and fanatics.]
Nuclear Exit Strategy. 1 July 2016.
[ The nuclear industries are riddled with Jewish frauds, and have been at least since the Manhattan project. Some Jews want to get out. But how do go against more than fifty years of lies? On the general subject, www.nukelies.org remains the best serious source. ]
Jo Cox 19 June 2016. - Supposed murder, fake rich charities supposedly for the 'Third World', 'Brexit' and leaving the EU vote, nonwhite invaders
Do 62 People Rule the World? 26 Jan 2016
Tell the Truth about Jews 3 Jan 2016
Donald Trump Republican Presidential candidate
Donald Trump vs Jews 25 Dec 2015
[ Attempt at a detailed look at Donald Trump. My list of ten important issues which may worry Jews is: 1 Experience with tall buildings; think of 9/11! 2 Money and Bank. Trump must have a lot of experience here. 3 Dissent between Jews and their crime syndicates. 4 Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Power: Trump has some practical experience and may discover nukes are not what they seem. 5 Muslims, Syria, Saudi Arabia, ISIS - all these are a factor in Jews trying to colonise more middle east land. Trump may twig to the real costs, and real effects, of these things. 6 China, Mexico, Japan: Trump has some feel for big international money flows. He may not be taken in with Jew-biased information. 7 Iraq Wars: Trump seems at least partially aware of the scams here. 8 Education. Trump knows the system is partly designed to turn out dim Americans. 9 Jewish books and freakishness may make an impression on Trump, despite his AIPAC advisors. 10 False Flags and Psyops: Trump seems easily strong-minded enough to question official accounts. ]
Jeremy Corbyn 15 Dec 2015
When the Gentiles Awake 23 Nov 2015
'MIGRANT CRISIS' as continued Jewish social interference using nonwhite invaders, 22 Nov 2015.
[ Networks of Jew-funded organisations, funded by such Jews as George Soros, include people traffickers, teams of lawyers, embedded Jews in police forces, third-rate journalists and so on. They are having a similar effect to Jews in the USA who force in illegals under 'President' Obama. Many people STILL don't understand that organised Jews are promoting and supporting nonwhite invasion of white countries - but not Israel. This is a deliberate, long-term strategy. My piece tries to show this even to people unwilling to admit it. evidence includes the fact that Jewish organisations ALL support invasion. This is worldwide - USA, Canada, Europe, Russia, Australia and New Zealand. Part of the reason is to ruin white societies; another part is to try to clear areas of the Middle East for Jews, just as Palestine was cleared by Jewish atrocities after 1948. ]
New View of Suffragettes 16 Nov 2015
[ Explored the idea, suggested by a book review, and new to me, that alleged suffragette atrocities were in fact Jewish false flags, aiming to get Britain and Germany at war ]
Flat Earth Promotion   16 Nov 2015
[ Looking at a wave of promotion of 'flat earthism'; probably to try to show critics of NASA are as ignorant of science as NASA itself ]
Much Money in the Bank. Little in the Head   13 Nov 2015
The Real Flynn Effect   9 Nov 2015

Two Tiers: Key to Understanding Money, Banks, Jews, and Varieties of Capitalism   1 Dec 2012
[ Important! Looking at money, banks, and in particular central banks with a monopoly in one country. The result is counter-intuitive: most people fear debt, but central banks benefit from it. Essential in understanding the modern system from the days of William of Orange and Cromwell, to the Fed and the present day. The 'two tiers' are ordinary people (who have to work for money) and the legal issuers of paper money and e-money (who don't). Includes typical details of banks and their relations with the Third World. ]
kevin macdonald
The work of Kevin B. MacDonald   18 Dec 2012
What Should We Do With Synagogues?   1 Dec 2012
Parasitism   3 Jan 2013
[ Survey of parasitism in nature: including tapeworms, ichneumon flies, greenfly, ants, cuckoos. Parasitism in people is hard to analyse, because belief systems, organisations and so on are far more complicated than in other forms of life: I've linked to a very convincing article, considering evolution in human groups, and the possibility that many generations living in cities in the middle east bred a parasitic group. I've tried to give many examples of behavioral traits which would be expected of human parasites, such as secrecy, mimicry, fanaticism, and indifference to behavior patterns of hosts. Denial of reality as a parasitic characteristic. And a look at the genetics of settled societies under attack from specialised hostile groups. ]
Scientific Nationalism   8 Jan 2013
Nuclear Scepticism and Revisionism   17 Feb 2013
Jewish Murderers and Mass Murderers   17 Feb 2013
Jew Process   10 April 2013
Cheese-eating Surrender Monkeys?   25 April 2013
One Man's Journey to ‘Anti-Semitism’   27 April 2013
[ Articles written under the pseudonym Luke O'Farrell, from 2005-2008. The author was jailed when he went to the USA with Simon Sheppard to claim asylum—which I'm told they could have done had they followed the procedure. Interesting articles on the fag end of Tony Blair's regime. Detailed and well-written pieces showing Jew awareness awakening. ]
The 'Holocaust' Fraud - The Evil of Lying   6 June 2013
What can We Learn From Napoleon and the 19th Century?   18 June 2013
Eugenics   22 June 2013
[ Examines the way Jews have made 'eugenics' into a word of horror, completely ignoring the medical possibilities and deeper possibilities if human power structures become understood ]
Campaign Against Arms Trade   30 June 2013
[ Reexamining campaigners against weapons, and peace campaigners: do they know what they're doing? ]
Some Notes on Population 4 July 2013
Jewish Plans for White Genocide by ShaunAntiJihad 11 July 2013
Taboos about Jews   3 Aug 2013
'Facism', 'Rascism', the 'Borjois' and the Need to Understand the Jewish 'Single Standard'   6 Aug 2013
RamZPaul on 'White Privilege'   16th Aug 2013
Irving on Himmler   30 August 2013
NEW REFORMATION & Modern Techniques of Image Fakery   22nd Aug/ 2 Sept 2013
[ An account of false flags, notably visual fakery, including the USA war against Spain, which used its own atrocity/ false flag propaganda. I was developing the comparison of removing Jewish influence now with the removal of Roman Catholic influence then, in the Reformation, though this comparison has the weakness of not recognising the common Jewish influences. The piece includes a link to a new theory by FirstClassSkeptic, that Pearl Harbor may have been bombed by Americans. ]
Jewish Control of Money. And the Missing Economic Theory of Macrofinance   14 Sept 2013
Paper Money: Warrant for Genocide   15 September 2013
[ Norman Cohn's negligible book 'Warrant for Genocide' was probably written in job-application mode; it's an empty work supposedly discussing the 'Protocols of Zion', and it's the sort of thing that still leads to promotion in the corrupt academic shadow world. ... ]
Straws in the Wind & Mental Drag   18 September 2013
Lauren M How Jews Use Blacks   15 November 2013
[ Jewish fake altruism towards blacks, in fact aimed at weakening white societies: includes the case of Amy Biehl, possibly like 'Lauren M' c 8th Feb 2016, and others. Many Jewish women are brought up on stories of such activities. ]
Protocols of Zion and the Case of the Missing Genre   19th November 2013
Inappropriate Politeness   5th December 2013
How White Is White Violence?   5th December 2013
Reparations to Whites   5th December 2013
Jews 1: Jewish 'Sayanim' and Liars, Trolls, Nudgers, Reputation Managers, Parasites   5th December 2013
Jews 2: Jews and Unions   6th December 2013
Jews 3: Jews and Fake Information   6th December 2013
Jews 4: Jews and Wars Considered as Jewish-Run Cock-Fights   6th December 2013
Jews 5: Jewish Hatred for Whites   1 July 2014
[ Quotations widely found on Internet showing Jewish hate for whites, in particular. Jewish organisations which claim to oppose hatred, xenophobia etc are entirely bogus. Many people of course find this hard to understand, and hard to believe. ]

[ Start of This Articles Page | New Articles 2016 - 2017 | Articles 2012-2015 | Detailed Article Index at End | Guide for Politically Perplexed | Truths About Jews | Jew Curriculum Ideas | Main Site ]

Writing, HTML © Rae West at the various dates listed. This version (three separate files, to save space: 1 Jews in history and the emergence of revisionism; 2 Miscellaneous articles; and 3 'Guide to the Perplexed') first uploaded together 2016-Feb-07. Some mobile phone tweaks 2016-10-23