Amalekite Lives Matter
“I believe Al-Qaeda today resembles the Leninist, or Communist, movement, before it came to power in 1917, or the Zionist movement of Herzl, before Ben-Gurion brought it to power in Israel.”-Mullah Krekar
“Yeah, but you know what? [holds up a coin] This one, this one right here... this was my dream, my wish. And it didn’t come true. So I’m taking it back. I’m taking them all back.”-Mouth
Qatari rag Al-Jazeera would have you believe that, far from the peoples of Europe being victimized by the scores of Fake Refugees descending on unarmed and unsuspecting populations, it is the young men claiming to be fleeing persecution that have stumbled into an even worse situation in Europe. Al-Jazeera has helped propagate the lie that “migrants” in Denmark are having all of their worldly possessions confiscated by the government (though if they are refugees, surely these beleaguered women and children came with just the clothes on their backs?). These poor migrants, having fled war and persecution, arrive in Europe open-hearted and ready to sprinkle some of Steve Sailer’s “Magic Dirt” on themselves, but the wicked Pale Face once again robs everything from them and forces the almost exclusively young males to beg, borrow, and steal (and rape). We are wicked even in our altruism. If this is the thanks we get, why bother? I guess it’s for all the benefits of diversity like the cuisine, jihadi bombings, and acid attacks.
In a painfully obvious attempt to superimpose the Holocaust on the so-called migrant crisis, British Jewess Rachel Shabi, under the employ of Al-Jazeera (how’s that for strange bedfellows?), writes:
In the Czech Republic, refugees had processing numbers inked on to their arms—an awful reminder of the serial numbers tattooed on to Jewish prisoners at Auschwitz. Across Europe, images of migrants show them in camps, on trains, amid barbed wire and guards and border patrols. Of course, none of this is to suggest that Europe is treating Syrian migrants in the same way Germany treated Jews. Nobody is saying that this is comparable to the systematic murder of six million Jews. But these policies of “othering,” of marking a group of people as separate, different and somehow lesser, are taking place in a Europe that was supposed to be vigilant to early warning signals, to signs of discrimination, to practices that can so often lead to persecution.
Why, then, would millions of fighting-age men—many of them supposed refugees of conflicts not actually happening, or otherwise masquerading as Syrians, Afghanis, and Iraqis—flood a European continent determined to repeat the Holocaust? Is it because the Last Chance Armada is returning to reclaim their birthright? Open borders hag Afua Hirsch claims, “There would be no British population if it weren’t for immigration. The idea that there’s this indigenous British person who is white…is a fiction. It’s not based on scientific facts…Everyone’s ancestors were immigrants at some point.” She states that “alien cultures” are in fact as British, if not more British, than Albion’s progeny. This highly-questionable extrapolation was based on the genome sequencing of “Cheddar Man,” a millennia-old skeleton found in England who supposedly had black skin, though we know now that Jewish scientist Yoan Dickmann “revised”—essentially falsified—the existing data to produce this dark-skinned version of the blue-eyed Cheddar Man who supposedly originally came from Africa or the Middle East. This is just another fabrication to club, harangue, and ultimately dispossess whites of the nations they built. Hirsch claims that, “White people weren’t always white” and, “We know there were Africans here before there were English people.” The latter is a curious claim given that 80% of the core British nation can trace their genetic roots back to the population that was present on the British Isles at the end of the Ice Age—and that Europeans share an unbroken genetic chain with the original population group on the continent 37,000 years ago.
Afua Hirsch is, by her calculus, more British than Michael Caine, but by a true appraisal, not even close. Hirsch was born in Norway and has a Ghanaian mother. Yes, she has a nominally English father, but he is descended from German Jews. Never forget what Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote about the Bolsheviks:
You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.
Hirsch’s prognosis: we must finally start talking about race, because, “Liberal attempts to be ‘colour-blind’ have caused more problems than they have solved.” As I’ve written before, despite the proliferation of endless race-baiting, White Guilt, university ethnic studies departments, and shameless pandering to the likes of Ta-Nehisi Coates, we, of course, never talk about race. Needless to say, I must admit, I was shocked—shocked—to discover Hirsch’s Jewish ancestry.
Hirsch is on to something, though. Just because you pretend there aren’t racial and ideological differences between groups of people doesn’t mean these differences won’t manifest themselves anyway, in often spectacularly destructive fashion. Enforced color blindness (for whites), which supports an inversion of a racial hierarchy that was invented as a straw-boogeyman in the first place, which is somehow inextricably intertwined with egalitarianism while singling whites out as uniquely corrupt, is naturally causing massive issues, a mess of incoherence and contradiction that is threatening to unravel the sacrosanct Liberal World Order. The Left doesn’t believe in such antiquated “trivialities” as a homeland you’d kill and die for, of familial obligation and honor, of any ideals higher than “diversity” and “inclusion” and fabricating hate crimes.
Of course these platitudes of tolerance always seem to arrive as the tip of the poisoned spear for increased dominance and control. The UK Labour Party, in a bid to consolidate its power, actively cultivates their network of imams in the Moslem community, and aids mass Moslem immigration and the proliferation of madrassas and mosques, to create a blacks-in-America-for-the-Democrat-Party-like identity-based voting bloc. They’ve even thrown support behind candidates such as Nasreen Khan, who has gone on record as saying, “Hitler wasn’t the bad guy” and “What have the Jews done good in this world?” Is she a member of the Alt-Right? There is clearly a lethal loggerheads forming, however, with the pincer movement of the OIC and the oil barons, and the World Jewish Congress and the media and banking tycoons, to inundate the West with as much of the Third World as possible. The West is becoming a battleground. Adam Milstein observed:
The Chicago Dyke March last summer, an event created to celebrate the LGBT community, expelled three people for having Stars of David on their pride flags, combining two symbols central to their identity. A few months later at SlutWalk Chicago, an event intended to oppose sexual assault, Zionists who marched were derided for trying to participate and condemned by organizers. The organizers then encouraged the walkers to attend a speech by Rasmea Odeh, a Palestinian terrorist convicted of killing two Jewish students; she believes her actions were justified and was recently deported from the United States…What’s most concerning about the rise of antisemitism is how the ideology has entered the mainstream. For instance, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders recently campaigned for UK Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, who has worked closely with antisemitic conspiracy theorist Paul Eisen, author of a blog titled “My Life as a Holocaust Denier.”
Sanders, it should be noted, is Jewish. In another great irony, as Denis MacEoin points out:
The “Left” have made the open reception of refugees a major cause, using intersectionality to justify this while condemning any other approach as fascist… the “Left,” including the anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist “Left,” have turned intersectionality into two seemingly unlinked matters: as an argument to call for unlimited entry for refugees and other migrants; and as a weapon to advance their hostility for Israel in demonstrations, in conferences, and in their written work… Do not the many thousands of black Jews who went from Ethiopia and Sudan to Israel deserve backing from Black Lives Matter? Do not the thousands of Indian Jews now in Israel deserve friendship from people of color?
The BLM/PoC coalition have ideas of their own. Judaism may have become an intersectional casualty in the hierarchy of Colored Peoples, trapped in its own game of double-dealing. Islam, again mirroring its Leftist enablers and allies, is a globalist project, and in a perverse twist, has a number of parallels to its sworn pan-Zionist enemy in this respect. The narrative of global solidarity is emphasized when beneficial, but so, too, does the notion of hearth and home persist, and can be reverted to at any point, as easy as changing the station on a TV. Of course, Islam is a proselytizing religion whereas Judaism is not, but their staunch resistance to assimilation has ensured their historical survival, and both are highly opportunistic in their political iterations.
Judaism as a religious faith is borderline non-existent, though it’s plenty existent in all other respects. Other than the most orthodox followers, its adherents generally do not take the foundational texts literally, to the point where Judaism could be considered to be all-encompassing except for the religious aspect. Both are collectivist in orientation and supra-national—dare I say globalist—in aim. With the key divider of belief in Yahweh/Allah, there is remarkably little daylight between Judaism and Islam.
This is a very lengthy quote by Dr. Andrew Joyce, but it is indispensable for understanding the inherent contradictions in the Zionist-globalist paradigm:
It was at the documenta X art exhibition in Kassel in 1997 that this particular ‘anti-racist’ movement [“No one is illegal”] is largely considered to have been formally founded. That year’s exhibition and the movement it spawned were organized by French-Jewish ‘Artistic Director’ Catherine David…Although the formal origins of the movement may be traced to Kassel 1997, this was arguably only the spiritual birth of the group and its specific ideology. More formal codification of its theory would arrive in the early 2000s with the publication of British-Jewish intellectual Steve Cohen’s No One Is Illegal: Asylum and Immigration Control, Past and Present (2003)…In his 2003 No One Is Illegal manifesto he asserted that immigration controls “are inherently racist in that they are based on the crudest of all nationalisms—namely the assertion that the British have a franchise on Britain.” In Cohen’s worldview the British, and Whites wherever they are, are mere squatters on land they can be rightfully dispossessed of. Their resources are free for the taking in the course of “competition.” Cohen, the apparent life-long Communist universalist, thus reveals a startlingly capitalist/social Darwinist view of land and territory, even to the extent of employing Capitalist language (‘franchise’) in order to make his point. This struck me at first reading as a vindication of Yockey’s idea that Marxism has an unshakeable “Capitalistic provenance,” but even stronger was the echo of the familiar socio-political position of ‘the Jew’ as both arch Communist and Capitalist. Like that of many Jews, Cohen’s political ideology was itself fluid and lacking borders, characterized chiefly by racial opportunism. For instance, we know that Cohen would never say that the British were entitled to colonize Africa in the nineteenth century because of the absurdity of the “Africans having a franchise on Africa.”
By that warped logic, the alien, Nilotic Tutsi people of Rwanda deserved to be hacked to bits by the Hutu, and there can be any number of other justifications for conflicts spurred by this idea of the “franchise.” Examples like this never seem to enter into the equation, though. Why? Simple: race, firstly, and where applicable, religion/ideology. Islam, Judaism, and Leftism in their political orientation all primarily filter things through the prism of power dynamics; “white,” “goyim,” and “kafir” are at turns those who will form the new under-class, potentially, depending on the extremity of one’s views, ear-marked for destruction or erasure.
This various ideologies of globalism—including Leftism, Islam, and Judaism—are blades stuck deep in the flesh of the West. Bolshevism had and continues to have a distinctly Jewish character (from Karl Marx on down)—and yet, as Joyce pointed out, there is also the “arch capitalist” Judaism (squaring the circle, don’t forget that Jews of Wall Street helped to finance the October Revolution in Russia); this kind of Judaism moves within Western society in such a way that minimizes friction but maximizes access to power via monetary and media control, generally without risking overt public exposure. One key feature is that these types of Jews will pretend to be white when it suits them, but will default to Zionist solidarity when it does not. Open borders applies everywhere in the West but not Israel, evidently. What happens, though, when Marxist-Jewish opportunism runs head-long into the Marxist-Islamist Axis of Evil? Zionist globalism has helped beget the ever-increasing presence on Western soil of Islamic fundamentalism. We do not know how/if this will be resolved. The Jews still have Israel, though, supported by the still-mighty US military, whereas the Europeans and the European Diaspora will have nowhere to call home if and when their nations are thoroughly colonized by the Third World. In one possible doomsday scenario, what Israel will do once the United States has disintegrated into sectionalist conflict and tribalism brought about in no small measure by the open-borders Zionist influence remains to be seen. Certainly with a new population the American juggernaut cannot retain its primacy in global affairs.
In their quest to atomize, destroy, and/or conquer our nations, the strangest of bedfellows might just start stabbing each other to death under the convers. The various globalist interests, from the banks and the multi-nationals to the African revolutionaries to the millenarian jihadis, each with their coterie of power players and mass of useful idiots—many of whom are bound up in these overlapping interests—are playing for keeps, with Western civilization as both jewel and collateral damage. Whether or not we allow that to happen is the great question of the age.