[Majorityrights News] Trump will ‘arm Ukraine to the teeth’ if Putin won’t negotiate ceasefire Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 16:20.
[Majorityrights News] Alex Navalny, born 4th June, 1976; died at Yamalo-Nenets penitentiary 16th February, 2024 Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 16 February 2024 23:43.
[Majorityrights Central] A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity’s origin Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 25 July 2023 22:19.
[Majorityrights News] Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 18 May 2023 18:55.
The article casts evergreen light on the nefarious power structure and imminions* of the British political class well beyond doubts as to how the Cox murder would impact the Brexit vote, now that the vote has transpired.
Some pearls from the article and comments:
“Hers was the typical smooth career path of the modern political cog.”
Her political way was paved by becoming a water carrier for wives of the liberal political class. She imbibed and voiced its concerns - i.e., for the plight of anybody** but White native British. To the point where she ignored the rape of British girls that was going on under her nose - crimes being prosecuted, in fact, the day she died. Despite the obvious contradiction of Islam and her liberal politics, she would not say “boo” to Islam because her lucrative political career depended upon support of Muslims in her constituency.
Her husband was in complete alignment with her liberal political madness. He openly discussed ways to pander to those young people, at least those who have not yet been disabused of the PC kool-aid, as a group to counteract growing “national populist anti-immigration sentiment.”
He was such a political apparatchik that on the day that his wife was murdered, he was preoccupied with lambasting the leave campaign as opposed to attending to normal protocols of family bereavement.
Just the kind of tag-team that would flush ordinary White men down the toilet. She the gate keeper to make sure that their voice and concerns were blocked and never to be addressed; only letting through and empowering liberal “alpha males” like Brandon, who would complete the act of flushing normal White men down the toilet.
Both were lavishly rewarded for betraying normal British people.
Now that we have a bead on the patterns underpinning Jo and Brandon Cox’s insane liberalism, it begs the question of who Tommy Mair was in response to theirs and their society’s insanity? Should we dismiss him as merely crazy? Should we shy away from the fact that he had political and native nationalist motivations because his manifestation was of dubious tact?
Or is it occasion to look at silenced voices behind the reaction?
* It was too tempting to not go with what started out as a typo to the word “minion” here.
** Excepting, perhaps, if they interfered with Jewish interests..
The vote to leave the EU began as a cry for liberty and ended as a rebuke to the establishment
A Leave supporter holds up a Union Jack flag after the result of the EU referendum outside London’s Downing Street Friday. Photo: Neil Hall/Reuters
The world is looking at Britain and asking: What on Earth just happened? Those who run Britain are asking the same question.
Never has there been a greater coalition of the establishment than that assembled by Prime Minister David Cameron for his referendum campaign to keep the U.K. in the European Union. There was almost every Westminster party leader, most of their troops and almost every trade union and employers’ federation. There were retired spy chiefs, historians, football clubs, national treasures like Stephen Hawking and divinities like Keira Knightley. And some global glamour too: President Barack Obama flew to London to do his bit, and Goldman Sachs opened its checkbook.
And none of it worked. The opinion polls barely moved over the course of the campaign, and 52% of Britons voted to leave the EU. That slender majority was probably the biggest slap in the face ever delivered to the British establishment in the history of universal suffrage.
Mr. Cameron announced that he would resign because he felt the country has taken a new direction—one that he disagrees with. If everyone else did the same, the House of Commons would be almost empty. Britain’s exit from the EU, or Brexit, was backed by barely a quarter of his government members and by not even a tenth of Labour politicians. It was a very British revolution.
In a further boost to the European Union (EU) referendum ‘Leave’ campaign, Great Britain’s key European ally, Poland, has not only been turning decisively Eurosceptic but has also found legal grounds to ban the EU flag.
There have of course been the widely reported and exaggerated developments – such as Poland sending shockwaves through the Europhile parts of the EU by removing the Union’s flags from the Polish Prime Minister’s conference room last November.
That move may have been merely symbolic, but it served as a gentle reminder to Europe of a change of guard in Warsaw by Andrzej Duda, the Euro-realist Polish President since May 2015. His appointment was soon followed by his Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, PiS) party forming Polish government last October with a decisive victory.
In March 2016 Poland at last introduced a scientific element to its EU debate. The formal cross-party Parliamentary Euro-realist Group (Parlamentarny Zespół Eurorealistyczny) was mandated to evaluate the Polish-EU relationship via actual cost-benefit analysis, as well as investigating the political and legal implications of Poland’s relationship with the EU.
Jacek Wilk
Congress of the New Right (Kongres Nowej Prawicy) – whose four MEPs entered the European Parliament in 2014 with a programme of reduction of EU prerogatives – has an MP in the Polish Parliament in Jacek Wilk, party chairman, who now channels these proposals via the Euro-realist Group.
He mentions that Lisbon Treaty allows for EU members’ exit, whilst guaranteeing a right to free trade, and references EEA and EFTA as the preferred options. Mr. Wilk points out that the current cross-continent standardisation drive, coupled with increasing socialism, are intentional moves that suit the strategy of EU’s undisputed leader, Germany. He considers the hopes of fixing the sclerotic EU bloc futile.
Tomasz Rzymkowski
Tomasz Rzymkowski, chairman of the Euro-realist Group and a Kukiz’15 / Ruch Narodowy (National Movement) parliamentarian stresses that opening up a debate is a must, given that until recently Poles have been subjected to one of the most intense Europhile propagandas on the continent via the largely German-owned media. He believes that by joining the EU, and hence allowing the more advanced Western economies to freely compete with Poland, the country may have forsaken its chances of development and instead solidified the position of a European low-cost periphery.
The group also aims to investigate the distortions to the Polish economy created by “EU grants” (i.e. largely Polish money circulated back to Poland via Brussels), as well as the indebtedness of local governments resulting from EU-facilitated financing of white elephant projects, such as underused airports.
Like many other euro-sceptics, euro-realists or increasingly even those concerned with preserving the EU, Tomasz Rzymkowski admits that the Union should be scaled back to its European Economic Area (EEA) foundations, where it purely acts a guarantor and facilitator of the four freedoms of movement (i.e. people, goods, services, and capital). Completely understanding of the members’ wish to exit and given the United Kingdom is recognised as Poland’s key ally, he confirms a serious commitment to cooperation in the event of a Brexit.
Robert Winnicki
Robert Winnicki, a National Movement parliamentarian and party chairman, is another prominent member of the Parliamentary Euro-realist Group. As much as he has some hope for reforming the EU, he believes that in its current shape, and in case of insufficient decentralising reforms, it would be in Poland’s interest to leave.
The recently resurgent Visegrad Group alliance of Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary with a possible addition of Belarus could provide a future international cooperation option if the right economic, political and defence-related bilateral agreements were secured. The idea is reminiscent of Piłsudski’s Intermarium (Międzymorze), albeit in a more realistic and minimalist form.
The Euro-realist Group is further tasked with assessing the compatibility of Poland’s EU accession treaty with the Polish constitution and investigating all the subsequent legislative additions the European Union has rolled out that impact on the Union’s relationship with Poland and the Polish law, inclusive of the Lisbon Treaty in particular.
Prof Krystyna Pawłowicz
Needless to say, the group consists of some foremost legal experts such as Professor Krystyna Pawłowicz, a PiS parliamentarian and one of the more prominent voices of opposition to the EU within her party, who as a former Constitutional Tribunal judge argues that Poland’s participation in the European Union in the present situation, whereby the EU law supersedes Polish law, directly contravenes Polish constitution.
Prof. Pawłowicz points out that the presence of the EU flag in Poland is illegal and that the EU tends towards a complete centralisation, which is at odds with the national interests of member states, including those of Poland. Her clear Euroscepticism sounds very natural to our British readers, especially with Euro-sceptics going officially mainstream last summer with the announcement of the Brexit referendum and Tory politicians coming out in their droves in support, but as the Eastern EU major parties are concerned that Pawłowicz is just one of the few voices fully critical of the failed EU concept.
Her clear Euroscepticism sounds very natural to British readers, especially with Euro-sceptics going officially mainstream last summer with the announcement of the Brexit referendum. But as the Eastern EU major parties are concerned Prof. Pawłowicz’s is just one of the few voices fully critical of the failed EU concept.
For the generations of Poles resident in the United Kingdom, Euroscepticism comes quite naturally. Just recently there used to be a Friends of Poland in UKIP club affiliated with the Eurosceptic party; the Polish Conservatives outfit also boasts a considerable Eurosceptic representation and there now is a Poles for Britain campaign.
It is therefore a very welcome development that Poles in Poland have come of EU age and we now observe some clear opposition to the European Union.
As such, although a Polexit referendum seems to be some way off, the debate around the real merits of the EU has at last been kicked off and participation of PiS parliamentarians ensures no empty accusations of furthering Russia’s interests can be thrown about by the Eurocentric camp.
“Piekło” means hell.
So long as it is necessary to endure eccentric pressures and at times draconian leanings from Poland’s PiS party, we may as well allow them to work in our interests where they will - against EU imposition, markedly with regard to immigration.
Presumptive Republican Party presidential nominee Donald Trump has appointed Elliott Broidy—a convicted Jew crook who bribed public officials to invest money in Israel—as his chief fundraiser.
Broidy only avoided jail after admitting guilt and paying a $48 million fine for bribing several New York pension fund managers in 2009.
Broidy, the new vice chairman of the Trump Victory Fund—set up by Trump and the Republican National Committee—has “extensive political ties in Israel,” and his appointment “comes just weeks after Steven Mnuchin, a Jewish Hollywood film producer and former Goldman Sachs executive, was named Trump’s national finance chairman,” the Israeli Haaretz newspaper reported.
According to Haaretz, Broidy decided to “combine a Zionist act and a business opportunity in establishing a major venture capital fund that would operate in Israel.”
There are really two important stories for White Nationalists that TNO has exposed in an article regarding Trump’s campaign.
First, that Trump has denied affinity with Matteo Salvini, the head of Italy’s anti-immigration party, Lega Nord. This denial came after Trump had garnered Salvini’s support and publicly commended him.
Secondly, what was a (((dead ringer))) from the start about the (((out of no-where))) viability of Trump’s Presidential Campaign has been corroborated by his son - i.e., that Trump’s (((campaign)) gained (((support))) by his agreement to denounce and challenge the Iran deal.
Donald Trump has rudely dumped Italy’s Lega Nord leader Matteo Salvini, saying he “never wanted to meet him” and “didn’t even know him”—only a few weeks after meeting and posing with the European populist.
In April this year, Trump met up and posed for pictures with Salvini at a rally in Wilkes-Barre, northeastern Pennsylvania, and, according to the La Repubblica newspaper, expressed the hope that Salvini would become the prime minister of Italy.
Now, however, Trump has completely reversed his positon. In an interview with journalist Michael Wolff published in the Hollywood Reporter (“The Donald Trump Conversation: Politics’ ‘Dark Heart’ Is Having the Best Time Anyone’s Ever Had,” June 01, 2016), Trump has completely distanced himself from Salvini.
In the interview, when asked about Salvini, Trump declared: “I didn’t want to meet him. I didn’t even know him.”
As Wolff wrote:
I ask if he sees himself as having similarities with leaders of the growing anti-immigrant (some would say outright racist) European nativist movements, like Marine Le Pen in France and Matteo Salvini in Italy, whom the Wall Street Journal reported Trump had met with and endorsed in Philadelphia. (“Matteo, I wish you become the next Italian premier soon,” Trump was quoted as saying.) In fact, he insists he didn’t meet Salvini. “I didn’t want to meet him.” And, in sum, he doesn’t particularly see similarities — or at least isn’t interested in them — between those movements and the anti-immigrant nationalism he is promoting in this country.
Salvini responded:
When asked why Trump would distance himself in this way, Salvini told the La Repubblica that this “makes me laugh…that interview is unbelievable. I assure you, a dozen emails were exchanged in preparation for that meeting. I didn’t jump from an airplane with a hat and flag.”
[...]
Whatever the reason, the reality remains that Trump’s public repudiation of Salvini is a clear indication that the maverick businessman-turned politician is starting to be “brought into line” by the establishment.
Another disturbing recent revelation about Trump has come with the claim by his son Eric that the decision to run for president was driven primarily by the “deal” struck with Iran over that nation’s mythical “atom bomb” project.
BRUSSELS - Facebook (FB.O), Twitter (TWTR.N), Google’s (GOOGL.O) YouTube and Microsoft (MSFT.O) on Tuesday agreed to an EU code of conduct to tackle online hate speech within 24 hours in Europe.
EU governments have been trying in recent months to get social platforms to crack down on rising online racism following the refugee crisis and terror attacks, with some even threatening action against the companies.
As part of the pledge agreed with the European Commission, the web giants will review the majority of valid requests for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to the content if necessary.
They will also strengthen their cooperation with civil society organizations who help flag hateful content when it goes online and promote “counter-narratives” to hate speech.
“The recent terror attacks have reminded us of the urgent need to address illegal online hate speech. Social media is unfortunately one of the tools that terrorist groups use to radicalize young people,” EU Justice Commissioner Vera Jourova said.
Germany got Google, Facebook and Twitter to agree to delete hate speech from their websites within 24 hours last year and even launched an investigation into the European head of Facebook over its alleged failure to remove racist hate speech.
“There’s no place for hate speech on Facebook,” said Monika Bickert, Head of Global Policy Management at Facebook.
“With a global community of 1.6 billion people we work hard to balance giving people the power to express themselves whilst ensuring we provide a respectful environment.”
The code of conduct is largely a continuation of efforts that the companies already take to counter hate speech on their websites, such as developing tools for people to report hateful content and training staff to handle such requests.
Twitter has suspended over 125,000 accounts since the middle of 2015 for threatening or promoting terror acts, primarily related to Islamic State.
The United States has undertaken similar efforts to entice the cooperation of tech companies in combating online radicalization, focusing on promoting “counter-narratives” to extremist content.
EU ministers had called for cooperation with tech companies to be stepped up after the Brussels attacks in March.
Jewish lobbyists, frequently the target of hate speech, welcomed the code of conduct.
“This is a historic agreement that couldn’t arrive at a better time,” said Dr. Moshe Kantor, President, European Jewish Congress.
David Duke is no friend of Poland; neither was Hitler or Friedrich
On many occasions David Duke has claimed that Nazi Germany was offering genuine peace - “22 peace offers” - to the West and only wanted back some places taken from Germany by The Versailles Treaty. He says nothing about the truth of the matter, which was that Hitler had obvious tactical reasons to not want to fight on two fronts and have his agenda for lebensraum in the east interfered with.
The peace offers were an obvious ruse to anybody. It is clear that Hitler was a war monger, had in mind lebensraum up to the Urals and intended to kill those Slavic peoples who fought against his plan to subject them as helots.
There is no excuse for ignoring that and for David Duke to present himself and Nazi Germany as sympathetic to Poland.
He completely ignores the fact that Poland had already fought and defeated the Soviets - who were on their way to Germany had they not been stopped by Piłsudski at Warsaw.
He talks about Soviet atrocities as if it is an either/or between the Soviet killing and the Nazi killing. Typical of Nazophiles, he edits the time line of events as it suits him - focusing after the Nazis stabbed Poland in the back with the Molotov Ribbentrop Pact.
Here is what Duke says on May 24, in a conversation with Professor Kevin MacDonald:
David Duke (sympathetic tone): Isn’t it true that hundreds of thousands of Poles were shipped-off to gulags, were stripped of any job, even a way to make a living, because they might have been seen as an enemy of Jews or enemies of the communist regime in Poland and the communist regime was absolutely controlled by Jews.
And in fact when the communists came into Poland it wasn’t the Germans who executed Polish prisoners. In fact the Germans, after they won, they paroled most of the Polish officers. They didn’t even keep them in prison during the whole war.
Sure, they were “liberators” of Poland. Where is Lana to add chorus?
Duke continues: The communists came in and we had the Katyn forest massacre; where they literally murdered 15,000 of the cream, of really intelligentsia of the young men of Poland; massacred them in the Kaytn forest. During the time of ‘46, the communists were putting people in prison, they were torturing Poles; they were sending people to the gulags even in Siberia from their own homeland. They were killing an awful lot of people; and the Jews were right at the head of this and that was the reason why the people in those areas rose up to fight the Jews; because of this horrific horror that was going on that was much worse than any program that was committed.
Kevin MacDonald corrects him: “pogroms”, then adds..
Much worse. The fact is that the Jews [inaudible] on the Soviet Union and when they came in in 1939; the fact is that they supported communism, they hated Polish nationalism and that there were so many Jews in the government, especially in the secret police and so on. It was really something that was made to order for anti-Jewish reaction. And it was there, I think it was 1967, they finally deposed this very Jewish dominated government; and quite a few of them just left for Israel. They weren’t really Poles they didn’t feel any uh, you know, feeling towards Poland and they just left for their homeland.
Duke: Let’s talk about the beginnings of the war and what happened here; in terms of the second world war. We can actually just start off by the fact that during the 1920s and 30s that tens of millions of people were liquidated; murdered in Russia; murdered in Ukraine; Jews dominated the secret service and the NKVD; and the other communist apparatus that tortured countless numbers of Russians; murdered millions of people; in Ukraine alone there was something like 7 or 11 million people that died, starved to death, women, children, elderly ...and this was all done, of course, in peace time. This was not done under the aegis of war; but for some reason, the anger of the media, the international media over which the Jews have control, like the New York Times, and the movie industry of this country, the entertainment industry of America and Europe, which were also heavily influenced; weren’t saying the big evil of the world was communism, they were saying the big evil was the Germans. And when the war began of course, it wasn’t just the Germans attacking the Poles over the city of Danzig and a few other issues, the Bolsheviks came in, the communists came in from the east, took about half of Poland, and where the Germans treated the Polish prisoners of war decently, we find out later that the Russian, not really Russian, but the Jewish led Bolsheviks of the time; and the Jewish led murderers, commissars literally caused the mass murder of the entire Polish army officer corps; of the country - 15,000 at Katyn. And yet, we had a media and we had governments of the west by the west who had so much influence by the Jews, they weren’t saying that we should declare war on Russia; Britain and France, they didn’t declare war on Russia, no - they declared war on Germany. A war that ultimately took the lives of 55,000 million of Europeans and really caused the communist take-over of half of Europe; and countless millions more who were victims. What are your thoughts on that sir?
[Note: WN typically do not manage to consider that maybe Hitler should not have invaded Eastward; after having already been granted the valuable Sudetenland and having been told that there would be war if he invaded further; while the Sudetenland was precious to Czech and perhaps contestable on historical grounds].
Unfortunately, KM endorses Duke’s totally one sided and highly selective account of history:
KM: Absolutely. I think um, in general, what these Jewish organizations will respond to all that is that “these people were not really Jews”, they didn’t identify as Jews so a big part of my work, when I wrote a chapter on Jews and the Left in The Culture of Critique… but these people did identify as Jews, it takes some close reading of the issues.. you have to go in there and show that it does make a difference.
The next day, May 25, David Duke has a program titled, “Dr. Duke interviews the leader of TradCatKnight who destroys Christian Zionist Lies.” Duke, the “friend of Poland”, talks with a Polish Catholic guy, who uses all these bizarre interpretations of the Abrahamic religion, talking about how the true Christianity will emerge and the Jewish head of the NWO will emerge in Israel, etc. - some anti-Christ figure from The Book of Revelation, no doubt, causing us all to get into a highly rational war on behalf of the true Jews.
David Duke is taking advantage of this Abrahamic fool, who has his eyes on scripture and his interpretations, not on this world, the world Jews care about; and this world, where they once led a Soviet Revolution that was even more murderous than Nazi Germany, but this world, where Nazi Germany mirrored Judaism, their unanimity for one people - Germanics - and not only a demonstrated willingness, but the protracted realization of killing that led to the killing of 55,000 million Europeans because Hitler could not cooperate with nationalists to the east, but started a war that might even out-do his idol, Friedrich the Great, in his eastward territorial conquests - and in which he aspired not only to rid his realm of Jews, but to take-over and subjugate the lands and the people of the lands eastward, up to the Urals; quite willing to destroy anyone who would oppose those objectives.
Roman Dmowski, wise to the need to exclude Jews but his nationalism was too right-wing.
Were there Jewish elements which had infiltrated Germany’s neighboring countries? Yes. Were there native nationalist elements in those countries which were aware that this alien and nefarious element needed to be purged - yes. Were they aware of the danger and willing to fight the Soviets? Also yes. It was incumbent upon a statesman to work with those elements. Lebensraum and a plan for subjugation of Slavic peoples does not accord with the principle of ethnonationalism; nor did Nazi Germany represent White nationalism - it represented Prussio-German imperialism.
In terms of truth, trust and relations, it is not going to do any good proceeding with the denial of Nazi Germany’s imperfection.
One of the difficulties with the philo-Nazism of WN is that they partake of one of its cottage industries - blaming Poland, itemizing Germany’s “superiority in every way” and cataloging Poland’s “perfidy”.
You don’t build good relations that way, you start wars through reciprocally escalating diatribe - when you have to be on constant vigil against a people who believe in their infallible right to destroy you, that makes it extremely difficult to say, hey, you know, my side had this, that or the other thing wrong, could have done better here and here is/was the way to correct that: which I would like to do - but it’s hard when the other side is making itself into another side rather than a partner, by constantly dishonestly insisting that it was perfect, a victim and that your side was pure evil or perfidy without circumstance.
Józef Piłsudski - wise and capable against the Soviets, but his nationalism was too civic, allowing for Jewish inclusion
If I were dealing with a more reasonable audience than Nazophilic WN, the place where I would go next in criticism of the Poland of the era would be this - of Piłsudski’s pragmatic brand of nationalism, which was (much) more propositional than it should have been.
Although Piłsudski respected Germans and German nationalism - good; and although he despised the Soviet Union and fought them successfully - also very good; he did not yet appreciate the need to eject the YKW from Polish nationalism. He believed that it was a practical necessity to include them in order to have sufficient fighting strength. And so long as Hitler had imperialistic designs of lebensraum, that, the necessity to include the YKW, could have been true in some unfortunate, short term sense. Roman Dmowksi (the father of Polish nationalism) however, recognized the perfidy of enfranchising Jews into the Polish nation. While he was more anti-German than Józef Piłsudski, his disputes with Germany were not imperialistic, but local - regarding Poznan, Leszno, Pila, Bydgoszcz, Torun, Gdansk and a bit beyond Gdansk, into Pomerania. But not even this was anywhere near as far west as the Polish/German border is today. Even by Dmowski’s designs, Germany still included Breslau (Wroclaw), Stettin (Szczecin), Konigsberg (Kaliningrad); in fact everything not far west of the towns he sought to reclaim.
It does no good to say that Hitler’s only dispute and designs were to win these particular areas for Germany, that Hitler was only taking defensive measures against the Soviets (as Duke constantly claims) and that it was all the fault of Poland. Hitler wanted lebensraum and not only did he design to take all of Poland, all of Czechoslovakia, all of Belarus, all of Ukraine and Russia up to the Urals; not only did he ignore the fact that there were staunch anti-Jewish and anti-Soviet forces in all of these places, he was perfectly willing to turn their people into slaves where he temporarily succeeded; into helots or material for Germanicization at best, were his designs to hold sway; and perfectly willing kill them if they fought for their ethno-states.
A new draft law approved by the German parliament today will give permanent residence to nonwhite invader “refugees” after just three years in that country.
The law is confirmation that the Merkel-regime actively seeks to keep the millions of invaders in Germany, rather than making them go home, as she initially told the German people.
The law will make special exceptions for the invaders in jobs, housing, and benefits. It also places them before anybody else seeking permanent residence in Germany, as the normal waiting period before permanent residence applications can be made is five years.
Elliot Broidy & Bibi Netanyahu. Who is Elliot Broidy anyway?
Roman Dmowski, wise to the need to exclude Jews but his nationalism was too right-wing.
Józef Piłsudski - wise and capable against the Soviets, but his nationalism was too civic, allowing for Jewish inclusion
