Majorityrights News > Category: Crusade against Discrimination in Britain

The Spirit Lives, by Roy Harper

“Where once were men but now are sheep
- a fiction and far cry,
From planet Earth’s proud animal
- who would be you and I
Alas, our forebears drank the cup of poisoned alibi
And made excuses far and wide,
And made God in the sky.

This boogaloo’s now round the world
- bad trips for everyone.
No more the man of paradise
Or the Celt of Albion
They queue like burning moths to spread
- the all time viscous lie
You Christians destroyed our tribe
- I’ll fight you till I die….”

“The Spirit Lives” - Roy Harper

        “I can see no reason at all to change these lyrics” - Mancinblack

Orthodox Christians look quite similar to orthodox Jews.  (((Cohencidence)))

Blessed Jewish mother’s ‘immaculate conception of god’ - i.e., king of the Jews - crucified by the Romans.

Radio Aryan, “The Orthodox Nationalist: Soviet Ideology, Western Delusion and the ROC in the USSR” - TON 112917

22:08: “The fact is that Orthodox politics has been set down in the Old Testament; and in the political theory of the great Orthodox nations and empires from Byzantium to Russia.”

  - ‘The Orthodox Nationalist’, Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson

The Old Testament is ulta Jewish nationalism -

i.e., Jewish imperialism.

Ann Marie Waters:

How it feels to me is that the walls are closing-in, and the walls are closing-in more every day. You see it all the time: There was a girl, a woman in Sweden, recently, and she was raped by Syrian migrants in her own flat. Now, the evidence was all there, her body was black and blue, there was DNA, there was semen, there was all the rest of it. And the prosecution, the police told her that there wasn’t enough evidence for a prosecution, and she killed herself.

Now, we have seen this happen up in Sunderland, with Justice for Chelsea, again, a massive load of evidence, but no prosecutions brought. So, they are closing in, they are closing-in and we are being told that black is white. We have all this evidence and we’re being told there’s no evidence. We have all these migrant rapes and we’re being told there’s no migrant rapes. We have what happened in Cologne; and the next day we were told that it has nothing to do with migrants, even though migrants had committed it.

We are essentially living in Orwell’s 1984, where we are seeing something with our own eyes and we’re told it’s not happening. And if we identify it and we dare to speak it, then we are shunned. We have people who are threatened with loss of their livelihood. A friend of mine, Annie the Greek, who some of you who follow me on Twitter might know, has lost her job. She lost her job in the NHS because she refused to apologize for her political opinion. 

Now we’re in a situation, now take this in, take this in. In the last… I remember twenty years ago, it wasn’t like this, it wasn’t like this; ten years ago, it wasn’t like this; but take it in - we are now at risk of losing our jobs if we say the wrong thing. We are at risk of having our venues closed if we say the wrong thing. We are at risk of going to prison, quite frankly, if we say the wrong thing. That’s the situation we’re in. It is deathly serious. it really is. And no amount of calling me a far-right fascist is going to change the reality.

                                                - Anne Marie Waters

Essence, “Black Twitter Wants An Invite To Prince Harry And Meghan Markle’s Royal Wedding”, 27 Nov 2017:

Thanksgiving holiday weekend is over, but Black Twitter is still feeling thankful for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s surprise engagement news.

Monday morning, Kensington Palace announced that the Royal and Suits actress will marry in the spring of 2018. To say that the Twitter timeline was lit would be an understatement.

From general excitement over the news to plans on how we’d collectively attend the wedding (should our invites not get lost in the mail), there’s no stopping the Black Twitter celebrations.

Jasmyn Lawson@JasmynBeKnowing:

Meghan does pass and there are conversations we can have about that, but the reality is she is biological a Black woman who was raised by a Black woman. No one can take that away from her. So Imma celebrate.

Are you as excited for Prince Harry and Meghan’s nuptials as we are?

GirlTyler@sheistyler:
We got us a Black princess ya’ll. You really can’t tell me a damn thing for the rest of the day because it won’t matter. Shout out to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Their wedding will be my Super Bowl.

1:52 PM - Nov 27, 2017
120 Replies, 2,751 Retweets, 6,838

S. @Samara_Linton:

Prince Harry’s future mother-in-law is a black woman with dreadlocks. There are no words for this kind of joy.
11:58 AM - Nov 27, 2017

  612 612 Replies
  24,545 24,545 Retweets, 97,389

36 year old divorcee, Meghan Merkel (inset, upper left), doesn’t wear dreadlocks like her mother (right), but chooses rather to straighten her erstwhile Afro, giving her more of a White appearance.

Image PA  

Bloomberg, “U.K. Cabinet Minister Resigns Over Secret Israeli Meetings”, 8 Nov 2017:

- Aid secretary Patel held unofficial meeting with Netanyahu

- She failed to tell PM May or U.K. Foreign Office in advance

Priti Patel resigned as U.K. international development secretary over talks with the Israeli government behind Prime Minister Theresa May’s back after more revelations of undisclosed visits came to light.

Patel failed to tell either May or the U.K. Foreign Office that she would be having 12 meetings with officials including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a 13-day holiday in Israel in August. On Tuesday, it emerged that she had suggested giving British aid money to an Israeli army project and that she had held further unauthorized meetings.

“I offer a fulsome apology to you and to the Government for what has happened and offer my resignation,” Patel said in a letter. May responded: “Now that further details have come to light, it is right that you have decided to resign and adhere to the high standards of transparency and openness that you have advocated.”

[Read Patel’s and May’s letters here]

Israel’s Haaretz newspaper reported Wednesday that Patel had also traveled to the Golan Heights in a breach of normal diplomatic protocol.

Those further revelations forced May to summon Patel back from a trip to Kenya within hours of her arrival. She then met the international development secretary on Wednesday evening for about half an hour, before her office made the resignation public.

‘Active’ Role

Patel’s departure piles pressure onto May, who initially tried to keep her in place while issuing a public rebuke over her lapse. Patel is the second cabinet minister to quit May’s government a week after Michael Fallon resigned as defense secretary over allegations of sexually inappropriate behavior.

May is struggling to maintain her grip on a government that’s been rocked by multiple crises since she lost personal authority as a result of her failure to retain her parliamentary majority in June’s national election.

Patel, one of the most prominent members of the campaign to leave the European Union, suggests in her letter that she is unlikely to let herself fade into obscurity now that she’s been relegated to the back benches.

She promises to “take an active role” representing local residents now she’s outside government and to “speak up for our country, our national interests and the great future that Britain has as a free, independent and sovereign nation.”

Patel, 45, first won a seat in Parliament in 2010 and became a junior Treasury minister four years later. She joined the cabinet as development secretary when May succeeded David Cameron in the aftermath of the Brexit referendum.

The ministerial code that governs the behavior of members of the British government makes no specific mention of secret meetings with foreign heads of government, but it does urge ministers to take “special care” when talking about issues “which are the responsibility of other ministers.”

On Tuesday, May’s spokesman told reporters that on returning from her vacation, Patel had asked her officials whether British aid money could be given to support the Israeli army’s relief work in the Golan Heights, which Israel seized from Syria in the 1967 Six-Day War. The idea was rejected—Britain doesn’t recognize Israel’s occupation of Golan.

Story of Argobad contextualizes the case brought against Jez Turner

Europa, “BRITAIN’S VIGILANTE POLICE”, 11 Oct 2017:

by Mike Walsh

Britain’s most popular ethno-nationalists, supporters and members of the public, face a David and Goliath battle to protest a state-funded race-police force. Contrary to all legal precedents the Shomrim Security Group, with eighty guards, now patrols North London boroughs.

Shockingly, these armed and uniformed Jewish storm-troopers, are said to be the only ‘private army on British soil’ The patrolling race-police wear state-provided uniforms and cruise the streets in £15,000 patrol cars.

Ostensibly, the purpose of these menacing uniformed Jews, recruited from the Hasidic Jewish community in London, is to police boroughs and to act against what they describe as ‘hate crimes’. Such would include criticism of Jewish or Israeli influence. Jewish and Asian groups are trained to make arrests and detain suspects until conventional police arrive.

It is well to reflect how news of a similar ethnic-European police force being sponsored would be greeted. Imagine for a moment, 80 British nationalists, concerned at the number of hate crimes perpetrated by non-Europeans on indigenous Britons, being given special status by the London police.

Shomrim, special Jewish police specifically looking after their community.

The self-appointed nationalist volunteers are trained, equipped and provided with liveried police cars by Britain’s largest police force. Patrolling the streets of London this private force, not covered by authority or law, are tasked with identifying the perpetrators of anti-White hate criminals. Merely the suggestion would be considered preposterous. Is Britain the only country that sponsors a race-group private police force?

Jez Turner says: “It’s utter disbelief that the Jews of Stamford Hill have set up their own police force which enforces their own Talmudic law on the streets of a White British city.”

An anti-vigilante protest group, supported by members of the public, took their protest to the streets.Holding banners reading ‘police impersonation is a crime’ and surrounded by a large police escort, the group of 50 concerned residents gathered at Lea Bridge Roundabout. Speeches were made by the National Front’s Tony Martin and the party’s former organiser Martin Webster.

The massive police operation investigating this demonstration has been given the name Operation Saurus (reptile). Police officers openly admitted that it was carried out at the order of the far-left Jewish Community Security Trust (CST).

Mr Turner says, “All politicians are nothing but a bunch of puppets dancing to a Jewish tune, and the ruling regimes in the West for the last 100 years have danced to the same tune. Let’s free England from Jewish control.”

Britain’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is set to prosecute the founder of the London Forum debating society for alleged anti-Semitism after a Jewish group mounted an unprecedented challenge to their original decision not to prosecute.

The CPS case is likely to collapse as it is based on Article 17; European Human Rights Convention that says protection is not extended to ‘those who would destroy that right’. It is unlikely that the organiser of an ad hoc debating society could be guilty of such a wacky bizarre allegation.

Why worry, lawyers will get richer, media will be enriched by anti-White propaganda, the political elite seen as tonguing the right backsides; the taxpayer pays for the repellent anti-White Carnival of Clowns.

When asked his reaction to the CPS decision to retreat under Jewish pressure, Jez Turner smiled and said: “Looks like I may be going away for a while, a free vacation at Her Majesty’s pleasure. But whatever happens, I’ll have a show trial first. And I’ll make sure that I give them a show and go down fighting!”

The mask of liberal democracy is slipping away. As anger rises over mass immigration to the West, so the authorities will be resorting to ever more desperate methods to stifle dissent. The greatest consciousness-raising resource of the last twenty years may be lost to us.

Independent, “Crown Prosecution Service to review decision not to prosecute prolific anti-Semite”, 8 Feb 2017:

Jez Turner’s case re-examined after 13-month campaign against him.

Crown Prosecution Service has agreed to review decision not to prosecute far-right activist known for making vitrolic speeches against the “Jewish world order”.

Jeremy Bedford-Turner’s case will be re-examined following a 13-month campaign.

In a July 2015 speech to an “anti-Shorim” rally on Whitehall, Jeremy Bedford-Turner said “all politicians are nothing but a bunch of puppets dancing to a Jewish tune, and the ruling regimes in the West for the last one hundred years have danced to the same tune.”

Jez Turner addresses small protest outside Whitehall July 2015

“Agobard of Lyon and The Origins of the Hostile Elite”

Andrew Joyce, Ph.D., Occidental Observer, 2 Nov 2017:

As part of the introduction to my forthcoming volume of essays, Talmud and Taboo, I’ve included an overview of key developments in the historical relationship between Jews and Europeans. During the course of this overview I emphasize the historical suppression of European responses to Jewish group behavior, an important and perennial aspect of Jewish-European interactions. This suppression/taboo, as a thing in itself, tends to be less explored and understood when compared to the attention devoted to more obvious manifestations of Jewish influence (e.g. assertive action in influencing immigration control), but consideration of it is crucial to a complete understanding of Jews as a hostile elite. A working theoretical definition of what is meant by “Jews as a hostile elite” is of course also necessary, and is taken here as the implication not only that Jews have historically been opposed/hostile to the interests of the European masses, but also that Jews have had direct access to political power, or significant levels of influence over European elites in possession of it. While writing the introduction to Talmud and Taboo I was primarily concerned with the origins of the Jewish acquisition of this power or influence in Europe, the mode of its expression, and its evolution over the course of centuries. Due to restrictions of space in the introduction to Talmud and Taboo, I want to take the opportunity here to expand on one such example.

To date, our best understanding of modern Jewish political strategies in the context of the “taboo” can be found in Chapter 6 of Kevin MacDonald’s Separation and Its Discontent: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism, titled “Jewish Strategies for Combatting Anti-Semitism.” One section deals with “Political Strategies for Minimizing Anti-Semitism.” MacDonald notes that Jews have been flexible strategizers in the political arena, buttressed by an IQ substantially above the Caucasian mean, and argues that the foundations for Jewish influence are wealth, education, and social status.[1] Today, Jews apply this influence in order to stifle negative discussion of their group, and at times to stifle any discussion of Jews at all. MacDonald points out that this is normally done via extensive communal support for “self-defense committees,” which are a feature of every Diaspora population. These committees invariably lobby governments, utilize and influence legal systems, produce pro-Jewish and pro-multicultural propaganda, and fund pro-Jewish candidates or initiatives. Another of their vital functions has been to monitor and expose “anti-Semites,” and to use legal systems in order to exact individual punishments, thereby making an example of individuals and thereby imposing a deterrent atmosphere on the rest of the population.

It almost goes without saying that in the modern era Jews have been very successful in making anti-Semitism a disreputable and unsavory enterprise. Perhaps more than any other shaming device, accusations of anti-Semitism can be socially and professionally devastating. Academic studies which argue that anti-Semitism has a rational and understandable basis, such as MacDonald’s work, are monitored and excluded from scholarly discourse in an unceasing effort to maintain Jewish control over narratives concerning their group and deflecting antagonism to it. A foundational idea underpinning the creation of this most modern taboo is that anti-Semitism is a personal flaw indicative or psychiatric disorder and a social aberration, epitomized by the writing of the Frankfurt School of Social Research. Despite achieving an almost monolithic position in the public mind of most European populations, it is particularly noteworthy that such conceptualizations of anti-Semitism as an irrational and inexplicable form of psychosocial illness are extremely recent, having been developed only in the last sixty years by a cast of Jewish intellectuals—particularly those at the nexus of psychoanalysis and the Frankfurt School.

This reframing of European understandings of anti-Semitism has been due not only to Jewish influence in academia, the media, and the development of social policy, but also to a general ignorance among Europeans of the historical experiences of their ancestors. Europeans cannot come to terms with the issue of Jewish influence purely by confronting its contemporary manifestations – they must engage with the experiences of their forebears, and understand how and why they viewed Jews as a hostile elite.

All of these considerations led to me to one question: when and how did this “hostile elite” begin? Although Jewish influence was noted during the life of the Roman Empire, I excluded this period from my deliberations for a number of reasons. The first was that I wanted a close contextual proximity to present conditions; in other words, as a bare minimum I felt it necessary that I should find an early example of Jewish influence that still mirrored enough features of the modern experience to be broadly valid in comparison. Despite a proliferation of expatriate communities, during the Roman Empire, or at least until the sack of Jerusalem by Titus in AD 70, Jews could be considered as predominantly a national people rather than a Diaspora. It could thus be argued that relations between the Roman Empire and Jewish populations could on some level be understood within the framework of traditional diplomacy and power relations.

It was only after Rome’s demolition of the Second Jewish Commonwealth in the first century that the Exilic period ushered in significantly novel forms of Jewish political activity. These political activities also became uniform, with Amichai Cohen and Stuart Cohen noting of the new Diaspora: “Notwithstanding variations dictated by vast differences of location and situation, all Jewish communities developed and refined a remarkably similar set of broad [political] strategies.”[2] The second reason is related to the first in the sense that this set of Jewish political strategies had to be present in a broad geographical area of Europe. This breadth of geographical dispersion, and the subsequent extension of Jewish interactions with European populations, only occurred after the fall of the Roman Empire. A third and final reason for omitting the period of the Roman Empire was that my precondition of close contextual proximity required that the nation states of today, at least in their prototypical form, should be broadly recognizable. Finally, the Jews of Visigothic Spain, although wealthy, powerful, and incredibly hostile, have been discounted due to their failure to establish a relationship with Visigothic elites. This failure most notably resulted in the Jews providing assistance to a replacement elite — Muslim invaders.[3]

The set of “broad political strategies” referred to above requires further elaboration. Lacking a state, and insistent on remaining apart from their host nations, Diaspora Jewish populations developed an indirect and at times highly abstract style of politics in order to advance their interests. In Jewish sources it became known as shtadtlanut (“intercession” or “petitioning”), and represented a personal and highly involved form of diplomacy or statecraft that, in the words of the Cohens, “prioritized persuasion.”[4] In the modern era we are familiar with such shtadlans as the Anti-Defamation League, and AIPAC. These bodies claim to represent all Jews, and the interests of all Jews, and do so when interacting with, interceding with, or “persuading” host nation governments or other arms of the White elite. However, the shtadlan as a large formal body or committee is a relatively modern development, and was a necessary response to the end of absolute monarchy at the beginning of the nineteenth century (and the corresponding rise of parliamentary democracy and the modern state). Prior to c.1815, Jews often pursued their interests via a small number of very wealthy and “persuasive” individual shtadlans who would form personal relationships with a king, prince, or other powerful members of the European elite. This was most pronounced during the Early Modern period when Hofjuden, or Court Jews, negotiated privileges and protections for Jews with European monarchs. An excellent example is that of Daniel Itzig (1723–1799), the Court Jew of Kings Frederick II the Great and Frederick William II of Prussia, who used his wealth and influence to persuade these monarchs to abolish many restrictions on Prussian Jews and grant them a succession of privileges. Put simply, the concentration of power in individuals meant that Jewish interests could also be negotiated by individuals.

However, although we may still see echoes of the old shtadlans in individuals like George Soros or Sheldon Adelson, the dispersal of political power following the collapse of the absolute monarchies required a greater number of Jewish “persuaders,” thus necessitating the development of the modern Jewish “diplomatic” organization. Of course, the majority of these modern bodies vigorously deny their “diplomatic” or political function, preferring to style themselves as “self-defense” bodies or similar abstractions. Writing on the subject of shtadtlanut Samuel Freedman has argued that Jews have “become wedded to a “crisis model” in community-building, in which either Holocaust commemoration or opposition to anti-Semitism are the raison d’etre for the largest communal organizations, from the Simon Wiesenthal Center to the American Jewish Committee.” This masking of deeper political interests should be seen as combining deception (of Europeans) and self-deception (among some Jews) in the broader Jewish strategy, or at least as a device designed to boost the recruitment of “persuaders.” Jews (at least those not consciously engaged in deception) and Europeans are thus led to believe that such bodies are necessary to defend and protect a vulnerable community in crisis, when in fact their primary function is to advance the interests of an extremely wealthy, culturally invulnerable, and politically powerful community — a hostile elite.

Story of Argobad contextualizes the case brought against Jez Turner

In searching for the origins of the hostile elite I was therefore looking for the earliest possible example of a Diaspora Jewish community in which shtadtlanut was in evidence — the obtaining of privileges and protections from a European elite, contrary to the interests of the masses of a given European population. Although I would very much welcome further suggestions from readers, the earliest convincing case that I have come upon concerns that of the Carolingian dynasty during the lifetime of Archbishop Agobard (c. 779–840).[5] Agobard was a Spanish-born priest and archbishop of Lyon during the Carolingian Renaissance. A fearless controversialist, Agobard gained fame and notoriety during his lifetime — and a place in posterity — by expressing his opposition to Jewish political influence in the Frankish kingdom.  Agobard’s Spanish origins are important. Bernard Bachrach notes that Agobard would have been very much aware of the scale and impact of Jewish influence, writing that “Agobard was born and raised in the Spanish March and Septimania where the Jews were extremely powerful. … He was aware of the power that the Jews of the Narbonnaise had exercised for centuries.”[6]

READ MORE...

“The Collapse of the Soviet Union Was the Greatest Geo-Political Catastrophe of the Century” - Vladimir Putin

Last Day of The Soviet Union. Now subtitled by RT, “Stabbing The Empire”, it provides further background - telling the story of the Bialowieza Accords that dissolved The Soviet Union.

On December 8th, 1991, the three leaders of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus signed the document which marked the end of the Soviet empire. The fate of the great conglomerate country was decided in less than 24 hours. It happened in secret in a remote residence in the Belavezha forest. Soon the agreement entered the history as the Belavezha Accords. Visit the place where it happened and reveal the mysterious details of the document with the eyewitnesses to the historic event only on RT.

READ MORE...