TVN24, “Permanent presence of American troops in Poland is our aim”, 5 July 2017:

“Security understood very broadly – military, energy security – will be the most important issue for President Andrzej Duda during his talks with U.S. President Donald Trump,” announced President’s spokesman Krzysztof Łapiński in “Fakty z Zagranicy”, TVN24 BiS. The minister was asked what the President’s plans were for his talks with the American President, what would be the most important issue for him, what he would like to hear from Trump or what kind of deal he would like to do with him.

“We know roughly what topics the talks will touch on. It is no secret that security [will be the key topic], security understood very broadly,” replied Łapiński. “On the one hand, military security, the presence of American troops in Poland, NATO, and on the other hand, energy security,” he explained.

“Security guarantees” “So, as of today, American soldiers are stationed [in Poland], and we are hoping that their presence will be permanent. It is important that these soldiers – whether they will be rotated once a year or once every two years, or three, this is less important. What is important is that American troops will be present in Poland, because this constitutes a security guarantee,” added Łapiński.

Asked how long the two Presidents’ tête-à-tête would be, he answered that it was expected to last about 25 minutes. Trump and Russia (http://www.tvn24.pl)

On Tuesday, in an interview for the wyborcza.pl website, Łapiński was asked if President Andrzej Duda hoped Trump would confirm the U.S. commitment to NATO during his visit to Poland. “Every day we see that President Trump and the United States confirm their commitment to the alliance, because American soldiers, who came here, are still stationed on the Polish soil. President Trump has never issued any signal or indication to justify any doubts, he never said that the presence of American soldiers in Poland was a bad idea,” the minister said.

The President on Trump’s visit: it cannot be ruled out that it will have historic significance

Asked whether the President expected Trump to announce permanent, rather than merely rotating presence of U.S. troops in Poland, he replied: “This is our aim. Whether such a declaration will be made now or at some other point is a question we should ask President Trump. The minister was also asked about charges made against Trump, concerning his alleged pro-Russian stance. Łapiński recalled the fact that one of Trump’s advisers, who had concealed his contacts with Russia, was dismissed. “President Trump himself, since he took office, has not given any indications that he was contemplating a deal with Russia over our heads,” stressed Łapiński. Źródło: tvn24.pl, wyborcza.pl/ tłumaczenie Intertext.com.pl (http://www.tvn24.pl)

Could have historic significance and impact on Poland indeed.

....as imposition of foreigners would: black, well financed and militarily equipped.

RHF Solicitors’ Festenstein advising Tommy Robinson.

Diversity Macht Frei, Tommy Robinson meets 12 Jews to beg for kosher certification, gets 400 quid”, 5 July 2017:

Tommy Robinson meets 12 Jews to beg for kosher certification. His employer (Ezra Levant) is Jewish. The lawyer (Robert Festenstein) he talks to in the video he makes is Jewish. He goes to Israel and proclaims himself a “Zionist”. And what does he get for all this effort? 400 quid, a denunciation from the Board of Deputies and every other mainstream Jewish organisation, repudiation by the Jewish lawyer he spoke to and an article in the Jewish Chronicle warning Jews not to associate with him.

Will the poor deluded Gentile fools in the Counterjewhad movement ever wake up and acknowledge the role Jews are playing in facilitating the islamisation of Europe, or indeed their role (link) as collaborators of Muslims throughout history, including in the creation of Islam itself?

The JC, “Former EDL leader Tommy Robinson holds secret meeting with Manchester Jews”, 4 July 2017:

JLM members had been left “outraged” after learning of the event.

Members of Manchester’s Jewish community held a secret meeting with Tommy Robinson, the former leader of the far-right English Defence League.

The controversial meeting, which took place in Prestwich last week, was billed as a charity fundraiser, but also saw Mr Robinson deliver a speech outlining his extreme views on Islam.

The JC spoke to one community member who confirmed her friends had organised the session, but said she would “take legal action” if her own name was linked to the event.

Another source confirmed the meeting with Mr Robinson, who is a former British National Party member, went on until “the early hours” of last Thursday morning. Around a dozen people attended.

Invitations to attend were extended to other community groups including the North West Friends of Israel – but its spokesman Anthony Dennison said the group had declined the invitation.

Mr Dennison said: “We find some of Tommy Robinson’s opinions abhorrent. Unfortunately in our community there are a small number of people who are attracted his policies.

“This is unacceptable, and something North West Friends of Israel will never be associated with.”

       

READ MORE...

Darwin Digest: North, East and West Africa. ...“We” was Not Kangs.

         
            ...It has been said that Greg is rather nondescript.

Greg Johnson discusses Heidegger’s Black Notebooks, which include Heidegger’s most clear statements on the Jewish question.

On the Significance of the Neo in Neo-Reaction - when Jewish victimology turns attention to Jews as the victimizers, Jewish exceptionalism is invoked as “Neo” - “As long as I can remember I’ve been a ‘Neo’-Something: A Neo-Marxist, a Neo-Trotskyist, a Neo-Liberal, a Neo-Conservative and in religion, always, Neo-Orthodox, even while I was a Neo-Trotskyist and a Neo-Marxist….I’m going to end up a Neo, just Neo, that’s all.”

Intersectionality: Jewish ordering and exceptionalism in victimology - the “Neo-exceptions” of victimology in the age of treason:

Tanstaafl usually provides incisive insight into Jewish machinations. As he does here in his observation of “intersectionality”, recognizing that to be the point at which Jewish victimology turns attention back to them as the victimizers - which then requires their interests to propose their exceptionalism to the rule - a rule which might be wiggled-out-of as they don themselves “neo” this or that.

Tan’s incisiveness can, however, cut off important “ambiguities” - “ambiguities” that provide means for learning, creativity and agency in the realm of praxis - Tan accuses me of “jargon” for this word, which outlines the interactivity of the social world and its impossibility to predict 1000% for the human capacity for reflexive agency in responses; e.g., I was surprised by Tan when he wanted me to clearly understand that he had “no problem with Hitler.” I expected him to change that, to observe problems, at least some problems with Hitler’s worldview after a reading on his former network of the chapter in Table-Talk, viz., where Hitler discusses his opinion of Ukrainians, the subservient role he saw for those not killed in resistance to his aspiration for aggrandizement of their land. Tan had, after all, objected to Carolyn’s insulting support of Hitler’s disparagement.

Typically in this post also then, we should look-out for some blind spots in Tan’s analysis for his tacit identification with a right-wing perspective, particularly Nazi apologetics.

The wish to vindicate Hitler can make for an over-focus, even if slightly, on Jews as the problem. If Jews were THAT much of the problem, virtually the only problem, then Hitler is apparently, largely vindicated for his “minor indiscretions”. It is not that there should not be strong focus on on the J.Q. But it becomes an “over-focus” when in that incisive focus it parses-out and does not afford discussion of our part, our agency - where any sort of ambiguity is not allowed-for as it does not follow the “logic” of the J.Q. (us or them) - as was the case where Tan’s logic accused someone like me of trying to distract, minimize or malign those who focus on the J.Q. Whereas I am, in fact, merely calling for the need to also examine the part some of our people play (as if we don’t know that Jews like Alana Mercer try to focus singularly on that side of the equation) in our situation, with Jews and otherwise.

When Tan seeks to vindicate Hitler and unburden guilt and agency among his community of sympathizers - by suggesting rather that I am minimizing the J.Q., the singularly paramount issue, a life and death struggle against Jewish interests, as he expresses it - Tan is pushing Whites in the direction of repeating the same mistake, of headlong and disastrous reaction for wont of sufficiently deep and broad epistemic preparation - a necessary grounding especially in the praxis of European ethno-national coordination (which the motive of Hitler vindication precludes). 

Furthermore, by not allowing for the “ambiguity” of praxis he performs an additional disservice by going along with a Jewish default on left and right - i.e., where they can’t get you to cop to being a right winger or an alt-righter, they want you to say, as Tan does, “left and right is not a useful distinction.” Tan adds cleverly, I am a “White winger.”

While he has criticized Lawrence Auster for making liberalism the problem and not Jews, his overly precise focus has bi-passed the fact that liberalism is the problem in the sense that liberalism unfolds characteristically, in reality, as license against group classificatory interests - a consequent in reality especially given the manicheanism of Jewish interests which exaggerate and instigate that liberal prerogative indeed; though liberalism as it follows consequently of insufficient account to our interests is still the manifest problem, even if Auster complains about it, even if instigated by Auster’s fellow YKW: And particularly if liberalism is hidden beneath titular conservatism, as in neo-conservatism or paleoconservatism, or the mistakenly presumed conservatism of Christianity - as any sort of conservatism that they propose will be under their Noahide control; thus not conservative of our sovereign classificatory interests.

Worse, Tan says that Gottfried wants to blame liberalism as well - and so he does, but even more so does Gottfried want to blame and vilify “The Left” - the unionized accountability to social classification - and to position White identity against it - and has, in the form of the Alternative-Right - everybody is blaming “the left” as a result of the language game Gottfried set in motion. And while it is not always correct to play “opposite day”, in this case, it is - we should be asking why Gottfried et al. want us to do that? What is wrong about a White Right - Alt-Right or otherwise? Even more significantly, what is correct about a White Left perspective such that Gottfried et al. do not want us to identify with it?

I do believe that Tan’s blind spots stem from his starting point in defense of his partial German heritage, partly from his STEM-nerd background as well, which has been overly-reinforced against the helpful ambiguities of praxis by right-wing reactionary communities in The US. Thus, he will gain dubious support, for example by fellow Hitler apologist Wolf Wall Street - who will call Tan “the greatest epistemologist in White Nationalism”. When in fact, epistemology is one of Tanstaafl’s blind spots and weak points.

That doesn’t mean that most of what Tan has to say isn’t good - it is. His amplification of the matter of crypsis is an important contribution. But incisive, good and significant as his citing “anti-racism as a Jewish construct” is, it hardly renders insignificant my observation that “anti-racism is Cartesian, it is prejudice, it is not innocent, it is hurting and killing people.” His statement can be seen as a focus on the major pathogen afflicting European peoples, while my statement focuses on the fundamental element of our systemic immuno-deficiency.

Unz Review, 19 June 2017: “Russia and Islam: Connecting the Dots and Discerning the Future.”

Russian nationalists (as opposed to Russian patriots) did try their best to infect Russia with her own brand of Islamophobia, but that movement was defeated by an absolutely uncompromising stance by Vladimir Putin himself:

I need to say that, as I have repeated many times before, from its beginning Russia had formed as a multiconfessional and multiethnic state. You are aware that we practice Eastern Christianity called Orthodoxy. And some theorists of religion say that Orthodoxy is in many ways closer to Islam than to Catholicism. I don’t want to evaluate how true this statement is, but in general the coexistence of these main religions was carried out in Russia for many centuries. Over the centuries we have developed a specific culture of interaction, that might be somewhat forgotten in the last few decades. We should now recall those our national roots.”

Clearly, as long as Putin and those who support him remain in power, Islamophobia will have no future whatsoever in Russia. Russia will have to become the place where the Islamophobic myths will debunked ..

This site, Unz Review, is being treated by the Alt-Right as being in its friendly orbit.

True, the site does provide occasional useful information from which arguments for White interests can be derived, such as the study showing Harvard’s massive discriminatory bias against Asians (from which bias against Whites can be inferred also if you recognize and parse out the fact that Jews are not White), or the demographic projections that (((Steve Sailer))) puts up of Africa’s horrifying birth trajectory compared to Europeans, but you must look beyond, to the site’s chutzpah in projecting influence and goals upon the Alt-Right.

First, the black dress that they lay-out for our funeral:

Unz Review, “Will Sub-Saharan Africa’s Population Hit 10 Billion? 15 Billion?”, 27 June 2017:

Over at VDARE.com, a demographer points out that all my scary graphs lately have been based on the U.N. Population Division’s optimistic-sounding “medium fertility variant” in which total fertility rates magically converge toward 1.85 babies per woman by the end of the century.

But what if Africans just go on doing what comes natural? The correspondent points out that 10 billion is within reach under the assumption of constant fertility and mortality rates. Indeed, the UN offers a “constant fertility” table with, I believe, declining mortality due to technological advances in health care in which Sub-Saharan Africa’s population in 2100 is 15,175,708,000.

Fifteen billion Sub-Saharans is really not likely to happen, but my main point is: I’m not making these numbers up. These all come from the United Nations, not me.

Also, the UN offers a super optimistic “instant replacement fertility” table in which the total fertility rate drops to replacement today and remains that for the rest of the century. Due to demographic momentum, the population of sub-Saharan Africa still grows from 969 million in 2015 to 1,237 million* in 2035 to 1,444 million* in 2050 to 1,731 million in 2100.

        * He meant to write “billion” (but maybe getting nervous).

       
It’s easy to get blinded like a deer in the headlights by something like this. Take it to heart as a massive weapon that can be used against us, but don’t lose site of who’s taking the aim, the array of “equipment” (other people besides blacks) that they deploy and just how mean they are in doing it. Don’t be distracted into thinking they are on our side: Look under the dress -

We’ll provide this example and then treat this as an ongoing roller, as we say, to monitor just what the Unz Review is up to in its chutzpah. Have a closer look again at this first:

Unz Review, 19 June 2017: “Russia and Islam: Connecting the Dots and Discerning the Future”

Russia only has an observer status in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) due to the fact that she is not a majority Muslim country. Russia is also a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) which brings together China, Kazakhstan , Kyrgyzstan , Russia , Tajikistan , Uzbekistan , India and Pakistan. Let’s look at the approximate number of Muslims in the SCO countries: China 40,000,000 , Kazakhstan 9,000,000, Kyrgyzstan 5,000,000, Russia 10,000,000, Tajikistan 6,000,000 , Uzbekistan 26,000,000, India 180,000,000, Pakistan 195,000,000. That’s a grand total of 471 million Muslims.



Add to this figure the 75’000’000 Iranians which will join the SCO in the near future (bringing the grand total to 546’000’000) and you will see this stunning contrast: while the West has more or less declared war in 1.8 billion Muslims, Russia has quietly forged an alliance with just over half a billion Muslims!

Russian nationalists (as opposed to Russian patriots) did try their best to infect Russia with her own brand of Islamophobia, but that movement was defeated by an absolutely uncompromising stance by Vladimir Putin himself who went as far as stating that:

I need to say that, as I have repeated many times before, from its beginning Russia had formed as a multiconfessional and multiethnic state. You are aware that we practice Eastern Christianity called Orthodoxy. And some theorists of religion say that Orthodoxy is in many ways closer to Islam than to Catholicism. I don’t want to evaluate how true this statement is, but in general the coexistence of these main religions was carried out in Russia for many centuries. Over the centuries we have developed a specific culture of interaction, that might be somewhat forgotten in the last few decades. We should now recall those our national roots.”

Clearly, as long as Putin and those who support him remain in power, Islamophobia will have no future whatsoever in Russia. [...] Russia will have to become the place where the Islamophobic myths will debunked and a different, truly multi-cultural, multi-religious and multi-ethnic civilizational model offered as an alternative to the monolithic Hegemony dominating the world today.

Modern secularist ideologies have given mankind nothing except violence, oppression, wars and even genocides. It is high time to kick them into the trash heaps of history were they belong…

Ah yes, “Russia and Islam: Connecting the Dots and Discerning the Future” ... connecting the dots…Islam and Russia, the blood, bread and s/oil resource behind Israel/Judaism, they’ll protect us from “Islamophobia” ....they have given us nothing but peace ...and Christianity will keep us real, protect us from violence. ...let us pray together (not think together).

Do you believe this stuff is being circulated flagrantly among the Alternative Right!?!

Euractiv, 30 June 2017:

“Malmström in Tokyo to clinch trade deal in time for G20.”

The European Union and Japan said on Tuesday (21 March) they intend to complete talks for a free trade agreement with Japan by the end of the year.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker dispatched the EU’s top trade officials to Tokyo Thursday (29 June) for crucial talks to seal a long-awaited deal with Japan.

After four years of talks, the two sides are working toward signing a deal at a G20 meeting in Hamburg next week, but Juncker said further work was needed.

“There are still a few sticking points. I have therefore sent the European agriculture commissioner and the trade commissioner to Japan,” Juncker said.

Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström and Agriculture Commissioner Phil Hogan will arrive on Friday (30 June) for talks with Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida.

Clinching a deal would be a victory for free-trade advocates after US President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership this year, dealing a possibly fatal blow to the mooted 12-nation deal.

Juncker said he wanted the negotiations to be finished before Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe holds talks with Juncker and EU President Donald Tusk in Brussels on July 6.

“The trade agreement with Japan, if it materialises, is important. And I am assuming that it will materialise,” Juncker said at a pre-G20 press conference with EU leaders in Berlin.