December 21st, 2015

Senator Ted Cruz is a ZOG presidential candidate.

Voters who have wondered why politicians always spend more tax money than they take in should now see the reason. When they begin to study our money system, they soon realize that these politicians are not the agents of the people but are the agents of the bankers, for whom they plan ways to place the people further in debt. It takes only a little imagination to see that if Congress had been “creating,” spending and issuing into circulation the necessary increase in the money supply, there would be no national debt.

So-called White conservatives in US are major contributors to the destruction of western civilization. They are the useful idiots that the zionists use in order to destroy our society.  Ted Cruz is one of them: "If you don't stand with Israel, I won't stand with you."

Senator Ted Cruz—his real name is Rafael Cruz—from Texas is Congress’ new fake conservative. Let me give you the scoop on this deceiver:
1. Cruz is a Cuban-American, born in Canada. His father was a Fidel Castro supporter who changed his mind and came over to Canada. Later, he moved to the U.S.2. His wife works for Goldman-Sachs Bank. (That tells us something, doesn’t it?)
2. Cruz is competing with over a dozen other presidential candidates to get funding for his presidential campaign, which mostly comes from groups and business tycoons linked to the Israel lobby. Analysts say that is the basic reason candidates are making pro-Israel statements.

Cruz flew to Israel twice to get instructions from his new masters. He and Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KS), went together on one of the trips—an “unscheduled” event.

Israeli clone Cruz already let everyone in Congress know he would be the southwest representative for the Israelis (Senator Marco Rubio of Florida is the southern representative). Like Rubio, Ted Cruz is 100% pro-immigration though he claims he’s for it only if we first fix border security (oh sure).

The US was the only country that voted against a resolution passed Friday by the 47-member UN rights body, which condemned Israel for targeting civilians in the Gaza Strip during its 50-day military offensive against the impoverished enclave. Five countries abstained.

Ted Cruz called on the United States to withdraw from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) after the body voted to condemn Israel’s assault on Gaza last summer.

Our zionist banker-controlled government takes our finest and bravest sons and sends them into foreign wars where tens of thousands are murdered, and hundreds of thousands are crippled (not to mention collateral damage and casualties among the “enemy” troops.)

When the “war” is over, we have gained nothing, but we are trillions of dollars further in debt to the jewish bankers, which was the reason for the “war” in the first place! And There’s More. The profits from these massive debts have been used to erect a complete and, almost hidden, jewish economic colossus, over our nation. They keep telling us they are trying to do us good, when in truth they work to bring harm and injury to our people. These would be despots know, it is easier to control and rob a ill, poorly educated, and confused people, than it is a healthy and intelligent population, so they deliberately prevent real cures for diseases, they degrade our educational systems, and they stir up social and racial unrest. For the same reason, zionists favor drug use, alcohol, sexual promiscuity, abortion, pornography, and crime.

“Ted Cruz is a well known zionist and lackey of Israel, he has made a career effectively out of prioritizing the interests of Israel above that of his own country,” Brian Martinez said. “This speaks to the power and influence of the AIPAC [pro-Israel] lobby in Washington.” Israel’s war on Gaza, which started on July 8, 2014, killed 2,140 Palestinians, about a third of them children. Israeli losses amounted to 67 soldiers and six civilians.

“So besides his Christian Zionism ideology which informs his pro-Israel fanaticism, it’s also a financial maneuver on his part,” Brian Martinez said of Sen. Cruz.

Are all races absolutely equal in every way?

The Unofficial 2014 NFL Player Census says that 68 percent of the NFL players are black, 28 percent white, and 4 percent other. But this can't be, because we know the racial makeup of the U.S. (in 2010) was 64 percent white, 12 percent black, 16 percent Hispanic or Latino, and 8 percent other. Is the NFL racist? Does the NFL believe that in general blacks are better football players than whites? The NFL must be racist!

What about the NBA? Wikipedia says the NBA in 2011 was composed of 78 percent black, 17 percent whites, 4 percent Latinos, and 1 percent Asian. Does the NBA believe that in general blacks are better basketball players than whites? What other conclusion could you reach? Of course it does. The NBA is racist.

Not to believe there are differences in the races when it comes to football, basketball or other sports is naive. Or perhaps deranged.

So, why wouldn't you think there are differences in the races when it comes to other characteristics? Of course there are differences. And of course, you know that.

Of course, no one can openly say that one race is smarter than another, because that’s politically incorrect information and a hate crime in most of the White countries.

Now, let's get to that forbidden topic of discussion: intelligence. Let's look at some facts.

Among white Americans, the average IQ, as of a decade or so ago (that translates to the late 1990s), was 103. Among Asian-Americans, it was 106. Among Latino Americans, it was 89. Among African-Americans, it was 85. Around the world, studies find the same general pattern: whites 100, East Asians 106, sub-Sarahan Africans 70.

Not surprisingly, a good deal of challenging and debate has been going on regarding IQ and race. Many attempts have been made to refute the findings. But the facts seem to refuse to budge. One challenge was to examine kids of various races, but who were brought up in white, middle-class homes. The idea was that environmental factors would be key in the determination of IQ. A series of trans-racial adoption studies shows this theory does not prove out. When kids of different races are raised in white, middle-class homes, the kids' IQ scores remain quite consistent with IQ scores of others of their race.

Racial differences have been demonstrated repeatedly by every test ever conducted by every branch of the U.S. Military, every state, county, and local school board, the U.S. Dept. of Education, etc. The same ratio of difference has held true over a 40-year period.

But, as was mentioned earlier, differences between races appear in numerous areas of comparison, not just IQ.

Most of the known medical differences also seem to be to the blacks' disadvantage. Black women are twice as likely to have strokes as white or Hispanic women, and they suffer more damaging aftereffects. Blacks are three to four times more likely to have dangerously underweight babies. Kidney disease is eighteen times more common among blacks than whites. Left untreated, AIDS kills blacks more rapidly than it does whites or Hispanics, and blacks do not respond as well to the drug AZT as do patients of other races. Glaucoma strikes blacks five times more often than it does whites. Blacks are also twice as likely as whites to have high blood pressure, and five to seven times more likely to have dangerously high blood pressure.

But what are we to do if we encounter uncomfortable facts? Are we to refute them? Are we to ignore them? Are we to pretend they don't exist? The politically correct are sticking to their script: Race doesn't really matter. There aren't any differences between races. All races are equal.

However, the rate at which blacks commit murder is thirteen times that of whites. Rape and assault: ten times. Though only 12% of the U.S. population, blacks commit more than half of all rapes and robberies and 60% of all murders in the U.S. A black person is 56 times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa. Black rapists choose white victims over half (54.9%) of the time, 30 times as often as whites choose blacks.


What happened to the Republic of South Africa after black animals gained the political power.

The worldwide media portrays Nelson Mandella as a larger-than-life heroic figure and the liberator of his people. But is that truth or fiction? And how will honest historians judge him?

The official story goes something like this: Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela was born in 1918 into the Thembu tribe’s royal family. He studied law at two prestigious universities and became involved in “anti-colonial politics,” joining the African National Congress (ANC).

He was committed to non-violent protest in gaining sovereignty for blacks. In 1962 he was arrested and convicted of sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the government and was sentenced to life in prison.

An international campaign lobbied for his release, which was granted in 1990, and he was hailed as martyr of white racism by the international media. This popularity propelled him to be elected president of South Africa in 1994, where he continued with his struggle to “end ethnic tensions and bring about racial equality.” Over the years, Mandela has received over 250 awards, including the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize, the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Soviet Order of Lenin.

That’s the official story. His critics, however, have a different opinion.

They point to the fact that Mandela was not imprisoned for opposing apartheid, or segregation, in Africa, but for being a communist terrorist murderer-bomber in service to the Soviet Union.

The ANC’s guerrilla force, known as uMkhonto we Sizwe—MK, or “Spear of the Nation”—was founded in 1961 by Mandela and his advisor, the Lithuanian-born communist Jew Joe Slovo, born Yossel Mashel Slovo, who was officially named secretary general of the South African Communist Party in 1986.

Slovo had been the planner of many of the ANC terrorist attacks, as detailed in the book Victory or Violence: The Story of the AWB of South Africa, including the January 8, 1982 attack on the Koeberg nuclear power plant near Cape Town, the Church Street bombing on May 20, 1983, which killed 19 people, and the June 14, 1986 car-bombing of Magoo’s Bar in Durban, in which three people were killed and 73 injured.

In 1962, Mandela was arrested along with 19 others, half of whom were White communist Jews, in a police raid of ANC headquarters at a farm owned by Andrew Goldreich, also a communist Jew, at Rivonia, a Johannesburg suburb.

In the Rivonia Trial, which took place between 1963 and 1964, the defendants were tried for 221 acts of sabotage designed to overthrow the government and conspiring to aid foreign military units, when they invaded SA to further the objects of communism.

The prosecutor, Percy Yutar said at the trial that “production requirements for munitions were sufficient to blow up a city the size of Johannesburg.”

Escaping the death sentence, Mandela was given life in prison.

By 1990, the communists behind Mandela had gained enough power to force his release. Apartheid was abolished in 1992 and the ANC was put into power in 1994 with Mandela as president. Slovo became his secretary of housing.

Shortly thereafter, Mandela and Slovo, along with a group of ANC leaders, were filmed chanting a pledge to kill all whites in South Africa.

Current South African President Jacob Zuma, also of the ANC, was also filmed as late as January 2012 singing a song called “Kill the Boer” in front of a crowd of thousands of blacks while they cheered and danced. The song advocates the murder of the descendents of the original white settlers of South Africa, with lyrics encouraging blacks to gun down the farmers with machine guns.

Mandela’s ex-wife Winnie, also a longtime ANC activist, prefers a method called “necklacing,” where a gasoline-filled tire is placed around the neck of a victim and set ablaze. “With our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country,” she is infamous for saying.

(Mandela was in solitary confinement at the time of the necklacing torture-murders. An estimated 3,000 victims died by necklacing.)

Since 1994, 68,000 whites have been brutally tortured and murdered by blacks in South Africa, in ways too gruesome to describe, including almost 4,000 Boers whose farms were confiscated by savage murderers, a combined area of over 25,000 square miles.

Contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of blacks in South Africa aren’t natives, but came by the millions from neighboring countries only after the white Boers created a country with a thriving economy, education opportunities and medical benefits.

Under white rule, blacks in South Africa enjoyed better living conditions than any other African country, where blacks kill each other in tribal warfare.

In 1994, the same year Mandela took power, the Hutu tribe killed 800,000 Tutsis in Rwanda. Similar tribal genocides have taken place in Congo, Somalia, Ethiopia, Chad, Mali, Zimbabwe, Angola and many more African countries. Tribal savagery and genocide has always been a way of life for Africans.

Since Mandela took over, South Africa has become a Third World country. It went from being the safest country in Africa, to being the rape and murder capital of the world. In Johannesburg, 5,000 people are murdered every year. Unemployment went from 5% in 1994 to 50% today.

South Africa also has the largest number of people infected with HIV/AIDS in the world. In 2007, over 18% of adults, or 5,700,000 people had AIDS. In 2010, an estimated 280,000 died of AIDS.

Looking beyond the media myth of a “negro demigod Mandela” as he faced his twilight, one can only say, “good riddance.”



South African lesson to the White race by Dr. William Pierce.

WE’VE SPOKEN several times about the situation in South Africa — in particular, about the systematic murder of White farmers there by Blacks and the failure of the new Black government to stop the murders.

The slaughter continues. Since I spoke with you about this in June, another 67 White farmers or members of White farm families have been murdered in South Africa. Many of the murders have been accompanied by torture, rape, and mutilation. Altogether nearly six hundred White farmers have been murdered by Blacks in South Africa since the Whites agreed in 1993 to let the Blacks run the country. That’s one per cent of South Africa’s 58,000 White farmers. Imagine the uproar in America if one percent of any occupational group — say, White school teachers or White policemen — were brutally murdered, with racial motivations, by Blacks in a four-year period. Of course, South Africa’s White farmers are in an uproar too, but they’re receiving virtually no help from South Africa’s Black government in dealing with the problem. The government says it has too many other problems to deal with.

And indeed it does. The per capita murder rate in South Africa is now more than ten times the rate in the United States. The HIV infection rate has continued to climb, and now one in every five Black women of child-bearing age in South Africa is infected with the AIDS-causing virus. Car-jackings are up sharply. Burglaries are up. Rapes have sky rocketed. It’s a mess.

And of course, the controlled mass media in America, the mass media which were beating the drums for an end to apartheid a few years ago, the news and entertainment media here which were pushing so hard for Black rule in South Africa and telling everyone that we must bring the injustice of White rule in South Africa to an end — these media which were telling us every day before 1993 how bad things in South Africa under White rule were — these controlled mass media in America are now strangely silent about South Africa. Now they have other fish to fry.

Last week I spoke at an international conference of nationalists in Thessaloniki, Greece. One of the other speakers at the conference was the foreign secretary of the most important White nationalist group in South Africa, the Herstigte National Party. I spoke with this man, Leon Strydom, about the killing of South African farmers, and the soaring crime rate in South Africa’s cities, and the many other problems which are overwhelming White South Africans. I asked him, “What do the White South Africans who voted in 1993 to turn their country over to Black rule think about their suicidal foolishness now?”

His reply was, “But we never voted for Black rule! We never even voted to permit the Blacks to participate in elections. We only voted to continue the process of reform in which the government of F W. DeKlerk already was engaged, the process of modernization and relaxation of some of the stricter apartheid practices. We believed that this would help our relations with the rest of the world and still allow us to remain masters in our own country.”

I responded to this explanation by asking him, “But surely the voters must have understood that if they gave DeKlerk the OK to continue along his path of appeasement of the Blacks and the New World Order crowd, that would lead very soon to Black rule. They understood that, didn’t they?” And he told me that most of the voters didn’t understand that. They had believed their politicians’ promise to maintain White rule. They had not expected DeKlerk and the others to betray them.

I was at first incredulous. How could White people be so foolish? But after I had thought about it for a few minutes, I realized that the average White person, whether in South Africa or the United States, is indeed that foolish. I believe that I tend to idealize White people in other countries, I tend to give them a little more credit for intelligence and moral rectitude than I give to Americans, and that’s a mistake. The fact is that the majority of White Americans are quite capable of unwittingly voting for their own destruction, and so I should not be surprised that the Whites of South Africa did exactly that. The majority of White Americans believe the lies of their politicians and preachers, and so it shouldn’t surprise us that the Whites of South Africa did the same thing.

In South Africa there were of course the nutcase liberals and the trendy airheads who were happy to see Black rule come and who now can’t quite figure out what went wrong when the earthly paradise of equality and interracial brotherhood didn’t arrive as promised. But we have exactly the same types in the United States. They’re the ones who applaud Clinton when he gives his speech about how it will be a good thing when there is no longer a White majority in the United States in another 30 years or so, and then we can have real “diversity” and real “brotherhood.” Our job, of course, is to do whatever it takes to ensure that our airheads never have to ask themselves what went wrong here. Our job is to disempower the trendies and the liberals before they have a chance to take us beyond the point of no return and say, oops, we made a mistake.

As for the great mass of the people here who are unwittingly headed in the direction of White minority status, the great mass of Americans who don’t really want America to become a non-White country but who trust their politicians and their preachers and therefore are headed toward extinction anyway — as for the great mass of our people, education is the only course for us at this time. Our task is to give our people knowledge, to give them truth, and help at least some of them gather their wits and understand what is happening.

And you know, there is no more illuminating example, no better lesson for White Americans than what has happened and is happening in South Africa. That, of course, is exactly why the controlled mass media here remain silent when White South African farmers are slaughtered, when White South African women are gang-raped, and when many other very educational things happen in South Africa. So today let’s briefly talk about some more of these South African things which it would be good for White Americans to know about, to think about, to ponder.

Perhaps the most instructive aspect of the South African tragedy is the betrayal of the people by those in whom they had placed their trust: principally their church leaders and their business/military/political establishment. Let’s talk about the church first.

For the Anglo element in South Africa, the church — that would be primarily the Episcopal Church — wasn’t of fundamental importance. Most of the English-speaking population didn’t take their church very seriously, and everyone already understood that the Episcopal Church establishment was thoroughly rotten, was completely sold out. But for the Boer element, the Dutch-speaking element of the population, it was different. They really believed in their church: that’s the Dutch Reformed Church. There was what might be called a compact, a covenant, between the Dutch Reformed Church and the Boer people, and the Boers took their religion very seriously. Like most other Protestant sects, it was based heavily on the Old Testament. The Boers saw many parallels between the Old Testament pseudo-history of the Jews and their own history. They saw themselves as a Chosen People in the Promised Land and the Dutch Reformed Church as their protector and guide. And the Church to a certain degree did fill that role. The Church gave the Boers a scriptural basis for their lives, for their institutions — including the institution of apartheid — at least, up until the early 1980s.

I, of course, always have been very leery of churches in general, and I could see, as an outsider, some things in the teachings of the Dutch Reformed Church in particular which worried me: their tendency to identify with the Jews, for example. But whenever I would try to talk about my worries with South African visitors, I would be told that their church was absolutely solid. They had complete faith in their church. And of course, I didn’t want to attack their faith, so I would drop the subject.

Well of course, when the crucial time came the Dutch Reformed Church did betray the Boers. Their church sold them out. Their church held them back from putting up any real resistance to the theft of their country. Why was that?

I don’t believe that the Dutch Reformed Church in its earlier days was anything but what it pretended to be, and that was a Boer institution. I don’t believe there was any long-running conspiracy in the Church to betray the Boers. But as the Boers prospered, so did the Church. The Church’s leaders became prominent men, wealthy men. Many of the Boers’ political leaders were ordained ministers in the Dutch Reformed Church. They were comfortable men, soft around the waist. They ate well and dressed well and lived well. And when the time came to make a hard choice: a choice between their people or their own comfortable positions . . . well, they made the kind of choice that comfortable people tend to make.

The situation in South Africa at the beginning of this decade was one in which White South Africans were still quite well off, despite the efforts of the New World Order crowd everywhere else to starve them into submission with a trade embargo. The country was big enough and rich enough and with a strong enough farming and industrial base so that it was able to take care of its own needs fairly well. There was no danger at all of the African National Congress or any other Black terrorist group causing any really major problems. Dealing with Black terrorists was hardly more than an ongoing training exercise for the South African military and counter-terrorist forces. What the White South Africans should have done at that time was simply expel all Blacks, terrorists or not, from South Africa — or otherwise get rid of them — reorganize themselves as an all-White country, and tell the New World Order crowd in the United States to go to hell.

They didn’t do that, for several reasons. One reason was that South Africans had let themselves become dependent on Black labor. Urban Whites couldn’t imagine life without their Black gardeners and cooks and housemaids and their Black garbage collectors and so on. They weren’t willing to do their own dirty work. On top of that, White businessmen weren’t willing to give up their cheap Black laborers and pay White wages to White workers instead. In many cases it would have meant shutting down mines or factories, at least temporarily.

And the Dutch Reformed Church had sapped the moral strength of the Boers to the point that they just couldn’t bring themselves to do what needed to be done. For at least 11 years before 1993 the Church had been back-pedaling on its racial doctrine. The Church would have made the Boers feel guilty if they had taken the hard measures against the Blacks that were called for to ensure the future of their own people. It was easy for the Blacks to contemplate massacring the Whites — the African National Congress had the slogan “one settler, one bullet” — but the Whites could no longer contemplate massacring the Blacks without feeling guilty.

The Jews, of course, were pumping their own spiritual poison into the White population through the mass media, urging them in a thousand subtle ways to surrender rather than fight. But it was betrayal by the Boer establishment — the Boer politicians and Church leaders and big businessmen — which sealed the fate of South Africa. The comfortable people wanted to stay comfortable. They didn’t want to remain cut off from the rest of the world. They didn’t want to have to tighten their belts and give up their profits and face a prolonged lean period as the New World Order tightened its sanctions on South Africa even more.

Many of them believed the lies of the Jews that things actually would get better in South Africa if the Blacks ruled and the sanctions were lifted. And so they lied to their own people and told them that if they would just go along with DeKlerk’s plan of moderating apartheid, of reforming apartheid, then White rule would be maintained in South Africa. The Boer establishment — including the Boers’ church — put its own short-term interests above the welfare, even the survival, of the Boer people. Greed prevailed over racial loyalty and racial responsibility.

In this regard it’s interesting to note what the Dutch Reformed Church has been up to since 1993. If the Church’s leaders expected South Africa’s new Black rulers to be grateful to them for pushing their Boer constituents toward surrender, they badly miscalculated. So the Church has continued to try to accommodate itself to its new situation and somehow hold onto whatever it can. Actually, even before 1993 the Church had reversed its former doctrine and had told Boers that apartheid was a sin. The Boers at least had the gumption in 1994 to shoot the preacher, to shoot the former leader of their church, who was responsible for that change, but shooting just one traitor wasn’t enough, and the Church kept back-pedaling anyway. Last month, the Dutch Reformed Church tried to merge with a Black and mixed-race church in South Africa and open its membership to all races. The opposition of one of its provincial branches stopped the merger temporarily, but next month, or next year it will happen. And then the Dutch Reformed Church will have Black deacons and Black elders, just the way the Episcopal Church has Black bishops today.

And what about the other traitors? Well, F.W. DeKlerk was rewarded with a Nobel Peace Prize and joined the illustrious ranks of such Peace Prize winners as Henry Kissinger, Menachem Begin, Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Elie Wiesel, and Yitzhak Rabin. Other Boer politicians also received their 30 pieces of silver and are holding down sinecures in the new government.

For the big businessmen things haven’t gone so well. The horrific crime rate, together with the government’s increasingly obvious corruption and growing inefficiency, has taken a toll. White urban professionals, no longer confident that they can protect their families, have been leaving the country in droves. This brain drain has created a critical shortage of management and other key personnel in many businesses and persuaded business owners to look for opportunities elsewhere. South Africa’s Jews, in particular, after playing a key role in scuttling the country, are clearing out. Not all of them, of course. There still are some business opportunities in South Africa. Jewish organized crime groups from the former Soviet Union have been moving part of their White slave trade to South Africa. They first bring their White slaves from eastern Europe to South Africa, and then ship them off to brothels in other countries. The new South African government looks the other way.

But in general, businessmen are leaving, and last month the largest business in South Africa, the Anglo American Corporation, announced its plans to move from Johannesburg to London early next year. The Anglo American Corporation, which used to be run by Harry Oppenheimer and is still very much under the influence of the Oppenheimer family and other wealthy Jews, was the company which more than any other pushed South Africa toward Black rule. Even the Boer businessmen in the Anglo American Corporation were in favor of Black rule. All they could think about was getting the trade sanctions against South Africa lifted so they could improve their profits. They pushed other businesses into working to dismantle apartheid also. The bosses of the Anglo American Corporation told the Boer people that apartheid was old-fashioned and unprofitable and that it had to go, that everything would be much better for the Boer people without apartheid.

And now that it hasn’t worked out that way, the Anglo American Corporation is pulling out, moving to London, where the big businessmen can remain comfortable and safe, where there is no danger of their suffering the fate of the Boer farmers whom they betrayed.

So that’s what has happened in South Africa. In America the rich and the comfortable, those who are part of the religious establishment or the business establishment or the political establishment, also have shown their false colors. The politicians in America, of course, always have been the rottenest of the rotten — at least, they have been that way since the mass media fell into the hands of the Jews.

And the Christian churches here, which even 60 or 70 years ago were still bulwarks of White American society, have fallen over each other since the Second World War in their scramble to adapt their doctrines and their practices to the Jewish party line. In the 1970s and the 1980s the churches in America were at the forefront of the institutions here pushing for Black rule in South Africa.

And, although they were a little slower than the rest to come around, America’s big businessmen — and I’m talking about White businessmen, not Jews — clearly have decided that it will be more profitable for them — at least in the short run — to join the Jews instead of fighting them. There is hardly a major corporation in America which has not decided to base its business plans on a future non-White majority in America and to adjust all of its policies accordingly. The corporate bosses may vote Republican, and they may not personally relish the idea of their grandchildren living in a non-White America — but when it comes to choosing between profits now by going with the flow, or fighting for principles in the long run, the principles come second.

So what’s the lesson for White Americans in all of this? Well, the lesson is that those who prosper from treason, or who believe that they will prosper from treason, will be traitors. There will be occasional exceptions to this rule, rare exceptions, but we’d better keep the rule itself in mind and not place our hope on the rare exceptions. If we want to survive as a people, as a race, then we must make treason unprofitable. We must make the preachers and the politicians and the corporate bosses believe that there will be no profit for them in treason. There is no other way.

Well, I’ll not carry that thought any further at this time, but you think about it — and thanks for being with me again today.

American Dissident Voices Broadcast of November 7, 1998

Sexual Suicide of the White Race. Miscegenation - The Morality of Death.

History has taught us that the most fundamental necessities for the existence of a healthy and progressive White society are the racial quality of its members and a moral code or value system which complements and enhances that quality.

Of course, miscegenation is not a natural occurrence. Evolution would have been impossible if every evolutionary experiment had been short-circuited by cross-breeding. Nature's urge toward higher and more complex life forms has demanded that subspecies remain genetically isolated until all possibility of genetic admixture has been removed.

When these natural conditions are disrupted and distorted, however, unnatural sexual activities such as homosexuality and miscegenation have been known to result. Just as bulls have been known to mount mares, and St. Bernard dogs have tried to mate with Chihuahuas when forced into close confinement and deprived of their natural environment, so Whites have copulated with Negroes in similar circumstances. It is the disruption of the White man's natural environment and the dehumanization of his society and culture, therefore, which the Jews and their collaborators in the news and entertainment media have consistently worked for in order to encourage racial mixing.

The Jews, as the main enemies of White race have obviously long understood this truth. That is why, a half-century ago, they waged the most vicious war the world has ever seen in order to destroy an idea based upon that racial truth. That is why they subsequently organized the systematic swamping of White civilization by millions of alien immigrants. And that is why they have used their control of the news and entertainment media, of the government, and of schools and universities to implement a massive propaganda campaign to encourage miscegenation between Whites and non-Whites.

This campaign began at least as early as 1967, when 16 U.S. states still had laws against miscegenation. In that year Jewish director/producer Stanley Kramer brought out the film Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, starring Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy as a couple whose daughter begins an affair with a Negro. The aim of the film was clear and since has been admitted. It was designed as an "educational film" for White Americans: after seeing their on-screen heroes, Tracy and Hepburn, surrendering their White daughter to a Black male, they would feel less compunction in doing the same.

The Hollywood film Last of the Mohicans, which came out in 1992 with the Jewish actor Daniel Day-Lewis in the leading role, is a typical example of how the Jewish news and entertainment media have spearheaded this campaign. In the film White males are portrayed as weak, cowardly, disloyal, and barbaric -- and as justly deserving of their slaughter at the hands of the noble, dignified, courageous, and sexy Red Indians. Yes, just to ensure that White women don't miss the implication that White men are worthless, the leading White female character dumps her despicable British-officer fiancé and runs off into the sunset with the Mohican hero. The underlying message of the film is clear: race-mixing is not only natural and understandable, it is also the morally right thing to do.

Not surprisingly, the Jews have gone all out to corrupt and cripple the latter tendency in Whites, particularly under the guise of "children's entertainment." In 1994, for example, the Walt Disney Company brought out a re-adaptation of its 1967 film The Jungle Book. This was Disney's first children's offering since being taken over by the Jewish clique headed by Michael Eisner, and, predictably, it was a complete distortion, both of the original Kipling story and the 1967 Disney animated version.  [Image: Michael Eisner.]

With a story line remarkably similar to Last of the Mohicans, the White heroine rejects her British-officer fiancé for an Indian jungle boy played by a Chinese actor.

Significantly, the White girl's decision is portrayed as being based upon moral considerations of right and wrong, upon her realization that White society and White men in particular are irredeemably bad. Eisner pursued this line in the two subsequent Disney animated children's films, Pocahontas and The Hunchback of Notre Dame, which are similar both in their pernicious race-mixing propaganda and in their blatant disregard for the original stories. Such systematic consistency in shape and content suggests design rather than coincidence.

In any case, the actual motivation of Michael Eisner in churning out such material is not the most important question. The thing that really matters is the actual effect of his efforts:young children are being influenced, at an age where they are most open to behavioral imprinting, with a message that miscegenation is good and morally correct, and that Whiteness is evil and morally wrong.

Just as young Whites in the past were encouraged by an alien religious dogma to feel sinful because of their natural sexual urges, to feel unclean in having them, and to seek "salvation" by denying them, so today they are indoctrinated with guilt-inducing ideas about being White. And the solution which they are offered to overcome these artificial feelings of guilt and self-hate is increasingly clear: mate with a non-White partner and have mongrel offspring. Racial suicide is thus insidiously presented to them as the only way in which they can overcome their Whiteness and all the consequent pain and shame that goes with it.

Behind the high-sounding slogans portraying miscegenation as morally imperative and beneficial, the motivation of its proponents is clear: the intention is not to "save" or "redeem" Whites, but to destroy them completely. What such "morality" really derives from is a totally subjective, alien mind-set which seeks the biological extinction of the White race, and which, from its own perspective, sees such an extinction as a good and righteous thing. Some of its proponents are much more honest than others in admitting to this reality. One journal, Race Traitor, edited by [Jewish academic] Noel Ignatiev and subtitled "Treason to Whiteness is Loyalty to Humanity," openly declares its conviction that the only way to solve the social problems of the age is to abolish the White race. Its admitted aim is not "multiculturalism" or "multiracialism," but biological unity and racelessness. [Image: "The Family of the Future," part of Jewish advertiser Oliviero Toscani's "United Colors of Benetton" campaign.]

Such thinking is not confined to the political fringes. On September 29, 1996, The New York Times Magazine ran an article by [Black] writer Stanley Crouch (author of the book The All-American Skin Game: Or, the Decoy of Race). Entitled "Race is Over," Crouch's article confidently predicted that a century from today unprecedented levels of racial mixing -- of a wide variety of combinations -- will ensure that the very concept of race will be redundant. Americans of the future, it argues, will find themselves surrounded in every direction by people who are part Asian, part Latin, part European, part American Indian. The sweep of body types, combinations of facial features, hair textures, eye colors, and what are now "unexpected skin tones" will, in Crouch's view, be far more common because the current paranoia over mixed marriages should be by then largely a superstition of the past.

Even this declared goal, however, reveals only part of the agenda, because one particular race has an exemption ticket from this universal morality of genetic amalgamation. But The New York Times Magazine article symbolizes what the Politically Correct movement is really all about. When the mainstream Harper's Magazine runs articles advocating government-sponsored summer camps for young White girls to meet and begin relationships with non-White males, it is not doing "good" for those girls; it is actively encouraging what is most definitely bad for them. And when the Prudential Insurance Company of America sponsors a series of racial unity conferences for children across America and the world, it is not doing what is "right" for those children; it is doing what is totally and utterly wrong for them.

Actually, such "morality" is without any moral foundation whatsoever. It's not based on any natural or biological law, nor does it follow any rational or scientific line of reasoning. This helps to explain why it is having some difficulty in achieving its objectives. Undoubtedly many Whites preach the cause of miscegenation, and many have put it into practice. But, revealingly, the numbers in the latter camp are still much smaller than in the former.

A recent study of miscegenation statistics by Jewish academic Douglas J. Besherov, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, seemed to give some credence to this view, although the report highlighted some very disturbing trends. These included atripling of marriages between Whites and Blacks since 1970, and a sharp increase in marriages between Whites and Asians or Hispanics. The U.S. Census Bureau counted about 150,000 interracial marriages nationwide in 1960. By 1990 that number grew tenfold to 1.5 million. In 1994 it was estimated at more than 3 million.

Equally alarming was the statistic that 35.4 percent of White women married to Black men said they planned to have children, a higher proportion than the 29 percent of White women married to White men who said they wanted children. This is on top of a four-fold increase in mixed-race births since 1970, although not all of these involved a White parent.

Such trends are obviously ominous and potentially catastrophic by pointing in the long term to the biological extinction of White America. In the short term, however, from the perspective of those of us trying to prevent such a nightmare from unfolding, they do provide at least some grounds for optimism and opportunity. Despite 30 years of Judeo-Christian brainwashing, over 90 per cent of Whites are declining to transgress what Douglas J. Besherov admits is American society's "last taboo."

Some of the Whites who advocate race-mixing are obviously unhealthy in a genetic sense, and mentally ill as opposed to spiritually sick.

Such a situation, however, will not last forever. History is full of examples of artificial and destructive moralities triumphing over the natural order. Despite its setbacks, the cult of miscegenation has spread substantially over the last thirty years and will continue to do so. Current trends continue to point to the most fundamental and inescapable reality which confronts us today: the White race stands on the precipice of biological extinction.

And one thing is certain: as the strains and tensions of this multiracial society increase in the coming years, so the campaign to destroy us through racial mixing will intensify. For this reason alone, regardless of increased racial polarization, the false morality of miscegenation will not disappear naturally. The circumstances of racial chaos will help us, but only organized and radical action on our part will achieve the vital necessity of a complete and decisive separation of the races and the final destruction of the morality of death.


no title

The destructive media by Dr. William Pierce.

What are the Jews doing with their control of the media that's harmful to us?

One of the subjects we've covered a number of times in this newsletter is the Jewish control of the news and entertainment media and the enormous damage this control is doing to America and to our people. We write about this so much because there's hardly anything in the world more important, hardly anything which demands our attention more urgently.

The evidence of the damage being done is quite obvious, but somehow many people manage to not notice that evidence. I had a newspaper reporter in my office a few weeks ago, and he asked me, "Why do you object to the Jews controlling the media? Aren't they running things about the same way anyone else would?"

I told him, "No, they're running things to fit their Jewish agenda, and that agenda is not good for us."

Then he asked me for specific examples.

Now, I really don't believe that the reporter wanted an answer to that question, because this was a man who knew which side his bread was buttered on. He couldn't afford to be thinking bad thoughts about the people on whom his career depended, but I gave him an answer anyway. I gave him some specific, concrete examples of the way in which the Jewish control of our news and entertainment media was damaging us as a people. Perhaps you'll be interested in hearing some of those examples too, and so I'll share them with you.

The first example I gave the reporter involved the largest media conglomerate in America, the Walt Disney Company. I reminded the reporter that Walt Disney, who was a Gentile -- who was one of us -- had been a pioneer in the motion picture industry. He was one of the men who built Hollywood. He built it by giving us films like Snow White and Fantasia and Cinderella. These were not just healthy, wholesome films: they were films which struck a deeply responsive chord in us, because Walt Disney shared our roots.

While Disney was winning a place in the hearts of people of European descent all over the world, the rest of Hollywood was being taken over by Jews. By the late 1920s it was apparent that not only was there money to be made in motion pictures, but motion pictures could become a very influential medium, and so Jews began taking over.

By the time Disney died he was about the only major non-Jewish film maker left in Hollywood. After his death Jews took control of the Disney company, and today it is controlled by Michael Eisner. Eisner immediately began making propaganda films designed to encourage degeneracy in viewers.

I gave to the reporter as an example of Eisner's films one that came out a couple of years ago and received all sorts of acclaim and awards from Jewish reviewers in the New York Times and other Jewish newspapers: it was The Crying Game, which was made by the Miramax division of Disney, a division headed by the Weinstein brothers. The Crying Game was a film about homosexuality and transvestitism and interracial sex. The message of the film was that these things are all right: that homosexuals and transvestites are people just like us, and that we should love them, and that it's all right for us to share their life-style.

Racial and sexual roles deliberately were made ambiguous in the film: a British soldier who just happens to be a Negro, an Irishman's mulatto girl friend who just happens to be a man wearing a dress. I doubt that I've ever seen a film with a sicker, more destructive message. And this film was held up by the Jewish media as wonderfully "sensitive," as wonderfully artistic. Nor was The Crying Game any sort of fluke or exception to the rule. Mr. Eisner has produced many other films with a similarly destructive message.

I also gave the reporter to whom I was speaking examples about the destructive way in which the Jews use their control of the news media. Do you remember the enormous hullabaloo in the news media a few months ago when two White soldiers at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, got drunk and shot a convicted Black crack dealer and his female companion? It was on the television news and in the big newspapers day after day after day. "Racism in the Army!" the headlines were screaming. News commentators wrung their hands and agonized over "White supremacy" at Fort Bragg. "What can we do about White supremacy in the military?" they moaned. And, of course, the politicians, who certainly know which side their bread is buttered on, had to get into the act. The White House issued statements. The secretary of the Army announced that an investigation would be launched to find out about White racists in the Army and then to boot them out when it found them. We were treated to tearful television interviews with the relatives of the slain Black crack dealer. We're still hearing about the killing of this convicted Black criminal by two drunken White soldiers, as Jewish groups continue to use it as an example in their media campaign for new laws against what they call "hate crimes" and "hate speech." Just two weeks ago there was yet another big article about it headed "Extremism in the Ranks" in Newsweek magazine, which is owned by the Jewish Washington Post. Everybody has heard about this shooting at Fort Bragg.

Now I'll tell you about a shooting you haven't heard about -- unless you happen to live in the immediate vicinity of Camp Pendleton, the big Marine base in southern California. Last month, on March 5, 1996, a 28-year-old Marine sergeant who was stationed at Camp Pendleton hid a .45-caliber pistol under his jacket, walked into the office of the executive officer of his unit, Lt. Colonel Daniel Kidd, and shot Kidd twice in the back, killing him. He then turned his pistol on the commanding officer, Lt. Col. Thomas Heffner, and shot Heffner in the chest, critically wounding him.

Both Lt. Colonel Kidd and Lt. Colonel Heffner are White. The murderer, Sergeant Jessie Quintanilla, is a dark-skinned Pacific Islander from Guam. When Quintanilla ran out of the office after shooting the two White officers, he shouted that he had done it "for the Brown side" and that the killings of Whites would continue until all non-Whites are released from prison.

Amazingly, not even the San Diego-area newspapers, which could hardly avoid at least reporting the bare facts of the shootings, suggested that race was a motive or that the killing of Lt. Colonel Kidd was a "hate crime." They ignored the race factor. The national media, so far as I am aware, have scrupulously avoided the whole story. No statements from the White House, no call for investigations of Brown racism in the Marines, no headlines anywhere about "extremism," no calls from Jewish organizations for new laws to control "haters" in the military.

Now, what is the difference between the shootings at Fort Bragg and the shootings at Camp Pendleton which could have justified the glaring difference in the way they were treated by the controlled news media? Was it that the Fort Bragg shootings were a more serious crime than the Camp Pendleton shootings? Was the killing of a convicted Black drug dealer by two drunken White soldiers more newsworthy than the cold-blooded murder of a White Marine Corps officer with an outstanding service record by a non-White sergeant with a hatred of White people? Was the Fort Bragg shooting more cause for concern on the part of ordinary Americans than the Camp Pendleton shooting?

I don't think so.

Let me suggest that the difference in the way in which the shootings were treated by the news media stems from the fact that the Jewish bosses of the media have an agenda of their own, and they slant the news accordingly. They make the news fit their agenda. The Jews who control the news media have a program to "sensitize" White Americans about racial matters, and by that I mean that they want to instill in White Americans a sense of White racial guilt, to make White Americans feel that any sense of White racial solidarity is reprehensible, to persuade them that any White resistance to demands by non-Whites is "racist" and therefore wicked.

And so they deliberately -- I say deliberately, knowingly, calculatingly -- create the impression with their biased and selective reporting of the news that White attacks on non-Whites are a far bigger problem than non-White attacks on Whites, whereas exactly the opposite is true. The shooting at Fort Bragg suited the Jews' purpose, and so they gave it enormous publicity and drummed it into everyone's consciousness. The shooting at Camp Pendleton didn't suit their purpose, and so they gave it minimal coverage in the news media they control. That's the sort of thing I have in mind when I say that the Jewish control of the media is doing enormous damage to our people. It's giving the average American a grossly distorted view of the world.

I'll give you another example, one which most of us probably have heard about. In Chicago earlier this year a White mother and her two young children were murdered by Blacks in an especially horrible manner. The White woman was slashed open with a butcher knife, and an unborn infant was ripped from her womb by Blacks who wanted the baby. The woman's children, a ten-year-old daughter and an eight-year-old son, were stabbed to death. These were racial killings, but because the victims were White and the murderers were Black most of the media would have preferred to ignore them. The unusually atrocious nature of the crime caught the attention of the tabloids, however, and so the rest of the news media were obliged to give it minimal and grudging coverage. But there were no demands from Jewish organizations, like the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center, for new "hate crime" laws because of these hate-inspired murders. There were no hand-wringing editorials about the murders in the New York Times or the Washington Post. The television networks wasted no tears on the victims. The whole attitude of the media was: the less said about these murders the better.

Can you imagine how different the treatment by the media would have been if the races of the victims and the murderers had been interchanged? Imagine that a gang of neo-Nazi skinheads had grabbed a pregnant Black woman and her two Black children, had stabbed the Black children to death and then killed the Black woman by ripping her open with a knife and tearing her unborn child from her body and running off with it. That would have been on the front page and the editorial page of the New York Times, the Washington Post, and every other Jewish newspaper in the country for weeks. Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather would still be telling us about it every evening. Every television screen in the country would still be full of politicians, priests, and rabbis telling us what we must do to eliminate "White racism." They would be telling us what kind of "racist" books and "racist" radio programs and "racist" music the skinheads were exposed to which led them to kill the Black family. And of course, spokesmen for the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League would be given non-stop media coverage as they clamored for laws to make Politically Incorrect speech illegal. You know that's the way it would be handled.

And that sort of slanted news is damaging, because tens of millions of White Americans actually believe what they see on television and read in the newspapers. They cannot distinguish between the real world and the slanted world portrayed by the media masters. They assume that real people behave the way the actors in Mr. Eisner's The Crying Game behaved; moreover, they assume that's approved behavior. They assume that the news stories selected for the evening television news programs are truly representative of what is happening in the world. Their opinions and attitudes are shaped by the slanted world of the media rather than by the real world. In the long run this Jewish media control is not just damaging: it is lethal. It will destroy us. And that, of course, is just what it is intended to do.

Here's another specific example of the way in which the Jewish control of our media is used to damage us as a people. Do you remember the Republic of South Africa? Do you remember what the media did to that country? Let me remind you. For years the mass media in America maintained a solid wall of hostility against South Africa. The Whites there were unspeakably wicked, according to the media, because they practiced a system they called "apartheid," which simply means apartness, or separation of the races.

Now, it is true that we always have had a busybody element among our own people -- egalitarians and other foolish or malicious types who always are looking for an opportunity to force others to conform to their ideas -- but without the support of the Jewish media the busybody element would not have been able to do much damage. It was the controlled media which made "apartheid" a dirty word; it was the controlled media which made the attitude toward South Africa a major political issue in this country; it was the controlled media which made a government enforced boycott of trade with South Africa politically popular; it was the controlled media which viciously attacked anyone who had a good word to say about South Africa; it was the controlled media over here which provided a forum for the handful of South African traitors and terrorists who were trying to destabilize their own society.

And ultimately it was the controlled media which destroyed South Africa. As the economic damage to South Africa from the trade boycott mounted, White South Africans found themselves under increasing pressure. Furthermore, they were being subjected to the same anti-White hate propaganda that we were. The films they saw, the television programs they watched in South Africa came from Hollywood and New York. And eventually the South Africans became so demoralized that they foolishly turned their country over to Black rule, hoping that somehow that would make the world love them and their economy would improve.

What actually has happened, of course, is that crime and mismanagement have skyrocketed and standards have fallen, and now the White South Africans who are able to go some place else are leaving. What has happened to every other country in sub-Saharan Africa after the Whites turned the government over to the Blacks is now happening to South Africa. It is slipping back toward the jungle. And the controlled media in America played the largest single role in bringing this result about.

And this result was deliberate. It was calculated. It was planned. It was not because of any fuzzy-minded, do-gooder sentiment on the part of the media bosses. They knew exactly what they were doing. It was cold-blooded. Compare this media concern with equality for Blacks in South Africa with the attitude of the media toward the behavior of the Jewish government in Israel. That government practices what is known as collective punishment. If a Palestinian is suspected of being a freedom fighter -- suspected, not convicted -- the Jewish government punishes his whole family. His wife, his parents, his children will be arrested and tortured. The house they live in will be blown up. Have you ever heard the controlled media criticize this sort of behavior?

Now, patriots have various concerns, various priorities. Some of them believe that we should concern ourselves first and foremost with the way the U.S. government handles its finances, with ruinous taxation and scandalous welfare programs. Some of them believe that our out-of-control immigration situation is our most pressing problem. Others are concerned primarily with the government's failure to deal effectively with street crime. And some have focused on the breakdown of our educational system under the impact of forced equality, or on the decay of our morals.

But I tell you that we can solve none of these problems until we regain control of our news and entertainment media. So long as the Jews control our mass media they will control our politicians, and so long as they control our politicians they will control the policies of the government. We will not be able to shut down the welfare system or control our borders or make our cities safe or restore our standards and values so long as the controlled mass media are able to make a majority of our people feel guilty for wanting to do these things, so long as the media are able to make people believe that keeping Mexicans and Haitians out of the country or shutting off the flow of welfare is racist, and that racism is the worst of all sins.

So long as the Jews control our mass media they will be able to keep enough of our people confused and misled and divided so that we cannot regain control of our government by peaceful, democratic means.

If we are to regain control of our destiny and survive as a people, then we have only two choices: violent revolution to take the control of the mass media back by force, or gentle but effective persuasion to lead more and more of our people from confusion into understanding.

I personally believe that violent revolution is not feasible at this time, and as long as the course of gentle persuasion remains open to us, that is the course we must choose. I believe that the only proper thing for us to do now is to continue building our own media and making them more effective -- media like our series of radio broadcasts and our World Wide Web sites on the Internet and the books and magazines published by National Vanguard Books.

#antiwhite #media #media #israel #jew #zionism #media #jewish #jew #america #media #jewish #jew #judaism #media #jewish#jew #putin #media#jewish #wakeupamerica #media #jews #media #refugees #america #putin #jewish #jew #judaism #refugees #islam #army#aryan #azov #BankingSystem #white #nationalism #nazi #blacks #caliphate #campus #cannibalism #censorship #china #christianity #church#civilization#communism

For how long would Western nationalists and right-wingers consider Putin a “Russian Nationalist”?

For how long would Western nationalists and right-wingers consider Putin a “Russian Nationalist” or “The Leader of the Free World”?

No one in the nationalist or conservative movement should harbor any illusions regarding the corrupt, grotesquely hypocritical, bureaucratic and police-state nature of the modern state authority and ideology existing in the Russian Federation. The single most important thing to understand is that this system is explicitly and purposefully anti-Russian.

Russian and zionist media presents a public image of Putin as a Christian faith defender and Russian patriot, who fights against corruption, oligarchy and globalist forces.

Still, Putin’s image is full of lies and deception. This image was created to placate the Russian people who have nationalist or conservative views. In reality, Putin is the leader and strong supporter of Russian oligarchs and corrupted officials, he also openly supports Israel, praises USSR and Stalin, defends multiculturalism inside his country and openly opposes "nationalism, neo-fascism, and anti-Semitism".

In 1998, Putin was director of FSB (former KGB) and served the government ruled by president Boris Yeltsin. He plotted for the fall of General Prosecutor Yury Skuratov, who persecuted Jewish oligarchs and was investigating Yeltsin for corruption. Skuratov was blackmailed and forced to renounce using a video taken in a FSB house where the man appears having sex with two prostitutes. In 1999, Putin was designated Prime Minister and then President by Yeltsin who retired this year. The first presidential decree that Putin signed, on 31 December 1999, was titled "On guarantees for former president of the Russian Federation and members of his family". This ensured that "corruption charges against the outgoing President and his relatives" would not be pursued.

Oligarchs are not in jail where they belong, instead they are partners with Putin. If someone going to praise and worship Putin’s policy against oligarchs, at least stick to the precise facts: 1 (ONE) Jewish oligarch was in jail, not oligarchs (plural). Nobody "kicked out" Jewish oligarchs, there are still many of them remaining. Putin appointed many Jewish oligarchs to statesmanship positions. The few rich Jews did leave, but it was far from all of them.  During the 2014 Sochi Olympics, Putin's childhood jewish friend Arkady Rotenberg, already one of the richest men in Russia, was awarded $7 billion of deals by Putin.

Although we cannot exclude that Putin and his close jewish circle dream about their ‘empire’, there won’t be any place in their Khazar ‘empire’ for the Russian spirit and Russian ideology, just as there was no place for Russianness in the Soviet Union. Remember that the process of destroying the Russian nation and Russian worldview, unprecedented in its scale and consequences, was launched precisely in the Soviet Union and the current authorities of Russian Federation carry on this process more or less consistently. The Russian culture and the Church were being destroyed in the USSR. Internationalism and inter-racial marriages were promoted. The USSR has done everything possible to make people to identify themselves not as Russians, but as Soviet people. All the facts show that it is the USSR and not the old Russia that serves as a role model for the current Russian authorities. They are building a post-Soviet state and not in any way a Russian national state.

The main supports for the Kremlin authorities in their anti-Russian enterprise are the security agencies. Their purpose is to suppress any popular protest and discontent by unlawful use of force — simply because it is impossible to do it by lawful methods. It is not a coincidence that today the members of the security agencies and not regular officials or manufacturers who get the most of benefits and opportunities.

Kremlin’s goal is to create in place of Russia and Russian civilization a new supranational pseudo- empire within the framework of the New World Order. Under the guidance of a Jewish elite, the Russian majority will be gradually replaced by Asian migrants. Of course, they cannot acknowledge this openly as it will cause mass protests and they will be quickly swept away. So for the people’s consumption they have an official ideology of building a society of prosperity, social justice and interethnic peace. Yet they cannot hide the truth, especially from those who have access to objective information. As a result, the silence of the ruling circles is bought by enormous material benefits on one hand, and by intimidation on the other. In this light, it is easy to understand the murders of generals Lebed and Rokhlin, Governor Evdokimov and many others who had ascended to the political Olympus in Russia but had not become completely loyal to those forces that control and deliberately destroy our country as the heart of Russian civilization. I think that the mysterious death of General Shebarshin, the last chief of the KGB, is in the same line of political murders.

Multiculturalism (‘multinationality’) is the official Putin ideology. Ten years ago there were virtually no alien migrants in Russia. Now there are 15 millions of them, mostly Central Asians — 10% of the total population. Most of them are males of military age. In Moscow they commit around a half of all violent crimes. Russian authorities do not even try to hide the fact that their goal is to alter the national and cultural composition of Russian population by means of importation and legalization of huge numbers of culture- and civilization-wise alien people, mainly from undeveloped Third World countries.  Moscow is no longer a Russian city.

Putin has overseen the biggest influx of non-whites into Russia since the days of the Mongol occupation. Millions of Azeris, Tajiks, Chinese, Chechens, Afghans and Kurds. This is something even left wingers and anti-Russians do not deny - the wave of non-white immigration in the last decade Russia became the second most popular destination for non-white immigrants on the planet. Moscow alone has something like a million Azeris, hundreds of thousands Chechens plus Chinese, as well as 'Europe's Curse', black Africans. ... Though the Russia’s media report only interracial crimes involved skinhead and poor innocent immigrants!

Now not a single month passes without some minor ethnic riot occurring in some part of the country, triggered by the depressingly similar scenario: a migrant kills a Russian, police either let the murderer go or don’t do anything, local authorities blame Russians for xenophobia, locals arise and protest. This is in fact good development as Russians learn that only rioting makes authorities listen. Unfortunately, as a result, the most active members of such events then go to prison.

Western media completely ignore that for each persecuted Pussy Riot member there are thousands of Russian men persecuted for as little as derogatory remarks about migrants made in social networks. However, you have heard nothing about them because mass media is not interested in them and they don’t have powerful advocates.

In Putin's speeches, he calls Russian nationalists enemies of the state. Russia has banned all influential Russian Nationalist organizations are prohibited new ones from starting. All Russian Nationalist leaders have either fled Russia, are on probation, or are under criminal investigation.

In February 2014, Putin has signed the law that increased the punishment for nationalism and racialism. He called nationalism as "extremism".  After the amendment to Penal Code was signed by the President Putin, activists of nationalists movement, (Article 282.2, part 1), can now be charged with extremism and expect the maximal possible sentence of 10 years in prison. Even during Stalin rule there were no such totalitarian laws for “hate speech”.  However, Russian can always torture even random people for false confessions.  Now any man in Russia can be charged with such a crime and arrested immediately following initiation of criminal investigation and kept in jail for the duration of the entire pretrial period. It is also now possible to tap the phones of the suspect, bug his residence and workplace, conduct surveillance, etc., without special court order. I believe this is the main “technical” reason why Putin decided to make this amendment. The regime wants not only to jail its opponents but also to spy on them legally at any moment of time. Corruption in the court system is rampant. The acquittal rate in criminal trials is around 0.5%. During Stalin's reign, it was 1-2%.

An approximate number of Russian Nationalists imprisoned during the last decade is around two thousand. Most of them are young Russians, convicted under the notorious Article 282 of the Penal Code (“incitement to racial hatred,” also colloquially known as the ‘Russian Article’ or ‘hatespeech’), usually in aftermath of conflicts with Central Asians or Caucasians muslims.

Putin's elections have rigged. Candidates who might defeat him have been blocked from registering. Ballots are stuffed. And since courts are under full Kremlin control, independent candidates cannot do anything.

Putin's neocommunist regime also continue to heroize history of the USSR.

Before enacting Holocaust Laws, Zionist slave Vladimir Putin reinstated the Soviet-era red star as the Russian military's official emblem--in the latest reincarnation of Communist symbols that has sparked fears of a return to the repressive past... On Putin's initiative, the Russian parliament earlier resurrected the music of the old Soviet anthem, and brought back the Soviet-era red banner as the military's flag. Portraits of Lenin and Stalin were openly paraded through Russian streets to mark Defender of the Fatherland Day, during 2012-2015.

President Vladimir Putin has also taken on the task of refreshing Russian history with a new perspective. He is on record lamenting the collapse of the Soviet Union as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century". As he has said: "It was worse, apparently, than World War I, worse than World War II". "Last year, the president informed a group of history teachers that Russia 'has nothing to be ashamed of Stalin and that it was their job to present a more balanced picture of Joseph Stalin, described in one approved volume as "the most successful Soviet leader ever."

In 2005 as a response to the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, Russian state media along with youth organizations launched the campaign ahead of World War II memorial celebrations. Their main symbol is Georgiyevskaya lenta. It was associated with military units in Red Army, who were awarded the collective Guard battle honors during the WWII, due to the usage of the color scheme in the "Great Patriotic War". I suppose, I don't have to remind about mass rape and murder of millions of white people by Red Army in Europe. Symbol of rape and murder of white European people became a decade ago part of state religion in Russia.

Kremlin was behind the crash of Airbus A321 (Metrojet Flight 9268) with its death toll of 224 people

The bombing was an attempt to 'kill two rabbits with one bullet' as it allowed Russia to bomb Bashar al-Assad's enemies in Syria while bringing Moscow back into the international community.

On a sultry night at Sharm el-Sheikh, one of the most popular tourist destinations in the Middle East, events were much the same as any evening. Passengers’ tickets at the airport were scanned and passports stamped. People dozed on chairs; babies cried.

Outside, taxi-drivers loitered as chartered flights arrived or thundered away into the sky. One such departure early that morning on October 31 was Metrojet Flight 9268, taking Russian tourists home to St Petersburg from holidays on the Red Sea.

The Russian captain, a veteran called Valery Yurievich Nemov, had 12,000 hours of experience. The safety logs were up to date, though there had been previous damage to the aircraft when the tail was damaged — and repaired — in 2001.

Former KGB agent Boris Karpichkov believes Russian president Vladimir Putin was behind the bombing.

As the aircraft taxied shortly before 4am, there were 217 passengers on board, with seven crew. Take-off went smoothly. The plane climbed to a cruising altitude of 31,000ft, and was 23 minutes into its flight, heading north over the Sinai peninsula. Then the nightmare happened.

A shattering explosion towards the rear of the plane effectively split the aircraft in two and it crashed to the ground.

Bodies were found — many still strapped into their seats — scattered over a 30-mile radius 31,000 feet below where the aircraft broke up in the sky.

Experts say there would have been a ‘hurricane-like’ decompression ripping through the plane from back to front, tearing anything — and anybody — not strapped down into a maelstrom of airborne objects flying through the cabin.

Some of those aboard died of hypoxia — loss of oxygen — while many others were killed on impact with the ground. But the injuries suffered by those at the back of the plane were markedly different from those at the front. According to Russian sources, passengers in the front section suffered ‘blunt trauma of the chest, abdomen and pelvis, with multiple fractures to the upper and lower limbs and trauma to the internal organs’.

They add that passengers seated at the rear of the aircraft suffered ‘explosive trauma with multiple burns over 90 per cent of their soft tissues’, while their bodies had been peppered with shrapnel.

All the 224 passengers and crew died after the plane exploded at 31,000 feet just 23 minutes after departing

Islamic fanatics soon claimed responsibility for this horrific act of mass murder, subsequently publishing a photograph of a drinks can concealing a timer and explosives, which the extremists claimed had been smuggled on to the aircraft, and detonated after it took off.

Yet, intriguingly, the extremists initially seemed to have as little detail about what actually happened as authorities on the ground, who, in the first hours after the disaster, were unsure of the cause.

Instead, in a brief and strikingly vague statement, IS condemned ‘Russian crusaders’ for their involvement in Syria, and warned that infidels ‘neither have safety in the lands of Muslims nor in their air’ and that ‘soldiers of the Caliphate were able to down a Russian airplane over Sinai province’.

If anything, the implication seemed to be that they had shot down the plane from the ground, not sabotaged it with a bomb.

What’s not in dispute is that the atrocity prompted an extraordinary, seismic shift in world politics between former foes.

Even though sanctions had been imposed on the Moscow regime over its intervention in Ukraine, David Cameron immediately made efforts to improve relations with Russia by phoning President Vladimir Putin to tell him that the British people ‘shared the pain and grief’ of the Russian people.

Putin was said to have been ‘gladdened’ by the call, and welcomed Cameron’s offer to help Russia track down the perpetrators, as other world powers — including France, Germany and China — pledged their solidarity with Russia over the outrage.

Islamic fanatics soon claimed responsibility for the atrocity, but it provided a seismic shift in world politics.

Public opinion, both in Russia and internationally, swung behind Putin after he swore to take ruthless revenge on Islamic State. Moscow started bombing Syria (where ISIS is taking on the ruling Bashar al-Assad government) within days of the aircraft being downed.

But is all really as it seems over the story of Metrojet Flight 9268? Could there be another very disturbing explanation of how the aircraft was blown out of the sky?
One man certainly believes so: Boris Karpichkov, a former spy with the KGB (later renamed the FSB) who now lives under a new identity with his wife and family at a secret location in England after fleeing here in fear for his life.

His sensational claim at first seems unbelievable. For he maintains it was the Kremlin, not ISIS, that deliberately blew the plane out of the sky.

And he says Putin cynically authorised the tragedy not only to obtain worldwide sympathy at a time when Russia was being treated as a pariah because of its aggression towards Ukraine, but also to gain support for its ostensible belligerence against ISIS, which Putin would use as a cover to attack rebel groups in Syria who were sworn enemies of his ally President al-Assad.

Of course, this could simply be the most monstrous slur by a deeply disenchanted man. For it has to be said that Major Karpichkov fell out with his KGB paymasters over money he claimed was owed to him, and ended up in jail before fleeing to Britain.

Yet his case deserves to be aired, particularly in view of the history of black propaganda emanating from Putin and his Kremlin cronies, and his argument is compelling.

Relatives grieve Russian plane crash in Egypt's Sinai.

Major Karpichov claimed the bombing was an attempt to 'kill two rabbits with one bullet' as it allowed Russia to bomb Bashar al-Assad's enemies in Syria while bringing Moscow back into the international community.

The major claims his information comes from a general lieutenant in GRU (one of Russia’s numerous military intelligence wings).

This man told him, he says, that around the time of the plane’s crash, Putin had been expressing his concerns to Kremlin allies about ‘possible losses of political influence’ in Syria and the Middle East. Putin, he went on, was worried about the fate of his traditional ally in the region, President al-Assad, given the West’s support for rebel groups trying to depose him.

A plan was allegedly hatched by officials within GRU to reverse Russia’s declining influence in the region and — as Major Karpichkov claims he was told by a senior source — to ‘kill two rabbits with one bullet’.

The aim was to get ‘at least silent international approval’ for massive military operations against Assad’s enemies under the guise of a campaign against the IS terrorists blamed for bombing the Russian passenger jet; and to bolster Russia’s multi-billion-pound weapons business with the Middle East.

This was all summarised in a dossier compiled by the former KGB spy: ‘In order to accomplish all these aims and to get Western consent to fighting Islamic State (which was, essentially, official support for keeping the Assad regime in power), the Kremlin desperately needed the kind of justification which would generate worldwide attention and full international sympathy and approval for military action.’

The major certainly knows all about the dark arts of espionage.

A graduate of a KGB academy in Minsk, he was taught how to kill with his bare hands as well as how to carry out other so-called ‘wet-jobs’ — the killing of a target without leaving any traces of evidence.

Major Karpichov used four passports to flee house arrest in Latvia before making it to London where he lives under an assumed name with his wife and family, however he claims to still have sources within the GRU.

He served in Russian intelligence for more than a decade, reaching the rank of KGB major and, as such, was privy to Kremlin secrets at a high level. He spent much of his career in the then Soviet republic of Latvia, where he specialised in counter-intelligence for the KGB.

When the Soviet empire collapsed in 1991, he stayed in newly independent Latvia, where he joined the country’s intelligence services. But he also remained on the books of the Kremlin, leaking information to his old bosses.

However, he was jailed for two months on weapons charges after a row over payments he claimed were owed to him by the KGB. The Russians, in turn, accused him of being involved in a massive fraud — part of the normal modus operandi of the Kremlin bringing criminal charges against enemies.

After he was placed under house arrest in Lativa, he used four false passports issued to him while he was a spy and fled the country, ending up in Britain a decade ago.
He says he retains high-level contacts in Russian intelligence circles, and that his dossier is an accurate representation of the truth about the worst terrorist atrocity involving an airliner since the terror attacks in New York on September 11, 2001.

The file states that Russian intelligence ‘geniuses’ in GRU outlined a plan to Putin and his closest aides to bomb a Russian airliner and blame it on Islamic extremists ‘to initiate enormous international hate towards ISIS and to create international sympathy to act on its own without any limits or reservations (for military action).’

The bomb, according to the claim, was designed to vilify ISIS while bringing sympathy to Russia

Once agreed, Major Karpichkov says, the operation was straightforward.
A specialist in ‘wet-jobs’ and other forms of espionage was despatched to Sharm el-Sheikh, where hundreds of thousands of Russians holiday each year to escape the cold. Posing as a fighter who was recuperating in the Red Sea after serving in Ukraine, the agent befriended a young Russian woman staying in the resort, and began a holiday romance.

When the woman was due to leave for St Petersburg, the Russian agent gave her a ‘present’ — asking her to deliver it to his parents at home in Russia — and escorted her through the notoriously lax security at Sharm el-Sheikh airport before she boarded the doomed Metrojet flight in the early hours of the morning.

The gift, says Major Karpichkov, was a bomb and the detonator used to ignite the explosives was known as an EHV-7, which is produced exclusively for special forces soldiers. The device itself looked like a piece of plumbing tube, which is primed to explode by an electrolyte ‘bath’ slowly corroding a metallic wire, which detonates the bomb once it is broken.

The explosive material was — sources add — cyclonite, an enormously powerful substitute for TNT.

It has been suggested that the bomb was most likely placed under the seat 30A or 31A. Plane records show that seat 30A was occupied by Nadezhda Bashakova, 77, from Volkhov in St Petersburg region, travelling with her daughter Margarita Simanova, 43, who sat in 30B. In seat 31A was Maria Ivleva, 15, also from St Petersburg region. Could this young woman have been be the unwitting carrier of the bomb? She was with her mother Marina Ivleva, 44, who occupied seat 31B. My sources say the bomb carrier was older, and sitting nearby.

The terror attack was designed to allow Russia international approval to bomb al-Assad's enemies in Syria.

However extraordinary, the allegations about the Sinai crash are not as far-fetched as they may seem. After all, Putin has allegedly used such a murderous method against his own people to generate support for war before. In 1999, during Putin’s first term as president after coming to power following a career as a KBG spy, he was accused of being behind the infamous bombings of four apartment blocks in Moscow as well as the cities of Buynaksk and Volgodonsk.

Within 24 hours of a series of explosions ripping through the apartment blocks, killing 307 civilians, including women and children, and injuring more than 1,700 more, Putin had blamed Islamic fighters in Chechnya — and launched a devastating air assault on the region.

According to Putin and his loyalists, the bombing was ordered by Islamist warlords, who were trying to wreak havoc among the Russian population. Yet, even as Putin was going to war against his enemies in Chechnya, three Kremlin spies were arrested by local police who accused them of planting the devices.

At the same time, another bomb plot was foiled and Russian police traced suspicious calls, in which ‘terrorists’ discussed the atrocity, to a number in Moscow. It turned out to belong to the FSB (state security).

Other suspects arrested for the bombing campaign were later released after showing their FSB official identification cards.

Even more damning, it transpired that a Russian official had expressed his condolences about the apartment building bombings in an official speech to a council meeting — three days before any of the explosions.

A special parliamentary commission was set up to investigate the plot in 2000. While Putin’s government refused to co-operate with the inquiry, two members of the commission were killed in apparent assassinations, and its senior lawyer was jailed.

However, critics claim that Karpichokov has made up the claims in order to embarrass the Kremlin.

The commission later blamed Islamists and Chechen separatists for the apartment bombings.

Yet Alexander Litvinenko, the former KGB spy who fled to Britain and was later murdered by two Russian agents, also alleged — along with several other former Putin allies — that the apartments were blown up on the Kremlin’s orders to win public support for a war in Chechnya.

Soon after making these and other allegations about Putin, Litvinenko was poisoned by Russian agents who slipped polonium 210 — a deadly radioactive substance — into his tea during a meeting at the Millennium Hotel in London’s Grosvenor Square. He died in agony several weeks later.

Not surprisingly, the Russians have furiously dismissed the claims by their former spy.


Multiсulturalism Is Dead. Denmark's Lesson to the White race.

Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark’s 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country’s convicted rapists, an especially combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim. Similar, if lesser, disproportions are found in other crimes.

Over time, as Muslim immigrants increase in numbers, they wish less to mix with the indigenous population. A recent survey finds that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would readily marry a Dane.

Forced marriages — promising a newborn daughter in Denmark to a male cousin in the home country, then compelling her to marry him, sometimes on pain of death — are one problem.

Muslim leaders openly declare their goal of introducing Islamic law once Denmark’s Muslim population grows large enough — a not-that-remote prospect. If present trends persist, one sociologist estimates, every third inhabitant of Denmark in 40 years will be Muslim.

It is easy to understand why a growing number of Danes would feel that Muslim immigrants show little respect for Danish values and laws.

An example is the phenomenon common to other European countries and Canada: some Muslims in Denmark who opted to leave the Muslim faith have been murdered in the name of Islam, while others hide in fear for their lives. Jews are also threatened and harassed openly by Muslim leaders in Denmark, a country where once Christian citizens worked to smuggle out nearly all of their 7,000 Jews by night to Sweden — before the Nazis could invade. I think of my Danish friend Elsa — who, as a teenager, had dreaded crossing the street to the bakery every morning under the eyes of occupying Nazi soldiers — and I wonder what she would say today.

In 2001, Denmark elected the most conservative government in some 70 years — one that had some decidedly non-generous ideas about liberal unfettered immigration. Today, Denmark has the strictest immigration policies in Europe. (Its effort to protect itself has been met with accusations of ‘racism’ by liberal media across Europe — even as other governments struggle to right the social problems wrought by years of too-lax immigration.)

If you wish to become Danish, you must attend three years of language classes. You must pass a test on Denmark’s history, culture, and a Danish language test. You must live in Denmark for 7 years before applying for citizenship. You must demonstrate intent to work, and have a job waiting. If you wish to bring a spouse into Denmark, you must both be over 24 years of age, and you won’t find it so easy anymore to move your friends and family to Denmark with you.

You will not be allowed to build a mosque in Copenhagen. Although your children have a choice of some 30 Arabic culture and language schools in Denmark, they will be strongly encouraged to assimilate to Danish society in ways that past immigrants weren’t.

In 2006, the Danish minister for employment, Claus Hjort Frederiksen, spoke publicly of the burden of Muslim immigrants on the Danish welfare system, and it was horrifying: the government’s welfare committee had calculated that if immigration from Third World countries were blocked, 75 percent of the cuts needed to sustain the huge welfare system in coming decades would be unnecessary. In other words, the welfare system, as it existed, was being exploited by immigrants to the point of eventually bankrupting the government. ‘We are simply forced to adopt a new policy on immigration.’

‘The calculations of the welfare committee are terrifying and show how unsuccessful the integration of immigrants has been up to now,’ he said.

A large thorn in the side of Denmark’s imams is the Minister of Immigration and Integration, Rikke Hvilshoj. She makes no bones about the new policy toward immigration, ‘The number of foreigners coming to the country makes a difference,’ Hvilshoj says, ‘There is an inverse correlation between how many come here and how well we can receive the foreigners that come.’ And on Muslim immigrants needing to demonstrate a willingness to blend in, ‘In my view, Denmark should be a country with room for different cultures and religions. Some values, however, are more important than others. We refuse to question democracy, equal rights, and freedom of speech.’

Hvilshoj has paid a price for her show of backbone. Perhaps to test her resolve, the leading radical imam in Denmark, Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, demanded that the government pay blood money to the family of a Muslim who was murdered in a suburb of Copenhagen, stating that the family’s thirst for revenge could be thwarted for money. When Hvilshoj dismissed his demand, he argued that in Muslim culture the payment of retribution money was common, to which Hvilshoj replied that what is done in a Muslim country is not necessarily what is done in Denmark.

The Muslim reply came soon after: her house was torched while she, her husband and children slept. All managed to escape unharmed, but she and her family were moved to a secret location and she and other ministers were assigned bodyguards for the first time — in a country where such murderous violence was once so scarce.

Her government has slid to the right, and her borders have tightened. Many believe that what happens in the next decade will determine whether Denmark survives as a bastion of good living, humane thinking and social responsibility, or whether it becomes a nation at civil war with supporters of Sharia law.

Denmark have one of the highest number of sexual assaults in Europe.

Iraqis, Iranians, Turks and Somalis are dramatically overrepresented among convicted rapists in Denmark. More than 80% of convicted rapists have immigrant backgrounds or were immigrant descedants according to official data from Statistics Denmark. Immigrants and their descendants account for only ten percent of the Danish population.

It’s abolutely criminal that the government and authorities continues to hide the fact that these dramatic figures are a direct result from a growing Muslim and migration presence in Europe. To not reveal this fact to the public and allow the people a choice to decide their own future and whether to support mass migration or not is completely undemocratic. Europe’s decades of struggles to give security and equality to women and children is under threat from social engineerings and one-sided government policies that refuses to listen to facts or allow proper data to be collected.

The European Union has pushed unprotected women and children into the arms of a foreign assaulter who present a medieval mindset which endlessly victimize and targets these groups as ‘lesser worthy’ beings. Muslim societies not only encourage the attack, beating, rape and even killing of women but also legalizes it.

You cannot transform an insular and violent primitive mindset imported into a modern society by a few lectures and leaflets on rules of conduct. It can take up to three generations to change the attitude of migrants. If the culture is domineering, totalitarian and refuses to accept the host culture, then the changes rarely take place but the ideals are merely imported as a new feature into society.

One in four Muslims in Denmark feel that Danish law must be based on Koranic law mixed with basic Danish constitution, while one in ten believe Danish law must be based only on the Koran.

53.9% of the surveyed believe in Danish laws. In other words, the remaining 46.1% of Muslims surveyed want Sharia law in Denmark. The Danes assumed Muslims would integrate and adapt Danish culture. But Muslims can never assimilate since their own religion will not permit assimilation with others.

We would do well to look to Denmark, and say a prayer for her future and for our own.

Multiсulturalism Is Dead. Sweden's Lesson to the White race.

In 1975, the Swedish parliament unanimously decided to change the former homogeneous Sweden into a multicultural country. Forty years later the dramatic consequences of this experiment emerge: violent crime has increased by 300%.

Back in 1975, the year when politicians decided that Sweden was to become multicultural, the Swedish population stood at 8,208,442. By 2014 it had grown to 9,743,087 — an increase of 18.7%. Sweden’s recent population growth is without parallel. Never before in the country’s history has the number of inhabitants increased so fast. Sweden is now the fastest growing country in Europe. This growth is entirely due to immigration, as Swedish women on average give birth to 1.92 children compared to the 2.24 average of immigrant women. One should, however, keep in mind that in the statistics, second-generation immigrants are counted as Swedes.

Welfare parasites

Sweden: Ten times higher welfare dependency among 16.5% foreign born (massively overrepresented by muslims and africans) – an increase of 82%.

According to one 2007 source, immigration, of which Muslims comprise a significant part, “costs Sweden at least 40 to 50 billion Swedish kroner [approximately $7 billion] every year … and has greatly contributed to bringing the Swedish welfare state to the brink of bankruptcy.” Yet two years earlier, the country’s finance minister declared counterintuitively that “more immigrants should be allowed into Sweden in order to safeguard the welfare system.”

According to an independent study of government data, Sweden’s 16.5% foreign born population (massively overrepresented by muslims and africans) use 66.4% of the nation’s government financial assistance. The cost of housing these foreign born is escalating out of control and in 2014 the 83.5% Swedish born population cost around 4,44 billion kroners while the foreign born population of 16.5% cost almost 8,88 billion kroners. The actual numbers may be even higher considering residence allowances, family allowances and old-age dependency support (ÄFS) is not included.

One Iranian immigrant to Sweden expressed astonishment at his new country’s policies: “In Sweden my family encountered a political system that seemed very strange. The interpreter told us that Sweden is a country where the government will put a check into your mailbox each month if you don’t work. She explained that there was no reason to get a job.”

Sweden will need to borrow more money and cut costs across the board to meet the expense of record numbers of asylum seekers arriving in the country. “It is going to take longer for us to get back to balanced public finances,” Andersson told reporters. “It also going to mean that we are going to need to borrow money.”

Oh, we see another feminist European politician, demanding White men pay for her brown and black pets.

Rape statistics in Sweden

Forty years after the Swedish parliament unanimously decided to change the formerly homogenous Sweden into a multicultural country, violent crime has increased by 300% and rapes by 1,472%. Sweden is now number two on the list of rape countries, surpassed only by Lesotho in Southern Africa.

If one looks at the number of rapes, however, the increase is even worse. In 1975, 421 rapes were reported to the police; in 2014, it was 6,620. That is an increase of 1,472%.

Sweden is now number two on the global list of rape countries. According to a survey from 2010, Sweden, with 53.2 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants, is surpassed only by tiny Lesotho in Southern Africa, with 91.6 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants.

As few as 10-20 percent of all sexual offences are reported to the police. The Swedish Crime Survey (Nationella trygghetsundersökningen, NTU) provides a better picture of the extent of criminality, with data on both victims as well as perpetrators — which is lacking in the criminal statistics. Of those who are suspected for sexual offences, the majority are men and only about two percent are women. A majority of the victims are women. In a third of reported rapes, the victim is younger than 15.

The BRÅ website states: “But when you contact senior police and government sources they confirm (anonymous in fear of losing their jobs) that these numbers represent Muslims. And a majority of these rapes and sexual assaults are caused by asylum seekers. And these numbers are only the tip of the ice berg. According to the authorities, Sweden’s real rape statistics are 400-900% higher than official numbers”.

Over the past 10-15 years, immigrants have mainly come from Muslim countries such as Iraq, Syria and Somalia. This mass influx can fully explain rape statistics. The foreign rape figures at 77.6% Muslim has been anonymously confirmed by Swedish police. The actual figure could be higher. These percentages do not include Muslims with Swedish citizenship contained within rapes in the figures categorized under “Swedish nationals”.

Men suspected of rape, men of foreign extraction were represented far more than Swedes.  There is a direct correspondence between the incidence of rape and the number of people with a foreign background in Sweden:

1960-1970s –2.6 times as often as Swedes
1980s – 4.7 times as often as Swedes
1990s – 8.1 times as often as Swedes
2000s – 19.5 times as often as Swedes

A 1996 report by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention reached the conclusion that immigrants from North Africa (Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia) were 23 times as likely to commit rape as Swedish men. The figures for men from Iraq, Bulgaria and Romania were, respectively, 20, 18 and 18. Men from the rest of Africa were 16 times more prone to commit rape; and men from Iran, Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia, 10 times as prone as Swedish men.

Since 2000, there has only been one research report on immigrant crime. It was done in 2006 by Ann-Christine Hjelm from Karlstads University. It emerged that in 2002, 85% of those sentenced to at least two years in prison for rape in Svea Hovrätt, a court of appeals, were foreign born or second-generation immigrants.

In the first seven months of 2013, over 1,000 Swedish women reported being raped by Muslim immigrants in the capital city of Stockholm.

Over 300 of those were under the age of 15. The number of rapes is up 16% so far this year compared to previous numbers. A large proportion of the increase include rape of young girls. The official radio report quoted from BRÅ (The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention) refuses to mention the M-word in the socialist-suffocated Sweden, a country held hostage by the extreme left.

According to figures published by The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brottsförebyggande rådet; known as Brå) -- an agency under the Ministry of Justice -- 29,000 Swedish women, during 2011, reported that they had been raped (which seems to indicate that less than 25% of the rapes are reported to the police).

But when you contact senior police and government sources they confirm (anonymous in fear of losing their jobs) that these numbers represent Muslims. And a majority of these rapes and sexual assaults are caused by asylum seekers. And these numbers are only the tip of the ice berg. According to the authorities, Sweden’s real rape statistics are 400-900% higher than official numbers. The BRÅ website states:

“As few as 10-20 percent of all sexual offences are reported to the police. The Swedish Crime Survey (Nationella trygghetsundersökningen, NTU) provides a better picture of the extent of criminality, with data on both victims as well as perpetrators — which is lacking in the criminal statistics. Of those who are suspected for sexual offences, the majority are men and only about two percent are women. A majority of the victims are women. In a third of reported rapes, the victim is younger than 15.”

Gang rapes in Sweden

A new trend reached Sweden with full force over the past few decades: gang rape — virtually unknown before in Swedish criminal history. The number of gang rapes increased spectacularly between 1995 and 2006. Since then no studies of them have been undertaken.

One of the worst cases occurred in 2012, when a 30-year old woman was raped by eight men in a housing project for asylum seekers, in the small town of Mariannelund. The woman was an acquaintance of a man from Afghanistan who had lived in Sweden for a number of years. He invited her to go out with him. She obliged. The Afghan man took her to a refugee housing project and left her defenseless. During the night, she was raped repeatedly by the asylum seekers and when her “friend” returned, he raped her too. The following morning she managed to call the police. Sweden’s public prosecutor has called the incident “the worst crime of rape in Swedish criminal history.”

Seven of the men were sentenced to between 4.5 and 6.5 years in prison. Prison time is usually reduced by a third, so it won’t be long before the men will be ready for new assaults — presumably on infidel women.

In cases of gang rape, culprits and victims are most often young and in almost every case, the perpetrators are of immigrant background, mostly from Muslim countries. In an astounding number of cases, the Swedish courts have demonstrated sympathy for the rapists. Several times the courts have acquitted suspects who have claimed that the girl wanted sex with six, seven or eight men.

One striking incident occurred in 2013, in the Stockholm suburb of Tensta. A 15-year-old girl was locked up while six men of foreign extraction had sex with her. The lower court convicted the six men but the court of appeals acquitted them because no violence had occurred, and because the court determined that the girl “had not been in a defenseless position.”

State support for rapists and pedophiles in Sweden

A 18-year-old Somali immigrant who brutally raped a 12-year-old girl in Sundsvall, Sweden, has been found guilty of rape of a child - but he was sentenced to 180 hours of community service.

A male refugee in an asylum center in Tingsryd municipality in Sweden, on Tuesday raped a three-year-old child. The Migration Board tried to conceal the incident

Responsible of the asylum center learned about the rape during the day, and in collaboration with the Swedish Migration Board had decided to move the man from the accommodation to protect him.

In the first seven months of 2013, over 1,000 Swedish women reported being raped by Muslim immigrants in the capital city of Stockholm.

Over 300 of those were under the age of 15. The number of rapes is up 16% so far this year compared to previous numbers. A large proportion of the increase include rape of young girls. The official radio report quoted from BRÅ (The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention) refuses to mention the M-word in the socialist-suffocated Sweden, a country held hostage by the extreme left.

In an astounding number of cases, the Swedish courts have demonstrated sympathy for the rapists, and have acquitted suspects who have claimed that the girl wanted to have sex with six, seven or eight men.

Rape clinic for men

In response to mass rape of Swedish males by muslim and black migrants Sweden has opened the world's first rape centre for male sexual violence victims. The hospital at Södersjukhuset opened as part of a strategy to ensure 'gender equal' patient care.

More and more men are being subjected to homosexual rape in multicultural Sweden. 370 sex crimes against boys and men were registered in 2014, although the actual number of incidents is thought to be significantly higher.

Glaring discrepancy

How is it, then, that in 2008, Sweden’s neighbor Denmark only had 7.3 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants compared to 53.2 in Sweden?

Danish legislation is not very different from Sweden’s, and there is no obvious reason why Danish women should be less inclined to report rape than their Swedish counterparts.

In 2011, 6,509 rapes were reported to the Swedish police — but only 392 in Denmark. The population of Denmark is about half the size of Sweden’s, so even adjusted for size, the discrepancy is significant.

In Sweden, the authorities do what they can to conceal the origin of the rapists.

In Denmark, the state’s official statistical office, Statistics Denmark, revealed that in 2010 more than half of convicted rapists had an immigrant background.

Politically Motivated Persecution of anyone speaking out about ‘rape problem’ in Sweden

Michael Hess, a local politician from Sweden Democrat Party, encouraged Swedish journalists to get acquainted with Islam’s view of women, in connection with the many rapes that took place in Cairo’s Tahrir Square during the “Arab Spring”. Hess wrote, “When will you journalists realize that it is deeply rooted in Islam’s culture to rape and brutalize women who refuse to comply with Islamic teachings. There is a strong connection between rapes in Sweden and the number of immigrants from MENA-countries [Middle East and North Africa].”

This remark led to Michael Hess being charged with “denigration of ethnic groups” [hets mot folkgrupp], a crime in Sweden. In May last year, he was handed a suspended jail sentence and a fine — the suspension was due to the fact that he had no prior convictions. During his trial, he provided evidence of how sharia law deals with rape, and statistics to indicate that Muslims are vastly overrepresented among perpetrators of rape in Sweden. However, the court decided that facts were irrelevant:
“The Court [Tingsrätten] notes that the question of whether or not Michael Hess’s pronouncement is true, or appeared to be true to Michael Hess, has no bearing on the case. Michael Hess’s pronouncement must therefore be viewed as an expression of disdain for immigrants with an Islamic faith.”

The Left cannot tolerate the existence of anyone who dares to question their innate, yet obviously non-existant, superiority and moral purity. Hence anyone that points out this lack is clearly radically biased and persecuted.

Totalitarian politicians in Sweden having secret services to monitor social media etc and ruining careers of anyone speaking out about their madness.

False media narrative about rape crimes

The most shocking thing, however, is the ‘political correctness’ overshadowing the reporting of rape crimes. Jewish-controlled Swedish press refuses to sound a warning alarm for white women about who these sexual predators are. Thus, when a Muslim commits a rape of white woman, the media only refers to him as a Swedish male.

All major Swedish media reported on a brutal gang rape on board the Finnish Ferry Amorella, running between Stockholm and Åbo in Finland. Big headlines told the readers that the perpetrators were Swedish:

“Several Swedish Men Suspected of Rape on the Finland Ferry” (Dagens Nyheter).
“Six Swedish Men Raped Woman in Cabin” (Aftonbladet).
“Six Swedes Arrested for Rape on Ferry” (Expressen).

On closer inspection, it turned out that seven of the eight suspects were Somalis and one was Iraqi. None of them had Swedish citizenship, so they were not even Swedish in that sense. According to witnesses, the group of men had been scouring the ferry looking for sex. The police released four of them (but they are still suspects) whereas four (all Somalis) remain in custody.

Still, however, most assumed that Swedish media hadn’t lied straight out, simply having neglected to publish the ethnicity but publishing their proper, formal nationality – that they were Somalis with Swedish citizenship. But that is not true. All of the four men who are currently in custody, on probable causes suspected of aggravated rape, have Somali citizenship.

The internet radio station Granskning Sverige called the mainstream newspapers Aftonposten andExpressen to ask why they had described the perpetrators as “Swedish men” when they actually were Somalis without Swedish citizenship. They were hugely offended when asked if they felt any responsibility to warn Swedish women to stay away from certain men. “If the women knew, then perhaps they would have stayed away from these men and avoided being raped,” said the reporter from Granskning Sverige.

Well, maybe the “benefiting the economy” argument for immigration, exploited by Jewish-controlled media is a hoax. But hey – someone has to gang-rape all these white women. After all, whites did the holocaust. They deserve to be punished. That’s why zionist media is always on the side of the “oppressed” non-white rapists.

The Swedish media market is dominated by the large zionist media groups Bonnier, Schibsted and Stampen. The following are, for example, the largest daily newspapers in Sweden:

1. Aftonbladet (Schibsted)
2.  Dagens Nyheter (Bonnier)
3.  Expressen (Bonnier)
4. Goteborgs-Posten (Stampen)
5. Svenska Dagbladet (Schibsted)
6. Sydsvenskan (Bonnier)
7. Dagens Industri (Bonnier)

As you can see, Bonnier owns or controls four of them, Schibsted two, and Stampen one. Together, they control all of the largest daily newspapers. Bonnier is owned by the Jewish family Bonnier, and Stampen is owned by the Jewish family Hjorne. Both families are known to be engaged in Jewish causes.

Schibsted is owned by major Jewish international banks such as Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Bank of New York Mellon. However, this is not merely about ownership and financial interests.

The Schibsted-owned newspaper Aftonbladet (the largest in Sweden) recently admitted that the management of Schibsted when needed consults with their Jewish masters. Aftonbladet says the banks1 power over Schibsted is "both direct and indirect".

We could go on about smaller newspaper, TV channels, and so on, and the pattern is similar. Jews also sit on key positions in these companies - for instance, the Jew Peter Wolodarski is editor-in-chief of the Bonnier-owned Dagens Nyheter.

A tiny group of parasites - there are only about 20,000 of them in Sweden - control all of the country's media, directly and indirectly.

Europe is turning into the third world sewer.

When Europe decided to kick out God and replace Jesus Christ with socialist and liberal madness, look what came swarming in. Sweden is being conquered by muslims and blacks without a single shot and soon it will happen to all the far left countries in E.U.

Sweden, Germany, U.K. France and Russia is a good example what can happens when people are dumb enough to allow a whole country to be run by ignorant neo-Marxist social workers who are mentally living in some magical fantasy communist land. The White European people elected these politics and do not even try to protest, so they deserve all they’ll get.

As the people in these countries try harder and harder to ignore the social reality, it becomes impossible to prevent the criminal acts of illegal immigrants who have flooded the European countries with the blessings of the European Union. That’s what you get for letting women and homosexuals run the place.

Liberals and leftist have opened the gates of hell and prevent anyone from closing them. Unimaginable evil has been unleashed on the white lands. But European people elect the same bastards for decades and they do not even try to defend their lands. And if local population remains indifferent to the muslim and black invasion, I won’t be sorry for the mass rape and murder in Europe, because they have brought all this trash willingly.

Remember socialism and liberalism is a mental disorder. It is cultural suicide.

Sexy anime girls

Гадание на Таро (карта дня).

Гадание Карта Дня поможет выделить акцент в событиях, чувствах или вопросах, наиболее значимых на настоящий момент. Она отразит также эмоции, настроение, мотивацию. Существует множество причин, по которым мы не всегда правильно расставляем приоритеты и добиваемся своих целей. Карта укажет лучший способ действий, полезный для личной эволюции и просто оптимальный в настоящий момент. Если сегодня вам выпала карта, которая вызвала тревогу, возьмите себе на вооружение ее предупреждения. Если же карта вам нравится, сфокусируйте свои действия так, чтобы предсказания карты сбылись.

Originally posted by lorddreadnought at Вместо люстрации всех Украинских судей давно нужно было перевешать.

#animegirl, #share, #bikini, #sexy, #teen, #sexyanimebabes, #manga, #illustrationspure, #capcom, #animesexy, #beauty, #follow, #likeforfollow, #animehot, #followus, #art, #anime, #hotanimebabes, #curvywomen, #hotanimegirl, #enjoy, #puredigital, #likes, #artwork, #mangas, #sex, #comics, sexy anime girls, #animebeautygirl, #ecchii, #curvygirls, #artfan, #likeus, #followme, #warriorbikini, #beautifuldigitalart, #mangahot, #artists, #teenager, #hottie, #sexyanimegirl, #gorgeous, #likeforlike, #panties, #like, #followforfollow, #animeillustrations, #artist, #hot

Гороскоп путешествий

Originally posted by lorddreadnought at Гороскоп путешествий

Гороскоп путешествий.

Все мы знаем, что отпуск может быть как удачным и запоминающимся, так и неудачным и бестолковым. Выбрать правильное время для своего путешествия – половина успеха. Этот гороскоп построен на индивидуальной интерпретации планетных транзитов на любой момент времени (нельзя только вернуться назад, чтобы посмотреть, а что же было когда-то...). Гороскоп бесплатный.

Из гороскопа вы сможете узнать:
какой день лучше всего выбрать для начала отпуска, чтобы он обеспечил вам максимально запоминающиеся впечатления;
какие дни будут удачными (или наоборот, нежелательными) для перелетов и поездок;
когда лучше арендовать номер в отеле, транспортное средство, договариваться о сервисе и услугах инструктора или повара;
на какие дни планировать самые интересные экскурсии и развлекательные мероприятия;
когда вас может ждать романтическое знакомство или встреча с интересными попутчиками;
когда можно сделать удачные покупки и какие именно;
удачные и опасные дни для занятий экстремальными видами спорта и приключений;
благоприятные дни для оздоровительных, косметических процедур.