web analytics
'Hitler' (book by Brendan Simms)

Hitler, 31

If Hitler saw Germany’s salvation in a domestic revival, this did not make him blind towards foreign models. Indeed, the international context within which all his thinking was embedded made him particularly interested in the strength of rival powers. Hitler’s principal model here was Britain. ‘The British,’ he admitted, ‘are entitled to feel proud as a people.’ Britain’s vitality was based on the ‘extraordinary brilliance’ of her population. They had the ‘British national sentiment which our people lacks so much’ and they had maintained ‘racial purity in the colonies’, by which he meant the general absence of intermarriage between settlers and colonial administrators and the native population .Unlike the belated German national state after 1871, Britain enjoyed ‘a centuries-long political-diplomatic tradition’. Unlike Germany, she had grasped the true connection between politics and economics. ‘England has recognized the first principle of state health and existence,’ Hitler argued, ‘and has acted for centuries according to the principle that economic power must be converted into political power’ and ‘that political power must be used to protect economic life’. ‘There are things that permit the British to exercise world domination,’ he explained: ‘a highly developed sense of national identity, clear racial unity, and finally the ability to convert economic power into political power, and political power into economic power’.

There were, however, two profound contradictions in Hitler’s thinking about Britain. First of all, he dubbed the country a ‘second Jewry’, which sat ill with his otherwise respectful attitude. Hitler regarded British Jews as primarily urban, and so well integrated ‘that they appeared to be British’, which prevented the growth of anti-Semitism there. If true, then this might—in Hitler’s reasoning—account for British hostility to the Reich, but he did not explain why this uniquely high level of Jewish penetration did not render her even weaker than Germany. This paradox at the heart of Hitler’s view of the United Kingdom was never resolved.

This is interesting and I feel I must give my opinion.

My view differs not only from the liberal (at its extreme pole, the Woke) or the common conservative (at its extreme pole, the white nationalist). It also differs from Hitler, as we can see from the masthead, ‘The Wall’, in the sense that discovering that Jesus didn’t even exist, but that one hundred per cent of the NT was Jewish literary fiction, takes us further away from even the northern side of the wall, to follow the masthead’s metaphor.

I still admire Hitler as the greatest politician Western history has ever produced, but I emphasise the anti-Christian Hitler who only revealed himself to his close friends and in some after-dinner talks (see Weikart’s book): not exactly the Hitler of his public speeches or Mein Kampf.

And that is the point. As Simms reveals throughout his book, Hitler’s thinking evolved from the basically monocausalist letter to Gemlich (i.e., like the Judeo-reductionism of the contemporary white nationalist) to a realisation of international chess: something like the realist John Mearsheimer school of international relations. (Besides having written a book on the immense power of the Jewish lobby, Mearsheimer understands international chess as well as Hitler did; though Mearsheimer does so from the American POV, not the German, let alone the racial one.)

Therefore, what Simms says requires a response. This academic, of course, is neither aware of the JQ nor the CQ and, like psychologist Richard Grannon about whom I spoke yesterday, Simms doesn’t give a damn about the current British Establishment promoting the interbreeding of English roses with orcs, as I witnessed a decade ago with the ubiquitous propaganda I saw on the streets, especially on billboards.

We could say that while it is true that before WW2 the English maintained to some extent the ethnic pride that Hitler saw, after 1945 the monsters from the Christian Id so overwhelmed that pride that it engendered an ethno-suicidal mania (remember that the first orcs were invited to the island by the ethno-traitor government in the second half of the 1940s). Hitler himself, had he survived the war, would have been shocked by this new twist of the collective Aryan unconscious, and would surely have revised his early views on England.

In other words, National Socialism is not a tightly closed system but continually evolving, even in our century, thanks to the post-1945 NS bequeathed to us by Savitri Devi. Simms continues:

Secondly, there was the apparent contradiction that Britain had risen to greatness under the parliamentary system he so despised. There are grounds for believing, however, that he believed representative government suitable for the British but not for the Germans. ‘If all Germans belonged to the tribe of the Lower Saxons [that is the tribe from which the English trace much of their descent—and the only one which Benjamin Franklin had considered fully white]’, he remarked, ‘the republican state form might be the most suited’ to enabling the state ‘to weather all storms and to draw on the best elements for running the country’. ‘Because that is not the case [in Germany],’ Hitler continued, ‘the German people will always need an idol in the shape of a monarch.’ It was an early indication of Hitler’s profound anxiety about German racial fragmentation in the face not so much of Jewry, as of the globally dominant Anglo-Saxons.

Free speech / Free press

Tyrone, Chris

and the UK

Just today I learned of something that happened a couple of weeks ago, about the subject of my post last month that two Londoners, who had commented on this site—Tyrone Patten-Walsh and Christopher Gibbons—had been prosecuted and found guilty for what they said on Chris’ podcast Black Wolf Radio.

I met both of them in August 2014 when I attended a peaceful BNP demonstration outside London. After the peaceful demonstration, I went with the whole group of young English men for a beer in a pub. While it is true that Tyrone and Chris liked revolutionary novels, such as what Harold Covington wrote, they never told me, either personally or by correspondence (I used to exchange emails with both of them, especially Tyrone) that they planned to do anything illegal. Ever.

Since, as I said in my post last year, the judge, prosecutors or even the System news story I reproduce below, fail to quote verbatim what Chris and Tyrone were saying in Black Wolf Radio I used to listen to, I assume they were jailed simply for thoughtcrime—the kind of pronouncements about which they would never have been jailed in the United States of America, thanks to that country’s First Amendment.

I’ve said it a couple of times and it bears repeating: Bloggers or podcasters who live in Europe, Canada, Australia or New Zealand should consider moving to the third world (where I’ve chosen to live). This is what podcaster Gonzalo Lira, murdered this month by the Kiev regime, advised. Gonzalo was murdered precisely because he failed to comply with his own advice (Ukraine is not third world but second world, and it is illegal there to criticise the Kiev regime).

Below I reproduce the System’s text on imprisonment, apparently for thoughtcrime, as they fail to cite verbatim whether it is true that Chris and Tyrone instigated others to commit terrorist acts. Pay particular attention to the penultimate paragraph, insofar as it suggests that it was thoughtcrime (‘homophobic, racist, antisemitic, Islamophobic and misogynistic comments’) rather than terrorist plots, or encouraging others to commit terrorist attacks, what has been punished this month:

Neo-Nazis who targeted [really?—Ed.] Prince Archie jailed for 15 Years

Two far-right British podcasters who encouraged acts of violence [really?—Ed.] against ethnic minorities as well as making derogatory comments about public figures including Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s son, Prince Archie, have been jailed for a total of 15 years.

Christopher Gibbons, 40, and Tyrone Patten-Walsh, 36, were jailed on January 4 after being convicted of committing crimes under the Terrorism Act 2006, between March 2019 and February 2020.

Gibbons and Patten-Walsh were both found guilty on eight counts each of encouraging acts of terrorism, with Gibbons convicted of two additional counts of dissemination of terrorist publications.

Gibbons received an eight-year prison sentence and Patten-Walsh seven years.

The two men from London were arrested in 2021 following an investigation by the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command that focused on material they created, including what the police described as a “neo-Nazi online podcast.”

Titled Black Wolf Radio the 21-episode chat show contained a number of homophobic, racist, antisemitic, Islamophobic and misogynistic comments, some targeted at the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their son.

In June 2022, prosecutor Anne Whyte QC told a London court, per the BBC, that Gibbons had described Prince Archie as an “abomination that should be put down.”

Gibbons also claimed that Prince Harry should be “prosecuted and found guilty and judicially killed for treason.”

Discussing the sentencing, the Met Police’s Counter Terrorism Commander, Dominic Murphy, said per a press release that Gibbons and Patten-Walsh’s material was “exactly the kind that has the potential to draw vulnerable people—particularly young people—into terrorism.”

“We are determined to identify and hold to account individuals pushing this material. In this case, officers reviewed hours-upon-hours of material to present a compelling case,” he said. “I hope this case and today’s sentencing sends a clear message that there are serious consequences for those who share terrorist material or encourage others to become involved in terrorism.”

Gonzalo Lira used to say in his videos that the repression of dissidents was going to escalate terribly in the West shortly. Now even I don’t feel safe visiting the UK again; for example, for having quoted extensively passages from Covington’s novel The Brigade on this site. By the standards that imprisoned Chris and Tyrone perhaps those novel quotes could be interpreted by the English justice system as ‘incitement to terrorism’ or something similar. So—

Goodbye, England!

From the comments section of the above-embedded video about the Chris & Tyrone case:

• ‘The other problems with such laws is that Police and Judges are left with the almost godlike decisions to prosecute’.

• ‘Government should never be able to tell us what we can and cannot say’.

• ‘7 and 8 years seems pretty harsh considering that judges routinely hand out joke sentences to people who actually do harm to others’.

• ‘Their sentence including Islamophobia means criticising the religion of child rapists comes with a 7 or 8 year prison sentence. Britain has Sharia now’.

• ‘In Scotland you can sit at your dinner table and if someone says something you don’t like you can report them to the police’.

• ‘Verbal attacks on Whites are ignored, while the very same words pointed towards minorities will [make] the law fall upon the speaker like a ton of bricks’.

• ‘As an English man in England I’ll think and speak my mind truthfully and factually. F the government’.

• ‘Shouting “fire” in a crowded theater is welcome when you believe there is a fire, and is then a moral duty!’

• ‘Free speech is a myth—every debate about free speech soon turns into a discussion about restrictions on free speech. Even those that say “I believe in free speech” always follow it with the word “but” and then go on to describe the restrictions they want imposed on speech’.

And so on…

Free speech / Free press

Two former commenters

…on this site are going to jail?

Tyrone Patten-Walsh used to comment quite frequently here under the pen name of Joseph Walsh. The last time I visited London I met him and his friend Cristopher Gibbons, who also commented on this site under the pseudonym Chris White, although very rarely.

Some visitors might remember Black Wolf Radio, where Chris talked to his pal Joseph Walsh (Tyrone, as he was known in the London Forum). They talked about things not unlike what we have said here, or what Andrew Anglin has said in The Daily Stormer.

But apparently the UK lacks a Brandenburg law[1]: a refinement of the First Amendment and these two Englishmen, who as I just said have commented on The West’s Darkest Hour, will spend some time in jail!

Tyrone and Chris were tried separately; a retrial was ordered due to irregularities in the prosecution case. Earlier this year they were found guilty but sentencing has been deferred until January. Based on the conduct and remarks of the presiding judge, a Londoner I also met during my latest trip is anticipating a sentence of about eight years for Chris and somewhat less for Tyrone.

England, the land of my English roses, is gone!


[1] According to Wikipedia: ‘Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”.  Specifically, the Court struck down Ohio’s criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence’.

Feminism Film

Downton Abbey revisited

Since I can’t tolerate watching films or television if a non-white actor appears, I recently re-watched the seasons of Downton Abbey. About the first season of this English series I had already written something in 2013, and about the movie they made in 2019 I also wrote something. Recently I even posted a picture of two actresses from Downton Abbey within the series categorised ‘Aryan Beauty’. I was very naive in 2013 but by the end of the seasons I understood Downton Abbey’s bad messages better.

When I wrote what I linked above about the 2010-2015 TV series, and 2019 film, I omitted that in some TV episodes they mentioned Hitler. Those were times when he was imprisoned for his coup attempt, before he was released. Needless to say, mentions of Hitler and his followers even before he came to power were all very negative!

Instead of the English understanding that they were facing the rise of the greatest psychogenic emergency that History has ever witnessed (read the book of which yesterday I only quoted the final sentences), Downton Abbey saturates us with all sorts of frivolous and inane activities of the 1920s jet set, including horse racing, car racing, fowling, fox and deer hunting; cricket, superbly elegant dresses, restaurants for the rich, castles for the English nobility, impressive mansions and lastly a ball or formal dance party before the king.

But the overall message of Downton Abbey, both TV and film, is to show in a benign light the transition from patriarchy to so-called women’s liberation in England. Now they have even made another film. In this second, 2022 sequel of Downton Abbey, the Earl of Grantham even tells his daughter that she is now at the helm; that she is now the captain of the estate we see below!

Highclere Castle, used for the interior
and exterior filming of Downton Abbey.

If Aryan children were in my care they would never see such a thing on television or at the cinema. It is sad to say, but a priest of the sacred words like me can’t have fun with the prolefeed provided by the System.

For new visitors to this site: If you want to know why feminism is a weapon of mass destruction aimed at the white race read this book, or if you just want to read one of its chapters, see pages 99-116. If you are interested in English culture or English films, Jane Austen’s novels represent the world before the feminist psychosis that is exterminating white people—and will exterminate them for good unless a revolution revalues all western values.

Instead of Downton Abbey I would recommend a couple of films: Sense and Sensibility (1995) and Pride and Prejudice (2005).

Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book) Winston Churchill

Savitri quotes

I have been forbidden to visit England since my participation in the Hitler camp at Costwolds in August 1962. The situation created nine years ago or more by the presence on British soil of almost two million Africans, Jamaicans and Pakistanis, not to mention the Jews who had arrived as early as 1933, was already alarming if not tragic. And according to the echoes that I have been able to hear, it has only worsened since then as no measures have been taken to expel all these non-native elements. […].

Eventually, they will be a hundred thousand, fifty thousand, twenty thousand [whites] scattered over the whole surface of the British Isles, then overpopulated with half-breeds of different shades. The English will be drowned among some hundred or two hundred million robots, generally dark-skinned, with the most varied features. They will be the only creatures in this termite mound worthy of the name ‘man’ in the sense we would use it. But the world of that time will have no use for such creatures.

Perhaps they will cultivate in themselves a belatedly awakened Aryan consciousness. Perhaps they will manage, despite the distances, to meet from time to time in small groups, and talk nostalgically about ‘old England,’ now deader than the Athens of Pericles. Perhaps, at some pitiful meeting on some historic anniversary, some man of knowledge and insight will arise and tell his brethren of the race the remote and deep causes of their downfall.

Behold, he will tell them, we are paying the price of the folly of our ancestors. They are the ones who, in what was once our Empire, encouraged the propaganda of the Christian missionaries, compulsory vaccination and the adherence of the ‘literates’ to democratic principles. They stubbornly refused the hand sincerely extended to them by the greatest of all Europeans: Adolf Hitler. In response to his repeated offer of alliance and his promise to leave us the domination of the seas, they unleashed the Second World War against him, drowned his country in a deluge of phosphorus and fire, and burned alive nearly five million of his compatriots, women and children, under the burning rubble or in the shelters where the liquefied asphalt of the streets penetrated in fiery streams.[1]

We are paying the price for the crimes of Mr Churchill and all those who believed in them and fought against National Socialist Germany, our sister, the defender of our common race. These men, you may say, were bona fide but short-sighted. That may be so. But that doesn’t excuse them before History. Stupidity is itself a crime when the interest of the nation, and especially of the Race, is at stake. We cannot do what our fathers did and escape punishment!

The punishment will be to have some woolly-haired, simian-faced Christian as Prime Minister of Great Britain: a descendant of equatorial African immigrants and perhaps named Winston after the gravedigger of the former British Empire. The punishment will be to live amid a brownish, camel-headed England—also, at least in large part, woolly-haired—whose former inhabitants, the legitimate inhabitants, the Aryans, whether Normans, Saxons or Celts, will number as few as the native Americans on the reservations do today in the US.

Then, perhaps, groups of true Englishmen, more obstinate than the others in their resentment, more combative if not less desperate, will burn, every 8th of May, some effigy of Churchill purposely grotesque: his big puffy, plump face, furnished with the legendary cigar and smeared like that of a clown; his big belly stuffed with gunpowder. May 8 will, indeed, at last be recognised as the anniversary of the shame of England as much as of the misfortune of the sister nation; once hated, now adored with all the passion that accompanies remorse that we know is useless.

Perhaps these same Englishmen, and others, will publicly worship Adolf Hitler, the Saviour whom their ancestors of yesterday rejected and whom their ancestors of today—our contemporaries—still insult. Perhaps there will be, among the dwindling number of Aryans throughout the world, a militant minority, serene, almost happy in its unshakeable loyalty, who will worship him while waiting to become (they or their descendants) the bodyguard of the Avenger he hinted at but wasn’t: Kalki. But all late repentance and retrospective devotions will remain ineffective, both in Europe and among the Aryan minorities in other countries, especially in an increasingly Jewified and negrified America. Nothing can save the youngest of humanity’s noble races from the fate that must befall as a consequence of the crimes committed or tolerated by too many of its representatives under the influence of anthropocentrism of the wrong sort.


[1] Editor’s note: read Tom Goodrich’s 2010 book Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany.

European beauty

St. Catherine’s Oratory, Isle of Wight, England.

Catholic Church Catholic religious orders Christendom Franks Old Testament Protestantism

The Holy Hook, 2

by Laurent Guyénot

The Old Testament as Israel’s Trojan Horse

In pre-Christian times, pagan scholars had shown little interest in the Hebrew Bible. Jewish writers (Aristobulus of Paneas, Artapan of Alexandria) had tried to bluff the Greeks on the antiquity of the Torah, claiming that Homer, Hesiod, Pythagoras, Socrates and Plato had been inspired by Moses, but no one before the Church Fathers seems to have taken them seriously. Jews had even produced fake Greek prophecies of their success under the title Sibylline Oracles, and written under a Greek pseudonym a Letter of Aristea to Philocrates praising Judaism, but again, it was not until the triumph of Christianity that these texts were met with Gentile gullibility.

Thanks to Christianity, the Jewish Tanakh was elevated to the status of authoritative history, and Jewish authors writing for pagans, such as Josephus and Philo, gained undeserved reputation—while being ignored by rabbinic Judaism. Christian academia uncritically tuned to the rigged history of the Jews. While Herodotus had crossed Syria-Palestine around 450 BCE without hearing about Judeans or Israelites, Christian historians decided that Jerusalem had been at that time the center of the world, and accepted as fact the totally fictitious empire of Solomon. Until the 19th century, world history was calibrated on a largely fanciful biblical chronology (Egyptology is now trying to recover from it).[4]

It can be argued, of course, that the Old Testament has served Christendom well: it was certainly not in the nonviolence of Christ that the Catholic Church found the energy and ideological means to impose its world order for nearly a thousand years on Western Europe. Yet for this glorious past, there was obviously a price to pay, a debt to the Jews that has to be paid one way or another. It is as if Christianity has sold its soul to the god of Israel, in exchange for its great accomplishment.

The Church has always advertised itself to the Jews as the gateway out of the prison of the Law, into the freedom of Christ. But it has never requested Jewish converts to leave their Torah on the doorstep. The Jews who entered the Church entered with their Bible, that is to say, with a big part of their Jewishness, while freeing themselves from all the civil restrictions imposed on their non-converted brethren.

When Jews were judged too slow to convert willingly, they were sometimes forced into baptism under threats of expulsion or death. The first documented case goes back to Clovis’ grandson, according to Bishop Gregory of Tours:

King Chilperic commanded that a large number of Jews be baptized, and he himself held several on the fonts. But many were baptized only in body and not in heart; they soon returned to their deceitful habits, for they really kept the Sabbath, and pretended to honour the Sunday (History of the Franks, chapter V).

Such collective forced conversions, producing only insincere and resentful Christians, were conducted throughout the Middle Ages. Hundreds of thousands of Spanish and Portuguese Jews were forced to convert at the end of the 15th century, before emigrating throughout Europe. Many of these ‘New Christians’ not only continued to ‘Judaize’ among themselves, but could now have greater influence on the ‘Old Christians’. The penetration of the Jewish spirit into the Roman Church, under the influence of these reluctantly converted Jews and their descendants, is a much more massive phenomenon than is generally admitted.

One case in point is the Jesuit Order, whose foundation coincided with the peak of the Spanish repression against Marranos, with the 1547 ‘purity-of-blood’ legislation issued by the Archbishop of Toledo and Inquisitor General of Spain. Of the seven founding members, four at least were of Jewish ancestry. The case of Loyola himself is unclear, but he was noted for his strong philo-Semitism. Robert Markys has demonstrated, in a groundbreaking study, how crypto-Jews infiltrated key positions in the Jesuit Order from its very beginning, resorting to nepotism in order to eventually establish a monopoly on top positions that extended to the Vatican. King Phillip II of Spain called the Order a ‘Synagogue of Hebrews.’[5]

Marranos established in the Spanish Netherlands played an important role in the Calvinist movement. According to Jewish historian Lucien Wolf,

The Marranos in Antwerp had taken an active part in the Reformation movement, and had given up their mask of Catholicism for a not less hollow pretense of Calvinism… The simulation of Calvinism brought them new friends, who, like them, were enemies of Rome, Spain and the Inquisition… Moreover, it was a form of Christianity which came nearer to their own simple Judaism.[6]

Calvin himself had learned Hebrew from rabbis and heaped praise on the Jewish people. He wrote in his commentary on Psalm 119: ‘Where did Our Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles draw their doctrine, if not Moses? And when we peel off all the layers, we find that the Gospel is simply an exhibition of what Moses had already said.’ The Covenant of God with the Jewish people is irrevocable because ‘no promise of God can be undone.’ That Covenant, ‘in its substance and truth, is so similar to ours, that we can call them one. The only difference is the order in which they were given.’[7]

Within one century, Calvinism, or Puritanism, became a dominant cultural and political force in England. Jewish historian Cecil Roth explains:

The religious developments of the seventeenth century brought to its climax an unmistakable philo-semitic tendency in certain English circles. Puritanism represented above all a return to the Bible, and this automatically fostered a more favourable frame of mind towards the people of the Old Testament.[8]

Some British Puritans went so far as to consider the Leviticus as still in force; they circumcised their children and scrupulously respected the Sabbath. Under Charles I (1625–1649), wrote Isaac d’Israeli (father of Benjamin Disraeli), ‘it seemed that religion chiefly consisted of Sabbatarian rigours; and that a British senate had been transformed into a company of Hebrew Rabbis.’[9] Wealthy Jews started to marry their daughters into the British aristocracy, to the extent that, according to Hilaire Belloc’s estimate, ‘with the opening of the twentieth century those of the great territorial English families in which there was no Jewish blood were the exception.’[10]

The influence of Puritanism on many aspects of British society naturally extended to the United States. The national mythology of the ‘Pilgrim Fathers’ fleeing Egypt (Anglican England) and settling into the Promised Land as the new chosen people, sets the tone. However, the Judaization of American Christianity has not been a spontaneous process from within, but rather one controlled by skillful manipulations from outside. For the 19th century, a good example is the Scofield Reference Bible, published in 1909 by Oxford University Press, under the sponsorship of Samuel Untermeyer, a Wall Street lawyer, Federal Reserve co-founder, and devoted Zionist, who would become the herald of the ‘holy war’ against Germany in 1933. The Scofield Bible is loaded with highly tendentious footnotes. For example, Yahweh’s promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3 gets a two-thirds-page footnote explaining that ‘God made an unconditional promise of blessings through Abram’s seed to the nation of Israel to inherit a specific territory forever’ (although Jacob, who first received the name Israel, was not yet born). The same note explains that ‘Both OT and NT are full of post-Sinaitic promises concerning Israel and the land which is to be Israel’s everlasting possession,’ accompanied by ‘a curse laid upon those who persecute the Jews,’ or ‘commit the sin of anti-Semitism.’[11]

As a result of this kind of gross propaganda, most American Evangelicals regard the creation of Israel in 1948 and its military victory in 1967 as miracles fulfilling biblical prophecies and heralding the second coming of Christ. Jerry Falwell declared, ‘Right at the very top of our priorities must be an unswerving commitment and devotion to the state of Israel,’ while Pat Robertson said ‘The future of this Nation [America] may be at stake, because God will bless those that bless Israel.’ As for John Hagee, chairman of Christians United for Israel, he once declared: ‘The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God’s plan for both Israel and the West.’[12]

Gullible Christians not only see God’s hand whenever Israel advances in its self-prophesized destiny of world domination, but are ready to see Israeli leaders themselves as prophets when they announce their own false-flag crimes.[13]


[4] Read Gunnar Heinsohn, “The Restauration of Ancient History” (webpage), “The Revision of Ancient History – A Perspective” (webpage).

[5] Robert A. Markys, The Jesuit Order as a Synagogue of Jews: Jesuits of Jewish Ancestry and Purity-of-Blood Laws in the Early Society of Jesus, Brill, 2009.

[6] Lucien Wolf, Report on the “Marranos” or Crypto-Jews of Portugal, Anglo-Jewish Association, 1926.

[7] Vincent Schmid, “Calvin et les Juifs : Prémices du dialogue judéo-chrétien chez Jean Calvin,” 2008, on www.racinesetsources.ch.

[8] Cecil Roth, A History of the Jews in England (1941), Clarendon Press, 1964, p. 148.

[9] Isaac Disraeli, ‘Commentaries on the Life and Reign of Charles the First, King of England’, 2 vols., 1851, quoted in Archibald Maule Ramsay, The Nameless War, 1952 (archive.org).

[10] Hilaire Belloc, The Jews, Constable & Co., 1922 (archive.org), p. 223.

[11] Joseph Canfield, The Incredible Scofield and His Book, Ross House Books, 2004, pp. 219–220.

[12] Jill Duchess of Hamilton, God, Guns and Israel: Britain, The First World War And The Jews in the Holy City, The History Press, 2009 , kindle, e. 414-417.

[13] Michael Evans, The American Prophecies, Terrorism and Mid-East Conflict Reveal a Nation’s Destiny.

Currency crash Hate Miscegenation

The big question

This is a response to Mauricio’s comment about the supposed representative of the English roses who died recently:

Miscegenation, the sin against the holy spirit of life is not to be forgiven, and the son of the late queen committed it.

But what is most worrying is that English males don’t seem to care about the propaganda to miscegenate they see on street advertisements, and I don’t even see hatred on the forums of so-called white nationalism on this side of the Atlantic.

The only hope for salvation, and I confess it is the thought that comforts me when I wake up at night, is that the crash of fiat currencies will cause such chaos as to initiate the collapse of the System.

Only infinite hatred can save us, but it must come from at least two per cent of the Aryan males of each nation. The big question is whether, after the dollar tanks and we enter an era of ethnic chaos in the West, the Aryan males will finally wake up…

European beauty

Kali Yuga Miscegenation

Astronomical self-hatred

The last time I visited England I saw loads of advertisements, everywhere: photos of mixed couples, English roses with Orcs.

When I first visited England, in the early 1980s, there was none of that on the streets or in the subway. It is obvious that the English of today suffers from a self-hatred without precedent in history: a self-hatred that reaches, indeed, astronomical levels.

(This was a response to what an Englishman commented this morning on this site.)