Pat Condell – Our Battle Of Britain

Our Battle Of Britain

The UK’s parliament needs to be hosed clean. Our freedom and democracy are being destroyed by corrupt politicians. We are custodians of this democracy, not its owners. We have no right to weaken it for future generations, any more than we have the right to leave them poisoned water or air. The European Union is a model for an anti-democratic global government. The purpose of the EU is to destroy the nation state and to transform Europe from a rich and diverse continent of sovereign nations into a single homogenous political bloc governed by a committee of unelected bureaucrats who think they know best. And they think we’re so docile and thick that we’ll just roll over and accept it if they keep telling us how sensible it is. Nobody’s feelings were consulted during the making of this video. Anyone who has a problem with that can drop dead. Everyone is free to download this video and post it to their own account if they wish, as long as it is not edited in any way (including the title) and not monetised.

Don’t Panic! Lighten Up!

Quenelle - Golden

Jonathan Pie: Brexit means Brexit!

Brexit ship cartoon

The latest political developments on ‘Brexit’ from intrepid UK News reporter Jonathan Pie.

Brexit means Brexit! Why? Because democracy means democracy.

Warning: contains strong language

For more hilariously, tragically, true news reports,


Leader of the British opposition Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn (C), smiles as he poses with members of the shadow cabinet including Deputy leader Tom Watson (CL) and Shadow Health Secretary Heidi Alexander (CR), Labour Party and TUC members during a photocall for the 'Labour In for Britain' campaign in London, on June 14, 2016 calling for a remain vote in the EU referendum

Labour’s Tom Watson Storms Out Of Meeting, PM May Sets Deadline on Brexit Talks



Get short URL – Sputnik

Shadow cabinet members were only given a presentation of the manifesto on a large screen instead of being offered hard copies of the document, a government source close to the Independent said on Tuesday.

Labour deputy leader Tom Watson has reportedly stormed out of a shadow cabinet meeting after UK Labour and opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn kept a copy of his draft policy on holding a second Brexit referendum a secret.

“The shadow cabinet were not going to see the draft, so what’s the point in being there,” a second source close to Mr. Watson told the Independent. “It was very disrespectful to the shadow cabinet.”

The news comes just hours after Labour was expected to select an election manifesto on the European parliamentary elections set to take place on 23 May. Mr. Corbyn and his top aides met on Tuesday, just before the party’s National Executive Committee, where the Labour leader is expected to resist demands from Mr. Watson on holding a second referendum under all scenarios.

Mr. Corbyn has instead kept a policy of holding a referendum against a “Tory Brexit”, or no-deal Brexit, aimed at appealing to Labour Leave voters.

But Mr. Watson denied “storming out” of the meeting, which was raised by Pippa Crerar, Daily Mail Political Editor, with the deputy leader stating that she had received an “inaccurate briefing” and that he had “politely asked” if the shadow cabinet was going to see the draft and was told “no”.

“So I left to walk to the NEC where the document will be available and the decision will be made,” Mr. Watson said.

Hours after the walkout, UK prime minister Theresa May said that she would abandon talks with Labour should cross-party talks fail to reach an agreement in a week’s time. The UK prime minister bowed to pressure to set a deadline for ending talks with the Labour leader in seven days, according to a government source cited by the Independent.

Should Labour officials allow PM May’s withdrawal agreement to proceed, it will be tested again in Commons, but the government will “move in another direction” without a guarantee, according to the source.

Government ministers have accused Mrs. May of stalling updates on how long talks with Labour would last, with nascent Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage receiving a major surge in public support due to the Conservative leader’s lack of progress. Both sides in negotiations remain divided over Labour’s demands for a customs union with the European Union, as well as guarantees that future Conservative prime ministers would not cancel the deal.

READ MORE: UKIP on Johnson’s PM Ambitions: ‘He Would Cause Conservative Party to Collapse’

Mr. Corbyn, who currently has support of 22 of the 39 NEC members, has been resisting efforts to shift Labour’s stance to supporting a “People’s Vote” in all circumstances, affording him the support of Unite the Union, the UK’s largest trade union. Mr. Corbyn and shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer inked a major agreement in February stating that Labour would agree that UK prime minister Theresa May’s embattled Brexit deal “should be subject to the lock of a public vote”.

But Momentum director Laura Parker wrote in a London Guardian column that Mr. Corbyn should “take a side” in order to avoid driving a wedge between the leader and his supporters “Labour’s members already know which side they are on. The party should commit to bringing whatever Brexit deal is done back to the people,” Ms. Parker said a day after a list of 118 MEPs and MPs signed a letter backing a public vote on all proposed Brexit deals.

UK COLUMN: Ukraine Election Circus, Brexit & EU Army, Joe Biden’s Demise

Despite all the talk of Brexit, EU Military Unification continues to roll ahead. Also the Ukraine elections have produced a front-runner straight off of the TV screen, literally – with comedian and actor Volodymyr Zelensky leading incumbent Petro Poroshenko going into the second round of voting. Also, hundreds of millions in public funds are being spent on new EU propaganda and censorship agencies – all in the name of protecting the people against ‘Russian influence.’ Lastly, former Democratic Vice President Joe Biden has been outed in a sexual harassment case which may upend his 2020 Presidential aspirations. All this and more. 

UKC News hosts Mike Robinson and Patrick Henningsen with the early week news round-up. Watch:

YouTube Video Preview

UKC Extra Time: Off-Air Discussion with Patrick & Mike


Clouds Gather Above the Middle East: War or No War?

In recent years, Israel has proved capable of reading between the lines to assess accurately the politico-military situation in the Middle East, exploiting timely opportunities to hit targets of its enemies in Syria and Iraq. Domestic, regional and unlimited US support for far-right Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu permitted his military machine to close in on his nearby opponents in the region, i.e. Syria, Iraq, Hezbollah, and Iranian targets in Syria, at moments of weakness without triggering much of a response from their side.

Today more than ever, the possibilities of war are increasing, a war that may be triggered by Israel and the US due to the consequences of the harsh sanctions on Iran and its partner the Lebanese Hezbollah that will be certainly end up weakening the local Lebanese and Iranian economies. Moreover, and most importantly, any sign of weakness on the part of Israel’s opponents, if analysed inadequately, could push Israel to provoke Hezbollah in Lebanon and its allies to a war.

The history of Israeli aggression towards Lebanon is long. Lebanese domestic reaction to the report of last week’s meeting of the Hezbollah leadership and the analysis of the situation may yet again give wrong signals to Israel, signalling that it can attack neighbouring countries in what it perceives as a moment of weakness. However, if these signs and signals do indeed lead to war, that will certainly be devastating to Lebanon, more than the 2006 war, and most likely also destructive to Israel at a level it has not experienced since 1973.

Lebanese reaction to the prospect of a war this summer – despite the personal evaluation of Hezbollah leader who said otherwise, opposing his military commander’s assessments according to what he said during his speech – could be significant. The Lebanese people are no longer ready to pay the price of another war (after the 2006 war and the eight-years of war attempting to impose regime change on Syria).

Indeed, the popular reaction revealed many other crucial, underlying issues: the number of casualties Hezbollah has suffered and is not enthusiastic to go through the same losses; the current poor relationship between Hezbollah and the oil-rich countries which will reduce tourism and prevent any investment in reconstructing the country if it is devastated by a war initiated by Israel (as in 2006); the harsh sanctions on Iran imposing a tight budget now mostly allocated domestically, thereby limiting support to its partners overseas to cover the costs of Israeli-caused damage in case of war; the impossibility of resupplying Hezbollah with weapons at the same speed Iran was capable of between 2006 and 2018; the superiority of the Israeli war machine in inflicting  great damage on Lebanon, considered by the US and Israel as responsible as a whole for embracing Hezbollah; and the ability of Israel’s friends and allies to resupply Tel Aviv with weapons and financial support to reconstruct any heavy damage Hezbollah could inflict in the “unlikely” event of a future war. All these factors do not decrease the likelihood of a future war in the Middle East; they are portents of danger and potential escalation.

The Hezbollah leadership’s personal assessment of the “unlikelihood” of a war this summer may be correct regarding the timing because the initiative has always been in the hands of Israel. Nevertheless, every military and political leader takes into consideration the worst-case scenario. Saying otherwise or spreading optimism may serve to promote an inaccurate feeling of well-being. On the other hand, it might indeed help avoiding domestic bickering, but would also represent an evasion of tangible concerns and the prospect of an even bleaker reality. Part of Lebanese are already labouring under heavy sanctions and the US is taking every possible opportunity to increase these sanctions on Hezbollah and on its rich and generous donors and businessmen.

The report of the outline of Hezbollah’s commanders gathering with their chief was not well-received by local society. This reaction illustrates how sharply the country is divided between supporters and opponents of Hezbollah. It also indicates how powerful is the effect of local and regional media on decision makers when they attack Hezbollah and its view of current politico-military affairs- and how fragile is the alignment behind Hezbollah’s readiness to respond to any future war. And lastly, it gives a clear warning that Hezbollah supporters are not ready to accept the loss of their leader in case of war, a destiny no-on have a say in it.

These messages are read by friends of Hezbollah, its members and commanders, but also by the enemies of Hezbollah. Israel – the country responsible for initiating every single war inflicted on Lebanon – is also reading the flow of information provided unwittingly by the reaction of the population and that of Hezbollah leadership. Nevertheless, the Israeli leadership needs to consider that, if cornered, Hezbollah can empty every silo and rain down on Israel and every single missile and rocket in its possession- abandoning the “Rules of Engagement” tacitly agreed between the two parties in case of war.

Because Hezbollah will have nothing to lose in case of war, it can empty its arsenal against Israel and play its cards right to the end. The question is: even if Israel enjoys the support of the world media, financial and many militarily powerful friends, is it ready to go through a long and horrific war just to empty Hezbollah’s missiles and rocket stock? If that is the Israeli objective, its chances of success are slim. Hezbollah is part of the society and cannot be removed unless several hundred thousand people are eliminated from Lebanon, the number that represents the society protecting and part of Hezbollah. Why would the US and or Israel declare a general war when financial sanctions are much more effective at little or no cost?

Iran, Hezbollah’s main partner and ally, is headed towards the unknown. The US has announced its intention to reduce Iran’s oil exports to zero, ending Iran oil waivers to US partners. Although it is virtually impossible to reach this desired and strict level of sanctions because many countries – mainly China, Iraq and Turkey – will not abide by the US’s will at this first stage, it is certain that Iran will not be capable of exporting all of its two million barrels of oil daily (Iran produces 3.45 million b/d). The US is not imposing an explicit embargo on Iran, otherwise, it would be considered an act of war and would spark an immediate warlike retaliation by Iran and its allies. The US is seeking to impose economic sanctions on the countries who buy Iranian oil, thus cornering Hezbollah’s main financier.

It is a war of strangulation that in the short and medium term is showing itself effective. Although this kind of efficient war was run in Syria on a micro level, will it work on a wider level- and what will be the reaction of Iran and its allies if cornered? A difficult question to answer today as the clouds gather above the Middle East.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from the author


Schumer, Pelosi, & Israeli billionaire Haim Saban at 2018 IAC conference

Are Americans Now Required To Sign A Loyalty Oath TO ISRAEL!?


Iran Is No One’s Colony: US Aggression Escalating to a Level that Threatens World War

The American aggression against Iran is escalating to a level that threatens world war. On Monday April 22, the USA declared that it has withdrawn “waivers” given to China, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, Italy and Greece, under the illegal US economic warfare campaign being conducted against Iran under the name of “sanctions.” The stated objective is to reduce Iranian oil exports to zero, crippling the Iranian economy, damaging the economies of countries that purchase Iranian oil and raising the price of oil for the rest of the world suppliers, including of course the US and Saudis, that have pledged to fill the gap, at a higher price of course.

The American Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo declared, with all the arrogance of Herr Garbage in Chaplin’s film The Great Dictator,

The Trump Administration has taken Iran’s oil exports to historic lows, and we are dramatically accelerating our pressure campaign in a calibrated way that meets our national security objectives while maintaining well supplied global oil markets.”

In other words, “we are going to bring Iran to its knees while we make a pile of dough doing it.”

Iran responded by stating that it will continue to ship oil and both Turkey and China quickly stated that they do not accept the US actions and will continue to buy Iranian oil. Italy and Greece have said nothing, but they kowtowed months ago and have not purchased Iranian oil despite being given the waivers by the US. It has to be assumed that they knew what was coming and so sought oil supplies elsewhere.

The Iranians have threatened to close the Straight of Hormuz if the waivers are suspended and the Americans use force to block Iranian oil shipments which would mean the blocking of oil shipments from the Arabian peninsular, thereby threatening oil supplies to many nations in the world that depend on those supplies, including Europe and North America. An attempt to block the Straight of Hormuz would result in the Americans trying to eliminate the Iranian naval vessels closing the passage, major naval engagements and outright war. It may be that the US is hoping to provoke such a clash to give it the pretext for war against Iran. Everything points to that conclusion.

Armed action to block Iranian exports of oil is the logical step the US will have to take if the illegal “sanctions” are ignored and the US maintains its threat to bring Iranian oil exports to zero. Any such action would not only be aggression against Iran, it would also be an act of aggression against China and the other nations relying on that oil. But armed conflict and the risk of a major war is a risk the US seems willing to take. Whether they are reckless or that is the American objective is difficult to say but if it comes to that it won’t much matter for the consequences will be terrible and world wide. But, looking at US actions, real war, not just economic, appears to be their objective.

The US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal a few months ago and immediately reimposed its panoply of “sanctions” against Iran affecting Iranian trade, banking, shipping, transportation and communications. It has since declared a formation of the Iranian armed forces, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to be a “terrorist organisation” a bizarre action since the armed forces of any nation cannot be considered “terrorists” in any sense. Iran quickly retaliated by declaring American armed forces as “terrorists,” and so it goes.

On April 3 the Pentagon repeated Wikileaks’ claims from 2010, which were also based on US Army sources, that Iran was responsible for the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq when, in fact, it was the Iraqi Resistance forces, that fought the Americans so valiantly, who inflicted the casualties on the US forces in Iraq.

On October 22, 2010, The Columbia Journalism Review commented on the Wikileaks release of documents and their use in the media on that date regarding Iraq that,

Just as it focused on Pakistan’s involvement in the war in Afghanistan in its reporting on WikiLeaks’s July dump, The New York Times focuses heavily on the involvement of Iran in the Iraq War logs released today.”


The Times’s current online lead WikiLeaks story is “Leaked Reports Detail Iran’s Aid for Iraqi Militias” which details the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ backing of Iraqi militias.

The piece draws on specific incidents from the logs to demonstrate that Iran’s Quds Forces mostly maintained a low-profile, arranging for Hezbollah to train Iraqi militias in Iran, and financing and providing weaponry to insurgents. Other times the Iranian forces sponsored assassinations; at others, they sought to influence politics, and otherwise coordinated attacks on US forces in Iraq.”

All these claims, based on US Army sources, were accepted without question by Wikileaks and the major newspapers that published them such as the New York Times, Washington Post, The Guardian, Der Spiegel, Le Monde and are now resurrected by the Pentagon and the media to fan the flames of hostility towards Iran in a more visceral way. Syria stated the claims were suspicious. Russia Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharaova stated that Russia was surprised by the allegations, that Washington had some explaining to do and that the US better not use the claims as a pretext for conflict.

The objective of declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as terrorists and resurrecting the dubious US Army-Wikileaks claims that Iran is responsible for American deaths in Iraq is of course to criminalise the Iranian government in the eyes of the western, particularly American public. Criminalisation of the enemy is always a sign that an attack is coming. They painted Manuel Noriegaas a criminal. They did the same with Slobodan Milosevic, with Saddam Hussein, with Muammar Ghaddafi. Negotiations, diplomacy are not possible with “criminals” is the US refrain and their targets end up dead or in an American prison.

The same logic applies to Iran. They are portraying the Iranian government as criminals and no matter how much Iran bends its principles in order to avoid war it will never be enough so long as Iran tries to act as an independent country. The economic warfare will continue for as long as the Americans have the power to wage it.

The excuse will vary with the time and circumstance but the strategy will remain. This is war, illegal and immoral, against an entire people, for the private gains of the elites in the west whose only concern is to make profit at the expense of everyone else.

I have said this before but it needs repeating that I have used the word “sanction” in parentheses because the word, “sanction,” means the provision of rewards for obedience, along with punishment for disobedience, to a law. There are other meanings for the word but they all define the same condition; obedience to a master by his vassal, to a monarch by his subject, to a warden by his prisoner. The condition necessarily implies that the person applying the sanction is legally in a superior position to the person being sanctioned, that he has the right to apply the sanction and that there exists a system of laws in which the use of sanctions is permitted and agreed upon.

This is the definition yet every day we hear of the “sanctions” imposed on Russia, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea for reasons that everyone knows are false, based on authority that does not exist, based on laws that have never been created, and by national governments that have only arrogance to support their grand presumption; that their nations are superior to others, that there is no equality or sovereignty of peoples, that their diktats are orders that must be obeyed by those who inferior to them.

Since the economic restrictions on banking, finance and trade set up against Iran by the United States and its subject states in the NATO alliance do not comply with the definition of sanctions, we have to use the correct term in describing these restrictions. There is only one word, and that word is, war and, since this form of warfare is not permitted by international law as found in the United Nations Charter they are economic war crimes, economic aggression for which a reckoning will one day have to be paid, one way or another.

It is in Chapter VII, Article 41 of the Charter that the power to completely or partially interrupt economic relations exists and only the Security Council can use that power. Nowhere else does this power exist.

Once again the issue comes back to the word war. It is clear that the attempted economic strangulation of Iran is an attempt to “punish” Iran for defending its strategic position, independence and sovereignty. Once a war has started it can only proceed to its logical end. Iran has the legitimate right to defend itself against the economic warfare and threat of war presented by the United States for Iran is no one’s colony, and never will be.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel “Beneath the Clouds. He writes essays on international law, politics and world events, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Featured image is from NEO


Alison Weir discusses the $38 billion military aid package to Israel and Rand Paul’s courageous action to block the legislation.

Alison Weir on The Critical Hour Nov. 30th, 2018

If Americans Knew – Intro

If Americans Knew about the numerous human rights violations and other treacherous behavior carried out by the state of Israel, they might feel differently about the overwhelming financial and military support given to them by our government.

Destroyed mosque da440

As the 300-foot spire of the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris tragically came tumbling down on live television, my thoughts ventured to Nuseirat Refugee Camp, my childhood home in the Gaza Strip.

Then, also on television, I watched as a small bulldozer hopelessly clawed through the rubble of my neighborhood mosque. I grew up around that mosque. I spent many hours there with my grandfather, Mohammed, a refugee from historic Palestine. Before grandpa became a refugee, he was a young Imam in a small mosque in his long-destroyed village of Beit Daras.

Mohammed and many in his generation took solace in erecting their own mosque in the refugee camp as soon as they arrived to the Gaza Strip in late 1948. The new mosque was first made of hardened mud, but was eventually remade with bricks, and later concrete. He spent much of his time there, and when he died, his old, frail body was taken to the same mosque for a final prayer, before being buried in the adjacent Martyrs Graveyard. When I was still a child, he used to hold my hand as we walked together to the mosque during prayer times. When he aged, and could barely walk, I, in turn, held his hand.

But Al-Masjid al-Kabir – the Great Mosque, later renamed Al-Qassam Mosque – was completely pulverized by Israeli missiles during the summer war on Gaza, starting July 8, 2014.

Hundreds of Palestinian houses of worship were targeted by the Israeli military in previous wars, most notably in 2008-9 and 2012. But the 2014 war was the most brutal and most destructive yet. Thousands were killed and more injured. Nothing was immune to Israeli bombs. According to Palestine Liberation Organization records, 63 mosques were completely destroyed and 150 damaged in that war alone, oftentimes with people seeking shelter inside. In the case of my mosque, two bodies were recovered after a long, agonizing search. They had no chance of being rescued. If they survived the deadly explosives, they were crushed by the massive slabs of concrete.

In truth, concrete, cements, bricks and physical structures don’t carry much meaning on their own. We give them meaning. Our collective experiences, our pains, joys, hopes and faith make a house of worship what it is.

Many generations of French Catholics have assigned the Notre Dame Cathedral with its layered meanings and symbolism since the 12th century.

While the fire consumed the oak roof and much of the structure, French citizens and many around the world watched in awe. It is as if the memories, prayers and hopes of a nation that is rooted in time were suddenly revealed, rising, all at once, with the pillars of smoke and fire.

But the very media that covered the news of the Notre Dame fire seemed oblivious to the obliteration of everything we hold sacred in Palestine as, day after day, Israeli war machinery continues to blow up, bulldoze and desecrate.

It is as if our religions are not worthy of respect, despite the fact that Christianity was born in Palestine. It was there that Jesus roamed the hills and valleys of our historic homeland teaching people about peace, love and justice. Palestine is also central to Islam. Haram al-Sharif, where al-Aqsa Mosque and The Dome of the Rock are kept, is the third holiest site for Muslims everywhere. Yet Christian and Muslim holy sites are besieged, often raided and shut down per military diktats. Moreover, the Israeli army-protected messianic Jewish extremists want to demolish Al-Aqsa and the Israeli government has been digging underneath its foundation for many years.

Although none of this is done in secret; international outrage remains muted. In fact, many find Israel’s actions justified. Some have bought into the ridiculous explanation offered by the Israeli military that bombing mosques is a necessary security measure. Others are motivated by dark religious prophecies of their own.

Palestine, though, is only a microcosm of the whole region. Many of us are familiar with the horrific destruction carried out by fringe militant groups against world cultural heritage in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Most memorable among these are the destruction of Palmyra in Syria, Buddhas of Bamyan in Afghanistan and the Great Mosque of al-Nuri in Mosul.

Nothing however can possibly be compared to what the invading US army has done to Iraq. Not only did the invaders desecrate a sovereign country and brutalize her people, they also devastated her culture that goes back to the start of human civilization. Just the immediate aftermath of the invasion alone resulted in the looting of over 15,000 Iraqi antiquities, including the Lady of Warka, also known as the Mona Lisa of Mesopotamia, a Sumerian artifact whose history goes back to 3100 BC.

I had the privilege of seeing many of these artifacts in a visit to the Iraq Museum only a few years before it was looted by US soldiers. At the time, Iraqi curators had all precious pieces hidden in a fortified basement in anticipation of a US bombing campaign. But nothing could prepare the museum for the savagery unleashed by the ground invasion. Since then, Iraqi culture has largely been reduced to items on the black market of the very western invaders that have torn that country apart. The valiant work of Iraqi cultural warriors and their colleagues around the world has managed to restore some of that stolen dignity, but it will take many years for the cradle of human civilization to redeem its vanquished honor.

Every mosque, every church, every graveyard, every piece of art and every artifact is significant because it is laden with meaning, the meaning bestowed on them by those who have built or sought in them an escape, a moment of solace, hope, faith and peace.

On August 2, 2014 the Israeli army bombed the historic Al-Omari Mosque in northern Gaza. The ancient mosque dates back to the 7th century and has since served as a symbol of resilience and faith for the people of Gaza.

As Notre Dame burned, I thought of Al-Omari too. While the fire at the French cathedral was likely accidental, destroyed Palestinian houses of worship were intentionally targeted. The Israeli culprits are yet to be held accountable.

I also thought of my grandfather, Mohammed, the kindly Imam with the handsome, small white beard. His mosque served as his only escape from a difficult existence, an exile that only ended with his own death.

*(Top image: A destroyed mosque in Rafah, Gaza, 12th January 2009. Credit: ISM Palestine/ flickr)



MUST WATCH: Max Igan Banned From Youtube For Exposing Christchurch Massacre Reality

Max Igan Banned From Youtube For Exposing Christchurch Massacre

How They Do It–New Zealand Jews and Muslims Unite Over Christchurch Massacre, Fight against White Supremacy

Jewish community members say they have been warmly welcomed by Muslim counterparts — making Auckland imam’s recent speech blaming Mossad for the mass shooting all the more shocking

ed note–again, not wanting to make this a ‘we told ya so’ morning but nevertheless, we told ya so.

Years ago when various individuals and groups within the ‘white nationalist’ neighborhood took up the ‘we hate Islam’ torch that had been HANDED to them by organized Jewish interests, it was warned in CLEAR AND UNEQUIVOCAL LANGUAGE that this was a trap which Jewish interests had laid in ensnaring the white nationalism ‘movement’ and in creating both a scapegoat and a backdoor so that later, once the more unhinged elements within that WN neighborhood had done the kind of dirty work as we saw taking place in New Zealand, the Jews would slip out the back door, begin cozying up to the Muslim community and utilize the new narrative for their own political purposes.

Predictably, given the lower than average IQ on the part of the average White Nationalist type, this warning was ignored and those giving this warning–including the late, great, and greatly-missed Mike Piper–were accused of being ‘anti-white’ and of being co-conspirators in ‘white genocide’.


Amid the thousands of flowers piled high outside a Christchurch mosque attacked by a white supremacist on March 15, a rabbi knelt down recently to lay a stone of remembrance on behalf of New Zealand’s Jewish community. It featured the words “Salaam,” “Shalom” and “Kia Kaha” — a phrase by the indigenous Maori people of New Zealand that means “Stay strong.”

The rabbi was Mendy Goldstein, co-director of Chabad of New Zealand. “We cannot overestimate the value of every hug, every gesture, every hand extended in support,” he told News after the ceremony.

Goldstein was part of a delegation of local Jewish community members who traveled to Christchurch, on New Zealand’s South Island, last week to help console and support a bereaved Muslim community still reeling from the massacre of 50 worshippers at the Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre during Friday prayers.

Juliet Moses, spokesperson for the New Zealand Jewish Council, was also part of the delegation. “It was hard and emotional — at that time, they were still waiting to bury their loved ones, which was causing much anguish,” she told Haaretz via email this week. However, she noted that the visit was “strangely uplifting as well, because we were welcomed with warmth, grace and gratitude.”

Although there had been interfaith ties between the Jewish and Muslim communities, including visits to each other’s synagogues and mosques, before the massacre — which New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern called one of her country’s darkest days — overall the communities tended to live mainly separate lives.

But the attacks have galvanized a new level of connection — and a shared sense of vulnerability: Following police advice, New Zealand’s synagogues were closed for the first time ever on the Shabbat of the attack.

“If there’s anything good that can come of this atrocity, it’s that it will bring our two communities closer together and that, importantly, we work together to defeat the terrible scourge of white supremacy,” Moses wrote.

Umar Abdul Kuddus, a lawyer from Auckland and Muslim youth leader, was among those who met with Moses and others in Christchurch. “It was heartwarming to see Jewish community leaders and rabbis coming and embracing us, praying with us and sharing words of love and support,” he told Haaretz, also via email. “While I was in Christchurch, I personally met a few people from the Jewish community and I was thankful for their love and support in this tragic time.”

Kuddus continued: “Regardless of race or religion, it is our Islamic belief that we are all brothers and sisters. The fact is that white supremacists would [win] in their evil ideology if we do not come together and unite as a community. I believe both our communities’ representatives need to have a serious dialogue as to how to put differences of religion aside in order to focus on humanity.”

New Zealand’s Jewish community has been fundraising to offer financial support to victims of the mosque attack and the local Muslim community. It has also partnered with the Jewish community of Pittsburgh — where a white supremacist attacked the Tree of Life synagogue last October, killing 11 worshippers — and the American Jewish Committee.

New Zealand has seen an outpouring of unity and condemnation of hatred following the March 15 massacre, which made a speech at an anti-racism rally in Auckland last Saturday especially jarring.

Ahmed Bhamji, a leader of the Masjid e Umar mosque in Auckland, said he suspected that Mossad might have funded the attack. “I stand here and I say I have a very, very strong suspicion that there’s some group behind [the shooter], and I am not afraid to say I feel Mossad is behind this,” Bhamji was recorded saying.

There were about 1,000 people at the rally, yet no one, including at least one New Zealand lawmaker in attendance, called out Bhamji’s remarks.

Bhamji later doubled down on his accusation, telling the Newshub website: “Mossad is up to all these things. When I talk about Mossad, why should the Jews be upset about it? Give me an answer?”

Moses described Bhamji’s comments as “very disappointing and distressing, and irresponsible.

“It endangers our community at a time of increased vulnerability and nervousness,” she told Haaretz. Moses also noted that while Bhamji’s speech had been condemned by the Human Rights Commission, the organizers of the rally and the leading Muslim body had not criticized it. However, she noted, “There has been criticism in the media in New Zealand and globally, and we have had some beautiful messages from Muslim individuals, apologizing, denouncing it, and offering their thanks for the support we have shown them.”

Kuddus also condemned Bhamji’s speech. “The statement by Ahmed Bhamji is absolutely absurd and unacceptable in such times where we are [trying] to come together as one community!” he told Haaretz. “I was horrified and offended that Bhamji made these ridiculous and hurtful comments toward the Jewish community. … I feel embarrassed and ashamed that Bhamji is seen as a representative of my community when in fact he represents [not] one person within the Muslim community.”

Both New Zealand’s Jewish and Muslim communities have common roots as refugees and immigrants. The South Pacific nation of some 4.5 million people is home to about 46,000 Muslims (based on 2013 census figures), mostly from South Asia and Iran, with others coming in the last 20 years from war-torn countries such as Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq. There are nearly 7,000 Jews in the country (the majority in Auckland and Wellington), some whose families came as refugees from Nazi Europe; more recent arrivals include Jews from South Africa.

Paul Wilton, a member of the Jewish community in Auckland who has been involved in interfaith work, told Haaretz via email that there have been several such initiatives in recent years. “These include participation in activities arranged or promoted by interfaith organizations; visiting of each other’s sacred places; joint educational programs; attendance at iftar dinners over Ramadan, and so on. My experience is that the Muslim community here tends to appreciate all overtures of friendship. Over recent days, especially, they have expressed their gratitude for the caring response of all New Zealanders, including the Jewish community.”

Moses said that before the mosque attack, her synagogue in Auckland (New Zealand’s largest city, situated on the North Island) was working on an interfaith initiative to get Muslim and Jewish women together over food and cooking. The plan is to pursue that project again, she wrote, “once things calm down.”

MAX IGAN ~ “Archons & Puppet Masters Of The Empire Of The Three Cities”

Age Of Truth TV presents a fascinating speaker from Australia! MAX IGAN – one of Australia´s leading authorities in the field of conspiracy research and truth seeking. Originally a musician and artist, Max Igan´s destiny changed drastically after his so-called “awakening” to what “really is going on the world that we have never been told”. He became a succesful full-time lecturer in many countries around the world, as well as an author, radiohost and filmmaker. Max Igan is connecting countless dots and pieces in a very complex puzzle, trying to uncover the truth of what is going on behind the scenes of the ruling elites of the world, the called Illuminati banking cartel and manipulative political system. Age Of Truth TV presenter Lucas Alexander sat down to talk to Max Igan about his extraordinary, eye-opening and highly controversial claims of how the world is run, and his alternative world view, during the Open Mind Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark in September 2014.

An intense conversation relevant at any point in time, during these turbulent changing times. TOPICS DISCUSSED: – The Puppet Masters behind the Empire of the 3 Cities! What are the 3 most important cities in the world, that in fact are little independant powerful states, which the general public is unaware of? – The Illuminati bloodline families “who run the world”. – The Archons, the parasitic force, The Reptilians and the Nag Hammadi scriptures. – Evil is NEEDED is to keep us growing? Truth? – Debt slaves to the system. Is real freedom an illusion? – Reincarnation and the afterlife. Past live vs. future lives. – The New World Order Vatican State. – GMO / Chemtrails / Flouride. – The massive war on the human body computer. – Atoms and no solidity. “Nothing has ever been touched”! – David Icke and other truth personalities. – The New Age movement and spiritual narcissism. – Religious mind and spirit control. – Discovering the perfection of yourself. All this and much more in this compelling 55 mins. Age Of Truth TV episode featuring a dynamic and knowledgable Max Igan. Filmed at the Open Mind Conference Kedelhallen, Copenhagen, Denmark 20 September 2014

Germany – Political Prisoner Horst Mahler, Prisoner of Conviction, Europe’s Most Persecuted Patriot

Horst Mahler: Prisoner of Faith, Europe’s Most Persecuted Patriot


Anton-Saefkow-Allee 22 in 14772 Brandenburg Prison

Open letter to the sons of the covenant B’nai Brith

You blasphemers, do you hear the rumbling of the mischief to come? The foundation of your world domination shows cracks. I am not referring to the crisis of the BANK. Your Holiness, the Holocaust Church, is wavering. Soon it will collapse. The BVerfG of the FRG, your servant, gives him the deadly blows, probably not deliberately, but out of stupidity.

It was the meritorious work of the publicist Ursula Haverbeck (90) that put the Karlsruhe “judges” in a position where they could only make mistakes. In doing so, they have chosen the worst imaginable. After all, they managed to justify the prosecution of the so-called Holocaust deniers with the sentence:

“The denial that a crime has been committed is an endorsement of that crime.”

With this verdict of the highest court the FRG is marked as an injustice state, if it were a state. It is, however, a foreign rule, as the father of the Basic Law, Prof. Dr. Carlo Schmid, a specialist in constitutional and international law, expertly and competently classified it as an “organisational form of a modality of foreign rule”.

There are many things you can do with us Germans. Our “naivety” is proverbial. Because we basically see the good in people, we can achieve a lot with lies. But you have overlooked something important: We have – in contrast to you – decency and a sense of honour. So it hurts us if we are expected to believe that obvious nonsense is the truth, but that’s exactly what you tried to do with your judge puppets.

Karlsruhe has spanned the arch.

Ursula Haverbeck became known because she – a contemporary witness – did not want to accept the accusation you made against the German people that they had slaughtered European Jewry in the years 1941-1945 in a factory.

We Germans do not believe in your God Yahweh and his countless threats of genocide against the peoples, including his “people of property.

Ursula Haverbeck thinks that the German people – her people – are not capable of committing the genocide you claim to have committed. Genocide is such a terrible and reprehensible crime for her that she fights for an acquittal for the German people with all her soul powers – now even in old age. For this she is now 90 years old and in prison.

And you? What are you doing? You have your ventriloquists announce that she “approved” the alleged genocide of the Jews of Europe.

You will atone for that. You will atone for it with the loss of the world domination which was promised to you by your God as compensation for the fact that you are hated by all nations because of the work of destruction commanded to you by Yahweh (Isaiah 60:12-16).

We will put you out of power by revealing to the nations that whatever may have happened to you in world history has happened to you by the will of Yahweh. That you therefore blaspheme your property god by pretending to have fallen into the hands of an “idol” – the German people (the “edomite Germania”) – and Yahweh could not help you.

It was you, after all, who forced atheism on the Christian Occident as a new religion (Enlightenment), so that no one would think any more of interpreting your fate (to be the No to the Life of the Peoples / Martin Buber) as the worldly existence of Yahweh, Satan.

You have always known that the “shaking off of the yoke of Jacob” threatens you from us (Genesis 27:40). And for centuries you have been addressing to Yahweh the prayer of thrust to avert this destiny from you (Talmud, Megilla Fol. 6b). So your world politics were shaped in such a way that they proved their worth in your pleas. And the nations did not notice it, but regarded Germany as the warmonger.

The invention of the Holocaust Church is your undertaking to transform your prayers into reality under your own direction. Thus you have turned away from Yahweh. There is now nothing left that will keep you as a people. Israel is no longer an issue.

The secret of the circumcision of your male descendants is revealed on the 8th day after birth. It is the traumatization that turns Hebrews into Jews, who thereby become an unnamed fear of life, which they fight against Yahweh with unconditional obedience. You have left this path forever with the Holocaust narrative. Now the free-floating fear will drive you mad. In this state, you will do things that the armies of nations will turn against you and devour you.

But the salvation for Israel also comes from him by putting an end – if necessary by force – to the desecration of boys. This act of salvation makes Satan’s people a people of men – within 40 years. The descendants of Israel who are no longer traumatized by circumcision will no longer be able to be talked into the genocidal Yahweh as their God. They will walk the path of Gilad Atzmon and free themselves from Yahweh. He has recognized Yahweh as an evil deity and reacts as people generally react to evil.

The Talmud (Megilla 6b) documents that you believe the German people to be the wrong-doers who will disempower you. Hence the hatred against our people! It is “holy hatred” which has no earthly (finite) cause – especially not the persecution of the Jews in the 20th century. A “saint” of our day, the archangel and two-time Nobel Prize winner (for literature and peace) Elie Wiesel, is my witness. He writes:

“Every Jew should preserve somewhere in his heart a zone of hatred, of healthy male hatred against that which the German embodies and which lies in the essence of the German.” (Elie Wiesel, “Appointment with Hate”, Legends of Our Time, New York 1968, p. 177 f.)

Half a century before him and without the experience of German Jewish politics between 1933 and 1945, the much-read Jew Cheskel Zwi Klötzel wrote:

“I believe one could prove that there is a movement in Judaism that is the faithful reflection of anti-Semitism, and I believe that this image would become more perfect than any other. And that’s what I call the ‘great Jewish hatred’ …

They call us a danger to Germanism. Certainly we are, as certain as Germanity is a danger to Judaism. But do they want us to commit suicide? No one can shake the fact that a strong Judaism is a danger to everything gentile. All attempts by certain Jewish circles to prove the contrary can thus be described as cowardly and comical. And as twice as lying as cowardly and funny. Whether we have power or not is the only question that interests us, and that is why we must strive to be and remain a power.” (Cheskel Zwi-Klötzel, Das große Hassen, Janus No. 2/1912; quoted from Theodor Fritsch, Handbuch der Judenfrage, Hammer Verlag, Leipzig 1944, p. 307)

The times in which we Germans no longer dared to let such thoughts approach us are finally over. You will never again be able to dictate how we should think. German idealistic philosophy – especially the thinking that Hegel showed mankind – has risen again. After that, God and man can no longer be thought of as separate. Atheism has thus become unthinkable. God is. Not in the afterlife. It appears as a world to recognize itself. World history is the development of his self-confidence. So in it it is reasonable. What is real is reasonable; what is reasonable is real (Hegel).

History is not a fact that can be grasped as such in the facts of a law. The “Holocaust” is not a fact – especially not obvious.

The criminal prohibition to deny the “Holocaust” is the prohibition to deny your God Yahweh and his power in the world. The “Holocaust religion” is the foreign rule of Judaism hostile to ALL peoples.

Already Jesus, the Christ, marked you Jews as descending from the devil (John 8:44) and condemned the work of the rabbinate (scribes and Pharisees) as “making the Jews children of hell” (Matthew 23:15).

The religious argument again has a basis – in reason. And reason recognizes you as Satanists on the basis of your holy books. In the Revelation of John (Apocalypse) you are identified as the “synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 3:9).

You betray the world. This knowledge takes away all power from you – even the power of money. This loss of power is hope for you.

The interpretation of your existence in the terminology of reason is the only reliable guarantee for your survival in the peoples – no longer as an exclusive cult cooperative, but as individuals and tolerated strangers. This grace is bestowed upon you by the word of the apostle Paul, the founder of Christian theology, that you are enemies for our sake (Romans 11:20). So it is our duty not to kill this enemy.

German idealistic philosophy begins with the cobbler from Görlitz, Jakob Böhme (1575 – 1624). He gave the key to the knowledge of the truth of the German-Jewish enmity, which Paul still pronounced as a secret:

“I will not conceal this mystery from you, brethren, lest you rely on your own wisdom: Blindness has partly happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has entered, and then all the people of Israel will be saved, as it is written (Isaiah 59:20; Jeremiah 31:33): “The Redeemer shall come from Zion, who averts the ungodly nature of Jacob. And this is my covenant with them, when I will take away their sins.

According to the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but according to God’s gracious choice they are beloved for the fathers’ sake.

For God’s gifts and calling cannot repent him.”

(Romans 11:25-29)

You are the “repulsiveness” without which we would not know what we are (according to Jakob Böhme). And perhaps we are the chastisement of Yahweh, through which he drives you to be this unpleasantness. We are not united by friendship among nations, but by holy enmity.

Do you realize how ridiculous and at the same time dangerous it is to want to hide this event of salvation in the “Holocaust Church”? If you do not voluntarily leave it, your people will be buried under its ruins.

Can’t you see the storm clouds on the horizon?

Holocaust justice is crumbling. The uprising is inspired by Thomas Fischer, the author of the most influential commentary on the penal code. He drives the Federal Constitutional Court before him. The Federal Constitutional Court reacted with the “Wunsiedel Decision” of 4 November 2009. Fischer had shown in a monograph how his fellow judges misused the expression “in a way that is likely to disturb public peace” in the determination of the legal property “protected” by §130 StGB. With the Wunsiedel decision the BVerfG seemed to want to eliminate the worst excesses. But that was again only a Talmudic deception.

But Thomas Fischer does not rest. In paragraph 25 of the explanation of §130 StGB (Volksverhetzung in der Begehungsform der Holocaust-Lenugnung) he reveals that the “jurisprudence” assumes a reversal of the burden of proof. The accused is burdened with the proof that his “denial” of the “overall historical events” of the Holocaust is not an approval of the same. This is called a “probatio diabolica”. This is a ticking time bomb. And it looks like it’s about to go off.

That the state must prove the guilt of the accused in order to trigger the state’s claim to punishment is the foundation of the rule of law. To describe the Federal Republic of Germany as a “constitutional state” is an obvious lie. Although it was never a constitutional state at any time, the BVerfG has now, with the Haverbeck Resolution, provided the evidence that is immediately obvious to everyone by means of a concrete example that “gets under the skin” of every honestly-minded citizen. And this decision goes far beyond Fischer’s statement. What is special about it is the fact that the BVerfG, by equating denial and approval, is deeply immersed in Talmudic rabble-rousing. This linguistic work is so exceptional for a Christian-influenced person that it deserves to be reproduced in its wording with the decisive statement. Otherwise you would again deny that something like this exists in the world. The Christian’s reaction to this is profound contempt for the authors of the resolution.

“According to the aforementioned principles, it is to be assumed that the constituent elements of approval and denial indicate an aptitude for disturbing public peace.


Nothing else shall apply to the variant of denial. The transgression of peacefulness here lies in the fact that denial can only be understood as denying the generally known genocide committed under National Socialism against the background of German history in such a way that these crimes are legitimized and approved by mantle. Denial thus has a similar effect to the approval of criminal acts, which is otherwise punishable under §140 StGB…

and in turn equals the glorification of the National Socialist dictatorship of violence and arbitrariness according to §130 (4) StGB”. (BVerfG of

22.06.2018, 1 BvR 673/18)

That’s the purest form of legal perversion. The criminal energy with which she has been staged is breathtaking.

The “red robes”, like a surprise stroke, presume a derogative power under supra-constitutional law to “recognize” “exceptions” to fundamental rights.

The master of the GG are the Bundestag and the Bundesrat. Only they can decide changes of the Basic Law with 2/3 majority. Karlsruhe should therefore have allowed Ursula Haverbeck’s constitutional complaint after the “judges” had finally admitted that the ban on Holocaust denial is a special law against a certain opinion and thus falls under the ban contained in Article 5 (2) of the Basic Law.

The claim of a “competence of recognition” for exceptions to fundamental rights violates the constitutional principle of separation of powers (Article 20 (2) GG).

Karlsruhe should have declared §130 para. 3 StGB null and void. At best, it should have signalled to the legislature that it would allow a prohibition law to pass as a law restricting fundamental rights within the meaning of Article 19.1 sentence 1 of the Basic Law if it were passed in compliance with the citation requirement of Article 19.1 sentence 2.

Do the “judges” want to defend themselves with the statement that they were not aware of this legal situation? Certainly not!

The “guardians of the constitution” were of course aware that in 2009, when the problem was openly recognized, the Bundestag would not pass the prohibition law again. The former Federal Constitutional Judges Hassemer and Hoffmann-Riem had already publicly expressed their concerns. It would also have been remembered that in 1994 the CDU parliamentary group of the Bundestag had unanimously spoken out against the prohibition law. The chairman of the Central Council at the time, Bubis, had only just succeeded in persuading the members of parliament to change their minds.

The “Central Council of Jews in Germany” will probably have taken the necessary measures to ensure that the prohibition of denial is not defeated. The only way to prevent this was to remove the BVerfG from the division of powers in the Basic Law so that it could save the ban on denial despite Articles 19 and 79 of the Basic Law.

This is how it happened.

What happened in the case of Haverbeck is the transition from hidden to open foreign domination. For what will can now still be thought of as decisive for the “BVerfG”?

As an organ of Jewish foreign rule over the German people, Karlsruhe has also callously ignored the Basic Law’s prohibition of retroactivity for criminal norms (Article 103 GG). At the time of the “commission of the offence” Ursula Haverbeck was allowed to assume that Article 5 of the Basic Law applied without restriction.

It is a stairway joke of world history that of all things the Haverbeck decision aimed at a conviction of all lawyers who acted as public prosecutors or judges in “Holocaust cases”, will now bring the blush of shame to the face. They must be ashamed because they have failed to assert the nullity of the ban on denial by submission to the BVerfG. They were too cowardly.

What the BVerfG has now said – that the ban on denial contravenes Article 5 of the Basic Law – was obvious to every legal layman, including every lawyer. Thus, in every case of denial, the requirements for a referral under Article 100 of the Basic Law, which is mandatory there, were met.

But that was not all: the accusation of cowardice applies to all judges, public prosecutors, lawyers and notaries, i.e. the “guardians of the law” in our country. They looked away and remained silent – even when their colleagues were thrown into prison because they defended the accused in cases of denial, arguing that their clients did not tell the truth and could prove the accuracy of their allegations.

Holocaustism does not only concern an insignificant niche of the life of our people, but also the core of our spiritual existence, in which our experience of identity is created by the self-determined imprinting of the people’s consciousness, through which we are only a people with the capacity for will (state).

It is your war goal to stop this educational process for all the future. It is the Talmudic modality of genocide.

You can only achieve this goal if you succeed in suppressing the contradiction against the Holocaust narrative through a system of social sanctions. The keystone of it is the Holocaust Inquisition, which does not deserve the name “Justice”.

The highly developed legal system on German soil in the past has been replaced by a New Barbarism. The Haverbeck resolution of the BVerfG now makes this “visible”. First signs indicate that judges and public prosecutors are now aware of this and are refusing their further participation in this system. The Regional Court of Hanover, for example, acquitted the convicted in the appeal proceedings of a “Holocaust denier” convicted at first instance at the request of the public prosecutor’s office. It is noteworthy that the Court of Appeal expressly refers to the aforementioned extract from the Haverbeck decision of the BVerfG and clearly and unambiguously based the acquittal on this extract against the intention of the Karlsruhe “judges”.

Consequently, the same public prosecutor’s office that had applied for the acquittal challenged it with the appeal.

Thus, an internal official conflict in the public prosecutor’s office in Hanover has become public. A one-off event!

We will closely observe how the careers of the presiding judge Goldmann and the public prosecutor Müller-Sommerfeldt, who are responsible for the acquittal, will proceed (Ns – 40 Js 81/13 – 42/18).

The first public prosecutor Wortmann, who justified the appeal with the hostile legal arguments of the BVerfG (NZS 1101 Js 15658/18 of 26.02.2019), will probably no longer be used as a lawyer in a free Germany. She has made herself dishonorable.

She deprives the Germans identified as “Holocaust deniers” of the right to express their opinion publicly on the grounds that this is appropriate,

“to induce the audience inclined to the utterer to aggression and to take action against those who are considered to be the authors or responsible persons of the distortion of the alleged historical truth implicitly claimed by denial”.

Apart from the fact that the alleged cause-and-effect relationship (nexus) is a pure invention (where is the empirical evidence?), this argument negates the principle of civil liberty: because others break the law, when they take note of my thoughts, these thoughts are forbidden. Whoever comes up with something like this is an enemy of the law. If this “federal constitutional judge,” then he is a highly dangerous enemy of the law.

That is the situation in the OMF FRG. The “punishability” of Holocaust denial is only the tip of the iceberg. The BVerfG thus protects the cornerstone on which an all-pervading system of thought police is built. The steam chatterer Peter Sloterdijk accurately described his appearance in the magazine “Cicero”:

“What would certainly stand out most to the observers of our circumstances coming from outside, although it has become almost invisible to us through its everyday nature, is that we have established ourselves under the guise of freedom of speech and unhindered expression of opinion in a system of subservience, or rather of organized linguistic and intellectual cowardice, which paralyzes practically the entire social field from top to bottom.

You – Sons of the Covenant – are the masters who created this system. They would like to congratulate you on this achievement. Under no circumstances should you be scolded for it. An enemy is an enemy because he acts like an enemy. That is all right. What is wrong is that some of our own think that Jews should be treated like friends. You have friends as individuals in dealing with individuals. As a people in relation to the people, the reasonable form of communication is the unity of war and peace. In the relationship with Jewry the moment of war is decisive, because Yahweh wants it so. It is therefore a holy war. In this war every one is a winner and a loser. At present you are winners and we are losers. For us this is the more favourable starting position; for the loser learns and is the winner of tomorrow. But you rot in the sun of victory. Amen! So be it!

Horst Mahler


BVerfG                      Federal Constitutional Court

Karlsruhe Town, in which the BVerfG resides

GG           Grundgesetz – not really a Constitution, but that’s what we have

Thought and Speech Crimes: The Disturbing Case of Imprisoned Revisionist Ursula Haverbeck, still imprisoned at the age of 90

By Thomas Müller

Forty percent of American millennials (ages 20-36) believe the government should intervene when citizens say something that might be considered offensive to minorities, a new Pew Research study reveals. It is not entirely clear what is meant by “intervene” and “minorities,” and the term “offensive” is broadly defined. Intuitively, the question likely pertains to the sort of nonsense we are seeing involving censorship and public persecution of those who espouse views that are deemed “politically incorrect.”

Despite the threat of political correctness (PC) from millennials, Americans overall still put a high value on free speech, with only 28% in favor of government regulation of speech. Among respondents, 27 percent of Gen Xers (37-52), 24 percent of Baby Boomers (ages 53-71) and 12 percent of the Silent Generation (age 72 and older) believe government should control and limit offensive speech. The dwindling Greatest Generation universally defends free speech, but they are now over age 90.

In Germany, a troubling 70% are in favor of limiting free speech. That country will jail those who engage even in revisionist history involving WWII, and even debate on the Holocaust is considered taboo. In fact, it is illegalin Germany to deny or even downplay the Holocaust. The term deny is curious given that no leading revisionist on the topic actually denies atrocities or actions against Jews and others.

Understanding of the Case of Ursula Haverbeck

I emphasized the word “downplay” because recently the German government imprisoned 88-year-old Ursula Haverbeck for “downplaying the Holocaust”. The court sentenced her to a two-year term for violating section 220a [see below]. For a woman of her advanced age, this is the equivalent of a death sentence.

The following video is the interview that got her into hot water. Watch it before it’s removed from the Internet.

Apparently, “downplay” is double-speak for revisionism. Watch the interview closely, as if you were on the jury. Nowhere does Haverbeck deny that crimes or atrocities were committed against Jews (and others), nor does she refuse to accept that they were rounded up or persecuted. Rather, she speaks mostly about the nature, methods and the numbers, which is deemed “revisionism.”

The following is an excerpt from the German law, and what a broad and sweeping law it is. In essence, it demands no one disturb the public peace, ruffle feathers or challenge a history that has been deemed set in stone or static.

(3) Whoever publicly or in a meeting approves of, denies or renders harmless an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the type indicated in Section 220a subsection (1), in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine.

Please, watch Haverbeck for yourself. See if you can identify her so-called offensive words that “might disturb the public peace.” In fact, Haverbeck was remarkably well composed and was relatively careful in her word choice. Despite the news coverage on her imprisonment, I certainly didn’t hear her “approve of” atrocities or claim they didn’t happen. Do you hear her “rendering harmless” acts committed under the rule of National Socialism?

She did go into the rarely discussed — but I think much-needed — topic of the mass murder (Hellstorm) of German civilians and POWs as the war wound down and after the defeat of Germany. Basically, she is “guilty” of processing things outside of the box or standard narrative. Her “revisionism” only involves researching and questioning the size and degree of atrocities against Jews and the aspects of the Hellstorm.

She did suggest that truth or history on these topic has been “distorted.” She uses the term “Das Groste Problem” to define this distortion. This is problematic in her eyes because this historical distortion has been used as an agenda to kowtow Germany and promote Zionist power.

I’m sorry, but I don’t see “The Great Problem” train of thought as a jailable crime. I don’t see being an aggressive revisionist as being a jailable crime either. Nor is hurting someone’s feelings a jailable offense. Any sensible observer would say that ALL history has been distorted to one degree or another and should be subjected to frequent revision, review and question. Nothing should be set in stone. […]

We do find the notion of a court approved version of events that one could lose their liberty over beyond Orwellian. It is fundamental that there should be open discussion, even of controversial views, without threat of prosecution. But if the authorities are willing to make an example out of an 88-year-old woman, well, what more is there to say.

We do find it deeply disturbing that Haverbeck was imprisoned at all. And what of those who simply defend free speech and the right of Haverbeck to conduct this interview without prosecution and jail time? Are they, too, going to be subjected via some contorted circular logic leading to derision, ridicule or even prosecution?

Support for Ursula Haverbeck can be provided here.

This article originally appeared on The New Nationalist and was shortened for publication here.

ISIS – Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi is a Mossad agent named Simon Elliot now surfaced in video since 2014

ISIS leader Baghdadi surfaces in video for first time since 2014

ISIS leader Baghdadi surfaces in video for first time since 2014
For the first time in years, the leader of Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) has appeared in video footage, disproving long-running rumors of his death.

Published by the terror group’s media arm on Monday, the video depicts a greying Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi calmly seated next to a rifle, discussing jihad with his cohorts.

“The video shows Baghdadi in a casual conversational setting with others (their faces blurred),” said Rita Katz, executive director of the SITE Intelligence Group, a company that tracks the activities of terror groups. “He talks about war against ‘Crusaders’ and about battles in Baghouz, Syria being over, indicating that this interview was filmed somewhat recently.”

Rita Katz


1) BREAKING: ’ Furqan issues new video showing leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, marking the first time he is shown in a video since his July 2014 sermon at the Great Mosque in

View image on Twitter

Rita Katz


2) The video shows Baghdadi in a casual conversational setting with others (their faces blurred). He talks about war against “Crusaders” and about battles in being over, indicating that this interview was filmed somewhat recently.

The militant, known by his nom de guerre, has not been spotted in video footage since his infamous 2014 sermon at the al-Nuri mosque in Mosul, Iraq, where he announced the creation of his group’s ‘Caliphate’. Rumors of his death or arrest have percolated in that time, but the video is the latest proof the jihadi commander lives on.

Baghdadi praised the recent Easter bombings in Sri Lanka, claiming the attacks as “revenge” for battles lost in Syria, and commended militants in Mali and Burkina Faso.

Rita Katz


3) In the vid, titled “In the Hospitality of the Emir of the Believers,” Baghdadi praises attackers over images of the attackers/attack (though not in the visual interview section; the audio may have thus been added via a later recording)–calling it revenge for Baghouz

Islamic State itself apparently saw the appearance as a big deal as well, as IS-linked accounts across social media hyped up the video. Katz said the group’s thriving social media presence was “troubling.”

“In anticipation for the video, announced a day prior, ISIS support network hyping it [with] nonstop creation of social media accounts and channels on Telegram,” said Katz. “Scale of the activity definitely exceeds that of recent releases, showing troubling resiliency of the group’s online network.”

Islamic State once had big ambitions. After its 2014 debut in Mosul, the group captured large swathes of territory across Syria and Iraq, at one point controlling a land area the size of Britain. For years the group survived on the proceeds from stolen oil, but was finally crushed after an arduous multinational effort led by Syria, Russia, Iran and a smattering of militias, as well as a coalition led by the United States.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

By West Mick

  1. NotQualifiedMember

    I took a quick look through the forums and hadn’t seen this anywhere. First thread, hope I’m not treading old ground with this.

    The claim and pictures were found on a blog claiming to be the “real free Syrian press”. I don’t know which side of the conflict this puts the blogger one (both sides like to accuse the other of working with, for, or being Jews) it’s enough to put the claim itself in serious doubt. However, what caught my attention and kept me from immediately dismissing the claim were 3 pictures that accompanied it:






    Now, as it stands, I do not have enough information on who Simon Elliot is to say that the person in these pictures is him or anyone else. What I can say is that the person in the upper left corner of the first picture IS Baghdadi and that the unidentified person on the right side of that picture does look strikingly similar to Baghdadi (those eyebrows), and that this unidentified person looks like the man in the other two pictures. However, just because the unidentified person looks like him (Baghdadi) doesn’t mean it is him, and just because the unidentified man in the first picture looks like the man in the other two pictures doesn’t mean that they are the same person.

    Because this hinges on people accepting the similarities between these people as them being the same person, I was hoping someone could either prove that the unidentified man is not a Mossad agent named Simon Elliot, or that someone has a strong enough background in facial recognition to say that unidentified man is not Baghdadi sans a beard and turban.

    In my opinion this is a weak claim without even going into who Simon Elliot is and whether or not he is a Mossad agent. It relies entirely on people accepting those pictures and the narrative that came with them at face value. Thank you for your effort and time, please let me know if the way I posed this is confusing. It certainly sounds confusing in my head


    The traces of Israeli intelligence woman in Tehran attacks;
    Who is Rita Katz and how is she related to ISIS?
    Political analysts believe that ISIS is being used as a front brand by other terrorist cartels and western countries to implement their aggressive plans in Iran and other parts of the world.

    When it comes to terrorist attacks by ISIS, a name strikes the minds of reporters and newsmen whose twitter account can be a good source to provide them with novel news; Rita Katz. Wednesday attack by ISIS forces in two spots to capital of Iran proved another time that the intelligence and briefs reach Katz sooner and first-handed than other sources.

    The founder of Search International Terrorist Entities (SITE) Intelligence Group has had a controversial past in personal life and work sphere. Rita Katz was born into a Jewish family in Basra, Iraq in 1963. Her father was accused and executed in Iraq for spying for Israel when Rita was only a child. Her mother, along with the three children, fled to Israel afterwards.

    Katz worked for Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and studied multiple subjects in Tel Aviv University. She did not had any plan to move then as she believed the main land of Jews is Israel. However, she was made to move to the United States by the husband for what is said to be continuing studies.

    Soon there, she started investigating the Islamist organizations. She worked as a spy, wearing Burqa and makeup to remain unknown, conveying information to intelligence organizations in the United States. In July 2002, Katz founded SITE Institute which was claimed to be aiming at analyzing corporate records, tax forms, credit reports, video tapes, internet news group postings and owned websites, among other resources, for indicators of illicit activity.” The institute, however, turned out to be an intelligence base gathering information by hacking, using spies and other unknown methods.

    Rita Katz and her organization are considered cover for latent movements and plans by Israel and extremist countries. The question about the origin of the information the SITE institute publishes once in a while has remained unanswered during the years. The website has published the famous video of beheading by ISIS forces for the first time. In fact, all the videos created by ISIS have been published by Katz’ institute for the first time. Yesterday’s video in Iranian parliament official building in the midst of the attack was not an exception.

    Besides, SITE sometimes publishes the announcement of ISIS group before they are put in their own news agency. Analysts believe there is a high probability that there is no Afaq News agency owned by ISIS and Katz and her allies in Israel and US publish what they want to be in the name of ISIS in Amaq.

    There is a big difference between who claims a terrorist act and who performs it. Wednesday attack in Tehran was accompanied by evidences that questioned ISIS being the real plotter behind the act. Katz and her grand intelligence apparatus truly find it desirable to implement US, Israel, and Saudi plans in the region and Iran using ISIS and a mask to control the worldwide reactions.

Holy Land – Palestinian doesn’t scrap career after losing leg in Israel attack

Using a wheelchair, crutches and a prosthetic limb, Amir continues to travel across the Strip to buy scrap metal

Twenty-four-year-old Amir Abu Jameh collects and recycles scrap metal in the Gaza Strip, a job he inherited from his father. Amir continues the trade in spite of losing a leg in an Israeli attack on the besieged enclave in 2014.

Using a wheelchair, crutches and a prosthetic limb, Amir continues to travel across the Strip to buy scrap metal, bringing it back to his makeshift workshop in a relative’s yard and working on the items readying them for resale.

A number of Amir’s relatives were killed in the Israeli attack which forced doctors to amputate his leg. The family’s house and shop were also destroyed forcing; leaving them faced with rebuilding their lives from scratch.

Operating in Bani Suhail, in the south of the Strip, Amir says: “I clean, sort, and dismantle the pieces I collect, and supply them to dealers who buy them to be sold and used in and out Gaza.”

Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’ is a hoax: Experts

“I have not had another job, especially after I got married in 2015, and now I have a family of three – two children and my wife – and this requires me to provide daily expenses,” he adds.

In addition to scrap metal, Amir regularly visits the local dump to collect plastic which he sells to recycling factories.

Working in this industry, he explains, has become more difficult as a result of his injury.

“I want to help myself and my family, and I do not need anyone, so I bought a rickshaw and I work on it,” he says.

“I lost my leg, but I did not lose the hope and the desire to live,” Amir concludes.

Arab League warns of erasure of Palestinian history in school curriculum

General view of Arab League foreign ministers emergency meeting in the Egyptian capital Cairo on 9 December, 2017 [Stringer/Anadolu Agency]

General view of Arab League foreign ministers in the Egyptian capital Cairo on 9 December 2017 [Stringer/Anadolu Agency]

Palestinian history is being wiped out in school text books through the Judaisation of the Arab curriculum, the Arab League warned in a meeting this weekend.

During the Palestinian Children Educational Affairs Council meeting, Assistant Secretary-General for Palestine and Arab Territories, Ambassador Said Abu-Ali, said education is the most important type of resistance so Israeli occupation authorities are working to undermine it.

Israel is working to impose its syllabus on Palestinian students in Jerusalem in order to erase the Palestinian identity, it also bans new schools from being set up in Arab areas and existing schools from being renovated.

The Arab League official said that this plan aims to liquidate the Palestinian cause and put pressure on the Palestinians to accept a peace plan which offers them far less  than the two-state solution.

The 80th meeting of the Palestinian Children Educational Affairs Council launched yesterday in the Arab League headquarters in Cairo, Egypt, to discuss ways to support and develop the educational process in the occupied Palestinian territories, as well as the educational institutions run by UNRWA in the Arab host countries, and the agency’s role in developing and providing financial support to the curricula and training to suit the fast tech changes.

Nakba History 7f65c

May 14 is coming up, ‘independence day’ for Zionists and the Nakba for the Palestinians.  This was indeed a catastrophe for them, no ‘war of independence’ but a war of colonial conquest, as it was the only way the bulk of Palestine’s indigenous population could be ethnically cleansed.

‘Israel’ remains what it was in 1948, a state built on stolen land. It was never founded with the intention of living alongside the native people of Palestine but living instead of them.  This was clear in Theodor Herzl’s diaries, where he refers to the ‘penniless population’ somehow being spirited out of the country. Getting rid of the Palestinians was always the conundrum that had to be solved.

The British used the Zionist movement because it was useful to them, a colony that could be planted in the heart of the Middle East. The mandate for Palestine was based on the denial of the right of the Palestinians to choose their own future.  This right was eventually granted to the Iraqis and the Syrians but Palestine – southern Syria but severed from it by agreement between Britain and France – was to be held in limbo until European settlers could constitute the majority.

This was never to happen but with British support Zionist colonization had by the 1940s reduced the Palestinian majority from 90 percent of the population to 70 percent. Bear in mind that even the 10 percent Jewish population in 1918 was the result of intensive Zionist settlement since the 1880s.  At that time the Jewish population of Palestine, pious and largely anti-Zionist, and living peaceably alongside Muslims and Christians, was no more than a few thousand.

Support for Zionism settlement violated inherent Palestinian rights as well as Woodrow Wilson’s 14-point declaration in 1918 aimed at ensuring world peace through the acknowledgment of the right of national self-determination.  We have seen where the denial of this right has led in the case of Palestine, endless wars and a standing threat to world peace.

In 1947 the UN General Assembly recommended partition.  That is all it was, a recommendation which would never have passed but for the intimidation of vulnerable delegations by the White House.  The recommendation violated article 1 of the UN Charter, passed in 1945, which states that ‘all peoples have the right to self-determination.’ Such a right clearly applies only to people living on their own land.  There can be no such ‘right’ for colonists to retain stolen land any more than there can be a ‘right’ to possess any other kind of stolen property.

On December 10, 1948, at a time Palestine was still being ethnically cleansed, the UN General Assembly passed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  There is practically no one of its 30 articles that the Zionist colonists and their regime did not break then or have not broken since.

On May 14, 1948, David Ben-Gurion declared Israel’s ‘independence.’ The later historical parallel would be the ‘unilateral declaration of independence’ by the colonial white settler minority government in Rhodesia (Zimbabwe)in 1965.   Both declarations violated the inherent rights of the indigenous people to choose their own future other but whereas European settler ‘independence’ in Rhodesia was rejected by the UN Security Council, colonial settler ‘independence’ in Palestine was accepted.

The other paradox in the case of Israel was that its colonial-settler declaration was made as colonized people in Africa and Asia were moving towards self-determination, with the support of the UN.  As was the case in the 1920s, only Palestine was to be deprived of this right.

Within minutes of Ben-Gurion’s declaration, the US recognized Israel.  This was not a decision taken by the Congress in conformity with the wishes of the American people.  It was not a decision taken on the advice of diplomats and senior State Department advisers, many of whom, in fact, were strongly against it.

It was a decision taken by President Truman, in violation of his administration’s official policy, which was to seek a UN trusteeship over Palestine, as it clearly could not be partitioned without extreme violence.  This was an enormous danger which the Zionists strove strenuously to head off.

Truman Ben Gurion e5536

*(Israel’s first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, and then-Israeli ambassador to the U.S. Abba Eban, center, presents a Hanukkah menorah to then-U.S. President Harry Truman. May 1, 1951.)

Members of the US delegation at the UN General Assembly had no idea Truman’s recognition of Israel was coming.  He ambushed them and the head of the delegation, Warren Austin, walked out of the chamber in disgust.

Truman was not guided by high principles but the need to secure the Jewish vote in the 1948 presidential elections. Other issues were involved besides Truman’s support for Israel but the tactic worked.  In his November triumph over the Republican candidate, Thomas Dewey, Truman won 75 percent of the Jewish vote.

The attempt by the UN to hold Israel to its principles was rejected from the start.  The Palestinians were not the accidental victims of war.  The Zionists had taken 24 percent more of Palestine than they were allocated in the partition plan.  They had no intention of handing any of it back or allowing the Palestinians to return.  Ethnic cleansing was the key to the success of their project.

Had Palestine been placed under UN trusteeship there could have been no democratic Jewish state, as even in the area set aside for one, native Palestinians were as numerous as Jewish colonists.  The ‘independence’ war was a war of necessity as it was the only way Palestine could be cleared of its population.

The UN General Assembly made a lame attempt to hold the Zionists to account by passing resolution 194 on December 11, 1948, the day after the passage of the universal declaration of human rights.

Resolution 194 calls for the return of the Palestinians to their homes.  As their expulsion was fundamental to the establishment of a colonial settler Jewish state on their land there was, of course, no way any Zionist government would comply with it.

Such is the state of Israel’s ‘democracy.’  Get rid of the people you don’t want first – in this case, the overwhelming majority – and then declare not just your democracy but ‘the only democracy in the Middle East.’ Not even the apartheid regime of South Africa sought to expel the African majority.

The passage of time does not change the nature of theft whatever the stolen article. Palestine was stolen from its owners in 1948.  The Palestinians lived on the land, worked the land, owned the land in every sense of the word, legal, historical and cultural.  The Zionists were interlopers who took it from them using the most savage methods.  Having stolen most of the land in 1948 they stole the rest in 1967 and have since then continued their quest to wipe out the Palestinian presence in history.

Now, against international law, Donald Trump has ‘recognized’ the Zionist occupation of Jerusalem and its occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights.   Flushed with success, Benjamin Netanyahu is going to name a Golan colony after Trump. This only adds insult to injury and in no way will change the course of history.

Israel thinks it can remake the Middle East. It has either gone to war or persuaded its American benefactor to go to war against all the central lands of the Middle East, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq.

Its pressure is undoubtedly a key reason the US is maintaining a presence in Syria, where Israel has supported takfiri fanatics with arms, money and the treatment of their wounded. It wants the US to go to war against Iran.

Iran presents no danger to the US. On the contrary, ever since the presidency of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (1989-1997), it has made many attempts to establish better relations with the US. All have been rebuffed, not because of US interests but because of Israel’s as Iran has never budged from its principled support of the Palestinians.

Short of the outright military attack it wants, but so far has been unable to get, Israel has been killing Iranian revolutionary guards in Syria – there with the permission of the Syrian government to help defend Syria against one of the most pernicious attempts ever made to destroy an Arab state –  and assassinating Iranian scientists in Iran as well as sabotaging Iran’s computer infrastructure.

Israel Independence day 4aa30

*(U.S. 242nd Independence day 2018. Credit: U.S. Embassy Jerusalem/ flickr)

As long as the world’s policeman protects the criminal, Israel sees no reason to stop what it is doing.  Two rogue states are working together to create mayhem in the Middle East and much further afield but this is not the 1890s and ‘the Arabs’ as described contemptuously by Netanyahu and the racist politicians, settlers and rabbis around him are not Kipling’s ‘lesser breeds without the law.’

Neither are the Iranians or anyone else against whom Israel has directed its sociopathic fury.  They have the same mixture of strengths and weaknesses as anyone else on this planet.  More importantly, they have law and morality on their side. This is the backbone of their resistance.

The US and Israel seem to think that they can kick people of the Middle East around endlessly but history sends out a different message.  As the Egyptians demonstrated in 1973, as Hezbollah showed in 2006 and Syrians have shown since 2011, ‘the Arabs’ are perfectly capable of working out ways of striking back at their enemies.

Now Jared Kushner is going to come up with the ‘deal of the century.’  Peace in the Middle East has been reduced to real estate haggling in which the mentality of money is expected to prevail. Deals and money are all Trump understands but having resisted Zionism for more than seven decades, it is not likely that the Palestinians are going to sell their rights now for Kushner’s 30 pieces of silver.

Israel is sitting on the lip of a volcano in the Middle East.  It is indeed having a party there, too drunk with success to see the fire burning below.  These are years that are going to be stamped on Jewish history forever.

*(Top image: History of the Nakba, painting. Credit: exlow/ flickr)