Millennial Woes

A Gram of Woes No 45

Tue, Nov 7, 2023

[Woes does an interesting round up of current events and his take on things, especially Tommy Robinson and his plans for a counter protest against pro-Palestinian protesters in London on Sat, Nov 11.

It was also very good to see Woes get stuck into that stuck-up Douglas Murray and his usual self-righteous display of grovelling suck-up to zionist power, the very people causing the destruction of the West that he claims to bemoan!

– KATANA]

https://odysee.com/@millennialwoes:4/Gram202345:a

Published on Tue, Nov 7, 2023

Description

A Gram of Woes: 7th November 2023
November 8, 2023
1,837 views
135
8
Support
Save
Repost
Share
Millennial Woes
@millennialwoes
11K followers
Join
Follow
https://www.millennialwoes.com/gram
00:00:23
Tommy vs the Palestinauts
00:40:09
Peter Hitchens walks out of interview
00:42:03
Halloween and Guy Fawkes Night
00:46:21
Support genocide or you’re an anti-Semite
00:48:43
Saudi Arabia condemns Israeli hate-mongering
00:49:38
Audrey Hale manifesto
00:52:32
The British state stoking tensions
00:53:11
AfD declared an extremist organisation
00:54:26
European confederacy and petty nationalism
01:01:18
Have we reached peak Jewish power?
01:15:21
Israel and the future
01:15:48
A circus of fauxism
01:17:30
Personal disorganisation
01:17:50
Western civilisation is now a chimera
01:18:12
Swindon woes
01:26:21
Token black luminaries
01:27:52
Smoking Ban Redux
License
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
File size
160.03 MB
Less
0
50 comments

_____________

TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 4 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment section. Thanks.

TRANSCRIPT

(Words: 11,916 – 1:30:37 mins)

2023, Week 45.

Hello, everyone, and welcome to A Gram of Woes, on regularly, Tuesday the 7th of November 2023.

So there’s a lot to talk about actually, I have a lot of things:

“Woes. With the news that pro-Palestine demonstrations are set to take place in London on Armistice Day and a Patriot counter-protest planned, how do you see the events playing out?”

“Most of us know it’s a trap, but it feels impossible sometimes to get through to the Patriot crowd, who care little for the realities of the situation and always reply with, ‘So we do nothing?’, when warned to stay away from London on Saturday. What adds more suspicion into the mix is that Tommy Robinson’s Twitter account has been reinstated at a terribly convenient time.”

Well, that gets us into a number of the things that I wanted to talk about.

So the Gaza thing continues. There are some awful pictures and footage that have come out recently. I try to avoid them, but it’s kind of difficult when you’re on social media. It continues, it gets worse. Tensions around the whole thing in terms of the conflict spreading, seem to have lessened somewhat since last week, I think because, well, I don’t know, I guess the time has sort of, sort of passed. There hadn’t been escalations, basically.

So Russia isn’t getting involved, China isn’t getting involved. Russia, I did see something that they were giving some sort of weaponry or defense system. I think it was a defense system to the Palestinians, but that’s all I’ve seen. And then Yemen did declare war, apparently declared war on Israel, but I’ve heard no more about that. So maybe that was fake?

So the point is that we don’t seem to be looking at World War Three, which is obviously a relief. But at the same time, that means more of this corrupt system will go on and on for the foreseeable future.

So that’s the general situation.

However, the split between Zionists and their supporters and their opponents has only deepened in the last week.

So you’ve got a real divide here! A huge divide now! Between what has been called the Left and the mainstream media and certainly the political establishment in every country. The mainstream media is actually being. I wouldn’t say fair, but it’s not being entirely pro-Zionist. Even the BBC is being fairly even handed.

So it’s an interesting thing where for the first time, you’ve got a sort of bifurcation in the mainstream for the first time in a long time. I mean, Covid, Ukraine, climate change, LGBT and the migrant crisis for the last ten years at least, the mainstream has very much been one unified entity. It’s kind of weird that it would take this issue to rupture that. Of course, they’ll still be united in all of those other issues, but this is different.

[04:023]

I also think that it has changed people’s view of Israel, and especially Zionism. I think that it suffered a huge amount of PR damage. And that is why it was interesting that several high profile Twitter accounts were reinstated over the last week because of the PR damage done to Israel and Zionism. It’s very interesting that Tommy Robinson and Katie Hopkins, and I think there was a third one, I’m forgetting now, got reinstated on Twitter. Which means unsuspended, got their accounts back with all their followers.

And I think that Tommy Robinson has about 300,000 followers, something like that. He’s big on there and he’s been on Telegram ever since, with, I think, 150,000 followers on there ever since. But upon being reinstated, he said:

“It’s nice to have a voice again.”

Which is interesting and rather depressing about how realistically Telegram fits into the ecosystem of social media. Because ultimately it is public, technically, but the general public aren’t there, whereas Twitter is much more open. I mean, you will see a tweet being shared and talked about in the media. You won’t see a Telegram post. They won’t be quoting a Telegram post in a Times article or something like that.

So anyway. And he was welcomed back. Tommy was welcomed back to Twitter by numerous people, including Sargon of Akad. There’s a screenshot doing the rounds of, you know, it just feels like we’re back in time! We’re so back in time, to coin a phrase. And it’s tedious and tiresome and fucking annoying! It could be 2015 again. And not in a good way, not in the optimism. Well, not 2015, 16, the optimism. No, this is 2015, 16, let’s moan about Muslims!

To get back to the whole thing, because there are numerous facets here.

So the tensions, the pro-Palestine demonstrations spreading all over the West, getting very large. And then it was announced that there would be a large, a really big one on Remembrance Day [Armistice Day] on the 11 November, which is obviously commemorating the war days, especially the two World wars, the Poppy and so on.

And it’s something that’s sort of intrinsic to British culture, certainly all of my lifetime, since the First World War, so over 100 years. It’s something that matters to us. It’s one of those traditions that binds us together, even those of us who certainly were not alive at that time or even the Second World War. This has been one of those staples of British culture which matters! Not that the remembrance itself about war obviously matters, but I think another way in which this matters is that it is a British tradition.

So it’s something for the British people especially, really only the indigenous British people. Because all the migrants, all the immigrants weren’t here. They were not here 100 years ago or even for the Second World War.

So this is not for them. It’s very much our heritage!

[08:01]

So when the pro-Palestine people say that they’re going to basically gate crash this, that’s not just uncouth, rude, it’s also perceived as anti-British. And there will be a contingent among them for whom it’s not anti-British like, they’re British Lefties who want to use Remembrance Sunday to bring awareness to their issue. But a great number of them, it will be anti-British because they won’t be British in any real sense.

And of course, this is a good example of how this whole issue is bringing to people’s minds the idea that these migrants are not really British, that they haven’t really integrated, that they don’t really care about the country or its culture or heritage. And so multiculturalism does not work! The real issue is that mass immigration does not work. But they’ll blame it on multiculturalism, which is the allowed euphemism here. They’ll say, well, if only they integrated, not multiculturalism:

“If they integrated into British culture, then everything would be okay. But in the meantime, we will be angry at them for not integrating.”

So this is the reaction that you’re now seeing from the other side. And cue Tommy. So he’s allowed back on Twitter! And apparently Elon Musk actually had a private meeting with Rishi Sunak just a few days before this happened.

So it’s going to kick off big time? Well, that’s what people are saying. That’s what the mainstream media are saying. They’re fears of a far-Right.

Of course, Tommy Robinson is called far-Right. So he’s associated with nationalism, with the dissident Right, the Alt-Right. Very annoying! Because the man is a dumpling. Worse than that, he’s not just thick. Well, he’s not just the class dunce. He’s the class clown as well.

In other words, he’s not just thick, he’s an attention seeker. He thrives on this. And he thrives on chaos and drama, which is why his crowd was always just absolutely rife with drama, like a soap opera. Because that’s the kind of person he is.

And he doesn’t really, I don’t think he really understands much, but he doesn’t need to. He does understand that some brown people aren’t like us. And that’s really it:

“Some brown people rape our daughters and sisters. Well, they should integrate. They should integrate more and then they wouldn’t rape our daughters and sisters!”

It’s fucking grug, grug stuff! And not even true! At least if it were accurate, you could say, well, it’s basic and stupid, but it’s true. It’s not true! And it is delusional about the reality of, well, different people’s identity, religion, race and so on.

The only way for them to really integrate is for us to be dissolved and them. So it’s a dreadful situation in which there is no other solution but for them to leave the country. That’s really the only solution here. Well, from my perspective. From their perspective, the solution is for me and all of us to dissolve into them.

[11:55]

But I don’t see that as a solution. I see that as a travesty!

So anyway, to get back to all this, I don’t think he understands much, but he does understand., … He is a natural leader, although he doesn’t have any strategy or brains or whatever, he does have charisma and he does love attention and he loves to be important. And people like him. For all his flaws, he is a likable character, on the surface. So he’s friendly, he’s outgoing, he’s loud, he likes a laugh, he’s a lad! So people warm to him.

So anyway, he is back on Twitter! And one of the first things he says is that literally, one of the first things he said, having got his Twitter back, was that he was going to “rally a nation” and specifically in the Remembrance Day event.

So it’s a counterprotest to the counterprotest, I’ll be specific. It’s like “patriotic” in inverted commas. Counterprotest to the pro-Palestine counterprotest to remembrance Sunday. So they’re saying that they’re going to protect our statues and all that.

Now, the word patriotic, we should be careful about this because in a low brow sense, these guys, these Tommy fans, are patriotic in the most basic sense. They do care about their country, their kin, their local town. They’re very sort of basic, simple people who don’t understand any of the abstractions that are going on! They just want the people they know to be safe. And increasingly the people they know will be multiracial and mixed race, but they just want them to be safe. And that’s really all the thinking that there is.

But that is a form of patriotism!

So when I say “patriotic” and inverted commas, it’s not exactly fair. They are actually enacting that instinct to protect homeland and kith and kin [one’s acquaintances and relatives]. That is the heart of patriotism. But unfortunately, the fact that it is grug and low brow matters, because it leaves them vulnerable to being manipulated and used like cannon fodder. And I think that’s what’s happening here.

Now, whether there will be violence at this. I mean, there will be some violence that’s just inevitable when you’ve got a bunch of drunk North FC types and a bunch of pro-Palestine [chuckling] Arabs facing off in central London. Yeah, there will be some violence for sure.

What I think is there might even be like a stabbing, something like that. But what I think is there won’t be major violence. I think this will turn out to be something where the mainstream media has got everyone worked up about it in expectation, and then actually it will pass largely without much bloodshed.

[15:27]

But the point is that the point will have been made, right? I don’t think they actually need much violence in order to make the point, which is:

“These brown people are bad because they don’t support the jews! They don’t support Zionism! I’ve got a jewish friend, he’s just like anyone else. He’s very upset about what these brown people are doing!”

Et cetera. That’s the point that will be made here. And that’s all that it’s supposed to make. That’s all that it’s supposed to do.

And that’s why Tommy Robinson has been reinstated on Twitter and why the mainstream media is crowing about this, about this whole thing, the counter-protest and the counter counter-protest.

I think it’s all orchestrated. And Morgoth put a good article out today when he talked about the Behavioural Insights Team, the Nudge Unit. And he made this very interesting observation that the Nudge Unit is used to pacify people. That’s basically what it’s done. The purposes to which it’s been put have all been to calm people down, get them to just do as they’re told, all that.

But what if it could also be used in the other direction to agitate people? And why wouldn’t it? You’re Garnering all this knowledge about what makes people tick and how to make people do what you want them to do. Well, you can put that to any use, can’t you?

And I agree with Morgoth and other people have made the same point over the last few days, that all of this is being orchestrated. The British state, not necessarily the British government as such. The politicians, I think they are largely dumplings. They don’t understand anything. But the British state is infested with civil servants and NGOs and so on, which are run by, I think, far smarter people and they know exactly what they’re doing here!

And basically it’s a fictitious patriotic drive where you get everyone worked up. And ultimately it’s about nothing! Because what if well, ultimately it leads to nothing. Because what would Tommy Robinson, his crowd, what kind of Britain do they want? They want the Britain of, well, 2010, 2015, [chuckling] I’m not sure. Maybe 2015, but without the Pakistani grooming gangs. So they just want everyone to integrate together. It’s the nihilism.

But that’s the best that this kind of patriotism could lead to, and it would be the dissolution of everything that we are culturally, genetically.

So that’s Tommy Robinson’s function, as well as just to distract people from real nationalism and real patriotism, like actual thinking patriotism, which is a huge part of it as well:

“This could be a golden opportunity to highlight the catastrophic failures of multiculturalism only for the football crowd to ruin everything and place all the focus on the emerging threat of the far-Right.”

Well, exactly!

So there are numerous things there. It will highlight the catastrophic failures of multiculturalism. Yes. But in a way that is useful to the establishment, because they can say:

“The test of multiculturalism is, do we all support Zionism or not?”

Which [chuckling] is fucking mental!

[19:17]

Anyway, the other aspect is that the football crowd, that’s Tommy Robinson’s crowd, will go in and be, … They will certainly be drunk. They will certainly, some of them be on drugs, and they are certainly looking for a fight! They are certainly looking for violence. So they’ll go in and cause mayhem!

And then the result is that the media, the government, the state, can then blame the far-Right and Tommy Robinson. But more importantly, the far-Right, for causing all this violence, which they have ginned up! Including by getting Tommy Robinson reinstated on Twitter.

I mean, I just don’t believe that that was spontaneous. I just simply don’t believe that he and Katie Hopkins, any more than I believe it was just a bizarre coincidence that Way of the World and I were banned from YouTube on the very same day! No! No, that doesn’t happen!

And similarly, Katie Hopkins and Tom Robinson being reinstated on Twitter on the same day, just a week before this all kicks off. No! It’s obviously orchestrated. They actually really should have staggered it. Like, have one of them reinstated one day and then another one, two weeks later or something, because that would have been more plausible.

The [chuckling] point is that they can do something like this right out in the open, obviously, and people won’t even notice! The grugs won’t even think it’s suspicious that Tommy and Katie were brought back onto Twitter on the same day. Won’t even fucking occur to them that that’s odd! Because they’re just thinking about the fight. They’re just thinking about:

“Eh, we’re going to stick it to those Arabs!”

Cukg.

And the thing is, they might. And then, as JR says, there will be a lot of violence then, and then a lot of grugs going to jail, but also the far-Right, that generally what is called the “far-Right”, I really reject that label. I don’t like it! I’m not comfortable with it.

But nonetheless, it is what we are called, and all of us will be demonised alongside that.

So then we are, I mean, they could even say it’s “terrorism”. The far-Right is the “terrorist threat”, because:

“Well, they stabbed some brown people on this protest!”

And I don’t even think it will be stabbing. It’ll be bottling, it’ll be fists, that kind of thing. Because Tommy’s crowd and the football crowd, they’re not a black street gang.

As far as I know, there hasn’t been anything like knives or guns or anything like that. I’m just trying to think what’s the worst that could possibly happen. It’s not going to be shootings, it would be stabbings. I think that’s as far as it could possibly go in terms of violence.

And I’m not saying that. I’m not trying to diminish that it’s obviously fucking awful! But I’m using that as the worst case scenario here, that there are stabbings at this.

It doesn’t really matter, though, because whatever happens, the media will use it, will create the impression that they desire about these events. As usual, they can work with almost anything.

[23:10]

“Also note that despite everything, there haven’t been any attacks that we might have expected as well. As do you mean terror attacks by Muslims serves to only further the idea that Tommy and co are just bullies.”

Yes, yes. Well, they can say that after the fact. They can say that:

“The Muslims, the pro-Palestine crowd, would disapprove of their point of view, but nonetheless, they were peaceful. But Tommy and his crowd went in there and beat them up, raised hell with these poor brown immigrants!”

And by the media, we mean the state, can manipulate and use this any way it likes in contradictory ways. They’ll gin up loathing for the Muslims, for being anti-semitic, anti-Zionist, but then gin up sympathy for the Muslims when they’re beaten up by the Tommy crowd. And they’ll gin up sympathy for the Tommy crowd for being patriotic, but then condemn them when there’s violence at this protest. Condemn them as animals! And even see Tommy going to prison again for what he organised:

“He organised violence that he meted out to those poor Muslims on Remembrance Sunday!”

And you can see the narratives, the storylines that they would construct for all of this.

Anyway, so let’s see. You could get lost in talking about all the different implications of this, the different facets of it. But I think I’ve covered the broad thing there.

So I’ll read this question again:

“With the news that pro-Palestine demonstrations are set to take place in London on Armistice Day, a patriotic counter-protest planned. How do you see the events playing out? Most of us know It’s a trap, but it feels impossible sometimes to get through to the patriot crowd who care little.”

Yes, it is impossible because they tend to be pretty thick! That’s just the fact of the matter:

“Who care little for the realities of the situation. And they always reply with, ‘So we do nothing?’, when warned to stay away from London.”

The truth is, we should do nothing, because we don’t have power. And so to do anything is to just lay yourself wide open to the predations of the powerful. That’s the truth! Yeah. We should do nothing. I don’t like it. I really don’t like it! I wish we could do something. I wish we could have our way. I wish we could get our ideas across in the public sphere and in the political sphere and transform Britain. I really do wish that!

But in this current situation, we have no power at all! And our enemies do have unlimited power!

[26:07]

So if you put yourself out there, you’re just a mix between puppet and cannon fodder. They will use you, however they like, to condemn all of your beliefs, to condemn your actions on the day, to condemn you as a person. They’ll dig up your past. They’ll paint you in whatever way they like and everything you believe in in whatever way they like! Because that’s what the powerful can do to the powerless, and we are basically the powerless. I’m sorry. It’s a depressing thing to say. But it’s true. And we have to face up to that because acting like we have power or we have the vicarious power of the state, like the state will back us up when we go and protest something, that’s unfortunately just bollocks!

The LGBT activist, he has the power of the state backing him up, so to speak, when he goes on a gay protest. [chuckling] But actual patriots and even fake patriots like Tommy don’t! Well, Tommy, this is weird. He does have the backing of the state, insofar as I’m certain they got his Twitter reinstated and I’m certain they are using him. I wouldn’t even be surprised if there is a spoken agreement between him and the state:

“Sometimes we’ll send you to prison. Don’t worry, it’ll be cushy, but otherwise we want you to cause trouble.”

I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s some sort of agreement between Tommy and the state.

But the point is, yeah, he is a fake patriot because of what his ideas lead to.

And ultimately, I don’t really, … I mean, I think he does care about Britain, but I think he cares more about having an argy-bargy:

“I’m getting lots of attention!”

Exactly!:

“It’s not going to change the demographics of London.”

Precisely.

Oh, Douglas Murray:

“Must admit, the Douglas Murray interview on Trigonometry got my blood pumping more than any intellectual discourse I’ve heard or have read in the last three years following Woes, AA and Morgoth, etc. Everyone on all sides is absolutely obsessed with the jews. Fuck off, man! And remember that to get a job done, you sometimes need to take all the allies you can get, get them all out.”

Well, look, if you’re talking about achieving mass deportation of Muslims, that would be terrific. Is that what this is going to lead to? But otherwise, these are not our allies. Douglas Murray is not our ally. Organised international jewry are not our allies.

And if you think they are, you’re a fucking fool! Just look at who started mass immigration! Look at who campaigned for Hate Speech laws relentlessly! Look who orchestrated the migrant crisis in 2015 onwards, and tell me that these are our fucking allies! Are you mad? I don’t know what you’re saying. I’m sorry if I’ve misunderstood something, but I just don’t understand.

Douglas Murray. His job is to prevent the general public from realizing what I’ve just said. And his appearance on Trigonometry, which I haven’t watched, … But those two as well. Trigonometry as well! Their job is to mislead people and prevent them from realizing the stuff I’ve just said.

Go and Google Andrew Joyce, Empire Windrush and you’ll find an essay on Occidental Observer that fucking lays it out for you! The stuff that Douglas Murray certainly wouldn’t want anyone to know! And really doesn’t want anyone to know!

He’s a piece of shit! The last few weeks it’s been disgusting! And his self righteousness, his dramatic way of speaking, his solemnness! This is all faux. It’s all fake! It’s all put on! It’s disgusting! It makes me sick, really!

[30:47]

For 15 years or more he has been a paid traitor to his people, riling them up about the Muslims pointlessly. Maybe there is a point to it. Maybe the British state realises that mass immigration has been a disaster:

“The Muslims aren’t integrating. So what we’ve got to do is gradually gin up loathing for them among the indigenous Brits and then that will justify us sending them all back!”

Do we believe that?

And then that’s the purpose of Douglas Murray and so on and Tommy Robinson, that the British state secretly wants to deport all these Muslims and reverse multiculturalism! Absolute bollocks! Because they continue bringing them in year after year, thousands upon thousands! Hundreds of thousands probably every year. So they would have stopped that years and years ago if they had any intention of mass deportation now. Or is it that the Muslims’reaction to the Gaza conflict has made them suddenly see:

“Oh, these Muslims aren’t integrating. We’ll have to deport them all! Quick, release, Tommy!”

Bollocks! Something is going on here that they’re not going to implement mass deportations, I don’t think. I mean, how can it just have occurred to them now that they’re not integrating?

So, no, I think there would be some token deportations. Red meat for the Tommytards and the Conservatards. But that’s it. The grander narrative here will be that the far-Right is evil. The far-Right is violent and stupid and low brow and so forth. But also that the Palestinians are awful for, … Well, that the Muslims are awful for being anti-semitic.

But they’ll also say that the far-Right, that Tommy crowd, is also anti-semitic. While he diligently rejects any form of awareness of the jewish question [JQ] and vehemently discourages it among his supporters, the state and the media will nonetheless call him an anti-semite, even though he’s funded by jews, in league with God knows how many jewish organisations, has jewish colleagues. Nonetheless, the likes of Hope not Hate will call him anti-semitic, and the BBC and so on.

Or they’ll say that his politics, his ideas, leads to anti-semitism. So he’ll be condemned for that. All the while the problems continue.

And that’s really what’s going on here. I think it’s just a containment mechanism. It’s just a red meat for the various concerned parties. But it won’t actually lead to any big social change, any policy change. Oh, yeah. So he wanted to fight for Israel. Yeah, there’s all that. There’s all that as well.

[34:12]

I mean, you could go into it. But I’m trying to keep it general! [chuckling] So that I don’t lose the thread. And he made the Shalom film, all that.

He actually has the same attitude as the British state, that multiculturalism is fine, it’s wonderful, until jews are harmed by it, then it’s terrible!

So we don’t really exist! And I bet you if you said to Tommy Robinson:

“What about the British people?”

He would probably say:

“Well, who do you mean? We don’t really exist. We’re all from Africa!”

Because he’ll have heard those slogans. I don’t think he’ll really understand anything. Maybe I’m underestimating the guy, but he just seems to get habitually used by Ezra Levant, jewish organisations, the mainstream media, the British state, especially the British state. Used and abused by them:

“Don’t know the details of what Tommy is trying to organise, but anyone who still thinks after Charlottesville on January 6, that IRL [In Real Life] protests are a smart idea is probably not going to make it.”

Yes, I agree. That’s exactly the point. These things are orchestrated beforehand, during, and especially afterwards! After the fact.

So, yeah, I guess that’s the takeaway. The summary is people should not go to this protest on Armistice Day, Remembrance Day, because it’s a trap. I think they want some amount of violence. As I say, I don’t think it’s going to be a bloodbath, but there will be fisticuffs, that kind of thing.

And I think they want it. They want to get a few photographs of some slob or hooligan punching a harmless brown guy. That would be ideal. That would be what they’d love to have at the end of this. But maybe also violence from the brown guys towards the hooligans.

And, of course, in the eyes of the middle class, this just looks like a fucking nightmare! It will look:

“Okay, so this is what patriotism is. Oh, dear! It’s having a tracksuit on and drinking a bottle of Newcastle Brown ale in public, and then getting into fisticuffs with a Muslim chap!”

And [chuckling] that’s not going to be attractive to the middle class! Which, of course, is exactly what they’ve always wanted to make nationalism, patriotism, repugnant to the middle class, to the educated. And Tommy has diligently served them well in that regard. Over and over again!

But then so have other elements of actual nationalism. To be fair, they’ve made it very easy for the state and the media to demonise this kind of stuff. But point is that as long as the middle class are on board with generally some diversity, multiculturalism, then nothing’s going to change. What Tommy and his grugs do is. Well, yeah, I’m just saying he is a leader, but he’s a leader of morons! And he’s certainly not going to change the culture or have any idea.

In fact, his only ideas for improving the culture and improving Britain would be, as I said earlier, that we all race mix. The guy’s in dumpling! I’m sorry, but he just does not seem to be very bright. He has that sociopathy that I think is very typical of political leaders and yeah, a cynical grifter. Yeah, I agree. Oh, yes:

“The brown men like Rishi Sunak will emerge as the voice of reason. Let’s not forget that Tommy’s cash till will be ringing louder than ever!”

Yeah, right.

[39:02]

So, yeah, what Tommy said on Twitter was:

“Saturday, eleven, eleven, eleven, London. Your country needs you!”

Echoing the famous poster with Lord Kitchener.

So that’s four days from now. So we’ll see what happened.

Unity News, they’re saying anyone who has still a functioning brain and cares about this country should stay well away from this obvious Fed op. Yes, I agree.

Nick Clews says:

“I don’t think it will be anything.”

Well, maybe nothing will come. Maybe it will just be a big sort of tension raising exercise in the media and then not much will actually happen.

But the point will have been established, nonetheless. Even though nothing happened. The point, it will have been inserted into people’s minds that the far-Right is a threat, which is really the goal with all of this, is to insert into the public’s mind certain ideas.

Oh, no, I didn’t see this interview with Hitchens and Alex O’Connor. Is that the one where he walked out of it after and he, … It took 17 minutes to, … Hold on a minute. Yes. Yes, I did! Yes, I did see this! I watched the whole thing. It’s a 17 minutes “walkout”, where he takes that long arguing with the guy. He’s standing up, he’s putting on his bicycling outfits and all that, and he’s still arguing with him for 17 minutes! And honestly, I’ve had three relatives who had dementia, and it manifests early on in different ways in each person. It’s different.

But one of the ways is a sort of frustration that they’re not keeping up with things, early on, in the progress of the disease. They realise that they’re not quite on the ball and they feel that other people are tricking them, moving too far ahead, confusing them.

And honestly, I’m a bit concerned. I am because for all his flaws, I like Peter Hitchens. And that was a strange thing, that 17 minutes walk out. I mean, it’s funny to watch. But during it I did start to think, was he just in a bad mood on this particular day? Or is there something more going on here?

Anyway, oh, I should have, … Right, okay, so Halloween happened and I was meant to do a stream with Lichtmesz with Martin Lichtmesz, about ghosts for Halloween, but unfortunately that didn’t happen. There was a technical screw up at his end that meant that we couldn’t do it.

And he also had to miss the Decameron the next day as well, which was very unfortunate. So we’ll see about rescheduling. It’s a shame. I really was looking forward to it, but unfortunately that couldn’t happen.

[42:35]

Also, Guy Fawkes Night happened. And on both of these occasions I scheduled loads of pictures throughout each of the Halloween and Guy Fawkes Day. Because I like both festivals, if you can call them a festival. I’m not sure what the word would be. But especially Guy Fawkes Night. I prefer that to Halloween just because it’s more dark and serious and rooted in British history. And I’ve got fond memories of the sights and sounds and smells of bonfire night. So it’s closer to me. And I was kind of disappointed that we couldn’t. Didn’t do a stream about it to commemorate it. But I thought:

“Well, there’s not actually that much to be said about. You’d say the same thing every year!”

Yeah, [chuckling] but it’s just a shame. It’d be nice to commemorate it in some way, to take part in it in some way.

And so my way was to post photos, mostly from yester, well, all from yesteryear, Guy Fawkes Night being celebrated by people, especially kids, throughout the decades. That was lovely. I liked that. So I hope people enjoyed those photos.

Halloween, I probably enjoyed it more when I was a child. I do like Halloween, … And this is the biggest cliche. So I’m sorry to say it, I don’t like how commercial it’s become. I don’t like that it all feels fake and plasticky. I think it should be local. I think you should keep it local. I think that things should be made by your mum or your friend’s mum, and by the wee shop, they should sell things. But I don’t like that. It feels very shallow.

And I can see Bonfire Night going the same way. Eventually the kids won’t make a Guy. I don’t even know if they still do that nowadays?

But I can imagine Amazon selling a Guy that you can burn. So that you don’t need to make your own, because it’s inconvenient! [chuckling] And I really hope that doesn’t happen.

But anyway, yeah, I liked Halloween as a child. Small, but as you get older, for the reasons I’ve just given, it starts to seem a bit shallow and American, sort of meaningless, which I don’t like saying because it does have roots. All Hallows Eve. It does have roots in European culture, but it’s all a bit shallow nowadays.

And I think that it’s salvageable, though. I mean, it’s perfectly salvageable. It just, you know, we should not. Well, we should have a better culture than we do, basically. Yeah. I mean, kids will always love Halloween, of course. Yeah. Probably the most internationally recognised day. It really is world-wide. And, yes, it’s very shallow. Yeah. It just feels like, as I say, plasticky. Silly.

I made the point last year about turnips, that it used to be turnips that we used in Britain, whereas it’s become pumpkins. And that’s just one sort of manifestation of this, where everything becomes Americanised over time. I don’t like it. Don’t like it at all!

[46:18]

And the Guardian and the BBC, there’s an article in MSN.com called “How the Guardian and BBC got swept up in a wave of anti-semitism”. And, I mean, this is amazing! So no matter how this is, you know, just to be fair and even handed about the conflict is in certain eyes to be “anti-semitic”.

And of course, to be anti-Zionist is to be anti-semitic in certain eyes. And no matter how craven your support for jews and the jewish people is, if you don’t support them carpet bombing Gaza and killing huge numbers of small children, then you’re an anti-semite! This is insane!

And that’s the thing. Look how craven, how absolutely committed to diversity and multiculturalism the Guardian and the BBC are! But if they say something critical of Israel’s conduct in this conflict, then they’re anti-semitic. So fucking tiresome! Oh, yes. So and this is an example of them ginning this up for Tommy and his crowd:

“Home Secretary Suella Braverman, who is not White and is married to a jew. Suella Braverman refers to the anti-war, pro-peace., …”

So this is the Palestine side:

“Refers to the anti-war, pro-peace protests as hate marches!”

Anti-war, pro-peace equals hate marches because it’s anti-semitic! So, in an article in Jewish Chronicle [chuckling] from March this year, long before this conflict started, Braverman wrote:

“My husband is a proud Zionist. We have close family members who serve in the IDF.”

[chuckling] There we go! She’s not compromised at all!

Oh, this is the thing I was trying to remember earlier. This is a letter from the Ministry of Foreign affairs in Saudi Arabia:

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia condemns, in the strongest terms possible, the extremist remarks by an Israeli occupation government minister regarding dropping a nuclear bomb on the besieged Gaza Strip, which show the pervasiveness of extremism and brutality among members of the Israeli government. Moreover, not dismissing the minister from the government immediately and only freezing his membership constitutes the utmost disregard for all human and religious moral values and legal norms by the Israeli government.”

There we go. That was another minor event that happened this week.

Oh, okay. One thing was Audrey Hale, the transsexual gunman who opened fire in a Christian school in Nashville last year. The manifesto has been leaked. And one page in the manifesto says:

“Kill those kids, those crackers! Going to private fancy schools with those fancy khakis and sports backpacks with their daddy’s Mustangs and convertibles. Fuck you little shits! I wish to shoot your weak arse dicks with your mop yellow hair! Want to kill all you little crackers. Bunch of little faggots with your White privileges. Fuck you, faggots!”

It’s interesting to hear a transgender using the word “faggots” I guess that’s like black people using a certain word [nigger]. They’re allowed to do it.

[50:35]

So this is the manifesto that the FBI would not release last year, when the shooting happened, they kept it under wraps. And you can see why. It was anti-White. It was expressly anti-White, the killing. Let me see this. Audrey Hale. And it’s weird, because as far as I can see, that is a White person, a White boy. I can’t even tell whether it was, … The jawline looks male, but it looks like, … No, I think it was originally a girl. And, yeah, that does look like her.

Anyway, the point is, Audrey Hale was White herself, but she seems to have been, well, pumped full of not only hormones, but also anti-White sentiment, anti-White beliefs. And that has formed part of her killing crusade. If what I’m saying is accurate, then that means that this is what they say about nationalism, that it leads to killing. To moan about Muslims or multiculturalism leads to murder!

Well, then this seems to be that exact thing, where you’re going on and on about how awful White people are, and then that leads to them being killed. Especially by black people, but even by this transgender. [chuckling] it’s all quite weird!

So, yeah, you can see why they wouldn’t release this manifesto at the time.

Whereas if it’s a racist White guy and he’s got a manifesto, they always release that it’s just so fucking annoying!

And a poppy seller in Edinburgh, Waverly station train station. He’s 78 years old and he was punched by pro-Palestine protesters, apparently. That was one thing that happened here. There are tensions, there are real tensions.

And I think on all sides, the tensions are being stoked by the mainstream media, by the British state, deliberately, knowingly. Because whatever the fallout is, they can control it. Or so they think.

Anyway, let’s, because I’ll get on to that later.

Another thing that happened was the AfD has been declared an extremist, Right-wing extremist organisation by the Federal Office for the Protection of the German Constitution. I’m guessing that’s the equivalent of our Home Office. But it’s the Saxony Anhalt office. It’s one division, as far as I know, not the general country. And in Saxony Anhalt, the AfD scored higher than the Christian Democrat Party, the CDU, for the first time, and that was just a few days ago.

And then this guy declares them Right-wing extremist organisation. This is how they do it. They are clearly very worried about the AfD. And you can moan about the AfD, a bunch of cucks or whatever, but it’s based enough for the establishment to be clearly very concerned about. Unless that too is a fiction that they’re manufacturing. But I just don’t get the feeling that is the case there in Germany.

Okay. Ross asks a question:

“In order to survive in a world of superpowers, do you think Europe might have to unite into a European superstate? It seems to me that nationalism in the traditional sense is dead and Imperium Europa is the way forward.”

[54:41]

Well, I’m with Mosley on this matter. He also believes in a European federation, but he clearly was devoted to Britain. I mean, you can do both. It’s not a contradiction. I mean, you could say it’s serving two masters, but not really, because Britain is part of Europe, so it makes sense. I mean, I don’t think that we should be opposed to France and Germany and Belgium and Sweden. I think that they are our allies, they’re our colleagues, our brothers. So we should put our interests first, but we should also put their interests second, and we should collaborate with them and help each other out.

I mean, there will always be brotherly sibling rivalry, but that’s just something for adults to deal with which they should fucking well be able to. It certainly doesn’t mean that we should be sabotaging each other or going to war with each other. And especially because we now know the full scope of the human species and just how different most of them are from us Europeans.

Regardless of the minor differences between us, the contrast between us and outside of Europe is much starker than any contrast within Europe. And that should be very clear to everyone at this point. If you can’t see the point of European identity and the salience of it at this point, then you’re just a retard!

So I do think that European identity clearly matters. There is such a thing as being European. There absolutely is! It’s part of being a civilisation. But that does not contradict love for one’s country, one’s own homeland, any more than love for one’s town precludes love for one’s country. Of course it doesn’t. My town is my favourite place and so on.

But that doesn’t mean, therefore I’m opposed to the rest of the country. Fucking, that’s ridiculous! No one would ever say that. I don’t think anyone has ever said that! [chuckling]

And yet we have this idea that to be pro-Britain is necessarily to be anti-Europe or opposed to other European countries. I just don’t see it. I don’t see it. I understand the logic of the thinking, but I just don’t think it’s actually true in the real world unless we make it true! Unless we decide to behave in that way. So we’ll moan about the French and the Germans and all this, like certain civic nationalists do, or the Spitfire Bulldog nationalists who are just a bunch of morons.

And as I say, historically, the time for that kind of small minded, petty nationalism is just absolutely over! It was over in 1945. It was over in 1918. We just should not be behaving like that towards each other or talking of each other like that.

[57:57]

I mean, I’ll make jokes about the French now and then, but it is a joke in the end. I absolutely want the best for the French. I don’t want the French to be Muslimified or blackified. Absolutely not!

People use the term “petty nationalism” in different ways. The way that I’m using it. What I mean by it here is that small minded nationalism, where you got this idea that you only care about your own country and are suspicious of other European countries. I think that’s silly!

The other way in which people use the term petty nationalism is, well, to simply care about your country. There are people who think that we should all be sort of cosmopolitan to some degree. And I disagree with that. I think it’s very natural and healthy to have attachment to your homeland, to what you have known, to the culture and people and history of your nation. I think that’s absolutely right! So to call that petty, I think, is ridiculous!

So anyway, that’s what I think about that.

And as for federation, yes, there should be some sort of federation, but it should be run by people. Well, it should be run by good people and formulated by good people, not managerialist husks, and certainly not nutters, [chuckling] technocrats and so on.

First and foremost there should be a love of, well, what we are. And if that were the guiding principle, if that were the heart of everything, then the EU would actually be a good thing. It would be a force for good.

So I don’t think that the EU entirely negates or discredits the idea of European Federation. I think it’s European Federation done in the worst possible way and with a retarded mentality. But that doesn’t mean that European Federation is always foolhardy by definition. I just don’t think that’s true at all. And I agree with what you’re saying in a world of superpowers, and that is the reality. Geopolitics is you can’t just put your head in the sand and just ignore what’s going on in the rest of the world. If you do that, the rest of the world will just rape you. That’s what the powerful do to the weak, unfortunately, in politics.

So, yeah, superpowers matter. Power matters. Geopolitics matters. And nationalism has to take place within that arena. You have to acknowledge the realities around it.

I mean, how else are you going to protect your country if you don’t acknowledge the realities of the power structures that you’re operating within?

So there we go.

And then Black Pigeon Pilled asked the question:

“Have we reached peak jewish power?”

Which is a very interesting matter.

And this is what I was saying, what I alluded to earlier, that the establishment think they can control the story after the fact, because they’ve got that power. Because historically, for a long time they’ve had that power, and now they’ve got the Nudge Unit to do it in a more slick know, inculcate ideas into the public and so on.

[1:01:47]

But there is a sense, and Counter-Currents did a podcast a few days ago with Morgoth and Pox Populi and Endeavour, which was a very interesting debate, and I shared it on Telegram, about this matter. Has jewish power peaked now?

I remember Richard Spencer once saying about 2018, sometime like that. He said that jewish power actually peaked in the mid 90s. Clinton, that sort of era. And the Iraq war and Afghanistan war actually helped to reduce it. And it’s been reducing ever since. It’s been diminishing ever since. Which would make sense because demographically it’s actually not looking good for the Ashkenazi in America. Their kids keep marrying out and not having enough children of their own. And in the establishment, especially the universities, there’s a lot of brown people now who don’t want to promote or enrol jews! [chuckling] Because they are anti-semitic, I mean, they actually are consciously anti-semitic.

So of course, those brown people have been aided in arriving in America, in the West by jewish organisations much of the time.

But nonetheless, once here in the West, they’re quite anti-jew. They’re quite anti-semitic because they don’t know who brought them here, who paved the way for them. So it doesn’t matter.

So the point is, to some extent, jews in America are being devoured by the things that they have helped create. And actually, well, I wrote a summary of this for someone else, but I don’t think I need to, … Things like Critical Theory and White Privilege because they get rolled into that, they get associated with being White by brown people at least.

And then imperialism, supremacy, all this kind of stuff, historical structures of systemic violence and oppression, all of that. They’ve been inculcating that in the curriculum all over the West. And now Israel is invading Gaza. And mean, it seems almost like a genocide. And certainly there are jews speaking genocidally about the Palestinians. So that looks a lot like supremacy and imperialism and racism and the powerful abusing the weak.

And there’s really not much that you can say in response to that except:

“Well, it’s the jews! So they’re an exception! So they can get away with doing stuff like this. It’s fine for them to do this!”

But that’s a ridiculous thing to say. Even with the Holocaust as a justifier!

“Well, yes, it might be supremacy and it might be racism and it might be mass murder and it might be an invasion, but it’s okay for the jews to do this because of the Holocaust, 80 years ago!”

That doesn’t really, I don’t think that convinces many people because they just think:

“Well, yeah, but two wrongs don’t make a right.”

[1:05:21]

I mean, just because you’ve been abused doesn’t mean that you should abuse other people. So even for people who fully believe the Holocaust narrative, it still doesn’t serve as sufficient justification for Israel to do what it’s doing. [chuckling] So there’s that.

And then generally about jewish influence, there is also that the mainstream media is falling apart slowly, and it’s happening much more slowly than we initially thought it would. But it is happening!

And the question is whether it can successfully transition to online., … I don’t know. But just now, the situation just now, it looks like once the Boomers die out, television is gone. The old media, I think it’s surviving because of the boomers still, because they’ve always got TV on in their living room all the fucking time! And it’s blaring the BBC or whatever. Once they’re gone, there won’t be a TV on in living rooms up and down the country, blaring the BBC. That will no longer be the case.

So that means that the mainstream media, as a persuasive propaganda tool, is losing it’s purchase on the population. And so if you’re using that tool to condition the population and enact your power, well, then you’re losing power! Because the tool just isn’t working anymore! [chuckling]

And I think that’s going to be ever more the case. As I say, unless they can successfully transition to online stuff. But I don’t know if they can! I don’t know. Maybe they can. Maybe for normies, the BBC YouTube channel will be what they look at on YouTube and they won’t go to any other website, perhaps.

So, yeah, the answer to the question, I think it is, and I think that jewish power is declining. And we talk about “jewish power”, that in itself is an anti-semitic concept. I believe it’s regarded as “anti-semitic”, which is kind of ridiculous because every group has power. So of course the jews are going to have power. There is going to be a thing called jewish power, just like there is a thing, British power and US power, and so forth.

But nonetheless, the very concept that jews collectively would have power and the desire to use it is often regarded as an anti-semitic trope. [chuckling] It’s just absurd! And why would any group not want to have power and to use it, and to have uses to put it to? Of course it will!

But, yeah, I think that it is declining.

And then another part of it is just the Holocaust, as I said last week, I think the Holocaust is just, I mean, there was already jewish power in America and Britain long before the Holocaust. But the Holocaust was something that really inaugurated and justified it. And the Holocaust is now a long time ago, and it just doesn’t mean to younger generations what it meant to the boomers and the silent generation.

[1:08:53]

So that’s that. And I don’t think there’s anything you can do to combat that you can have endless Holocaust stuff in the media and in education, but it still seems like something that happened a long time ago. And within a context that we can’t even recognise now, the context of national pride. To your average teenager today, it’s unrelatable! It’s unrelatable for the millennials in their thirties and forties. It’s just that we’ve never lived in a context where our countries were oriented towards our people.

So it’s a very difficult thing to get worked up about the possibility of something like the Third Reich happening, or something like the Holocaust happening in Britain today. No one thinks that! No one thinks it’s not going to be that.

If you’re going to put people in concentration camps, [chuckling] ironically, it’s going to be World Health Organisation bollocks! It’s going to be the UN, it’s going to be the World Economic Forum decreeing that this must be done for the good of the public. It’s not going to be the national government saying:

“We don’t like this minority, so we’re going to put them in camps!”

That is just completely unrelatable. I think.

So, yeah the Holocaust has lost it’s purchase, and that will only continue, especially as Western populations become more diverse, which really, these jewish NGOs are killing the goose that lays the golden egg there. But that seems to be something that they do.

And what we care about is what we care about what’s good for us. And that’s not the Holocaust, and it’s not the mass immigration either. It’s us! It’s our countries. The fact that our governments aren’t oriented towards our people, that is the problem!

In short, I think that the answer to the question is, yes.

But in the meantime, for now, jewish power very much remains a very real thing. And there will also be other reasons as well, within the jewish people that they’ll start believing their own propaganda. Their ethnocentrism, which is very strong, will nonetheless be negated by their beliefs. If they really do believe that race is a little rubbish and it’s just an illusion, and that we should be open minded and that we should learn from other types of people, then there’s no point getting into that marriage that your parents are trying to push you into with that rich but dull banker from the Rubenstein family. You’re interested in that exotic student you’ve met on your business studies degree at whatever university you’re at. So this, I think, is the situation for many young jewish people today.

And so again, the ethnocentrism that they’ve had in the past, I think, is being corroded by their own stated beliefs that they state for the Gentiles, but nonetheless, it weaken their own standing. It does weaken their own identity, which in turn weakens their political power as a group.

Now, as I say, it’s a slow process, and I’m not going to say it’s going to necessarily nullify jewish power throughout the West.

[1:12:55]

But I do think you’re not looking at the situation of 1995 anymore. I tend to agree with Richard Spencer on this. I think that it probably peaked in the mid nineties. And ever since then it has remained a thing. And even today, even now, it’s still very powerful! I think that they told Rishi Sunak:

“Get Tommy Robinson back on Twitter.”

He had a meeting with Musk and it happened. That’s what I basically think happened here.

So I don’t mean to say it’s over, that jewish power is just not a thing. It will always be a thing. As long as they exist. Of course they will have some amount of powers by definition. And I think they will remain an especially powerful group, probably forever or foreseeable future.

But I don’t think they’re going to have, I mean, well, to put it a different way, jewish power is not going to be the monolithic thing that it was in the past and without that transformation, et cetera, et cetera. [paraphrasing Babara Lerner Spectre]

Yeah, China replaces them. That’s the whole other thing. Yeah, China! It’s a whole other aspect of this. And Russia is a different thing as well. It’s obviously different from the West, but it’s also got these weird tendencies that you wouldn’t expect.

The point is that Russia is its own thing and it’s quite bizarre and in some ways it is beholden to some of the same ridiculous ideas that have done such damage in the West.

But yeah, China is clearly a rising power. And that also is going to weaken jewish influence in the world.

Oh, the Holocaust memorial in Victoria Tower Gardens. Yeah, that’s a whole thing. As I say, I do believe that their power is waning.

So actually, I think that’s probably why they kvetch so much to have these memorials, to try to bolster their declining power. And that’s regardless of what happens with Gaza, just now with this conflict, I think this is still the case.

As I said before, I think this is the last time that they could do something like this. But the long term consequences are still bad for the Israelis either way. Maybe they should move to somewhere else in the world. I don’t know. I’m not saying that is true. I’m just saying maybe something for them to look into. Because clearly it’s an endlessly precarious, nasty, situation in Israel for everyone. But that’s their problem. And it shouldn’t be ours, and it shouldn’t have anything to do with us. We shouldn’t need to know about it.

And part of the perversity of the age we live in is that it is our problem! And that we are talking about it! And that we are spending an hour and a half talking about the various ramifications of this march. What’s it got to do with any of our culture, any of our heritage or history?

You’ve got a bunch of brown people, the pro-Palestine crowd, and then you’ve got a bunch of faux patriots, largely organised by jews on the other side, fighting it out so as to be condemned by a media that is certainly compromised in multiple directions, and a British state that is completely corrupt.

So it’s a very shitty situation!

[1:16:46]

And I’m not going to black pill people. I’m just outlining the variety and degree of bullshit that’s going on here, and just how disconnected and it is from us and our interests.

So I would say, just to emphasise, in case anyone hasn’t gleaned this already, I expressly discourage anyone from attending this counter-protest with Tommy Robinson in London on Remembrance Day. I think it’s just an absolute trap! 100%! And nothing good can come of it.

All right, well, I guess that’s everything. I should have taken time to organise the notes better beforehand. That is a lesson. This has been an unnecessarily arduous talk because I didn’t organise the notes beforehand. For anyone doing similar things learn from my mistake. [chuckling] One with Thumbs. That’s a good one!

At this point, yes, I think the Western civilisation is a chimera. This is a system of systems, but it’s not a spiritual conquest. It’s become a bureaucratic fucking nightmare! Did I finish my fight with Sargon? The Sargon thing? [chuckling] challenged him to., … Oh, this is the whole thing with Gad Saad. Sargon I can’t see his Twitter, right? Because I’m blocked.

So I’m not really aware of what he’s., … Yeah, so Gad Saad has been kvetching on Twitter for the last few weeks, and Sargon seems to have decided that Gad Saad is an ally, a friend of the West, against Muslims against Islam. And yes, sure, he’s not as bad as some of them, of course he isn’t.

But the message is still the same. He’s not pro-White Identity or heritage or whatever what I would call Western civilisation. He’s a consumer looking for a safe place to consume, like many (((wanderers))) and many non-Whites. And what he wants is the West to be fit for that purpose. So he’s not an ally in any real sense.

And for Sargon to think that he is, I’m sorry, it’s typical of Sargon. I mean, he’s, sorry, he’s not the sharpest tool in the box! And he doesn’t have much excuse at this point. He has many people that he could be learning from. If he can’t fucking work it out himself, which he clearly can, he has many people he could be just [chuckling] asking:

“Can you just explain this to me or just tell me what is the situation here?”

But he never does.

He arduously argues against you for years, and then eventually quietly realises that you were right all along. And he adopts your talking points, but acts as if he came up with them himself. And you are still an idiot! That’s what he does. Because he doesn’t have much, well, any integrity. I’m sorry, but that’s basically the situation. He’s a man without much intelligence and without much integrity.

[1:20:35]

And I’m sorry to say that because it sounds bitchy, and it is bitchy. But it’s the truth and it’s relevant. I wouldn’t say it just for the sake of it. I’m saying it because it’s relevant. And it matters, too, because he’s holding people back with this nonsense! And it’s what he’s always been doing. I mean, right back to 2015 when he said that:

“The alt-Right, the SJWs, Right-wing SJWs!”

Just a moron. It’s a fucking stupid thing to say!

And this is what he specialises in, these thought terminating cliches, these stupid gotchas! Horseshoe theory and so on, that prevent thought. [chuckling] That’s what he does.

So, no, he certainly won’t be on Millenniyule 23. I actually don’t think I would have him on Millenniyule. I would do a stream with him, but I wouldn’t want it to be part of Millenniyule, because it just feels like that would be sullying Millenniyule at this point. And I know that sounds like sour grapes and I’m lying, but honestly, I wouldn’t want to have them on Millenniyule! Because I want Millenniyule to be not combative. I want it to be good spirited and so on.

And with Sargon, I would want to be combative. So the Millenniyule wouldn’t be the venue for that.

Yeah, exactly! It should be cozy. And I also, frankly, more egotistically, I think that he would need to earn the right to appear on Millenniyule because he’s snubbed me for years now.

So, no, I’m not just going to take him back like that! No, he’d have to do some work.

Yes, he has been combative on Millenniyule. If you watch the 2017 one, for example, or the 2016 one, and definitely the 2015 one, when he appeared on it uninvited – but nobody was invited as such. It was an open hangout so anyone could join. And he joined. And he was certainly just, … He spent four or 5 hours misunderstanding and pretending to misunderstand, which is a combination. He does both of those.

On the one hand, he’s not bright enough to understand what you’re saying, but he is bright enough to pretend to misunderstand those bits that he does understand. [chuckling] Fucking hell!

So, yeah, just not the best.

I mean, the only reason we have to talk about this guy at all is that he is big, he’s powerful, he’s influential, and that’s an aspect of the perversity of the age we live in. A guy like him should not have influence. He should not be prominent. Unfortunately, because of the abundance of midwits in the world, there are many, many people who will follow a guy like him. There we are.

“I like the gay little thing about us adopting SJW language.”

I mean, what the fuck? He’s obviously trying to get us to look like morons. Oh, yes, that was some weird thing.

And that was another one where it took ages to explain the idea, as if he was talking to a fucking five year old. So you’d have to go very slowly so that I’ll understand. But all it actually had the opposite effect where I was thinking:

“Sargon, will you get the fucking point? What the fuck are you trying to say here? Taking ages!”

And eventually he did lay it out very simply, and I thought:

“Okay, well, that’s just a stupid idea!”

Once you can see it clearly, it’s just fucking stupid!

So, yeah, I agree.

Anyway:

“Is Woes really discussing Sargon?”

I’m afraid so. And you’re right, I shouldn’t be:

“You should have really bludgeoned him for that one!”

[chuckling] Well, I’ll be honest, if he did agree to our stream now, I would bludgeon him!

And I think he knows that. I think he knows that I wouldn’t be treating him with kid gloves now. So he’s not going to do it. But he wouldn’t do it anyway because he doesn’t want to be shown up. And he also doesn’t want to be associated with me, or any of us.

So, yeah, the days of him doing impromptu debates and discussions that is long over, he’s not going to do that. He’s playing it very safe. And I understand that for no one wants to lose their income and whatever. But then fucking check out of the discourse. Don’t keep polluting it with your low brow, low-T nonsense, obviously. But he does, and it’s exasperating!:

“I should gate crash an online event of his.”

Well, [chuckling] I’m pretty sure his mods would have me banned in short order, but I don’t think he even does events that you can gate crash, does he? I’m not sure. All right. Okay. That’s all.

I’m not going to go on about that guy anymore. It is bad when I’m talking about him. Because I know he won’t be talking about me, so I shouldn’t be talking about him:

“He was a valuable gateway.”

Yes, he was, for sure.

I mean, I certainly got lots of new followers from that four hour debate that I did with them for years afterward, so it was certainly good for me. Far better than it was for him. [chuckling] But he’s not going to make that mistake again.

“Neil deGrasse Tyson loses his mind.”

Oh, God. [chuckling] I mean, he is thick as fuck! He’s just a dumpling. And it’s embarrassing! It’s embarrassing because he’s like the Thomas Sowell of science. People think of him as very., … Oh, and Thomas Sowell! I saw a clip of him. Oh, fuck! Someone asked him:

“Where does anti-semitism come from?”

And he came out with the old canard that:

“It’s about jealousy of jewish success, because it’s always easier to hate someone else than to hate yourself for underachieving!”

Well, thanks for that, Thomas! I don’t rate Thomas well, I’m sorry.

I mean, yeah, he comes out with some good middle of the road observations that have been said by other people already, but in and of himself, no. If that’s the best that they can do, and let’s face it, it is the best they can do! Then I’m not impressed.

[1:27:30]

As for Neil deGrasse Tyson, he’s the definition of a diversity hire. He’s only got his career at all because he is black. But he’s certainly not bright. Holy shit! And that clip of him talking about the vaccine, I mean, that really should condemn him forever. Dreadful!

Holy shit!

“King Charles has confirmed that Rishi Sunak will introduce a permanent smoking ban in Britain for everyone born in 2009 or after.”

So nobody born after January 2009 will ever legally be able to buy cigarettes. Holy fuck! So anyone under 14 now, or 14 or under. Will never be able to buy cigarettes. That’s something else. Yeah. I’m against this. I don’t approve of this.

I mean, I don’t approve of smoking, really. I know it’s bad for you and it be discouraged, but I don’t agree with banning it. And I still enjoy being in the presence of people smoking, even though I’ve not., … A cigarette has not touched my lips for three and a half years! And I’ve never been close to doing it, to smoking. You just make a decision and that’s it. You’re no longer a smoker, so why would you smoke? It’s easy!

But then I did have a sort of maybe divine intervention there to help me with it.

But anyway, if I can do it, anyone else could do it!

But then again, what about the other things that I’m addicted to, like Coca Cola? Whole other issue.

So the point is, I don’t agree with banning it, but at the same time, I’m not surprised that they’re doing this because it has been going this way for a long time in this direction.

So there we go.

And yes, PGM says:

“Meanwhile, we have weed at the liquor store.”

Well, that’s in Canada. Yeah. I do suspect that cannabis is just going to be decriminalised everywhere in time because ultimately it serves their ends, it serves their purposes. People are just stoned and listless, which they already largely are.

All right, I think that’s it.

All right, well, this has been a good one, I think. A bit disjointed, but nonetheless, I think it went fairly well. Yeah So thank you. Thank you for the comments. Thank you for the Superchats. I will see you again next week, hopefully on the correct night of the week.

And in the meantime, bye bye for now.

[1:30:37]

END

top

[Brythonic Tea Time # 6 brings us several guests to discuss the ongoing genocide of Whites being carried out by Orgjew and its proxies, amid current events.

— KATANA]

Brythonic – Tea Time # 6

Mark Collett, Unwashed, Ronny Cameron,

Son of Allfather, Brizer

Mar 6, 2020

Click here for the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6nh0gazZvg

Published on Mar 6, 2020

Video Description

Brythonic

541 subscribers

Livestreaming on Friday March 6th 2020 from 7:00pm UK time.

Joining the stream today from Great Britain is Mark Collett and Unwashed, from Canada is Ronny Cameron, from USA is Son of the Allfather, and from Ireland is Brizer.

Legal disclaimer: Nothing we say in this stream is intended or meant in a defamatory or hateful manner, nor to defame or incite hate. We will be discussing historical events through different perspectives which may contrast and/or give context to the official agreed-upon narrative which the general population is encouraged and/or forced to believe, or in short “history written by the victors”. We will try to keep this discussion within the bounds which YouTube and the ADL has set. Those boundaries are shifting day by day, but nevertheless, we are giving our perspective as we see it. We harbour no hatred towards any group of people; either national, ethnic, racial, or religious. We express this in good faith and kindly ask to remain uncensored on the wonderful public space that is YouTube. Thank you for this opportunity to engage in and enjoy the free exchange of ideas and perspectives.

Link of the day:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca_9Q…

————–
Potential topics:

– Greece being invaded by Turkey, with Erdogan calling for ever more invaders to rush into Greece. Turkey has deployed special forces to fight the Greek border guards. Is this war?

– Amnesty International condemns Greece’s measures to block migrants at Turkish border as “inhumane” and “reckless”. Is this NGO intentionally part of the overall agenda to flood Europe with migrants, or are they unknowingly playing into the agenda that Turkey and much of the mainstream media have for Europe?

– Mark Collett’s video on the NGOs involved with importing migrants into Europe has disappeared on YouTube? Now on his BitChute channel.

– Grooming Gang Review petition, and how people with British blood who aren’t UK citizens are, in the eyes of the current UK government, lesser than people with a British passport without British blood. Why can’t people of British ancestry vote, but invaders can? Sign and share the petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/petiti…

– Why are we having a points-based immigration system rather than adopting a family reward system / breeding program for native Britons?

– The rise of Unwashed’s channel, and him being booted off of youtube and subsequently having to rely on DLive.

– The Irish election (Brizer)

– Canadian secession (Ronny), and Ronny’s connection to Richard Spencer’s brand of secession. In terms of Fight or Flight, this is a hardline Flight stance, or ethno-separatism. How realistic is this in comparison to a “ Stand Your Ground ” stance? What is the end goal and methods for either path?

– Tommy Robinson, and his Hearts of Oak party. Can he be held accountable for the missing donation money, his broken promises of various documentaries etc, and his shattered credibility? What do we say to his hard-line followers and Israel supporters?

And more…
———-
GUESTS:

Mark Collett
http://www.thefallofwesternman.com/
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3cc…
http://www.lulu.com/shop/http://www.l…
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/154241764…

Unwashed

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1MK…

https://dlive.tv/UNWAShED

Ronny Cameron / Proper Gander TV
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo32…

Son Of The Allfather
https://www.youtube.com/user/TheTimmae21
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/RTMm…

Brizer
https://grizzom.blogspot.com/

Home

https://republicbroadcasting.org/news…
https://twitter.com/Brizer09

——–
Subscribe and hit the bell button to get notifications.

Support the channel:
SubscribeStar: https://tinyurl.com/w6xllty
Patreon: https://tinyurl.com/r3ovtry

Also on these platforms
Bitchute: https://tinyurl.com/wooho8d
Minds: https://tinyurl.com/rt9emmj

TRANSCRIPT

(198 mins)

[00:00]

[Andrew Anglin of Daily Stormer fame, has a debate, or conversation, with Sargon of Akkad. hosted by Baked Alaska, with input from Andy Warski. Here are a selection of clips that YouTuber, Kronos, has posted — KATANA.]

Andrew Anglin

vs

Sargon of Akkad

Feb 2018 – Clips

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LZh6VzLhxU

TRANSCRIPTS

(Various mins)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ChhZMWmXQE

Andrew Anglin vs. Sargon of Akkad

Anglin: So I guess my question to start with for [00:02] Sargon, would be, do you grant the moral premise that White people have a right to their own country, and you’re just saying that it’s impossible to make that happen?

Sargon: Well I said at the beginning that I didn’t really want to debate the talking points, because there’s no point!

Anglin: Then what do you want to talk about Sargon?

Sargon: Let me explain.

Alaska: Wait hold on. You agree, you agreed to a debate. I mean, and then, you know.

Sargon: I really want to talk to Andrew.

Alaska: So you just show up at a debate and you don’t want to debate them?

Sargon: Not really. It seems I’m with, ..

Alaska: Why did you contact and send me an email, …

Sargon: Let me explain.

Alaska: Okay go ahead.

Sargon: I don’t know how to contact, sorry contact Andrew?

Alaska: We have been emailing back and forth.

Sargon: Yeah, because you were in contact with Andrew.

Alaska: I know, so if you didn’t want a debate, you should have emailed me, and said, “hey I don’t really want a debate [01:00] can we have a different sort of dialogue”. But go ahead.

Sargon: I don’t want to bicker or anything. So when you said debate I figured you mean “talk about things from different perspectives”.

Alaska: Okay! Go ahead and talk!

Anglin: That’s what we can do. I’m not trying to have an aggressive debate!

Sargon: Let me talk a second.

Anglin: I think it’s I think it’s a good starting point. What I just said, that you went straight to logistics and, .. Embrace race realism. And then the moral right of White people. So go ahead.

Sargon: Okay. Listen right. The problem that I have with anything that the Alt-Right says, when it comes to the concept of an ethno-state, is that it is trying to strip away the ethnic heritage that I have inherited. Do you understand that?

Anglin: What? I don’t understand that? No. Always, is it the thing that you’re a quadroon?

Sargon: No.

Anglin: That’s not true Sargon.

Sargon: It is absolutely true. My grandfather, ..

Anglin: I saw your parents in a videos [02:01] Sargon! In Baked Alaska stream, is that bullshit? Because I saw your parents! I saw your parents Sargon! There’s no way that’s true.

Sargon: I don’t care about your opinion on that! It really doesn’t matter to me.

Anglin: It’s not only an opinion. It’s an observation.

Sargon: Of course, it’s an opinion. Andrew, listen. I thought we’d be able to have an honest conversation. Because as far as I’m concerned, …

Anglin: Let’s get back to the quadroon question.

Sargon: Well let me speak. Look I’m not here to attack you, okay. As far as I’m concerned you are the only honest person in the entire alternative right. So I actually, of all of the people in the Alt-Right respect you the most! You are living the most honest version of your principles. And it is seeing you being, as Baked Alaska said, and I think rightfully so, the most persecuted and suppressed person in modern times. This is what you get for being honest!

Anglin: That is true.

Sargon: I don’t agree with [03:02] your principles. I don’t agree with the conception that you’re talking about. When I said my ethnic heritage, I mean, as an Englishman. If you think I’m giving up 800 years of fight against tyranny, from the point we are now, in an individualist state with civic nationalism. I as a citizen have control of my government. And if you think I’m giving that up for anything, you’re wrong! That is the English heritage! The idea that you think the I would give that away, …

Anglin: What about all these immigrants?

Sargon: I don’t even give a fuck about immigrants! All right? I’m never going to agree with that.

Anglin: What are they do with anything?

Sargon: Listen. I don’t, … Like I said, we’re not going to agree on this. You guys are okay with getting rid of that. I’m not!

Anglin: Getting rid of what?

Sargon: Civic nationalism!

Anglin: Like rights? I mean, I read, …

Sargon: Yes like rights.

Anglin: I don’t want to take anybody’s rights [04:01] away, Sargon.

Sargon: Of course, you do.

Anglin: Sargon! Sargon!

Sargon: On your website you’ve got “race war and the jewish problem”! Come on! Don’t lie to me! Don’t pretend!

Anglin: Okay, I am not lying. Let me say my thing, Sargon. I am an American nationalist. I believe in the principles of the United States Constitution.

And this country, my country. I’m not there right now. But the United States, as it was formed, okay, which was as a White nationalist country. Our entire history, the writings of Thomas Jefferson and the other founding fathers. This was a White nationalist country. We had laws enforcing White Nationalism in the United States of America.

That’s what I believe in! Okay? Anything else about, you know, civic ideals, this is all peripheral. What I believe in is the right of White people to have self-determination. [05:00] that is the core ideal here. And anything else is just at the side of that. It’s not primary.

Sargon: Okay. Well this is again where I disagree with you. But I’m not interested in discussing the ins and outs. I really just want to like talk to you and understand you. Because, …

Anglin: That’s, that’s the core of it. That’s what needs to be talked about. Stuff to do with time. And so on. I mean, …

Sargon: No no. Let me explain.

Alaska: No. First you said you don’t want to debate! Now you don’t want to discuss! I mean, …

Anglin: I’m going to ask you a bunch of questions!

Alaska: You have I mean, you’re getting paid eight thousand dollars a month on Patreon for you to represent your fans, your people’s ideas.

Sargon: No, that is not true.

Alaska: You need to represent, … You’re not getting paid $8,000 on Patreon?

Sargon: No, just the reason that you’re giving.

Alaska: I can pull up, …

Sargon: I’m getting paid by people in Patreon, because [06:01] I produce videos that they like to watch.

Alaska: Okay so you’re not, …

Sargon: I’m not being paid to be here.

Alaska: You don’t talk in your videos about. “I want to have a conversation!” I mean, I hear that all the time from you. But seems like you don’t want.

Sargon: I would love to have a conversation now. If you guys would stop being so defensive.

Sargon of Akkad is Genuinely

Disappointed in

Andrew Anglin

and Taze A Bro Nationalism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ChhZMWmXQE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ChhZMWmXQE

Sargon: I honestly. This, I’m genuinely [00:02] disappointed Andrew.

Andrew: Yeah I know. You want me to say some crazy shit so you can play it like that.

Sargon: No. You put shit every day on your website.

Anglin: Yeah but it’s, you know, it’s tongue-in-cheek. It’s joking.

Sargon: Is it? Look I have to say the mainstream doesn’t think it’s tongue-in-cheek. And I honestly thought.

Alaska: Are you really giving the mainstream media credit for getting anything right Sargon?

Sargon: Some things. Not everything obviously.

Anglin: Okay, so if we’re gonna do logistics okay?

Sargon: We’re not doing logistics we’re talking about the moral principles.

Anglin: What we’re talking about is logistics. Morality is logistics.

Sargon: Is it right Andrew, Andrew listen. Is it right for the government to shoot lawful property owners?

Anglin: Okay we’re not gonna shoot anybody.

Sargon: Yeah you are. This is why, …

Anglin: We can taze them. [laughing] most of these people who don’t even own a property. They live [01:01] in Section eight housing.

Alaska: Don’t taze me bro!

Anglin: We’re going to taze these bros! Nationalism now! Can use knockout gas, you know. I mean, we guns that shoot tranquilizer darts.

Sargon: It doesn’t change the morality. Yeah we’re gonna protect your rights and come to our country and then buy property., you know, become citizens, and then we’re gonna take that away. Is the moral?

Anglin: You would accept, … Is that moral? You know, what is immoral is having our right to exist taken away from us. Okay? You are not answering my question. It’s breaking it down.

Sargon: Is it moral to have a government do that?

Edgy Book Recommendations.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CQc4eQ4RQk

[00:00]

Sargon: Listen, every person has a right to exist.

Anglin: Sargon have you even read Heidegger? [Alaska bursts out laughing]

Sargon: No, I haven’t. And he said that every person hasn’t gotta right to exist?

Anglin: Well, what he said is that human existence has a deeper meaning than this mathematical equation that you’ve presented as the as the meaning of existence. That we should base our morality off of a mathematical equation as to who is going to suffer. And I think that that’s using an underlying philosophical difference.

Alaska: Have you even read Siege, Sargon? Have you read Siege?

Sargon: Would you mind not interrupting? Huh?

Alaska: Have you read Siege?

Sargon: Do you mind not interrupting? Is that okay? Yeah? I’m trying to have a conversation with Andrew.

Alaska: All right.

Sargon Clashes With Baked Alaska

and Andy Warski

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QRMX9CXc48

[00:00]

Sargon: This is German bullshit! And the Germans can get fucked! Okay?

Anglin: So you sounds like you hate German there Sargon? You telling us they’re White niggers Sargon?

Sargon: It’s way worse!

Alaska: And, by the way, Sargon, …

Sargon: Honestly you guys need to get woke on the German question.

Alaska: Sargon you are on my channel. You should show some respect buddy. If I was on your channel I would give you respect. All right? So you’re on my show.

Sargon: Weren’t you just laughing and interrupting me a second ago?

Alaska: I’m the moderator. I can do whatever I want. It’s my show.

Sargon: Which means you shouldn’t do that. You should, …

Alaska: No I can do it. I can do my show however I want.

Sargon: It’s not showing is it?

Alaska: I can do it however I want.

Sargon: Is that not showing respect?

Alaska: I’m showing you respect. If something is funny I’m gonna laugh at it. People in the chat are actually saying moderate more. But I’m letting you guys have a conversation.

Sargon: I think that you should try and enforce your own rules. But I think, …

Alaska: I think you should stop dodging debates.

Sargon: I’m not dodging any debates.

Alaska: Like you dodged the Andy Warski debate. Yeah you almost dropped out of mine. You showed up 30 minutes late.

Sargon: I didn’t almost, ..

Alaska: And then you’re gonna, yeah you did drop out of Andy Warski’s debate. And then, …

Sargon: No! When did we arrange a debate? When did we arrange a debate?

Alaska: So you stopped doing a debate with Warski?

Sargon: Well no. Tell me when I arranged a debate from?

Alaska: I mean, he literally showed the screen shot on the Kumite. You believe in your ideas enough so you have to keep dodging questions. Dodging debates, …

Sargon: I’m not dodging anything.

Alaska: You are!

Sargon: No, no, listen, listen!

Alaska: You said I’m not having a debate I’m having a conversation. To you said I’m not gonna have a discussion about this. Sargon! You are a laughing stock of the internet right now!

Sargon: Because I don’t.

Alaska: You are intellectually dishonest! It’s not the Alt-Right. It’s the whole internet. I was a big fan of you Sargon! I was a big fan of you!

Sargon: I didn’t change anything.

Alaska: You need to get off your high horse Sargon! I want you to succeed!

Sargon: You are not listening to [02:01] anything that I’m saying. You don’t understand what I’m trying to put forward to you.

Alaska: Stop having this smug attitude about everything. We want to like you! We want to, …

Sargon: I don’t really, I don’t care if you like me, or not.

Alaska: I’m not talking about me, I’m speaking for the entire internet. This is what the entire internet, ..

Sargon: Are you sure that you are the voice of the entire internet?

Alaska: I am the voice of the Internet!

Sargon: I never arranged anything with Andy Warski. I never arranged, …

Alaska: I literally, Andy okay, …

Sargon: Look I know I know that you think I did. I will send you my correspondence with Andy. I don’t know why he’s lied about it.

Alaska: No Andy showed his email with you and you said “sure. We’ll do it soon”. You confirmed that you were doing a debate with him.

Sargon: Soon! But there is no time. There is no date. I haven’t set anything.

Alaska: But wait, so first you said you did not set up a debate with him, now now you did?

Sargon: No. That’s you just said I didn’t set up a [03:00] debate, because I didn’t give a time and a date.

Alaska: But you agreed to a debate and now you’re now you’re dodging it.

Sargon: When it suits my time frame, I’m happy to have a conversation.

Alaska: When it suits your time.

Sargon: Absolutely!

Alaska: But you wanna have a conversation with anyone except, … you don’t want to talk about this topic, or that topic. You don’t want to have a debate, even though you’re at this, you know, the head of the liberalism.

Sargon: I didn’t think there’d be any need to have a debate with Andrew, but we’ve gone through it all. I think there was, …

Alaska: Why would there be no need to have a debate when I set up a fucking debate with you? That’s, you’re literally sounding insane!

Sargon: If I get to talk to one of my arch-nemesis for the past four, …

Alaska: But you’re not talking to him dude!

Sargon: Because you’re talking.

Alaska: Okay, well here’s Sargon talking to. Well here’s Warski to address these issues.

Warski: I did say multiple times that you’re gonna do it. And I have these side chats that I screen shared yesterday on the Kumite, saying, yes I could screen share it right now.

Sargon: I think you should [04:01] cuz I said “soon” didn’t I?

Warski: Yeah you said “fairly soon” which means you did say that you would do the debate!

Sargon: Yeah.

Warski: All right. Yeah.

Sargon: Yeah.

Warski: That’s my point.

Sargon: When? When? That was ten days ago Andy.

Warski: Yeah! But the thing is Vee and a bunch of people kept saying you wanted a round two, so I was trying to I was trying to plan it.

Sargon: [Garbled.]

Warski: Hang on! Sargon! Jesus Christ do you let anyone finish a fucking sentence?

Sargon: Oh get fucked man! Everyone has been interrupting me constantly.

Alaska: Oh come on!

Sargon: And then.

Warski: You can’t say about, … bullshit, ….

Alaska: Let me suck you don’t let anybody speak and then you accuse everyone else of interrupting you.

Sargon: Unbelievable! It’s unbelievable!

Warski: Whiny fuck man!

Sargon: You’re whining at me that I’m not doing the debate soon enough? And you call me a whiny fuck!

Warski: No! No! Okay, first of all,

Sargon: Yes yes Andy, come on.

Warski: You can all get fucked! [screaming] do you let anyone finish the [05:02] fucking sentence! ?

Sargon: Oh welcome to my world my friend. Carry on.

Warski: You’ve been interrupting Andrew the entire time. You were supposed to be here to debate, and you start off with “I don’t want to have a debate. I just want to have a conversation”. Who the fuck is coming here to watch a conversation? Agree to a conversation we want to hear a fucking debate.

Sargon: Do you think a lot of, …

I would be interested in a real debate?

Alaska: You didn’t agree to a conversation! You agreed to a debate. So Andrew has already won by default, by you dodging, …

Sargon: Great victory! Enjoy it!

Warski: My point is you’ve lost this debate.

Sargon: You can’t understand the terms I’m using man. I’m trying to explain, I’ve explained to you in explicit detail.

Anglin: Do I have a case of Dunning Kruger here’s Sargon?

Sargon: Yes, yes, I’m the one with the case of Dunning Kruger.

Anglin: I you might think you’re smarter than you are!

Sargon: Yes I’m sure you are as exactly as smart as you think you are as well.

Warski: You said that you wanted to debate, Sargon over and over again [06:02] soon! Soon! Soon! And then you go on your White White nigger rants! I’ve done with debating the alternative-right! If you think the Alt-Right is so wrong about their principles and ideas, then fucking man up and debate! How are you the leader of the liberalists when you can’t even debate Vee? In my opinion V should be the fucking leader! Because he has the balls!

Sargon: Shall we give him the crown?

Warski: Yes!

Alaska: Yes!

Anglin: Do it!

Sargon: Vee, the king of the liberalists! Good on you!

Alaska: Whoa!

Sargon: Now what!

Anglin: I don’t know. It’s your thing. I guess we’ll have to ask Vee? We’ll have to ask Vee!

Warski: My point is you don’t want to debate anyone! Never debate anyone.

Sargon: Can I, … Andy, right? Shut up! , you know, that’s bollocks!

Warski: I literally see you saying that you wanted to debate him. And now you’re like I never promised! You said “I never promised him that”. And then you were like “okay I did. But I said soon”

Sargon: I never said “I promise you” me saying I will have a talk with you “soon” is not a problem.

Warski: Alt-Right I’m going to open up the Skype right now.

Sargon: No one cares man!

Warski: Let’s open it up right now.

Sargon: Oh my god! Andy I don’t care!

Warski: I can prove it! You’re lying right now. Therefore I will have to prove it.

Sargon: I’m lying! [sarc]

Warski: There we going. I have to make sure I don’t reveal any private Skype. Okay share screen. Here it is. Okay look look at this. Ah where is it. “yo Sargon, people are asking when you’re down for this Spencer rematch” “fairly soon man. I’ve been busy”. This clearly indicates that you were down to [08:00] have the debate, plus he mentioned it to be a bunch of times, and be messaging me saying you wanted me to help, me to set up the debate. So you coming on here and saying you never promised it, is bullshit! Sargon!

Sargon: That is not a promise.

Anglin: Sargon, the reason you wanted to debate me, because you thought I was gonna come on here and say I was gonna kill a bunch of people.

Sargon: You’ve already said that Andrew.

Anglin: [shouting] I have not said I’m going to to kill a bunch of people, Sargon! You thought I was going to say something crazy.

Sargon: [garbled]

Anglin: Everything necessitates violence! They put guns at the backs of little kids to integrate them with the blacks!

Sargon: Then stop being a fucking pussy and say your solution needs violence.

Anglin: Sargon that is not a good “gotcha” I’ve said.

Sargon: I didn’t say it was a “gotcha!”

Anglin: It requires force, the violence, the violence, ..

Sargon: Andrew right, as far as I’m concerned you are a Nazi! There’s no point trying to xx. On a Nazi. Now I’m actually impressed that you actually pretend not to be a Nazi. I [09:00] never thought that you would ever say that.

Anglin: I do not pretend not to be a Nazi, or to be a Nazi! I don’t know what that means! Okay? I do not know what that means when you use that term “Nazi”

Sargon: Okay.

Anglin: It’s a slur!

Sargon: Can I just quickly finish answering Andy then I’ll, …

Anglin: We’re in a debate about debating. [laughing]

Sargon: It is pretty ridiculous. But look it’s a slur when the far-left use the term “Nazi”, because A) they don’t know anything about Nazis, and they don’t know anything about the person they’re talking about. And they think it’s a way of just dismissing them as a bad person. Right? It’s not a slur when you can actually refer to the points of principle under which Nazis self-identified.

Anglin: But you’re just talking about White Nationalism, which goes back to the entire history of Europe. I mean, when they kept these people out of here.

Sargon: I’m not just  talking to them.

Anglin: Were the founding fathers Nazis?

Sargon: Okay, listen. There’s a reason why we are not White nationalist now. But anyway, Andy, right? I’m sorry that you thought I was [10:00] promising something to you. And I’m sorry that I’ve not done whatever it is you want, soon enough. But I have been busy, and I said “soon” ten days ago. And in my world ten days is not that long a time.

Warski: I have one question. Do you want to debate Spencer again, or not?

Sargon: Honestly I don’t mind. I’m happy to do it at some point. But it’s not like top of my list of priorities.

Warski: And you had messaged me, …

Sargon: Debating Anglin is far higher, because I personally can engage, …

Alaska: Wait! Wait! Wait! Debating Anglin it’s far higher on your priorities, but you literally came on, …

Sargon: Oh my god! Baked Alaska, look it’s a semantic point you bring up here. It it’s not really anything important, is it?

Alaska: I think everyone can see through you, …

Anglin: It like your “logistics”. Is it logistics Sargon? Were you having logistic problems arranging the debate? With your, …

Sargon: Yeah we were actually., because I thought you started nine o’clock. But apparently I got the time wrong [11:00] So yeah, ..

Alaska: I emailed you the correct time.

Anglin: Everything is logistics! The logistics man! [laughing]

Sargon: No, I’m happy to say that was my mistake. If that’s okay? Do you mind if I do? [patronizing apology tone] I’m happy to say I made the mistake of arriving half an hour late. It’s my mistake.

Alaska: That’s fine. But then you said that, …

Sargon: Can I explain what I was saying?

Alaska: Sure.

Sargon: I consider Andrew to have a much higher standing than Richard Spencer! Andrew actually has grassroots support! He actually has a base. He’s built a platform. And actually managed to make himself the target of literally every fucking person in the world! He’s actually got supporters. He gets money from them. They believe in what he’s doing, or at least, I guess, they believe in what you’re pretending to be doing.

Anglin: I’m not pretending to do anything Sargon.

Sargon: But the point is Richard Spencer, as far as I can tell, is like the Hillary Clinton of the Alt-Right [12:00]. He’s the sort of person who, I mean, who here would actually willingly go and talk to the mainstream media?

Anglin: Richard Spencer.

Sargon: Exactly. Why would he do that?

Anglin: I don’t know yeah.

Sargon: Exactly! Nobody knows. It’s weird. It’s like he’s whoring himself out, or something. In this week I received an invite from a Dutch documentary team in the BBC, to appear on their shows. And I haven’t accepted, obviously, because I don’t trust them! And I don’t need to trust them. But Richard Spencer does! He would slap it up in a heart-beat. And now they’ve stopped talking to him, he’s come to the YouTubers. This is what I mean. He’s not high on my list of priorities. And “ethane states in space”? Is there anyone here who thinks that Richard Spencer’s plans are ever gonna come to fruition?

Warski: Not me.

Sargon: He’s not high on my list of, … okay?

Warski: Right, fair enough then.

Anglin: That was a groundbreaking debate that you had. That’s why people liked it. Sargon. It was entertaining.

Sargon: Not really! Oh, that is true.

Alaska: It was number one trending. It was good content.

Warski: So you don’t want a debate him?

Sargon: One thing about it, is we got to find out exactly what Richard actually believed. And his beliefs are so fringe, not even most of the Alt-Right believe him.

Anglin: But to you straw manned him Sargon! With a bunch of stupid shit about that he wanted feudalism, and that he was gonna hurt people with violence okay?

Sargon: Didn’t he advocate for a warrior aristocracy?

Anglin: The state requires violence okay? Spencer, you attacked him for saying the state is violent. Every policy of the state requires violence! Politics are the movement of violence, physical force, or threat of it.

Sargon: I didn’t, or at least if I did say that to I’ll take it back.

Anglin: So you’re saying you keep talking about this violence! But every everything is violence, as far as the state policy. All of it is enforced by the threat, the theoretical threat of [14:00] violence! If you start smoking in a hospital then there is the threat of violence. There’s a rule against that. So you’re saying you’re saying this, or cannot be any laws with your thing that, …

Sargon: Andrew you’re not representing my views correctly here.

Anglin: Okay then give us your views of how you can have policies without violence?

Sargon: Now I don’t think that you can have anything without violence. I think that the state has the monopoly on violence. And the purpose of the state is to protect the property rights of the individuals, beginning with the property of themselves.

Anglin: Of the state?

Sargon: What?

Anglin: The property of the state itself?

Sargon: No, no, no! The property of the people, the individuals. The citizens. That’s what civic nationalism is.

Anglin: Okay, but this return, continued return, to this idea that if you remove these people it would have to have violence. Well that’s the same theory if you said there’s no smoking in the hospital, you can’t make that rule, because people are [15:00] gonna smoke and then you’re gonna have to shoot them!

Sargon: Yeah, but that is not my primary objection. That’s not my primary objection.

Anglin: Your primary objection was the logistics of it!

Sargon: No.

Anglin: You said it’s impossible.

Sargon: No. I keep telling you that’s not the case, but you won’t, …

Anglin: You’re moving the goal-posts here. [sound was cut]

Alaska: Hello?

Warski: I’m here.

Anglin: Yeah I’m here.

Alaska: We’re losing Sargon.

Warski: Your internet is cutting out Sargon. Alright I’ll, …

Sargon: Can you hear me?

Warski: Baked Alaska invite me back later. I’ll jump out I’m gonna talk it up — he doesn’t want to do the debate with, …

Sargon: Can you guys hear me?

Alaska: Yeah we can hear you. [16:00]

Warski: I have Vee and this angel guy, or whatever I’m round to debate him. I don’t want people to be just waiting there with her flaccid dicks in their hand. You do what you have to do, and I’ll see you.

Sargon: Don’t arrange a date for something I didn’t agree a date on, …

Warski: I didn’t have a date. I just, …

Sargon: Well, why are they holding their flaccid dicks?

Warski: Because it seems like you’re being cowardly. If you think Richard Spencer is that much of a low cow, you should be able to defeat him pretty easily, without any preparation.

Sargon: I don’t think that he has won any debate. Do you understand? Saying he wants a “warrior aristocracy in space” is pretty bloody ridiculous!

Anglin: Your straw-manning Sargon.

Sargon: That’s not a straw-man. He literally advocated the balkanization of the US. A return to an aristocracy?

Anglin: For all our purposes, all of our purposes is to create a block of people defending the rights of White people in our own countries!

Sargon VS Anglin on Liberalist

Plan and Alt Right Influence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig4X0bzhqsk

[00:00]

Sargon: Stop interrupting and I’ll explain to you my plan right. Basically I think that with a sort of form of cultural imperialism, as in being proud of the native cultures that we have, and emphasizing these above above other cultures, this will act as a kind of soft power. This will kind this will be a natural buffer against people who would like to come here and set up ethnic enclaves. Like, for example, in Rotherham, in you know, Bradford, where all these other countries. If they want to live with Sharia law, that’s too bad. I want Sharia Courts banned in my country. Do you understand?

I want that to happen. I don’t want to abandon individual rights, but I don’t want a separate parallel legal system set up. And I think it’s completely within the state’s right to prevent that as well. The state is the arbiter of justice. But I don’t want to just undermine my own civic fucking power over my state. I’m not throwing away civic nationalism! It’s a ridiculous thing to say! Right? But the and this means we can’t do certain things., because if we start allowing the state to violate other people’s rights.

[01:02]

Then inevitably it’s gonna get round to my rights, because I’m a fucking dissident! Okay? I’m in very in many ways a lot like you Andrew. I also oppose what’s going on. It’s just I have a different perspective. This is I think something that will happen over time, but I think it will be effective and it won’t necessitate the violation of anyone’s rights. And at the end of the day if they all want to kind of like convert and act British, be British, if you know, if you guys think they’re genetically possible. Then I don’t really have a problem with them staying., because like we’ve seen Muslim birth rates reduce in this country, because it’s just it’s a consequence of wealth! If you get wealthy, you want less kids. It’s just, because you’ve got the option I guess. But this is a point. If you guys misrepresent me constantly and you do. If you guys deliberately not understand what I’m saying which I think you do.

[02:01]

Anglin: I’m not and you said you promote culture in it, that’s going, that’s the solution?

Sargon: Yeah.

Anglin: To this situation?

Sargon: Shutting borders and promoting some kind of culture, …

Anglin: By these animals.

Sargon: Yes! yes, exactly!

Anglin: We’re shit holing it here!

Sargon: Yeah, I think we should stop these people coming to our country. I’m not pro Congolese immigration! Unlike the UN delegate.

Alaska: All right, so I’m getting this in the chat. Someone said Sargon never gave us his solution. He mentioned cultural Imperium and then digressed without explaining his solution.

Sargon: Well I’ve just explained it and the thing is I don’t want to explain one more time.

Alaska: Break that down! Break that down!

Sargon: I literally just did. I just the did. I just the explained it to you.

Anglin: No you didn’t!

Sargon: I did Andrew!

Anglin: It will just go away? It will just disappear, all these behavior patterns will just disappear? If you just, I mean, look, …

[03:02]

Sargon: They will leave of their own accord when they find this country is not to their liking Andrew.

Alaska: Make sure to get all your questions in too., because also apparently Vee told us that this is Sargon’s last Alt-Right interview.

Sargon: I told you that!

Alaska: So are you, …

Anglin: Vee as your ambassador, …

Sargon: No! I said that myself!

Anglin: Why? Why is it?

Alaska: Are you accepting, …

Sargon: I don’t, … you want to consider me as a defeat, I’m happy. No, no, honestly, I want you to think that I’m accepting defeat.

Alaska: Okay!

Sargon: Okay? We good?

Alaska: But I want to, … I don’t care what you want me to think. I want to actually know your, …

Anglin: We want an official surrender here!

Sargon: Yeah.

Alaska: You’re going to try to argue that the Alt-Right has no influence on culture. I mean, that’s obviously not true. So either you are, …

Sargon: I don’t see how you you, … what are you influencing?

[04:02]

Alaska: Are you kidding me dude?

Sargon: What are you influencing? Seriously. Go!

Alaska: I mean, you’re part, you’ve seen it having the number one stream on YouTube.

Sargon: Oh right,

Anglin: It’s pretty obvious.

Sargon: So that’s the Alt-Right is it?

Alaska: Right, yeah, that’s what people are interested, …

Anglin: It’s happening in real life.

Sargon: Would that have happened if I was xxx, …

Anglin: Taking over youth culture.

Sargon: Is it?

Alaska: Right.

Anglin: It is in America, yes. We hear these, …

Alaska: Have you not seen 4chan? Have you not seen what people are talking about?

Anglin: We had a poll last year. We have 10%! We have 10% support of the Alt-Right in the United States. 10% of the people, …

Sargon: Might be your own confirmation bias though?

Anglin: Well, I mean, it’s a poll.

Sargon: It was a poll done by far lefties, who want there to be a significant Nazi threat in the US.

Anglin: I think it was, so I mean, it’s you know, I guess, …

Sargon: I looked at it the other day. I mean, like it was done immediately in Charlottesville. And it was nebulous! I don’t think the public know what the Alt-right is.

[05:02]

Anglin: So there’s gonna be a lower rating after Charlottesville, I think.

Sargon: Tell me what your influence is.

Anglin: I just said, we’re influencing the culture. These memes are popping up in our media and these are spreading throughout the culture. White people are waking up and developing a consciousness, a racial consciousness and a belief that they have a right to exist as a people! That is the goal! It’s to put a consciousness in the minds of the collective White population, in all of our countries that are being invaded.

I mean, they already have this in Eastern Europe, but in the countries that are being invaded, we want to create a consciousness of being White! So that people will begin to organize and act in their own interests! And that is happening! We are affecting the way that masses of people are thinking and everything is going, … I mean, look look at Donald Trump as a phenomenon. This is a White racial phenomenon! It’s a White racial phenomenon!

Sargon: I don’t agree.

[06:02]

============================================

PDF Notes

* Total words = xxx

* Total images = xx

* Total A4 pages = xx

Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB):

(Available later)

Version History

Version 5:

Version 4:

Version 3:

Version 2: Feb 12, 2018 — Added fifth clip — “Sargon VS Anglin on Liberalist Plan and Alt Right Influence“. Improved formatting.

Version 1: Feb 11, 2018  — Published post.

[John Friend and Carolyn Yeager discuss the recent Greg Johnson vs Andrew Anglin “debate” where the “Holocaust” and Revisionism were some of the topics discussed.

John and Carolyn then take Kevin MacDonald and Greggy to the woodshed for their failure to man-up and confront the fraudulent nature of the “holocaust industry” that the jews have placed, like a millstone, around the necks of Whites.

The Revisionists have systematically and conclusively proven that the “Holocaust” is the “hoax of the 20th century“. What stands in the way of this becoming general public knowledge is organized jewry’s stranglehold over our governments and media, etc.

Between this proven hoax and the public’s  lack of awareness stand two prominent members of the White movement, who for reasons explored by Carolyn and John, make excuses for evading this fact, or worst, pretend with word play that it still “happened“.

As Carolyn and John discuss, the fraudulent “Holocaust” is central to organized jewry’s strategy of guilt tripping Whites to prevent them into moving towards White nationalism by linking it negatively to racial awareness, that then leads to “Nazism” and the inevitable “gassing of six million innocent jews“.

As such, it is essential that the White movement comes to grips with exposing the Holohoax for what it is, so that this massive psychological weapon, roadblock, can be neutralized.

Meanwhile the jews continue on with their genocidal plans to destroy the White race — KATANA.]

_______________________

The Realist Report

Carolyn Yeager

On the Johnson vs Anglin Debate

Click the link below to John’s blog post:

The Realist Report – Carolyn Yeager

Click the link below to listen the audio:

http://therealistreport.com/?powerpress_pinw=4424-podcast

Or for a tidied up version of the audio, from Carolyn:

https://carolynyeager.net/system/files/Friend-Yeager_greggy_9-6-17.mp3

The realist Report Description

Published on Sep 6, 2017

On this edition of The Realist Report, we’re joined once again by Carolyn Yeager. Carolyn and I focus on the recent debate between Andrew Anglin and Greg Johnson which focused on the importance and relevance of historical revisionism in the overall pro-White struggle. Carolyn and I both agree that revisionism is an essential aspect of the struggle for the White race, as our historical narrative – especially as it pertains to WWII, Adolf Hitler, and the so-called “Holocaust” of “6 million Jews” – has been entirely weaponized against our people. We also address a number of other related issues in this very important podcast.

Below are relevant links for this program:

• Greg Johnson echos Kevin MacDonald in opposing ‘Holocaust revisionism’ – One must ask why – Carolyn Yeager
• Andrew Anglin And Greg Johnson Discuss The Alt Right
• My Conversation with Andrew Anglin – Greg Johnson
• Why the Holocaust Story Was Invented – John Wear
• Top Jewish leader claims entire Western world culpable for “Holocaust” – John Friend

Subscribe to The Realist Report today, and support independent media!

Did you enjoy this program? Consider donating to The Realist Report to help us continue producing podcasts. Enter your email below and donate $10 now!

__________________________

TRANSCRIPT

(80:11 mins)

[00:38]

Voice over: You are listening to The Realist Report. And now your host, John Friend!

John: All right folks, welcome back to another edition of The Realist Report. This is your host John Friend. The website is The Realist Report dot com, where you can find an extensive archive of these pod casts as well as other radio broadcasts I have participated in, in the past. You can also find all of my blog posts and articles, a contact page, my Twitter feed, which is embedded on the right hand side of the website, and many other useful and important links. I am a regular reporter for American Free Press, America’s last real newspaper, and I also contribute to The Barnes Review, the bi-monthly history magazine affiliated with American Free Press. I encourage everyone listening to subscribe to both publications. Check out American Free Press dot net and The Barnes Review dot org for more details.

OK, with that said, let me introduce my special guest this evening. Carolyn Yeager is back once again to discuss a recent debate between Andrew Anglin and Greg Johnson. Which focuses on the importance and relevance of historical Revisionism in the overall pro-White struggle. A topic Carolyn and I have addressed in the past.

Carolyn, welcome back to the program! How are you this evening?

Carolyn: I’m just fine, John. Glad to be here.

John: Yes, good! I’m glad that you could join me. You wrote an article about this debate between Greg Johnson and Andrew Anglin which is over on Carolyn Yeager dot net. And I will link to it. I hope people go there and check it out. I think you have a lot of very important and good things to say about the debate. And really that’s going to be the main topic for this conversation. I will be honest, I did not listen to the entire debate. I think if you can find it on YouTube and you can also find it on, … There’s like a new alternative to YouTube from what I understand. I think it’s Bitchute, is that correct?

Carolyn: Yes.

John: Yes. You can find it [the debate] in multiple places. You have it linked on a couple of different, …

Carolyn: Yes. I have both of them linked.

John: Yes, over on your site. If you just Google it, you can find it. It’s been all over the place. It is a pretty interesting debate. Certainly worth checking out. Again I didn’t listen to the entire thing. I listened to most of it, and I mean, frankly I’ve basically heard what both Anglin and Johnson have to say about the subject, so it really wasn’t anything, …

[Image] The many faces of Andrew Anglin.

Carolyn: And then Anglin said, afterwards, that it wasn’t supposed to be a debate, but then afterwards they started calling it a debate. But I guess that was important to him, that he didn’t feel like he was in debate. You know, he wasn’t prepared, maybe, to debate anything. You know, but they did have interestingly pretty much opposing views when it came to “Holocaust” and revisionism, which is the part that I found interesting.

John: Right. Now there was a another debate that preceded the Anglin and Johnson debate, and that was between Greg Johnson and Vox Day. And they did a debate, and it was hosted by Terry McCarthy, who also hosted the debate between Anglin and Johnson.

[Image] Vox Day vs Greg Johnson debate.

In the Johnson and Vox Day debate, was a few weeks ago, I want to say, shortly after Charlottesville. And they were kind of addressing similar topics. They were talking about National Socialists and Nazis. How important, or relevant they are, like in the pro-White, Alt-Right movement, or whatever. And I’d listened to that too, again I didn’t listen to the entire thing, but I thought that was kind of interesting. Again, I’ve heard the arguments made by Johnson and Fox Day. So again, it wasn’t really anything, …

Carolyn: I had not before. It was sort of focused on Socialism in that debate, National Socialism and what Socialism meant, how to interpret it and so on.

And I listened to it, because you mentioned it to me. But I didn’t think much of it.

[05:14]

John: Yeah, you know, I really didn’t either. And even the Anglin and Johnson debate, I really wasn’t that impressed with either of them. So I mean, I agreed more with Anglin, but I think I would basically just present the information and present my perspective much differently than even Anglin would. I would explain it much differently and make different points than he would, than he did in this debate. Although I think he did OK. But I think I would have just handled it much differently.

So, I think overall, I would agree with Anglin.

Carolyn: The reason they had that, … According to Anglin, and it is true, was that Anglin complained that Greg Johnson had misrepresented him in the Johnson Vox Day debate. And so he said: “Well, you come on and we’ll talk about that.” And so in a couple places that’s when Johnson asked Andrew:

“Well, how did I misrepresent you, Andrew?”

And Andrew told him. He was prepared to say that. He had a couple different things that he thought were important. But then I don’t think Anglin had thought he was prepared to debate the “Holocaust” and, or Adolf Hitler, or anything like that. So, that’s why he said what he did, because maybe he would have done a different job, if he had gone there intending to debate that.

John: Okay, I get you.

Carolyn: He said what he thought, you know, I thought he did okay. But you’re right, he didn’t have some things right.

John: Yeah, I think overall he did pretty good.

Carolyn: Yeah.

John: And again I would certainly agree with Anglin over Greg Johnson, for sure, when it comes to this issue. So with that being said, I just want to say really quickly about Greg Johnson, because I think you’re going to be much more critical of him, than I will be.

I’ve been listening to and reading Greg Johnson for a number of years. I have one of his books, and I’m forgetting the title, off the top of my head. “New Right versus Old Right” I think that’s the name of it.

[Image] New Right vs Old Right by Greg Johnson. Click image to enlarge.

Carolyn: Yeah.

John: And I think Greg Johnson is a very, very smart man. He’s very articulate. I think he makes a lot of good arguments. His book I thought was really good, although there are certain sections, that I totally disagreed with. Including the article where he talks about the “Holocaust”. And it was actually the article that was published originally on The Occidental Observer dot net. It was basically the same article he wrote for the website, that was also published in the book.

And that’s an article that I’m sure we’ll bring up and talk about here as we proceed. But the book overall, was very good. I learned a lot from it. I think he makes a very good case for, you know, pro-White interests over all.

Again, I think he’s very articulate, very intelligent. I mean, the man’s a Ph D. He’s obviously, very smart. I just totally disagree with him when it comes to Revisionism and the “Holocaust”.

So, I just want to say that. I think he’s very smart, I think he is an asset to the movement overall. I just disagree with him. Then, of course, there’s also this debate, whether, or not he’s gay. And I don’t know if he is, or not.

Carolyn: John! John! That’s a definite fact! I mean, he didn’t want to talk about it for a long time, tried to avoid it and not talk about it. But he never denied it!

John: Right.

Carolyn: And it was Alex Linder who was trying to get him to deny it. And he didn’t do it. He was always walking around it. So, he’s even prides himself in being able to, you know, swerve around and make his arguments and come out with what he thinks is a winning argument. No matter what. It’s not based really on that he’s got all the facts right, or the facts on his side, but he just thinks he knows how to argue. And he said that. So, I think that there’s no doubt about that. He doesn’t want to say so, but he doesn’t fight it.

John: Right. And, you know, honestly I think you’re probably right, but again it’s not something that I frankly care too much about. It is what it is.

Carolyn: Let me say that I don’t care too much about him. I could leave him alone, but I do care about, as you know, about Revisionism. And I care about World War Two history, and I care about National Socialism. And when I hear him saying the things he does, I can’t, and I don’t think we should, just say, well that’s his opinion, he can have his opinion.

Naturally, he can have his opinion. But, I wouldn’t just let it pass it by and say it doesn’t matter. He’s good on other things. I think it does matter, because, as I’m going to try to point out here, the things that he says about it are totally ridiculous! And wrong! And uneducated!

John: Sure. I agree.

Carolyn: He makes this “great” argument. He makes this argument that just flips around. But, it’s not based on facts, and therefore it shouldn’t be respected, I don’t think.

[10:50]

John: OK. Yeah I sort of agree with you, I mean, pretty much. Before we get into the main topic, let’s actually just address this right off the bat. This issue of Johnson being gay. Because I’ve heard you argue in the article you wrote that his homosexuality seems to influence his thinking in his pro-White stance, and everything. So, how influential is his homosexual sexual identity in all of this? Do you think it has a huge role in his overall perspective?

Carolyn: Yeah, well I’ve said so and, you know, I realized when I was writing this, that I was just being way out there with talking about him actually giving the reasons for his thinking as his homosexuality, over and over, again. I knew I was doing that, and I didn’t actually get criticized for it. You know, to my face. But I thought I would. But then I thought, this just hits me so hard in everything that he says, while I kept to the “Holocaust” Revisionism, for the most part, and somewhat with the Hitler stuff.

It just strikes me so strongly that, that is the reasoning behind it. And this is not brand new, because I’ve said these things before, but I haven’t talked about Greg Johnson for a long time. And I don’t think, in a sense it’s none of my business what Greg Johnson is doing. But when he comes out publicly with this stuff on this topic, I just feel like I got to answer this, and I’ve got to say something.

John: Yes.

Carolyn: And there are some people who appreciate it.

John: No, definitely! I mean, every time I hear him, or Dr Kevin MacDonald, again two individuals I’ve learned a lot from, I respect. I think they’re certainly on our side, overall, but I just totally disagree with this. And I think it is a very important point. In fact, as you know, I often argue when I’m doing pod-casts when I’m writing, that the fake “Holocaust” story is the entire bedrock of this New World Order! This anti-White, White genocide agenda, jewish agenda. This is the heart of it. This is what drives all. It’s the paradigm that really shapes this and advances it. And I mean, I just don’t see how we can avoid it, if we are to confront these problems, and deal with them seriously. I don’t think that we can. And we will get into that as we, …

Carolyn: Yeah, I know you believe that John. But you’re also a very nice person, but also you are committed to the movement. You don’t want to criticize people. And I’m criticized for going out and criticizing people who some people think shouldn’t be criticized, especially Kevin MacDonald. And, you know, a couple weeks before this Johnson Anglin discussion, I wrote something* about Kevin MacDonald, which was longer than this.

[* See Carolyn’s Aug 8, 2017 blog post: “Kevin MacDonald on record saying whether the Holocaust actually happened is ‘not important’“]

[Image] Kevin MacDonald (pic taken at the 2016 NPI conference) and his landmark book on jews, “The Culture of Critique“.

He did a radio program with that, “non jewish” jew, and a girl there asked him about the “Holocaust” and Hitler and stuff. So he answered. And I was so shocked! Just thought his answers are pretty terrible. And I wrote about him about two years ago on the same topic, because a radio program* he did.

[* See Carolyn’s Nov 16, 2015 blog post: “The Heretics’ Hour: Kevin MacDonald’s problem with Holocaust revisionism“]

So these two men, … Now, MacDonald I always respected so much and I would never have, … Well he never talked about it, that I knew of in the past. But he did on these two occasions, because he was asked! And these were both, maybe since he was retired, I don’t know if he was retired the first one, but probably. And I thought, well that’s pretty ignorant! That’s not right. And so I made a noise about it, and I’m good at doing that. [John laughs]

John: Yes, you are.

Carolyn: That’s my role, I guess. So I have those two, that kind of go together in my mind. So when this came up with Greg Johnson, I thought, well I’m going to write something about this, too. Just to be fair! [chuckling]

[15:28]

John: Yeah, and I think it’s totally legitimate to have these discussions and to publicly disagree with other thought leaders, in the Alt-Right, or whatever. I think that’s totally fine. I think that’s healthy, really, what we should be doing, rather than engaging in drama, or gossip, and all this other crap. If we’re going to criticize somebody, …

Carolyn: We’re just ignoring it. Mostly, people don’t want to criticize someone like Kevin MacDonald, even over his views on “Holocaust” revisionism. But, it was a big hit, a lot of conversation about it. A lot of comments, a good thread about it and so on.

John: Right.

Carolyn: Anyway, like you, that is my big thing. And I’ve decided even more, and more, that when it comes down to it, that’s my big thing! And so, I’m going to push it as much as I can. And I don’t have the reach those guys do, but I can certainly say what I think about the misleading things they’re saying about it.

John: Yes, exactly. So, let’s get right into it. What were your overall thoughts on the debate? What points would you make?

Carolyn: Johnson said:

“No honest revisionist claims that the “Holocaust” never happened.”

And then he says:

“Robert Faurisson claims that the “Holocaust” never happened. But only by insisting on a particular definition.”

Those are his words. He says:

“His argument is too clever by half and cannot be taken seriously.”

He kept repeating:

“We don’t have to rehabilitate the Third Reich.”

And he said:

“You can say that we are Nazis, or you can say, ‘No, we’re not Nazis’, or you can say, ‘Nazis are not evil’, but you can’t say, …”

I don’t know, whatever.

John: Well, his main argument seemed to be that the pro-White struggle and having a pro-White identity, and just the overall pro-White message is in no way related to what happened during World War Two.

Carolyn: Right. Right.

John: that was his main thing. And theoretically what he’s saying is true! I mean, the fact that White people deserve their own countries, that there’s this very blatant anti-White, agenda that’s being advanced on every single White country. We’re being forced with all this mass immigration, forced multiculturalism, forced integration, all this anti-White propaganda, etc.

This is wrong, and our cause is totally legitimate. And is in no way related to, or tied to World War Two. That’s correct in theory, but that’s not the way it works in the real world, right?

[19:47]

Carolyn: Yeah, and everybody is familiar with that. You know, that is just a bunch of baloney, saying that. That’s fine for us to say, but nobody pays attention to it, as you just said, in the real world. So he kept saying:

“Well we can made this wonderful argument, that this is absurd what people are saying.”

To say what they call White supremacists, or just White identists, or White activists, are Nazis. That’s just so absurd on it’s face. That’s silly. And that’s not a good argument. First of all we can just ignore that, and just go on and do our thing whatever.

He doesn’t really have an answer to it. His whole answer to all of it, is to ignore it, in what he called in his article he wrote quite a number of years ago, that caused such a stir. He was using that phrase, “To step over it”. So we just “step over” the “Holocaust” and go on our way. And say it doesn’t have anything to do with us.

John: Right. But there’s no way to. I mean, theoretically you could, if you’re talking about it again from a theoretical perspective, …

Carolyn: Andrew Anglin countered that on that show, by saying that if we say we agree with everything Hitler said and did, which he does, you know, basically expects that people are going to do. If we agree with what Hitler did, we can’t then say that we have nothing to do with him. And he says that nobody’s going to fall for that. Nobody’s going to go along with that.

And Greg is saying, well he wouldn’t say that. He didn’t say those words, but that then leads him to trying to dismiss, get us away from Adolf Hitler’s National Socialism, too. Which he disagrees with. And that’s part of what the “New Right” is about, right?

John: Yeah. And from what I remember about the book, his main critique of the “Old Right” is that it was kind of brutal, and violent, and tyrannical. And I think that’s a totally distorted view of National Socialism.

Carolyn: Well it is. See now, that’s where the homosexuality comes in. That absolutely comes in there. He doesn’t like, … He was much more friendly toward Hitler and National Socialism, but he’s moved away from that, because he sees, or decided, or whatever, that this is over quite a number of years, that this is a government that could treat his group badly. And so therefore he rejects anything to do with fascism, you know, what we call fascism, or the Third Reich. He rejects it.

[Image] Heinrich Himmler talks of the problem with homosexuals in society. See: Heinrich Himmler on Homosexuality.

And to me, it’s because he’s afraid of the brutality, he’s afraid of the harshness. He doesn’t think that he could convince them that he’s a good guy and that they should leave him and his friends alone.

John: It’s almost as if he knows that he would be sort of excluded in a National Socialist type state, because he is a homosexual. And that’s kind of what motivates him. And that seems to be kind of the argument you’re making in your article. And I mean, it’s entirely valid. It certainly does seem to be sort of the case.

Carolyn: Well, I think that Greg has been so successful, financially, he takes in a lot of money. From the way I think, and the way you think, I’m pretty sure, as compared to how much money you have ever gotten, he gets a lot of money. I think he gets a lot from the homosexual community. Because, even though he was criticized for being homosexual, he wouldn’t admit to any of it. He published books by blatant homosexuals, like James O’Meara, who has been exposed on the Internet, cross-dressing, and doing a lot of weird things. Pictures and everything. And Jack Donovan, and he’s been very friendly, he was very friendly with him.

And I think he has a lot of writers. Although, I was looking at his site more recently, which I haven’t for a long time, and he’s got a lot of different people writing articles, there. I don’t know who they all are. But he had a lot of writers that I think, just from the sound of them, the way they wrote, what they wrote about, that I suspect they were homosexuals.

Now, your commenter, Tucker, thinks that I see homosexuals everywhere. I do, I guess, I may have a sensitively to them, because when I think that they are, I notice it. So, I just have my opinion, he depends a lot on the homosexual community, at least for money. And they send him a lot of money because he stands up and publishes their work, and so on.

[25:30]

[Image] Some of the homo imagery featured in Counter-Currents in the last 12 months. Click image to enlarge.

And he also, I don’t know so much now, but back when I was making a study of it, I noticed and pointed out that he had constantly photographs, you know, he has a picture with every little post announcement on his site. Way outnumbered photographs of men with a lot of muscles showing, and not wearing very much. Old classic pictures, [chuckling] classic paintings, and sculptures, and so on. He supposedly deals in the classics, but there’s all these men, the kind of pictures that homosexuals would like looking at. Would really love looking at. So the whole thing just all fits together. And when he would say something like, you know, let me find something that he actually said:

 

“It’s foolish for us to attack the enemy at their best defended points, …”

We’re now into revisionism.

“… Because we can make a case for White identity and White interests that doesn’t depend on whether or not the Nazis got it right, or wrong.”

Things like I, …

John: But I think he’s so wrong about that! Because any time you make a pro-White case, it’s inevitably going to be tied into Hitler, the Nazis and the “Holocaust”. I mean, the jews have been so successful with this fake story, it’s totally discredited any form of White identity, and they pathologize it. And it’s instantly tied in with this!

Carolyn: Yeah. And that’s why he wants to distance himself from National Socialism, and Hitler, as much as possible. And he thinks, says, that will work. But then he also said in this podcast:

“There are many things I think the National Socialists did wrong. And I do think that their plans for the Slavic east were really genocidal.”

Then he said that Plan Ost, which is on the famous Wikipedia page, was a fabrication, as far as he can tell. But he still considers the “Holocaust” a genocide against jews! Now what really gets me, and because we don’t have forever I’m going to jump to it.

In his article on his website that he wrote about the debate, he said some interesting things, and then this Ermin, … What’s his first name? Vince Irmin*, or something, who he published his book. Who wrote a book about Hitler, a kind of a friendly book about Hitler, and Greg’s company published it. He wrote a comment and said he thought Anglin was right.

* Vinson Irmin, “Some Thoughts on Hitler and Other Essays”. Foreword by Kevin MacDonald, edited by Greg Johnson (2012). Click image to enlarge.

He said, Anglin was doing the right thing by, making fun of the “Holocaust” and so on. And Greg wrote a reply to him and he said:

“The ‘Holocaust’ is a great big pile of dead jews, not a normative claim* that jewish suffering is more important than non-jewish suffering.”

[* “Normative” statements/claims present an account of how the world should be. The word contains the stem ‘norm’: something that should be lived up to; or that should be pursued.]

Sorry, I left out that this Irmin said that:

 

“The whole meaning of the ‘Holocaust’ is not genocide, but that it’s a claim of jews that their suffering, during World War Two was vastly more significant than any other suffering in history.”

Comment exchange between Johnson and Irmin. Click images to enlarge.

A very good point, which you would agree with, I’m sure. That’s really what it’s all about. They are so jealous of anybody else having any claims to having, … Then that will come up when we talk about the Poles, and the Pole’s demands now for reparations, if we get a chance to do that.

[30:00]

So, anyway, Greg answered that:

“The “Holocaust” is a great big pile of dead jews, not a normative claim that jewish suffering is more important than non-jews suffering. You can drop that moral absurdity, …”

Everything, he wants to call that way.

“But there’s still a great big pile of dead jews!”

John: But is there really Carolyn?

Carolyn: No!

John: No, there’s not. Exactly!

Carolyn: I mean what is a pile of, … The “Holocaust” has to be more than a pile of dead Jews! There’s piles of dead people of all kinds!

John: Exactly! There’s photos of piles of bodies that are presented to a very gullible traumatized public and were told:

“Oh! Hey look how evil the Nazis are! Look at all these dead people that died in these concentration camps!”

It’s never explained how these people died, what happened, what was going on at the time, there’s no context. It’s all very emotional and psychological exploitative propaganda, that is designed to instill and reinforce this fake narrative!

Carolyn: Right! And here is where I want to make the point that I made in the wrong place before, that he said that Andrew’s position — in this article he said this — Andrew’s position on the “Holocaust” boils down to:

“It never happened. But it should have.”

And he says this is completely indefensible. And I ask, what is “it”? Because I’m saying, my point I’m going to make here, is that you need to define what the “Holocaust” is. That’s why saying it’s a big pile of dead jews, doesn’t cut it!

And then Greg writes:

“First, to say it never happened is factually indefensible. No honest revisionist claims that the ‘Holocaust’ never happened.”

And then he says:

“Robert Faurisson, does claim this, but only by insisting on a particular definition. His argument is too clever by half, …”

[laughs] The pot calling the kettle black!

“… And cannot be taken seriously.”

Oh come on!

“Even if one grants every serious revisionist argument, what remains is ‘Holocaust’ enough for most people.”

Now this is just coming from that 2012, I think it was, long article titled, “Dealing with the “Holocaust” that he published at Occidental Observer. And MacDonald, turns out was totally in agreement with him and ends up coming out later with the very same arguments.

The Occidental Observer article (Jul 20, 2012) by Johnson titled “Dealing with the Holocaust“. Click image to enlarge. Note: the comments are not available to be viewed.

You know, the thing is Faurisson* is right. You have to have a definition for what you’re talking about! What is the “Holocaust”? You can’t talk about the “Holocaust” and then everybody talking about has a different idea what it is. And it’s just a big pile of dead jews, according to this very smart Ph. D., John! Who you say is such a smart man.

[* Robert Faurisson is one of Europe’s foremost Holocaust revisionist scholars]

Article (Aug 30, 2017) by Johnson on the “debate” with Andrew Anglin. Click image to enlarge.

John: No. I hear you. [Carolyn laughs] By the way, you’re referring to an article, and I’ve not read this article, I just found it on Counter hyphen Currents dot com. “My Conversation with Andrew Anglin”.

Carolyn: Right, right. I’ve got a link to it here.

John: I’ll link to that in this blog post, so people can go read what he has to say. It looks like it’s kind of his summary or concluding thoughts on his debate with Anglin.

Carolyn: Right.

John: One thing I wanted to ask you is, and Greg Johnson brought this up in the debate, he’s obviously not like an outright National Socialist, you know, he loves Hitler, etc. But, you know, he’s tries to be objective and fair and say:

“Oh well, the Nazis weren’t that bad, but they did do some things wrong.”

Carolyn, what exactly did Hitler and the Nazis do wrong? I’m trying to figure that out.

Carolyn: See, I don’t agree with that. He mentions that Operation Ost, or whatever it was called, they found some notes about it. There was kind of a plan, but they made all kinds of plans! That different people wrote out plans for the East when they took more control of it, and so on. That doesn’t mean they were ever carried [out], or they were going to be, quite in that way. And so there’s a whole lot made out of that. But then he admits that it’s a fabrication. But he thinks that still, he always says that the Nazis did things wrong. He said it in both the debate and in his article. But he can never really point out to what it is, but he thinks that they did exterminate jews! Now for him, that’s immoral.

[35:18]

He doesn’t say, you know, he’s supposed to be anti-jew, but that’s immoral. Well others, revisionists, say they didn’t exterminate jews and there was never a plan. Now this brings us to the definition of the “Holocaust”, which you’re very aware of, and a lot of people are, but let’s just go over real quick.

As Michael Shermer wrote in 2000, and he’s a jewish “Holocaust” apologist. He says:

“When historians talk about the “Holocaust” what they mean, is that about six million jews were killed in an intentional and systematic fashion by the Nazis using a number of different means, including gas chambers.”

 

[Image] Michael Shermer’s book “Denying History” in which he gives a standard definition of what is the “Holocaust“. Click image to enlarge.

And then Michael Berenbaum and Deborah Lipstadt, said the same thing. So have many, many others. And that’s known to be what they insist on! The jews themselves insist on that, for the “Holocaust”. They don’t let’s you change that, take away from the six million, or say that there was no plan, or intention to kill the jews. And Deborah Lipstadt says; “they were intended to kill every jew in Europe“, and things like that, you know. They have no evidence for that.

And that’s why someone like Greg Johnson doesn’t want to bring that up. Because he knows it can be debunked. But, at the same time he wants to say that there was a “Holocaust” and the Nazis are responsible for it, and that’s why we don’t want to be associated with them, or call ourselves Nazis. That is not the reason. That is all.
nbsp;

[Image] Carlo Mattogno’s book “Fail: Denying History” in which he gives Shermer’s book “Denying History” a good thrashing. Click image to enlarge.

John: And that’s what’s so bizarre to me with, how a guy like Greg Johnson, this very smart man, an academic, a Ph. D. Kevin MacDonald the same thing. Richard Spencer as well. He’s kind of always pooh-poohed revisionism. He doesn’t think it’s important and relevant, at least from what I’ve heard from him in the past, in conversations I’ve had with him.

Carolyn: They all do the same thing!

John: Yeah, they all think we can “step over it”. We don’t have to address it. We can ignore it. It’s not relevant, or related to our current, …

Carolyn: And you know, I also think, I don’t want to make a fuss here, but I also think that Richard Spencer is basically homosexual. And I think there’s a problem with, now of course, Kevin isn’t, but I think there’s a problem with having so many homosexuals in the White movement, as leaders. I think there’s a problem with that personally. So, I just thought I’d bring it up, because it comes up.

John: It always does. And to my knowledge Richard Spencer is not a homosexual. That’s all I’ll say about it. I don’t think that he is. From what I understand he is married and he has a child and everything.

Carolyn: You can do that.

John: My point is, … Right, yeah. Anyways, my point is that these guys, these very smart guys, always dismiss Revisionism. They don’t think it’s important. But what’s bizarre to me is that Revisionism itself is very, very well founded, from a scholarly perspective, from an academic perspective. I mean, all of the books that have been written debunking, scientifically debunking, the “Holocaust” in virtually every single regard, every single aspect of the official “Holocaust” narrative is not true. I can confidently say that at this point. None of it is true! It’s all propaganda! It’s all, just this fake narrative!

Carolyn: And these guys avoid that! They don’t talk about it!

John: Exactly!

Carolyn: They don’t talk about it at all, and then they just say:

“Well I’m not convinced it didn’t happen.”

What kind of thing? They don’t let themselves be convinced. They won’t read anything!

John: And Johnson even argued in the debate that it’s like, “over the heads of most people” and it’s “too difficult to go through all this information”. And it’s like, no! It’s not! I mean, if you just stop and think about it and break it down.

[Image] Holocaust Handbook Series — 1 of 4.  Click image to enlarge.

As you were kind of explaining, the basic tenets of the official “Holocaust” narrative, are; six million jews, it was done in gas chambers, largely, and it was a systematic, coordinated plan, carried out by the Nazis. All three of those assertions are easily proven to be false!

I don’t understand, … It’s clear to me that they are just afraid of this topic! They’re avoiding it, because they think it’s bad PR. I think that’s really what it boils down to.

[40:01]

Carolyn: I used to say that, but now I go further, and I’m pretty convinced that they don’t like Nazism. They don’t like Hitler. And I’ve given my reasons for why Greg doesn’t. But Kevin doesn’t, because he just never has. He likes Americanism. He thinks we need to be American. He doesn’t want to go there.

John: It’s too taboo I think, for MacDonald especially.

Carolyn: Yeah, yeah. I think with Kevin, he personally doesn’t like anything to do with Nazis. It personally turns him off. He doesn’t like uniforms, he doesn’t like the swastika, he doesn’t like any of that. The way they behave. I mean, he really sincerely doesn’t like it, but that means he’s not looking at it, as he supposedly looks at history, in an honest objective manner. He doesn’t want us to get involved with that. And so, that’s why they don’t want to reconstruct, or revisit the “Holocaust”, because if the “Holocaust” didn’t happen then Hitler might be rehabilitated! And that’s the one thing they don’t want. They want Hitler to be the bad guy.

John: Yeah.

Carolyn: You see, some of us don’t want that. So we’re really at odds here!

John: I totally, …

Carolyn: I can’t just ignore that and say:

“Oh well, that is okay, I still support you.”

Because, to me, what they’re doing is keeping us in this bondage to the jews. And they’re helping the jews! They don’t want to help the jews, but they think they can ignore the “Holocaust” and National Socialism, the Third Reich, and move ahead with White identity. And talking about where the jews are wrong and this won’t hurt anything. But all of them, are much more tolerant of jews as friends and in the movement then what I would be.

Richard Spencer was talking in that video I linked you in that comment I wrote, that he thinks that mixed race people can be in the White movement and if they’re mostly White they can certainly, you know, adjust if they really are for us. That we can just accept all these people.

That’s too lax for me.

John: Yep, I hear you. And by the way, the comments that you’re referring, and you mentioned Tucker who is a commenter on my website, this is from our last pod cast. So if you go back in the archives you find the most recent conversation I had with you, you can find all the comments there and kind of see what we’re talking about.

Carolyn: Yeah.

John: Yeah. I mean, to me it just doesn’t make any sense how these are obviously very smart, educated men, can just dismiss all of this scholarly research done into the “Holocaust”, by guys like Germar Rudolf, for example, who is himself a scientist and a Ph. D. Robert Faurisson and many others, countless others! Check out The Barnes Review dot org for all the most classic “Holocaust” revisionists books. They’re all for sale. They’re all worth purchasing and reading in my view.

[Image] Holocaust Handbook Series — 2 of 4.  Click image to enlarge.

We’ve proven that this story is not true! We’ve proven it scientifically, we proven it from a very scholarly perspective. It’s really, in my view, not up for debate anymore. So it’s just a matter of these guys not taking the time to do the research, or just choosing to ignore this and downplay it! And you can’t! I mean, it’s very clear that you can’t! Try going, …

Carolyn: They don’t want that to be a part of their movement!

John: Right.

Carolyn: So to me, they’re dishonest about it. They won’t argue it. You know, they won’t talk, … They won’t say:

“Okay, I think this is wrong and this is why.”

They won’t argue those points. They don’t want to get into it. Because they don’t think they have a very good argument, so they just avoid it. And that I think is dishonest, and it’s not fair.

[44:57]

Now I came across something else at Counter-Currents, just yesterday, written by Kevin MacDonald in 2016, September. One year ago posted there, titled “The Alt-Right and the jews”. And most of it was just the usual thing that Kevin talks about with the jewish influence and how it ruling in our societies, and so on. But then he got into a little more specific things, and he said, which others have said:

“I think it’s fine that some organizations and some Alt-Right figures do not discuss jewish issues.”

Well that’s OK, but then, a few sentences later he said:

“I would love it if there could be an Alt-Right mass movement with significant jewish support.”

And then he gives some reasons why that’s probably not going to happen and why it might not work out so well. But it shows that’s just a different attitude, that he would like to see Jewish support.

[Image] Kmac’s article, “The Alt-Right and the jews” with a couple of critical comments. Click image to enlarge.

John: It’s incredible! I mean, it’s a naive attitude to think:

“Oh, maybe jews will finally be objective, like us, and realize that our message is legitimate, and righteous, and honest!”

No! The jews are never going to admit this! At least not in large numbers. There might be a couple individual jews who would maybe support the idea of a White ethnostate or, sort of go along with our perspective. But overall, the jews have made very clear as a collective racial entity, that they are very, very, and blatantly hostile to our interests, and hostile to the future prospects of our race! And, in fact, are doing everything in their power to bring about our destruction! They make this very clear. So to me it’s very naive. I don’t understand it.

Like, just one day, we are going to finally convince the jews that we have a righteous cause?

Carolyn: If they want to have some jews who they think would see it, … And here’s what he said:

“That jews would see it in their interest that White societies continue to be healthy, because that’s in the jews interests as they live there.”

You know, they don’t want them to deteriorate into all these minorities, factions, and so on then. He’s still talking about jewish interests. So jews are doing it, because it’s best for them, not because it’s in the interest of White people! Not because they identify as White, but only that they want to live in White countries and get along all right for themselves.

So that’s a totally different thing! Yes, it is very naive and it’s very much academic, I guess. You praise these guys, because their Ph D.’s, and then this is an attitude that more academics tend to have. You know, I still respect Kevin MacDonald a great deal. I mean, I’ve always liked him, but I just think that this needs to be said. And I actually hope that more people would look at all this and make comments about it and think about it.

John: Sure.

Carolyn: I think it’s very harmful to what we’re trying to do.

John: I’ll just say publicly, I don’t know if Kevin MacDonald, or Greg Johnson, or Richard Spencer would even listen to this, but if they do and they’re interested in discussing this with me, I’d be more than happy to have them on. I’m sure most people listening [know that] I’m not like this very hostile interviewer. I want to hear them out. I would probably challenge them, obviously.

Carolyn: Well I don’t think they would.

John: I don’t think so.

Carolyn: I sincerely doubt very much, because they don’t want to have to explain themselves. That’s why they do it, the way they do.

John: Well, all I would say is, to a guy like him, Kevin MacDonald, or Greg Johnson, or Spencer, anybody else who kind of goes along with their line of thinking, that we can avoid this issue, “step over it” as Johnson argues, … If you really do think that, that’s fine I guess. I would just say don’t, to use an Alt-Right expression, don’t counter signal revisionists, people that are critically investigating the fake “Holocaust” narrative.

[50:10]

There’s no need to! If you’re not interested in this topic, if you don’t think it’s important, then simply avoid it! But! Don’t accept the mainstream jewish narrative in any way! Just say:

“Hey look! It’s got nothing to do with what I’m saying. White people have rights. My pro-White ideas and views have nothing to do with Hitler, or Nazis, or the “Holocaust”. I don’t care about it! That happened seventy, eighty years ago. What I’m talking about is now!”

That’s all they have to do!

Carolyn: Right.

John: They don’t have to go along with the fake story, they don’t have to say:

“Oh well, Hitler did do some things wrong and jews were persecuted, and murdered.”

No! Just avoid it altogether! That to me is the best approach to take, if you are going to go along with Johnson, and MacDonald, and Spencer, and these other guys.

Carolyn: Well right. I said that in that article about MacDonald and his pod-casts, and it would be okay with me, if you just said:

“I don’t know anything about it. I haven’t studied it. I don’t like to talk about it, because I, have not studied the issue.”

And then that would be it. But instead, he did give some opinions. And then he made a silly comment:

“That I’ve never seen anything that convinced me.”

Well that’s just a dumb comment!

John: He’s not looking very hard then!

Carolyn: No! [laughing] No!

[Image] Revisionist “Holocaust” books. Click image to enlarge.

John: Because, I mean, Dr MacDonald, I’ll send you multiple books, … I mean, you can find this all out on the Internet! And see, that was another thing I wanted to bring up. Johnson kept arguing that to get our message across to people in a modern context, we don’t need to rehabilitate Hitler, or the Third Reich, or National Socialism, or anything like that.

I would disagree with that! I think that from an objective, truth-seeking perspective, it’s very clear that Hitler was a very righteous and honorable man! He was the greatest political statesman in modern Western history! I think you could say that, argue that very, very convincingly from a very objective, scholarly, perspective.

Carolyn: Yes. But you would have to have all your facts and figures at hand. That is not easy, but, yeah! Sure you could! Of course you could.

John: That’s true. And also I think that he still, …

Carolyn: Johnson says that, not because he knows that, or anything, but he says that, because he doesn’t want it! He doesn’t want it to be rehabilitated! Because he doesn’t want it to return.

John: Yeah.

Carolyn: In that way, that’s exactly what the jews don’t want. The jews don’t want Hitler to be rehabilitated more than they care about the “Holocaust”. The “Holocaust” is very important to them. But they don’t want Hitler to return or anything like that! So they’re in accord with that. And that’s why they want to keep the “Holocaust” in place, so they can say:

“Look! He’s responsible for this and we can’t have him. He was a bad guy!”

John: Right, exactly, yeah.

Carolyn: I’m sorry to say, they’re not coming from an honest place. They’re not coming from an honest, scholarly place. And in truth, the whole thing is that everybody comes from what they want to happen. It’s all about power! When you come down to it, history is all, who’s in power, and it’s not what’s true. You can find a lot about truth and what’s true and have different opinions. But in the overall, it’s who’s in power and that’s what it’s going to be.

So you have to change the power. And so someone like Andrew Anglin and his way dealing with that, I’m not saying he does it the best, but that way of dealing with it is in the end, it’s necessary. Because we agree, but we could talk with other people until we were blue in the face. And if they don’t want to change the way, their views of modern life are, they’re not going to go with it.

[54:57]

John: Right. Well really, it’s all about who controls the narrative, and the jews have control of the narrative when it comes to pretty much every major issue of importance. All of the issues that really form our paradigms for how we understand the world, how we understand our history. It’s all a jewish narrative. It’s a jewish approved narrative that advances jewish interests and delegitimizes White interests. I mean, that’s what it’s all about. It’s about controlling the narrative. And what is sad to me is that we’ve made so much progress in countering that jewish narrative, that weaponized, jewish narrative. Certainly within the past, since I’ve been involved in this movement, anyways. I mean, think about “Adolf Hitler, The Greatest Story Never Told”.

Carolyn: Right.

John: What a brilliant film! Very professionally done! Very, very powerful! Very, very moving! A great film, and it’s huge on YouTube. I mean, it’s been censored countless times. But I would venture to say that literally millions of people have seen that, and it has profoundly impacted them. It certainly did for me. And there’s many other documentaries, many other books that have been written, many other pod-casts. I mean, you’ve done a lot of work on this. I think you’ve played a huge role in rehabilitating the image of Hitler, and Nazis, and the WWII narrative, in general. And other people have as well.

Carolyn: Thank you.

John: And this work is so important! And we’ve made a lot of progress, we really have!

Carolyn: You’re right! I mean, that’s why we got to keep pushing! We’ve got to keep pushing it! I’m convinced of that now. That if I do anything, I’m going to just keep working on “Holocaust” revisionism, and also what I can do with Hitler. But mostly with this revisionism, because there is so much. I mean, it’s all been figured out, it’s all been debunked. It’s just a matter of getting people to pay attention.

[Image] Holocaust Handbook Series — 3 of 4.  Click image to enlarge.

You know, I was talking to you about my nephew and what I noticed with him, he’s very open-minded, very nonjudgmental, willing to look at things. But he doesn’t care all that much. I can tell. I sent him some things to read and look at, and he did. And then he said:

“Well, what about this and that, …”

And he wasn’t completely convinced by it. Well, when I came to it I was, like, ready to be convinced. I mean, I wanted to be convinced, I admit that. I wanted it to not be true. Other people wanted it to be, so it was different. But he’s kind of like just, he’s more interested in the Constitution and things like that. So I’m not going to press it, but I did sent him the book, “Debating the Holocaust”, and he said he would read it.

But, you know, you can’t force this down people. It’s not really what they think is most important, so even if he was convinced to some degree, which would at least be nice, it doesn’t mean he would become like me. [laughs]

John: Right. That’s how the vast majority of people are. And that’s why controlling the narrative, controlling how information is presented, whether it’s through the media, whether it’s through our educational establishment, it’s so important. And the jew again, the jews have a total stranglehold over this! At least in the official channels. I think we’re chipping away at that and sort of eroding that. Certainly within the past ten years, or so.

But that’s really what it’s all about. Most people don’t care about World War Two! They don’t care about the “Holocaust”. They don’t care about Hitler.

Carolyn: No.

John: They’re just been taught all these truly false and highly weaponized narratives about this period of our history, and they just accept it. It doesn’t mean much to them, but that’s just what they know, what they’ve been taught. And they don’t really think about it.

So could you imagine, rather than watching Schindler’s List, in seventh grade, when we were in our English class, we’re watching, you know, “Adolf Hitler, The Greatest Story Never Told”. Which is clearly much more objective and scholarly than any of these ridiculous “Holocaust” films.

Carolyn: Right.

John: And people would have a much different perspective, a much different outlook on everything! On life in general.

Carolyn: They would! Absolutely! That’s just absolutely true! So, this is where it’s at. It’s a tough battle, that’s what it is. But I just think, that when it comes to revisionism, if everybody in the White activist movement would get on board with it. And would talk in favor of it, it would make a big difference. I think it would, because lots of people just never mention it, that are influential. I just think it would be good, but obviously it doesn’t look like it’s going to happen.

[60:19]

John: I completely agree with you. and I think that, again, more advice to people that kind of go along with Johnson, and MacDonald , and others. Look at this from strictly a free speech, freedom of expression, freedom of intellectual inquiry, think about it just from that perspective. I mean, we should be able to question the “Holocaust”! We should be able to critically examine it and to entertain other ideas, other perspectives about what really happened. Just that alone, I mean, just from a free speech perspective, …

Carolyn: Well, my nephew, …

John: You don’t have to agree with it, but you should be able to say:

“Hey look, I think the “Holocaust” really did happen! but if somebody wants to question it and do research into it, I fully support them in doing that.”

You know what I mean?

Carolyn: Yeah. my nephew did say, … He looked at all these great arguments and he was like, “Yeah, yeah, yeah.”

But then when I happened to bring up in passing, the laws against it in Europe, and how you couldn’t talk about it, you go to jail, he said:

“That’s one of the more convincing part of it, to me.”

Yeah!

John: Well, it is! It totally flies in the face of American traditions, you know, free speech, the First Amendment! It’s totally contrary to all that!

Carolyn: Yeah! Am I breaking up to you?

John: No.

Carolyn: Yours is breaking up to me, but maybe that doesn’t matter.

John: Okay. No. You’ve been crystal clear this entire time.

Carolyn: Okay.

John: Carolyn, I know we’re pretty much at the hour mark and we’re going to wrap up here in just a second. I just wanted to really emphasize the fact that this fake narrative, this fake “Holocaust” narrative, this hysterical, irrational, entirely unfounded, you know, demonization of Hitler and the Nazis. This narrative really is the bedrock of the entire New World Order agenda, the White genocide agenda, which are basically one and the same thing, right? This is so clear, so easy to demonstrate, that this is the case!

There’s a couple articles I just want to highlight and bring up here real quick. One of which was just published over at The Renegade Tribune, and it’s written by a man named, John Wear, who has actually contributed to The Barnes Review in the past, and I think The Barnes Review sells some of his books, if I’m not mistaken.

He wrote an article called “Why the Holocaust Story was Invented” and he lists a number of reasons that kind of explain the purpose of the fake “Holocaust” narrative. What agenda it’s advancing and, of course, the establishment of Israel, and the demonization of Germany, etc., There’s a number of arguments he makes. It’s very, very much worth reading. I don’t know if you caught that. I tweeted it out today.

I will also link it when I post, …

Carolyn: I read something by him, that maybe you sent to me?

John: It’s good, yeah.

Carolyn: I’m trying to remember it.

John: And this article this may be an older article, I’m not sure. I just saw it posted by Kyle Hunt at The Renegade Tribune. so it may be an article that John Wear wrote in the past, and he’s just reposting it. I know he does that often.

But it’s worth reading. it’s very good. I mean, …

Carolyn: Does he kind of hold off in certain areas, he’s not one hundred percent, or is this just in this thing I read? It seems like he was doing that. Maybe to be more acceptable, more convincing, or something? I don’t know. I can’t remember. I actually can’t remember exactly what it was. But would you say he kind of holds back a little bit, or not?

John: From what I can tell it doesn’t seem like that to me.

Carolyn: Okay.

John: I mean, maybe you wouldn’t be as forceful as we are when we talk about these subjects, but no, he seems pretty solid to me.

And this article is very good, it’s worth reading.

And then also, I wrote an article and, you know, I’ve been harping on this issue for a number of years. And this article goes back to April 26th of 2015. And it’s actually on my old blog, my old blogspot website, which amazingly is still up right now. If you go to it, it’s John Friends blog dot blogspot dot com. [johnfriendsblog.blogspot.com]

[65:00]

If you go to it, Google has that warning, you know, this is restricted content, or controversial content, or whatever. You have to click, “I understand and I Will Continue”. So they’re basically kind of censoring it. But anyways, you can still find it. And again I’ll link to this article as well.

And this article is titled, “Top jewish Leader Claims Entire Western World Culpable for the Holocau$t”*. And I just highlighted an article I found in the “Algemeine”, which is a jewish newspaper. Again, people who have followed my site know I highlight jewish newspapers and just what the jews actually say, just to expose their agenda and everything that they’re about. Because again, they openly admit these things and say exactly what they’re up to.

And this article in particular, I was highlighting, some comments that were made by Ron Lauder, who I believe still is the President of the World jewish Congress.

[* http:// johnfriendsblog.blogspot.com/2015/04/top-jewish-leader-claims-entire-western.html]

And this was right around the time of the, …

Carolyn: Whose name did you say?

John: Ron Lauder. Ronald Lauder.

Carolyn: Yeah.

John: Yeah, he’s a big time jew that is been involved in all this stuff for a long time. Anyways, he made a speech, this was at the seventieth anniversary of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen. And he’s basically arguing that literally the entire Western world is essentially responsible for the “Holocaust” happening. Because they didn’t do enough to help the jews!

And it’s just so incredible some of the statements that these jews make! You know, he’s demonizing the United States for, quote, unquote:

“Shutting it’s doors to jews that were trying to flee Europe. And no one was doing enough to help the poor jews in Europe, ” etc.,

It’s just, it’s so infuriating seeing what these jews say, and just how brazen they are!

Carolyn: They’ve got such balls, they are almost like, insane! It’s almost like they’re stupid! Because they come out with stuff like. It’s not going to be accepted. And it just reinforces the idea that Jewish deaths are more important than anybody else’s! If the whole world has to stop and be responsible for what happened here, for this huge number they came up with, this six million baloney! But I mean, sometimes they are talking to jews and they don’t think the rest of us are going to be paying any attention.

John: Yeah. That is true, and most people, …

Carolyn: But I can’t see how xxx jews would like that either?

John: And that’s the thing, most people don’t ever sit down and read jewish newspapers and jewish news outlets. Which is why I try to highlight them and say:

“Hey! Look these jews are saying this, not me! You can call me an anti-Semite, and a neo-Nazi and everything else, but all I’m doing is quoting jews themselves, OK? ”

Carolyn: Yeah.

It’s amazing the Jews are so important, that to say that the whole world, even to say all Europe and all Europeans are responsible for what happened to them! And then what? What does he say? What’s supposed to be done about it?

John: Well, unlimited money, unlimited sympathy, unlimited, just acquiescence to this jewish agenda to genocide our race.

Carolyn: Well, I think they want to pass laws against anti-semitism. I think that is what they’re after.

John: Yeah. Exactly.

Carolyn: And there’s nothing worse than that! To say:

“Oh yeah, it’s illegal! You’re going to go to jail if you express anything that we consider anti-semitic.”

And they’ve got a whole, … They’re working out what anti-semitism is. There’s a whole list of stuff. I mean, it’s all kinds of stuff! It includes criticizing Israel in various ways and so, you know, it just puts them totally, outside of anybody’s control in any way, shape, or form. And they can’t be harmed, nothing can happen to them in any way. So they’re not even responsible for obeying laws, or whatever.

So, they are just showing that they really do want extraordinary privileges.

John: Privilege! They talk about White privilege all the time! It’s really jewish privilege and [for] other minorities that they’ve elevated, and used as weapons against our race!

Yes no doubt! I mean, again it’s very clear if you just read what Jews have to say and listen to what they have to say.

[Image] Holocaust Handbook Series — 4 of 4.  Click image to enlarge.

[70:00]

Carolyn: I think sometimes we’re at war! That’s one thing that Hitler recognized. And people blame him for it, saying he shouldn’t have. This was a war and he couldn’t evade it. You have to go ahead and do it.

And we’re at war with these jews, and we can’t say:

“Oh well, let’s hope we can all get along! Let’s hope that some of them will be on our side.”

What? Five or six of them? [bursts out laughing]

John: Exactly! Exactly!

Carolyn: It’s just aversion for having to confront things. And of course for war, getting serious, … It’s no fun! It’s terrible! Of course we’d like to evade it! But sometimes you can’t, because you’re just going to be done in by it.

That’s probably one argument for what Hitler finally did about the jews in Germany. He went about it in such a mild way in the beginning! Just helping them out, you know, working with the Zionists that wanted to go somewhere else anyway. I don’t know, you know, … It built up, because of jews from around the world who didn’t want that to happen.

John: Yeah. Yeah again, and that’s what’s so incredible when you really have a good understanding of revisionism and all the research that’s been done to actually demonstrate that the Germans were not interested in killing jews, at all! They were interested in preserving their lives, because they wanted to use their labor in some of these labor camps.

Again, it’s like the total opposite of what we’ve been told. But again, the whole World War narrative is essentially the exact opposite of what we’ve been told!

But I wanted to also highlight one other article that I actually cite in this article that I mentioned. That’s on my blog. You can find you can find what I’m about to read there, and again I’ll link this when I post this program.

[Image] Ian Kagedan. Click image to enlarge.

There was an article written by a man named Ian Kagedan, I think is how you pronounce it. He was the former national director of the B’nai B’rth in Canada, and you wrote a very, very revealing op-ed in The Toronto Star, back in 1991. And the title of it is, get this Carolyn, I’m sure you’ve heard of this, “Memory of the Holocaust Central to New World Order”. That’s literally the title of the article, or of the op-ed.

“Central to New World Order“, right? I mean, this is the title of the article. It’s incredible! And he argues here, quote:

“The Holocau$t stands as Western civilizations greatest failure! It was a natural outcome of centuries of racism and of anti-Semitism. To deny the Holocau$t is to deny racism’s capacity to undercut our civilization’s basic values and to destroy democracy. Achieving our quest of a New [Jew] World Order depends on our learning the Holocau$t lessons.”

And what are the lessons of the “Holocaust”? I mean, again, this proves my point. The fake “Holocaust” narrative is literally the linchpin of the entire New World Order agenda! Which is simply a jewish plot to enslave the world, politically, economically and culturally, destroying all genuine national and racial distinctions in the process.

And the lessons of the “Holocaust”, which, of course, include “tolerance, diversity, anti-racism, multiculturalism”. The lessons of the “Holocaust” are specifically designed to erode, de-legitimizes and ultimately destroy any form of White racial identity, and to justify multiculturalism, and massive non-White immigration into the West. And to end all criticism of jews and the jewish state of Israel, and to equate it with anti-Semitism and hate speech. That’s what this is all about!

Carolyn: Yeah.

John: I mean, how could we avoid this Carolyn?

Carolyn: He makes it very clearly, doesn’t he? That’s a horrible picture! Total enslavement! You’re going to be programmed with this stuff and you’re going to believe it, or you’re on the outs. You’re somebody who’s bad, can’t exist in our societies. So you’d have to go into some bad place, or whatever.

And this is the kind of thing you have to fight! But these people will say:

“Oh! That is just that one guy. Nobody will ever fall for all that stuff!”

Well look at how much the world has fallen for it, now.

[75:13]

And I guess they can fall for the rest of it, if the media continues to be so controlled. I don’t want to bring this up, as I don’t want to take up any more time, but just to say real quickly, … Then there’s Trump, who is like somebody who’s, you know, standing against that, but he doesn’t have the power to overcome it. We all have to overcome it! We all have to do it. We have to say:

 

“God! We have to stop this!”

And that’s why people like, this is what I was going to say, but I couldn’t remember. Just this, that’s what people like MacDonald and Johnson are getting in the way of! They’re actually helping the jews in what they’re doing!

They need to be told this! They need to, … This needs to be pushed in their face, actually! I mean, rather than say:

“Oh well, we don’t want to say anything bad about them. We have to support them.”

John: Yeah, I completely with you. I would be willing to discuss this with any of them and make my opinions very clear. Not just opinions. Again, how could you, …

Carolyn: You know, I wish we could! John, here’s an idea. Somebody was talking about they’d like to have a debate with, … Mark. Mark Weber! You know Mark Weber, … Johnson got his ideas from Mark Weber, or Mark Weber helped him. Or maybe he didn’t mean to send him in that direction, altogether, but they got it from there. And they think that Mark Weber and David Irving gives them some support.

And MacDonald, I believe too, knows Mark Weber quite well. And they get those ideas from Mark Weber. And yet I just don’t think Mark Weber is so afraid of this, as they are.

Maybe we could get a conversation with Mark Weber? At one time Mark Weber wanted to talk on the phone with me, and discuss all these things. And I wouldn’t do it, because I was so in disagreement with him, and I though he was trying to make me see it his way. But I would talk to him now, but I would rather talk to him in public, on a public debate, a public forum, not necessarily a debate. And ask him some questions. I don’t know he’d be willing to do that, or not. But it just occurs to me that he might be more willing than MacDonald or Johnson would be.

John: Carolyn, I’m going to see if I can make that happen, because I actually know Mark Weber.

Carolyn: Good.

John: I’ll see what I can do on that front. Boy! that would be very, very interesting! [laughing]

Carolyn: Yeah!

John: Well. I’ll see what I can do. And I’ll certainly be in touch. We’re well past the hour now, but that’s okay, let’s go ahead and wrap up.

I just want to conclude by saying, I think from my perspective, which I think I could defend very well, … Objectively speaking, Hitler was in fact the greatest White leader in modern history! That’s very clear to me. I think we do need to rehabilitate his image, and I think we’ve done a good job at doing that, over the course of the past, say ten years, or whatever. Pro-White ideas and perspectives will always! Always! Always be tied to Hitler, to the Nazis, to the “Holocaust”! There’s no reason to avoid it, or to cower in fear about it! We are right! And we have the evidence and the proof to demonstrate that we’re right!

And, this is something we need to tackle head on! And if you don’t want to, if you disagree with me, don’t counter signal it! Just, avoid it! Step over it. Whatever you’ve got to do. But don’t accept this jewish nonsense about gas chambers, and jews were murdered in this and that.

[Image] Holocaust Myth Cartoon. Click image to enlarge.

It’s all bullshit! Everything the jews have to say about the “Holocaust” is utter bullshit! Designed specifically to advance jewish interests, and to delegitimize White racial interests! That is so clear, it’s so obvious, we should not even be debating this at this point.

That’s all I got to say Carolyn. Go ahead.

Carolyn: Well. I agree with you John! Good for you!

John: Thank you. [both laugh]

Well this has been fun, Carolyn. I’ll go ahead and post this up tonight, and I’ll see if I get Mark Weber to talk about this. That would be very interesting.

Carolyn: Good! Okay! Well, it’s been fun for me too! And so, I hope the listeners enjoy it. Thanks John.

John: Okay. Thank you very much! I will talk to you real soon.

Carolyn: Good.

John: All right. Good night.

[80:28]

END

===============================================

See Also:

The World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention — Instauration Dec, 1979

An Open Letter to New Jersey’s Governor

Historians or Hoaxers?

House of Orwell

Misha: Surviving with Wolves or …

Bradley Smith’s Smith Report # 1

The Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies

The Plum Cake

Auschwitz: Myths and Facts

Powers and Principalities XI – Ewen Cameron, MK-Ultra, Holocaust Revisionism — TRANSCRIPT

Tales of the Holohoax – A Historian’s Assessment – Part 1

The Holocaust Lie — Made in America

Probing the Holocaust: The Horror Explained — TRANSCRIPT

Jim Rizoli Interviews Prof Robert Faurisson, Oct 2015 — TRANSCRIPT

Holocaust Eyewitnesses: Is the Testimony Reliable?

Alain Soral – My Homage to Robert Faurisson, Oct 2018 — TRANSCRIPT

Inside Auschwitz – You’ve never seen THIS before! — TRANSCRIPT

Amazion Bans 100s of Holocaust Revisionist Books!

AUSCHWITZ – A Personal Account by Thies Christophersen

Jim Rizoli Interviews Bradley Smith — TRANSCRIPT

London Forum – Alfred Schaefer – Psychological Warfare – TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report Interviews Eric Hunt — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio – Germar Rudolf – Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster – Part 1— TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio: Nicholas Kollerstrom — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice TV – Ingrid Carlqvist – Scandal in Sweden When Ingrid Questions the Unquestionable — TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report with Carolyn Yeager on Johnson vs Anglin debate — TRANSCRIPT

============================================

PDF Notes

PDF: Version 1 — Sep 21, 2017

* Total words = 12,525
* Total images = 35
* Total A4 pages = 94

Click to download a PDF of this post (6.0 MB):

The Realist Report – Carolyn Yeager – Sep 2017 — TRANSCRIPT

Version History

Version 12: Jun 2, 2022 — Improved formatting.

Version 11: Jan 30, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version. Added See Also links.

Version 10: Sep 21, 2017 — Added PDF Version 1 for download.

Version 9: Sep 18, 2017 — Added some more links, and corrected some typos. Removed Transcript Status items. Added 1 image.

Version 8: Sep 17, 2017  — Added 15 images. Updated cover image. Expanded my intro.

Version 7: Sep 16, 2017  — Added 4 images. Proofed 15 more minutes. Total proofed = 80 mins. TRANSCRIPT NOW COMPLETE!

Version 6: Sep 14, 2017  — Added 3 images. Proofed 5 more minutes. Total proofed = 65 mins.

Version 5: Sep 13, 2017  — Added 3 images. Proofed 5 more minutes. Total proofed = 60 mins.

Version 4: Sep 12, 2017  — Proofed 10 more minutes. Total proofed = 55 mins.

Version 3: Sep 11, 2017  — Added 1 image. Proofed 10 more minutes. Total proofed = 45 mins.

Version 2: Sep 10, 2017  — Added 5 images. Proofed 10 more minutes. Total proofed = 35 mins.

Version 1: Sep 9, 2017  — Published post. Total proofed = 25 mins.

[Ramzpaul gives his take on the “Alt-Right” given recent events including Charlottesville. His views are his mixture of “nationalism for all” and a “Boy Scout” call for restraint and good behavior by all concerned. He denounces the Daily Stormer as a likely ADL, non legit operation, and the Alt-Right as now being toxic. Ramzpaul toots his own horn in discussing his prominent role in establishing the Alt-Right and how it was taken over by the neo-Nazis, etc.. He urges people to distance themselves from the Alt-Right and to infiltrate the “system” but work legally, although using methods as if we were illegal. He ends optimistically by saying we will win once we get through these dark days. 

I think Ramzpaul’s allegations against the Daily Stormer are worthy of investigation, if only to confirm them as being false — KATANA.]

RAMZPAUL

The Alt-Right

What Went Wrong?

;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8VYmY89_KUxx

Description

Thursday, August 17, 2017

The Alt Right – What went wrong?

 

Initially the Alt Right was a broad coalition of people who rejected mainstream conservatism. However, the movement was not involved with the old school 14/88 White Nationalism. It was fundamentally identity politics for our people without the neo-nazi baggage.

 

I published an article on January 5, 2016 that explained my vision of the Alt Right.

 

http://www.returnofkings.com/76454/what-is-the-alternative-right

 

Sadly, the movement was co-opted by the Hollywood Nazis once Richard Spencer aligned with the Daily Stormer after the infamous “Heilgate”.  I warned Richard about the dangers of associating with these Hollywood Nazis privately and in a video response to him. But he insisted on doing a podcast with Anglin the week after Heilgate.

 

 

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHKU1n5kTWQ]

 

At that time, The Right Stuff (TRS) also aligned with the Daily Stormer. Weev was involved with their web site administration and Anglin was a frequent guest. Based on that I knew it was impossible to rehabilitate the brand, so I ceased to call myself Alt Right.

The establishment has now used Charlottesville as an excuse to shut down anything remotely associated to the Alt Right. We are now witnessing Soviet tier censorship and clamp down on dissent.

 

 

 

[Image] Censorship of various websites. (Click image to enlarge)

 

___________________

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

 

[00:00]

 

 

Hey guys, has there been anything happening out there? I’ve been looking for a video subject, nothing I can see, …

 

Oh, oh, besides that! Looks like Trump may be part of a coup, overthrown, America’s breaking into civil war, we have a little Rubio saying it’s okay, to physically attack people that you disagree with politically! We have lynch mobs running out destroying our history! Other than that, I don’t know, there’s not much to complain about.

 

I don’t know! I laugh, because humor’s a kind of a defense mechanism. I’ve always used that since I was a kid and in some ways it’s funny, other ways it’s sad. But this is where we are and I guess you can predict it based on the how things were going, it would eventually reach this point. I actually thought it would happen if Hillary was elected. She was scary! She looked like a Trotsky, there was going to be massive bloodshed if she was elected and she was going to purge her enemies and throw them in concentration camps! And then when she lost there is like rage on the Left and they brought up this Russia conspiracy! They were just insane! And they’re continuing to be insane.

 

And we have Trump trying to stand up for Americans. I, … God help him! I mean, he’s kind of looks like alone now, but this is where we are. We’re in a situation that’s very dangerous. If you have the wrong views, not even if you have the wrong views, if you’re suspected of having the wrong views you can now literally, probably, be killed on the streets. This is what it’s become in America. And groups like the SPLC* [Southern Poverty Law Center] and the ADL* [Anti-Defamation League] have been pushing that. We’re going into, … we’ve pretty much lost the First Amendment, now.

 

I don’t see this as America anymore. Take that for why you will. So, yeah the “Black Pills”. Pretty much anything associated with the Right wing, especially the Alt-Right is now just being shut down, period.

 

 

[* Southern Poverty Law Center

The Southern Poverty Law Center (abbreviated as the SPLC) is an anti-White “civil rights” organization set up in Montgomery, Alabama in 1971 by Morris Dees and the Jewish Joseph J. Levin Jr. The current SPLC president J Richard Cohen is also Jewish, as is its main media representative Mark Potok.

Unlike the Anti-Defamation League and like American Civil Liberties Union the SPLC is not an openly Jewish organization. The SPLC may therefore be able to appeal to individuals and groups who find the more open pro-Jewish lobbying by the ADL disquieting. However, activities of the SPLC generally serve Jewish interests and Jews are prominent among staff and those giving money to the organization.
Source: http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center ]

 

[** Anti-Defamation League

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is a powerful Jewish lobby organization primarily based in the United States but with offices in some other countries. It was founded in 1913 as a branch of B’nai B’rith. In 1930 they had only three full-time employees. By 1938 the organization expanded to two-hundred and fifty workers.

The organization describes itself as a civil rights organization that fights antisemitism and bigotry more generally.

Critics of Jewish influence and how it is used have often been highly critical of the ADL.

Controversies

Leo Frank

The ADL states that it was founded in 1913 in response to the perceived antisemitism against the Jew Leo Frank who was convicted of the murder of 13-year-old Mary Phagan that year. Controversy has continued regarding the case with continued attempts to turn Leo Frank into an innocent martyr.

Morton Sobel

In the 1950s the ADL campaigned to free the Jew Morton Sobell from charges of espionage. In 2008 Sobell admitted to spying for the Soviet Union.
Israel

The ADL claims to be an international civil rights organization working for equal civil rights for all but the organization supports Israel and its often Jewish supremacist policies.

ADL undercover agents such as Abraham Feinberg have been stated to have been investigated by the FBI as agents of a foreign government and for stopping investigations regarding illegal arms-smuggling from the US to Israel. Feinberg became well known as financing Harry Truman and helping him to victory in the 1948 presidential elections. Truman recognized Israel minutes after the declaration of independence. Feinberg was also one of the financiers of the Israeli nuclear weapons program.

Espionage and infiltration

One of the earliest activities was the establishment of what has been described as a private intelligence agency, and sending spies, infiltrators, disruptors, and agents provocateurs against perceived opponents (including other Jews). In the early 1940s they had over 50,000 files on American citizens and their political associations. Declassified FBI files state that in 1940, the ADL supplied contact information of nearly 1,600 ADL members to the FBI to serve as informants and undercover sources. A FBI letter advised that “the Anti-Defamation League does not wish it to become generally known that they do employ private investigators”. A 1947 Congressional hearing revealed that the ADL had begun providing information to the original House Committee on Un-American Activities.
Source: http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Anti-Defamation_League ]

 

 

[02:04]

 

 

There’s a coordinated attack, and I’ll link to it on my blog. I can even keep track of it. Even people that had nothing to do with “Unite the Right“, it doesn’t matter if they think you have bad views, they’re trying to get rid of you. And so we’re into heavy censorship.

 

;

So even what used to be the First Amendment, that you had a right to go somewhere and speak, that is just being too bad. Because if you try to speak somewhere, we’ll have people who try to kill you, and people like little Rubio will say:

 

“That’s fine, bad views, you deserve to die!”

 

So we don’t have free speech in this country. It’s a scary situation!

 

All right, now I want to talk a little bit about the Alt-Right, a little bit about the history. I don’t want to dig this all up again, but I think it’s important to realize what we’ve become and what we need to do going forward. Because my e-mails have just been huge! People are like:

 

“Ramsey Paul your like the last ones standing.”

“Ramsey Paul you were right all the time about how the Alt-Right was going!”

 

And I’m getting a lot of interview requests, mostly I turn them down, because I’m not interested in the “fake media“! A few I’m going to reply to. So I thought I need to get this video out and kind of explain what the Alt-Right used to be, where it went, and why did it go that way, and what can we do in the future to prevent that.

 

And I take some responsibility. I have a lot of guilt that I didn’t more forcefully stand up and prevent the Alt-Right from being co-opted. It’s mostly, because I’m not naturally a leader, it’s not something I wanted to do. So I let someone else, Richard Spencer run with it and then he ran with it, right into the ditch!

 

And I should have done something with like Vox Day and people that are more reasonable, saying that we don’t want the Alt-Right to go that direction, but I didn’t do it!

 

 

 

And if you want to know the whole Alt-Right story, and I’m not trying to toot my horn, but a lot of the reason the Alt-Right got popular was, because of me! It was! Because I wrote the article for “The Return of Kings”, which I have linked to. In which I explained my vision of the Alt-Right, which was not traditional Republicanism or Conservatism, but at the same time not the old 14/88 neo-Nazi bullshit!

 

And lot of people got excited about that article, because they’re like:

 

“Whoa! Yeah that’s kind of what I was looking for!”

 

And then one person who got excited was Milo [Milo Yiannopoulos]. He worked for Breitbart. He got a lot of information from me and he published his article based mostly on my views of what the Alt-Right was. And that is what got a lot of people on Breitbart excited about it, including [Steve]Bannon, right?

 

 

So, it had a huge influence. But then, the real 14/88 neo-Nazis, that really pissed them off, because they thought the Alt-Right was weak and cucky and all that type of stuff. But then they changed directions, especially the Daily Stormer. They changed directions and they were originally opposed to the Alt-Right, then they said:

 

“No! No! No! We are the true the Alt-Right, the Alt-Right is naming the jew! It’s hard core White Nationalism! It’s 14/88! Don’t be a cuck!”

 

 

[05:03]

 

 

Okay, I have to back up and just speak explicitly. I think all you guys know, I think the Daily Stormer was always a fake organization! I think it’s ADL funded. I don’t think Anglin writes most of the articles. He’s a front man. Weev is jewish, I have facts on that, and I have screen shots where he is advocated — on Twitter before he got banned — doing fertilizer bombs, drones to attack the government, and then recently he was advocating trying to get people to take guns to that funeral and disrupt it. He’s trying to get people thrown into prison. I believe the reason Weev’s not in prison is he flipped a deal with the Feds. He’s an informer.

 

[Image] Andrew Anglin.

 

And you guys don’t have to believe that, but if you associate with him, you’re probably in big trouble. The whole Daily Stormer was trouble from the beginning, and I told Richard Spencer, I said Richard, I told him in private, I said:

 

“Richard don’t affiliate with these assholes, I don’t even think they’re genuine. But even if they are genuine, you don’t want the brand of “Alt-Right” to be associated with neo-Nazi bullshit!”

 

And then we had videos. I’ll link to the video, I did a video called, “Alt-Right and Boundaries” which I talk to Richard directly, publicly, because he responded to me. He made a video about me. And I said we need to have these boundaries, but he didn’t really listen and he took the Alt-Right brand, which he had control of, … He didn’t come up with the term Alt-Right, that is bullshit. He used that on a blog spot, he got bored with it, sold it went to his Radix or something. And then, when the Alt-Right started to get popular again he came and said:

 

“Oh no, no, no! I coined the term!”

 

He basically said and replied to the media that he was now the leader of the Alt-Right. And the media really wanted a leader so that they could pin something on. They didn’t understand it, because there wasn’t a leader per se, but then he kind of emerged. And I was like:

 

“I don’t care, you know, I don’t want to be leader of anything. If you want to take it and run with it, go for it!”

 

He did, and then after that whole Heilgate, which I didn’t care about, but then when he, you know, aligned with the Daily Stormer, I go, “fuck”! And it’s like there’s no way that I could rehabilitate it at that time. Especially since another popular group “The Right Stuff”, they used to be more funny, more edgy, but at the same time not “Nazi”. But then, they kind of aligned with the Daily Stormer, and so did Richard Spencer.

 

[Click here to go to transcript]

 

So from that point on the Alt-Right, I could see was going to be a cluster fuck disaster! Because they aligned to these so-called neo-Nazi groups. I don’t think Daily Stormer was ever legit, so it’s not really neo-Nazis, it’s more, probably jewish funded. But, playing the Hollywood Nazi role I knew it was screwed. And what happened in Charlottesville, this was bound to happen!

 

So about a year ago I left the Alt-Right, because I saw it couldn’t be rehabilitated. Everyone called me a cuck and everything, and I don’t care. You guys do what you want to, I just don’t want to be a part of it, because I saw where it was going. And I’m even more so now, obviously.

 

There’s a lot of good people in the Alt-Right. Like Vox Day. I wish he was more of a leader. And he’s fighting to say:

 

“No, no, no! The neo-Nazism, that’s not really part of the Alt-Right.”

 

Vox, I really like you and I think you’re correct intellectually, but it doesn’t matter anymore. The brand has been forever tainted in the minds of people! You can’t rehabilitate the Alt-Right brand! And I say that other good people like Terry McCarthy. She’s involved with the Alt-Right, “Wife with a Purpose”.

 

And I really, from my heart, recommend you guys dissociate yourself with that brand, just where it is now. It’s always going to be associated now with Naziism, even though we know it’s not really that, and that was just a segment, but that segment, the Daily Stormer saying through Richard Spencer, and Richard Spencer is seen as a leader to the media and the world, … They’ve associated that now to Naziism. We can’t rehabilitate it!

 

So, as such, I dropped being associated with the Alt-Right about a year ago. And I won’t ever go there again, because that brand is toxic! I won’t be involved with anything that’s called Alt-Right, or go to any interview with someone that they call themselves Alt-Right. It’s just a dead-end that is going nowhere!

 

All right, so the future though, I’m going to start dropping “White Pills”. In a way the Alt-Right exists, I hope that it continues to exist, because it will keep, … Now it will just attract Nazi types, just unsociable people will tend to be flocked to that now. And we need to start something new. And I don’t want to start something called, “Alt-Lite”, or “Alt-West”, it’s just stupid! We’re just the Right! and I don’t want to take a leadership position, but at the same time, I don’t know what else to do. It’s like, I can’t abandon my country and my people! So I’m always going to be here until they throw me off, supporting nationalism for everyone. That’s my, I’ve always said, if you look through all my videos for the past seven years, I’ve always rejected White Nationalism! I’ve always rejected Nazism! And I’ve supported the simple concept:

 

“Nationalism for all people and everyone has a right to life”.

 

That needs to be the foundation.

 

 

[10:10]

 

 

And the neo-Nazi, “gas the kikes” [laughing mockingly] how funny, people, … I don’t care if you’re joking about it, but keep that on the Alt-Right! Right?

 

We need a new serious movement and this is what I call the “Nationalist Movement”, or the “Right”, on the right. And leaders, I met some great leaders. I know three great leaders; one in America, one in Canada, and one in Europe. And they’re all young, under twenty. And I think our young people will come up and eventually start a real organization of leadership. That’s something I’m not qualified to do. Because again I’m not really a leader. I will hopefully help to transition that process. I’m going to fight for us, and I’m going to fight for our people, and that’s not gonna change.

 

My views haven’t changed one iota! But this time to be a lot more careful of not allowing in the, you know, they’ll try the same tricks. They may copy Anglin, or Weev, but they’ll get someone else to play the role, to try to get in and to try to discredit the movement.

 

So we need to have better boundaries to prevent that from happening again. I’ll work tirelessly to make sure that happens, so good people don’t get sucked in to this nonsense, this bullshit that we saw happen into the Alt-Right.

 

So going forward, one of the phrases that I’ve heard that I really agree with is:

 

“We need to be very legal, because we’re looking to set us up, but at the same time we need to act like we’re illegal in how we run things.”

 

And that means we need to be more underground. And a lot of you that watch me, if you’re not outed you may want to play the role of “Social Justice Warrior” in your normie life, you know, say that, how you hate White people and, you know, really “virtue signal” that way while you get your education, you get into positions of power. I’m not against doing that. I think that could be a strategy. And most people I think need to be careful. We’ve got to look like we’re living under the old Soviet Union, because it is almost, this is not an exaggeration anymore. I used to say that was like “hyperbole”, but right now we’re almost in that situation. If you have the wrong beliefs you could just be killed outright and the government won’t care. In fact the government may sponsor it.

 

I’m not trying to say that to be scare anyone, but that’s, I see where this country’s going. And we’re almost at that spot now. We have a senator advocating that, so we’re kind of crossed that bridge, so you need to be careful. You need to watch what you put on Facebook, what you put on Twitter, what you say. We need to connect in real life and we need to connect privately in private locations. We can’t announce where we are going to meet, because the Alt-Left will come and try to attack us, maybe with guns and kill us! We can’t do that. We need to be discrete on how we do things.

 

And again, we need to avoid the labels like “Nazi”, or “Alt-Right”, because that’s been associated with that. We’ve got to totally avoid all that type of weirdo stuff, even joking, because it’s not really funny, you know, doing the gas chamber memes and all that. We need to avoid that.

 

It doesn’t mean we need to be “Cuck Republicans”. We can’t do that. We’ve got to, because unlike them, there are opposed to nationalism, except for jews. They worship of jewish lobby and their number one thing in their heart is to protect Israel, to be an ethnic national state. Right? That’s what they are! We don’t want to be that. We want to do that for everyone! Not just for jews, but we have that right too!

 

So we don’t want to be like those Cuck Republicans, but we don’t want to be like the Nazis, or the Alt-Right. And it would be stupid! We need to have our boundaries and move forward, but we also need to be kind of discreet. I can’t, because I’m in this role. But you, I really recommend that you be smart about things, because things are dangerous now.

 

Now the White pill though, is, and I don’t like to get mystical, or real religious, but we win! Our people eventually win! Okay? We’re the good guys and we will win. But we’re in a kind of hard and dark time now, we need to persevere and get through this.

 

I’ll talk to you guys later, I hope. [chuckling] You never know anymore!

 

 

[14:24]

 

 

END

 

 

===============================

 

 

PDF Notes

* Total words = 3,796

* Total pages = 26

*Total images = 9

PDF Version 1: Published Aug 23, 2017

 

Click to download a PDF of this post (6.0 MB):

 

RAMZPAUL – The Alt Right – What Went Wrong — TRANSCRIPTS

 

 

 

Version History

 

Version 4: Aug 23, 2017 — Added a PDF for download. Added some notes. Fixed typos.

 

Version 3: Aug 22, 2017 — Proofed 5 more minutes. Added 3 images. Fixed typos.  Total proofed = 15 mins. TRANSCRIPT NOW COMPLETE!

 

Version 2: Aug 21, 2017 — Proofed 8 more minutes. Added 1 image.  Total proofed = 10 mins.

 

Version 1: Aug 20, 2017 — Proofed 2 minutes. Published post.

[Millennial Woes, a Scottish vlogger, discusses his recent doxing by the Main Sewer Media, Hope Not Hate and some low-life anti-fa types  — KATANA.]

_______________________

YouTube Description

The story of the attack on me by the Daily Record (including ace reporter Alan McEwen), the Scottish Sunday Herald, and other low-brow newspapers, done in collusion with Hope Not Hate and some gormless Scottish antifa.

Part 1: 0:00:00
Part 2: 0:03:57
Part 3: 0:28:02
Part 4: 0:53:48
Part 5: 1:08:42
Part 6: 1:16:53

[This channel is my livelihood. Donations to www.paypal.me/MillennialWoes are appreciated, as are pledges on www.patreon.com/MillennialWoes and bitcoin donations to 1743rc3jnBaYL3piL9eeEHqbrXrroZLVWW. Thank you.]

[This video is not intended to condone violence or hate.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AhMPTFRwPM

A Woes By Any Other Name

TRANSCRIPT

[00:00]

Part One: Introduction

Hello. This video is going to describe what has happened to yours truly over the last few weeks. And it’s going to be quite an involved story, I’m afraid. I’ll try to be brief, but we know that, I don’t tend to do that successfully very often. Nonetheless, I will try. But before I get into what happened, first things first. I’ve got a few messages from various people. To my supporters. These are the most important people. Thank you very, very much for the help you’ve given me over the last seven days! Thank you for the donations which have been very generous and numerous and certainly have made my immediate future more navigable than it was before. And also, thank you for the countless messages of moral support and encouragement that you’ve sent. Well, … It would have been pretty awful without them, honestly. I would have felt quite alone without that, so thank you!

To the public. I do not hate. This is contrary to what you will have read about me in the press. These ridiculous articles that are being printed, or have been printed. I want to give you my side of things. You need to be able to see me as I am and not as these hack journalists portray me. I do not hate. I do not spew hate on this channel, or anywhere else. And I don’t, I don’t encourage hate either. And certainly not deliberately. I’ve no interest in doing that. I never have had any interest in doing that.

I mean, we’ll get into that later. Anyway, to the police, because I know that I’ve probably been reported for “hate speech” in the last few days. I mean, I expect so.

So on to the police. Honestly, it seems to me [laughing] that you have better things to do than investigate someone like me. I’m just a guy talking about the world and trying to do so honestly. And that’s all I’ve ever been doing on this channel. But, I know that you have to follow up on things. So, maybe I’ll be speaking to you soon.

To the Scottish Government and judiciary. I don’t believe I’ve said anything illegal on my channel and I don’t think it’s “hate speech”. That is just an infantile category, of course. But I don’t think that what I do qualifies as “hate speech”. However, if you do put me on trial —and this is not threat. This is just what I think is likely to happen. If you do put me on trial for “hate speech” I think it will backfire hugely on yourselves, for various reasons. I have international support. Tens of thousands of people I know will rally around and it will just look ridiculous to put someone like me on trial. However, I’ll go into in more detail in a future video. For now, let’s concentrate on what has happened recently in the last two weeks.

Part Two: What Happened

OK, so we’ll start with our rundown, a chronological rundown of what happened, starting from the 19th of November last year, 2016. And with the NPI [National Policy Institute] gathering in Washington DC. This is my, the third conference I’d attended and everything was going just swimmingly — up until the end of Richard Spencer’s speech, when some people gave Nazi salutes in the audience.

Now, I’ve talked about this before on the channel, briefly, but I think it’s worth emphasizing there were about, at least, three hundred people there, I believe, at that conference. And from the footage it looks like about four people did these salutes. I don’t know who they were. I saw one of them bragging about it on a forum.

[05:00]

I don’t know if they were leftist infiltrators. I don’t know if they were just young men drunk and showing bravado. And I don’t know if they were genuine neo Nazis. But what I do know is that they did not represent the majority of that audience, or anything like it. They’re a tiny minority.

And certainly it’s irritating when people do something like that and I get associated with it. That’s, it’s annoying! It’s inconvenient. Of course, it’s worth saying that our opponents on the opposite side of the spectrum do not have any fear about being associated with the extremists. Indeed, well some people who have attacked me recently, are proper Marxists and they have no shame about that, whatsoever.

But, let’s leave that aside, the point is that “Heilgate”, as it has come to be known, clearly sow the seeds for trouble later on. I had premonitions about NPI. I thought something was going to happen at NPI. And as it turns out I was absolutely right. Three days after the conference, on the 22nd of November, some Leftie blog in Edinburgh, … Well I don’t know if it’s in Edinburgh, or Glasgow. Somewhere in Scotland. This Marxist blog, “A Thousand Flowers”

Now you can talk about the genesis of that name. The irony is delicious! Chairman Mao [laughing loudly] for God’s sake! Chairman Mao! And, in fact, I don’t really care to, it would take too long part. The point is, Chairman Mao asked for people to give their opinions, their criticisms of his regime. And then when those criticisms were too harsh, too inconvenient, he turned against it and halted the campaign and imprisoned people!

And I thought, now when I read about that, I had heard the phrase “One Hundred Flowers” that was what it was called, this campaign. I’ve heard of before, but didn’t really know what it was. And when I Googled this I thought, “Fuck me!” you know, this total lack of self reflection! Which I’ve come to really associate with the Left. Perfectly example provided by Chairman Mao! When things go bad, … In fact, first of all you say you’re going to do this, but then, when it goes bad you just renege on that earlier promise. And then also you don’t, you know, you are not honest with the people and you’re honest with yourself either. Because you told yourself that you’re being open minded, but you weren’t at all. And you told yourself you’re being benign, or that you were a benign person. But, in fact, there’s venom in you! There’s hatred in you!

So, the fact that these people would choose the name, “A Thousand Flowers” for their blog, I can’t help, but think it’s significant. Are they hoping to be ten times as self deluded as Chairman Mao?

Anyway. So, three days after NPI, these people, this blog published a post about me, because I had spoken at that conference. It’s worth saying that the speech I gave was not really, it certainly wasn’t political, it was philosophical and spiritual. But, of course, that’s of no importance to these people. I’m just evil to them! So, I have to be vilified.

And in that blog post they asked people to sell me out. They asked people to contact them with my details. Much as “Hope Not Hate”, has done eighteen months earlier, it’s worth saying. I did a video about that at the time. There’s no point going into it now. Now that was on the 22nd. The very next day, the 23rd, “The Daily Record” a Scottish tabloid, gutter newspaper, published an article. It was not on a prominent article, I think it was towards the back of the paper. And it was titled:

“Who is this mystery Scottish racist who spoke at a rally where White supremacists gave Nazi salutes in support of Donald Trump!”

And then it continued:

“The vile blogger, believed to be from Edinburgh, gave a speech at a White Nationalist conference in Washington DC that has sparked a political firestorm!”

And you can see them sensationalizing here. But, I also have to point out that the use of this word “vile” which is repeated over and over in The Daily Record coverage of me. Enough! I’m not going to go into that.

[10:00]

This article also asked people to e-mail, or phone the Daily Record with my information. Again, they were trying to get people to sell me out. And we’ll get into that later, but I just do want to ask, just drop the question in here. Why is it important? Why am I, why is my name important? Why is my age important? Why is my address important? Why is any of this important? Why do they want these details? Is it, because knowing these details will help them to understand my ideas? Why? Will it help the public to understand my ideas? How? There’s no reason for them to want this information.

I said the same thing when Hope Not Hate tried to find me. It’s just ridiculous! It’s childish! Anyway, the print version of that article, which appeared the next day, I think, had the headline twisted! “Can you identify a racist scum bag?” Again, that this puerile, childish, spiteful, ignorant, close minded, yeah hateful, I think has the word, prose is not worthy of a national newspaper. And is not worthy of the British public. It’s insulting to everyone and well, as for me, I think calling me a racist scum bag is just ludicrous!

I think it’s absurd!

Anyway, that was going on and I was still in America at this stage. I think I came back, I should say I went back to Scotland about two weeks later. And it was decided as a result of all this new controversy, — which I have not sought, I had not wanted and they said later that sought, that I got notoriety, or I won notoriety — I had never, I’ve never wanted notoriety!

But anyway, as a result of all this exposure, it was decided that I would move out, because I’ve been living with my dad. I decided that I would move out and get a flat of my own. It’s worth, it’s important to point out that my dad does not share my views. None of my relatives are very political, at all! And we agreed that it wasn’t fair for him, or them, to be associated with my views.

So, I was going to move out. And, if you’re wondering why I at the age of thirty four was still living with my father, that’s gone into my channel long, long ago. So I was going to move out, but before I could do that I had the Millennial, the “Christmas Hangeouts” on my channel to organize and host. So, things had to be delayed. I couldn’t do it. However, by the fifth of January I was well on the way to finding a place of my own and I was probably about three weeks away from moving out.

But then the next thing happened. On Thursday the fifth of January, 2017. There was a knock at the door at my house — my dad’s house — and I went and answered it. And I he’s twenty five or twenty six.

I can’t remember what he said. I think he said, “Hello. Collin?”

And I said, “Yes?”

And he said:

“We’re here to talk to you. We’re here from the National. We want to talk to you about Millennial Woes.”

And I said — this was the first time, I mean, this was, immediately I knew, OK. I’ve been found. That’s it!

And I said:

“I don’t want to talk to you about that. I’ve got nothing to say about that.”

And then he started talking, started saying something else. And then I noticed a car parked nearby with the window rolled down. And I said to him, “Is that guy taking photos?” I think it was a guy. I think there was a guy in there taking photos. And I said that to the journalist and he paused for a second and then said, “Yes”. And I looked him right in the eye and I said, “Go away!” And I was angry. I was disgusted!

We’ll get into that later.

[15:00]

So, he began, he actually looked scared, I have to say. He looked scared. I don’t kn why. And he began turning away and I just closed the door. So that was that. And then, what happened then? What happened then? Oh yeah. Nothing happened the next day. And then on what must have been the Saturday, Saturday the seventh of January. It was decided that I should just leave. I should just leave, because they’re going to keep coming now and indeed they did. I arranged my flight, my escape from Britain that day, on Saturday.

And then, at about noon, there was another knock at the door and I knew it was going to be a journalist, so I didn’t answer. And I have to say, this is the first time I’ve been in this kind of situation and I didn’t seek it out. I didn’t want it. I don’t really, I don’t want fame.

I’m happy just working on YouTube. And to suddenly be thrown into this position where you’re having to deal, where you’re being publicly broadcast, like to everyone, nationwide, not just by an internet YouTube channel, but for a national newspaper. To be thrust into the public limelight and to have journalists coming to your house knocking on your door and, you know, that they don’t mean you well. You know, that they have malice for you. And to be in that position is rather scary, rather intimidating actually. For the first, … I think if it happened again I would deal with it a hell of a lot better, but it was scary!

It was intimidating because, you know, these people mean you harm. It’s not that they’re going to beat you up, or something, but they think you’re a bad person. That’s the only reason they’re at your house. And so they have come to your house. They’ve come to your sanctuary. You know, your place where you’re safe from the whole world and they have violated that. They have taken that away from you. And, of course, this is the whole point. This is something that the the media have done to people for ever! And it’s disgusting! I mean you would think that they were dealing with really villainous people. People who deserve something like that. People who had committed crimes, you know, violent crimes.

I mean just to emphasis, all I’ve done is say things on YouTube and I’ve gone to three conferences, spoken at three conferences. Anyway, a certainly on a Saturday there was a knock at the door and I knew it was going to be a journalist. So I just ignored it. And then I heard this voice coming round the back. He must have gone round the back of the house, trespassing on my father’s property, it’s worth saying. And he went around the back of the house, down the driveway, I think into the back garden. And I heard him say, what was it? It was a voice of this age, youngish guy, middle class, but not well spoken.

I think he said something like:

“Colin! Mr. Robertson! Are you there? Want to ask you a few questions!”

And I thought:

“For fuck’s sake!”

And, of course, I just, I didn’t do anything. I was just sitting there waiting for him to fuck off! And eventually he did.

I don’t know how long he stayed for. But eventually he left.

I think this was Liam. Let’s say, Liam, from the “A Thousand Flowers” blog.

I don’t know. I don’t know for sure. It might have been someone else from that blog. Or it might have been someone, … I don’t know. I think they did say that they had gone to the house that day. And he said, “We want to ask you a few questions.” So maybe it was multiple people from that blog. I don’t know.

Anyway, at four thirty that day, the Saturday, I decided to email the National telling them that if they published the photos that they’d taken there on the Thursday, or my name or address, or anything like that, I would take a legal action against them.

[20:06]

It is interesting that three hours after that e-mail was sent, “A Thousand Flowers” doxed me by publishing the article. So I suspect that there was some communication between – and I don’t, can’t prove that. It’s just this supposition. I think that the National had communicated with “A Thousand Flowers” saying:

“He’s threatened legal action against us, so we won’t publish it, so you go ahead and break the story, and that will circumvent normal journalistic rules and laws”.

I think that’s maybe what happened, but I don’t know, and I’ll never be able to prove it.

So they published that at 7.30 p.m., roundabout. And one thing they did that did amuse me actually, about that article on “A Thousand Flowers”. It said:

“After an extensive investigation we can reveal who Millennial Woes is”.

And I have to say, you know, I don’t know these people personally, obviously, I’ve never met them, or anything, but I suspect that this is all self-aggrandisement. I don’t think that they had launched any “extensive investigation”. I doubt that they’d done anything at all. I think what happened was that simply, someone who knows me in real life – and I also I think I know who it was as well – but I think someone who knows me in real life sold me out. I think they probably contacted the National, who then gave the information to “A Thousand Flowers”.

So, I think that’s what happened. I don’t think there was any extensive investigation by these these numpties at “A Thousand Flowers”. So, that’s what I think happened. I think someone contacted the National to sell me out, the National came to my house, but they were then ordered by me not to reveal the information, so they passed it on to “A Thousand Flowers”, who published the information and then passed on to the Daily Record. Which I think also happened in November. I think it was “A Thousand Flowers” first, and then immediately the next day the Daily Record.

So, I think there’s communication between them as well, especially, because the guy who runs “A Thousand Flowers” has previously written articles for The Daily Record. So, there we go. I just need to emphasize this, I can’t prove it! I don’t know for sure! It’s just what I suspect. I think there was collusion going on between the official press and anti-fa.

OK. So that was the Saturday. I was doxed on that Saturday at 7.30. And then on the Sunday at about two p.m. – oh, well, before that my mother phoned to say that people had been round at her house. And they’d asked about me and she just closed the door in their face, which was rather amusing. But then I knew that they were bound to be coming round to my dad’s house. And, of course, just a few minutes later they did. And, you know, what it was? Someone knocking at the front door; but not in a normal way. Not in a warm way. It was three ominous thumps on the door like this: [knocks on table three times] . Like that. And I didn’t know who they were. I heard voices, and then they began talking to my neighbours, and it sounded like it was multiple men, that I didn’t know – it was difficult to tell. I looked outside and I saw the car.

And there was a fat old guy in there looking at his phone and – he never seemed to put his phone down – and I looked out about ten minutes later and he was still there, and his colleague was still talking to my neighbours. It was really weird, and eventually they drove away. But then they came back, and then at that point I called the police, because I thought this is scary. Frankly, this is intimidating! And I’ll admit I was intimidated. Well done!

So, I called the police. Because I didn’t know if these were the same people who’d come the two times before – I didn’t know who they were. So, the police arrived and I had, oddly enough, I had spoken to both of them. It was two policemen, and I knew them both, because they had been at my house before, but we’ll get to that later.

[25:01]

They ended up going outside and speaking to the two – oh yeah, because that was it, the men had gone away by the time the police arrived, the men had gone away, again.

So then the police came in and spoke to me, but then the men came back for a third time and they were outside. One of the policemen went out and spoke to them, then both of the police went and spoke to them, and they’re talking to them for ages. It was like forty minutes or something. They ID’d the two men, it turned out that they were Daily Record journalists, and they told the police that there was going to be an article about me published the very next day.

So, there was the fat old guy. I don’t know who he was. Maybe it was a photographer. Maybe he was hoping to get some photos of me. I don’t know. And then there was a younger guy. He was very tall. And I think he was Alan McEwen, but I don’t know, it was difficult to see. And that was really it. The men left after quite a long time. They’d spoken to several of my neighbours, and they had tried to frighten me. And it succeeded, honestly – I’ll be honest – and I think they had wanted to, well, do what journalists do. Do what unscrupulous, ruthless journalists have always done, which is to get someone on their doorstep, ask them a bunch of awkward questions, take photos of them looking scared etcetera.

So, they didn’t get what they wanted, but they did at least get to manipulate my neighbours and inconvenience two police officers. And then they got a few quotes for their story, and then eventually they left.

And then, later that night, I left my house. I left that room. I was packing up the computer, I was packing up everything — frantically — and I was spirited away from that room where I created Millennial Woes!

All right, in the next segment, I will talk about the articles that were published the next day and in the subsequent days.

Part Three: The Newspaper Articles

I could dissect the various articles that were written, but I don’t think there’s much point. They are simply disingenuous, hateful hate pieces, and they’re misleading, they’re manipulative; they’re awful! You know, I was never really – I had heard the phrase the gutter press – but I didn’t really know the reality of it until now. And, well, it’s sickening! Just sickening! The way they have portrayed me; the way they’ve lied about me, and picked out certain things, exaggerated them, given them undue emphasis, lied by omission, twisted certain things; it’s just awful!

And now – but I won’t go through dissecting them, but I will just pick up on certain things that I think especially relevant.

So, the next day, Monday – this is the ninth of January 2017 – the piece was published. And this was written by the same journalist who wrote the previous Daily Record piece in November, Allen McKeown. And it was titled “Meet the Vile Vlogger” – the word “vile” again, they are very fond of that – “Meet the vile vlogger, his racist rants have made him a global internet sensation!”. Now, the phrase, “a global internet sensation” is, you know, – I’d like, you know, in a way: I don’t seek fame, but it would be kind of nice to be “a global internet sensation”: It would feed my ego – but the truth is that’s ludicrous exaggeration. My channel had fewer than twenty thousand subscribers at this time, when this was published. And that is… I’m not a global internet sensation and I’m a – I’m still a very long way from being that, so they’re sort of over egging my impact; my reach and my fame, or my infamy. So it’s absurd!

[30:21] 

But anyway, it’s worth pointing out that this was not only, … It had a lot more prominence than the previous Daily Record article in November. This was a front page article! I was, … My face was plastered over the front page of The Daily Record.

Ironically enough, next an article about a British woman who was accused of adultery by her violent Muslim husband in Bahrain and had successfully got a quickie divorce from him. I mean, for God’s sake! Anyway, … Let’s just ignore that.

So, the subtitle of this article was:

“The 34 year old extremist YouTube star is a jobless ex-student who films his hate filled videos from a bedroom at his dad’s!”

Now, a few things. “Extremist!” Who’s the extremist? You know, I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. All I want is a safe society for my people, for my ethnic group. That’s just what everyone else in the whole fucking world wants, and had, up until very recently! You know, I mean, we demonized the phrase, “Britain for the British!” Why? What’s so bad about that? And what so extreme about that? It’s the way we evolved, it’s the way we are! Every other ethnic group wants this and most of them have it.

So what’s wrong with us wanting it? What’s wrong, what’s so extreme about me wanting that? That’s all I want.

Now, I think the extremists are the ones, I think the situation is extreme! You know, this drastic mixing of global populations that’s going on just now. I think that’s a very extreme phenomenon! And I think the extremists are the ones who are perfectly happy with this radical change that’s going on. I think they’re the extremists. I think I’m just, … All I want is what our grandparents had and took for granted! Is that really extreme?

I don’t understand how that’s extreme!

I don’t want a totalitarian dictatorship. I don’t want goose stepping up and down the streets. And I don’t want any of these things that we associate with extremists. I don’t want violence, I don’t want bombs, I don’t want terrorism.

Am I an extremist?

I don’t understand.

That’s my first objection to this ludicrous subtitle. The second one is the word “jobless” here. It describes me as a jobless, well the editor, whoever it was who came up with this. Describes me as a “jobless ex-student”. So, let’s deal with that, “jobless”. I’m not jobless! And the Millennial Woes project is my job. It’s my full time job! It’s what I do all the time. And if my channel gets taken down, by the way, Millennial Woes will still be my job. I’ll simply migrate onto other platforms, like many people have done before me.

This is my life and it’s my job. And I am certainly not jobless. But that’s just completely dishonest to describe me in that way.

And then the other one, “ex-student”. [laughing heartily] I mean, that’s one of these phrases that doesn’t actually mean much at all, if anything. But it’s just designed to sound bad! And the fact of the matter is, anyone who was once a student is an “ex” student. Now I’m used to be a student, then I graduated. Now I’m an ex-student. Though, I don’t think there’s anything to hate there. I don’t think there’s anything laughable about that! So, what are they playing at? This manipulative nonsense!

And then finally, “his hate filled videos”.

What the hell! [laughing] You know, maybe I sound hateful in this video, because I’m talking about people who have personally attacked me, but I don’t think I’m genuinely, … In fact, I’m sure I’m not hateful. I think that’s just a lie!

It’s so manipulative, it’s so, … It’s such a tainted version of, … A tainted representation of my channel and my work to say that it’s hateful. It’s dishonest, just dishonest! I think it’s bullshit to say that I’m hateful and to say that my work is somehow motivated by hate, or driven by hate.

[35:09]

No, I don’t accept that at all. It certainly goes on, Robertson, that is me Colin Robertson, admits being reported to police over his videos. Now again, quite frankly, this is just a lie! They are just lying! I do not admit to being reported to police. It wouldn’t surprise me if I’ve been reported to police, because as I said, because of the very sensitive climate that we live in now. But, I have no idea whether I’ve ever been reported to the police. It seems likely to me, but I don’t know whether it’s happened. And therefore why would I admit to it having happened?

I’ve never admitted to it! I don’t know that it’s happened. So they’re saying that I’ve admitted to being reported to the police. No! No!

And so, that’s what I wanted to talk about, the article. And I want to also, … Oh yeah, I said that neighbors said they’d seen police officers call at his home late last year. It’s another quote:

“Neighbor said they’d seen police officers call at his home, late last year.”

Now, I think it’s definitely worth going into this, because I think it is very significant. It wasn’t late last year, it was at the end of June. It was on the day of the Brexit referendum funnily enough. I had a hangout in the morning and then had a hangout at night and in between that and then after the second hangout as well, I was dealing with something. I was dealing with something very serious. Which required the attendance of the police at my house. So I’m going to tell you what it was. Just to show you how malicious and disgusting it is that they mentioned this.

The truth is, that the police have indeed known who I am, since at least at the end of June and the Brexit referendum day at the latest. And maybe before then, but definitely since then. And I know this, because I doxed myself to the police on that day, June last year. And I did this in order to save a man’s life! How about that?

Somebody contacted me through the channel. He was very depressed. I tried to counsel him, that was a few weeks before. Then he contacted me on that day, telling me that he was going to kill himself. I tried to talk him out of it. He was determined he was going to kill himself.

So I contacted the police. They came to my house and interviewed me. They asked me how I got in touch, or how this guy had got in touch with me. I told them. I told them about the channel. They asked what it was called. I told them what it was called. So they knew from that point on, Colin Robertson, Millennial Woes at that address. And I then stayed up all night. Oh well, I did the second hangout about Brexit. And then the police arrived again at my house and we stayed up all night with police sitting next to me in the living room. And we were emailing this guy, trying to talk him out of it. And in the process of this they were able to locate him and save his life. Save him in time. He did actually attempt suicide. But, because of my help — I’m not bragging here, it’s just the facts of the matter — because of my help they were able to get him in time to save his life. And that is why there were police and my house.

So, you could say that there were police at my house, because of my channel, back then. But the truth is without my channel that man would now be dead!

So, I can legitimately say that I have saved lives with my channel and I wonder what Alan McEwen can say that he has achieved, with his work?

So! It really is fucking infuriating! And that’s why there were police outside my house. Not, because I’ve done something bad! It was because I was trying to save someone’s life!

[40:00]

As I say, ever since that day, they’ve known who I am, where I lived. So if they’d wanted to contact me they could have at any time and they haven’t. And also those two police who came and interviewed me about the man, they were the two police who came, … If go when the Daily Record journalists were outside my house. That’s how I knew them.

Anyway, last Monday, last week, Monday the ninth. That was the day I left Britain so as to avoid any further encounters with shitty, immoral journalists! And frankly also, because I felt there was a lynch mob coming after me! And that certainly seemed to be what the newspapers were trying to promote, trying to encourage. I no longer felt safe in Linlithgow. I no longer felt safe in Edinburgh, and since I’m not a physical guy, I thought it was best not to risk it. I’m not going to become a martyr, not pointlessly, not just like that.

And then once I reached my destination, I made a video, “Fugitive Woes” explaining the situation and asking for donations. And also saying that it might be the last video I uploaded to the channel. And I thought it was likely that the channel may get taken down.

And I also thought it was likely that I would be a reported for hate speech! Just all these SJW’s, all these antifas. And so I thought, I’m probably going to be, I might well be in court, sometime soon And so, if so, I’m going to need money. And before that I’m going to need money to move around, because if antifa is going to pursue me, then — and people will put me up, but only for so long — so I’m going to have to move between different places. I needed money and that’s why I asked for donations. That’s why I “begged” for donations, in the words of the Daily Record!

Now that was two days later. The next day, the tenth, the Daily Record put out their second article. This time anonymously. And can I just point out, the disgusting, laughable hypocrisy of boasting about “unmasking” someone and not even having the balls to use your own name! Because he done it before, the previous article was done by Alan McEwen, this one was anonymous Record reporter. Maybe it was McEwen who wrote it, maybe not. We’ll never know. He was anonymous. And this one of was titled “Vile vlogger” remember “vile”, I think this is the third time, the third time they described me as “vile”!

“Vile vlogger, Colin Robertson could face police probe over racists rants!”

And then:

“We unmasked Collin Robertson yesterday!” [laughing]

“… And Hope Not Hate say that he should face a police investigation.”

Now, this is a bit weird, honestly. I think that they were doing some sort of damage control with this article. I think they realized that they had gone too far with the previous article and therefore they were probably going to need to make me look like even more of a villain. So they, I think, they were trying to encourage people to report it to the police. And they were trying to encourage the police to investigate me. So they were then wouldn’t have to answer for vilifying me. I think that’s what the Daily Record was doing here.

As for Hope Not Hate, who they had apparently consulted about my “villainy” — Hope Not Hate is a joke organization, but we’ll get to them in a few minutes. And then on the next day, and by this time they’d seen my video “Fugitive Woes”, this is on the eleventh of January. Again, an anonymously written article in the Daily Record.

“Vile”, yet again, the fourth time:

“Vile YouTube racist flees to US and puts out the begging bowl after the Record exposes him!”

What fucking heroes you are, Daily Record! What public servants!

[45:00]

And then the subtitle:

“Hate filled vlogger Colin Robertson says he may have posted his last vile rant, …” the fifth time!

And it says:

“... He may have posed as his last vile rant online as he begs supporters for donations to keep him going!”

So, just in that sentence alone at least these two, the words “vile, racist, begging, hate filled, vile” and “begs”. Now, I know that I’m ranting a bit in this video for, I think, understandable reasons, but just thinking about these words here, “vile, racist, begging, hate filled, vile, begs” do you think they’re being fair to me?

Do you think our press are being fair, even handed, open minded?

I mean, I’m angry! Right now, I’m fucking angry at these people! If I sound hate filled, [laughing] I think you can understand why. And if I’m ranting, I think you can understand why.

It’s a campaign of vilification. And I don’t want to sound like I’m feeling sorry for myself. Honestly, this hasn’t been the most fucking pleasant experience!

And I’m sure they’ll probably write another article, once they see this video, they’ll probably, write another article, saying, you know, vile, whatever, does something, moans about us doing our duty as a public, … For, fuck off! Just, just fuck off! This sickens me, sickens me! The tactics, that attitude! The lack of scruples.

Anyway, that’s pretty much all I’m going to say about the Daily Record, I think. Yeah, I think so.

So we’ll move on to some other things.

Oh yeah, there were articles in various other papers. They’ve been spawned by this Daily Record campaign. If I remember correctly, these other peoples were the Daily Mail, the Daily Mirror, The Sun and the Scottish Sunday Herald.

Now I won’t talk about the others, but the Scottish Sunday Herald article is interesting, because, [laughing] well firstly, because it uses a photo taken by The National’s photographer back on the Thursday. The first, the fifth, when he had been, .. I thought, it looks like, … I thought the photographer had been hiding in the car with the window rolled down. But that was off to the left. This photo looks like it was taken right in front of the door. So, I don’t know how that happened maybe he was hiding in the opposite driveway, the opposite side of the road. I don’t know! But it’s a weird, it’s a strange. And also I have to say that the photo off me is so dreadfully bad! It’s a terrible, terrible photo! [laughing] This is kind of thing you just gotta laugh about, you know. It’s, you see this photo of me and I look, … They’ve made me look as bad as possible! I’m sure they’re probably took dozens of photos in those few seconds, that I’ve had the door open. But they’ve chosen the one where I look awful.

It’s amazing that there are photographers, and this is part of the malice of the press, there are photographers whose job it is, to make their subjects look as bad as possible. In this case there’s no way to sugarcoat it. I look like a whale! Coming up for air out of the sea! And it’s terrible. But I don’t know, I mean, I think they must have caught me in middle-sentence, or something. I don’t know. My mouths wide open. I look terrible!

Anyway. It’s one of those things. It does bother one! You know, it’s like, “God, could you have made me look any worse?” And they’re obviously trying to make me, make the public think, “God! What a fat loser!” and “How stupid he looks, how thick he looks!” and so on. Whatever!

So, that was one thing. And the other thing that was interesting about the Herald article is that it had this quote from some guy from Hope Not Hate. And in that it was Joe Mulhall from Hope Not Hate and here’s the quotation.

“If the American stuff hadn’t happened, he would just be an online irrelevance, his YouTube views aren’t massive, but the American stuff makes him of interest,” “It pulls him into the higher leagues of this cesspool of people all pumping this stuff out online.”

[50:01]

And that’s Joe Mulhall. I have to say, if I am just an online irrelevance, then why was your organization trying to hunt me down, trying to get people to sell me out, trying to get my details as far back as eighteen months ago in July, 2015. It’s a bit weird isn’t it? For your organization to do that to someone who’s just an online irrelevance. Of course, the same questions apply as applied with the Daily Record. Why do you want my details? Why do you want my name? Why do you want my age? Why do you all my address? What has that got to do with any of my ideas? What has it got to do with my work? I don’t think it’s got anything to do with my work, or my ideas! I think you’re just trying to intimidate people!

I think that’s why you asked them for my, … Why you asked people to sell me out, eighteen months ago, Hope not Hate. First, I invited you to a debate on the channel where we could talk about our ideas and our disagreements, but you’ve never got in touch, because you don’t do that kind of thing. That would be too reasonable, that would be too human. You’re in the business of intimidation and silencing.

Fucking pieces of shit!

But, to be fair to Joe Mulhall, maybe he doesn’t know about this, that his organization which wanted to hunt me down eighteen months ago.

So, let’s assume that he’s speaking honestly and he sees me as just an online irrelevance. Until I got involved with NPI. Well in that case, I have to say I think he’s rather behind the times. Now, to say that someone is just an online irrelevance, that’s really behind the times when it comes to cultural movements. The fact is they are online now. Everything important happens online nowadays. Apart, obviously, from real life instance when someone gets shot, or whatever. You know, cultural movements happen online.

And I think this is very interesting, because it shows that these people that Hope not Hate and similar organizations are still dinosaurs! I mean, they still think it’s the nineties. And they can vilify nationalists, when they think that Nationalists are just bugs, skinheads marching down a street causing trouble. And, of course, even then they were organizations like Hope not Hate were demonizing them out of hand. But still, I know that those guys were not angels. But the point is that Hope not Hate and similar organizations have not moved forward. They think and they’re desperate to paint people like me, as people like that. Because, if they didn’t do that then they would have to engage with me on an intellectual level. They would have to engage my ideas. And they’ll never do that! Because whenever they do try that, they lose.

So they have to say things like this, what was the phrase, “this cesspool of people pumping this stuff out”.

Whatever! And I just think it’s rather interesting and I think that Hope not Hate are a bunch of dinosaurs and as I get to in the next segment, I think that the mainstream media, the legacy media, the Daily Record and so on, I think they’re just a bunch of dinosaurs as well.

Anyway, we’ll get to that in a wee minute.

Part Four: Thoughts on the Legacy Media

OK, in this segment I’m going to summarize the newspaper coverage. Hopefully get this over with.

All right, so some questions for the media. Of course they’ll never answer them, but still, let’s just put them out as rhetorical questions.

What is the purpose of going to my house? What is the point of that? Do you really think you’re going to get an enlightening calm interview by showing up out of the blue to someone to whom you are clearly vehemently opposed and who you are at trying to set up. And trying to get his neighbors, also poised against him? Do you think you’re going to get some choice “quotes”? Do you think you’re going to get a picture of the real man, the real person by just showing up at the house, out of the blue? Doesn’t seem very likely. I think if you don’t expect to get a good interview from me, or from similar people by showing up at our houses.

I think you do that specifically and solely to intimidate to make them feel unsafe in their own homes. I think that’s why you do it. And that’s what you were hoping to do. I think you’re also going to get some horrible photos of me as well, looking shocked that I’ve been discovered!

[55:23]

So another question for you, because you’re not going to answer them so I’ll move on to the next. What is the purpose of printing my name and address in public? Was the point? It’s my ideas that matter, not me. I am not important at all! And as for my address, what on earth does that have to do with my work, or of my ideas, or anything that I do? Why do people, why do the public need to know where I live? Are you crazy? I mean, that, all you did was, … Let’s just cut to the chase Daily Record and need all these other papers.

The only reason you did that was to endanger me! That’s what I think. And that’s what a lot of people think. I think is what a lot of the public who are not connected to me in any way also think about this. About what you’ve done.

And then, finally another question What is the purpose of talking to my neighbors? And by the way, apparently he, I don’t know whether I said this earlier, but I’m going to include it again. He said to my neighbor, one of them, because I talked to him afterwards. This neighbor, apparently the journalist said to him:

“So, how does it feel to be neighbors with our racist and anti-semite?”

Again, are you expecting, or what are you expecting? And he asked some other questions like that. Are you expecting truth, calm reasoned discussion? I don’t think you are.

I also think you don’t care about how it affects me, or my family, when you say something like that to my neighbors.

And then, as for the articles themselves, it’s difficult to avoid noticing that they don’t contain a single argument against my ideas, or my views, or my opinions. Not a single argument! And there’s just demonization of my ideas, my opinions, and so on. And character assassination of me! Often quite pointed and ruthless, merciless, below the belt! And I shouldn’t be surprised. I’m not really surprised, but I just want to point it out. That they don’t make any attempt to refute my ideas about the world, about people, or anything. Just demonize those ideas and demonize me.

Another point that has to be made about, especially about the tabloids, especially about the Daily Record articles, is the puerile prose! Honestly, it would be marked down if it were an essay at school. It’s appalling! It’s very, very bad writing! Not grammatically, it’s grammatically correct, but the attitude! I mean, if I’d written an essay like that at school I would have been marked down, very much, because, apart from anything else, it shows no lack of interest [sic] whatsoever in the subject, or his ideas, or his reasons for holding them. It’s just a rant! I mean, if you want to see a rant, read one of these articles about me in the Daily Record. They constantly insist that I constantly rant.

If you want to see “hate”, read one of those articles about me. You’ll see hate. They’re appalling, it’s terrible journalism!

It’s also worth pointing out that they’re attacking someone for his ideas, not his deeds. This is something in itself. A person’s moral value being judged not by what he does, but by what he believes. That is an interesting intellectual discussion to be had about that.

I think that, perhaps, someone’s beliefs are a reflection of their core nature, to some extent. But, you can’t afford to judge them in that way, because it’s just, … I mean, everyone has all sorts of beliefs that they may not act upon, or rather they may not want the world to know, because they’re not sure. And they’re not sure about how it fits into a bigger system and so on. So to judge someone by their ideas is very slippery ground, indeed. And that’s why we insist on judging them by their actions. That’s just a prerequisite of living in a sane society.

[60:04]

And then, another point I wanted to make about everything that’s happened, is old media tactics, legacy media tactics. And I use that phrase quite gleefully, the legacy media, because I think these dinosaurs are doomed. We’ll get to that in a minute. Let’s just talk about these tactics.

You have to know the person’s name. You have to publicize their name! You have to publicize their address! And you have to show up at their door, out of the blue, even though this does not in any way aid the discourse! Which is what you’re supposed to be doing. I mean, that’s what I do, public discourse, journalism. That’s public discourse. But these tactics of basically intimidation. They don’t aid that in any way. And I think nowadays we know that, it’s just, it’s so crass and obvious.

I don’t think that the alternative media will go in for that kind of thing, so much. I think it’s very often an other age, a previous age. And everyone can see the cruelty of them. The crassness of then.

And then as for trying to set my neighbors against me. Get me ostracized in my community and ruin my life. And let’s not beat about the bush, that is what they tried to do. The Daily Record has tried to ruin my life! Let’s not split hairs about that. That’s what they’ve tried to do.

And them failed, of course! But that is what they’ve tried to do, nothing short of that. So trying to set my neighbors against me! God! I don’t know what to say! There’s no, … It’s just so obviously, self evidently wrong and immoral. So, yeah! OK.

And then the issue of free speech. They shut down the comment thread under these articles, because they’re getting such bad feedback from the public. Thye shut down the comments threads after trying to shut down me. [laughing] It’s ludicrous! And then, the other thing, witch hunt slash lynch mob. That’s what they were doing! They were engaging in a witch hunt. And it might not be over yet? You know, I mean, I talk in the past tense but they might still continue it. I don’t know. But if they do, I want this video, I want this video to survive on. This video to be evidence of what they’ve done from my point of view. I want my side of the story to be out there. This is why it is essential to do this video. Because these people are expert at manipulation and distortion. And they have tried to instigate a witch hunt and a lynch mob. I think that’s what they were trying to encourage.

I don’t know how much of the public would fall for such a thing. Indeed, I think increasing numbers of the public share my ideas. I really do think that. And so, I don’t know if it would ever happen. Certainly there are some sections of the public who probably would want to lynch me. [laughing] It seems ludicrous, because I know that I haven’t harmed anyone and I haven’t wished anyone harm. But certainly when you read those articles about me you probably, you could be forgiven for thinking that I’m just a piece of shit!

So again, is this responsible journalism? I hardly think so. But! One thing that I must say, for moral reasons and for more pragmatic reasons, I must say that I don’t want these journalists to be harassed. I think these people should be judged by the public and the through the usual channels. Through the proper channel. And I think they’ll be judged harshly.

So, a few other points, about the mainstream media, the legacy media. The circulation of the National newspaper is fifteen thousand, which is minuscule for a paper.

And it’s worth saying that I’ve got more than that. When this broke, I had twenty thousand, or just under. I’ve actually got more subscribers than the National has readers. It’s kind of amazing! The Scottish Sunday Herald, twenty five thousand. And for a national newspaper that is tiny and if you look at the graph, the trend, of all these newspapers, it’s remarkable how they’re just losing readers, hand over over fist.

[64:55]

So that’s, that. Then there’s the Daily Record, one hundred seventy six thousand. Daily Mail, one point five million. Daily Mirror, one point nine million. And The Sun, four and a half million. And all of these, I mean, some of these are big numbers still, but they’re nothing compared to what they were ten years ago. And I think this is very interesting, because some we’ve seen in recent months, several attempts by established media outlets to demonize alternative media outlets. “Fake news”, that phenomenon that they’ve just invented out of thin air.

Then something like this, I mean, you know, I have enough subscribers to rival the National and the Scottish Sunday Herald. I think, I honestly think they’re a bit freaked out. And I think that they can see their doom coming. You know, the Daily Record, I think within five years they might be bankrupt. I don’t know, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all.

I think they can feel it. And so, they’re freaked out and they’re vengeful. And that might explain some of their behavior. But it’s not surprising that people are abandoning them, because of things like this! Things like what’s happened to me! Their treatment of me has been dishonest and malicious and I think that a lot of the readers can tell that. You know, you’ve only got to come and see my channel. It’s blatantly obvious that I’m not the man they’ve described. And I think people are sick of this stuff, you know, the contempt that these newspapers have for their readers.

I think there’s an inevitability to all this, which is kind of comforting.

One final thing about this. I want to emphasize I will not do any interviews with any of these newspapers, or any media outlets, any established mainstream media outlets.

I don’t trust them! I think they are utterly uninterested in being honest! And I think, well as I say, I think they’re malicious. I think they have no scruples. There are other words I could use to describe them, but I will hold back.

The only newspaper I would consider cooperating with would be the local paper in the Linlithgow, because that’s more personal. I don’t like the people from Linlithgow being manipulated, being lied to. Actually, I don’t think it’s been successful, because it’s obvious that the whole the whole town knows by now. And people have contacted and me who haven’t spoken to me years and years, have contacted me. Just offer their support and say that they know the papers are lying about me. You know, people see through this shit! But nonetheless, I would like to set the record straight, so to speak, by speaking to the local Linlithgow paper. That’s the only one I’d consider, and even then I would want a guarantee that they’re going to, well, not misrepresent me, or to do so to a minimal extent.

As for the rest of the newspapers, fuck them! Fuck them all! And their conduct has utterly disgusted me! And I think many other people too. If ever, there are an example of why the legacy media should die a quick death, I think the way they’ve treated me probably qualifies.

Part Five: Thoughts on the Antifa

OK. Now I’m going to talk about the anti-fa [anti-facist] activists who are involved this. The names of these activists, these Marxists, and they are proper Marxists, have been widely disseminated.

I wasn’t responsible for the discovery of their names and I wasn’t responsible for the disseminating of their names, either. Since I’m a nice guy, I’m not even going to name them here, even though the information is widely available. I’m not going to do it. Because I’m above you people! I don’t do the kind of things that you do! And I know you’re watching. I know you’re watching.

So, I’m certainly not going to publish their addresses, or other photographs, or photos of the homes either.

Imagine that? However I will list their first names. Just for the sake of it.

Liam. Lovely Liam. Sarah. Lindsay. Jonathan. Ashley. And fanboy Jammie.

[70:10]

Now, I want to say that the full names, addresses and phone numbers of these people were all found by members of the Alt-Right, within five hours of the article being published on A Thousand Flowers.

That really didn’t take very long. And there was no extensive investigation. There was no months of waiting and searching and hunting. It was all done, it was all managed in a few hours. They knew who you are. And it was rather amusing, a few days later when the Daily Record out, I had a look on Twitter and these numpties, these anti-fa Marxists, were puffing themselves up for doxing me. It was so strange to watch them being all triumphant. And they had no idea that they had already been identified days earlier. They were basking in the glow of self-satisfaction for endangering someone that they disagreed with.

God, it’s sickening! It’s sickening!

Now, the ringleader, for what it’s worth, Liam seems to be a middle class ne’er do well who has been in scraps with the police. And yes, there he is. To do with that and I won’t go into it now, but he doesn’t seem to be a very well adjusted young man. And then the rest of them look like a fairly typical assortment of troubled young leftists who display the three prime traits of, well what I would call that the prime traits of leftists.

Smugness, lack of self reflection and self knowledge, and irrational, almost unbridled hatred of their opponents, or people they see as their opponent. Smugness, lack of self reflection and self knowledge, and irrational hatred of their opponent. It’s so typical, down the ages. And here they are, another iteration of blind leftists.

One of them said that doxing a fascist — by which he was referring to me — isn’t the same as doxing saying an ordinary person. And this is an exercise in dehumanizing their opponents so that they can abuse him and put them in danger.

I’m sure there’s a psychological term for it. “Transference”, or something. I don’t know. It’s very interesting to witness. No, he’s not an ordinary person. Doing this to him is not the same as doing it to an ordinary person. We can endanger him without feeling bad.

And then the ringleader, Liam, … His father congratulated him on, I think it was on Twitter, on publishing my details! Imagine that? I think it’s bizarre and sickening that a father would congratulate his son on endangering another man.

“Well done son! You endangered that guy. You put his life at risk. Well done! I’m proud of you!”

What kind of family is that?

Ideological leftists, I think is the answer. But good God!

Well, also incidentally, there was apparently a prank phone call made to that father. And I want on record, so to speak, that I had nothing to do with this. I put the message out once I heard, around that people had found their names and addresses. I didn’t want trouble. And I put the message out:

“Don’t harass these people. We should be better than them.”

But, unfortunately, not everyone heeded that call and somebody phoned his father. It’s unfortunate and regrettable. To be honest I don’t really want to beat on these anti-fa losers very much, because it seems to me that they are just naive, internally troubled. And, of course, they would laugh about that Scoff at that, the very idea that they’ve got any psychological frailties, but I’m pretty damn sure they have. I think though, troubled, naive young idealists, who probably have heads full of bright ideas and not a shred of realism and not a shred of self reflection.

[75:03]

I also think they have probably been used as pawns, useful idiots, by other people who are more powerful. But, I don’t want to get too paranoid about that. Could be that this is just all their game. I don’t know.

Anyway, I think the salient point is that anti-fa, including these Marxists, have a limited window in which to operate. Much like the legacy media have a limited time frame.

Anti-fa, ten years from now, I think will be despised by the public in general. I’m pretty damn confident about that. And I think that probably they are as well. I think they probably sense this as well.

Unsavory people indeed! And honestly, I think they are tragic people! And they are lost, lost young people!

How much compassion should I show them? They’ve endangered me.

It’s funny, I can’t help feeling sorry for them. I can’t help, .. I actually feel some concern for these people, can you believe that? I actually do.

I think I’ll end this segment now, before I get too nice, because these people are after all fucking villains! I mean, what they’ve done is shitty! Yeah. I’ll leave it there.

Part Six: Closing Thoughts

OK. And some closing thoughts.

At the end of this Sunday’s, what is it, the Scottish Sunday Herald article, read thus:

“Last year was a good one for the Alt-Right. The election of Trump has bolstered the movement thinning the lines between the broad alternative American right and the White nationalist extremism of the Alt-Right. This year hasn’t been a good one for Collin Robertson.”

There’s this note of rather sickening triumphalism;

“Last year was a good one for the Alt-Right. This year hasn’t been a good one for Collin Robertson.”

And they wonder why I refused their interview back in November.

But I have to say, on the contrary, my channel has grown by twenty percent since this whole thing started. And what’s more, the exposure has achieved what ten years of torment couldn’t achieve. It has finally got me out of the house!

I’ve finally flown the nest! And well, as for my name being known, so what? I never wanted a normal life anyway. It’s not going to be possible, now. But I don’t care! I never wanted one. So, I haven’t really lost anything there. And then what’s in a name? I mean, why did they want my name in the first place? What do you think you’ve won?

I would say to the mainstream media and these anti-fa types as well, who are involved in it.

Anyone, and this is really crucial, anyone can look at my work, whether it’s on YouTube, or anywhere else. Anyone can look at my work and see that I’m not the villain you’ve tried to paint me as.

And then, they will see how dishonest you are! And for what it’s worth, since this all started, four thousand people HAVE looked at my work and they have liked what they’ve seen! And have realized that you are disgracefully dishonest! So, so far, although it has been stressful, 2017 has actually been a very good year for me. I’ve got four thousand new subscribers [laughing] and I’m away from home.

I no longer live my dad! So you can’t even use that charge against me anymore.

So we’ll see what the rest of 2017 has and store. And I’m not complacent about this. It might well be a stressful year. But, certainly I think it’s rather too early for the mainstream media to be smug about this.

Now, one final thing. In all of this they have tried to paint me as a villain, hater, ranter, whatever else, neo-Nazi, racist and all this. But also, they’ve tried to paint me as some kind of political activist.

[80:03]

Now, I started this channel three years ago. Actually, funnily enough something I meant to mention is that. That guy turned up at my door on the fifth of January. That was the anniversary ersary of the first video being uploaded to the channel. Rather ironic! Anyway, I started this channel three years ago thinking that it would come to nothing. I thought I’d make fifteen, or twenty videos. No one would watch them, and I would just lose interest and give up and find something else to do.

I never intended it to be political activism. And even as it grew, I didn’t intend it to be political activism. And I don’t see myself as a political activist. The world of politics does not appeal to me. I think it’s a cesspit! And I don’t think I’d be any good in that world.

So I don’t see myself as a political activist. If anything, and this sounds a bit pretentious, I’m going to say it. I see myself as a psychological activist, or even a spiritual activist. I see myself working at that level. I’m trying to help people as individuals and as a group, my group.

So, that’s what I’m trying to do. I’m trying to heal people. To help them overcome the nihilism and the confusion of the age that we live in.

In my work I try to understand the world. I try to understand people, and to help them, enlighten them, inspire them, work through their problems, counsel them and bring them together with other people. In the course of doing so I have enabled relationships to begin and children to be conceived [there’s a joke somewhere there — KATANA] . And occasionally I have even saved lives.

So, I’m not ashamed.

I’m not ashamed of what I’ve done! And I’m absolutely going to continue!

So, I hope you have enjoyed your campaign. It has backfired! It has failed!

It has benefited me! And it has only encouraged me to keep going.

Thank you for watching.

[83:18]

END

[Here’s the transcript of a short YouTube video by Colin Liddell from Alternative Right website on the banning of  the “neo-nazi” group  National Action in Britain. He also discusses The Daily Stormer   — KATANA.]

Discussing Stormerism in a Storm

Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJXthTFF-iA

See also his blog post:

http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2016/12/video-discussing-stormerism-in-storm.html

By Colin Liddell

Published on Dec 15, 2016

YouTube Description

While cycling along a Tokyo dyke in a storm — as you do — Colin Liddell, the Chief Editor of Alternative Right, discusses a recent debate about Stormerism (the tendency of some Alt-Righters to LARP as full-blown Hollywood Nazis). This is then linked to the recent banning by the British government of National Action, a group that employs Stormerist tactics. He also draws attention to the interesting fact that where Neo-Nazied Stormerist excesses are directly banned by the state, nationalist movements tend to do rather well, and where they aren’t they tend to do badly.

Greg Johnson’s “Punching Right” (with butthurt comments by (((Andrew Anglin))) ):

http://www.counter-currents.com/2016ed…

Article by Daniel Barge on the banning of National Action:

http://alternative-right.blogspot.com…

______________________

TRANSCRIPT

[09:24 mins]

[Note: For “stylistic” reasons Liddell chose to record this while riding a bike along a dyke on a stormy day, making it hard to hear some parts. Text has now been updated with the missing parts.]

Colin Liddell: Hello! Friends, followers and fellow fake fascists of the Alternative Right. This is Colin Liddell, the chief editor of Alternative Right.

And, here I am cycling along Tokyo’s flood defenses, on my way to one of my “normie” jobs. And as you can see the weather is a bit inclement today. So, I don’t think I want to talk for too long. But, you know, I’ve been a bit busy to make a video for a couple of weeks, so, and this is the first one for at least two or three weeks, I think. And it’s been a very kind of eventful sort of three weeks, as it always is in the Alternative Right. Never a dull moment.

There’s been a bit of a spat with The Daily Stormer and Andrew Anglin. And I think, well, you know, Greg Johnson wrote an article at Counter Currents called “Punching Right“, and I think anybody who was anybody in the ’punching right’ debate kind of pitched in, so that was kind of interesting, I think. I expressed my opinion there. I said, … I think one of my most interesting points was that the Daily Stormer lures people into a state of inauthenticity, having a fake position in private, having a different position in public life — whichever one is fake, whichever one is genuine who knows. Suspicions abound.

Anyway, it’s not a healthy way to be, to sort of believe something, or to be lured into believing in something that you can’t actually talk to normal people about! That is obviously a ghettoizing mechanism to prevent White nationalism, which is a natural ideology of most people, because it suits their interests. That’s obviously a ghettoizing device to stop White nationalism spreading. And it’s a kind of anti, … The left would see it as an anti-contagion device — and that’s a disease metaphor. So, we would not use that, obviously. We would see, we would see it more in terms of spreading enlightenment.

See if I can just fix my hat here. No, no, the winds is keeping it there! Anyway, have a look around. There’s an interesting vista — some motorways over there, bridges, dredging the river, … And I’m actually cycling along a large dyke, which is relatively, relatively deserted. Just one, or two other lonely cyclists on their way to work at this early hour in the morning.

Anyway, back to the big debate, … Also, I think another thing that ties into this “punching Right” debate is the banning of this so-called “neo-Nazi group“, National Action in the UK. They were banned, I think just yesterday, by the Home Secretary who goes by the name of Amber Rudd, which is a soft sounding name especially for a Conservative. And anyway, they were banned. Now, National Action, they kind of dress up in scary costumes with skull masks and black ninja costumes and they wave their obviously very fascistic looking flags. And there is usually about, like, 10 to 20 of them. And if they stick around for more than five minutes the anti-fa usually give them a hard time. So they kind of pop up and they pop down a lot. And I’ve always seen them as a kind of cosplay neo-Nazi LARPy* group.

* A live action role-playing game (LARP) is a form of role-playing game where the participants physically act out their characters’ actions. The players pursue goals within a fictional setting represented by the real world while interacting with each other in character.

And so, I think banning them isn’t actually, you know, really it’s almost an irrelevance. But, I think the only significant point is that the state can use these little shock groups to justify clamping down on things like social media, more and more. It becomes permissible for social media to throw perfectly moderate and calm people off their platforms, because such groups exist!

And, you know, we saw that with, when Andrew Anglin was on Twitter. He was very active, and of course, you know, he sort of set a precedent for Twitter throwing people off. And then, they then used that power more recently against many members of the Alt-Right, including their Richard Spencer. And then, they kind of, you know, they retracted that suspension in the case of Richard Spencer. But, you know, it’s just something they can do any time they feel like now. And they can always justify it and back it up with:

“Look at these neo-Nazi psychopaths spreading hatred and violence! And look what happened to Joe Cox and that poor jewish MP, Luciana Berger. She was sent hate mail and death threats!” blah, blah, blah!

And, because these politicians are women, it makes it all the more easy to ban those kind of extremist groups!

Now, I’m not too bothered by that, you know, because if you look at the one country that doesn’t have a lot of extreme censorship is America. OK, you can still lose your job, but for the most part, for the most part, it’s not really a problem, if you are financially independent.

[On his bike] I’m going downhill now, it’s getting a bit fast! Safety first!

Anyway, so as I was saying, … The one country, the one country that doesn’t have extreme censorship laws is the United States. And, “Wow!” by weird coincidence that is also the one country that doesn’t really have a healthy White nationalist movement. At least in electoral terms.

Whereas Europe, which has a lot if, you know, “thought crime” legislation and “hate crime” legislation and that bans little funny cosplay* groups like National Action. This area, or this collection of countries, that is where nationalism is doing much, much, better. Although, of course, in the UK, it’s in a period of abeyance at the moment after, following the collapse of the BNP a few years ago. But, if you look around Europe, they all have these very, very strict, you know, anti, you know, in inverted commas “hate laws” and various other forms of thought crime legislation and, … You know, nationalism is doing relatively well there!

* Cosplay: the practice of dressing up as a character from a film, book, or video game, especially one from the Japanese genres of manga or anime.

Austria — they almost elected somebody from the Austrian Freedom Party! They almost elected somebody from the Austrian Freedom Party, which is typically described as a hard line anti-immigrant party.

In France Marine Le Pen is, you know, again, very, very, you know, a cultural, she’s a cultural nationalist, I guess you could say, civic nationalist, not a religious a genuine ethno-nationalist, but still that’s a lot better than what America’s got. America’s got Donald Trump, and we’re still not really sure of, what we’ve got there. The omens are very, very mixed. He could turn out to be, you know, he could actually turn out to be a decent guy, a stand up guy, who wants to at least ensure the dominance of the Republican Party. Which would also mean deporting a lot of the illegals and securing the borders, and encouraging White people to have more kids. Or he could just be part of the whole the globalist system! A kind of reboot.

Anyway, I think that is plenty of thoughts to mull over.

So, from Tokyo, over and out!

END