Winston Churchill delusional glow worm

Spread the love

I’ve gotten many positive remarks back on yesterday’s radio show with Clay Douglas.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/claydouglas/2010/02/05/free-american-hour

I wil segu into that topic of the possibility that some people may reincarnate via my answer to a comrade who was very frustrated at trying to educate a namby-pamby economic “patriot” who would not hear anything bad about the juze:

* * *

My friend, if you presented al the facts and he still goats around, he is in the final analysis probably just a coward….

It is no “coincidence” that he (and so many others) chooses the judeophilic position that JUST HAPPENS to keep him OUT of the persecution hot water I am in every day….

The average person of mediocre morality knows that antisemitism means trouble for the truthsayer.

And THAT means it is not ABOUT facts for them; it is about their desire to “look out for Number One,” i.e.., their sorry little SELVES. Don’t waste time on such egotistical cowards.

As Hans Schmidt of the Waffen-SS said to me 20 years ago, in a cafeteria in downtown Washington, there are millions of whites out there right now who would leap to join our Cause if they ever got just one pamphlet or brochure to read. If you meet a time-waster, whom NO FACT can satisfy, just move on. It is a numbers game. Go on to the next one.

Btw, I am getting a HUGE response to my radio show yesterday on reincarnation and typical of it was men who told me they felt a hypnotic attraction to the SS as small boys, and a horror of cold and snow also……

Here is what a new friend and comrade wrote me, also a former Marine with Heartland roots:

* * *

I never give reincarnation a real lot of thought, but have thought about it some. I think it sure is possible.

Now you have read me online talking about my German heritage.

Well, I can remember as a kid…. I think maybe in the fourth grade (I went to a Catholic grade school) we were doing book reports. I don’t remember what book report or subject I was doing, but a friend of mine (I still remember him and this moment I’m about to tell you about, and that was 30 years ago) was doing his book report on WWII.

http://www.abfar.co.uk/_images/36236.jpgWell, Jack had some books — on the Army, Navy, Marines and so forth. No big deal, and I didn’t give them a second thought. Then I saw one book he had. It was Waffen SS — the Asphalt Soldiers. I grabbed that book as if I were mesmerized. I just looked at the cover in a daze and quickly thumbed through the pictures like I was looking for someone or something. I begged him to let me borrow it, and he did. I ran home with it and studied this book from cover to cover. I actually thought I knew these men. I was more giddy about this book that I came across then I would have been at Christmas receiving a train.

[JdN: Btw, this book, whiich I have, was written by a John Keegan who was not yet prestigious enough (he is now “Sir” John Keegan) to dare on his own to really praise the Germans as they deserved — as he later did in Six Armies at Normandy. In this strangely named “Asphalt Soldiers” book Keegan barely manages to find any praise at all for the greatest fighting force that ever existed in the last 4,000 years, and I say this as a proud former US Marine. But the pictures were okay. 🙂]

Now I was maybe eight years old and felt so strongly about these SS men. Also, when growing up as a kid — I have long since grown out of it — I hated winter and the cold. Growing up, I would get upset and almost cry over icy cold weather. I live in Wisconsin and winters can be rough. It was something about winter I just could not stand. I was miserable and wished for warm weather. My cousins or sisters never gave winter a second thought, but for me I thought it was tragic. I didn’t join the Marines because I was a wimp, but the cold really bothered me…..

* * *

I replied:

* * *

Your experience seeing that Waffen-SS book sent chills down my spine. That is just how I felt staring at that Hitler stamp. I think MANY of our fellow WN activists will see themselves in your story! That ATTRACTION for German things…..was WAY beyond anything we were getting as kids in our environment…..Hey, after WWII Germany’s name was mud in America and there was no pro-German talk going on at MY kitchen table in the 1950s. My dad fought in WWII and conformed to the “Hitler-was-evil” line, which is why he snatched away that framed Hitler stamp. My mother and father both had many juish friends.

==========SPEAKING OF SNOW — PITTSBURGH JUST GOT ALMOST TWO FEET OF IT!

Hey, thank God for Obongo’s global warming — or it could have been two feet, one inch…. 🙂

Snow scene from my office in February 2010
Two feet of snow (note mailbox just under window crossbar) seen from kitchen window onto Ekastown Rd., Feb. 6, 2010

=================ANOTHER REVIEW OF MEL GIBSON’S MASTERPIECE “EDGE OF DARKNESS”

Merlin Miller: Review of Edge of Darkness

http://theoccidentalobserver.net/tooblog/?p=724

Merlin Miller: Edge of Darkness is an important and timely political thriller that will keep you on the edge of your seat. Originally produced as a British mini-series, this story has been modernized and set in Boston. Director Martin Campbell, who helmed the original, as well as several recent hit films, including Casino Royale, brilliantly executes with a cast and crew tailor made for their roles.

Mel Gibson Stars in Edge of DarknessMel Gibson Stars in “Edge of Darkness”

The story is about a veteran homicide detective, Thomas Craven, who must solve the murder of his own daughter, Emma (who dies in his arms), and the conspiracy that led to it. As Craven, Mel Gibson is back with a performance that reminds us why he is one of the all time greats. He hasnt been in front of the camera since 2002s Signs, but what a return this is! His powerful performance grabs and doesnt let go. Even though his intense blue eyes have been intentionally muted with wardrobe and lighting to create a disheveled and distraught character appearance, he still captivates. As a widower, who has now lost his only child, Craven has but one goal left and that is to find and exact vengeance on her killers.

Initially believed to be the target himself, things dont stack up for Craven and he discovers that his daughter led a life that he knew nothing about. Throughout the film, use of memory flashbacks of Emma as a little girl, and apparitions of her lost spirit, provide love connections, which are beautifully and hauntingly effective. The chemistry, between father and daughter, is wonderfully developed by Gibson and Serbian-Australian actress, Bojana Novakovic.

As a nuclear physicist intern, Emma worked for an energy and research firm that held government contracts. She became aware of sinister efforts by her corporate employer (played with arrogant perversity by Danny Huston) to produce nuclear weapons that could be used and then blamed on Jihadists. This future false flag operation had the secret support of elements of our own government. Emmas efforts to do right and protect our true national interests were betrayed by those she thought she could trust, including a US Senator.

As Craven investigates with increasing despair, he uncovers key parts of the conspiracy with the enigmatic assistance of a government clean-up agent (and assassin), Darius Jedburgh, wonderfully played by Ray Winston. Although his delivery was difficult to understand at times, Winstons understated performance is central to the story and his scenes with Gibson are riveting. At one point, Jedburgh philosophically states to an inquiring Craven, you just never can connect A to B. Craven responds How do you know? to which Jedburgh replies Because Im usually the guy that stops you from connecting A to B. But Jedburgh is terminal (as he says we all are), and this takes him through a soul searching process, where he will ultimately be tested to either do his assigned job or do the right thing. This is a decision many of our government servants may be asking themselves today.

The themes of honoring family (Jedburgh regrets never having had one and Craven has devastatingly lost his) and protecting our freedoms are tightly woven into this storys tapestry. A memorable and repeated line, Everythings illegal in Massachusetts, speaks tellingly to current and historic patriots. And Cravens threat to the Senator, You had better decide whether youre hangin on the Cross, or bangin in the nails, speaks to our unfortunate loss of faith and increasing corruption.

One aspect of the film that may undercut its effectiveness was a dependency on the ultimate honor and integrity of the media. In sympathy for a female reporter, who showed respect and was less predatory than others, Craven sent her Emmas secret discs, which revealed the conspiracy. If we still trust in the mainstream media, then it could be a satisfying ending. Unfortunately, trust in media today is justifiably even lower than trust in our politicians. But this reporter was local and working for a less controlled media, so perhaps truth can prevail. This truth dependency is somewhat reminiscent of Three Days of the Condor in which the Robert Redford characters survival rests in the possible publication of his story in the New York Times. If we had our doubts then, what are we to think now?

The production credits for this revenge thriller are first rate, and give the film a realistic and gritty film noir quality. The camera flows smoothly, with visual intensity, and the editing and scoring keep us on an emotional roller coaster. With such a compelling script and top-notch performances, this film has broad commercial appeal, but also works on other important levels. With its truth-seeking attitude and yearning for traditional values, Edge of Darkness, is an uncertain journey through evil and darkness. And like Craven, Emma, and Jedburgh, we are left wondering if we, as a people and nation, can rediscover what is important and return to a world of light.

Merlin Miller (email him) is a motion picture producer/director and founder of Americana Pictures. A graduate of West Point and USC film school, he is building a quality alternative to Hollywood. His article, Americana Pictures: Restoring the Dream appeared in TOO in April, 2009.

===================Winston Churchill, delusional “glow worm”

churchillcover.jpgBook Review: Churchill: The Greatest Briton Unmasked: – by Nigel Knight

Published by David and Charles, 2008, ISBN 13-978-0-7153-2855-2, 11.49 + postage (hardcover) 384pp; ISBN-13: 978-0-7153-2853-8. 9.29 + postage (softcover) 400pp. Available from www.amazon.co.uk.

All men are worms, but I am a glow worm. – Winston S. Churchill

It is ironic that during the recent Euro-election, the British National Party juxtaposed the image of Winston Churchill with photographs of WWII RAF fighter aircraft as the motif for its election campaign. The truth is that if Churchill had had his way he would have committed almost all Britains available fighter squadrons to saving France during the German invasion of that country. We would then inevitably have lost the Battle of Britain. Fortunately, the C-in-C of Fighter Command, Air Chief Marshal Sir Hugh Dowding, a man of great foresight and courage, refused to let the squadrons go. The result was that despite the RAFs numerical inferiority vis- -vis the Luftwaffe, it won the Battle of Britain. It is indisputable that if that Battle had been lost, Britain would have lost the war. Sad to relate, no sooner than the Battle was won, Dowding was sacked, and he was never promoted a Marshal of the RAF as other, lesser chair-borne Air Marshals were.

(Sacking senior commanders was a penalty Churchill inflicted on any commander or chief of staff who dared to question his often bizarre and impossible orders or ideas. In this way, he relegated to backwaters many of his most able military leaders. As Nigel Knight puts it, “This was a characteristic of Churchill: he was reluctant to overrule his chiefs of staff, but he would sack them.”)

Churchill had almost nothing to do with either the preparation or conduct of the Battle of Britain. Such rearmament as had taken place prior to the war was the result of the policies of former Premiers, Ramsay MacDonald, Stanley Baldwin and the much-maligned Neville Chamberlain. Churchills reputation as the saviour of Britain at that time relies mainly on his inspired speeches, which did much to raise public morale, and his writings after the war. In his six-volume narrative, The Second World War, he greatly exaggerates his part in the Battle and blames everyone apart from himself for any errors and shortcomings. As he once boasted: “I have not always been wrong. History will bear me out, particularly as I shall write that history myself”. Referring to Churchills self-justifying account of his part in WWI, Arthur Balfour said, “Winston has written a great book about himself and called it The World Crisis.”

Nigel Knights meticulously researched book is important because it reveals the truth that lies behind the Churchill persona and the damaging consequences his leadership had for Britain and the British Empire. In 1942 he famously said, “I have not become the Kings First Minister to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire”. However, by his megalomania, chicanery and refusal to listen to any opinions other than his own, that is precisely what he did achieve. The Empire has now long gone, and today our country is a shadow of its former self. That this is so is in no small measure due to the malign influence he wielded over our national affairs for more than half a century.

http://www.movietrimmer.com/content/default/english/images/movies/375653_3.jpgMr Knight does not dwell for long on Churchills childhood or early life, apart from telling us that his military career was marked with impetuosity and glory-seeking. His book, unlike so many other books about Churchill, is not a work of hagiography. He points out that beginning with the havoc Churchill wrought on the Allies at Gallipoli during WWI, when First Lord of the Admiralty, his career was a catalogue of misjudgments and defeats.

The catastrophic Gallipoli debacle – during which Britain and the Commonwealth suffered some 238,000 casualties – was almost entirely Churchills fault. It was the prototype operation of his “soft underbelly” theory, which Knight calls the “dispersionist” strategy, whereby instead of attacking the enemy directly, war was waged by means of a series of futile pinpricks on the periphery of the main theatres of operations. Churchill had little knowledge of naval affairs. He did not understand that the Royal Navy had insufficient vessels or firepower to penetrate the Dardanelles successfully. This insufficiency was also Churchills responsibility because in 1909, when he was President of the Board of Trade, he persuaded the Chancellor, David Lloyd George, to oppose any increase in naval construction. Churchills dispersionist strategy was the precursor of the policy he adopted in WWII during the campaigns in Norway, North Africa, the Balkans, Greece and Italy.

The author explains that although Churchill vociferously supported rearmament owing to the threat posed by Germany, Italy and Japan during the 1930s when out of office, he was equally vociferous in opposing rearmament in the 1920s, when the threat was becoming increasingly apparent. Indeed, when Chancellor in 1925, his budget for that year significantly decreased the Service Estimates, particularly with regard to the RAF. This penny-pinching would have disastrous consequences later. Fortunately, however, Ramsay MacDonalds government initiated a programme to develop the Hurricane and Spitfire aircraft in the mid 1930s. These aircraft, together with the development of radar, ultimately proved to be Britains salvation. The author claims that it was not Churchill, but MacDonald, Baldwin and Chamberlain – and of course Dowding – “who put in place the organization and matriel, particularly for Fighter Command, which would prove decisive in protecting Britain in its hour of greatest danger”. Although Neville Chamberlain has been unfairly linked with appeasement, he at least bought us time (just!) to rearm. If Churchill had been in power in the 1930s, he would have prematurely attacked Germany, as Knight says, with “canvas-skinned biplane fighters, and short-range bombers of the period, with limited armament, open cockpits and fixed landing gear…” Knight obviously admires Chamberlain. He quotes a letter Chamberlain wrote to his sister in 1936:

I have had to do most work on the programme, which has been materially modified as a result, and I am pretty satisfied now that, if we can keep out of war for a few years, we shall have an air force of such striking power that no one will to care to run risks with it. I cannot believe that the next war, if it ever comes, will be like the last one, and I believe our resources will be more profitably employed in the air, and on the sea, than in building up great armies.

These words are hardly those of an “appeaser”.

As soon as the war was under way, Churchill was able to give free rein to experiment with his dispersionist strategy. Norway was Churchills first attempt to relive the Gallipoli operation and thus prove his critics wrong. It had all the hallmarks of a Churchillian operation. He went ahead with it against the advice of the First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Dudley Pound. As Knight says, “The entire Norwegian campaign had endured disastrous organization, planning and execution, and, more than anyone, Churchill had been in charge”. Matters were made worse by his continual interference with the plans of the operational commanders and his frequent changes of mind and vacillation. Knight sums up the campaign by writing:

The fiasco has largely been airbrushed out of history, despite the fact that it was clear that Churchill undertook political and military direction and had learned nothing from the experience of Gallipoli. It is deeply ironic that the immediate cause of Churchill succeeding Chamberlain as Prime Minister was a catastrophic event for which he himself had been culpable.

The Battle of France that culminated in the catastrophe of Dunkirk was yet another example of Churchills incompetence. He simply did not understand that the Battle was lost until too late and admitted that the defeat was “one of the greatest surprises I have had in my life”. While the Battle raged, Churchill promised to supply France an additional ten RAF fighter squadrons. Dowding immediately wrote what Knight calls “a seminal letter” of protest, pointing out that RAF fighter losses in France were exceeding the rate of replacement. Dowding ended his letter with these words:

I believe that, if an adequate fighter force is kept in this country, if the fleet remains in being, and if Home Forces are suitably organized to resist invasion, we should be able to carry on the war single-handed for some time, if not indefinitely. But, if the Home Defence Force is drained away in desperate attempts to remedy the situation in France, defeat in France will involve the final, complete and irremediable defeat of this country.

Churchill then told the Cabinet that Dowding had agreed to the departure of more squadrons to France, to which Dowding replied: “What can one say about Churchills statement other than that it was totally untrue… I never discussed such a point with him. Id never had the opportunity to discuss with him anything about such matters…” It is clear that Churchill lied; it is also clear that he was prepared to denude the RAF far beyond the point of risking “final, complete and irremediable defeat”. During the Battle of France, the RAF lost more aircraft than it did in the Battle of Britain.

According to Knight, during the Battle of France Britain abandoned 2,472 guns, 84,427 vehicles, 657,000 tons of ammunition, six destroyers, and 1,000 aircraft. In addition to the thousands of soldiers and sailors who were killed or injured, 320 pilots were killed or reported missing, and 115 became prisoners of war. This represents a massive defeat by any standards. Knight rightly says that the battle “amply demonstrates Churchills lack of grasp of the realities of Blitzkrieg warfare”. He goes on to suggest that “Although Churchill was quite out of touch with events as they unfolded, he insisted on interfering with military strategy at a most critical moment…”

The one redeeming feature of the whole sorry affair was that Britain was fortunate in having such leaders as Hugh Dowding, and Vice-Admiral Bertram Ramsay (earlier sacked as Fifth Sea Lord by Churchill) who masterminded the successful evacuation of 338,000 troops from France. Knight quotes the following passage from an article written by Max Hastings:

Dowding… understood what Winston Churchill did not: that his job was not to destroy the Luftwaffe, an almost impossible task, but simply to keep his force flying and fighting. If Dowding had thrown everything into the Battle, as the Prime Minister instinctively wanted, the RAF could not have supported its rate of attrition against the much bigger German air force. Dowding also knew that if the RAF could keep going until the approaching winter made flying difficult, it would be possible to build up the RAFs strength during the winter months.

Nigel Knight devotes a large part of his book to recording the failure of many of Churchills dispersionist escapades that were costly in lives and matriel, as well as detracting from the war against the German homeland. These included the war in North Africa; the excursions in the Balkans, Greece and Crete; the long and futile slog from Sicily and up through Italy – all of which contributed very little towards the defeat of Germany. Such sideshows militated against the early establishment of the Second Front in the West, much to the annoyance of Roosevelt and Stalin, who both wanted the invasion of France to begin as early as 1942. In order to mollify them, Churchill ordered the launch of the botched and ill-fated raid on Dieppe, which resulted in many casualties, particularly of Canadians. Knight calls the raid “Churchills Folly”.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Bodies_of_Canadian_soldiers_-_Dieppe_Raid.jpgDead Canadians after the Dieppe Raid

Churchills continued procrastination in establishing the Second Front infuriated the Americans and Russians, as well as some of his own commanders. It was from this point that Churchill, and hence Britain, began to be sidelined by the “Big Two”. Knight states:

Churchills behaviour weakened Britains ties with Canada. It would help to loosen the grip of Empire, which had been central to Churchills interests for most of his political career. It would do little to help the Allied war effort – far from it. Dieppe was no more than a pinprick raid, another part of Churchills dispersionist strategy.

bomberharris.jpgBomber Harris

Bomber Command provided Britain with the best chance of bringing the war to an early closure, but Churchill squandered that opportunity by ordering the C-in-C, Air Marshal Arthur “Bomber” Harris, to adopt a policy of area bombing German cities rather than targeting the countrys industrial complexes. He thought that this would undermine the morale of the German civilian populace, but the evidence is that it had precisely the opposite effect. When, after the horrific firebombing of Dresden, international concern suggested that Britain was committing war crimes against civilians, Churchill distanced himself from the bombing campaign and blamed Harris as responsible for the policy. In fact, Churchill washed his hands of the bombing campaign, the consequent murder of countless German civilians, including women and children, and the unnecessary deaths of 55,500 RAF aircrew who had bravely carried out the policy that he had initiated and ordered. In his “VE” Day broadcast to the nation he made no mention of Bomber Command, and unlike other senior commanders, Bomber Harriss name was omitted from the subsequent New Years honours list. As Knight writes, “Yet again, things that Churchill didnt like were someone elses fault, not his own”.

Knight claims that Churchills reputation as a war leader rests almost entirely on his rhetoric: “His rhetoric inspired the nation but it was victories that were needed, not rhetoric”. Aneurin Bevan put it more succinctly; suggesting that Churchill treated speeches as though they were battles and battles as though they were speeches. Knight ends this compelling, if controversial, account of Churchills political career by comparing Churchill with Hitler in the following words:

In the deepest of ironies, it was Hitler who made Churchill a historical figure. If it had not been for Hitler, Churchill would never have been recalled as First Lord of the Admiralty in 1939, let alone become Prime Minister. He would have ended his political career in 1929, as Chancellor of the Exchequer – just as his father had. He would have been a minor figure in British political history, and would be largely forgotten today. It is because of Churchills role in World War II, and because he wrote so much of the history himself, that we remember Churchill, above all else, for Hitlers defeat. Hitler is remembered for himself.

Reviewed by Ronald G. W. Rickcord, Newport Pagnell, England

This review was first published in the January-March 2010 issue (39) of Heritage and Destiny magazine. For a sample copy send $5.00 to; PO Box 6501, Falls Church, VA 22046, USA, or order online at – www.efp.org.uk

* * *

Heritage and Destiny is a very fine magazine and I was honored that it published a part of my book which discussed Americans and Australians of Norman ancestry.

==========A COMRADE SEEKS TO EXONERATE MUSLIMS

An idealistic European comrade wrote me that muslim societies are less degenerate than ours, and sent me statistics that purported to show that there was less rape in their countries.

I replied:

* * *

I understand your noble desire to see the good in other people, and to sympathize with muslims (such as Palestinians) for being oppressed by juze.And many of us have thought “If only the muslims could be our allies!”

But the total picture has been highly negative for 1400 years. In reality, only the rise of the juze has made uns even consider an alliance with muslims. Before that, we always saw them correctly as a strange and very dangerous people, and the behavior of the muslim Moghuls in India, the muslim Arabs and the muslim Turks toward white people and especially toward white women for ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED YEARS OF INVASION, RAPE AND VIOLENCE has amply justified this realization.

You really should read the Brussels Journal (http://www.brusselsjournal.com) to see the dark side of the behavior, the hyper-violent, contemptuous and hate-filled behavior, of the ungrateful muslim minorities that are living in Europe and ruining its cities, and creating terror for our white women and girls.

It is not only morally correct to oppose Islam as our clear enemy, but also it is smart politics, since the muslism are enraging white people all over Europe, Russia and Australia, where they are commiting terrible gang rapes on the beachs of Sydney and elsewhere.


The heavily Irish-blooded Australians at Cronulla near Sydney riot in December 2005 against Lebanese gang-rapists lurking near their beaches and savaging the beautiful Australian girls. The ju-trained police had done NOTHING to protect white Australian women and girls.
You have a good and noble heart, brother, but I think that the document I sent you about Neanderthals [see end of this post] gives the reason why, as I believe, the muslims are and always will be our GENETIC enemy, and never a useful ally. I hope we can, as they say, “agree to disagree” on this one issue.

And I saw your info claiming there never was any intervbreeding between Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals, and I do not believe it. Other scientists agree with me, that there WAS interbreeding. And I agree with the half-ju Michael Bradley that it happened through RAPE. We have found skeletons of mixed CM-Neander offspring in caves in Portugal and in other places.

Most of all, semites simply LOOK neanderthal [see my post below] (and WHERE did they get that look?). They also have that obstinacy and lack of flexibility that is characteristic of the Neander population, which could not change and adapt as Cro-Magnons could.

(This reminds me of what Charles de Gaulle exclaimed to his assistant and confidant Alain Peyrefitte to justify granting independence to arabic Algeria, to detaching this province from France. “The Arabs and the Jews — obstinate and impossible! Who can stand either of them?”)

When a key muslim betrayed me and my friend, who very easily could have helped him in his perilous situation (six years of miserable exile!!), that was “the final straw.” I saw that muslims will NEVER feel any sympathy for white nationalists. And they are too — incredibly — OBTUSE to see the advantages FOR THEM of collaboration.

(They would rather spend money on white whores, roulette tables, $600 cashmere sweaters in Georgetown [Washington DC — I dated a girl who told me her stories about this] and buying Pentagon weapons!)

And I as a Solutrean leader will not make the mistake of Hitler who depended with great sentimentality on Mussolini, an unreliable and in the end disastrous ally. Mussolini’s invasion of Greece was morally wrong, psychologicaly egotistical, as well as militarily incompetent. Worst of all, it bogged down the Germans in rescuing him in the Balkans an sGreece — when the Wehrmacht needed to invade the Bolshevik USSR and smash the hideous communist terror regime as early as possible in the SPRING of 1941 so as to avoid the terrible muddy roads that arise in the Russian autumn and then the horrific cold and snow of the Russian winter. (The Germans called it “General Winter,” and knew as Napoleon discovered in 1812 that it was their worst enemy.)

Germany lost World War II because of a USELESS and harmful ally.

http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/mussolini.jpg...but great at fierce and heroic postures….

We western Aryans can perhaps find some use in certain potential allies such as the Japanese, but most of all in the eastern Aryans who are our Slavic white brethren, and perhaps in others too, on the basis of rational and practical considerations…but for 1400 years the muslims have attacked the white world, as have the mongolid peoples (Tatars, Mongols, who loved to stack up mountains of white skulls.)

The semites are not about to change — in their 50,000-year Neander war on the descendants of the Cro-Magnons.

Here is the document I sent you:

* * *

A very important topic in the realm of psychopathy is the influence of the genes of the Neanderthals, the rivals in Europe of our white Cro-Magnon forbears for at least 50,000 years.

Both Stan Gooch and Michael Bradley, respected juish authors, have written books saying that juze are in fact very heavily Neanderthal, and that the antisemitism of today is the ineradicable continuation of a 50,000-year-old race war between us, the descendants of the pure Cro-Magnons, and them, the juish NeanderthalCro-Magnon mix.



Juish psychologist Stan Gooch writes that juze should be PROUD to be Neanderthals.

Stan Gooch, a ju psychologist, has written at length that juze are latter-day Neanderthals, yet as a positive thing that makes juze unique. (Thats a safe bet. Being a descendant of Neanderthals would make you different. 😉)



The ju Gooch here glorifies his Neanderthal forbears as great dreamers who thought up the great world religions and arts, and also the Kabbalah, a classic product, he says, of the mystical Neanderthal gene and genius [sic].

Both Gooch and Bradley flesh out their arguments with many surprising facts. It all makes one think in view of the juze proudly proclaimed and rather indubitable uniqueness.


In Michael Bradleys 1992 book
Chosen People from the Caucasus (subtitled Jewish Origins, Delusions, Deceptions and Historical Role in the Slave Trade, Genocide and Cultural Colonization) the author makes it crystal-clear that he, a half-ju himself, also sees the juze as genetic quasi-Neanderthals, but he interprets this in a very negative light seeing juze as the vicious, psychopathic, brutal descendants of equally vicious, psychopathic, brutal Neanderthals.

Bradley then became a razor-sharp critic of judaism by 1992, later in his writing career, believing the Neanderthals were basically violent sociopaths, and in fact misogynists (brutal toward women).

In Bradleys view, as modern man (the Cro-Magnons descendants) spread over Europe over the course of tens of thousands of years, the Neanderthals likewise retreated from those same places and eventually holed up for safety, yeti-like, in the Caucasus mountains.


The Caucasus, home of Armenians, Georgians (such as Joseph Stalin) and Chechens, all dark-skinned quasi-whites, many hook-nosed.


Ruth Bader Ginzburg, appointed by the white psychopath Bill Clinton to the Supreme Court.


Henry Kissinger, an ultra-juish muilitant, world government cut-throat –and classic example of a quasi-neanderthal face and forehead.


Neanderthals on the warpath


Professor Robert Faurisson (right), Holocaust fraud debunker, attacked near his home in Lyons by a group of Jewish thugs, his jaw smashed.


Palestinian boy burned by bombs


Cowardly juze at Dachau beat an SS guard to death; his SS comrades (almost all draftees) have been mowed down by machine guns, Dachau was never any sort of “death camp” — but a work camp for homosexuals, communists, juze and draft dodgers. Only at the end of the war, when the German economy collapsed, did prisoners die in large numbers due to the end of food and medicine, and over-crowding. Should the families of Gemany, being pounded day and night by Allied bombers and often homeless themselves, have taken in
homosexuals, communists, juze and draft dodgers in their water-filled cellars where they existed, and fished the last crust of bread out of their children’s mouths to give it to the enemy population? Would any American mother do that?


An infamous Hollywood casting-couch Jew and sexual harasser, the director Otto Preminger


A recent depiction of a Neanderthal; note the Caucasian features
black hair, short neck, hooked nose, receding forehead and sloping chin. Many juze look as if they have some Neanderthal blood.

However, Bradley believes these Neanderthals who had retreated to the high mountains also descended into the valleys and carried off, raping, many of our own women, whence the admixture back then producing what is now called Jews today. It is a certainty that Neanderthals once also heavily populated prehistoric Palestine, as many skeletons and archeological digs there reveal.

The most hated ju in Occupied Germany, Michel Friedman, moral apostle to the Germans about the Holohoax. He had to resign as head of the Central Council of Jews in Germany (Zentralrat der Juden in Deutschland) after details of his cocaine use and constant recourse to Ukrainian and Polish forced prostitute girls came out. These are poor white girls kidnapped and raped by juish and turkish white-slave traders and then turned over to pimps in various countries such as Germany. (In August Kubizeks book Adolf Hitler: My Friend in Youth, Kubizek writes that it was only when Hitler learned about the juish control of white sex slavery that Hitler became a hardened antisemite.) The truth about Friedmans cocaine use was accidentally (LOL) sent by the Berlin police by fax to a Berlin pizzeria, which gave it to the media. 🙂 Note that the juze are arrogantly open about their superior status in Germany; it is not the Central Council of Jewish Germans but instead Council of Jews IN Germany as the lords and masters of the psychologically and economically crushed Germans. Germany today must export to countries that juze control.

The white race has been under attack thus, not only from Arabs, Huns, Turks and Mongols in historical times, but also from Neanderthals very far back, and the juish attack now is the resumption of that millennial attack from THEN the oldest and longest attack of all on our genes and our survival. And it is two juze who are saying ju = Neanderthal/Cro-Magnon mixture.

Interestingly, Bradley, who started out his writing career as a typical leftist ju and wrote books bashing white people, such as The Iceman Inheritance in 1978, reversed course totally. He thus joined a long list of juze who criticize the ju mindset, such as Israel Shamir, Israel Shahak, Benjamin Freedman, Bobby Fischer, Roger Dommergue Polacco de Menasc (with whom Ive spoken), David Cole, and. much less openly, Rabbi Michael Lerner of Tikkun.org (with whom Ive briefly corresponded), Mark Lane (whom Ive met), MIT professor Noam Chomsky (with whom Ive corresponded) and Norman Finkelstein.

The Khazar Turks have these same Neanderthal traits, these Caucasus mountain features, and were thus a perfect candidate people, a kindred latter-day Neanderthaloid people, to convert to Judaism.

I had a juish landlord, Theodore J. Weiner, in Massachusetts from 1996-2001, and one day I asked him to give his version of what explained juish success.

He replied persistence. I would amplify that — and say obstinacy, tenacity, and fierce tribalism against outsiders.

All who survey juish history and the remarks even of ancient historians note that their nature has not changed in the slightest degree in the three thousand years that they have been known to the rest of humanity.

Something THIS persistent must be, not cultural, but profoundly genetic in origin, anchored at the inner core of their DNA.

If one adds the Neanderthal-ju concept to Professor Kevin MacDonalds work, then voil, one sees judaism as a survival mechanism for the last of the Neanderthals in a Cro-Magnon white world.

Of course, compared to Cro-Magnons, the Neanderthals proved an eminently losing race. This is a genetic war, a war of tenacity, ongoing for 50,000 years now, one we can win, a war between the neo-Neanderthals and the neo-Cro-Magnons, and culminating in our own climactic generation.

To be an Eternal Solutrean is to comprehend that the Ice Age War continues. They have never stopped fighting us, because obstinacy is a neanderthal trait.


Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*