Sunday, 13 April 2014


I've noted before that the Counterjihad movement is essentially a Jewish construct designed to advance Jewish interests. Almost everyone involved in it either is Jewish, receives money from Jews or is part of a Jewish influence network. It could be construed as a movement designed to counter the part of the European Genocide that is harmful to Jews (Muslim immigration) while allowing the rest of it to continue unimpaired and uncriticised. As with previous Jewish-dominated intellectual movements like Marxism, or Freudianism, the ideology is alluring enough to captivate gentiles who have no conscious intention of advancing Jewish interests. It is clear that most Europeans involved in the Counterjihad movement have simply latched on to it as a way of expressing resistance the colonisation of their countries.

Now and then, however, we see "stress fractures" develop between the genuine European Resistance Movement and the CounterJewhad, usually where there is some Jewish interest at stake. Support for Golden Dawn was one such example. The CounterJewhad belittled Golden Dawn because they were critical of Jews, even though they would have been an effective bulwark against Islam if they had come to power. There are only a few thousand Jews in Greece so no anti-Jewish action (if any) Golden Dawn ever undertook could have had any real practical signifiance. But to the CounterJewhad movement, mere verbal criticism of Jews counts for more than actual invasion of European soil by Muslims.

Another of the stress fractures was Syria. Israel strongly favoured action against the Assad regime and Jewish intellectuals around the world began a concerted lobbying campaign pushing for military action. For example, in Britain, it was said that the main pressure for action within the government was coming from the Jewish Chancellor of the Exchequer Gideon Osborne and his adviser Lord Levy. To be fair to them, much of the CounterJewhad movement took the opposite tack, recognising that the "Arab Spring" would bring Jihad regimes to power. Nonetheless, we saw some Jews who are loosely considered part of the Counterjihad movement breaking with the pack on this issue, notably some of the (Jewish-owned) Gatestone crowd and, in Germany, Henryk Broder.

The Ukraine is another such issue. I've noted before how the Jews, as usual, have opposed the principle of nationalism and therefore Russia on this issue. Because the AfD party in Germany (a kind of German UKIP) has made some remarks about the Ukraine dispute that are mildly less critical of Russia than the German mainstream parties, Henryk Broder has denounced AfD and declared that no decent person could vote for it. This has upset PI, the main Islam-critical website in Germany. PI, in general, is pro-Israel and pro-Jew to the point of embarrassing itself. The terms "Pro-American" and "Pro-Israeli" appear before the words "Against the islamisation of Europe" on its title page. But it seems PI has finally broken with Broder over his denunciation of AfD, even noting his Jewishness as a factor in the positions he has staked out.

But it is striking how Broder from the start has supported the "Arab Spring", an unprecedented, endless catastrophe, not only for North Africa, but also for us. Instead of Gaddafi, there are now, for example, half a million black Africans in Libya and want to come as economic refugees to Europe!  Broder couldn't care less.
Instead of this Broder, also, notably, like many other Jewish intellectuals incidentally, has urged on and is urging on the murderous struggle against Assad in Syria.

 I have exposed Broder before as an anti-European genocidist. He has said he "would be happy to give up white Europe" and saw the demographic transformation of the continent as a good thing.

What, in all seriousness, I consider a good thing is that this demographic structure of Europe can no longer be maintained. The sooner the Europeans see that, the better. Some cities are already highly coloured and no longer "Aryan" white, and I have nothing against that.

(See more of this here.) Note that the reactions to my publication of this post also exposed the pseudo-Counterjihad movement as, in reality, the CounterJewhad movement. SheikYerMami, a Jew resident in Australia responsible for a website of the same name, and KGS, a "Polish" American resident in Finland responsible for a website called Tundra Tabloids, announced that they would no longer link to me after I posted it. Rather then denounce the Jew who had openly advocated bringing about the genocide of the European peoples through the ethnic distintegration of their societies, they rallied round him and denounced the person who had exposed him.

But as the example of PI shows, it is possible for a genuine commitment to the survival of the European peoples to emerge from the swamp of the Counterjihad movement once the Europeans involved in it grasp that the people running the show have a separate agenda.




5 comments:

  1. There is a general nervousness in the counterjihad about discussing Jewish issues. Take into account that the most effective counterjihadists are names like Horowitz and Geller. Jews tend to have the networks, the interest and the talent to assert themselves in movements where certain verbal and literally skills are required. This doesn't mean the counterjihad is some vast conspiracy meant to lull their gentile followers into a vast sleep, that it is all shades and mirrors meant to fool all involved. The Jews in the movement do risk a lot going up against Islam, and some even protest against multiculturalism and the left, I am sure the vast majority are genuine. But they are also Jews,they do not consider themselves European and therefore believe they have no interest in maintaining a white majority in Europe.

    Reality is simple,Jews, are "legitimately" afraid of a non-existing threat, namely the rise of an irrational form of white nationalism. They are only people after all, who promote and defend their ethnic interests like you and I do, but they do so more effectively. These interests clash. We should discuss these issues , but unfortunately this tends to attract scoundrels who simply use the word Jew as a pejorative instead of applying serious analysis. I believe across Europe the influence of Jewish interests is fleeting, and both Jews and Europeans will have to find a different way to view their relationship. To conclude that this naturally should be a hostile one is simplistic, though I would always advocate caution.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Still hoping you add disquss. It supports blogspot.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "I'll look into that."

    Great idea...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Everything can be hacked. Disquss is user friendly, and there are an incredible number of users on it who would enjoy this blog.

    ReplyDelete