Friday, 29 April 2016



It's a strange day when I find myself agreeing with George Galloway and defending a Muslim, but here we are. There's not much I'd disagree with in Galloway's analysis above. The timing, just before upcoming elections, is unlikely to be a coincidence.

Search the newspaper articles about this manufactured scandal and you will struggle to find one where comments are allowed.
If Trump wins the nomination in the US, no doubt they will try something similar there. All in all, it's a frightening demonstration of the Power of Unreason, of mob power and of Jew power. The Jews are, of course, playing their games, and they have their minions like the ridiculous John Mann, but there are also many ordinary goyim who have simply been conditioned to think as the Jews want them to think. They react reflexively, as they have been trained to do. And as we typically see in outbreaks of Oriental hysteria, the question of objective truth is simply ignored.

 

6 comments:

  1. The interviewer contends that discussing the German National Socialist Government, its leader or its ideology is 'provocative'. The correct response to that observation should have been that Jewish bigotry against freedom of speech AND the objective truth has made such discussions impossible at an unemotional and rational level, and that this intolerable constraint is unhealthy and dangerous for the British people, their country and its foreign and domestic policies. To do, as Galloway did, and trot out the usual dubious mantra of millions of jews killed by the Germans is to use this as a sop, an apologia even, for having the courage to initially question the propaganda of jews under which yoke Western European countries and their peoples have lived for decades, and will be dispossessed, enslaved or killed if they do not demand and assert freedom of speech now.

    PS No surprise that very few British media allow readers' comments: the Guardian, that bulwark of crazed Leftism and 'liberalism' for decades, announced some weeks' ago that no comments would be permitted from its readership on the subjects of Islam, Racism or Immigration. And the Daily Telegraph, in its latest online format, allows no comments on ANY subject. The latter paper, as the Times, was owned by Jews for decades, almost from its inception and has led the campaign against 'anti-semitism' (first coined in 1870s by Wilhelm Marr, a left activist with the assistance of his wealthy Jewish wife).

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is yet another instance of the Jewish tenet of 'lashon hara' (speech which is deemed evil, EVEN IF IT IS TRUE, because it may impact negatively upon the 'community' i.e., Jews). Most people seem not to have noticed a fairly recent sleight of hand in this issue: recently Israel's government announced that Israel is a Jewish state, its people and laws bound by Jewish law. Therefore, any negative comment on 'Israel' can therefore be deemed, under talmudic judaism, to be 'evil speech' against Jews overall (the basis for the speech being 'evil' is that the jews being a favoured people of their deity, that any such speech is an attack on their deity as well as 'his' chosen people. This is now why one sees in the British press that criticism of 'Israel' is "really" nothing less than 'anti-semitism.'

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ken Livingstone is reported on the Telegraph as saying "How can speaking the truth be regarded as offensive?"

    This is what comes of not studying 'theology' (aka your enemy's ideology). I won't be putting up any LOL symbol. There's nothing funny about the continuing destruction of freedom of speech in the West nor of the immoral ignorance of people who imagine themselves to be representatives of the public. I can only say WE here and elsewhere on the internet need to get these facts out, not only about past wars but also what ideology is behind the silencing of free speech, why, how it is done (by legislation usually passed off as 'aiding' public and social 'peace') and what the ultimate goal is. The last thing we need is a bungling fool who cannot properly articulate the facts or the ideology attempting to obscure and distort them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If Galloway really wants to hit the Jews where it hurts why doesn't he attack the holocaust. Here is a new documentary which destroys a lot of the points of holocaust propaganda. It's called Questioning The Holocaust -
    http://questioningtheholocaust.com

    ReplyDelete
  5. Relacionadas noticias en Occidente.

    La Democracia ha muerto en Alemania 2016 ( testado y confirmado ):
    http://gaceta.es/noticias/los-disidente-alemanes-buscan-refugio-suiza-criticar-merkel-28042016-1955

    Corbyn and ¨ Podemos ¨ as equal, all tool of Zionist, also all left and all rigth, thus.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The amusing thing about this controversy is that we have those who deny 99% of history and those who deny 100% of history, and they're bickering over the 1%. They agree on 99% of their delusions, such as the so-called "Holocaust" of the Jews (conceived in the 1890s) and the "Arab hijackers" of 9/11 (conceived in 1991)! It's the blind arguing with the blind. Livingstone got about 1% right, whereas Mann is a total Zionist stooge.

    For anyone who is not afraid of the truth, visit the following link: http://www.takeourworldback.com/blockheads.htm

    ReplyDelete