Journalist lectures the Irish on their “white privilege”.

Well it was inevitable. This cancer has gradually creeped into other white countries as they have become more racially diverse. It was inevitable that it would happen here as we became more racially diverse too. You see, it doesn’t matter that we were victims, rather than perpetrators of colonialism. It doesn’t matter that our people were discriminated against for hundreds of years. It doesn’t matter that our ancestors experienced borderline genocides at various points throughout history (the famine, Cromwell, the Plantations, etc). It doesn’t matter that our country has allowed people of other races to live among us (without giving us the option to vote on whether we wanted to or not).

We still have privilege apparently, and need to feel ashamed of ourselves because of it.


From Irish Times

The expression “white privilege” has been around for years but “white skin privilege” has recently been repopularised in the US, where numerous African-American deaths at the hands of police have ignited the Black Lives Matter movement.


I’m not going to go through this yet again. I’ll just leave this here instead because it already has the appropriate response.

Broadly speaking, it means the interlocking societal benefits that Caucasians in the West enjoy – benefits that non-white people in the same social, political, or economic circumstances can only look at from the outside, like kids pressed up against a sweet shop window.

Yes who would have thought that members of the dominant population demographic of a country would be the ones to feel most comfortable in a society that was built by people of that very same demographic? I guess we should stop creating a society which suits the needs of the majority, and instead create one that suits minorities. If we don’t, they’ll call us mean names like “racist” or “white supremacist”, or try to shame us for our “white privilege”.

In Ireland – a country where up until very recently anyone not 100 per cent white and Christian was seen as something different – white privilege is rooted in the blissful unawareness of the obstacles people of colour experience. The failure to see the destructive attitudes that exist in our communities; our collective neglect in making this land inhospitable for racist ideas and actions.

If Ireland, much like every other white majority country is such a horrible, racist place, in which non-white people are treated like shit, then why is it that so many of them want to live in the same countries as us so badly? Surely, they would be much happier living in countries in which they don’t have to deal with us horrible white people, but for some reason, they never seem to consider that option. Instead, they just moan constantly about how terrible we all are, and try to shame us into changing our ways somehow. At the same time, they never seem to state any specific demands on how exactly they think we should change, so we never seem to progress beyond the moaning stage, followed by a load of self-hating white people beating themselves up over some perceived injustice they feel guilty about by virtue of being white. Personally, I’m sick of it. As a white guy myself, I have absolutely no desire to oppress any “people of colour”. I just want to get on with my life and not listen to your constant whining about how terrible my race is.

This is yet more proof that despite the constant lies that we’re told to the contrary, in actuality, diversity is not a strength.

The best example I have is my own life. I’m half-Asian, but with plenty of white people here to blend in with, I pretty much pass for white on the street. It would be hard for me to deny that it’s made my life easier. Nobody has ever told me to go back to my own country or denied my right to identify as an Irish person. No stranger has ever targeted me with a racial slur.

So he hasen’t actually experienced racial abuse then in Ireland? So what exactly is the problem here? Is he actually just some closet white supremacist who wishes he was fully white, and regards his Asian half as being inferior somehow? Because that sounds horribly familiar.

“He wrote in “My Twisted World” that being of mixed race made him “different from the normal fully white kids”. ~ Taken from his Wikipedia article.

Jokes aside, I don’t think this guy has anything in common with Elliot Roger, other than the fact that they are (were in Roger’s case), half white, half Asian. But seriously, this is absolutely ridiculous. The guy hasn’t experienced racial abuse, yet he has come to the conclusion that it’s only because he “passes for white”. Did it ever occur to him that maybe, just maybe, people can tell that he’s half-Asian, but they don’t racially abuse him, because they simply do not care?

I inadvertently benefit from white privilege; except, of course, online when my foreign-sounding surname means it’s open season.

Without examples, we only have his word for this.

Boilerplate racism

White privilege is different to overt prejudice and the majority of Irish people deplore naked, boilerplate racism, of course. But one of its defining traits is that those who benefit may be unaware that they do so.

Oh yes, the whole “you can’t see your privileges” argument. Of course, if we were to point out the privileges that non-white racial minorities have such as, for example, the privilege to make sweeping judgements about all white people, without being shamed as a racist for doing so, they wouldn’t see them either. How about the privilege of knowing that other races have the right to a homeland of their own, in which their race can guarantee it’s survival and continuation as a distinct demographic, whereas all white people, have to live in multicultural societies, in which it will be impossible to do the same thing. Inevitably, if things continue the way they’re going, we will become minorities in our own countries and be overrun by other races. Those other races meanwhile will always have countries, in which their own race will remain the majority.





There are plenty of Irish people who will look away when a person of colour – born here or not – points to race-based prejudice.

Because it gets thrown around so much that it begins to lose all meaning. In all honesty, everyone holds some level of racial prejudice. In fact, even infants with no concept of race, show preference for their own. In other words, it seems to be a hardwired, biological instinct, rather than a learned behaviour.

dollys-for-internet_thumb (1)
It’s only evil when white babies do it.

This doesn’t mean that treating members of another race like shit because of their race is justified in any way. It simply means that people of all races, have a natural, in built preference to be around other people of their own. Kin selection, but on a larger scale essentially. So why is it that only white people are shamed for exhibiting this natural, biological, instinctive behaviour, when every other races feels it too? This is basically getting into the area of thought crime, were white people are automatically just as evil and monstrous as the Nazis, just because they feel more comfortable around other white people. That is wrong.

They’ve created their own bubble, unaffected by the same discrimination, that denies its existence. They will contort themselves into pretzels to stop it from being burst.

Or maybe we’re just too busy dealing with our own personal problems and struggles to deal with his issues. Again, what exactly does he want us to do? He and other like him keep moaning about the alleged discrimination they face, but they never seem to suggest anything that we can do to perhaps solve it.

Take the case of Samia Jalal, who applied for the same job at a Dublin radio station under two different names: her own and the more traditionally Melanin-deprived name of Neville. One was accepted for an interview and the other received a rejection notice. The excuse from the company that this was nothing more sinister than an “administrative error” seems beyond the realms of believability. Jalal hit social media with facts and evidence, but her claims were met with derision.

Finally, a specific case, rather than just vague and unspecified moaning. Assuming this story is completely above board and not a hoax, then I fully agree that this was wrong on the part of the employer. However, this is not evidence of a systematic problem.

And then there is the popular @Ireland Twitter account – which sees a different person curate it each week in an attempt to paint a broad picture of contemporary Irish society. It suffered numerous racist attacks when Michelle Marie, a black woman, took the wheel.

This might have something to do with the fact that the indigenous ethnic Irish population are racially white. By having a black woman in control of the @Ireland twitter account, it symbolically (whether intentional or not) is a reminder of the fact that we are being gradually ethnically replaced in our own ancestral homeland, and this bothers us on an instinctive level. I don’t agree with the racial abuse directed towards the woman, but I will say that it does offend me that she was the face chosen to control our country’s twitter account, because it almost seems as if it was done to mock us about being displaced in our own country. Could you imagine the outrage if a white person was given control of the twitter account of some random African country for example? People would be outraged, saying it was yet another example of “white privilege” or “neo-colonialism” or something along those lines. So why is it that we can’t be offended when the same thing happens to us?

Captain Sweden, played by a black actor. Read the comments to see how this went down.

White panel

The Last Word on Today FM had a segment on the back of this that discussed racism in Ireland. It featured an all-white panel. *

You should be grateful for the fact that they even took the time to have such a panel at all. As I’ve said before, only white people are indigenous to Ireland. All non-white people are here because we were generous enough to allow them in, and they then came here, either by their own choice, or that of their parents. If the country is so racist, then why did they choose to not only come here, but to stay?

This situation yet again

Perhaps that’s why the Irish slave myth has surfaced. The indentured servitude experienced by Irish immigrants in America is being compared to the horrors of perpetual chattel slavery as a way of delegitimising black suffering. It’s horribly inaccurate.

Ok, a few facts about the slave trade.

  1.  The Arab slave trade went on for far longer than the Atlantic slave trade and was far more brutal in its treatment of slaves (the West didn’t castrate their slaves for example). Arabs also enslaved black people, just like white Western countries, but nobody tries to shame Arabs for what their ancestors did.
  2. While the United States may have generated the most wealth from slave labour (I’m not certain, I’d need to do further research), it was actually Brazil , not America which had the highest number of African slaves out of any country in the Americas.
  3. Those African slaves were originally enslaved by other Africans, and then sold to Europeans afterwards at slave markets. This doesn’t mean that the white Europeans are blameless of course. It just means that they weren’t the only guilty party, and shouldn’t take all the blame.
  4. All races have practiced slavery at some point in history, and all races have been victims of it. It wasn’t just white people who enslaved other races, and white people themselves have been enslaved too throughout history.
  5. There were free black people in America who themselves owned slaves. One of the the largest slave owners in America was a black man by the name of William Ellison. There was also Anthony Johnson, and Antoine Dubuclet.
  6. In fact, it was because of the actions of the black man, Anthony Johnson that chattel slavery even began in America. Before then, indentured servitude existed, and slaves would eventually be freed after a few years of service, but he wanted to keep his slave, John Casor permanently, took his case to court, and was awarded ownership of him for life. That set the precedent which followed for all slaves in America.
  7. Most of the major slave ships in the Atlantic slave trade were run by Dutch Jews, rather than white Christians, but this is never brought up because doing so would be “anti-semitic”. Yet it’s perfectly OK to lay such blame on “white people” in general.
  8. Western civilisations (led by Britain) were the first civilisations to willingly choose to abolish slavery. Every other culture in the world had to have abolition forced upon them by the West. Most would have kept practicing it if not for Western efforts to make it illegal on a global scale. Parts of Africa and the Middle East still practice it today even though it’s illegal globally.
  9. America fought a bloody civil war to end slavery because those who fought to end it knew it was wrong. Yet their white descendants are still made to feel guilty for slavery anyway.
  10. Only a small percentage of white Americans actually owned slaves. Some estimates say as little as 1%, some as high as 5%. Yet all white people are made to feel shame for this in America today even though they weren’t alive for it, and chances are, their ancestors weren’t involved either.

Just to be clear, I’m not justifying slavery in any way because it was wrong, no matter where it was practiced. However, I do take offence to this idea of only ever talking about the experiences of black slaves at the hands of white people in white majority countries, as if those are the only slaves whose experiences matter. I guess it’s another example of our white privilege. We have the privilege of having our entire race share the guilt for what other white people did hundreds of years ago, and the privilege of having the suffering of members of our own race at the hands of other races ignored as if it doesn’t matter.

In 2016, people of colour’s modern-day torments are still being marginalised. Prejudice isn’t being called out.

If anything, it’s being called out too much, even in situations were it isn’t even true. But by all means, keep living in your fantasy land, were white people aren’t living in constant terror that someone might think they’re a racist, and that any accusation of such, doesn’t potentially destroy their reputations.

Victims of racism are being met with suspicion.

Probably because the race card is pulled so often, that people are naturally suspicious that it’s yet another false or exaggerated claim. Don’t blame us for being suspicious. Blame those who have overused the term “racist”, to the point were it has lost all meaning.

When it comes to race relations, there’s plenty of distance left to run.

Again, with the vague and unspecified statements. If there is a specific race problem, then say what it is, and then we can have a conversation and try to resolve it. These vague comments just come off as moaning, and aren’t constructive in the slightest.

White privilege is real and it’s in Ireland.

Needless to say, I disagree.

ISIS terrorists to be given “free everything” in Sweden.

With the looming possibility of a potential third world war occurring, I’ve had a difficult time paying attention to much else that’s been going on in the world. There simply hasn’t been much else happening lately that seems significant enough in comparison to that topic worth discussing instead. Today however I found a rather interesting story from the old reliable Sweden, that I just couldn’t pass up.

From Fria Tider (Translated by Google)

The Muslims who returned to Sweden after returning to the terrorist organization Islamic state, ice, in the Middle East can be offered tax benefits which drivers education, free housing and even debt restructuring.

Free housing.

Free driving lessons.

Special tax benefits.

All to be given to returning ISIS terrorists.

“Hello Swedish infidels. We’re here for our free money and houses. Allahu Akbar.”

This must be the epitome of a nation going out of its way to destroy itself for absolutely no reason. There is literally no conceivable way that you can justify something like this and say that it’s somehow beneficial to Sweden. Seriously, is there any single benefit that people can name, that come from having ISIS fighters in your country? Especially benefits which justify handing over all these free things to them? Because I sure can’t think of any.

Swedish Radio has talked with Christoffer Carlsson, author of the report at the national coordinator against violent extremism, which lines up examples of how the terrorists to be “reintegrated” into Swedish society with the help of state funds.

Why would you want to “reintegrate” them at all? In fact, why were they even allowed into Sweden in the first place? Why did Sweden need these people? What benefit was it to Sweden and the Swedish people, to do this?  What was the fucking point in filling a once great country like Sweden with people from a hostile and incompatible cultural background? The country worked just fine the way it was, and arguably had the highest living standards of any country on the planet. There never was a good reason for going down this path.

This was Sweden before “diversity”.
This is Sweden after.

– It’s a straight through social, economic and material terms. You need to be able to reintegrate into the job market, you may need to have a driving license, debt settlement and shelter. When people leave, they want to leave for something else, they have not the resources to it so it is difficult to realize it, says Christoffer Carlsson.

Brilliant logic there Christoffer. The returning ISIS fighters must have just come back to Sweden to get jobs. They must have gotten bored with capturing sex slaves and beheading all the “non-believers” in Syria. They certainly couldn’t possibly be planning to engage in similar activities on Swedish soil. Instead, they probably decided they wanted to come back to Sweden to drive IKEA delivery trucks. If only they knew how to drive. Seeing as these terrorists provide such vast (but never specified or explained) benefits to Sweden, then the only solution is to give them housing and opportunities ahead of your own indigenous citizens, who’ve never beheaded anyone. It makes perfect sense.

Without that kind of sour cream on the Swedish taxpayers’ expense, there is a risk that terrorists “do not pass” to leave the Muslim extremist environment, stresses Carlsson.

If only there was another solution to this problem such as, ooh… I dunno… NOT LETTING THESE MONSTERS INTO YOUR FUCKING COUNTRY TO BEGIN WITH!!!!

“But how would Sweden survive without its ISIS terrorists?”                 

In SR’s reports also participates Anna Sjöstrand, municipal coordinator against violent extremism in Lund. She points out that one can not deny the terrorists the tax benefits just because they made a “wrong choice”.

Becoming a terrorist was just a “wrong choice”. Just like when you write the number 5 instead of 4 to the question “What is 2 plus 2?”. Not a big deal, everybody makes mistakes once in a while. Why should those poor innocent terrorists be punished just because they made a silly mistake that involved joining an organistation that is actively raping, murdering, and enslaving untold numbers of people? Sure, they’re not indigenous Swedish people. Sure, they’ve probably never paid a penny in tax in Sweden. Sure, they have attitudes and beliefs which are completely incompatible with Sweden’s liberal values. None of this matters. They should be allowed to benefit from Sweden’s tax payer funded resources anyway, for reasons which will never actually be explained.

– We can not say that because you made a wrong choice, you have no right to come back and live in our society, says Anna Sjöstrand to SR.

Yes you can. You have every right to tell these scum that they have no right to live in your society. They aren’t Swedish. You have no obligation to them. You just won’t do that, because you Swedes are a bunch of virtue signalling cowards, who are more afraid of being thought of as “intolerant” or “bigoted” by an enemy that wants you dead and laughs at your stupidity anyway, than the idea of your once great country being destroyed. I really think you’re all beyond saving at this point. The sooner the collapse happens so you can serve as an example to the rest of us, the better.

Soon… though I doubt there’ll be many rainbows seen at that point.

Jewish ADL accuses Trump of anti-Semitism, for speech he made.

So Donald Trump made a big speech recently, in which he pointed out the completely obvious reality that there are powerful forces in the world who use their control of various important institutions in our societies, to try and influence political decisions in ways that favour them. Even for someone who isn’t a big follower of current affairs, this statement should just simply be common sense, just from looking at the way the world works. Whether it’s starting wars, allowing mass immigration from incompatible cultures, bank bailouts, the implementation of unfair taxes and laws etc., we constantly see establishment politicians making decisions which are the exact opposite of what the majority of their voters want from them. It would make absolutely no sense to make such universally unpopular decisions, unless there were powerful people in control of these politicians, who somehow benefited from these decisions. We’ve heard many terms used to describe these figures: Globalists, Illuminati, the One Percent, etc., but there’s one specific group of people, who were greatly offended by Trump’s speech.

God’s chosen people.
“Oy vey Goyim. That’s just an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, with no basis in reality.”

So let’s read what they said.

From Mediaite

Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt warned on Twitter Thursday that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump‘s rhetoric was bordering on tropes historically used to ferment hatred of Jews.

In a Thursday speech, Trump argued that Hillary Clinton “meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty,” in order to enrich “global international powers,” an apparent reference to her paid Wall Street speeches. He added that “media enablers [wield] control over this nation through means that are very well known.”

Greenblatt argued in a tweet that the notion that “international bankers” and the media were secretly planning the destruction of America is dangerously close to common anti-Semitic claims.

The speech itself.

Strange really isn’t it. I haven’t watched the full speech myself yet, because of how long it is, but from everything I’ve read up on it, apparently Trump never actually mentioned the word “Jew” at all. He just made vague references to a powerful group of elites who control international finance, establishment politics, and the media, and that they use their power and influence to push forward with agendas which benefit themselves and their inner circles, at the expense of the general population. Agendas such as mass third world immigration to the first world, globalisation, pointless wars, and relentless propaganda campaigns against anything which could be a threat to their goals (such as Brexit and the possibility of a Trump presidency). Yet even though he never once mentioned Jews apparently, the Jewish run ADL is accusing him of anti-Semitism, simply for pointing out the very obvious reality, that there are powerful people conspiring to push unpopular and destructive agendas which benefit themselves only.

If that’s the case, then by saying that these comments about a group of unnamed powerful people is “anti-Semitic” is that not essentially an admission on their part, that these unnamed powerful people are in fact Jews?









I’ll let you ponder that one for a while.

We might not need to wait for Hillary, to get WW3

So the war might happen before the election at this rate. If that was the case, Obama would probably call a state of emergency, “postpone” the election, and stay in power for the duration of the war. At least it would stop that horrible hate filled racist/sexist, who says mean words from coming to power.

From RT

US President Barack Obama is set to discuss further US action in Syria with his senior foreign policy advisers at the National Security Council (NSC) on Friday. US officials say military options are to be mulled over, among other possibilities.

One scenario to be discussed involves direct US military action in Syria, including airstrikes on Syrian military, radar and anti-aircraft bases, as well as arms depots, Reuters  citing high-ranking US officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.

This is just absolute insanity. The Syrian civil war is being fought between two major forces: The Assad government and Russia, versus various terrorist groups (of which ISIS is the most notable). The US claim that in addition to the terrorists, there are “moderate opposition forces” as well, which are fighting against both ISIS and Assad, but if that was the case, then why would these “moderates” be living and fighting alongside actual terrorist groups?

They literally told Russia to stop bombing a terrorist stronghold, because moderate opposition forces were there too. Why would moderates be there, if they’re supposedly enemies off the terrorists?

It’s a complete bullshit narrative. These so called “moderates”, may not be ISIS by name, but they are in fact aligned with them. I think most people would also agree, that ISIS are by far the greater threat to the world right now than the Assad government, yet the US is actually choosing to attack the Assad government forces instead. This is actually beyond the realm of comprehension because of how insane it sounds. I guarantee if you were to ask any random person what’s going on in Syria, they would naturally assume that the US is fighting against ISIS, seeing as that would be the course of action that would make sense. Not only that, but because the reality of what is actually going on is so nonsensical, they would not be able to process it at all.

A normie trying to process the truth.

Another scenario to be considered is allowing coalition forces to provide the US-backed ‘moderate Syrian opposition’ with advanced ammunition and weaponry.


I’m actually responding to this article as I go through it (as in, I haven’t actually read through in its entirety yet, and am just breaking it up as I go along). Actually seeing the term “moderate Syrian opposition” now, after having used the similar “moderate opposition forces” term myself earlier, just shows how predictable they are with their overused lies.



This would not include shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, as Washington fears they could be used against Western airliners.

Nonsense, nothing could possibly go wrong, allowing a bunch of primitive barbarians to get their hands on advanced weaponry. Nothing at…


The officials, however, stated it was unlikely that Obama would actually give the green light to US airstrikes on Syrian government targets, or that he would make any specific decisions at the upcoming meeting.

Why is he even considering it then? This is not a game. If he attacks the Syrian forces, that puts him directly at odds with Russia. Why, why would you even consider such stupidity?

One official noted that, as Russian and Syrian troops cooperate extensively, striking Syrian government forces could result in a direct confrontation between the US and Russia – something Obama has been trying to avoid.

Trying to avoid… yet he keeps provoking them anyway. This is absolutely ridiculous. The only possible explanation I can think of, is that he isn’t really trying to avoid it at all, but he doesn’t want America to make the first strike. Instead, he’s hoping to provoke Russia into attacking first, thus making them look like the aggressors in any conflict that results. Purely a public relations thing, because he knows damn well that the American people (and indeed, the world at large),  won’t support a war of aggression against Russia, but retaliation against a Russian attack would be a different story.

The White House declined to comment on the speculation surrounding any possible decisions, but confirmed the NSC meeting will take place on Friday, Reuters reported.

US authorities have already raised the bombing of Syrian government forces as an option, with White House spokesman Josh Earnest telling reporters last week that although such action is unlikely to reduce violence, nothing can be taken off the table under the circumstances.

Might I suggest ‘Recognising the legitimacy of the Assad government, pulling your forces out of Syria, and cutting off all support to the terrorists’ as an alternative solution instead?

According to a recent report in the Washington Post, several top US officials have been considering striking positions of the Syrian military covertly and without a UN Security Council resolution.

Illegal under international law. Not that they haven’t been acting illegally already, but this is bad even for them.

The NSC meeting comes just ahead of the ministerial talks on Syria in Lausanne, Switzerland. On Wednesday, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced that Russia, the US and a number of regional powers will have a meeting “in a narrow format” on October 15 to discuss possible steps for a Syrian settlement.

Commenting on the upcoming Lausanne talks, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov expressed hope that they “will launch a serious dialogue on the basis of the principles contained in the Russian-American deal, which was broadly welcomed but which unfortunately was not launched.”

Again, Russia is trying to be reasonable here, just like when they agreed to that stupid US orchestrated ceasefire, that the terrorists broke about 24 hours later. They really are trying their best to avoid this war. I can guarantee that if it does break out anyway, that there will be a lot of anti-Russian propaganda in our media, holding them responsible for causing it. That’s why I think it’s important to get the facts straight now, before it happens, so we can see through the lies when we hear them.

“Breaking news. Russia started this war because Putin is the new Hitler, and he hates our western freedoms. Bla bla bla bla bla.”

The US State Department noted that Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry are likely to focus their discussion on the situation in the Syrian city of Aleppo and “getting cessation of hostility in place,”which could enable conditions for political talks to resume.

Last week, Washington officially suspended bilateral cooperation with Moscow, ending a brief period of close cooperation aimed at sustaining the ceasefire in Syria, which had been agreed by the sides on September 9 after months of negotiations. The move followed mutual accusations of failing to fulfill the obligations agreed upon. The US claimed Russia didn’t deliver on a promise to ensure Damascus suspended its military campaign and provide humanitarian access to besieged areas of Syria, while Russia accused the US of failing to separate the moderate opposition under its control from the jihadists, particularly from Al-Nusra Front (now Jabhat Fateh al-Sham), as was agreed, and organize the withdrawal of militants from Castello Road to allow humanitarian aid supply to Aleppo.

In his interview to Russia’s Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper earlier this week, Syrian President Bashar Assad said there are no “moderates” fighting in Aleppo, as all armed groups there “work with Al-Nusra in the area that’s controlled by Al-Nusra.”

This should be obvious just from using common sense. If there really were moderate forces who are opposed to both Assad and the extremist groups, in the extremist controlled regions, then wouldn’t the extremists have killed them already? It wouldn’t make sense to keep any other armed forces around in areas under your control, unless those other armed forces were actually your allies.


Assad denied criticism that Russian and Syrian air forces are bombing the positions of moderate rebels, stressing that anyone who holds a weapon is a terrorist. Concerning the United States and its actions in Syria, the leader said Washington is using the battle against terrorists as an excuse to achieve its own objectives in the wider Middle East as well as those of its allies, while trying to keep the “hegemony of the Americans around the world.”

Couldn’t have said it better myself. You would think it would be obvious by now.We saw the same tricks in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya already. Are people really going to fall for it again, and believe that America has good intentions in Syria?



Vote Trump or face nuclear war

Well they’ve finally come out and said it outright. It was obvious to me many months ago that this was going to happen. In fact, it was a point that I specifically brought up back in February when I wrote my post about “Why I support Trump”. I made it quite clear that America’s relationship with Russia is deteriorating, and that it would only get worse to the point of potential war between the two, if Hillary Clinton was to come to power. Trump on the other hand has made it clear that he wants to improve America’s relationship with Russia and as far as I’m concerned, that’s probably the most vital issue of this election.

This is how unhinged these people actually are. They would actually choose nuclear war over a guy who says politically incorrect things.

You see, I don’t care about the man’s personality flaws. I don’t care that he’s said things that are considered taboo to say in our insane, overly politically correct world. In the grand scheme of things, none of that stuff really matters. All they are, is just fucking words. Nobody is going to get killed by them. There’s no way anyone can try to claim the moral high ground by supporting the woman who may very well lead us into the most destructive war, with the greatest potential for lost human life in human history, over a man who says stuff that people take offence to. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fucking moron.

So anyway, an ally of Putin has come out and stated what was obvious to me months ago… that America needs a Trump victory, or else nuclear war could be inevitable.


Americans should vote for Donald Trump as president next month or risk being dragged into a nuclear war, according to a Russian ultra-nationalist ally of President Vladimir Putin who likes to compare himself to the U.S. Republican candidate.

Just in case it isn’t clear, this is not a threat, even though it might look like it. Rather, it is a plead to the American people to see sense and make the right choice. If you’ve read any of my previous articles on this topic, you would know that America, not Russia, have been the aggressors in this situation, and that Hillary Clinton is one of the most aggressive of all. A Hillary victory is 100% guaranteed to result in her going after Russia even more, and this is what this Russian guy is hoping to prevent. He wants someone that Russia can actually cooperate with, not an unstable lunatic like Hillary, who seems to have a vendetta against them.

Even as far back as mid 2013, she was already threatening them. Make sure to read the video comments as well to get a better insight.

Vladimir Zhirinovsky, a flamboyant veteran lawmaker known for his fiery rhetoric, told Reuters in an interview that Trump was the only person able to de-escalate dangerous tensions between Moscow and Washington.

By contrast, Trump’s Democratic rival Hillary Clinton could spark World War Three, said Zhirinovsky, who received a top state award from Putin after his pro-Kremlin Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) came third in Russia’s parliamentary election last month.

See what I mean? The Russians don’t want things to get worse. They actually do want to find a peaceful solution. It’s just that they recognise the fact that the current American establishment (of which, Hillary is a major player in), can’t be reasoned with at all.

It’s not as if they haven’t tried reasoning with America. They just wouldn’t listen.

Many Russians regard Zhirinovsky as a clownish figure who makes outspoken statements to grab attention but he is also widely viewed as a faithful servant of Kremlin policy, sometimes used to float radical opinions to test public reaction. 

“Relations between Russia and the United States can’t get any worse. The only way they can get worse is if a war starts,” said Zhirinovsky, speaking in his huge office on the 10th floor of Russia’s State Duma, or lower house of parliament.

“Americans voting for a president on Nov. 8 must realize that they are voting for peace on Planet Earth if they vote for Trump. But if they vote for Hillary it’s war. It will be a short movie. There will be Hiroshimas and Nagasakis everywhere.”

Again, not a threat. Simply a statement of fact. If Russia and America were to go to war it would cause major destruction worldwide, because of the firepower that both countries possess. The fact that people like Hillary and her backers aren’t concerned, leads me to believe that they must have somewhere safe to go and hide when all hell breaks loose.

Should be safe from the nukes in here.

The ordinary citizens on the other hand…

…won’t have the same opportunities.

Zhirinovsky’s comments coincide with deep disagreements between Washington and Moscow over Syria and Ukraine and after the White House last week accused Russia of a campaign of cyber attacks against Democratic Party organizations.

Without any evidence to back up these accusations.

Even as WikiLeaks released another trove of internal documents from Clinton’s campaign on Wednesday, Putin insisted his country was not involved in an effort to influence the U.S. presidential election.

He wouldn’t even need to. From what I understand, the “hacked” documents came from John Podesta’s Gmail account. As far as I know, Google’s servers weren’t hacked, it was only his account, which means that whoever “hacked” him had to get his password specifically. He probably just responded to a phishing email, or he may have just used a very weak password that could have been guessed easily, or was perhaps used on multiple sites. You wouldn’t need Russia to do something as simple as that.

Zhirinovsky likes to shock liberal public opinion and he has frequently heaped scorn on the West, which he and other Russian nationalists regard as decadent, hypocritical and corrupted by political correctness.

I wonder how he got that impression of the West.









His combative style, reminiscent of Trump’s, ensures him plenty of television air time and millions of votes in Russian elections, often from the kind of blue-collar workers who are the bedrock of the U.S. Republican candidate’s support.

Zhirinovsky once proposed blocking off mostly Muslim southern Russia with a barbed wire fence, echoing Trump’s call for a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico.

Must be another hate-filled Islamophobe, who hates Muslims for no reason, just like Trump. If only these hate filled bigots would learn that Islam is a religion of peace. They media even tells us so every single time a terrorist attack is committed by someone claiming to represent Islam, and it must be true, because our media would never dream of lying to us.

Zhirinovsky, who said he met Trump in New York in 2002, revels in his similarities with the American businessman — they are the same age, favor coarse, sometimes misogynistic language and boast about putting their own country first. Zhirinovsky has even said he wants a DNA test to see if he is related to Trump.

But unlike Trump, a billionaire real estate developer who casts himself as the anti-establishment candidate in the U.S. presidential race with no past political experience, Zhirinovsky is a consummate political insider who has sat in the Duma for more than two decades.

Putin has also praised Trump as “very talented”, while the Republican candidate has said the Kremlin boss is a better leader than U.S. President Barack Obama. Clinton has accused Trump of being too cozy with Putin and questioned his business interests in Russia.

In other comments that have delighted Moscow, Trump has questioned the value of NATO for Washington, has spoken ambiguously about Russia’s 2014 annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea and suggested that the United States under his leadership would adopt a more isolationist foreign policy.

And sure, why shouldn’t they? Look at all the damage they’ve done to the world in the last few years by interfering in the affairs of others. They destroyed Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq. They would have destroyed Syria, if Russia hadn’t gotten involved when they did. All they’ve done is destabilised the world, and caused the loss of so many lives, that never should have been lost. That’s why I have to laugh as well at anyone who is outraged at what Russia is doing to Aleppo. No, it isn’t the ideal scenario, but at the same time, it wouldn’t even be happening, if America hadn’t trained, armed, and financed, a bunch of terrorists, to destabilise Syria in the first place.

“He (Trump) won’t care about Syria, Libya and Iraq and why an earth should America interfere in these countries? And Ukraine. Who needs Ukraine?,” said Zhirinovsky, who once counted himself a friend of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi and whose deaths he still laments.

“Trump will have a brilliant chance to make relations more peaceful … He’s the only one who can do this,” he said, adding that Trump could even win a Nobel peace prize.

Hey, if Henry Kissinger could win one, then I don’t see why Trump couldn’t.

What a wonderful man, truly deserving of the award.

Clinton ‘craves’ power

In contrast, Zhirinovsky described Clinton as “an evil mother-in law” and said her record as secretary of state under Obama in 2009-2013 showed she was unfit to lead her country.

I agree. Actions speak louder than words, and Hillary has proven herself to be unfit for office, whereas Trump is a great unknown. If the choice is between a guaranteed disaster, or a wild card who could go either way, then the choice is obvious to me, I’ll take my chances on the wild card.

“She craves power. Her view is that Hillary is the most important person on the planet, that America is an exceptional country, as Barack Obama said,” said Zhirinovsky. “That’s dangerous. She could start a nuclear war.”

In typically chauvinistic remarks, Zhirinovsky said Clinton’s gender should also bar her from the presidency.

“Most Americans should choose Trump because men have been leading for millions of year. You can’t take the risk of having one of the richest, most powerful countries led by a woman president,” he said.

Whether you agree with this or not, it’s not the most important to take from all of this. Feel free to condemn the man for his comments about women in general if you wish, but don’t think for a second that just because you disagree with that point, that it suddenly makes Hillary any better than she was. She’s still the same, unstable, psychopath that she always was, regardless of whether you condone his comments about women or not.

Asked about lewd comments Trump made about women in 2005 that have harmed his campaign, Zhirinovsky defended the Republican: “Men all round the world sometimes say such things that are just for their comrades. We must only consider his business (and political) qualities.”

Again, something I agree with. Plenty of us say things in private, that we wouldn’t consider appropriate to say publicly. What really matters is the actions that we take. If we’re really going to go down that path of bringing private conversations into the mix, then there’s plenty that can be used against Hillary too. Again, if you want to condemn either one of them for things they’ve said, then do as you wish. You’re perfectly free to disagree with them if you want. However, none of it is relevant to the presidency, as far as I’m concerned. Only the actions that they’ll perform in their role as president matter, and the way I see it, Trump is the superior choice for the role.

Though Putin and Trump have never met, Zhirinovsky said he believed they could establish a close working relationship, adding: “Victory for Trump would be a gift to humanity. But if Hillary Clinton wins it will be the last U.S. president ever.”

Ominous words. Let’s hope cooler heads prevail.

After November, will it be this…
…or this?

It’s beginning…

So yeah, it really looks as if the big war between Russia and the West might actually be getting underway soon. I’m really feeling very pessimistic right now.

From Daily Mail

Russia is ordering all of its officials to fly home any relatives living abroad amid heightened tensions over the prospect of global war, it has been claimed.

Global war. They actually used those words. I think this might very well be the very first time were anyone has actually come right out and said it. There’s been plenty of hints that it might eventually come to this, and these hints were obvious even to me just shy of a year ago. So if an ordinary person like me could see this coming, that long ago, then surely those in power, have known for much longer. The fact that they’ve actually let it get this stage rather than trying to resolve it peacefully, is truly a testament to just how sick and twisted our elites really are.

Politicians and high-ranking figures are said to have received a warning from president Vladimir Putin to bring their loved-ones home to the ‘Motherland’, according to local media.

Putin doesn’t strike me as the panicky type. The fact that he is this concerned this time, suggests that he sees this is a very serious matter.

It comes after Putin cancelled a planned visit to France amid a furious row over Moscow’s role in the Syrian conflict and just days after it emerged the Kremlin had moved nuclear-capable missiles near to the Polish border.

Again let me point out that Moscow’s role in the Syrian conflict is legal under international law, as they were actually invited by the legal Syrian government to help out there. It’s the West who have been acting illegally by operating there without the consent of either the UN Security Council, or the Syrian government.

And as for the point about moving nuclear missiles close to the Polish border, can you really blame them? With how much the West has been provoking them the last few years, I simply see this as a way of saying “We will stand up for ourselves”.

“And then would you believe, they had the audacity to move their missiles around, within their own border space. What an aggressive warmonger that Putin is”~ Western media and politicians.

Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev has also warned that the world is at a ‘dangerous point’ due to rising tensions between Russia and the US.

See my previous post for that.

According to the Russian site, administration staff, regional administrators, lawmakers of all levels and employees of public corporations have been ordered to take their children out of foreign schools immediately.

Failure to act will see officials jeopardising their chances of promotion, local media has reported.

The exact reason for the order is not yet clear.

Maybe not the exact reason, but we can make a pretty educated guess. It wouldn’t make sense, strategically speaking, to have some of your top people trapped in other countries, while you’re at war with those countries.

But Russian political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky is quoted by the Daily Star as saying: ‘This is all part of the package of measures to prepare elites to some ‘big war’.’ 

Relations between Russia and the US are at their lowest since the Cold War and have soured in recent days after Washington pulled the plug on Syria talks and accused Russia of hacking attacks.

Alleged hacking attacks, for which they are yet to provide any evidence for.

The Kremlin has also suspended a series of nuclear pacts, including a symbolic cooperation deal to cut stocks of weapons-grade plutonium. 

Just days ago, it was reported that Russia had moved nuclear-capable missiles near to the Polish border as tensions escalated between the world’s largest nation and the West.

The Iskander missiles sent to Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave on the Baltic Sea between Nato members Poland and Lithuania, are now within range of major Western cities including Berlin.

On the plus side. If Berlin gets nuked, it might get rid of a lot of recently arrived jihadists and gang rapists.

Typical “New Berliners”, who recently escaped the brutal Syrian civil war in Turkey.

No, in all seriousness, there is no bright side to this situation. It’s really, really bad.

Polish officials – whose capital Warsaw is potentially threatened – have described the move as of the ‘highest concern’. 

And so it should be.

Putin’s decision to cancel his Paris visit came a day after French President Francois Hollande said Syrian forces had committed a ‘war crime’ in the battered city of Aleppo with the support of Russian air strikes.

Yeah… nobody cares about what this guy thinks.

Putin had been due in Paris on October 19 to inaugurate a spiritual centre at a new Russian Orthodox church near the Eiffel Tower, but Hollande had insisted his Russian counterpart also took part in talks with him about Syria.

I think he (Hollande) would be better served focusing on his own problems, like the frequent Islamic terrorist attacks, instead of lecturing Putin over something which is none of his business.

The unprecedented cancellation of a visit so close to being finalised is a ‘serious step… reminiscent of the Cold War’, said Russian foreign policy analyst Fyodor Lukyanov.

‘This is part of the broader escalation in the tensions between Russia and the West, and Russia and NATO,’ he told AFP.

The Kremlin has also been angered over the banning of the Russian Paralympic team from the Rio Olympics amid claims of state-sponsored doping of its athletes.

Yeah, just like with Trump, they’ll try and throw pretty much anything  they can think of at Russia, in their relentless campaign to demonise them.

Meanwhile, the top advisor to US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has said the FBI is investigating Russia’s possible role in hacking thousands of his personal emails.

Oh, so it’s only a “possible role” now? With the way they’ve spoken about it before, you would think they had already been tried, found guilty, and used up every one of their appeals, what with how sure they claimed to be, that Russia were responsible for the hacks.

“GUILTY…um… I mean, ‘ORDER’. Court is now in session. *cough* “guilty”*cough*

But Russian officials have vigorously rejected accusations of meddling in the US presidential elections and dismissed allegations that Moscow was behind a series of recent hacks on US institutions. 

And as I’ve said before, America’s word has such little credibility in my eyes anymore, that I’m more inclined to trust Russia than America, whenever they have a differing interpretation of the truth.

Retired Russian Lt. Gen. Evgeny Buzhinsky told the BBC: ‘Of course there is a reaction. As far as Russia sees it, as Putin sees it, it is full-scale confrontation on all fronts. If you want a confrontation, you’ll get one.

‘But it won’t be a confrontation that doesn’t harm the interests of the United States. You want a confrontation, you’ll get one everywhere.’

And I believe it. This isn’t some puny Arab country that America can push around with ease. If it came down to it, Russia could very well win.

Earlier this week British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson waded into the row, calling for anti-war campaigners to protest outside the Russian embassy in London.

Fucking idiot. So America are the aggressors in this conflict, and this buffoons solution is to call on people to protest outside the Russian embassy instead of the American one. The sheer stupidity of that line of thought is absolutely astounding. Although perhaps it isn’t necessarily stupidity, but rather just an early start in trying to place the blame on Russia, when the war starts. I can guarantee that if it does really happen, our entire controlled media will launch a major propaganda campaign against Russia.  Don’t believe the lies when it happens. The West are entirely at fault in this case.

Johnson said the ‘wells of outrage are growing exhausted’ and anti-war groups were not expressing sufficient outrage at the conflict in Aleppo.

‘Where is the Stop the War Coalition at the moment? Where are they?’ he said during a parliamentary debate. 

I don’t know Boris. Indeed, where are the protesters, and why aren’t they protesting against America and its allies, for causing the war in the first place by training, arming and financing the opposition forces? You can oppose what Russia is doing to Aleppo all you want, but the fact is, they wouldn’t even be doing what they’re doing, if those forces hadn’t been supported by America in the first place.

Gorbachev is worried about possible nuclear war.

The potential war is definitely seeming more like a reality every single day.

From Yahoo News

Moscow (AFP) – Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev warned on Monday that the world has reached a “dangerous point” as tensions between Russia and the United States spike over the Syria conflict.

And yet the average person hasn’t got a clue about any of this at all. It’s blatantly in our faces, and yet nobody is talking about it. There’s probably more people in the world right now who are still talking about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt breaking up, or about Kim Kardashian having millions of dollars worth of Jewelry taken from her in an armed robbery recently, than about issues like this which actually matter.

My own theory is that Kanye organised the robbery himself, so that he could claim the insurance money for the jewelry, and then fence the “stolen” jewels on the black market. Just kidding, I doubt he would be bright enough to think of a plan like that. Also, who the fuck cares anyway? It’s not an important issue.

Relations between Moscow and Washington — already at their lowest since the Cold War over the Ukraine conflict — have soured further in recent days as the United States pulled the plug on Syria talks and accused Russia of hacking attacks.

Yeah, they’ve accused Russia of being involved in some crazy conspiracy alongside Donald Trump, Wikileaks, and internet trolls, to try and rig the election in favour of Trump. At least, I think that’s the claim that they’ve made. I’m not sure exactly, because it’s all so ridiculous, that it’s hard to really comprehend what they’re saying. Also, as far as I can see so far, they’ve offered absolutely no evidence to back up their claims about Russia yet. They may very well be telling the truth, and Russia really could be trying to rig their election, but until they provide evidence, I’m inclined not to believe them, seeing as they’ve lied so many times in the past.

These are the “deplorables”, who are working tirelessly to undermine American democracy. It’s real because the Hillary campaign says so, and they would never lie… except for all those times in the past that they have.

The Kremlin has suspended a series of nuclear pacts, including a symbolic cooperation deal to cut stocks of weapons-grade plutonium.

Yeah, something I addressed in a recent post. Symbolic or not, I don’t see this as being a good thing, not in the slightest.

“I think the world has reached a dangerous point,” Gorbachev, 85, told state news agency RIA Novosti.

“I don’t want to give any concrete prescriptions but I do want to say that this needs to stop. We need to renew dialogue. Stopping it was the biggest mistake.”

I agree that they need to renew dialogue, and that’s why we need to see Trump win, because we sure won’t see it happen if Hillary wins.

As the last leader of the Soviet Union, Gorbachev oversaw an easing of decades of tensions with the West that helped to end the Cold War.

He signed several landmark nuclear disarmament deals with Washington aimed at defusing the standoff between the two superpowers.

“It is necessary to return to the main priorities. These are nuclear disarmament, the fight against terrorism, the prevention of an environmental disaster,” he said.

“Compared to these challenges, all the rest slips into the background.”

I completely agree with the last part. Nothing else matters as much as preventing a potential global war from happening. I don’t care how many politically incorrect things Trump has said in the past. I don’t care about any of the manufactured scandals against him. And I certainly don’t care if he goes through with his plan to put an end to illegal immigration. What I care about, is preventing millions of lives (perhaps even hundreds of millions if nuclear weapons are used) from being lost in a pointless and unwanted conflict. That should be the most important issue of all to any sane person right now, and anyone who thinks they have the moral high ground because they think Trump is worse for saying mean words, is a fucking moron.