Julia Ebner, as a member of the Quilliam Foundation, came to fame after writing an article for the Guardian, in which she accused Tommy Robinson of being ‘Far-Right’ and a ‘White Supremacist’.
We are used to this sort of rubbish in the Guardian but many of us were wondering what had happened to the Quilliam Foundation, as Tommy had been working with them for a few years.
To find out, Tommy visited the offices of the Foundation to speak to Julia face to face. He and his cameraman were assaulted for their trouble and their equipment damaged. So why would Adam Deen and the likely lads at Quilliam feel so protected by law that they would assault Tommy and his cameraman?
I have to warn you! The answer will terrify you!
MUSLIMS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM!
We all know that Muslims have been protected by the state for decades. The police, the media and the government will do anything rather than highlight the crimes committed by Muslims. It seemed logical then that the British State, in its ‘war’ with Radical Islam, would cling to the ‘moderate’ Quilliam Foundation like a drowning man desperately clings to any line you throw him. Unfortunately, we have been fatally naive, the answer is far more sinister!
With the addition of Julia Ebner in 2015, Quilliam went ‘International’ and while she was with them (she left in 2017 to work with the London Institute for Strategic Dialogue, more of which in a moment) she gave us a glimpse of the monster behind the corporate mask. Perhaps more importantly she and Quilliam have given us a clue as to why all western governments have been so intent on importing vast numbers of Muslim immigrants into the West (contrary to the wishes and the best interests of western indigenous populations) and how they will do anything to silence anyone who disagrees with their planned genocide.
For those of you who don’t know, it might be a good idea to explain who and what the Quilliam Foundation is!
Three former members of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Ed Husain, Maajid Nawaz and Rashad Zaman Ali) set up a foundation they called ‘Quilliam’, ostensibly to combat ‘Radical’ Islam.
They chose the name ‘Quilliam’ after a 19th century British convert to Islam who advocated for a worldwide Caliphate and the implementation of Sharia Law in the UK. Mr Quilliam’s views would now be considered to be ‘Radical’ by the British Home Office so the choice of the name for a ‘Moderate’ organisation is not obvious!
The Quilliam Foundation have made a name for themselves by creating a sort of ‘Islam-lite’.
They make the distinction that Islam and Islamism are two different things. Unfortunately, that means having Islam without the Prophet, which is a bit like having a Gin and Tonic, without the Gin.
Predictably enough, anyone with the reading age of ten and who has read the books of the religion of Islam (everybody in the world should read the Kor’an, Hadith and Sira) find the childish word play at best laughable and, at worst, a blatant attempt at Taqiya (lying). And there it would lay, if it were not for the fact that these ‘would be prophets of Islam-lite‘ have the ear of the government.
ISLAM OR ISLAMISM?
The truth is there is only Islam! There is no such thing as ‘Radical’ Islam! Islam is a religion based on the biography of a famous warlord from the 7th Century. It is foundational to the religion that his example and words are the perfect guide for all time and this is the problem: the man could not really be called ‘spiritual’ and was morally ambivalent, untrustworthy, violent and rather found of chopping people’s heads off.
To those of us who actually know something about Islam, the Quilliam Foundation (Now Quilliam International) seemed like a rather ‘dodgy’ lifeline on which to bet the lives of the British people. Most of us assumed that the state’s reliance on Quilliam was simply another example of government stupidity but we were wrong!
While Quilliam’s Maajid Nawaz was busy challenging ‘Radical’ Muslims on prime-time television nobody wanted to explore what Quilliam actually suggested as the solution to the ‘Muslim’ problem.
WORLDWIDE SURVEILLANCE OF ALL MUSLIMS:
The Quilliam Foundation has suggested, in a secret memo, that governments should spy on all Muslims, even those who are not committing terrorist offences. That line bears repeating! That means ‘spy on ALL Muslims’! (I will link to Douglas Murray’s Guardian article in the references).
The problem for Muslims is that ‘Islam-lite’ has no textual validity. That leaves Muslims in a very tricky position! If they follow the texts of their religion they could be accused, by Quilliam, of being radicals. Either way, Muslims are in a lose/lose situation, lose their religion/culture or lose their freedom.
Some of you non-Muslims might titter at this suggestion but remember, tyranny rarely comes with a fanfare or announced in the news. It comes in slowly, like a knife in the back, so slowly you hardly notice it until it is too late.
And so, talking of tyranny, we naturally come back to our lovely Julia Ebner.
JULIA EBNER CAN’T ‘RIGHT’!
Julia left Quilliam and joined the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) in July 2017, just as the guns at Quilliam swept over the heads of Muslims and were brought firmly to bear on anyone who spoke against the progressive, multicultural narrative.
Although Julia’s academic background was focused on economics and Islamic terrorism her true love appears to be in fighting the ‘Right’.
The problem for Julia is that her writing is rather bad, and she insists on using ‘Alt-Right’, ‘Far-Right’ ‘White Supremacist’, Neo-Nazi enthusiastically and somewhat interchangeably.
As it transpires, in many ways Julia is very much like the Prophet of Islam! As you will see in a moment, she is morally ambivalent, vindictive and almost inhuman in her lack of self-awareness.
I won’t subject you to an analysis of her articles here (I will link to them below) so, in the interests of brevity, let’s look at two of her headlines.
JULIA EBNER’S WORK:
The article that, quite rightly, annoyed Tommy was entitled ‘The Far Right Thrives on Global Networks. They must be fought online and off’.
From the beginning of her hit piece, Julia dismisses any opinion or concern she doesn’t agree with as ‘far right’ but never explains what she means by that term. The really worrying sentence is the second and it tells us that ‘they’ (whoever ‘they’ are?) should be fought online and off.
If you stop to think about these two statements, they translate, on the one hand, to censoring speech, having people’s websites and work destroyed and, on the other, to an incitement to violence, which is exactly how ANTIFA took her advice last year when they attacked Tommy in the street.
Before the Second World War Julia would have been suggesting book burning and forcing people, who express ‘wrong speak’ or came from the wrong background, to wear stars of David on their clothes (sound familiar yet?)
The second article was charmingly entitled ‘Tommy Robinson’s cheerleaders are hypocrites, but his strategy is working’.
Again she derides out of hand anyone who would support Tommy Robinson as ‘Cheerleaders and Hypocrites’. She then, in the same sentence suggests that ‘his’ strategy is working. The fact that the poor man was languishing in jail and daily faced execution by Islamic fundamentalists, at the time, did not in any way assuage the bile of her invective.
The fact that she finishes nearly every article or talk with the accusation that her ‘enemies’ dehumanise their opponents and use words that ‘other’ their enemies is a wonderful example of the pot calling the kettle sooty! To Julia, Radical Muslims and anyone she thinks of as ‘Right’ are not human and must be silenced.
The two articles appear to have been written by a spoilt, privileged girl with no real experience of ever having to fight for anything in her pampered life, which on review is just about right. But then that begs another question! Why would the Institute for Strategic Dialogue employ such a nasty little shit? And this is where it gets really scary!
THE INSTITUTE FOR STRATEGIC DIALOGUE:
The Institute for Strategic Dialogue (could anyone come up with a more Orwellian name?) was set up by Baron Weidenfeld, another Austrian, and is now run by Sasha Havlicek. Officially, the Institute was set up to combat extremism and this is where the link to Quilliam starts to make sense.
The Institute For Strategic Dialogue talks to a lot of governments, over 15 in fact, but they are not so keen on ordinary people talking to each other.
The ISD are behind the 2017 Google.org innovation to counter ‘hate’ online. They are behind the Orwellian ‘Internet Citizens’ movement that fights ‘Fake News’, echo chambers and filter bubbles (whatever that means?).
The fact that this all happened just when Julia arrived in their overheated offices must , of course, be a coincidence and the additional fact that they enthusiastically use her particular form of ‘double speak’ is also a coincidence, I’m sure!
Given the profile and high level contacts of the Globalist actors involved in this tragedy, it would not be a stretch to suggest that Patreon’s latest putsch against its clients may largely be due to pressure from the global banking cartels to silence any voices raised against the destruction of our nation states from within and by the mass importation of Muslim immigrants.
It is evident that Brexit and President Trump’s election has deeply disturbed this nest of vipers.
In view of the above, it seems evident that Islam and Muslim immigration is the weapon that governments are using to destroy national identity and to justify the destruction of human freedom and dignity.
In many ways, Muslims are also the victims here! And, it is also obvious that Quilliam and ISD are the way that this attack is being promoted and coordinated.
What should concern all of us, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, is the fact that, in the process of using Islam as a weapon against both Muslim and non-Muslim alike, they are also destroying Islam and the lives of ordinary Muslims. This seems to be a point not many have considered.
As powerful as they are, the Corporate Marxist Elites are a shy bunch and it is not often you get to look them in the eye. But looking into the cold shark-like eyes of Julia Ebner you get to see the face of ultimate tyranny and the death of human dignity.
Maybe it is time that Muslims and other ordinary people start worrying about our real enemies, because to Julia Ebner, and her Corporate Marxist Elite friends, we are all Kuffar now!
References and links:
Douglas Murray’s excellent piece in the Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/oct/23/quilliam-islamic-fundamentalists-terrorism
BREXIT AND MUSLIMS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM
The British people voted to leave the European Union mainly because they were worried about the mass importation of Muslim immigrants, but ‘Brexit’ and Islamic Immigration are just two symptoms of a sickness that has been at the heart of British culture for nearly a thousand years. From the Norman invasion to Tony Blair’s illegal wars in the Middle East, the British Elites have only ever had contempt for the people whose lives they hold, so carelessly, in their hands.
Nothing reveals that systemic contempt of the Global Elites more than the way the British mass media (The Fake News Industrial Complex) have dealt with the voices raised against the European Union and mass Islamic immigration.
ONLY POSH CAN HAVE AN OPINION
On the one hand, people with a middle-class background and posh accents can say what they like but if, on the other hand, you are unfortunate enough to come from a working class background, if you speak up against the official narrative, you will be shouted down, slandered by the media, hounded by the police and subjected to state sponsored violence.
Mr Douglas Murray went to Eton college, is painfully middle-class and languidly gay. In many ways, he represents everything that was ‘great’ about the British. Before anything else, Douglas Murray is a ‘gentleman’ who is conspicuously confident in his inherent superiority.
WORKING CLASS = FAR RIGHT
In comparison, we have the man they call ‘Tommy Robinson’. He had the singular misfortune of being born in Luton and speaks with an estuary English accent that screams ‘Moron’ to most English ears. The fact that he is not a moron deters none of his detractors. The fact that he is possibly Britain’s bravest son is totally ignored.
In Douglas Murray’s world, the privileged world of the elites, there is very little chance of facing actual serious violence. When Jeremy Clarkson punched Piers Morgan he was neither prosecuted nor condemned by the media. If you are one of the elites with a capacity for violence you are just a romantic hero.
In the world that Tommy Robinson, and indeed most of us, inhabits there is often little choice but to defend yourself or those whom you love. Robinson is forever tagged as a ‘thug’ for defending himself.
WE ARE JUDGED BY OUR MASTERS, NOT OUR PEERS
Despite the difference in the worlds these two men inhabit, the elites judge Robinson, not as his peers, but as his masters.
The unholy trinity of the British Government, its police and mass media (its paramilitary wing and its ministry of propaganda respectively) have set themselves against Tommy Robinson and all those he represents.
Douglas Murray has made a career by being vocal opponent of Islam and Tommy Robinson has never said anything that Murray has not also said but Robinson is constantly harassed by the police and slandered by the media, Murray not at all.
When the media interviews Murray it is with respect but when Robinson is interviewed it is with contempt.
CRIME: BEING WORKING CLASS WHILE IN POSSESSION OF A WRONG OPINION
Jayda Fransen is the deputy leader of Britain First and not someone I would invite to a dinner party but just before Christmas she was arrested by the British police as soon as her plane landed in Gatwick for what they call ‘Hate Crimes’. Her crime was to loudly express her opposition to the Islamisation of Britain and the way that Muslims rape gangs have been allowed to exploit vulnerable English girls. Both of those two claims have been previously made by Mr Murray.
Before Tony and Cherie Blair subverted British Law, this would have been called ‘free speech’ but now expressing the wrong opinion will get you banged up at Christmas. Was Jayda uncouth and noisily common? Yes! Did she hurt anything more than someone’s feelings? No!
TOO STUPID TO HAVE AN OPINION
Nowhere is this contempt more openly displayed than in regards to Britexit, from Politico to the Guardian and from the BBC to the Evening Standard. The left wing elites are unanimous, ‘The British People are small, stupid and boring’. On television and in print, ordinary people are ridiculed and most of the vitriol is aimed at stupid white men. Lord Kerr of Kinlochard stated that the British are ‘Bloody Stupid‘, presumably he excluded himself from his own condemnation.
These swaggering elite cowards almost inevitably change their tone when they have to write about or interview one of the few elites who dare to swim against the politically correct current. Andrew Neil verily fauns over Douglas Murray but never lets the plebeian Robinson even finish a sentence.
That there is a class apartheid in Britain is a historical fact and now painfully evident but that begs the question: If the working class could find anew the dignity and discipline that was once their birth right would the elites relent? Would these privileged and pampered people abandon their prejudice?
I doubt it!
If that is the case, what recourse do the people have in the face of tyranny and oppression?
Let me know what you think in the comments.
The Daily Mail, in the UK, is the country’s most ‘right-wing’ newspaper but despite that, this morning out of the seventeen leading stories, nine were ostensibly anti Trump.
The left-wing bias of the UK Mass Media is obvious to most people and has been for several years.
During the run up to the vote to leave the European Union all newspapers in the UK maintained a anti leave bias and the Daily Mail gleefully ran stories of the impending apocalypse.
The Daily Mail consistently smears and misreports anyone, particularly from the working class, who dares to highlight the problems of mass immigration into the UK.
According to a Yougov poll, the Daily Mail has a readership demographic of middle-age right-wing people, mostly women. Why then would they consistently run political stories that push the left-wing agenda? These stories are against the known interests and bias of their own readership, so what would possess a newspaper to try to subvert its own readership?
If you examine a single story within the world’s ‘Fake News Industrial Complex’ on the BBC, CNN etc, you will find that they all use the same spin and in some cases exactly the same talking points.
Given that the majority of Americans voted for Trump and the majority of Brits voted against the EU project, why is it that the media still spin reports contrary to the interests of the masses? It doesn’t make any business sense, particularly if we are supposed to be living in an ‘evil’ capitalist society.
Once you begin to see the bias, the way that FNIC use language to programme a response in the minds of the audience, you will not be able to unsee it!
Let me know what you think in the comments.
Christine Sullivan and Jenna Pelegrini were stabbed to death, in their home last year. There were no witnesses but they had an Amazon Echo in their home. Now a judge has ordered Amazon to turn over a copy of the voice recordings the Echo made over three days. What you need to understand is that that the appliance constantly records your voice and uploads it to the cloud.
From mobile phones to washing machines, we have been conned into paying for the very machines that the government can use to spy on every aspect of our home life.
As usual, Amazon hides the truth behind a 12,000 word document that they laughingly call their ‘terms and conditions’. At one point it says that Alexa is not recording your conversations but then admits that all your messages, communications, requests and all related interactions are stored on their servers.
Buried within the small print are the clauses that state that if you don’t agree to Alexa recording and storing your voice and conversations that Amazon can revoke you access to the appliance without refund. You have to ask yourself why they would put that clause in the contract?
Most of us have had the experience of discussing a product we might buy, only to find that Google or Facebook ads suddenly fills our browser with adverts for the products we just mentioned in the real world.
It’s obvious that the Corporate Marxist elites see us as cash cows to be milked but what is really galling is that the more the government restricts the internet, ostensibly because of their concerns for our privacy, the less ‘privacy’ we actually have.
To read the original article go HERE
Let me ask you a question! Do you trust your doctor? Your psychiatrist?
I grew up in the 1960s and in those days we were programmed to trust psychiatrists, doctors, police and the state — usually in that order.
After the Second World War, the Church and it’s priests had quietly abdicated their moral high ground, after loudly supporting two world wars and signing deals with two of the world’s biggest mass murderers: Hitler and Mussolini.
It was to the doctors that the parents of my generation turned, now that the Church could no longer be trusted.
Today, as the gold plaiting is wearing off the twenty-first century, our youth are beginning to pay the price for my generation’s stupidity.
With suicide the biggest killer of our children, now might be a very good time to call your attention to a few points that the mass media never discuss.
INSANITY IS BIG BUSINESS:
“The roots of psychiatry have to do with control, power and alienation from society”
Dr Lee Coleman – Author: ‘Reign of Error’
Bethlem Royal Hospital, infamously known as ‘Bedlam’, started the psychiatric scam in the seventeenth century. At that time, psychiatrists were seen more as gaolers rather than doctors. For the last three hundred years, ‘Professional Standing’ has been the gold at the end of the psychiatrist’s rainbow.
Dr Ty Colbert, the author of ‘The Rape of the Soul’, explains that psychiatry invented biological interventions (torture) in order to justify their occupation.
Devices like ‘drowning machines’ and forced immobilisation, both of which would now be called torture devices, were used on vulnerable patients. Inevitably an extremely high mortality rate was the price of psychiatry’s early professional pretensions.
An American, Dr Benjamin Rush, was convinced that insanity was caused by too much blood in the head. He made a fortune draining blood from his patients. Predictably enough, his treatments were, more often than not, fatal. This hasn’t stopped the Americans naming him the “Father of American Psychiatry”.
As the eighteenth century wore on, it became obvious that psychiatrists had failed to cure anyone and with the mounting death toll, their incompetence was getting hard to conceal. Dr Henry Cotton, frustrated at his failure to find a cure for mental disorders, hit on the brilliant idea of cutting bits off of his patients. He started with their teeth, but quickly moved on to tonsils, stomachs and other previously useful parts. Obviously, the threat of maiming would have cured most people, which kind of proves that they weren’t that crazy!
Professor Thomas Szasz, author of ‘The Myth of Mental Illness’, explains that mutilation of patients IS the history of psychiatry.
Psychiatrists learnt very early on to cloak their torture in medical jargon. This came to be called, ‘The Medical Model’.
It wasn’t until 1879 that Professor Wilhelm Wundt, in his book ‘Human and Animal Psychology’, stated that the appearance or illusion of consciousness is purely a chemical reaction. As Darwinism convinced everyone to think of humans as organic machines that had evolved by accident, it became possible to imply that all mental disorders had a physiological cause.
In 1883, a cousin of Charles Darwin named Francis Galton, a psychologist, took Wundt’s idea to its logical conclusion and gave the world the Eugenics movement. Eugenics built on Darwin’s theory of evolution by giving nature a little shove in the right direction. He proposed the forced sterilisation of anyone he didn’t like the look of. It was an approach that the American government embraced. Between 1907 and 1963 it enthusiastically sterilised criminals and ‘other undesirables’.
It was the Eugenics movement in America and its programme of forced sterilisation that inspired Hitler and gave rise to the Holocaust and the Second World War. But I’m getting ahead of myself.
A countrymen of Wundt’s, the philosopher, Friedrich Nietzshe, put it well when he said,
‘God is dead, God remains dead and we killed him’.
And so the psychiatrists have proved.
Ivan Pavlov noticed that if you reward a dog with food after ringing a bell, eventually the dog will salivate when you ring the bell on its own. Obviously this Russian idiot had not grown up with dogs, otherwise he would have known that dogs know what time it is without having to wear a watch.
He continued his experiments by torturing humans, so you can imagine the horror he visited on the poor dogs.
It is important to note that many modern psychiatrists consider Pavlov a genius!!
Psychologist John Watson, a famous behaviourist, said that “children should be treated as you would treat an ox you slaughter”. B. F Skinner, Watson’s successor, kept his own baby daughter in a box for a year to prove his hero’s point.
In the 1930s, Manfred Sakel, a psychiatrist, from Austria emigrated to America and gifted the world the concept of killing braincells with insulin. Over 40% of his patients suffered severe spinal cord damage from the epileptic fits he induced. Sadly, psychiatrists never let the body count bother them.
Electric Shock Therapy, started in Italy, when the ever humane psychiatrists noticed that shocking the life out a pig made them docile and easy to kill. They soon expanded their victim pool to include all kinds of animals. Inevitably, they started using Electric Shock Therapy on the most vulnerable people in society, the mentally ill. Broken teeth and broken spines were common but this didn’t dampen psychiatry’s enthusiasm.
PSYCHOLOGISTS HAD EFFECTIVELY SOLD ‘BRAIN DAMAGE’ TO THE WORLD AS A CURE!
American, Dr Walter J. Freeman took psychiatry to new depths of horror by giving people a lobotomy (destroying the frontal lobe of the brain) without anaesthetic through the simple expedient of sticking an ice pick through their eye socket into their brain. He travelled the country in his ‘Lobotomobile’ giving the American people the benefit of his extensive “education” and services at $25 a go!
By the time Freeman retired at 57 he had lobotomised over 3500 people, some as young as four years old. He had no surgical training and over 25% of his patients ended up in a vegetative state and many died.
He even lobotomised John F. Kennedy’s sister, Rosemary, and left her with severe brain damage. You could never accuse psychiatrists of being faint hearted. They carried on with the mutilation of their patients regardless of the damage they caused to them or their families. After all, they were the new ‘priesthood’.
Lobotomising patients earned psychiatrists an average of 31 million dollars annually.
By the 1950s psychiatrists had discovered that a chemical, originally designed to kill parasites in pigs, could be repackaged as a chemical lobotomy. Thorazine was a much neater solution than an ice pick and it gave the profession an entry into the drug industry. What they didn’t tell their patients was that their new wonder ‘cure’ often caused long term or permanent brain damage.
And so it was that a marriage made in hell began, the psychiatry industry had finally met the pharmaceutical industry; it was love at first sight — the world would never be the same again.