Chav Culture and National Socialism

CHAV Culture And The Rise of National Socialism

Contrary to popular belief, the strange death of England is not a recent event. England was mortally wounded during the first world war and, unfortunately, the English failed to notice until it was too late. The country that had given democracy and civilisation to the modern world was left to rot like an unloved dog at the side of the road and what grew within that stinking bloated corpse after the Second World War was not honey.

In the first quarter of the 21st Century many good people tried to resuscitate the English dream but only succeeded in releasing a pox that has since infected the world. That pox was called national socialism.


The Casual Violence of Kai Murros


So what was ‘England’ and how did it die?


To answer that question you must understand that a people are the sum of their stories and the story that Victorian British believed was, at heart, a lie. It was the truth of this lie that eventually destroyed the country.

The lie was the belief in a victorious people united under God and Country.

The truth is that the English had been invaded by the Normans a thousand years before but the Norman French, who became the ruling elite, never really lost their utter contempt for the conquered and subjugated Saxons.


To the East of the Tower of London were the docks through which, for centuries, the goods of an empire were siphoned. It was to this area that French, Jewish and Huguenot immigrants had always flocked. When the local silk weaving industry failed in 1860 the East End of London fell into poverty and crime. The people of the East End of London became, to all intents and purposes, feral.

Despite this limited immigration, the English had been largely a genetically homogonous nation since the Norman invasion and an uneasy peace had existed between the people and those who ruled over them until, of course, the events of the First World War.

If a country’s culture is defined by its values, the values of Victorian Britain sprung from the concepts of  God and Country and it was FOR  God and Country that a million men, mostly of the Saxon lower class that died fighting the Germans in France simply because the Church and their government told them that it was their duty to do so. At the same time, in 1917, the communists took over Russia and the seeds of socialism wafted over the channel to take root, first within the liberal elites and then within the working class.

God and Country

At the end of that war, the English no longer believed in England  and would no longer settle for the status quo. Working class men and then women were given the vote just as the Protestant church began to die. This fundamental shift in the country’s power base left the country vulnerable to the new and pernicious contagion called socialism.

It is true that England had many shit holes but, by the beginning of the twentieth century, the East End of London was in a league of its own. With no uniting matrix of belief and made up of immigrants from all over the world,  the people of the East End eyed the London middle-class with envious and sullen eyes.

After the Second World War, the Church of England quietly committed suicide and God, for most English people, was officially dead. The Liberal elites had taken over the country and now offered the people a National Health Service and an unending supply of free stuff.

Like rats following a food source, the feral underclass of the East End expanded along the North Bank of the Thames like a plague to move into the ‘New Towns’ built by the post war socialist government. It was here that Council House and Violent was abbreviated to CHAV.

Due to the proximity of the London East End to the Liberal Elites in the media, ‘CHAV’ Culture was spread around England by way of TV programmes. These programmes were obviously an exercise in cultural programming and so it was that Coronation Street and East Enders spread the depravity of the East End culture far and wide.

With no moral values, no concept of God or Country to modify their behaviour, the feral working class began to eat itself. Sexual promiscuity and drug addiction became the norm blighting the lives of millions. Lost generations of children were effectively illiterate despite the fact that they could speed type on a mobile phone while sniffing cocaine.


Predictably enough, by 2020, generation after generation of the white working class had never had a job and were not expected to ever get one. As the Socialist elite set about replacing the white working class by importing a more malleable and less feral (they hoped) people from Asia it was obvious, to anyone with eyes, that the very structure of society would soon breakdown.

Somewhat predictably, to anyone who knew anything about Islam, some Muslim men started to prey upon white working class children and based on a perfectly reasonable hatred of Islam, many people looked to the philosophy of National Socialism for hope.

CHAVs were, and are, attracted to socialism like flies are attracted to shit. The old class hatred and resentment that had plagued the English for a thousand years found a new and legitimate outlet for its violence. The problem was that Muslims tended to stick together and enjoyed violence even more than the English. As CHAVS tended to get arrested and given stiff sentences, but Muslims and ANTIFA were protected by the state, the CHAVs soon learnt to give Muslims a wide berth.

As the under employed masses loved the idea of taking money from other people but hated the idea of paying taxes, it wasn’t long before they noticed that Jews tended to be more financially successful than white working class. They noticed a lot of Jews in power and mistook correlation for causation. They also noticed that British Jews didn’t fight back.

By 2020 the old National Socialist myths once again became socially acceptable and Anti-Semitism was once again at the centre of British government. What didn’t help was the fact that many of the globalist elite were, in fact, ethnically Jewish. In was inevitable that CHAVs, like the Germans before them, found that they could blame the Jewish people for their own empty and pointless lives.

And so National Socialism was reborn as a political force in Britain.

Unfortunately, when you make a god of the collective and sacrifice the individual to that god, all you ever get is a totalitarian hell. Many well meaning English people thought that they had found a solution to their imminent extinction but no matter how you dress up National Socialism it will always result in extreme violence and so it was that the second English civil war began.

Extinction Rebellion and the Rise of the Fourth Reich


Many historians, sympathetic to the Resistance, blame President, For Life, Thunberg for the rise the Fourth Reich but that only tells half the story. The truth is, the One World Government was spawned in the darkness and the ashes of the Second World War, long before Greta’s fatal Extinction Rebellion.

Looking back it is clear to see that, in 1948, civilisation was mortally wounded and in its exhaustion it fell to the left. But in the age of ‘Unlearning’, that soon followed, people stopped asking questions and were happy to believe whatever the state told them to believe. After this date, the ancient philosophical divisions of ‘left’ and ‘right’ became effectively meaningless.

By the time Greta Thunberg was born, the One World Government, which later came to be called ‘The Fourth Reich’ had already achieved dominion. The ideology of  the fourth Reich controlled the media, the judiciary, the police, the universities and the military through its proxies: the United Nations, the World Bank and the European Union.

The United States of Europe, or as it was then known, the European Union, had been busy discrediting the concept of ‘nation states’ since 1992. Any resistance to the UN’s Agenda 21 or its program of race replacement was swiftly crushed. Anyone who complained about the destruction of their country or their culture felt the full terrifying power of the state.

It was in the context of this cultural vacuum that the Extinction Rebellion gave shape to a general feeling of unease shared by most. By 2010 it was obvious that there was something terribly wrong with the modern world.

The genius of the 4th Reich was to make the people see only what they were told to see. The corruption of the food chain, the mass rape of white women by immigrants, the drugging of the population, the pollution of the sea by the third world, these were questions not allowed.

It’s hard to believe but in the face of these obvious concerns, like kittens chasing shadows, the Extinction Rebellion obsessed over carbon emissions despite all the evidence that CO2 had nothing to do with the weather.

In order to understand how the Fourth Reich, that enslaves us now, was democratically voted into power, you must understand the reasons for the resurrection of the concept of national socialism that gave President Thunberg the excuse she had been waiting for in order to declare herself ‘President for Life’.

But I get ahead of myself. In order to understand the currents that swept away three thousand years of civilisation and 80% of the world’s population, you must understand how human society was ordered within the framework of that civilisation.


The Scale of the Sacred

Human beings are a paradox, we are at the same time an individual and, prior to the fourth Reich, we were also a part of a collective – a family, a village, a nation. To understand this dichotomy, Imagine you stand on a road with the ocean in front of you and the desert behind. The road runs East to West further than the eye can see. We will call this the road ‘the scale of the sacred.’

Why? Because that which a people hold sacred determines the essential nature of their society.

To your left, which we will call east, is the concept of the ‘collective’ and to your right is the concept of the ‘individual’. Prior to the industrial revolution, based on our Judeo/Christian culture there had been a kind of balance between the two ideas but after the Second World War that balance was destroyed.

To understand the nature of that loss of balance, imagine that you stand on that road with the east to your left. The desert that is behind you we will call negative coercion and the sea which is to the north of the road we will call positive coercion.

In order to motivate people to act they must have a reason to do so, that motivation or coercion may be either positive or negative.

Looking to our right, we see the individual as god and in the Post Modern Progressive Culture into which President Thunberg was born the individual was held as absolutely sacred. But what makes this idea so corrosive is that the individual only exists in reference to the individual itself.

It was this concept that finally killed the idea of objective truth or morality. Truth is what you say it is and there is no such thing as right or wrong – only what pleasures you.  The concept of the sacred individual also killed the natural instinct of the nurturing mother and the protective father, the loss of which may have greatly contributed to President Thunberg’s well known excesses in recent years.

If you hold yourself as sacred and you are your own god – acts of empathy or kindness are only attempts to validate your own faith and signal your idea of virtue to others. In such a world, violence is only ever seconds away. By 2003 the One World Government were already masters of the art of violence because in world full of narcissists violence or the threat of violence is the only way to ensure obedience.

But it was the Extinction Rebellion and President Thunberg, while still just a girl, that gave the mob and their violence a direction. Only extreme violence would have made a people accept their own destruction.

In 2025 under UN Agenda 21, the one world government made meat consumption illegal and slaughtered all domestic and farm animals.

With the animals and the topsoil gone, The subsequent mass starvation was inevitable.

Our vegan food poisoned our children with Monsanto chemicals. We found out too late that humans couldn’t digest Genetically modified food. Malnutrition crippled a generation. As travel was illegal the people had nowhere to run.

In response to the violence of the green movement, ethnic replacement and the destruction of their countries, people of good conscience all over the world, tried to resist but their revulsion to the concept of the sacred individual led these heroes to embrace its opposite: National Socialism.

Looking to the left of the scale of the sacred we see the ‘collective’ as god. But National Socialism sees that god only in context of the collective – Marxism, Socialism, Fascism were all symptoms of this disease.

The irony was that when we hold the individual as sacred in reference to only the individual itself or when we hold the collective as sacred in reference to only the collective – in both cases we must use negative coercion to control the people. It is for this reason that both extremes have always resulted in failure and genocide.

Long before the great killing of 2025, Anti-Semitism from both those who worshiped the collective and those who worshiped the individual had became normal again because validation for both can only come from destruction of the ‘other’.

Violence is therefore a natural product of negative coercion so it was inevitable that the violence of the newly reborn National Socialists would finally start the European Civil War. A demonstration in Rotherham against yet another rape scandal lead to the massacre of otherwise innocent Mulsims. As in the Lebonon in the previous century, Muslim Militias were formed. The civil war spread from the Britian to the rest of Europe and then the world.

Without that war, The United States of Europe would never have become an Islamic state and Greta would never have become President for Life.

But despite the horrors of the last hundred years, you must not lose hope! Looking back, we can now see that there was a solution to the madness of the fourth Reich. Like a mist in the mountains, ephemeral and yet beautiful beyond imagination, there is a balance between both concepts – the individual and the collective.

When the people hold the individual as sacred but within the context of the collective and when the collective is held as sacred in the context only of the individual there is a balance. But here is our problem, for this to work, we must use positive coercion and that can only happen when we share a common philosophical, moral and sociological matrix of belief that enshrines the concept of ‘All for One and One for All’.

Perhaps it’s ironic or maybe some kind of cosmic joke that throughout all of the centuries of genocide and war the only people that held this balance of the sacred was the Jewish people. Maybe it was that balance that caused them to be so successful and engender such hatred.

Now we will never know, when Europe became a part of the caliphate, the destruction of Israel was, of course, inevitable. Today, people take the extermination of the Jewish people as proof of their conspiracy – logically speaking it must have been the most unsuccessful conspiracy in history.

I have shown you why the only hope for our people is within nationalism but a kind of nationalism that holds the individual and not the collective as sacred. We must defy the law and once again study Jewish texts and rediscover what it was that helped them keep the sacred balance. If only we could find a way to turn the clock back on the industrial revolution we might be able to live in balance with our planet.


Julia Ebner - The Face of Tyranny


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!


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.


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.


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 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.


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 (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 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:

Julia’s work:

Tommy’s video for Rebel Media: 

Douglas Murray’s excellent piece in the Guardian:




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.


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.

Douglas Murray


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.

Tommy robinson

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.


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.

Piers morgan


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.

Jayda Frensen

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!


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.


Fake News Industrial Complex


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

Quaker Oatmeal Squares


Do you know what you are feeding your children, or you for that matter? There are currently 28 different cereals that contain the ingredient ‘glyphosate’, an herbicide applied to the leaves of plants to kill both broadleaf plants and grasses. The Environmental Protection Agency caps glyphosate tolerance at 5.0 parts per million (ppm), whilst the Environmental Working Group deems any level above 160 parts per billion (ppb) is not safe. If that is the case then why is Quaker Oatmeal Squares Cereal Honey Nut, registering at 2,837 ppb available for sale and human consumption! Read this article by Mary Kekatos for the Daily Mail


‘Cancer-causing’ weed killer is found in Honey Nut Cheerios, Quaker Oats and 24 more cereals. The Environmental Working Group tested 28 cereals, oatmeals and snack bars.

It found that all of them had glyphosate, but 26 had levels deemed ‘unsafe’.

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup, the most commonly used herbicide in agriculture.

None of the products had levels above what is allowed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The World Health Organization and California have listed the chemical as carcinogenic.

Dozens of cereals, oatmeals and snack bars contain trace amounts of a weed killer that has been linked to cancer, a new report says.

Released by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), the report found 26 of 28 oat-based cereal products that were tested had ‘harmful’ levels of glyphosate, the main ingredient of Roundup.

Products included variations of Cheerios and Quaker Oats, including Honey Nut Cheerios, Quaker Oatmeal Squares Honey Nut, and Quaker Overnight Oats.

The weed killer was recently at the center of a trial in which a California jury found Roundup was responsible for giving groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson, 46, terminal cancer.

None of the products in the new report had levels above what is allowed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but the EWG argues that customers should be concerned that any levels are being detected in products consumed by children everyday.

The report from the Environmental Working Group found 26 of 28 oat-based cereal products that were tested had levels of glyphosate, the main ingredient of Roundup.

In August, the EWG conducted its first study, which found the presence of glyphosate in 45 samples of breakfast cereals from producers Quakers, Kellogg’s, and General Mills.

On the heels of this study, the group wanted to dive further and test specifically Quaker Oats and Cheerios products, because high levels of glyphosate were found in the first study and they are two of the most popular cereal brands.

For the new study, the EWG purchased the products at grocery stores in San Francisco and Washington, DC, and had them tested at Anresco Laboratories in San Francisco.

Results of the samples showed glyphosate was detectable in all 28 products, and levels considered unsafe were found in 26.

The EPA caps glyphosate tolerance at 5.0 parts per million (ppm).

But the EWG’s health benchmark is much more conservative and says any level greater than 160 parts per billion (ppb) is not safe.

In the report, the highest level was found Quaker Oatmeal Squares Cereal Honey Nut, registering at 2,837 ppb.

That number is nearly 18 times greater than EWG’s benchmark.

However, government agencies, manufacturers and advocacy groups seem to be conflicted about what is – and is not – considered safe.

Following the results of the EWG’s report, both General Mills and Quaker released statements insisting their products are safe.

‘[The] EWG report artificially creates a “safe level” for glyphosate that is detached from those that have been established by responsible regulatory bodies in an effort to grab headlines,’ a statement from Quaker, sent to Daily Mail Online, read in part.

‘We believe EWG’s approach is invalid, and we stand behind our statement that the Quaker products tested by EWG are safe.’

General Mills, the makers of Cheerios, also cited the group’s benchmark, telling CNN: ‘The extremely low levels of pesticide residue cited in recent news reports is a tiny fraction of the amount the government allows.’

The EPA itself released a statement saying the report should not leave consumers concerned.

But Dr Alexis Temkin, a toxicologist at the EWG who worked on the report, says the results are disconcerting.

‘Just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s safe or that it provides that extra level of protection for children,’ she told Daily Mail Online.

She mentioned that the EPA increased the amounts of glyphosate residue allowed on oats from 20 ppm in 1997 to 30 ppm in 2008.

‘The EPA likely saw it was increasingly being used as a pre-harvest dessicant (the application of a herbicide crops shortly before harvest) and increased the limit to allow it to be legal,’ Dr Temkin said.

Glyphosate-based products are sold in more than 160 countries, and farmers use it on 250 types of crops in California alone, which is the leading farming state in the US.

In March 2015, the World Health Organization found that that the herbicide is ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’.

Then, in 2017, California named glyphosate an ingredient that causes cancer under the state’s Proposition 65, which requires Roundup to carry a warning label if sold in California.

Roundup’s maker, Monsanto, says glyphosate is safe and that its product has undergone stringent testing.

However, in August, a California jury ordered the company to pay $289 million to a groundsman who claimed the weed killer is responsible for giving him cancer.

A judge upheld the verdict on Monday but reduced Monsanto’s payout to Dewayne Johnson to $78million.

‘The report shows that breakfast cereals are not a place for pesticides linked to cancer,’ said Dr Temkin.

‘What we show here is that there are detectable levels in common foods that children exposed to every day. Over a long period of time, that can be dangerous.’



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.


“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.


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.

Rosemary Kennedy

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.