Leftist Jews: Israel is Jewish Ethnostate

The far left Jewish lobby has finally admitted in public that Israel is nothing more than a Jewish ethnostate which has racially-based laws built on Jewish Supremacism, and Israel-supporting Jews who oppose what they call “white racism” in Europe and America are self-serving hypocrites.

The admission was made in a recent article on Mondoweiss, the “progressive Jewish” journal created by former New York Observer journalist Philip Weiss—who once described himself as a “traitor to the tribe.”

In an article titled “Deborah Lipstadt’s double standard on white nationalism and Jewish nationalism,” Weiss pointed out that recent public pronouncements about “white supremacists” and Donald Trump by Lipstadt—the Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish History and Holocaust Studies at Emory University—were blatantly hypocritical because she supports Israel, which has racially-based laws and institutions which she claims to oppose.

Weiss said that Lipstadt had said on radio that the “so-called alt-right” was nothing but a euphemism for white nationalism, which is itself a euphemism for white supremacy; and “the media should cut through the pretense and say ‘white supremacism.’”

“To properly understand the danger, we should call them by what they really are, white supremacists,” Lipstadt said.

Weiss went on to point to an article written by Lipstadt in the Jewish Forward journal that attacked Jewish groups for not “slamming” what she called “anti-Semitism on the Left” and which stated that anti-Semitism was the same thing as anti-Zionism.

Lipstadt went on to write that “anti-Semitism from the left” included developments such as Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party in the United Kingdom, and incidents on college campuses across America, things which she described as “dangerous.”

As Weiss pointed out, Lipstadt is “advocating a double standard. If she is going to criticize white nationalism as a white supremacist ideology, then what about Jewish nationalism?”

The Mondoweiss author pointed out that “Palestinians routinely describe the Zionist regime in Israel Palestine as Jewish supremacy; and there is plenty of evidence to support the victims’ view of the matter.”

Weiss then used an old illustration of a Jewess and a Palestinian demonstrating Israel’s racially-based immigration laws: “As the illustration above makes plain, any Jew can move to Israel tomorrow; but a Palestinian who was born there and made a refugee by the Jewish state is not allowed to return to his or her own village.”

In addition, Weiss admitted, “many laws in Israel discriminate against Palestinians in favor of Jews, including many involving land ownership and zoning that are reminiscent of the Jim Crow South. And if you are a Palestinian living in the occupied West Bank, you can’t vote for the government that rules your life; but a Jewish settler living alongside you in an illegal colony can vote. That would seem to be the definition of supremacy.”

Thus, Weiss, concluded, “Lipstadt is slamming white nationalism while extolling Jewish nationalism. The left is consistent in condemning both.”

Weiss, who in 2007 described himself in an article in the American Conservative as a “traitor to the tribe” for daring to write about Israel from a “progressive” point of view, has, of course, deliberately confused what he describes as “white supremacism” and “Jewish supremacism.”

Almost no one Weiss and other far-leftists would call “white supremacists” want to rule over anybody else, and a far more accurate definition of them would be “white separatists.”

It is also doubtful that many Zionist Jews in Israel want to rule directly over the Palestinians—most would probably want to see only Jews living in Israel—and even on that level, Weiss and his fellow leftists have erred ideologically.

Nonetheless, when these errors in terminology are stripped away, the core of his argument remains valid: namely that the Zionist demand for a Jewish ethnostate to preserve Jewish identity is indeed the same as that made by Europeans who seek European ethnostates to preserve their identity.

For Jews such as Lipstadt to condemn what they call “white supremacists” while endorsing Israel, is, therefore, as Weiss correctly admits, extremely hypocritical.

Avoiding America’s Demographic Destiny

Given current racial demographic predictions, whites in America will go into an absolute decline within 14 years, and slip into minority status only a few years after that—unless Third World immigration is halted, and reversed—and whites start having children.

New data shows that 17 states had more white deaths than births in 2014—the highest such decrease in U.S. history. In 2004, this decrease occurred in just four states.

A study by demographers Rogelio Saenz and Kenneth Johnson from the University of New Hampshire’s Carsey School of Public Policy (White Deaths Exceed Births in One-Third of U.S. States) pointed out that several of the states experiencing “white natural decrease” (more deaths than births) are among the nation’s most populous and urbanized.

The 17 states, home to 121 million residents or roughly 38 percent of the U.S. population, had more deaths than births among non-Hispanic whites (hereafter referred to as whites) in 2014.

In twelve of the seventeen states with white natural decreases, the white population diminished overall between 2013 and 2014.

In addition, the rising number of older adults, the falling number of women of childbearing age, and lower fertility rates increase the likelihood of white natural decrease, the paper added.

“Our analysis of the demographic factors that cause white natural decrease suggests that the pace is likely to pick up in the future,” the researchers wrote.

“More widespread natural decrease results from declining fertility due to the “banking crisis recession,” and the aging of the large baby boom generation born between 1946 and 1964.

“This senior population is projected to expand from nearly 15 percent of the total population in 2015 to nearly 24 percent in 2060. Much of this aging baby boom population is white, and so white mortality is growing,” the demographers wrote.

“Together, growing white mortality and the diminishing number of white births increase the likelihood of more white natural decrease.

“In contrast, births exceed deaths by a considerable margin among the younger Latino population, and the combination of these very different demographic trends is increasing the diversity of the U.S. population.”

In total, the white population in the United States has decreased from 79.6 percent in 1980 to 61.9 percent in 2014, the study pointed out.

The percentage of Latinos rose from 6.4 percent to 17.3 percent over the same time, while both the black and Asian populations have also gone up, the study found.

Nationally, the number of whites born in 2014 is only slightly higher, 2.15 million, than the number of whites who died, 2.06 million. A decade ago, white births outpaced deaths by nearly 400,000 each year. The ratio of white births to deaths fell 79 percent between 1999 and 2014.

Today, the median age of a white American is 43, four years higher than it was in 2000. The number of white Americans over the age of 65 has jumped from 15 percent to 18 percent of the overall white population.

By contrast, the average Latino is just 28 years old. Latino birth rates exceeded death rates in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, the researchers found.

Nationally, the number of white Americans is expected to begin declining in absolute numbers between 2030 and 2040, according to projections from the U.S. Census Bureau. By 2050, whites are expected to make up less than half the U.S. population.

There are now more nonwhite babies than white babies being born in America and more nonwhite children than white children attending public schools.

Although the white fertility rate has remained the same since 1989, the number of white mothers is declining. However, most Hispanics and blacks are under the age of 27, and therefore more likely to have babies.

Can this demographic destiny be avoided? The short answer is yes—but it requires a shift in political will at the highest levels.

Preventing America from becoming another Latin American Second World nation will require four far-reaching policy decisions:

Firstly, all illegal immigration must be halted.

Secondly, legal immigration routes—which have proven to be as racially-damaging as illegal immigration—must be closed and reset to allow immigration from European-origin nations only.

This can be done by simply increasing the requirements for entry, such as skills, ability to contribute to society, and so on.

Thirdly, the issue of already resident Third World immigrants inside America needs to be addressed by a program of repatriation.

This is possibly the most politically difficult part of any policy program, but without it, the demographic overrunning of America by the Third World is inevitable, no matter what other steps are instituted. This means that there are already sufficient numbers of Third Worlders present in America to overrun the white population—merely due to their more prolific reproduction rates.

This critical demographic truth must be dealt with, no matter how strenuous the consequences might be. White Americans will either address this issue, or they will be overwhelmed.

Finally, the societal order—economic and social—needs to be reset to encourage normal family units and motherhood.

This requires firstly a dramatic reform of the economy to bring living expenses in line once again, free from the ravages of unrestrained capitalism so that it will once again be possible to have single income households. This will allow women to stay at home if they want, which will inevitably increase the natural birthrate.

In addition, a social program to repudiate all the mental illnesses that have been promoted as “normal” for the past few decades—such as homosexuality, “transgenderism,” male-hating variants of “feminism,” and “same-sex marriage” must be implemented.

The promotion of these deviancies has been encouraged and promoted by the controlled media, and requires urgent countermeasures.

It might well be asked if any of these policy programs are even politically feasible, given the current political climate.

Fortunately, this question will be answered shortly.

The Trump presidency offers a window whereby America can rescue itself—but no one yet knows if even that administration has the political foresight and willpower to take the steps necessary to make America great again.

5 Ways How Anti-Whites Always Contradict Themselves

That the people who prefer to call themselves “anti-racist” are in fact anti-white is something that we have highlighted before. After all, it is just one of the many contradictions in the anti-white mindset.

However, there many more contradictions that we have not yet discussed in depth, and we wanted to explore more about their values and statements to see if they actually live up to what they claim and supposedly believe in or not. Below we have listed some of their common sayings and belief systems (in no particular order) and these are contradictions that they do not seem to be aware of themselves.

“Anti-racists are against hate and discrimination”

We often hear today that there is a problem with “racist rightwing groups” and that we need to combat such groups. Their claim is that such groups hate immigrants because they feel threatened by them for being different.  We also hear that non-whites more often than not are victims of discrimination due to their foreign ethnicity.

Although they say it is bad to associate an ethnic group with a negative characteristic, they themselves have no problem to associate whites with racism (like how Swedish journalists and politicians tend to brand the whole Danish population of being racist just for having/wanting a stricter immigration policy).

By doing so they are judging and generalizing an entire group/race of people.

When they talk about “racist groups” they are generalizing and judging people they do not know and have never met, which is the exact same thing they accuse “racists” for doing. They are not tolerant and they are not interested in understanding people with a different viewpoint.

They say they are against hate, but this group are the ones that advocate hate and discrimination most of all. It just does not seem to count in their eyes since it is directed to white people.

They are the ones that want to enforce discrimination laws and call it nice things, such as “affirmative action”, that says non-whites must be hired wherever there are too many white people solely because they are not white.

They are the ones that display the most hate whenever they talk how we should “combat racism”, i.e. people who do not agree that our people should become a minority in our homelands.

An example of this is a fairly recent spectacle in Sweden where the secretary-general of The Swedish Bar Association Cecilia Hagen posted in one of the biggest newspapers in the country that she wanted to literally exterminate “human brown rats” with poison, meaning of course people who do not agree with the current immigration open border policy (in a nutshell, whites are the oppressors and we need to help non-whites to even the playfield).

They say they are against hate, but all they do is hate people who oppose their policies.

“Anti-racists” are not against hate, they are for hate against us whites.

“Anti-racists LOVE diversity”

This is something that they have bombarded with for many decades. All hail diversity, we must have diversity. We find this really ironic. The people who claim they love diversity are actually the people who show with their actions that they love diversity the least.

We already had diversity in the world, with different peoples and cultures all over the world. Travelling actually meant experiencing new cultures and people. Now, every Western country is made indistinguishable with open borders and degenerated “McDonald’s cultures”. We are expected to consume the same things, we are told that we are “all the same” and that we have nothing unique worthwhile to begin with. We are all “multicultural societies”, i.e. rootless consumption societies.

“Diversity” is not want they want, what they want is to mix everybody in a melting pot in all white countries.

“Anti-racists do not care about skin color”

Perhaps the biggest joke/contradiction of them all.

People who call themselves “anti-racist” (i.e. anti whites) like to say that gender and skin color don’t matter but in reality they are just contradicting themselves as usual.

Let’s put aside the obvious irony about enforcing affirmative actions laws where there are too many whites (you never hear schools, neighborhoods or workplaces being “too black” or “too asian”), here is a blunt question that no one seems to highlight or be able to answer:

If skin color does not matter, then why is racial diversity (in all and only white countries) so important?

And why does it have to be enforced?

“Anti-racists just want to help people”

This is something that I will never buy. Granted, I do believe that many ordinary people who happen to have an anti white mindset have the intention of helping others, after all they have been persuaded to believe what they are doing and supporting is something good.

However, there are in fact many ways to help people without having open borders and bringing everybody here at our expense (until we become a minority in our own countries).

We COULD, for example, help people in the Third World rebuild their own countries by providing them with education and aid where it would be most needed. Not to say it is our responsibility, just making a point that there are many ways we could help other peoples that would not lead to us becoming a minority in our own countries. But that is all they are interested in. After all, they are anti white for a reason. And in the anti white mindset up is down and West is East.

Besides, they are not helping anybody, neither us or Third Worlders, by bringing their best and brightest.

“Anti-racists claim that no one should be judged based on your race”

White guilt – nuff said.


There are so many contradictions in the anti-white mindset it is so hard to pick the ones to highlight.

In the end, anti-whites are always the opposite of what they claim to be.


The best sons of the Arab nation stayed to defend their land and are heroically fighting for it against rabble from around the world. And that small part of ragtag, which any nation has, fled to Europe or joined to the ranks of the ISIS. That is why we can see such an outrage, especially in European cities.

The Internet has been shocked by a video, recorded by security cameras in the Berlin subway, showing brutal and senseless attack of a group of migrants on a German girl. A migrant brutally attacked the young girl, pitting her down the stairs with a strongest kick in the back, after which the victim flew over half of the stairs and hit her head.

As the video shows, a man, holding a cigarette in one hand and a bottle in another one, came up behind the girl, going down the stairs, and gave her a powerful kick in the back. The victim flew several meters and fell to the lower platform.

The attacker and his buddies left the scene, picking up the fallen bottle off the floor. They even do not have a thought to help the girl. The victim received initial care from subway passengers.

According to unconfirmed information, the attack was made by a member of the ‘Afghan movement’.

As the Bild newspaper reported, citing the Berlin police, there were not any quarrels or squabbles between the migrants and the 26-year-old girl before the incident. The Berlin police qualified the incident as a grievous bodily harm and reported that the young girl was hospitalized.

Over 40% of UK Muslims support “aspects” of sharia law

Over 40% of UK Muslims support “aspects” of sharia lawPolicy Exchange survey, described as the largest study of Muslim opinion in the UK ever undertaken, has found widespread belief in conspiracy theories and significant support for sharia law.

The Policy Exchange study found that unsurprisingly “British Muslims as a whole represent an unquestionably more religious section of the wider UK community” and that “Faith clearly plays a more central role in the lives of British Muslims”.

Muslims hold concerns on the NHS and the economy (among other political issues) that are normal among the rest of the population, but as other polls have shown, on specific issues there are marked differences between British Muslims and the general public.

“There are relatively large levels of support among British Muslims for the implementation of elements of Sharia law,” Policy Exchange said.

43% said they supported “the introduction of Sharia Law” and just 22% were opposed. 16% of British Muslims “strongly support” the “introduction of aspects of Sharia law into Britain”.

35% of 18-24 year olds expressed support for “aspects” of sharia and nearly half of the over-55s supported some “provisions” of sharia.

The report noted that other polls conducted in the past had found younger Muslims were more likely to support sharia, but Policy Exchange suggested that sharia might have “diminished appeal” “in an age in which this concept has become associated with, and tarnished by, ISIS.”

49% of respondents in London favoured “Sharia provisions.”

Just over half of British Muslims said they wanted to “fully integrate” (53%), and 37% said they wanted to integrate “on most things” with what Policy Exchange described as “separation in some areas, such as schooling and laws.” 6% sought a “separate Islamic life as far as possible” and 1% wanted a “‘fully separate Islamic area in Britain, subject to Sharia Law and government”.

59% of young Muslims wanted full integration, suggesting some progress has been made, and the Policy Exchange report noted that this result suggested “that support for integration will increase as time goes by”.

Unsurprisingly, “More religiously devout and observant respondents were relatively less likely to call for full integration”.

However, there were significant regional variations, and in Yorkshire and the Humber just 28% were in favour of “full integration”.

40% supported gender segregated education and 41% opposed, but 44% “supported the idea that schools should be able to insist on the hijab or niqab”.

Support for gender segregation decreased among younger Muslims, but 1-in-4 of 18-24 year old Muslims supported segregation by gender.

53% said they “preferred to send their children to schools with strong ‘Muslim values'”, compared to just 20% of the general public who preferred a school with “strong religious values”.

Respondents emphasised the quality of education, Policy Exchange said, but the British Muslim conception of what “good education” meant differed from that of the general public.

15% said art and music should not be taught at school, and Muslims who lived in areas where Muslims “made up over 50″ of the local population” were more likely to oppose the teaching of art and music.

The report also said that anti-Muslim attacks “have become an ingrained part of the mental landscape of many Muslims, and appear to confirm the threat posed by racism” despite the fact that “such episodes remain relatively rare and unusual”.

Muslims “tended to say that they themselves had not experienced racism or Islamophobia” but had stories they could “point” to, often revolving around family members.

“Without in any way wishing to deny the reality of racist and Islamophobic attacks, it is striking how, to many people, these are a mediated phenomenon,” the authors noted.

There was a “pervasive sense of unease,” according to focus groups, though some participants “were willing to reflect critically about the extent to which an over-developed sense of victimhood might fuel paranoia,” the report said.

“Arguably, this is a product of a culture infused with an abstract sense of grievance, at least as much as it as a response to tangible, empirical realities.”

91% said they are “entirely free to practice their religion in Britain.”

This paranoia also translated into belief in conspiracy theories, and the more educated Muslims were the more likely they were to believe in conspiracy theories.

52% of Muslims said they “did not know” who was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. 31% said the “American Government”, 7% said “Jews”, and just 4% said al-Qaeda. One participant in a focus group said, “There was no Jews that were in that day.”

By contrast 71% of the general public say al-Qaeda was responsible, with 1% blaming “the Jews”.

Invader Rape Rampage Unabated

Four recent brutal sex attacks by fake refugees in Europe—three in Germany, and one in Sweden—have again drawn attention to the ongoing invader rape plague which the nonwhite invasion has created.

The attacks—on a 19-year-old German girl, two Chinese students, and the gang rape of a 14-year-old boy—have been deliberately downplayed by the controlled media.

Police in Bochum, western Germany, hold a press conference with a display of wanted invader rapist posters.

The attack and murder of Maria Ladenburger in the German city of Freiburg, was the only small exception to this censorship, because the victim’s father, Dr. Clemens Ladenburger, is a well-known pro-invasion activist who works with the European Union’s legal directorate.

She was on her way back from a party in the Black Forest city of Freiburg when she was attacked on the edge of a cycle path behind Schwarzwald station. Raped and drowned, Maria’s body was later found in the River Dreisam. Her black scarf was later recovered from the scene along with a bike found parked in the middle of the path.

A strand of what police called “partially-dyed blonde hair” led police to the invader, who was arrested on December 2, according to Freiburg prosecutor Dieter Inhofer. The Afghan invader confessed following his arrest, and he will go on trial early in 2017.

Maria Ladenburger had earlier volunteered to work at a “refugee home” in her spare time, but it is still unknown whether she knew her attacker.

The rapist-murderer arrived in Germany in 2015 pretending to be an “unaccompanied minor refugee,” and was taken in by a local liberal German family in Freiburg.

The police in the city also confirmed that they are investigating his links to the rape and murder of another German girl in the area who was attacked while jogging in Ending, near Freiburg.

News of the Afghan invader’s arrest triggered a large amount of reaction on social media, with thousands of people sharing a “thank you” meme to German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

READ  Mediterranean Invasion Higher than 2015

In the other cases, police in Bochum, western Germany, announced the arrest of a 31-year-old Iraqi invader for sex attacks on Chinese students near the town’s university.

The Iraqi, who came to Germany pretending to be a refugee in 2015, was living with his wife and two children near the scene of the two attacks, state prosecutors said.

Police have charged the invader with attempted murder, rape, and aggravated assault.

That case also highlighted the fact that German police are forbidden to use DNA evidence found at crime scenes to issue racial profiles of suspects in order to narrow down searches.

After the Bochum case, German Justice Minister Heiko Maas has now said that he was “open to further discussion about such use of DNA.”

The anti-invasion Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) blamed the crime on the “uncontrolled influx of foreigners,” while the head of a police union warned of the “dangers that always go along with massive immigration.”

AfD co-chairman Jörg Meuthen, said: “We are shocked by this crime and at the same time we see that our warnings about the uncontrolled arrival of hundreds of thousands of young men from Islamic-patriarchal cultures are written off as populist.”

The chairman of the DPoIG police union, Rainer Wendt, said the killing could have been prevented. “We wouldn’t have this victim, and so many others, if our country had been better prepared for the dangers that always go along with massive immigration,” he was quoted as saying.

The other attack—which has generated far less controlled media attention, took place in the Swedish city of Uppsala.

In that attack, five Afghan invaders, all claiming to be “unaccompanied minor refugees,” gang-raped a fellow Afghan “child” invader at knifepoint.

The victim went to police to report the hour-long ordeal, parts of which were filmed and posted on social media by the attackers, who are said to have known him.

READ  Cruz Supported Illegal Invasion

The victim was also punched, kicked, bitten, and spat on as well as being raped.

The five attackers all claim to be 16- or 17-years old, and all arrived in Sweden as “unaccompanied minors,” as did their victim, last year, prosecutor Johan Stromback was quoted as saying.

If convicted the five accused will be sentenced to juvenile detention, after which they would be deported and barred from returning to the country. They will appear at Uppsala District Court.

Homosexual attacks of that sort are common in Afghanistan, where the practice known as “bacha baazi,” or “dancing boys,” is routine.

Bacha baazi consists of the mass sexual assault of young boys who are trained to dance in female clothes.

An October 2013 article in Foreign Policy magazine said bacha baazi “has grown more rampant since 2001” when the Taliban was ousted.

The article referred to a 2009 Human Terrain Team report titled, “Pashtun Sexuality,” which said bacha baazi is not considered “un-Islamic or homosexual at all” according to Pashtun social norms.

The report noted that “one of the country’s favorite sayings is ‘women are for children, boys are for pleasure.’”

There is, of course, no justification for any Afghans to claim to be refugees in Europe, as they are being deported back to that country with the active aid of the United Nations, as reported earlier.

It’s official: Renzi resigns as Italy awaits new government

It's official: Renzi resigns as Italy awaits new government

Matteo Renzi bowed out as Italian prime minister on Wednesday with a combination of jokes, regrets and a strong hint that he wants to lead his party into an early election battle.

Forced to quit after a crushing referendum defeat, Renzi formally submitted his resignation to President Sergio Mattarella on Wednesday evening.

The presidential palace said political consultations on forming a caretaker government would begin on Thursday at 6pm..

Before handing back the keys to his Palazzo Chigi residence, the 41-year-old chaired a meeting of the executive of his Democratic Party (PD).

“We are not afraid of anything or anybody, if other parties want to go to the polls …. the PD is not afraid of democracy or elections,” Renzi said, in reference to opposition clamour for a nationwide vote due in early 2018 to be brought forward by up to a year.

Ironically, Renzi’s rule came to an end with his government winning a vote of confidence in the Senate, the parliamentary chamber he tried to emasculate with a referendum in which he suffered a crushing defeat on Sunday.

The confidence vote curtailed prolonged discussion on the approval of Italy’s 2017 budget — an unfinished task which had prompted Mattarella to ask Renzi to delay his departure for a few days.

“Budget law approved. Formal resignation at 1900. Thanks to everyone and viva l’Italia!” (“long live Italy!”) he tweeted. This being Italy, 7pm came and went, and Renzi had still not resigned.

Better luck at PlayStation

After the talks at his party headquarters, Renzi said he assumed full responsibility for the referendum but gave no indication he was considering stepping down from the PD leadership.

He said he would be spending Thursday, a public holiday, celebrating his grandmother’s 86th birthday. “We have to thank the elderly,” he said in a reference to pensioners supporting him in the referendum debate.

“And hopefully tomorrow I will have more luck in the Playstation battle with my sons than I have had here,” he added.

Renzi’s speech sounded at times like the launch of an election campaign, with the former Florence mayor boasting of how he had left Italy with “fewer taxes and more rights” and pointedly playing up his leadership in the aftermath of a series of devastating earthquakes between August and October.

The fallout from the referendum remains unclear however with the PD beset by internal divisions that were painfully exposed by the vote.

As secretary general, Renzi controls the party apparatus, which he used to stage the coup that deposed his predecessor Enrico Letta in February 2014.

The opposition meanwhile insists the referendum was a vote of no confidence in the centre-left coalition.

“Either we have immediate elections or we take to the streets,” Matteo Salvini, leader of the far-right Northern League, warned Wednesday.

“We cannot make a mockery of the 32 million people who voted on Sunday.”

Polls taken before the referendum suggested that the PD remains well-placed to emerge from an election with the largest share of the vote, despite the upward trend in backing for the populist Five Star Movement.

Recipe for paralysis

Led by comedian Beppe Grillo, Five Star is skilled at pitching an eclectic message to all shades of opinion — from libertarian leftists and ultra-environmentalists to anti-euro and anti-immigration eurosceptics.

The last year has seen the movement emerge decisively as Italy’s biggest opposition force, largely at the expense of 80-year-old former PM Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia, with around 30 percent of voters likely to back it.

Backing for the Northern League has been largely stable at around 15 percent of voter intentions, and Five Star’s hopes of power are seen as being restricted by its reluctance to countenance alliances with other parties.

The major obstacle to holding an election in two months’ time is that parliament must first revise the rules by which it will be held.

As things stand, two different electoral laws apply to the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, which hold equal powers under the “perfect bicameral” principle upheld by the referendum.

A new system for the Chamber of Deputies, under which the party getting the most votes would be guaranteed a majority of the seats, was approved earlier this year. But all the parties had agreed to revise it before the referendum.

The Senate meanwhile is elected by a proportional system unlikely to give any one party or coalition a majority. Elections under two different systems would be a recipe for political paralysis, most observers agree.

Crucially, reports say Mattarella shares that view.

Pearl Harbor False Flag 75th Anniversary: Time to Admit the Deception

The Pearl Harbor false flag operation of December 7th, 1941 which provided the excuse for the US to enter World War 2 is about to be celebrated once again. This Wednesday (December 7th, 2016) will be the Pearl Harbor 75th Anniversary event. The horrific event was yet another in a long long line of false flag operations that have been carried out by unscrupulous criminals (our misleaders) over the years. Just as with the 9/11 false flag attack, around 3000 American lives were sacrificed so that the US Government had the pretext they needed to go to war. As the 75th anniversary approaches, it is appropriate to cast our gaze back in time and set the record straight on the Pearl Harbor false flag op in the hope that this information will spread far and wide, and prevent future leaders from using this hackneyed tactic to trick people into submission and achieve their dark political and geopolitical goals.

The Pearl Harbor False Flag Motive: Providing a “Legitimate” Cover Story for the Long-Planned Entry of the US into WW2

To begin with, the Pearl Harbor attack is not a false flag op in the sense that the US attacked in its own ships and planes. It is a false flag in the sense that at the very least Roosevelt let it happen, and as the evidence will show, he made it happen. Most of the US Pacific fleet of planes and ships were intentionally left there as sitting ducks with no air protection, an easy target for the Japanese torpedo planes. The Japanese managed to destroy nearly 20 American naval vessels, including 8 massive battleships and over 300 airplanes.

The “surprise” attack proved to be an easy excuse for Roosevelt to convince the American people and Congress to enter WW2. (Yep, those were the days when the US President actually followed the Constitution more [although Roosevelt was still a criminal of course for his actions here], unlike Obama who has tried throughout his 8-year tenure to go to war without Congressional approval.) After all, who would begrudge a nation declaring on war on another nation, after the former had been attacked for no apparent reason? The collective mindset 75 years ago was quite different to show it is today. People trusted their leaders more; people were more patriotic and nationalistic; and there was no internet or easy way for people to “fact check” their leaders to tell if they were lying or not.


Bankers’ Wars

Before we examine the evidence that Roosevelt knew full well that Pearl Harbor was going to happen, we need to consider how wars are really run. Wars occur on the surface between nations, but really, it is the dark force of the international banking cabal that pulls the strings behind the scenes to aggravate opposing sides, instigate tension and encourage conflict. Then it funds both sides to ensure there is a war, and can often decide the outcome of the war by choosing which side to fund more heavily.

Mark Twain observed that while history may not repeat itself, it sure does rhyme. A similar type of false flag operation also occurred during WW1, when Germany sank the British Lusitania ship (which was carrying Munitions) on its way from New York to England. There was foreknowledge – the German embassy in the US had placed an advertisement in the newspaper warning people that sailing on the Lusitania could be dangerous. Even the biased and controlled Wikipedia admits:

“The sinking caused a storm of protest in the United States, however, as 128 American citizens were among the dead. The sinking helped shift public opinion in the United States against Germany, and was a factor in the United States’ declaration of war nearly two years later.”

Woodrow Wilson assured the population that the US would not enter WW1, and was elected partly on the basis of that pre-election promise, but when Americans were killed, what was he supposed to do, right? Ditto for Roosevelt. Same old scam. History rhymes.

The Pearl Harbor False Flag Op: 3 Conspiracies

Turning now to Pearl Harbor false flag event itself, some of the best information can be found in the book Day of Deceit by author Robert Stinnett, who served in the US Navy during WW2. His research includes declassified documents which were withheld from the American public for over 60 years. Stinnett’s work shows that there were really 3 conspiracies surrounding the event: the first was to induce Japan to attack America and thus provide an unbeatable pretext for America to enter World War 2; the second was to deprive the Pearl Harbor commanders of available information about Japan’s intentions; and the third was to ensure that all evidence of foreknowledge from the public.

Conspiracy #1: Coaxing Japan into Attacking

Stinnett includes a memorandum that he obtained under FOIA by Japanese expert Captain Arthur McCollum, chief of the Far Eastern Section of Naval Intelligence, dated October 7, 1940. This nefarious McCollum memo (pictured above) listed an 8-point plan to induce Japan “to commit an overt act of war”. In an interview in 2002, Stinnett was asked whether FDR saw the memo:

“Is there any proof that FDR saw McCollum’s memorandum?

Stinnett: There’s no proof that he actually saw the memorandum, but he adopted all eight of the provocations—including where he signed executive orders…And other information in Navy files offers conclusive evidence that he did see it.”

Here are the 8 points McCollum advocated, all of which Roosevelt performed or arranged (some over the objections of Commander-in-chief of the US fleet James Richardson):

  • A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.
  • B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies.
  • C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang-Kai-Shek.
  • D. Send a division of long range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore.
  • E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.
  • F. Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.
  • G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.
  • H. Completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire.

Point F is highly significant, because it allowed the Japanese to destroy a major part of the US fleet, thus maximizing the injury in the public’s perception – which was after all the ultimate target that day. In addition to coaxing the attack in many ways, the US also allowed a Japanese naval spy carte blanche to spy on the base at Pearl Harbor and transmit information back to Japan in preparation for the attack.

Conspiracy #2: Crack the Japanese Code but Keep ‘Em in the Dark

Remember the good old mushroom modus operandi? Feed ’em shit and keep ’em in the dark? That’s what went on with the Pearl Harbor commanders, Admiral Kimmel (Commander in Chief of the US Fleet) and Lt. General Short (head of the US Army Defenses at Pearl Harbor), who were denied the critical information they needed to prepare for and defend against the attack.

According to Stinnett, US cryptographers had deciphered Japan’s diplomatic code (known as MAGIC). They had also deciphered some of Japan’s military codes, which meant that they could understand the messages they were intercepting in the Pacific. The significant information that was received from these intercepts (such as the Japanese Task Force’s last-minute choice for its staging area, its destination and its attack order) was deliberately withheld from Kimmel and Short.

Around 2 weeks before the attack occurred (on November 23, 1941) Kimmel had ordered (without White House approval) a search for Japanese forces north of Hawaii. He had actually moved the fleet into the North Pacific. However, once White House officials learned of this, they ordered the ships back to Pearl Harbor. Another piece of evidence is that on November 25, the Navy headquarters in Washington ordered Kimmel to route all transpacific shipping southward leaving the north Pacific conveniently open, allowing Japan to attack with no intervening vessels.

Conspiracy #3: Evidence of Foreknowledge

There is a considerable amount of foreknowledge, in addition to the points above. Here are some more examples:

– Roosevelt wanted to “win the war together” with England. As James Perloff writes:

“Roosevelt dispatched his closest advisor, Harry Hopkins, to meet British Prime Minister Winston Churchill in January 1941. Hopkins told Churchill: “The President is determined that we [the United States and England] shall win the war together …”

Roosevelt’s intentions were nearly exposed in 1940 when Tyler Kent, a code clerk at the U.S. embassy in London, discovered secret dispatches between Roosevelt and Churchill. These revealed that FDR — despite contrary campaign promises — was determined to engage America in the war. Kent smuggled some of the documents out of the embassy, hoping to alert the American public — but was caught.”

– On November 25th, 1941, FDR received a “positive war warning” from Churchill that the Japanese would strike against America at the end of the first week in December. This warning caused the President to do an abrupt about-face on plans for a time-buying modus vivendi with Japan and it resulted in Secretary of State Hull’s deliberately provocative ultimatum of November 26th, 1941, that guaranteed war.

– On November 26th, 1941. Washington ordered both US aircraft carriers, the Enterprise and the Lexington, out of Pearl Harbor “as soon as possible”. This order included stripping Pearl of 50 planes or 40% of its already inadequate fighter protection. On the same day Cordell Hull issued his ultimatum demanding full Japanese withdrawal from Indochina and all China. The US Ambassador to Japan called this “the document that touched the button that started the war.”

– On November 29th, 1941, Hull told United Press reporter Joe Leib that Pearl Harbor would be attacked on December 7. The New York Times reported on December 8th (“Attack Was Expected,” p. 13) that the US knew of the attack a week earlier.

– On December 1st, 1941, the Office of Naval Intelligence, ONI, 12th Naval District in San Francisco found the missing Japanese fleet by correlating reports from the 4 wireless news services and several shipping companies that they were getting signals west of Hawaii.

– On December 5th, 1941, FDR wrote to the Australian Prime Minister, “There is always the Japanese to consider. Perhaps the next four or five days will decide the matters.”

– Stinnett aso notes that it was reported that before the bombing occurred, newspapers were delivered detailing the attack.

Conclusion: Spread the Truth about the Pearl Harbor False Flag Operation

So, as the Pearl Harbor 75th anniversary approaches, approach it from an informed perspective. Those 3,000 Americans died for a lie. Just as with 9/11, thousands of American lives were sacrificed so the US criminal elite had an excuse to go to war. The US was worried by industrial and military strength of Nazi Germany and needed a backdoor way to enter the war against Germany. Staging a Pearl Harbor false flag op was the only way, leading officials felt, to galvanize the reluctant American public into action.

Pearl Harbor was a carefully orchestrated plot adopted by US President Franklin Roosevelt to lure Japan into attacking and starting a war with the US. It’s time for everyone to know the truth.

Europe’s populist wave encounters first test with votes in Italy and Austria

Newspaper headlines show Italian Premier Matteo Renzi's resignation following the result of Sunday's constitutional referendum, at a newsstand in Rome, Monday, Dec. 5, 2016. Italian voters dealt Premier Renzi a resounding rebuke early Monday by rejecting his proposed constitutional reforms, plunging Europe's fourth-largest economy into political and economic uncertainty. (AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia)

The results over the weekend of Italy’s referendum and Austria’s presidential election were billed as the first true test of the rising tide of populism that has engulfed European politics amid stagnant economies, high unemployment and unease over the continuing stream of migrants from the Middle East and North Africa.

But instead of making a murky political situation clearer, Sunday’s results have left observers with almost more questions than answers as the world awaits 2017’s key elections in Western European superpowers France, Germany and The Netherlands.

“There are definitely trends that we’re seeing across the region, but one thing this weekend showed is that each country is different,” Dan Kelemen, a professor of political scene at Rutgers University, told FoxNews.com. “We shouldn’t expect that just because the Brexit in the U.K., the election of [Donald] Trump in the U.S. and the rise of some populist leaders in Europe that the rest of the countries are going to go this way.”

In Rome – amid a wave of anti-establishment anger led by populist comedian-turned-politician Beppe Grillo’s Five Star Movement – Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has promised to step down from power after Italians voted against a series of reforms that acted as an unofficial plebiscite on his rule.

While Italy’s “no” vote on Renzi’s referendum is a clear indication of populism’s rise on the boot of Europe, Sunday’s decision may be a high point for the movement given the fractured nature of Italian politics and the varying political viewpoints at play.

Grillo’s 5-Star Movement is the biggest winner in the referendum’s failure, but the more left-leaning populist will have to face numerous other candidates if he hopes to win the prime minister’s job when elections are next held.

Grillo has called for quick elections, but political analyst Giovanni Orsina, deputy director of the school of government at Rome’s LUISS university, said he probably doesn’t want them to come too soon because he wants the establishment’s failure to “cook” over time. If opinion polls hold, the 5-Star movement commands roughly one-third of the vote, but whether that would be enough to govern depends on how the new electoral law is written.

The other big player in Italy’s upcoming election is the anti-EU, anti-migrant Northern League and its leader, Matteo Salvini. The Northern League’s popularity got a boost in the week after Trump’s victory, and Salvini has deepened his alliances with Europe’s far-right parties to solidify his influence.

Salvini wants  immediate elections in an effort to latch on to the growing discontent connected to the migrant crisis, especially in the northern regions of Veneto and Lombardy where they run regional governments and where Italy’s proud entrepreneurial class is still struggling to regain footing after the economic crisis.

Experts say that while these two parties certainly used the strength of Europe’s populist movement to squash Renzi’s referendum, the sheer number of political parties in Italy will make it difficult for one party to seize power outright.

“The referendum was definitely a vote for populism, but it was more so about Italian anger at  Renzi than populism,” Kelemen said.

About 700 miles to the north, the far-right candidate Norbert Hofer narrowly lost the country’s presidential election to leftist Alexander Van der Bellen in a race that pitted Hofer’s nationalistic brand of populism against Van der Bellen’s self-described “Pro-European” politics.

Van der Bellen’s victory over Hofer was welcomed by moderate European leaders – on both the right and left – as a win for supporters of the European Union and a blow against the populist forces looking to weaken it.

“What happens here today has relevance for all of Europe,” Van der Bellen said as he cast his ballot, later noting that his win showed most voters backed his message of “freedom, equality, solidarity.”

Van der Bellen added that  the win sends a “message to the capitals of the European Union that one can win elections with high European positions.” He said he would work to unite a country deeply split between the moderate liberals who voted for him and supporters of Hofer’s anti-immigrant Freedom Party.

“This is definitely a clear cut win for those in favor of a multi-national, more Euro-centric view of politics,” Kelemen said. Van der Bellen received praise from numerous European leaders including France’s Francois Hollande, who said Austrians “made the choice of Europe, and openness.”

The results in Italy and Austria may give those two countries a better grasp on their domestic political situations, but does little to help forecast how their neighbors will vote in 2017.

In France, the socially conservative former Prime Minister Francois Fillon looks poised to face off next year against Marine Le Pen, whose staunch opposition to the European Union and hardline immigration proposals has won her many supporters among the country’s far-right.

The Dutch will decide in March if they want the pugnacious populist Geert Wilders and his Party for Freedom to run the country. While he currently sits atop the polls, experts say that the Dutch political system would make it difficult for him to pass a number of items on his agenda if elected.

“He’s popular, but the Dutch system has a lot of coalitions and not many other parties appear willing to work with Wilders,” Kimberly Morgan, a political science professor at George Washington University, told FoxNews.com.

And in Germany, as Chancellor Angela Merkel goes for her fourth term, she will face a resurgent far-right led by populist politician Frauke Petry of the Alternative for Germany party. However, it seems that Merkel will retain her job despite grumblings about her handling of the refugee crisis.

“We should not jump to conclusions that Europe is going to the far right like some people are saying,” Kelemen said. “They may make some gains, but it will be far from a takeover.”

Germany: Invaders Stay on Welfare

The liberal claim that Third World immigration is needed to “boost Europe’s labor force” has been exposed once again as a lie with the news that none of the 50,000 officially recognized “asylum seekers” in the German state of North Rhine Westphalia are working, and all are living on welfare.

The Deutsche Welle (DW) news service has admitted that “there is little demand for these would-be-employees in Germany’s most populous state.”



In an article titled “Refugee Dilemma: The challenge of finding jobs for refugees in Germany,” DW reported that the official “employment agency of Germany’s most populous state is sounding the alarm over its inability to provide tens of thousands of refugees with work.”

So far, the 50,000 nonwhite invaders who have “completed the prerequisite asylum process and integration courses” in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) “are now at the point where they may apply for jobs, the state’s employment agency says.”

The DW goes on to repeat the classic liberal arguments used to promote Third World immigration—but then immediately, and likely inadvertently, admits that these arguments are false:

“In the face of Germany’s low birthrate and rapidly aging population, one would think that the influx of new labor would be beneficial, but in NRW, however, there is little demand for these would-be-employees in Germany’s most populous state.”

Christiane Schönefeld, the head of the NRW employment agency, in an interview with the WDR broadcaster, and quoted by DW, attempted to explain this mysterious lack of employment by claiming that employers are not interested because the invaders’ “resident permit status is still not clear or the work permit regulations are too complicated.”

READ  Abdeslam and the Immigration Threat

This is however nonsense, because recognized “asylum seekers” have been granted residence rights, and there are no more formalities to fulfill.

The DW article then goes on to admit the truth, saying that the invaders just do not have any skills or ability:

“It seems many refugees from Syria and other war-torn countries lack the skills and qualifications German companies need, even if they have completed vocational training or a university degree in their native countries,” the DW says, despite quoting Schönefeld as saying that “this is the moment in time when integrating refugees into the labor market either succeeds or fails.”

The state has gone through great lengths to try and get the invaders into work. Months ago, the DW reports, NRW set up 47 specific “integration point” centers where invaders can find help with “integration classes,” “guidance counseling,” “recognition of foreign credentials,” or even finding a kindergarten place for their children.

However, the problem is that at least one-third of the invaders have no schooling at all, the NRW employment agency told DW, adding that “young people with little or no schooling rarely have a chance of finding a trainee position.”

Furthermore, “in general, asylum seekers to Europe are mainly young and male,” a study commissioned earlier this year by the European Parliament found. Of first-time “asylum applicants, 74 percent are male, and 82 percent are younger than 35.

The same numbers hold true in NRW, the employment agency said. Seventy percent of the invaders in the state’s October unemployment statistics are male, and poorly educated, and more than 60 percent are younger than 35.

Nationwide, the government’s “migration experts” predict that by the end of 2017, at least 460,000 invaders will be “ready to enter the German job market”—but, going by the NRW test, none of them are actually going to work either.

In July 2016, it was reported that the top 30 listed companies on the German stock exchange have only been able to employ 54 of the invaders posing as refugees in Germany.