Sunday, 9 July 2017

DON'T GO FULL RETARD ON THE JQ!

There are in fact many ways one can go full retard on the JQ. One way is to invite Jews into the movement by associating with them, which allows them the possibility of ingratiating themselves with you. Pretty soon, they may be writing articles on your Alt Right website or making podcasts for the 'goyim'. A while later, they might try introducing some subversive elements into the mix, all done ironically, of course, and in the best of humour. Indeed, the humour will be such that when good nationalists speak out against having Jews in the movement, others will accuse them of 'counter-signalling' and 'purity spiralling', when what they really mean is 'muh entertainment'. The Gods forbid anyone should stand in the way of their entertainment with reasonable concerns.

 

Yes, I know they are.

Another way you can go full retard on the JQ is the Jack Renshaw way. Jack has been charged with a racial hatecrime for the speeches he gave at a rally in Blackpool and at the Yorkshire Forum last year in which he addressed the JQ. I also spoke at that Yorkshire Forum event and Jack's speech followed mine. It was without doubt the most cretinous, most idiotic, most retarded piece of oration I have ever heard. As is widely known, both because of moles within nationalist circles and Jack's own boasting, and now also because the police appear to have received a copy of the speech, Jack called for the extermination of the Jews. At the end of the speech, he was pilloried by the audience assembled, including by me and by the two members of the National Front I had brought from Hull. We left straight after the speech because of time constraints, and so we had very little time to debate with him. Nick Walsh quite rightly just called him an idiot. 

 

I have since speculated as to whether he is a plant sent to discredit our movement, but lean towards him being just a silly young boy egged on by his peers and by people who are trying to discredit the movement. Certainly though, I do not appreciate him having mentioned me personally in his speech, which I mused may have been a ploy to implicate me in all this nonsense by association, particularly as I had spoken about the poet Ted Hughes' relationship to Jewry in my speech. The Left has, after all, been attacking me and Mjolnir Magazine for some time now. Jack and his peers have criticised me for having mentioned the word 'plant'. Yet there are plants in the movement and moles at the London and Yorkshire Forums. In fact, I deliberately fed one disinformation about me that has since turned up in Hope Not Hate and Searchlight articles. 

 

 

 

But let us assume he is just simple minded, as I suspect, and examine why what he said is retarded. Firstly, there is the issue of Jack's impending court case brought by the Crown Prosecution Service. We can argue all day about the wrongs of the Orwellian hatespeech laws, but it makes no difference. Those are the existing laws and breaking them will result in prosecution. As James Lewthwaite once said, though, as long as we are reasonable, the authorities would be reluctant to come for the Rightist intelligentsia because we can defend ourselves intellectually and our imprisonment would give greater impetus to our cause, as it would be seen as unjust by an increasingly aware public. What Jack has done, though, is to say something deliberately that the general public will find morally repugnant. Far from seeing the case against Jack as unjust, the case can and will be used by the state to normalise the laws against the freedom of speech and expression we have in Britain.


Not only this, but the case may be used to shut down the London and Yorkshire Forums and their other spin-offs, which would rob the movement of a platform for our ideas. The day after the event, I wrote this e-mail to the main organiser of the London Forum, Jez Turner:


Subject: Re: How well do we know L***** D*****?


Hi Jez,

I'm more concerned about Renshaw himself. If the London Forum puts his speech up on Youtube, these things will happen:
1) the boy will be sent to prison for no less than two years (assuming he's not some commie agitator)
2) the London Forum channel will be erased from Youtube
3) the state will shut the London Forum down and possibly prosecute its members
4) the incident will be used to demonise the movement for years to come.

What I also don't like is that he mentioned me in his speech at the beginning. I want nothing to do with this individual. Mjolnir is drawing good creative and intelligent people to it and thus into the movement. I don't want some idiot spoiling it. These "Hitler was right" types have no sense of reality - or of history - and think that Joe Public is suddenly going to start embracing the F├╝hrer and revolt against their masters. The problem is they spend all their time in little cliques and on the internet and then believe everyone is like them deep down.

I am not concerned by L***** D*****, even if she turns out to be a BBC reporter. I have done or said nothing I am ashamed of. Renshaw plays straight into our enemies' hands though and little wonder the speech drew attention given the content.

Best,
Dave


You see, even if Jack Renshaw puffs himself up with bravado about not being bothered about going to jail, and even if I think he is retarded, I would like to see him escape a prison sentence if possible and I tried to get his speech supressed both for his own good and for the good of the movement as a whole. Prison will not be a pleasant place for Whites who are known racialists, given the demographics there. Jack and his ilk have stated that people who do not go around in public screaming the most retarded stereotyped slogans that the Left so love to report are cowards and only appear on the internet. This is complete horseshit and done to try to coerce the simple-minded into joining in the buffoonery. I for one have happily spoken in public on many occasions and stood on Rotherham market for the BNP with Marlene Guest and John Sheldon back in the day.

 


Yet Jack is a symptom of a wider problem in the movement, and that is a sort of autistic focusing on a single antagonistic group, as though with the removal of that group, the whole world would hold hands and sing songs together. For some it is the Jews, for others the Muslims, still others Negroes, and so on. And here I believe young Jack has been led astray by older heads who ought to know better, but who, like their Leftist counterparts, have never grown up - people who in middle age and beyond still fantasise about the Third Reich of their imagination. While I do not subscribe to the official narrative concerning the Third Reich and the Jews, the fact remains that that regime had determined upon an expansionist war in the East, beyond the 1914 boundaries, in order to turn White European ethnostates into German colonies, a war that would cost millions of lives of the best of European men.


But let us return to the Jewish Question. Let us look at Jack's proposition itself. How would you exterminate the Jews exactly? No matter the morality, Israel is a militarily powerful state with nuclear capabilities. Do you really think Israel would stand by and watch Jewry in the West be systematically exterminated? And this again shows the nonsense of the Hitler-worshippers and Friends of Palestine in the movement when they say they wish to see Israel erased from the map. A two-state solution is the most logical one, but logic has little bearing on that region and, in any case, the whole issue is a distraction from what we should really be focusing on, which is not what our antagonists are doing, but what we are not doing, namely creating the conditions for our future survival and prosperity.


Granted Jewry has been eager to see and oversee our downfall as a race, but this is no different to any other outsider group, for the law of Nature demands one assures the dominance of one's own group. So what does one do with the Jews? The simple answer is they have a place to go: Israel. And that is why Israel is actually needed. Individuals who have attempted to ensure our genocide must be punished as individuals, just as those individuals of our own people would be. Yet one cannot put all the world's woes on Jewry. Do not forget that only a few centuries ago, they lived in ghettoes and were forbidden power. So who let them out and why? Answer that question and you might get somewhere. Like the rest of this article, that might not be a popular assertion, but reality is never popular and I'm not here to win popularity contests.

9 comments:

  1. I agree with your comments about Jews and Israel, and have said as much myself on many occasions over several years. It is logical and makes sense. However most people in the 'Movement' [Is there one?] do not seem to agree.

    Personally, the way I see it is that my quarrel is not with Jews or other non-whites, but with other whites. This is a white [British] civil war (that is, war in the Clausewitzian sense). The non-whites are just sidelights and stage hands to the main show. White people could end all this in a single day, if they wanted, and then Jews and all the rest would no longer matter and would in fact seem laughable.

    However most people in the 'Movement' [Is there one?] do not seem to agree with this sort of thinking and want to discuss Jews and various reactionary issues, which is fine in principle except it doesn't progress us to our objectives.

    As for Jack Renshaw, given that he has now been charged, parts of your article may be sub judice and, respectfully, you may wish to consider at least editing out specific references to the defendant. In any event, I will leave the matter to the courts and will only observe that young men with fire in their bellies may say inadvisable things. This man is, I believe, still only 21 or 22, which is comfortably old enough for him to know what he is doing and take responsibility for it, but not necessarily old enough for him to know what to do or foresee all the consequences of certain risk-taking, if you see what I mean.

    Young men need older men to lead them. The basic flaw in National Action was that it separated youth from experience, with predictable results.

    Of course, all this assumes that these people are genuine and not state or enemy agents of some kind. Who knows? For me, it's enough to know that their methods are wrong, though I have to say (and here I risk rebuke) that I think the Movement's methods are largely wrong anyway. You don't have to be a motivated by malice to be in the wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Tom. I'm afraid the police have a copy of the speech, which National Action themselves circulated, so anything I've written here is superfluous. In fact, Renshaw is still very proud of his speech.

      Delete
  2. Thanks Dave. It wasn't a criticism of you, I was just trying to help. You're a cleverer man than me, I acknowledge that, but I know how easy it is to fall into these legal traps. Even I've done it on occasion - and of course, I'm doing it here by commenting! Let's bear in mind he has not yet been convicted of anything and might not be.

    I do hope the young man has a good outcome to it all. If it does goes badly for him, I'll be writing to him. As Joe Owens says, we need to start winning again, but the public respect strength, not weakness. They don't want to vote for a wet lettuce. We do need men with a bit of nerve and backbone who are not going to compromise on a core principle when a camera is shoved in their faces, otherwise there is hardly any point. That, I believe, is the problem with UKIP. Their spokesmen fold like wet cardboard on all the issues that concern us, whereas on the plus side, strength has been shown here, it's just misdirected. It needs leadership and experience to harness it. That's my opinion on the matter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wouldn't say I'm any smarter than you and you are probably better versed in the law. You are correct that we need men with backbone, but Jonathan Bowden identified the problem many years ago: "Those with courage have no intelligence and those with intelligence have no courage at all." And if one needs the spectre of Hitler to hide behind or if one is afraid of being called a Nazi, one ends up on exactly the same path to failure.

      Delete
  3. Duck the JQ and you show that you don't know who your enemies are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you are suggesting that I duck the JQ, then you have not even bothered to read the opening paragraph or any of the articles on the JQ in this blog. I address the JQ, I just do not reduce everything down to it.

      Delete
  4. Hi Dave, hope you are well. Just a few thoughts on the matter that the Forums ought to consider. Given that we know state agents might be planted or at least listening:

    - Why was someone so young allowed to give a speech at all?

    - Why was the speech not vetted first by an approval committee of trusted speakers?

    - Post speech, why was it circulated rather than undergoing damage control?

    - As for the JQ, the fundamental issue as I see it is that power is in the hands of who own money. For e.g. if it had been a Muslim King who owed the BofE and then the Federal Reserve, we would be dominated by a group other than Jews today.

    If this is so, and it is my opinion that it is, then until we have a movement capable of generating public demand for the nationalisation of the BofE and reparations to the Treasury of all the wealth the owners of the BofE have acquired then we will continue down the same road, which as we all know, ends with a Muslim majority in the UK within 20 or 30 years on present trends. We've had centuries to deal with the issue of the Rothschild central bank and we are out of time. Even more unfortunately, if this is done unilaterally, as did Nazi Germany, then the remaining nations under the Jewish owned Central Banks will unite to destroy us.

    We need to be smart, as Trump would say. And it is OK to delude a public driven insane by propaganda rather than just playing into the hands of our enemies by breaking the thought-control Hate Speech laws. (Speech is just thought enunciated after all.) Look at Macron and how he rose from nothing. Of course, it is a false "new" party, as it's exactly the same as the other traitors to France, but it shows it can be done. Corbyn almost pulled off a coup by telling who knows what lies to the young and to starry eyed students. There is the whiff of revolution in the air and if the white-genocide parties keep control of the situation then we can only look forward to a repeat of the Armenian genocide.

    So get your thinking cap on lad, because leadership is what is needed to unite the alt-right into something that can be capable of accomplishing specific tasks as a united movement in the way the SPLC does.

    Whatever we need, it must be both pan-European and and pan-Anglosphere simultaneously. What do we have to work with? The alt-right, Brexiters, dissidents against PC and the immorality of the age etc. What is our time window? Trump.

    We could be almost out of time. Don't let the Forums die over this young lad. But either way, they cannot remain just talking shops. We need organised action en-masse that leads to a revolution against who owns our money - for that is the source of their power.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Contrary to popular belief among our brethren, the banks' uniting against Hitler was insignificant in the build-up to WWII. It is often forgotten that the British Conservative Party's policy under Neville Chamberlain (a good man) regarding Hitler was one of appeasement. The reason for war was Hitler's expansionist policy in the East.

      If we look at the situation now, it does not matter if a lone nationalist state is ganged up on if that state has nuclear capabilities. Nuclear weapons prevent invasion by a foreign power. This is why Israel wants war with Iran before they get them. Syria does not have them; therefore Assad is fair game.

      As for time windows and other matters, I will address those in another article, but to put it short: I've heard about time windows all the time I've been in the movement. This is because few nationalists can think outside of the democratic box. In actual fact, time windows are largely irrelevant.

      Delete