The Unseemly Spectacle of Patriot Turf Wars

By Mike James on February 19, 2012

By Mike James in Germany – 19 February 2012

Over the course of the last forty years, our lives have been torn asunder and our hearts have been broken by what has happened to our once sovereign nations.

We struggle to understand why the world is turning around Satan’s counterfeit version of Israel. We feel ourselves remorselessly crushed by the dead-weight of multiculturalism, political correctness and the intrusive legislation and technologies of burgeoning police states. We find ourselves indentured to a rapaciously parasitic banking system, which destroys wealth, enterprise and hope by shackling our bodies and our souls to Mammon, rendering us as little more than tax slaves and consumer tit-feeders.

We know that all these things have come to pass not by accident, but by design, for, if it were the former, happenstance would have smiled more kindly on us and the evil we sense quite palpably would not bear the all too obvious signature of invention.

We seek an explanation as to why such calamities have beset us, degrading the proud societies in which we once lived, corrupting the natural order of human relationships and perverting all governments, which have surrendered any pretence that it is the patriotic interests of the people and not the banking and corporate cartels they serve. In so doing, we turn to the internet, for even seasoned journalists who work for the print media or television networks believe not a single word they themselves write or say.

Explanations of varying shades are to be found in abundance and for this we must thank the many thousands of dedicated patriots who have devoted the best part of their lives to making such information available to all who seek the truth, and at no charge whatsoever.

Having exercised discernment in studying the vast wealth of literature accessible with just a few clicks of a mouse, the reader who is not frightened by his realisation that almost everything he was taught as a youngster is a lie now finds himself at liberty to decide whether or not he wishes to do something practical with his new-found knowledge and sense of outrage. There is however something he should be advised to bear in mind.

The internet is the saviour of no man, let alone those who regard themselves as patriots. It is merely a tool that provides for rapid access to valuable information and which additionally serves as a means of communication. At its best, that is all it is. It is also a double-edged sword that can be used against you. Primarily developed to serve the needs of the scientific and military complex, the Net was made available to the world by the self-same powers who currently use it to spy on you and regulate every aspect of your life.

Without the Net, the pro-Zionist colour revolutions backed by the CIA and US Sate Department in the nations of the former Soviet Union would not have been possible. It was additionally deployed to initiate and then control the outcomes of more violent revolutions in the Arab world, including one which saw fanatically deluded militants and globalist stooges in Libya foolishly work in concert with NATO to destroy the factories, public utilities and transport infrastructure built by themselves, their parents and their grandparents, effectively guaranteeing lucrative reconstruction contracts for parasitic French and British real estate gangsters.

Outside of China and Germany, the internet has remained largely uncensored for a very good reason. Data mining companies, consumer profilers, corporate lobbyists, political research groups, social engineers and intelligence agencies have profited enormously from the free flow of information that has allowed them to build a fairly exact picture as to who you are, the friends that you have, what you consume, your state of health, what you believe and, by means of predictive programming, what you will do when the proverbial shit hits the global CPU fan.

Not that it really matters. Without electrical power all modern systems of surveillance, control and repression can be switched off at the flick of a switch, so to speak, and those who are serious about shutting down the life support systems that animate the European Union and other global leviathans of an unlawful and totalitarian nature are in training to do just exactly that. They use a modality of the internet of which few people are aware and though they cooperate with one another through code, each participant is blind to the identity of the others.

Back up here on the “visible” internet, the sooner we realise that there is not and never was a cohesive anti-Zionist and patriotic “truth” movement (for the truth is in and of God and he requires no explanation by means of organised human agencies), the sooner we shall thwart the globalists in their building a nearly completed New Babylon.

The sooner we realise that unity is neither possible nor desirable, and which indeed mitigates against the fierce spirit of individualism that breathes life into the battle cries of all true warriors who know that the monster which has enslaved humanity will be slain not by a single mortal blow but by a plethora of strategically inflicted wounds, the sooner we shall commit to an already functioning and fearsome Leaderless Resistance predicated on necessarily secret and untold individual acts of daring and courage.

The sooner we realise that laying the best laid plans makes mice of men and that those who elevate themselves as spokesmen for a “movement” rather than working as studious and humble facilitators of truthful information are to be treated with sceptical circumspection, the sooner we shall stop expending precious vigour in judging others and losing ourselves in endless debates, caught in the World Wide Web of our own vanities, our own despair, our own wantonly tragic inaction.

Journalists or, as in my case, former freelance journalists who write voluntarily for the Net all too often forget that they are nothing more than the information and inspiration they impart to others, must accept editorial constraints commensurate with the web portal’s house-style and should not seek to make of themselves a cult of personality. Some of the best writing on the Net is either penned or presented by those who have had absolutely no journalistic or investigative training whatsoever.

I speak of the diligent and largely ignored Holger Haffke (gnosticliberationfront.com) whose courageous and passionate dedication to freeing his fellow citizens from the squalor and poverty of ignorance has cost him his health, and of the inestimably brave Brother Nathaniel, with whom I had the pleasure of collaborating during my crisis year of 2008, and who, even down to his last few cents, phoned me four times from New York to speak not only of the constant threats to his life but to also reassure me that the harassment I myself was enduring would, by the Will of God, be cut short.

I could speak of many others (thousands of them) who contacted me in the years when my e-mail and home addresses were made known to all and sundry, some of whom I came to care about deeply, not just as friends out there in the ether, but as close fellow combatants, anxious sons and daughters who came to me for advice.

Patriots who command an esteemed presence on the internet do a great disservice to those who derive inspiration from them by arguing unnecessarily among themselves, creating suspicions where none should exist and allowing discord, petty bickering and back-biting to poison the wellspring of good intentions and brave deeds.

We who are opposed to Zionism, the European Union, the New World Order and the effeminate Jewification of Celtic-Saxon culture are, by nature, quite unlike the international socialists, liberals and soft-bellied conservatives who have sold our people into slavery. We are, in the main, militant freeborn individualists, gnostic free spirits, Christians without a church or denomination, pugnacious scrappers and unashamed politically incorrect troublemakers who are unafraid to offend the fragile sensibilities of those in authority. Let us therefore not take affright when we offend each other.

Those who have artfully crafted the unnatural and anti-human consensual mode of existence by which we live in a world informed by a Luciferian and liberal Zeitgeist mediated by the decadent and corrupting influence of Zionism in all of its manifestations fear nothing more than the fully awakened and spiritually assured individual who, no matter how humble or penniless he may be and without regard to his own personal welfare and the status accorded to him by his slave masters on the global plantation, seeks to tell the truth as he perceives it so that his compatriots are enlightened as to the illusions under which they travail and are forewarned of the fate that surely awaits them.

Before sewing discord in the hearts of those who yearn for freedom, the slave masters invariably attempt to unite them in order to infiltrate, subvert, co-opt and thereby control the forces of opposition to their schemes. They know that they must discourage individuality and a strong faith in the only leader to whom men should look for guidance, liberation and, ultimately, salvation: God Almighty.

When Jesus Christ came into this world to relate a blindingly simple message of freedom from material bondage and spiritual tyranny, the religious elites and the secular Idumean-Jewish power network, horrified at this potential challenge to their wealth and status, sent out spies and tricksters who sought to find evidence sufficient to the task of incriminating him for sedition or to discover ways in which he could be accommodated to their own political advantage.

In their hearts the revolutionary zealots, the Pharisees, the religious separatists, the Messianic “truth” activists, the Sadducees and the Hellenist freethinkers and philosophers of the day all saw the advantage of recruiting Jesus into their respective ranks or at least having him endorse them as legitimate and worthy of men’s allegiance. They were to be bitterly disappointed.

In their ignorance and in the lusts according to their own selfishly legalistic obsessions, they murdered the messenger who spoke the Word through which, resurrected forever in the hearts of those who had the childlike faculties to understand, all men and women, for all time and retrospectively backdated, were set free from the bondage of ignorance and granted direct access, without any human mediator, to the unbounded grace of the Creator of all things.

It is no coincidence that in America, Britain, Ireland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and in other enclaves of Celtic-Saxon culture, the rate of social collapse and disintegration is directly proportional to the loss of faith in Christ and the replacement of naturally intuited moral correctness with the blasphemous depravity of political correctness.

It may have escaped your notice, but let me remind you that our kind is assaulted daily by the Serpent Race, those who say they are Jews, but are not: those who came from the East and whose forefathers were never inhabitants of a land that God forbade the original Jews to ever enter again, the Ashkenazim, all puffed up, cunning, manipulative, deceitful, skilled in the arts of financial trickery and political fraud on a scale that defies the scope of any one of their many slick Hollywood productions.

For too long now we have allowed them to debase all that was decent, proper, virtuous and good about our way of life. Their financial alchemists whispered into the ears of our kings and regents long ago, sequestering for themselves the sole right to issue currency and charge interest against loans conjured up out of thin air as if by kabbalistic magic, which is really all it is, thus enslaving entire nations to an anti-human money system that denies all of us the bounty of living in joy, with each of us working only for those things necessary to sustenance and the attainment of a future for our children while living fully in the Present, enjoying the God-given gift of life to the very full.

I am heartbroken by what they have done to my nation, England. For the love of a woman, I left those shores twenty years ago, returning only once, and yet I am enraged by the despoliation of the greatest race of men, the fairest among the fair, the salt of the earth, the hardiest of souls that walked and still walk in the loving Shadow of Greatness and who, despite all of their endearing shortcomings and their self-effacing denial of innate moral excellence, painted upon the canvas of this earthly domain a portrait of their own creativity and compassion for all of the races of humankind.

We, the Celtic-Saxon peoples of this world, were born as lion cubs, brave and free, emotionally and temperamentally unsuited to servitude. We owe it to our children and our great-grandchildren to fight, and fight we shall.

This world was given over to us as a charge, as a keepsake; and for this reason, even before the foundation of all things, God predestined those who now speak English as of their indigenous and cultural inheritance to give every thing on the face of the earth, every thing below it and every thing above a name, and also to teach the other races to do the same. If it were not so, then why is it that the Asians, the Negroes, and the Jews cannot make themselves understood at an international level unless they speak the language that was, even seen within an “evolutionary” scheme of things, the fittest to survive by means of the moral excellence of those who first spoke it?

Therefore, let there be no discord between you, for these are perilous times. My people require that all avenues of communication are open to them without fear or favour, and let no patriot who fancies himself as a writer of repute to be emulated stand in the way on account of his own ego or personal vanities, for, in the final reckoning of things, all will be counted against him.

The people of my nation, England, yearn for freedom. They dream that, one day, they may live as a people secure and prosperous within their own God-given country, liberated from the impositions of parasitic foreign hordes, strange religions, utopian European projects and the psychotic vicissitudes of international financial alchemy that has robbed them of their wealth and natural inheritance.

Let us not for one moment weaken in our resolve to ensure that they get it.

———-
Michael James, an English republican patriot, is a blacklisted former freelance journalist resident in Zionist-occupied Germany since 1992 with additional long-haul stays in East Africa, Poland and Switzerland. He advocates a Leaderless Resistance to destroy the Soviet European Union and prays for a free and independent England, shorn of all alliances with the EU, UK, NATO, the UN, WTO, IMF, Israel and any other treacherous international cabal or entity.
———-

IMPORTANT -"Sovereignty and the UFO"

Alexander Wendt and Raymond Duvall
"Sovereignty and the UFO"
Thursday, January 19, 2006
12:00 p.m.

Mershon Center for International Security Studies
Wendt&Duvall, Draft 1: p.1
Alexander Wendt is the Ralph D. Mershon Professor of International Security Studies at the Mershon Center, and Raymond Duvall is Professor of Political Science and Associate Director of the Interdisciplinary Center for the Study of Global Change/MacArthur Interdisciplinary Program on Global Change, Sustainability, and Justice at the University of Minnesota. They gave a talk entitled “Sovereignty and the UFO” at the Mershon Center, addressing the puzzle of why it is that modern states do not take Unidentified Flying Objects seriously.

Wendt and Duvall offer what they call an “epistemology of UFO ignorance” to explain why modern states systematically resist the notion that extra-terrestrial life forms might both exist and travel to earth. They emphasized their militant agnosticism about whether UFOs really are extra-terrestrial, saying that they are interested only in how and why the ignorance is maintained.

They said that the authoritative public sphere discourages taking UFOs seriously, and that this is ignorance masquerading as knowledge. There has actually been little scientific research on the subject, meaning that we do not know whether or not UFOs exist. Lack of evidence for UFOs’ existence does not mean that they do not exist, Wendt and Duvall argued, and skepticism regarding UFOs – that extra-terrestrials would be unable to reach earth, that UFOs would land on the White House lawn, that we would know if UFOs had been on earth – is not sufficient. Instead, the burden of proof ought to lie with disproving their existence.

Wendt and Duvall explained why they would expect UFOs to be taken seriously. First, if UFOs were found to prove the existence of extra-terrestrial life, this would be the most important event in world history. Second, aliens pervade popular culture, making it clear that people are interested in the phenomenon of UFOs. Third, states have historically been very willing to label things security threats, because the presence of more security threats increases states’ power in order to deal with them. Last, natural scientific curiosity would seem to make research about UFOs interesting and desirable. Despite all of this, very little is known about UFOs, and the modern state shows no signs of encouraging otherwise.

Wendt and Duvall argued that the authoritative epistemology of UFO ignorance is necessary to maintain modern governance, because intelligent extra terrestrial life that can make itself known on earth is a threat to human-centered science and rule. They said that UFOs constitute a metaphysical threat to human power, making ignoring them the only alternative acceptable to modern states. They divided their argument into three parts. 

First, they situated modern rule as “governmentality.” Governmentality is what Foucault describes as non-coercive rule, or power that functions not by violence or physical oppression but through control of knowledge. Both science and the state rest upon an anthropocentric metaphysics, whereby human conduct is all that matters. A regime of governmentality may also have a sovereign or coercive face, however, which deals with the physical threats that arise (but rarely).
Second, they discussed how that sovereign face functions. They said that there are sometimes physical threats to governmentality, and that, in these exceptional circumstances, the state must resort to coercive behavior. 

Third, they said that the UFO poses not just a physical threat, to which a modern state could respond with its sovereign behavior, but also a metaphysical threat. Even if a UFO and its occupants had benign intentions, its unique otherness (in being non-human) would require a world government, united against the other, and this new universal sovereignty would replace the modern state as we know it.
Wendt and Duvall repeated that phenomena requiring exceptions to normal governmentality fall into two categories: physical (e.g. conquest) and existential or ontological threats (e.g. the existence of a non-human world that would extinguish the viability of individual nationally sovereign states). They said that the state cannot decide how to deal with UFOs as an exception, because even acknowledging their possible existence would call into question the state’s role as the sole securitizer, and this leaves only one option: the existence of UFOs must be denied.

They also noted that the study of UFOs, even if it were not actively discouraged politically, may be a difficult task. The UFO poses what they called a “threat of unknowability” to science, on several grounds. First, UFOs are random and seemingly unsystematic. Second, UFOs appear to violate the laws of physics, making them “impossible” per the laws of science that would be used to study them. Third, the UFO raises the possibility of a non-human subjectivity, making an understanding of UFOs potentially unassayable.

Wendt and Duvall said that modern states’ ignorance of UFOs need not be conscious, as conspiracy theories would suggest. States might unconsciously repress UFOs as taboo, so as not to reveal their existential insecurities. Wendt and Duvall identified four mechanisms by which states, whether consciously or unconsciously, authoritatively repress UFOs.
--First, epistemic authorities may simply announce that we know UFOs not to exist.
--Second, they may announce that UFOs do not and cannot constitute a security threat (on the grounds mentioned earlier, e.g. UFOs would not be able to reach earth, etc). These claims might be supported by secrecy, such as the non-reporting of cases or redactions from official reports.
--Third, they may denounce UFO research as inherently pseudo-science. They may do this by systematically denying federal funding to any grant proposal about such research, or by otherwise exerting pressure on scientists to self-censor to avoid ridicule.
--Last, epistemic authorities may practice pseudo-science, themselves. For example, the U.S. Air Force commissioned a report on UFOs in the late 1960s, and the panel undertaking the research was stacked with skeptics whose bias rendered their findings unscientific. Even while suffering from serious methodological flaws that biased findings against the existence of UFOs, the study had a 30% failure rate at explaining them. This failure rate hardly warranted the study’s summary, which declared that UFOs do not exist.

Ultimately, Wendt and Duvall characterized UFOs as a political problem first, rather than a scientific or sociological one. In order to address UFOs, the taboos against such research must be lifted. They said that once there is real scientific research underway, it should be possible for science and the state to diverge on the question of UFOs’ existence.