Joerie, joerie, botter en brood,
as ek jou kry, slaat ek jou dood

Saturday, January 31, 2015


Kyk ook:


30 January 2015 Last updated at 21:03 GMT

Vicar's 9/11 Facebook post investigated by Church

Attack of World Trade CentreThe 9/11 attacks on New York, Washington and Pennsylvania in 2001 claimed nearly 3,000 lives
The Church of England is investigating a vicar accused of posting an article on Facebook blaming Israel for the 9/11 attacks in the US.
The Reverend Stephen Sizer, vicar of Christ Church, in Virginia Water, Surrey, allegedly posted a link to an article entitled: "9/11 Israel did it."
He reportedly wrote: "Is this anti-Semitic? It raises so many questions."
Mr Sizer later removed the link and apologised for his "ill-considered and misguided" actions.
The Diocese of Guildford said it was taking "immediate steps" to investigate.
A spokesman for the diocese - which oversees Mr Sizer - said it was a matter of "deep sorrow and shame" that the posts appeared in the same week as the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.
"Our attention has been drawn to comments by the Rev Stephen Sizer on social media.
"In those comments Rev Sizer linked to an article entitled '9/11 Israel did it'," the spokesman said.
'Beyond absurd'
"These comments would rightly be seen as unacceptable whenever they were posted.
"It is a matter of deep sorrow and shame that they have been posted in this week of all weeks."
He added the diocese was "aware of the seriousness of the matter" and was also in touch with the Board of Deputies of British Jews.
In a statement, Mr Sizer said: "It was particularly insensitive in that last week coincided with Holocaust Memorial Day.
"I removed the link as soon as I received adverse feedback, and realised that offence had been caused.
"I have never believed Israel or any other country was complicit in the terrorist atrocity of 9/11, and my sharing of this material was ill-considered and misguided."
He added that at the request of the diocese, he would not be using social media or blogs until further notice.
BBC religious affairs correspondent Caroline Wyatt said Mr Sizer had a history of disputes with Jewish community leaders over blog postings on Israel and Zionism.
In 2013, he and the Board of Deputies of British Jews reached a mediated agreement aimed at ending a long-running dispute over postings on his blog.

Jonathan Arkush, vice-president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews,told the Jewish News: "Posting, and giving approval to, an article which in effect accuses Jews of responsibility for the 9/11 atrocity is unquestionably anti-Semitic, just as it is beyond absurd."

Wednesday, January 28, 2015


Russia In The Cross Hairs
By Paul Craig Roberts

January 27, 2015 "ICH" -  Washington’s attack on Russia has moved beyond the boundary of the absurd into the realm of insanity.

The New Chief of the US Broadcasting Board of Governors, Andrew Lack, has declared the Russian news service, RT, which broadcasts in multiple languages, to be a terrorist organization equivalent to Boko Haram and the Islamic State, and Standard and Poor’s just downgraded Russia’s credit rating to junk status.
Today RT International interviewed me about these insane developments.

In prior days when America was still a sane country, Lack’s charge would have led to him being laughed out of office. He would have had to resign and disappear from public life. Today in the make-believe world that Western propaganda has created, Lack’s statement is taken seriously. Yet another terrorist threat has been identified – RT. (Although both Boko Haram and the Islamic State employ terror, strictly speaking they are political organizations seeking to rule, not terror organizations, but this distinction would be over Lack’s head. Yes, I know. There is a good joke that could be made here about what Lack lacks. Appropriately named and all that.)

Nevertheless, whatever Lack might lack, I doubt he believes his nonsensical statement that RT is a terrorist organization. So what is his game?

The answer is that the Western presstitute media by becoming Ministries of Propaganda for Washington, have created large markets for RT, Press TV, and Al Jazeera. As more and more of the peoples of the world turn to these more honest news sources, Washington’s ability to fabricate self-serving explanations has declined.

RT in particular has a large Western audience. The contrast between RT’s truthful reporting and the lies spewed by US media is undermining Washington’s control of the explanation. This is no longer acceptable.

Lack has sent a message to RT. The message is: pull in your horns; stop reporting differently from our line; stop contesting the facts as Washington states them and the presstitutes report them; get on board or else.

In other words, the “free speech” that Washington and its EU, Canadian, and Australian puppet states tout means: free speech for Washington’s propaganda and lies, but not for any truth. Truth is terrorism, because truth is the major threat to Washington.
Washington would prefer to avoid the embarrassment of actually shutting down RT as its UK vassal did to Press TV. Washington simply wants to shut up RT. Lack’s message to RT is: self-censure.
In my opinion, RT already understates in its coverage and reporting as does Al Jazeera. Both news organizations understand that they cannot be too forthright, at least not too often or on too many occasions.

I have often wondered why the Russian government allows 20 percent of the Russian media to function as Washington’s fifth column inside Russia. I suspect the reason is that by tolerating Washington’s blatant propaganda inside Russia, the Russian government hopes that some factual news can be reported in the US via RT and other Russian news organizations.

These hopes, like other Russian hopes about the West, are likely to be disappointed in the end. If RT is closed down or assimilated into the Western presstitute media, nothing will be said about it, but if the Russian government closes down Washington’s agents, blatant liars all, in the Russian media, we will hear forever about the evil Russians suppressing “free speech.” Remember, the only allowable “free speech” is Washington’s propaganda.

Only time will tell whether RT decides to be closed down for telling the truth or whether it adds its voice to Washington’s propaganda.

The other item in the interview was the downgrading of Russian credit to junk status.

Standard and Poor’s downgrade is, without any doubt, a political act. It proves what we already know, and that is that the American rating firms are corrupt political operations. Remember the Investment Grade rating the American rating agencies gave to obvious subprime junk? These rating agencies are paid by Wall Street, and like Wall Street they serve the US government.

A look at the facts serves to establish the political nature of the ruling. Don’t expect the corrupt US financial press to look at the facts. But right now, we will look at the facts.

Indeed, we will put the facts in context with the US debt situation.
According to the debt clocks available online, the Russian national debt as a percentage of Russian GDP is 11 percent. The American national debt as a percentage of US GDP is 105 percent, about ten times higher. My coauthors, Dave Kranzler, John Williams, and I have shown that when measured correctly, the US debt as a percent of GDP is much higher than the official figure.
The Russian national debt per capita is $1,645. The US national debt per capita is $56,952.

The size of Russia’s national debt is $235 billion, less than one quarter of a trillion. The size of the US national debt is $18 trillion, 76.6 times larger than the Russian debt.

Putting this in perspective: according to the debt clocks, US GDP is $17.3 trillion and Russian GDP is $2.1 trillion. So, US GDP is 8 times greater than Russian GDP, but US national debt is 76.6 times greater than Russia’s debt.

Clearly, it is the US credit rating that should have been downgraded to junk status. But this cannot happen. Any US credit rating agency that told the truth would be closed and prosecuted. It wouldn’t matter what the absurd charges are. The rating agencies would be guilty of being anti-american, terrorist organizations like RT, etc. and so on, and they know it. Never expect any truth from any Wall Street denizen. They lie for a living.

According to this site: the US owes Russia as of January 2013 $162.9 billion. As the Russian national debt is $235 billion, 69 percent of the Russian national debt is covered by US debt obligations to Russia.

If this is a Russian Crisis, I am Alexander the Great.
As Russia has enough US dollar holdings to redeem its entire national debt and have a couple hundred billion dollars left, what is Russia’s problem?

One of Russia’s problems is its central bank. For the most part, Russian economists are the same neoliberal incompetents that exist in the Western world. The Russian economists are enamored of their contacts with the “superior” West and with the prestige that they image these contacts give them. As long as the Russian economists agree with the Western ones, they get invited to conferences abroad. These Russian economists are de facto American agents whether they realize it or not.

Currently, the Russian central bank is squandering the large Russian holdings of foreign reserves in support of the Western attack on the ruble. This is a fools’ game that no central bank should play. The Russian central bank should remember, or learn if it does not know, Soros’ attack on the Bank of England.
Russian foreign reserves should be used to retire the outstanding national debt, thus making Russia the only country in the world without a national debt. The remaining dollars should be dumped in coordinated actions with China to destroy the dollar, the power basis of American Imperialism.

Alternatively, the Russian government should announce that its reply to the economic warfare being conducted against Russia by the government in Washington and Wall Street rating agencies is default on its loans to Western creditors. Russia has nothing to lose as Russia is already cut off from Western credit by US sanctions. Russian default would cause consternation and crisis in the European banking system, which is exactly what Russia wants in order to break up Europe’s support of US sanctions.

In my opinion, the neoliberal economists who control Russian economic policy are a much greater threat to the sovereignty of Russia than economic sanctions and US missile bases. To survive Washington, Russia desperately needs people who are not romantic about the West.

To dramatize the situation, if President Putin will grant me Russian citizenship and allow me to appoint Michael Hudson and Nomi Prins as my deputies, I will take over the operation of the Russian central bank and put the West out of operation.

But that would require Russia taking risks associated with victory. The Atlanticist Integrationists inside the Russian government want victory for the West, not for Russia. A country imbued with treason inside the government itself has reduced chance against Washington, a determined player.

Another fifth column operating against Russia from within are the US and German funded NGOs. These American agents masquerade as “human rights organizations,” as “women’s rights organizations,” as “democracy organizations,” and whatever other cant titles that serve in a politically correct age and are unchallengeable.

Yet another threat to Russia comes from the percentage of the Russian youth who lust for the depraved culture of the West. 

Sexual license, pornography, drugs, self-absorption. These are the West’s cultural offerings. And, of course, killing Muslims.

If Russians want to kill people for the fun of it and to solidify US hegemony over themselves and the world, they should support “Atlanticist integration” and turn their backs on Russian nationalism. Why be Russian if you can be American serfs?

What better result for the American neoconservatives than to have Russia support Washington’s hegemony over the world? That is what the neoliberal Russian economists and the “European Integrationists” support. These Russians are willing to be American serfs in order to be part of the West and to be paid well for their treason.

As I was interviewed about these developments by RT, the news anchor kept trying to confront Washington’s charges with the facts. It is astonishing that the Russian journalists do not understand that facts have nothing to do with it. The Russian journalists, those independent of American bribes, think that facts matter in the disputes about Russian actions. They think that the assaults on civilians by the American supported Ukrainian Nazis is a fact. But, of course no such fact exists in the Western media. In the Western media the Russians, and only the Russians, are responsible for violence in Ukraine.

Washington’s story line is that it is the evil Putin’s intent on restoring the Soviet Empire that is the cause of the conflict. This media line in the West has no relationship to any facts.
In my opinion, Russia is in grave danger. Russians are relying on facts, and Washington is relying on propaganda. For Washington, facts are not relevant. Russian voices are small compared to Western voices.

The lack of a Russian voice is due to Russia itself. Russia accepted living in a world controlled by US financial, legal, and telecommunication services. Living in this world means that the only voice is Washington’s.

Why Russia agreed to this strategic disadvantage is a mystery. But as a result of this strategic mistake, Russia is at a disadvantage.

Considering the inroads that Washington has into the Russian government itself, the economically powerful oligarchs and state employees with Western connections, as well as into the Russian media and Russian youth, with the hundreds of American and German financed NGOs that can put Russians into the streets to protest any defense of Russia, Russia’s future as a sovereign country is in doubt.

The American neoconservatives are relentless. Their Russian opponent is weakened by the success inside Russia of Western cold war propaganda that portrays the US as the savior and future of mankind.

The darkness from Sauron America continues to spread over the world.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.

Friday, January 23, 2015


Wim Van Rooy wordt woordvoerder PEGIDA Vlaanderen

wimvanrooyPEGIDA, de Duitse volksbeweging tegen islamisering en voor de vrijheid, is intussen alom bekend.  In Dresden en in gans Duitsland heeft de beweging het taboe over de ware aard van het islamisme doorbroken.  Sinds kort mobiliseert ook PEGIDA Vlaanderen:  de beweging wil een eerste ‘volksbijeenkomst’ houden in Antwerpen op 26.01, om 20 uur, voor vrijheid en tegen islamisering.  De locatie werd gewijzigd van Groenplaats naar Hendrik Conscienceplein.
Vele mensen stelden zich echter de vraag: wie of wat gaat er schuil achter PEGIDA Vlaanderen?  Een woordvoerder met gezag ontbrak.  Maar daar lijkt nu verandering in te komen, want PEGIDA meldt via zijn facebookpagina (die intussen al bijna 7000 volgers heeft) dat de nieuwe woordvoerder Wim Van Rooy zal zijn.
Wim van Rooy (1947) behaalde in 1971 het diploma Letteren en Wijsbegeerte (afdeling Germaanse Filologie), met als bijkomende specialisatie godsdienstwetenschap. Hij was dertig jaarwerkzaam in het onderwijs en is publicist.  Als freelancer was hij 25 jaar lang verbonden aan ‘Radio 3′ (het huidige ‘Klara’), met een honderdtal programma’s over religie, antropologie, politicologie, literatuur, filosofie. Gedurende enkele jaren was hij ook tv-presentator van ‘Het Vrije Woord’.  Wim van Rooy schreef honderden artikelen en recensies in verschillende literaire, maatschappelijke, historische en politieke tijdschriften, waaronder een tiental opiniestukken in De Standaard en De Morgen (recentste opiniestuk: ‘Islamofobie en waar ze vandaan komt’ – De Standaard, 29 januari 2009).
Hij is auteur van het boek ‘De malaise van de multiculturaliteit’ (Uitgeverij Acco, 2008) en mede-samensteller van en -auteur in de essaybundel ‘De Islam, kritische essays over een politieke religie’ (Uitgeverij ASP, 2010) en ‘Europa wankelt. De ontvoering van Europa door de EU’ (Uitgeverij Van Halewyck, 2012). Momenteel schrijft hij aan een nieuw boek, waarin immigratie en islam een grote rol zullen spelen. Tot slot gaf hij de laatste jaren meer dan honderd lezingen over postmodernisme, multiculturalisme en de islam.
Met de aanduiding van deze opmerkelijke woordvoerder gaat de groei van PEGIDA Vlaanderen dus gestaag verder.  Aanmelden kan nog steeds op de facebookpagina van Pegida Vlaanderen,waar ook alle communicatie gebeurt.  Een website is er (nog) niet, dus er wordt opgeroepen zeker nergens geld te storten.

10 Reacties »

  1. PEGIDA VLAANDEREN is een broodnodig initiatief dat gesteund dient te worden door eenieder die voor zijn (klein)kinderen als legaat een EUROPEES Europa wil achterlaten. Dat is immers ONS continent en geen kalifaat kolonie van Saoudie-Arabie met Mekkantwerpen als één der metropolen, de Sharia als Constitutie en clitoridectormy voor onze (klein)dochters !

    Rate This
  2. @reinder281165:
    De islam is een gevaar dat zichtbaar is voor iedereen met minstens 2 werkende hersenscellen.
    Het zionisme (het internationalisme) is een sluipende kanker waar de gemiddelde persoon niets van weet, en daarom duizendmaal erger dan islam.
    Het Westen kan niet herstellen zolang beide ziektes aanwezig zijn.

    Rate This
  3. Eerste de multiculturele waanzin organiseren, dan de reactie ertegen recupereren. Eigenlijk best knap.

    Rate This
  4. Laat ek maar herhaal wat ek en my Goeie Kameraad elders al gesê het:
    ” Solank Europa optree teen alleen een-derde van die Joods-Christelik-Islamitiese drie-eenheidsgodsdiens, gaan dit donker bly in die Avondland.”

    Rate This
  5. WIe joden een groter gevaar vindt dan de islam is oliedom

    Rate This
    • Toe ek byna ‘n kwarteeu gelede saam met my gesin aan die Vlaamse kus van die Avondland aangespoel het, was ek ‘n fundamentalistiese, Calvinisties-Protestantse Christen, maar ek het gou-gou uitgevind dat dié lewens- en wêreldbeskouing nié toepaslik is in Europa nie en uitgevind dat ‘n mens te doene het met ‘n Joods-Christelik-Islamitiese drie-eenheidsgodsdiens waar die (fisiek) kleinste van die drie, die ander twee soos ‘n soort Amplified Mobility Platform ( gebruik om sy doelwitte te bereik – enigiemand wat dít nie raaksien of kán/wíl raaksien nie, is “oliedom”.

      Rate This
  6. Waarvoor gevreesd kon worden. Met zo’n zionist als woordvoerder heeft geen enkele rechtgeaarde nationalist nog iets bij PEGIDA te zoeken…

    Rate This

Tuesday, January 20, 2015


Reflections on the Recent Paris Massacre and Zionism
By Uri Avnery 

January 18, 2015 "
ICH" -   The three Islamic terrorists could have been very proud of themselves, if they had lived to see it.

By committing two attacks (quite ordinary ones by Israeli standards) they spread panic throughout France, brought millions of people onto the streets, gathered more than 40 heads of states in Paris. They changed the landscape of the French capital and other French cities by mobilizing thousands of soldiers and police officers to guard Jewish and other potential targets. For several days they dominated the news throughout the world.

Three terrorists, probably acting alone. Three!!!

For other potential Islamic terrorists throughout Europe and America, this must look like a huge achievement. It is an invitation for individuals and tiny groups to do the same again, everywhere.

Terrorism means striking fear. The three in Paris certainly succeeded in doing that. They terrorized the French population. And if three youngsters without any qualifications can do that, imagine what 30 could do, or 300!

Frankly, I did not like the huge demonstration. I have been in many demonstrations in my time, maybe more than 500, but always against the powers that be. I have never participated in a demonstration called by the government, even when the purpose was good. They remind me too much of the late Soviet Union, Fascist Italy and worse. Not for me, thank you.

But this particular demonstration was also counterproductive. Not only did it prove that terrorism is effective, not only did it invite copycat attacks, but it also hurt the real fight against the fanatics.

To conduct an effective fight, one has to put oneself first into the shoes of the fanatics and try to understand the dynamic that pushes young local-born Muslims to commit such acts. Who are they? What do they think?  What are their feelings? In what circumstances did they grow up? What can be done to change them?

After decades of neglect, that is hard work. It takes time and effort, with results uncertain. Much easier for politicians to march in the street in front of the cameras.

And who marched in the first row, beaming like a victor?

Our own and only Bibi.

How did he get there? The facts came out within record time. Seems he was not invited at all. On the contrary, President Francois Hollande sent explicit messages: please, please don’t come. It would turn the demo into a show of solidarity with the Jews, instead of a public outcry for the freedom of the press and other “republican values”. Netanyahu came nevertheless, with two extreme rightist ministers in tow.

Placed in the second row, he did what Israelis do: he shoved aside a black African president in front of him and placed himself in the front row.

Once there, he began waving to the people on the balconies along the way. He was beaming, like a Roman general in his triumphal parade. One can only guess the feelings of Hollande and the other heads of state – who tried to look appropriately solemn and mournful – at this display of Chutzpah.

Netanyahu went to Paris as part of his election campaign. As a veteran campaigner, he knew that three days in Paris, visiting synagogues and making proud Jewish speeches, were worth more than three weeks at home, slinging mud.

The blood of the four Jews murdered in the kosher supermarket was not yet dry, when Israeli leaders called upon the Jews in France to pack up and come to Israel. Israel, as everybody knows, is the safest place on earth.

This was an almost automatic Zionist gut reaction. Jews are in danger. Their only safe haven is Israel. Make haste and come. The next day Israeli papers reported joyfully that in 2015 more than 10,000 French Jews were about to come to live here, driven by growing anti-Semitism.

Apparently, there is a lot of anti-Semitism in France and other European countries, though probably far less than Islamophobia. But the fight between Jews and Arabs on French soil has little to do with anti-Semitism. It is a struggle imported from North Africa.
When the Algerian war of liberation broke out in 1954, the Jews there had to choose sides. Almost all decided to support the colonial power, France, against the Algerian people.

That had a historical background. In 1870, the French minister of justice, Adolphe Cremieux, who happened to be a Jew, conferred French citizenship on all Algerian Jews, separating them from their Muslim neighbors.

The Algerian Liberation Front (FLN) tried very hard to draw the local Jews to their side. I know because I was somewhat involved. Their underground organization in France asked me to set up an Israeli support group, in order to convince our Algerian co-religionists. I founded the “Israeli Committee For A Free Algeria” and published material which was used by the FLN in their effort to win over the Jews.

In vain. The local Jews, proud of their French citizenship, staunchly supported the colonists. In the end, the Jews were prominent in the OAS, the extreme French underground which conducted a bloody struggle against the freedom fighters. The result was that practically all the Jews fled Algeria together with the French when the day of reckoning arrived. They did not go to Israel. Almost all of them went to France. (Unlike the Moroccan and Tunisian Jews, many of whom came to Israel. Generally, the poorer and less educated chose Israel, while the French-educated elite went to France and Canada.)

What we see now is the continuation of this war between Algerian Muslims and Jews on French soil. All the four “French” Jews killed in the attack had North African names and were buried in Israel.

Not without trouble. The Israeli government put great pressure on the four families to bury their sons here. They wanted to bury them in France, near their homes. After a lot of haggling about the price of the graves, the families finally agreed.

It has been said that Israelis love immigration and don’t love the immigrants. That certainly applies to the new “French” immigrants. In recent years, “French” tourists have been coming here in large numbers. They were often disliked. Especially when they started to buy up apartments on the Tel Aviv sea front and left them empty, as a kind of insurance, while young local people could neither find nor afford apartments in the metropolitan area. Practically all these “French” tourists and immigrants are of North African origin.

When asked what drives them to Israel, their unanimous answer is: anti-Semitism. That is not a new phenomenon. As a matter of fact, the vast majority of Israelis, they or their parents or grandparents, were driven here by anti-Semitism.

The two terms – anti-Semitism and Zionism – were born at almost the same time, towards the end of the 19th century. Theodor Herzl, the founder of the Zionist movement, conceived his idea when he was working in France as a foreign correspondence of a Viennese newspaper during the Dreyfus affair, when virulent anti-Semitism in France reached new heights.  (Anti-Semitism is, of course, a misnomer. Arabs are Semites, too. But the term is generally used to mean only Jew-haters.)

Later, Herzl wooed outspoken anti-Semitic leaders in Russia and elsewhere, asking for their help and promising to take the Jews off their hands. So did his successors. In 1939, the Irgun underground planned an armed invasion of Palestine with the help of the profoundly anti-Semitic generals of the Polish army. One may wonder if the State of Israel would have come into being in 1948 if there had not been the Holocaust. Recently, a million and a half Russian Jews were driven to Israel by anti-Semitism.

Zionism was born at the end of the 19th century as a direct answer to the challenge of anti-Semitism. After the French revolution, the new national idea took hold of all European nations, big and small, and all of the national movements were more or less anti-Semitic.

The basic belief of Zionism is that Jews cannot live anywhere except in the Jewish State, because the victory of anti-Semitism is inevitable everywhere. Let the Jews of America rejoice in their freedom and prosperity – sooner or later that will come to an end. They are doomed like Jews everywhere outside Israel.

The new outrage in Paris only confirms this basic belief. There was very little real commiseration in Israel. Rather, a secret sense of triumph. The gut reaction of ordinary Israelis is: “We told you so!” and also: “Come quickly, before it is too late!”

I have often tried to explain to my Arab friends: the anti-Semites are the greatest enemy of the Palestinian people. The anti-Semites have helped drive the Jews to Palestine, and now they are doing so again. And some of the new immigrants will certainly settle beyond the Green Line in the occupied Palestinian territories on stolen Arab land.

The fact that Israel benefits from the Paris attack has led some Arab media to believe that the whole affair is really a “false flag” operation. Ergo, in this case, the Arab perpetrators were really manipulated by the Israeli Mossad.

After a crime, the first question is “cui bono”, who benefits? Obviously, the only winner from this outrage is Israel. But to draw the conclusion that Israel is hiding behind the Jihadists is utter nonsense.

The simple fact is that all Islamic Jihadism on European soil hurts only the Muslims. Fanatics of all stripes generally help their worst enemies. The three Muslim men who committed the outrages in Paris certainly did Binyamin Netanyahu a great favor.

Sunday, January 18, 2015


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: H
Date: 2015-01-12 11:52 GMT+01:00
Subject: Vryheid van spraak in die Weste? Se gat!
To: T, S, P, P, P, L, J, J, B, A, C, F, F, H, H, J, J, M, p

January 10, 2015

"Cartoon blasphemy” links
Judaic Cartoonist Art Spiegelman told the Canadian Jewish News that those who write satires of Holocaustianity “deserve a bullet.”

Cartoons blaspheming barbaric rabbinic circumcision of infants — these cartoons were denounced by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)

Cartoon about Israeli venality denounced as “anti-Semitic” and withdrawn by Australian newspaper:

Politically correct liberals are beginning to turn against Charlie Hebdo:
They’re accusing Charlie Hebdo of being “all white people” who were “racist, sexist, homophobic” blah blah blah:

France has free speech which only Muslims violate? That’s a lie! Dieudonne and Robert Faurisson are banned in France.
In France it’s illegal to publish doubts about gas chambers: 

Help this link go viral: hilarious Tales of the Holohoax satirical comic book:

Two men in Britain were jailed for distributing Tales of the Holohoax gas chamber cartoons: 

Cartoon blasphemy of Holocaustianity is damned by the West:

January 7: An Anniversary shared by Ernst Zündel and Charlie Hebdo:

Links are updated daily here

Pass on this list of links to your own contacts! 


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Petrus Potgieter <>
Date: 2015-01-13 11:38 GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: Vryheid van spraak in die Weste? Se gat!
To: H
Cc: T et al

die meteorologiese omstandighede van maklik die laaste halfmaand waai my onontkomelik terug tot in my bartonwegse kinderdae van kaskarre-op-en-af-innie-straat-saam-met-niel-en-anthony-du-toit, moesie den, die-outa-met-die-3-wiel-roomyskarretjie-en-klokkie-waar-jy-oppie-voorwiel-moes-klim-ommie-deksel-by-te-kom-om-tussen-al-die-lekkers-te-rommel-vir-'n-tiekiese-yslollie-of-'n-rocket-of-'n-wall's-wafer-of-'n-sikspense-sjokoladegedoopte-roomys-oppe-stokkie-waarvan-die-naam-my-nou-ontgaan en die rooinek jeremy taylor se ag pleez dêddie en daai ingroeitoonnael-aambeigekwelde-stinkasem harold macmillan met sy winds-of-change en dr verwoerd se antwoord in die winderigste, maar (h)eerlikste baai van almal en ek voel dit so aan my kwas: dieselfde winde-van-verandering raas nou deur europa en die avondland staan op die randjie en op die vooraand van eksistensiële keuses en verandering wat dít wat in suid-afrika gebeur het, na kinderspeletjies kan laat lyk 


 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: i
Date: 2015-01-13 16:51 GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: [1973uperegte1] Re: Vryheid van spraak in die Weste? Se gat!
To: 1973uperegte1
Cc: H et al

Enigiemand wat hierdie laan van herinneringe bewandel kan nie anders as om nostalgies te raak nie!

Ek onthou die liedjie van Elvis goed - dit is opgeneem toe hy sy diensplig gedoen het in Duitsland en dit was ’n groot storie destyds. Ons het die solus 7-plaatjie by die huis gehad, saam met ander solus 7-plate wat destyds nog in die vorm van die pragtigste poskaarte was. Die draaitafel was nog oorgetrek met so ’n ligbruin vilt-agtige materiaal.

Ek het my eie klein vingertjies destyds (ek dink ek was toe so ses jaar oud) omtrent verbrysel toe ek hulle per ongeluk tussen die binnewerke van 'n ou platgedrukte kinderwaentjie gesit het in 'n poging om myself in my sittende posisie daarop regop te hou terwyl ek teen tempo hewig de bult van Aragonweg in die Baai afgejaag het. Daardie jáág teen die afdraande van bo by die hoek van Lovemoresingel (omtrent bý die hoek van die gronde van Andrew Rabie) tot onder, tot óm die draai, tot ’n mens vanself tot stilstand in die middel van Diazweg gekom het, was darem te lekker! Dít is seker waar ek my “neiging tot spoed” opgetel het waarteen die motorrybewysinspekteur my later van tyd gewaarsku het.

Ek onthou die roomyskarretjies en die outas goed. Hulle was goeie siele en het altyd toegelaat dat elkeen van die bondel kinders ’n beurt kry om onder in sy Mary Poppins karretjie grou om te kry wat hulle gesoek het terwyl hy staan en hanna-hanna met die ousies wat gedurende hulle uitgebreide teetyd op die sypaadjie gesit het of in die straat geslenter het - weet julle, noudat ek daaraan dink en die ousies se lawwe gekekkel onthou, het hy nie naderhand met hulle "geflirt" nie? Nietemin, ek het altyd so ’n wit-en-pienk “wafer” geëet want hulle was die maklikste om te beheer sonder om te mors. Mens kon presies dieselfde roomys in ’n “cone” (wat is die ingels daarvoor nou weer?) gekry het, maar dan het die roomys altyd gesmelt en tot onder in die tippie afgedrup. Dan het die spul só soggie geword en naderhand op die grond geval en daar was jy al jou lekkergoed kwyt - ai, dít was nou sleg!

Wat my ook opgeval het in die klomp Springbokradioadvertensies, waarvan ek 'n hele klompie nog kon saam opsê en -sing, was die prentjie van die ou SAL vliegtuig: daardie stert vat 'n mens darem terug na die dae toe die eenvoudige emblem van die springbok nog kwaliteit beteken het (ten spyte van Hendrik Schoeman se vraag of die passasiers wou vlieg of vreet!).

Ter afsluiting wil ek die volgende uit hierdie ware republikeinse staatsman se raak antwoord haal en dit van toepassing maak op die afgelope week se gebeurde – ek dink nie dit is die enigste belangrike punt van de toespraak nie maar, soos die res van die repliek, is dit nog steeds vandag toepaslik en ek is seker almal in hierdie pc-wêreld sal daarmee saamstem, so lank hulle nie weet dit kom uit hierdie (uit-die-vuis) toespraak nie:
 “... no-one can do any good by trying to hurt somebody with [sic] whose points he differs but ... only good can come from trying to do good to others ...”.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: o
Date: 2015-01-16 7:31 GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: [1973uperegte1] Re: Vryheid van spraak in die Weste? Se gat!
To: 1973uperegte1

Spoeg en plak van 'n e-pos wat ek ontvang het...


This is by far the best explanation of the Muslim terrorist situation I have ever  read.
The  author's references to past history are accurate and clear. It's not a lengthy read, it's easy to understand, and it's well worth  the read.

The  author of this email is Dr. Emanuel Tanay, a well-known and well-respected psychiatrist.

A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates.

When  he was asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he  gave can guide our attitude toward  fanaticism.

'Very few people were true Nazis,' he  said, 'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more  were too busy to care.  I  was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools.  So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before  we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of  the world had come.

My  family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.'

We  are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that  Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of  Muslims just want to live in  peace.  Although  this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant.  It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant  to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the  globe in the name of Islam.

The  fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in  history.

It  is the fanatics who march.

It  is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.
It  is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal  groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire  continent in an Islamic wave.

It  is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honour-kill. It is  the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.

It  is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of  rape victims and homosexuals.

It  is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become  suicide bombers.

The  hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent  majority,' is cowed and extraneous.

Communist  Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of  about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were  irrelevant.

China's  huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million  people..

The  average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a  warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way  across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the  systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by  sword, shovel, and bayonet.

And  who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery. Could it  not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace  loving'?

History  lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated  of points:  Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their  silence.

Peace-loving  Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that  the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have  begun.

Peace-loving  Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many  others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up  until it was too late.

Now  Islamic prayers have been introduced into Toronto and other public  schools in Ontario , and, yes, in Ottawa too, while the Lord's  Prayer was removed (due to being so offensive?). The Islamic way  may be peaceful for the time being in our country until the  fanatics move in.

In  Australia , and indeed in many countries around the world, many of  the most commonly-consumed food items have the halal emblem on  them.

Just  look at the back of some of the most popular chocolate bars, and  at other food items in your local  supermarket.

Food  on aircraft have the halal emblem, just to appease the privileged  minority who are now rapidly expanding within the nation’s'  shores.

In  the U.K, the Muslim communities refuse to integrate and there are  now dozens of “no-go” zones within major cities across the country  that the police force dare not intrude  upon.  Sharia  law prevails there, because the Muslim community in those areas  refuse to acknowledge British law.

As  for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only  group that counts - the fanatics who threaten our way of  life.
Lastly,  anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this  email without sending it on, is contributing to the passivity that  allows the problems to expand.  So,  extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands, world-wide, read this and think about it, and they  also continue to send it on - before it's too  late.

And we are silent......and  then.....silenced.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: s
Date: 2015-01-16 12:29 GMT+01:00
Subject: [1973uperegte1] Deurmekaar . . .
To: 1973uperegte1

Kyk, ek is nou nie van die vinnigste denkers op dese aardbodem nie.  Maar blykbaar was die voormalige (adjunk?) minister Hennie Smit verkeerd toe hy die Kleurlinge as stadige denkers beskryf het (ek het al op my voorgeslagte ingegaan en die bietjie gemengde bloed wat ek het, dateer van so lank gelede dat dit vir praktiese doeleindes as "uitgeteel" beskou kan word.  Dog, in beginsel is Hennie Smit se hipotese dan tog korrek?).

Ek is/was verward oor die opskrif van gesprek in die lyn van "spraakvryheid in die weste - se gat", maar wat dan jeugherinneringe opdiep.  Mis ek die verband?  Is ek deurmekaar?

Dink ek sal verder ondersoek instel en kom af op 'n klomp verwysings in 'n gesprek van 'n ander groep (?) wat my lyk wat wel gevoer was oor die onderwerp.  Die bevat 'n verwysing na Wikipedia (nie altyd korrek nie, maar ek vind dit gewoonlik interessant) en wetgewing in Frankryk waaroor gesê word: "

The Gayssot Act or Gayssot Law (FrenchLoi Gayssot), enacted on July 13, 1990, makes it an offense in France to question the existence or size of the category of crimes against humanity as defined in the London Charter of 1945, on the basis of which Nazi leaders were convicted by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-46 (art.9).
Communist deputy Jean-Claude Gayssot proposed the law. It is one of several European laws prohibiting Holocaust denial. Its first article states that "any discrimination founded on membership or non-membership of an ethnic group, a nation, a race or a religion is prohibited."
Nou is ek weer verward/deurmekaar.  Ek kan my tog sekerlik nie op vryheid van spraak beroep as ek gevang word dat ek saamsweer om sedisie/hoogverraad/moord te pleeg nie?  Dit (vryheid van spraak) kan tog nie 'n regverdigingsgrond wees om 'n misdryf te pleeg nie?  (Strafreg was nooit my gunsteling of sterk vak gewees nie, ek het 'n her daarvoor gekry - so miskien het ek dit nog altyd verkeerd verstaan!).  Of moet vryheid van spraak sover gaan om die leuen teen die waarheid te beskerm:  daar was nie 'n holocaust nie, daar was nog nie 'n wêreldoorlog in die geskiedenis nie, daar was nie boere oorloë nie, Dingaan het nie vir Piet Retief doodgemaak nie, Jan van Riebeeck het nie aan die Kaap geland nie en die aarde is plat!!!
Dis vir my bietjie deurmekaar...

Groetnis orals!