England: Land of Evil

The English are a hard-pressed people. In many ways we as a people are an example of what the globalists have in store for the world. We have been manipulated by our rulers to the point that we take pride in what has been done to us, and what we have done to others at the behest of our rulers. In true Orwellian style, we have come to love Big Brother.

How did this sorry state come to pass? How did the people of the Norse Eddas, mingled with Rome, Germania, and the truly magickal people of the Celtic nation, become so subservient to the alien presence that not only do we not revolt against our oppressors, but we actively persecute those who can see the reality beyond the pantomime? How did the English become the engine of the globalist machine which is destroying every people and culture on the planet, replacing them with a sub-human mass of organic robots, with no allegiance to anything except self, materialism and survival?

To understand how debased the English have become, we need to go back to a time when being English was a badge of honour. The nation of England was born in 986 with the fusion of the smaller nations which had occupied the land up to that time. England existed as a sovereign land until 1066 when the 'Norsemen' invaded. Led by William the Bastard, the Norman conquest saw England reduced to a vassal of a foreign power. The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom which had gradually been forged with the admixture of related European peoples was subjected to a new regime, which rather than blending with the general population, imposed its will by means of harsh persecution and butchery of all who refused to accept the new overlords. The Feudal System was modelled along Talmudic lines to suit the new rulers who were Christian in name only, if at all. This tragedy in the history of the English was unparalleled in its brutality by any invasion prior or since. Even the horrors inflicted upon the Druids by the Romans paled in comparison with the slaughter unleashed by the Normans and those who collaborated with them.

Following the Norman Conquest, Anglo-Saxon England was changed forever. The traditional organic moot system of government was replaced by the feudal system. Whereas before, leaders ruled with the consent and approval of a cooperative people, under the new system, rule was imposed by fear and the use of barbarity and cruelty of truly Biblical proportions. It was with the arrival of the cosmopolitan Norman ruling elite that the divisive class system was introduced. The spiritual quality of the nation was undermined with the wholesale butchery of the clergy. The Anglo-Saxon language was likewise attacked, with French being imposed as the official language of commerce and government. The French tongue trickled into the vernacular of the masses creating the hybrid language which evolved into the English spoken today.

The hatred for the French-speaking elite has been passed down through the generations in folklore. Anyone who knows the story of Robin hood will know that he was a native of Yorkshire who led raids upon the lackeys of the establishment, and then redistributed the wealth thus obtained amongst his impoverished Anglo-Saxon kinsmen. Across the channel in France, the same hated establishment so persecuted the native population that in time they rose up and beheaded those who ruled them and claimed to be French. In England, a similar uprising did not occur. A hatred of all things French bedded into the popular culture, which was ironic, as the real French were as much victims of the establishment oppressors as were the English - in classic divide and rule style, the focus of animosity was targeted against a linguistic group, not against the true enemy who happened to speak their language. Certainly, the Royal Family in England were deposed, but during the short-lived Commonweal of Cromwell, the tyranny of the state was accelerated to the point that the hated Royals were given back the position of authority which they had enjoyed before the revolt. The ruling class did not experience the same justice as their brethren across the Channel and for them the English Republic was but a brief break in overt control. In truth, the rulers of the Republic were from the same families as beforehand, thus there was no break in the rule by the Royal despots at all.

In the run up to the regime of the puppet Republic, the Royals ensured that their control was extended to the farthest reaches of the nation. Contrary to the romantic myth, the Royals were hated by the general population who viewed them as outsiders who had stolen the Crown from the indigenous rulers. The nation of England following the Norman invasion, has not to this day seen a true Anglo-Saxon on the Throne.

In the first English Civil War - a War which has become known as the War of the Roses - the 'French' elite fought against their 'Welsh' cousins for mastery of England. The bloodshed was such that to this very day there is animosity between the counties of Yorkshire (the White Rose) and Lancashire (the Red Rose). The War served only to advance the agenda of the Royal dictators. Foolish Englishmen from Yorkshire and Lancashire still hold a burning hatred for one another for the crimes committed by the rulers they still champion. It is one thing to honour our dead ancestors, but an entirely different matter to revere the butchers whose blood lust and power-mania was the sole cause of their deaths. With the defeat of the Plantagenets, the ruling power passed to the house of Tudor. The Tudor dynasty hailed from Wales which although a nation in its own right, has been ruled by the English for centuries. Ironically although the true Britons were pushed into Wales by the waves of European invaders, the bloodline of the Tudors was tainted by blood from further afield - the same taint as the 'french' rulers they deposed. The Tudors were as harmful to the English as the faux-French monarchs they replaced.

Akin to all the despots who have ruled England, Henry VIII was a cruel and twisted tyrant. His most famous crime was splitting the Church. A man obsessed with his own selfish interests, this gluttonous oaf was a serial adulterer and murderer. Married to Catherine of Aragon, he allowed his lust for Ann Boleyn to go before the needs of the nation he ruled over. Confronted by a woman who refused to allow her body to be used as he saw fit in an adulteress manner, the sex-obsessed egomaniac ordered his lackeys to annul his marriage - in spite of the fact that there were no acceptable grounds for this. The Pope had no choice but to excommunicate Henry the heretic. The despicable Monarch soon tired of his new 'wife' and in due course ended his officially sanctioned cohabitation ('marriage'). Ann Boleyn was, unlike Catherine of Aragon, not the daughter of a powerful Monarch, so he had no need to fraudulently annul the arrangement - he simply had her beheaded - ostensibly for incestuous adultery which ironically was classed as treason. Henry VIII went on to divorce another 'wife', and behead another. Such was the glorious beginning of the Church of England.

Henry VIII may have been the man responsible for rift between the English Monarchy and the Roman Catholic Church IN England, but it was his daughter, Elizabeth, who created the Church OF England as a separate entity. The entire justification for the founding of the Church was to legitimise the adultery, divorce and remarriage of Henry VIII. From this one event followed centuries of persecution of Catholics who held true to the Christian faith and rejected the Satanic Cult which had supplanted it in England. It is a sad indictment of the character of the English that the majority betrayed their faith and adopted the anti-Christ cult of the Royalty. To be fair, there was stiff resistance in the early days of the C of E, and it took the insane tortures ordered by the establishment (Royal and Cromwellian) to finally break the Catholic Church in England.

Stripped of its spiritual defence, England was open for the return of the descendants of the Talmudists who had been expelled in 1290 by the Catholic King, Edward Longshanks. For all his ills, the King acted in the manner of a true Christian and realising that the Talmudists could not be allowed to stay in England if the nation was to survive, took the only logical spiritual decision and removed them. Roman Catholicism in its authentic form is the absolute opposite of Talmudism. Sadly, the Cult of Edom which officially labelled itself as Anglicanism, was not simply a Reformist Protestant variation of Catholicism, it was rather, nothing short of a Talmudic cult. Embracing Divorce/adultery, and Usury/covetousness, the C of E embraced the essence of Talmudism. Putting the value of goods and money above the divine, the materialistic cult was the launching point for Capitalism and all the suffering that abomination was to cause.

Queen Elizabeth was in every way as evil as her namesake of modern times. It was during her reign that the pirate ships of her criminal navy terrorised the high seas, murdering and stealing for the benefit of the Crown. It was also during her reign that the Freemasonic Francis Bacon led a team of writers who wrote the plays attributed to the illiterate actor, William Shakespeare. These plays are a perfect example of political correctness, in that they falsified history in order to create a positive image of the ruling elite. These plays which are celebrated as masterpieces of English literature and art unfortunately also have obliterated knowledge of our true history. George Orwell's description of the revision of history with the truth disappearing down the memory hole was not merely a pseudo-prophetic analysis of the potential for manipulation by a coming elite, it was actually describing events which have already unfolded. The Elizabethan era saw the Establishment of the English Empire, and its accompanying Secret Police as created by the Satanist, John '007' Dee. We have been mis-educated in the school system to look back at this period as a great time for England. In truth it saw the birth of a despotic empire which murdered generations of Englishmen in the pirate navy, and the slave fields. If any point in history can be seen as the moment when the English became nothing more than cannon fodder and slaves to the ruling class, the Elizabethan era was that point. The English descendants of the heroic Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and Celts never recovered from the break with Rome. They allowed a false jingoist patriotism to pervert them from being spiritually wholesome family-centred people, into Empire-worshipping materialistic bigots.

As England was turned from a natural society into a materialistic sewer, those who dissented were beaten into submission by a tyrannical Army and Police State. The natural reaction of the people should have been to revolt against an armed force killing our brothers and sisters. Instead the people rallied behind the troops at massacres such as Peterloo. When the Luddites who protested against the mechanisation of production and the destruction of childhood (with children dying in massive numbers in mills unfit for any human presence), were murdered by the establishment, the people did nothing. As the industrial era progressed and the English Empire became the British Empire, the common people rallied to the rag of their oppressors, proudly flying the Union Jack and celebrating the butchery in Ireland and across the globe. Press-ganging, slavery (first of Englishmen, then of the Irish, then of Africans) was treated as nothing to complain about, the rule of the elite via barbaric punishments such as exiling the hungry to prison colonies in Australia for the crime of trying to feed themselves and their families - these and other signs of the sickness of the elite were ignored, and later celebrated.

During the reign of the insane butcher, Victoria, and into the Twentieth Century the establishment fought a succession of Imperialistic wars of aggression, against the Dutch and German farmers (Baueren/Boers) in southern Africa, and against continental Europe in the Great War and Second World War. The people, so befuddled by generations of Judaeo-Anglicanism rather than refusing to murder their kin in foreign countries, raced to 'join-up' to increase the wealth of the Rothschild-Royal cabal. Those who had the wisdom to see that the wars were acts of pure evil, solely for the enrichment of an inhuman elite, were slandered as cowards and shot for refusing to participate in the carnage which destroyed the last vestiges of English decency.

The demise of England was finalised with a cowed and despondent public sheepishly embracing the post-war Europe and allowing themselves to be stampeded into the EU prison state. Why did they allow this? Simply because being the product of generations of psychological and physical abuse at the hands of a criminal elite, it was all they knew. Just as an abused child expresses its love for the abuser, so the abused English express their devotion to the Monarchy and their hatred for those who expose this diseased family and seek its overthrowal.

What is to be done for poor little England? Now that Rome herself has fallen to a variation of Anglicanism, reconversion of the nation to Catholicism is out of the question. Without a spiritual defence against Talmudic materialism, England cannot but remain lost. Pity our dead nation. Nothing short of a spiritual revolution akin to the great deed of 1290 will save us now - but this time the Monarchy will have to be destroyed to the last man, woman and child. They are not part of the solution, but a fundamental part of the problem.

From perpetual victim to worshipped saviour?

I came across an article which I recommend every one read. The article concerns the pariah state of Israel and how it has milked the Holyhoax to the point where people are heartily sick of hearing sob stories about poor innocent Jews being gassed, turned into lampshades, transported to a different concentration camps, being gassed again, turned into soap, then miraculously surviving to make a fortune selling their memoirs to a dumbed down Zionised world - and of course getting rich sucking the financial wealth of Europeans who were not even in the political establishments of the nations which built the transit camps, oops, extermination camps, in the first place!




Having exhausted the lie of the Shoah, the savage regime in occupied Palestine are now building up Iran as the new Nazi menace, and are set to destroy Iran in order to gain the financial support of a grateful gentile world, which will naturally drop all allegiance to Christianity as a mark of respect for the self-chosen people. Those who practice Judæo-Christianity will simply just drop the pretence that they are anything but Talmudists and simply jettison Jesus - no doubt joining in the blasphemous cat-calling about Him roasting over an open privy for eternity. Read the Talmud - this is what the book so beloved of the Œcumenical 'Judaism is equal with Christianity' lunatics states.



In the light of the USA and EU being ruled by Talmudists who may make token gestures of opposition to Israel, but in truth are of the same Zionist mould, it is important that everyone understands the game afoot here. The prize is nothing short of complete global domination and servitude for those outside the chosen cabal. Those who have taken the time to study the Protocols of Zion will know that the document is no forgery, but is rather a blueprint which is not far from being realised in its entirety.

The article concerning the slithering and posturing of the Talmudist-Sabattean cult who have captured and subverted Judaism can be found here: http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/the-golden-goose-of-holocaustianity-and-the-real-reasons-for-irana-phobia/

Fashion: another word for thought control

Fashion is a word which seems inoccuos enough. At face value, the manipulation of the vanity of people who are so vacuous as to seriously believe that how they look is the be-all and end-all of their existence, seems to be a sad indictment of the self-obsession of the individuals in question. However, the curse of fashion should not be so readily dismissed. Fashion goes beyond clothing, hairstyles, and other such material matters, and is indeed a problem which must be addressed by anyone who has the desire to understand how our oppressors control the societies we live in, and who wish to use this knowledge to undermine this control and free us all from this menace.

When we think of fashion, we tend to think only in terms of physical appearance. From the ridiculous flared trousers of the 1960s to the revolting tracksuits tucked into socks of the 2000's, it is easy to regard fashion as comical - but is it? Is it really a source of amusement that chronologically adult people dress themselves in the manner of circus performers at the command of an industry which revels in the ability to make allegedly sensible people reduce themselves to figures of ridicule - and to put themselves into debt in order to do so?

The phenomenon of fashion is worthy of study as it is clearly displays the strategy of our rulers in containing all the options available to the manipulated populace. For example, the mainstream fashion for girls may consist of the 'cheer-leader' or slutty look, with the fashion for those who reject the mainstream being the 'goth' or dyke look. Those who have the intelligence to see through the manipulation of the overt media are neatly herded into the camp of those who refuse to buy the designer label and TV-endorsed look. Far from expressing their individuality and freedom from the manipulators, they reveal that they too are falling in line with the mind controllers. Dressing in black and spiking one's hair may cause a reaction of indignation which serves to satisfy the desire to feel as if one is in rebellion against the system, but it is a completely controlled rebellion - ie no rebellion at all. When the punk group Crass stated that Punk was dead, they were referring to this manipulation - sadly the devotees of Crass, Conflict etc who confine their rebellion to clothing, music and repeating lyrics which they haven't bothered to examine, have fallen into the trap of becoming a part of the controlled opposition.

Fashion in music is an interesting arena. Unless one lives on a remote mountain top, with no radio or television, and no need to visit what passes for civilisation, one cannot escape exposure to what the establishment laughingly class as music. Nearly every shop, pub, cafe etc pumps out the music of the establishment. Whether it is the sexually explicit boy band and girl band material, or it is the controlled anger of the tailor-made false rebels, there is almost no break from the relentless aural assault on the senses of the passive listener.

What does it matter that the people have bread and circuses to keep them occupied? What else would the masses do if they didn't have their sensory pleasures catered for? Perhaps, just perhaps, they would begin to think for themselves and to see the world for how it really is, and not for how they have been conditioned to see it. What does is matter that pop culture is manufactured and all pervasive? Well, it matters precisely because it is all pervasive.

Pop music is targeted at children. Why? They are not economically independent, so the motive goes beyond material greed. Sexually explicit lyrics and calls to reject the authority of parents are not in the majority of songs played on the radio by mere chance. These lyrics are placed in the public realm deliberately. It is a much researched fact that repetition is a key method of brainwashing. Radio stations have a limited number of songs which they play over and over. The result is to place in the mind of the listener an attitude which is beneficial to the establishment. The ruling powers need to atomise society to the point where there are no familial ties and there is no respect between individuals and generations. What better way to destroy the natural order of a healthy society than to implant in the minds of its youth the idea that (as Mrs Thatcher stated in the 1980s) 'there is no society, only the individual'? Children sing about the primacy of the individual, the importance of being popular, about hatred of family, about love being an illusion, about meaningless anonymous sex with every man, woman, and animal being a positive thing. This self-brainwashing then transfers into reality - destroying the family, spreading selfishness and perversion, and giving authority to the establishment to the detriment of wholesome and natural structures.

Fashion goes beyond the material into every aspect of life. Religion for example has been subjected to the ceaseless assault of the politically motivated doyens of anti-morality. Before Vatican II, even Anglicans looked to homosexuality and abortion as examples of spiritual decay. Now the Anglican 'church' has openly homosexual priests, and has quietly dropped the last of the Christian principles it once held. Anglicanism has always been a heretical cult which has been a front for anti-Christian beliefs, so to see the facade drop is not that surprising. However the Holy Roman Church has mirrored its Anglican counterpart by embracing all manner of apostasy in order to appear 'with it' and fashionable. Only a few years ago one could expect to be given Hail Marys and Our Fathers to recite as penance for confessed sins, but that now has been dropped by the modernisers - it seems even God must conform to the whims of the dictators of fashion.

In politics, traditionalism and respect for country is laughed at - except when the establishment require patriotism to bolster their homicidal wars of aggression. This cynical manipulation of the feelings of the public is gently pushed by the 'news' media, who select which stories to tell to the public, and in reality create the news. At present it is fashionable to be pro-war, to 'support the troops' (the images of British soldiers murdering defenceless civilian in criminally occupied lands children and babies are hidden from the public gaze) and to love US President Obama (whose subservience to the globalist agenda and betrayal of the USA, perversion, drug addiction and blood lust never gets mentioned). Only a few years ago, flying the Union Jack in England was classed as racist - now failing to do so is unpatriotic. - so easily are the people swayed by the fear of being 'different' and out of step. In truth the Union Jack is an imperialist rag which when one understands its significance as a symbol of the Monarchy and their Zionist criminal brethren, deserves only to be burned whenever one comes across it.

Fashion has come to be an indicator of the power of the establishment. What is the reaction one gets when one is critical of the sexualisation of children, or the contrived immigration of unassimiable aliens for the benefit of the economic elite? Are the arguments in favour of morality, decency, protection of children, defence of family, the primacy of the spiritual over materialism, the halt to degeneracy and decadence etc... are these arguments met with reasoned discussion? No! Those who uphold morality and decency are immediately labelled as 'old-fashioned' are by the application of this label, all debate is prevented!

We need to confront this farce and reject the pressure to conform to fashion. We are right to defend our people and to expose the enemy. Being out of step and out of fashion with the sickening Zionist cult which is destroying the world is no source of shame, but rather of pride.

Fashion is just another word for thought control. Resist it.