As the year draws to a close, perhaps a certain era is drawing to a close, an era in which the anti-culture, which calls itself cancel culture, will finally breathe its last and take with it to the grave all the abominations it has bestowed upon us for several decades. And this cancel culture has bestowed upon us generously: the war between the sexes, the war between the races, the war on biological sex, the war of man against man in defense of animals and plants! Just think about all the lunacy that we have seen: models on the catwalks in ridiculous nun outfits (what kind of psyche does one need to have to do something like that?), Dutch farmers arrested by the police for refusing to give up on the fields they have cultivated for generations, successive packages of sanctions that hit those who impose them, the constant ethnic replacement that is being carried out in so-called democratic countries without the populations being asked for consent, the virus craze, and the final admission by the authorities that vaccinated people… die more often than the unvaccinated! (however, if until a few months ago this and that person advised against overdoing the sanitary restrictions, they were subject to punishment or at best ridiculed), men with haircuts that women wear, people of both sexes tattooed from head to toe, a Swedish teenage girl casting a spell on obliging presidents and prime ministers, an Amazonian goddess inside the most important temple of the Catholic Church, Ukrainian oligarchs of Jewish origin paying for Ukrainian nationalist and… anti-Semitic militias, an Indian Prime Minister of the UK, census results showing that the two largest British cities are each populated by a majority of people of color, the same stats showing that the UK is no longer a Christian country, the ritual kneeling of athletes either in support of blacks or people with sexual deviations during international competitions… the list is endless!

The year is coming to an end, the darkness will expand for only a few more days, and then it will begin to retreat, and then it will begin to give way to the light. Let’s hope that not only this astronomical darkness will soon begin to lose its power, but also its human, social, and mental counterpart. Absurdity and craziness have accumulated so much that it can only get better now. If no argument helps anymore, people generally sober up when they come face to face with a real problem, with real poverty, with a real challenge and with a real threat. We have a war. We have a war in Eastern Europe. The war will bring with it an economic crisis. As millions of people begin to starve and freeze, as the time of trial drags on, they will stop thinking about gender reassignment or the compensation for slavery, which ended 200 years ago, they will stop tattooing themselves and dressing themselves ridiculously in the habits of nuns: they will simply begin to fight for survival, for a modest meal and a little warmth at home. They will from one day to another realize what is important and what is not, they will find out where bread and fuel eventually come from (not from shops or filling stations!), they will suddenly become aware that family and nation matter after all simply because a person alone, when welfare systems disappear, is not able to survive from day to day. Who then will bother to promote gender assignment? Who then will think of installing toilets for the third gender? War and deprivation discipline people effectively. Very effectively. So there is hope that the nonsense and madness will soon end. That the day will come.

 

They could have come at almost any time of the year, although they obviously preferred the warm months. They could have waited for the troops guarding the area to change their place of deployment. They could attack this village or that town to deliberately draw the protection troops away from their intended victims, in intended towns and villages. With the troops guarding these territories being occupied elsewhere, they would then attack villages or towns, loot and pillage, burn and tear down, but above all abduct hundreds, thousands of people. Who?

The Tatars – a Mongolian people – who inhabited the Crimea at the time. Yes, the same Crimea over which there is now a dispute between Ukraine and Russia; the same Crimea which, in 1954, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev, arbitrarily detached from Russia and gave to Ukraine; the same Crimea from which Comrade Joseph Stalin, a darling (Uncle Joe) of the Western press during the years of the Second World War, evicted the Tartars; the same Crimea which the English and French tried to conquer in the 19th century (Crimean War); the same Crimea which Empress Catherine II of Russia conquered in the 18th century. The Tartars found their way to this peninsula in the Middle Ages when they invaded eastern and central Europe. In the times we are talking about they were Muslim vassals of Turkey.

(Excuse the following remark, but most of the readers have no idea about all this. There is nothing wrong with them not having the slightest idea about the history of this peninsular or, indeed, any other region around the world, so long as they do not start judging who is right in this or that dispute, in this or that corner of the globe. But we digress.)

The people abducted almost year after year for two centuries – hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of white and Christian men, women and children (the old and sick were simply killed by the Tartars) – were then taken to the slave markets in Turkey, above all in Istanbul, the former Constantinople, where children were separated from their parents, where spouses were separated, where siblings were separated, and they were sold to buyers from all ends of the Ottoman Empire (which stretched from Iran to Morocco, from Belgrade to Sudan), with pretty young girls being placed in harems where they sexually serviced Muslim men, with many teenage boys selected to serve in the harems of the sultan and men in top positions being castrated. Anaesthesia in the modern sense of the word was unknown at the time. If you occasionally watch Turkish films or observe Turkish athletes, you are bound to be amazed more than once by the appearance of some of them: the appearance of a European anthropological type. Continue reading →

Little is written about this in the Western media – in fact nothing – and meanwhile tensions are rising in Kosovo. Let us recall: Kosovo – part of Serbia, the historic cradle of Serbian statehood – was separated from Serbia by the West without a corresponding decision by the United Nations. Most Western countries recognised Kosovo’s independence on the basis of the right of peoples to self-determination. Somehow the same motivation did not work in the case of Crimea and Donbass, but let us leave these details aside.

The direct triggers of the current tensions are as follows. One is that the authorities in Pristina, the capital of Kosovo, have taken the decision to order all drivers to change their licence plates to Kosovar ones. The Serbian minority still living in Kosovo has resisted. The Serbs have right on their side: as Kosovo is still part of Serbia, the introduction of licence plates other than those of Serbia is not legally mandated. Another reason for tensions is the unclear case of a police officer of Serbian nationality who was arrested by the Kosovo authorities. The Serb minority reacted very strongly: barricades were erected in the streets in towns where Serbs live.

As if this were not enough – or perhaps precisely to escalate tensions – on 15 December this year Pristina submitted an application for Kosovo’s admission to the European Union. Although several members of the Union – and these are Cyprus, Greece, Romania, Slovakia and Spain – do not recognise Kosovo’s independence, which blocks even the consideration of a membership application, for some reason Pristina took this step. Apparently, it got the signal that such a step should be taken right now. This begs the question: what is going on in the Balkans again? What is it all about? Well, the answer is rather obvious.

In Europe, Serbia is the only country that has friendly relations with Russia. Belgrade, despite pressure from the European Union, has not joined the sanctions imposed by Brussels on Russia. President Vučić – even if he wanted to – is not in a position to pursue a policy hostile to Moscow because the overwhelming majority of Serbs consider the Russians to be friends and Russia to be an ally. This is due to the fact that Serbs and Russians are Slavs, that Serbs and Russians are peoples who profess Orthodox Christianity; finally, Serbs feel gratitude towards Russia for the fact that in the late 19th century Russia fought against Turkey, which ruled over Serbia for centuries, and for the fact that Russia stepped in to defend little Serbia in 1914 when Austria-Hungary declared war on Belgrade. Anyone who has read and remembers Leo Tolstoy’s “Anna Karenina” will recall that one of the main characters, Anna Karenina’s lover, a Russian officer, goes to war with Turkey precisely to defend the Serbs. True, Russia did not help Serbia in 1999, when NATO bombed it for 78 days, because Russia itself was then in deep political, social and economic crisis.

What did the policymakers in Berlin, Paris, London and Washington have in mind? They have thought of killing two birds with one stone. The powers that be are putting pressure on Belgrade through the unrest in Kosovo to force Serbia to join the sanctions. As long as Belgrade resists this, the unrest in Kosovo will continue to grow. This is one of the goals the West wants to achieve. The other is to hit Russia in the one place in the Balkans where it has political and cultural influence. Of course, it will be impossible for Moscow to help Serbia, as Serbia has become a landlocked country, surrounded by NATO members. However, Russia will have to undertake something, and this will deplete the effort it is currently putting into defeating the West on the military training ground that goes by the name of Ukraine.  Continue reading →

Have you ever listened to any speech by the President of Belarus? Certainly not. Why would you? But somehow you know that he is a dictator, tyrant and satrap. Somehow you know that the people don’t like him and don’t want him as president. You know because you have been told repeatedly that Alexander Lukashenko is president only because, in collusion with a group of people like him in top positions, he rigs elections, practices propaganda and does God knows what else just to stay in power. Isn’t this the way to look at the situation in Belarus? Who would bother and check how it really is! Who would even think of checking what the media of the so-called free world say about some Belarus! After all, it is known that Belarus is a backward country, which – oh, horror! – does not belong to the European Union and – horror of horrors! – doesn’t even apply for it! Has anyone heard anything like this? How is it even possible not to want to belong to the European Union?! This alone shows that President Lukashenko is governing badly. So why listen to him? Why read his speeches? Why even find out how he, how his entourage, how the vast majority of Belarusians think, how they look at the world? After all, the Western media have already explained it all to us in detail. After all, we know that the whole Belarusian nation wants to be ruled by Mrs. Tikhanovskaya and the Belorussian people want her to include their country in the European Union as soon as possible because, as we know, without the European Union there is no salvation. But let’s return to the Belarusian president.

If we were willing to listen to or read at least one longer speech by him, we would understand why Alexander Lukashenko has been in power for twenty years and why people continue to elect him. We would have understood that the presidential election could not have been rigged. We would understand that those who rioted in the streets of Minsk were juvenile delinquents that Belarusians by no means support. We would understand that Aleksandr Lukashenko is held in high esteem by the vast majority of the nation, and that if not every Belarusian has a high opinion of him, the alternative for every Belarusian is much worse. What does the Belarusian president say to the nation that makes him liked and respected? Why does the West hate him?

Aleksandr Lukashenko presents himself best when he speaks spontaneously. He does it with passion and speaks like a man to a man: he speaks as if he is addressing someone with whom he is feasting at a table. He speaks like a human being, not an EU apparatchik who spews out of his mouth alternately democracy and human rights along with climate change. Alexander Lukashenko talks about the lives of ordinary people and uses the language of ordinary people, and not once does he use this newspeak full of green economics or climate change or human rights. He addresses pressing economic and social problems, and sees them exactly as ordinary people see them. Continue reading →

Two hammers, which will sooner or later hit mankind, place it in a global concentration camp, make us all say goodbye to freedom and privacy, are already in the pipeline. Two hammers will strike at the two most basic areas of everyone’s life: the material or economic base that enables each of us to survive plus the concern for health without which everything else ceases to matter. These two hammers are:

– digital programmable currency and the

– global treaty on pandemic prevention.

Both hammers have a tangent line, but about that in a moment.

Digital programmable currency referred to as digital central bank currency or DCBC is money that cannot be touched because it will only exist in the form of zero-one pulses. Everyone will be equipped with an account in a single central (at first national, ultimately – global) bank and all settlements will be electronic. In an age when computer networks dispose of ever-increasing data collection and tracking capabilities, this means that all, absolutely all transactions, donations and even almsgiving will be recorded. The anonymity and privacy of remittances will disappear. If cash is abolished completely, someone somewhere will even know the amount of pocket money a child or teenager gets from their parents!

Digital money is programmable money, which means that the government will be able to attribute to selected sums of money in the accounts of selected people such properties as the need to spend it within a certain period or on certain goods and services. A citizen will receive an allowance from the government, or an employee will receive a salary from his or her employer, a certain proportion of which will have to be spent – for example – within three months on – for example – cleaning products. A huge and efficient internet of things will make it impossible to spend this money on anything else and will make it disappear from the account after a period in which it has not been used.

That is not all! The authorities can make the permission for the money to be spent conditional on how the citizen behaves, that is, whether he supports the authorities, whether she expresses opinions that are in line with mainstream opinions and so on. Such a system is being tried in China; such a system has already been activated in Canada, where Justin Trudeau’s government prevented protesting truck drivers from using their own bank accounts, from using their own money! This is already happening! in the West! which is regarded as an oasis of all freedoms and human rights. It is highly possible that Justin Trudeau inadvertently did something he should not have done yet: he may have frightened people and showed them what was coming. However, knowing human memory and naivety, it is safe to assume that the vast majority of people did not learn anything from this event. One can be sure that most people in the so-called free world will be outraged at the lack of liberties in the aforementioned China or Russia because they will be fed such information by the media, without noticing or (more likely) not wanting to notice that freedom ends in the West. Continue reading →

A text about there being no difference between Tony Blair and Nikita Khrushchev, or about there being no difference between the United Kingdom – the model democracy as it is often claimed – and the USSR – the despotic Soviet system. Are you surprised? Surprised that we are comparing one of the leaders of the so-called free, democratic world and one of the leaders of an inhuman system that collapsed precisely because it was inhuman? Yes, we are comparing Great Britain and the Soviet Union, we are comparing Tony Blair with a Stalinist satrap. More than that: we dare to put an equals sign between the educated leader of the United Kingdom and the simple-minded, uneducated Ukrainian peasant who ruled a superpower for a while. What entitles us to do so?

Justin Trudeau had the bank accounts of Canadian truck drivers who dared to protest against Ottawa’s decisions blocked! Indeed, this fact alone shows that Alexander Lukashenko, the Belarusian leader hated by the entire “progressive” world, could take lessons from Justin Trudeau on how to ride roughshod over the whole of society!

Both one and the other decided the fate of millions of people and it never occurred to them to ask these people for their opinion. Both one and the other made decision concerning millions of people and could not be bothered to listen to the wishes and desires of those people. Both the one and the other claimed that they governed in the name of the people, for the people, and on the authority of the people. Ha, ha, ha!

In the 1950s, Nikita Khrushchev and his supporting party camarilla separated the Crimea from the Russian Soviet Socialist Federal Republic with a single stroke of the pen and incorporated it into the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. In other words, overnight the Russians living in Crimea (for all practical purposes only Russians live in Crimea) became… Ukrainians. Is this what they wanted for themselves? Not at all. Could they have done something to oppose it? Let them try!

Similarly, in the 1990s Tony Blair and his camarilla (industrialists, bankers, who else?) decided to attract millions of people from the Third World to Great Britain and gradually give them British citizenship. Overnight, millions of indigenous Britons in London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester and other cities woke up in communities that might as well have been part of Pakistan, India or Kenya. Did Tony Blair and his camarilla ask the British people if they wanted to live in Pakistan, India or Kenya? Not at all. When asked, would the British people have answered that they wanted to? Did those in power even care about the opinion of ordinary people? Could ordinary indigenous Britons have resisted what was done to them? Let them try! Continue reading →