Tag Archives: Brenton Tarrant

Diary Blog, 16 August 2021

History moves on


Meanwhile, “from the sublime to the ridiculous”, Rory Stewart, “the man who thought he could be king”, bleats about a few young Afghans going to Oxford University. Amid these possibly world-historic events!

At first, and briefly, I was rather impressed by Rory Stewart; about 2-3 years ago. Now, my view is that the UK dodged a bullet when Stewart failed to become leader of the Conservative Party, and that despite my never having had any time for Boris-idiot. My blog assessment of Stewart from a couple of years ago: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/05/03/will-rory-stewart-mp-be-prime-minister/

More tweets seen

Brenton Tarrant [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings] will be fuming (if he is allowed to see the news), but because he took action both premature and violent (resulting in a huge backlash from the State, and from much of the public of New Zealand), he is powerless. See also https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/03/25/the-new-zealand-attack-and-related-matters/.

A pro-Taliban tweet? Rather different from others seen:

Look at the eyes of those children. Palpable fear.

This is the fault of the US and its allies (notably the UK), which should have imposed a new form of society, even if that meant exterminating backward elements en masse. In fact, what was done was an attempt to control and “manage” Afghanistan, to just keep a lid on it, in the manner of the British policy in Northern Ireland from 1969-1997. Doesn’t work.

Now, or soon, it may be terrible in Afghanistan. We shall see. It does not look hopeful.

Reminiscent of the endgame in Saigon, 1975.

The sort of literate, measured TV report that was standard in the 1970s but looks incredibly good when compared to the sort of trash that the BBC, ITV, Sky etc put out today.

More tweets

Well, at least he is decent enough to feel.

Appalling lack of intelligence” [Nick Ferrari on LBC radio]. Well, that’s SIS for you. A career opportunity for some of the British middle classes, but not much good when you come right down to it, and when you strip away the (hugely overblown) WW2 “successes”, the rather few Cold War successes (I suppose that Penkovsky was the numero uno), and the fantasies of spy fiction, such as Ian Fleming’s James Bond books and the subsequent films, not much is left, certainly not in the public domain.

Forget Philby. He was of little real interest (though that would not have been the case had he gone on to be Chief of the SIS).

The real SIS failures have not been its probably small number of traitorous staff but its actual intelligence failures, such as failure to predict the fall of the Shah, fall of the Soviet bloc, invasion of the Falklands etc. Actual uselessness.

Operations such as putting Gordievsky in a car boot and smuggling him to Finland were of rather small importance in the big scheme of things.

Mitrokhin? His material is of huge historical importance, but that is another matter. There may well have been other, still-confidential material, but whether that was so or not, he was a “walk-in”, and all SIS had to do was not reject his approach (and later excavate the bulk of his material from under his dacha). He was never cultivated or developed prior to his “recruitment” (if such be the bon mot); the initiative was his. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Mitrokhin

Incidentally, Ian Fleming was far from being an “intelligence expert”: he was found a job (having been useless at everything beforehand) by his loaded banking family [Fleming’s Bank: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fleming_%26_Co.] as the assistant to the Director of Naval Intelligence, basically a male PA. He was given a courtesy rank, Lieutenant, then Lt. Commander. He was never a real naval (or intelligence) officer, neither was he given any training, whether naval or otherwise. Most if not all of the operations he planned during WW2 were failures or nullities. A play “intelligence officer”.

Late morning music

More tweets

Afternoon music

More tweets

Almost right. The migration-invasion continues, reinforcing the non-European occupation of the cities. As for “MI6” (or “MI5”, for that matter…), forget it.

At what point will both (real) Swedes and British say “NO MORE!“?

So far, the Israelis (Jews) have interfered with British politics and society far more than have the barbarians of the Taliban or ISIS…shall we invade Israel (occupied Palestine) next?

At what point (again) will the “normies” wake up and see all that for what it is, i.e. socio-political conspiracy?

I wonder how much she and her family have ripped off?

As I have been blogging recently, the transition of Australia into a multikulti “biosecurity”, “woke” police state has been among the most surprising of the manifestations of the transnational conspiracy as we rush to the year 2022. What about New Zealand, as well?

The System parties in the UK are treacherous enemies, worthy of being destroyed.

Kabul is a city of 4.5M people. Some (I daresay) support the Taliban; the majority are probably waiting to see what will happen (and have little choice anyway). Only a few thousand (those who know that they face arrest and possibly death) are at the airport, scrambling to get onto evacuation flights.

…”and none dare call it conspiracy”…

Where Julian Assange has gone, others will go, now that the UK is becoming, slowly, gradually, a police state. Jez Turner of the now-defunct London Forum, for making a speech urging the deportation of Jews from England; Alison Chabloz, imprisoned for her socio-political remarks on an Internet “radio” discussion podcast; Graham Hart, recently sentenced to 32 months (!) for making some contentious remarks on an internet “radio” show he presented. And so on.

…as happened after Hungerford and Dunblane. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_massacre; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_massacre.

Alison Chabloz appeal

Report from sources usually reliable.

Readers of the blog will recall that, last Friday (13 August 2021), Alison Chabloz, having lost her appeal from the Westminster Mags, was (oddly) remanded in custody pending sentence today (Monday 16 August 2021) by the presiding judge, H.H. Judge Beddoe [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Beddoe].

The current situation is that Alison was “produced” in court today, but the Court is still having “difficulties” accessing Alison’s probation records, it having transpired on Friday last that “higher authority” would be required to allow access even to the judge (who is a Circuit judge)!

The net result of this bureaucratic nonsense was that, today, sentence could not be passed, because the judge wanted to see those probation records first. He has therefore once again remanded Alison in custody, this time until Wednesday!

As I blogged previously, Alison has already served about 9 weeks in prison as a result of the 18-week sentence given by the lower court, which means that any greater sentence given by this present court (to a maximum of 6 months) would, in reality (bearing in mind the usual release after half of the sentence is served) mean that Alison would have to do about another 2-3 weeks (she has several days “credit” for having served a few days in 2020 prior to a successful appeal).

Alison now has another 5 days served in Bronzefield Prison, so (if my calculations are accurate) even if she gets the maximum sentence on Wednesday, can probably expect release about 1-2 weeks later.

I am beginning to think that she will not get further imprisonment, or that perhaps some way will be found to “embugger” her otherwise, by adding on “community service” or some other onerous penalty.

We shall discover what “British justice” has to say on Wednesday.

[Alison Chabloz]

The Daily Mail has published a rather confused report about it all: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9898627/Anti-Semitic-blogger-57-sent-jail-losing-appeal-against-18-week-sentence.html.

Late tweets seen

See also: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/05/03/will-rory-stewart-mp-be-prime-minister/.

“Elected” maybe, but before that he was selected, to represent the interests of “the usual suspects”…let’s just say “ZOG” and “NWO”…

Anecdotal but…in the early 1990s, a Sri Lankan solicitor, a woman, used to instruct a few members of my then chambers (including me, occasionally). Thick as two short planks, and seemed to think that paying Counsel was optional. In the end, she was about to be indicted for embezzlement when she killed herself. My point is that she was presumably part of the “educated elite” of Sri Lanka.

All the same, it may be that, after almost unimaginable destruction and bloodshed, the first generation of a post-Aryan super-race may one day (maybe as soon as 2050 or 2100) walk the depopulated and greening expanses of what were once the British urban and suburban areas.

That last tweet applies to the UK, too.

I visited a Tesco store about 6 miles from home today. About 50% or so of the shoppers were masked, including two virtue-signalling fat women who were slapping vast amounts of free Tesco hand gel all over their hands, arms etc at the entrance, while loudly talking about how they were protecting themselves and others. It was amusing to walk past them, unmasked, while almost laughing at them.

Late music

Diary Blog, 22 July 2021

Crazed Britain

A woman who shielded for nine months was killed on her first day out after being hit by a lorry while searching for a face mask in her handbag. Sarah Lewis was struck by the vehicle on November 16, 2020 after stepping into its blind spot while untangling a face covering from her belongings.” [Daily Telegraph] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/07/21/woman-killed-lorry-first-day-shielding-nine-months/.

I myself have saved not only reckless pheasant and pigeons (not to mention a number of cats) from certain death on the road recently, but several equally-reckless human persons, including one old lady and one young girl, both of whom insisted on stepping in front of my car while both muzzled and engrossed in what I took to be mobile telephones.

Zoo news


Tweets seen

I rarely repost tweets by Jewish-Zionist individuals but, in the old Theosophical saying, “there is no religion higher than truth”…

Look at that Patel bitch! Smirking…Well, of course she is smirking! Instead of spending her life serving behind the counter of a Kampala grocery shop, she is a “British” Cabinet minister! She may be rubbish at her job, she may be thick as two short planks, but there she is… sitting there…(and dragging down a few hundred thousand a year as well).

More tweets

God, how absolutely disgusting.

I myself have heard verified accounts of how some people with serious conditions are now effectively barred from getting necessary scans and/or treatments because unwilling to have the painful and intrusive “Covid tests” before being allowed into the precincts of the therapeutic clinics.

Tweets seen

I have blogged about Paul Mason previously. When he writes about economics, he can be interesting, but when he writes or speaks about politics, he is ludicrous. His political viewpoint seems to be a kind of anarcho-syndicalist/Trotskyist/general “Leftist” mixture which leaves both history and good sense far behind.

Why does Mason support Jewish-lobby puppet, Keir Starmer? Well, that is an open question. Mason is part-Jew, like Owen Jones and other msm talking heads, so that may be part of it. There again, it may be that Mason thinks that “mainstream” Labour is still the only political game in town apart from the equally-misnamed Conservative Party. He may therefore imagine that he can perhaps influence Starmer-Labour, and so rescue himself from being a fringe commentator.

For all I know, Mason may even harbour ambitions to become a Labour MP and then something more, such as, in time, a major Labour Party figure. Who knows?

That may seem to be absurd, but perhaps less so than “Boris” becoming a Cabinet minister and then Prime Minister…if one political bad joke can rise high, why not another? After all, it happened not only to “Boris” but to Priti Patel, Sajid Javid, Grant Shapps, Matt Hancock etc. A similar case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanis_Varoufakis.

Never say never…

John Pilger! A “blast from the past” as people used to say. Had not heard of him for many years. 81 now, apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pilger.

Another myth is that a scientist is, ipso facto, honest. We have seen enough fakery around the “climate change” narrative to have a different view. For example, that scientist (whose name I forget) at the UN IPCC (and University of East Anglia) who colluded with the Indian at the IPCC to falsify data, so that the public would believe the “climate change” narrative more readily.

That was about 13 years ago, about the same time as said Indian claimed that the Himalayan glaciers would cease to exist by about 2015, leading to the Ganges, Brahmaputra, Indus and other rivers running dry. Not yet, anyway.

Many will recall the Al Gore film, An Inconvenient Truth, with its claims that, inter alia, “climate change” caused the Aral Sea to dry up (no, it was caused by the mad diversion of rivers in order to support cotton production: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea).

That is without even starting on certain “historical” untruths…scientists are not necessarily any more credible than historians, when they depend on certain “narratives” for their careers, publishing etc.

Peter Hitchens has an almost touching faith in the efficacy of writing to MPs. That is one rather big delusion (though I like much of what he writes). I do not know what might change the mind of the clowns now posing as MPs. Not letters, anyway…

and once again the police are useless, pathetically begging the unidentified perpetrator to hand himself in…

Those once-fine old English/British institutions such as the RSPB, RNLI, National Trust etc have all been taken over by the enemy, the fake communitarians of Common Purpose, “BLM” etc. The enemy thus gets well-paid while subverting both the institution in question and the general society. A general purge is needed.

The sort of rabbits that go around wearing facemasks are really the weak-minded who do what they think the mob wants. “Everybody” does it, think they. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if you see someone masked or muzzled when the law does not mandate it, that person can probably be written off as a free or independent thinker.

Glad to see that I am not the only person awake! Ouspensky [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._D._Ouspensky] once had an experience in the street in which he perceived that all others in that street were actually asleep, not really awake…

I was in Australia for 3 years in the late 1960s, and attended school there (Middle Harbour PS and North Sydney Boys’ High). I have come to understand that basically Anglo countries such as Australia and the UK are held back by their basic philistinism; in other words, by their prioritizing of mass spectator sport and mass TV rubbish over thinking freely.

Thus, the System can easily impose a biosecurity police state, or import millions of backward people from Africa, Asia, Caribbean, without the slightest serious challenge from the people, because what matters to the (so far) majority white population is not spirituality, philosophy, history, good government, even logic, but winning some televised sporting pleb-fest on the other side of the world.

Look at New Zealand. I do not say that Brenton Tarrant [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings] did the “right thing” in 2019 (indeed, I blogged to the contrary at the time: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/03/25/the-new-zealand-attack-and-related-matters/), but he saw New Zealand’s trajectory and wanted to change it, whereas the mass of the population was and remains asleep, and led by a woman totally part of the international System [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacinda_Ardern].

More tweets

These are invaders, and must be treated as such.

I’m with tweeter “@barbyonabike” as far as this goes.

Well, as I understand it (may or may not be correct), Tommy Robinson is not only insolvent but actually bankrupt [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tommy-robinson-cocaine-donations-prison-b1787467.html], in which case the damages awarded today will not be collected.

Legal action cannot usually be taken against a bankrupt, but the issuance of proceedings for legal action in this case preceded the bankruptcy petition.

It will be recalled that I blogged prolifically about the supposed legal action (in harassment, I think) being taken a couple of years ago by Twitter twit, “antifa” cheerleader and mental case Mike Stuchbery against Tommy Robinson. It never was likely to happen, as I said from the start. Now, it cannot. A bankrupt cannot usually be sued, as noted. Also, there would be no point in suing “Tommy Robinson” now, even if it could be done.

I suppose that that one will have to be filed with Stuchbery’s other fantasy libel actions (against stray Twitter users, a number of Danes who laughed at him, and against me!). He loves the idea that he might “clean them out”…

Never mind, he can also send me (yet another— he sent a couple in the past when he forgot to take his medication) would-be intimidating comment on my blog comments page. They made me laugh (which is “the best medicine”, it is said; not that I need any).

Stuchbery, with “Resisting Hate” Twitter troll Roanna Carleton Taylor (“@witchofpeace”, aka “@antifashwitch” and now “@oilpaintwitch”) launched a GoFundMe appeal to pay for action against “Robinson”. A Pakistani one-man solicitor firm was supposedly going to issue proceedings. As I guessed would prove to be the case, from the beginning, it never happened.

I still sometimes idly wonder what Roanna Carleton Taylor, Stuchbery, and the Pakistani did with the nearly £12,000 they were given (by a total of nearly 700 “antifascist” mugs). It certainly was not spent on legal work. It seems that the Pakistani drafted only one very short and very poor “letter before action” to Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (Tommy Robinson’s real name), which letter may not even have been delivered.

See also: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/10/23/a-few-words-about-mike-stuchbery/.

More tweets

Below, a typical Twitter-twit hysteric:

Possibly yet another Twitter user with mental health problems. I do not know. The “virus” infects many people, but only a tiny number have any symptoms; only a few (an even smaller proportion) need any medical help at all. A tiny tiny number die from or “with” this virus.

My 99-y-o mother-in-law only knew she had it after having been routinely tested while in hospital for a fracture; oh, and she contracted it in hospital, where all patients were constantly masked, an indictment of both the appallingly-poor hygiene in NHS hospitals and the uselessness of facemasks; she was discharged weeks later, still without symptoms.

My 20-something Australian niece (working in London) contracted the virus last year, but only required a few paracetomol tablets and a few weeks of rest. I know of no-one else at all who has knowingly contracted “Covid-19”.

Dan Snow, System msm drone and over-privileged silver-spoon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Snow

Late tweets

Tweeter “@Gelert9” may be worth following for those with a Twitter account (a pack of Jews had me expelled from Twitter in 2018).

The sooner all those Gulf micro-states bite the dust, the better.

I wonder why so many white British people want to live outside the main urban concentrations?…I blogged about the question in early 2019: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/02/04/white-flight-in-a-small-country/.

When will the poor people of this land awaken to the false binary choice presented to them time and again?

As for the USA, a dystopian facade of fake “democracy”…

The, so to speak, killer question…

The British answer to the society of The Handmaid’s Tale

By the dummy logic of tweeter “@peterfrot27”, all cars should be run at 5 mph…

Late music

The New Zealand Attack and Related Matters


I have thought for a week or so before writing this. As one would expect, there has been an outpouring of virtue-signalling (accompanied by State repression or threats thereof) not seen since the Anders Breivik event in Norway eight years ago. I wanted to write not only about the Christchurch shooting itself, and about the perpetrator, but also about surrounding events and the overall context. I also want to examine the moral and ethical aspects.


There are many mass shootings in the world. The USA alone seems to have one on a weekly if not daily basis (and those are only the ones which are reported heavily). The anti-gun lobby focusses on ease of access in the USA, New Zealand etc. Obviously, if a disturbed (or other) person cannot acquire firearms, then he cannot shoot people; he can, however, stab them, blow them up, drive at them etc.

Firearms events have more victims, usually. Having said that, one could say “ban cars, because some people misuse them”, to which the answer would no doubt come, “people need cars, they don’t need guns”. Well, true, though still arguable. It all depends on where society decides to draw the line. In the UK, since the late 1990s, it has been almost impossible to own lawfully-held firearms (except shotguns and, in some cases, certain types of hunting rifle). That was not always the case.

“Members of the public may own sporting rifles and shotguns, subject to licensing, but handguns were effectively banned after the Dunblane school massacre in 1996 with the exception of Northern Ireland. Dunblane was the UK’s first and only school shooting. There has been one spree killing since Dunblane, the Cumbria shootings in June 2010, which involved a shotgun and a .22 calibre rifle, both legally-held. Prior to Dunblane though, there had only been one mass shooting carried out by a civilian in the entire history of Great Britain, which took place in Hungerford on 19 August 1987.” [Wikipedia]

Note that. In the entire history of Great Britain there have only been three mass shootings, yet the government took the opportunity to ban most firearms (at which time there had only been two such events in British history), and did so with the apparent agreement of a majority, probably high, of the general public, most of whom know nothing about firearms, have never so much as seen one (other than on TV), and who were stampeded by the publicity around the 1996 Dunblane school murders.

At one time, there was little regulation of firearms in the UK:

Following the assassination of William of Orange in 1584 with a concealed wheellock pistol, Queen Elizabeth I, fearing assassination by Roman Catholics, banned possession of wheellock pistols in England near a royal palace in 1594.[73] There were growing concerns in the 16th century over the use of guns and crossbows. Four acts were imposed to restrict their use in England and Wales.[74]

The Bill of Rights restated the ancient rights of the people to bear arms by reinstating the right of Protestants to have arms after they had been illegally disarmed by James II. It follows closely the Declaration of Rights made in Parliament in February 1689.[75] The Bill of Rights text declares that “That the Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law”.” [Wikipedia]

British common law applied to the UK and Australia, and until 1791 to the colonies in North America that became the United States. The right to keep and bear arms had originated in England during the reign of Henry II with the 1181 Assize of Arms, and developed as part of common law.”

Starting in 1903, there were restrictions placed on purchase of certain firearms (mainly pistols), subsequent Acts of 1920, 1937, 1968 and 1988 tightening the law in other respects too.

It is worth noting that, following the two 1997 Acts, which effectively banned private possession of handguns (pistols and revolvers) and required surrender of thus-affected weapons, 57,000 people (0.1% of the population) handed in 162,000 weapons and 700 tons of ammunition! In other words, one maniac with a few weapons became the trigger (so to speak) for a law which affected at least 57,000 people all of whom had held and used their weapons peacefully until then!

I personally was not affected by the ban, though I was at one time (mid 1970s/mid 1980s) a member of the Kensington Rifle and Pistol Club in London. In the UK and/or other countries, I have fired a variety of weapons, including the 7.62 R-1 automatic/semi-auto rifle (there was a switch on the side), semi-automatic pistols including the 9mm Browning Hi-Power and numerous others in .32 and .22 calibre, and also revolvers such as the Colt .32, .38 and .357 Magnum, and have handled (overseas and mostly long ago, again in the 1970s and 1980s) others, such as the famous Uzi submachinegun and some Warsaw Pact automatic weapons. Despite that, I am not in fact particularly interested in firearms  (or any weapons) and, even in the unlikely event of the 1997 Acts being repealed, would probably not bother to join a gun club. As far as shotguns are concerned, I have used them in Ireland and in England (in England only for clay pigeon, because I disapprove of shooting birds and animals for sport or “fun”). I myself have never privately owned any firearm.

I doubt that many people now even know that there used to be public ranges in England, where for a small fee, people could take their own weapons and fire them. I went once (in 1976) to the one at Dartford (Kent), quite near what was then a (disused?) mental hospital. Now the area is probably either a housing development or perhaps might be the present Dartford Clay Shooting Club, which (I just saw on Google) seems to be at or near the same location (it is not an area that I know, though).

Most British people have never fired nor even seen a firearm and that does tend to colour their reaction.

In the USA, things are of course very different. The old English Common Law right to bear arms is written into the U.S. Constitution, though muddied by the famous words about “a well-regulated militia” etc. Leaving aside the legal and quasi-theological arguments revolving around that Amendment, it always seemed to me when I lived there (in New Jersey) that it was odd for many American states to require people to have a licence to own or at least drive a car, but not a pistol, shotgun or something even more dangerous.

In the UK, people tend to say, “look at the USA: easy ownership of guns and a massacre every week!”, but that has to be set against the fact that tens and probably hundreds of millions of Americans own firearms. Probably the vast majority have never received even the most basic training. True, there are huge numbers of crimes committed with firearms in the USA, but simply banning guns (as in some other countries) is a simplistic solution which might leave American citizens helpless. Societies differ. I met an American lady, a blonde with startlingly blue eyes, in the Caribbean. She said that she had a large silver-plated automatic pistol (I forget the marque), which she kept under her pillow. I never got to see it, by the way!

As far as New Zealand is concerned, its gun ownership laws were lax compared to the UK or even Australia, but huge numbers of New Zealanders (about 5% of the population, 250,000 out of 5 million) own at least one weapon. New Zealand is a country about 10% larger than the UK but with only about 5 million inhabitants. Much of the country is rural. There had never been a massacre there such as the one recently perpetrated in Christchurch by Brenton Tarrant.

First impressions, Muslims in the UK and NZ, the history, the demographics

When the Christchurch attack happened and the news organizations started to report, my first surprise was to hear that New Zealand has 50,000 Muslims living there! That figure may seem small, but is still 1% of the whole population.

In the UK, there were at one time effectively no Muslims, though trade with Muslim lands, evidenced by coins, goes back at least as far as the time of King Offa in the 8th Century. All the same, there were only a few Muslims in England, mostly diplomats, traders etc, for centuries, e.g. in the Tudor and Stuart periods (15th-17thC), until sailors from British India (mostly Bengal) known as lascars started to spend time in ports such as London, Bristol, Liverpool etc in the 19thC. There may have been 10,000 at any one time, but few were permanent residents. The Sherlock Holmes stories by Arthur Conan Doyle occasionally mention lascars, not infrequently preceded by words such as “rascally”.

The first small mosque in England was built in Woking (Surrey) in 1889 (it’s still there, quite near the railway station), having been built there adjunct to an Islamic burial ground. The first mosque in London only appeared in 1924. By 2007, there had been established 1,500 mosques in the UK! Now, in 2019, the figure is even greater: 1,750 [BBC statistic]. 250 more mosques in little more than a decade…

As to the population figures, England and Wales had 50,000 Muslims in 1961. That was then around 0.1% of the whole population. A decade later, in 1971, there were 226,000, a quadrupling, then by 1981, 553,000; 1991, 950,000. Doubling every decade at that point. Then 1.6 million in 2001; 2.7 million by 2011 and, a mere three years later in 2014, well over 3 million.

The present number of UK-based Muslims is not officially known but is around 3.5 million.

So in the UK, 50,000 Muslims became (via immigration and births) 3.5 million within little more than half a century. New Zealand has 50,000 now. New Zealand has different immigration and other factors as compared to the UK, but will New Zealand, a land of only 5 million people now, have a population of Muslims alone of 3.5 million by, say, 2075 or 2100? It cannot be dismissed out of hand. At that point, the Muslims would be already dominant even if the general NZ population will by then have grown to, say, 10 million (twice its present level). Yes, that projected third of the population could in fact be the dominant bloc. A laser is powerful because its light is concentrated and disciplined, not diffuse.

The intention of the shooter

It seems that the perpetrator of the massacre had been travelling, perhaps using inherited monies, for 7 years. Information given out by the msm indicates that Tarrant was “radicalized” not while a member of some group or party, but by events witnessed while travelling around Europe and, finally, in New Zealand itself.

The manifesto of Brenton Tarrant, The Great Replacement,  will not be reproduced here. It is found with ease on the Internet, via Google or the like. I do not want to give anyone hostile the excuse to say that, by posting it on here, I am somehow “encouraging” terrorism or political violence. It does seem very repressive that major Internet platforms have been pressured to remove his manifesto, and have acquiesced.

Reading that manifesto, the motivation of Brenton Tarrant seems to be almost impersonal on the face of it. It has elements of sacrifice and self-sacrifice. It shows determination (he has that in common with Breivik). As to education or erudition, I do not think that he lays claim to much, but there is intelligence manifest in the document. He has learned (whatever might be said about that) from his travels.

Politically, Brenton Tarrant describes himself as an “ethno-nationalist”. He also says (the manifesto is mostly written in Q & A format):

“Were/are you a nazi?

No, actual nazis do not exist.They haven’t been a political or social force anywhere in the world for more than 60 years.”

That is a good point. As Hitler said, “National Socialism is not for export.” Hitler also remarked to his last secretary, Traudl Junge, and others, in 1945, that German National Socialism was finished, but that something with the same essential core might emerge “in a “hundred years” and then “take hold of the world with the force of a religion”. Well, here we are in 2019, 100 years after the founding of the NSDAP, though of course we are only 74 years from the end of the Reich.

Tarrant also describes himself as an “eco-fascist” as well as writing that he is at one with many of the policies expounded by Oswald Mosley. A word of explanation might be useful here. I knew someone who was at one time quite well acquainted with Mosley. She always said that he was basically an intellectual who saw himself as a “man of action” (“Action” was also the name of Mosley’s newspaper). Mosley of course was also a “man of action”, who had flown in the First World War (where he was a fellow-officer of the aforesaid lady’s husband in the Royal Flying Corps), but he, arguably, made too much of sports, fencing, physical fitness generally, as a politician. That was the Zeitgeist of the 1930s though, not only in Germany and Italy but in the UK, where lidos and indoor public swimming pools etc proliferated.

Mosley was once described as someone who could have been a great prime minister of the UK, for either [System] party. He was unwilling to accept mass unemployment, so resigned from the Labour Party (under which he was a government minister).

Mosley is now remembered, in the public mind, in the “cartoon” version put out by a largely Jewish mass media: the sneering Fascist demagogue in his black uniform. As with all important lies, of course, there was a kernel of truth in that.

As to Tarrant’s “eco-fascism”, there has always been linkage between “green” politics, environmentalism etc, and social nationalism. See:


In fact, the author Henry Williamson, who wrote Tarka the Otter, combined Englishness, support for Mosley and support for German National Socialism with being an early environmentalist and, in essence, “green” activist:


Tarrant declares in his manifesto that he will not kill NZ police. He kept to that and allowed himself to be captured. He also makes the following point:

Were/are you a supporter of Brexit?

Yes, though not for an official policy made. The truth is that eventually people must face the fact that it wasn’t a damn thing to do with the economy.That it was the British people firing back at mass immigration, cultural displacement and globalism, and that’s a great and wonderful thing.”

Amen to that.

He adds, re. Marine le Pen’s party in France:

Were/are you a supporter of Front National?

No,they’re a party of milquetoast civic nationalist boomers, completely incapable of creating real change and with no actual viable plan to save their nation.

Rather oddly, Tarrant says that one Candace Owens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candace_Owens#Political_views was a major influence. I had to look up her details. I myself see nothing of any real interest there, but this blog post is about the New Zealand attack and its author, not me.

As to the psychology of Brenton Tarrant, hard to say. True, he shares some characteristics with other “rampage killers”, being marginalized by society, not having a solid career or place in society, not having a solid marriage or other relationship either. He seems to be sane and in fact makes some very good if obvious points in his manifesto. No doubt the New Zealand state’s psychiatrists will find suitable labels to attach…

The reaction of the New Zealand state, msm and public

Once the initial shock of the massacre ebbed, there was a wave of sympathy for the victims, especially in New Zealand itself. Looking at the TV news, one can see how warm-hearted the New Zealanders are, though it is all too easy to see a crowd of a few hundred and assume that it represents a whole country. The New Zealanders have proven that they have a heart. It is far more doubtful as to whether they have a head. Like Australia, New Zealand has gone from being an entirely white European society (albeit grafted onto an existing “native” one) to a developing multikulti mess, but the extent of that is probably slight enough in terms of numbers and percentages (so far) that most New Zealanders are unaware of it. I cannot say.

The New Zealand Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, immediately started virtue-signalling on an epic scale, wearing Arab dress and insisting that even women police officers did the same. It was rather chilling to see an armed policewoman carrying her automatic rifle and wearing the Arab hijab. Reminiscent of the ISIS barbarians.

Stray thoughts

Many of those who virtue-signalled like mad about the people shot in New Zealand scarcely noticed, I think, the many killed recently by American or British bombers when the ISIS barbarians were under attack. The ISIS fighters had to take their chances, perhaps their camp-followers too, but what about uninvolved civilians? What about small children also killed by the assaults on towns such as Raqqa?

Then take another example: the Second World War bombings (on both sides, though the Allied bombing was far worse, in Germany, both in terms of numbers killed and in terms of intensity). In Japan, the populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki may have supported the war effort, may also have been related to soldiers or whatever, but were themselves not combatants. Their children even less so.


[above, Dresden 1945]

To attribute blame becomes difficult. That is why human beings cling to the conventional. Many will have seen The Night of the Generals, which is based around questions like that: in the midst of a massive war, where thousands are being killed monthly or weekly, and where the Wehrmacht resistance to Hitler is in the background (with its premise that Hitler must die for the greater good…), an investigation is launched into the murder of a prostitute.

If conventional morality says that it is justified for a state to kill civilians and even civilian children for some larger end result, then perhaps the same argument could be used by an individual who massacres civilians whom he regards as either “the enemy” or “collateral damage” to achieve some larger end? The moral question which looked so clear superficially becomes opaque.

For me, the NZ shooting was unpleasant, unnecessary and possibly counter-productive. Tarrant obviously disagrees with that conclusion. All one can say is that the large-scale movements of population will continue until someone says or enough people say NO.



















The Gathering Cloak of Censorship

In Pittsburgh, someone has apparently shot some Jews in a synagogue. His motives need not concern us. What does concern me is how the System has seized upon the event as an excuse to censor social media comment. In particular, the enemies of freedom have taken the opportunity to attack and try to shut down GAB [https://gab.com/home], at which the alleged shooter is said to have maintained an account.

Within hours of the shooting, both GAB’s hosting service, Joyent [https://www.joyent.com/] as well as Paypal [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayPal] withdrew services from GAB in a blatant attempt to destroy GAB, which is a small (and freer) version of Twitter.

The rationale for this censorship conspiracy (and of course it is obvious which tribe is behind it) is that GAB is somehow (unspecified) responsible for the Pittsburgh shooting event because the alleged shooter had a GAB account!

Now these days almost everyone has a social media account. The mass killer, Anders Breivik, had a Facebook account. There was no conspiracy or clamour to shut down Facebook after he shot about 80 people a few years ago.


In fact, it turns out that the alleged perpetrator of the Pittsburgh event also had accounts on both Facebook and Twitter! However, neither Facebook nor Twitter are facing any threat of close-down, unlike Gab; neither are the hardcore Jewish Zionists on those platforms calling for any such shut-down. Only Gab is facing destruction…Surely even the “antifa” idiots can see that there is something fishy here?

In other words, the attack on GAB is purely political and is being led, basically, by the Zionist element, which is trying to remove any space wherein social-national or “white nationalist” views can be expressed. Twitter has already purged thousands of its most interesting accounts (including my own) after Jews complained. Now GAB is under threat for not purging the same sort of views. It has nothing to do with violence or supposed incitement to violence. Most GAB posters do not incite violence (far less than do the more extreme Jewish Zionists and their “antifa” “useful idiots”). It is a purely political attempt to prevent any social-national or even traditional-type nationalist views from being expressed anywhere.

It is sobering to look at Twitter and see how the mob is baying for the blood of GAB. Many of the most fervent supporters of censorship are those whose predecessors would have gone to the barricades in defence of freedom: journalists, TV presenters, academics, writers, film directors etc. Many are not Jews but “useful idiot” types, completely bamboozled (but withal aware that to stand against Zionism is often not a good career move in a milieu where “they” have a stranglehold…).

What happens when people are denied a voice, even where that voice is small? Let history judge.


When I spoke at the London Forum in February 2017, I used the last part of my talk to raise the point, only since then raised by others (both in UK and especially USA), about what I called “the privatization of public space” online. As I explained in that talk, what I meant was that a very few huge online enterprises now act as near or quasi-monopolies: Facebook, Twitter, Amazon (in respect of book reviews etc), ebay. If the citizen is thrown off those sites and/or barred from expressing opinion, his right to self-expression has been denied him, and that remains true even if there are small websites where he can still comment. The citizen has no right of redress qua citizen, only as a “customer” of those sites. That amounts to no right at all when it comes to freedom of expression.

There should be a right of appeal to an independent agency or tribunal, or to the courts. At present, the large online companies can arbitrarily remove a person from posting, without appeal even in-house in most cases. Those who say that these are private enterprises and have the right to remove whomsoever they wish are missing the point. Risibly, such unthinking and/or malicious people often think of themselves as the “tolerant” and “freedom”-loving ones…their glee at GAB being shut down tells the true story, though. They simply wish to repress freedom of expression for those with whom they (in, often, their smug ignorance) disagree on political, social or historical matters.




Below: Gab comments via its Twitter account (and retweets supporters)


Meanwhile, the Jewish-Zionist element is holding conferences about how to “manage” the news and how to present those whom they hate…it seems that the spirit of Pravda and Komsomolskaya Pravda is not dead…

Interview with Gab founder Andrew Torba

Further Developments



“Free speech” in the Britain of 2019! Note (in the above newspaper report) the robotic refusal of Humberside Police to apologize or engage with the free speech argument, even now. Sinister is the right word for this.


Update, 9 May 2019

Believe it or not, this idiot (Paul Bernal, see tweet below) is a law lecturer! I feel sorry for his students at the University of East Anglia! According to his definition, even Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s China had “free speech” (you could *say* whatever you liked, but as a consequence might get shot..). What an idiot!