I know it's been posted before, but this man is a hero:





I've been in personal contact with him and he's a hero. And history will recognise him as such.

Tommy has been fighting the good fight way before any of us even knew of the passive muslim takeover, he was one of the unfortunate people to have had first hand experience in the Islamic rise of the UK. Luton probably one of the worst areas in all of London right now to live unless you as a muslim.

The dude has dedicated his life to fighting islamic extremism, it's of no surprise he gets smeared in the media, false arrest charges and attacked by muslims on the regular. Wish I had even half the balls that guy has.

(01-23-2016 02:39 AM)N°6 Wrote:  I disagree. The West has been geo-politically imploding since the end of the rebel Rhodesian Republic. Instead of learning the lessons from Rhodesia and South Africa, Europe and the USA have gleefully imported the very same problems that destroyed the most prosperous African countries.

The media will never allow people to know the truth.

It doesn't make sense to compare the US and Europe directly on this subject.

For one, Europe already had nearly 20x times as many Muslims as the US before the migrant crisis. I'd estimate more Muslims have come into Europe within the past few months than the US has total.

Secondly, the US leans a lot further right politically. We're already on the verge of electing a president who's running on a platform of limiting Muslim immigration, and we don't even have thousands of them pouring across the border and raping our women.

In other words, the US already knows the "truth", at least partially. The things happening in Europe are just making that truth even more vivid.

Not to mention that US is much, much larger than Europe, and if we take into account it's mostly Western Europe taking the brunt of the invasion, it becomes even more unbalanced. The sheer dymension of the US render such a takeover almost impossible.

(01-24-2016 05:21 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  UK Government is being badgered to take a lot of "unaccompanied" children to our shores and house them.

Reuters

Taking bets on these children having parents after all and extended families. All of whom will plead a case to come here with the help of the charities.

Why would we have thousands of undocumented children from a foreign country coming here when we have serious issues with looking after what children are in care already? There are hundreds of cases every year where social services failed to protect vulnerable children and teenagers, namely from Pakistani rape gangs.

ANd they want to throw more onto the bonfire? Fucking hell.

Absolutely. 100% Trojan Horse.

From that Reuters article:
"Campaign groups and more than 80 Church of England bishops have urged Cameron to do more."
When I see statements like this, I think there's no way all 80 of these bishops can be that stupid or naïve, just no way.
Does anyone think that at least some church leaders have been bought so as to further promote the Globalist narrative?
Thereby religious people are more inclined to abide by the wishes of their church and not rise up and protest against the madness we're seeing.
The more I see and read about events and the more presumably reasonably intelligent people who seem to be promoting utterly suicidal measures for Europe, the more I think there has to be some sort of joined-up agreed upon plan behind this, a conspiracy if you will.
Russia Today have been hinting at this lately and Gearóid Ó Colmáin has been outright stating that it's part of the US's Globalist 'divide and conquer' strategy to undermine and destabilise Europe and in particular to try and put an end to 'nation states'.

(01-24-2016 06:42 PM)LEMONed IScream Wrote:  Not to mention that US is much, much larger than Europe, and if we take into account it's mostly Western Europe taking the brunt of the invasion, it becomes even more unbalanced. The sheer dymension of the US render such a takeover almost impossible.

It's unlikely, but not impossible.

A modern equivalent to the run by Genghis Khan, from Mongolia, through China, the middle east, all the way to Hungary would be analogous.



The U.S. has a lot of open area, that has a significant amount of infrastructure for quick transport across the country. Major geological features could be limiting if an invasion did happen here and a lot of the major highways and rail shut down through difficult passes. But, a fast, mobile force, if it penetrated into the country, may not have a lot of resistance through vast, unpopulated areas. Mongols did it on horseback, with lightweight armor that they kept silk shirts underneath to keep their calvary from bleeding out of arrow wounds. Landing a significant force may be the most difficult part. Maintaining it, with the amount of small arms owned by the U.S. citizenry, may be a challenge. I'd actually be curious to see a real scenario of how this would go down by someone a lot more knowledgeable.

(01-24-2016 07:54 PM)philosophical_recovery Wrote:  It's unlikely, but not impossible.

A modern equivalent to the run by Genghis Khan, from Mongolia, through China, the middle east, all the way to Hungary would be analogous.

The U.S. has a lot of open area, that has a significant amount of infrastructure for quick transport across the country. Major geological features could be limiting if an invasion did happen here and a lot of the major highways and rail shut down through difficult passes. But, a fast, mobile force, if it penetrated into the country, may not have a lot of resistance through vast, unpopulated areas. Mongols did it on horseback, with lightweight armor that they kept silk shirts underneath to keep their calvary from bleeding out of arrow wounds. Landing a significant force may be the most difficult part. Maintaining it, with the amount of small arms owned by the U.S. citizenry, may be a challenge. I'd actually be curious to see a real scenario of how this would go down by someone a lot more knowledgeable.

You're ignoring the fact that there is an ocean between the US and the nearest Muslim country. Not a sea, an ocean.

I'm not saying the US shouldn't be wary of what's going on, but you simply can't compare the two situations as if they're apples and apples.

(01-24-2016 06:19 PM)Teedub Wrote:  I know it's been posted before, but this man is a hero:





I've been in personal contact with him and he's a hero. And history will recognise him as such.

In the recent London thread, I think it was Samseau who mentioned that Britain's last hope probably rests on the monarchy.

Now, I know that the English monarch is ruler in title only and doesn't have any political clout. However, if somehow a guy like Tommy Robinson could get in touch with one of the members of the British royal family, in particular Prince William or Prince Harry, and persuades him to take charge of their country, then there is an actual real possibility of the UK stopping itself from becoming an Islamic country. I know that there will be a lot of resistance to the restoration of the monarchy in England, especially from the moronic politicians in parliament. However, it would be really easy for the one of the members of the British royal family to rally their people a la Trump. More importantly, they would probably have the backing of the military - especially if one of the princes become rulers given that they each served in the military.

(01-24-2016 08:04 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

(01-24-2016 07:54 PM)philosophical_recovery Wrote:  It's unlikely, but not impossible.

A modern equivalent to the run by Genghis Khan, from Mongolia, through China, the middle east, all the way to Hungary would be analogous.

The U.S. has a lot of open area, that has a significant amount of infrastructure for quick transport across the country. Major geological features could be limiting if an invasion did happen here and a lot of the major highways and rail shut down through difficult passes. But, a fast, mobile force, if it penetrated into the country, may not have a lot of resistance through vast, unpopulated areas. Mongols did it on horseback, with lightweight armor that they kept silk shirts underneath to keep their calvary from bleeding out of arrow wounds. Landing a significant force may be the most difficult part. Maintaining it, with the amount of small arms owned by the U.S. citizenry, may be a challenge. I'd actually be curious to see a real scenario of how this would go down by someone a lot more knowledgeable.

You're ignoring the fact that there is an ocean between the US and the nearest Muslim country. Not a sea, an ocean.

I'm not saying the US shouldn't be wary of what's going on, but you simply can't compare the two situations as if they're apples and apples.

Stop an invasion before it reaches our shores. This is why U.S. Code requires America to have 11 Aircraft carriers.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/5062

(01-24-2016 03:25 PM)Hotwheels Wrote:  I'm impressed by the fact a white Frenchman has a gun.

How many do? They may need them soon.

Matter of fact, many, many Frenchmen outside of Paris have hunting rifles in their family houses. Their fathers' rifles. Like, more than half of native French have a hunting gun (2-barrels) somewhere..

@quino_16 that's a fascinating proposition, one that never occurred to me.
You may be right, it might be Britain's last hope of avoiding becoming Muslim majority by mid century (perhaps even before, especially if tens of thousands more extra Muslims are ushered in each year as part of the migrant crisis).
As unlikely as this scenario seem, if it were to happen, the monarch would have to severely limit Muslim immigration to the UK with immediate effect and abolish Family Reunification laws for Muslims indefinitely.
This might sound harsh but anything less will result in Britain turning Muslim majority, the only difference being in the length of time it would take.
Of course there would be a massive outcry from the cucked masses but sometimes people don't know what's good for them, and an r-selected population sure as hell have no clue what's good for society in the long run.
There's probably a 0.01% chance of the above scenario playing out, perhaps shifting into 1 to 5% range if there were several high profile terrorist attacks in Europe or the UK, so unfortunately we're talking pipedream territory barring some sort of divine intervention event!

(01-24-2016 08:16 PM)Direct or subtle Wrote:  

(01-24-2016 03:25 PM)Hotwheels Wrote:  I'm impressed by the fact a white Frenchman has a gun.

How many do? They may need them soon.

Matter of fact, many, many Frenchmen outside of Paris have hunting rifles in their family houses. Their fathers' rifles. Like, more than half of native French have a hunting gun (2-barrels) somewhere..

Is it difficult to get ammo?

A place near me moves it around like this;

France has the 11th highest number of guns per resident by nation. Just over a quarter of the US number.

According to http://www.gunpolicy.org there are 19,000,000 guns in civilian hands. That can arm 57% of the male population. France ranks fifth in the world in number of privately owned guns.

However, the number of registered guns is only 4.44 guns per 100 frogs.

Damn Europeans make it both time consuming and expensive to get a hunting license and if you want to get a rifle or gun through a shooting club then it is also time consuming.

Might just begin my zombie horde preparation with a big two handed axe to honor my ancestors.

Kick off will happen 100% in Germany first.

For all the jokes, when has the ethnic French shown any balls ever? The Spanish? The Italians? The British?

The Germans on the other hand, they're numerous, they're efficient, they have a penchant for political extremism. They are already tens of thousand strong with each Pegida march.

Ground Zero.

I used to think it would be Marseille or some other defacto lawless zone, but the French are gutless honestly. They've allowed Africans and North Africans to run absolutely wild there for decades. They will have a serious fight on their hands in many of their cities, much much worse than Germany.

(01-24-2016 09:03 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  For all the jokes, when has the ethnic French shown any balls ever?

Orleans, Fontenoy, Eylau, Borodino, Verdun, Dien Bien Phu...French valor has been demonstrated time and time again. Perhaps not so much lately, though.

I just want to live to see the shit hit the fan.

Nomad you seem to be missing the craziness that has been going on in Corsica island. Then again they're crazy fucks, crazier than french, more gutsy.

Quote:For all the jokes, when has the ethnic French shown any balls ever?

Little guy, from Corsica.

His French army beat up on everyone in Europe for nearly twenty years.

You may have heard if him, Napoleon.

(01-24-2016 03:20 PM)amity Wrote:  

(01-24-2016 12:04 PM)Anabasis to Desta Wrote:  

(01-24-2016 09:52 AM)Mekorig Wrote:  The Calais situation is very tense right now. I think we will see a dead person (be a invader/lefty supporter or a frenchmen) in the next few days.

Nobody cares if an invader dies. It would actually serve the Jewish media perfectly. Headline ... "Fleeing the Syrian Civil War to be executed in Europe: Militant far-right members murder Syrian asylum seeker in cold blood". The media will jump on it like that Syrian boy washed up on the shore. We'll see pics of the dead invader plastered all over facebook for attention and virtue signaling.

Nobody cares if a French man dies. Men are disposable canon fodder. The media will sweep it under the rug and even if they don't, a man dying doesn't deliver the same punch.

Best bang for the buck would be a bunch of beautiful, young, blonde, shitlib upper-middle class women getting raped and decapitated by a group of invaders. Nothing else will have the emotional intensity to change people's minds.

This is why the formally sheeplike German media actually grew a pair of balls, at least for a few weeks after the Cologne attacks.
The fact that the women mugged and sexually assaulted by these inbreds were predominantly white German women in their late teens and early twenties was too shocking for Germans as a whole for the mainstream media to sweep under the carpet, even though it was the protected class(migrants) that carried out the attacks.
Also because it was being spoken about so much on social media, they had no choice but to report on it.
Even 'Der Spiegel' which is more or less 'The Guardian' for Germans, has begun to take a less arselicking approach to the migrants than before and have actually had a few reasonably balanced articles of late on the dangers of inviting hordes of young Muslim males into Europe.

The Paris attack hit a sweet spot in the mainstream media, most victims were liberals hipsters, some people in the fashion world, some close friend with journalist, your typical coffee latte drinker, call me cynical but these are the kind of people whom need to suffer the consequence.

This is how the last Golden Globe


http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2...1/2751429/

This are the celebrities Tweeting about how much USA should accept rapefugees and give away their guns, lets move all of them Malibu, MidWest Manhattan, The Hantoms, lets see how open they are about it.

(01-24-2016 07:20 PM)amity Wrote:  From that Reuters article:
"Campaign groups and more than 80 Church of England bishops have urged Cameron to do more."
When I see statements like this, I think there's no way all 80 of these bishops can be that stupid or naïve, just no way.
Does anyone think that at least some church leaders have been bought so as to further promote the Globalist narrative?
Thereby religious people are more inclined to abide by the wishes of their church and not rise up and protest against the madness we're seeing.
The more I see and read about events and the more presumably reasonably intelligent people who seem to be promoting utterly suicidal measures for Europe, the more I think there has to be some sort of joined-up agreed upon plan behind this, a conspiracy if you will.
Russia Today have been hinting at this lately and Gearóid Ó Colmáin has been outright stating that it's part of the US's Globalist 'divide and conquer' strategy to undermine and destabilise Europe and in particular to try and put an end to 'nation states'.

The Anglican (Episcopal Church here in the US) is pretty far left when it comes to pretty much everything from social issues to theological doctrine. The Episcopal Church actually has a female archbishop and has had gay bishops and priests.