By Timothy Fitzpatrick
Aug. 15, 2022 Anno Domini 

I would like to thank David Duke for taking the time to reply to my query (from his Gab account) as to his why he lived in the Soviet Union and what he was doing there. But I can’t. You see, he never actually answered my question but, instead, turned it into an opportunity to shill for Vladimir Putinstein and the neo-Soviet “Russian Federation”, like the apparent obedient operative that he is.

His infantilized response was something a politician would do. He tries to set the tone early by appealing to his white nationalist audience with,

“It is also important to note that Moscow has the largest White population of any city on Earth!”

There is little, if any, evidence to back this up. When I challenged this, one of Duke’s apparent followers threw me a Wikipedia link showing how Russia was over 90 per cent “Russian”, as if “Russian” constitutes whiteness. Even a casual observer or someone who’s been to Russia knows that Russia is highly multi-ethnic, and white-skinned Russians tend to have Asiatic features, due to much Tatar, Mongol, and Central Asian race mixing over centuries of the empire’s existence (One could argue that the Russian’ Empire’s multi-ethnic character is what made it more vulnerable to the advances of revolutionary Communism—a system which feeds on division).

Putin’s brain Aleksandr Dugin, an apparent associate of David Duke and an admitted hater of whiteness even though he himself has white skin, stated in 2001 during the early formations of the Eurasian movement:

“Never in Russian history, in the history of our statehood, have we known a mono-ethnic state, a state that would be based solely on the dominance of a homogeneous ethnos … This is the basis of the philosophy of Eurasianism, that the Russians are not, say, an ethnic and racial community that has a kind of, how to say, monopoly on statehood. We also exist thanks to the alliance, thanks to the infusion of a powerful Turkic factor into our common state historical construction.”

(Turkic, sort of like the Khazars?)

There are Chinese people who have whiter skin than many Europeans, but does that make them white? If we take white to mean those of European stock, then absolutely not. And for those Slavs who have white skin with little or no Asiatic blending, they are of a different mentality than Northern Europeans and even Southern Europeans. Anyone who has had to deal with Slavs, be it personal or business, knows this. They are different. Are they “white”? Duke doesn’t seem to explain. I am not well read in the writings of Adolph Hitler, but I understand that he was not a fan of the Slavic peoples (apparently, Duke didn’t get the message from his supposed neo-Nazi controllers). There are exceptions, but in my own personal experience with Slavs, having spent considerable time in the Russian Orthodox community before my conversion to Roman Catholicism, they tend to be a brutish, simple, and chauvinistic people prone to pettiness, crime, and corruption. I doubt very much Duke would get into these details. He wouldn’t want to alienate is apparent Soviet benefactors or inform his large audience of the race reality of the Slavs to the point that they lose sympathy for Putin and Neo-Soviet Russia.

Duke drones on,

“At the same time Russia is about RUSSIANS, and Russian heritage, it has a friendly attitude to other minorities. Why is this?

It is because Russian leaders understand real politic, they know that if the Jews are able to divide the Russian empire Russia would be bankrupted and face huge problems of survival.”

No, Mr. Duke. It has a friendly attitude towards minorities because it is a multi-ethnic socialist state, which is what they are turning the West into. Russia was a multi-ethnic society even before Bolshevism came into the picture. The October Revolution only expanded on that and divided the empire further. Russia has never really had a tangible identity, and it still has none today. You cannot identify a mongrelized melting pot, and that’s why Eurasianists can only identify Russia as the “Third Rome”, “Eurasian”, and in other ridiculous terms (keep in mind here that the original Rome was largely multi-ethnic).

Duke suggests that Jews are targeting Russia today because they are somehow a bulwark against Jewry, even though Russia’s oligarchic neo-Soviet leadership is disproportionately Jewish, even though Jews never left Russia after the fake collapse of Communism in 1991, even though the Rothschilds were never thrown out of Russia and Russia’s Central Bank is a member of the Rothschild Bank of International Settlements, and even though Jewry’s central power—be it corrupt high finance or the Chabad movement—seems to be concentrated in Moscow today, even above Tel Aviv, Israel. Late Jewish-American Jack Bernstein exposed the whole charade in his pamphlets, particularly in The Life of an American Jew in Racist Marxist Israel. Israel is nothing but a Soviet satellite working to undermine the West as a two-faced ally and to keep the Middle East divided for easier Russian control and expansion of its long sought after Eurasian landmass. Former Mossad asset Juval Aviv even admitted that Mossad is “an old Russian school”. Nearly every Israeli Prime Minister has had Soviet roots—all of these important facts are ignored and covered up by David Duke so that his audience remains ignorant and deceived in the lead up to the neo-Soviet Eurasian takeover of the world. He is setting up patriots to accept a world regime they will later regret accepting. But by that time, it will be too late.

Duke provides himself with an alibi, pretends not to be a total Putinist shill when he writes,

“Does Russia and Putin do enough to advance our ideology. (sic) The short answer is No. I think he needs to do more and that it will soon be time to name the Jew (but in, of course, a reasoned and factual way).”

It’s really sick that Duke strings along his audience with this nonsense. He provides no evidence that Putinist Russia is advancing our (the white) cause (Russia is already multi-ethnic). Furthermore, we know from the admissions of the Nazbolic Eurasianist, closeted homosexual Aleksandr Dugin that the Russian Federation hates white people (Dugin even admitted that Russia fuels black supremacism in the West). Of course, Duke won’t tell the truth about what Dugin really thinks. They are in apparent cahoots. Would Mr. Duke care to explain why he associates with an open national Bolshevik, Crowleyite, homosexual, West and Catholic hater, and someone fond of the Jewish Kabbalah and Freemasonry?

“…the reason the Jewish globalist world order, media, and banking establishment hates Putin and the Russian people is because: THEY KNOW HE IS THEIR ENEMY AND RUSSIA ITSELF IS VERY COGNIZANT OF JEWISH GLOBAL POWER AND THE DANGER Jewish global supremacy PRESENTS TO RUSSIA AND THE WORLD….”

Duke figures that if he repeats “Jewish global Power” enough, his case is argued. It’s amateur hour, folks. Russia’s mainstream media is as controlled and Jewish dominated as the West’s. The Western media’s criticism of Russia and Putin are superficial and short-lived—deliberately. They won’t nail him down for what he really is because the Western media has long been penetrated by the same Bolshevik Jewish elite that run RT, Pravda, TASS, etc., and they are all in on the charade. It’s like the phony dialectic between the Scottish rite masons and the Grand Orient (continental) masons. While their blows at each other might make it seem like they hate each other and are fundamentally opposed, it’s nothing more than sibling rivalry at worst. Even if we accept Duke’s denial that Putin is Jewish, he cannot answer for the disproportionate number of Jews in the current Russian oligarchy. All he can resort to is the Qanon-like nonsense that Putin is just playing along with the Jews because of a prolonged strategy for eventual overthrow.

“His (Putin’s) skills enabled him to infiltrate the coterie of the Yeltsin regime, biding his time until he became President, and then serving the true Russian interests.

He still plays the more subtle game of subverting the enemy while I believe the time has come for open challenge of the Jewish Supremacy that rules most of the world!”

This rhetoric is for children. Duke is becoming irrelevant in the patriot movement. The lengths he will go to in order to shill for Putin reach the absurd. Another example:

“THE KEY TO OUR VICTORY OF US AND THE WORLD OVER JEWISH TOTALITARIAN SUPREMACY IS OPENLY EXPOSE THE JEWISH RACIAL SUPREMACIST THREAT.

Putin IS ACTUALLY DOING THAT IN A WAY WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT DENAZIFICATION, IF NAZISM IS DEFINED BY THE MEDIA AS RACIAL TYRANNY AND RULE, JEWS ARE NAZIS. He is using their rhetoric against them.”

Wrong again, Mr. Duke. Putin is talking about deNazification because that was the narrative back in the 1940s when the Soviets “liberated” Europe from the Nazis, and why let a good narrative go to waste, right? History repeats itself. Duke uses all upper case letters, because that’s how arguments are won.

The problem with Duke is not so much his dime store anti-Judaism but his scandalous and treasonous shilling for the Eurasianists while pretending to be a white nationalist and U.S. patriot. More disturbingly, is he just and unwitting fool for accepting Russian propaganda or a deep-cover double agent given the mission to sway the Western dissident community to the side of those conspiring against them? Why was he living in Russia, what did he do there, and how did he come to be associated with Kabbalist degenerate Aleksandr Dugin?

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
April 24, 2019 Anno Domini

The Soviet Trust model of using controlled opposition to trap anti-communists and conservatives is still in use today.

Look no further than Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has successfully fooled Western (and Eastern) conservatives into believing that he and a clique of so called Eastern nationalists, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, are genuine conservatives trying to save the world from the globalists and the evil West. It seems Orban’s anti-immigration policy has been the main driver in affirming this carefully crafted ruse.

Unfortunately, Orban and other East Bloc nations’ anti-immigration policies are not about saving Europe and conservatives but about preserving stability within the Soviet Bloc nations as they reform and about pushing more migrants to Western Europe, which is the primary target of the Soviet Kalergi plan of migration destabilization. When Hungary was officially communist, under János Kádár, immigration was greatly restricted, so Orban’s policy on immigration is essentially the same as it was in Red Hungary.

No one seems to be asking how these Soviet Bloc nations with membership in the European Union are able to maintain membership whilst going against E.U. directives like unfettered immigration.
The answer can only be that the Kremlin has cut a deal to keep its satellites free of the migration agenda, thus empowering the satellites while its Western European neighbours disintegrate. That or the European Union has become the victim of nuclear blackmail and has no choice but to let the Kremlin and its satellites do what they like. Of course, the E.U. is full of communist saboteurs, so whatever scenario, it’s not hard to believe.

Soviet analyst Max Moritz writes,

“Orbán’s attacks against Brussels, against George Soros, and certainly against immigration are more than just bombastic spectacle. Hungary, which formed in February 1991 together with Poland and then-Czechoslovakia, the so-called Visegrád Group, is seamlessly pursuing, like its meanwhile three good old socialist brother states (that include Slovakia), an unchanged East Bloc policy, which in the new situation is designed to make sure that these countries only benefit from their membership in the European Union.

“Their (Hungary, Poland, etc.) behaviour during the 2015 so-called “refugee crisis” gave these four countries completely away, as they outright refused (and still refuse) to take any significant numbers of people in. In other words, they do not regard themselves as part of the E.U. or the West at all! Given the fact that this immense wave of migration (that hasn’t stopped even now) represents a clandestine Russian operation aimed at destabilising Western Europe, and Western Europe only, it becomes clear that these unchanged East-bloc countries, based on their fictitious nationalism, won’t allow these people from Africa and Asia in. After all, the migration crisis is designed to hit solely the West! And: They are, under whatever pretext, silently or not so silently leaving the EU, not formally, but factually, moving back into the same East-European communist sphere they came from!,” says Moritz.

Orban is accused of being a communist informant during the 1980s when Hungary was openly communist. It seems the Kremlin set him up in a Soviet Trust model from the beginning—bringing him to fame as a (fake) anti-Communist, which resulted in ensnaring legitimate anti-communists and conservatives and, thereby, controlling legitimate anti-communistm in the country, thus allowing the continuance of the rebranded communist regime.

“…since coming into office in Hungary’s 2010 general elections, he (Orban) has faced frequent accusations both at home and abroad of emulating the authoritarian practices he once opposed.” (Source)

Orban’s role as a fake anti-communist also appears to have helped facilitate the grand deception of the global collapse of communism in the 1990s, with Hungary being part of a carefully laid out plan to conveniently allow the world’s media to have cameras ready to roll as one regime appeared to fall after another, in successive order. Now he is the Prime Minister of the country, whose anxious populace view him as a stooge of Putin and the Kremlin. This is unsurprising, as Orban is surrounded by “former” communist advisors. Some of Orban’s critics see him as using the exact same playbook used by Kádár. Critics also accuse Poland’s Jarosław Kaczyński (pictured above as a crypto-Communist alongside Orban) of using the playbook from Communist Poland, which is similar to Kádár’s. They are similar because they come from the same source, the COMINTERN at the Kremlin.

When it became public in 2015 that Orban was part of the Soviet Trust honeypot, he was called to appear before a parliamentary national security committee—to which he refused, calling it “absurd and ridiculous”.

Orban and Hungary are not the only ones running this fake opposition Soviet Trust. The same could be said for Poland and other “former” Soviet bloc nations also blocking E.U. immigration directives. So, while these Soviet Bloc nations continue to fool Western conservatives and anti-communists alike that Russia and its satellites have reformed to capitalism and conservative values, Western Europe and America continue to cripple under the weight of Soviet destabilization measures like the Kalergi plan and cultural Marxism. Meanwhile, said Soviet Bloc nations continue to draw on European Union coffers. What a swindle!

Some white nationalists, especially those of the Anglo variety, portray the British Empire as a noble victim of unjust calumny by Zionists. In fact, much more often than not, modern Zionists wax enthusiastic about the Empire. Why not? Unlike the white nats, they know that the Rothschilds and other Jewish moneybags sponsored it, and that it served Jewish supremacist interests rather than those of the British people, much less the foreign subjects of the Empire.

Hardcore British Neocons—Michael Gove, Niall Ferguson, Melanie Philips, Andrew Roberts, and so on—use precisely the same arguments in favour of the British Empire that the likes of David Duke use, but then go a step further and posit the Empire as an early exponent of Neocon moral interventionism—the thrust of their message being, if you liked the British Empire, you’ll love Neocon creative destruction.

In an essay, The Very British Roots Of Neoconservatism and Its Lessons For British Conservatives, Gove even argued that, far from being minted in post-war America, Neoconservatism’s origins lay in the imperialist philosophy of 19th century British statesmen like George Canning and Lord Palmerston.

Even on the left of British politics, the more Zionist the pundit or politician, the more likely he or she is to champion British imperial rule in Ireland and elsewhere. Non-Zionist British leftists—Ken Livingstone, Jeremy Corbyn, the late Tony Benn, et al.—tend to condemn British imperialism, albeit from a debased cultural Marxist perspective, but Zionist progressives—e.g., David Aaronovitch, Peter Mandelson, and the lesbian feminist Julie Burchill—eulogise the Empire as an agent of progress and modernity.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Burchill was the highest paid columnist in Britain—her journalism invariably combining vitriolic attacks on the Irish, the Palestinians, the Germans, and continental Europeans generally, with slavish devotion to the Soviet Union and the state of Israel. Clearly, her blend of selective xenophobia and ultra-Zionist leftism found favour with the Rothschilds, since the Murdoch press empire (a Rothschild front) employed her as a star columnist, first in the Sunday Times, and later with the Sun newspaper. She’s also written for the Masonic soft-porn sheet, the Daily Mail, and for the left liberal Guardian.
Britain is one of the most PC nations on earth when it comes to racism. Making even mildly disparaging remarks about non-whites, Jews, or Muslims can land you in jail, but conversely, mocking the Germans as humourless sadists, the French as cowards, or the Irish as stupid feckless drunks, is positively encouraged by the Zio-cultural commissars.
Virulently anti-Catholic TV shows like “Father Ted” (still running on primetime on mainstream TV channels in Britain and Ireland 20 years after ceasing production) reflect the intense ethnic and religious hatred at the heart of the British cultural establishment (and its MI5 controlled “Irish” counterpart).
“Zio-Hollywood” makes a Catholic bashing blockbuster film on average once every two or three years—”Philomena”, “Spotlight”, “The Magdalen Sisters” etc.,—and garlands these productions with Oscars and Oscar nominations galore.
Even films with no ostensible religious theme are often thinly disguised vehicles for anti-Catholic propaganda, e.g., “The Legend Of Tarzan”, “Elizabeth”, “Pirates Of The Caribbean”, etc.
The ostensible paradox of the Anglo-Saxonist jingoist as “anti-racist” PC zealot is not really a paradox at all, but reflects the anti-western, anti-Christian hatred at the heart of Anglo-masonry.
In the centuries since the Reformation, Anglo-Protestant imperialism and Jewish supremacism, far from opposing each other, formed an enduring alliance, which found organised expression in occult societies like the Skull and Bones, the Round Table, Bohemian Grove, and the daddy of them all, the Freemasons (not to mention Masonry’s numerous offshoots, the Know Nothings, the Orange Order, Purple Arch, etc.).
It is no coincidence that the rabidly anti-Catholic Know Nothing movement, which terrorised Irish and German Catholics in 19th century America, was led by Jewish supremacists, Charles Lewis Levin and Samuel Kramer, or that Lord George Gordon, the instigator of the anti-Catholic Gordon Riots in 18th century London, later converted to Orthodox Judaism.
George Benjamin, the first Canadian Jewish Member of Parliament, belonged to the anti-Catholic Anglo-Israelist Orange Order.
Underscoring the unspoken alliance between Zionist sponsored multiculturalism and Anglo-Masonry, British Orange terrorist groups such as the Ulster Defence Association and the Ulster Volunteer Force, have a 25-year history of  trafficking illegal immigrants to the Irish Republic.

John Dee, the occult magician at the court of Elizabeth I, was apparently the first person to coin the term “British Empire”, so from the very get go the Empire was an occult cabalist project—all its main propagandists, and indeed actors, being occultists of one sort or another.

According to Stuart Piggot’s book The Druids, Dee “grew up surrounded by the controversy and currents” of what became known as the British Empire—and “sought to merge the Arthurian Imperial tradition with cabalistic interpretations of Hebrew scripture”.

“Dee created the concept of British Israel, which gave the British and the Jews a common racial identity, and invoked biblical prophecy to show the inevitable triumph of British imperialism, the British as Abraham’s seed were to inherit the earth.”

Far from being simply an ethnocentric take on Biblical Christianity, Dee’s pseudo-genealogical supremacist theory was steeped in pagan druidism, being “Christian” only in the sense that New Age pantheism is “Christian”, i.e., it co-opted elements of Christian doctrine and ritual, the better to insinuate itself almost effortlessly into the mainstream of British Christian life.

Dee’s contemporary, the celebrated Elizabethan poet Edmund Spenser, laid out a manifesto for British occult imperialism in his epic poem The Faerie Queene, which called for the ruthless crushing of Irish Catholics, the forcible imposition of the English language in Ireland, and the practice of incest among the English.

Two centuries later, another mouthpiece for Anglo-Judaeo Masonry, Marx’s sidekick, Friedrich Engels, gleefully predicted the wiping out of “whole races of reactionaries”—e.g., the Gaels, the Basques, the Slavs etc.,—in the cause of “progress”.

Zionists talk endlessly of the Holocaust, and Anglo white nats counter by invoking the genocidal Ukrainian Holodomor, but neither side dare mention the deliberate forcible starvation of Irish Catholics in the mid 19th century by the Masonic British government—an act of genocide that a Times of London editorial of 1848 gloated would make “the Celt as rare on the banks of the Shannon as the Redman on the banks of the Manhattan”.

Despite its occult Masonic origins and genocidal policies, Anglo-Israelism gained many adherents among British and American Protestants, who promoted the theory of the British Royal Family as the House of David, and Britain and the United States as the modern tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh respectively.

One might have expected that the Jews, the original self-designated “chosen”, would have resented the Johnny come lately Anglo pretenders to chosenness, but far from it: Jewish supremacists welcomed the claims of Anglo-Freemasonry to tribal co-ethnicity precisely because they understood that wherever it took root, Freemasonry laid waste the surrounding Christian civilization.

However, when, in the 20th century, some mostly American Anglo-Israelists rejected the Anglo-Israelist alliance with organised Jewry and embraced Christian Identitarianism, Jewish supremacists, in the shape of the Anti-Defamation League, denounced Christian Identity as an “ugly turn” away from the original noble tenets of Anglo-Israelism.

So, the avowed anti-racists of the ADL had no quarrel with Anglo-Israelists’ ultra-racist claim to be the rightful rulers of the whole world but objected when some of the Anglos sought to shut Jews out of the exclusive supremacist party. Straining at gnats indeed.

Like Zionism, Anglo-Israelism based its claims on an incoherent mixture of cod genealogy and self-fulfilling prophecy. Initially, the Anglo-Israelists touted the ancient Britons as the source of Britain’s supposed Jewish connection, but once Protestantism became associated with the nordic nations, they changed tack and refashioned the English lost tribe as Anglo-Saxon to the core.

Most reliable evidence indicates that the English share considerably more genetic heritage with the French than with the Germans, but when did facts ever get in the way of racial supremacist theories?

Benjamin Disraeli, the Jewish supremacist British Prime Minister of the mid-Victorian era, eagerly promoted Anglo-Israelism as the semi-official ideology of the British Empire—which, thanks to Jewish sponsorship, was then reaching the zenith of its power and prestige.

Borrowing heavily from Protestant theories of wealth and success as a sign of divine favour, Anglo-Israelists argued that Britain’s great power in the world proved the English were part of God’s chosen race. The logic was circular—the belief in chosenness impelled  the supremacist drive to be “top nation”: the ensuing top nation status then being cited as evidence of chosen-ness.

Anglo-Israelism in the 19th century made huge inroads in the Church of England; the de facto takeover of Anglicanism by Masonic Israelists prompted Cardinal Newman to desert the English state church and convert to Catholicism.

According to The Union Jack, a 1970 book on Anglo-Israelism by ‘Helen Peters’, Anglo-Israelist Freemasonry controls all the major ‘right-wing’ Protestant churches in the United States. This helps explain why such churches have become slavish mouthpieces for Zionism and the endless war agenda of the Anglo-American Neocons on left and right.

The Union Jack argues that Anglo-Israelism and Freemasonry are synonymous, and embody the Kingdom-of-Heaven-on-Earth heresy, i.e., the idea of materialistic worldly “progress” as the ultimate goal of existence.

Though steeped in Protestant Freemasonry, Anglo-Israelism has a constituency even within the Catholic fold. The late Catholic modernist left liberal-turned Atlanticist Neocon Michael Novak touted liberal capitalism as the flower of “the English genius”, and condemned traditional Catholic teaching on usury, contraception, subsidiarity, and just war. A few years before his death, he wrote a book celebrating the New Atheism entitled No One Sees God.

Arguing, as many Ku Klux Klan types do, that the Jews have waged war against so called White Anglo Saxon Protestant culture, renders modern history utterly incomprehensible. Far from seeking to destroy Anglo-Masonic culture, the Anglo Israelist Jewish alliance strives to impose it as a one-size-fits-all model on the  whole world.
Otherwise, how can one explain the triumph of English language throughout the globe? Or the rapid spread, via Masonic lodges, of the Anglo-Masonic sports of soccer (the founding meeting of the English Football Association took place in the Freemasons Arms hotel), cricket, rugby, and their derivatives, baseball and gridiron football?

By the same token, the global Zio-media’s exhaustive and largely fawning coverage of the not especially charismatic or interesting Masonic British royal family doesn’t suggest any notable Zionist antipathy towards Anglo-Masonry or its institutions.

Almost all the major currents of modernity at least partly originated in Masonic Britain: political liberalism, usurious capitalism, Fabianism, Darwinism, even Marxism.

Throughout the 20th century, the Anglo-American alliance instigated devastating wars that wiped out the last vestiges of Christendom and paved the way for the current cultural Marxist wage-slave ultra-surveilled police states of the West.

In the 21st century, the same alliance has joined forces with Islamic Wahabists and the state of Israel to overthrow Christian-friendly governments in Yugoslavia, Syria, and Iraq.

Anti-globalists like Paul Craig Roberts tend to interpret all of this as proof that Britain is America’s poodle, but the evidence suggests something closer to the opposite: that the U.S. is in fact the City of London’s muscle-bound global enforcer.

One must be careful to distinguish between the City of London (the Crown) and the United Kingdom. The Crown is not the British Windsor monarchy but rather the cabalist Masonic force which controls both the British monarchy and the British government.

Just in case British Members of British Parliament run away with the foolish idea that their deliberations matter a jot, the City of London’s representative (or “remembrancer”) sits behind the Speaker in the Westminster House of Commons to remind them who really calls the shots in the U.K.

Nevertheless, the Crown has used Anglo- Israelism—a species of gentile Zionist supremacism—to impose its homogenized globalist Anglo-centric cultural and political model on the world.

Again, it is necessary to distinguish between Anglo-Israelism and common or garden British nationalism. Not every British or English nationalist is an Anglo-Israelist, just as not every Chinese nationalist supports the Chinese Communist Party. What distinguishes Anglo-Israelism from nationalism is its relentless drive to eradicate all other national cultures. Like Zionism, it is the enemy of nationalism—even English and British nationalism, properly understood.

If every nation in Europe still spoke its own language and maintained its own traditions and economic independence, it is impossible to imagine the current immigration tsunami now overwhelming Europe ever having taken place. The British people, it should be noted, have not been spared this tsunami or the other ravages of globalism, in spite of their country being the HQ of global masonry.

Far from regarding other European races as brethren, Anglo-Israelist Masons always viewed them as enemies of the Masonic liberal Anglo-international. The Masonic British Empire sided with the Turks against Christendom, with Pagan Japan against Orthodox Christian Russia, and with radical atheist revolutionaries against Catholic European governments and their possessions in the Americas and elsewhere.

Similarly, as the late British researcher Anthony Sutton has shown, Anglo-America not only aided the Bolshevik regime in Russia but ensured its survival through huge economic, military, and technological aid.

In modern times, Anglo-Israelist Neocons in Britain extoll the idea of the multi-cultural, multi-ethnic Commonwealth over the ancient Christian nations of Europe.

Many jingoistic Masonically inclined Brexiteers absurdly tout a German/Jesuit/Vatican conspiracy as the true power behind the E.U. but never get around to explaining why, if this is so, Europe has, since the start of E.U. integration in the 1950s, been rapidly Anglicized linguistically, politically, economically, and culturally, and why Anglo-Zio-Masonic militarism—and the disastrous migration that flows from it—define modern E.U. history.

David Duke has done sterling work exposing the ludicrous hypocrisy of Zionist “anti-racists”, but framing the debate about immigration and globalism as a struggle between old-fashioned noble imperialists and evil lefty multiculturalists completely misses the point. The Masonic imperialists and the leftists were on the same side in the 19th century and they still are today.

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
October 1, 2016 Anno Domini

“Limited hangout” is intelligence jargon for a form of propaganda in which a selected portion of a scandal, criminal act, sensitive or classified information, etc. is revealed or leaked, without telling the whole story. The intention may be to establish credibility as a critic of something or somebody by engaging in criticism of them while in fact covering up for them by omitting many details; to distance oneself publicly from something using innocuous or vague criticism even when ones own sympathies are privately with them; or to divert public attention away from a more heinous act by leaking information about something less heinous. —Rational Wiki

From Paul Joseph Watson to Stefan Molyneux, Donald Trump to Milo Yiannopoulos, the rising secular “right wing” in the Americas, dubbed the “alt right” by some, shares one common narrative that reveals it as the limited hangout, controlled-opposition operation that it is.

Omission of the Jewish-Masonic question.

It is completely absent from any meaningful discourse of every single alt right personality, despite that the Jewish question lurks behind all of the revolutionary movements that have conspired against the West and Christian mores for the last 2,000 years to the present time. With the rise of U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump, his perceived populism, and the growing backlash to political correctness, the alt right has sprung up all too quickly, all too conveniently as those disillusioned with the radical leftist world takeover grapple for answers. Right on cue, the controlled-opposition agents have filled in the gaps and have “answered” our questions in a manner that leaves out the more damning, darker truth.

The legitimate right, those identifying with traditional, Hellenic-Christian culture, appear completely oblivious to this hijacking of the right, much in the same way past controlled opposition garnered favour with the right only to later lead it down a dead-end road or, worse, to slaughter.

All the way down the line, the new alt right talking heads have acted as gatekeepers for the Judeo-Masonic establishment. Take for example Stefan Molyneux and his recent example of excusing Jewish over-representation in positions of influence, Paul Joseph Watson’s laughable denial of Jewish influence anywhere in the world, Alex Jones’ playing limited hangout 20-years plus (defending freemasonry, at times allowing for mild, superficial criticism of Israel but omitting the bigger issues regarding Israel and Judaism), or Donald Trump’s total subservience to the Israel lobby and Judaism (AIPAC, Jewish staffers, Zionist foreign policy position, all his kids either married to or dating Jews). Homosexual alt right icon Milo Yiannopoulos, although a more honest Jew (he has admitted Jewish influence in the world), also serves to advance the controlled right’s agenda of Jewish omission by displacing bigger issues with smaller ones (for example, restricting immigration would require kicking all of the Jewish policymakers and their ilk off of the policy boards and replacing them with populists; shallowly criticizing unfettered immigration solves little).

More Jewish alt right gatekeepers
While I appreciate the many truths spoken by alt right talking heads like Breitbart (founded by Jew Andrew Breitbart), homosexual Jew Matt Drudge (Drudge Report), Ezra Levant (Jewish), Lauren Southern (Rebel Media), or the aforementioned personalities, their agenda is, at best, a half measure solution to the world’s problem, at worst, leading the right to its ultimate destruction. They, like CIA front National Review and the John Birch Society, discuss very real issues but are there to homogenize the right whilst omitting the issues that reveal the entire truth—and in that complete truth wherein lies real solutions for the world’s greatest dilemma (incidentally, the National Review has condemned the alt right as racist and anti-Semitic). The only effective method for containing the Judeo-Masonic dilemma has been the Byzantine Solution, or the Vatican’s Sicut Judaeis Non, which would have to be expanded to include freemasonry and its many gnostic offshoots.

Infowars’ Alex Jones is sort of the pioneer of 21st century limited hangout. He was doing it on an international stage long before the current alt right talking heads became as popular as they. It’s only because of Donald Trump and growing public disillusionment with the left that there is a need for a pantheon of limited hangout agents, who have now surpassed Jones in notoriety. Jones, apparently, was the beta test for the establishment’s plan for a rise of the pseudo right.

White nationalists appear to have completely bought into the alt right bait, with personalities like David Duke and Professor Kevin MacDonald riding the Trump, alt right bandwagon; although, MacDonald has demonstrated his awareness of the Jewish involvement in the alt right and is supporting it anyways likely for strategic reasons. White nationalist opposition to Judeo-Masonry has proven itself a failure (National Socialism) and is based in racialism. Only the Church has adequately addressed and dealt with the question. Any notion of the “true” alt right being hijacked from the supposed rightful heir white nationalists by Milo types is ridiculous.

Neither of the two groups are the rightful heirs.

This alt right and its friendly alternative media are not allowing any other talking points to the reach the masses.
Right wing sentiment must not deviate from what the establishment has set out. Dissenting views from the alt right narrative are regarded as divisive, anti-Trump, leftist, or they are simply ignored (dynamic silence). The alt right is a neocon of the necons—its controlled outgrowth that is a false attempt at a return to conservatism. The only true conservatism is one based not in secular populism but in Jesus Christ and the moral order.

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
September 8, 2015 Anno Domini

Leaked documents showing Alex Jones’ divorce settlement with his Jewish wife Kelly (Violet) Rebecca Jones have been circulating on the web for a couple of days now, yet Jones has decided to publicly ignore it, perhaps as a means of perpetuating his good-Christian-patriot persona as he continues his HASBARA/COINTELPRO operation.

The documents, first revealed by Aaron Wilson of AlexJonesCritic.com, show that the couple, after almost seven years of marriage, officially divorced on March 23 of this year after Kelly’s initial filing with the 428th Judicial District Court of Hays County all the way back on December 18 of 2013. As part of the settlement, Jones was ordered to pay Kelly a $3.1 million, as well as the deed to their Back of the Moon Drive, Austin, Texas estate, valued at just under $1 million. Divorces typically involve a 50/50 split of the assets between couples, so it’s very possible that Jones may be worth close to $8 million, assuming he has no other hidden assets. With Jones now apparently out of the house, it appears Jones is living at the Ashton apartments overlooking the Colorado River in Austin, Texas. Jones has done several broadcasts from a high-rise building resembling the Ashton building. The document in the “settlement” link above lists Jones’ address as 101 Colorado Street in Austin, which appears to confirm that it is the high-rise Ashton building.

Jones alleged to have had affair with Infowars employee

Alleged federal whistleblower Stew Webb alleges that the divorce was caused by an affair between Jones and an unnamed Infowars employee. Although Webb does not name the employee, he states that it is a female, based on his source within the Infowars operation.

I will not name this woman out of respect for her privacy. Everybody on the Infowars team knew about the affair, states Webb

Rumours are swirling that the employee is undoubtedly Infowars reporter Lee Ann McAdoo, a big-busted young woman who many believe was hired by Jones merely for sex appeal. Jones, being the intelligent PR man that he is, knows that sex sells.

Jones must protect his image
In order for Jones to salvage what’s left of the control he has over NWO dissent, he must protect his image and that of his Jewish wife, which explains his complete silence over the issue. As far as Jones’ listeners are concerned, Jones is a good Christian patriot and a hero. To think of Jones as an adultering pig with multiple ties to the Jewish lobby would devastate the trust he has built up with his audience over his 20-year on-air operation.

Conspiracy researcher and Protestant preacher Texe Marrs claims to have married Alex and Kelly. The irony of this divorce is heightened by the fact that Marrs has gone out of his way multiple times to vouch for Jones as the upstanding Christian patriot he presents himself as. Marrs has done this despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It’s strange, because Marrs, unlike Jones, tells the truth about Jewish power. He, of all people, should be able to spot a Zionist shill with great ease.

Jones misappropriating funds from his Infowars operation?
Is Jones using the proceeds from Infowars campaigns like his infamous “money bomb” to pay for his divorce settlement? Blogger Glenn Canady comes to a very likely conclusion:

This is only a story because Alex Jones continues to keep his huge divorce settlement a secret and is taking money from patriots which could now be going to the ex-wife and not to the fight against the new world order as he claims.  Alex needs to come clean on this divorce and admit that nearly $4 million of his money from his fans is going to the ex-wife now.
…
Alex Jones is doing a 24 hour money bomb on Sept. 16 to raise $1 million from his fans.  But since Alex Jones has kept his $4-million divorce a secret from his fans, how much of this money bomb will instead end up in the hands of his ex wife now?

You can’t put anything past Jones. There is no law that I know of that could stop him from misappropriating the money his naive fans donate to him.

HASBARA must go on
As well, nothing can interrupt Jones’ objective as an Israeli/Jewish HASBARA shill, especially following the defeat Jones conceded to one David Duke in a recent on-air debate. The debate proved so devastating that even Jones’ supporters walked away in disgust with Jones’ behaviour, coupled with the contradictory evidence Duke presented to Jones’ typical pro-Jewish narrative. Towards the end of the debate, Jones tried to save face, after realizing how bad he came off, by having his Jewish crewman Rob Jacobson attack Duke.

It appears that Kelly was the brains behind the Infowars operation, herself being a publicity hound for PETA at one time. Being Jewish just adds to the image of her as a Jewish revolutionary, with Jones as the parrot, whoring for Zionism every day on the microphone. But with this divorce, what direction will Jones and Infowars take? Was Kelly his Zionist handler? Perhaps his 34 Jewish advertizers, Jewish staffers, and apparent Stratfor connections will be enough to keep the engine running.

The Duke defeat as well as this divorce leak could be the final nail in the coffin of the Infowars operation. What credibility will Jones have left?

Libido Dominandi
If Jones’ alleged affair is true, what are the chances that this isn’t the first time Jones has let his passions rule him into a compromising situation? Could this, then, be the primary method by which Jones’ Jewish handlers direct him? Libido Dominandi is unequivocally the primary method the establishment uses to control and socially engineer people. For an exhaustive explanation of this form of control, I recommend historian E. Michael Jones’ most excellent book of the same title.

Above all, Alex Jones is human. His audience needs to unlearn the god-like image they have of him.