Where’s the North Pole, and has anyone found it yet?

There appears to be some mystery both on the North and South poles that we are not told about. We’re told both places are just boring lands of ice with polar bears or penguins. Not much to see there, except for climate researchers who occasionally claim the polar ice is melting. No, I think they’re hiding something on both poles, but I’ll focus on the North here.


Where’s the Pole?

First of all go google “north pole”. You’d think you’d see lots of pictures of people at the actual north pole, the magnetic pole or whatever its called. You know the red and white striped pole they always show in the movies. All I could find is pictures of ice, that I believe were taken around the northern ice, but it does not appear to be near the pole, and cartoons or CGI pictures of the pole.

Oh, there’s this picture. The pole looks homemade, and it doesn’t say it is the real pole on the website anyways.

Wikipedia says: “In recent years, journeys to the North Pole by air (landing by helicopter or on a runway prepared on the ice) or by icebreaker have become relatively routine, and are even available to small groups of tourists through adventure holiday companies.” I’ve seen photos of such groups on the ice, but not at the actual pole.

You’d think there’d be plenty of pictures of the North Pole taken by digital cameras in the last 10 years. Or maybe the red and white pole is just a myth invented by Hollywood. The real magnetic or the geographic North Pole (they’re apparently different) may just be a patch of snow and ice, with no man-made landmarks in sight. If that’s the case, how can we know if anyone’s ever gone there?



The first white man to reach the pole was supposedly the American Frederick Cook with two Inuits/Eskimos. This was in 1908. The next year the American Robert Peary reached the pole with his team of Eskimos. In 1926 US naval officer Richard E. Byrd supposedly flew over the pole with his Fokker aeroplane. However, all of these three expeditions have been discredited in the modern days. The accounts of the explorers are either considered erroneous or fabricated.

Nowadays the first man who reached the North Pole is considered to have been Norwegian Roald Amundsen. He was no slouch as he is also credited as the first man to have reached the South Pole. One particularly interesting detail is that Richard E. Byrd supposedly reached the North Pole a few days before Amundsen did. However, it is glaringly obvious that the modern narrative on their race to the pole was that Byrd hoaxed his trip there, whereas Amundsen did it for real. What I don’t get is that the scientific community has been very critical of the expeditions of Cook, Peary and Byrd, but Amundsen is hailed as a hero. Yet they don’t seem to elaborate why Amundsen’s proof that he reached the pole was credible.

Peary at least took a photo with his team on some sort of lump of snow.



Roald Amundsen was probably a Freemason. Some websites describe him as such, whereas Masonry Today states: “Amundsen is listed in many books and websites as being a Freemason. According to the Grand Lodge of Norway, Amundsen was never initiated in any lodge in Norway. They have also not found any record of him being initiated in any lodge in a country he may have visited. We are left with the conclusion that despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary Amundsen was more than likely not a Freemason.”

Perhaps he was a Freemason, perhaps he wasn’t, but at least Masonry Today saw fit to commemorate his exploits and his death on the website. Additionally there is a Sons of Norway, Roald Amundsen Lodge No. 6-48 in Sacramento, California. It appears to be a Masonic lodge, or at least connected with Freemasons in some way.

Amundsen’s death is a mystery as well, as he was never confirmed dead. He disappeared in 1928 in an attempt to rescue an airship at sea. Perhaps he just died in an accident, or was murdered for some reason, or disappeared onto the island of Thule or Shambala. Who knows.

That’s not all. Richard E. Byrd appears to have been a Freemason as well. Even Wikipedia proudly states this: “Byrd was an active Freemason. He became a member of Federal Lodge No. 1, Washington, D.C. on March 19, 1921 and affiliated with Kane Lodge No. 454, New York City, September 18, 1928. He was a member of National Sojourners Chapter No. 3 at Washington. He and his pilot, Bernt Balchen dropped Masonic flags on the two poles —Balchen also added his Shrine fez. In the Antarctic expedition of 1933—1935, sixty of the eighty-two members were Freemasons and on February 5, 1935 established First Antarctic Lodge No. 777 of New Zealand constitution.”

He is also famous for his 1947 flight into the Antarctic, where he supposedly found an entrance to the Hollow Earth.

Robert Peary, the second guy to the pole, appears to have been a Freemason too. It seems that out of these explorers only the first one who allegedly reached the pole, Frederick Cook, was not a Mason. Or at least I did not find evidence suggesting he was.



What emerges here is that there does not seem to be pictorial evidence that anyone has ever gone to the North Pole, although you’d think there’s be dozens of pictures of it on the internet. Moreover, ever since the first explorers supposedly reached the pole a hundred years ago, there has been arm wrestling whether or not they actually went there. The praises that Amundsen has received are questionable as well. Why is his account so credible while others are not?

Most of these explorers seem to have been Freemasons, or at least revered by them, so it begs to question whether finding the pole was some sort of “fraternal” competition between these men? Or perhaps they never actually found the pole, but pretended to have done so deter others from doing so. Perhaps the North Pole contains a secret the Masons prefer left hidden.

One convoluted scenario I thought of is that perhaps Richard E. Byrd’s trip’s questionable nature is due to make Amundsen’s claim seem credible. They say “look, Byrd was fake. Good thing we have Amundsen who was the real deal.” Or maybe Amundsen was not a Freemason after all, and he discovered some secret on his trip to the poles. The Masons could be revering him because he died without revealing this secret to outsiders.

What could the secret be then? I don’t know. There are many possibilities, such as the Axis of the World, or Mount Meru, the sacred mountain, being the Invisible Mountain situated in the North Pole. It could be entrance to the Hollow Earth, or something completely different, and less mythical. All I know, I don’t think they’re telling us everything about the North Pole.



North Pole: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Pole#21st_century

National Geographic: http://education.nationalgeographic.com/encyclopedia/north-pole/

North Magnetic Pole: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Magnetic_Pole

Roald Amundsen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roald_Amundsen

Famous Freemasons: http://www.illuminati-news.com/famous-freemasons.htm

Sir Ernest Shackleton  CVO, OBE, FRGS, Polar Explorer and Freemason.: http://www.irishmasonichistory.com/sir-ernest-shackleton-cvo-obe-frgs-polar-explorer-and-freemason.html

Roald Engelbregt Gravning Amundsen Passed Away: http://www.masonrytoday.com/index.php?new_month=6&new_day=18&new_year=2015

Roald Amundsen lodge: http://www.sonsofnorwaysacramento.com/events.html

Richard E. Byrd: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_E._Byrd#Freemasonry

Robert E. Peary: http://www.phoenixmasonry.org/masonicmuseum/peary_fdc.htm

The Invisible Mountain: http://tracytwyman.com/the-invisible-mountain-is-it-real/

Mount Meru Magnetic Mountain at the North Pole: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNudvfIzNz0

Flat Earth Revisited

Recently the flat earth model of the earth has resurfaced in the alternative and conspiracy research community. Some folks claim the flat earth movement is completely made up of co-intelpro agents with the purpose of discrediting conspiracy theorists, the alt-right and other people searching for truth and sanity. To a degree I think this is true. Several flat earth proponents do seem dubious, and not very credible. Some though I find credible at least in the sense that they do believe in the flat earth model, and are not complete idiots. This doesn’t, however, prove the earth is flat, but at least there seems to be some evidence for it.

A week ago or so Stefan Molyneux had debate with a flat earth proponent, which seems to have gone viral. At least for me, Youtube was always offering the video until I decided to watch it. My regular readers probably know I don’t have much respect for Molyneux. Well, I think he’s a disingenuous prick, but he did alright in this debate in my opinion. Maybe I’d go as far as to say that he even won the debate. However, the opponent he had wasn’t exactly the foremost expert on the topic, and Molyneux isn’t the expert on the spherical earth model either, so this debate only proved people have different opinions on the shape of the earth.

One interesting point the flat earth proponent brought up was a letter written by an industrial valve expert that the International Space Station (ISS) cannot exist, because the air cylinder technology and other stuff it would have to use is miraculous. The flat earther was going to read a quote by the expert, but Molyneux shut him up. Fortunately I managed find a video by Mark Sargent where the letter is read out loud. It’s very technical, so I cannot verify what the alleged expert is saying is true, but it sounds credible at least. If the ISS is fake, it doesn’t prove the earth is flat, but it is one more note in the ever-increasing dossier pointing out that what NASA has been saying about outer space and the space program is false.

In the debate the flat earther saying something like he doesn’t believe in things he cannot verify by himself. I think this is a very reasonable position. Much of our physics and cosmology today is based in abstract mathematics and not in empirical facts. Molyneux rightly countered this by asking if he’s been to the Antarctic to see that the Antarctic is actually a ring around the flat, circular earth, since flat earther’s claim it’s not this continent down south, but a ring around the world. The flat earther, of course, hasn’t been there to verify this himself, since the governments don’t let people go there. In this respect I agree with Molyneux that it is somewhat irrational to believe in the flat earth, if they haven’t verified it themselves.

I’ve heard from several sources that the Antarctic is heavily guarded, and they don’t let people there. I do think this is significant, and they’re covering something up. However, it does not necessarily suggest the earth is flat. There could be secret military bases in the Antarctic, entrances to the hollow earth, a dinosaur park or whatever they don’t want us to see. One possibility is that exploring the Antarctic would prove the earth is flat, however, I need someone to prove this is the case before I’m willing to believe it.

Molyneux and the flat earther also discussed the religious aspect of the flat earth vs globular earth, or more specifically the geocentric and heliocentric models. The geocentric model claims the sun revolves around the earth, and the heliocentric is vice versa. Underlying assumptions often associated with these models is that geocentrists believe God, or something similar, made the earth specifically for people to live in, whereas heliocentrists believe that earth is just another planet among billions of others, and not that special. Whatever the physical, ontological fact about the models are, whether the earth revolves around the sun, or vice versa, is, I would say that theologically the geocentric model is more plausible. Human beings are very unique in all of cosmos. We are clearly more complex in many ways compared to all other known animals. And despite there allegedly being billions and trillions of stars and planets, earth is the only one with life on it. Sure, there could be life out there somewhere, but so far we haven’t seen any evidence of it. Based on the data available currently, outer space seems utterly devoid of life.

Like I said earlier, there are many dubious characters in the flat earth movement, and others seem more confused, like the guy debating Molyneux, I think there are exceptions. In the last few months I’ve seen several videos by Eric Dubay, and I must say, I enjoy listening to him. He seems intelligent, honest and genuine. This could mean two things; he’s a very good conman, or he is onto something. Last night I watched his video 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball, and found it compelling. But then again, I’m not physics major, and many of the proofs he used were somewhat technical. Maybe he is simply making arguments that sound sophisticated to the unintiated and ignorant like me. So I hope more people would watch the video, and either debunk his claims if they are incorrect, or verify them if they are true.

I for one am happy to see the flat earth debate reopened. I have not jumped that bandwagon as of yet, and I don’t see myself doing so until someone offers very drastic proofs for the flat earth, such as going to the Antarctic, and demonstrates it is a ring of ice. It is however becoming more and more apparent that much of what we’re told about the make-up of the earth and the cosmos is not all there is. Whatever the truth about the shape of the earth is, debating about it is a good thing. No science is ever settled. The truth fears no investigation, and other clichés are applicable here.



The Flat Earth Conspiracy Debate! Yes, Really: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsOz_J6tJVU

Industrial Valve Expert: The ISS is a LIE – Flat Earth – SW25: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m5QqdEuvec

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5i_iDyUTCg

The Earth is Flat!: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2014/02/07/the-earth-is-flat/

Stefan Molyneux is a Prick: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/01/31/stefan-molyneux-is-a-prick/

The Truth about Stefan Molyneux: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/02/03/the-truth-about-stefan-molyneux/

Stefan Molyneux on 9/11: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/stefan-molyneux-on-911/

Friday the 13th Paris Terror Attack Aftermath Psyops

After the terror attack in Paris last Friday the 13th the media is ripe with psychological manipulation, much the same as with Charlie Hebdo. Facebook allows you to change your avatar into a French flag, similar to the rainbow flag last summer after the pro-gay laws in America. Facebook has an app that lets people to know you were alright after the attack. Even Youtube changed its icon to have the French flag. This is celebration of victimization.

The people who buy into these feel-good hype compassion campaigns just signal that they too wish to be victims, as victimization is somehow spiritually uplifting. First you have to get victimized, and then you do something symbolical and meaningless to show how brave you are, while nothing actually gets done to, you know, stop further acts of terrorism.

I don’t get it how people have their heads so up their asses they don’t look at the scenario we’re presented like rational adults. The scenario the main stream puts forward is this: shiploads of Muslim immigrants, many of them undocumented, are brought into Europe. The government and the media celebrate this and says we have to accept them, and the immigrants are given all sorts of privileges. Yet then fairly regularly Muslims commit terrorist acts, and people die. People are outraged about this, but here’s the thing that doesn’t make sense; the people do not address the issue that Muslims are brought into our countries, and commit crimes. They’re so afraid of being called racist that they cannot say, if the Muslims commit all of these crimes, let’s deport them, let’s have martial law, let’s start another war on terror. Anything. The basic logic of survival is absent from the media discussion.

However, this is just how the main stream media presents the case. Plenty of Europeans are against this mass immigration, and understand that many Muslims do not respect our laws and notions of decency. We just have to understand that pretty much every article and story originating from the main stream media is some form of psy-op. The world view they push is devoid of reality, and they are trying to make you insane. They want you to silently accept the violence perpetrated by the invaders.

Yet, that’s not the whole story. While I do understand that many Muslim immigrants do commit crimes, I’m skeptical as to whether or not this Paris attack was perpetrated by them. There are countless rapes and murders done by immigrants in Europe every month, but usually the main stream media ignores or downplays them. Sometimes if an African or Middle-Eastern man rapes a woman, the media only says they were a Swedish or German citizen, i.e. hides the fact that they are foreigners. Yet some of these  other violent acts get great media attention. This makes me suspect it was a false flag, as well as the whole Facebook and Youtube support for the French terrorists.

Granted, this attack was one of the biggest terror attacks since 9/11, so naturally it deserves much attention, but it’s just the way the media promotes this sort of events, and ignores other crimes, makes me suspect this is an event explicitly planned by the globalist establishment. There’s some evidence of a drill the same day the attack occurred, but there always is some evidence to suggest any event was a false flag if you’re actively looking for it. Like I stated yesterday, if president Hollande is to be trusted, the perpetrators were US-Israeli Zionists. However, whether or not it was a false flag, the most important issue is the agendas they’re going to push after the event.

Youtuber Professor Doom1 and 21st Century Wire both pointed out that a Syrian passport was discovered somewhere nearby one of the crime scenes. They suggest this might be used as an excuse to launch a war on Syria now that Russia seems to have eradicated most of the Zionist-controlled ISIS-forces. Another agenda, a very obvious one, is to push the self-victimization of Europeans further. They are angry about terrorism, yet they cannot rise against the alleged Islamic terrorists, so they have to settle for their symbolical suffering cults.

One obvious detail that has been pointed out in many places is the date the attack occurred, Friday the 13th, i.e. the day the Knights Templar were arrested in France centuries ago. The date may only have superficial, symbolical significance here, but based on my understanding the secret the Templars uncovered in the Holy Land during the Crusades is still influencing the world today, and is kept by the Freemasons, but that’s another story.

Regardless of whoever you believe perpetrated this attack, and for what reason, don’t let yourself be suckered into the media’s feel good campaigns. We have to be like that guy in the movie, Network, and be mad as hell and not take it anymore.


P. S.

Some have argued that this terror attack was a hoax, and nobody died. I think it’s possible, but improbable. And even if nobody died, it was still an attack on our sanity and consciousness.




Attack on Paris France: Passports, Paintings and more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fn9Z_EmPuk

Magic Passports Redux: Syrian Passport Allegedly Discovered on Suicide Bomber: http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/11/14/magic-passports-redux-syrian-passport-allegedly-discovered-on-suicide-bomber/

Paris Attacks – Believe it or else!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3ad_tm9xNg

The True Friday the 13th Baphomet Artifact – Tracy Twyman: http://freemantv.com/the-true-friday-the-13th-baphomet-artifact-tracy-twyman/

Mad as hell: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwMVMbmQBug

Je ne suis pas Charlie: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/01/10/je-ne-suis-pas-charlie/

Big ISIS Terror Attack in Paris

There was a terror attack in Paris with at least 125 people dead allegedly perpetrated by ISIS. That pretty much says it all; US-Israel did it.

Finnish YLE news reports that French president Hollande claims an extremist Islamic terrorist organization perpetrated the attack. YLE writes (my translation): “According to President  François Hollande the Paris attacks were an act of war. He claims the attacks were planned and organized from abroad in collusion with parties within France.” Later YLE states that ISIS has published an announcement that says they were behind the attack. BBC also states that Hollande blames ISIS for the attack.

This is fairly reminiscent of 9/11 that the authorities know so early on who perpetrated the attack, and Hollande also knew very early on that the Germanwings plane that allegedly crashed into a mountain last March was crushed into small pieces. Yet I’ve learned to reign in my nasty conspiracy theorist impulses since those incidents and trust what the authorities say. They say ISIS did, so it must be true.

ISIS is, of course, a US-lead coalition, as was admitted by some guy on CNN last month. The war ISIS is waging benefits Israel, and curiously this alleged Islamic extremist organization has not attacked Israel, but mainly attacks countries that are not allied with the United States. Plenty of people have pointed out how ISIS is a US-Israeli creation, how they always seem to have Toyotas, and all that stuff. So I’m inclined to believe president Hollande when he says the attacks were planned and organized from abroad in collusion with parties within France.

The attack was fairly elaborate. There were apparently attacks in six different locations. This suggests it took some professional planning, and was not simply done by rag-tag refugees who got drunk of religious fervor. This is not to say that some of the so-called refugees couldn’t be professional soldiers, but I doubt they would have all of the resources for pulling an operation like this without backing from a government.

Some might say it is insensitive of me to go into conspiracy theories on this attack while all the bodies may not be yet cold. Quite frankly I don’t care how people feel. This was a mass murder, a terrible crime, and if we’re trying to find out what happened, we have to look into it rationally from day one. Moreover, so many terror attacks and false flags, other acts of violence have occurred since 9/11, I don’t get it how somebody can feel emotionally shocked when something like this happens, except of course if someone you know was killed in the attack. Stuff like this happens every week. Acting like a hysterical woman won’t prevent future attacks.

I reiterate; if ISIS did the attack, as Hollande seems to be saying, it means US and/or Israel did it.


P. S.

I just saw the most fucked up thing on Facebook. There’s a new app you can use to mark if you were safe after the Paris terror attack. Sure, on one level I can admit it is handy, but on another it represents quiet acquiescence to the ever-present terrorism. It’s like “it’s raining. It sucks but I just have to use my umbrella.” “The terrorists blew up another building. It sucks, but I’m glad I have this Facebook app.”

I wonder if they’ve used this app before, or if it was devised specifically for this terror attack?

Paris Terror Attacks




Isis iski Pariisiin, kuolleita ainakin 128: http://yle.fi/uutiset/isis_iski_pariisiin_kuolleita_ainakin_128__yle_seuraa_hetki_hetkelta/8455268

Paris attacks: Hollande blames Islamic State for ‘act of war’: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34820016

Oops: Did CNN Just Admit the U.S. Is Working with ISIS?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKFHGatEV1w

US Created The Islamic State (ISIS) for Sake of Israel and Military Industrial Complex: Ex-CIA contractor: http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-created-the-islamic-state-isis-for-sake-of-israel-and-military-industrial-complex-ex-cia-contractor/5457911

ISIS Terrorists Driving Toyota Pickup Trucks, Where Do They Get Them From?: http://www.globalresearch.ca/isis-terrorists-driving-toyota-pickup-trucks-where-do-they-get-them-from/5480595

Paris Attacks: More Than 100 Killed: http://redicecreations.com/article.php?id=34737


When I was younger, let’s say 20 years ago, the meaning of the word “racism” was something like this:

Racism meant using racial differences as an excuse for torture and exploitation. Nowadays the media represents racism as something like this:

Three white men together. No black representation. So racist, oh noes! (And I think Steve Guttenberg is a Jew.)

Notice the difference in the change in the meaning of the word? The old form of racism is wrong, because torture and exploitation are wrong. Race in that case is a superfluous excuse for these immoral acts. The pre-disposition of the aggressor in torture, for example, in regard to other races does not matter as much as the fact that he is committing a criminal act. Granted that racial differences probably are a greater motivation for crime than the victim using the wrong type of perfume, but having a thought or an emotion cannot be a crime, unless you prefer to live in a totalitarian police state.

Prosecuting someone for Thought Crimes is commonly understood as a form of tyranny. However, in our day there is a concept such a Hate Crime. That is equally totalitarian. Feeling certain types of emotions should not be penalized. An emotion can act as a catalyst for a crime, but you cannot punish someone for simply experiencing an emotion unless they act on it. I hate Harry Potter, but I’ve never murdered anyone because of it. I suggest you arrest me regardless, since I am clearly guilty of Hate.

Nowadays racism is perceived as anything that is not overwhelmingly multi-cultural, such as white people doing stuff together with no black people around. Is that a crime for people to congregate together? To do stuff is immoral? Cultural Marxists have sucked the meaning out of the word “racism”. If an actually racist act occurs, it seems as irrelevant as the countless false alarms in main stream media in the past few years. Although, the term racism might be a Marxist invention to begin with, so maybe it’s better to ignore the concept anyways. When a crime occurs, calling it racist, sexist, homophobic, etc, will divert attention away from the crime itself. It’s like if a man in a green jacket stabs someone, and the media goes wild over how people who wear green jackets are evil and should be marginalized, instead of saying that stabbing people is wrong. Sure, the green jacket can be used in identifying the suspect, but the jacket itself holds no more significance.

The way the accusation of racism is used has rendered it fairly irrelevant. I hope people don’t fazed anymore if someone accuses them of racism.


P. S. I used a picture of a white slaver master beating his black slave as example, but I should point out that racism, or slavery, are not the trademark of white people alone. Anyone can do it if they put their hearts into it.


In recent decades we’ve often heard that race is just social construct, or you care about the race of a person you’re a racist. They say there’s only one race, the human race, and other benign-sounding yet pointless slogans. This is the modern leftist of view of race. On the other hand some right-wing people claim their race is the best and smartest race there is. I don’t really subscribe to either view, so I’ll discuss here what race means to me.


Race has an obvious biological component to it

First of all, let’s quickly debunk the modern leftist view that claims there is no race or that it is social construct. Anyone with some common sense and eyes to see can recognize that there is such a thing as race, and its at least partially based in biology. Below are pictures of three men. One of them is Chinese, one is from Congo and one is German.





I don’t think you need me to tell you which is which. I’m sure any peasant today who lives in a country that uses electricity can successfully complete this race puzzle. However, some politically correct academics like to kid themselves they can’t. As George Orwell said: “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.”

It should be obvious now that race has a biological component to it, yet I would agree with the leftists that race is partially a social construct. I think race is a combination of the genetic traits you inherit from your parents, and also the values and beliefs you inherit from them and the society around you.


Preference for one’s own race

In my experience pretty much all people of all races and cultures feel on some level that their race and culture is the best one, except if they’re infected with Marxist ideas of self-loathing. Even countries like Finland and Azerbaijan that aren’t the most powerful and well-known countries, and don’t have a great history of military dominance and art, do on some level consider them to be the best, even if they envy the bigger countries at times. This sort of racial supremacy ideology is normal, and there is nothing wrong with it.

Sometimes though, these supremacist ideas go too far, and people of one race try to scientifically prove they’re unquestionably superior to another. There are some White Supremacists, Black Supremacists, Jewish Supremacists and so on. However, I do not consider this sort of ideology to be a big threat in this day and age, except when it comes to Jewish Supremacists. Moreover, often the media uses the negative label “White Supremacist” to silence White people who simply wish to preserve their race. Yet I’m sure there have been, and still are, some actual White Supremacists in the world.

A greater threat today are far left race denialists, who go so far as to wish to eradicare biological and cultural differences in people, since they perceive these differences create conflict. I do agree with them to the extent that many types of differences between people (men and women, different races or religions) do often create conflict , but it is not always a negative conflict, but a constructive one. The conflict that the Monoethnic Globalists wage is far greater and more harmful than any naturally occurring one.


Purpose of race

I’ve wondered for a long time why humanity is divided into several races. What is the origin and purpose of race? I still today do not know, but I can only say that race must have a purpose. If you believe in evolution, then you would have to say that the races are different because they have evolved in this way. If you believe that God created humanity, then God must have created different races for a purpose. If you believe that Ancient Alien Space Brothers created different races, they must have made them different for a reason. I don’t think that racial difference is merely an arbitrary or accidental one.

However, I’m wary of anyone claiming to make any universal value statements over race, i.e. saying one is inherently superior to another. I do think that races have differences, and people of one race might be superior to others in general in certain tasks, such as Europeans and East-Asians being better at science and engineering than Africans. However, I do not think Africans are inherently denied abilities in such fields based on their race, but generally speaking Black African cultures are not scientifically minded.

I see each race as being a representation of a different aesthetic or spiritual world view. In such matters it is only natural to have preference for one over another. Some people like rock music, others like classical or rap music. Some people like ice hockey, others like basketball, and some people don’t care about sports at all. It does not mean if you hate one if you prefer the other. I’ve spent a few years in Asia, and I’m a Westerner, so I prefer Asian and Western culture to Middle-Eastern or African culture. It doesn’t mean I hate them. But no, it means I’m a racist so you should ignore all I say.

Also saying that there is an Asian, European or African race is a very rough generalization. There are racial, and biological, differences between Finns and English, and Chinese and Japanese, although they’re not as obvios as the differences between the larger groups.



Racial mixing is fairly controversial topic. The far left is all for it, and the far right is against it. I think both views are extremist, and can be harmful if they go too far.

Some right-wingers would ban inter-racial marriages altogether in order to preserve their race. I’m all for preserving one’s race, but if you are going to legislate racial relations, you should first be able to distinguish what exactly constitutes as a race. Some Nordicists say that only people with blond hair and blue eyes are proper Whites, and others are mongrels. I have brown eyes and hair, so I guess couldn’t intermarry with them. A more common view is that anyone who just looks White is White. I once met a guy from Alabama who looked White, but he said he was 1/8 Native American or so, and he would be legally allowed to open a Casino in the States. Is he White, is he Native American, is he just a mongrel?

My solution would simply be not to over-think it. Moreover, I am not so concerned about this far right view of race, since modern leftists or Marxists are in control of the world today.

They wish to promote inter-racial marriages in order to create a colourless mass. In recent years even here in Finland I’ve begun to notice all sorts of ads that depict non-White people in supermarkets and products. Even some diaper packages had pictures of Black babies on them. I don’t think this is harmless, but a way of manipulating the people to accept this “racial diversity” in order to bring about racial homogeneity globally. Marxists want to gradually erode individuality; racial, social, cultural and intellectual. I find this push for racial mixing repulsive.

However, I am not against people of different races starting families together. If I was I’d be very hypocritical and schizophrenic since my girlfriend is Asian, and I’m White. We’ll probably get married some day and have half-breed children. I am against the global agenda to manipulate people to breed outside of their race though. I’ve even heard some stories of White women feeling like they’re obliged to marry someone of a different race, because of the alleged racism inherent in our race. I find it disgusting that people have been coaxed to be racist against themselves.

For all of my Finnish friends who have a wife or a girlfriend, the girl is Finnish. I think this is usual far all people that they prefer to marry someone of their own race and culture. This is the natural way of things. Yet I don’t think it is unnatural to marry outside of your race, although it is unusual. It wouldn’t suit most people, and the globalist agenda that pushes inter-racial marriage will only bring needless confusion. Me and my girlfriend though, are unusual representatives of our cultures, and for us this seems to work. I don’t think this makes us and better or worse than others, merely different.



In conclusion, all I can say about race is that it exists for a reason, even if I do not know what it is. We should preserve all races from the schemes of the Marxist globalists, but not be too obsessed about “racial purity” either. In one sense the leftists are right that all races are part of the one race which is human race, since all races are able to interbreed with each other. We are of the same species. The offspring of two different races can create fertile offspring, i.e. they are not like mules, the descendants of horses and donkeys. Yet just because we can do something does not mean we should do it willy-nilly either.

Cultural Marxism is not only about eradicating white culture, but all cultures

The term White Genocide has been thrown around for a while now as being one of the goals of the Cultural Marxists. I don’t necessarily disagree with the accusation, but that’s not all they want. They want to have a monoethnic globe, i.e. eradicate all traces of race and culture, except for the corporate culture of today.

Last year a “yoga studio” in Texas wanted to have a Bollywood-themed party, where people would dress up in Indian costumes and such. However, it had to be canceled since some “South Asians” might have found it offensive. I don’t think it anyone even found it offensive, but someone said that someone could be offended by it so it had to be banned.

Texans were celebrating Indian culture, and people thought it was offensive. This isn’t about being considerate of the feelings of South Asian people, but rather despising their indigenous culture. Marxists abhor diversity, and want to see it destroyed, although they claim the opposite. I am offended by Cultural Marxism, Harry Potter and the European Union, but I don’t see anyone coming to my rescue to ban them and prevent me from being offended.

Earlier this year candy from the company Haribo had to be banned, since the candy depicted images of “primitive African, Asian or Native American art”. This is apparently racist.

This summer there was some controversy that Western women dressing up in Japanese kimonos is Cultural Appropriation. Once again celebrating other cultures is racist. But if TV shows and videos game don’t depict members of other cultures, they’re racist since there’s no representation. You’re racist if you do, racist if you don’t, so I suggest you stop caring about these Marxist mocking birds’ opinions.

I’ve worn a kimono a few times in my life, and I own one, and one yukata as well. I recommend it, it’s fun. See how racist I am.

Just last week a high school boy from Ontario, Canada, wanted to dress up as a Mariachi musician for Halloween, but of course he couldn’t since that was Cultural Appropriation. However, apparently the boy was Colombian, and the Mariachi band is part of his own ethnic background, but that still wasn’t enough. A “culture is not a costume”, so it’s wrong, ‘mmkay.

The unifying theme here is that the Cultural Marxists despise expressions of unique culture. They are Monoethnic Globalists, i.e. they want a world with no diversity in race or culture. This is a corporate, transhumanist vision where everything we do and think is artificial. Physicist, and NWO puppet, Michio Kaku highlighted the vision in the infamous video where he says that Arnold Schwarzenegger and Madonna represent universal world culture that everyone should accept. If you don’t, you’re basically a terrorist. I kind of like Schwarzenegger, but he’s hardly the originator of the greatest pieces of art on this planet.

The reason why Cultural Marxists adore Islam is that in this day and age Islam is useful for destroying other cultures. However, when the time is ripe, they will turn against Islam the same as they do for all cultures.

I do think that Marxists are genuine in their philosophy of equality. They despise all cultures equally when it comes down to it. The reason why White/Europeans culture is most heavily under assault is that the breeding chamber that Marxists crawled out of, is situated in the West, and they want to devour their own father first, as that is the culture they know and hate the most, but ideologically all cultures are equal for them.



Major Yoga Studio Forced to Cancel Costume Party After Claims of Racism: http://www.prisonplanet.com/major-yoga-studio-forced-to-cancel-costume-party-after-claims-of-racism.html

Haribo stop selling ‘RACIST’ sweets after social media outcry: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/haribo-racist-sweets-outcry-forces-3034977

Underneath the ‘Orientalist’ kimono: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/culture/2015/07/18/books/underneath-orientalist-kimono/#.VjtwWL-rGzk

Ontario High School: Halloween Costume Can’t Appropriate Your Own Culture: http://www.mrctv.org/blog/ontario-high-school-halloween-costume-can-t-appropriate-your-own-culture#.xlgfna3:RD6p

Michio Kaku about future civilization: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI6vANpHhOA