Category Archives: Conspiracy

Notre Dame, Al-Aqsa fire and Fire Investigation

The fire of Notre Dame has stopped. Fortunately the whole building hasn’t come down. Yesterday the media was repeating all over how  it was probably an accident relating to the renovation, and then the sheeple were repeating that as fact. Before I get to accident story, I’ll share something else first.

Yesterday, at the same time Notre Dame was burning, the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem had a fire too. Fortunately the firemen over there were able to put out the fire wihout any major damages, or so I understand. What a coincidence that this very important religious building for Muslims, was burning at the same time as the Christian Notre Dame. I don’t buy it as coincidence as a second, but whether the act was done by God, the devil, or a wordly organization with the power to do such an operation is up for debate. Certain Jews want to tear down the mosque so they can build their prophesized Third Temple.  Maybe God was pinging both locations at the same time trying to tell Christians and Muslims who their real enemy is. Yet a lot of people will just brush the two fires as curious coincidences.

This is where two kinds of worldviews conflict, the somewhat religiously inclined (although I’m not a believer of any certain religion) conspiracy nut view I have where most things happen for a reason, there is a deliberate cause and an effect, and the worldview of most first world people nowadays where mechanistic accidental “rational” causes make things happen. In both of these world views, the idea of things having a purpose in the former, and not having a purpose in the latter, the principles they follow are applied to most aspects of life ranging from the origin to life to politics and incidents like these fires.

Since the media is toting the Notre Dame fire as an accident, most people buy it at face value. Today at work some people were discussing it. One guy said it was an accident relating to the renovation, and I pointed out that they don’t really know the cause yet, it could also be arson. He looked at me sort of funny. Almost as if “normal” people like him are unable to differentiate between a claim made in the media and a fact they have witnessed themselves. He’s not the only person, I’ve seen take the accident narrative as gospel, apparently not even considering there are other possibilities, as if the media was the voice of God. Same kind of behaviour applies to many other cases than the Notre Dame fire.

It’s like these people are watching a movie without thinking it too deeply, and as long as there is a explanation, they believe it. Just as when they watch a movie only to be entertained and do not notice the plotholes, because they don’t care about the details. This phenomenon can obviously be seen also in fanboys of movie franchises, such as Star Wars. There are people making videos pointing out the plotholes in those movies, yet the fanboys get angry at the messenger awhile holding onto the narrative they like. These people are like fanboys of main stream media.

The Paris public prosecutor had said, according to the BBC, they were “‘favouring the theory of an accident’, ‘but had assigned 50 people to investigate the origin of the fire.” This at least sounds more reasonable than the narrative the media was pushing yesterday, explicitly disregarding the possibility of foul play and promoting the accident narrative. At best this is irresponsible. When a shocking event happens, people feel unconfortable. They seek an explanation why, and they tend to stick with the first one they hear. This is why false flags have to start early on promoting the official line. Whether the fire was a false flag or not, I cannot say for sure. But when the authorities are pushing this clearly fictitious narrative, and it is fictitious since they cannot know the cause so early on if it was an accident, I naturally suspect a false flag. There are still other possibilities.

One reason to push this narrative is to prevent rampant theorizing on the causes, however in my case it caused just the opposite reaction. Some people are sure to suspect Muslim terrorists, saying it was an accident would alleviate some of those suspicions in the general public. If this is the case, it’s dishonest disrespectful as it is treating adults like children. If they don’t know the reason, they should say it they don’t know it and urge people to remain calm while they investigate. Another reason might be that the authorities don’t know the exact cause, but they suspect it was Muslims, Antifa or a similar group. They are giving the accident narrative to prevent a backlash against the Muslim community in France, a bit like the authorities have done in the UK with Pakistani rape gangs. If this is true, they are aiding and abetting criminals.

Why I am harping on about the accident narrative is that it is impossible to know the cause of the fire right now, unless it was a false flag or a terrorist attack the French government is covering for, since when a fire happens, the fire department conducts a fire investigation. These things take time. The West Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service has an article detailing the life of a fire investigator. According to it, “Dependant on the size of the incident an investigation can vary from a few hours to a number of months.” Carroll County Times also has an article on fire investigations. Fire marshal Kenny Pool said some investigations can “go for days, months, years”. The Notre Dame fire was pretty big. I’d say it should take at least a month, probably much longer. Certainly over 24 hours. And they should certainly have waited until the fire was put down and were able to send investigators in, before they claiming it was probably an accident. The French authorities were priming people with the accident narrative when the cathedral was still aflame.

We’ll have to wait and see when the fire investigation is done what they say, and of course wonder if their account can be trusted either.

I mentioned in the previous article how people were saying Notre Dame will be replaced with a mosque. Now that it is still mostly intact (a masterpiece of architecture btw. Our “advanced” society couldn’t build anything to last for over 800 years), maybe they will renovate it as a sanctum for all people of all beliefs, instead of just for Christians or Catholics. The usual New World Order claptrap.



Firefighters put out blaze at revered Al-Aqsa Mosque at same time as Notre Dame fire:

Notre-Dame fire: Cathedral saved within crucial half hour:

A Day In The Life Of A Fire Investigator:

Major fire investigations can take time to get answers:


Notre Dame is Burning

The famous Notre Dame cathedral in Paris burning. The official cause has not been announced yet, although the media is hinting toward it having been an accident. It had been under renovation and there are rumours the accident got its start from there. As can be seen in the picture, there are scaffolding on the church.



I have my doubts, but let’s explore the possibility of an accident. First of all if it was an accident due to the renovation crew’s mistake, they’re the worst crew in the world and the whole company should get bankrupt. Renovations are supposed to do the opposite of burning down the building. I found a New York Times article from 2017 saying how the cathedral badly needs renovation. According to the article the architect in charge is Philippe Villeneuve. I found a French website La Compagnie des Architectes en Chef des Monuments Historiques that employes a man of the same name. I presume it’s the same man.

EDIT: Apparently the company behind the renovation is called Socra. Villeneuve is the architect only.

Notre Dame is one of the most iconic, historical and famous buildings in the world, so you’d think they would take the necessary precautions to ensure they don’t accidentally burn it down or cause other irreparable damage. Shouldn’t there be smoke detectors there, if a spark set something on fire? How did the fire get so large before it was noticed? The company behind the renovation seems professional enough, even their name is a mouthful. Certainly looking at the state of the current president of France, it is somewhat plausible that they don’t really care about the historical achievements of France, and thus would allow incompetence to lead to something like this. Yet I doubt it.


My usual Conspiracy Schtick

I believe the fire has been deliberate. It certainly is a symbolical blow to French and Christian history.  Some people are even predicting or joking that if the whole building burns down, they will erect a mosque there. Sounds plausible.

It’s also exactly one month since the Christchurch attack in New Zealand on a mosque. It happened March 15. Too coincidental for my taste. For an attack on a Muslim religious building, although not a very historical one, and now Notre Dame is burning.

According to some comments I’ve seen it took around 40 minutes for the fire department to arrive and start hosing down the fire. If that’s true, sounds like it’s way beyond incompetence. It’s in the center of Paris, and a well-known building is burning down. You’d think they’d get to it pretty fast.

My guess is that the renovation was a cover for setting up this fire. That is was deliberate. Whether or not Philippe Villeneuve’s company was involved in this operation, I cannot say. French president Jupiter, I mean Macron, had been in trouble for months due to the Yellow Vests protesters. In fact he was going address them and possibly announce new policies today, or might be doing it as I type this. Now that the cathedral is burning down, it can be used to demoralize French nationalist sentiment, to direct attention towards people virtue signalling over this tragedy, and to paint the Yellow Vests as insensitive if they continue to protest after this fire, because all French should come together to overcome the tragedy. In fact, the Yellow Vests will probably be blamed for the fire directly or indirectly. Either they claim that a Yellow Vest started the fire, or the cathedral burned down because the govenment had to allocate too many forces to combat them instead of focusing on protecting historical sites like this.

In recent times many other French churches have been purposefully desecrated as well. What a coincidental time that this fire happened now.


Interesting Comments

Some interesting comments have emerged on social media regarding Notre Dame’s fire. The Jewish Worker has sought to remind us of our anti-semitic White privilege, as any good Jew always will do.


There’s also a video showing the Notre Dame burning in the background and loads of people with Arabic names showing a smiley face. I cannot upload the video here, so here’s a screencap.


These Semitic people surely are our brothers and share our pain, am I right?



Notre Dame is still burning as I type this, so it’s difficult to say anything for sure. Yet I find the level of incompetence required for the fire so immense I find it hard to believe it was merely an accident. If it had been a bunch of rogue Muslims or other arsonists sounds also far-fetched. Shouldn’t there be some sort of security to prevent this, unless the security was conveniently lacking today. If this was some sort of false flag, the purpose would be symbolical demoralization and a distraction from other events.

EDIT: AP reports that the cause of the fire is not known, yet “The Paris prosecutors’ office ruled out arson and possible terror-related motives, and said it was treating it as an accident.” How does that work? How can they exclude the possibility of arson, if they haven’t investigated the cause? Shouldn’t they wait for the fire to settle down and see if there is evidence of foul play? I thought that’s how things usually work if a building burns down.




In Paris, Worn-Out Notre-Dame Needs a Makeover, and Hopes You Can Help:

La Compagnie des Architectes en Chef des Monuments Historiques:

Macron set to reveal new measures to allay Yellow Vest anger:

Incendie à Paris : Patrick Palem, responsable de la SOCRA, invité ce mardi de France Bleu Périgord:

Brenton Tarrant’s Manifesto

I read through Brenton Tarrant’s, the alleged Christchurch shooter, manifesto the other day, and now is the time to comment on it.


His Motives

The Great Replacement, as it’s called, explains how the birthrates in countries with European heritage are falling, and top of that we are being replaced with third world immigrant, mainly Muslim, with higher birthrates. Tarrant calls this White Genocide. I find none of this particularly controversial, and I agree it a fairly accurate description of the situation. However, it is not a very unique or insightful position either. The Alt-Right and other factions in the so-called dissident right have been saying this for at least five years.

Tarrant also advocates Europeans (people of European heritage, not merely those who live in the geographical area) to remove invaders from their lands. He wants to take revenge on the invaders (mainly Muslims) for their recent and historical transgressions against the European people. He wants to “incite violence, retaliation and further divide between the European people and the invaders currently occupying European soil”. His “radical” notions appear to be fairly recent, since he said that events that took place April and May 2017 changed his views. The first one was the death of a young Swedish girl named Ebba Åkerlund who was killed by an Islamic attacker. The second was the French election between a globalist banker and a “milquetoast” civic nationalist, and the whole situation in France where the French seemed to be a minority in their own country compared to the invaders.


Statements of Note

There were certain comments in the manifesto I found interesting, or odd. I will focus on them.


Tarrant said he receive the “blessing” of the Knights Templar for his attack. I wonder whether he is claiming he contacted a secret society that calls itself the Templars, or is this a joke referring to knights who fought the Saracens.


According to my understanding the manifesto was written before the attack, yet he speaks in the past tense as in “death was a definite possibility” and “survival was a better alternative”. He sounds confident he would survive. It could simply imply his confidence, or perhaps he knew he would not be in any danger during the attack.

However later on he asks the following question and gives the answer:

This sounds like a more natural way of discussing an upcoming dangerous undertaking.


Tarrant says China’s political system is closest to his values. This sounds odd, since elsewhere he claims he is an eco-fascist. China does not come off as an environmentally friendly nation to me. Maybe this was a joke.

Like I wrote in my first Christchurch article this whole event seemed like an elaborate dark joke. Below you will see a few examples of this.

I haven’t played either game, but I wonder whether he is partially honest when it comes to Spyro 3. Maybe it has an ethno-nationalist message?


This is quite a funny and insightful message. It highlights how arbitrary it often is how is hailed as a hero and who is reviled as a monster.


This does not convince me. But I suppose I appreciate the thought.


He does not define who this group of capitalists refers to. I will come back to that later.


This is one of the passages that makes me think Tarrant was not any kind of right wing rebel but an intelligence asset. He seems to believe that Climate Change/ Global Warming/ Greenhouse Effect is a real issue, and not a scam to push all sorts of laws and agendas. Same with overpopulation, which seems to be a problem when it comes to White people, but people in the third world are fine to have as many children as they want according to the media.


Here Tarrant demonstrates he believes the official line about 9/11 being perpetrated by Muslims. Not very Redpilled.


Here Tarrant states the West has a dying culture, which is why immigrant that come from a healthy culture refuse to assimilate. I agree with this, however, he does not address why does the West have this decaying culture. Who or what could have caused it? This simply makes it sound like the West has a dying culture, the immigrants don’t, so we deserve to get replaced by them, but instead of making it easy for them to do it, we should try to make them die as well before we perish.


He encourages White to kill “high profile enemies”. He names Merkel of Germany, Turkey’s Erdogan and London’s Sadiq Khan. I wonder why he chose to name these three of all people? Why not name the Rothschilds, George Soros or perhaps Barbara Lerner Spectre, for example? What could be the reason behind this? But don’t go kill anyone because of me. This blog does not advocate murder.


The passage on NGOs is a whole page long, but I shortened it to save space/effort. Tarrant advocates violence against NGOs and calls them Cultural Marxists and “modern money changers inside the church”. He does not however name any NGOs or who the people behind these NGOs are.

Lastly we go to the most telling bit of the manifesto:

This is the only time Tarrant mentions Jews. I suppose you could interpret Cultural Marxists and money changers to refer to Jews as well, however that is just an interpretation. There is also a passage where he says invaders must be removed from Europe, regardless of their origin and mentions “Roma, African, Indian, Turkish, Semitic or other”. Prior to his attack, Tarrant supposedly uploaded the following on 8chan, and generally tries to embody the notion of an Australian “shitposter”:

As you can see, it mentions his Facebook account by name, Brenton Tarrant. The narrative has been made, and many on 8chan are trying to make you believe that Brenton Tarrant was one of them, and he somehow embodied their values. This is blatantly false. He appears to believe the official story on 9/11, or at least does not consider it important to question it. He believes in Global Warming and other Agenda 21 propaganda. And most importantly he has convenietly avoided blaming the Jews in the great replacement that is going on. 8channers blame the Jews when they stub their toe, so why ignore Jewish involvement is pushing the degenerate, decaying culture in the West? Why ignore the Jewish role in promoting mass immigration in Europe? Ignorance of the facts is no excuse in this case, since this guy was supposed to be a regular forumite.

I’ve seen some excuses that he didn’t want to focus on the Jews so he wouldn’t sound crazy. Well it’s a guy who allegedly shot over 50 people in their place of worship. I don’t think he should be worrying whether he seems crazy or not. What good is his manifesto if he does not expose anything that regular people don’t already know? It’s not a secret that Muslims have been killing and raping Europeans in the recent years. It is still to a large part unknown among the general populace that there is a significant Jewish element to this whole New World Order agenda. This is what he would have emphasized heavily had he been an actual White nationalist who regularly visited 8chan.

All he has done is give more excuses for the elites to push gun control, censorship of the internet, demonize White right-wingers, and promote enmity between Europeans and Muslims. Or on the other hand he is encouraging excessive sympathy towards Muslims. After seeing atrocities like this, some Whites might think we must never do any harm against any Muslims, or might think we deserve the rapes and terrorism.

I want Muslims invaders gone too, but whether that includes every Muslim in Western countries or not is up for debate. I also would prefer their removal to be as peaceful as possible, except when it comes to actual rapists and other violent criminals. However the big picture is that there is no good reason for Whites and Muslims to be enemies. I’m not saying we should hold hands and sing kumbaya, but there is no need for either side to try to eradicate the other. This conflict which has lasted for decades has been manipulated by the New World Order globalists. The most obvious sign of this is 9/11 of course, but Western countries have been screwing with the Middle-East long before that. I’d say the creation of Israel is what started the whole conflict.

Brenton Tarrant has done nothing to expose the truth, nor has he done anything to hinder the actual enemies (unlike the French Yellow Vests, for example). Instead his manifesto and motives have been concocted under false pretenses of being an 8chan regular White nationalist, while actually possessing only a cartoonishly superficial version of their beliefs. Some of the humour I found funny too. I give him 2/10.

More Info on the ChristChurch shooting including Israel and Podesta

Last Friday there was a shooting incident in ChristChurch New Zealand near a mosque or two. I already pointed out some discrepancies in the official story in my previous article, and I’ve found some more of them.


Israel Connection

The suspect Brenton Tarrant had visited Israel back in late 2016 for nine days, according to website. He wrote in his manifesto that he had traveled all around the world, so this in itself is not necessarily suspicious. Also nine days is a normal time for a tourist to stay in a country. However, this is not the only Israel connection in the incident. Intellectual Observer website has reported that “The fifth suspect of Christchurch shootings has defected to Israel”. We know from previous news sources that originally arrested 4 four suspects: Tarrant, two other men and a woman. According to the TVNZ website the police does not believe the three others were involved, but one had a firearm with him and was therefore charged with a firearms offence. Also “A further person, an 18-year-old man was also arrested and is due to appear in court on Monday.” Yet the police do not believe he was involved in the the shootings.

Here’s a clip supposedly of other two suspects. One of them is clearly holding a gun. According to TVNZ one person with a gun was arrested, so could this be him? Probably not. A man and a woman were in a car when arrested. It could be that after this video was taken the two ran into a car to hide. However these two people look both like men.

If the Intellectual Observer is correct, there was a sixth suspect, in addition to the 18-year old, and he fled to Israel “with the help of unknown aides”. This has Mossad false flag written all over it. Otherwise why would the suspect flee the country in such a hurry, and why would the New Zealand authorities allow it? It’s reminiscent of 9/11 when the dancing Israelies were first arrested by the police, but then allowed to return to Israel.

The BBC even states that the attacker was a “lone gunman”. A fall guy as usual, all attention is drawn to Tarrant, whereas his co-perpetrators’ involvement are downplayed and eventually ignored. Looks like an operation that was pulled by an intelligence agency or two.


Wikipedia Changing

The Wikipedia article on the shooting has changed since Friday, which is to be expected. Good thing I saved the original, so I can compare the omissions.

There is no longer mention of the “extremist views” of the other suspects, report of one of them wearing explosives, or the shooting at ChristChurch hospital.


Tarrant’s Video

Tarrant streamed the beginning of the shooting incident. I have not been able to find the whole video, but I have seen some clips. I will not share them here as they might just take down the blog. In the clips that I’ve seen, the perpetrator seems to be shooting a lot of people, but there is a distinct lack of blood in many cases. There are pools of blood under some of the people, but only a few, and you can see the bullets tear into the flesh of some of the people who are getting shot. However, most people look like nothing hits them. It could very well be that the shooter is using blanks, and in the cases where you see wounds, they are using bloodpacks or other props.

This is not in any way conclusive, and I am merely suggesting the possibility that “crisis actors” were used. Let’s just explore the possibility that this whole event was in fact staged, at least the mosque shooting in the video. It could be that there was another, a real shooting elsewhere, such as the ChristChurch hospital, and the goal of this shooting was to distract from that.

So why use actors instead of killing real people? I often hear the argument that The Powers That Be have no qualms about killing people. Which I agree with. However there are reasons why they possibly would not do so. One possibility that I’ve discussed in the past is that certain organizations may simply not have the legal right to do it. There might be intelligence agencies with the right to use lethal force, but maybe there are NGOs that don’t. Also if you are pulling an attack where the goal is to kill real people, you have to make sure you don’t end up killing important people. For example during 9/11 Larry Silverstein was conveniently at the denstist, if I recall correctly. You have to make sure you don’t accidentally kill a powerful politician or his family members during a false flag.

Even a better reason why to use “crisis actors” instead of killing real people is control. You need to be able to control the whole incident, if you want to control the narrative that develops afterwards. If every victim, witness or perpetrator is working under the same management towards the same goal, it’s easier to manage. If there are outsiders there in your false flag, they will bring a chaotic element to it. Maybe there’s someone with a gun and they end up killing your perpetrator(s), maybe they accidentally shoot a witness that was supposed to be a part of your narrative. Maybe they will see something they shouldn’t, and manage to escape from the perpertrator. For example, many false flags seem to have several gunmen, yet in the official story there’s only a lone nut. It’s the same reason they don’t let random people get into the ring in professional wrestling, since they might derail the whole show.


Podesta Visit to NZ

Former Hillary Clinton aide of Pizzagate fame, John Podesta, visited New Zealand a week before the shooting. He called the country’s prime minister Jacinda Ardern, a superstar. The New Zealand Herald quoted him saying:

“I think she combines an approach that is dealing with building a fair, more inclusive, more sustainable economy with someone who is exciting and young and brings her baby to the United Nations.”

This coming from Podesta sounds quite creepy and possibly literal when Ardern “brings her baby to the United Nations” to be abused in their occult rituals. My hunch is that Podesta’s role was to prepare the NZ government for the false flag whereas Mossad or whomever was taking care of the logistics of the incident.



It starts to look more and more like a false flag. I don’t think Brenton Tarrant was acting alone, if he was even involved in any of this. This wasn’t an “organic” shooting.

I was planning to discuss Tarrant’s manifesto here as well, but the article is long enough already, so maybe I’ll do it next time.



Christchurch mosque attacks: Alleged gunman Brenton Tarrant visited Israel in 2016:

The fifth suspect of Christchurch shootings has defected to Israel:

Police say of the four arrested following Christchurch shooting, only one is charged:

Christchurch shootings: Attacker was ‘lone gunman’:

Former White House adviser John Podesta praises ‘superstar’ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern:

The ChristChurch Shooting Comedy

Earlier today an Australian man, Brenton Tarrant, shot 49 people in a mosque and in an Islamic centre in ChristChurch, New Zealand. Or so we’re told. Right off the bat the name of the city where the event took place is quite ironic, ChristChurch, a mosque in ChristChurch gets shot up. This whole event seems like the work of a master of dark comedy.

Whenever any act of violence occurs with significant political implications and it gets vast international media attention, a good rule of thumb is to assume it’s a false flag of some sort. I didn’t say it’s necessarily one, but it’s more reasonable to start off with that assumption than believe everything the media says at face value. The purpose of the media is propaganda, purely that. It is there to deceive you, to feed you a false sense of reality. If this sounds far-fetched to you, you haven’t been paying attention. It is in no way reasonable to assume they are being honest when it comes to political events such as this. My impression is that even the alternative media nowadays tends to assume the “facts” of these sort of events are correct, they’re simply giving the story a different spin.


What if he did it?

Despite me thinking it very unlikely that the shooting was orchestrated by this Lone Nut™, I’ll explore the possibility and its implications. Tarrant supposedly wrote a 74 page manifesto explaining his motives. He was worried about the Great Replacement, i.e. White people getting replaced in their own countries by third world immigrants. He saw Islam especially as a threat and took action against it, leading to the deaths of 49 people (most or all of them Muslim). It is not for me to condemn or condone his methods, and I do understand his motive. The question here is not whether or not it was moral to do what he did, but will the actions he took lead to the outcome he desired? Will killing a bunch of Muslims lead to New Zealand being liberated from Islamic invaders? I don’t think so, it’s possible, but doubtful. It is conceivable Tarrant’s actions will inspire New Zealanders to take up arms against Muslims in their lands and lead to many more acts of violence against them, and in, let’s say 10 years time, most Muslims will leave the country. If this happens, Tarrant was correct in his actions. I however think this will only hinder the cause Tarrant was supposedly championing. Criticizing Muslims will be more suppressed in the Western world because of this incident. According to some reports such as the one below, certain “right-wing” websites are already blocked in New Zealand due to the shooting.


You may take offense to what I said that I don’t condemn Tarrant’s actions or that if his actions lead to New Zealand getting de-Muslimified he was correct. If this offends you, you disgust me. Condemning and denoucing those of engage in violence is mere effeminate virtue signalling. I condemned the United States when they attacked Afghanistan in 2001, I condemned them when they invaded Iraq two years later. Did my moral outrage stop these wars? Of course not. At best, it’s impotent whining to condemn perpetrators of violence. It is also an (unfortunate?) fact that violence does solve certain problems, and sometimes it’s the only solution. After all the United States gained their independence by violence, not by writing eloquent essays. National Socialist Germany was destroyed with violence, not by sternly wagging a finger at them.  The French Revolution too was won with violence, and currently the Yellow Vests are achieving something in France by violence. Regardless of what was your preferred outcome in any of these conflicts, the winners achieved their goals with violence.

Simple-minded people tend to react emotionally to mass-shootings like this. They’re shocked and horrified. I suppose I was too once, but the shootings are so common nowadays I don’t really care to bring emotion into it. You’re supposed to grow up and start looking at these events rationally, if you really do care. Still most people don’t. They can express their emotional outrage on social media, condemning violence and all that, until the next week when it’s all forgotten. But then I’m such a heartless bastard, and I don’t care about poor Muslims, including women and children, that allegedly died today. Show me your outrage on social media about the children Jeffrey Epstein and his cronies molested on Lolita island, the Palestinians and other Muslims Israel has killed over the years, the Americans Israel killed on the USS Liberty and on 9/11, the children Muslims have raped in Rotherham and other places around Europe, etc.

Part of the reason people get more emotional about these sort of shootings by a regular guy is that it’s easier for their small minds to put themselves in the situation, be they the victim or the perpetrator. It doesn’t require much imagination or understanding to do so, but when it comes to war and other political and conspiratorial issues, it’s complicated and their brain shuts off. The deaths caused by an abstract institution or a committee is a statistic, but the deaths caused by an individual is a tragedy. The crime itself, or the perpetrator(s) does not anger me as much as the regular people who feign interest and outrage. But let’s get back to the shooting itself.


Black Comedy

I’ve been at work whole day, so there are still many details of the incident I am yet to have seen or heard, including reading through the whole manifesto or watching the videos the alleged perpetrator uploaded. Wikipedia provides a few interesting details about our suspect. Brenton Tarrant livestreamed 16 minutes of his attack on Facebook. Wikipedia says: “Moments before the shooting the perpetrator in his car played ‘Serbia Strong'”. This is hilarious if you know what song this is. Maybe you’ve heard it:


Also before commencing the attack, Tarrant said “subscribe to PewDiePie”, the evil Alt-Right gamer Swedish gamer troll and king of Youtube. How is this not funny? Regardless of whether it is a false flag or not. The silly irony is increased as in some places in the Western world, such as New York, Australia and presumably New Zealand, the police are guarding mosques against “right-wing” terrorists. I member bit under 18 years ago when White people were afraid of Islamic terrorism, and the Big Brother was out there to help them. Now its reversed.

Maybe it’s just me, but this seems like an elaborate joke that someone orchestrated.


Everything doesn’t add up

There are some details to the shooting that don’t make sense. First of all, Brenton Tarrant gets all of the blame, although the police arrested two other men and one woman as well. One of them has been released. Did they participate in shooting as well? Why is Tarrant getting all the attention? The shooting occurred at two locations, Al Noor mosque and the Linwood Islamic Centre. It started at the mosque, I suppose the shooter then drove to Linwood, since the two locations are around 6km apart from each other. How long did it take cops to get their asses over there? The blue dot on the right is the mosque and Linwood is on the left.


Wikipedia mentions that the police found two car bombs. Also one of the suspects was reported as wearing explosives and there were reports of shooting at the ChristChurch hospital. The police denied the two latter claims. Things like these suggest a false flag, but as the source is Wikipedia, I’m suspicious of them.

Tarrant supposedly frequented the website 8chan. One forum there is dedicated to traditional Nepalese basketweaving and holds people with far-right racist views. If Tarrant was a regular there and he internalized their doctrine he would not have written the following in his manifesto:

“Were/are you an anti-semite?

No.A jew living in israel is no enemy of mine, so long as they do not seek to subvert or harm my people.”

No person worth his salt on that forum would say this, as it is a core belief there that Jews are behind most of the problems in the modern world. A true forumite would hold the position that Jews will try to subvert and harm his people, even when they live in Israel. Moreover, in the whole manifesto, which is quite long, the word “Jew” is used only once. A true believer in their doctrine would have emphasized the role of Jews in control of media, finance, US foreign policy, possibly mention how the Holocaust is a fraud, and so on. Tarrant did none of this.

According to certain claims, a magazine for a gun was planted at the mosque before Tarrant arrived. This should be viable in the video he uploaded, but I haven’t gotten my hands on it yet. However I’ll share this image here nonetheless.

There is also this image supposedly of Tarrant on Facebook floating about. According to it, he visited Pakistan, a Muslim country, only six months ago and seemed to be pleased with the locals. There also snippets of people discussing him on Facebook. The conversation seems to hint that Tarrant had Shia sympathies, and the reason he shot up the mosque was because they were Sunni. I don’t know the actual origins of the picture, so it could be fake. If so, it is quite an elaborate one.



Well, no conclusion except as usual there’s more to this case than meets the eye at first glance. There’s bound to be more interesting evidence to be found.


P. S. You might argue that the Whites in New Zealand are invaders who don’t have the right to be there too, so they shouldn’t complain about Muslims coming there. Even if that’s true, it still doesn’t justify another wave of invaders to be allowed on the island.



Mosque shooting:

1816: A Year without Summer

The year 1816 was a year without summer in Europe and North America. Crops failed, people froze and starved. This was supposedly caused by a volcano eruption in Indonesia the year before. The volcano Tambora erupted April 10th, 1815. I say this was supposedly caused by the volcano, because I don’t buy it.

I came across this subject matter a couple of years ago when doing research on something else. So better late than never, right?


Dubious Claims

First of all, if the volcano erupted in Indonesia, in Asia, why it only affected Europe and North America? Well, according to Wikipedia:

“In China, the cold weather killed trees, rice crops, and even water buffalo, especially in the north. Floods destroyed many remaining crops. The monsoon season was disrupted, resulting in overwhelming floods in the Yangtze Valley. In India, the delayed summer monsoon caused late torrential rains that aggravated the spread of cholera from a region near the Ganges in Bengal to as far as Moscow.”

However, the source for that only links to Discovery Channel UK’s website. No mention of these disasters. Wikipedia continues:

“In Japan . . . the cold damaged crops, but no crop failures were reported, and there were adverse effects on population.”

The source for this is a dubious looking Japanese language article, but at least it’s something, and it does mention Tambora, but if I understand correctly (my Japanese is quite rusty), it says in Japan crop failures were not confirmed, and they were not adversely affected. In case I misunderstood something in the Japanese, let’s look at the Wikipedia quote:”the cold damaged crops, but no crop failures were reported, and there were adverse effects on population.” Does that make any sense? If crop failures were not reported, how can people today know that they happened? How did it adversely affect the population?

There’s a decent article on this event on ThoughtCo. website. It makes no mention of China or Japan, only Europe and North America:

“The weather in 1816 was unprecedented. Spring arrived as usual. But then the seasons seemed to turn backward, as cold temperatures returned. In some places, the sky appeared permanently overcast. The lack of sunlight became so severe that farmers lost their crops and food shortages were reported in Ireland, France, England, and the United States.”

Supposedly dust from Mount Tambora’s eruption over a year before “had shrouded the globe. And with sunlight blocked, 1816 did not have a normal summer.” They also quote a couple of excerpts from newspapers from the time. From the Boston Independent Chronicle, June 17, 1816:

“On the night of 6th instant, after a cold day, Jack Frost paid another visit to this region of the country, and nipped the beans, cucumbers, and other tender plants. This surely is cold weather for summer.

On the 5th we had quite warm weather, and in the afternoon copious showers attended with lightning and thunder — then followed high cold winds from the northwest, and back back again the above mentioned unwelcome visitor. On the 6th, 7th, and 8th June, fires were quite agreeable company in our habitations.”

From The Albany Advertiser, October 6:

“The weather during the past summer has been generally considered as very uncommon, not only in this country, but, as it would seem from newspaper accounts, in Europe also. Here it has been dry, and cold. We do not recollect the time when the drought has been so extensive, and general, not when there has been so cold a summer. There have been hard frosts in every summer month, a fact that we have never known before. It has also been cold and dry in some parts of Europe, and very wet in other places in that quarter of the world.”

There’s another excerpt from the same article mentioning a possible relation between sunspots and the cold summer:

“Many persons suppose that the seasons have not thoroughly recovered from the shock they experienced at the time of the total eclipse of the sun. Others seem disposed to charge the peculiarities of the season, the present year, upon the spots on the sun. If the dryness of the season has in any measure depended on the latter cause, it has not operated uniformly in different places — the spots have been visible in Europe, as well as here, and yet in some parts of Europe, as we have already remarked, they have been drenched with rain.

Without undertaking to discuss, much less to decide, such a learned subject as this, we should be glad if proper pains were taken to ascertain, by regular journals of the weather from year to year, the state of the seaons in this country and Europe, as well as the general state of health in both quarters of the globe. We think the facts might be collected, and the comparison made, without much difficulty; and when once made, that it would be of great advantage to medical men, and medical science.”

Notice anything lacking? There is no mention of the sun being obscured by dust, as the ThoughtCo. article claimed. Had volcanic dust “shrouded” the Earth, surely people would have commented on that too. The last newspaper quote does mention “the total eclipse of the sun”, so you might say that means the dust was obscuring the sun. The closest total eclipse of the sun prior to writing of the Albany Advertiser article published in October 1816 was July 6, 1815, which is probably referred to here. There were eclipses also in December 1815 and May 1816, but they weren’t total.

This wouldn’t be the only time that volcano dust is accused of causing mayhem, but I don’t buy it. In 2010 the volcano in Iceland, Eyjafjallajökull, erupted. Because of it air traffic was disrupted in many places. The volcanic ash was supposedly harmful to airplanes, so they couldn’t fly at certain times in certain places. I don’t know why, but even back then I thought the volcano was an excuse to prevent planes from flying. Maybe there was heavy clandestine military traffic in the air, and they didn’t want civilians to see it. Maybe it was something else.

It’s interesting that the old newspaper article mentions sunspots as the possible cause for the coldness, since there have been some modern day theories that sunspot activity causes the earth to warm instead the usual Greenhouse Effect/Global Warming/Climate Change CO2 claptrap. The ThoughtCo. article also mentions the notion that a volcano eruption caused the summerless year in 1816, originated a hundred years after it took place in the 20th century.


Do Volcano Eruptions cause Global Cooling?

I don’t see causation between eruption of Mount Tambora and the summerless year. There is correlation, but we all know the old cliché. So let’s see if there are other cases of volcanoes causing the climate to cool down.

According to Wikipedia, i.e. the establishment, there is. The page on Volcanic Winter has some examples, three most recent ones are:

1991: Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines cooled temperatures for 2-3 years

1883: Krakatoa caused four years of cold.

1815: Mount Tambora.

Now let’s look at some temperature charts I found with Google.

This starts with the year 1850, so Tambora’s effects cannot be seen. However we see sharp spike of warming around 1878 or so, then a year later the temperature goes back to normal. Around 1883 or so, when the Krakatoa erupted the temperature does indeed go down for a couple of years. Then it goes back up again. Around 1890, it goes down. Soon up. Temperature goes down in 1900. Were there volcano eruptions also in 1890 and 1900 as well that caused those cold periods?

Around 1990, the time of Mount Pinatubo eruption, there is hardly any change to be seen. The temperature just keeps zigzagging up and down, although overall its obviously climbing. Let’s look at another chart.

Krakatoa erupted 1883, and the four following years were cold, i.e. until 1887, according to Wikipedia. Sure, I don’t disagree with any of that, but according to this chart 1890 and 1905-1912 are much colder than the cool period following the eruption of Krakatoa. What volcanoes erupted then, Mount Obama and Mount Pikachu?

There’s also a brief cold period around the eruption of Pinatubo in 1991, but the same pattern happens also in the 80s before that and in the late 90s. More charts.

This is from the oh so trustworthy NASA. Do I even need to say anything about this chart? Same as the others in the sense that warm and cold periods come and go without giving a fuck about volcanoes.

According to this chart, during this 30 year period the years following the eruption of Pinatubo are indeed the coldest (although 1985 looks to be around the same point). It’s just that the time span is short, and its contradicted by the other charts. You can choose which one to believe. I believe none of them.

It might be that the Earth is getting warmer. That is a possibility, but I am certain it’s not due to CO2 gases. That is a political issue pushed for political reasons, not for scientific ones, which is why I don’t fully trust “scientists” and their temperature charts. Still if I was to do so, these charts would not support the argument that volcano eruptions cause cooling, except the last one, which is hardly objective since it has been made with the explicit reason of claiming that the eruption of Pinatubo caused global cooling. If there is some sort of causation between climate cooling and volcano eruptions, I would guess it’s more like the other way around; the climate starts getting cooler, which somehow causes a chemical reaction in the volcano. Not because volcano ash or dust blocks sunlight, which in turn causes cooling.


Eruption of Mount Tambora

Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles, the founder of Singapore, wrote about the eruption of Mount Tambora (here Tomboro) on the island of Sumbawa in the book The History of Java published 1830. In April 1815 there were “tremulous motions”, report of explosions, showers of ash, clouds of ash overcast the sun and ash covered streets and houses. No such clouds were reported in Europe or America. On Java “explosions were heard at intervals, like the report of artillery or the noise of distant thunder”. Officers thought they were cannon fire, possibly from pirates: “The first explosions were heard on this island (Java) in the evening of the 5th of April: they were noticed in every quarter, and continued at intervals until the following day. The noise was, in the first instance, universally attributed to distant cannon: so much so, that a detachment of troops was marched from Djocjocarta, under the apprehension that a neighbouring post had been attacked”. After they saw ash, they realized it wasn’t pirates.

The book mentions Lieutenant Owen Phillips’ report of the incident. There were three pillars of fire on top of the volcano, and a powerful whirlwind that tore aparts houses, trees, people and cattle. There was a big tsunami as well. The eruption destroyed whole villages, but there were survivors: “In Pekáté no vestige of a house is left: twenty-six of the people, who were at Sumbawa at the time, are the whole of the population who have escaped. From the most particular inquiries I have been able to make, there were certainly not fewer than twelve thousand individuals in Tomboro and Pekáté at the time of the eruption, of whom only five or six survive.” I presume the “five or six” means five or six thousand, not five or six individuals.

The first time I read the account from Raffles’ book, I wondered whether really was a volcano eruption due to the cannon fire sounds and the whirlwind. However, apparently whirlwinds can accord due to eruptions. It happened last year as Mount Kilauea in Hawaii erupted last year. Although the intensity of the whirlwind at Tamboro was much stronger. Explosions don’t seem that unusual when it comes to volcanoes either.

There is one interesting addition to this story though. In 2006 volcanologist (and Tolkien character) Haraldur Sigurdsson found the remains of a “lost kingdom” in Tambora. He found bones, ceramics and remains of houses. NPR website says the following: “Few written records of the lost civilization exist. Colonial British officials visited Tambora shortly before it was buried. About 10,000 people lived there. The officials recorded 48 words of their language. It wasn’t Malay, like other Indonesian dialects, but more like the Khmer language of Cambodia.”

So there was a unique culture there with a unique language, and now it has apparently been wiped out by the volcano. Yet according to the British officer in the book, almost half of the people managed to escape. Something doesn’t add up.

Maybe since the people lost their homes, they were absorbed into other tribes, and lost their unique culture, since they had little choice but to adapt. Or maybe it was a very significant culture that someone wanted to wipe out. The volcano eruption might have been used as a cover for genociding them, or maybe the eruption was artificially induced to wipe them out. The explosions might have been actual explosives used as a catalyst for the volcano. Just throwing out ideas since something feels off.



I do not think that the eruption of Mount Tambora caused the summerless year in 1816. What caused it then? It was probably natural, though of course one might always speculate about ancient geo-engineering technologies, but I think it was a natural yet unusual occurrence. The theory that Tambora caused the cooling in the summer is probably just a result of the smugness of academics, who think they have all the answers, and no-one can conclusively disprove their accepted orthodoxy of a 200-year old event.

The eruption of Tambora was probably natural as well. Probably. I do wonder about the kingdom that was wiped out though.



Year Without Summer: or

Supposedly evidence of China’s summerless year:

Evidence of Japanese summerless year: or

The Year Without a Summer Was a Bizarre Weather Disaster in 1816:

List of solar eclipses in the 19th century:

Air travel disruption after the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption:

Volcanic winter:

The History of Java:

Lava whirlwind caught on two-month mark of Kilauea eruption:

Culture Destroyed by 1815 Volcano Rediscovered:

The Appearance of the NPC Meme

A few weeks ago, the latest iteration of, the NPC meme appeared on the face of the internet, mainly from 4chan and some other ethnic basket weaving forums. It makes fun of people who lack independent thought and repeat what the media tells them to think. NPC is a term meaning “non-player character”, which originates from tabletop roleplaying games or computer games. It refers to all characters not controlled by the player, but in reference to the recent meme it seems to especially apply to dull and generic characters. Here is an example of the meme:

There are various versions of the meme with the gray expressionless face, What makes the emergence of the meme curious is how it has caught the attention and ire of the main stream media, such as the New York Times and Kotaku. Twitter has also banned countless accounts propagating the meme. One of their concerns is how the NPC meme “dehumanizes” people. A curiously hypocritical assertion from the liberal media, as the following meme demonstrates:


The media and the mainstream establishment has been dehumanizing dissent for decades, from George W. Bush saying you’re with him or you’re with the terrorists, or the media labelling reasonable skepticism in pretty much any significant issue as crazy conspiracy theories. More recently anyone who does not go along with the liberal agenda is called a “Nazi”, and apparently it’s fine to attack, verbally or physically, anyone who is a “Nazi”.

Although originally, according to my understanding, the meme was not directed towards leftists or liberals, but towards all kinds of people who don’t seem exhibit independent thought processes, yet for some reason the liberals seemed most outraged by the NPC meme. It reminds me of the late William Cooper explaining the sheeple meme and people’s reactions to it. He said that if you’re walking down the street and you shout “stop thief”, the person who runs, is the thief. Same applies here, the person most getting outraged by allegations of lacking in originality appear to be the liberals who repeat what the TV tells them to.

What is curious though, is why would the media get involved in such a meme. One reason might simply be that the media is becoming less and less relevant, and they’re trying to seem more relevant by discussing the meme. Additionally, it allows them to cement more division between the political right and the left. Yet there is the possibility that The Powers That Be did find this meme threatening, and are trying to fight against its propagation.

The notion that some humans are like NPCs from games, is not new; David Icke has used the term Repeaters (people who simply repeat what the establishment says), then there’s of course the term sheeple, I’ve even heard the term Organic Portal be used in similar context, and myself I have used the term Simulacrum People back in 2013 and in 2014 I compared the thinking of Cultural Marxists to computer programming. The recent iteration of the NPC meme came to be when a 2011 article from Psychology Today appeared on certain internet forums. Based on the study referred to in the article, some people never thought in language, or they lacked and inner voice or inner dialogue. While accuracy of the study should certainly be questioned, it did create a decent amount of discussion. Do certain people really lack the capacity for inner dialogue, are the actually just NPCs? The following Reddit post was also found, which would suggest yes:


The core of the NPC question is a metaphysical one that asks what is a human being? Are we all ultimately chiseled from the same material, or are we not. There are certain references to two possibly types of humans in the Bible as well; in Genesis God says he puts enmity between the seed of the woman and seed of the serpent, and Jesus talks about the wheat and the tares. It is unquestionable that many people truly are NPCs, or sheeple, whatever term you want to use, based on their behaviour, but the question is, are they that way because they simply do not have any inner sense of self, or self-awareness, or have they simply been brainwashed?

In my experience, I would say that the NPCs truly lack some inner aspect that makes them truly human. This is a conundrum I’ve been trying to figure out since I was a teenager. I didn’t care about politics or issues such as that, but I cared about music, creativity, originality and uniqueness. I despised the consumerist pop-culture of the day, which in hind-sight isn’t as bad as today. It annoyed and troubled me that most people were content to consume whatever vapid media was thrust upon them on the TV or radio. It’s as if they had no taste of their own. A perfect example of this is when two class-mates of mine, when I was 15 or so, who always liked the music that was in the top 40-hits that week. One week a band that I actually liked managed to reach the charts, and for a brief period I could share my love for the band with those two people, although naturally it felt hollow.

Yet if it is true that some people truly are NPCs, it still is not easy to determine who is a genuine person and who is not. Moreover, if and when the actual NPCs hear about the concept of NPCs, eventually they will adopt the meme for themselves, and start calling other people NPCs without understanding what it actually means. As the NPC is incapable of inner reflection or understanding the concept of objective truth. They derive their sense of reality from society. What society tells them is true, is true, and they cannot fathom it to be otherwise. Now that does not mean that each NPC is a carbon copy of the other, as NPCs infest any walk of life as it gains enough popularity. On the surface, NPCs can vary greatly, but within their programming is the same. The liberal left is still the prevailing establishment, so naturally the majority of NPCs linger there, but certain there are many NPCs in the Trump-supporting right-wing, or even the conspiracy theorist community/ truth movement. It depends on the authority in the preferred community of the NPC, who constructs their sense of reality.

A more optimistic view on NPCs is that they are simply people who have been brainwashed to lose their ability for independent thought through conditioning and fear, but theoretically are capable of regaining their individuality. It’s possible this view is correct, but I do not possess it. However, if this is true sharing NPC memes, might aid some people in waking them from their stupor as they are forced to face their cognitive dissonance.

Yet if the NPC meme is real, it does have intriguing implications, such as the fact that democracy cannot work, as not all men have been created equal. The NPCs will always be manipulated by those willing and able to do so. As Abraham Lincoln said: “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” It also behooves those of us who are not NPCs to rise above to take charge. In my opinion, there are basically three types of people: the conscious or self-aware people, the NPCs, and then the malicious people who manipulate the NPCs against the conscious people, as is demonstrated in the meme below. To fix things, we must first recognize the problem, and not hold on to false ideas of equality.



I’d like to thank Mr. Charles McRowan whose comment on my previous article “How about DNA, is it another occult hoax?” inspired me to write this. The article, as the title suggests, explores whether the concept of the double helix DNA is truly science or simply the occult masquerading as such, and Charles left me the following message yesterday:

“Wow…just wow. It’s hard to believe with the vast amount of information available online, in university libraries, and various scientific journals ignorance to this level still exists.”

I was thinking whether or not I should write about the NPC meme phenomenon or not, but as I received Charles’ classic NPC response, I thought I should. Thanks Charles.



New York Times:


Right-wing watch:

Simulacrum People:

Insight into the Cultural Marxist mind:

Not Everyone Conducts Inner Speech:

How about DNA, is it another occult hoax?: