Defiance! It is the way of our ancestors, and so must it be again in the Dark Times ahead! So here is a fine example, form the past, for the near future!

During the Battle of Vienna, the grand vizier of the invading Ottoman Turks sent an emissary to deliver a summons of surrender to the city. The summons read:

ACCEPT ISLAM AND LIVE IN PEACE UNDER THE SULTAN! OR DELIVER UP THE FORTRESS AND LIVE IN PEACE UNDER THE SULTAN AS CHRISTIANS; AND IF ANY MAN PREFER, LET HIM DEPART PEACEABLY, TAKING HIS GOODS WITH HIM. BUT IF YOU RESIST THE WILL OF ALLAH, THEN DEATH OR SPOLIATION OR SLAVERY SHALL BE THE FATE OF YOU ALL! FIGHT AND YOU DIE! SURRENDER AND YOU LIVE!

The military governor of Vienna, Count Ernst Rüdiger von Starhemberg, told the crowd of people gathered near the town’s Cathedral:

THE INFIDELS PROMISE US THAT IF WE SURRENDER, ALL CHRISTIANS WILL BE ALLOWED TO REMAIN CHRISTIAN. BUT, ASK THE GREEKS WHAT THAT PROMISE MEANS. ASK THE SERBS. ASK THE ALBANIANS. HOW DO THE PEOPLE OF VIENNA REPLY TO THAT INVITATION?

The crowd immediately responded with a shout “No!”

May the men of Europe find the same courage as their ancestors and resist the demands of the global elite to sacrifice their nations!

Jesus’ death on the cross, as described in the New Testament, has become one of the most famous events. But what happened to the 12 disciples who were his closest followers? There are many sources, including the New Testament itself, apocryphal texts, early Christian historians, legends and lore.

• Simon, AKA Peter: Simon-Peter, who was appointed by Jesus the leader of the new sect, is viewed by Roman Catholics as the first pope, was eventually martyred in Rome during the reign of the emperor Nero. As the story goes, Peter asked to be crucified upside down, so that his death would not be the equal of Jesus and the Romans supposedly obliged.

• Andrew: According to 15th Century religious historian Dorman Newman, Andrew—the brother of Peter—went to Patras in western Greece in 69 AD, where the Roman proconsul Aegeates debated religion with him. Aegeates tried to convince Andrew to forsake Christianity, so that he would not have to torture and execute him. But when that didn’t work, apparently he decided to give Andrew the full treatment. Andrew was scourged, and then tied rather than nailed to a cross, so that he would suffer for a longer time before dying. Andrew lived for two days, during which he preached to passersby.

• James (son of Zebedee, AKA James the Greater): Acts 12:1-19 says that James was killed with a sword. The newly-appointed governor of Judea, Herod Agrippa, decided to ingratiate himself with the Romans by persecuting leaders of the new sect. After James was arrested and led to place of execution, his unnamed accuser was moved by his courage. He not only repented and converted on the spot, but asked to be executed alongside James. The Roman executioners obliged, and both men were beheaded simultaneously.

• John: John was the only one of the original disciples not to die a violent death. Instead, he passed away peacefully in Patmos in his old age, sometime around 100 AD.

• Philip: Philip, the first of Jesus’ disciples, became a missionary in Asia. Eventually, he traveled to the Egyptian city of Heliopolis, where he was scourged, thrown into prison, and crucified in 54 AD.

• Bartholomew: Bartholomew supposedly preached in several countries, including India, where he translated the Gospel of Matthew for believers. In one account, “impatient idolaters” beat Bartholomew and then crucified him, while in another, he was skinned alive and then beheaded.

• Thomas: Apparently Thomas preached the gospel in Greece and India, where he angered local religious authorities, who martyred him by running him through with a spear.

• Matthew: According to legend, the former tax collector turned missionary was martyred in Ethiopia, where he was supposedly stabbed in the back by an swordsman sent by King Hertacus, after he criticized the king’s morals.

• James (son of Alphaeus, AKA James the Less): According to Foxe, James, who was elected by his fellow believers to head the churches of Jerusalem, was one of the longest-lived apostles, perhaps exceeded only by John. At the age of 94, he was beaten and stoned by persecutors, and then killed him by hitting him in the head with a club.

• Thaddaeus, AKA Lebbaeus, Judas or Jude: According to several stories, he was crucified at Edessa (the name of cities in both Turkey and Greece) in 72 AD.

• Simon the Canaanite AKA the Zealot: Simon preached in Mauritania on the west coast of Africa, and then went to England, where he was crucified in 74 AD.

• Judas Iscariot: According to Matthew 27:3-6, the treacherous apostle quickly felt remorse over his betrayal of Jesus and went to the Temple to recant. When the high priests ignored his plea, he threw down the 30 pieces of silver that he had been paid, and went off and hanged himself.  But Acts 1:15-20, gives a different and even grislier version of Judas’ demise. He says that Judas used the blood money to purchase a piece of land and then fell headlong from a high place there, so that “he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.” Jerusalem residents subsequently named the place Aceldama, which means “the field of blood.”

The BBC, the much-loved institution of the liberal cosmopolitan elite, is the biggest disseminator of leftist propaganda this side of the Atlantic.

When it is not pushing multiculturalism in its television broadcasts, war in the Middle east on behalf of the interventionists or anti-Trump and anti-Brexit scare stories, it is attempting to convince the average man and woman on the street that boys can wear dresses and girls can be truck drivers and elite soldiers.

Lifesitenews:

A video recently shared by the BBC purports to shame adults for “gender-stereotyp[ing]” children and suggests that distinctions between boys and girls should be erased entirely.

The video, tweeted over the weekend, highlights an experiment in which a male or female baby is dressed in clothes opposite to the baby's sex, a mat full of toys is laid out, and a series of adult volunteers are filmed playing with the babies. The adults are not told of the experiment, and led to believe Edward is actually “Sophie” and Marnie is actually “Oliver.” The video is clipped from a program featuring Dr. Javid Abdelmoneim and is titled: “No more boys and girls: Can our kids go gender free?”

The adults pick out dolls and plush toys for the child they think is a girl, and robots and cars for the perceived boy.

The BBC suggests that "stereotyped" toys will disadvantage girls later in life, noting that men “hugely dominate careers prizing maths, spatial awareness, and physical confidence” -- attributes ostensibly reinforced by “male” toys. The video does not identify what boys are supposed to gain from girls’ toys.

“Are boys born ‘better’ at these? Is it nature or is it nurture?” the video asks. “When children play spatial awareness games frequently their brains change physically within just three months.”

Despite the video coming down confidently on “nurture” as the answer, declaring the adult volunteers to have shown “bias” toward the kids, the actual footage seems to support their original intuitions, with Edward and Marine showing little interest in toys meant for “Sophie and Oliver.”

Liberals claim it is we Conservatives and Christians that hate science, a laughable insult when one considers the Christian origins of much of Western science, but totally ignore the mountain of evidence compiling that debunks their gender fluid nonsense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWu44AqF0iI

A variety of scientific literature indicates that promoting gender fluidity within children’s minds is unnecessary and destructive. Studies indicate that between 80-90% of children experiencing gender dysphoria outgrow it on their own by late adolescence, and that even full gender reassignment surgery often fails to resolve gender-confused individuals’ heightened tendency to engage in self-harm and suicide.

The Soviet organ of propaganda Pravda has nothing on the liberal bias of the BBC…

The absence of authority within Western societies, whether it be parental or social, is one of the most glaring features of our times, a contributing factor to societal demise and an issue Conservatives and Christians must address if we are to turn back the waves of liberalism that has battered the walls of Christian European civilisation for two centuries.

But our military institutions is one area liberals have found hard to penetrate, although not for the lack of trying...

The Burkean Journal:

When one thinks of a classic army officer, images of Pinochet or Hindenburg spring to mind as that Prussian ideal of the stoic, mustachioed generalissimo. One questions how true this image is of a modern military, in an age where every aspect of our civilisation is steeped, swamped and marinated in the preachings of liberalism.

At a cursory glance, one could be forgiven for believing that a modern military is not going to be more to the right politically than society at large, due to the effects of modern education, social media, television, etc. This would be true perhaps of a conscript army of composed of people taken from all different walks of life.

The British Army ads earlier this year was just one example of “social engineering” in practice and a blatant attempt to subvert the ideals of military, provoking an online backlash:

However, if a modern professional military is built through volunteers, then does it attract a different kind of person and if so, why?

In the past, many young men turned to the life of the soldier simply as a means of getting a square meal and a warm bed. Today however, such cases are rare enough, almost nobody joins a modern military to get rich. From the start we can assume that most volunteers aren’t particularly materialistic, and since they are not compelled to join, one could assume it is because they are at least somewhat patriotic.

They are of course young, fit, almost exclusively male, and generally unafraid of taking risk. If they proceed past basic training, it would be because they are largely team players, able to work well and take instruction under authority.

The military is probably the last place in modern Western society where an authoritative hierarchy is so clearly displayed, if not flaunted. Rank demands respect, forms of subservience and recognition of position are obeyed without a word.

The consequent virtues of this hierarchy are a firm sense of duty, honour and ultimately, a sense of fidelity which can only be achieved through shared hardships. Those in command of the military will have earned their stripes through such service and constitute a hierarchy whose very nature is the essence of conservatism.

So, if the military is by virtue of its selection process filled with people of a more conservative outlook, then is it immune from outside attempts to change its basic nature? From experience, by and large, it is. Apart from the now standard anti-discrimination and diversity quota programmes, the basic core of what military life is now is the same as it has always been.

The reason for this is simple, yet subtle; the programmes of the left can only fly in the face of reality for so long. At its most basic level, a military exists to fight and kill. And this reality is frankly not conducive to social engineering projects. Young men are the ones who fight wars, and they have to be fit, masculine and aggressive in all the ways that make the modern left shudder.

Viewed cynically, the military is allowed to remain immune from leftism so long as it cordons off and politically sterilises through service the most potentially anti-left portion of the populace. The military and its recruits are then put under the control of the most servile of civil servants. When they finally come out of military service, many veterans feel completely disconnected politically and socially, even from their own friends and family.

So what lesson should be learnt from the relative immunity of the military from leftist social engineering, and how could it be applied to other aspects of society?

In short, the left should be fought where they are weakest. That is, where human reality is starkest, and least conducive to doomed social engineering projects, such as the reality of front-line soldiers on a battlefield. We should pay heed to what military experience tells us about the psychology of young men. They need clear authority figures, they need structure, they need a purpose and a group with which to fulfil it. Should such a framework be given to the youth of today, then perhaps Western society would begin to see the glimmers of its salvation from the depths of its current liberal nihilism.

The Western man finds himself in a world where traditional values are deemed to be out of date and the centuries-old expectations of manhood is attributed to Western capitalisms “cultural programming,” but military leaders know full well the importance of courage, selflessness and order; an army  nor a society cannot exist in there absence.

Earlier today Tommy Robinson has been released on bail after his outrageous and draconian prison sentence by the state.

He refused to give the press a statement as he left the court surrounded by friends and security.

The establishments attempt to silence Tommy through imprisonment only served to wake up more of the British people to reality of the Orwellian police state in which they find themselves.

Tommy’s crime was simply reporting on the grooming gangs terrorising English families throughout the country.

He is due to appear in court at a later date to fight the case against him.

ARCHAEOLOGISTS have uncovered the gates to the biblical city where it is believed that Jesus fed the masses.

Viktor Orbán, the Christian leader of Hungary and the scourge of Soros’ NGO’s, blasted the cancerous liberalism destroying Europe and told supporters he will use his mandate to advance into a “new era”, with Central European nations becoming bastions of Christian culture.

Breitbart:

Speaking at an event in the predominantly ethnic Hungarian region of Székely Land in Romania, the Fidesz leader said he was looking forward to the end of the present European Commission led by Jean-Claude Juncker, and to elections to the European Parliament in 2019 — which he predicts will for the first time revolve around one common European issue: mass migration.

Orbán said these elections would provide an opportunity to block “the great goal of transforming Europe and moving it towards a post-Christian and post-national era” and hand a heavy defeat to “the elite of ’68” and their liberal democratic system.

As Western European states grapples with its declining birthrates, Orban has offered generous incentives for couples to have children, ensuring the survival of a Christian Hungarian nation.

“In European politics it is the turn of the anti-communist generation, which has Christian convictions and commitment to the nation,” he declared.

“The situation in the West is that there is liberalism, but there is no democracy… Censorship and restrictions on freedom of speech have become general phenomena,” he observed.

“Working together, political leaders and technology giants filter news items that are uncomfortable for the liberal elite… see the ingenious and cunning means by which they restrict access to negative news reports on migrants, immigrants and related topics… The liberal concept of freedom of opinion has gone so far that liberals see diversity of opinion as important up until the point that they realise, to their shock, that there are opinions which are different from theirs.”

Those unfortunate to live under the rule of liberal-globalists in Germany, France and the UK can only look on with envy as our brothers and sisters and their leaders in the East pick up the mantle of the European civilization.

Is it any wonder we see businesses and citizens of Northern Europe flocking to the East to set up shop and start new families as their own states disintegrate!

The brutal Manchester Bomber who slaughtered 22 young concert-goers had been ‘rescue’ by the Royal Navy on the orders of Prime Minister David Cameron! The latest shocking news about how the killer was aided and abetted by the Tory government emerged this morning in the Daily Mail.

The vile suicide bomber was rescued by the Navy from war-torn Libya three years before his pop concert atrocity, the Mail reveals today.

HMS Enterprise plucked Salman Abedi, then 19, from the Libyan coast and took him to Malta for a flight home to Britain in August 2014.

The bomb he set off in Manchester Arena killed 22, including seven children.

Abedi’s younger brother, Hashem, who is in jail in Tripoli facing trial over the attack, was also rescued by HMS Enterprise.

The pair were among more than 100 British citizens taken to safety.

But Cameron’s guilt goes much further than that! The Tripoli Brigade to which the killer belonged was not some random bunch of Jihadi crazies. It was a part of the so-called National Liberation Army, the umbrella force organised to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi. The NLA was the ground-force backed by none other than David Cameron, who turned the RAF into the air arm of the Islamist rebellion.

It was founded, organised and led by Mahdi al-Harati, a Libyan-Irish citizen. It was armed by the CIA, through the American puppet regime in Qatar. The brigade included officers who had lived most of their lives in English speaking countries including Ireland, Canada, UK and the US.

An article in Ireland’s Sunday World drew attention to relations between Mahdi al-Harati and an unnamed US intelligence agency.

According to the article on November 6, 2011, €200,000 in cash was stolen from al-Harati’s Dublin house a month previously.

The Sunday World reported that a criminal gang working the area found two envelopes stuffed with €500 notes during a raid on the al-Harati’s family home, October 6.

The article, apparently relying on police sources, stated that al-Harati, who has been a Dublin resident employed as an Arabic teacher for 20 years, claimed, when contacted by police, that the stolen cash was “given to him by an American intelligence agency.”

The article continued, “Astonished officers made contact with Mahdi al-Harati who told them that he had travelled to France, the United States and Qatar the previous month and that representatives of an American intelligence agency had given him a significant amount of money to help in the efforts to defeat Gaddafi. He said he left two envelopes with his wife in case he was killed and took the rest of the cash with him when he went back to Libya.”

When Abdallah’s brother was shot and paralysed from the waist down, he was flown back to Britain to get NHS treatment. But the UK’s aid for the rebels went far beyond the ‘health tourism’ we’ve all come to expect in Soft Touch Britain.

Middle Eastern Eye blew the whistle on what really happened on 25th May 2017, in a major investigation entitled ‘Sorted’ by MI5: How UK government sent British-Libyans to fight Gadaffi. This included the following revelations:

“One British citizen with a Libyan background who was placed on a control order – effectively house arrest – because of fears that he would join militant groups in Iraq said he was “shocked” that he was able to travel to Libya in 2011 shortly after his control order was lifted.

“‘I was allowed to go, no questions asked,’ said the source, who wished to remain anonymous.

“He said he had met several other British-Libyans in London who also had control orders lifted in 2011 as the war against Gaddafi intensified, with the UK, France and the US carrying out air strikes and deploying special forces soldiers in support of the rebels.

“‘They didn’t have passports, they were looking for fakes or a way to smuggle themselves across,’ said the source.

“But within days of their control orders being lifted, British authorities returned their passports, he said.

READ TO BOTTOM FOR  VIDEO

“‘These were old school LIFG guys, they [the British authorities] knew what they were doing,’ he said, referring to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an anti-Gaddafi Islamist militant group formed in 1990 by Libyan veterans of the fight against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

“Belal Younis, another British citizen who went to Libya, described how he was stopped under ‘Schedule 7’ counter-terrorism powers on his return to the UK after a visit to the country in early 2011. Schedule 7 allows police and immigration officials to detain and question any person passing through border controls at ports and airports to determine whether they are involved in terrorism.He said he was subsequently asked by an intelligence officer from MI5, the UK’s domestic security agency: “Are you willing to go into battle?

“‘While I took time to find an answer he turned and told me the British government have no problem with people fighting against Gaddafi,’ he told MEE.

As he was travelling back to Libya in May 2011 he was approached by two counter-terrorism police officers in the departure lounge who told him that if he was going to fight he would be committing a crime.

But after providing them with the name and phone number of the MI5 officer he had spoken to previously, and following a quick phone call to him, he was waved through.

“As he waited to board the plane, he said the same MI5 officer called him to tell him that he had ‘sorted it out’.”

The victims of Cameron’s blowback disaster in Manchester

The Manchester Bomber’s own father first came to Britain with the help of the security services as a leading member of the LIFG. And now it has been confirmed that his close friend Mohammed Abdallah was a fighter with the Tripoli Brigade – David Cameron’s allies and “boots on the ground” in the war on Libya.

So we see that the terrorist cell which murdered 22 innocent people in Manchester being a bunch of ungrateful immigrants who slipped in and out of Britain to wage terrorist war without anyone noticing. Rather, they were part of a group deliberately encouraged and aided and abetted by the British political elite.

The Manchester bombing is a terrible and classic example of ‘blow back’. Sadly, it will not be the last.

Europe’s globalist project was rocked in 2016 by the decision of the British people to leave the liberal empire.

Their example has given the citizens of many European states, sickened by the power-grabbing and cronyism of the Brussels bureaucratic elite, a badly-needed boost in their own fight to reclaim their national sovereignty and control of their own destinies.  

Russia Today:

Nearly half of Swedes and Danes said they’d rather be in a ‘Nordic Union’ with their neighbors from Norway, Finland and Iceland than in the EU, a fresh poll revealed.

Research conducted by pollster Sentio for Norwegian newspaper Klassekampen showed 47 percent support the hypothetical Nordic Union in Sweden and 45 percent in Denmark. 32 percent of Swedes and 36 percent of Danes were happy to remain in the European Union, while the rest said they were undecided on the issue.

As for non-EU member Norway, only 10 percent suggested that it would be a good idea for the country to join the European Union. The concept of the so-called ‘Nordic Union,’ which would see Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Iceland implementing joint policies, was backed by 32 percent of Norwegians.

The poll was conducted in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, with around 1,000 people surveyed in each of the countries. The researchers didn’t ask those in Finland and Iceland for their opinion.

Fed up with the unpopular mandates dictated to them by the unelected in Brussels, from the internet censorship laws to the austerity programmes and banking debts, Europeans are calling time on the EU project.

With Poland, The Czech Republic and Hungary refusing to play ball and settle hundreds of thousands of refugees in their native lands and Italy’s tough stance on border controls, the Europhiles are losing the war for the hearts and minds of the people of Europe.

In response to President Trump’s accusation that Twitter is secretly “shadow banning” Conservative and Pro-Life and Christian voices, Twitter released a vague statement claiming they simply “rank[s] tweets and search results” to ensure content is “immediately relevant” and addresses “bad-faith actors who intend to manipulate or detract from healthy conversation.”

Lifesitenews:

“We do not shadow ban,” [Trust & Safety lead] Gadde and [product lead] Beykpour declared. “You are always able to see the tweets from accounts you follow (although you may have to do more work to find them, like go directly to their profile). And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.”

Their explanation did not convince many conservatives, with many highlighting the “more work to find them” line for ridicule.

Twitter’s latest explanation for their algorithm amounts to “bury[ing] Republicans for something totally out of their control,” the Daily Caller’s Peter Hasson noted. “Twitter’s algorithm likely suppressed the Republican congressmen because the wrong accounts ‘engaged’ with theirs, they said.”

At Breitbart, John Nolte wrote that Twitter’s explanation effectively admitted that, “although you have gone to the trouble of following someone’s Twitter account, and have done so specifically because you want to read their tweets, Twitter is interfering in this process.”

“How are you supposed to know to look at somebody’s profile to check on their tweets when Twitter is shadow banning their tweets, banning from your feed the tweets you specifically requested to see?” he asked. “How are you supposed to know you are missing what you can’t see, what you don’t even know is out there? How are you supposed to find new people to follow, expose yourself to new ideas?”

Thankfully there is a multitude of lawsuits pending against Twitter and when they are dragged into court and required to hand over all their files on their censorship policy, we may well see their censorship czars walking from the courts with egg on their face and a new dawn of free speech on social media on the horizon.

For too long liberal authoritarianism has been given a free hand to silence their opponents by the political establishment but with Trump’s intervention and their user-ship and profits in free-fall, they are scurrying to limit the damage done and their power to hinder the silent majority is on the wane.