In this episode of Week-End Warrior, Lana and Henrik of Red Ice TV discuss the latest film form Dinesh D’Souza, Death of a Nation. To make things brief, D’Souza tries to sell us the idea that the Democrats were the real Nazis and fascists and that the Democrat Party was the party of slavery, etc. Although this thesis has certain merits, I agree with Lana and Henrik that Dinesh D’Souza twists reality in order to propagandize against the Democrat Party and that is wrong. There were partisans of slavery and of nazism in both parties. But I want to cover another aspect of D’Souza’s view of things that they don’t talk about (not directly). It is the question of White supremacy. Dinesh D’Souza covered the subject of White supremacy in an interview given to Frank Gaffney on the air of Secure Freedom Radio (the audio files are below). During the interview, he explains to Gaffney that fascism and Nazism were left-wing ideologies and that is an argument that can be made if we look at their doctrine. He says that the Left put the blame on the Right for the crimes of Nazism and fascism and that is true. Right-wingers don’t commit mass murder and try to reduce the rights of the citizens. But he fails to see that, in that regard, the so-called White supremacy is a concept that was invented by the same Left to try to portray patriots in a bad light. During the interview, he makes references to figures of the Alt-Right like Jason Kessler and Richard Spencer and says that they are wrong, etc, etc. People in the patriotic and/or nationalist movement are not ‘White supremacists’. They are activists or advocates for the white race. That means that they want the best conditions for the white race, to thrive, to be prosperous, to grow, etc, and there is nothing ‘supremacist’ about that. And that is done not at the expense of others. Every race and ethnic group has the right to be free and live in an environment favorable to its development. Dinesh D’Souza falls into the trap of calling ‘supremacist’ good men and women who simply want to protect us from harm and avoid the catastrophe of totalitarianism. Dinesh D’Souza is trying to have it both ways. He wants the public to believe that those who call right-wingers ‘fascists’ and ‘nazis’ are wrong when they do that, but on the other hand, that they are right when they call certain right-wingers ‘white supremacists’. According to Dinesh D’Souza those so-called ‘White supremacists’ are not really right-wingers. The truth is that they are really right-wingers but they are not White supremacists. They are trying to protect us.
To visit the page of the show on SFR: Interview with Dinesh D’Souza on Death of a Nation
In a recent article, I blogged about the unfortunate imprisonment of British patriot Tommy Robinson. In Russia, one of the most famous and courageous person who had decided to confront the local totalitarian forces there is Vladimir Bukovsky. He passed many years in prison and faced many hardships. Among others, you can read one of his books,To Build a Castle: My Life as a Dissenter. In this interview on the air of Secure Freedom Radio, he explains to Frank Gaffney that everything that is happening in the West right now was foreseeable. Because once you allow the germs of totalitarianism to take roots, it is only a question of time before the whole society is overturned.
It is a very dark day for Great Britain. Tommy Robinson has just been released from prison, and that’s good news. The bad news is, as anyone can see in this interview given to Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, that Robinson has apparently suffered from some kind of psychological damage or trauma as a consequence of his imprisonment. Will that damage be permanent? Nobody knows but the British government bears responsibility. During the interview, Robinson recalls that he was placed in solitary confinement in a prison with a large representation of Muslims and that those Muslims used to throw feces through his open window, among other things. He was arrested on very disputable grounds, his rights were not respected, due process was not followed, etc. The whole thing seemed like a kangaroo court-type of procedure. The look of horror on Tucker Carlson’s face while Robinson tells his story is worth the trip because it says it all. What country on Earth, supposedly a democratic one, would treat one of its citizens like that, especially a patriot who, beside a few minor things, does nothing wrong and is beyond reproach? Great Britain apparently.
But why, would you ask yourself. Let me provide my own explanation. Robinson was arrested simply because he was protesting in front of a court building where a specific case that interested him was held. Authorities used the pretext that he was already in the vicinity of a court building to bring him in, if you know what I mean, before a judge. Again why? Probably because they wanted to punish him for doing the unthinkable: speaking his mind, courageously, in public. In effect, he was the one who read the famous speech at Speaker’s Corner that Martin Sellner, in the company of Brittany Pettibone and Lauren Southern, was supposed to give there. You see, it has been a long time since Great Britain is no longer a democracy. Remember that both George Orwell’ 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World see their action taking place in Great Britain. It is not an accident. Also, the famous cult TV series The Prisoner, starring Patrick McGoohan, was a british production. These three artistic productions were trying to portray reality as it is, not the fantasy world that the media would like us to believe. And by the way, Canada is a former british colony (they took over from the French in 1760) and curiously, I have seen before these kind of tactics. I can recognize the modus operandi. They are used regularly here against individuals with a strong mind a strong personality, so I am not surprised. Business as usual in the British Empire.
However here, contrary to the life of relative comfort and abundance that Patrick McGoohan’s character enjoyed in The Prisoner, Tommy Robinson was given a treatment reminiscent more of the ‘room 101′ treatment in George Orwell’ 1984. In that novel, room 101 was the room where the prisoners were interrogated and tortured to break their will and their mind. And I think this whole episode with Tommy Robinson has to be considered like that. The powers that be in Great Britain are trying to break him psychologically, and to a certain degree, they seem to have succeeded at least partially and temporarily, judging by the non-verbal signals and language given in this interview. We have to denounce that vigorously because if we don’t, tomorrow, it could be anyone of us going down the same road. Yes, it is a dark for Great Britain. The least the government could do would be to apologize to him and drop charges. Will they do it? Don’t hold your breath…
Finally, the Center for Security Policy has installed an embeddable audio file player on its website to present the Secure Freedom Radio podcasts. That means that now bloggers like me can share them with a much sexier look than just a web link. That’s great. I will continue to provide the links for each show just to make sure that you keep up with their great material. Now concerning this interview with Paul Kengor, a few thoughts. There was no ‘end’ to the Cold War as we have been told to believe. The Cold War continued without interruption to this day. Only, when the Soviet Union collapsed it shifted, transformed itself into a new thing, with the result that now we live in a much more dangerous world than we used to during the duration of the ‘official’ Cold War period. The Russians continued their operations while we were busy drinking champagne when the Berlin Wall came down. Nothing changed either in Cuba or North Korea. In other terms, while we were celebrating the supposed collapse of the communist ideology, the communists in flesh-and-blood continued to wage war against us and adapted their strategy and operations for the post-soviet era.
In those days, China was not really a threat. It was a poor country, without the means to do real damage. It was a communist regime without teeth. Now it has changed drastically. The country is rich and powerful militarily and technologically. Thanks to its entry in the World Trade Organization and to the massive transfer of wealth and technology made by our corrupt political elites (who have betrayed us big time), China has developed into a mastodon that may very well surpass the United States very soon. Just by looking at the behavior of western liberal politicians, some of them have already begun to behave as if China was now the number one superpower of the planet. In a past interview on the airwaves of Secure Freedom Radio (I can’t find the audio file for the moment, sorry), the perspicacious Kevin Freeman made a very relevant observation about China. He said that the chinese system was not really communist but rather fascist, instead. He is right. When you look at the way that everything in China has been consolidated to strengthen and promote the state, then what you have is a fascist system, similar to Nazi Germany or fascist Italy. The fact that the chinese state presents itself as a communist state serves mainly propaganda purposes. Of course, the political apparatus in China is communist, there is no doubt about that. But the Chinese are using the market economy to build and promote themselves in a way that the Soviets never did. That explains why western politicians are so fascinated by China. They can do business there, while saving their reputations. In effect, for a liberal politician, to do business in a totalitarian country is perfectly fine…as long as it is officially communist or Islamist and not fascist. The Chinese have succeeded to merge into one single system the most efficient aspects of both communism and fascism and that makes them a very dangerous force. They have more chances to become the next number one superpower than the Soviets or the Nazis never had, precisely because they have find a way to bring together the strongest qualities of both systems while reducing or eliminating their respective weaknesses. Also, another whole issue to talk about would be the involvement of eastern regimes like China or Russia in the support of radical Islam. It is something that many people suspect without necessarily having the evidence to back it up, but there are more and more signs that point in that direction. I will leave you listen to the show. For the web page, please visite: The Existential Threat of Today.
À peine quelques jours après leur victoire aux élections fédérales de 2015, certains hauts gradés du Parti Libéral du Canada se sont rendus en Chine pour une mission économique. Ils y ont rencontré là-bas des membres influents de la communauté des affaires chinoise. La Société Radio-Canada avait réalisé un reportage sur le sujet, où l’on voyait l’état-major du parti se démener sur le terrain pour conclure des alliances et des ententes. Le voyage semblait une réussite complète et les participants ravis des résultats. Aussi, il me semblait que le Premier Ministre nouvellement élu, Justin Trudeau, en avait profité pour faire un arrêt en Corée du Nord avant de revenir au Canada. Malheureusement, mes recherches dans Google ont été infructueuses à cet égard. Je n’ai pas réussi à trouver de références qui pourrait nous le rappeler. C’est bien dommage.
Voyez-vous, les élites Libérales du Canada sont devenues spécialistes de ce genre de voyage. Ils les multiplient, à tel point qu’on se demande s’ils ne préfèrent pas dans le fond se retrouver dans des pays totalitaires, dictatoriaux ou autoritaires plutôt que de se trouver dans le pays démocratique où ils ont été élus et où ils sont responsables du bien-être de leur population. On se souviendra que le Premier Ministre Libéral du Québec Philippe Couillard, qui a vécu dans le régime islamiste de l’Arabie Saoudite plusieurs années, s’est rendu à Cuba en septembre 2016 pour une mission économique, où il a eu l’occasion de rencontrer Raul Castro lui-même. Le Premier Ministre arborait un très large sourire aux lèvres lors de cette rencontre. En janvier 2018, Couillard s’est à son tour rendu en Chine, encore une fois pour une mission économique. Il a eu droit d’accès à la Cité interdite, ce qui est assez rare pour un dignitaire étranger. Il y a fait la rencontre de plusieurs ministres du gouvernement chinois. On peut se demander à cet égard quels sont les critères qui déterminent la décision par les autorités chinoises de donner ou de ne pas donner accès à la Cité interdite à un dignitaire étranger. Est-ce la réputation, l’orientation idéologique, les valeurs, la vision de l’économie? Quel élément fait pencher la balance d’un côté ou de l’autre?
Le dernier épisode en date de ce genre de voyage a été réalisé par nul autre que le Premier Ministre du Canada, Justin Trudeau, lors de son voyage en Inde voilà quelques semaines. Trudeau en a profité pour enfiler le plus possible de vêtements traditionnels et il était entouré d’une délégation sikh assez importante. Comme cela a été souligné par certains, comme Alexandre Cormier-Denis de Nomos-TV, plusieurs ministres de son gouvernement sont issus de la communauté sikh et certains semblent avoir des liens avec des groupes extrémistes sikhs. C’est peut-être pour cela qu’il y a été accueilli avec des sentiments partagés par les autorités indiennes.
Ce qui est frappant dans tout cela, c’est le type de pays qui est choisi par nos élites Libérales canadiennes pour leur ‘missions économiques’. C’est très souvent la Chine, Cuba, des pays arabes, etc. Or, si ces bonnes élites Libérales étaient réellement composées de patriotes, on s’attendrait à ce qu’elles se rendent en priorité appuyer les autres patriotes qui défendent nos libertés dans des pays comme le Japon, Israël et les quatre pays du Groupe de Visegrad, à savoir la Hongrie, la Pologne, la Slovaquie et la République Tchèque, d’une part et, d’autre part, dans des pays où les patriotes sont en difficulté, ce qui est le cas de l’ensemble des pays occidentaux, à part les quelques exceptions nommées plus haut. Et lorsque ces bonne élites se rendent aux États-Unis par exemple, c’est pour ‘mettre de la pression‘ sur le gouvernement américain comme l’a si bien dit Philippe Couillard, et non pas pour appuyer Donald Trump et l’ensemble des patriotes américains. (Notables exceptions ici, le maire de Montréal Denis Coderre s’est rendu au Japon en juillet 2014 et la nouvelle mairesse de Montréal s’y trouve au moment d’écrire ces lignes.) En fait, cela n’intéresse pas nos élites Libérales d’appuyer les patriotes. Leur priorité, c’est la Chine ou un de ses pays satellites. J’imagine que dans les prochaines semaines ou prochains mois on va nous annoncer un voyage en Iran ou en Corée du Nord. Ce serait tout à fait logique avec leur façon de faire et avec leurs valeurs. J’espère que les Québécois et les Canadiens se souviendront de tout cela au moment de voter lors des prochaines élections, qui auront lieu respectivement en 2018 au Québec et en 2019 au Canada.