What breed of subversive Jew is this? Mixing them in test tubes these days.
The scope and scale of the treason and treachery is beyond what I thought. Before, during remigration tribunals will have to be expedited. DPen will mean many thousands may pay the ultimate price in a painful return to reality not seen since the end of WWII.
Really like this guy. True culture exchange
American tries fry up in the UK 🇬🇧
(📍The Lemon Tree)
Are you a fried bread on your breakfast person? 🧐 #britishfood #uk #england
Tom Garvy retweeted
I’m going to let you in on a secret about rape that I learned while bouncing at 3 nightclubs concurrently for my entire undergrad. 500 nights at the club dealing with women and creeps have produced some insight.
The first thing to understand is that 99% of date-rape cases are just patently false. Every weekend like clockwork a new tiny girl who hadn’t eaten all day would confidently down 5 shots of tequila then claim she was drugged once word got around that she shit herself in a cab, or fell asleep in a dumpster.
I’ve lost count of how many of them were perplexed to report that their drug tests came back clean the next morning.
BUT… In my 500 nights of service, I witnessed it happen for real, bill cosby style, twice.
And in 100% of those cases it was a black or an Indian guy.
The first was a guy named Sohil who had actually openly made some suspect remarks to people I knew. Why was nothing done? Because the concept was so completely alien to the white guys around him that they simply didn’t believe what they were hearing.
It was exactly like the scene from American Psycho where he talks about a girls head on a stick as though it’s the punchline to a joke, and his friends just exchange a weird look and carry on. That’s how crazy the prospect of rape sounds to white guys, he might as well have said he had a head in his freezer.
Ultimately, Sohil was caught trying to sneak into a drugged girl’s bedroom window after her roommates had shuttled her home for the night. He was sentenced to 2 years in prison. There was no international outrage, no big news articles, nothing. Just a post on Facebook shared between the bar staff.
The second was a black guy from Martinique. He was a charming niggardly character who hung around the bars every weekend bumming cigarettes or making a few bucks selling fake cocaine. He lived in someone’s walk-in closet for $300 a month.
He had rumours circulating about his predation, but nobody had anything concrete until he was finally caught inappropriately touching an incapacitated girl and force feeding her drugs.
He was quickly and brutally sentenced to a swift release and a mild scolding from a social worker. He had successfully argued to the judge that people would kill him if he were sent back to Martinique, and was therefore let off with not even a slap on the wrist.
The funniest part of this whole ordeal is that we have reason to suspect that he was a refugee in the first place because he had raped the wrong guy’s sister back home. You genuinely can’t make this shit up.
Word got around to the bars, but this was back in the day. We didn’t have ID scanners, and hiring was a revolving door. Every Fortnite we’d have a new roster of Dianabol enthusiasts standing at the entrance letting groups of bombshells skip the line. It was impossible to entirely keep people out.
And so within 2 months it happened again. Exactly the same as last time. And the black guy hit the judge with the exact same excuse. Luckily the judge finally came to his senses, and sent him back to a third world shithole. He has lived in Paris France ever since.
I tell these stories because I’m at my whits end with headlines like the one I see below. At this point we’re so used to being gaslit that the omission of a description is as good as a 4K portrait.
So I’ll do my small part to set record straight.
It is never the white men.
Man who drugged and raped dead NYC college student texted nude pics of her instead of calling 911: feds trib.al/pAEqBDj
Tom Garvy retweeted
The idolisation of parties like AfD or RN by British 'nationalists' who simultaneously denounce Reform and Restore is incomprehensible to me, since these parties are like clones of each other.
Not a shred of evidence of homosexual activity.
Your bots and confused-angry Incels will love this. Just stop having sex with men, and lying about it, Nick. Stop recruiting men into the incel lifestyle. If you want to improve America, and preserve the culture, and save White European culture, encourage them to have children. Have some yourself.
You've got such obvious, rare, talent. Don't prostitute yourself. Physically or for shekels.
Embrace the talent God gave you, and use it for happy, productive truth.
Tom Garvy retweeted
Wikipedia is not a reliable or unbiased source. The core “staff” of so-called Wikipedians falls into the exact same biased writing, again and again. Here’s a short, non-exhaustive list of some common tropes:
1. Biased usage of active and passive voice. See the article on Argentina’s Dirty War: actions by RW groups were unprompted and active, whereas leftist terrorism “just happened,” as if lacking agency. This was a two-sided guerrilla war in which no party was “innocent,” so it’s particularly egregious to read. But the same thing happens in dozens of other articles.
2. Odd and intentional use of criticism. You can tell whenever Wikipedia likes a certain philosopher or thinker, and you can *really* tell when it doesn’t. For someone Approved but still surrounded by controversy, like Margaret Mead, it’s evident. Her article mentions the primary criticisms, but then makes sure to “discredit” those criticisms with increasingly-obscure references. When Wikipedians really don’t like a thinker, the only criticism included is considered the final word, even when there was a lively back-and-forth debate in the relevant field — see Laurence Waddell.
3. New Atheist “debunking” of anything and everything. If Wikipedia hates anything more than right-wing thought, it’s liminal phenomena. Any instance or thinker related to esotericism or paraphysical research is treated with extreme aggression. These articles seem to be written not as informational pieces but as Snopes “debunks,” even of people who just wrote on the matter. Someone like Charles Fort, a serious & agnostic researcher, is reduced to a huckster in their article — because he countered The Science.
4. Blatant moralizing. Read the article for any conquest during the Age of Exploration, and compare it to an article about an ancient conquest. The former will read like a seething screed against the conquerors, whereas the latter will read like history. They can’t resist slipping in little digs every other paragraph.
5. Inclusion and exclusion of detail. China Miéville has a massive article. Robert Drews has a stub. This happens everywhere.
6. Overreliance on female writers. This is hard to capture properly, but it’s a trend I’ve noticed — with citing sources, especially by name in the text, Wikipedia drastically favors female historians and thinkers. Most of the unremarked-upon footnotes will be work by men, but there’s a conscious desire to virtue signal and include female writers in the text, even when they’re nearly irrelevant or there are far more important male thinkers on the subject. This also goes for non-white/non-straight thinkers, but it’s less visibly obvious that way. There’s just a strong DEI tilt to what sources get a specific callout.
I could keep going for a while, but these are some of the primary issues. They mostly have to do with historical articles; pieces on modern politics are so obviously biased that I don’t think I even need to cover it.
Anyway, don’t ever donate to Wikipedia. They’re an activist organization and an active arm of the political Left.
And make sure that when you’re reading about some historical event or figure, you’re able to read between the lines and look through the leftist schlock.
I first watch a Metatron in 2015 and remember thinking wow what a dork… 10 years later he’s a white nationalist / white adjacent? Either you hid your power level through the censorship years or you bend and break with the wind based on how it’s blowing, whichever way he won.
THIS happened today.
Stay tuned for the full fascinating conversation tomorrow. 4pm central.
@JakeMunro
Tom Garvy retweeted
Saint Expeditus.
The Patron for Task- & Time Management, Process Optimization, against Procrastination, Endless Meetings, Unactionable Tasks, Lack of KPIs and Focus.
The Martyr is depicted with a Cross that says "Hodie" (today) crushing a bird that says "tomorrow!
Needs to be in every Office.
Tom Garvy retweeted
This is Scotland.
In Aberdeen, a migrant who can barely speak English and needs an interpreter just to understand what’s happening is handed the keys to a brand-new, taxpayer-funded house. Fucking Disgusting and makes me absolutely sick!!
Meanwhile, Scots who’ve paid into the system their whole lives are struggling to put food on the table or keep a roof over their heads. Housing waiting lists stretch for years. Veterans sleep rough. Families are priced out.
We’ve had decades of this: open the door, hand out the keys, and call anyone who questions it a bigot. The people who built and paid for this country are expected to just accept it.
This isn’t compassion. It’s a government that looks after everyone except its own.
I heard this years back then read it was another hit job. I think it’s weird timing for more defamation considering Tuam was completely debunked.
🚨 NEW: Joe Rogan was in shock when historical storyteller Cody Tucker revealed that Mother Teresa was actually a horrible person who kept dying patients in horrible conditions while massive donations flowed to the Vatican:
TUCKER: “She's a scumbag. Mother Teresa never did anything good.”
CONTEXT: In 1994, a physician named Robin Fox visited Mother Teresa's Home for the Dying in Calcutta.
Fox wasn't some anonymous critic.
He was the editor of The Lancet, one of the world's most prestigious medical journals.
And what he described was deeply troubling.
Medical care was inconsistent.
Some decisions were made by nuns and volunteers without formal medical training.
Basic diagnostic investigations were rarely available.
And the facility did not have strong painkillers in its medication supply.
Fox described a patient with a high fever who initially received paracetamol and an antibiotic before a visiting doctor suspected malaria and changed the treatment.
His central objection was that patients who might have treatable conditions weren't being reliably distinguished from people who were actually dying.
Think about that.
Someone could arrive believing they were receiving medical care when they might have needed a proper diagnosis, referral or treatment.
And this wasn't the only criticism.
In 2013, three Canadian academics published a critical review of Mother Teresa's life and work in the journal Studies in Religion.
They questioned her approach to caring for the sick, her political relationships and the management of the enormous donations her organization received.
One of their central concerns was whether a religious belief in the spiritual value of suffering had been allowed to influence the standard of care provided to vulnerable patients.
Mother Teresa believed suffering could have profound spiritual meaning.
But there's a difference between helping someone find meaning in unavoidable suffering...
AND FAILING TO RELIEVE SUFFERING THAT MEDICINE COULD PREVENT.
There is also an important complication.
During the 1990s, India had extraordinarily restrictive regulations governing access to morphine.
Human Rights Watch later documented that India's medical morphine consumption collapsed by approximately 97% between 1985 and 1997.
Even major hospitals struggled to obtain adequate pain medication.
So the absence of strong painkillers at Mother Teresa's facilities does not, by itself, prove she deliberately withheld them because she wanted patients to suffer.
And Fox acknowledged something critics often leave out:
The home he visited provided cleanliness, wound care and genuine kindness to desperately poor people.
The Missionaries of Charity also cared for people whom hospitals had turned away.
Mother Teresa saw her mission primarily as offering dignity, love and spiritual comfort to the abandoned, rather than operating conventional hospitals.
Critics have questioned the Missionaries of Charity's financial transparency for decades.
But Tucker's more specific allegation that Mother Teresa funneled donated money to the Vatican rather than caring for patients has not been established by the evidence reviewed here.
That distinction matters.
IMPORTANT NOTES: Mother Teresa received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979.
The Catholic Church canonized her as a saint in 2016.
To millions of people, she remains one of the greatest symbols of compassion in modern history.
But the historical record also contains serious criticisms that deserve examination rather than automatic dismissal.
The most disturbing question isn't whether Mother Teresa personally believed suffering had spiritual value.
It's whether that belief, combined with the way her facilities operated, ever resulted in people enduring pain or illness that could have been treated.
Because there is a fundamental difference between helping someone die with dignity...
And allowing someone to suffer when they might not have needed to.