reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Marx openly advocated genocide against Slavs, referring to them as "racial trash" who must perish in a revolutionary holocaust. This fact is not widely known, but it is shocking when mentioned. Engels also supported this idea, stating that primitive societies in Europe, such as the Bosques, Bretons, Scottish Highlanders, and Serbs, would need to be destroyed because they were two stages behind in the historical struggle. Marx believed that Slavic people were vulgar and dirty, and he even questioned the existence of Poland. In summary, Marx and Engels believed that classes and races too weak to adapt to new conditions of life should perish in a revolutionary holocaust.

The speaker claims Winston Churchill's mother was Jewish and that Churchill was financed by a secret group called The Focus, primarily composed of Jewish industrialists and bankers, from 1936 onward. This group allegedly influenced Churchill to adopt an anti-Nazi stance, leading to his rise to Prime Minister and Britain's involvement in a war that was not in its best interest. The speaker suggests Britain should have allowed Poland and the Jews to resolve their issues with Germany independently. He cites a letter from Chaim Weizmann to Churchill in 1941, stating that Zionist support for the British cause and their ability to bring the United States into the war were contingent on the creation of a Jewish army in the Middle East. The speaker asserts that Churchill became a "gentile frontman" for Jewish interests, naming Robert Monde, Robert Valley Cohen, and Berna Baruch as examples. He also claims Neville Chamberlain believed American and world Jews forced England into the war. The speaker quotes the Jewish magazine Sentinel of Chicago as stating that the war was brought about by Jews. Churchill allegedly rejected peace offers from Germany, even when Britain was isolated, as confirmed in a letter to Stalin.

Many believe England is united behind Churchill, but that's false. The British constitution has devolved into a dictatorship, not for the people's benefit but for a small elite. Historically, the British Empire was built by adventurers, but since Queen Victoria, its wealth has been exploited by a few. The current war isn't about national identity; it's a struggle between civilization and destructive ideologies. We face a choice: either succumb to tyranny or fight for a nationalist and socialist revolution. If we fail to defend our civilization, we risk losing everything built over 2,000 years. The fight is crucial, as history shows that civilizations can vanish. We must act to preserve our legacy, or we will be remembered only as a footnote in history, overshadowed by barbarism. Only time will reveal if my actions are deemed traitorous.

All the world's problems stem from the British Empire, including those in Gaza, China, Pakistan, India, and the Middle East. As the most powerful empire for 200 years, the British created conflicts worldwide. The current disaster in Palestine is partially due to British promises made between 1915 and 1917. The British promised the same territory to three different groups. First, in the McMahon communications, they promised it to the Arabs in exchange for fighting the Turks. Then, through the Sykes-Picot Treaty, they promised it to the French. Finally, in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, they declared it a Jewish homeland, despite the land not belonging to them.

In a 1920 article, Winston Churchill expressed his belief that some international Jews aimed to establish a global communist state under Jewish control. He suggested that these individuals would utilize both communism and Zionism to achieve their goals.

In the early 20th century, soldiers fought for England and Britain, not for tolerance or inclusion. They fought for glory, pride, and the future their rulers promised. The sacrifices made in wars were not for a multicultural or politically correct society, but for a different vision of society that is now deemed unacceptable to mention.

Hitler and the National Socialists did not view other races as subhuman, contrary to post-war propaganda. The term "master race" was a mistranslation, referring to Germans being masters of themselves and their country. "Lebensraum" means living space, not brutality against other races. Jewish supremacists use race to describe their own, projecting the idea of an Aryan master race onto Germans to deflect from their own racism.

The Afrikaans people have no other home, and their language is unique to them. They are descendants of Dutch settlers who arrived in South Africa before the British. The speaker argues against rewriting history to pretend that African tribes didn't compete for resources before settlers arrived. They recount a story about Zulu tribesmen questioning why white men cared more about rhinos than their own land. The speaker questions who has a legitimate claim to land, as they believe humanity's presence is increasingly viewed as an aberration. They claim that when farmers arrived in South Africa, the land was uninhabited and transformed into fertile land. They warn of the consequences of governments taking land without compensation, citing Zimbabwe as an example where land seizures led to violence, cronyism, and agricultural collapse. The speaker suggests that simply being Black does not qualify someone to manage a commercial farm.

The speaker argues that the indigeneity of Palestinians to the land of Palestine does not entitle them to their own country within Israel. They claim almost every country was conquered, citing Canada and Australia as examples where indigenous populations like the Inuits and Aboriginals are not allowed to create their own countries. The speaker states that in 1948, Jews won a war against Arabs and Palestinians on the land, and therefore, it is now their country. They assert that no other country is expected to separate and give land to indigenous people. The speaker believes that demanding this of Israel is a result of Jew hatred, as such demands are not made of countries like the US, Mexico, Canada, or Australia.

The speaker states their group prioritizes their own British and European people, but will also help others. They claim policies promoting multiracialism are a universal mix-up that seeks to eliminate natural diversity, replacing it with a "gray" uniformity. They argue against mixing widely different peoples and races, predicting it will lead to trouble. They assert that multiracial policies have been disastrous in Africa, citing the Congo, and that similar policies brought many "colored people" to Britain to force white Britons to accept blacks in a multiracial society. The speaker believes this policy has failed in both Africa and Britain. They advocate for separating white and black populations in Africa into separate nations living peacefully side by side, offering aid and advice for their development, but not mixing them. They maintain their policy has become entirely vindicated by events.

South Africans don't understand white people. Science shows white people are inferior, with Neanderthal blood. White populations are shrinking, along with their leadership and wealth. We are dealing with the weakest whites ever. We expect humanity, but whites are below human. It's like negotiating with a wild dog – you can't expect it to guard your house. We seek justice for stolen land and butchered people, but we're not out for blood. Why don't white people understand Ubuntu? They don't have a heart because they're incapable. You can't expect human behavior from a dog.

CNN commentators suggest white South Africans should return home, despite generations in the country, while Somalis in Minnesota are considered American upon arrival. White people, regardless of their history in a place, are often labeled colonizers with no legitimate claim to any land. Under this framework, white people are the only demographic unable to be considered native to any country. If a white person claims the UK as a white country, they are condemned. White people are told America isn't their land, but Europe isn't acknowledged as their homeland either. The question is posed: where can white people claim a legitimate homeland and be considered native? How many generations must pass for a white person to be considered native to a country? If there's no amount of time, where is their native homeland? The terms native, colonizer, invader, and indigenous are tools of manipulation.

Speaker 0 states he was against immigration as early as 1955, before others like Mr. Powell. While repatriation is now more difficult due to the large number of immigrants, it can be done humanely if Europe works together to create conditions in immigrants' homelands that would encourage their return. Speaker 1 suggests Speaker 0 has a history of using scapegoats, such as Jews in the 30s and Black people in the 50s-70s. Speaker 0 denies generalized prejudice, stating he opposed certain Jews who were "agitating for war" and the import of a different alien population. He claims to have opposed persecution of the Irish and is against atrocity and bullying. He believes action was necessary against a minority agitating for war and against importing another population into an overcrowded island. He reiterates that any return of people to their native lands must be handled fairly and require creating conditions to which they wish to return.

In 1920, Winston Churchill wrote that international Jews were using communism and Zionism to establish a global Jewish dominion.

As South Africans, we don't understand white people. Science, even studies conducted by white eugenicists, shows they're an inferior species with Neanderthal blood. Their population is shrinking, and their leadership and wealth are dying out. We're dealing with the weakest whites ever. We expect humanity from them, but they're barely human. It's like negotiating with a wild dog, expecting it to guard your house. We ask for justice for stolen land and butchered people. We're not seeking their blood, yet they lack ubuntu and heart. But they're incapable of it. You can't expect human behavior from a dog.

I am an American who greatly admires Great Britain. I believe that an Arab Palestine poses a threat to Britain and the world, while a Jewish Palestine would be beneficial to Britain and a blessing.

Marx openly advocated for the genocide of Slavs, labeling them as racial trash who should be eliminated in a revolutionary holocaust. This fact is not widely known, but it shocks people when they hear about it. Engels also supported this idea, stating that primitive societies in Europe, like the Bosques, Bretons, Scottish Highlanders, and Serbs, should be destroyed because they are two stages behind in the class war. Marx also expressed disdain for Slavic people, particularly Poland, believing they had no reason to exist. In summary, Marx's views on genocide and racial superiority laid the foundation for these ideas.

In 1943, Britain hoarded rice when Japan occupied Burma, causing prices to increase. Churchill diverted Australian wheat from starving Indians to British troops and refused free food shipments from Canada and the United States. Churchill intentionally starved over 4 million Bengalis to fund the war effort, disliking Indians due to their desire for independence. He blamed Indians for the famine, saying they "breed like rabbits." Churchill expressed hatred towards Indians, calling them "beastly people" and suggesting Gandhi be trampled by an elephant. His behavior may have stemmed from alcohol addiction or antisocial tendencies. The victims have not been compensated, and Churchill has been celebrated as a hero.

All the world's problems can be traced back to the British Empire. The British created conflicts globally, including in Gaza, China, Pakistan, India, and throughout the Middle East, due to being the most powerful empire for 200 years. The current disaster in Palestine is one example. Between 1915 and 1917, the British promised the same territory to three different groups. First, they promised it to the Arabs in the McMahon communications in exchange for fighting against the Turks. Then, through the Sykes-Picot treaty, they promised it to the French. Finally, in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, they promised it as a Jewish homeland, despite the land not belonging to them.

Our race is superior, like divine gods, while other races are inferior, like insects or animals. Our destiny is to rule over them, with the masses serving as our slaves. This statement is often attributed to Hitler, but it actually comes from a monarch. Jewish scholars believe their covenant is with God, not with humans.

Speaker 1 asserts that Hitler was the aggressor of World War II, beginning the war by driving east with the intention of destroying communist Russia. He states that Britain intervened and declared war to prevent Hitler from achieving that objective, and as a result, Britain “today” has to maneuver back and forth between America and Russia. He claims that Britain has “lost the empire,” that 25,000,000 Europeans were killed, and that he is proud to have done his utmost to stop what he describes as a suicidal war that “has destroyed Great Britain.” Speaker 0 acknowledges this sequence and asks for the precise words spoken in 1939, requesting to know what Speaker 1 claimed at that time, specifically referencing the assertion that the conflict was “simply a Jewish financier's quarrel.”

Should Europe remain small nations mixing with unsuitable people, or expand into vast spaces for its own people's development, benefiting mankind? The policy of mixture is a mask for exploiting backward peoples, as financial forces did in the 1930s in India, Hong Kong, Japan, and China. These countries were exploited for cheap labor, ruining British and European industries, while London and Wall Street profited. This exploitation led to China's embrace of communism. Finance seeks new fields of exploitation in Africa, where ignorant, savage people lack protection. Under European flags, these people will be exploited in sweatshops, destroying new British industries, just as old ones were. Is this worthy of Britain or Europe? Will African sweat fields be used to create competition within Europe? The financial power has shifted from London to Wall Street, and it exerts its influence in politics, so that governments are ruled by money alone.

Letting in people of different cultures and religions was seen as a mistake as it creates pressure groups within each country.

Why does every other group in the world have the right to its own homeland except white people? Explain how that makes sense. Either no group has the right, or every group does. Why are we playing along with this nonsense? It's leading to a bad conclusion. Either every group has a right to self-determination, or no group does. It can't be some groups do, or all groups do but one. It's all or nothing. What's the counter-argument? There is no answer. Uniformity is maintained through threats, like, "Shut up. You're a bad person for saying that. You're a Nazi." No. I hate the Nazis and attacking people for what they can't control, like how they're born. I'm a Christian, and I don't believe in it. Call me whatever you want. I'm making the opposite case. I've done nothing to be ashamed of. If defending people from being murdered because of how they were born is a crime, then I'll plead guilty.

"Is because you can then misuse words like oppression." "There has been no oppression for the white man in this country." "You tell me which white men were dragged out of their homes." "You tell me which one of them got dragged all the way across an ocean and told that you are gonna go at work." "We are gonna steal your wives." "We are gonna rape your wives." "That didn't happen." "That is oppression." "We didn't ask to be here." "We're not the same migrants that y'all constantly come up against." "We didn't run away from home. We were stolen." "So, yeah, we are gonna sit here and be offended when you wanna sit here and act like and and and don't let it escape you that it is white men on this side of the aisle telling us, people of color on this side of the aisle, that y'all are the ones being oppressed, that y'all are the ones that are being harmed."