Video Title: Kabbalah and the Antichristian Revolution. Source: The Two Cities Podcast. Date Published: November 30, 2024.
September 1, 2026
Kyiv Today, Europe Tomorrow: Russian Strategy After Beating The Nazis And NATO In Ukraine
Russia is winning the war in Ukraine, as we all expected.
But Moscow must not celebrate any military victory in Kyiv. It's a reconquest of former Russian territory. What is there to celebrate? The fact it took this long and required military sacrifices should shame Russia. Kyiv, the spiritual and ancestral home of Russian civilization, should have been a lay up.
Taking Kyiv was supposed to be a cake walk.
Still, it's a good starting point. But the real battles are coming.
For true, permanent victory, Russia must not stop at Kyiv. It must go all the way to Berlin, Paris, and eventually cross the Channel and conquer London.
The West must be saved from itself. Russia will be seen as Christian liberators in lands where Freemasons, Jews, Muslims, Africans, Atheists, Communists, Migrants, and degenerate Royals have raped and trampled upon for far too long.
European capitals need new, decisive leadership, and in the years ahead they will look to Moscow for guidance, wisdom, and strength. Russia must not abdicate this sacred responsibility and historic opportunity.
The United States and the European Union have been bad stewards of European affairs. The continent is begging for new management and new leadership.
Is Russia strong and wise enough to provide that leadership?
The bar today couldn't be lower.
The EU's demonic boss spoke of the values of the "Talmud" guiding Europe, and in a recent speech she threatened to confiscate the savings of average, hardworking European families.
These are the values of the European Union. Public theft and spiritual warfare.
Like the Soviet Union before it, the European Union's days are numbered. Russia need only to turn the calendar and watch it crumble.
The Communists lost in 1989 in Russia. They will lose again, this time in Europe.
The Origins of The Right of Intervention
Napoleon III.
Related:
Some History On The Emancipation of Moroccan Jews.
Napoleon And Islam: How The Emperor of Europe Saw The East.
The European Information War In The Muslim World Prior To WWII.
The history of European and Western military and political interventions in the Muslim world did not begin with Iraq or Libya.
Before the creation of Israel, the justification given by European powers to intervene in the Middle East was to protect minorities, specifically Christian communities in the Ottoman Empire that were coming under attack.
France and Europe, along with Russia, decided to intervene in Syria in 1860 to stop the massacre of Orthodox Christians by Muslims.
Unlike the Armenians who endured Ottoman slaughter during WWI with few, if any, international condemnations, the victims of these massacres had a powerful foreign patron in Russia in their corner, as well as several European empires that wanted to see the Ottoman empire reprimanded and its laws regarding non-Muslims drastically changed.
An excerpt from, "Europe and the Islamic World: A History" By John Tolan, Gilles Veinstein, and Henry Laurens; Translated by Jane Marie Todd, Princeton University Press, 2013, Pg. 302-03:
The faith-based community, or "millet,' was a product of modernity, stemming both from the internal evolution of Ottoman society and from European intervention. It proceeded from the emancipation of collectivities, not individuals, and led to political sectarianism. The 'Treaty of Paris of March 30, 1856, recorded the "generous intentions" of the sultan "toward the Christian populations." It was difficult for Europeans to acknowledge that the rights granted to the Jews in the Ottoman world were greater than those they possessed in much of Europe.
Incidentally in the Hatt-i Hümayun, the Europeans imposed the right of foreigners to possess property in the Ottoman Empire. The reformers took the opportunity to push through their economic program: the abolition of tax farms in favor of direct taxation; incentives for public utility projects, particularly highways; the institution of a public budget that the state would pledge to respect; and the creation of banks and financial institutions. "To reach these goals," they wrote, "we will seek the means to take best advantage of European science, art, and capital, and to put them into practice one by one."
For some Europeans, the emancipation of the Christians was a step toward Islam's disappearance, which would inexorably occur with historical progress. Curiously, this view can be seen as the counterpart to the discourse of free-thinkers on the disappearance of religion in the modern world. It was supported by the steady decline of the independent Muslim powers and the higher rate of population growth of Christian societies, including those of Eastern Christians. Some clerical circles therefore imagined the Christian East rising up from the ruins of the Islamic world.
The Muslims had a related view, seeing the edict of emancipation, missionary work, and the various sorts of European interference as demonstrations of a vast conspiracy destined to destroy Islam, with the Eastern Christians rep resenting its vanguard. Within that context, the Syrian provinces, which had lagged behind in reforms, constituted a realm where tensions between the different religious communities were likely to develop. The events of 1860 in Lebanon and Syria, where a social emancipation movement of Christian peasants sparked violence between Druzes and Maronites, and then a massacre of Orthodox Christians in Damascus, caused an enormous stir in Europe, where the image of Islam became inextricably linked to that of the massacre. In France, Napoleon III decided to intervene and obtained a European mandate for what we would now call the "right of intervention." Closely overseen by the other European powers, the operation culminated in a conference of ambassadors, who decided to create a semiautonomous Mount Lebanon in the empire, with a Christian governor named by the Porte in agreement with the great powers, and a council elected by the community. The constitution of an autonomous Greater Syria on the model of Egypt was envisioned. Napoleon III sounded out Abd al-Qadir, who had distinguished himself in the defense of the Christians of Damascus, to learn whether he would consent to assume the leadership of an Arab kingdom of Syria, but the exiled emir refused. The British proposed handing over the leadership of that Syrian entity to a reformist Ottoman vizier, but the vizier's circle was intent on defending the integrity of the Ottoman Empire.
August 31, 2026
Collapse With Dignity
When the Soviet Union began its process of collapse it didn't go around renaming bodies of water and looting the natural resources of its neighbours. It accepted the demise of its bloated and unpopular empire with some measure of humility and grace.
I advise Washington and the Jews and Masons running things in that capital to do likewise. Take a page out of Russian history. Collapse with dignity. Do not go insane.
Take Trump out the back and shoot the son of a bitch. Install a real leader, a real man. That's what America needs during this crisis. Not an actor. Not an egoist. Not a fake news merchant. Not a television star. Not a double agent. Not a tranny. Not a faggot. Not a cokehead. Not a pedophile. Not a son of the CIA or a plaything of the Mossad. A man for Christ's sake. A godly man.
Freemasonry And France: The Role of Paris In The End Times
When the Ayatollah was on the run in 1978 as an international fugitive he could have theoretically chosen any godforsaken country to stay holed up in.
He chose France.
That little detail in this whole story always puzzled me. France, the land of atheists, revolutionaries, and romantics, decided to harbor an old anti-American Islamic cleric. Why?
Why did Paris stick its nose in an international issue and a political dispute far removed from its geopolitical domain?
What business is it of France who leads Syria, Iran, Lebanon, or any country in the Middle East?
Why is France so interested in the Holy Land, Israel, Iran, and the lands of Islam?
Believe it or not, France had more say, along with England and Israel, in Syria's political outcome in the immediate post-Assad exit than either the United States, Saudi Arabia, or Turkey.
Throughout the war the Americans provided the money, advisory troops, and weapons. The Saudis offered political, cultural, and religious cover. And the Turks gave a land bridge to Al-Qaeda and all types of gullible Islamic fanatics. But none of them were the final arbiters of Syria's destiny. They did the grunt work, and all the logistics. The Jews, the British, and the French were the brains behind the operation.
Final discussions to resolve the war in Syria were chosen to take place in Paris earlier this year for more than symbolic reasons or because Paris is a beautiful European capital that can accommodate official diplomatic business.
Paris is no ordinary city. Paris is like a love letter to Freemasonry. It might be the capital of these demons. London is the intellectual capital, Washington is the muscle, but Paris is their spiritual home. That's where their first Masonic revolution succeeded. France was their first and true love. That's where their revolutionary ideas first became reality.
Russia was the second. And Iran was the third.
That historical context must always be remembered.
The drama unfolding in the Middle East and the Strait of Hormuz is not a conflict between imperialists and anti-imperialists. The Masonic masters and occult ideologues on both sides of the conflict don't care about the fate of the countries they're managing. Their loyalty is to a higher principle and a higher authority than their nation and their professed religion.
Do you think the Nazis truly cared about Germany? If they did they would not have dedicated it to war and destruction. They answered to higher gods than that of the nation-state of Germany.
The Masons running America, similarly, do not answer to America. They want to destroy the American empire financially, politically, and militarily. Everything they've done since 9/11 has been done to realize this grand goal. All the debts and deficits, all the wars, all the jobs sent overseas, none of them are policy failures, or accidents of history.
I found it curious why Trump decided to pull out of Afghanistan during his first term and then go to war against Iran in his second term. Why not stay in Afghanistan if the plan all along was to attack Iran? Wouldn't American military presence there be useful in future operations? Or why not attack Iran in 2006? Why wait twenty years?
It's like America was set up to fail in this war. It might seem that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, but this is all coordinated theatre. I don't think Trump attacked Iran because of the Epstein files. Epstein is a patsy, a fall guy, a middle man, just as Trump is.
These are not men of political consequence. When history is rewritten their roles will be marginalized. Nobody will read a biography of Trump or Obama, or of any modern politician, like they read Churchill's or Hitler's today. Our political leadership class, for the most part, have not produced lives worthy to read and learn from. They're just pathetic actors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)