Some will object, saying that during the period stretching from the eighth century in France to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in Spain and the Balkans (and all the way to Vienna, even), Europeans were faced with the presence of Arab and Turkish-Muslim invaders and occupiers, whom they eventually managed to drive back as part of a Reconquista movement that ended with the liberation of Greece in the early nineteenth century. True enough, but at the time, the invaders did not enjoy such demographic superiority, and they were perceived as foreign occupiers with their own army — just like the Germans in France during the last war. They were not, as is the case today, increasingly hostile and Islamised populations that have oftentimes been granted the nationality of European countries (a supremely horrific development) and have embedded themselves in the fabric of our societies. The above-mentioned wars were all wars of liberation waged against foreign armies in order to expel the invaders, and not, in fact, civil wars.
High-Intensity Hatred
The most fascinating type of war — the one that mobilises the greatest amount of hatred — is actually civil war, and not war between foreign nations. This is due to the fact that we are no longer fighting against soldiers from a distant country but face, instead, enemies living on the same territory, who are both nearby (often fellow citizens) and completely different from us: violence, fear and cruelty thus find themselves multiplied as a result of this proximity.
Today, the civil war that threatens us, especially in France, is bound to be much worse than the religious wars of the sixteenth century. But why is that? Because it will combine the characteristics of a classical civil war with those of a foreign conflict. Indeed, the clash will involve the inhabitants of the same territory, with the sides supporting conflicting ideologies and/or religions (as is the case with all civil wars); but at the same time, they will be foreign to each other by blood, with our rival protagonists having come from elsewhere, through immigration, and remaining dissimilar to us on the ethnic, cultural, religious and, to use the taboo word, racial level.
This war will therefore be characterised by a very high intensity resulting from the multiplication of its explosive causes, since the conflict will simultaneously be a civil and internal one, an ethnic one, a religious one and a racial one. An unheard-of event in Europe.
In addition to this, the level of barbarity and violence displayed by young rioters and delinquents of immigrant origin continues to grow. The following remark was made by a prison administration officer whom I am fortunate enough to call a friend and who happens to know these people very well. He told me:
The criminal profiles we have in front of us are often those of increasingly younger people who are completely uninhibited when it comes to violence and authority.
We had better brace ourselves for a lot of fun…
Europe — and perhaps, but to a lesser extent, North America, because of the weak presence of Islam — is likely to experience the situation afflicting the Middle East or Africa, where civil wars between different ethnic groups (and almost always involving Islam) are endemic in their frequency, violence and cruelty. By importing these populations into Europe, immigration has brought along with them their disorder, their general mediocrity, their psychoses, and their fanaticisms, which they perpetuate in an atavistic way.
The problem is neither ideological nor even religious in nature, but, in fact, anthropological. And so is the solution. The coming war will involve people who have nothing to say to one another and who should never have been made to live together.
A Probably Inevitable Confrontation
Indeed, a huge and constantly accelerating wave of colonising immigration is underway, unlike any other in the entire history of Europe. This invasion, which is both ethnic (one of population replacement) and cultural, and paired with accelerating Islamisation, has only encountered sluggish opposition at the hands of European states and the authorities in Brussels and has sometimes even been perversely fostered… Contrary to what is constantly repeated by the dominant ideology, this population-swelling immigration is not only disastrous in all areas, causing economic impoverishment, social disorders, and multiple regressions (particularly in the field of education and teaching), but is also essentially hostile! It turns out to be increasingly aggressive, demanding, intolerant, and bloodthirsty…
According to a study conducted by the Institut Montaigne in 2016, ‘ever larger and younger populations are seceding from French civilisation’. These are obviously young Arabs and African immigrants — a fact that everyone is aware of but which is never stated clearly by the media in this country, where freedom of expression is on the wane. Despite being protected, favoured and assisted in all spheres, they are driven by growing hatred and resentment. The same remark can be applied to all countries of Western and Northern Europe, all of which have fallen prey to the predominantly Islamic immigrational invasion. If the newcomers are not initially Muslim when leaving their homes, they become so upon settling here because of the conversions that take place in the neighbourhoods which they inhabit and where they participate in illegal trafficking of all kinds.
Never before has France found itself in such a volatile situation, a situation which other European countries are bound to experience soon. An ever-increasing proportion of its immigrant minorities have never assimilated, even after three generations, which, contrary to the claims of utopian intellectuals, is perfectly logical. Non-Europeans do not wish to assimilate or integrate into our society. It is now the native French who, having become a minority in many areas, must adapt to the newcomers by renouncing their identity in misfortune and fear. A growing number of these immigrants, especially the young ones, think of themselves as a mass of colonisers and invaders gathered under the banner of Islam. Those who have been radicalised, support both jihad and terrorism and are driven by conscious and unpunished anti-white racism are always more numerous than the others.
These foreigners by blood and at heart have, to a large extent, yielded to a conquering hatred combining resentment with a desire for revenge. Lacking, by and large, any creative talent (with their strength restricted to a solely demographic and annihilating dimension), their only purpose is to wreak destruction upon European civilisation. The notion of ‘living together’ is merely an Orwellian slogan invented by cynics and serving to conceal the threat of racial civil war, in an effort to ward it off using words.
Gilles Kepel, a political scientist specialising in Islamic issues, believes that ‘one of the major challenges’ of future elections lies in determining whether the French will be able to ‘continue living together’ by ‘projecting themselves into traditional distinctions, especially between the Left and the Right’ (Le Figaro, 30th November, 2016). He also mentions the strong possibility of people abandoning this political divide and the emergence of an ethnic one: ‘An identitarian resurgence that considers Muslims not to be genuinely French’ and, in parallel to it, ‘communitarian tensions’ characterised by a rejection of French society among the Muslims themselves. In short, all the ingredients of a human catastrophe are thus blended together.
So far, the clashes (riots and attacks) have only been the presages and early warning signs of the coming war and have been limited to confrontations between Maghrebian and black youths on one side and our public security forces on the other. At no time has the French indigenous population been involved, except in Corsica. We will be returning to this issue at a later point.
One could say that the day our indigenous population begins to defend itself, refuses to be victimised and fights back (at long last!) shall mark the true onset of the racial war.
The French State’s Collaborationist Tropism
What our domestic French secret services (DGSI)1 fear above all are the retaliatory actions of native French groups (the so-called ‘identitarians’) against the Muslim aggressors. They want to avoid a real civil war, i.e. one involving not only the French police but also a part of our rebelling pop
ulation. This suggests, on the one hand, that this war is already brewing, and on the other, that the ever-cowardly French state prefers a gentle and progressive invasion to a clash. In the eyes of the French state, what is unbearable and threatening is not so much the suicide bombings as Islamophobia. The main source of enmity, the main danger, is thus not to be found among the Muslim aggressors themselves, but stems from the risk of a violent reaction on the part of our native population — utter hogwash!
In both Le Figaro and on his own blog, Ivan Rioufol2 speaks of ‘neo-collaborationists willing to enter into a pact with colonising Islam’, thus daring, in an unprecedented attitude, to incriminate not only Islamism but even Islam as a whole. This collaborationist position is reminiscent of the political configuration of the Vichy regime (which François Mitterrand3 was associated with), a regime that had largely stemmed from the Left, including the communist milieu. As far as our contemporary traitors are concerned, it is necessary to be forbearing in one’s treatment of the invaders and to make sure that any dangerous resistance is persecuted. Whereas in the past, one collaborated with the Third Reich’s occupying forces, today, it is with Islam; for the invaders are no longer Nazis, but Muslims (in this regard, one resorts to the word ‘Islamists’ so as not to shock the good people of France). Whatever one may think of the fascist undertakings of the 1930s, the fact remains that the phases that lead some people to embrace collaborationism are still the same as in the past. As if by chance, both collaborationist groups, whether today or under the Occupation, stem mainly from the Left. As for the members of the resistance, they mostly come from the Right. And yet for the past decades, the media have been trying to make us believe the very opposite.
Islam Is Currently Our Greatest Enemy
Muslims, and not just Islamists, are the ones who desire this war against our civilisation, a war that actually began — or rather recommenced — with the attacks of 11th September, 2001 in the United States. How very shocking.
This war was, in fact, initiated in the eighth century, when Muslim invaders first swept into Europe, and has been ongoing in different shapes ever since. With the Spanish Reconquista and the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, which had proceeded to invade the Balkans, the Islamic populations were driven out of Europe. Today, for the first time, the war against these same populations has been reignited in the heart of the continent, yet in a completely new form; through an invasion carried out from below by immigrant populations whose numbers are too great to enable their assimilation and integration, Islam has taken the necessary organisational steps to bring its jihad to the heart of Europe.
As I have already explained in my book entitled Understanding Islam,4 their goal has always been the same — to achieve a successful invasion of Western Europe. The strength of this primal civilisation, which is far more destructive than creative, lies in its memory, its fixedness, and the immutability of its obsession; it is a blind fanaticism that remains ignorant of the exact nature of its final ambition (a vague ‘universal caliphate’ that is actually quite similar to the communist internationalist utopia), but whose jihad, i.e. a propensity for permanent and gratuitous violence even against its own members, occupies a central position.
At the time of his presidency, Barack Obama never dared, of course, designate Islamism — let alone Islam itself! — as a danger and a challenge, nor even as a mere opponent. Surprisingly, he restricted himself to using the vague term ‘terrorism’, without ever defining it. Was he incapacitated by his personal religious convictions, or is it possible that he fell prey to an identity crisis? Could it be, perhaps, that he secretly sympathises with Islam?
Democracy Imposes Invasion Upon Peoples
During his farewell visit to Europe on 19th November, 2016, following Donald Trump’s victory, Mr Obama dubbed Mrs Merkel, the German Chancellor, the ‘guardian of the values of the West and democracy’. This pompous praise was a reference to the fact that she had forced her own citizens to welcome more than one million ‘migrants’, most of whom were fake refugees and included a Muslim majority, without ever consulting her people. Referring to Trump, considered horribly populistic, xenophobic and averse to immigration, Obama congratulated Merkel for ‘fighting for the same democratic values’ as he himself does. Sheer lies and deception! In no way are these people democrats.
In short, after Trump’s election, Obama urged Europeans to preserve true democracy against dangerous populists, who are all immoral and, implicitly, racist. True democracy would therefore consist in violating the will of one’s necessarily ignorant and misguided people and acting in accordance with the choices of the politicao-mediatic and cultural elites. What we are dealing with here is a complete overturning of reality — for such ‘democratic values’ are, in fact, entirely oligarchic and undemocratic. And the mechanism is an identical, albeit subtler, version of the one used in the former people’s democracies of Soviet-controlled Eastern Europe.
The underlying purpose is for the system to impose upon ethnic peoples — upon Whites, to be perfectly clear — an invasion at the hands of foreign masses of illegal immigrants and to force them to accept the destruction of their own living environment and culture. Populism, which is presented as the enemy of official democracy, is, on the contrary, the sole true democracy, through which our (politically incorrect) people can reclaim their destiny by refusing to be invaded and rejecting a large part of their elites, who have betrayed them and proceeded to collude and collaborate with the Afro-Oriental invader.
In doing so, this putrid oligarchy, which declares itself democratic and considers itself the sole legitimate one (although it has been organising the invasive settlement immigration for decades on end, going against the wishes and interests of our indigenous population and doing everything in its power to promote the Islamic culture of the invaders/invitees at the expense of the traditions of its own people), is guilty of paving the way for an ethno-racial civil war not only in Western Europe (beginning with France itself), but perhaps also in the United States and Canada.
The Oligarchy’s Collusion with the Invaders
For the first time in history, the invaded are assisting the invaders: in the Mediterranean, one proceeds to rescue illegal migrants who know all too well that they will never be expelled should they manage to disembark on our soil. They depend on us and on our kindness for assistance. They rely on our adulation of Human Rights, rooted in a Christian principle that has been taken to insane extremes. Pope Francis acts as their greatest ally whenever he demands that we welcome them in spite of the fact that so many them adhere to an aggressive and vengeful Islam targeting our own civilisation. The more we help them, save them from drowning and harbour them, the more they come in droves. Such behaviour is utter madness: it is a mixture of masochism and delusional humanitarianism on the part of our authorities, who are thus complicit in the destruction of their own people through populational flooding.
This massive phenomenon, unprecedented in Europe since the beginning of its historical existence, threatens to wreak death upon our civilisation and germen, i.e. upon our ethno-cultural and anthropological foundation, whose roots stretch back several millennia. An extra-European and predominantly Muslim immigration of populations that are much more demographically fertile than ours is akin to the worst form of invasion one could ever experience. And yet the collaborationist elites responsible for organising this invasion do not care at all. They are not concerned with protecting their compatriots and their children any more than they are with safeguarding the memory of their ancestors. They despise their own past and future and exist in a state of absolute presentism, with an extra morbid dose of self-flagellation added — not to mention a pathological anxiety to satisfy their own short-term desires, without ever managing to do so. This oligarchy will eventually be wiped out — either by its fellow citizens or by its adored invader-protégés. Regardless of who ends up claiming victory in the coming racial civil war, the ones that have c
hosen to collaborate with the occupiers, i.e. the traitors, will be eliminated by one of the two sides.
Arise, Oh Desired Storms!
We are experiencing the last days of an Indian summer, the end of a beautiful autumn, beyond which we shall enter a long, icy and sanguinary winter. The Islamic attacks that have been taking place since the mid-1990s have been the warning signs of an apocalypse. And although this might seem a horrible thing to say, it is this apocalypse that may turn out to be the solution, the factor that shall allow us to emerge from it all by finally provoking a reaction on the part of Europeans. If the invasion had taken place peacefully, without any disorder, without Islamic attacks, and without a constantly growing wave of criminality, it would be virtually impossible to mobilise the forces of the Resistance.
Those who reassure us are all deceivers.
Day by day, things take a turn for the worse, as migration and demographic colonisation progress further and Islam gains ground. Our only hope of awakening will thus unfortunately be embodied by this civil war; provided, of course, that ethnic Europeans dare to defend themselves against the attacks…
The worst alternative would have been a smooth invasion, in which our Islamisation, Arabisation or Africanisation would have been conducted peacefully, without violence, using mainly demographical means — a soft invasion. The terrorist violence, delinquency and nuisance caused by these populations have, however, abolished this scenario. Despite the vehement denials made by mediatic propaganda, which finds itself increasingly powerless to disguise the truth, our people are now aware of the fact that a conflict with these foreigners is underway. All the better!
Ethnic Apocalypse Page 2