The Excavator

Hitler's Moral Stance On The Use of Chemical Weapons

2026-04-16T10:30:00.006-04:00

"One of the most intriguing mysteries of World War II is why Germany and the Allies did not use chemical and biological weapons against each other. As the Third Reich crumbled, it seemed ever more likely that Hitler would employ weapons of mass destruction.

The reason he didn’t was deterrence. Both sides feared that, as in World War I, once one side used chemical weapons, so would their opponents. It turned out that German nerve gases like sarin were far more effective than Allied chemical weapons, such as mustard gas, but the Germans didn’t know that." - Michael Peck, "What If Hitler Used Chemical Weapons Against the Allies on D-Day?" The National Interest, June 14, 2020.

A question that has perplexed Western historiography on WWII, which is dominated by Jewish voices, is why Hitler didn't use chemical weapons against the Allied invasion of Normandy considering his regime had no qualms about using gas on Jewish civilians.

Was he simply afraid that his enemy would return the favour in spades?

Or did he have more noble intentions?

This question is fatal to the Holocaust narrative and exposes it as a total lie.

A likely explanation is that Hitler prohibited the use of chemical weapons on moral grounds against both military and civilian targets.

Hitler personally experienced gas warfare in the trenches of WWI and that painful memory undoubtedly influenced his decision to not repeat the errors of his military superiors.

The black and white mind is incapable of giving the benefit of the doubt to Hitler because in that myopic worldview he's the epitome of the Devil. Facts do not sway. Once you are convinced of something on an emotional level it's hard to dislodge that belief.

The fact is the Nazi war machine was more moral than its adversaries, especially the Soviets.

There's no question repugnant characters made their way up the ranks of the Nazi regime. Government power always attracts the worst cretins and murderers in all societies. But, as a matter of state policy, which fell under the final authority of Hitler, chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction were prohibited from military and civilian use for moral reasons.

Liberating The White House

2026-04-15T12:32:00.009-04:00

A radical, genocidal, anti-religious, anti-human, anti-freedom, anti-Semitic, and anti-American regime currently occupies the White House.

Some are convinced this regime came into power in 1913 with the secret establishment of the Federal Reserve Bank by the Rothschilds dynasty and its subordinates in the United States.

Those in the American banking establishment who opposed this financial coup for patriotic reasons were removed from the picture by the deliberate sinking of the Titanic 114 years ago today, many of whom were on board.

The two World Wars that followed the creation of this evil bank led to the destruction of European power, the end of multiple European empires, the subjugation of Christendom, and the creation of the messianic Jewish state in the heart of the Middle East.

We now know with absolute certainty that the justification for the State of Israel - the so-called Holocaust - was a complete lie. The Nazi regime in Germany committed no such crime.

Zionists and Nazis shared a common aim in dispossessing European Jews and settling them in Palestine. They were practically allies. The Israeli regime is secretly the biggest fan of the Nazis.

They learned from the best.

It was a Nazi tactic to tell a big lie often enough until it became historical gospel.

Defaming the Nazis and garnering world sympathy for the Jews' plight with one big lie was an act of evil genius. That tactic was repeated on 9/11 against a new global enemy---Islam.

By the turn of the 21st century the United States was well within the Zionist bosom. The murder of President Kennedy in 1963 send a warning shot to the American political system that even Presidents are considered fair game if they grow a mind of their own and step out of line. No one is immune from the Zionist' wrath.

The traitors and collaborators who worked with the Zionists were rewarded with political power and wealth. The Bush Family played it beautifully, and received multiple terms in the Oval Office.

Over time, the parasite took on the body of the host.

Previous Presidents had the tact and political acumen to hide the true allegiance of the White House and disguise the real purpose of its foreign policy.

But then came Trump. In many ways he's a gift from God, for he has exposed just how occupied the White House really is.

He clumsily tries to hide his loyalty to Israel over America by wearing that cheap MAGA hat, but he's too stupid to pull off the act. And his team, from the FBI head to his Vice President and War Secretary, are full of retards. We have watched Idiocracy come to life in the past few years.

But it's not all a joke.

We must always remember evil crimes have been committed by occupants in the White House and their masters. Cannibalism. The rape of minors. Mass murder. State terrorism. Genocide.

They offer the world nothing but death, disease, and destruction. And they expect to be thanked for it.

This sinking ship hit an iceberg in the Persian Gulf and now demands lifeboats from every nation and sub-nation on Earth, even going so far as to dictate to the Vatican its Near East policy.

They have lost the plot.

Instead of returning the White House to the American people the Zionists seek its complete destruction. The way they see it is if they can't have it then nobody can.

I anticipate the Zionists will attack the White House in a false flag operation in the future and kill Trump if they have to. Yes, they are that brazen.

But they will not get away with it.

The White House will be liberated.

Catholic Teaching On Nuclear Weapons

2026-04-14T23:59:00.003-04:00

An excerpt from, "Nuclear Weapons And Our Catholic Response" United States Conference of Catholic Bishops:

The Catholic Church’s teaching requires that any use of force be proportionate and discriminate. It must not produce more harm than good and must respect noncombatant immunity and protect civilians. The Church has long opposed the use of nuclear weapons, especially against non-nuclear threats, and the development of new nuclear weapons. The Church urges that nuclear deterrence be replaced with concrete measures of disarmament based on dialogue and multilateral negotiations.
. . .
“What can be said, too, about those governments which count on nuclear arms as a means of ensuring the security of their countries? Along with countless persons of good will, one can state that this point of view is not only baneful but also completely fallacious. In a nuclear war there would be no victors, only victims. The truth of peace requires that all —whether those governments which openly or secretly possess nuclear arms, or those planning to acquire them— agree to change their course by clear and firm decisions, and strive for a progressive and concerted nuclear disarmament. The resources which would be saved could then be employed in projects of development capable of benefiting all their people, especially the poor.” - Pope Benedict XVI, 2009 World Day of Peace Message, no. 13.

An excerpt from, "What the Catholic Church Teaches on Nuclear Weapons" Catholic Peace Action:

The Catholic Church has always been consistent that there can be no moral case for the actual use of a weapon of mass destruction as it is indiscriminate. On this basis the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Catholic teaching are indefensible.
These writings however did not close the discussion as it was argued by many leading Catholics that the concept of nuclear deterrence would not only prevent the use of nuclear weapons but even prevent war itself. A balance of terror they argued would at the height of the Cold War preserve peace if both sides had nuclear arsenals. Pope St.John Paul II gave some support for this position when he wrote in 1982 to the United Nations,
“in current conditions deterrence based on balance, certainly not as an end in itself but as a step on the way toward a progressive disarmament, may still be judged morally acceptable.”

For Catholics in a nuclear weapons state this was a very interesting time with debate for and against the possession of nuclear weapons. These debates and exchanges continued for many years with respect shown on all sides.

The Scottish Catholic Bishops in 1982 also made a statement,

“If it is immoral to use these (nuclear) weapons it is immoral to threaten their use”

For many years the official position of the Catholic Church remained that of Pope St.John Paul II but the discussions continued and as time progressed the conditional acceptance of nuclear deterrence became more difficult to sustain as it became more evident the condition of progressive disarmament was not happening.

In 2005 Archbishop Migliore, the then observer of the Holy See to the United Nations wrote,

“The time has gone for finding ways to a balance in terror, the time has come to re-examine the whole strategy of nuclear deterrence…it is evident that nuclear deterrence drives the development of ever newer nuclear arms thus preventing genuine nuclear disarmament.”

Why The World Needs A Catholic Nuke, An African Nuke, And A Shia Nuke

2026-04-14T10:31:00.002-04:00

List of nations with nuclear weapons:

Russia (Christian Orthodox)

United States of America (Freemason Republic)

China (Communism)

France (Freemason Republic)

United Kingdom (Protestant Monarchy)

Pakistan (Sunni Islam)

India (Hinduism)

Israel (Judaism)

North Korea (Communism)

The policy of nuclear prohibition has been a disastrous and misguided error. It has made the world less safe, less free, and less stable.

It's also curious that of the nine nations that officially have nuclear weapons, not one of them is a Catholic country.

Brazil, Mexico, and the Philippines are the countries with the biggest Catholic populations and not one of them has acquired nuclear weapons.

Why is that?

Is there a Vatican fatwa against the possession of nukes?

Why is there a Masonic bomb, a Jewish bomb, a Sunni bomb, a Hindu bomb, a Communist bomb, a Protestant bomb, a Christian Orthodox bomb, but not a Catholic bomb?

The continent of Asia has five countries with nukes. That's the most.

Africa has zero.

Gaddafi tried to get one but he gave up. If Libya had acquired nukes it probably would not have fallen, and Europe would be safer today.

Nukes are nothing to be afraid of. They bring safety, comfort, and dignity to a nation, like a gun does for a household. It keeps trespassers and thieves away.

My advice to the Pope and the Ayatollah is don't wait. End the misguided religious prohibition against nuclear weapons. Protect your flock. Get nukes now. Build as many as you can.

The same goes for countries like Brazil and South Africa.

South America and Africa need the nuclear blanket.

Let the Catholics, the Africans, and the Shia feel the same sense of security as the Jews, Hindus, Masons, Protestants, and Communists do.

Operation Desert Storm II: The Christian Reconquest of Jerusalem

2026-04-13T12:23:00.011-04:00

Give the order Leo.

For the longest time I was emotionally supportive of the State of Israel because I believe every people deserves a homeland. The Jewish people, scattered and tormented across Europe for centuries, finally going back to their spiritual birthplace and establishing a state of their own, is a very appealing story.

But the reality is Israel is an expansionist and genocidal monster that encourages chaos, civil wars, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and state destruction all around it. It is a messianic cult, not a rational state.

Israel wants to rule as the undisputed power not just in the Middle East but in the world. The persecuted race wants to be the master race.

Its grip on America is now naked and unashamed. Netanyahu struts around the White House like he owns the place. The entire Trump presidency has been one long humiliation ritual.

Israel is a threat to the entire world. Any nation or political figure that speaks out against it is killed or severely reprimanded, whether it be the President, the Ayatollah, the Caliph, or the Pope.

Israel's ire is limitless. Recently, Spain's rebuke of Israel's war crimes found it the target of another migrant wave into its cities. This was no doubt a message from Israel that Spain is vulnerable to demographic warfare and should mind its business.

But it is its business. Spain will not be safe, and Europe will not be free, unless the Holy Land comes once again under Christian dominion.

It is now common knowledge that the NGOs that direct Muslim and African refugees into Europe are Jewish-run. They kill two birds with one stone - functioning Middle Eastern states, and European polities.

But Israel is not responsible for all the conflicts and sources of trouble in the Middle East. It did not put the radical Ayatollahs in power in Iran. That was the work of America and England. It is not at fault for the lingering Kurdish question. The West and the regional states are to blame for not resolving that issue fairly and humanely.

But Israel is responsible for initiating unnecessary wars, spreading Jihadist terrorism, and directing the U.S. military machine like its playtoy.

As long as Israel is allowed to survive it will cause trouble both for Muslims and Christians. It is a global issue, and primarily an European one.

Its dismemberment should not solely be a Palestinian or Islamic aim. Frankly, Christians have more right to that real estate. A new crusade would be more within reason and have greater religious standing than the establishment of a Palestinian state or a liberation by Shiite Muslims.

The Pope must answer Trump's insult and the Christian-bashing by the lunatics around him not with polite messages and soft rhetoric but a declaration of war.

Let the self-righteous fools in Washington understand that the Zio-American empire has done enough damage to the world. Their time is finished.

On Iran's Geography And Iranian-Jewish History

2026-04-12T20:39:00.006-04:00

Ezra.

An excerpt from, "The Fall of Heaven: The Pahlavis And The Final Days of Imperial Iran" by Andrew Scott Cooper, Picador, 2018, Pg. 48-51:

In the 1920s the land he was destined to rule nudged the southern border of the newly established Soviet Union for more than a thousand miles, skirting the shoreline of the Caspian Sea, plentiful in sturgeon, whose fine caviar graced tables around the world. The spongy storm clouds that sailed down from southern Russia were squeezed dry trying to clear the mountainous rock face of the Alborz Mountains range, ensuring that Persia's northern coast remained perpetually drenched while the kingdom's interior was almost always parched. "Water is the chief concern of the Persian peasant," an American traveler wrote in the early twentieth century. "Wherever he can find the flow of a mountain stream or build a crude canal from a well or spring, a small portion of the desert becomes a paradise and he prospers. Certain of these regions are said to be among the most fertile in the world, producing in abundance not only the finest of wheat and barley, but grapes, peaches, nectarines, pomegranates, figs and melons which are unsurpassed among the fruits of the Temperate Zone."
The sweeping view from the top of the Alborz ridge was of a "magnificent plateau which seems to stretch to eternity," a visitor to Persia once said. Eighteen thousand feet below, clinging to its mountainous hemline, Tehran basked in the sun like a smug cat whose muddy brick tail extended to the edge of the great salt desert. To the east, beyond Yazd with its lyrical skyline of wind chimneys, travelers entered "the great lifeless desert, shaped like a huge hour-glass, 900 miles in length, from the foothills of the Alborz range, in the north, almost to the Indian Ocean, in the south, and ranging in width from 300 to 100 miles." The sprawling Dasht-e Kavit desert held tight its mysteries and miracles. Mighty dust storms roared through like locomotives. Locals in Sistan Province dreaded the annual Wind of One-Hundred-Twenty Days, when broiling gales lashed the region from June to September, and locals still spoke of the time a shepherd and his flock of sheep were dug out alive after a week buried under a sand drift. "Some sections in their utter bleakness resembled landscapes on the moon," was how one American described Dasht-e Kavir in 1950. "At wide intervals walled adobe villages, with green fields and slender poplar trees, or an upthrust of jagged, rocky hills broke the monotony. . . .A haze wrapped the horizon in mystery. Eastward, seemingly limitless, stretched the great salt desert, shimmering in the heat. To the west, gaunt rock hills, pastel-shaped, made a grotesque skyline. A caravan of camels plodded by carrion birds glided above a burro's carcass."
The main centers of urban life hovered at the desert edge, each a reflection of Persia's dazzling cultural and ethnic diversity. The capital, Tehran, had always been a rough town. Laid waste by the Afghans in 1723, Tehran was a mere cluster of three thousand mud and brick hovels when the Qajar Dynasty appointed it the new Imperial seat. This made strategic sense---the village occupied the gateway to the heights of the Alborz, which overlooked the plateau---but Tehran lacked the elegant artistry and sophistication of the former capital, Isfahan, and most visitors regarded the locals as uncouth and too focused on turning a profit. About seventy-five miles to Tehran's south sat Qom, where the ayatollahs, the country's religious leaders, resided and where important religious schools known as the hawza were located. The second major center of clerical power was Mashad, to the northeast, nestled against the border with Afghanistan. Each year pilgrims trekked to Mashad to pay their respects at the stupendous Holy Shrine of Imam Reza, resting place of the Prophet Mohammad's eighth disciple. Isfahan, always elegant, dominated the central provinces, and tourists from around the world admired the Shah Abbas Mosque, one of the finest examples of Isla mic architecture in the world, which opened out onto the splendid Naghsh-e Jahan Square, where Persian monarchs watched polo matches from a high pavilion, and also the picturesque "Bridge of Thirty-Three Arches," which spanned the Zayande River. Dominating the southwest was the city of Shiraz, "an oasis situated on a high plateau ringed by barren hills. It is a city of gardens and has never been known as a center of trade and industry. Its fame is due to its poets, its gardens, its wine, and its almost mythical position in the Iranian mind." Persia's greatest poets, Hafez and Saadi, wrote of the Shirazi love of songbirds, sweet wine and scent of rose.
The southern provinces were Iran's economic lifeline. In the breadbasket province of Khuzestan, which straddled the Iraqi border, the port city of Abadan boasted the world's largest oil refinery. Running along the southern coastline were the Zagros Mountains, rocky sentinels overlooking the Persian Gulf, where mighty tankers crept through the Strait of Hormuz, only twenty-one miles wide at its narrowest tip, on their way to market. In the sixties the Shah poured more than $1 billion into Persian Gulf oil facilities and at a stroke trebled Iran's oil production and established the foundations for the country's spectacular economic takeoff. The Persian Gulf was Iran's "jugular vein," and he brushed aside foreign critics who accused him of harboring territorial ambitions. When an American journalist asked the Shah whether "Iran's entry into the Persian Gulf would affect the country's relations with the Arabs and Israelis," he offered a stiff retort: "We are in the Persian Gulf. What we are demanding is what has always belonged to our country throughout history."
The Shah's people embodied the contradictions of life along the highway of history. They retained a distinct identity that set them apart from their neighbors and reflected their unique passage through space and time. Life on the high plateau was a constant game of survival, with ever-changing rules. Persians had endured centuries of foreign occupation by absorbing the ways of their overlords to the point where the Greeks, Arabs, and Mongols mirrored them back in return. They were Persians first but also Arabs, Baluchis, Armenians, Kurds, and Turks. More than 90 percent were Muslim, but they shared the land with Jewish, Christian, Bahai, and Zoroastrian minorities. Renowned for their hospitality, artistry, and individualism, the Persians were also inveterate grumblers, too easily slighted and with a capacity to exaggerate and embellish. For a people who prided themselves on their knowledge of science, philosophy, and literature, Persians saw their world as one shaped by elaborate conspiracies that allowed them to shift the blame for their own mistakes and misfortunes onto the shoulders of others. These ultimate survivors were adept at showing different faces to outsiders but also to their own rulers, whom they had a habit of raising up and turning out with bewildering speed---an old saying had it that the people did not often turn, but when they did, it was usually fatal. Persians thrived in adversity only to slacken in good times, so that even when their borders stoved in under relentless pressure from the Russians, Turks, and British in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Persian art, culture, and literature flourished under the Safavid and Qajar Dynasties.
Western visitors regarded the Persians as a brilliant and inscrutable people. The American journalist Frances Fitzgerald traveled to Iran in 1974 and wrote a penetrating account of life under the second Pahlavi king. "Iran is a country of walls and mirrors," she wrote. "Walls surround the villages as they surround every house in Tehran, dividing the public and private lives, creating distances where they do not exist. Behind walls that are mud-brown and anonymous, the rich conceal their fountains and gardens from the desert. . . the great families of Iran have covered the insides of their houses with murals and faceted mirrors so that each room is a visual maze of light and reflections of the real and painted figures. Turn the thought around and the mirrors are a complete defense system, turning away the truth. In Iran, nothing is exactly what it seems. A foreigner finds uncertainty behind arrogance, sadness behind euphoria. But ambiguity may be the only principle of nature in Iran."

An excerpt from, "In Search of Zarathustra: Across Iran and Central Asia To Find the World's First Prophet" by Paul Kriwaczek, Vintage Books, 2002, Pg. 194-95:

The suggestion that Darius was a committed Zoroastrian might shed some light on the otherwise mysterious process by which a number of Zarathustra's key concepts had already infiltrated the Jewish religion long before a belief in the imminent End of Time and the coming of the Messiah so altered the fate of the Roman world.
Unfortunately the only record we have of relations between the Judaean exiles and their Achaemenid rulers is contained in the biblical books of Ezra and Nehemiah, a rather tortured account of the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in Jerusalem, so badly confusing dates and names of kings that generations of scholars have argued about whether Ezra or Nehemiah came first and when and how the walls of Jerusalem were repaired and the Temple rebuilt. What does seem clear is that both Ezra and Nehemiah were important personages in the Persian royal court in the fifth century BC----Nehemiah was cup-bearer to the king----and that they received permission----and financial support----to return to the land of their fathers and carry out a religious revolution, forcibly imposing their version of true Judaism on an astonished population. From now on, only those who had been in exile were to be counted as true Jews. It would be surprising if they hadn't, even unconsciously, absorbed Iranian ideas while serving their Persian masters. The consequences were to be great, for Ezra is thought by most scholars to have been the one responsible for editing together the traditional texts preserved by the Judaean exiles, thus creating the Hebrew Bible.

The Three Blind Mice Conduct "Diplomacy"

2026-04-12T07:47:00.008-04:00

America did not send its best and brightest to negotiate a deal with Iran in Pakistan. If it wasn't all so tragic we would be able to laugh at this.

The idea of talking for twenty one hours and failing to agree on even one issue of significance shows both sides were talking past and over each other. These were not serious negotiations. Washington did not send statesmen to conduct diplomacy but buffoons who were instructed to make unreasonable demands so talks can fail and war can resume.

And there's nothing wrong with that. War is good. Sometimes, war is needed. As I've written before, West Asia needs a cleansing and only war can provide that.

If America wants to be a midwife to the chaos and kill its empire in the service of filthy Zionists then that's a choice it will have to live with for the rest of time. Pax Americana won't be missed, and Pax Judaica will be a miscarriage. Iran will abort the baby, even if it means its demise.

Israel will come to see reality the hard way. The world will not be a permanent hostage to the mythology of a B.C. Semitic tribe. If they think Iran is radical they haven't been paying attention because what's coming will make the Ayatollahs look like Ghandi.

The Shi'ite are the peaceniks of Islam. They're the mystic ones, preoccupied with philosophy. The real warriors of Islam have always been the Sunnis. And they haven't entered the battle yet.

And I doubt they will because most of them are under lock and key. They are zombies. The main Sunni nations of today, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, are truly pathetic. They are American slaves.

But every slave eventually turns on its master, especially when the sting of the whip doesn't inspire fear like it used to. And it's reaching that point.

Rise of The Planet of The Jews: The War at Hand And The Charade In Pakistan

2026-04-11T20:25:00.008-04:00

America and Iran negotiating over the fate of the Middle East with Israel in the background is a bit like Batman and the mob negotiating over the fate of Gotham while the Joker grins with giddy in the corner, planning to burn it all down.

Until the problem of Zionist supremacy is faced directly by the world powers, and Middle Eastern states, do not speak of peace, negotiations, or ceasefires.

Israel is more than a traditional spoiler in geopolitics that can be ignored because it has the world's superpower by the balls and isn't letting go.

It has the power to threaten, not Trump.

Trump threatening China is like Carney threatening America. It's just silliness.

As far as the world is concerned, Washington isn't really relevant anymore. It wasn't relevant in Syria, Afghanistan, or Iraq. Turkey, Pakistan, and Iran closed those files.

America only served as the battering ram, the hammer of Thor, used to break things. Diplomatically it didn't initiate anything. It didn't bring democracy. It left behind Sunni and Shia terrorist groups in charge in all three countries. It even abandoned its makeshift allies, discarding them like trash.

World leaders, Iranian representatives included, must negotiate directly with Israel. It is the sole power in Washington. Why speak with Vance? It's a waste of time. He has no power.

If America had any sovereignty left it would have hanged the traitor and Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard to set an example to the other Jewish traitors that treason won't be tolerated. Instead they let him go back to Israel because that's where the power is.

It is Israel we must set our focus and ire on. Jews in Israel and elsewhere believe they are the master race, above the law everywhere they go. This silly notion of theirs must be opposed and defeated.

No single race or religion must be allowed to rule this planet. Both Jew and Muslim must come to understand that they are not morally superior to anyone else.

They either get with the program or get left behind.

Shakespeare's Father, His Catholicism, And The Catholic Persecution of Protestants

2026-04-11T12:55:00.001-04:00

Was the real Shakespeare, Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, a catholic? His father's ties to Bloody Mary, the themes of his plays, and the historical evidence suggests so.

Related:

Shakespeare's Motives For Concealing His Real Identity

Wikipedia - John de Vere, 16th Earl of Oxford:

John de Vere, 16th Earl of Oxford (1516 – 3 August 1562) was born to John de Vere, 15th Earl of Oxford, and Elizabeth Trussell, daughter of Edward Trussell. He was styled Lord Bolebec 1526 to 1540 before he succeeded to his father's title.
While never of consequence in the Tudor court, the 16th Earl's support for Queen Mary was instrumental in her accession to the throne in 1553, though he was given no preferment by her. During her reign he was active as the principal magnate in Essex. Under Mary, Essex men and women suspected of heresy against Catholicism were brought before Oxford to be charged, and thence conveyed to the Bishop of London for examination. Of his prisoners, at least sixteen were condemned and burnt, beginning with his former servant, Thomas Hawkes, who was burnt at Coggeshall on 10 June 1555.

Wikipedia - Religious views of William Shakespeare:

In 1611 the historian John Speed asserted Shakespeare's links with Catholicism, accusing him of satirising in Henry IV the Lollard (or proto-Protestant) martyr John Oldcastle (first portrayed by Shakespeare under his character's real name, then the alias John Falstaff after complaints from Oldcastle's descendants) and linking the playwright with the Jesuit Robert Persons, describing them together as "the Papist and his poet".
. . .Literary scholar and Jesuit Father Peter Milward and the writer Clare Asquith are among those who have written that Catholic sympathies are detectable in Shakespeare's works. Asquith believed that Shakespeare uses terms such as "high" when referring to Catholic characters and "low" when referring to Protestants (the terms refer to their altars) and "light" or "fair" to refer to Catholic and "dark" to refer to Protestant, a reference to certain clerical garbs.

. . .Although Shakespeare commonly adapted existing tales, typically myths or works in another language, Joseph Pearce claims that King John, King Lear and Hamlet were all works that had been done recently and in English with an anti-Catholic bias, and that Shakespeare's versions appear to be a refutation of the source plays. Pearce believes otherwise he would not have "reinvented the wheel", revisiting recent English plays.

5 Reasons Why USrahell Lost Iran War Round 2

2026-04-10T22:41:00.004-04:00

If it hasn't been made clear already, this past week's ceasefire shenanigans has proven that this war isn't shaping up to be a knockout fight. This isn't Ali vs. Foreman. This one is going the distance, all 12 rounds.

Round one, the 12 day war last summer, was a draw. The two fighters tested each other's capabilities, drew some blood, and went back into their corners anticipating a long bout ahead.

In Round two the fight tilted towards Iran's favour when it landed a gut punch by selectively closing the Strait of Hormuz to the U.S., Israel and their co-belligerents, costing them reputational loss and economic damage for the world. On the other side, the decapitation of the regime had the opposite effect it intended, plus it was a cheap shot, so they get docked points for that.

Now, as we wait for Round three, let's examine why USrahell's war strategy has failed so far.

I think it's a combination of 5 different factors; 1) Washington underestimating its opponent, 2) alienating both its distant allies and regional proxies, especially the Kurds, who are a ready-made indigenous army, 3) failing to convince the lukewarm Iranian population of its post-war political program, 4) the inability to generate any sort of international consensus for a prolonged military engagement against an embattled adversary, and, finally, 5) running from the battlefield.

The last one is not a reflection of the fighting spirit of the American soldier, but of the limited number of soldiers in the region, poor military planning, and the overall cowardly war strategy that USrahell had decided to carry out from the very beginning of the conflict.

It is obvious that competent military planners were sidelined and replaced by political appointees who thought the war would be short and relatively painless. They should have expected the thousands of American soldiers in the region would be sitting ducks on those bases and that ordering them to hide in hotels and high rise apartments would crush their morale. The American army wasn't sufficiently prepared psychologically for this war and it showed in the early days.

The criminals in the White House treated their lives as cheaply as the lives of the adversary because, and this must never be forgotten, the Israelis consider all goyim as cattle, especially soldiers. Remember what Kissinger said? He called warriors dumb, stupid animals. And Kissinger is not unique in that view. That is how Jews view non-Jews. They have no respect for the army they've fielded. And when you lack respect for the sacrifice and service of the common soldier you end up losing war after war.

USrahell Must Choose Between A Golden Age And A Dark Age

2026-04-10T11:25:00.003-04:00

China.

Gaza.

China offers the world infrastructure development, progress, and economic prosperity.

USrahell offers the world Biblical violence, economic suicide, and genocidal wars.

The rest of the world must choose who they want to align with.

The choice should be obvious at this point.

This is not Cold War 2.0

It is a matter of life and death, of global energy abundance or artificial scarcity, a hopeful embrace of the future or a return to the dark ages under the permanent rule of cannibalistic pedophiles and genocidal killers.

To countries like Germany, Japan, France, and England that are currently defending genocide: choose wisely.

This is not a moral question or a matter of conscience. It's a matter of international security and the well-being of your nations. Think of your own future.

The world revolves around Africa, Asia, South America, and the Middle East, not the parasitic cannibals in Washington and Israel. Do not let them drag you down with them.

As for USrahell, know this: all empires end. The question is how will yours - in flames or with grace.

You can be instrumental in unleashing a new golden age or keeping humanity in a dark age.

Trump In Tirade Attacks His Base, Insults The Great Alex Jones

2026-04-10T01:35:00.005-04:00

Trump crossed another red line.

Mr. Sloppy Seconds, the Devil's Apprentice, Diaper Don, the man of many names, minds, and faces, couldn't help himself yesterday, using that big mouth of his to insult one of the great men of our time.

Alex Jones has more bravery in his pinky than Trump has in his body.

On the day of 9/11, Alex stuck his neck out to report the truth about that historic crime while Trump went on air to spread the official lie like a good little goy.

While Trump was filming reality tv and raping kids backstage at his pageant show, Alex was educating and awakening an entire generation. He built something Trump's pathetic mind couldn't even imagine.

You foolish con man, you ungrateful vermin! Who do you think you are?

You're the biggest slave in the land.

Mind your tongue and do not insult men better than you.

A New Order In The Persian Gulf

2026-04-09T21:58:00.003-04:00

"The other danger posed by the threat of an Ottoman navy in the Gulf was that, by casting doubts on British paramountcy, it might revive Arab piracy. Poor Arab traders would be tempted to return to plunder, if they thought they could play British and Ottoman authorities against each other. This would be a retrograde step, since British ambitions to secure order in the Gulf were increasing significantly in the mid-1840s. In 1846, Hennell agreed informally with the Persian governor of Fars that British ships would police the Persian shore looking for pirates, though this agreement was not made public. In 1845, Muscat bowed to British pressure and agreed to confine its slave trading to the African coast rather than the Gulf. In 1847, the Porte agreed to forbid Ottoman vessels and subjects from engaging in the slave trade, giving British warships limited rights of search and seizure over them. Meanwhile, Hennell persuaded the Trucial shaykhs to ban the slave trade in 1847. Britain's assault on the slave trade, as on piracy, was part of its aim of creating an ordered space for free commerce.

. . .Ottoman assertiveness, however, merely encouraged the British to secure their own position in the Gulf to head off any challenge. When the maritime truce in the Gulf expired after ten years, it was replaced by a permanent truce in 1853, guaranteed by the British resident and negotiated by Hennell's successor Kemball. It offered the shaykhs permanent protection and "peace in perpetuity." All the Trucial rulers agreed to prevent hostilities between them, and to rely on the British authorities to obtain reparations for any act of aggression on them. The Ottoman navy in the Gulf remained a phantom for some decades. Meanwhile, in 1861, the British met continuing threats to Bahrain, from the Saudis and others, with the first of several treaties guaranteeing its independence. The local British representatives rejected Ottoman claims to sovereignty, either in the Gulf or over Faysal, and insisted that Gulf security was a British responsibility.

So naval power guaranteed British authority on the coast. Whether it could also improve the economic condition of the pashalik of Baghdad was a greater challenge." - An excerpt from, "Promised Lands: The British and the Ottoman Middle East" by Jonathan Parry, Princeton University Press, 2022, Pg. 307 - 309. More here.

"As part of their offensive, British forces seized the canal. Lesseps denounced the seizure as a violation of the canal's neutrality, but British troops had in fact occupied the entire country. Several years passed before an international convention declared that the Suez Canal should never be closed to ships of any nation by any nation, and in the interim, the British established a protectorate over Egypt. While the khedive ruled in name, along with a prime minister and an assembly, the British government held ultimate authority, and the British consul general, Lord Cromer, was the final arbiter of what the government could and could not do." - An excerpt from, "Parting The Desert: The Creation of the Suez Canal" by Zachary Karabell, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 2003, Pg. 266

The British brought law and order to the Persian Gulf and surrounding waters when they arrived. They elevated civilization. Muslim piracy and the Muslim slave trade were real problems in the 19th century. The Ottomans weren't interested in addressing those issues and Iran wasn't strong enough to do anything about them even if it wanted.

That's not the case now. The origin of the chaos lies outside the Persian Gulf, and is a direct result of U.S. policy over the span of multiple decades.

In the past fifty years it's been the British and American installed regimes in the Persian Gulf countries, from Saddam to the Ayatollahs, and the Arab tribal kings, who have been causing trouble and mischief, each in their turn.

America and England have used both Iraq and Iran to help police the waters and keep the territorial ambitions of each other in check. And, should they step out of line, like Saddam did with Kuwait, they received harsh slaps.

This was not an exercise in international law, but naval power.

Power enabled the Anglo-American empire to run roughshod in the Persian Gulf and basically command the various puppet states to do its bidding.

But that's only part of the story. In geostrategic bodies of water that are hard to navigate, whether the Middle East or elsewhere, Western technology liberated trade. That fact is undeniable.

But it was, and still is, a dog eat dog world. French ingenuity built the Suez Canal, and British power seized it. They didn't ask nicely either.

And power will once again shape the new security and economic arrangement in the Persian Gulf. I think it's paramount for regional security and international stability that both Iran and Iraq have a strong say.

The days of isolating either one should not be brought back. As for their obnoxious southern neighbours, they need to learn some gratitude and avoid playing the role of spoiler.

Trump can get a major political win here if he has his head screwed on straight and helps orchestrate a new and fair order. He can have some island near the Strait of Hormuz named after him if glory and fame is what he's after.

Dante's Monarchia

2026-04-09T15:06:00.005-04:00

Wikipedia:

Monarchia, often called De Monarchia "(On) Monarchy"), is a Latin treatise on secular and religious power by Dante Alighieri, who wrote it between 1312 and 1313. With this text, the poet intervened in one of the most controversial subjects of his period: the relationship between secular authority (represented by the Holy Roman Emperor) and religious authority (represented by the Pope). Dante's point of view is known on this problem, since during his political activity he had fought to defend the autonomy of the city-government of Florence from the temporal demands of Pope Boniface VIII. The work was banned by the Catholic Church in 1585.

Video Title: Dante's Monarchia. Source: Apostolic Majesty. Date Published: July 19, 2024. Description:

Brilli, Elisa, and Milani, Giuliano. Dante’s New Lives: Biography and Autobiography. London , 2023:
Cassell, Anthony K. The Monarchia Controversy: An Historical Study with Accompanying Translations of Dante Alighieri’s Monarchia, Guido Vernani’s Refutation of the Monarchia Composed by Dante and Pope John XXII’s Bull, Si Fratrum. Catholic University of America Press, 2004.

The War of The Three Kings

2026-04-09T10:22:00.006-04:00

A deserter, a rebel, and a thief.

'This miserable state

is borne by the wretched souls of those

who lived without disgrace and without praise."

- Dante, Divine Comedy.

"All America is an insane asylum."

- Ezra Pound.

In war, character is revealed, both of individuals and of nations.

America revealed itself to be led by a total lunatic with the slaughter of unarmed sailors and innocent schoolchildren in the first days of the war.

Trump had, whether deliberately or not, lost the war before even fielding his army. He committed a great error against his country and his soldiers. As a commander he didn't even give his army a chance.

Usually armies committ massacres during a war, not at the start of one.

It's totally nonsensical and counter-productive.

That's why I'm having a tough time nailing down this war. How does bombing a school help America achieve its military objectives?

Trump couldn't even bother to give a speech outlining his thoughts as to why he embraced a war that not long ago he saw as stupid.

All he's ever done since the start of the war is tell one lie after another, about every detail and operation.

This war is especially foggy. We still don't have proof of life for Netanyahu, the most important actor in the drama. Has he made an appearance in the White House since those AI videos? He could be dead. He could be alive. The ambiguity can only be eliminated with him standing shoulder to shoulder with Trump like that bunny.

As far as the official tally goes, it's one down, and two to go. And that's not good enough. Not by a long shot. But it ain't over till it's over. Trump and Netanyahu aren't out of the woods yet.

The thief is dead. The deserter and the rebel remain on the run, spiritually speaking.

Trump has lost his mind and his popularity. This war has broken him. He had to have Vance take the bullets for him publicly after announcing the supposed ceasefire on social media.

And now there are reports his administration threatened the Pope during this ordeal.

I don't mind that sort of defiance. Who is the Pope, anyways? But, it can also be said, who is the President to threaten a Pope? Is he a king appointed by God? What moral authority does he possess? The same one as the "Supreme" Leader of Iran? Where is his moral authority now?

Six feet under.

Trump should remember he is mortal, too. And where he'll finally end up is deeper than six feet.

Operation Arrowhead: The Coming Global Invasion And Dismantlement of Israel

2026-04-08T14:58:00.007-04:00

Iran and Muslims need to step aside.

They cannot do what needs to be done.

Islamic countries like Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia are filled with racist retards, traitorous opportunists, and hateful sectarian idiots who can't take care of one small ethnostate that's causing so many problems for the world. They bring shame upon Islam.

China, America, Russia, and the European Union must, for the sake of world peace and international stability, as well as the health of their own economies, form a temporary global military coalition and invade Israel, bringing about its complete dismantlement.

An international coalition must be assembled to disarm Israel, secure the nuclear heads, and arrest its leaders. https://t.co/dTeDxso22F
— Jehad Abusalim (@JehadAbusalim) April 8, 2026

China’s Growing Footprint in North Africa: Money, Diplomacy, and Other Measures

2026-04-08T13:19:00.004-04:00

An excerpt from, "China in the Maghreb: Forging a New Era of Geopolitical Influence" Middle East Council On Global Affairs, October 20, 2025:

China’s pragmatic focus on infrastructure, its non-interference and non-alignment principles, and reliance on soft power has secured it durable partnerships in the Maghreb. As the region’s strategic importance rises, this issue brief examines Beijing’s ties with Algeria, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia through its resource security strategy and push for a multipolar global order.
China’s approach in the Maghreb2 combines economic engagement and soft power projection. These countries, though diverse in political orientation, foreign relations, and economic structure, share a strategic location that bridges Africa, Europe, and the Middle East, making the Maghreb a key area for China’s broader global ambitions. China’s engagement with the Maghreb can be traced back to the mid-20th century, coinciding with decolonization efforts across Africa.

Video Title: China’s Growing Footprint in North Africa: Money, Diplomacy, and Other Measures. Source: Foreign Policy Institute at Johns Hopkins SAIS. Date Published: February 13, 2024. Description:

China's inroads in the Maghreb, as part of its New Silk Road grand strategy, are shifting the balance of power within the sub-region and between North African countries, the European Union, the United States. Unlike Russia and the U.S., which tend to see the Maghreb as merely an extension of the Middle East, thus warranting little priority or attention, China views the sub-region as a heterogeneous group of countries within a wider Arab with their own unique characteristics and peculiarities.
Characterized as both ideological and pragmatic, China’s presence in the Maghreb remains focused primarily on trade, economic development and strategic cooperation. Unfettered access to natural resources, mainly energy, and the exploration of markets for Chinese exports have been important drivers of further cooperation. With a potential market of just over 100 million people, expanding trade and strategic partnerships in the Maghreb is also vital because it is the northern gateway to the African continent.
Notwithstanding historically close ties and deference to Europe, the Maghreb's growing economic relations with China carry ramifications that are as varied as they are complex. This increasing interdependence is raising concerns in the West, particularly in a few European capitals that typically view the sub-region as part of their own backyard. However, without counter-balancing China's grand ambitions, the developing synergies in energy, infrastructure, trade, investment, financial integration, and limited security cooperation will continue to shape the Maghreb, and ultimately, tilt the power balance in this part of the world.
In this discussion, speakers shared their insights and analyses of the emerging partnerships between China and the Maghreb countries by examining the complexities, and realities of Beijing's presence in this part of the world, through the lens of its Belt & Road Initiative (BRI). They examined how a growing Chinese presence in the Maghreb can feasibly advance the sub-region's economic development, while also safeguarding China's strategic interest in being a developer, collaborator and accelerator of South-South cooperation. Between receding American engagement and a deeply fragmented Europe, discussants assessed the West's potential responses (or lack thereof) and their likely impact on fostering security, democratization, stability, development, and intra-regional cooperation in the Maghreb.
Keynote Speaker: Dr. Mordechai Chaziza, Senior lecturer, Ashkelon Academic College

Speakers:

Dr. Lina Benabdallah, Visiting Fellow the Center for African Studies, Harvard University, and Assistant Professor, Wake Forest University

Dr. Tin Hinane El Kadi, PhD Researcher, London School of Economics and Political Science

In The Mouth of A Dragon: A New World Order Takes Shape As A New Umpire Emerges - China

2026-04-08T06:35:00.011-04:00

"A new power is rising. Its victory is at hand. This night the land will be stained with the blood of . . ." - Saruman, Lord of The Rings.

A Pro-West Iran Checkmates Russia And Contains China.

John Limbert - Iran and America: Endless Enemies? (November 2013 Lecture At University of Central Oklahoma).

The Differences Between Iranian Kurds And Other Kurds.

In The Clutches of Hell: Expect 9/11 2.0 And War Against Iran.

The Two Georges, The Two Irans, And The Two Paths In The Middle East Drama.

A late phone call from China changed everything.

Once the smoke clears it will become clear what has happened.

A new sheriff is in town.

A new umpire is behind the plate.

A new world order was declared financially and diplomatically in the Strait of Hormuz.

China, through Pakistan, told Iran and America to take their medicine and listen to reason.

Over the course of the war America was relegated to a regional hegemon, while Iran was elevated to one.

The Arab kingdoms are by far the biggest losers of this war, and China is the biggest winner.

China has emerged victorious once again in a Middle East war without firing a single shot, suffering any casualties, or spending even one yuan.

This is real power. This is how winning is done. With economic leverage, not threats and strikes.

China showed both Iran and America who is the real boss, the umpire of the drama, and the playground authority. The kids can have fun and play war games, but when recess is over and the teacher blows the whistle they all have to go back to class.

If Israel wants to hang around the schoolyard and kick rocks until 3 pm to then start a new fight, that its choice, but class will go on without it. It will either face detention or be expelled. There are rules and it must learn to follow them.

Thankfully AIPAC doesn't exist in China, at least not yet, so Israel can't change China's mind.

This brief opening in diplomatic time can hopefully bring positive results and creative solutions to the region.

If China wants to cement its new status as the undisputed global umpire it will bring peace to Gaza and secure a permanent diplomatic resolution between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

Towards A Grand Bargain Between America And Iran + 5 Ceasefire Predictions

2026-04-07T22:29:00.014-04:00

As the articles indicate below, written over a decade ago, I've always been in favour of a strategic alliance between the United States and Iran, despite my revulsion for the Ayatollah' regime. It just makes rational sense to form a grand alliance.

And, as the last month and a half showed, a prolonged war between the two sides would be catastrophic. It is not in the national interests of either America or Iran to engage in permanent hostilities. Ultimately both will lose.

I. Towards A Grand Bargain Between America And Iran

"An American-Israeli attack on Iran will achieve nothing but further destroy the American economy and America's image. It must be prevented. Instead of getting worried about non-existent nuclear weapons in Iran, America must look inward and worry about collapsing infrastructure, rampant financial corruption, economic collapse, citizen distrust, and political discontent. Going to war with Iran will not solve these problems, but exacerbate them." - End of The Great Satan Narrative: Why An American-Iranian Truce Is Not So Far-Fetched, November 3, 2012.

"For America to survive as a nation it must be firm with both Israel and Palestine, and avoid a war with Iran. The problems that America must fix are an excessive national debt, a bad economy, immigration problems, border challenges, and a severe political crisis that springs from long-standing treasonous policies by the Democratic-Republican leadership which benefit a small, politically powerful class, but harm the livelihoods and security of the majority of the American people.

I am highly skeptical that America will cut off ties with Israel, AIPAC, and Neocons. Washington and Tel Aviv are a siamese twin of evil, separating one from the other would automatically cause the death of both, if the separation is not done with great care and skill. An attack on Iran will unite them, but for the worse. It will then become clear to all that the special marriage between America and Israel that was born in hell and maintained under Satan's good graces can only die in hell. And, ironically, it will be a hell of their own making."

I'll end this article by quoting journalist and author Alan Hart. In his article called, "Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty – The full story," Hart writes: "The lesson of this cold-blooded, murderous attack was that there is nothing the Zionist state might not do, to its friends as well as its enemies, in order to get its own way." - 45 Reasons Why America Should Cut Off Ties With Israel, AIPAC And The Neocons, June 7, 2012.

"Experts agree that an American-Iranian rapprochement will bring much needed peace, stability, and prosperity to the Middle East. Any nation that tries to torpedo this pragmatic effort is working against peace, economic growth, and regional stability." - Gulf Feudal Lords Are Scared That America And Iran Will Make A Deal, November 30, 2012.

"People who are against this peace deal on the grounds that war is a better idea need to take a hard look in the mirror. War is not a solution as it was in the past when rulers did not possess lethal chemical and nuclear weapons as they do today and when the people were not as enlightened.

The peoples of the Middle East deserve a better fate than unending war. Ending animosity between nations and groups is now the job of informed and disinterested citizens, especially in an age when the mass media, journalists, governments, and politicians have taken the opposite stance and do everything in their power to increase hatred, fear, misunderstanding, and hostility between peoples.

. . .The deal resolving the Iranian nuclear issue is really a mask. The Iranian nuclear program was never geared towards building a nuclear bomb. There was no real controversy to begin with. It was an example of hyped international political theatre to distract the world's attention from the failing peace process in Israel-Palestine. The media's eyes were taken away from Israel's illegal settlement construction on Palestinian land and turned towards Iran's legal construction relating to its nuclear program.

Now that this deal is done and out of the way, the world must turn its attention to other issues, and resolve the Israeli-Palestinian crisis once and for all. The hardliners and radicals in all camps, Jews and Muslims, Americans and Iranians, must be cut off from this delicate process." - Americans And Iranians Say No To A Catastrophic War; Israel Is An Obstacle To Regional Peace, November 27, 2013.

"Hillary Mann Leverett: Yes, but if I can just come back to a point that you were just discussing with Ali that I think is very important in terms of the balance of power in the region, you know, in the 1980s, the Israelis were not at all concerned about Iran’s nuclear program. They weren’t at all concerned about many of Iran’s other activities that they now profess concern about. In fact, in the 1980s, the United States wanted to impose sanctions on Iran for our concern about their connection to the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut. And the then Israeli government, in a live interview by the then Minister Ariel Sharon, said that Israel would oppose sanctions being—they would oppose sanctions being imposed on Iran. That changes in 1990, not because of any change in Iranian behavior, but because the Iraqi military was essentially taken out after the invasion of Kuwait and the U.S. routing of Iraq from Kuwait. Literally six months after that, in early 1992, you have the first visit to Washington by then Prime Minister Rabin, who’s considered more dovish than the current prime minister, Netanyahu, and it was then that Rabin started to raise concerns about Iran’s nuclear program and the prospect of sanctions. And it was then, in 1995, that the United States first imposes its comprehensive economic embargo on Iran. So I think it’s important to understand that even though Prime Minister Netanyahu’s rhetoric is very vitriolic, there is something deeper in terms of Israeli concerns about the rise of Iran in the region, that could check Israel’s, what I would call, reckless impulses vis-à-vis its neighbors." - Hillary Mann Leverett Calls GOP Letter To Iran "Reckless" And Says President Obama Should Make A Stronger, Strategic Case For Rapprochement With Iran, March 13, 2015.

II. 5 Ceasefire Predictions

1. A Nuclear 9/11 event takes place in a Democratic majority city like Chicago, perpetuated by Mossad, to be blamed on rogue IRGC elements dissatisfied with their political leaders' decision to agree to a ceasefire and eventual peace agreement with the United States.

2. The assassination of President Trump by Mossad to be blamed either on a Muslim patsy, a Kurdish militant, or a Pakistani Shiite.

3. Iran’s military leaders, emboldened by their war with the United States and Israel, capitalize on the political momentum at home by committing thousands of political executions of minorities, political activists, spies, dissidents, and youthful protesters.

4. The United States, Israel, and their regional proxies regroup militarily, rebuild defenses, and transfer new equipment to initiate further hostilities against the Islamic Republic when it has its guard down.

5. Iran and its militias in Iraq and Lebanon launch a war against Syria and Iraqi Kurdistan simultaneously, removing the emerging security threat that Jolani's regime poses to the Islamic Republic and Iraq.

Not 47

2026-04-07T14:55:00.010-04:00

Of the three Allied leaders who met in Tehran in 1943, only Stalin showed the young Shah any respect.

"Reza Shah's plan for a well-crafted transfer of power to his son was upended during the Second World War when on August 25, 1941, the combined armies of Great Britain and Soviet Russia invaded Iran on the flimsy pretext of preventing the kingdom's road and rail links and oil depots from falling into German hands. The real problem was Reza Shah's policy of neutrality and his refusal to be seen bending to the same foreigr powers who earlier in the century had divided the country among them. On the day of the invasion the Imperial Family gathered for lunch. The mood at the table was "so tense and so grim that none of us dared speak," recalled Princess Ashraf. "What I knew was inevitable has happened," her father told them. "The Allies have invaded. I think this will be the end for me---the English will see to it." In a moment of great drama, the Crown Prince handed his sister a gun. "Ashraf, keep this gun with you, and if troops enter Tehran and try to take us, fire a few shots and then take your own life," he told his sister. "I'll do the same." The next day bombers reached the outskirts of Tehran and dropped explosives. The Queen and the princesses sheltered in the palace basement and as soon as the all-clear was sounded packed and fled south to Isfahan.
The Shah and his eldest son stayed behind to rally the generals, but Iran's army disintegrated under the Allied onslaught. On September 16, 1941, Reza Shah signed the formal instrument of abdication, changed into civilian clothes, and drove to Isfahan to join his wife and daughters. He was told by his British captors that he must leave Iran to spend his days in exile---a fitting end for the former Cossack who came to the throne idolizing Napoleon Bonaparte. Princess Ashraf begged to join her father but he said no. "I would love to have you with me, but your brother needs you more," her father explained. "I want you to stay with him. I wish you had been a boy, so you could be a brother to him now." Stripped of his titles, rank, and wealth, Reza Shah boarded a British cruiser bound for his preferred destination of Argentina. Only when the vessel was at sea did the captain inform the deposed monarch that he was actually headed to permanent exile in South Africa. His son later noted the irony---unbeknownst to the British, at the time of their invasion his father had already set his mind on abdication and spending the rest of his life abroad. Mohammad Reza Shah later wrote, "You might say that Reza Shah was exiled by mutual desire and consent."
The British and Russian ambassadors considered turning out the Pahlavis and replacing them with the more pliable Qajars. Fearful of arousing nationalist opinion, they abandoned the scheme but nonetheless snubbed the Shah's investiture. In his maiden speech from the throne the new king assured parliament and the people that he would abide by the Constitution and return his father's estates back to the nation. His speech went down well, but his ministers and the Allied ambassadors were determined to see to it that the second Pahlavi king's wings were firmly clipped and surrounded him with forceful older personalities determined to reestablish constitutional rule and prevent the emergence of a second autocracy. The proud young monarch felt the sting of humiliation every time he drove in and out of the capital, where he was obliged to present his identification papers to the Russian troops manning the gates. Two years later, when Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill flew to Tehran to discuss their war aims, only Stalin made an effort to treat the twenty-four-year-old King with the respect he felt he deserved as Iran's head of state. Roosevelt said he would be happy to receive the Shah---at his lodgings in the Russian embassy. The Shah bitterly recalled that "it seemed a curious situation that I had to go to the Russian embassy to see him, while Stalin came to see me." Slights like this left their mark.
The Shah found himself "plunged into a sea of trouble," and perhaps his greatest achievement in those fraught early years was simply to survive. The U.S. embassy in Tehran informed the State Department that the young king had "no solid power base and no political machine" but nonetheless thought they saw promise in his idealism and character.
Mohammad Shah is a man of much stronger purpose than is generally realized. He stands almost alone, distrusts most advisers, is honest in his efforts to secure a democratic form of government in Iran. He is not easily influenced and cannot be shaken. Installed as a figurehead during the 1941 crisis, he may yet surprise the factions in his country and the outside powers. He thinks along Western lines, and is inalienably attached to his Iranian army. The military budget is half the national expenditure now. Yet, of course, the army is almost his only backing within Iran.
The young monarch could barely hide his frustration with his lot. "I inherited a crown," he protested. "Before I put it on, I want to earn it." He had been on the throne a year when he met with a group of senior politicians to plead his case for far-reaching social and economic reforms "I told them that we must establish social justice in this country," he said, drawing on his tutelage in Switzerland and bearing in mind Madame Arfa's talk of revolutionary kings. "It is not fair that a number of people should be at a loss what to do with their wealth," he said, "while a number die from hunger." His ministers dismissed his "revolutionary ideas" as empty talk and the naive ramblings of a young man with too much time on his hands.
The Shah's brimming youthful idealism was never more fully expressed than during a reception he hosted for the country's religious leaders in the late forties. In words that would come back to haunt him later in life, he lectured the ulama on their responsibilities as moral guardians of the nation. No ruler of Iran was above the law, he reminded them. "People must not remain silent, or neutral, about the actions of their rulers," he said in reference to the farr, which sanctioned rebellion in case of injustice. "They must rise up if governments trample their rights or break the laws. It is indeed one of the major responsibilities of the clergy to awaken people and make them aware of their legal rights, and thus not allow rulers and governments to engage in reckless and lawless behavior." - An excerpt from, "The Fall of Heaven: The Pahlavis And The Final Days of Imperial Iran" by Andrew Scott Cooper, Picador, 2018, Pg. 60-63.

The number that bellicose American leaders keep citing when talking about Iran is 47.

They falsely believe that Iranian animosity towards America and England only began 47 years ago, in 1979, when the rogue Ayatollah, backed by the Americans and British themselves, was installed into power in Tehran following the Shah's exile.

The real history is much different. Relations between the Anglo-American empire and Iran were poisoned long before 1979, even prior to the 1953 CIA-MI6 coup that saw the Shah installed as the undisputed King of Iran.

America and England have insulted the Iranian nation as soon as they came into contact with it, just as they insulted Egypt, China, India, and all non-Western civilizations.

When the Americans, British, and Soviets invaded Iran during WWII they didn't ask how Iranians felt, or fret about what type of government model they had, they treated the country as a plaything and the Shah as a toy. In their colonial worldview Iran didn't exist.

And that history cannot be dismissed when discussing why Iranians today are so determined not to see their country fall into the hands of the Americans and British again. Come hell or high water, Iran will be respected.

When national egos are violated and insulted, especially of nations with long memories of statehood and prior episodes of glory and dominance, only war can wipe the disgrace away.

But the problem is that Iran today is not led by a nationalist minded government that is fighting a war for national liberation. It is led by an Islamic martyrdom cult that puts more emphasis on securing Palestinian rights than Iranian rights.

The same can be said for the other side, with American and British leaders more concerned with Jewish welfare and Jewish rights than those of their own citizens.

What we have here is a war between two uncivilized cults that have seized power in Tehran, London, and Washington.

So, do not speak of a war between the West and Iran. This is not an American war. America ceased to exist in 1963. This is a war between Islam and Israel, between two eschatological religions.

Alex Jones On Trump's Rogue Behaviour

2026-04-07T12:00:00.001-04:00

President Trump has openly announced a plan to conduct the EXACT definition of genocide against the Iranian people!

The MADNESS MUST STOP NOW!! https://t.co/H1wUCmm9r8 pic.twitter.com/m8iJclOQwO
— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) April 7, 2026

Mad Bunny: Trump's Sacrilegious Easter Tirade

2026-04-06T22:20:00.006-04:00

It is hard to decipher Trump.

Is he an initiate of the mysteries who views himself as above the mass popular religions? Is he a Jewish supremacist, an agent 47 for the State of Israel? Is he just a crazy person who has lost his reasoning faculties and control of his bowel movements? Is he a willing scapegoat for the collapse of the Dollar and the apocalyptic war in the Middle East? Only he can answer these questions and chances are he'll be dead before he confesses anything. He'll take his secrets and his sins to his grave.

An excerpt from, "The Hare and the Goddess: the story of a sacred animal" by Candy Dowson, Medium, September 16, 2024:

Across Celtic, Germanic and pre-Roman cultures, the hare was a sacred and mystical animal held in deep love and honour by the indigenous tribal peoples of Europe, Britain and Ireland.
To the ancient ones, the hare represented fertility, sexuality, abundance, prosperity, good fortune, and new life — as well as violence, madness, trickery, divination, death and resurrection. The hare was considered so sacred that it was forbidden to be hunted and eaten in Britain and parts of Europe.
Because the hare has been linked with the moon for such a long time, many of the goddesses associated with it are also linked to the moon, as well as to fertility, prosperity, rebirth and war.

Wikipedia:

The idea of rabbits as a symbol of vitality, rebirth and resurrection derives from antiquity. This explains their role in connection with Easter, the resurrection of Christ. The unusual presentation in Christian iconography of a Madonna with the Christ Child playing with a white rabbit in Titian's Madonna of the Rabbit can thus be interpreted Christologically. Together with the basket of bread and wine, a symbol of the sacrificial death of Christ, the picture may be interpreted as the resurrection of Christ after death.
The phenomenon of superfetation, where embryos from different menstrual cycles are present in the uterus, results in hares and rabbits being able to give birth seemingly without having been impregnated, which caused them to be seen as symbols of virginity. Rabbits also live underground, an echo of the tomb of Christ.

Tucker Carlson speaks out against Trump’s Easter morning “truth”:

“This is a mockery, not just of Islam but of Christianity. To send out a tweet with the F-word on Easter morning promising the murder of civilians and then saying ‘Praise be to Allah’. We can’t support that.” pic.twitter.com/MJlmO3GAgS
— The American Conservative (@amconmag) April 6, 2026

Here's Donnie!

2026-04-06T19:47:00.002-04:00

This man insulted two religions in one weekend. Has he truly gone nuts or is this all an act?

Trump, his Zionist handlers, the Rothschild empire, and U.S. officials want to be to able to use the insanity defense in the future so they can wipe their hands off of the disaster in the Middle East and move on to the next stage of their grand plan to transform the world.

But Trump's crazy act won't hold water in the court of public opinion.

Humanity will not let them get away with it.

How is a person supposed to tell if they are having a psychotic break or not these days?

Everyone else can see the big rabbit listening to Trump talk about bombing Iran, right? pic.twitter.com/aH9C2RohFE
— Peter Hague (@peterrhague) April 6, 2026

Trump Is A Jewish Supremacist, Not An American

2026-04-06T18:08:00.004-04:00

I know it's hard to believe, but Donald Trump doesn't consider himself an American, or a Christian. He identifies as a Jew first and foremost. He is a Jewish supremacist masquerading as an American nationalist.

Just as the Ayatollah didn't put any value on the lives of Iranians, considering them worthless unless they sacrificed for Islam, Trump and the cabal that owns him don't value American lives. He will destroy America to empower and elevate Israel.

Have you noticed the pattern with Talmud following Donald Trump? Btw, he feels exactly the same way about us.

Isn't it obvious? https://t.co/TrjIYR9JPh pic.twitter.com/dnrXi3g2Gw
— Kentucky Statesman (@ky_statesman) April 6, 2026

As a sparrow's flight in the winter hall: the Catholic Tradition of England of Old

2026-04-06T15:49:00.002-04:00

Video Title: As a sparrow's flight in the winter hall: the Catholic Tradition of England of Old. Source: Schwerpunkt. Date Published: April 5, 2026.