London Reels From Terror Attack, Hitchens Grovels, Brexit Solved Nothing

The terror attack in London should have surprised literally no one. More terror attacks are bound to follow as London continues to slide into Caliphate status.

Of the most interest to everyone is how the British public will react. Will they do anything? Will conservative voices come forward and make a stand? The short answer is “no”.

Even the anti-SJW warrior and old fogey, Peter Hitchens ducked out of the discussion. Here are some of his recent tweets.

Drugs are the underlying variable here.

It seems that his late brother was the one with the brains and the functioning set of testicles.

What is Peter good for except for sounding off on Trump on Question Time, debating spoiled children at Oxford, and being a living, breathing stereotype of a depressed posh old fuddy duddy British aristocrat?

Meanwhile, the identity of the suspect seems to still be in question. The brother of Abu Izzadeen, the man originally suspected of being the attacker by the media, has claimed that his brother is in fact, still in prison and could not have been the attacker.

But you have to admit, this radical sunni cleric bears more than a passing resemblance to the attacker. Where have we seen him before? Oh, thats right. In a confrontation with British nationalists led by Paul Golding.

Perhaps the British Nationalists knew something that respectable British conservatives did not.

UPDATE: Khalid Masood named by police as responsible for Westminster attack

Meanwhile the MSM is trying to defend the refugees.

See nazis! It wasn’t a refugee, he was British born. He’s a more conservative Muslim than either of his immigrant parents and he was radicalised right here in Britain, in British mosques! So take that!

This is actually a huge misstep on their part. In their haste to defend the refugees, they are proving the point that blood and soil nationalists have been making for awhile now — assimilation is a myth. All they are doing is breeding discontented second and third generation extremists.

What about the Brexit folks? The ones that so courageously stood up for British sovereignty?

Again with the “values” talk. What about “the people”?

And what did Sharia May have to say.

It is not Islam it is a perversion of a GREAT faith”

But at least all those Poles will be deported from the UK, and that’s good enough, eh fellow nationalists?

In general, from my observations, I have found that “secular” muslims are the most dangerous. The ones who integrated into the hedonistic Western culture and then end up repenting and rediscovering their faith are the most fanatical. They feel an extreme need to repent their previous decadent criminal life by attacking infidels. They are prime recruiting targets for radical preachers as well. If you have a moderate, nice muslim friend, sooner or later you will be blamed for their transgressions.

Vincent Law
the authorVincent Law
I have a Hatreon now! If you like my writing and want me to write more, consider supporting me there.


  • Disgusting filth. No business being in any white country. Send them back to the third world hell holes where they belong.

  • I struggle to see how anybody respectably calling himself alt-right can prefer the pro-war, atheistic, neo-con left-winger Christopher Hitchens over his right-wing, conservative, Christian brother.

    Peter is regarded as some sort of far-right extremist in the UK and is pretty much a lone voice on the perils of drugs. This article makes no attempt to refute Peter’s assertion that the spate of terrorist attacks have been caused by drug-abusing petty criminals who were lured into violent fundamentalism.

    You can still hold negative views on Islam and recognise what Hitchens has said about the terrorists being druggies.

    • The problem with the analysis from Peter is that it gives greater credence to the ‘drugs’ than to Islam?Yes,we know they are all lowlife criminals but what is it specifically that leads them to kill always in the name of Islam?

      • According to a Muslim convert I am acquainted with (to clarify the kind of person he is, he is almost indistinguishable from an old-fashioned British conservative, has served in the Armed Forces, votes Ukip, and does not feel any less of a Christian despite his conversion in the 1960s), the creed these people espouse is Wahhabism, which is a Saudi-originated perversion of the faith. Perhaps drug-using habitual criminals are more susceptible to seduction by the Wahhabi creed, given its full-throttle fundamentalism.

        Regardless, I’ll agree that Hitchens does not pay enough attention to the ideology here — whether it is Wahhabism or plain Islam — but right-wingers who hate Islam anyway are on the flip side of the same coin by ignoring the fact these people are druggies.

        I also accurately predicted on the day after the attack that the press would be at pains not to use the word “Islamic” in connexion with this atrocity. Now, this is a correct distinction if my convert acquaintance is to be believed, but I am under no doubts that the Government is stressing this ‘un-Islamicness’ of the act because it is preoccupied by the nuances of theology.

  • I met Hitchens once, he was interviewing me about cultural Marxism. Smart guy but never has good solutions. He’s middle class btw, not aristocrat.

    • Did you see Murdoch Murdoch’s latest clip, “The Greatest Generation”? Rather apropos.

      Why dream of the defilement of Bomber’s descendants though? We’ve got multitudes of perfectly good traitors living right now. Harris may have even thought he was doing the right thing at the time. Today’s worms know full well what they’re engaged in and what the endgame is.

    • I don’t think bomber Harris was responsible for the decision to bomb Dresden,but he certainly did the heinous deed.

  • Boris Johnson: ‘Nations around the world are pouring out their sympathies for us today. This is a fight we’re all in together.’ What fight? Once again our authorities will take no action, there will be more appeasement, a refusal to name the enemy & evasion of the truth. Other nations sympathies are no use to us. When Muslims see that this is all that happens they will realise that they have nothing to fear & become even more emboldened.

  • At least the liberal elite shit heads are still spouting the same bullshit talking points we’ve heard 1000s of times by now. If they were to stop doing that, I’d begin to worry. So please keep it up assholz, keep up that sweet sweet alienating rhetoric, we on the Alt-Right are counting on it.

  • Repenting their previous decadence?Yes,I suspect that could be one of the myriad of reasons that they wish to kill us.But isn’t one of the basic tenets of the Koran that we kafir deserve to be killed?

    • Not people of the book (Christians and Jews) we just pay jizzya and provide janissaries, and white teen girls for rich guys harems, but not getting killed. Ofc. today with overpopulated deserts they could change their mind, using fatwa.

        • The sooner Europeans can shake off the hex of these Abrahamic fairy tales the better will be our chance of survival,it is not the wisdom of our folk & our current predicament is testament to that fact.

      • People of the ‘Book” I take that to mean the Bible??
        Christians and Jews do not follow the same religion?

        • “People of the ‘Book” I take that to mean the Bible?”- Bible and Torah, it’s same for them.

          For Muslims we’re the “people of the book” together with Jews, basically believers in faith that laid foundation for Islam who refused Mohamed. For example they see emperor Constantine as a Muslim, or Moses, Abraham is the first Muslim etc. So in caliphate by sharia, Christians (and Jews) can pay for freedom of religion (jizzya tax), in Ottoman empire and apparently Andalusia (not sure for this), Jews got some additional rights. Ofc, treatment differed on culture to culture . For example middle eastern Christians were treated better then European ones , not to mention Africans.

  • The British won’t do anything – yet. It’s not in our nature to react in such a way. Most people in Britain know what is going on, we just don’t advertise it. What we need is a leader.

      • We don’t work like that. I agree with you, and find it very frustrating, but British history has a very established pattern. That’s why Churchill and Thatcher were so successful. The best we can do at the moment is create the conditions for such a person to arise.

    • We have plenty of leaders, but most of them leave a lot to be desired. People are starting to get sick of Muslims and the constant excuses made for them, but nationalism has a serious image problem in the UK. We need to fix that first.

      • Present as a “normie”, but speak boldly about the issues. Don’t use any of the symbols or terminology that have been demonized and associated with “Ebil Nazis”. Just think of creative ways to rephrase, restate, and REPEAT the underlying themes, concepts, ideas, and truths of our outlook. Point out the contradictions and double-standards of the enemy’s program. Ask leading questions, rather than making assertions.

        • That’s fine as far as it goes, but I’m talking about the image that nationalism brings to mind among people: it’s either golf club bores like Farage (and I’ve a lot of time for the man, but that’s what he is) or bovver boys (skinheads and thugs for American readers), more often than not overweight and covered in tattoos. Moreover, in the UK, nationalism is an old man’s game.

          Contrast that with the situation in Europe, where well-dressed, freshed-faced young men are leading identitarian movements, and patriotic politicians are leading folk against the decrepit May 68ers. We need some more of that over here.

        • Well, I’m all for speaking truth to (((power))), but open JQ discourse turns off the vast majority of people here.

          • If people looked at the state of the world logically they could see patterns.We must encourage them to discover the truth surely?
            The invaders are the tools of the elite.Many know this instinctively.

          • We need to look at things through the prism of ‘What’s best for White people’. At the moment, the new right is on the rise across Europe; it is becoming a serious electoral force, and it may even take power in France. Our (the alt-right’s) role, in my view, is to push politics rightward and toward a White identity movement: to get Europeans to see politics in terms of their racial interests. And that means building mass support around issues that people can identify with.

            For example, most White people in the UK support a complete halt to Muslim immigration; maybe 1 in 10 at most are wise to the JQ. Which is the better issue to focus on? Which is more likely to serve our people’s interests?

          • The ‘prism’ of what is best for our race I completely with.Yes we are becoming a force to be reckoned with.The divisions are widening.The one party system is beginning to crack,the myth of democracy is exposed.
            It is crucial that we propagate our traditionalist and economic values .

            Most white people never supported any immigration,look where that got us?
            Racial awareness is crucial to our movement,even those who curse the Muslim invasion do not seem to join the dots?

          • What about rallying around the Queen. Hold up signs we need our Queen to fight for us. Something like that.

          • Unfortunately the Queen signed 5 treaties with the EU giving away her sovereignty,breaking her oath!We are a sovereign people though,bound into Common law,not EU o Sharia but Common!

      • I don’t consider them leaders – they are globalist sell outs. I don’t think it would take that much to tip people into nationalism, because as you say, most people are sick of mass immigration and it’s attendant issues. We were a very nationalistic country not so long ago. It’s not until post ww2 and then the 60’s that this started to fade. If you read a BNP manifesto from the noughties, you’ll find it was virtually the same as what the Labour party used to advocate in the 1920’s.
        The trouble is, in England in particular, we have a long history of rallying around a strong leader, be it a King or a politician. It’s ingrained in our psyche and goes back to pre-Christian days. It’s one of the reasons we are so individualistic, even for a European country. We need to recognise that trait and work with it rather than trying to ignore it. It’s one reason they are quick to clamp down on any right wing movements so that no leader will come forth. As I said upstream, the best we can do is try and create the conditions in which such a leader can emerge.

        • I don’t think I was clear: I was referring to leaders on the nationalist/far right. I’m not sure I agree that Britain has always been a nationalistic country. I should say that it’s always been a a patriotic country, which isn’t quite the same thing. Racial nationalism has had a very bad rep in this country, at least since WW2.

          I agree with you that we must create the conditions for great leaders to emerge.

        • Back in May of 2016 she slipped off of the plantation and made a statement about supporting Brexit. By July she was forced by her handlers to say she had no opinion. This woman saw her country through one of the greatest wars as a child and come out the other side victorious. If you watch her and William most everything they do and say has an element of rational and traditionalism. Harry like his father is liberal and spoiled. Let’s hope Charles won’t have long to reign.

      • She’s in her 90’s. Her son wants to be ‘Defender of ALL Faiths’ as opposed to the traditional ‘Defender of THE Faith’ which was Church of England Christianity. I’m aware of what she said about Brexit, though. I don’t think Charles will be as popular a monarch he is chomping at the bit to get on the throne and ‘reform’.

    • Leaderless resistance. You need to make every action you take work against this system. Be your own leader, awaken others.

Leave a Reply