The English Patient


I write for the Daily Stormer

This is in reference to Eli James and his recent broadcast about who the British are, Judah is Germany bla bla bla. All of it is just nonsense. Lets start with where the word British or Britain came from

Wiki- yes I know this is wiki, but this will be an ongoing thread on who the first British were.

The term Britain is a linguistic descendant (reflex) of one of the oldest known names for Great Britain, an island off the north-western coast of continental Europe. The terms Briton and British, similarly derived, refer to its inhabitants and, to varying extents, the smaller islands in the vicinity. “British Isles” is the only ancient name for these islands to survive in general usage. Its first written appearance was by Pytheas of Massalia in the 4th century BC. It originates with a group of P-Celtic speakers, resident on Great Britain, who were referred to, and perhaps referred to themselves, by the earliest known form of the term “British”.

Eli James claims that Alfred the Great was a king of Britain, but the truth is he was the king of England not Britain.

Traditionally, the Kingdom of England is usually considered to begin with Alfred the Great, King of Wessex, one of the petty kingdoms to rule the southeastern portion of Great Britain. While Alfred was not the first king to lay claim to rule all of the English, his rule represents the first unbroken line of Kings to rule the whole of England, the House of Wessex. The last monarch of England was Queen Anne, who became Queen of Great Britain when England merged with Scotland to form a union in 1707. For monarchs after Queen Anne, see List of British monarchs.

Again King Arthur

King Arthur was a legendary British leader who, according to medieval histories and romances, led the defence of Britain against Saxon invaders in the late 5th and early 6th centuries AD. The details of Arthur’s story are mainly composed of folklore and literary invention, and his historical existence is debated and disputed by modern historians.[2] The sparse historical background of Arthur is gleaned from various sources, including the Annales Cambriae, the Historia Brittonum, and the writings of Gildas. Arthur’s name also occurs in early poetic sources such as Y Gododdin.[3]

King Arthur, a British king was Celtic. Many CI people and even British Israel people believe King Arthur was a blood relative of Joseph of Arimathea.

How do Eli James’ Saxons become “British” if they were fighting against the British?

Another hard truth about Scythians. The Saxons can only speculate that they are Scythians, the Scots say they are Scythians in their Declaration of Arbroath.

Eli James claims that Britain was Albion before the Saxons invaded, but anyone can see this was not true.

Albion was a British name:


The Codex Vatopedinus‘s Ptolemaic map of the British Isles, labelled Alouïōnos (Ἀλȣϊωɴοϲ, “Albion”) and Iouérnïos (Ἰȣέρνϊοϲ, “Hibernia“). c. 1300.

The Brittonic name for the island, Hellenised as Albíōn (Ἀλβίων) and Latinised as Albiō (genitive Albionis), derives from the Proto-Celtic nasal stem *Albi̯iū (oblique *Albiion-) and survived in Old Irish as Albu (genitive Albann). The name originally referred to Britain as a whole, but was later restricted to Caledonia (giving the modern Scottish Gaelic name for Scotland, Alba). The root *albiio- is also found in Gaulish and Galatian albio- (“world”) and Welsh elfydd (elbid, “earth, world, land, country, district”). It may be related to other European and Mediterranean toponyms such as Alpes and Albania. It has two possible etymologies: either *albho-, a Proto-Indo-European root meaning “white” (perhaps in reference to the white southern shores of the island, though Celtic linguist Xavier Delamarre argued that it originally meant “the world above, the visible world”, in opposition to “the world below”, i.e., the underworld), or *alb-, Proto-Indo-European for “hill”.[6][7][8]

To say Albion isn’t or wasnt British is like saying Texas isnt an American state because it has a different name. Britain was a word used for all the British isles including Scotland (which was Ireland before it was Scotland).

Eli James simply picks an English King and makes him out to be a God, therefore he can also steal names, dates and geographical locations. The truth is Brittany in todays France and Britain was there somewhere around 2000 years before the Saxons got there.

It was indeed “the world above” the world below, but today things are upside down including Britain thanks to the Jews and to people who should never attempt to interpret history from their own jewish history books and or British Israel who think they are Judah too.

Not only did Germans and their brothers, the Romans invade Britain and Brittany (in Amorica), but they knew it was Britain they were invading…..and then kind of stole the name.

The word “Brittany”, along with its French, Breton and Gallo equivalents “Bretagne”, “Breizh” and “Bertaèyn”, derive from the Latin Britannia, which means Britons‘ land”. This word has been used by the Romans since the 1st century to name Great Britain, and more specifically the Roman province of Britain. This word derives from a Greek word, Πρεττανικη (Prettanike) or Βρεττανίαι (Brettaniai), used by Pytheas, an explorer from Massalia who visited the British Islands around 320 BC.

The Romans called Brittany Armorica, together with a quite indefinite region that extended along the Channel coast from the Seine estuary to the Loire estuary, and according to several sources, maybe along the Atlantic coast to the Garonne estuary. This term probably comes from a Gallic word, aremorica, which means “close to the sea”.[8] Another name, Letauia (in English “Litavis“), was used until the 12th century. It possibly means “wide and flat” or “to expand” and it gave the Welsh name for Brittany: Llydaw.[9]


The Cruthin/Pretani (the same name rendered in different forms of Celtic languages) were the oldest named people in the British Isles. This is beyond doubt, and attested to by so many authentic sources that politically-motivated “revisionists” cannot get around that fact. The Greeks called our islands Pretannikai Nesoi – the British Isles, after the Pretani/Cruthin people who lived there, probably based on the writings of the explorer Pytheas in 325 BC.

325 BC, was that before the Anglos got there? If Pytheas knew this as Britain in 325 BC it means it could have gone back even further.

Eli James says the Picts were Jews. Whats left to say? Some of you out there will claim I am taking a crack at CI because Eli James is on so many shows representing CI and bringing Jews into the movement more than anyone else, but I am not taking a crack at CI I am taking a crack at people who use CI to spread historical falsities. If you use false history and claim it is truth you obviously have no need to learn the truth.

The Romans always knew Britain as Britain or Pretani as did the Greeks, it is the Anglos who renamed a portion of it “England”.

Lets take a quick look at Bavaria, which is without a doubt the nicest part of Germany and has always had the best people in Germany.

The earliest known inhabitants that are mentioned in written sources were the Celts, participating in the widespread La Tène culture, whom the Romans subdued just before the commencement of the Christian era; founding colonies among them and including their land in the provinces of Raetia and Noricum. The Roman centre of administration for this area was Castra Regina (modern-day Regensburg).

Back awaay!


Im going to tell you true history, the Anglos allowed the Jews into Germany and then brought them into Britain and now they claim they are the only ones who fought against Jews (and dont want to fight against them right now). Like Trump and like the Jews they come to your house, make a pig sty out of it and then claim we have a dirty house. No you have a dirty house!.





This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to The English Patient

  1. melgibstein says:

    Take a look into the descendants of Joseph of Arimathea
    They claim he died or was buried in Glastonbury, England, yet the very name Glastonbury is Celtic and was not England at his time of death.
    When did Anglo Saxon England begin?
    The Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain was the process, from the mid 5th to early 7th centuries, by which the coastal lowlands of Britain developed from a Romano-British to a Germanic culture following the Roman withdrawal in the early 5th century. The traditional view of the process has assumed an invasion of several Germanic peoples, later collectively referred to as Anglo-Saxons, from the western coasts of continental Europe, followed by the establishment of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms across most of what is now England and parts of lowland Scotland. The arrival of a Germanic element in the history of Britain is also called the Advent of the Saxons (Latin: Adventus Saxonum), a term first used by Bede in about 731.[1]

    The Anglos capitalized on the Romans initial attack on lower Britain. They must be proud. An army of David Dukes from Amsterdam no doubt.

    You want the truth? Do you want the truth? You cant handle it.

  2. melgibstein says:

    Britain (or more accurately, Great Britain) is the name of the largest of the British Isles, which lie off the northwest coast of continental Europe. The name is probably Celtic and derives from a word meaning ‘white’; this is usually assumed to be a reference to the famous white Cliffs of Dover, which any new arrival to the country by sea can hardly miss. The first mention of the island was by the Greek navigator Pytheas, who explored the island’s coastline, c. 325 BCE.

    Britain means “white” and it aint for no white cliffs of Dover.

    Before Roman occupation the island was inhabited by a diverse number of tribes that are generally believed to be of Celtic origin, collectively known as Britons. The Romans knew the island as Britannia.
    Also called Alba. Folks what does alba mean in Latin? It means “white” just like Phoenicia and Lebanon.

    Does anyone see Sussex (South Saxon) Wessex (West Saxon) etc. on this pre Roman British map? Who are the name stealers? Why are these people stealing Celtic words and language?

    Lets look at that word Dumonii: The Dumnonii or Dumnones were British tribe who inhabited Dumnonia, the area now known as Devon and Cornwall (and some areas of present-day Dorset and Somerset) in the farther parts of the South West peninsula of Britain, from at least the Iron Age up to the early Saxon period. They were bordered to the east by the Durotriges tribe.

    Read that again Eli.

    The people of Dumnonia spoke a Southwestern Brythonic dialect similar to the forerunner of more recent Cornish and Breton. Irish immigrants, the Déisi,[3] are evidenced by the Ogham-inscribed stones they have left behind, confirmed and supplemented by toponymical studies.[4] The stones are sometimes inscribed in Latin, sometimes in both scripts.[3] Tristram Risdon suggested the continuance of a Brythonic dialect in the South Hams, Devon, as late as the 14th century, in addition to its use in Cornwall.

    These Celts spoke “Brythonic” imagine that? Did Germans speak Brythonic? They did but they wont admit to it, too much pork I guess.

    A kingdom of Domnonée (and of Cornouaille alongside) was established in the province of Armorica directly across the English Channel (of course not then called the English Channel), and has apparent links with the British population, suggesting an ancient connection of peoples along the western Atlantic seaboard.

    The River “Tamar”

    The river-name Tamar is ancient Celtic, possibly meaning ‘the dark one’ or simply ‘the river’. There are several other British rivers whose names have the same root-meaning; the Thames (Latin Tamesis) in London, the Team in County Durham, the Thame in Buckingham/Oxfordshire, and finally the Tame, of which there are three, in Warwickshire/Staffordshire, Yorkshire/Cheshire and North Yorkshire.
    — Anonymous User 4/11/2007

    Tamar River named by the Celts, again the name Tamar also meant “palm tree” and was the symbol of the Phoenicians. The Phoenicians were the Celts any way you want to look at it.

    Odd nobody knows what this celtic word “Tamar” means. Funny how we know some history and we dont know other history (the Holocaust for instance- everyone knows that history).

    Amazing how the Jew Andy Yitzcack of Euro Folk radio who lives in Cornwall never brings up this river. He’s damned if he does and damned if he doesnt.

    This map shows “Celtica” as the France area today, but the truth is everywhere on that map was Celtic.

    Celtic/Gaelic/Gallic/Phoenician whatever you want to call it, they were all the same people and not one people better than another, some smart enough to get away from the dumber however.

  3. melgibstein says:

    If Brutus of Troy had something to do with the name “Britain” it came not by the way of Germany, but by the Celts through Iberia.

    Of course wiki calls it Spain, but the truth is it was before Spain.

    Historia Britonum
    The Historia Britonum states that “The island of Britain derives its name from Brutus, a Roman consul” who conquered Spain. This is ultimately derived from Isidore of Seville’s popular 7th-century work Etymologiae, in which it was speculated that Britain was named after the Roman general Decimus Junius Brutus Callaicus, who pacified Further Spain in 138 BC. A more detailed story, set before the foundation of Rome, follows, in which Brutus is the grandson or great grandson of Aeneas — a legend that blends Isidore’s spurious etymology with the Christian, pseudo-historical “Table of Nations” tradition that emerged in the early medieval European scholarly world and attempted to trace the peoples of the known world (as well as legendary figures, such as the Trojan house of Aeneas) back to Biblical ancestors.[1

    Heres the story:

    The boy, named Brutus, later accidentally killed his father with an arrow and was banished from Italy. After wandering among the islands of the Tyrrhenian Sea and through Gaul, where he founded the city of Tours, Brutus eventually came to Britain, named it after himself, and filled it with his descendants. His reign is synchronised to the time the High Priest Eli was judge in Israel (not the jew from Chi-town), and when the Ark of the Covenant was taken by the Philistines.[2]

    Just a slight correction, it wasnt Italy then either.

    The truth is this all falls into the Phoenician category that history has excluded and conveniently added into Roman history (and some Jewish CI pastors as well).
    The very story of Troy was written by a Phoenician and rewritten by a Roman (pssst the Romans destroyed everything the Phoenicians had written and took it as their own, this story being one of them).

    One simply has to ask “Was there a Britain before the time of the Romans in Britain?” Look back at that map.

    Heres another

    Brigantes- anyone know what that word means?

    The Brigantes were a Celtic tribe who in pre-Roman times controlled the largest section of what would become Northern England. Their territory, often referred to as Brigantia was centred in what was later known as Yorkshire.

    The name Brigantes (Βρίγαντες in Ancient Greek) shares the same Proto-Celtic root as the goddess Brigantia, *brigant- meaning “high, elevated”, and it is unclear whether settlements called Brigantium were so named as “high ones” in a metaphorical sense of nobility, or literally as “highlanders”, referring to the Pennines, or inhabitants of physically elevated fortifications. (IEW, s.v. “bhereg’h-“).

    In modern Welsh the word braint means ‘privilege, prestige’ and comes from the same root *brigantī. Other related forms from the modern Celtic languages are: Welsh brenin ‘king’ (< *brigantīnos); Welsh/Cornish/Breton bri 'prestige, reputation, honour, dignity', Scottish Gaelic brìgh 'pith, power', Irish brí 'energy, significance', Manx bree 'power, energy' (all < *brīg-/brigi-); and Welsh/Cornish/Breton bre 'hill' (< *brigā). The name Bridget from Old Irish Brigit (Modern Irish Bríd) also comes from Brigantī, as does the English river name Brent.

    Brigantia, Brigit, Britannia, Britain………not in the slightest bit English folks. Not even in their wildest dreams. They had to steal it.

    Some of you are wondering, where did the word Parisi come from?


    The origin of the name is uncertain; Celticists John T. Koch and Raimund Karl propose a Celtic linguistic origin, meaning “the commanders”, similar to the Welsh verb peri (to cause, command or have done, from Proto-Celtic *kwer-).[11] Linguist Eric Hamp also links the name to this verb and suggests a meaning of “Fighters“.[12] Xavier Delamarre prefers to link the ethnic name to the P-Celtic root *pario- “cauldron” and translates Parisi as “They of the Cauldrons” (taking their name after a distinctive type of vessel used by the Iron Age Celts).[13]

    I suppose they were Saxons too? Everyone is a Saxon and everyone is Judah- except Jewish CI Germans.


    You could follow all this back to the Phoenicians, Trojans, Greeks, etc., but no doubt what started all of these wars among white people was one white people thinking they were better than the other. if I had to choose I would have went the way of the Phoenicians to Britain as far away from these morons as possible. id get on the biggest boat I could build or find and wait for an East wind.

    The Veneti who were in Gaul or Armorica were Phoenicians and in Ireland as well as mainland Britain (before the Germans knew what a boat was).

    The Veneti were a seafaring Celtic people who lived in the Brittany peninsula (France), which in Roman times formed part of an area called Armorica. They gave their name to the modern city of Vannes.

    To call white people “Anglo Saxons” and claim this was the “Germanic” people is just lunacy. To say that Germany is the tribe of Judah and then moved to England to mix in with the Irish and Scottish kings (same people) and unwelcomed is simply a crime against true history. Why is it that CI Germans claim to be Germanic AND Saxons (which they claim comes from Isaacs sons)? Wouldnt they be more proud of being Isaac’s sons than what the Romans called them? And then, why England? Because the Celts were incapable of naming their own land?

    Then we have the Saca dilemma, if the Saxons were the sons of Isaac, why werent they calling themselves the sons of Judah? The House of Israel that split from the House of Judah were the Sacka not the House of Judah. All of this crap is Jewish pilpulism.

    • Roger Martin says:

      Would ‘Brit’ in British not be related to B’rith meaning ‘covenant’ in Hebrew? I always assumed that’s where their name came from.

      • melgibstein says:

        The word Britain goes back to Ibri and if you read my Strange Brew thread you can see how the word Iberia relates to “bri” or “bre” as in Breoghan” or “Bryan” or “aryan” etc. It can mean “bright” like “Brigit” it can mean white like the Isle of Wight. It can mean bald, shining, royal, nobel, etc. Whether “covenant people” came out of it or it out of covenant people I havent totally investigeted, but the connection is there just like Fianna in Gaelic can mean white or holy or shining, bright etc. One thing is for sure it is Celtic or Keltic or Kellic, whatever word you prefer. We are dealing with the the mixup of several languages, several different spellings and at the time there were no vowels. Even some of the consonants were mixed up like p and b, f and p, etc etc.

        When I first started out playing baseball as a kid (again I grew up with a lot of Jews in my town) I can remember from the earliest times that when I hit a home run there was always a Jew screaming “yeaaaaah”, “whoooo hoooo” with a high pitched voice for a very long time (making the other team feel it). When I first saw this I thought this guy cant even bunt the ball and he is screaming victory for something I did. I never behaved that way since then.
        It seems we now have pastors in the CI movement doing the same thing with that same Jew attitude screaming victory for something they did not contribute to, they were just there wearing the uniform.

        I remember watching some of these Jews play baseball on my team with great difficulty, it was like I could go buy a hot dog at the concession stand between the time the ball hit the catchers glove and the time the Jew swung the bat (like the world had to stop for the Jew to hit the ball). This was the group of people screaming victory the loudest. There is a lesson in everything regarding Jews.

  4. melgibstein says:

    I think I have demonstrated that the British were not the Anglo Saxons in fact the Anglo Saxons briefly renamed Britain and wanted all of Britain to be under English rule, didnt happen.

    In conclusion, Germans arent British and considering the Anglos were Germans it means the Angles arent British either. They might as well be Jews trying to steal the name of Israel in my opinion. They come to your house, make it a cesspool and then say your house is dirty.

    I dont know of any Celts throughout history that ever did this, they always wanted to just be left alone from all the nutbags of the earth.

    The House of Britain today is like the Scottish, Welsh and Irish moving in with the Adams Family (Jews included).

  5. melgibstein says:

    Caratacus (Kah) theres that “kah” again to the Roman nutjobs.

    If the degree of my nobility and fortune had been matched by moderation in success, I would have come to this City as a friend rather than a captive, nor would you have disdained to receive with a treaty of peace one sprung from brilliant ancestors and commanding a great many nations. But my present lot, disfiguring as it is for me, is magnificent for you. I had horses, men, arms, and wealth: what wonder if I was unwilling to lose them? If you wish to command everyone, does it really follow that everyone should accept your slavery? If I were now being handed over as one who had surrendered immediately, neither my fortune nor your glory would have achieved brilliance. It is also true that in my case any reprisal will be followed by oblivion. On the other hand, if you preserve me safe and sound, I shall be an eternal example of your clemency.[11]

    This was a true Brit (True Grit).

  6. melgibstein says:

    The Ibri were out of the Med, again 2000 years before anyone else and had the gates of Hercules (Melqart) shut behind them. Only seafaring people were in the British Isles and Scandinavia then. By the time Germans got into Scandinavia and or Britain the Ibri, whether you call them Celts or Phoenicians, were not only all over the North, but all over the Western world Germans didnt even know existed. People say Vikings discovered America, but Vikings were just Iberians with some later mixtures of central European people. Who do you think knew the sea better, the people who came there by the sea or the people who came up through the inland rivers (even behind the original celts who did that first too) ?

    Who would need to be the smarter of the two, the people who sailed the open seas or the people who followed up a river in only one direction?

  7. melgibstein says:

    David Duke and CI pastors are big Jew DNA believers, but do they believe this too?

    The David Dukes of the world claim the irish were from the North Pole chasing rabbits around the icebergs. This claims much of the Irish come from inner Europe (if you believe DNA that is).

    What they dont know is the Irish in those days were the Scottish and several different white groups of people all from the same tree. To claim the Irish come from Indo Europe or outer Europe is like saying “flies have wings”. They came by boat from the East- period and had many different white peoples throughout time. To characterize them by any other word than “White” and call them a geography is all Jewish twist speak. People arent geography, people are biology.

  8. melgibstein says:

    King Arthurs name is said to mean “bear” or Artorius.

    Bear in Strongs Concordance Hebrew is “arktos”.

    The name Arthur

    Another possibility is that it is derived from a Brittonic patronym *Arto-rīg-ios (the root of which, *arto-rīg- “bear-king” is to be found in the Old Irish personal name Art-ri) via a Latinized form Artōrius.[30] Less likely is the commonly proposed derivation from Welsh arth “bear” + (g)wr “man” (earlier *Arto-uiros in Brittonic); there are phonological difficulties with this theory—notably that a Brittonic compound name *Arto-uiros should produce Old Welsh *Artgur and Middle/Modern Welsh *Arthwr and not Arthur (in Welsh poetry the name is always spelled Arthur and is exclusively rhymed with words ending in -ur – never words ending in -wr – which confirms that the second element cannot be [g]wr “man”).[31][32]

    bear is there, man isnt, more likely bear king.

  9. melgibstein says:

    The history of the Celtic peoples stretches back thousands of years, the Celts first appear in history in the pages of Herodotus (480-408 B.C.),who referred to them as “Kelt-oi” and located them on the continent of Western Europe. The earliest European Celtic culture was in Hallstadt, Austria, and this was followed by the La Tene Celts in Switzerland. The idea of a ‘Celtic’ race is a modern concept, the peoples described as Celts were loosely tied by similar languages, religion, and cultural expression.

    The first Celtic immigrants in Britain, probably arrived between 2000 and 1200 BC. These are known as the q-Celts and spoke Goidelic or Gaelic Celtic, q-Celtic derives from the differences between the early Celtic and Latin languages, which included the lack of a ‘p’ in Celtic and an ‘a’ rather than the Italic ‘o’. A later wave of Brythonic-speaking Celtic immigrants, who settled in England, Wales and the lowands of Scotland are known as the p-Celts.
    Even these Historian writers are ninkompoops, the Celts didnt settle in England they settled in Britain, all over Britain because they were the original British not the Angle douche bags. They hate us but they steal our names, who does that remind you of?

    Brythonic and Goidelic are both “CELTIC” languages. Both came from the same language and both through IBERIA and other places like Brittany who spoke Breton, another Celtic dialect. Because some of the language was Latin does not mean it was always Latin. Latin was the Lingua Franca even in Ireland, Scotland and Britain eventually. Even the Phoenicians sometimes wrote in Latin, why? Because the Phoenicians and original Romans were the same people just a bit dumber and greedier.
    Does anyone here believe that the Celts or any peoples who came to Ireland in the earliest times would not also go to what we call Wales and England today? Did the original Irish seafarers not see Wales and England sailing up the Irish Sea ( Nova Mare Hibernicum)? What we have here is a failure to own up to the fact where the word Britain came from and I am here to tell you it came from the exact place Iberia came from, the Ibri (there were no vowels back then).

    Breton, Bretagne, Iberia, Hibernia, Hebrides, Brittany, Britain, Iverskaya, Ivernia, Ebros, many many others and this all have the same root meaning:

    It came to mean “white”, “shining”, “bright”, “holy”, “fair”, “aryan” or nobel and for some reason white people dont want to know this. Not even the Stormfront pagans or CI? Whats up with that folks? This is cutting edge stuff.

    • Ray Zerwitt says:

      They don’t do the cutting edge thing. This truth movement has become something like alternate ordinary. You’re the only one actively pursuing the truth. I visited Rense the other day, and that one has gone totally stupid. Their targets are the 100 IQ range. That’s where the money is. Lies have their limits and this truth movement has plateaued. Some scriptural algebra: Clean + unclean = unclean everytime. The unclean have dropped their fly in the perfume. The leaven has permeated the whole loaf. All of these troof movement dissident blogs are as bogus as Naamah’s kiss. They allow and humor defrocked and exposed liars. It’s all for the titillation of the 100 IQ set. You’re piecing something holistic out of it. Square, level, plumb and flush come as a package. An unassailable package. You know it when you see it.

      You gotta be kiddin me that they don’t know the difference between Anglo-Saxons and Britons? They’re reinforcing that whopper on the radio? Who do they think King Arthur was fighting? London was deserted after the Romans left. The Britons wouldn’t live there. That would be against the sanitation laws of Leviticus like burying your dung outside the camp. They had the scriptures. The Catholic church brought London back complete with the dwellers pitching their chamber pots out the window into the street. The catholics had the scriptures too! During those plagues, the catholic church was telling their congregation that washing your hands and face with water was the sin of vanity. They’re looking like controlled opposition. They use the scriptures to bring the curses down on Israel. You had to get a license and pay a fee to study the scriptures, on top of being educated by those same catholics and dyed in the wool to the system. Just like NOW with the judeo-pseudeo-satano-christianity oxymoron.

      St. Patrick (Jeremiah) had the place cleaned up of the snakes. It was one place the jews couldn’t go, even during Yahshua’s time.

      This editor keeps leaving out characters. I don’t know if I said what I set out to say, for all the distraction of going back and filling in characters. It’s looking disjointed to me.

      What you’re getting up to is the cutting edge, trailblazing stuff. If they want titillation, they don’t matter anyway.

      • melgibstein says:

        To show you how upside down things are, I just posted a comment on “The Patsy” and the brother of James Earl Ray (who supposedly shot MLK) said a very simple but revealing thing about todays media and that includes media like Rense, RBN etc. He said they cannot go against the grain (he says government but we know its Jews) or they will be punished. This guy is telling the truth and he is being “put out of the limelight” as the brother of Hitler himself.
        Truth is this puts the government planted Stormfront in deep sh** too. I just ordered this guys book and if he is still alive Im going to give him a voice somehow.

        If anyone out there knows how to contact this guy, let me know. Jews killed MLK just like they killed McKinley, Patton, Lincoln etc etc etc. Blacks need to know the truth, maybe they will do something about it because with all of these jew led white groups we never will.

      • DC says:

        “London was deserted after the Romans left.”

        I was never a history buff, just know what I learned through following CI and haven’t had the time to check it out, but Bertrand Comparet in his “first Christian nation” talk said that the Romans never actually conquered England. So maybe the belief that the Romans ruled England for a certain time is another lie.

        So certainly the case has been made very well that the Britons were in England before the Anglo-Saxon, my question is why does that matter? Maybe I’m a little slow to catch on here, but if the truth movement is working to obfuscate this, then what are they hiding and why? Or is it just muddying the waters?

      • Ray Zerwitt says:

        I just got a notice that your site is dangerous, Mel. Looks like you got their attention. The only thing in danger, with any of them, is your trust in computers, which I don’t have anyway.

        It’s arguable if they ever did conquer Brittania. According to D. Wesley Swift, the Britons played the Romans like a trump ace. They would let the Romans build a road to where they were to collect the taxes, and they would pay the tribute, getting the road for 1/4 the price it would cost them to do it themselves, which was unaffordable. A loophole in Roman policy to be taken advantage of. The difference between Britons and Anglo Saxons being; where the Britons obeyed the scriptures, the catholic invaders used it and changed it to manipulate the source of their wealth, ultimately. The goose that lays the golden eggs. The catholic church gets up to some propaganda.

      • melgibstein says:

        Im dangerous to Jews no doubt, especially the cryptos all over internet radio.

      • DC says:

        Right, the Catholic thing keeps coming up. Martin Lindsted accuses Bill Finck of pushing CI mixed with Catholicism. Bertrand Comparet also talks extensively about the evil of the Catholic Church in his Revelation talk. It seems the like this Church has been Satanic for a very long time.

      • Chris says:

        ” Martin Lindsted accuses Bill Finck of pushing CI mixed with Catholicism”.

        Cant say that’s true listening to Bill. Never listened to Lindsted.

      • DC says:

        Lindstedt’s main complaint is Bill’s belief that Satan has already been released after his 1000 years spent in in the pit talked about in Revelation. You can witness this throughout the transcription of Bertrand Comparet’s Revelation book that Finck and Clifton Emahiser edited and put out on the internet. It’s filled with additional comments by them, pointing out Comparet’s “mistakes”.

        From what I understand Preterism is a well known doctrine introduced by the Catholic Church and Finck has mentioned in his podcasts that he was raised with the Catholic church.

        Queeny Cameron has also exposed Finck’s Catholic roots in some of her videos.

        Finck is also “no-devil” and claims Genesis 3:15 refers to “a race mixing event” and not the seduction of Eve by the literal Satan. He also pushes “reverse universalism” in claiming that all non-Israel will be exterminated when Christ returns.

    • melgibstein says:

      It matters because it obliviates British Israel and also obliviates the fact that the Anglos were the original British, they in fact were not. I dont go through this because I hate germans or English but because I know that lies are used to push the jew agenda wherever they come from. You fall for one jew lie and you fall for two, then four etc. Lies need to be nipped in the bud right from the start. If a + is where a – is the answer in the end is wrong and it is wasted time. Jews know this.

  10. melgibstein says:

    The geographer Strabo, who died 24 AD, described the tribes in the interior of Britain as taller than the Gaulish colonists on the coast and describes the men as warlike, passionate, disputatious, easily provoked, but generous and unsuspicious.

    The Roman historian Tacitus described the Britons as being descended from people who had arrived from the continent, comparing the Caledonians of Scotland to their Germanic neighbours; the Silures of Southern Wales to Iberian settlers, and the inhabitants of Southeast Britain to the Gauls.
    ~Germany wasnt there folks! Germany was a twinkle in some Celts eye at the time.

    Julius Caesar describes the Brythonic Celts as dressed in leather skins and decorated with woad, a blue dye:-‘All the Britons dye themselves with woad, which produces a blue colour, and as a result their appearance in battle is all the more daunting. They wear their hair long, and shave all their bodies with the exception of their heads and upper lip'(Caesar). Some tattooed skin from a Scythian grave of this period suggests that the Celts may have been tattooed in blue.

    Without the Jew map of course.

    These “British” people with woad on their faces were not “Angles” and not “Germans”.

    You think we have wrapped this up yet? I dont you know why? Because some people of this earth are not of the truth and you find many of them in the supposed truth movement.

    Comments are wiiiiiiide open.

    Tumbleweeds…….now Im coming for you on the phone, next time I put the woad on.

    The truth is the very people who claim to believe the Traditions of Glastonbury by E Raymond Capt actually helped destroy that history by pretending they were those people when they actually fought against them to steal their land and destroy their history.

    The Germans and or Romans did not bring Christianity to Ireland and Britain they brought the bastardized forms of Christianity to Britain. There used to be a county in Wales named after Aristobulus (Arwystli) who was just one of the original disciples who came to Britain.

    The Catholic church which the Germans and Romans brought to Britain say that Aristobulus was stoned to death by “barbarians”.
    We can all see today that there was never a reason to trust the Catholic church that came to conquer and not to bring Christianity to a place that already had it (the true Christianity and not the universal nutjob one).

    Yes the Celts stoned Aristobulus to death and then made a county out of his name, I see. And maranno’s fly.

  11. melgibstein says:

    I want people to understand that this is not against the English people or the German people it is only against the lemming English and lemming German people who want to claim they are better than other white people (also knowing that these nutjobs could very well be jews).

  12. melgibstein says:

    Brutus who came to Britain much later than Britain was already named was a descendant of Aenaeas, a second cousin to Hector of Troy and grandson of the founder of Troy is said to have married Dido the Queen of Carthage (a Phoenician) and then left Dido who then committed suicide, but we forget that the Romans, which Brutus was (proving he could not have given Britain its name) destroyed all Phoenician history including the truth about Dido.
    Naturally the truth is Dido did not want Aenaeas because he was a complete nutjob, hence the Punic Wars began.

    Phoenicians and Celts later traveled on foot around the Alps together and came right to the gates of Rome telling these nutbags that they wanted peace or they will level Rome and returned to Iberia. What language do you think the Phoenicians were using when they led this march? Look up “Berla Feni” the basis of all Goidelic/Brythonic languages. Brythonic goes back as far as Gaelic in the British Isles, figure it out. People were there 2000 years before anyone else got out of the Med. Rome did not even yet exist.

  13. GTRman says:


    Tyson Fury launches another foul-mouthed rant as he shares his anti-Semitic views and claims rape and bestiality will one day be made legal

    Tyson Fury has again aired his (((controversial views))) during an interview
    The world champion claims rape and bestiality will one day be made legal
    Traveller Fury also questioned the morals of women during hour-long rant

    ‘The world has gone mad, there is no morals there is no loyalty there is no nothing.

    ‘Everyone just do what you can, listen to the government, follow everybody like sheep, be brainwashed by all the Zionist, Jewish people who own all the banks, all the papers, all the TV stations. Be brainwashed by them all.’

    (((JoshDaily))), (((London))), (((United Kingdom))), 8 minutes ago

    “He says he is a Christian and that Jesus is his saviour but forgets that Jesus was a Jew. Ignorant idiot.”

    “Anti-semitism is the first sign of a lowlife.”

    “I’ve followed Fury’s career since his first professional fight. I normally don’t like watching heavyweight fights but he is a really spectacular boxer. I don’t know if he had always held these views and beliefs, but they never came out before – perhaps he did have them but wasn’t given the platform to air them until recently. It’s really disappointing. I can’t help wondering if he’s having some mental health issues looking at some of these comments – and if that’s the case then the BBBofC should advise that he receives professional help .”

  14. melgibstein says:

    Irish gypo is Heavyweight champ of the world and doesnt like Jews’ Now there is a man!

    Wherever there is a Jew there is an Irishman to take him out just like Michael. He apologized but he didnt take it back.
    They dont want a guy like this in the MMA or someone is going to pay a little too dearly. He beat the giant jew Klitscho’s arse. Way to go, Gypo.

  15. melgibstein says:

    While Christopher Columbus is generally credited with having “discovered” America in 1492, a 1521 Spanish report provides inklings of evidence that there were, in fact, Irish people settled in America prior to Columbus’ journey.

    “Researchers feel certain that there was a colony of Irish folk living in what is now South Carolina, when Christopher Columbus ‘thought’ he had discovered the New World,” writes Richard Thornton for The Examiner.

    In 1520, Peter Martyr d’Anghiera, a historian and professor, was appointed by Charles V, ruler of the Holy Roman Empire from 1519, to be chronicler for the new Council of the Indies.

    Though Martyr died in 1526, his report, founded on several weeks of interviews, was published posthumously in a book named “De Orbe Novo” (About the New World). The book has been published and translated numerous times in the centuries since then. The passages concerning the land that would become Georgia and the Carolinas were always included, but generally ignored, says Thornton.

    While interviewing Spanish colonists, Martyr took note of their vicious treatment of Chicora Indians. However, he also included in his report that the Spanish colonists had a very good relationship with another nearby colony, which Martyr reported to be named Duhare.

    READ MORE: The forgotten voyager – the story of an Irishman who discovered America and inspired Columbus’ voyages

    Physically, the people of Duhare appeared to be European according to the Spanish colonists in the area. The people of Duhare had red to brown hair, tan skin and gray eyes, and were noticeably taller than the Spanish. According to Spanish accounts, the people of Duhare were Caucasian, though their houses and pottery were similar to those of American Indians.

    Peter Martyr Vermigli. Image: Public Domain/WikiCommons

    Peter Martyr Vermigli. Image: Public Domain/WikiCommons

    The king of Duhare was said to be named Datha and was described by the Spanish as being a giant, even when compared to his peers. He had five children and a wife as tall as him. Datha had brightly colored paint or tattoos on his skin that seemed to distinguish him from the commoners.

    Despite Martyr’s report that included the apparently unique tribe of the Duhare, the believed predecessors of the Creek Indian tribe, more recent scholars are wary of the possibility of a Caucasian tribe at that time in America.

    “In 1922 the Smithsonian Institute published, ‘Early History of the Creek Indians and Their Neighbors’ by renowned ethnologist, John W. Swanton. It included much of Martyr’s passages on Duhare, but was prefaced with contemptuous remarks by Swanton that the story couldn’t be true and that the Duhare were probably a Siouan tribe,” explains Thornton.

    However, later in 2006, People of One Fire, a nationwide team of Native American scholars, primarily of Creek Indian heritage, began a comprehensive research program to obtain more accurate and detailed knowledge of North America’s pre-European history.

    As part of their research, they began to attempt to translate every single Native American word that was translated by the Spanish. While many of those words were easily translated by modern Creek, Alabama, Koasati or Choctaw dictionaries, the words associated with the province of Duhare defied translation until 2011.

    Researchers began to investigate the similarity of Irish rock carvings to those in the state of South Carolina. One member of the People of One Fire team came across an ancient Irish lullaby entitled “Bainne nam fiadh” – “On milk of deer I was reared. On milk of deer I was nurtured. On milk of deer beneath the ridge of storms on crest of hill and mountain.”

    The lullaby has particular significance as the deer were a prominent resource for Duhare people. According to Spanish sources, the Duhare maintained large herds of domesticated deer and made cheese from deer milk. The excess male deer population was fattened with corn for butchering.

    The deer stayed in corrals within the villages at night, but grazed in herds in the day time, accompanied by “deer-herders” and herd dogs. Neighboring peoples knew not to hunt them.

    The Duhare words, recorded by the Spanish, were able to be translated using Gaelic dictionaries. Duhare, in fact, was found to be translated to either “place of the Clan Hare,” or if the Duhare came from west of the Shannon River, it meant, “du’hEir,” place of the Irish.

    Further solidifying the Irish roots in Duhare, it was found that Datha, the name of the leader of Duhare, was a standard Medieval Irish Gaelic word that means “painted.” Datha of Duhare was remembered for being tattooed or painted, as if to separate himself from the commoners – a tradition among Celts.

    Also in 2011, the mystery of the Reinhardt Boulder – an ancient and mysterious carved rock that was found years ago on the Cline farm in the Hickory Log area of Cherokee County in Georgia near the Etowah River – was put to rest after striking similarities between its carvings and rock carvings that originated around the Atlantic Coast of Ireland were identified.

    “There is a boulder on the Dingle Peninsula of County Kerry that has the same glyphs (carvings) as the Reinhardt boulder and is approximately the same size. The Reinhardt Boulders’ concentric circles are a common theme of petroglyphic boulders all along the western Irish coast. However, the answer to the riddle of the Reinhardt Petroglyph has created many more questions about North America’s history before Christopher Columbus’s voyage,” writes Thornton in a separate article.

    READ MORE: Did the Irish and St. Brendan discover America first? – VIDEO

    Thornton himself asserts that researchers believe that the Duhare tribe was established prior to Columbus “discovering” America in 1492. However, he freely admits that historians and researchers do not know how, when, or why the Irish arrived in present-day America.

    While there is overwhelming evidence of Irish influence in what is now the area of South Carolina and Georgia, Thornton himself is careful to note that until solid DNA evidence is produced, it is hard to definitively link pre-Columbus America with Ireland.

  16. melgibstein says:

    The Irish did absolutely nothing in the English/German mind, but then again you gave the Jews brothels in the camps too.

    ….. and that aint just South Carolina and Georgia (they were their summer homes before the English and Germans WERE English and German). Be careful when you say “The Founding Fathers” around me.

    You might even find a swastika or two, but the Germans/English had nuttin ta do wit it.
    They didnt name it “America” either. Think about it, a bunch of Britts name their new country after a whop Jew Vespucci who was friends with the Jew Medici family? All of these clowns who claim the white man killed off all the Indians never claim that we shouldnt call America America. The Irish called it “Iberia” just like Britain, Hibernia, Hebrides, Brittany, Iberia East, Iberia Central and all the names associated with it throughout the world.
    Some clown started calling it Eire (can I hab ab egg McMuh?) and then added “land”. Guess who that was? The English. If you steal history, whether you are a Jew or controlled by Jews and change a country’s name, take away their feats, destroy their history (and I dont mean the Indians) you destroy your own truth. If you claim to be an Israelite and you believe you are better than another Israelite for any reason, the truth is you are no different than a Jew.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s