One thousand neo-Nazis are about to take to the streets of Berlin in a major rally to revere Rudolf Hess, a Nazi and German mercenary who fought for the Islamic Ottoman Empire. This is just another sign of the coming Germano-Ottoman alliance. I talk about this in my most recent video:
Both the Germans and the Ottomans used each other to fight the allies. Thousands of Germans fought in the Ottoman Empire during the First World War. One of the more famous Germans who fought for the Ottomans was Rudolf Hesse, who would later become a major member of the Nazi party, and is currently one of the idols of neo-Nazis. Hesse recounted the intense moment of warfare in his first battle, when he fought against a number of Indian soldiers fighting for the British.
“Meanwhile the Turks had been driven forward once more,” wrote Hesse, “and a counterattack was launched. …During the advance I glanced with some trepidation and nervousness at my dead man, and I did not feel very happy about it all. I cannot say whether I killed or wounded any more Indians during the battle, although I had aimed and fired at the enemy who emerged from behind cover. I was too excited about the whole thing.” Hesse would continue to fight for the Ottoman Empire, partaking in battles in Jerusalem and the Hejaz. He was awarded both a German Iron Cross, and a Muslim Turkish Iron Crescent. (See Ihrig, Ataturk in the Nazi Imagination, prologue, pp. 4-5)
Do you know who else reveres Rudolf Hess? Mark Jordt, a Danish neo-Nazi who worked with the organization Stop the Islamization Of Denmark (SIAD), which was founded by Anders Gravers and his American counterjihad partners, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.
According to the reputable Danish newspaper, Nordjyske,
“One of the faithful members of the Association events is a former member of the Danish People’s Party, Mark Jordt appearing on the photos from several of SIADs demonstrations in both Aalborg and Fredericia. Mark Jordt was recently forced to resign from the Danish People’s Party after the publication of photos documenting his strong Nazi sympathies. Otherwise he would have been thrown out of the party. Mark Jordt participated among others in a Rudolf Hess tribute march in August last year. Rudolf Hess was the deputy of Adolf Hitler in Nazi Germany.”
Here is a photo of Mark Jordt (man on right side, shaved sides with sunglasses) at the Herman Hess parade, notice how the poster has a picture of Herman Hess with a promotion for the National Socialist Movement of Denmark (DNNSB)
When Gravers was asked on whether or not he cared that his demonstrations attract such people, he said:
“No, I do not care about it, and I think that on our website is keen to emphasize that we are for democracy and freedom of expression.”
The revival of Nazism in Europe has been going on for years, and what we are witnessing now is the work of the Counterjihad movement coming into fruition.
While everyone is worrying and agonizing over the nuclear capabilities of Iran and North Korea, there is very little chatter about how the neo-Ottomanist are working with Japan to currently build a nuclear power plant in Turkey, and how this ties in to both Japanese nationalism, neo-Ottomanism, and the rise of German National Socialism from its slumber.
Recently, the Foreign Minister of Turkey, Mevlut Cavusoglu, in a joint press conference, declared that: “Japan is our biggest economic partner in the Asia-Pacific region,” indicating the deep economic relationship between Japan and Turkey.
Cavusoglu expressed his praise for Japanese industries for their current building of the Sinop Nuclear Power Plant on the Black Sea. Cavusoglu also stated that currently steps are being taken to create the Turkish-Japanese Science and Technology University, which was approved in the Turkish parliament this year on June 12th.
The plan for the creation of this university goes back to 2014, when Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Shinzo Abe met together in a meeting to discuss the erection of the Sinop Nuclear Power Plant, in which they agreed to the establishment of the institute. That they agreed to this in a meeting on the creation of a nuclear power plant in Turkey is not coincidental. The university will be built in Istanbul and will only accept an elite select group of post-grad and doctorate students, and they will learn “nuclear science and reactor engineering, architecture, construction and earthquake engineering.” Japan will be paying $100 million for the construction of the university, while Turkey will be providing the land owned by the State near the Sabiha Gökçen Airport.
Shinzo Abe and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, shaking hands over their agreement on the creation of the Sinop Nuclear Power Plant
Digital image of the Sinop Nuclear Power Plant
This is all happening in the midst of Japan and Europe just recently agreeing to create the largest free-trade zone on earth, which is set to materialize in 2019. When Japan and Turkey agreed to create the nuclear technology university, Erdogan said that they “agreed to launch negotiations for a free trade deal between the two countries.” Here we have a plan by Turkey, Japan and Germany -- this triangle of evil -- forming one giant free trade zone. While the world may think that Japan would sever ties with Turkey as it becomes increasingly Islamist, the reality is that the more Islamist Turkey becomes, the more united Japan becomes with Turkey.
Hosuk Lee-Makiyama, director of the European Centre for International Political Economy in Brussels, says that although Britain has been hoping to create a free-trade zone with the EU, Japan has already come to a free-trade agreement with the EU, and if this continues on this route, Japanese investments that would be for the UK will shift to Turkey:
“If the UK is not able to replicate the EU’s trade agreement with Japan after Brexit,” there is a “really likely scenario that the EU and Japan would be better [economically] integrated than the EU and UK …
“Under such a scenario, we can easily assume that the Japanese investments currently going to the UK would flow to the single market or Turkey instead.”
The EU is Turkey’s largest market. About 48.5% of Turkey’s exports are received by the EU market. If and when the Japan-EU free trade zone is created, Turkey would also be a part of it. Just this month Abe said that “Tokyo would like to promote talks on a free trade agreement with Ankara and see Japanese companies participating in infrastructure projects in Turkey”.
Prime Minister Theresa May and some British officials are wishing to develop free-trade with the EU, but Michel Barnier, the European Union's Brexit negotiator, has said flat out that there will be no “frictionless trade” between the bloc and the British:
"I have heard some people in the U.K. argue that one can leave the single market and build a customs union to achieve 'frictionless trade'--that is not possible”
Michel Barnier
Britain got its Brexit, and now its begging the very EU it wanted to leave for free trade. Great Britain was the biggest obstacle to Germany starting an EU military force, and now that Britain is gone and Germany is starting to carry out this plan, it looks like the British fell for the trap, and that the Germans got what they wanted. Boris Johnson, part Turkish and German, was amongst the biggest pushers for Brexit, telling people -- through crowd manipulation -- that if they did not leave the EU, Britain would be flooded with refugees. Now that Brexit happened, Boris Johnson is now exhorting the EU to accept Turkey to revive the Roman Empire.
Turkey and Japan will become the dominant forces allied with Germany (the leading nation of the EU) in the future, and this is being presaged by talks and agreements on free trade between the three nations. Turkey is also working heavily to establish a free trade zone with the nations of East Asia. Currently, Turkey is working to establish a free trade zone with the Buddhist nation of Thailand, and other than Japan, wants free trade agreements with Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore and South Korea. Turkish Economy Minister Nihat Zeybekci, in a meeting in Ankara with his Thai counterpart, Apiradi Tantraporn, said:
“Our technical delegations finalized impact analyses on the road to an FTA with Thailand. On the basis of these analyses, we expect to boost our bilateral trade by 40 percent in the initial stage. In a three-year period after the deal is signed, we aim to double our bilateral trade”
After the meeting, both Zeybekci and Trantraporn signed a joint declaration to mark the beginning of their free trade agreement negotiations. Before this, Tantraporn said:
“We will celebrate the 60th anniversary of our bilateral economic ties next year. We want to sign the deal by 2018”
I believe what is happening here is the same thing that Turkey was doing in the first half of the nineteenth century: pan-Asianism, or the ideology that all Asian nations — Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu — unite as a single body against the Christian world, with the two hinging nations being Turkey and Japan.
In 2013, as we reported years ago, Shinzo Abe made it known that he sees Asia as a bird, and that Japan and Turkey are its two wings, thus giving the image of the continent being controlled by these two very powerful countries:
“Turkey and Japan, who are working to bring peace and stability to the world, are the two wings that support this vast Asia from East and West.
This image has recurred to me time and again as I set foot in the great city of Istanbul that connects East and West on this day on which you have realized the dream you have held for 150 years. Bringing peace to Asia, as well as prosperity. Turkey and Japan are the two wings that will make Asia soar.”
This was an expression of pan-Asianism, and before we deny that this is what is happening, we must first have some idea on the deep history between Turkey and Japan. In the first half of the twentieth century, Japan was the major influence on the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans saw Japan as their model: an Eastern nation, not Christian but Buddhist and Shinto, that had been able to perfectly adapt to and utilize Western technology, and maintain zeal for their pagan religion.
The Ottoman Empire not only revered Japan as a model for itself, but envied what it perceived as Japan’s racial homogeneity, seeing the Japanese people as a ethnically unified and untainted people, while resenting the racial diversity of the Ottoman Empire, with its Greeks, Armenians, Assyrians, Arabs, Egyptians and others. Both the Ottoman Empire and Japan fanatically held to eugenist beliefs, and the former looked to the latter for inspiration in its “race science” and the belief that certain peoples are more worthy to live than others, simply because of their ethnicity.
The Ottoman Empire’s eugenist beliefs, and its aspiring to be more and more like Japan, played as major influences behind the horrid Armenian Genocide, in which Christians of Greek, Armenian and Assyrian decent, were systemically exterminated. While the Ottoman killing squads saw their victims as Christian infidels and enemies of Islam, the Ottoman elites saw it as a purging of racial inferiors. They identified religion with race, and since people who were Armenian, Greek or Assyrian, were collectively Christian, their faith was seen as synonymous with their ethnicity. By doing this, the Ottomans hit two birds with one stone: by killing them for their faith, this gave license to the Muslim fanatics, and by targeting them for their race, this pleased the elites who envisioned a racially homogenous empire, paralleled with Japan.
In 1908, after the Austro-Hungarians annexed Ottoman Bosnia-Herzegovina, Ottoman officials, members of the Young Turks, went to British officials to forge an alliance between Great Britain and the Ottoman Empire, and addressed themselves as the “Japan of the Near East”. By this, they wanted to represent what Japan represented: a non-Christian Asian empire that, while observing its own religion, took advantage of Western technology. For the Young Turks, and the rest of the elite in the Ottoman Empire, Japan showed how an Asian nation can form an empire by advanced Western technology, while at the same time keeping to its Eastern identity.
The Young Turks
This pan-Asian sentiment was really energized by Japan’s victory over Russia in the Russo-Japanese War that lasted from 1904 to 1905. The whole Ottoman world roared in utter glee as they heard the news of Russian troops being butchered by the tens of thousands by Japanese forces. Ottoman media and elites saw Japan’s victory as the beginning of the rise of the Eastern world against the West, a significant moment that sparked the unification of all Asians.
One Ottoman publication spoke of the “rise of the East,” or an “awakening in Asia” that had been commenced and sparked by “the rising Sun [Japan].” The Ottoman Empire would idealize the Meiji era of Japan that began in 1868, which was the mark of Japanese history in which the country became unified and modernized, accepting the necessity of Western technology in order to become a major power. What commenced this era of Japan was a revolution: idealistic and zealous Samurai overthrew the Tokugawa Shogunate, empowered the Emperor Meiji as the god of the people, and established a militarist oligarchy. These oligarchs, or genro as they were known, would create reforms and lead Japan into the imperialist empire that it would become in the twentieth century.
During this time, the Young Turks were trying to start their own revolution against the Sultan Abdul Hamid II, and in this they were inspired by the success of the Samurai in their forging of a unified and modern Japan. The Japanese would establish itself as the model for Asian nations combating and resisting Europe and Christian Russia. The Japanese oligarchy presented Japan as “the apex of non-Western people”.
The Battle of Ueno, in 1868, in which the Shogun were defeated by the Emperor Meiji's forces
In the nineteenth century, the Ottoman Young Turks were heavily influenced by both Japan and the West on a very powerful and dangerous sentiment: that of national pride and identity. In their perusing of Western history, the Young Turks were especially influenced by the nationalism of the French Revolution. The French Revolution of the late 18th century was fueled and bolstered by nationalism; the idea that the Church was a foreign entity that encroached upon French and native pagan culture, was central in the ideology of the antichrist revolutionaries. One of the main philosophers behind the revolution, Jean Jacques Rousseau, wrote his complaint, that “the Gospel doesn’t establish any national religion,” and went on to say that “national divisions led to polytheism,” and this same French anti-Catholic expressed his protest against Christ Who he accused of “separating the theological from the political system,” and through the Christian Faith, “destroyed the unity of the state, and caused the internal divisions that have never ceased to trouble Christian peoples.” (1)
Rousseau’s philosophy could be summarized very simply: nationalism can only be possible with paganism, and that Christianity was the antithesis to a national religion; for Catholicism signified universalism (Catholic means Universal), and paganism was the worship of the native gods of a particular nation, and by this, polytheism guaranteed national pride. And so now we know why neo-paganism is sweeping through Northern Europe and some of the Slavic nations, since nationalism is also on the rise in these very regions. We are seeing history repeat itself.
Rousseau, while his philosophy was pernicious, was correct in his observation: paganism does indeed lead to jingoism, and Catholicism brings one to a universalist mentality, since the pagan religion brings one to fixate on the gods of his race, while Christianity brings one to worship the Creator of all humanity.
Read the religious texts of any nation of antiquity, and it will talk about the creation of the race that worships the gods of its people. The Scripture is the only religious text that speaks of the creation of all humanity. The Egyptians spoke of their gods and how they lived on earth, and how their pharaohs had their lineage directly with the gods, and under this belief was there the despotism of Egypt in which the enslavement, human sacrifice and even cannibalism of foreigners, was justified. Hatred for minorities is ultimately rooted in the anger that members of a minority are more financially successful than members of the majority. It is why the Egyptians harbored hatred against the Hebrews, since in the Scriptures the Egyptians cry out: “Behold the people of the children of Israel are numerous and stronger than we.” (Exodus 1:9)
Wherever paganism reigns, there racism will also reign. The Scripture’s account of the creation of humanity does not begin with a specific race, but with the creation of Adam, whose name means Man. And so, in the war between Christianity and paganism, there lies — at its most fundamental level — the war between those who hold to the universality of man and those who hold to the reverence of a particular race.
Rousseau’s push for a national religion, in emulation of the pagans, went hand in hand with his belief that Christianity needed to be abolished as a threat to nationalist ideology. Rousseau wrote:
“Anyone who ventures to say: ‘Outside the Church is no salvation’ should be driven from the state, unless the state is the Church and the prince the pope.” (2)
Thus, in a non-Catholic State, the Catholic Church is to be uprooted according to Rousseau. In the French Revolution, rebels slaughtered, butchered and cannibalized Catholics by the hundreds of thousands, as Mme. Roland, an adamant supporter of the revolution, recounted in horror:
“Women were brutally violated before being torn to pieces by those tigers; intestines cut out and worn as turbans; bleeding human flesh devoured.”
French Revolution. Execution of clerics and prisoners by members of the Paris Commune. September, 1792. Colored engraving. 19th century.
How was this so different from what the pagan Egyptians did, when they slaughtered and cannibalized people because they were seen as enemies of Egypt? How were these people of modern France different from the people of the Pharaoh who, in one ritual, consumed the flesh of Asiatics, Beduins, Nubians, and others for “breakfast, lunch, and supper”? Is it any wonder that the "idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst thereof" (Isaiah 19:1)
The racists of today will point to cannibalism, and other heinous crimes in Africa, and attribute them to the biological and genetic makeups of blacks, thus making it about race and not religion or morality. But these same eugenists who speak in such a way will never take into account how whites in France partook in cannibalism and exhibited forms of violence and cruelty that rival Muslim terrorists in the Middle East. Why did the French of the 18th century act no different than the cannibals of Egypt? It had nothing to do with race, and everything to do with morality, the internal conviction as to what is right and what is wrong.
Before the France of antiquity, that is, Gaul, had become Catholic, the natives of that land were so savage that they watched with sadistic bliss Christians being cut to pieces, burned alive and eaten by wild animals in the colosseum. St. Irenaeus, who was the bishop of Lyon in the second century, delivered an epistle written by certain people within the church in France to Pope Eleutherus, in which it is recounted how the pagans in that land, believing in the revolting slanders made against the Christians, “were so savage in their treatment of us, that, if before some had restrained themselves on account of some affinity, they now carried their cruelty and rage against us to a great excess.” The same letter describes how the pagans sadistically laughed as the Christians were put before the most cruel tortures, and praised their gods for the slaughter of the saints; it also speaks of the Christians being fed to dogs and decapitated:
“For those that were suffocating in the prison, they cast to the dogs, carefully watching them night and day, lest any should be buried by us, and then also cast away the remains left by the beasts and the fire, howsoever they had either been mangled or burnt. They also guarded the heads of the others, together with the trunks of their bodies, with military watches, for many days in succession, in order to prevent them from being buried. Some, indeed, raged and gnashed their teeth against them, anxious to find out some better way of punishment. Others, again, laughed at and insulted them, extolling their idols, and imputing to them the punishment of the martyrs.” (3)
France would be known as the eldest daughter of the Church for its ancient history with the Catholic Faith. When Pope Urban II wanted to commence a crusade to liberate the Christian lands of the Near East from the Muslims, he went to France where he led the Council of Clermont in which the First Crusade was commenced. When no king in Christendom wanted to fight the Turks when they invaded Christian occupied Gaza in 1244, it was St. King Louis IX who answered the call and fought a fierce war in Egypt. When the Arian heretics occupied much of France, it was King Clovis — the first Christian king of France — guided by a mysterious light beheld in the sky, who drove out the enemies of God and of the Church.
France has a beautiful history in the reign of Christendom; from being a nation of barbarians, it became a force of civilization. But France, lapsed back to its pagan ways, and returned to its vicious savagery. When the militant Christian spirit declined, so the soul of the nation went back to the same sanguinary ways of its ancestors. When I first began reading on the French Revolution and all of its carnage, I asked myself, how could people in the 18th century, in a Catholic nation such as France, all of a sudden become so violent? Did a people, raised in a civilized nation, all of a sudden wake up one morning, and decide to cannibalize people, to wear their intestines as turbans, to behead and drown human beings by the hundreds of thousands? The answer is no. Evil, such as what was witnessed in 18th century France, does not come out of thin air; it implodes after generations of moral decay in which similar acts of violence are done. The decline of Christianity did not begin in the 1960s hippie generation, as so many people believe. Christendom began to die in the 16th century, with the decline of Christian zeal in the Catholic world and the rise of protestantism, an idea which sought to destroy the hegemony of the ecclesiastical roots that were embedded so deeply in Europe.
This decline of the Christian spirit and increasing favor towards paganism in France, can be seen in what took place on February 15, 1580. On the eve of Mardi Gras, a mob of peasants and artisans, who were a part of what was called the League of the Commoners, danced in the streets of the Protestant town of Dauphine, crying out: “Before three days, Christian flesh will be sold at sixpence a pound!” They led a revolt against the wealthy and took over the town. Their leader, Jehan Serve, sat in the mayor’s office dressed in bearskin (like an ancient barbarian), consuming meat that was passed for human flesh. His followers dressed as priests and cried: “Christian flesh for sixpence.” The rich people in the town were so horrified by these threats of cannibalism, that they ambushed these rebels with arms and slaughtered them in a massacre that lasted for three days. (4)
While this mob did not commit actual cannibalism, but pretended cannibalism, it was nonetheless a reflection of the moral decay and decline of Christianity; their posterity of a later generation did indeed consume human flesh. The gradual decline of the Christian spirit in France, from the fragmentation of its society on account of Protestantism in the 16th and 17th centuries, to the acceptance of paganism and Enlightenment philosophy, led to an implosion of savagery in the late 18th century. All of this history leads to one much ignored reality: get rid of the universalism of the Catholic spirit, and you erase the universality of man, and are left with the discrimination of pagan cruelty. Get rid of Catholic universalism, and you end up with nationalism; with nationalism comes adversity to the universal God, reverence for a national god, and a fanatical pull towards local deities, a trend for the old idols of people who lived before understanding that human life is sacred. And we see this repeating.
Nationalist religion is contrary to Catholic identity. It is why Pope Pius XI wrote:
“None but superficial minds could stumble into concepts of a national God, of a national religion; or attempt to lock within the frontiers of a single people, within the narrow limits of a single race, God, the Creator of the universe, King and Legislator of all nations before whose immensity they are ‘as a drop of a bucket.’ (Isaiah XI, 15).”
Hatred for Christianity will always lead to a love of a nation above God. It is why Rousseau, in his animosity towards the Catholic Church, wanted a national religion. The rebels who butchered Catholics by the hundreds of thousands in late 18th century France, wanted a pagan national religion and saw the papacy as a foreign element that needed to be destroyed. Take away the Christian element from society, and a once civilized nation will go back to the savagery that preceded it. It is why when Germany in the first half of the 20th century turned to Germanic paganism it as well turned to racism and anti-Catholicism. This anti-Catholic spirit was reflected in one Nazi poem:
“Go bury the delusive hope
About His Holiness the Pope
For all he knows concerning Race
Would get a schoolboy in disgrace.” (5)
Nazi pagan ceremony
Nationalist pagan crowd in Ukraine
Christianity is like a stone that keeps an edifice together; take it away and the whole thing collapses. Christianity is the cornerstone that keeps the soul of humanity intact. Remove the Faith, and instantly the society will turn to its old pagan ways.
It was both the carnage and the nationalist philosophy of the French Revolution that inspired the Young Turks. As historian Renee Worringer writes:
“Earlier in the nineteenth century, new ideologies had begun to swirl in the minds of Ottoman thinkers concerned about the Empire’s survival: the European Enlightenment and the French Revolution had left an indelible imprint on the Ottoman intellectual educated either in Europe or domestically in one of the many modern schools established as part of the Westernizing reforms of the Tanzimat and after.” (6)
The Young Turks advanced the European ideas of nationalism, rational science and pride in one’s homeland, in their movement against the Sultan. But, in wanting to maintain their Oriental image, the Young Turks went on to “glance east” towards Japan as the role model for a nation that kept its Asian identity while at the same time utilizing Western technology and Enlightenment ideology. The religion of the Enlightenment led to the developing of evolutionism and eugenics, since Erasmus Darwin — Charles Darwin’s grandfather — was a thinker of the Enlightenment period who supported the carnage and slaughter of the French Revolution and articulated ideas which would help serve for the “survival of the fittest” ideology that became so popular in subsequent centuries.
Enlightenment philosophy and Darwinism would be absorbed by both the Japanese and the Ottoman Empire, and both of these would use such belief systems as justification for their own genocides, be it in China or Armenia.
Members of Unit 731 conduct a human experiment in Harbin.
In the early 20th century, the Ottomans, tired of their state of decline, wanted to restore the glory days when it was much more powerful and feared. The Young Turks looked to the theories of Herbert Spencer, the Darwinist who coined the term “survival of the fittest”. Now Spencer came up with a theory that there was a hierarchy of people, and the Ottomans applied this theory to themselves, seeing it as an evidence that their empire could return to a state of superiority over the European nations. The Japanese as well applied Spencer’s ideas to themselves, seeing Japan as biologically determined for superiority over Europe and other Asian countries.
Popular amongst both Turkish and Japanese elites was a social-Darwinist book entitled, The Psychological Laws of the Evolution of Peoples, published in 1894 and written by the French eugenist, Gustave Le Bon. In this very book, Le Bon writes against race-mixing, stating in very eugenist language:
“The first effect of interbreeding between different races is to destroy the soul of the races, and by their soul we mean that congeries of common ideas and sentiments which make the strength of peoples, and without which there is no such thing as a nation or a fatherland.”
Now I will reveal the eugenist beliefs of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey, showing that it was not just about Islam, but social-Darwinism as well, a reality that is rarely ever discussed. Ayca Alemdaroglu wrote a very in depth essay on the eugenics of the Young Turks and describes some of the eugenist beliefs of Ataturk:
“Atatürk, the leader of the Republican modernisation movement never mentioned eugenics as such; nevertheless, in the eyes of the eugenicists some of his famous remarks such as ‘strong and sturdy generations are the essence of Turkey’ and ‘the nation should be protected from degenerative perils’ were the basis of Turkish eugenic discourse.”
There was a Turkish doctor by the name of Fahrettin Kerim Gokay, a professor of psychiatry at Istanbul, who promoted and advocated for eugenics. He subscribed to the German ideology of “racial hygiene,” and affirmed that the preservation of superior racial traits from degeneration must be amongst the highest principles of the Turkish nation. Gokay referred to retarded people as ‘inferior’ beings who were a danger to the morals and order of the Turkish society.
Server Kamil Tokgöz, a Turkish medical professor, wrote in his 1938 book that “abnormal” people will reverse the process of Darwinian evolution. He broke society down into three categories: the superiors, the mediocre, and the “cacogenics,” that is the inferior people, who he described as the mute, the deaf, the insane, alcoholics, vagabonds, the immoral and the criminals. While praising the Young Turks — even though they butchered millions — he would go around labeling criminals as “inferior.”
In the 1934 book, entitled Biology and the Human Life, by Devlet Matbaasi, it affirms that the survival of Turkey will depend on the perpetuation of the superior genes of the Turk:
“The Turkish race of which we are proud to belong has a distinguished place amongst the best, strongest, most intelligent and most competent races in the world. Our duty is to preserve the essential qualities and virtues of the Turkish race and to confirm that we deserve to be members of this race. For that reason, one of our primary national duties is to adhere to the principle of leading physically and spiritually worthwhile lives by protecting ourselves from the perils of ill health, and by applying the knowledge of biology to our lives. The future of our Turkey will depend on the breeding of high valued Turkish progeny in the families that today’s youth will form in the future.”
The Young Turks believed in both biological and spiritual racism. The Armenians and Greeks were seen as both racially and spiritually distinct from the Ottomans, and thus they were a threat not only to the Turkish people, but to the religious unity of the nation. This is why the Young Turks demanded for a constitutional government and society that would be based on both Islam and contemporary science, in their vision of a modern Islamic nation.
In modern Ottomanist ideology, to be a true Ottoman was to be Muslim, to believe in modern science, and to respect Ottoman hegemony. The Armenians and Greeks, being Christians and refusing to consider themselves as Ottoman, posed a threat in the eyes of the Young Turks.
The Japanese thinker, Fukuzawa Yukichi, described Japan’s “leaving Asia” to “enter the West” as Bunmei Kaika, or progress towards enlightenment. Whereas the Ottomans, being a people whose lineage originally stemmed from Central Asia, believed that they had to “revisit” Asia to rediscover and reinvigorate their racially Eastern potential. It was the Japanification of Turkey. In other words, Turkey wanted to go back to their Central Asian ancestors.
Fukuzawa Yukichi
The Ottomans saw Japan as the guiding light for their endeavor, or as the Turkish journalist, Abdullah Cevdet, said in 1905 (the year in which Japan defeated Russia) Japan would be the “carrier of the torch.”
Abdullah Cevdet
Japan’s victory over Russia in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905, sparked a huge admiration for Japan in the Ottoman Empire.The Turkish feminist, Halide Edib, even named her son after the Japanese admiral, Togo, during the Russo-Japanese War. The Sultan Abdul Hamid II, stated that the victory of Japan was a victory for the Ottoman Empire:
“Japan’s victory pleases us, for their victory over Russia is considered a victory for us.”
Out of all the things about Japan that the Ottoman admired, a central aspect of Japanese society that the Ottomans wanted to emulate was the fixation on racial homogeneity, or the maintaining of ‘racial purity.’ The racist Young Turk publication, Ichtihad, stated that Japan “in all [its] natural disposition and knowledge, a homogenous people that from end to end is touched by the same sentiments, pursues the same hopes. They love the homeland, with zeal fall victim for the sake of the homeland, in an instant they sacrifice lives for honor and dignity, lives that they sincerely loved and appreciated. They never fear death.”
As the architects of the Armenian Genocide in 1915, the Young Turks conducted their whole scale massacres for the eugenist cause of racial homogeneity, in their perverted attempt to be like Japan. We have an interesting situation here: Turkey wanting to emulate Japan, and both these countries accepting and imposing genocidal eugenist policies, in the name of racial purity. Eugenics, Ottomanism and Japanese nationalism were all intellectually interconnected.
Turkey wanted to be like Japan in its supposed racial purity. And is it not interesting that today, nationalist publications are praising Japan for its militarism and nationalism. For example, the Rightwing publication, Front Page Magazine, published an article by Daniel Greenfield, in which he praised Japanese society for not being “diluted by immigrants” and because it has “turned to the right.” Early this year, Dennis Prager wrote an article describing Japan as a homogeneous society that has low crime rates because of its racial homogeneity, and he writes also that there is a direct correlation between crime and ethnic homogeneity:
“I am writing this column in Japan, a country whose crime rate is the lowest among countries with large populations. I asked my Japanese translator, a middle-aged woman, what she thought.
‘Why is there is so little crime in Japan?’ I asked.
Without taking a moment to reflect, she responded, ‘Because we don't allow immigration.’
Anyone who visits Japan is struck by the ethnic homogeneity of the nation. If you meet a Caucasian, a black or a Hispanic in Japan, you can be all but certain that the person is visiting or studying there, not a citizen.
Likewise in the United States, there is direct correlation between ethnic homogeneity and low levels of violence.”
Now, if Japan is peaceful because of “ethnic homogeneity,” or if there lies a correlation between morality and a society being homogenous, then I would like for Dennis to explain as to why it took until 2014 for Japan to finally make the possession of child porn illegal, and why in Japan it is still legal to produce and own child pornography anime? According to one report on sex trafficking and child pornography in Japan:
“The U.S. State Department's 2013 report on human rights practices in Japan labels the country ‘an international hub for the production and trafficking of child pornography.’
It cited Japanese police data showing the number of child pornography investigations in 2012 rose 9.7% from a year earlier to a record of 1,596. The cases involved 1,264 child victims, almost twice as many as in the previous year.
Under the new law, people in possession of child pornography have one year to dispose of it before they risk prosecution.”
See how fast your favorite conservative icons are becoming the mouthpieces of an antichrist spirit. I wonder if Dennis Prager could explain as to why Japan, a nation of such low crime rate, allows for the mass production and consumption of child porn anime in which, as we read in one report, depicts minors in “violent sex acts with dominant characters.” Is it any wonder that Dennis Prager is now pushing for pedophilia?
If racial homogeneity is somehow the source of low crime, then why is there such perversion in Japan? And why, when this “homogeneous” people of Japan went to China in the 1930s they butchered millions and committed mass rape in a genocide the likes of which is amongst the most unparalleled atrocities done in human history?
Japanese anime is filled with the most deplorable depictions of violence and degeneracy, and one wonders if there is a correlation between this fetishizing and the utterly disturbing depravity witnessed in the genocide of tens of millions by Japanese imperial forces. The reason why so many of the Japanese consume horrific and violent pornography is because, since they are not allowed to carry out their demonic fantasies on other human beings, such as the Chinese or Koreans, they indulge themselves in gory and depraved artwork. I am afraid one day they will make their sick fantasies into a reality, and since the Japanese of today have been so engrossed in these deplorable drawings and shows, they will be much worse than the soldiers of 20th century Imperial Japan.
Whats prepping now, which you will see in the near future, is the fulfillment of Wisdom 2, in which the wicked say:
"But let our strength be the law of justice: for that which is feeble, is found to be nothing worth." (Wisdom 2:11)
It is a spirit of dominance and domination, as you see in rape and murder. There is not only an admiration for Japan’s racialism in the Right, but there appears to be a rise in praise for the Ottoman Empire and Turkey, in Rightwing circles. For example, the popular Alt-Right website, Return of Kings, published an article acclaiming Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the Turkish Republic who was deeply involved in both the extermination of the Armenians and of Greek Christians in Smyrna. The article praises Ataturk as a leader who defended his people and defeated the British and the Greeks. The article expresses admiration for Ataturk because he “steered a strongly secular course.” It also venerates this same genocidal leader because “He abolished Sharia law” and “looked to Western success for inspiration to modernize Turkey.”
The author of this article compares Turkey with Germany, since both were defeated in the First World War, and both were occupied by the victors. The Alt-Right author, in words typically used by sympathizers to Nazism, says that what the Entente did to Turkey after World War One, “was much like [what] the victors had done to Germany, but worse.” In another praise for Germany’s and Turkey’s rising above its squalor after their defeat in WW1, the author writes: “The 1920s and 1930s were a tumultuous time of grim struggle and energizing rebirth throughout many nations, and Turkey was one of them.”
The author, in utter Rightwing claptrap, affirms that Turkey needed a “strong leader” to control the “multiculturalism” of Turkey:
“Turkey itself was very multicultural, and without a strong government to suppress by force the inevitable tensions, fissures in their core homeland became evident.”
This is exactly how the Young Turks, who took control over Turkey, thought when they conducted the extermination of Armenians and Greeks. To them, there was too much diversity in the Ottoman Empire, too many different races that hindered the utopian vision of a racially homogeneous society. And is it not both revealing and disturbing that numerous figures in the Rightwing are speaking favorably towards racial ideology and genocidal governments like Turkey? This admiration for Turkey and its brutality was exhibited by the Germans after the First World War.
In the heat of the late Summer in 1922, the Greeks invaded Istanbul, wanting to make it into what was once theirs: Christian Constantinople. In September of 1922, Ataturk led his forces into the Greek Christian city of Smyrna, where Turkish forces raped and butchered hundreds of thousands.
The burning of Smyrna
After this, in the same month, the Turks put the Greeks to flight. The brutality and cruelty of the Turks were admired by the Germans who saw such evil as an example for their own country to follow. There was a writer who expressed this admiration for Turkish brutality and exhorted the Germans to emulate this very wanton cruelty. His name was Hans Trobst, a German mercenary who fought for Ataturk from 1921 to 1923.
In a series of articles written for the German nationalist newspaper, Heimatland (Homeland), Trobst praised the Turks for their “National will” in their struggle against the British and the Greeks and for their “liberation of Izmir [Smyrna]”, that is, the destruction and rape of Smyrna. Comparing Turkey’s struggle and Germany being imposed with the Treaty of Versailles, Trobst hailed the Turks for taking victory through sheer force and tenacity and saw their will as exemplary for the German nation:
“Through its own power Turkey has torn apart its own dictated ‘Versailles Peace’ and has asserted its own will to live against a world of enemies.”
Trobst, in praising the Turks, said that the Germans needed to have the “ability to destroy anybody working against them ruthlessly and forever. …This destruction must take a shape that is final and visible to everyone. This way the movement is preceded by terror, and only terror in its most blatant form today has an impact on unnerved and tired mankind. In this respect the Turks are exemplary teachers.”
There was another evil exhibited by the Turks which Trobst wanted Germany to emulate: the eugenist extermination done by the Young Turks against the Christian Armenians and Greeks. Presaging Nazi eugenics, Trobst hailed Turkish eugenics as “national purification,” stating:
“Hand in hand with the establishment of a united front must be national purification. In this respect the circumstances were the same in Asia Minor as here. The bloodsuckers and parasites on the Turkish national body were Greeks and Armenians. They had to be eradicated and rendered harmless; otherwise the whole struggle for freedom would have been put in jeopardy. Gentle measures — that history has always shown — will not do in such cases. And consideration for the so-called ‘long establishment’ or ‘decent’ elements, or whatever these catchwords may be, would be fundamentally wrong, because the result would compromise, and compromise is the beginning of the end. …Almost all those of foreign background (Fremdstammige) in the area of combat had to die; their number is not put too low with 500,000.”
Hans Trobst
Trobst believed that the extermination was necessary because the “Armenians and the Greeks multiplied very fast in comparison with the Turks,” and he went on to describe them as leaching off “the ever more powerless [Turkish] population totally at their mercy.” (7)
The support for the extermination of the Armenians cannot be limited to one German mercenary; for it came right from the upper echelons of the German government. Hans von Seeckt, a major German general of the First World War, and a virulent nationalist, expressed his utter support for the extermination of the Armenians. In a letter to Berlin von Seeckt wrote:
“It is an impossible state of affairs to be allied with the Turks and to stand up for the Armenians. In my view, any consideration, Christian, sentimental or political, must be eclipsed by its clear necessity for the war effort.”
The Germans not only supported the genocide, they facilitated it as well. It was Germany who sent Lenin from Switzerland to Russia and funded his Bolshevik Revolution. The Germans did this because they understood that communism would weaken Russia, which was dominating the Germans and the Austro-Hungarians prior to the Bolshevik takeover. When the Marxists took control, Russia became something of a puppet for the Germans. When the Germans demanded a huge chunk of Russian territory, the Marxists obeyed and gave it to them, and with this land the Germans carved out what is called Ukraine today. Since the Ottomans were allies with Germany, they demanded that Russia handover Armenia (which was territory that had belonged to the Russian empire). The Bolsheviks conceded to this demand, and with Armenia back in Ottoman control, the Muslims and their Young Turk overlords executed their genocidal policy, with German support. When discussing the Armenian Genocide, we always solely attribute it to Muslims. But this was not entirely the case. The Armenian Genocide was carried out by Muslim killers, planned and devised by eugenist Turkish elites, and facilitated by German allies.
As Germany admired Turkey for its brutality and cruelty, so the Ottomans saw Japanese brutality, nationalism and martial prowess as exemplary. For example, the Syrian protestant writer, Faris al-Khuri, expressed his awe after hearing a story about a Japanese woman for committing suicide in order to prevent herself from stopping her son from fighting the Russians:
“Today I read a short story al-Diya published called ‘The Old Japanese Woman’ in which she committed suicide in order not to obstruct her son from plunging into the deluge of war. I saw it as an extraordinarily good portrayal, and the quintessential line from it was a saying in Japanese: ‘If we are yellow, what harm is it to us? Does yellowing spoil gold?’ If you come across the latest issue of al-Diya, read it and take pleasure in it.”
Intellectuals in the Ottoman Empire believed that the East had entered a state of ignorance, but that it was evolving into superiority, and Japan was a sign of this rise to a higher level above Europe. Eastern superiority was expressed in a 1910 issue of al-Irfan, a magazine ran by Ahmad Arif al-Zayn, in which it states that the West was due to fall, not because of religion or morality, but because of “natural law,” thus illustrating the Darwinist ideology that was subscribed to within intellectual circles in the Ottoman Empire. While the West was due to fall according to nature’s whims, Easterners were naturally set for “progress.” As the publication states:
“Westerners, their sun inclined to set due to natural law, and Easterners enjoying a perpetual radiance in their pure lands. …Easterners have a deep-rooted past. Civilization developed and reaped the fruits of its harvest in their lands and in the East today remains this civilization and progress — what Westerners reached in comparison with it is confusing and baffling, yet most of it had been achieved more than a thousand years ago! And these priceless vestiges are sufficient alone to indicate the complete predisposition of Easterners for progress.”
The Young Turks wanted to reverse the conventional social-Darwinist thought so prevalent in the Western world: that the white man was superior to the Asian. By fixating themselves on the Japanese victory over Russia, these Ottoman intellectuals wanted to use this to prove that it was the Oriental who was naturally superior to the European. As the Young Turk magazine, Sura-yi Ummet, states:
“Some Europeans and some Ottomans who imitate whatever they see without understanding, consider us a race in the lower part of the racial hierarchy. Let us say it in plain Turkish: they regard the Turks as second class human beings. Japanese people, being of the stock of the yellow race, are annihilating the slander against nature with the progress in their country and with their cannons and rifles in Manchuria.”
Ahmed Riza, a prominent member of the Young Turks and a person who was amongst the ranks of the Ottoman elites, believed that Japan’s victory over Russia proved that the Asian races could be superior to European peoples; that a nation did not need to be Christian to be advanced in civilization, and that the reason why the Japanese race was at a higher level in its evolutionary “progress,” was because it was “isolated and preserved”. As Riza wrote:
“There are multiple well-merited lessons that the war permitted the Japanese to give to the ‘superior races’. … One cannot doubt the pre-eminence of the social and political institutions of Japan, a so-called inferior race by most of those peoples upon whom the patent of superiority is conferred. The splendid victory of the Japanese has proved the Christian world arrogant; that it is not indispensable for a people to embrace morality, civilization, and an aptitude for progress. …Likewise events of the Far East have put forth evidence of the uselessness of interventions, frequent if pernicious, of Europe for reforming a people. On the contrary, the more isolated and preserved from contact with European invaders and plunderers a people is, the better is the measure of [their] evolution toward a rational renovation.”
Japan’s ultra-nationalism against Europeans and other Asians was admired by the elites of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman writer, Ahmed Munir, expressed this admiration for Japanese nationalism:
“in Asia, nationalism (milliyetperverlik), patriotism (vatanperverlik), constitutionalism (mesrutiyet perverlik) and military technology have so rapidly advanced that Europe has not attained even one of these achievements in the same era of progress.”
Abdurresid Ibrahim, a Tatar intellectual who became a major influence for the Young Turks, looked to the rigidness, excessive nationalism, and the emperor worship of the Japanese as his inspiration for a pan-Asian hegemony. “The military, commanders and officers,” wrote Ibrahim, “their religion and their beliefs are obedience to His Majesty the Emperor Mikado who is their sovereign, and service to their nation.” Ibrahim went on to praise the Japanese field marshal, Oyama Iwao, one of the founders of the Imperial Japanese Army, as “perhaps the foremost among those who took upon themselves the need to preserve this national morality (ahlak-l milliye)”.
Abdurresid Ibrahim
The Japanese businessman, Yamada Torajiro, wrote a letter to the Ottoman foreign affairs, Said Pasha, in which he described the relationship between Turkey and Japan as one that will last for eternity; he stated that the ties forged between the two countries will restore the greatness of Asia, and expressed pan-Asianist racial superiority by affirming that the Asian race was the first human race to have come into existence:
“If we compare the continent of Asia to the several other kingdoms of the world, we shall find out that the kingdoms of Asia are the most ancient, it is the largest of the four quarters of the globe, the disposition of its people are mild. They are renowned for their literature and military art, and they were the first inhabitants of the world. The fortunes and conditions of Asia have changed since the middle ages. Annam has been overrun and its monarchy overthrown within the last few years. Persia, Afghanistan, Siam, Corea, etc. are reduced and their ancient greatness disappeared; and now Turkey, Japan and China are the only three independent kingdoms which compare in power to the several other kingdoms of the civilized world, but we greatly feel dissatisfaction on account of the non-existence of a communication between each other. Turkey has been the first to send an ambassador to our country to cement a friendship which we trust will continue to all eternity and insure the return of the former great influence and power of Asia.”
Yamada Torajiro, in Ottoman garb
Mehmed Zeki, who served as a commander for the Ottoman military, wrote a whole book in praise of Japan entitled, Japan’s Past, Present and Future, described the Japanese as a distinct race in the Creation of Allah:
“For just as the Creator still honors the country of Japan with local distinguishing characteristics, so He commanded the Japanese heart, a wellspring of virtues always flowing, his intellect a storehouse of skillful aptitude, to reach and desire without envy.”
There is a similar spirit that lodges inside both of the souls of the Japanese and the Turks: it is the spirit of callous detachment, to make oneself unaccountable to the evils that one does, and indifferent to human suffering. This similarity in spirit is represented by their two related religions: Sufism in Turkey and Mahayana Buddhism in Japan. Both of these religions stress becoming callous.
This emphasis on detachment is so strong within Buddhism that it can enable one even to kill his own parents. One of the best examples of this within Buddhism is when the Buddhist king Ajatasatru murdered his father Bimbisara, and Manjusri, the infamous disciple of the Buddha himself, excuses his murder by saying that the thoughts which drove him to commit patricide “did not undermine the essential purity of his mind (citta-mula-visuddhi).”
Rumi, the most reputable of all Sufi authorities, recounts a story in which a Hindu boy is taken prisoner by the Muslim tyrant Mahmud, and in turn weeps since he misses his mother and father. Rumi then says, “The mother and father are your attachment to beliefs and blood-ties and desires and comforting habits. Don’t listen to them! They seem to protect, but they imprison. They are your worst enemies. They make you afraid of living in emptiness.” In other words, your parents, or any relations, are your enemies that keep you away from spiritual enlightenment.
The desire to form a spiritual union between the Japanese and the Turks was reflected in the spiritual practice of Asci Dede Ibrahim, an Ottoman Ministry of War official and a devout Sufi who was so fanatical about the Japanese that “he felt called to pray for the Japanese, and even came to believe he was their ‘spiritual commander.’”
The fascination with Japan and its nationalism by the Ottoman Empire will be, I believe, continuing into the future, and will help motivate and facilitate an Ottoman, German and Japanese alliance. The Young Turks revered the Japanese for their barbarism (giving them the title, with pride, of “barbarians”), their callousness while conducting massacres, and also for the love of patriotism. In the Sura-yi Ummet it reads a praise to the Japanese:
“Behold the work of these barbarians … they whose civilization, achieved in half a century, has become superior to European civilization which has fallen into decay; they who do not have to reproach massacres, who do not have to gag any mouths out of which a liberal word came, who do not have to exile or suppress patriots, who do not have to dynamite any human beings under the pretext that their skin was dark and that it constituted a happy pastime!” (Quoted by Worringer, ch. 5, p. 142)
The Ottoman military officer, Pertev Bey, praised the Japanese soldiers, and wrote in awe of how they went “one by one, like a machine, emotionless, heartless, spiritless, voiceless” to defend Japan with “patriotic affection”. This talk of patriotism, alongside a reverence for Japan, went in hand in hand with the Ottoman belief in the superiority of the Turanian race. This glorification of the Japanese as a race, overlapped and interconnected with Ottoman universalist religion.
In this spirit of cruelty, both the Ottomans and the Japanese showed the same level of sadism and bloodlust in their genocides. In one description of the Japanese massacre of the city of Nanking in China, it is said that
“a pregnant woman began to fight for her life, clawing desperately at a soldier to drag her away from the group to rape her. Nobody helped her, and in the end the soldier killed her, ripping open her belly with his bayonet and jerking out not only her intestines but a squirming fetus. …The Japanese directed burial operations with the precision and efficiency of an assembly line. Soldiers would force one group of Chinese captives to dig a grave, a second group to bury the first, and then a third group to bury the second and so on. Some victims were partially buried to their chests or necks so that they would endure further agony, such as being hacked to pieces by swords or run over by horses and tanks. … In Hsiakwan a Japanese soldier bound Chinese captives together, ten at a time, and pushed them into a pit, where they were sprayed with gasoline and ignited.” (8)
In a 1915 account of the massacres done against the Armenians by Ottoman soldiers, reveals the same evil spirit:
“Early in July, the authorities ordered the Armenians to surrender their arms, and pay a large money ransom. The leading Armenians of the town and the headman of the villages were subjected to revolting tortures. Their finger nails and then their toe nails were forcibly extracted; their teeth were knocked out, and in some cases their noses were whittled down, the victims being thus done to death under shocking, lingering agonies. The female relatives of the victims who came to the rescue were outraged in public before the very eyes of their mutilated husbands and brothers. The shrieks and death-cries of the victims filled the air, yet they did not move the Turkish beast. …The shortest method of disposing of the women and children concentrated in the various camps was to burn them. Fire was set to large wooden sheds in Alidjan, Megrakom, Khaskegh, and other Armenian villages, and these absolutely helpless women and children were roasted to death. Many went mad and threw their children away; some knelt down and prayed amid the flames in which their bodies were burning; others shrieked and cried for help which came from nowhere. And the executioners, who seem to have been unmoved by this unparalleled savagery, grasped infants by one leg and hurled them into the fire, calling out to the burning mothers: ‘Here are your lions.’” (9)
In the same account it reads that:
“In the town of Moush itself the Armenians, under the leadership of Gotoyan and others, entrenched themselves in the churches and stone-built houses and fought for four days in self-defense. The Turkish artillery, manned by German officers, made short work of all the Armenian positions.”
German officers were manning the artillery against the Armenians, showing further the German role in the Armenian Genocide. Germany, Turkey and Japan, their histories being filled with eugenics, hatred against Catholicism, genocide and imperialism, are goat nations that were and still are of the spirit of the Antichrist.
As long as you have people who believe that their race is superior to other races, there will always be war. The downfall of humanity began, and continues to begin, with anger. Eve wanted to consume the forbidden fruit because she was discontent — she was angry — with her position. She wanted to be a god. Mankind today is continuously discontent, he is ceaselessly angry, with his position, always wanting more, always viciously ambitious to rise above his state and dominate others. As long as you have anger and discontentment, there will always be war.
Post a Comment