Trump: Fascist Israel to Move Capital to Jerusalem!


International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network

Anyone who doubts that Zionism is not just another form of White racism (and White supremacy) only has to look at the cosy relationship between the elected fascist dictators Trump and Netanyahu. Trump’s anti-Arab and anti-Muslim attitudes mirror those of Zionism exactly – and that is the motivation behind Trump colluding with Netanyahu to move the capital of Israel to Jerusalem (from the designated Tel Aviv). This move is designed to cause the maximum outrage to Palestinian (and Arab) sensitivities, and lead to an all-out war in the region, whereby US-assisted Israel will militarily take the rest of Palestine and expel what is left of the Palestinian population into the wilderness. This impending (aggressive) military attack by Israel upon the defenceless Palestinian population will be fully supported by the BBC and presented to the world as an ‘act of self-defence’ – even though it is obvious who the aggressors actually are.

The USSR broke-off diplomatic relations with Israel in 1952 due to the behaviour of various Israeli diplomats in Russia – who abused their diplomatic status and tried to encourage Soviet Citizens (of Jewish heritage) to rise-up and over-throw the Soviet Regime (killing an aging Stalin in the process). The Trotskyite Khrushchev re-established diplomatic links with Israel fr a time – but the USSR permanently severed all diplomatic links with Israel in 1967 following the Zionist land-grab known as the ‘Six Day War’. In 1975, at the urging of the USSR, the UN voted unanimously to condemn ‘Zionism’ and formally recognise it as a racist ideology. This has not prevented the US or Israeli fascist politicians from continuing to murder non-Whites in the region, and with Trump’s latest insane initiative, this trend looks like it will continue unabated. Never forget that Zionism is racism, and that Israel is a fascist State that utilises murder in the name of religion. Many Jewish people oppose racist Zionism from both within and outside of Israel, and it is with these people that non-Jews should join, in a united front against all forms of racism (including anti-Semitism).

Film: Another Mother’s Son (2017) Soviet POWs On Jersey and Their Misrepresentation


British Police Collaborating with Nazi Germans (Jersey)


Another Mother’s Son (2017)

Another Mother’s Son (Russian Language)

Whilst Winston Churchill and President Roosevelt were encouraging Joseph Stalin to actively engage the military force of Nazi Germany, both Western leaders were working behind the scenes to create the conditions for the eventual ‘collapse’ of the Soviet Union. When the Red Army ‘liberated’ Nazi occupied Ukraine, they found a well organised Nazi insurgency armed in-part with British and US weaponry (the battle against this Nazi insurgency was carried-out by the NKVD and lasted until 1947, but periodically resurfaced from time to time). Churchill was certainly not ‘happy’ with the presence of Soviet POWs on British soil, as he did not want any contact between ordinary British people (who were prone to Socialistic ideas), and Communist educated Red Army soldiers). Churchill was, however, perfectly happy to grant political asylum to Ukrainian members of the SS Galicia Division in Scotland, which had carried-out atrocities in Nazi German-occupied Ukraine during WWII (as part of the ‘holocaust). In the light of Churchill’s duplicity and flirting with Nazism, I recently watched the British film entitled ‘Another Mother’s Son’ to see if it contained any merit, a brief description of which reads:

‘Based on the true story of Louisa Gould, the drama is set during World War II on the Nazi-occupied island of Jersey. Lou took in an escaped Russian POW and hid him over the war’s course. The tension mounts as it becomes clear that Churchill will not risk an assault to recapture the British soil, and the island-community spirit begins to fray under pressures of hunger, occupation and divided loyalty. Against this backdrop, Lou fights to preserve her family’s sense of humanity and to protect the Russian boy as if he was her own.’

In fact, there is not much background information within English language sources about this film, or the apparently ‘true’ story it depicts. I have had to search Russian language historical texts to verify the content and plot, etc. What is beyond historical doubt is that once Winson Churchill withdrew British troops from the Channel Islands, the British Authorities on those islands decided that the best policy toward any Nazi German invasion was ‘collaboration’ with the Hitlerite forces. Even within Britain today, the collaborative behaviour of many of the ‘British’ people living on the Channel Islands still leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. This is compounded by the fact that many of the people living there today, are very wealthy, exempt from various British taxes, and continuously court a French identity. Indeed, so insular and exclusive has places like Jersey become, that ‘Another Mother’s Son’ could not gain permission to be filmed on the island, and instead had to settle for Somerset (situated to the West of the British Mainland). Apparently, one or two highly influential inhabitants of Jersey today, were not so much ashamed of their island’s historical collaboration with the occupying Nazi German forces – but rather were more concerned with Jersey’s historical association with ‘assisting’ Soviet POWs – although to be fair, most Jersey inhabitants were far too busy cosying-up to the Nazi German Authorities, to have cared too much about the brutal treatment routinely meted-out to Red Army prisoners by their SS Guards.


This film is typical of one that tries to tread the Cold War tight-rope of feeling sorry for Soviet POWs on the one hand – whilst never appearing to condone the ‘Communist’ political system they represent on the other. This ridiculous homage to US Cold War disinformation leads to films that are purportedly ‘true’, literally changing the facts (here and there) to support an obvious anti-Soviet propaganda. At no time in this film is the word ‘Soviet’ used to describe the Russian prisoners – despite the fact that the term ‘Soviet’ is mentioned in both the English and Russian languages on a commemorative plaque located in Jersey. What is true, is that a brave British woman named ‘Louisa Gould’ (of Jewish ancestry) ultimately lost her life in a Nazi German gas chamber, for helping the escaped Soviet POW named ‘Fyodor Burogo’ (Федора Бурого).


For her act of bravery, Louisa Gould paid with her life. Photo: Jersey Archive

Hitler wanted to secure his rear prior to his invasion of the USSR, and so the Channel Islands were successfully invaded in early 1942. The first batch of prisoners of war was transferred to Jersey in early 1942. A number of SS Nazi German Concentration Camps were established on the Channel Islands (notably Alderney), which were used to work Soviet POWs, French, Poles, Czechs, and Spanish Republicans to death. Soviet POWs were forced to work 12 hour day and night shifts in the local quarries – where they were fed only meagre rations – and routinely beaten. The Nazi German Commandant was ordered to work each batch of Soviet prisoners for six months only in the quarries, before finally murdering them all in often barbaric fashion (designed to save ammunition). Any Jersey inhabitant showing any type of mercy toward Soviet POWs was either shot on the spot, or ‘tried’ and transported to Germany. The Russian-language description of this film offers much more background detail:

‘The plot is based on the real fate of the photographer from Tomsk, Fyodor Burogo, who was sheltered by a resident of the English island of Jersey from fascists during the Second World War. The script was written by Louisa Gould’s grand-niece, writer Jenny Lecoet, who for many years collected materials about the feat of her relative. Louise was played by British actress Jenny Seagrove, Fyodor – Julian Kostov. He really looks a bit like the real Burogo, whose photographs are still kept in the museum of the 166th Infantry Division, located in Tomsk school No. 51. The veteran died in 2001, but the “Komsomolskaya Pravda” found out his story from those who knew him personally.;


One of the rare front-line photographs of Fyodor Burogo (left). 1941 year. Photograph: Museum of the 166th Rifle Division, Tomsk.

Many of the Soviet POWs were transported from the Ukraine to the Channel Islands, where the Nazi German policy of ‘Operation Ost’ (i.e. the eradication of the Slavic race) was put into effect. In this film, the script describes Fyodor Burogo as a ‘pilot’, when historical records show that he was in fact a Rad Army infantryman. Despite being a hardened frontline soldier who had survived the horrors of Nazi German warfare in the USSR, and the equally brutal and vicious imprisonment reserved for those termed ‘inferior races’ by Hitlerite ideology, this film portrays him as a weak man who urinates himself when a Nazi German officer talks to him, and a man who is prone to immature emotional outbursts. His character in the film is also (and falsely) depicted as ‘going to church’ and being ‘interested’ in the ‘Christian singing’ – events that never happened at all. In fact, Fyodor Burogo was a patriotic Soviet soldier and citizen who despised organised religion. The final ‘lie’ that this film portrays as ‘true’ is the false statement that the Soviet government routinely ‘discriminated’ against ALL returning Soviet POWs. This is historically untrue. Many returning Soviet POWs were treated as heroes – particularly those that had tried to escape, or had actually escaped (as was the case with Fyodor Burogo). Every captured Soviet soldier had a duty to try and escape and continue the fight against Nazi Germany. What is true (but not included in this film), is the fact that those minority of Soviet POWs who collaborated with the Nazi German occupiers were arrested and tried for treason. This was exactly the same fate that befell any Allied soldiers who collaborated with the enemy. As is usual of this type of film, it portrays anti-Soviet propaganda by ‘sentimentalizing’ the Russian characters it depicts, effectively ‘stripping’ them of their ‘Sovietness’. It is not entirely a ‘true’ story as it deliberately misrepresents many of the historical facts. Fyodor Burogo had a long and fulfilling life and was admired for his bravery by the Soviet State – an attitude toward his military service that followed him into modern Russia post-1991.


After the end of WWII, Russian language sources state:

‘”We lived next door to Fyodor Polikarpovich Burogo on Kartashov Street in Tomsk,” says Natalya Morokova, who studied the history of the 166th Infantry Division. – In the 1960s, Fyodor Burogo often gave lectures at schools in front of students, talking about his extraordinary biography. Then his name was familiar to everyone in our city. In addition, he was a famous photographer, his pictures were often published in magazines, newspapers, books. He was a very kind, intelligent person.’

So much for returning Soviet POWs being routinely discriminated against, by the Soviet Authorities! Fyodor Burogo was hidden by Louisa Gould (whose son had been killed earlier in the war), but her family was betrayed by other Jersey inhabitants. Before her arrest, Louisa managed to get Fyodor Burogo out to safety. Whilst a hunted fugitive on te island, Fyodor Burogo illegally listened to radio broadcasts from London. Having translated these news reports into the Russian language, he then ‘threw’ hundreds of leaflets over the wire of the Concentration Camps holding Soviet POWs – so that he imprisoned Comrades could gain knowledge of all the Red Army advances, successes and victories. This episode of Fyodor Burogo’s life on the island of Jersey is completely omitted from this film, as is the fact that Fyodor Burogo, along with other escaped Soviet POWs (and a small number of Jersey inhabitants), planned an armed uprising against the Nazi Germany occupiers, scheduled to begin on May 15th, 1945. However, London soon announced that the Red Army had already taken Berlin on May 9th, and the armed uprising on Jersey was called-off. As the 10oth Anniversary of the Russian ‘Ocober’ Revolution approaches, it is important that films such as this are studied carefully, and their short-comings clearly revealed.

Russian Language Source Article:

The Day They Took Away Our Pagoda


Since 2010, much damage has been done to fabric of the UK’s culture, since the coming to power of the Tory Party and LibDem Party. This has not only resulted in the death of thousands due to the ideologically led ‘Austerity’ programme that has seen the privatisation of the NHS and Welfare System, (which resulted in the UK being found Guilty of Crimes Against Humanity by the UN in 2016), but also in a tremendous rise in racism, racist policies, and race-hate attacks. This is not to say that anti-Chinese racism is new – it definitely is not. The British Government – acting upon common sentiments among the population – has ethnically ‘cleansed’ the UK Chinese populations twice during the 20th century, once in 1919, and again in 1946 (the latter case under the Labour Party). Even when Labour’s Ken Livingstone was the Mayor of London, he nearly buckled to big business and suggested the pagoda be demolished and Chinese businesses be re-located to remote areas of East London (effectively ‘hiding’ and ‘isolating’ the Chinese presence in London). It was only extensive campaigning on behalf of the Chinese community – together with non-Chinese supporters – that called a halt to this new attempt at ethnic cleansing. The stay of execution, however, was only short-lived, as when the Tory Boris Johnson was elected Mayor of London, he initiated a vicious campaign which has seen the mass ‘eviction’ of Chinese-owned businesses forcibly removed from the areas around Gerrard Street, their old premises demolished, and redeveloped for trans-national corporations to take-over and eradicate the ‘Chinese’ presence from the area. With the election of the Labour Blairite Mayor of London – Sadiq Khan – the continuation of cleansing the Chinese presence from London’s Chinatown was not only affirmed – but intensified as a consequence.


London’s Muslim Mayor – despite being asked to intercede on behalf of the Chinese community- refused to support another of London’s ethnic minorities, and ordered the demolishing of the Pagoda that once stood near the entrance to Gerrard Street. This barbarous act has had a tremendously negative effect upon the psychology of the Chinese community in London (and beyond), and is tantamount in experience to a racial attack, or a hate-crime, but as usual, the mainstream UK remains indifferent to a prominent section of its population.


English Language Reference:


%d bloggers like this: