The Perils of Non-Compliance

Te Tari Taiwhenua — the New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs — won’t let bygones be bygones. To quote the Grateful Dead, “it gets to wearing thin/They just won’t let you be.”

Te Tari Taiwhenua began their work week by sending me a notice of my non-compliance with their earlier demand that I take down Brenton Tarrant’s manifesto (see my most recent post on the New Zeal of the New Zealand government). Here’s what the email said:

Dear Mr May

Re: Non-Compliance Warning — 2022/10 Gates of Vienna — The Great Replacement Manifesto

Thank you for your email dated 20 June 2023 in response to the Take Down Notice ‘2022/10 Gates of Vienna
— The Great Replacement Manifesto’.

We acknowledge your views about publications that are not considered illegal in the US and observations on focusing internally. The Notice does provide the opportunity to geo-block the objectionable content from New Zealand as an alternative.

We are obligated to serve a Non-Compliance Warning as the final stage of our Notice issuing process, and as such, attach the same. This now closes our file.

For your ease of reference, here is a link to the Department’s Take-Down Notice guidance.

Please contact us if you:

  • require any additional information or if you reasonably believe you will not be able to comply within the required period;
  • have removed or prevented New Zealand public access to the objectionable online publication from your platform;
  • would like to provide us with additional or updated contact information, such as group emails, for your company.


Inspector of Publications
Warrant Card [redacted]
Digital Violent Extremism, Digital Safety
Toi Hiranga | Regulation & Policy
Te Tari Taiwhenua | The Department of Internal Affairs

Notice that they are “provid[ing] the opportunity to geo-block the objectionable content from New Zealand”. That is, they expect me to use my precious time to enforce their tomfool laws against their own citizens! The chutzpa is astonishing.

Below is the email I sent them in reply:

To whom it may concern:

Thank you for your considered response to my most recent email.

Your note that your office will “provide the opportunity to geo-block the objectionable content from New Zealand” means, I assume, that you would expect Gates of Vienna itself to do the geo-blocking on behalf of the New Zealand government. Unfortunately, I have neither the time nor the resources to take such an action, even if I thought that doing so would be a good idea.

Therefore, pursuant to the first item in your bulleted list, I am required to notify you that I reasonably believe that I will not be able to comply within the required period, or indeed within any time period.

Please feel free to contact me again if you deem it necessary.


Ned May
a.k.a. “Baron Bodissey”

The fact that they’ve closed their file on me may indicate an end to their harassment of me, but I wouldn’t count on it. The worst thing they could do would be to contact the State Department and demand that the U.S. government do something about my heinous offense — have my whole site taken down, for example. I consider that very unlikely, though.

In any case, I recommend that anyone who has their own website upload the manifesto, if you haven’t already. Anything a government wants taken down that badly is something that we should make available. You can’t stop the signal!

As I’ve often said in the past, this sort of behavior by a government brings out the Scot in me. At my core is an atavistic kilt-wearing claymore-waving red-bearded brigand who screams in defiance against any so-called government that would coerce him into doing something that goes against his nature.

For those who are interested, I’ve extracted the first two pages from the PDF file attached to the email and formatted the text in HTML:

Continue reading

Helping the Kiwi Police With Their Enquiries

One of the emails waiting for me when the Internet came back on today was from the government of New Zealand:

Dear Gates of Vienna

Re: Notice 2022/10 Gates of Vienna — The Great Replacement Manifesto

Te Tari Taiwhenua (The Department of Internal Affairs New Zealand) is responsible for online content regulation under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act (1993). We have identified content on your platform that is classified as objectionable under this Act.

Attached is a formal take-down notice outlining your responsibility as a platform providing content to New Zealanders. Non-compliance may result in enforcement proceedings, outlined under Section 119H of the Act.

To provide you with clarification of your legal duties and further understanding, please find a link to the Department’s Take-Down Notice guidance.

This publication has previously been classified as objectionable by the Classification Office. A copy of this email has been sent to the Chief Censor at the Classification Office.

Please contact us if you:

  • Require any additional information or if you reasonably believe you will not be able to comply within the required period;
  • Have removed or prevented New Zealand public access to the objectionable online publication from your platform;
  • Would like to provide us with additional or updated contact information, such as group emails, for your company.


Inspector of Publications
Warrant Card [redacted]
Digital Violent Extremism, Digital Safety
Toi Hiranga | Regulation & Policy
Te Tari Taiwhenua | The Department of Internal Affairs

They also attached a PDF document, which is essentially the same as their email message from the summer of 2021.

Today’s email is a resumption of the demands they made in August of 2021. In case you’ve forgotten, the Kiwi apparatchik is talking about Brenton Tarrant’s manifesto.

My post about the earlier demand is here.

When a government is that intent on forbidding people from seeing a document, it brings out the Scot in me, and makes me really, really want to make sure people can see it. However, New Zealand residents are advised not to click that link, because you may be arrested and imprisoned if you do.

I began my reply to Te Tari Taiwhenua with this:

To whom it may concern,

Your office contacted me about this issue almost two years ago. I am not sure whether it was you who wrote me back then, since you have neglected to include your name this time.

In any case, I will repeat what I said back in August of 2021:…

I then appended the full text from my August 2021 email; it’s reprised in the post below.

I’ll repeat what I said in my 2021 post: “I must respectfully request that you refrain from contacting the department [Te Tari Taiwhenua] to complain. There’s no need to intervene on my behalf. I have nothing to fear from the New Zealand government, but there’s no sense in poking the beast excessively in his lair.”

And also this note to commenters: “I will treat remarks about Brenton Tarrant the same way I have treated those about Anders Behring Breivik, and summarily delete any expressions of support or approval for his vile actions. I don’t care how you justify it; you might as well save yourself the trouble if your sentiments happen to run in that direction.”

Below the jump is my complete post from August of 2021. The only real difference is that Tarrant’s massacre is now four and a half years ago rather than two and a half years ago.

Continue reading

New Corona “Cases” Mean Two More Years of Totalitarian Rule in New Zealand

For authoritarian leaders who long to become totalitarians, the Wuhan Coronavirus provides the ideal means to that end. The ludicrously inaccurate PCR test for the presence of the virus is notorious for producing an excessive number of false positive results. Thus the would-be dictator has only to order another round of mass testing, and BINGO! A new wave of COVID appears, ready to be pushed into the news cycle, providing the opportunity for whatever additional coercive measures the pocket Hitler longs to impose.

A case in point is New Zealand, which is ruled by the prognathous Jacinda Ardern. Ms. Ardern has never made any bones about her totalitarian ambitions, and a new surge in Corona “cases” has given her government the excuse to extend the COVID state of emergency for two more years, during which time it may command the populace to do whatever it likes.

Below is a news report from New Zealand about the new decision. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for uploading this video:

Terra Australis Incognita

Terra Australis, world map by Rumold Mercator, 1587

From deepest antiquity until the early 19th century, it was widely believed that there was an enormous continent occupying most of the Southern Hemisphere. Known as Terra Australis, or Terra Australis Incognita (“Unknown Southern Land”), it was thought to be centered on the South Pole, and to extend far north into the temperate regions of the South Pacific and the southern Indian Ocean. The necessity of its existence was logically deduced from the fact that large landmasses were known to exist in the Northern Hemisphere, but not in the Southern. It was posited that there had to be a southern mass to balance out the globe, so a huge continent must exist in the far south.

At various times Tierra Del Fuego, the northern coast of Australia (then called New Holland), New Guinea, New Zealand, the Solomon Islands, and miscellaneous large islands in Polynesia were identified as portions of the coastline of Terra Australis.

Later, as exploration of the far south continued and maps became more completely filled in, the possible dimensions of Terra Australis shrank, and Australia, New Guinea, New Zealand, and eventually even Tasmania had to be identified as free-standing islands (or, in the case of Australia, a continent). Eventually the idea of Terra Australis had to be completely abandoned, and it joined spontaneous generation, the four humors, phlogiston, and the celestial spheres in the dusty attic of discredited scientific exotica.

For centuries the imagined continent had been referred to as Australia. When it became clear that it didn’t exist, New Holland (by then a British territory) was renamed Australia so that it could be identified without reference to either the English or the Dutch. Then, when the real Terra Australis was finally discovered, it had to be given the name Antarctica, since “Australia” was already taken. It turned out to be a cold, bleak, and unromantic place. The customs and practices of the indigenous penguins are nowhere near as interesting as those of the elaborate autochthons imagined by the devotees of Terra Australis.

The people who believed in the great southern continent weren’t wild-eyed zealots espousing a religious cult. They were explorers, scientists, geographers, cartographers, and their aristocratic patrons. The fact that they could hold such firm but erroneous beliefs shows how sober, rational, intelligent, educated men, proceeding carefully and methodically, can get a matter of such great significance completely and utterly wrong.

The elaborate maps and descriptions of Terra Australis arose out of a combination of small scholarly errors and a paucity of well-documented information on the southern reaches. With so little detailed first-hand observations available, a few slight inadvertent errors — mistaking “north” for “south”, the conflation of similar names, etc. — allowed the construction of the imagined continent, assisted by the powerful engine of wishful thinking. Even the habits, customs, and apparel of the natives were described in vivid accounts of the fabulous South.

The idea that there ought to be a landmass in the Southern Hemisphere to balance those in the North makes complete sense. Knowing what we know now, I could have told them: “Yes, there is an actual imbalance in the Earth’s landmasses because of the catastrophic collision that created the Moon and left a big hole on one side of the planet. The southern regions, especially in the Pacific area, comprise the remains of that hole, which is still being filled in by the extremely slow drifting of the Earth’s continents.”

But they had no way of knowing that back then. Their conjecture completely fit the facts, as they understood them.

There may be some lessons in there for us modern-day folk who think we understand everything about everything. Each epoch has embraced its share of “facts” that everyone knew to be true. They were well-understood, beyond discussion, and established by the consensus of the scholars. Yet they were eventually discredited, and now appear as historical footnotes or in anthologies of quaint archaic fancies.

Does anyone believe that our own time is exempt from such misguided fancies?

If not, what are our most significant delusions?

Continue reading

A New Zeal for Repression

The new totalitarianism that has descended over the Western world in the last two years varies in its intensity and emphases. New Zealand has one of the most repressive Corona regimes, right up there with Australia, Germany, Austria, Greece, and Canada.

Even though New Zealand has almost no COVID cases, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has imposed a draconian and finely-tuned lockdown on the populace. The government is vigorously pushing citizens to get vaxed. Ms. Ardern has stated in no uncertain terms that the populace will from now on be divided into two classes, the “vaccinated” and the “unvaccinated”, with the unvaxed having a more restricted set of rights and privileges. The prime minister’s approach makes sense, given that she was groomed by Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum as part of the “Young Global Leaders” group (as previously reported here and here).

The following account comes from an unvaxed young man named Scott. As a pureblood in max-vaxed New Zealand, he is now feeling the chilly winds of repression on a daily basis.

This report concerns his experience with the country’s healthcare system. The medical establishment Scott visits is a medium-sized clinic with mostly female doctors, which has segregated its clientele and relegated him to the back of the bus — or rather, the back of the ambulance bay:

One incident, the most recent and certainly a pretty indicative event, sums up the situation well. Something fairly innocuous yet foreboding.

Sitting there in the ambulance bay out back waiting for my medical appointment — yes, that’s right, in the ambulance bay — I wasn’t terribly bothered. I’d made an appointment earlier in the week and was told over the phone that because I was unvaccinated, my doctor would see me out the back. Oh, OK, I said, thinking some sterile room at the back of the building. But no, it was actually outside at the back. Segregated, I guess. But still… OK, I said.

Still not really bothered. Not until I was there in the bay, in my designated spot, and had spent some time, no idea how long, maybe fifteen minutes or so. Well, I began to think how this could make some people feel. And also wondered if this was really for reasons of health, or was it psychological and done to deliberately exclude and probably humiliate and degrade people? Wear them down.

Jacinda certainly had said there will be two classes of people going forward, vaccinated and unvaccinated. So to degrade certainly fits in with her own words. It made me think further, though. How far will this go? How far can it go?

And although it really didn’t bother me much at all, should I let on to that fact? Or do I faux-scream out that this entire situation hurts too much?

I don’t know. I just don’t know.

If someone being tied up and tortured for information feels that the pain he’s feeling is actually really light and quite tolerable, and not near the breaking point, what should he do? If the torturer realizes it, then obviously the pain will be turned up several notches. So, quick — cry, scream and act as though you simply cannot endure any more of this, it’s so excruciating. And he thinks, any information the victim had would surely have been revealed. No? When actually it’s not much bother personally to this individual at the moment.

Continue reading

Mohmadin’s Lamp

Here’s a report from The Daily Sun with news on the latest violent extremist incident in New Zealand:

New Zealand Lampman Who Attacked Eight People Before Police Shot Him Dead Can Finally be Named

The ISIS-supporting terrorist who went on a battering rampage in a lighting store in New Zealand on Friday has been named as Mohammed Mahmoud Mehmet Mohmadin.

The 32-year-old Sudanese refugee was shot dead after clubbing eight people with lamps in Light of the World, a lighting business in east Auckland. Five of the victims were seriously wounded, with two receiving life-threatening injuries. Mr. Mohmadin is alleged to have shouted “Allahu Akhbar” during his rampage.

On Saturday morning numerous stores in Auckland removed lamps, flowerpots, wine racks, picture frames, teakettles, and other heavy objects from displays in response to the attack. Anti-terrorism experts have warned that such objects may be picked up and used as weapons opportunistically by terrorists. The bedding store Lullabies went so far as to remove pillows from its showrooms after Police Commissioner Beezle McFee warned retailers that a victim may be smothered to death with a pillow in as little as 90 seconds. He said that there have thus far been no terror attacks with pillows, but he fears that it is only a matter of time before one occurs.

Commissioner McFee defended his officers, and said there was no indication an attack was imminent when Mohmadin arrived at the store, adding that long-term surveillance is ‘difficult’.

In a bid to reassure the public, he vowed to increase police presence at lighting stores, bedding stores, supermarkets, gyms, restaurants, churches, and other locations where soft or heavy objects might be accessed by known extremists.

Police have not yet been able to determine a motive for the attack.

[Yes, the above article is satirical, at least for the time being. I used this report from The Daily Mail as a model (hat tip: Seneca III).]

The Globalist Grooming Gang

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich is a German lawyer and politician who leads a regular podcast called Corona Ausschuss (“Corona Committee”). The following video is the first of three excerpts from a recent podcast by the group.

In this segment of the video Dr. Fuellmich interviews Ernst Wolff, a journalist and author who specializes in the economics of globalism. Mr. Wolff has researched the labyrinthine connections among various globalist groups, paying special attention to Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum. In this clip he talks about the leadership training groups associated with the WEF that groom promising candidates for positions in global governance. In a striking coincidence, the Western leaders who play the most prominent roles in the authoritarian responses to the Wuhan Coronavirus have all passed through these WEF leadership training sessions.

Many thanks to Oz-Rita for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

More information on Young Global Leaders (hat tip Johnny U.)

Video transcript:

Continue reading

New Zealand Asks For My Help With Their Memory Hole

Well, there goes my planned vacation in New Zealand!

A lot has happened in the nearly two and half years since the Christchurch massacre. Cast your mind back through the Corona fog, if you will, to March 15, 2019, when a young man named Brenton Tarrant massacred fifty-one people in two different mosques in Christchurch, the largest city on South Island in New Zealand.

Mr. Tarrant’s evil actions prompted a renewed push against “Islamophobia” all over the world, but especially in New Zealand.

The killer left behind a manifesto, copies of which immediately began disappearing from the Internet. As is my usual practice, I made it available [pdf] to those who wished to download it and read it.

When New Zealand cracked down on anyone who possessed a copy of the manifesto, making it a jailable offense, I warned our Kiwi readers that they should not avail themselves of that link if they wanted to stay out of prison.

Dymphna posted her own inimitable take on what happened in “Pigs and Monkeys and Mossad, Oh My!” (It was one of the last major posts she wrote before her death.)

A couple of days ago, just before my phone and Internet went out, I received an email from a fellow in the Department of Internal Affairs in New Zealand. Before you read the text, I must respectfully request that you refrain from contacting the department to complain. There’s no need to intervene on my behalf. I have nothing to fear from the New Zealand government, but there’s no sense in poking the beast excessively in his lair.

Here’s what the email said:

Dear Gates of Vienna

Good afternoon,

I am an investigator within the Digital Safety, Digital Violent Extremism Team at the Department of Internal Affairs in New Zealand. The Digital Violent Extremism Team is dedicated to preventing the spread of unlawful online content that promotes, supports or encourages violent extremism. We strive to keep New Zealanders safe from online harm, such as content relating to the Christchurch attacks which deeply affected NZ communities.

Recently, we received information regarding a PDF document hosted by your website: The PDF is the Christchurch terrorist’s manifesto.

The Christchurch terrorist published a manifesto containing his beliefs and plans online, the same day he livestreamed the Christchurch mass shooting attacks that took place on March 15th 2019. Tragically 51 people were killed and 50 were injured that day.

Following the tragic events, various Heads of State, Government and Leaders from the tech sector around the world have committed to what is known as ‘The Christchurch Call’.(1) The ‘call’ rests on the conviction that a free, open and secure internet offers extraordinary benefits to society and that respect for freedom of expression is fundamental, however no one has the right to create and share terrorist and violent extremism content online.

The Christchurch terrorist’s manifesto has been classified as ‘objectionable’ (banned) under New Zealand legislation.(2)

We have confirmed that the PDF document hosted at the aforementioned link is the manifesto, which is objectionable in New Zealand.

Could you please advise me of whether you can assist with having this file taken down from your site or alternatively blocking visibility of the PDF from New Zealand in order to comply with our law?

We would greatly appreciate the assistance you can provide in reducing the harm to the New Zealand public, the victims and their families.

I hope you are willing to assist us and look forward to hearing from you in due course.

With best regards,

(2)NZ Films, Videos and Classifications Act 1993

Ngā mihi nui

[Name redacted]
Inspector of Publications
Warrant Card [redacted]
Manager: Digital Violent Extremism, Digital Safety
Toi Hiranga | Policy, Regulation and Communities
Phone Work [redacted]
Te Tari Taiwhenua | The Department of Internal Affairs

This was the text of my reply:

Continue reading

Merkel Benches Come to Auckland

A reader in New Zealand just sent the following photo:

Merkel benches have arrived in New Zealand much more quietly than the recent law change and police confiscation of 30,000 privately owned semi-automatic firearms. Pictured here is fine example of Mrs Merkel’s work at a railway station in a culturally enriched area of Auckland.

A New Conservatism: Nationalist, Populist and Converging

Dr. Turley sums up the realignments that even the New York Times is admitting. From India to Australia to Japan, a form of “Trumpism” is coming into being. And the EU is trembling as it feels the earth moving under its old globalist certainties:

That doesn’t mean the realignments don’t hurt. Some people will be discombobulated; change is inevitable and rocky. Those who can see their loss as an opportunity will flourish. Others, like PM May in Great Britain, could be looking at the end.

With these changes, Gates of Vienna needs to update its categories. No longer is it enough to have the “EU” without naming its constituent nation-states. We will probably have to list “globalism” as a thing, even as it shrinks into something less…well, less global.

Pigs and Monkeys and Mossad, Oh My!

David Wood has done us all a favor by shining his ray of sunlight on this dark, demented “thinking”:

And, as he usually does, David lets the Koran hoist itself with its own petard. The shouting imam in New Zealand, blaming Mossad and Zionists for this latest mass killer, is the usual predictable Koranic Kutie. I’ll bet most of us can sing along with him by now.

Meanwhile, The Apostate Prophet tells us what it’s like to grow up in Germany learning his ABCs of hatred against the kuffar. Just so you know its origins.

Are we recycling the 1930s all over again? A place where anti-Semitism is cool, and the anti-Semites are free again to shout the same filth all over again? But only certain haters are given a free pass on foaming at the mouth. Others are so muzzled by political correctness that they live in hiding or under guard — Salman Rushdie and Geert Wilders come to mind.

What is so mind-boggling about that New Zealand imam’s rant is not his “anti-Zionist” tirade, but that New Zealand is so accepting of it. There don’t seem to be (m)any MSM reports on this phenomenon. I’ve been hanging around all day, looking for items. They’re few and far between.

Is there any antidote to this moral rot? We are seeing it ever more openly now, even in the U.K. Parliament and the U.S. Congress. Anti-Semitism is becoming cool among the socialists…

The nutjob who massacred those Muslims in New Zealand is being compared to Breivik. As I said at the time of ABB’s massacres, first in Oslo and later on Utøya island, people in a position of power who sincerely wanted to know the deeper reality behind his Manifesto needed to have a forensic analysis done on his work. Of course, they didn’t want the truth; they wanted the circus they created, so the real authors got away with murder. More murder than they’d planned on perpetrating, perhaps. Their monster had a mind of his own; he got away and then went off-script. They didn’t know ABB didn’t care if he got caught. ABB had plans for his incarceration. Besides, I think they sold him a bill of goods about being the leader of a neo-Nazi movement which would rise up and free him from that court.

Later on, in prison, after Breivik sent out a formal retraction of “his” ideas to the major news media, admitting he’d been a neo-Nazi the whole time, the MSM ignored this plot twist. They liked him stuck in the hardened concrete they’d poured into his place in history so there he would stay, anti-Islamic to the end.

This new nutjob, at the other end of the earth, is even now having the cement poured around him before it’s been determined if he’s sane. Or if he had help with composing his “manifesto”. Nope, they’re setting him in stone, and will carve the narrative to fit their own nefarious needs, Truth be damned. You can bet the annual OIC report on “Islamophobic attacks” will feature this one big time. Usually, all they have to write about is endless accounts of bacon left on the threshold of a mosque or some (easily removed) graffiti. Now they have a story with teeth, and we will hear them growling over it far longer than we heard about 9/11 or 7/7. Don’t you wonder what PR term will come to designate this NZ massacre?

A mass killer is, ipso facto, crazy. It doesn’t matter if he’s legally ‘sane’, he’s still a whackjob. But then, so are those who claim his weapons belong to Mossad also insane. They are not only whackjobs, they’re selling their souls for anti-Semitic ABCs they took in with their mother’s milk.

Evil and unutterably sad.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Oh, I just remembered Trevor Loudon’s website, New Zeal. Find it here. For whatever glitchy reason, my browser doesn’t want to open it. I can say if you scroll down a bit, he’ll have more accurate information than you’re likely to get elsewhere. Please report back — don’t know when I’ll be able to open it.

Hat tip: Vlad

Crackdown in New Zealand

A Kiwi reader sent us this email:

The chief censor in New Zealand has banned the Christchurch killer’s manifesto, and it is a serious crime to possess copies of it OR READ IT. It is equivalent to possessing child porn, a jailable offence.

So you need to post a warning at your link for NZ citizens.

It is now impossible to show anyone in New Zealand that our media and politicians are lying about the terrorist’s being “right-wing” (he claims to a traditional 1930s Fascist, a far-left ideology, and maintains that position throughout the document).

New Zealanders, beware!

I doubt they can read this warning, though. I would imagine that this website, like all the other “hate” sites, is now blocked in New Zealand.

If anyone wants to read Brenton Tarrant’s useless manifesto, it is here.

Maoris, Moors and Migrants: A history lesson for civilized humans facing an Ork invasion

The essay below by Matthew Bracken serves as a follow-up or companion piece to “The Alienork Way”.

Maoris, Moors and Migrants

A history lesson for civilized humans facing an Ork invasion

by Matthew Bracken

From ‘Moriori’, by Denise Davis and Māui Solomon, in Te Ara — the Encyclopedia of New Zealand:

Hundreds of years ago the Moriori, of the Chatham Islands, took a solemn vow of peace known as Nunuku’s Law. The decision to uphold this sacred law in the face of aggression in 1835 had tragic consequences. They were slaughtered, enslaved, and dispossessed of their lands. The Moriori lived on Chatham Island and Pitt Island, two islands in the Chatham Islands group, about 700 kilometers south-east of Wellington.

Nunuku’s Law: Isolated from mainland New Zealand, the Moriori developed a unique culture based on a law of peace. This was called Nunuku’s Law, after the ancestor Nunuku-whenua. After seeing bloody conflict between the Hamata people and later arrivals, he banned murder and the eating of human flesh forever. After 1791, when the British ship Chatham called at Rēkohu, Moriori came into contact with Europeans and Māori who came as crew on sealing and whaling vessels. Some settled on the islands and lived alongside the Moriori. This relative peace was shattered in 1835 when Maoris from two tribes, both from Taranaki, arrived in the Chatham Islands in search of new territories and resources.

In 1835, 24 generations after the Moriori chief Nunuku had forbidden war, the Moriori welcomed about 900 people from the two Māori tribes. Originally from Taranaki on New Zealand’s North Island, they had voyaged from Wellington on an overcrowded European vessel, the Rodney. They arrived severely weakened, but were nursed back to health by their Moriori hosts. However, they soon revealed hostile intentions and embarked on a reign of terror.

Stunned, the Moriori called a council of 1,000 men at Te Awapātiki to debate their response. The younger men were keen to repel the invaders, and argued that even though they had not fought for many centuries, they outnumbered the newcomers two-to-one and were a strong people. But the elders argued that Nunuku’s Law was a sacred covenant with their gods and could not be broken. The consequences for Moriori were devastating.

Although the total number of Moriori first slaughtered was said to be around 300, hundreds more were enslaved and later died. Some were killed by their captors. Others, horrified by the desecration of their beliefs, died of ‘kongenge’ or despair [often suicide by leaping from cliffs]. According to records made by their elders, 1,561 Moriori died between 1835 and 1863, when they were released from slavery. Many succumbed to diseases introduced by Europeans, but large numbers died at the hands of the Maoris. In 1862 only 101 remained. When the last known full-blooded Moriori died in 1933, many thought this marked the extinction of a race.

The Maori and the Chatham Islanders

On Chatham Island, 800 kilometers east of New Zealand, lived the Moriori, who were related to the Maori. They were hunters and gatherers, sparse in population and, perhaps because they were few in number and isolated, they were unpracticed at warfare. In late 1835 about 900 Maori from New Zealand landed on Chatham Island. The Maori were armed with guns, clubs and axes. They announced to the Moriori that they were their slaves. Moriori chiefs conferred with each other and drew from their religious heritage. [Nunuku’s Law.] They offered the Maori friendship and a share of the island’s resources. The attempt to appease the Maori failed. The Maori began killing the Moriori, including women and children. The Maori put people in pens and feasted on the tender meat of Moriori children. A Maori conqueror described it:

We took possession, in accordance with our customs and we caught all the people. Not one escaped. Some ran away from us. These we killed, and others we killed – but what of that? It was in accordance with our custom.

The lesson of Chatham Island is that people who live in comfortable circumstances for enough generations to forget the horrors of anarchy and total war, will often let down their guard to a fatal degree. The examples I will compare are Chatham Island in 1835, the Island of Plenty from my Alienork Way allegory, and Europe today. It is my observation that, in a well-calculated series of defined steps and expected responses, alien Orks (taken from “The Alienork Way”) can overcome and subdue even an outwardly more affluent, powerful and successful society.

Continue reading

Who Decided the Location of the Second Front?

I wasn’t aware that Andy Bostom had written this article when I posted about American Betrayal early this morning. Dr. Bostom originally submitted his piece to American Thinker, and, like Diana West, was rebuffed — further evidence of the long arm of The Invisible Man.

Jeff Lipkes, Hanson Baldwin, and The World War II “Second Front Debate”

by Andrew Bostom

Déjà vu all over again, Diana West has noted at her website how she was not permitted to respond to a new round of critiques of American Betrayal at The American Thinker, which astonishingly included letter “appendices” containing two more rounds of ad hominem attacks on her by Ron Radosh and David Horowitz.

My own response to American Thinker’s “military expert” editor J.R. Dunn provides an introduction to a staid essay that was also summarily rejected without any ethical, or factual justification.

From: Andrew Bostom
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 8:48 AM
To: J R Dunn
Subject: Ike’s quote and your “interpretation”

One last item, as an estimable (per your own mind) World War II (WWII) “authority,” you wrote, with typically inappropriate hubris:

Re: The “Aegean” issue arises from a single quote by Eisenhower and nothing else. Ike had to have been referring to Operation Accolade, one of the Brits’ attempts at the “Underbelly”, consisting of landings in the Dodecanese. (I know something about this

The unsuccessful British Dodecanese efforts codenamed “Accolade” — which were apparently not very large troop deployments — at any rate took place between September 8 and November 22, 1943.

Eisenhower opined the following at Cairo on November 26, 1943, 2:30 PM, i.e., AFTER the failed Brit Dodecanese campaign, and focused primarily on the Po Valley, which mentioned (initial) “harrying operations” in the Aegean, followed by a sustained campaign only after other military objectives had been achieved within Italy/the Mediterranean theater, as reported in United States Department of State, Foreign relations of the United States diplomatic papers (FRUS), The Conferences at Cairo and Tehran, (1943), pp. 359-60:

Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the valley of the Po. In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany….

The next best method of harrying the enemy was to undertake operations in the Aegean. There are sufficient forces in the Mediterranean to take this area provided it is not done until after the Po line has been reached….The time to turn to the Aegean would be when the line north of Rome has been achieved. German reactions to our occupation of the islands had clearly proved how strongly they resented action on our part in this area. From here the Balkans could be kept aflame, Ploesti [Rumanian; a significant source of oil for Nazi Germany] would be threatened and the Dardanelles [a Turkish strait, connecting the Aegean Sea to the Sea of Marmara] might be opened. Sufficient forces should be used for operations in the Aegean and no unnecessary risks run. He considered that the earlier British occupation of the islands had been right and justified, but that the position was now different and strong German reactions could be expected. In either of the two assumptions it was essential to bring Turkey into the war at the moment that the operations in the Aegean were undertaken

You obviously compound your intellectual laziness — i.e. you NEVER bothered to read the relevant FRUS Diplomatic Papers, with a fundamental reading comprehension deficiency. This explains your non-sequiturs and generally confused, profoundly ignorant (albeit confidently asserted) “observations.” Seen in this light, although these errors are now understandable, they remain unacceptable. It is well past time for thoroughly incompetent, self-appointed “gatekeepers” like yourself to in fact be given the gate to the great benefit of intelligent readers, fully capable of separating wheat from chaff without your “remedial” censorship.

Installment two of Jeff Lipkes’ discussion of Diana West’s American Betrayal is entitled, “Diana and Ron: The Second Front.” Readers can decide for themselves whether or not Lipkes adequately represents Ms. West’s arguments by comparing his assessment to her own full chapter on the so-called “Second Front debate.” Regardless, I maintain readers wishing to understand this serious World War II (WWII) debate — and the post- WWII consensus about the geo-political consequences of its “resolution” — would do well to consider the historian Hanson Baldwin’s post-mortem assessment monograph, published shortly after WWII concluded.

Hanson W. Baldwin (d. 1991), was a military-affairs editor for The New York Times who authored over a dozen books on military and naval history and policy. Baldwin, a graduate of the United States Naval Academy, joined The Times in 1929, and in 1943 won a Pulitzer Prize for his World War II reporting from the Pacific.

Before retiring from The Times, Baldwin reported on the strategy, tactics and weapons of war in Korea, Vietnam, the Middle East and other theaters. Earlier, after covering the European and Pacific battles of World War II, as well as the immediate postwar transition period, so astutely, Hanson Baldwin had already earned recognition as one of the nation’s leading authorities on military and naval affairs.

In 1950, Baldwin published a pellucid World War II strategic assessment monograph of 114 pages entitled Great Mistakes of the War. Baldwin’s summary analysis identifies, in his words, the four “great — and false — premises, certainly false in retrospect and seen by some to be false at the time,” as the following:

    1.   That the Politburo had abandoned (with the ostensible end of the Communist International) its policy of a world Communist revolution and was honestly interested in the maintenance of friendly relations with capitalist governments.
    2.   That “Joe” Stalin was a “good fellow” and we could “get along with him.” This was primarily a Rooseveltian policy and was based in part on the judgments formed by Roosevelt as a result of his direct and indirect contacts with Stalin during the war. This belief was shaken in the last months of Roosevelt’s life, partly by the Soviet stand on Poland.
    3.   That Russia might make a separate peace with Germany. Fear of this dominated the waking thoughts of our politico-strategists throughout all the early phases of the war, and some anticipated such an eventuality even after our landing in Normandy.
    4.   That Russian entry into the war against Japan was either: a) essential to victory, or b) necessary to save thousands of American lives. Some of our military men clung to this concept even after the capture of the Marianas and Okinawa.

The common denominator for these basic misconceptions, Baldwin argues, excepting, perhaps the second, which became a stubbornly willful “Rooseveltian policy,” was,

…lack of adequate knowledge about Russian strengths, purposes, and motivations; and inadequate evaluation and interpretation of the knowledge we did possess, or failure to accept and apply it.

Baldwin reiterates his contention (i.e., regarding points 1 and 2) that American wartime policy hinged upon avoidable fallacious premises, which caused us to be victimized by our own hagiographic propaganda about Communism, Stalin, and the Soviet Union, observing:

Continue reading