“When you look at the state of manhood in the West, it’s clear that we’re witnessing a time when the feminisation of men is reaching its climax after years of policies and social engineering.”
I’m less than a minute into my interview with the delectable Noor Bin Ladin, and it’s already abundantly clear that this won’t be a surface-level discussion of the more obvious stereotypes of 21st-century masculinity we’re all familiar with. It starts out gently enough – “What’s the first thing you think of when I say, ‘Men in 2021?’” Answer, “Soy boys!” – but then, hold your breath!, we’re already taking a deep-dive into the causes of the present-day crisis not just of masculinity, but of Western civilisation itself. I shouldn’t have expected anything less.
For those of you who don’t know, yes, Noor Bin Ladin is a member of that Bin Ladin family, and September is never the best of months to have that infamous surname. It’s a time that elicits solemnity and reflection from Noor. And this September is no exception, given that it’s the twentieth anniversary of 9/11. This September also marks the one-year anniversary of Noor coming out in support of Donald Trump with her “Letter to America”, and she plans to follow it up this year with another personal statement of support for the US. (By the time this interview “goes to press”, we’ll already know what it is, but at the time of writing all I had to go on was a few rather enigmatic clues.)
“With President Trump at her helm,” she wrote in her “Letter”, “America stands a chance at restoring her principles, pride, independence and true place in the world as beacon of liberty and hope for all. This to me, is what “Make America Great Again” means. Looking back at your country’s foundation, and preserving what makes it truly GREAT. But also knowing that the best is yet to come.”
It may come as a shock to you to learn that a member of the Bin Ladin family is an America First patriot, but in these strange times, when nothing is as it seems, it feels somehow rather apt. Noor Bin Ladin was born in Switzerland to a Swiss mother and Saudi father who just so happened to be Osama Bin Ladin’s older brother. When Noor’s mother realised she couldn’t raise her daughters according to Saudi traditions, there ensued an almighty legal battle in the Swiss Courts to allow her to raise them in the West. It was her mother’s victory in this battle, ‘this clash between my life and how different it would have been in Saudi Arabia had she lost’, and frequent visits to America from a young age that have made Noor so profoundly appreciative of what the West, and especially America, represents. This is why, rather than dispiriting her, the outrage of the fraudulent election has only made her fight harder for what she believes in. Soon after Biden was installed into office, she was exposed to the full glare of the global media spotlight for a boat-borne protest against him on Lake Geneva. She’s also made appearances on Tonight with Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon’s War Room: Pandemic. She has an active, pugnacious presence on Twitter, with close to 60k followers. Noor Bin Ladin isn’t going anywhere; or, to put it conversely, wherever it is she is going, only she decides.
Social engineering, and especially the efforts of globalists and globalist organisations like Julian Huxley and the Rockefeller Foundation, is one of the main focuses of her work, she tells me; she likes to call her field “the real history of the twentieth century”. In particular, she’s interested in the way the 19th century science of eugenics was rebranded as “population control” after the events of the Second World War, which made social and medical intervention to curb or entirely remove “undesirable” populations a very hard sell. But while the name changed to a more pleasing euphemism, the attitudes and the methods remained broadly the same: a paternalist elite, self-appointed, would get to decide who reproduces and who doesn’t. (Noor calls that elite a “cult of Malthusian psycho-freaks”.) The bad news? The vast majority of the world’s population doesn’t make the cut. “This whole population control movement,” she says, “is a direct cause of the state of manhood today.” The feminisation of men, up to and including the promotion of transgenderism, is a clear way “to limit reproduction.” It’s that simple.
Nor does the denigration and, finally, the destruction of the masculine ideal stand alone as an aim on the road to population control for these social engineers. Rather, this is just one prong of a many-pronged attack on the two genders and the root of their combined strength: the nuclear family. Abortion, the birth-control pill, irreligion, women in the workplace, sterile hedonism, transgenderism – all have, some more than others, been weaponised by the social engineers to force men and women apart and to make it less likely that they’ll have children. Noor and I both agree that this process has taken place in distinct phases, with a particular focus on changing women’s behaviour and attitudes in the immediate decades after the Second World War. One of the stranger ironies of the new transgender agenda (try saying that in a hurry!) has been the sustained attack on women, not only on the rights and “freedoms” they’ve won in the twentieth century, but also on the very biological notion of womanhood. Even stranger has been the enthusiastic acquiescence of many so-called feminists in this process. (One Twitter commentator whose name escapes me perceptively suggested that this is just the apogee of the AWFL desire for ethical self-effacement – to be, quite literally, defined out of existence for the greater good. How moral!) The upshot, though, is the same as before: confusion, disorientation and subversion of traditional gender roles.
Anybody who’s taken a cursory glance at the demographics of the Western world will, at the very least, have a hard time denying that we aren’t having children like we used to. Even so, to many the notion of a global depopulation plan will of course sound like the most lurid of “conspiracy theories” (DUN DUN DUN!). Well, I’m not here to pitch you the notion of such a plan, and neither, ultimately, is Noor Bin Ladin; although she could marshal, and does during our interview, an impressive array of evidence in favour of that idea. She speaks with certainty, and I can tell that she believes that at this point in proceedings, the globalist plan should be plain as day to anybody whose eyes aren’t screwed or glued shut; she says as much when we speak.
But I will say a few things, since Noor and I end up talking about them at length. First, the ideas and goals of eugenics are very old and also remarkably consistent across the ages. One thing that struck me when I was writing my cookbook, Raw Egg Nationalism, was how the ideas expressed about diet control in Plato’s Republic, for instance, mirror those that seem to lie behind the notion of a “Great Reset”, including the injunction that we must all give up eating animal products, especially red meat. In both cases, a grain-slop diet, free from meat, is an essential part of maintaining orderly control of the workers; on that Plato’s Socrates and Klaus Schwab, the ludicrous thrift-store Palpatine of the WEF, would seem to be in total agreement. The only substantial difference between then and now is that today’s eugenicists actually have the means to realise their perverted dreams.
Then there’s the question of whether the globalist depopulation plan actually qualifies as a ‘conspiracy’ at all, if by that term you mean that the plan is hidden. Because very little about the beliefs and desires of the most prominent globalists is hidden – far from it. Since the earliest days, groups like the Fabian Society, Rockefeller Foundation, Audubon Society and individuals like Bertrand Russell and Julian Huxley have been quite open about their eugenic beliefs, and this openness has continued to the present day. I get the sense with Noor that there’s still a certain disbelief at just how brazen this “cult of Malthusian psycho-freaks” really is. They’re not even hiding in plain sight, as the saying goes. They’re just there, and all you have to do is look them up, and what they’ve said and done, on the internet. Bill Gates is obviously the most prominent example, but it seems that you only have to scratch the surface of a billionaire these days and you’re likely to reveal someone who believes that the higher man must transcend his fleshly body, merge with machines and jet off into space to fulfil some greater destiny. While the growing fascination with space may simply be to provide these billionaires with a pristine space to fuck kids away from prying eyes now that Little St James is off-limits, their obsession with life-extension technology and increasingly urgent preparations for some unspecified doomsday scenario – remember those bunkers in New Zealand? – at the very least suggest that they know something big that we don’t.
Like I said, it’s a whole can of worms, and one we could spend multiple interviews discussing. But we’re here primarily to talk about men – and maybe women too. Although she’s unequivocal about the fact that most men in the West these days aren’t exactly masculine (or attractive), Noor doesn’t blame them entirely for this state of affairs. In this regard, it pleases me greatly to learn that she’s hip to the xenoestrogen question. Xenoestrogens, if you don’t know – and you really should – are industrial chemicals that mimic the effects of the female hormone estrogen. By upsetting the natural hormonal balance, these substances wreak absolute havoc on our health and the health of a wide variety of animals too, including Alex Jones’s famous “gay frogs”. The worst thing about xenoestrogens is their ubiquity: they are quite literally everywhere – in the food, in the water and even, as we’re discovering with microplastics, in the air. As Noor points out, prominent “population control” experts like Paul Ehrlich, for instance, were saying as early as the 1960s that sterility drugs might have to be put in the water to limit the population (there’s a New York Times article about it if you don’t believe me), but even if the spread of all of these gender-bending chemicals isn’t totally deliberate, their feminising effects serve the depopulation agenda nonetheless.
“What we need is more egg men, not soy boys!” Noor chimes in at one point. I’m pleased that she intuitively understands what I’m trying to say about the importance of taking control of your diet in the modern world if you want to live a full and independent life. But the problem, as we’ve already established, is a societal one. How do we fix an entire generation of weak men? Noor finds it especially funny that China is now doing its best to curb effeminacy – “China bans ‘sissy men’ from TV, demands masculine role models and orders broadcasters to stop promoting ‘vulgar internet stars’”, runs one headline – at precisely the time that the US, including the military, is embracing degeneracy like never before. Noor tells me, by contrast, that Moscow has banned pride marches for the next 100 years. She’s in no doubt that the West must find the will to reverse its growing degeneracy.
Noor’s view of the current state of Western politics is, as you might expect, far from positive. ‘Politics is totally performative – how do you say? – astroturfed!’ (She laughs with abandon whenever a word comes to her, her mother tongue being French.) The endless squabbling of mainstream politicians is just a distraction from the real problems, which most politicians have no interest in solving. In fact, they have every interest in perpetuating them. Noor has a very keen nose for who is and isn’t a fake conservative, a uniquely besetting problem on this side of the chamber. The words ‘Ben Shapiro’ and ‘Dan Crenshaw’ elicit visible disgust from her, much to my amusement. Still, there are a few America First candidates, like Joe Kent, who are trying to take back the Republican Party, but it’s a tall order for sure.
For many, the answer to a broken political system, one whose institutions have been totally colonised by the enemy, is to withdraw from the wider pozzed world into based enclaves and intentional communities of like-minded individuals. It’s easy to see the appeal of this approach. Even so, neither of us believes it’s the right one. A few weeks before the interview, Noor and I talked at length about secessionism, and we both agree that this is the worst possible solution. The globalist game is divide and rule, and secessionism will only divide the United States and make it easier to rule. Look at the history of the smaller nations of Europe, say the former Habsburg nations after 1918, and tell me why an independent Florida or new Confederacy wouldn’t suffer the same fate. A real American civil war would almost certainly see the involvement, directly or indirectly, of other major powers like Russia and China, not to mention the UN. The answer, then? To fight for what is rightfully ours – all of it.
How? “We have to get involved locally”, something General Flynn, another of Noor’s heroes apart from Trump, has been a strong advocate of. Many of you will have seen the Twitter videos of parents bringing down righteous fury on school boards for their mask mandates or promotion of paedophilia, and this is precisely the kind of thing Noor means. Fight for your local communities and institutions, take them back from our enemies. One of the lesser-known facts of Biden’s “victory” is the way figures like George Soros and Mark Zuckerberg poured money into local institutions, including election officials, in order to capture them in advance of the 2020 election. Take care of the little things and the big things will look after themselves, or so the Bible has it.
So what’s to come? Noor is in no doubt that America is the lynchpin. “The future rests on the shoulders of America right now,” she says. “If America succeeds, the rest of the world has a chance.” It’s not just the fact that America remains, for now, the most powerful nation on earth that makes its fate the true test of whether or not global government will succeed. It’s what America represents and its unique arsenal of ideas and traditions, in particular the written Constitution, that make its people uniquely placed to resist. And the globalists know this as well as anybody else, which explains why so much of their effort, for decades but with increasing ferocity over the last five years, has been focused there.
By turns, Noor blends optimism and pessimism about the future. “I walk through the streets sometimes and think to myself, ‘My God, so many of these people don’t realise the war we’re in.’” But it’s clear enough to me that her attitude is ultimately one of hope for the future. When I suggest that the pandemic response has been a “great filter” event – an event that decides, quite literally, whether people are going to make it or not – and that most people have failed abjectly, she rebuffs me strongly. However many people have accepted events at face value and gone along with what the good doctor Anthony Fauci has told them, enough people are aware of the “war”, and of the stakes involved, that a globalist victory is anything but assured. Despite the reversals of the last year, what she calls the “Great Awakening”, which began five years ago with the election of Donald Trump, is still going strong. “People are fighting back” – look at the protests in France, the Netherlands and even Australia, which people have been far too quick to write off as totally lost, she says. The increasingly desperate measures taken by authorities, especially vaccine mandates, are a clear sign for Noor that things are not going as planned for the globalists.
And, for all the talk of irreligion, decadence and degeneracy over the past hour – however “far removed from God we are”, as she puts it – she trusts, nonetheless, that “we all have an innate sense of morality” and “people know that what is happening is wrong.”
“But whatever happens,” she adds, “God wins at the end of the day.” This seems like a good place for us to end our conversation.
There’s one last thing, though. Given the gravity of everything we’ve talked about – from Auschwitz to xenoestrogens – it feels almost frivolous to ask Noor the burning question, the question that prompted this interview in the first place. But since we’re wrapping up, I think “what the hell?” and ask it anyway.
So what is it based women really want?
“Oh that’s simple,” Noor replies, with a smile. “Based women want a man who’s even more based than they are.”
“And who might that be?”
“Mel Gibson wouldn’t be bad… Is he single?”