Special Report on the West Germanic Conflict: Part 2




In Part 1 we interviewed Markus Abernathy. Now we interview Penda II, leader of West Germania, to hear his take on events. Having read both parts of our special report, we hope our readers will be able to make up their own mind on the conflict.

Thanks for joining us, Penda. Let us begin the interview.

  1. Thanks for joining us, King Penda. First of all, why did West Germania submit to New Israel in the first place? What benefit did you see to joining New Israel?
    Back in the day, Emperor Markus II was leading a nation called Freedomia (and its descendant Freihetia is still one of New Israel’s imperial states). I was initially invited to participate in Freedomia’s government. At the time, there were two particular members who were trying to overthrow Markus and I wanted to support him. I feel he was treated very unfairly when there was a controversy over a vote which the opposition claimed to have won even though it was in a public forum. Markus and I were both devout Christians in what seemed, at the time, to be a largely atheistic or at least secularist micronational community. It seemed a good idea to merge our nations – Markus suggested a Christian empire.
  2. When did the situation start to deteriorate, and did you experience any aggression from New Israel before?
    The situation began to deteriorate in June, I think. One of the sources of inspiration for the West Germanic model is Puritan England. I passed a law (applying only to West Germania) which forbade church calendars, images of Christ and episcopalian church government. Markus disagreed with this and his response to it irritated me a little. I found it condescending.  Markus had a fixation especially with Jewish holidays and we had conversations where we spoke about the restoration of the Temple and future sacrifices which I found unsettling because I could see the national Israel philosophy might have a great impact on New Israel. Markus had already made it clear that the New Israeli Church and government should be closely linked and I was concerned certain beliefs would be imposed on West Germania and its Church. I wanted to put protections in place to prevent this from happening.
  3. What was the final straw for you, which made you think secession was the best way forward?
    The final straw for me was the ‘Decree on behalf of the Jews’ wherein Markus stated that ‘the Holy Empire of New Israel reaffirms its support for the State of Israel… and the Zionist movement…’ He proceeded to talk about the State of Israel’s ‘God-given’ boundaries and the ‘true Holy Land’. I consider national Israel (the theocracy of the Old Testament) to be abrogated now that God’s Israel is fulfilled in the Church. Moreover, considering recent events in Palestine and allegations against Israel, I was alarmed that this legislation would effectively condone military expansion of Israel by any means necessary to regain the territory laid out in Genesis. I could not in good conscience submit to the decree. And I was furious that, in the decree, it states that any subversion thereof is a subversion of the gospel and ‘high treason against the Lord Jesus Christ’. Markus had no place to say that. I felt utterly alienated.
  4. According to New Israel, who insist you are an anti-Semite, you once said that Judaism “is no derivative of the true Abrahamic faith, but rather a filthy and vain religion”. Did you really say this, and if so, should micronationalists hesitate before supporting you in the conflict as a result?
    I did indeed say that about Judaism. My remark should be seen from a Christian perspective, however. For Christians, salvation in Christ alone is absolute truth. I used the word ‘vain’ for its futility, because without faith in Christ, the practice of religion earns no favour with God. I used the word ‘filthy’ because of the Jewish religion’s dishonourable presumption on God’s mercy despite rejecting its own Messiah. The comment was made in a fully Christian context and I stand by it. If people will hesitate because of this, then that is up to them. But everyone is entitled to have an opinion. People disagree on many things and I respect many people, even those whose views I dislike. I definitely would not say that I am anti-Semitic, since that suggests my criticism is racial. I criticise Judaism, the religion, and not the Jewish people. I would use exactly the same words to criticise Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism or any other non-Christian, non-trinitarian faith. This does not mean I hate or persecute the people who believe in them.
  5. New Israel has finally issued a long awaited declaration of war. What is your response to this declaration, and to the support offered to you by the micronational community?
    My response to the declaration is to carry on as usual. Realistically, Markus has no control over West Germania and can do nothing other than to issue propaganda. I have no desire to take over the New Israeli throne. I am very grateful for the support of the community because I want West Germania to be recognised as an independent nation. I have not called upon anyone to fight a war on my behalf and my advice to those who have not signed the Treaty of York would be not to get involved.
  6. Do you see any solution to the conflict? Or could the conflict have been avoided in the first place through peaceful negotiation?
    I can only see two solutions. The first is that Markus recognises West Germania in which case I would gladly forget the whole conflict and hopefully become an ally of New Israel. The second is that Markus continues to oppose West Germania in which case I will have no choice but to ignore him completely. In the first place, I wanted West Germania to secede peacefully and my preference is still for peaceful negotiation.


  7. What do you think of Markus Abernathy personally, and what do you make of his views, which can sometimes prove to be controversial?
    Personally, I have great respect and admiration for Markus. We both believe that the Holy Bible is inerrant and we know that the Bible can be an offensive and controversial book. As such, I share most of Markus’ controversial opinions and that has at times resulted in tense relations with the rest of the community. Markus, though his heart is in the right place, hasn’t always expressed his opinions elegantly and since I’ve been the mouthpiece for New Israel, I feel that a friendlier image has been presented. Bearing in mind I have only been a Christian myself since the age of 19 and my world views have changed a fair amount, so I can easily relate to others; therefore, I get along well with most people regardless of the opinions they have or the religion they practise. Nevertheless, I am not afraid to speak my mind when I am called upon to do so.
  8. What are your plans for the future in an independent West Germania? Do you think you could ever rejoin New Israel?
    My plans for West Germania haven’t changed greatly. It was established in June 2010 and has always continued to exist under various unions. I am already progressing with the re-establishment of the Saxon Empire (which existed before West Germania acceded to New Israel). The Saxon Empire is to be governed as a confederation of autonomous and equal constituent countries, where all leaders will have a voice and all governments will reserve their powers. It is my wish for West Germania and the greater Saxon Empire to maintain good relations with the community as well as to be more active both politically and culturally. Because of my loyalty to Prussia, a Saxon nation, and the possible accession of a new country to the Saxon Empire, it is unlikely we would rejoin New Israel. I certainly would not take this action without the unanimous approval of all Saxon countries (including any observer states). I would also be concerned, after remarks Markus made about giving me too much power, that a future New Israel would leave me with no voice at all. However, I do hope that West Germania and New Israel can be close allies at some point in the near future.
  9. Finally, what would you to say to Markus II, if he was reading this?
     I hope Markus reads what I’ve said about him in this interview. I reminisce about our friendship and they are much better times than what we have now. We had some great edifying discussions. I still like to think we could be friends again some day. I wronged him by letting my concerns build up inside until the secession happened very suddenly. I was frightened of rocking the boat, so I did not confront him with minor issues, and distrust grew. I believe Markus has made some false charges against me, but I really don’t care about that. I myself have openly criticised some of his behaviour. As things stand, politically, he is an ‘enemy’. But in spite of all the rhetoric, I do not dislike Markus. I have always stood up for him and would do so again.

A truly interesting and surprising interview. Our thanks to King Penda for his time in taking part in the interview. Now it is your turn. We want to hear you opinions of the conflict, now that we have heard both arguments and viewpoints from each end of the conflict. At the time of publication, there was no thaw in the conflict, and no deal had been reached. In fact, no progress of any sort has been made in the conflict so far. So the question we put to our readers now is: What is the best solution to the conflict now, and can it ever be won by anyone?

Comment below, and stay tuned for future stories from Béal na Tíre. 


Special Report: New Israel and the West Germanic Conflict


BREAKING NEWS – Béal na Tíre’s request for an exclusive interview with Markus II of New Israel has been accepted. In this Special Report, Béal na Tíre reports on the New Israeli view on the conflict between them and West Germania, a take on events not previously covered by the micronational media.

Above is New Israeli propaganda provided to us directly by Markus II. He hoped it would provide the micronational community with a greater understanding of the conflict.

But now we turn to him, and ask him the questions all of us in the micronational community want answers for.

Markus, thanks for joining us today. From what I can interpret, this conflict really dates back to around 2012, when you ruled Freedomia. You were put on trial in absentia on 11 December 2012 by the Wurtige Empire. What is your take on the events leading up to the trial, and your opinion of the trial itself?

You are correct in that interpretation, sir. I will say that the trial in absentia on the 11 December 2012 was by no means a fair and just trial, and was totally dominated by my opposition. There was no legitimate defense. I was unable to attend the trial in the first place (and I have made this clear to Mr. Cunningham and others in the Wurtige Empire) because I was at school. The trial was conveniently scheduled during a work week during working hours. Though I understand the time-zone difference ‘across the pond’, accomodations should have been made.The trial itself was part of the practical coup where Arthur Lobao took control of the Confederate States of Prosperity. I was relentless in attacking Mr. Lobao when I saw what he was up to. Playing the victim game, just as Penda is doing now, he managed to win the hearts of the people, leaving me defenseless. This trial officially excluded me from the affairs of the Wurtige Empire, where I was planning on representing Knoll Island, starting an opposition party lobbying for Knollish independence.

2 Was there any conflict after the trial, before this week’s events? Was there build up to this conflict in the past few weeks, and could you have forseen West Germania’s secession?

After the trial I was quite frustrated with Thomas I, who was, I believe, King of Knoll Island at the time. He allowed this to happen and permitted the Wurtige imperial courts to interfere with a local matter. As for this conflict, we should remember that the trial of the 11 December and the conflict with King Penda of Saxony are two separate events. In Mr. Cunningham’s mind, these are apparently significant and tie in together.

To answer your question in completion, I admit I have been suspicious of Penda for the last month or so, as soon as he began diverting from honest Biblical theology. Five days ago when I first read Penda’s anti-Semite decree, where he called Judaism ‘filthy and vain’, I knew I would have to step in. That’s why I issued an imperial decree in defense of the Jewish people, Israel, and Zionism. Penda responded with hostility — and secession.

3 You issued a controversial decree declaring support for Israel in the conflict with Gaza. Why do you side with Israel, despite their indiscriminate destruction of residential areas, and the killing of hundreds of innocent Palestinians?

I thought this was going to be an objective interview, sir, but it appears to have an anti-Zionist slant. I will say that we live in a sin-cursed world, so death is going to happen no matter what. As is war. Death and war are not good things, but in some cases they are not particular bad either. God promised the Jewish people a land of their own. The Islamic people have 22 some states of their own, dominating a good 97% of the land of the Middle East. I believe the Jewish people should be allowed to have their own state.

We should remember that at the establishment of the state of Israel, their Arabic, Muslim majority nations proceeded to attack them. Israel, with, I believe, the help of God, warded off all of these invasions. As for the deaths of innocent Palestinians — I would rather call them suicidal Palestinians. Israel, unless I am wrong, always issues some sort of warning before they attack a residential area. In the most recent assault on the Gaza strip, Israel was careful to drop hundreds of leaflets informing the Palestinian people, in their own language, that they would soon be attacked and ought to evacuate in the interest of their own safety. According to my own knowledge and what I have heard, the Islamofascist Hamas terrorists told the people to ignore the warnings.

4 As a result of this decree, West Germania seceded from New Israel in protest of your views on the Israel-Gaza conflict. Why did you declare war on West Germania? Why wasn’t a peaceful diplomatic solution found to the conflict before any violence broke out?

That is false information. No declaration of war was issued against West Germania, though we do have a declaration of war on standby in case attacks like these continue.

As for peaceable solution: I did consult both a high-ranking official in the Grand Unified Micronational, as well as another official within the Ashukov empire. Both of them led me on that they would help us find a peace solution in New Israel’s interest. We talked for a good three hours. The next day, both gentlemen told me that they would be ‘distancing themselves from this’. I wasted my time attempting to negotiate peace, and would argue that the two men I consulted with are limp-wristed sissies with absolutely no interest in diplomatic progress.

5 Of course, what would have been a purely domestic issue has sparked debate across the micronational war. You are probably aware of the Treaty of York, and who its signatories are. What do you say to those states willing to go to war against New Israel? Will you declare war on Kleinebayern and Wurtige as well?

Under normal circumstances, for instance, if New Israel was ruled by a different leader, the micronational community would react differently. It is because of the MicroWiki communal hatred towards both me and my Biblical beliefs that has led to the supposed ‘outrage’. We should remember that Penda was once hated by the ‘community’ almost as much as I was. However, as soon as Penda jumped ship, he was embraced and merely used as a target in the non-ceasing war to bring down New Israel and stop the spread of the gospel in America.

I should remind you again that New Israel never issued a declaration of war. There is absolutely no declaration of any kind. Once again, all we have is a declaration of war on standby which we can issue should it ever be necessary.

As for the Treaty of York: I am aware of it. I have a copy of the disgraceful treaty saved on my personal computer for reference. Since New Israel never issued a declaration of war, the true aggressors are Penda, Cunningham, and the other signers of this treaty. They are the ones at fault for starting this conflict. Really, the bulk of fault rests with Penda and his vehement hatred for the Jewish religion, and, I would argue, Jewish people.

6 The vast majority of the micronational community opposes your move to declare war on West Germania. Even those who state their neutrality in the conflict often sympathise with West Germania, while those who withdraw their declarations of war have called on you to find a peaceful solution. In the face of such mounting pressure and unpopularity, is it really wise to continue on a war footing?

Again, sir, there was no declaration of war on West Germania. Since New Israel has been declared war upon, we recognize the war. If necessary, we will issue a declaration of our own. Once again, we have a declaration on standby.

You should be asking this question to West Germania and her new-found friends, considering they started the war, not me.

7 Do you think you can win the war, and reinstate West Germania as a constituent of New Israel?

I have issued a request to Prince Justin I of Prussia, an imperial state of New Israel, and have asked him to take the throne of West Germania. We will not West Germanic independence because it is rooted in hatred of the Jewish religion and the Jewish state. New Israel, though being primarily Christian, is adamant in its support of the oppressed Jewish people. We hope to bring the gospel of Jesus Christ to all, both Jew and Gentile (Romans 1:16). Our main hope is that Penda will stop with his tirades and baseless theology and turn back to the true gospel.

8. But this isn’t the first time New Israel has declared war on a micronation. What about April 1, 2013, when you declared war on Oasis Islands over their leader being gay? Back in July 2013 the micronational community criticised New Israel for different reasons, for your views on homosexuality. Could you tell us what are your views on homosexuality and gay marriage, and explain to us the events of the conflict between you and the Oasis Islands?

False information. New Israel declared war on Oasis Islands because Oasis Islands and its former leaders, Titus Smith and Casey Hamlin, were agitating New Israel constantly, in an alliance with Yurt Kyong-yon of Yurtyzstan and Jacque Miles of Rocklund. Once these men heard back in February 2013 that Freedomia was becoming more Christian, and turning to Christ and the Bible for leadership, they became more and more hostile. Our declaration of war, which is still in effect, is an assertion of our sovereignty and our refusal to make concessions to these anti-Christian terrorists.

My views on homosexuality are quite clear. Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God. Some professing Christians claim that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable because Jesus never specifically talked about it in the New Testament, which is false (Matthew 19:4). Furthermore, God does not change his mind or change at all — what he says is set in stone. God’s law expressively prohibits homosexuality, and that doesn’t change because of the New Covenant. What does change is how God responds to homosexuality. He sent his son, Jesus Christ, to die on the cross for the sins of all mankind. Any homosexual may and must repent of his sins, turn to Christ, and so recieve the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9). So homosexuality is a sin. The Apostle John puts it well in Revelation 22:12-15 – Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

9. Between the New Israel-Oasis Islands conflict, and now the West Germania-New Israeli war, I feel as though I am seeing a trend. Is it true to say that you think that declaring war on a nation is a much better way of solving a diplomatic issue rather than true peaceful negotiations? Will you solve future diplomatic problems New Israel may face by simply by declaring war on any entity that disagrees with you?

Firstly, unless Titus or Casey put you on to this, I don’t see how there is any correlation between the New Israel-Oasis conflict and the West Germania-New Israeli war. I should remind you yet again that there was no declaration of war issued by New Israel to West Germania. In this age of information it is remarkable how ignorant and misinformed some people can be. I should remind you yet again that we did pursue diplomacy and attempted to appoint two ambassadors, but they jumped boat at the last minute, wasting three hours of my time.

10 With a history of conflict and your popularity in the micronational sphere at yet another all time low, do you feel you can leave the past behind, move on from these wars and lead a successful, professional and popular micronation into the future? What are your strategies for doing so?

Just as Israel is dealing with Islamofascist enemies on all sides, New Israel will continue to deal with the micronational enemies that we face on all sides. We believe we are in the right. We have adopted as an unofficial motto that we are ‘standing on the truth of God’s word and the gospel’. As for war, see Ecclesiastes 3:8. As for popularity, see Matthew 5:5. As for this interview, thank you for your time and God bless you and all nations and peoples everywhere. ​

Thank you for your time in taking part in this interview.
And now we have heard the New Israeli side of the war. No declaration of war was in fact issued by New Israel, according to them. Claiming the contrary is the pro-West Germanic side, as this quote from the Burnham Micropress Report on the war states:
“Abernathy refused the West Germanic people their wish for independence, and declared war on them for unconstitutional treachery instead.”
All we can conclude from this is that this conflict is getting messy already, as we don’t even know if war was declared in the first place by New Israel. It is unclear if anyone will win this war, or if we can even call it a war.
In Part 2 of our special report on this conflict, we will interview King Penda of West Germania, to hear his side of the conflict. Part 2 will be available within the next few days. This special report is sure to ignite debate, so why not comment below with your opinions on this interview and on the conflict as a whole.


Interview with the Chair of the GUM



An Caochóg, 17ú Aibreán – Béal na Tíre was invited to interview Bradley of Dullahan, the new Chair of the Grand Unified Micronational. The Chairperson spoke to us about his plans for the GUM, and how he sees the GUM as “a beacon of professionalism” which “binds communities”.

1. The GUM has experienced a great deal more activity as of late than it has in the past. What has caused this, and how has this benefited the GUM?

Although its less than under my predecessors term it is indeed an improvement, albeit a moderate one. This is not because of more meaning for the GUM but because the nations had more to choose, something exiting was happening, this in the form of the Charter, which replaced the Constitution

2. It’s now your third time as Chair of the GUM. What will be different about this term?

Yes, funny you ask me this. It is technically my third term. I have never served one full term though. The first term is a bit controversial, some claim I was unprepared and didn’t know enough of the complex rules, though I was credited for cultural growth.

My second term was the shortest reign of all GUM Chairs, I as Acting-Chairman replaced Chairman Mar, though within the hour I had resigned as well. Mr. Mar and I were involved in a scheme to remove two micronations from the GUM who in our eyes were disturbing the peace.

My third term should be an interesting one. I want to bring new life in the GUM, I want to bring it back to the international stage and show our members that we can be a meaningful organisation on the subjects of culture and politics. And of course I want to sit this term out.

3. Why have you set up the GUM Staff, and how will this benefit the GUM and the micronations who take part in the organisation?

The GUM Staff is basically a cabinet of ministers. I want to show people that if an organisation wishes to be active but also have a working executive roles then you need to bring them together. The Staffroom and the Staff meetings are a tool to make sure that the Staff works together and acts in the best interests for the  Quorum. It will take some time but it will work. The Chairman cant bear all the weight, its a team effort.

4. What projects have you planned for the GUM?

I have much in store for the GUM. An example is the currently running project; we are talking to both admin teams of the two MicroWiki communities. We act as mediators to make sure that both of them can come together and share information. This way we hope to close the gab between the two communities. A second project that is running is the GUM Peacekeeper award, we want this award to be awarded to those who aid in making the Wikia a better, more professional and peaceful place. We all must take up our responsibilities to teach the newbies, so to speak, in our ways, rules and customs, this award is to stimulate that behaviour.

But, I have more in store for the GUM, I want to create the GUM Institute or GUM International University where member states their own national universities can join and reach a bigger audience through the GUM. This will not only increase cultural development and nation development but also bring people together to learn, share and cooperate. Next to this I want the GUM more involved in International affairs, if there is a crises the GUM will offer to mediate.

5. The Charter has replaced the Constitution as the GUM’s main legal document. What is so important about this change, and why was it necessary to change it in the first place?

The Charter has its flaws and is far from perfect. But Ciprian must be given one credit: Its easier than the Constitution. The Constitution had a lot of useless rules and was endlessly complex. Replacing it meant a new start for this old organisation, a fresh start, if you will. No more dull conventions, no more rule of the elite or the old.

6. How do you plan to improve an organisation that in the past has suffered from a rather stained image?

I think that through our projects we can show that this organisation still has a lot of good in it and a purpose that helps and benefits the community.

7. What is your vision for the GUM?

My vision for the GUM is a GUM that is active in the community, that mediates where needed, which binds communities and teaches old and new how to get along with each other but above all a beacon of proffessionalism

Thank you for your time in taking part in this interview!

You’re welcome.

Interview with Sigmund Schmidt


Sigmund Schmidt is the Governor of the Ashukov Federal Territory of Carpathia, located in Romania. He has kindly allowed Béal na Tíre interview him. This is the first interview Béal na Tíre has ever conducted.

1. What inspired you to become a micronationalist?

An article on Wikipedia about micronationalism. I found the concept very interesting.

2. Tell us a bit about your early micronational career.

It was like the life of an ordinary human,I had no contact with micronationalists, and I was preparing for the Romanian Geography Olympiad. Then I discovered the MicroWikia community in May 2013. It was quite strange,I met new people and my micronational career took an interesting turn. This also helped me with my English skills.

3. You founded the Federal Kingdom of the South-Eastern Carpathians, but months later you joined the Ashukov Federation? Why did you decide to join Ashukovo?

Because I thought it would help Carpathia develop more and more. Within Ashukovo, I thought Carpathia would become a nation among the most influential and serious in the community.

4. And has this been true for Carpathia? Has your time in Ashukovo helped you become more influential and serious?

Yes,certainly. As we became a federal territory recently, we are working for reforming Carpathia as a state of the Ashukov Federation, through attracting more citizens.

5. Has Carpathia’s downgrade to a Federal Territory been a blow to you and your country? How has it affected Carpathia?

It has been a blow for me as the founder of the nation,but I do hope Carpathia is not too affected by it. Having very few citizens, Carpathia is a tiny nation.

6. What is your impression of the micronational community?

It is a large and welcoming community, comprising members of many different groups. Many people having ADHD,autism,and/or are part of other groups are micronationalists,which is very good for us. However,the general Romanian public is not aware of and frowns upon micronationalists.

7. What are your plans for the future of Carpathia?

Carpathia’s development through Ashukovo, and Ashukovo’s recognition by other governments.

Any closing comments?

I would just like to wish all micronationalists a good career!

Thank you.

Béal na Tíre would like to thank Sigmund Schmidt for his time in taking part in this interview.