Conservative elites and their feckless Republican Party allies—primarily Jewish—are pushing back on normal Americans for aggressively opposing further encroachment of homosexual and transgender propaganda in the cultural and educational spheres. Much of this opposition has manifested in ordinary people labeling those in favor of homosexual and transgender indoctrination in schools and in children’s films as “groomers.”
Parents groups have caused major disruptions to the system’s pro-gay efforts, confronting school boards and putting teachers on the defensive for trying to preach the LGBTQ agenda. Last week large protests were staged outside the offices of the Walt Disney Corporation in Burbank, California.
BREAKING: Protesters gather in front of the Disney HQ in Burbank CA chanting “BOYCOTT DISNEY!” pic.twitter.com/hKVp2ufGBQ
Initially it was gay advocates in the media who complained about the use of the groomer label, but increasingly voices on the right are cautioning concerned parents and citizens against using the effective attack.
Jewish neocon and infamous warmonger Bill Kristol complained on Twitter that those using the label and opposing the gay agenda are “embracing and …toying with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”
I watch the grotesque (and evidence-free) accusations of “grooming,” “pro-pedophilia,” etc., and feel I’m in another era, with some politicians embracing and others toying with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and the media judiciously reporting both sides of the “debate.”
Another Jewish neocon, David Harsanyi, penned an editorial in The National Review chastising normal Americans for “Turning it to eleven” on the issue. Harsanyi would prefer the socially conservative base of Republican voters follow the lead of GOP politicians and give in on every issue.
The conservative establishment has long sought to integrate the agenda of Big Gay into Republican politics. In 2012, Jewish Republican donor Paul Singer founded a pro-gay super-PAC to push the GOP into supporting so-called “gay marriage.” Singer was joined in his effort by other super-rich Jewish hedge fund managers Dan Loeb, Steve Cohen, Seth Klarman, David Tepper, Ken Melman and Cliff Asness.
The recent groomer controversy comes in the wake of Republican Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signing the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law, which restricts teachers from discussing sexuality outside of the assigned class curriculum for kids below 4th grade, and requires schools to inform parents if a child starts saying they are gay or trans. Even this rather milquetoast and ineffectual law has generated outrage from Disney, which operates its premier amusement park in Orlando, Florida and has many offices and employees in the state.
A leaked online meeting of Disney executives revealed just how far down the gay rabbit hole the ultra-liberal company has gone. Black Disney producer Latoya Raveneau bragged about inserting gay propaganda into children’s films at every opportunity with no pushback from management, and Disney executive Karey Burke, who claimed to be a mother of transgender and “pansexual” children, said she wants all future Disney characters to be LGBTQIA or racial minorities. According to Jewish gender ideology, a pansexual is a person who is willing to have sex with transgender people.
Gay and Liberal teachers have taken to social media to cry about how they are so oppressed and devastated under the parental rights law because they are not allowed to discuss their sexual practices or things they did with their gay partners over the weekend with children as young as 4-years-old.
Florida’s law, while the focus of gay rage, only provides protection for children until roughly age 10, at which point presumably teachers are free to groom children with the blessing of Republicans.
The weakness of the Republican party’s actions aren’t limited to the Sunshine State. In fact the GOP has a storied history of failing to protect school students.
Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah in March vetoed a bill that would have barred young transgender athletes from participating in girls’ sports, becoming the second Republican governor in two days to reject such legislation.
Gov. Eric Holcomb of Indiana, a Republican, vetoed a similar bill, saying it would likely have been challenged in court and would not have solved any pressing issue.
In April 2021, Republican North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum vetoed a bill that would have banned transgender K–12 students from playing on school-sponsored teams with normal students.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem killed legislation in March 2021 that would have banned transgender athletes from girls’ and women’s sports, refusing to sign the bill after it was returned to her unchanged despite her request for revisions. Her action came five years after the previous Republican governor of South Dakota, Dennis Daugaard, vetoed a similar measure.
Even on something as relatively inconsequential as women’s sports, Republicans would rather cater to the sensibilities of groomers and shift the discussion to non-starters like school choice or privatization.
The fact is, people who want to discuss their perversions and sex lives with children are, in reality, groomers. Their self-admitted purpose is to make children see LGBTQ as morally superior to those who supposedly oppress them—normal people—and therefore make them more likely to embrace LGBTQ. Children who “come out” are lauded and rewarded as brave and special.
This is why there has been an explosion of self-professed homosexuality and other unnatural perversions among generation Z.
The National Justice Party supports protecting students from K-12 from any discussion of homosexuality, transgenderism or any other kind of “kink” or deviant sexual practice in schools or on film. The LGBTQ agenda shouldn’t be taught in school or appear in children’s movies and TV shows at all.
The people who attempt to indoctrinate children with gay propaganda or normalize perverse sexual practices with grade school kids should be arrested and imprisoned on felony charges for the sexual corruption of minors.
The conservative elite and policy makers in the Republican party must stop bowing to the wishes of Jewish donors and homosexual advocates like Paul Singer and his cabal of pro-gay hedge fund managers.
The National Justice Party stands for the protection of children from sexual predators, without apology, reservation or qualification.
Points 20 and 23 in our party platform state:
20. We will restore reason, logic and tradition to the education system by implementing a comprehensive classical curriculum. Homosexual, neoliberal, and transgender propaganda will be explicitly banned from being taught to children.
23. We support strong families. Married women will be paid by the state to care for their children. No fault divorce will be repealed, and homosexual marriage will be banned.
The National Justice Party is a political organization headquartered in Pennsylvania, and is the only party that explicitly represents the interests of ordinary White Americans. The NJP advocates for White civil rights, the working and middle class and traditional families. Read our platform to find out more about our issues.
This is the biggest news story on the planet. Mainstream Media football show hosts openly talking about adverse reactions sweeping the world after #OllieWines was hospitalised with an irregular heartbeat. pic.twitter.com/9azM3eFTz1
Port Adelaide AFL footballer Ollie Wines was subbed out of Thursday night’s match against Melbourne at the Adelaide Oval with what was initially referred to as “nausea”. The next day it was revealed he was in hospital due to an irregular heartbeat and myocarditis.
In Round 1, Footscray’s Haden Crozier was subbed out after fainting at half time. Covid vaccination is mandatory for Australian footballers. Carlton’s Liam Jones retired late last year to avoid taking the dangerous, untested vaccines.
On yesterday’s Sunday Footy Show the pressure finally became too much, with journalists and former footballers openly acknowledging the link between the Covid “vaccines” and heart issues, ie myocarditis and heart attacks, as well as Bell’s Palsy:
“Watch this space at this stage, nothing coming out of the Port Adelaide team this morning,” Barrett said.
“His subbing out of the game on Thursday night for nausea slash heart reasons, he spent time in hospital — it’s just a big unknown as to when he will play again. It may be as soon as this week but nothing coming out of the club at this stage.”
That prompted Brown to ask, “Is there a lot of this going on in world sport at the moment, Damo? A lot of athletes have got these issues?”
Are you referring to the booster shots and the contracting of Covid?” Barrett said.
Brown replied, “I was referring to the booster shots, that’s obviously the word going around.”
“Look, it’s being discussed,” Barrett said.
“I haven’t been able to get an official line on that from anyone attached to Ollie Wines at this stage, but yeah, the question is being asked and put to me and others, including yourself, by a lot of people, about the possibility of that.”
Jones chimed in that “it’s not just the heart issues”, pointing out that Lloyd had been diagnosed with Bell’s palsy — facial paralysis — earlier this year…
“Without delving into your private affairs, you’ve got Bell’s palsy at the moment, which hopefully you’re on the back end of that, but there’s a bit of that going around as well,” Jones said.
“Exactly, heart issues and Bell’s palsy has gone through the roof since the boosters and Covid issues,” Lloyd said.
“We had (sports journalist) Michelangelo Rucci on (3AW) on Friday night and he said that there‘s a ward filled with people with similar symptoms to Ollie Wines – nausea, heart issues – so there has to be something more to it.”
Jones then stressed that “we’re not anti-vaxxers”.
“We’ve all done our due diligence with our booster shots and all that sort of stuff, but there is going to have to be some study done on this, not just in a sporting sphere but like a community,” he said.
(UPDATE 12/4/21: Ollie Wines has controversially denied that his myocarditis is related to the Covid vaccine.)
AFL is the biggest sporting code in Australia, and Wines was last year’s Brownlow Medalist, the equivalent of an MVP. Australian footballers are well payed and have put up with a lot of woke humiliation to keep their well-paying jobs.
Being cursed with heart ailments at a young age which could significantly shorten their lifespans may finally break the dam. The truth has finally been allowed to be told on mainstream Australian television.
Keep in mind that this would have had to go through producers, lawyers and the higher ups. Nothing gets said on the mainstream Lying Press that has not been pre-approved. This means is they are receiving more pressure from footballers, their families, their managers and their lawyers than from the very powerful people, corporations and institutions that determines the Narrative.
This is about to blow up, big time. As XYZ News has reported for over a year, a pandemic of adverse reactions has swept the globe since the introduction of dangerous and untested Covid “vaccines”. The carnage on sporting fields is the most visible precisely because it is televised, but it is the tip of the iceberg
The devastation the vaccines have wrought globally is out of all proportion to anything we have ever seen. We’re talking hundreds of thousands of deaths already, with millions more to come. Until now they have not been acknowledged because they’re simply not reported, not by the doctors, the Lying Press nor the authorities.
All of this could be about to be blown out of the water thanks to a little weekend sports program at the bottom of the world.
One last thing. I noted in my report on Friday that the body language of the players after the match told me that they know what was going on, and they’re worried that any of them could be next.
This was confirmed by Damien Barrett:
“I haven’t been able to get an official line on that from anyone attached to Ollie Wines at this stage, but yeah, the question is being asked and put to me and others, including yourself, by a lot of people, about the possibility of that.”
Very soon, Australian footballers may refuse to play. It could spread across the competition, across the world, then from sporting royalty to the proles. If that happens, all bets are off.
Originally published at Upon Hope on 22 October, 2014. You can find Mark’s Subscribestar here.
When you look at the news or hear someone on the broad Left talking and you think to yourself “don’t they know how destructive that is?” the answer is sometimes, yes, they know and they want destruction. Within us there is a part that likes destruction, particularly if we get to do the destroying.
Sometimes, not always, but sometimes we get to see that expressed not as a physical act but as a political idea. Not an ideal, even a wrong ideal has a lofty goal, but an idea can be either good or bad, low or high. This idea can seem to be a positive and that is often how it is portrayed, but at heart its goal is to destroy. I’ll give you an example.
A few months ago someone I know put up a post on Facebook supporting homosexual marriage. I replied that I was opposed to it. The usual things came back, people should be free to love whoever they want, it’s cruel to stop two people who love each other from marrying, etc. etc. What was interesting was that they didn’t have any real arguments to my points, they simply restated their original points. I’m sure you’ve noticed this as well that they have slogans not arguments. But then a women who I have never met popped up and joined in, against me. That’s okay I’m a big boy, I can handle it. She tried the female tactic of attacking me and then trying to imply it’s all in jest. I wasn’t that interested in her, but instead concentrated on the other person, I mean I know them and I also know why they think as they do on this issue. They think they are being nice to people, having empathy for people. I pointed out the long term consequences of supporting homosexual marriage. You are not just supporting one new form of marriage, but by default all new forms of marriage because the arguments for legalizing homosexual marriage are exactly the same as those that allow you to marry your brother, a spider or a chair. It’s not the advancement of marriage, it’s the road to the death of marriage. I said “you think this is a small reform, but it’s not”. The other women then said “I know!”.
Ummm now thats interesting, she knows that she supports the end of marriage. She knows that she is destroying something precious and that is the appeal. Destroying something is the aim of a significant minority on the broad Left. They are an important part of the Left as they allow two things to occur. Firstly they are the ones who put up the wacky ideas and then they look around to see who saluted. And if the idea gets rejected, well it’s not the mainstream who supports this wacky idea, it’s others further along. Secondly they are the ones who are violent. When things need to be smashed, whether they be ideas, windows or faces, then they are ready to do violence. Sometimes all they need to do is threaten violence.
The thrill of destruction is not unique to the Left, it is shared by all people. What is different about the Left however is that whatever thought comes into their head they believe to be an ideal, when often it is nothing more than the thrill of destruction.
George Orwell is probably best known for two of his novels in particular: that published in 1949, Nineteen Eighty Four, based on what he imagined as a future nightmarish totalitarian dystopia; and AnimalFarm (1945), the thinly disguised ridicule of Stalin’s Soviet Union. Both novels said something of Orwell’s own experiences and his subsequent disillusionment with the political Left-wing. These writings also articulated his fears as he looked forward to the post-World War II years and the second half of the twentieth century.
In addition, Orwell wrote numerous short pieces, many characterised by their political and cultural insights. One of the most well-known is his England Your England (1941) which revealed his own seemingly contradictory views that attempted to hold together his socialist convictions on the one hand, and his clear English patriotism on the other. The essay is also interesting in the way in which it brought these themes together with a profound critique of the English Left-wing intelligentsia of his time, the latter being a subject Orwell regularly touched upon elsewhere in his writings. While Orwell could subscribe to many of the socialist views of the intelligentsia, he was scornful of both its lack of patriotic convictions and contempt for the working class it purported to support. England Your England, then, is worth reflecting on – and there are other of his essays too – in which he seemingly also speaks to us on such matters in these uncertain times we live in.
First, consider Orwell’s patriotism. In this respect he is at pains to separate patriotism from the more aggressive and expansive forms of nationalism obsessed with the acquisition of power. It was his loathing of the authoritarian manifestation of Franco’s nationalism in Spain of the 1930s that drew him to fight for the Republican forces and join Leftist elements – Stalinists, Trotskyist, socialist, anarchists among them – a short lived coalition that crumbled under internal rivalries as the country’s civil war unravelled.
Grim reality of life for the English working class.
Definitions
Orwell’s definition of nationalism which he viewed as a malignant force, espoused most cogently in his Notes on Nationalism (1945), is somewhat muddled, confused, and so broad that contemporary political scientists would probably challenge its main criteria. Whether his definition is workable or not, Orwell distinguished aggressive nationalism from patriotism. Patriotism was, for Orwell, about love of country and he loved his country, England, despite its profound class divisions and the acute social inequalities that he observed. Thus, he cared desperately about the English working class as noted in another of his famous works, The Road to Wigan Pier, detailing the appalling conditions – the mass unemployment, poverty and slums – under which that class toiled and lived. But Orwell noted that, despite their social environment, it was a class which was inclined towards patriotic loyalties which, in reality, turned out to be a more constructive and authentic form of nationalism.
Orwell further defined patriotism in his Notes on Nationalism:
“By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force upon other people.”
In England Your England Orwell outlines the significant and impact of patriotism, claiming that it was no trivial matter. It is worth quoting what he had to say at length:
“One cannot see the modern world as it is unless one recognizes the overwhelming strength of patriotism, national loyalty. In certain circumstances it can break down, at certain levels of civilization it does not exist, but as a positive (emphasis original) there is nothing to set beside it. Christianity and international Socialism are as weak as straw in comparison with it. Also, one must admit that the divisions between nation are founded on real differences of outlook. Till recently it was thought proper to pretend that all human beings are very much alike, but in fact anyone able to use his eyes knows that the average of human behaviour differs enormously from country to country. Things that could happen in one country could not happen in another.”
The essential elements of patriotism and its enduring appeal and the virtues of an organic national and cultural loyalty, Orwell insisted, was a fact that the Left-wing intelligentsia failed to recognise. This was a tendency, he suggested, particularly evident among the English intellectuals with their engrained hatred for country, King, and empire. In England Your EnglandOrwell observed that:
“The mentality of the English Left-Wing intelligentsia can be studied in half a dozen weekly and monthly papers. The immediate striking thing about all these papers is their generally negative, querulous attitude, their complete lack at all times of any constructive suggestion. There is little in them except the irresponsible carping of people who have never been and never expect to be in position of power. Another marked characteristic is the emotional shallowness of people who live in a world of ideas and have little contact with physical reality. And underlying this is the really important fact about so many of the English intelligentsia – their severance from the common culture of the country.”
Orwell continues:
“In intention, at any rate, the English intelligentsia are Europeanized…. In the general patriotism of the country they form a sort of island of dissident thought. England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality.”
In a further essay, James Burnham and the Managerial Revolution (1940), Orwell noted that the English intelligentsia, at the height of the Second World War when prospects looked bleak for Britain, were far more defeatist than the mass of the population. He thus saw the intelligentsia as “chipping away” at English morale and morality, stating that “Within the intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain is more or less compulsory.” In his time Orwell sensed the decay of the British empire partly due a stagnating military middle class, adding “.… but the spread of a shallow Leftism hastened the process.” Moreover, he insisted at the same time that the attitude of the Left-wing intelligentsia towards the Stalin’s totalitarian Soviet Union was one of “genuinely progressive impulses mixed up with admiration and cruelty”. This was accompanied by what Orwell discerned as widespread anti-Semitism among the ranks of the intellectuals.
Bourgeois elitists
This Left-wing intelligentsia, needless to say, were not drawn from the English working class they claimed to support. Orwell referred to such people in various places in his writings as the “Bloomsbury highbrow” and “the pansy-life circles”. In short, they were little more than well-healed bourgeois elitists. He also spoke of the ingrained Anglophobia of Left-wing parties insisting that, in turn, themselves often reflected the hypocrisy of the Left intellectuals. As he writes in his essay Rudyard Kipling (1941):
“All Left-wing parties in the highly industrialized countries are at bottom a sham, because they make it their business to fight against something which they do not really wish to destroy. They have internationalist aims, and at the same time they struggle to keep up a standard of life which those aims are incompatible.”
What would Orwell have made of his subject matter in the political atmosphere of today: patriotism, the working class, the leftie intelligentsia? Some matters he spoke of have changed but not others. He would no doubt have noted that segments of the English (indeed British) working class and the Labour Party that historically support it are increasingly going their own different ways. One development is that many in the working class are more affluent or at least feel affluent and as a result have increasingly voted Tory since the Thatcher years. To this, more recently, there is the matter of Labour’s resistance to Brexit, so that in the 2019 general election many traditional Labour seats, including poorer sections of the working class, fell to the Tories as the so-called Red Wall across northern England crumbled.
Labour’s voter base is no longer the native English working class.
The other dilemma for the Labour Party and the Left in general is that the size of the working class as a component of the British population has dwindled, especially as the nation’s industrial base and subsequently working class communities collapsed in the face of neo-liberal policies of recent governments. To win political power, explained leading Left-wing intellectuals (and not just the British variant), the Leftist parties had to solicit the support of minority and “oppressed communities” to be found in all classes in forging a coalition to propel Labour into power: women, immigrants, LGBTQ sorts and other minorities (there is certainly a dilemma in holding these groupings together of course) – to be won over by identity grievance politics and a curious mix of liberally infused human rights and the old socialist “progressive” imperative. Both liberalism and socialism have no room for meaningful and authentic patriotism of a particular ethnic people: the white indigenous British. Labour Party conference speakers are now less likely to be trade union leaders with true working class roots and more likely to be queer as folk people, gender confused types, rampant feminists, middle class environmental nut jobs and adherents to the religion of perpetual peace and harmony, each of whose identities clinging to imagined oppression rather than any commitment to patriotic loyalties.
It has often been said that it is not so much a matter of Labour voters have departed the party but that the Labour Party has betrayed the working class, subsequently the party has left it feeling increasingly alienated. In the context of multi-culturalism the white working class became marginalised and neglected – to the cost of the Labour Party. For the Left-wing intelligentsia all cultures are to be welcomed, embraced and valourised. Except one: that of the white working class. And what has not changed are key elements of much of that class’s core culture. One such element is that it is not easily duped by spurious claims that “diversity is our strength” or “Britain has always been a country of immigrants”. Orwell claimed all of those years back, in so many words, that the genius of the working class was that it could smell manure a mile off. He claimed that it “blew raspberries” at radical Left-wing manifestoes and platforms as much as it did at the rancour of dictators and Prime Ministers.
Much of the political orientation become clear as many working class people voted for Brexit. This was to the derision and of the condemnation of the Left-wing intelligentsia who were convinced they knew better. The “leave” the European Union vote was about patriotism and resisting mass immigration, as much as democracy and national sovereignty. The intelligentsia failed to understand this, despising the white working class bloke with his white van and the English flag draped from the front of the house that he bought from the local council back in the ‘80s. The intelligentsia saw only stupid peasants, the ‘gammon’, who were inclined to wander off the plantation, kept departing from the revolutionary path as identified by the Left. They don’t know what’s good for them. Uneducated stupid bastards that don’t know their own interests! If only they read Marx, Trotsky and Marcuse!
Us and them
The Leftie intelligentsia has not fundamentally changed since Orwell wrote. Its ideology may have evolved from conventional Marxism into cultural Marxism with an input from radical feminism, Foucault waffle, intersectional wokery and rampant bourgeois hyper-liberalism. But this elite still hates British patriotism, particularly English patriotism. It is comprised by “nowhere people” who seek the like-minded across borders (and preferably without borders). Everywhere they see “us” and “them”. Elsewhere, in his essay Politics and the English Language (1946), Orwell includes a discussion of “meaningless words”. One such word, he pointed out, regularly used by the intelligentsia was that of that of “Fascism” which, he said was used to describe everyone and everything they disliked and everyone who disagreed with them. Nothing has changed in this respect. Neither, it seems, has the Left intelligentsia abandoned anti-Semitism.
This intelligentsia is a closeted elite. For the “Bloomsbury highbrow”, Orwell spoke of, now substitute the “Islington set” in London and similar oligarchies to be found in other metropolitan areas and they often dominate local Labour Party leaderships. Middle class university educated Momentum types. They fail now, just as they did in Orwell’s time, to understand the patriotism of the English working class and unable to realise that they are out of touch with it. It is an elite lacking self-awareness, unable to reflect on its own failings. The poverty of their so-called intellectual thought cannot recognise this because it cannot see outside of its own international worldview in which it is entrapped in a globalised world and, ironically, dovetails with the interests of corporate capitalism. The intelligentsia continues to entertain utopian fantasies not embedded in sense of reality since it rarely recognises the virtues of the nation state, borders, tradition and moral culture.
Epitome of New Labour – closeted elite.
Orwell is remembered because he turned political writing into an art. People of different ideological perspectives have emphasised various aspects of his writing which suit them. But perhaps above all, he is remembered because of prophetic talents that predicted a growing totalitarianism in the modern world. For instance, the threat to freedom of speech now evident even in so-called liberal democracies. Some seventy years after he penned the work England Your England many of Orwell’s insights remain valid for patriots. He was, of course, an internationalist himself, with sympathy for the working class elsewhere besides England. However, Orwell would probably have been a Brexiteer as were later “Old” Labour socialist in the 1960s and ‘70s. He remained a patriot to the end. He loved the country pub, the Sunday roast, ‘saucy’ seaside postcards, the moderate temper of the English. This is why his England Your England is written in honour of the English. In it he shows an understanding that layers of national experience, history and culture do matter. Much of this continues to be maligned by the Leftish intelligentsia who are attempting to make their loathing of the nation’s culture mainstream. Here is our struggle. English culture, as described by Orwell, cannot be reinvented in these times, but it can be rediscovered if we dig deep enough – including the inspiration of the writings of a great English author.
Former Pakistani cricket champion Imran Khan has been ousted as Prime Minister of Pakistan for aligning his country with Russia since the invasion of the Ukraine:
Imran Khan has been ousted as prime minister of Pakistan after losing a no-confidence motion in parliament.
Pakistan’s lower house of parliament voted in favour of removing him from office following a nearly 14-hour stand-off between the opposition and Mr Khan’s ruling party that started on Saturday morning.
The former cricketer had tried to block the motion from going ahead by dissolving parliament, but that was ruled unconstitutional by Pakistan’s highest court.
After a late-night session of parliament, a majority of MPs voted for the resolution to remove Mr Khan as the country’s leader.
Opposition parties were able to secure 174 votes in the 342-member house in support of the no-confidence motion, the house speaker said, making it a majority vote.
There were just a few legislators of Mr Khan’s ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party present for the process.
The vote means Mr Khan will no longer hold office and the country’s lower house will now elect a new prime minister and government.
The Pakistani parliament’s lower house will meet on Monday to vote for a new prime minister, the acting speaker said.
The manner in which Imran Khan was deposed has the veneer of democratic process to it, however the fact that the courts ruled against him and that so few of his own Party members showed up for the vote hints at an unseen hand:
The announcement of the vote’s result on Sunday came after multiple adjournments in the lower house caused by members of Khan’s party, who said there was a foreign conspiracy to oust the cricket star-turned-politician.
Khan, 69, surged to power in 2018 with the military’s support but recently lost his parliamentary majority when allies quit his coalition government.
There were also signs he had lost the support of the military, analysts said.
America has had very close ties with the Pakistani military for decades, ties which were crucial during the War on Terror. Rest assured they would know who to tap on the shoulder to achieve Regime Change via “democratic” means:
In an impassioned speech on Friday, Mr Khan doubled down on his accusations that his opponents colluded with the United States to unseat him over his foreign policy choices, which often seemed to favour China and Russia and defied the US.
Mr Khan said Washington opposed his February 24 meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in the Kremlin hours after tanks rolled into Ukraine, launching a devastating war in the heart of Europe.
The US State Department has denied any involvement in Pakistan’s internal politics.
Deputy State Department spokeswoman Jalina Porter told reporters on Friday there was “absolutely no truth to these allegations.”
Still, Mr Khan urged his supporters to take to the streets, particularly the youth, who have been the backbone of his support since the former cricket star, then a conservative Islamist politician, came to power in 2018.
He said they needed to protect Pakistan’s sovereignty and oppose US dictations.
The American Regime has responded to the War in the Ukraine by attempting to lay siege to Russia. In addition to sanctions, it has confiscated Russia’s foreign currency reserves and cut it off from the international financial system. Russia was preparing for this siege for almost a decade and has developed its own financial infrastructure to allow it to continue business.
Russia has reestablished the Gold Standard, demanded payment for its oil and gas in Rubles and has increased its trade with Central Asian countries in its region. This threatens the monopoly of the US dollar in the international energy trade and lays the groundwork for a superpower bloc at the centre of the world comprising about 3 billion people.
Given the Regime is $30 trillion in (official) debt, American policymakers have openly stated they are concerned about maintaining the US petrodollar monopoly, and have started chipping away at the edges of this Central Asian power bloc. Saudi Arabia, which a few weeks ago expressed interest in trading in Rubles, promptly suffered a missile attack against an oil installation near its Grand Prix track just before the race.
They have been awfully quiet about the Ruble since. A Realist would acknowledge that those pesky Yemeni rebels may have had a little help.
This is the context in which we should view the ouster of Imran Khan. The American Regime is picking off Russia’s allies one by one in order to tighten the siege. It’s fascinating stuff. We are literally watching a modern day, real life game of thrones in real time, (only with even more degeneracy.)
Regardless of who wins, we would do well to heed Adam Piggott’s advice to get our affairs with God in order.
One last comment on Imran Khan. He was the toast of the West’s Lying Press in the previous decade, when the media’s prime concern was to convince Europe’s civilians that all the blowback terrorist bombings and beheadings were their fault for not accepting their replacement silently. A marriage with a glamorous White woman was even set up to encourage White women to make Kalergi babies with their foreign conquerers. Naturally the marriage fell apart when Imran didn’t let Jemima whore it up as much as she wanted. Jemima’s gone back to using her maiden name:
Born at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in London, England, Goldsmith is the eldest child of Lady Annabel Vane-Tempest-Stewart and financier Sir James Goldsmith (1933–1997). Her mother, from an aristocratic Anglo−Irish family, is the daughter of the 8th Marquess of Londonderry. Goldsmith’s father was the son of a luxury hotel tycoon and former Conservative Member of Parliament (MP), Major Frank Goldsmith, who was a member of the Goldsmith family of German−Jewish descent.[5] Her paternal grandmother was French.
It’s a strange feeling to realise that all of those kooky fundamentalist Christians from back in the 80s were right. But the question is whether or not we are viewed today as just as lunatic as they were viewed. How large is the gap between people on our side of the divide and normies? I’m not talking about liberals of any stripe; liberals are all on a slippery slope to Moloch whether they know it or not.
As but one example, once you accept the idea into your life that gay marriage is fine and dandy then you’ll eventually turn a blind eye to your kids being groomed by the establishment. Liberals don’t get to choose where the liberal train takes them once they get on board. They just have to continually get with the ever changing program.
No, when I talk about normies I’m referring to average Joe with his wife and kids, if they still even exist; perhaps it’s average Wang Woo now. Back in the day, and I mean really back in the day, working class Joe’s were the stalwart ramparts of the Catholic Church. Your average working class Joe’s were labeled as red meat and Rosaries. This labeling, often by the leadership of the Church, was meant to be patronising. Praying the Rosary and consuming lots of red meat was seen as uncouth and old fashioned, not at all cultured and ideal.
Working class Joe’s today can still be labeled with the epithet of red meat, although for how much longer is now under undisguised threat. The Netherlands is about to introduce a tax on meat in an effort to get the plebs to consume bugs and soy. We can expect warning labels on meat packages in supermarkets in the future. With graphic photos of people who supposedly ate meat, (the horror). Perhaps the act of barbequing in your back yard will have the effect of your uptight NPC neighbors coming around to complain about the smell. Councils will introduce regulations banning the use of barbeques as a health hazard, not to mention the immediate and deadly threat to the global warmings.
The Rosary, however, amongst working class Joe’s seems to be dead and buried. Joe finds his faith in other outlets; we can speculate as to what they might be. Vatican II was specifically designed to remove spirituality from worship with the intention of driving away the faithful from God. That it worked is undeniable, but how much blame lies with the Joe’s of this world? We can claim to have been manipulated but ultimately God wants men who stand up for themselves, who resist the manipulation and the lies and who strive for Him regardless.
The fundamentalist Christians from my teenage years were the ones that got it. The ones who resisted the manipulation. And their numbers were pitiful in comparison. I suspect that our own numbers are just as pitiful today. The question then is whether we continue to loudly fight the System and attempt to wake up the normies or if we simply seek out our fellow men and leave the world to its burning.
The answer is that there must always be hope and we must always have faith. In some ways we have it easier today than those back in the 80s. The evil of the System is far more obvious and harder to ignore. But on the other hand, our nations are splintered and less homogeneous, making it harder for us to find our own people.
One thing I think is for sure and that is until the average Joe’s of the world return to a diet of red meat and Rosaries then our situation will only get worse. Red meat nourishes the body and the Rosary nourishes the soul. But it was never said that we could not raise our own average Joe’s to aspire for such a humble and wholesome life. Food for thought.
Yesterday at 1:25 pm in Fawkner Park, South Yarra, a pedophile attacked UAP leader Craig Kelly. The pedophile threw several eggs at Mr Kelly and ranted indecipherably.
You’ll always lose in Melbourne. Neo nazis sympathisers, misogynists and anti-semites are not welcome here. Pack up your cooker show #CraigKelly
Since the legalisation of poo marriage swept the West several years ago, rabid leftists have openly embraced the grooming of young children in kindergartens, schools and through the media.
Their ultimate aim is the legalisation of pedophilia, hence why we label all Marxists as pedophiles. Mr Kelly has stated that he will press charges against the pedophile:
“It’s not about me about getting hurt anyway, but it’s the precedent that this sets.
“If someone is able to get away with this act, and no member of parliament can walk through the streets of any of our major capital cities freely without the concern about being attacked in such a way.”
Obviously, Mr Kelly is a politician, and thus a normie who believes in a democratic solution to our problems, otherwise he would never have said anything so ridiculous as expressing concern that Australian politicians cannot walk the streets of Australian cities in safety.
Moreover, the question on everybody’s lips since the egging has been, “why didn’t he slap her?” In March 2019, Fraser Anning was egged at a function in Melbourne. It resulted in the slap of the century.
Yesterday’s egger should probably consider herself very lucky, as Craig Kelly would have been more than justified in responding in similar fashion to Anning.
It is worth noting that both Prime Minister Scott Morrison and opposition leader Anthony Albanese had run ins this week with angry constituents.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison didn’t quite get the welcome he was hoping for at the Edgeworth Tavern in Newcastle. A pretty messy confrontation with a local punter. “You better f——g do something. I’m sick of your b——t.” 📽️courtesy Blake Doyle #auspol@abcnewspic.twitter.com/IttnYK1lcJ
A local resident in Perth tries to join the media pack and pose a “tough question” to Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese, who politely declines. #Auspol@SBSNewspic.twitter.com/18AiM2ITE4
However, although neither Morrison’s nor Albanese’s heckler used violence, the Lying Press reported the assault against Kelly as though it was equivalent, ie a legitimate form of protest. No doubt if someone had egged the Prime Minister they would now be in chains. This hypocrisy has been noted by Thomas Sewell:
“While the Terrorist Police and Politicians accuse us being domestic terrorists who are using violence to assert our political views, the only 3 recent examples of Political Violence in Australia are the assaults on MP Craig Kelly, Senator Fraser Anning and Conservative spokesperson Andrew Bolt.
“In all three cases the Lying Press has reported these political motivated violent attacks as “Protests” while they refer to us as “backyard terrorists” for having bbqs and exercising on private property.”
Yes.
Basically, Marxist pedophile terrorists know they have a get out of jail free card to assault anybody who openly opposes the globalist narrative. They are the foot soldiers of the establishment.
During the lockdown Victoria Police were paid to bash ordinary people who refused to be slaves. These useful idiots do it for free.
Nah who am I kidding, they’re likely paid in heroin.
What’s everyone been catching lately? [DON’T UPGRADE THAT PHONE…]
Q.
What’s the difference between a plan-trusting Q boomer and a mainstream liberal? Absolutely nothing. Both of them are more than happy to defer their senses to an abstract authority. Something that Mark Moncrieff in particular has been careful to elucidate over the years is that liberalism of any stripe is just a point somewhere on a slippery slope, and no matter how far left or right it may seem, it’s always sliding towards the same pit. This observation will catch some by surprise, particularly classical liberals, libertarians, and “leave me alone” types, who will happily adopt a live and let live attitude so long as they’re left to simmer and the water doesn’t start boiling. Of course, these days the water is boiling so hard it’s frothing over the sides of the pot, and few with any skin in the game are still clinging to that naivety. Few, except for the disaffected middle-aged normies like Chris Rufo (the anti-Critical Race Theory guy) and those trying to seem palatable to the “mainstream”. But it’s a real uphill battle to win over people who made up their sociopolitical opinions decades ago. Most people will just trust that some invisible authority somewhere out there is waiting to fix everything, it just needs to be enabled.
Plan trusters are so good at this, in fact, that said authority can be totally fictional. Now don’t get me wrong, there were some weird coincidences with the Q stuff back in the day. There was definitely some kind of intelligence agency involvement, even Alex Jones never trusted the whole phenomena, and I can’t believe I’m admitting this but he’s been more trustworthy than the mainstream for a really long time. It took me a while to realise this, as I used to put InfoWars on merely as interesting background noise. That said, the Q thing served to defuse a lot of pent-up conservative anger in the US and beyond, because it made it look like there was a secret game being played by powerful, shadowy authorities.
But this is much broader than just Q. There seems to be a type of response induced in the disaffected these days where they don’t try to fix anything themselves. This is exactly what woke liberals do – find the next thing to be outraged about and complain until the authorities step in. The authorities always seem very happy to step in on their behalf, so it kind of makes sense that other disaffected types would try to emulate the behaviour. When something goes against a “right-wing” “conservative” liberal’s worldview, the peg stuck in the ground where liberalism was 20 years ago, they are afforded one course of action and that’s to lobby the power structure to fix it. Therein lies the problem though, as liberalism is fundamentally deconstructive and always has been. People may say that a certain point in its term was not deconstructive, many look to the 1950s and more recently 1990s, but that’s only ever how it felt at the time because things were going well and the deconstruction could be ignored. There have been moral outrages over the decades which have generally triggered these deconstructions, and I fail to think of a single one where the system acknowledged the results were a mistake and put the lid back on it. Maybe Prohibition, but basically the Mob gathers around an issue, the authorities listen and pretend to really care, then get halfway to finding a solution that ends up working for nobody.
It’s no secret that we are in a time where moralism has made a resurgence. In the 90s and 2000s people were browbeaten by what was called the “religious right” particularly when it came to violent video games, music, and drugs, and that inflated moralism was attributed to backwards conservatives. Moving into the 2010s, when tumblr culture made its way off the internet and onto university campuses, it was warned that it would transform into the new moralism, and those warnings came completely true. But as usual, outraged appeals to authority have resulted in half-solutions all the way.
Below are some examples of how the liberal narrative shifts. Let’s start with something most people today are too scared to speak against:
The sign is correct, that marriage was illegal only a few decades ago. But no good liberal, whether they consider themselves left or right, will ever consider that it was illegal for a reason. It was Bad and Wrong, and it’s been corrected by the steady march of progress. Then the 2010s rolled around and gay marriage was the topic. This is a meme from that era:
Amazing. All those other things have pretty much happened, but gay marriages are statistically insignificant and the gay community is still rampantly promiscuous. It’s like a complete inverse of this. How poorly adapted is the liberal mind to deal with reality?
The right wing liberals start wearing the issue in an attempt to own the left wing liberals. See, we’re just like you, only better because we don’t think liberalism should have progressed past the 90s.
Mega Corporation has heard your concerns. We listened. We learned. Mega Corporation promises to do better, be better, and create a future that is better for everyone. Mega Corporation will do everything in its power to teach children gay sex.
As Jonathan Bowden said, we need to regard liberalism as a faulty premise and simply step past it. Using the language of the enemy against them isn’t going to work, and in the same way using the ideological framework of the enemy isn’t going to work either. In both of these cases they will always have the upper hand, because the system is geared towards whatever will slide down the slippery slope. Liberalism is only ever a slippery slope, and cannot comprehend pushing something back up to the top and letting it stand there forever. So to wrap up the initial topic of this article, why are Q plan trusters the same as woke progressives? The answer is because in 10 years time, “conservative” liberals will be begging the “progressive” liberals to just go back to 2022 culturally and morally. The whole thing is rotten. Find a way to get out now.
Last year’s AFL Brownlow Medalist, Port Adelaide’s Ollie Wines, had to be subbed out of last night’s match against Melbourne at the Adelaide Cricket Ground.
Initially we were told it was just nausea. Nobody believed it:
At the end of the match as the opponents shook hands, the cameras honed in on Ollie Wines speaking to the Melbourne players. They looked visibly concerned and he looked perplexed. Reading the body language of players from both sides, they had the look of men who knew that they could be next at any moment.
Today the truth has come out that Wines has been hospitalised with an irregular heartbeat.
PORT ADELAIDE midfielder Ollie Wines has spent the night in hospital following last night’s loss to Melbourne.
The Brownlow Medallist was subbed out of the game at half time after feeling unwell.
He is currently still in hospital with a heart irregularity – the cause of which is undetermined and will be investigated over the coming days.
Wines remains well and in good spirits.
A further update will be provided once more information becomes available.
Wines’ adverse reaction to the Covid vaccine is the latest in a series of incidents to hit high level sport since 2021 when the not-vaccines were rolled out. This is the second adverse reaction to occur during an AFL match this season, after Footscray’s Hayden Crozier fainted at half time in Round 1 against Melbourne.
Multiple players past and present have been affected across multiple sporting codes in many countries. Tragically for Australians, Cricket legends Shane Warne and Rod Marsh both died of heart attacks in successive days. Evidence has emerged that Warne’s “heart attack” may have been a pulmonary embolism caused by the vaccine.
Sporting authorities are doing everything they can to avoid acknowledging that Covid “vaccines” are putting the health of their players at risk. They have been widely lampooned for the ongoing hesitancy to admit adverse reactions are occurring on a mass scale.
The ideology of OH&S has deeply infiltrated corporate sport in recent years. Concern must be mounting among players that something very bad is going on.
Refreshingly, Andrew Bogut is still calling a spade a spade.
One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts stuck his neck out a long way during a recent speech in Federal Parliament. He dared to push back against the pro-Ukrainian government hysteria which has gripped Australia’s elites in recent months, saying he does not want to take sides in the current conflict between Russia and the Ukraine:
I have no doubt that he is voicing his genuine view on the matter, and that his words reflect the views of a strong proportion of ordinary Australians who are completely ignored by the political class, whether it comes to immigration, Covid Tyranny, or our utter disdain for Globohomo.
But wait there’s more. Roberts quotes US Senator Ron Paul in excoriating the privately owned US Federal Reserve:
“Every major war since 1913 can be directly attributed to the United States Federal Reserve Bank, which is controlled by globalists.”
Yes.
This is the most significant speech by an Australian politician since Fraser Anning’s “Final Solution” speech in 2018. In triggering sheer hysteria over his use of two innocuous words strung together, Anning exposed the way in which the narrative of the holocaust myth is used to demonise any expression of White solidarity. A fictional genocide has become the logic underpinning the very real White Genocide currently underway in all White nations.
Roberts has built on this, pointing out by proxy that jews are responsible not just for World Wars 1 & 2 but for all major wars, including the current one in the Ukraine.
It is interesting then that Roberts’ speech has not blown up the media in the way which Anning’s did. I am happy to attribute this to the historical ignorance of the Lying Press rather than any conspiracy of silence.
There is a glut of information out there, so if you want to expand your knowledge of the facts laid out here, these three videos are a good place to start:
The Money Masters provides a broad historical perspective on the expansion of central bank power in recent centuries:
Robert Sepehr has exposed the forgotten history behind the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913:
And if you have a spare 12 hours, Europa the Last Battle provides detail on the role of central banks in starting all those wars.
From National Justice Party.
