Before World War II, long before the Dark Age of political correctness and the rule of the elites, historians often advanced the Aryan hypothesis, that White European tribes, of a warlike barbarian nature, swept into areas such as China and India and conquered the lands, or at least joined the ruling elites: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2017/06/18/western-greatness-and-its-enemies/. Such a view became heretical after the end of World War II.

     However, evidence has continued to mount, of White, often red-haired  Europeans in China, now preserved as mummies: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2015/07/18/these-red-haired-chinese-mummies-come-from-all-over-eurasia-dna-reveals/#43117b1b3e2c, and now India: http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/how-genetics-is-settling-the-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece.

     The elites continue to pour out their pro-refugee, migration propaganda:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/opinion/only-mass-deportation-can-save-america.html,  while the evidence from Europe is that mass immigration is having massively destructive effects, spiralling into an uncivil war.

     Each day, scores of horrific rapes are reported by the MSM, which are a drop in the ocean of misery, since most rapes go unreported, out of fear of “racism”: https://www.rt.com/news/393238-germany-asylum-seekers-rape/.
This is now common news.

     The latest from Safe Schools creator Roz Ward, is that up to half of all young people are gay: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/safe-schools-founder-up-to-half-of-child-are-gay/news-story/4de46d3e53990c19e21ddc4592031281.

     What is being claimed here? It sounds like 50 percent of young people are gay. If so, then there will need to be appropriate funding from taxpayers for whatever. But, the “up to half” talk is meaningless. It could easily be replaced by “up to 100 percent” and still be vacuous. There is no evidence that 50 percent of young people are gay.
     Just another day in the cultural wars.

     Just as the big stores have end of financial year sales, the government periodically has a national gun amnesty, so criminals and terrorists can hand over their hard-earnt guns. Ha! Australia is awash with illegal guns, in the hands of the underworld, and it is just plain stupid to think that they would surrender anything:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/government-toughens-gun-laws-in-response-to-shootings-and-gangs-arms-race-20151027-gkk18x.html
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/as-many-as-600000-illegal-guns-in-australia-20161020-gs74ay.html
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/automatic-pistols-from-southeast-asia-spotted-on-local-black-market/news-story/a1c16504680a792cfaf0566aecaa0e3e

     The claim that a national amnesty would do anything to stop terrorism is beyond ridiculous, as even mainstream sites have recognised http://theconversation.com/a-national-amnesty-will-not-rid-australia-of-violent-gun-crime-7956.
 In fact, as I see it, all of this is just about the social control of ordinary citizens, with the hope of removing more guns from the ordinary people.  It will make it easier for the white genocide waiting down the tracks, when TSHTF, and TEOTWAWKI (The end of the world as we know it).

     The comments in an interview given recently by Prince Harry to the American magazine Newsweek in which he stated that: “the heavy burden which comes with the throne isn’t something anyone aspired to” are being broadcast - and often misinterpreted - on Australian television and other media.
     In many ways, Prince Harry is quite correct. To be monarch is an awesome burden. Not only does one have to be on call 24 hours each day, read through State papers, meet with ministers to be consulted and to advise, attend various events and functions almost every day but also, worse, the monarch and heirs are in the public spotlight continuously.

     The Queen has carried on her duties for over 65 years immaculately. Even though the 24/7 news cycle occurred only more recently during her reign, Her Majesty has taken it all on board and has unflinchingly continued to serve the people.
     Service and duty is today what the monarchy is all about. As Prince Harry said in his interview “Despite the challenges that come with it” the monarchy was “a force for good”.
     Australia’s system of constitutional monarchy has upheld our democracy for well over a hundred years during which time so many countries became republics and then dictatorships.

Riding on the City of New Orleans Illinois Central Monday morning rail
Fifteen cars and fifteen restless riders
Three conductors and twenty-five sacks of mail
All along the southbound odyssey the train pulls out at Kankakee
And rolls along past houses farms and fields
Passing trains that have no name and freight yards full of old black men
And the graveyards of the rusted automobiles

to THE AUSTRALIAN
     Civil Liberties Australia argues that Australia is not a Christian country, but Kevin Donnelly disagrees (‘We are a Christian nation’, 15/6). Each party describes Australia in the way it wishes to see it;  but the truth is that we look a bit like the ‘muddle’ that E. M. Forster saw India as being a century ago and later described in ‘A Passage to India’.

     What kind of nation should we aim to be? My answer is that we should seek to be a people who are collectively aware of the numinous and the mysterious. That is where we should primarily locate the sacred, not in theology or past works of art or acts of charity (as Donnelly does).
     He wants to resuscitate a mode of Christianity that appears to be in slow terminal decline. Liberty Australia thinks to dance on its grave. Neither approach will lead to a fruitful tomorrow. Only a fresh visioning of the ‘worlds beyond’ will be sufficient.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     I was not surprised to read that “ “Despite there being many illegal migrants and failed asylum seekers from North Africa and the Middle East, last year the Berlin government has overwhelmingly deported only migrants from the Balkan states”: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/12/80-per-cent-migrants-deported-berlin-balkans/. For, after all, the future of Germany is to become part of the Islamic caliphate, aided and abetted by Merkel.

     I was not surprised to read that Merkel was in Mexico, saying that walls are bad, bad, bad, because, presumably, borders should not exist: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/angela-merkel-criticises-donald-trump-mexico-city-walls-us-border-infrastructure-german-chancellor-a7786116.html. She did not condemn Israel’s wall, which is working fine: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/background-and-overview-of-israel-s-security-fence. After all, the future of the United States is to be, the Disunited States of Greater Mexico.

     So sung the Eagles in their 1976 song “The Last Resort.” While some segments of the high tech elites are looking to abandon Earth for space: http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/stephen-hawking-warns-that-humans-must-leave-earth-in-100-years/news-story/4b979ea1ab2d0fe6f3eb68f45b0d25c0, there have come warnings that this may not be possible any time soon.
     Space cadets will face the onslaught of cosmic rays once in space, outside of the protective magnetic shield of the Earth. With this will come, not super powers, as depicted in the Fantastic Four comics, but cancer: http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-06-12-astronauts-extremely-likely-to-die-from-cancer-if-they-travel-to-mars-warns-new-science-study.html. Cosmic rays will severely damage the DNA of cells, and affected cancer cells may alter near-by cells, or “bystander” cells, causing mega-mutations. Merely having thicker shields and space suits may not solve the problem, given the length of time to be spent in space, let alone staying there, forever.
     We are all going to stay on this planet and see how it all pans out. No doubt, everything will come out in the wash, one way of another.

     Hey, that’s the sort of paranoid conspiratorial title readers have come to expect, and love, from me. But, the title is only a paraphrase of “Aussie Unis Boost Chinese Military,” The Weekend Australian, June 10-11, 2017, p.1.
     The story here is universities are supplying the Chinese military with technological leadership and knowledge which China needs for advanced military and industry superiority. The claims have been made by public intellectual Clive Hamilton. Here is how just some of this works, courtesy of your tax payer’s dollars, according to The Australian:

“For instance, last year the ARC awarded a $400,000 grant to Adelaide University for a research partnership with the Beijing Institute of Aeronautical Materials, which is part of the Aviation Industry Corporation of China. Government-owned AVIC is the major supplier of military aircraft to the People’s Liberation Army Air Force.
As Mr Hamilton and Mr Joske say, “when the PLA unveiled its first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, it was loaded with Shenyang J-15 fighter jets built by AVIC”.
The Adelaide University project is intended to help develop materials and devices that, the ARC’s proposal says, “are comfortable, quiet and energy-efficient” for use in aircraft, motor vehicles and ships. The authors point out: “It will also enhance the PLA Air Force’s capacity to improve the performance of its most sophisticated warplanes.”

to THE AUSTRALIAN
     Noel Pearson is fantasising when he claims (‘Token change is not an option for Pearson’, 16/6) that the establishment of the Constitution in 1901 has led to a ‘lack of structural power’ for our Aboriginals that ‘cascades down into the daily lives on the streets of communities.’  There are plenty of reasonable life opportunities for today’s Australians who happen to have Aboriginal blood, so there is no need at all to create national political division where there is none. It would be statesmanlike for Pearson to admit that any kind of constitutional recognition is against the interests of the great majority of today’s Australians and to rededicate himself to uncontentious efforts to improve Aboriginal welfare.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     Our favourite mainstream conservative journalist Andrew Bolt has bravely fought back against what appears to be antifa attackers, who savagely attacked him on Lygon Street, Melbourne, which is full of nice snacky sidewalk eating spots:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gmohao7jXnc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anUyzZzz4Q0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e_1XTt9Kbc

     Bolt was cowardly attacked from behind by one thug, who threw some substance onto him, and then a second low-life joined the attack, hurling Bolt into tables and chairs. Bolt fought back, strategically getting his back to a shop front, and kicked one guy in the groin, then punched him in the face, and then punched another guy in the face. He must have done some damage because Melbourne Antifa were crying on their Facebook page that Bolt assaulted them! One needs to only look at the footage to see that Bolt could have been killed by the attack if the substance was something deadly, so he needs some more work on situational awareness: https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Personal-Defense-Jeff-Cooper/dp/1581604955.

This is the full text of Enoch Powell's so-called 'Rivers of Blood' speech, which was delivered to a Conservative Association meeting in Birmingham on April 20 1968.
Ref: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643823/Enoch-Powells-Rivers-of-Blood-speech.html

The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.

to THE AGE
     Fred Chaney is idealistic but not realistic (‘Don’t fear the T-word’, 8/6). All advocacy of a treaty between our Aboriginals and other Australians implicitly means support for an eventual partition of the continent into two nations.  Australia has already moved too far in that direction with the Mabo judgment, plucked out of the air by judicial adventurism, and subsequent land agreements with, as Chaney notes, ‘peoples, collectives, not individual Aboriginal people’.

     Constitutionally we need to treat all Australians as equal, for reasons of equity, national unity, social stability and political security in dealing with the rather threatening world situation that is developing.  Our governments are right to seek to improve Aboriginal welfare - the benefiting of Aboriginal individuals seen as disadvantaged Australian citizens.
NJ, Belgrave

to THE AUSTRALIAN
     God does not write books, nor does he dictate them word for word through human intermediaries. This applies to the Bible as well as the Koran.  So merely advocating metaphorical rather than literal interpretation (Letters, 8/6) is not sufficient to deal with the current religion-based political crisis.

     On the other hand both these holy books have many passages that are profound and beautiful, which may well be the result of exceptional inspiration. Thus, asserting, as does Jim Campbell (8/6), that ‘there are no arguable circumstances’ under which the Koran should ‘play a role in shaping the character of any Australian citizen’ is an unhelpful and extremist approach.
     Islam itself contains the solution in its doctrine of shirk - that nothing in creation can be equated to God. Muslims generally need to accept that this applies to their prophet, their book and their tradition. Ditto for Christians.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     The three London terrorists shouted, “This is for Allah,” as they went on a rampage, with the new weapons of choice, a truck and knives. They killed seven people and hospitalised 48 others. One Queensland woman had her throat slashed. This is the third Islamic terrorist attack in Britain in the past three months. The mayor of the now non-white majority city of London (http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/census-reveals-white-britons-as-minority-in-capital-for-first-time-8405998.html),  himself a Muslim, said that there was no reason to be alarmed and that London is one of the safest cities in the world: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/04/trump-blasts-london-mayor-sadiq-khan-saying-no-reason-alarmed-london-attack/; http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-06-04-mainstream-media-complicit-in-excusing-global-terrorism-as-london-suffers-deadly-isis-linked-attack.html.   After all, as he said last year, terrorism is “part and parcel of living in a big city.”

     Mike Adams in the article referenced above, is spot on in saying that this is open warfare on Western civilisation: “Western civilization, you see, has become obsessed with self-induced idiocy and political correctness that’s so insane, its political leaders can’t even muster the will to engage in simple acts of self-defense against a cultural onslaught. Western Europe, in particular, is being overrun by radicals who practice an extreme, violent form of Islam that has zero tolerance for anyone who isn’t obedient to their narratives.

     Another day, another terrorist attack. Although I know that global warming is a myth, it is possible that so many candle-lit vigils will be held, that we may find the poles melting and glaciers, well, turning into slushies!! Of course, I jest: global warming, as Don Trumpeter well knows, is just hot air, as conspiracy to stop the West enjoying the fruits of the good life.

     No sooner than I had completed my masterpiece article on the London bombing, sorry, truck and knife attacks, then we have a terrible terror in Melbourne, with an abduction and killing, with the police shooting the terrorist dead: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/world/australia/australia-terrorism-isis-hostage-killing.html?_r=0. All of this brought to you from the unfriendly people at ISIS Pty Ltd.

     Open homosexual Alt Right figure, Jack Donovan, who had previously defended white nationalism, the right of whites to defend their own identity, http://www.jack-donovan.com/axis/2011/12/mighty-white/, has now written a piece: “Why I am Not a White Nationalist”:
https://www.jack-donovan.com/axis/2017/05/why-i-am-not-a-white-nationalist/.

     Donovan gives various loosely woven arguments, such as the one that white nationalists, at least in America, are disunited and fight more among themselves than the enemy. They are broken people, who “suck.” No statistical proof is offered to substantiate this, being, like most journalism, based on his gut feelings.

(Own report) - On her trip to Argentina and Mexico last week, Chancellor Angela Merkel sought to use the tensions between US President Donald Trump and Latin America to strengthen German influence on the subcontinent, by expanding business relations. Berlin would like to knit closer ties to Argentina through a free trade agreement with the South American Mercosur alliance and is planning to expand bi-lateral trade with Mexico, on the basis of the existing free trade agreement. Already long before Trump's electoral victory, the German government had been seeking to strengthen its trade with Latin America. Trump's threats to fortify the Mexican border with a wall and the revocation of the NAFTA free trade agreement have practically driven the countries of this region into Berlin's arms. This was even reinforced, when Chancellor Merkel publicly criticized the wall project. The coup had the desired effect, despite the fact that the EU - under German pressure - is surrounding itself with wall-like border fortifications. The German effort to expand its Latin American influence is also directed at China.
Ref: http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/59035

     Marc Randazza , a Las Vegas-based lawyer who  specialises  in free-speech cases, is representing the publisher of a leading neo-Nazi website, Andrew Anglin. Anglin is being  sued for allegedly  orchestrating an anti-Semitic online trolling campaign against a Montana Jewish  family. The mainstream press give no reason for why he chose this particular family to “harass,” but his website gives his point of view. I should add that I do not support the Anglin site, and what he represents, and see  many of his articles as alarming and fanatical. But, as a free speech advocate I still have an interest in the case, which raises fascinating points of law.

     According to Mr Randazza:
“Everybody deserves to have their constitutional rights defended… Nobody needs the First Amendment to protect Mr. Rogers. That’s not what it’s there for.”
See: http://www.timesofisrael.com/first-amendment-lawyer-defending-neo-nazi-website-publisher/; https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/06/09/us/ap-us-internet-trolling-lawsuit.html?_r=0.
The point is that real free speech laws protect unpopular speech.