China and Human Rights By Bruce Bennett

     Reaching number one, on the top of the charts must be great, but with great power comes great responsibility, as Stan Lee once penned as a tag line for Spider-Man. So, what is China up to? Brace yourself:

“Women who have survived China’s concentration camps for Muslim ethnic minorities reported widespread rape, forced abortions, forced sterilization, and other extreme sexual human rights atrocities in accounts published this weekend. Speaking to the Washington Post, the women echo the experiences of others who have escaped the estimated thousands of concentration camps built in Xinjiang, China’s largest and westernmost province, to house Uighur, Kazakh, and Kyrgyz ethnic people. While survivors tend to be Kazakh – they can use their dual citizenship to escape to neighboring Kazakhstan – the majority of the 1 to 3 million people trapped in the camps are believed to be Uighurs. Others who have survived have been able to use their marital status to citizens of Pakistan or other neighboring countries to place pressure on Beijing to release them. The nations themselves have not made any official statements condemning the Communist Party’s attempt to eradicate ethnic minorities in Xinjiang – sometimes actively praising it – but have quietly helped individuals with the influence to get their attention. Camp survivors have previously testified to extreme torture, killings, live organ harvesting, infanticide, and slavery in the camps. An Associated Press (AP) report published last year revealed that some clothes made in slave facilities in the concentration camps made its way to America.

Continue reading

Is Hillary Clinton Going from Crazy to Creepy? By Charles Taylor

     There are plenty of articles out there in internet land, indicating that Hillary Clinton is getting ready for her second run against Donald Trump. The degenerate libtards have never recovered from the Trump victory, and many are still saying that Hillary actually won. Yet, if the Red Queen does intend to run, is she mentally fit to do so? There was the weird head shaking during the last election, like she was some sort of defective toy scaring children, but the media has censored that now, or she is better, or she has the right meds. But, what about this?

“In her efforts to rationalize her 2016 loss, Hillary Clinton has gone full cuckoo. Vladimir Putin not only robbed her, he’s positioning his “assets” to do it again. Doing a podcast with David Plouffe, a former adviser to President Barack Obama, she insisted that Putin is “grooming” a Democrat for a third-party run next year. “I’m not making any predictions, but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate. She’s the favorite of the Russians,” Clinton raved. She plainly meant Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, as Plouffe said. Never mind that Gabbard ruled out any third-party bid on CNN in August — or that she’s a veteran who put her life on the line for this country. This follows last week’s New York Times story hinting at the same conspiracy theory, which cited at least two former Clinton aides and which Gabbard slammed onstage at last week’s debate. The former secretary of state (who once proudly offered Putin a giant “reset” button) also tarred 2016 Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein as yet another Russian tool, who might elbow out Gabbard. “That’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which, she might not ’cause she’s also a Russian asset.” Clinton said. “She’s a Russian asset, totally. They know they can’t win without a third-party candidate.” The thought that Americans wouldn’t dare run a third-party candidate on their own — as they’ve done for decades — because it might re-elect President Trump is nowhere on Clinton’s radar screen. In short, she’s doubling down on the actual reason why she lost: her palpable contempt for most Americans.”

Continue reading

Letter to The Editor - There is a mystery surrounding this archbishop

To The Australian         Criticisms of British PM Boris Johnson by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Reverend Justin Welby, should be taken with a large grain of salt ("Johnson 'pouring petrol on division'", 28/10). Archbishop Welby has a track record of favouring the contemporary, pro-Remain elite culture in the UK that is supported by the benighted left but opposed by advocates for Brexit. As an Australian Anglican, I do not have confidence in his political views. Moreover, the language used by Johnson, which he attacks, has been more than matched by that of commentators on the left. There is a mystery surrounding this archbishop that is comparable to that surrounding French leader Emmanuel Macron. Each, as it were, appeared from nowhere and rose to a great height with astonishing speed. A book on how they achieved their success and what they really stand for might be very interesting.
  Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic

Teething Problems for Australia Becoming Part of Communist China By James Reed

     Does Peter Dutton, despite good intensions, ever go to the CBD of Sydney and examine the demographics, and look at the immigration statistics and make the projections?

“The Chinese embassy has denounced Peter Dutton for suggesting the policies of the Communist Party of China are “inconsistent” with Australian values, warning his “malicious slur” has severely damaged the “mutual trust” between Beijing and Canberra. After the Home Affairs Minister argued the Chinese political system did not support freedom of speech, expression or thought, the embassy issued a statement on Friday night saying: “We categorically reject Mr Dutton’s irrational accusations against China, which are shocking and baseless. We strongly condemn his malicious slur on the Communist Party of China, which constitutes an outright provocation to the Chinese people. Such ridiculous rhetoric severely harms the mutual trust between China and Australia and betrays the common interests of the two peoples.” Mr Dutton and Immigration Minister David Coleman had earlier declared that the policies of the Communist Party were “inconsistent” with Australian values and warned of “considerable attacks on our systems”. Mr Dutton said hacking of Australian systems by state and non-state actors was a “threat” and he also pushed back against foreign influence on university campuses. The Home Affairs Minister, who said the government had no issue with Chinese people or the “amazing Chinese diaspora community”, said “we won’t allow theft of intellectual property and we won’t allow our government bodies or our non-government bodies to be hacked into”.

Continue reading

Antifa and the Totalitarian Left By Charles Taylor

     There was to be some talkfest that intellectuals from the Dissent Right were to attend, the Scandza meeting, but it seems that Antifa just collapsed the whole thing. I don’t know much about the would-be speakers, this being a European thing, and I being an American, but some other so-called Dissent Right sites, who spend more time criticising people they don’t like on the Right, than attacking the Left, were laughing about it, and that is where we take off here. From what I have seen, antifa will shutdown anyone that they do not like. How about arranging an anti-climate change seminar? Do you think that it would not be a target? Race is just the tip of the suppression ice berg. Thus, anti-feminists can’t even talk about the limits of feminism, anti-abortionists have no voice, ands it is only a matter of time before those sites who attack people from their side get wiped out too.

     Thus, Facebook has deleted one of the largest Trump fan pages, because, well Trump must be defeated, and we high techers are going to do it this time, so that a multigendered Republic can be created, anything to deconstruct white males, anything. Posts depicting Trump being murdered a fine and never violate Big Tech’s big policies. Bring on the EMP event that roasts this whole rotten system, for it would be better to hunt rats with a rusty spear than to live as a techno-slave, as we do now.

Continue reading

Nuclear War Insanity from the Universities? No. By James Reed

     A Princeton University study on the fallout from global nuclear war, has upset our Russian friends, who have interrupted the study, I think incorrectly, as saying that such a war is doable:

“We're continuing our talk about the most important matters. A lyrical digression - American scientists at Princeton University have estimated how many would die in a full-scale nuclear conflict between Russia and the US. The number is not comforting - almost 60 million people killed. If counting the wounded - 96 million people. Why would they conduct such research? We don't understand, but this footage is impressive, and the results are nightmarish. “Nuclear warning shots. Russia launches a nuclear warning shot from a base near Kaliningrad. NATO retaliates with a single tactical nuclear air strike. The tactical plan. Russia sends 300 nuclear warheads via aircraft and short- and intermediate-range missiles to hit NATO bases. NATO responds with 180 nuclear warheads. The number of immediate casualties: 2.6 million over three hours. The counterforce plan. With Europe destroyed, NATO launches a strategic strike of 600 warheads from US land and submarine-based missiles aimed at Russian nuclear forces. Russia launches a retaliatory strike. The number of immediate casualties: 3.4 million over 45 minutes. The countervalue plan. Russia and NATO each target the other's 30 most populated cities, using 5-10 warheads on each city. The number of immediate casualties: 85.3 million over 45 minutes. The number of immediate casualties - 91.5 million, including 34.1 million fatalities and 57.4 million injuries. - What a nightmare, Princeton University... We wish you all happiness and a long life. Anyway, let's reach an agreement...”

Continue reading

Free speech for Them, But Never for Us (We Must be Replaced) By Paul Walker

     Old Zucky has been busy writing in The Wall Street Journal saying yeah to free speech, while censoring conservatives, because basic human rights are only given out those whom the Left decide are human. Let’s ask Pam, one of the leading victims of Big Tech, what she thinks about this:

“In an extraordinary oped in the Wall Street Journal, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg makes the case for freedom of speech and freedom of expression. I couldn’t have said it better myself. Extraordinary because Zuckerberg’s Facebook has systematically censored, blocked and banned my colleagues and me on what is the most influential news portal in the world. My newsfeed is still in lockdown. Mr. Zuckerberg, let my thoughts and ideas be free. I have a million and a half followers on Facebook – and that is just my page. That does not include my groups AFDI, SIOA and the other SIO groups. At one time my organic traffic from Facebook was 100,000+ a day, now – because of bans, blocks and shadowbanning the Geller Report newsfeed, it barely reaches 2000. Never Trumpers, on the hand, have enjoyed the benevolence of the little dictator as have left-wing media pages. Facebook has instituted a fake news meter – which is nothing short of digital authoritarianism..  And now Zuckerberg is announcing the creation of an independent Oversight Board that will make binding decisions on what content stays up and comes down. Who will be on this board? … Zuckerberg claims that Facebook is “going to appoint members to this board who have a diversity of views and backgrounds, but who each hold free expression as a paramount value.” Who is that? Outside of my colleagues and I, no one on the left or the RINO right believes in free expression.  On whose side did the elites come down when jihadis opened fire on my free speech event in Garland, Texas.”

Continue reading

Impeach All Peaches! Civil War 2.0 is Inevitable By Charles Taylor

     What has become known as Trump Derangement Syndrome, has certainly gripped the US Democrats, where after the candidate’s debate all they could agree upon is that Trump needs to be impeached because it is just not right that American whites should exist, I think. Thus, it is a hanging offence to ask the Ukrainian president to investigate possible crook actions by the Biden’s because, well, Democrats are always permitted to do crook things, as Hillary has done, and the worst crime is taking about it, and exposing it.

“Today we will answer the question: May a president ask a foreign country to investigate corruption if it serves his "personal, political" interests? The "personal, political" angle is the last gasp of the impeachment hysterics. (I'm looking at you, Sens. Rob Portman (Ohio), Susan Collins (Maine), Mitt Romney (Utah) and Ben Sasse (Nebraska).) Yes, Donald Trump is, technically, "president," and, yes, former Vice President Joe Biden used his government position to withhold foreign aid until the president of Ukraine fired a prosecutor looking into a company paying Biden's drug addict son millions of dollars for mysterious reasons. But, the impeachment fanatics assert, by asking a foreign leader to assist in an otherwise legitimate corruption investigation, Trump has committed a monstrous crime—because he was pursuing a "personal political interest." To wit: Trump was trying to harm his political opponent, Joe Biden. Apart from the blindingly obvious fact that you can't commit crimes and then escape justice simply by running for president, Democrats take official government action for "personal, political" reasons all the time. Frequently, they do so for the sole purpose of harming their political opponents.”

Continue reading

Racism Made Me Fat! So Impeach Trump! By Mrs Vera West

     Here, at last is an utterly irrefutable reason for impeaching Trump …muh racism:

“Do President Trump’s policies make me look fat? That’s the sort of question some black women may be asking themselves, a Rutgers University professor suggested during a recent appearance on the Oprah Winfrey Network. Although, more accurately, the problem may be the stress and anxiety caused by the policies than the policies themselves, Brittney Cooper, who teaches gender studies at the New Jersey-based university, said on a recent episode of “Black Women OWN the Conversation.” Research shows black women lose weight more slowly than white women, and the Trump presidency may be exacerbating the situation, Cooper said on the program, according to “We are living in the Trump era,” she said, “and look, those policies kill our people. You can’t get access to good health care, good insurance.”

Continue reading

Japan Fears China, and Rightly So By James Reed

     The Japanese are clear thinking and do not go in for our brand of economic prostitution, that we trade with X, therefore we worship X, or pretend to be their toadies. Trade is trade for the much more rational, still far from deracinated Japanese, who are difficult not to admire. Their culture is everything our is not, but once was.

“China's growing military might has replaced North Korean belligerence as the main security threat to Japan, according to Tokyo's annual defence review — this despite signs that Pyongyang could have nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles. Key Points:

Continue reading

A Border Moat with Snakes and Crocodiles? By Charles Taylor

     Here is bs story the New York Times ran with, I did not find other sources following it up. Look how crazy and racist Trump is, he wants to make a border moat with snakes and crocodiles:

“The Oval Office meeting this past March began, as so many had, with President Trump fuming about migrants. But this time he had a solution. As White House advisers listened astonished, he ordered them to shut down the entire 2,000-mile border with Mexico — by noon the next day. The advisers feared the president’s edict would trap American tourists in Mexico, strand children at schools on both sides of the border and create an economic meltdown in two countries. Yet they also knew how much the president’s zeal to stop immigration had sent him lurching for solutions, one more extreme than the next. Privately, the president had often talked about fortifying a border wall with a water-filled trench, stocked with snakes or alligators, prompting aides to seek a cost estimate. He wanted the wall electrified, with spikes on top that could pierce human flesh. After publicly suggesting that soldiers shoot migrants if they threw rocks, the president backed off when his staff told him that was illegal. But later in a meeting, aides recalled, he suggested that they shoot migrants in the legs to slow them down. That’s not allowed either, they told him. “The president was frustrated and I think he took that moment to hit the reset button,” said Thomas D. Homan, who had served as Mr. Trump’s acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, recalling that week in March. “The president wanted it to be fixed quickly.”

Continue reading

Greg Sheridan on the China Threat? What!? By James Reed

     In the good old days, I could be sure that anytime I saw an article by Greg Sheridan I would disagree with it, and immediately would have copy, something to write about, someone to refute. But, then one day, maybe I changed, he changed, we both changed, or the world changed, and I could see that it was far too simplistic to view him as an enemy, but rather, he was a complex thinker, always with an interesting point of view, that sometimes was surprising. Take the rise of China for example:

“China’s President Xi Jinping never leaves you in any doubt what he thinks. So his warning is typically stark. Any effort to prise a region away from China will result in “in crushed bodies and shattered bones”. This is a very direct threat to the protesters of Hong Kong, although he has not addressed the Hong Kong disturbances directly by name. Nonetheless, the balance of probability would have to be that the mainland Chinese forces are not likely to undertake a massive 1989 Tiananmen massacre style intervention in Hong Kong, at least not yet. They will intervene if they feel they have to. Although any such intervention will be very tough, it will still likely involve a much more sophisticated and discriminate use of force than Tiananmen did. However, Beijing scored a big victory on Hong Kong recently. Donald Trump in announcing, prematurely, that he and Beijing have come to a trade deal, also remarked that he thought the troubles in Hong Kong were subsiding and the Chinese government would handle them fine. In one way, Trump’s remarks are prudent enough. International leaders should be very careful what they say about Hong Kong, because if Beijing does intervene there, not a single foreigner will go to help the local Hong Kongers. However, Trump was capable of applying some leverage to Beijing, and now he’s chosen not to. He hasn’t, as he did with the Turks, given Beijing a green light for action, but he has said more or less that he isn’t much concerned with what’s happening in Hong Kong.

Continue reading

The Illusion of Cooperative Globalism By James Reed

     Thanks to Lou for emailing me this little item to keep my already exploding blood pressure high. The globalists are dead worried about a fall in global growth and all that. But, why worry, since they already have infinite wealth created at the gentle stoke of computer keys through the magic of credit creation, so they will always have plenty of baked beans in the cupboard, to flavour the smoked salmon and caviar.

     Here is the global foundation, pondering how bright the future for globalism will be:

Continue reading

The Economists were Wrong about Globalisation. Now They Tell Us! By James Reed

     Anti-Trumper, and free trader economic rationalist supremo, Paul Krugman, has now admitted that globalists like him made a bit of a boo-boo with economic globalisation:

“In a column for Bloomberg titled “What Economists (Including Me) Got Wrong About Globalization,” Krugman admits that the economic consensus for free trade that has prevailed for decades has failed to recognize how globalization has skyrocketed inequality for America’s working and middle class workers.

Continue reading

For that Money, Maybe I Too Should Jump Ship and become a Pirate … eh … a Climate Protester!!! By James Reed

     Follow the money trail – that is always good advice about getting to the bottom of things, of who has greased whose palms. The climate zealots, for example, seem to be on a good wicket:

“Extinction Rebellion is paying activists up to £400 a week to lead the protests that have brought chaos to the streets of Britain, documents seen by The Mail on Sunday reveal. Protesters have received payments totalling more than £70,000 in four months alone. But the eco-protest group privately fears it could face a six-figure tax bill if the money, which is given as expenses, is deemed to be payment for work done on XR's behalf. Last night, one Tory MP called on HMRC to launch an immediate investigation into the movement's tax affairs. Most of the thousands of activists who brought chaos to London last week were unpaid volunteers, but a select number are claiming the funds which enable them to dedicate their efforts to the protest group, also known as XR. This newspaper has seen claims for expenses from 168 activists, including Tamsin Omond, a baronet's granddaughter who has appeared in Tatler and rubbed shoulders with Boris Johnson – and who asked for money after ditching some public relations clients to concentrate on protests. A dossier of files from within XR reveals the inner workings of the protest movement and its finances.

Continue reading

Who are the Uyghurs of China? By James Reed

     I have been writing about the Chinese communist government’s human rights violations against the Uyghurs, and the relative lack of interest about this in the public debates about China worship. But, for interest, who are the Uyghurs? Here are some extracts from a recent vDare article telling us. Turns out that the Uyghurs, are predominantly white, which explains why the Left will just let them burn, just as the ethnic cleansing of the Yazidis by ISIS, to “smash their blond bloodline,” was never of any interest to the Left of the West:

“There’s an old stereotype that “all Chinese people look the same.” However, what people really mean is that Han Chinese people, who make up 91% of the population of the People’s Republic of China, look the same. There are also 55 officially-recognized ethnic minorities in China. And then there are ethnic minorities whom the Chinese government refuses to recognize. This is usually because they are Turkic peoples who are genetically very different from the Han and don’t like being ruled by them. One of these unrecognized ethnic minorities: 11.3 million-strong Muslim “Uyghur.” They have effectively been in rebellion against Han occupation for centuries. And, genetically, they are, to a great extent, white. … The Uyghur, known until the 1930s simply as the Turki, have repeatedly risen up against their East Asian Han overlords, inevitable because they are genetically and culturally very different from the Han. It has been demonstrated that the more genetically different two ethnic groups are, the more likely they are fight against each other [see Ethnic Conflicts, by Tatu Vanhanen]. Essentially, there has been continuous unrest in the Northwest province of Xinjiang, where the China’s Uyghur mainly live, since 1931. This province, once overwhelmingly Uyghur, is now only 45% Uyghur—and 40% Han. Its capital city, Urumqi, is now 75% Han and only 12.8% Uyghur.

Continue reading

China’s Rape Camps By James Reed

     The Left have not spoken a word about this, but anything challenging open borders is racist, and hell, it makes you fit for being bashed to death, which is the  way of the radical Left, as seen by vicious attacks upon innocent Trump supporters:

     Then there is what has been called, “China’s genocide’:

Continue reading

Letter to The Editor - That is what lies ahead for them, too, if they let slip this chance for escape from totalitarianism

To The Age         It is good to read that "there are a lot of ideologues on the hard Brexit wing who care more for principle than consequences" ("Brexit deal hangs in the balance", 19/10). Such a position is ethically valid. It sounds as though Nigel Farage is correct in stating that Boris Johnson's withdrawal agreement with the EU "isn't Brexit." In that case, let's hope it is defeated in the House of Commons as were its Theresa May prototypes. Britons eager to have their nation reclaim its full sovereignty and traditional protection of free speech must not let themselves be fooled by threats or cajolery. They should note the recent EU Court of Human Rights dismissal of an appeal by German politician Udo Pastore against an unjust conviction for speaking his mind in parliament. That is what lies ahead for them, too, if they let slip this chance for escape from totalitarianism.
  Nigel Jackson, Belgrave

Letter to The Editor - This piddling withdrawal deal should be defeated emphatically in the House of Commons

To The Australian        Your editorial ("Only viable Brexit deal on offer", 19-20/10) must be one of the worst in the history of your newspaper and is deeply disappointing to those of us who advocate a genuine Brexit that unequivocally honours the 2016 referendum result. In advising acceptance of what seems to be another pseudo-Brexit proposal you manage somehow to omit any reference to the two key issues, which are the restoration of full national sovereignty and the protection of the principle of free speech which has been fatally cast aside by the EU's Court of Human Rights. As to the latter, that court's recent dismissal of an appeal by German politician Udo Pastore against an unjust conviction for speaking his mind in parliament on a controversial topic is the latest example of tyranny riding rampant through a context of legal dishonesty and chicanery. Those "28 hardline Brexit 'Spartans'" are surely right that Boris Johnson has compromised with the EU too much. This piddling withdrawal deal should be defeated emphatically in the House of Commons.
  Nigel Jackson, Belgrave

Letter to The Editor - Contrary to Australia's real interests

To The Australian        The proposal by the City of Port Phillip to hold "a morning of mourning" on Australia Day is unwise ("Wyatt backs proposal for 'morning of mourning'", 18/10). It is really too late in the day; and, psychologically speaking, it is unhealthy to grieve beyond a reasonable length of time. Also, Liberal MP Tim Smith is right to oppose the idea as being part of the current tendency of local government to "insert itself into issues of national and international politics". That can lead to an unnecessary complication of political activity in the nation to the detriment of sound local government. Moreover, in the present context of an unwelcome push from some quarters to facilitate a nationwide movement of Aboriginal separatism, the council's decision can be seen as divisive and contrary to Australia's real interests.
  Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic