Elon Musk, supposed champion of free speech, also has a World Economic Forum transhuman agenda. While proclaiming that AI poses an existential threat to humanity, his own Neuralink is charging ahead with a Terminator project, that involves chip implants into the human brain. This is supposed to do all matter of wonderous things, like make the blind see again … turn water into wine, well, not quite.

However, it seems that one implant of the dark tech into a macaque monkey led to rupture of the poor thing’s brain. Yet, Musk insists that human trials must now go on. How many brains must be ruptured on the path to AI domination of the world?

As well as retired US Department of Defense officer, Former Pentagon insider Gregory Weaver, warning of the coming of nuclear war, Trump has also issued his warning, following the volatile Middle East situation, and the on-going Ukraine war. “We are in grave danger of having World War III," Trump said during his campaign stop. "This will be world obliteration. This is a real deal.” As well, he noted that the southern border invasion was in full force, noting that the immigrants as "some of the same people who just attacked Israel" and said that under Biden's open border policy, the United States has allowed "tens and thousands of terrorists into our country."

What Trump said about the US situation applies with even more force across the West, especially Western Europe, anywhere where the diversity/multicult cult rules.

According to a retired US Department of Defense officer, Former Pentagon insider Gregory Weaver, who specialised in nuclear weapons defence, Russia does not have a strict adherence to the Mad, Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine regarding nuclear weapons, and has instead a “escalate to de-escalate” position. This is not well known outside of the circle of defence experts, and it certainly is not well known in the general intellectual population, whose thought is still back in the 1960s.

But, as documented by the late Dr Peter Pry, this nuclear doctrine is also held by other axis of evil adversaries, such as communist China, North Korea, and Iran. The policy relates to the use of smaller scale tactical nukes, rather than things like the country-destroying Satan II missile which can annihilated areas the size of France or Texas. There is no coming back if one of those giant fire crackers is let off.

The foundational belief of the Yes campaign, embodied in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, is that the Voice is something that indigenous Australians want. If this is so, the argument from guilt gets going, such as, why should non-indigenous Australians vote to not let these special people have their special rights?

But, it seems the core proposition of the Yes site is just false. Polling done by the No side is indicating tht the majority of indigenous Australians support No, and will oppose the Voice. This, if it proves to be true in the only poll that counts, on election day, it will knock the Yes side quite badly. In the aftermath if they dare rattle on about white racism, if the majority of indigenous people oppose the Voice, that claim will be knocked flat. How will we know? By polling after the vote to deal with the statistic of some indigenous people changing their minds.

Dr Syed has posted an article last week where he detailed, in full scientific glory, how the DNA from the Covid mRNA vaxxes could be integrated into the cells. Here is a simpler explanation. But, we need not get bogged down on the scientific details, because what is important are the ramifications. The fact is that if this line of thought is right, people have undergone genetic modification. The vast majority of the human race are now genetically modified organisms. Where will this lead? The adverse effects from the vaxxes indicate that we do not know. And worse, the push for mRNA vaxxes of everything, including putting it in food so everyone gets vaxxed, is frightening indeed:

https://www.wfla.com/news/national/vaccines-in-your-salad-scientists-growing-medicine-filled-plants-to-replace-injections/  

The legal cases against Donald Trump are clearly devised as lawfare to either prevent him from running, or destroy him financially and personally. There has never been anything like this in history, short of just shooting the guy, which I suppose is being contemplated by the Dark Lords.

The New York Supreme Court's order, based upon allegations of civil fraud, called for the dissolution of the Trump Organization. It is based upon allegations of Trump over-valuing his real estate to secure loans, all of which were paid back. The case is utterly absurd, since everyone over-values their assets, and that is why big grown ups like banks do independent assessments to get the right values. There is no case against Trump, but the courts have become dominated by Leftists who do not even try to be fair. This is case study of how Leftism destroys the rule of law.

I have been covering the China buy ups of Aussie land, especially fuelled by the massive overseas student migration scam, totalling hundreds of thousands, if not more, students, as the agenda of the Asianisation Great Replacement of what remains of white Australia, rolls relentless on. Australia is being targeted as the top destination for buy ups, as the Australian laws are so utterly traitorous; most of South East Asia would never allow the buy ups that are occurring now, pricing local Aussies out of the market to occur. The universities have a big part to play in this, which is one more reason for closing down these commo globo centres for immigration recruitment. Higher education needs a radical rethink.

There is need for a new anti-immigration movement that is more hard-line than the ones in the past, as the hour now is getting late. Wake up, or die!

One of the great dogmas of the anti-fossil fuel lobby is that wind power is cheaper than gas. This idea is fuelling such nonsense, seen in the US, but spreading, of banning gas stoves n new homes, and gas in the food industry and restaurants. This is an ideology that our side of politics needs to counter, and fortunately there is material to do this.

I have been waiting for the climate change maniacs to declare war upon lawns. Lawns are so European, even British, bringing to mind an English country garden. The Left just has to attack them. While NASA has argued that lawns are a good urban carbon sink, absorbing large amounts of carbon, the counter is that lawns require resources such as mowers, fertilizer and weedicides, and each of these has a carbon footprint. Sure, everything does including human flatulence from eating World Economic Forum bugs. The argument below tries to show that having cows on farms can be much more ecologically sound than lawns, which is no doubt true. But, what should people in urban areas have if not lawns? Growing vegetables would be subject to the same argument, and maybe even less of a carbon sink. Of course, I oppose the whole carbon nonsense, but let us run with it for the sake of argument.

I have no doubt that there is an alternative approach to lawns which does not involve these costs. Like mowing them with hand pushers, and organic methods of weed control, like using vinegar, or just pulling the weeds up by hand.

A new peer-reviewed study in the journal Climate, has made the case that the global warming hypothesis is challenged by an examination of the location of temperature measuring stations. It was found that most of these are in urban areas, giving rise to a heat island effect. If the measurement of temperature changes was using rural stations only, the extent of global warming changes from 0.89 degrees (C) per century to only 0.55 degrees per century. This alone would refute the climate emergency narrative that is being used to eliminate fossil fuels and farming in the West.

Thus, this is an important piece of evidence for our side. The issue about the accuracy of the thermometers measuring temperature in urban areas has often been raised as an objection to the global warming hypothesis. The counter is usually that there are so many stations, that any errors will get averaged out. That strikes me a bogus, as the error will apply to each station in an urban area, with all of them being inaccurate, so there is no averaging process that will work satisfactorily. An average of bogus data, is just averaged bogus data.

We from New Zealand recall the former prime minister Jacinda Ardern crowing about how civil liberties must be restricted in a time of Covid. She is still working on restricting free speech as her new day job after leaving the NZ parliament: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iridvM_spg

But, while as PM, she was proclaiming all of this, New Zealand Ministry of Health granted vaccine exemptions to hundreds among its key staff. According to a Freedom of Information request: “From 13 November 2021 to 26 September 2022, a total of 478 applications for Significant Service Disruption exemption (SSD) were received. 103 applications were granted, covering approximately 11,005 workers. Please note that it is not possible to provide the exact number of workers that were covered by SSDs. This is because it was possible for an organisation to submit an application to cover more than one worker.”

The Hamas attack upon Israel has significance beyond the Middle East. Across the world, migrants, including asylum seekers, have been taking to the streets to celebrate the deaths, rapes and torture. It is one thing to have a political objection, quite another to support sheer barbarism. Toddlers are being kept in dog cages by Hamas for example. Readers would be psychologically soiled seeing some of the other horrors now on social media, many inflicted upon young women. That is not the way of the warrior; if the attack was a man-to-man thing against the Defense Forces, well, that is war. But, the attacks upon the innocent are terrorism. How can babies defend themselves?

The street celebrations show that multiculturalism is just about white liberals permitting their country to become dominated by the tribalism of the diverse. And, true to form, as documented in the extract below, the Left is generally supportive of Hamas’s attack.

The Greens and environmentalists used to love whales, especially gay whales, but in the US, whales are being allowed to be zapped out of their cetacean brains by the noises of marine wind turbines. No Greenpeace boats to disrupt the turbines, a new sacred icon of the environmentalists. And on land, the turbines are threatening hundreds of thousands of bats. These creatures, who feast on fruit, then fly around spreading rabies, and in Australia, Australian bat lyssavirus, which is closely related to rabies, are being shredded by the giant flying swords of the wind turbines. You would have thought that such creatures, would be something the Left would want to save, but, here you go.

Where is Batman when you need him!

One of the questions which is of vital importance in the Voice referendum, but which has only recently been given the attention it deserves by academic only so far, is if the referendum succeeds, what effects does this have upon the federalist structure? The prime minister is falsely saying that the changes are only symbolic, but he also from the other side of his mouth proclaims that it would be a brave parliament that in any way did not follow the recommendations of the Voice, making it a third chamber of parliament. So, he is inconsistent, indicating that something is up.

A research paper in law, by Nicholas Aroney, The University of Queensland - T.C. Beirne School of Law; Emory University - Center for the Study of Law and Religion, and Peter Congdon, “The Voice Referendum and the Federal Division of Powers: A New Head of Commonwealth Legislative Power to Implement the Voice’s Representations?” suggests what is up.

Sky News is reporting that people do not like the Voice, whether they come from the Liberal or Labor camps. I was at the community centre reading the article extract below, and a debate erupted between a young white guy, a Yes supporter, and an Indian woman, supporting No. He raised the racism objection which she smashed, saying, I am not white, and he caved in immediately.  And, she raised the fundamental issue discussed below, that there are so many uncertainties with the Yes change to the constitution, that even if one supported a type of Voice, or a treaty, as Mundane does, this is the wrong way to do it. Ok, I can live with that, for the next week. Everyone, of all politics and hues, needs to vote No! to knock this over!

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/labor-voters-against-the-voice-referendum-in-large-numbers/ar-AA1hydAY?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=099c7e988f3c4bfcb3aade77cb6f3e51&ei=15

To: The Prime Minister, Hon. Anthony Albanese Dear Prime Minister,

You, more than most, would be aware the times are out of joint. To a frightening degree, they resemble those of the mid-1930s. At that time a programme was launched by the ABC called “Is democracy doomed?” in which Sir Robert Menzies participated. His starting point was this: as a system of government, it was extremely young; in the full political sense it had been current for not more than a few generations. And it was fragile. To keep it in good health required eternal vigilance.

Both former prime ministers, John Howard and Tony Abbott, have said that the Northern Territory is a failed state. That is about as bad as it gets, putting the Northern Territory in the African camp. Remote communities are not getting even basic services, such as adequate education for indigenous children, and both doubt whether the Voice could in principle solve these problems. Both liberals rightly have stated the Voice changes to the constitution would put racial separatism into the constitution, which would be highly divisive. Further, whatever proposals are canvassed for helping remote communities, nothing will be seen for some years, while urgent action is needed now. And, that is the problem with having a centralised body such as the Voice. The Yes side, has to some degree recognised this, but instead as seeing their proposal as fundamentally flawed, have doubled down, wanting masses of regional Voices. It will only multiple problems, increase expenses, and go nowhere except, make a group of elites, even more well paid.

I have been out in Melbourne campaigning for the No side of the referendum. In the past I campaigned for anti-immigration groups and the going was often hard. But, this time I am seeing that most people do not even understand the basics of  Yes. About an hour ago I spoke to a woman who is Black from America, who said that she was voting Yes, because she was Black and thus naturally had to vote for Aboriginal people. I told her that I respected her tribalism, but she should consider that the leaders of the No side are Aboriginal too. She was amazed and did not believe me, so she checked the Fair website and saw Senator Price. At that point she was open to debate, and finally admitted that there were so many uncertainties, and things she was not told, that she would have to vote No. This was someone who supported reparations in America for Black, and Black Lives matter! Below is a good summary of the same argument that people can print off this week, memorise and use to convince the unconverted.

Under conditions of uncertainty, and unreliable information, the correct decision is to minimise regret, and a No vote does that even if one supported some aspects of the Voice. I have seen this week people undecided be converted, and I am not a genius or expert debater. Talk to everyone you meet now and put the basic case: we don’t know, so vote No!

Paul Craig Roberts comments upon the Nobel Prize for medicine being given to two mRNA Covid vax researchers. He does not discuss the priority issue, that Dr Robert Malone has a claim to be included in the Prize, if it is legitimate. But, the basic issue here is that the Nobel Committee has ignored the vast evidence of adverse effects from the Covid mRNA vax. This is now a topic that is going mainstream, so no more is it a conspiracy.

Below is some ground-breaking news, that challenges the line proposed by the trans lobby, that gender-aligning surgery and hormones are necessary for health. But a Danish study of trans people found: “Trans women [i.e., men] taking [female] hormones are up to 95 per cent more likely to suffer heart disease, a new study has found. Researchers found that trans women [i.e., men] – people born male who identify as women – taking gender-affirming hormones are almost twice as likely to suffer from any cardiovascular disease as men.”

So, the conclusion, at least for hormone replacement issues, needs to be made, that these interventions have harms that could lead to death. If so, doesn’t this refute the social construction view that sex categories are just social constructions? I think so.