How the Christchurch Massacre has helped advance Islam.

Many Muslim leaders have declared that they want the whole world to become Muslim.  The Koran has pages of instruction to followers on how to persuade others to become Muslim. It also has pages of instruction on how to force others to become Muslim.  Some use Jihad, 'holy war,' in the hope of turning others to Islam.

Luckily, most people are good people, whether religious or not,  and do not resort to violence. They use other means, peaceful means, and they are making inroads. They are getting converts, but almost as important, more and more countries are making it risky, even unlawful, to criticise Islam.

It is a battle of religions, mostly covert, sometimes overt.

Something happened on the 14th of March, 2019, that may not appear significant in the battle, but is beginning to appear that it might be a major advance for the spread of Islam.

One Brenton Tarrant shot dead fifty people at two separate mosques in New Zealand.  There were also many injured, and another death in early May. Some of those killed were small children.

It was a terrible crime.  According to various summaries on what he called his 'manifesto,' his intention was to divide people in order to turn division and resentment into outright war. (The 'manifesto' has been censored.)

New Zealand's Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, said that the killer would not succeed in his intention, that his act was not dividing the community, it was uniting them.

She appeared to be right - to begin with.  There was an outpouring of sympathy, and the mounds of flowers grew,  as they do after every other terrorist attack.

Ardern's compassion was praised.  An online petition signed by thousands of people wanted her to receive a Nobel Peace Prize.



But that 'uniting' has been short-lived.  Resentment has grown when Ardern wears the hijab, a symbol of the lowly status of women within Islam, and a symbol of a religion that says that unbelievers should be killed.

Unbelievably, she has gone further.  The Islamic Call to Prayer was broadcast over New Zealand,  a call that states, among other things, that there is no god but Allah.  Surely that is blasphemy for all other religions, including Christianity, the main religion of most Western countries.


The translation:

Allahu Akbar

God is Great
(said four times)

I bear witness that there is no god except the One God.
(said two times)

I bear witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God.
(said two times)

Hurry to the prayer (Rise up for prayer)
(said two times)

Hurry to success (Rise up for Salvation)
(said two times)
Allahu Akbar
God is Great
[said two times]

There is no god except the One God





There have been remembrance services, and a fortnight after the event, yet another, even bigger, remembrance service.  And all of that time, Ardern has acted as if the whole world has committed a grievous sin against Islam.

So many pictures of her face, often wearing a hijab, making her grieving expression.

Her face was even shown projected onto a tall building in Dubai.  She may have taken it as a tribute to her beautiful nature, but I suspect it is more of a triumphant gloat that the leader of a Western Nation is bowing down to Islam.

There was a Benefit concert - 'Stand up for Christchurch.'  (TV, Win, 22/4/19) with the money raised to go to the victims and families of the Christchurch attack.




23rd April, it was announced that a silo in Melbourne is to be painted with that same image as the tower in Dubai. "It has, for us, become a beacon of tolerance, love and peace in these divisive times."   
But a typical reaction from a f/b discussion goes more like this - "What the fuck has Jacinda Ardern's nauseating act of sympathy towards a group of people whose 'religion' exhorts violence towards non muslims daily got to do with Melbourne ???!?!"

https://www.smh.com.au/national/victoria/a-beacon-of-tolerance-love-and-peace-jacinda-ardern-mural-to-be-painted-on-brunswick-silos-20190422-p51g7t.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0TVrWkrWLLv2LxM41ESzuOAQn3v1AsgIcdo2Q_DQaJ5PEikrCw2Uj6wzc#Echobox=1555967722

And the privilege of permanent residency:

It has been announced that Muslims who were attacked in the Christchurch mosque massacre will be granted permanent residency in New Zealand.  It includes their immediate families.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6953195/Muslims-attacked-Christchurch-mosque-massacre-given-NZ-permanent-residency.html?fbclid=IwAR00N2S6SjXwxbuVoKkGZAm4f7FErFugR-ClfC-BoZc-rIEsIU3UF6BC9p4

Anzac Day  25th April. There was a suggestion that the ceremonies include an Islamic Prayer.   There were objections to this.  Islam has nothing to do with the commemoration of the sacrifices made by our soldiers in past wars. 

But then, two-thirds of the planned Anzac Day ceremonies in New Zealand were cancelled  - 'security concerns,' although, of course, no-one would say just where they feared that the threat might come from.  Surely it could not be that the Muslims in New Zealand are not those same lovely people that Ardern likes to hug.

https://7news.com.au/news/anzac/nearly-60-anzac-day-services-are-cancelled-in-auckland-over-safety-concerns-c-51796?utm_campaign=share-icons&fbclid=IwAR1qU-QmYwhiITuC9M1LosGsgbdPBo0yp5FEzLyFBqcaEzBUxLsGnHgcNs4

Police are boosting security at Anzac Day marches all over Australia and New Zealand. There was actually a sniper posted on the Shrine of Remembrance, Melbourne.

And in Bendigo, Victoria, for the first time, bollards were used against a potential vehicle attack by terrorists. 

In other country centres, it was the same, like a large truck, with large and heavy trailer attached, planted across the main road in to the centre of town, toward the scheduled march.  That truck was not merely for traffic control, as we would have assumed just a few years ago.

It is a sad thing that we have to take precautions like this.  It is obvious that it is Muslim fanatics that are the threat, but few want to admit that.


We should honour those ones who sacrificed for our freedom. It is shameful and a dishonour to all of us that some are afraid to do what we have done since WW1.


Right.  This is a chap known as 'Curly Kirk.' He did not survive the Japanese POW
 camps of WW2.

 
There are others, so many others, who fought for our country.  And yet now, we fear attacks from those living within our borders.

26th April, 2019.  Prince William and wife, Kate, visited New Zealand and met with affected families.  And again, we see  Ardern with her hijab and sad expression!  Some are still rewarding this with praise, though more and more of us are thoroughly disgusted.

There is criticism from some Muslim women as well.  There are places where the hijab is compulsory, places where women who revolt are very severely punished.  So is wearing the hijab showing solidarity with Muslims?  Or is it showing solidarity with those who force their women to wear it?  Sometimes it is not just a hijab that women are forced to wear, but whole wearable tents that say that a woman is no longer a person, but a thing. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan under the Taliban, all strongly Islamic societies.

I wonder if Ardern understands that in some Islamic countries, she would be stoned to death for being an unmarried mother.

Jacinta Ardern is overdoing it.

There have been so many terrorist attacks by Muslims, and the world tries so hard to say that such violence is 'nothing to do with Islam,' or it was a lone wolf,  or maybe mental illness, or even domestic or workplace violence.

I have no doubt that she is truly grieved that such a thing happened in New Zealand, one of the few countries that has not experienced an Islamic inspired terrorist attack.

But the display has gone so far, it makes one wonder if a large part of it is a show made in the hope that there will be fewer attacks by Muslims against non-believers.  Maybe New Zealand will continue to be spared.

Maybe it has worked.  So far,  New Zealand has been spared any incidents of Islamic terrorism (that we know of.)

Other places, it goes on pretty much as usual.

In parts of Africa, there is a continuous war against non-Muslims.  In various Arabic countries, there are very few non Muslims left.  Either they have converted, been killed or left.

In Nigeria

"Nearly 300 people killed in at least seven Christian villages across Mid Nigeria in February and March of this year, including brutal rapes and maiming with machetes."   

"The Muslim group known as the Fulani have also maimed or killed over 6,000 Christian women, children, and elderly in the last two years."    

 https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/03/nigeria-muslims-burn-four-churches-and-28-homes-rape-and-murder-christian-woman-in-raids-on-christian-villages?fbclid=IwAR3ypk6XIC6fqZ0MpzR3c7Yd9YlZvWazy6uYoGPxFs-273qAn6sFqNLSh94

There have also been numerous attacks on Christian churches all over the world - Africa, of course,  but also other countries of Europe, America, even Australia, though I have yet to see one of the fires at Australian churches being blamed on Muslims.

France has been particularly bad.  "French churches are coming increasingly under attack with an average of nearly three churches per day targetted for vandalism alone over the past three years."    (Brietbart News,  30th March, 2019.)

Mid March, 2019,  A Muslim woman was sentenced to eight years in prison for plotting to blow up Notre Dame Cathedral, Paris.

16th April, 2019:  Notre Dame is very badly damaged by fire. It could, of course, have been an accident. Findings are yet to be made public.



https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/04/catholic-churches-being-vandalized-across-the-usa/?fbclid=IwAR1GfcYiGhaK-hzGqde1_KysagJ-kt8a-5poFxD5bGy7W0X0L3Eor7DNb_c


Islamic terrorism continues. 

"In the 18 days after the Christchurch massacre, there have been 65 attacks, 418 killings by terrorism, overwhelmingly Islamist terrorists."   

These figures were provided by One Nation Senator, Peter Georgiou. 13/4/19) in relation to the censure motion on Senator Fraser Anning.  He was accused of blaming the victims.

Sri Lanka

Easter Sunday, 21st April, 2019, Sri Lanka.  There was a series of coordinated attacks on Christian churches and two hotels.  Around 250 dead, hundreds more injured. 

Someone suggested that it was revenge for the Christchurch attack, but that is unlikely. A multi-pronged attack such as this would have been in planning for months.

Two weeks later, Christian churches are still not permitted to open.  The threat continues.


As I said, Muslim attacks continue exactly as normal. 

And now for the repercussions of the Christchurch attack.

Gun Laws:

First, gun laws in New Zealand are to be drastically tightened.  This will not concern most of us.

Censorship:

The gunman's 'manifesto' has been banned, and having a copy can earn a person up to ten years in prison, an absurd sentence for what is scarcely a crime at all.  (I presume it can only apply to those in New Zealand.)  Since it was very long, and few would have been interested in the ravings of a lunatic, it is hard to know whether the banning will result in more or less reading of the script.

To see an illuminating article on the manifesto, go to: 
https://quadrant.org.au/…/the-anti-humanist-ideology-of-th…/

Just a couple of points from that article:  Tarrant was aggrieved that European civilisation was being undermined by the 'invasion'  of millions of immigrants from 3rd world countries.   But also he detested Conservatives, Marxists, the “cult of individualism”, urbanisation, industrialisation, drug addiction, capitalism, globalisation, democracy, exploitation of workers, free markets, multiculturalism, diversity and free trade.

He said: "I was a Communist, then an Anarchist, and finally a Libertarian before becoming an Eco-Fascist.”  

 He was also a member of Antifa, so if anything, he can be categorised as more left-wing than right-wing, if those terms meant as much as the media portray. 
That does not make him a 'right-wing' extremist, but mostly, a very garbled extremist.

NOT Conservative, and not right-wing, but these are the ones who have been blamed.

Copies of the livestream of the massacre have been banned.  I wonder if this could be a mistake, as such a banning gives rise to conspiracy theories - statements such as 'there were no bullet holes,' 'there was no blood, it could not be real,' and one I have seen  -  that in one picture Tarrant had a beard and in another, he did not.

Christchurch

I have no doubt it was real. It happened, an awful thing.  There could not possibly be a conspiracy that involved so many people.

Maybe only those who think that Christchurch is a small place at the other end of the earth could even contemplate such an idea.

But banning information is a prime way of fostering such ideas.





I didn’t think they would actually punish for sharing the video or the manifesto. It seems extreme. But a teenager is in prison now because he shared the livestream,  and a total of six people have appeared in New Zealand court on charges they illegally redistributed the gunman’s video. 
(7 news, 26/4/19) 

https://7news.com.au/news/terrorism/christchurch-mosque-shooting-new-zealand-man-pleads-guilty-to-sharing-video-online-c-80324?fbclid=IwAR2wz5zbGM2aK-V9ULk8i0OK1NvDytMAMwJGaZOOaCDx9MSoDE4BnVIX6PYhttps://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8660140/new-zealand-shooting-christchurch-teenager-shares-live-stream-faces-jail/

So New Zealand now has laws akin to a police state.     How very, very sad.


A new Law in Australia:

A new law was rushed through parliament that outlaws the sharing of 'abhorrent violent material.' The law has been widely criticized for the way it was rushed through and for its vagueness. And I am not at all sure how they will send non-Australian social media executives to prison for not pulling down live-streamed material 'expeditiously.'

Avi Yemini says of it 'These new laws mean that Australians will no longer be able to share video-news on “terrorist attacks, murders or rapes”, essentially implementing a Chinese-regime-style news filter.' (3rd April 2019)

In my own facebook feed, I am seeing far more posts that have been censored, though I have never watched 'abhorrent violent material.' My guess is that they are pulling any videos that show Muslims in a bad light.

There is a further crackdown on those who criticise Islam:

A prospective speaking tour of Australia by Milo Yiannopoulis was stopped.  He was refused a visa, though when he commented on the case, it was to condemn the violence.

May 3rd, 2019,  more conservative speakers have been banned from facebook. -  Paul Joseph Watson, Laura Loomer,  Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson, several others.  None have incited violence and none of them are guilty of 'hate speech' (if any reasonable definition is used,) but all have criticised Islam, and that is no longer permitted.

Watson confirmed his ban, saying, “In an authoritarian society controlled by a handful of Silicon Valley giants, all dissent must be purged.”

Lesser known critics have also found themselves in 'facebook prison.' Islam must not be criticised.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/32187-war-on-free-speech-facebook-bans-people-it-considers-dangerous?fbclid=IwAR20q7gG0sTUnYd8J3kygzLtwiJQTmIi0CLWOv91mmXU7IJwiK_glbbyI6s

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/05/03/only-trump-can-stop-silicon-valleys-war-on-freedom-of-speech/

Obfuscation of the facts:

The media has often appeared reluctant to talk about it when Muslims are the aggressors, and that.  overwhelmingly, terrorism around the world is Islamic.  It is shown in the eagerness with which they pronounce a non-Muslim attack to be terrorism, such as the killing of a journalist in Ireland by the 'New IRA.' 

Or Tarrant, who was immediately pronounced a terrorist. It depends on your definition of terrorism, but if the Christchurch killings were to promote a religion or political view rather than simply to make division more bitter, it was not in his manifesto. But he did call himself a terrorist, and terrorism it was labelled, very early on.  Not a lone attack by a lunatic or anything else,  as killings by Muslims are so often called.  When a Muslim attacks, it tends to be called anything from 'workplace violence,' to 'domestic violence,' and frequently,  the perpetrator is called 'mentally ill,' rather than 'Muslim.'

So many dead in the Sri Lanka attacks.  They were aimed directly at Christians by Muslims.

The reaction?  'Be kind to Muslims. It was not Muslims, but ISIS,' one said.  And some, unbelievably could not bring themselves to speak of the Christian victims, but referred to them as 'Easter worshippers.'   I saw a news item (ABC)  that instead of saying that Muslims attacked Christians, said that the risk was of  'religious minorities attacking each other.'  


And there is more blind insistence that Muslims are only good and that Islam is a 'Religion of Peace.'

For instance: in response to my posting something about a book I bought, came this rant.  (Only a portion has been reproduced.)   "I'm a Christian, but I am shocked and ashamed to see this intolerant, bigoted, unwarranted hatred being peddled by people who seemingly know no better. If Christianity is a religion of tolerance, then show some." 

 The book is by Cheri Berens: ‘An American Woman Living in Egypt:  Life during an Islamic takeover.’   It is a memoir by one who still lives in Egypt, so obviously is not saying that all Muslims are bad. 

These days, any hint that Islam might not be all  good, all the time, tends to be greeted by a half-hysterical insistence that it is good, and that anyone who says not, is a hate-filled bigot.

And yet: "Australia's National Terrorism Threat Level remains PROBABLE. Credible intelligence, assessed by our security agencies, indicates that individuals or groups continue to possess the intent and capability to conduct a terrorist attack in Australia."

 And though it is not said, that terrorism threat is from Muslims, not from 'white nationalists' or anyone else. 
  https://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/…/national-terrorism-th…

It reminds me of  what I wrote a while back in this blog - 'Threat?  What threat?'   People just prefer not to know. 
That was in June, 2018.

 http://mamcrae-author.blogspot.com/2018/06/threat-what-threat.html

Tarrant killed 51 people in that attack.  None of those people or their families or friends would think it any sort of a victory for Islam in its efforts to take over Western Civilization.

But when it has resulted in such an increased censorship,  then yes, it has been an advance for Islam in its struggle.  Its 'Jihad.'  The Christchurch Massacre has helped Islam's advance through Western Civilization.   

May 18th, 2019. These elections are vitally important.

This election is more important than any that I remember in my life-time.  People need to think about it.  There is no room for donkey votes or whimsical nonsense in these elections.  Use your vote to help our country, just as well as you can, the way you see it.


First:   TAKE NO NOTICE OF 'HOW-TO-VOTE' CARDS.  These are the vehicles by which the Parties do their dirty little preference deals among themselves.

Your vote is your own, and that includes your preferences.  So vote the way YOU prefer. You don't have to take orders.  The Senate - vote BELOW the line, you have to number at least up to 12,  and you can choose exactly who you want.  Voting above the line risks your vote going to someone whom you would never voluntarily choose.


The Major Parties:

I will not tell anyone how to vote (much)  but here is a summary of the points of difference that I think most important.

 Climate Policy.

The Coalition (Libs/Nats)  aim to bring 'emissions' down by 28%  by 2030.  This will cost a lot of money and will achieve absolutely nothing in bringing down global temperatures.  While I personally do not believe that humans are making any change in the climate, even if you do, Australia's total emissions compared to the rest of the world, is miniscule.  What this means is a detrimental effect on our prosperity,  but nil effect on climate. 

Labor aims to bring down 'emissions' by a massive 45%.  This will cost a fortune, and will still not make the slightest change in bringing down global temperatures.  They will not give an estimate of the cost of this, only waffle on about the cost of  not doing it.  (If you are not a believer in human-caused Global Warming, you would see the cost of not doing it as nil.)  

Incidentally, I put 'emissions' in inverted commas because I think the talk about carbon dioxide a bit ridiculous - a harmless, inert gas, and a tiny percentage of the atmosphere.  We breathe it out all day, every day.



Immigration and population:  

The Coalition aims to continue firm control of our borders, and plans to reduce the rate of increase in our population.  Refugee numbers are to be limited.  (We would still have one of the most generous schemes in the world.)  

Labor plans to double the numbers of humanitarian visas (refugees)    It says that it will keep the policy of off-shore processing, but their past record on border protection is poor.  
It has not announced any plans to reduce the rate of  population increase, and are more likely to increase it.

Our rate of population increase is extremely high, and it is mostly by immigration.  Last I heard, 28% of our population was born overseas.  A country's culture cannot remain unchanged with that number of newcomers, especially when so many are from cultures that are very different from our own.  Like many, I do not want our population any higher, and I think it frankly dangerous to choose immigrants who are reluctant to integrate. 

Neither of the major parties have a policy of reducing immigration to zero net immigration, even though our major cities, and even our lesser regional cities are becoming more crowded by the day.

A few of the more bizarre, harmful and even dangerous policies of the major parties:

Labor wants 50% of new cars to be electric cars by 2030.  

Bill Shorten demonstrated his utter ignorance when he thought that an electric car takes around 8 - 10 minutes to charge.  While having an electric car might be feasible in the city, recharged every night in your own garage, it is mad to think they would be fine for country driving.  Further, when cost of manufacture is taken into account, there is no overall decrease in 'emissions.'  And more, we are already having problems with our electricity supply - very expensive and becoming more and more unreliable due to the increasing proportion of heavily subsidized renewable sources, solar and wind.  How are we supposed to cope with a drastically increased demand?  


Labor wants to add a 'National Gender Centre.'  

"The policy aims to make 'gender affirming technology' more affordable and accessible as well as adding more gender identification options on birth certificates.  The document states it should 'focus on creating fair, equal and affordable access to medical care and treatments relevant to trans and gender-diverse Australians.'

In effect, it will continue what the so-called 'Safe Schools' has started - telling children that their sex is something they can change, and providing the doctors that might 'affirm' their new gender, and then harm their bodies with hormones and surgery.

There is already a problem with children being encouraged to change gender. It is a concern that Labor's policy in this regard would inevitably make it worse.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6957289/Labor-gender-policies-cause-children-undergo-unnecessary-sex-changes.html?fbclid=IwAR1VBfnqa41Hd2BdjKtqwOAzNsvxQMx9vvUAHdqMI50C6eaY_MMAoNtZAwo


Labor is to drop the limits on immigration of parents of immigrants.

If they go ahead with this one, it will be very expensive, remembering that the parents will often be elderly.  Also, one of the justifications for such a large number of immigrants, is to change the demographic of an aging population so that we have more productive, tax-paying younger people. Add a few hundred thousand elderly people, and that will not happen.

Labor says they will increase foreign aid.  You may think that good or bad, but I really do not know why Indonesia, for instance, warrants any of our money, since their status as allies is so shaky.

Labor plans to add 'religion' to the list of things covered by the notorious 18c Law.  What this means is that we can be punished if a person feels offended because he is religious.  It is effectively, a 'blasphemy' law, as we used to have centuries before we outgrew such a medieval concept.   Some backward countries still have such a law. How sad if Australia winds up with the same law under a different name.

This list is seeming a bit lop sided here now,  but I don't know of any new policies of the Coalition that make the list.  They are the current government, of course, so they would have already implemented changes they deem warranted.


Tax Policy -  Negative Gearing, Dividends Imputation, changes to Capital Gains Tax.

Dividends from shares should not be taxed twice, so if a person's taxable income is low, they may find that there are refunds made for tax paid on their shares. This is Dividend Imputation.  It mostly affects self-funded retirees,  a group that deserves maximum credit for looking after themselves.  Labor aims to abolish this refund.  This change could cost a retiree thousands, and may make it necessary for them to go on the pension.  So, as well as being unfair, the policy will not save as much as expected.  In some cases, there will be more cost to the government, not less.

Negative gearing:  If you have a net loss from real estate,  (usually because of interest on a mortgage)  then you can offset that loss against income from other sources such as a salary.  Fair and reasonable, and standard for all sorts of losses.  But Labor wants to abolish negative gearing on real estate (except for new construction)   This has been tried before, but the legislation was, quite quickly, rescinded because of the adverse consequences on the rental market.

Other taxes, other promises:  You will need to do your own research for differences in other taxes, and for various promised handouts.  One can usually expect, however, that whenever there is a change in government, some of the more generous promises will be rescinded when they find that inevitable 'black hole'  in the budget.  One should not vote for a short-term perceived financial advantage.

The Minor Parties:

The Greens: 

The Greens were formed to fight for the environment.  But that was years ago, and while they have some climate goals,  (100% Renewable energy, zero emissions)  they are also socialist,  pro-gender bending, pro-Globalization,  and anti-Israel.  In fact, they will support pretty much any lunatic policy as long as they deem it politically correct.

The minor Conservative Parties:

One Nation:

One Nation is the best known of the minor Conservative parties.  It was first formed  in 1997, and caused considerable alarm within the media and the political class by quickly gaining a great deal of support from people who have long felt unrepresented by the major parties.

Forces were mobilized against them. There was the constant sneering by the media, aimed at both the Party and its supporters.  There was the mean tactic from both the major parties of agreeing to  'Put One Nation Last' in preferences.  This made it very difficult for One Nation to win seats. Finally, nastiest of all, a charge was concocted that  resulted in Pauline Hanson going to prison.

That charge was overturned on appeal, and Hanson released. She re-entered politics in 2016, winning a Senate position, and so did three other One Nation members.

One Nation stands for equal treatment for all Australians, and for limits on 'multiculturalism' -  immigrants are expected to integrate, not demand special treatment. They are especially wary of Muslim immigration and the trouble that has brought with it. They advocate new water infrastructure that will help protect farmers and food production against drought. They also say they will push for the provision of  'Citizens Initiated Referenda.'

(Obviously that is a mere summary.)

Recently, there has been a 'sting' mounted against One Nation by Al Jazeera (Qatar)  then quite joyfully disseminated by local media, especially the ABC.  Two senior members were lured to America and then filmed talking about money and influence.  Contrary to what the media continues to state, there is no evidence that they asked the American NRA for funds in order to weaken Australia's gun laws.

That resulted in an apparent loss of support for One Nation (by poll)  but maybe not enough as there was another bit of film released a few days ago, showing one of the same idiot men at a strip club and behaving as men do when they go to strip clubs. He has now resigned, and One Nation lost more support ( according to polls.)

This has been interference in our election by a foreign government, but as One Nation has so many enemies within Australia, that rather important factor has been virtually ignored.

Why Qatar thought it worthwhile to mount a four-year sting operation against a minor political party in Australia, I don't know.  But I don't think any of us should allow Qatar to tell us what to do in our elections.


Cory Bernardi's  'Australian Conservatives'

Cory Bernardi was a Liberal, but since the Libs have moved more and more to the Left, he broke away and formed his own Conservative Party.  He says the the rate of immigration is far too high, and that the mix needs to be looked at. 

Fraser Anning's Conservative National Party. 

Anning has been vilified by the media and by other politicians.  Some facts are not supposed to be spoken of.  Anning said that Muslim immigration rises the likelihood of violence.  Statistics back him up.

Anning wants our non-discriminatory immigration policy to start being far more discriminating.  He says that it should preference those from European countries that share our values.  The victims of some of our worst immigration decisions, such as those who have suffered violence from Sudanese gangs, would very much agree.


Shooters, Fishers and Farmers: 

In the recent NSW State election, the SFF did surprisingly well.  I think they won support from country people who are usually ignored by other parties, even by the Nationals who were once the Country Party.

Christian Democratic party (Fred Niles group)

Fred Niles has been around a long time, and so has his party. The Christian Democrats are supporters of Christian values as well as established Australian values including freedom of speech.  They  oppose Sharia Law, abortion, euthanasia and the decriminalization of drugs.


Clive Palmer's 'United Australia Party.' 

Clive Palmer has spent a fortune on ads, he has a catchy tune,  and often, what he says, makes sense.  But before considering voting for this man or his party, look into his record of business dealings.  Some of our politicians turn out to be dishonest and without ethics, but we should not knowingly vote one into office.  So do your research before considering granting him your vote, and remember, talk costs nothing.  There is not the slightest guarantee that he will make any attempt to do anything that he says.

Bizarre and harmful policies of the minor parties:

Luckily, the minor parties will not have the capability of putting them into effect - unless they wind up with the Balance of Power,  and can trade a concession in return for a vote on what the government wants.  And that is common practice that doesn't even rate a raised eyebrow,  even though some of the general public (like me) might think that members of parliament should vote on what is right for the country rather than self-interested wheeling and dealing.

Clive Palmer's United Australia Party has said that anyone who lives more than 200 kms from a major city should have a 20% tax decrease.  Ludicrous and not feasible.

Palmer has other bizarre policies, but since I am in the habit of silencing the TV whenever one of his ads comes on, and he is absolutely not worth researching, I don't know about them.

The Greens want a 100% reduction in 'emissions.'  This would, of course, break the country.  Think Venezuela.

There are also Independents running for office.    

People should know, though, that many so-called Independents running in this year's elections are funded by overseas interests, and are heavily backed by 'Getup,' which is a very left-wing organization.  Anyone considering voting for an Independent should check carefully first, in case you wind up voting for the looniest of Greens without intending to.

Other minor parties on the NSW Senate ballot.

Other states will have other parties, sometimes referred to as 'Micro-parties' or 'single-issue' parties.  Most of these are no more than 'feeders' for other candidates or parties.  So don't pick one because it sounds good - 'Pirate Party,' for instance.  If one sounds good enough to you, at least do some research, and then vote below the line so your vote does not wind up where you don't want it.


List of other minor parties in NSW: 

Rise up Australia Party
Help End Marihuana Prohibition Party.
Health Australia Party.
Pirate Party
Affordable Housing Party
Australian People's Party
Socialist Alliance
The Together Party
The Great Australian Party
Independents for Climate Action Now
Liberal Democrats
The Women's Party
Seniors United Party of Australia
Socialist Equality Party
Australian Workers Party
Australian Better Families
Involuntary Medication Objectors (Vaccination/Fluoride) Party
Democratic Labour Party
Climate Action/Immigration Action/Accountable Politicians
Animal Justice Party
Voteflux.Org1. Upgrade Democracy
Science Party
Citizens Electoral Council
Sustainable Australia
Australian Democrats
The Small Business Party

The NSW Senate ballot paper is around a metre long. It is no wonder that more and more people make an excuse to do a postal vote.  Voting booths are not made for metre long papers.

Voting is a precious right. It should not be wasted.  

Think, do your research rather than automatically voting for the same party you have for the last twenty years, (Parties change)  and then take care with your vote, especially including those preferences.  In our system, they are very important.

Postscript written three weeks after the election:


And the Coalition won - decisively. It appears that Labor's agenda was so alarmingly radical that a lot of people switched their votes from Labor to Liberal or National, or to one of the Conservative parties with preferences going to the Coalition.

For three weeks afterwards, the Coalition has been doing some reassessing since everyone had expected them to lose. They have also been doing some gloating. "How do you put the cork back in the champagne bottle? Ask Bill Shorten." (Alan Jones)

For three weeks afterwards, Labor has been blaming anyone they can think of, though at least, as far as I know, 'Russian Collusion' had not been mentioned. A few have been particularly nasty, blaming those who voted the 'wrong' way, blaming 'bigots' and even 'knuckle-draggers.' One commentator  labelled them 'turds.' It was a reminder of the American presidential election, when those who voted for Trump instead of Clinton were labelled not merely bigots, racists and misogynists, but even 'a basket of deplorables.' 

Bill Shorten (Labor leader) made a speech that spoke of 'vested interests' and 'corporate leviathons' being set against them. He still doesn't seem to have the slightest inkling that it was hundreds of thousands of ordinary people (like me) who were alarmed about his agenda, and even more alarmed when they realised he had so little idea of what his own agenda meant, (like that he thought that electric cars take a mere eight minutes to fully charge.)

The Coalition, instead, say it was a victory for 'the quiet Australians.'

This is the brilliant thing about democracy. Those who regard themselves as the 'elite' may do as much browbeating as they choose, but in the end, the people get to vote. This is not a 'failure of democracy' as some of the political voices have said, it is the triumph of democracy.


The minor parties - One Nation did very well, in spite of the hit job engineered by Qatar through Al Jazeera.

Cory Bernardi's Conservative Party, on the other hand, did poorly, and on 21/6/19, Bernardi announced that he was deregistering the party.

And Clive Palmer. He spent a fortune on advertising, and yet did not manage to buy himself a seat. And what a good thing that is!

*

Two plus two equals five

As I recall from George Orwell's '1984,'  it was not enough that the protagonist verbally agreed that 2+2=5,  he had to really believe it.

And now, it is not enough that we politely agree with a deluded (or cheating) man that he is a woman, or vice versa, we have to act as if we believe it.   So science,  (as in chromosomes XY means male,  and XX means female)  has to be ignored. Biological fact must be cast aside in favour of ideological nonsense.  And those who do not go along with the nonsense are punished.

Luckily, this tripe has not truly affected most of us so far, but unless common sense enjoys a resurgence, then it will, inevitably.

There are some things that do not matter much, for example, the waste of money that is involved in providing women's sanitary products in boys' toilets.  Or the assertion that there is a 'female penis.'  That was a Transgender person who calls himself a woman, and says that therefore his penis must be a 'female penis.'

Now we see newspaper articles of  a man's experience when having a baby.  But no man has ever become pregnant and had a baby.  A few just like to pretend.

Hayden Cross

Headline: Man Gives Birth.  Hayden Cross was legally a man when she became pregnant and gave birth to a daughter.

The poster to the right is of a 1994 movie, 'Junior.'  They would have been astounded that 25 years later, people are actually talking about men having babies.

And they are not supposed to laugh, but rather, accept it without a blink.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4676182/Britain-s-pregnant-man-gives-birth-baby-girl.html

Women's Sport:

Women's sport is important.  It is such a shame that a man can now claim to be woman, and win money, fame and championships.  And when they do, they are more likely to be praised for their 'courage' and being 'true to their own selves,' than they are to be criticized for being blatant cheats.

Just a few years ago, it would have been assumed that very few men would have so little self respect that they would call themselves women merely in order to win prizes.  But it is becoming more and more common.

The Olympic Games are to be in 2020.  As far as I know, the only limits put on biological males competing in women's events is that their Testosterone level must be below a certain level.  And there are some individuals protesting even that feeble limit - 'discrimination,' they say.  And 'invasion of privacy.'

Female athletes are labelled 'Transphobic' if they dare object, and may lose their places on their team, or may be barred from representing their country.

 A few are finally starting to object as more and more men take the prizes from women.  Mostly, so far, it has almost always only been those who have retired from competitive sports, such as Martina Navratilova, retired tennis player.

 "Players born as men simply have too many advantages, no matter how many hormones they take," she says, and has suffered a lot of criticism for stating this obvious fact.





There is also the matter of a woman's safety in contact sports.  A martial arts competitor, Fallon Fox,  caused considerable damage to 'her' opponent, Tamikka Brents,  whose eye injury resulted in a damaged orbital bone that required seven staples.

In a post-fight interview,  Brents said, "I've never felt so overpowered ever in my life.” And that was because she was fighting a man, and not a woman.

https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/transgender-mma-fighter-destroys-female-opponent/

Left:  Fallon Fox defeating another female opponent, Tamikka Brents.


Brents had the temerity to say something, but in the article I saw, was heavily criticized for it.

To demonstrate the absurdity of the pretense that a woman is the same as a TG 'woman,' a chap who calls himself 'Rapper Zuby' stated he now identified as a woman, and broke the women's weight-lifting record. And then he re-identified as a man.

"I keep hearing about how biological men don't have any physical strength advantage over women in 2019...
So watch me DESTROY the British Women's deadlift record without trying.
P.S. I identified as a woman whilst lifting the weight. Don't be a bigot."                Zuby, Feb, 2019.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BqlQlUNs8A&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0afTqwf1nWqcQVNCaFkSpNtvti_aaay-jyIoIbLsze8Tg9YO0kH47B3Qs

Women's Safety

The nonsense that a man can be a woman merely because he says so, is compromising women's safety, and not just in competitive sports.

Women's toilets:

In some areas, there have been changes to rules, sometimes actual laws, that individuals can use the toilet they are 'most comfortable with.'  This, of course, can compromise the comfort and the safety of others.   I read a story just yesterday, of American highschool girls objecting to a TG 'girl' with male genitalia using their change-room.  There are others, girls finally having the courage to brave the accusations of bigotry. 
https://www.dailysignal.com/2015/12/21/why-these-high-school-girls-dont-want-transgender-student-a-in-their-locker-room/

They need to be brave, as attacks will follow the ' wrongthink.'  I have even experienced this myself, when I said (online)  that I did not like 'unisex'  toilets.  The comment was:   'So you must want to look at men's penises, so are  you the pervert?'  (Just for the record, in the opinion of most women, a man's penis is not the object of beauty that the man himself seems to think.)


A Washington restaurant had to pay a fine for questioning an individual who was using the women's restrooms. They also had to post a notice saying that "that, under D.C. law, everyone is allowed to use the restroom that matches their gender identity or expression."
https://www.theblaze.com/news/dc-restaurant-fined-for-questioning-gender

So the employee who questioned the man was punished, and the restaurant was punished.

Every time  this sort of thing happens,  women are less safe.  It is a problem that some transgender 'women' are so ready to become aggressive when other people do not recognize they are supposed to be women.  I am thinking of the video that went viral of an individual becoming furious that someone called him 'Sir' instead of 'Ma'am.  "I am 'Ma'am,"  he was bellowing.

Luckily, women who 'transition' to men are either not as aggressive,  or I have not happened to hear about problems they cause.

Hospital wards: 

Except for Intensive Care wards, where the patients are too sick to care, hospital wards have traditionally been separated into male and female wards. Will that be ended? Will you find a man who pretends to be a woman (or thinks he is a woman) in the next bed to you in hospital? Will you have to put up with his snoring, or his intrusive staring when you are at your most vulnerable?

Probably, you will. And if you object, then suddenly, you could be labelled as intolerant or 'transphobic.'   If an employee, you risk losing your job for your 'non- inclusive' attitude.


Women's Refuges:

It is biological fact that most men are bigger and stronger than most women, and some men use that to bully their wives or partners. These women need protection, and that is why we have women's refuges. Is it now 'discrimination' to say that no men are allowed?

The 'Hope Center' in Anchorage, (Alaska) is fighting the city council who are trying to tell them that they must admit any man who calls himself a woman.

At the time of the article, 2018, they were resisting.  If discrimination laws are brought against them,  they are likely to be defeated and then the women-only spaces will no longer be women only.  When men are admitted, no matter if they wear a dress,  then those areas are less safe.

https://www.adn.com/opinions/2018/12/06/anchorage-threatens-womens-shelter-for-serving-women/?fbclid=IwAR19gXkaywNcxfNPfFhY3baHWmxmbawIEGieBqUdr-cAQGS5FA3RAkliYL0


Women's prisons:

When I spoke of this concern to someone, I was assured that female prisoners are a lot tougher than most women.  But so are male prisoners, and they are almost always bigger and stronger than women. So now, men who call themselves women, have been placed in women's prisons, where they are free to intimidate or rape as they choose.

One example is a chap called Martin Ponting, who was convicted of the rapes of two young girls. Once in prison, he decided to be a woman instead. So 'Jessica Winfield' was moved to a women-only prison (despite still having a perfectly usable penis) but then had to be isolated because he was making unwanted advances to the real women.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4400327/transgender-rapist-womens-prison/

In 2017, Australia, a very violent individual attacked random people with an axe. The person has a man's build and face and calls himself Evie Amarti. The photos of him wielding that axe are horrific.

One of his victims is Sharon Hacker, shown left.

"Evie Amarti" is now in a women's prison. His fellow prisoners are less safe than they were.

Britain is the first country to open a special prison for men pretending to be women, after several instances of rapes of real women by TG 'women.'  Predictably, transgender activists are objecting on the grounds that it is discriminatory.  I think it is high time it was pointed out that discrimination is a necessary thing, not a bad thing.  Try being non-discriminatory when you eat fungi, for instance. It does not work.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/03/04/uk-transgender-prison-sex-attacks/

They are trying to say that there is no difference between transgender 'women' and real women.  In many workplaces, people are obliged to pretend to believe that in order to keep their jobs.

Of course, there are differences. That is not 'bigoted,' it is factual, especially as it is apparently no longer necessary for a man to do anything more to 'become' a woman than declare that he now 'identifies as' a woman. Absurd, but the PC mob would have us believe it.

 2 + 2 = 5, and we can be punished if we don't appear to fully believe it.

Punishment:

In some areas, punishments are becoming more severe for those who do not appear to believe that a man is a woman or vice versa. Nearly all men who call themselves women are clearly and obviously, still men. And the ones who still look most like men seem to be the ones who become most irate if someone makes a mistake. Complaints, law suits, even violence against the one who does not know a 'Ma'am' when he sees a man.
Genuine errors have not so far been punished legally, as far as I know. But more places are now punishing when it is deemed that the 'misgendering' or 'deadnaming' might be deliberate. 

New York City, for instance, issued guidelines that state that businesses and property owners must use an individual's preferred pronoun, (as in Ms. Mrs, Mr, but also 'Ze' or 'they,') or face a possible fine of up to $250,000. It is hard to believe they would actually do that, and they do say "for violations that are the result of willful, wanton, or malicious conduct."


Still, what other rudeness could possibly be punished so severely?



New York City is not alone.   Canada has become a very 'progressive' country, though most of what is called 'progressive' these days, smacks rather of lunacy.

Ontario, 2017. A chap called Bill Whatcott passed out flyers that stated that one of the local candidates for Parliament was a man, not a woman. And up until five years before, the candidate had lived as a married man with children, so it was no lie. It was also a fact that those about to vote were entitled to take into consideration.

Whatcott was arrested, imprisoned, and had to pay a fine of $55,000 for committing a 'hate crime.'

https://www.afa.net/the-stand/culture/2019/04/fined-55-000-for-calling-a-male-a-male/

Also in Canada,  a man has been threatened with arrest if he refers to his child by its true gender. Hormone blockers were given to the child without the parents' consent. He/she was fourteen at the time.  And there was an additional order made that rules that the father "will henceforth be subject to arrest, immediately and “without warrant” if any police officer has “reasonable” grounds to believe that he has in any way referred to his daughter as a girl in public or in private." 

https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/29/authorities-arrest-canadian-father-refers-trans-child-real-sex/?fbclid=IwAR0FarLhvx_mlUn2irF3Ibg83NjHJ008DGSKApRUGHQB8RWFG-sqgQEimTo

In Britain, a woman was arrested for stating that a man was not a woman. She was arrested in front of her children, which must have been traumatizing for them, and spent seven hours in prison.  This is Britain, once the bastion of fair play.

https://hotair.com/archives/2019/02/10/british-woman-arrested-identifying-gender-transgender-attorney/

Newborn babies, 'assigned' sex. 

Some of those who now say that gender is fluid, and who talk about, not whether a newborn baby is boy or girl, but instead, speak of their 'doctor-assigned gender,' have made some extraordinary wins.  Tasmania (Australia) has actually passed a law that makes stating the sex of a baby, optional on birth certificates.  Admittedly, there are some very rare babies with ambiguous genitalia, but normally, it is perfectly obvious whether a baby is a boy or a girl.  Some people want to deny biological fact.

We are yet to see what implications this extraordinary decision will have.


Children's Safety:

Most sinister of all is what some parents are doing with their children, or allowing others to do.  Teaching a young child that he can be the other sex if he chooses is a very bad idea.  A three-year-old boy is likely to notice that his sister gets to wear far fancier clothing than he does,  so he could try,  "I want to wear a dress."

Before this modern fad, the parents would laugh and probably agree he could wear a dress for a bit if he chose.  There is NO WAY they would agree that he could somehow change to be a girl.

Cowboy girl

And a girl of six or seven might notice that men get to do more exciting things, and declare herself 'really' a boy. 

A sensible parent would point out that girls can do exciting things as well if they choose.










These days, though, some parents are likely to take the child to a clinic and maybe even start treatment that will damage her health. It will not, cannot, turn her into a boy. She will probably be made sterile.

And that boy will not turn into a girl, even with surgery that makes his genitalia look less masculine.

In many Australian public schools, small children are taught the nonsense that gender is 'fluid.' Gender is not fluid. You are XX, female, or XY, male. (There are very rare exceptions.)
Teaching a child that gender is not set at conception is wrong.  

It is child abuse.

So far, they have not tried to change a child into a dog when he states he is 'really'  a dog. Children like to pretend.  But maybe that will be next.


And what about those strange adults whose kink is that they are  ponies?  Are we supposed to believe those as well?

We know there is a middle-aged man who says he is a six-year-old girl.  It is hard to believe that he has found a man and woman who agree to pretend they are his parents.

Worse, the couple have a real daughter.  I do not like the thought of a young girl growing up with an unrelated and obviously kinky man in the same home.  How much chance has that real little girl have of  growing up unmolested?

There must be a lot more eunuchs around now.  Some years ago, I wrote a series of books about a boy turned eunuch.  The first was called 'Not a Man,' written in 2010, so I was trying to research in 2009.  I wanted to know more about the effects of castration before puberty.

I found almost nothing.  

Just 10 years later, and things are so different, except they don't call the castrated boys 'eunuchs;' they say they have 'transitioned,'  and they are now girls.  And as there is a push from transgender activists for candidates to 'transition' before puberty, there are going to be a lot more eunuchs around, eunuchs that include normal boys castrated before puberty.  A lot of those, inevitably, will be very much regretting that premature decision to mutilate their bodies and to destroy their natural sex drive.  In another 10 years, it will probably be far easier to research the effects of castration.  That is hardly a good thing!

So, 1984.  Two plus two equals five.  We know it is wrong, and yet Transgender activists would force us to act as if it is true.  What miserable individuals these activists must be, maybe never happy with themselves.

Are there transgender people who are happy in their new personality?  Maybe there are some who are not worried what other people think, and simply go about their lives.  Those ones could be happy.

But no matter what he does with surgery, hormones, and self deception, a man will never be a woman.  A woman will never be a man.  We are different.  That is the way biology works. 

Two plus two does not equal five, and wanting it to be so, does not make it so.

ZUBY:
✔@ZubyMusic
· Feb 26, 2019



I keep hearing about how biological men don't have any physical strength advantage over women in 2019...

So watch me DESTROY the British Women's deadlift record without trying.

P.S. I identified as a woman whilst lifting the weight. Don't be a bigot.