Do these people really deserve a voice in Parliament?

Fantastic interview. Glad there’s more people coming out now and exposing this radical, neurotic, psychopathic anti-white, anti-Christian agenda being perpetuated and forced upon students in British universities. Bravo to this lady. Here’s the crowdfund for her court case:

http://gofundme.com/f/standuptowoke

At least we're not speaking German!

Give it 5 years and the Churchill monument in Parliament Square will be pulled down

Very interesting development. If Rishi actually delivers and goes full counter-jihad on pakis it will be the funniest shit ever.

https://twitter.com/wasiquk/status/1584973794803851266?s=46&t=cW6tUyjUG_M7JMEkxZOu3g

It’s going to be a party in the UK soon lads!

This is hilarious. This guy is too autistic to realise he's violating the most sacred taboo in the west just giving an honest analysis of Jewish power

https://youtu.be/weTZFx0Dt1M

🇮🇹🏴 100 Years anniversary of March on Rome

100 years ago on this day, thousands of fascists and Nationalists marched into Rome to seize total control of the Italian government

Clarification:

The threshold I.Q. level for a diagnosis of mental retardation has been progressively lowered over the years, in part because of awareness of the damaging social prejudice suffered by those labeled "retarded." In 1959, the American Association on Mental Deficiency set 85 as the I.Q. below which a person was considered to be retarded. In 1992, the renamed American Association on Mental Retardation lowered the mental retardation "ceiling" to an I.Q. of 70-75. This means the average aboriginal IQ of 62 is actually 23 points below the threshold for retardation, not eight.

https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/ustat/ustat0301-01.htm

Great debate exposing the complete fabrication of frontier history and stories of mass genocide against Aborigines by mainstream historians, especially by Henry Reynolds, the one who popularised the myth and grandiose claims in 1981. The same myths that are now accepted as gospel by the system and have led to crippling White guilt and the waste of billions of tax-payers money as a part of ‘reconciliation.’

One of the most poignant points in this debate that Keith makes is that from his research in the Tasmanian archives and all the history available on it, he found that Aboriginals killed twice as many Whites as Whites killed blacks. Ironically, Henry doesn’t apply the same logic he does to Queensland - whereby he claims that in order to know how many blacks were killed by Whites, you multiply the amount of Whites killed by blacks tenfold until you get some ridiculous number -, as he does to Tasmania. Henry also tends to ignore that the Native Police were a force of peace in Victoria, and that the Native Police records in Queensland are missing. The same Native Police who are blamed for for sooo many massacres in Queensland. Based on what evidence? Well, we aren’t told. You just have to accept it. You just have to be content with pseudo-history; and if you say it’s that, you’re an evil racist.

On another note, Keith goes onto mention that a lot of these killings by Whites were the result of Aborigine murder and abduction of children, based on aboriginal ‘oral legends’ written down by Whites in the 60s and 70s, and that the future of this nation hinges on this debate.

The conclusion he makes regarding the death counts are also based on regional studies, records, and not baseless assumptions, which is how you do history apparently; well, at least according to Henry Reynolds it is. However, that’s of course not true, and Keith has gone to great lengths to tell the real story, so I recommend checking out his books and the many articles on quadrant.org.au on the subject.

All around great points on both sides. It’s a shame that televised public debates like this are no longer allowed. Quite weird how you’re not allowed to question the official narrative anymore without being completely ostracised from society, isn’t it?

https://youtu.be/dD4IUgFWH_g

“The debate over what happened to the Aborigines is not only about them. Ultimately, it is about the character of the Australian nation and the calibre of the civilisation that Britain brought to these shores in 1788. Pretty obviously, my own work is a defence of the integrity of both the nation itself and the civilisation from which it derives. This is probably why I have been so vilified by my opponents. For some reason, they want to portray their own country as the moral equivalent of Hitler’s Germany or Stalin’s Russia. They are entitled to their opinion but they are not entitled to invent the facts on which that opinion is based. Nor are they entitled to deceive their students and the public at large, both white and black, as they have been doing over the past 30 years.”

- Keith Windschuttle

A new Rome is coming. 100 years after thousands of Italian blackshirts marched on Rome to bring a new epoch to Europe, we remember their sacrifices. But on this day we remember primarily that of Italy, the brave Italians that took the first step, a step which others followed. And 100 years later we hope that someone new will come and take that first step again. And that this time, all of Europe follows.

Revolutionary Arts
Revolutionary Chat

Keith Windschuttle: Indigenous Recognition in the Constitution

https://youtu.be/3NH3qvQGAV8

Good riddance

We’re so back