Germar Rudolf: Thank you. I need to get my instruments ready here. Now they fall apart. There was a cap to it and somehow that fell off. I apologize for this. All right.

 

I have something positive to say about this country to just attach right to the speech you just heard. And that is the fact that we can do what we do right now in this country. Because in many countries where our ancestors came from, we would not be able to do this! So there’s freedom of speech and freedom of assembly in this country. So there’s something good to say.

 

Also, what I wanted to mention is when it comes to the war against Iran, the Iranians are an Indo-European people. The language is closer to English and German than it is to Arabic. And when we should talk about the victims that this war causes, we should talk about the thousands and thousands of people of Indo-Europeans of Iranian ancestry that are being murdered.

 

Now, my topic today, as you would probably guess, is on Holocaust, because that’s what I’m known for and that’s what I’m good at. Before I do it, I give a little bit of an introduction of who I am. I would assume most of you know, but probably not all.

 

I am a German citizen. I grew up, born in the mid-1960s, grew up in West Germany, had a normal lower middle class upbringing, went to a normal public school, eventually studied chemistry, graduated. And in the process of graduating, I stumbled over that topic, research that had been done here in the United States by an expert in execution technologies who was looking into the gas chamber question and had some chemical arguments which caught my attention. And as a chemist, I couldn’t look away down the rabbit hole I went and never came back.

 

Now, the persecution that has resulted from my activity, because Germany is not a country where free speech and freedom of science, freedom of assembly has led me ultimately to this country. And there’s another good thing. The government has tried hard to keep me out. They actually arrested me. I was married to a US citizen. I had a granted immigrant visa. They arrested and deported me anyhow, with the reason given “no criminal case”. So in violation of that, I ended up in Germany. And Germany, I was put on trial for the research that I had published over the past five years while in exile. And they sentenced me to 44 months in total. And I had to spend that time.

 

Now, I’m not a singular case and I’m not the worst case of what’s going on in Europe.

 

Anyway. I fought my way back. I won in court. What they’d done to me was wrong. It was remedied as much as you can remedy losing five years of your life in prison. Was reunited with my family and I got the status of a permanent legal resident now in this country.

 

So 35 years of research on that topic have a number of years ago raised the question to me, how do I get the message out to the masses? The first 30 years, I would say I was looking for answers myself. I wasn’t sure whether I understood everything and whether I really got this story straight.

 

And then at the end of the 30 year mark, I was pretty sure. And then the idea came up of how do I get the message out now? One way is of course writing something that makes the information accessible. A lot of you actually bought it today from me. So I wrote an encyclopedia because that’s what scholars do all the time.

 

Actually, no, they don’t!

 

But I was in the unique situation that I had this knowledge. 35 years of sitting at the helm at the core of this skeptical, scrutinizing research. And I decided it needs to be done. And in lack of support from others and due to a cataclysmic development in my private life, I had the time to do it and I pulled it off.

 

So we have the knowledge published, we have it concisely presented and made accessible. There is still a step of how do I get people to listen? Because we’re talking about a taboo topic and people don’t want to hear it.

 

You, most of you probably are open minded. Some of you are, almost many I don’t know are convinced already that the mainstream narrative is phony. But we want to reach those who sit on the fence or even on the other side of it. How do we do that? And I want to give you a little bit of a instruction by example of the best approach.

 

[05:23]

 

 

And the best approach you already have seen. Some of you coming by our book stand there seeing those signs here and marveling over these graphics and the information that’s on there.

 

The best approach for the normies into this topic is not talking about lies that they’ve made up like jewish soap. They all have admitted it didn’t happen or lampshades or what. No! What you want to talk to them about is massive violation of civil rights! It’s free speech, is freedom of assembly that doesn’t exist over there. And make them see in concrete examples what that means!

 

When we’re talking about this topic here, people need to realize, every person needs to realize that every historian on this planet to one degree or another, if he wants to write Holocaust historiography or talk about it or write about it, he is doing history at gunpoint.!

 

That’s the only topic in the world right now, more or less on a global scale, where historians are threatened with at least destruction of their career, if not outright prosecution and imprisonment.

 

 

Scholars, not just historians, scholars you can do physics, you can do psychology, you can do any science and you will not get in trouble if you say something that’s controversial. It’s only this one! This particular part in history that gets people in trouble! Even in this country we have free speech. But any historian who touches that is a third rail topic, he will find his career ended.

 

 

This is the map of Europe. You see in red the countries that have outlawed Holocaust skepticism, that have outlawed doubt! Doubt is the core feature of us human beings, that sets us apart from animals who cannot doubt their central input. We can doubt what we see. We can systematically look for the truth and communicate with our fellow humans what the truth is or what we think the truth is, and can even make it independent of ourselves by putting it down encoded so that everyone can see it. That is what sets us apart!

 

And a government that outlaws doubt, outlaws search for truth, outlaws communicating the truth with others, is outlawing humanity! These countries have outlawed humanity! Stalinist Russia, as bad as it was, had no laws that would proscribe the result of any scholarly research in any field by penal law. This is the first in mankind history that we have that the European Union forces members who have not yet passed laws in the European Union to do it or they are threatened with sanctions. Finland just passed earlier this year, the last one, because they said we’re threatened by the EU by some kind of sanctions or measures. And that’s why we introduced that law.

 

 

Now what does that mean? I’ve told you about my 44 months for the research. You can see that there are two books, Chemistry for Auschwitz, if you want to look at it. It’s my original forensic research and lectures on the Holocaust.

 

 

 

Having done what I’m doing right now here to academic audiences in Germany, talking about my research in the calm and academic style led to being sentenced. There were worse cases.

 

 

I want to focus here on Austria. Some of you have looked through a list of all the countries and some are not on this map. Actually, of course, Canada has introduced a law north of us and Australia uses a backdoor way of doing it. And Israel, of course, is the first country that has outlawed skepticism. And there are other countries who use other laws. They twist and tweak in order to send people to prison.

 

[09:23]

 

And in the Arabic world, unfortunately, we should think there should be an open mind there. A lot of governments in the Arabic world are bought by Europe and America and they prosecute dissidents on that topic with extra legal means. They are not democracies under the rule of law, whatever that means. Because in some aspects we are not anymore either. But for them it’s pure arbitrariness.

 

So this is a global thing, a global problem. We just had a censorship hit us, a company in China. We wanted to have merchandise produced with certain slogans on it on Holocaust skepticism. And they pulled a plug. Not even in China they want to do it anymore!

 

 

Austria, the worst case, 20 years! You can go up to 20 years in prison. If you combine it, the skepticism, quote, unquote, “denial” with statements that they interpret as re-engaging in National Socialist activities. If you were, for instance, to argue that the Austrians are just one tribe of the Germans and they should live together with other Germans in Germany, which was a normal thought up to 1945. In the 17th century, 18th century, 19th century, in the 20th century, as the people of Austria always felt. And they were for the longest time the core in the center of Germany. And they got kind of pushed out with Prussia taken over in the late 19th century. And then after the collapse of Prussian Germany and Austria, the Austrian Empire after the First World War, they said:

 

“Okay, we had it, now let’s get reunified.”

 

That was the idea of the Wilson 14 points for the truce to have everyone self-determination. And the Austrians got it denied. And after the war, Second World War, they had special laws enacted if you violate them, up to 20 years. Denial combined with demands for self-determination.

 

 

To put a face to it, Austrian engineer Wolfgang Fröhlich was arrested in the early 2000s for a paper he had written. He’s an expert for disinfestation technology and disinfestation gas chambers. So he knows the technique and compared it to what was said to have been going on in German extermination camp during the war. And said:

 

“That’s technical nonsense, it can’t be!”

 

And he got eventually indicted and put in prison. And he was upset about what they did to him. And he kept writing letters and arguments from within prison, got more and more indictments and got sentenced over and over again! At the end of the day, he spent 16 years in prison for his engineering arguments. And he came out just around Covid, caught Covid and died shortly afterwards.

 

Western politicians complain about Iran or China putting dissidents for four, five, seven years in prison. At the same time they put them for 16 years in prison! That’s the worst case.

 

 

This graph here shows you the initiation of criminal investigation for thought crimes in Germany. Since 1994 some 4, 500, up to the most recent data for, … The year 2025 comes out maybe next month. Getting a little bit of a feedback here. [humming sound] The blue one is Right-wing thought crimes. That’s what we are committing here right now! Okay? Then you have the Left-wing ones. These are usually Antifa communists who make some radical statements about blowing up Parliament or having a communist revolution. And then you have the green ones, foreign religious, that usually means Muslim, Muslim radicals who want to introduce Sharia law or something like that. So for these two cases you really have to make aggressive statements that are not peaceful anymore.

 

Whereas in these cases if you’re just against mass immigration, you say anything critical about the jews, any dissent on the Holocaust, or more recently anything critical about Israel’s policy in Gaza. This is the Gaza escalation that you see.

 

 

Germany has extended their law that they outlaw more and more both by case law and by actually written code. And now this past data we were up to 40,000, 35,000 of them. Stuff that people like we do, like what we argue and talk about. 35,000 initiated criminal investigations does not result in 35,000 people sitting in prison. I want to make that clear. Most people never get caught for the slogan they have sprayed on some wall or sticker they left somewhere. And if for first time offenders, usually it ends up with slap on the wrist. It may just be a summary offense with a fine that has to be paid. And for first time offenders it rarely ends with prison. But then you have the 1 or 2% of these cases that end up actually with prison cases.

 

[14:50]

 

Only minority of that is Holocaust skepticism. And I have no numbers, they don’t in their paperwork. This is data based actually on what the German government releases. And they are put proud of it! Because they call themselves a combative, defensive democracy! Okay?

 

So they defend themselves in combating anyone they consider to be an enemy. But they are actually the biggest enemy of democracy. I wouldn’t even call it democracy, but a state under the rule of law that respects human rights that they never get a mirror held against them to look into it because that’s the enemy that caused this kind of persecution.

 

Back to history. This kind of an atmosphere that you have in Europe, in most countries and even in this country where historians don’t go to prison, but immigrants like me, I’m currently constantly on an ejector seat and I can get thrown out any minute if the Trump government so decides, because they don’t respect the law either.

 

 

What effect does it have, actually concrete, on historians? Here you see the lovely face of Wacław Długoborski, Auschwitz survivor who was put in charge, as I say, the Billy goat that was put in charge of the garden. He was put in charge of the Auschwitz Museum’s historical research center. And for many decades he has been that boss. And under his auspices, the lie that 4 million people died at Auschwitz was maintained until the Soviet Union collapsed.

 

Then it did collapse, and they suddenly reduced the number from 4 million to 1 million and said:

 

“Well, we have known it all along.”

 

And then in an interview in 1998, this historian was asked:

 

“Well, why did you lie? Why did you make that up if you knew all along that it was wrong? Why didn’t you correct the number earlier when you knew that it was wrong?”

 

And he basically said:

 

“Well, there was a prohibition in place in the Eastern Bloc in the communist countries that historians who would not toe the party line could be facing.”

 

How he expressed it, “disciplinary measures”.

 

 

What does that mean? You lose your job, you’re getting demoted, you have to become a street sweeper, or a janitor. That’s what that means in these communist planned economies.

 

Ironically, 1998, that’s when he gave the interview. That was the same year Poland, pressured by the European Union, in particular Germany, introduced a law, 1998, that made Holocaust skepticism a crime punishable with up to three years in prison.

 

 

So from communist “disciplinary measures” to Democratic “three years in prison”. What’s worse? I’d take disciplinary measures anytime over prison term. So he said that:

 

“Now we can tell the truth! Back then we couldn’t because we had disciplinary measures. We’ve corrected. Now it’s 1 million. Because you need to believe us, because now we are only threatened with three years!”

 

Any mainstream person who thinks everything is kosher with the Holocaust narrative that we fed now must realize:

 

“Yeah, kosher it may be, it means the jews like it!”

 

But it most certainly doesn’t mean authentic and reliable, because historians who are threatened at gunpoint to write history cannot be trusted! He admits:

 

“We couldn’t be trusted! We have been lying. We knew we were lying. We did it intentionally, but we did so because we were threatened with getting demoted or losing our job!”

 

And now we should believe you when you are threatened with three years, with five years, with six years, with, 20 years! How much more do you need to teach people, to tell people, to realize you can’t trust these people! History at gunpoint does not give you the truth in no section of society!

 

 

So once you have opened up people’s mind and that they realize the dimension of persecution, of suppression, of oppression and the unique nature the Holocaust is unique in terms of the length governments go to and societies go to suppress dissent, to keep complete control over the narrative! Nowhere else in society will you find it. That shows you who is the main beneficiary usually is also the one who pushes most. And it shows you that this is for them the most important topic to keep total control over!

 

Once you have opened people mind:

 

“Something is fishy here! You can’t trust those historians because they have admitted they have lied when they were threatened even less than they are threatened today!”

 

Then we go to the pith, the center of the story. Now I handed it out to you guys, free of charge, a little brochure and I want to go through a few things here that you find actually in the brochure. If this thing is too far away from you, I apologize. But you’ll find some of this in this brochure.

 

[20:08]

 

 

And the first one I’m going to is actually on the last page, the back cover if you wish. You know that thing technically speaking has no back cover. You see a graph there, a bar chart that shows claims of death tolls for the Majdanek camp. Now I would assume that most of you, at least most of normal populace have not heard about the Majdanek! Camp. It’s not anymore a major player in the bigger picture of the Holocaust in terms of mass extermination. It used to be completely different. The Majdanek camp actually was officially called the Lublin camp in central Poland was overrun by the Red Army in July of 1944.

 

So it was first major camp that the Soviets overran. And in a press conference right after the conquest of the camp, and I say “conquest”, the Red Army never liberated anyone! So you will not hear the word “liberation” when it even comes to camps, when it comes to the Red Army.

 

 

So they conquered the camp. In the press conference they claimed 2 million people were murdered there. It was the first big, still doing the war propaganda campaign on extermination, claim that started in August 1944. Big show! With all the world media, invited journalists from everywhere and cameras rolling.

 

 

Now in subsequent events, the Poles later that year still during the war, by the way, December ’44 had a show trial. They claimed 1.7 million. That’s a little bit of a reduction, but they weren’t generous. It’s kind of the same order of magnitude.

 

 

The Soviets then during the International Military Tribunal introduced an expert report. They claimed 1.5 million. Still again, 500,000 difference is not immaterial. But in the bigger picture, looking at it scientifically, it’s kind of the same order of magnitude. We don’t want to be nitpicking here.

 

However, the frenzy of immediate end of the war or post-war propaganda comes to an end and things cool down a little bit. And a Polish investigative judge reduces the number down to 360,000. And this is a considerable drop!

 

 

We’re down to 80%! Now, as I just showed you, there is a rule in communist countries you have to toe the party line and the new party line was 360,000. Couldn’t really go underneath that, even though they knew again, they knew in this case too, it is wrong! I think the number of prisoners sent to the camp was around that order of magnitude. And that assumes that every single one of them was murdered. And there’s plenty of documentation shown that was absolutely not the case!

 

The Soviet Union collapses and the number gets reduced again by a new historian in charge of the museum. 235,000. Not all that extreme a drop if you compare it with Auschwitz, compared to these two. But here we have already almost only 10%.

 

 

But that wasn’t the end of it. We Holocaust skeptics went into the archives after the Soviet Union collapsed, 1994, 95, 96. And researched the whole material, published a investigation on it. And it was so devastatingly demasking the propaganda of the homicidal gas chamber story, that pressure on the Majdaneck museum became so big that eventually in 2005, a new generation, a new historian dropped the death toll to 76,000. And that is only not even 4% of the initial 2 million claim.

 

 

And actually from the beginning they had claimed seven homicidal gas chambers. They maintained that number until the end. But five of them were so ridiculously, obviously, technically impossible to have ever been used for what they claim to have been used that to throw propaganda ballast overboard.

 

 

 

Thomas Kranz, the new Polish historian, threw five of them overboard. So what we have is an admission:

 

“That okay, we exaggerated, we lied, we lied, we fix, we fix, we keep fixing, we drop more and more of these lies!”

 

And then that’s what the situation is here today. They keep shifting the goalposts, they keep reducing the claim. You see, something is fishy with their attitude in general. But now:

 

“They got it right!”

 

Really, when you’re threatened with three years in prison? Why would I believe you?

 

[24:48]

 

Now we could say:

 

“Okay, one camp. What does one camp prove? That’s the most extreme downward revision by the mainstream.”

 

I haven’t shown our number that would here in 98, we published the book.

 

 

We find in the historical record 42, 200 death cases and no homicidal death chambers at all! They were all fumigation chambers!

 

So I’m just showing you what the mainstream itself has admitted to have been wrong over and over again! Is it a singular case? People make mistakes. Corrections for other camps? If you go in the brochure, if you want to go on page six, you see the table there now the same table here, the major camps that played a role in Allied war as well as immediate post-war propaganda as claimed extermination camps.

 

 

You see the initial death toll here on the left numbers column. And the death toll that is claimed by the mainstream.

 

 

Again, I say in the mainstream, Holocaust skeptical numbers? What really can be documented and what is forensically possible is an entirely different story.

 

So I want to show you that if you just use their own arguments and their shifty way of moving goalposts, you should make every believer see something isn’t right. And you see it here, mistakes stray statistically from the true value. If I make a mistake, I may under or overestimate, but they should stray to both sides. Here you see only one tendency, extreme exaggeration!

 

 

That’s not called a mistake, that’s called a lie! Truth is always the first victim of every war. And why should it be any different with the Second World War? The victors write the history and they never write it objectively. And why should it be any different for the worst war ever fought that ended for the losing side in a major disaster that mankind has not seen all that often in history? Cathage and the Punic wars probably had a worse fate than Germany because they got completely wiped. But other than that, Germany was in pretty bad shape after the Second World War.

 

So you see here, these are lies! They have been lying systematically! They have been correcting and admitting in Auschwitz, I showed you here in Majdanek again and again they lied. They knew they’re lying. And now they are threatened even worse than they were before. The question.

 

 

So for my Majdanek, 96% of the victims were invented. 70% of the homicidal gas chambers were invented. They got it wrong repeatedly acting under coercion, still under coercion even worse so today! Why believe them uncritically now? You wouldn’t!

 

 

And it doesn’t stop with numbers. If you go on the second table of the page six here, we’re talking about invented methods. What the mainstream, again, what the mainstream has admitted, we’re looking in the second column here, of all the stuff that is actually has been invented.

 

 

And I actually added a few more here on this one. And here you see for Auschwitz, war gases, high voltage electrocution, gas showers, gas bombs, pneumatic hammer, conveyor belt.

 

 

Treblinka, you have machine guns, mobile gas chambers, stunning gas, unslaked lime, hot steam, high voltage, chlorine, ether, a death bridge, burning alive.

 

 

So it goes on and on for the other camps. Suffocation with human excrements as a mass murder method is claimed for Bełzec by one witness. It gets absurd at times. But of course, all this stuff, sometimes based on only one witness, sometimes based on tens of witnesses on all kinds of wartime reports, got dumped! Interestingly, the stories that prevailed during the war, hot steam for Treblinkaa, high voltage for Belzec, chlorine gas for Sobibor, all got dumped! You won’t find a word of it today anymore, even though they were the ones that were most commonly claimed during the war, and even during the International Military Tribunal, by the way. It’s all gone!

 

 

What we have left now is this. Zyklon B, and engine exhaust gases. For a long time they even claimed they were diesel exhaust gases, which are technically impossible because they’re not toxic enough.

 

 

Just recently, well, not too recently, 15 years ago, a mainstream toxicologist tried to move the goalpost there again:

 

“Okay, diesel doesn’t work. Why don’t we say it was engine exhaust?”

 

 

So murder methods claimed during and right after the war were highly contradictory. Even once claimed main murder methods were all abandoned! Polish Stalinist officials streamline the narrative against facts! And mainstream historians hide these extreme revisions and manipulations from you! Because they are writing history on gunpoint!

 

[29:58]

 

How was it done? To give you one example, and unfortunately I don’t think I have that in this brochure. You would actually have to go, because that goes a little bit more into detail for which this brochure doesn’t have room. I have that detailed example in this book here. Nazi Gas Chambers, which you can either buy there as a hard copy or you can find it on holocausthandbooks.com free of charge as an ebook.

 

 

The one case that shows everyone, and should show every normie that the story was faked, is the case of Sobibor! Now again, Auschwitz, everyone knows, Treblinka, some of you may have heard. Bełzec, maybe. Majdanek, unlikely. Sobibor also, not very often. Sobibor is one of the three so-called “pure extermination camps”. Actually four. Chelmno is a special camp. It’s a separate issue.

 

 

Treblinkaa, Belzec and Sobibor are the three big ones that were jews were shipped to be murdered and nothing else. That’s the claim of the mainstream. Sobibor was the smallest of them. Treblinka. The other here started out with 3 million. Belzec, 3 million claim and Sobibor with, 20 million. It’s down to 200,000 now, plus, minus. There’s always this kind of an average of the mainstream claim because they can’t really agree exactly on how much. But the other ones are way higher.

 

 

Sobibor is an interesting case. The same judge who after the war downgraded massively the death toll from Majdanek to 360,000 also investigated the Sobibor camp and the Treblinkaa camp and wrote the story for it for the Polish Commission for German War Crimes. He investigated a number of witnesses. They are listed here by name.

 

 

Right after the war, the inmates that were alive in summer of 1943 had a revolt in the Sobibor camp. There’s actually a movie about that. Not very historically accurate, but the revolt did take place and many witnesses, survivors or inmates, ran away and they ended up testifying in front of that investigative judge. This is Zdzislaw Tukaszkiewicz. Now the interesting thing is of what they told him. Right now for Sobibor, they claim engine exhaust gas as the murder method.

 

 

And they are supposed to have been murdered in just a normal chamber. One door. They walk in, they get killed with gas, the other door at the other end opens out and they get carried out to mass graves or pyres to be burned. That’s the mainstream narrative right now! However, if you look at what these witnesses testified, if they describe the alleged murder method, many of them said chlorine. Nobody said engine exhaust. Not a single witness!

 

 

What they claimed of the mechanics of the gas chamber is very interesting because they kind of agreed, with a few exceptions of witnesses who didn’t say anything about that.

 

 

That the floors in those chambers were hydraulically opened up, they collapsed downward, discharge the dead victims into two carts running on tracks below in some kind of basement area, and would then be driven out to mass graves or to cremation pyres. And they agreed on that you will not hear a single thing about that in the mainstream narrative! What Zdzislaw Tukaszkiewicz did when he wrote, based on his interrogations, that’s the only evidence he had, he said:

 

“Well, they were killed with engine exhaust and with just a normal gas chamber with doors.”

 

Invented out of the blue! With no basis in fact of any of the evidence! He threw out all the witnesses!

 

 

Now where did he get that narrative from? He actually copied it over. I just mentioned he had also investigated the Treblinka camp. He had copied it over from the narrative he had developed from the Treblinka camp!

 

 

And if you were to go there. I don’t want to go do that now again, you can find the list of witnesses and what they said on Treblinka in here. You find in Treblinka this chaos here! Electrocution, engine exhaust, gas, vacuum, steam, all kinds of claims. He cleaned that up, threw everything out, kept the engine exhaust and wrote the narrative according to that.

 

 

And then he copied it over to Sobibor. That is invented history with no basis in fact, none whatsoever in the case of Sobibor! The clearest case where you can absolutely pinpoint what happened.

 

So that is what you find if you go into the historical record, which became accessible to us only after the collapse of the Soviet Union, in the archives in the east became accessible. And we could actually go to these interrogation protocols and then see what narrative they made of it.

 

There is an interesting question that arises. Why was that done? I mean, it’s an obvious question. You want to look, make your enemy look as bad as possible. So whatever comes after the war, you can manipulate and destroy them as much as possible. Psychological warfare is just a continuation of warfare with other means. And ethnically speaking, the whole Second World War broke out because the actual tinderbox that blew it up, there were many more conflicts around the globe was the ethnic conflicts between Poles and Germans, mainly over the city of Danzig.

 

 

And after the war, as you may know, Poland gained huge territories from Germany and expelled the population. My paternal ancestry was expelled from Silesia, so they were part of the victims of that. And Germany was not willing after the First World War to accept the loss of Danzig, which was a 95% German city. How would you make them expect to accept the loss of a quarter of its entire territory and the expulsion of 7 million civilians from their homeland, where they had lived for centuries. And were not just a majority in large parts of the world, just only Germans, all gone! How do you accept Germany to this time accept it?

 

If you break the German spine with a guilt complex, you can make them accept anything as justified punishment. And that’s what the homicidal gas chambers are good for!

 

[36:49]

 

 

Now I’ve looked into all of the people who have done the investigation on those camps and who have written the history. We’re actually talking about only four individuals that were doing the investigation. I’ve mentioned Zdzislaw Lukaszkiewicz for Treblinka, for Majdanek and for Sobibor. Jan Sehn was investigative judge for Auschwitz. For Belzec we have an historian. There was no trial on Belzec. That was Eugeniusz Szrojt. And for Chelmno, which isn’t even on here, it’s a special case. There it is actually. It was Wladyslaw Bednarz.

 

So we have four Polish individuals all working for the Polish commission for the investigation of war crimes and Stalinist organization set up by Stalin to stick it to the Germans and to use all kinds of fishy methods, as I just said, and with the aim of destroying Germany psychologically and make them accept all that was coming their way. And it worked “beautifully”, quote, unquote.

 

This is if you present these things that way, I have found you can get people to understand first of all that it’s not some lunatic idea, but that there’s something profoundly wrong in a society that prescribes the writing of any scholarly field under the threat of punishment. And what that must lead to is untruthfulness of scholars. And then showing them, yeah, they have admitted over and over again to have lied, to have shifted the goalpost to hide facts from us, to completely change their story.

 

And then psychologically, very important, it’s not the jews who did it. In a great conspiracy theory! That’s what I’m getting here. I’m not saying I want to win the jews over seeing how they were duped, they were. But you know, all those witnesses at the end of it, most of them are jews. They had an axe to grind. I can’t blame them. They were treated horribly. And in the frenzy of post-war propaganda, they were making stuff up!

 

And this is completely made up stuff here! And they even co-ordinated these witnesses. Coordinated, as they couldn’t have come up all with the same story. But the investigative judge couldn’t do anything with it. In other cases, they were so contradictory, they weren’t coordinating any of these witnesses. They were just inventing whatever came.

 

And in the complete frenzy of post-war anti-German hysteria, you can understand where they are coming from. It would have been the judge’s job to say:

 

“This is all nonsense! We can’t make head or tail out of it. And therefore, we need to say that!”

 

They didn’t do that. These judges were put in by the new Stalinist government. It was a Stalinist agenda. I couldn’t find any jewish backgrounds in any of those four individuals. I don’t know the chain of command. They did what they did on orders. Nothing of that kind of propagandistic political nature was left to chance.

 

So you can bet that there were orders coming from Warsaw and from Moscow. What type they were, this is the kind of investigation we have yet to do. Whether in that chain of command jews were sitting, I don’t know. But they are not needed. You can see here the Stalinist will to completely destroy psychologically Germany and to pit Poland against Germany. That is an important point. Hitler had tried until 39, until the very last moment, to win the Poles over for an anti-communist pact against Stalinist Russia. And Stalinist Russia tried to conquer all of Europe. That was the declared concept of world revolution from 1918 onward. It wasn’t a secret. And Hitler tried to make a bulwark, a European fortress against Stalin’s plan to conquer all of Europe. Poland refused and went their way of poking the German eagle to the point where they lashed out. And the rest is history.

 

[40:46]

 

Pitting Poland against Germany. Any other normal nation. If you imagine Mexico in a World War that breaks out between Russia, China and the United States, United States loses and then Mexico gets everything that they used to own and more. You name the States of Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, California. Give everything to the Mexicans and drive out every White American. Would America put up with it if they gain strength again? How do you get the Germans to accept that kind of calamity? It worked. What did not work. And I want to make that sure. Even though my parents were expelled, my parental ancestors were expelled from that region. Is that today Germany and Poland are not pitted against each other anymore.

 

I’ve gone with my father to the our Poles who had expelled him and his family in the 1980s and 90s. German expellees went back to Poland to party with our Poles in the house it used to belong to my grandfather! There’s no frontier, no border between Germany and Poland anymore. If I wanted, the German government not sticking me in prison for other reasons, I could go back and settle where my parental ancestors came from. That story is over. In Europe we don’t kill each other. We don’t kill White people over territorial. That should be the case. Unfortunately, the Russians and the Ukrainians have yet to learn that lesson. That is over. Stalin did not succeed in pitting us against each other we work together.

 

Now, I am saying these things in order to make you understand where this come from, how it was done, who did it, why they did it! Not in order to, say, give Germany its territories, they can’t even populate their current territory, nor can the Poles. The real biggest challenge for all of us in Europe is population collapse, which is something I will talk about tonight, by the way, and how this ties in to all these issues that I’ve been talking about historically.

 

So now we are not talking territories here. We’re talking about historical understanding and to make the jews understand and the Zionists, we’re not coming after you. We’re not blaming you for having constructed this narrative in order to whatever. Sure, they took advantage of it, particularly since 1961 when the gravy train was already running with the Eichmann trial big time, and ever since have been profited from that.

 

But if you look in the first decades of the state of Israel and of the jewish community, particularly in this country, they were not riding the Holocaust train! It wasn’t even called that way back then. The partial identity between Soviet spies in the United States and a religious jewish background was troublesome truth for the jewish community. They kept their head low in the early years of the Cold War and were not rocking the boat.

 

So this way you can make even the jews see we’re not out for revenge for what you did to us, psychologically. The story came from a different angle. And I think that is because people assume we are spreading these Holocaust “denial theories”, as they call them, in order to get at the jews, in order to say the jews have made this big conspiracy in order to get us and destroy us. Yeah, it’s being used now as such. What happens now with them manipulating us with this and saying in order to prevent anything like that happening again, we must allow and support them to pre-emptively kill everyone that even looks askance at them, which is what’s happening in Gaza and what the conflict with many of these nations in the Middle East with Israel is about. That’s a separate story where we are today.

 

Historically seen as it started differently and it has taken on its own life. And we need to break that vicious circle we are in, using this presumed genocide, say what happens to the jews as we define genocide by the United Nations and in law, actually it was a genocide. You don’t need gas chambers to commit genocide. If you separate people so that they can’t reproduce, it’s already called genocide. And that’s what the National Socialists did in the camps, separating genders and putting them under living conditions that inevitably had to lead to many of them dying of disease and so forth. So technically speaking, legally speaking, how it is defined today, it was genocide. Now, that law didn’t exist back then. That’s a legal fine print.

 

So this genocide in its downgraded fashion without homicidal gas chambers, which didn’t exist, but the homicidal gas chambers being the foremost psychological weapon to traumatize the jews, young jews of new generation today and every one of us, we have gone through this education and know how shocking it is to see these bulldozers shoving corpses into mass graves at Bergen-Belsen and being told that’s what the Germans did to the jews. That was Fforce majeure of epidemics breaking out in camps that the Germans had no control over. They didn’t plan that. But you’re not being told that.

 

And the effect of it is that America for the most part is willing to go along, and Europe, to go along with what the jews and Zionists do in the Middle East. To break that vicious circle, to get a correct understanding, we can learn the correct lessons of history only if we get first the facts straight. And no matter what the facts are, morally speaking, you are never allowed to use past catastrophes of whatever nature to justify or foment current and future catastrophes! And that’s what’s happening. In order to prevent a new “Holocaust”, Israel is committing genocide.

 

[46:54]

 

So in order to prevent genocide, they commit genocide! There’s something wrong with this! And to see how we are manipulated with historical accounts being exaggerated and invented, to see it in this old example, the most extreme example, makes us see that happens all the time. What was it October 7, 2023, what happened there. Israel has a law outlawing, as I just mentioned, it was the first one outlawing Holocaust skepticism. And they have now introduced a law outlawing Gaza skepticism in terms of just what happened on the 7th of October. And they are probably in the process of making it a crime to accuse Israel of genocide.

 

All right, I’m having, as I mentioned, a second presentation tonight. We are talking about demographic collapse and where that leaves us, which options we have and what the various drivers are, which Holocaust propaganda actually is one of them. And I’ll explain that tonight. I hope I’ll get a chance to talk to you and maybe even discuss that with you guys.

 

 

If you want to look into this book, if you don’t have it yet, about how this core of the Holocaust, the homicide, gas chamber story, was created. As I mentioned there you can have it.

 

 

The encyclopedia also. I still have six copies floating around. Please keep the brochure. It is a short description and summary of Holocaust revisionist arguments with reference of all the books. You can find them all free of charge at holocausthandbooks.com. But you can also buy them from us on these websites and you’ll find links to purchase them.

 

And if you don’t want to keep it, leave it on the table and we’ll collect it later because this is advertising for our products, for our knowledge, for our insight, and we liked it to get spread.

 

So thank you for your attention.

 

[49:00]

 

[loud applause]

 

[Outro message]

 

 

If you want to learn more, here are a few suggested websites. At our Holocaust Encyclopedia you can find concise information on almost 600 related topics with references to further reading.

 

 

 

The results of 35 years of archival and forensic research into the Holocaust can be accessed free of charge at our Holocaust Handbooks website, where you can also access several documentaries as well as our Mini Series Holocaust Pocketbooks, which give easy to read introductions into various topics.

 

 

 

Printed copies of these and many other books can be purchased on our websites armreg.us and armreg.co.uk.

 

 

At our Holocaust Academy, we teach the ropes of skeptical Holocaust research.

 

 

 

It also features our growing podcast series named “Holocast”.

 

 

At the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust, we lobby for free speech where it is threatened the most.

 

 

Most prominently with our periodical Inconvenient History.

 

And last but not least, Germar Rudolf’s personal website where you can learn more about him.

 

 

[50:22]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

============================================

 

Rumble Comments

top

(Comments as of 6/23/2026 = 3)

Unlocking_Freedom
5 days ago
This video is so important. Discussing with a normie has many challenges, layers of brain washing, mind control by legacy media. https://www.printernational.co.uk/timmann2/history.htm#holocaust Approaching such a sensitive subject, especially with relatives is so hard. Yes the method of just sciences : Biology : Cholera, Tuberculosis (TB), Famine, Dysentery and Typhoid (Typhus) were at epidemic levels of disease Engineering : Wooden Doors, Floor Drains in a “gas chamber” Architecture : Swinging Doors Chemistry : Residue in the walls This video is a better beginning because the banning is a serious question for thought control. Exaggeration to Reduction in numbers comes from the authorities, which normies only will accept. Changing method of executions. There is no consistency.
1
0

Lueger
1 week ago
https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10000207&FassungVom=2023-01-08 interesting history of the modifications of this “Verbotsgesetz 1947” in Austria

‹ Hide 1 reply
Lueger
1 week ago
The AI could not identify a legislative or political donor impetus for the 1992 amendment, but that the “1992 Verbotsgesetz amendment was adopted by the Austrian Parliament with broad cross‑party support; it was driven by government and parliamentary lawmakers (major parties including the SPÖ and ÖVP), backed publicly by Jewish organizations and civil‑society groups concerned about rising neo‑Nazi activity and legal inconsistency. Major identifiable supporters were: Parliamentary sponsors and supporters: members of the governing parties at the time (Social Democratic Party — SPÖ — and Austrian People’s Party — ÖVP) who voted for the amendment in Parliament. Wikipedia Civil-society and community backers: Austrian Jewish organizations and international Jewish groups, prosecutors and legal scholars who urged a clear statutory prohibition to close court inconsistencies and enable prosecutions.” I asked it to enumerate and identify the neo-nazi events, which it indicated would take 30 minutes. Bin gespannt.
0
0

==========================

See Also

top

 

 

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Blair Cottrell: Picture this. Your country is overwhelmed by immigration and poor leadership. There’s rampant crime, there’s terrorism, and housing is completely unaffordable. You’ll never own a home like your parents did! And it’s really not even safe to just go for a walk in the streets where you grew up. But the presiding government ignores the problems and just keeps doing what (((the money))) tells them to do.

 

So you and your mates get together and you start talking about how to solve some of these problems. But you realise to have a lasting impact, you need a political party. You need to contest elections and win some seats in Parliament. You start by making some videos online, you host some protests, some meetings, and your message is really resonating with the people. Within a year, you’ve got almost, 2,000 members signed on and many more supporters. More than enough to register a party with the Electoral Commission. Your plan is to halt immigration, which will instantly drop the price of property and rent. You want to restore national manufacturing, get our oil refineries going again and put the Australian people, the original working class, first.

 

But then, early one morning, riot police kick your door in! They drag you out of bed and say:

 

“You’re a member of a prohibited hate group! And you’re under arrest!”

 

You ask them what that means and what crime you’ve committed, but they don’t answer you. They don’t actually know what you did or didn’t do. They’re just on orders to arrest you. And the truth is, you didn’t do anything! You haven’t actually broken any laws. The problem is your political party just got made illegal. In the weeks following, all your party members are arrested because while you were trying to register your party, the presiding government used a new law which allows them to ban political parties on the basis that those parties are “hateful”.

 

Some of your members do deals with cops to stay out of prison. Others go to jail for 10 or 15 years. That’s the end of your party and you’re in jail for the foreseeable future. That might sound crazy that could only happen in some Banana Republic, or a very corrupt third world country.

 

But as of January this year, the Australian government can and has been doing this! On May 15th of this year, Foreign Minister Tony Burke used new laws rushed through Parliament after the Bondi terror attack [Dec 14, 2025] to ban the White Australia Party as a prohibited “hate group”.

 

Now, the government in Australia hasn’t tried to do anything like this in a long time. Back in 1951, Prime Minister Robert Menzies tried to make a law to ban the Communist Party of Australia. But the High Court stepped in and said:

 

“You can’t just ban political parties. That basically violates everything we stand for as a democracy.”

 

Menzies wasn’t ready to give up though. He put a referendum to the people seeking public support to ban the Communist Party, but the people refused. The public wasn’t too keen on Communism, but they still agreed that banning political parties was undemocratic. So the precedent was set. Outlawing political parties wasn’t allowed.

 

Back to the present day, the White Australia Party obviously had nothing to do with the Bondi terror attack, but they’ve been outlawed as a hate group anyway based on laws that were made immediately after that terror attack and as a consequence of that attack. How does banning the White Australia Party stop terrorism? It doesn’t! At all! The government is just set on banning certain political parties.

 

But why? Well, new political parties are rising all across the West, opposing mass immigration and vowing to undo the damage former governments have done to their own nations. These new parties are generating huge amounts of support. Ever since social media changed the way we access information and the kind of information we can see, old governments or the traditional two party voting systems have never been more unpopular.

 

Basically, people’s eyes are wide open now! Especially after Covid-19. The traditional major parties of the West have really fallen out of favour with the people and they’re on the way out.

 

But in Australia, the presiding government has created a scheme for clinging to power in a way which really steamrolls our national constitution and essentially amounts to treason. It’s a very simple three step scheme:

 

– Immigration to replace the existing voter base.

 

– Censorship to stop you from talking about it.

 

– And banning political parties, so there’s no way we can vote them out.

 

The laws they just rushed through at the start of 2026 are called Combating Anti-semitism, Hate and Extremism Bill. They allow the government to ban political parties and jail their political opponents for up to 15 years! And they’ve done this in spite of the legal precedent set by the High Court in 1951. It’s like they don’t even care what the Federal Court says.

 

But here’s the crazy part. No one in a party that’s being banned needs to have committed any actual crimes. The presiding government only needs to be satisfied that the targeted party’s members have engaged in “hateful conduct”, even if that hateful conduct was years in the past.

 

What is “hateful conduct”? The definition is loose. It’s basically whatever the government decides it wants “hateful” to mean. The meaning of hate in the context of this law is almost entirely subjective, meaning it doesn’t have a strong fixed definition. And they’ve used this term deliberately so they can flexibly apply this law to any group or party the government wants to cancel.

 

So when you hear government ministers talk about hate or even hate crime, that’s not a term referencing any legitimate criminal activity. It can mean pretty much anything. You can say something that challenges government policy in a way which embarrasses a certain minister and they can decide you’re guilty of a hate crime. Any group you’re involved in, even loosely, you don’t have to be a direct member. Any group you’re associated with can be outlawed as a hate group on the basis of your comments or your conduct, which doesn’t even have to be criminal. It doesn’t matter if the group we’re talking about is a registered political organisation or religious group. There’s no legal protections here.

 

Now, I’m not someone who tries to drum up outrage for clicks. I’m not trying to sell you a Tshirt. I’m trying to tell you that if you’re Australian like me, we’re in a lot of trouble here! The major parties in our country have exploited terrorism to make a deal to cancel democracy, so we can’t vote them out!

 

Until this year, every Australian citizen had the right to register political parties, contest elections and vote for a party of their choosing. But that just got cancelled. While the media talks about taxes and the definition of a “woman”, your right to fully participate in politics, express yourself freely and vote the way you choose to vote just got shut down. This is the worst thing that’s ever happened to Australia and no one’s talking about it, because the government has deliberately misframed it as banning “Nazis”! But they’re lying! Because this law isn’t actually about banning Nazis!

 

This is about cancelling your right to contest elections, forge new political parties and vote freely. The Labor Party is using anti-Nazi moral hysteria to try to prevent people from understanding or criticising this new law:

 

“If you don’t like the hate group law, then you must be a Nazi!”

 

That’s what they’re trying to imply. But isn’t the whole reason “Nazis” are even considered bad is because they ban political parties and try to eradicate certain people and ideologies? So what? To fight Nazis, the government needs to do exactly what Nazis did historically?

 

And the White Australia Party was trying to participate in politics legally through a registered political party. So even if they are “Nazis”, whatever that even actually means these days, they were forced to operate within a certain legal framework which prevented violence and extremism, which is the whole point of democracy. But that framework is now gone! Which obviously encourages political violence!

 

And what happens when thousands of White Australia members and supporters retreat to One Nation, which they’re currently doing since their original party was banned? Well, then the government can just ban One Nation as well, on the basis that its new members and associates are guilty of hate! And there’s no realistic way for One Nation to protect itself from this outcome. Even if they shut down their branches and introduce strict vetting process, people are going to slip through the cracks and someone will have done something the government decides is “hateful”, at some point in the past.

 

The government will try to ban One Nation next and any of its major contenders. One Nation really has no choice but to demand these laws are repealed immediately and campaign on that basis. Because even if One Nation or other political parties are not banned immediately on the basis of this law, the threat of a ban will constantly loom overhead, coercing the way these parties behave and forcing them into deals they otherwise wouldn’t have done.

 

Any political party which expects to participate in politics independently and forge its own policies freely has to contest the next election purely on the grounds of repealing these new laws. If these laws stand, they allow the government to ban any political party without any due process and no criminal convictions required.

 

Constitutional legal expert Dr. Anne Twomey* just three days ago sounded the alarm, using her YouTube channel to warn Australia that the government has implemented these laws to set a precedent for banning political parties to preserve its position and cancel its opponents. As long as this hate group law exists, there’s literally no point in voting, and no political solution.

 

[ *See: Constitutional Clarion – The Challenge by ‘White Australia’ to the Prohibited Hate Group Law – May 24, 2026 – Transcript ]

 

Former White Australia Party member Thomas Sewell has applied for an emergency injunction at the High Court, which was accepted and is scheduled for a hearing in September to try to fight these laws. But you don’t need to support Thomas Sewell or Thomas Sewell’s ideology directly in order to understand the severity of these laws and oppose them. Every Australian with a brain has a moral duty to oppose these laws! Every sensible person will stop worrying about the definition of a woman and start talking about these hate group laws. Nothing in Australia is more pressing right now!

 

So share this video with your friends and family and help them understand.

 

[9:33]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

============================================

 

Rumble Comments

top

(Comments as of 5/28/2026 = 4)

TVR_
5 hours ago
Great video on what is ultimately the greatest pressing issue in Australia today
9
0

Gretashapiro
1 hour ago
needs to be shared to normies
3
0

Skygod2020
3 hours ago
I left Australia 14 years ago, moved to China, and I feel sorry for the Australian people for what they are going through and what’s to come. China is light years ahead of Australia in every aspect. Australians need to ask themselves why they are subject to anti-China propaganda 24/7.
1
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
somethingforthisbox
7 minutes ago
Strange how my Chinese friends find the west more comfortable at least for them, though more expensive here… and they are monitored here too. Many things they won’t discuss
0
0

==========================

See Also

top

 

 

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Anne Twomey: Welcome back to the Constitutional Clarion!

 

The Commonwealth Government has made a regulation that classifies White Australia, or the White Australia Party, as a prohibited hate group. The party has now commenced a constitutional challenge in the High Court to the validity of that law, which will be heard in September. In the meantime, there will also be a hearing in the first week of June which of an application to suspend the effects of its prohibition until the Constitutional case is determined. In this video, I’ll try to explain some of the arguments that will be run in the Constitutional challenge.

 

But first, a bit of a recap on what the law does.

 

Now, for those of you who want more detail, see my previous video, which was called How the New Federal Hate Laws Work.

 

The power to prohibit hate groups was enacted in the Combating Anti-semitism, Hate and Extremism Criminal and Migration Laws Act in January 2026. It inserts a new part 5.3B in the Commonwealth Criminal Code. It authorises the Governor General, acting on the advice of the Australian Federal Police Minister, to make a regulation designating a group as a “prohibited hate group”. The Minister must be satisfied on reasonable grounds that the group has engaged in conduct constituting a hate crime or been associated with a hate crime.

 

For example, by:

 

“Preparing, planning or assisting a hate crime, or advocating engaging in such conduct. The conduct of formal or informal members of the group can also be attributed to the group.”

 

So if rogue members of a group incite racial hatred or advocate violence based on race, that might well be sufficient.

 

Now, you might think that the term “hate crime” means that the group or its members actually have to have committed crimes! But that’s not so! The law says that:

 

“No crime needs to have been committed, no one needs to have been convicted by a court, and conduct can be a hate crime even though it happened in the past when it wasn’t a crime. It’s enough for the Minister to be satisfied on reasonable grounds that the group has engaged in or been associated with the conduct constituting a hate crime.”

 

This means that it’s the Minister, rather than a court, who assesses that the group has engaged in such conduct. There’s no independent assessment of whether that conduct occurred, whether it satisfied the terms of any offence, whether it could be attributed to the group or whether any defences apply. In some cases, the Minister would have to also be satisfied that the conduct would:

 

“Cause a reasonable member of the targeted group to be intimidated, to fear harassment, or violence or to fear for their safety.”

 

These matters are quite impressionistic in nature and ordinarily they are determined by a court after hearing relevant evidence.

 

But under part 5.3B, it’s just up to the Minister to be satisfied without evidence, without a hearing and without procedural fairness.

 

Moreover, it seems that the conduct in many cases could have occurred at any time in the past, no matter how long ago, and certainly before that conduct became an offence.

 

Given the past rhetoric of members of political parties about racial, immigration and refugee matters, it would not be hard to satisfy this criteria in order to ban any political party! Making this a very dangerous weapon for a future authoritarian government to use.

 

There are, however, some further hoops to go through before a grip can be banned:

 

“The Minister must be satisfied, on reasonable grounds, that banning the group is reasonably necessary to protect the Australian community, or a part of it from social, economic, psychological and physical harm.”

 

But “psychological harm” could mean almost anything. And its stated in the act to:

 

“Include harm caused by the continued presence in Australia of the group that has engaged in or been associated with hate crimes.”

 

So it’s actually a self fulfilling condition!

 

More significantly, the Minister must have received advice from the Director General of Security, who’s the head of ASIO [Australian Security Intelligence Organisation], recommending the group be banned because it has:

 

“Engaged in activities that are likely to increase the risk of politically motivated violence or communal violence, or has either itself advocated for or engaged in such violence, or there’s a risk that it might do so in the future.”

 

So it covers activities that do not themselves constitute or cause harm, but simply if there’s a risk of harm.

 

While one might trust ASIO to make that assessment fairly now, one cannot guarantee it for the future. If, for example, an authoritarian leader placed a crony in the Office of Director General of Security. It’s therefore some protection from the abuse of the power, but not great protection.

 

The Attorney General must also sign off on any ban and the Leader of the Opposition must be briefed, and that’s it! Once this process is completed, a group can be designated a “prohibited hate group”.

 

Now, to be clear, this does not involve convicting anyone of a hate crime. It’s an administrative act to ban a group. But the consequences of that ban are serious! Continuing as a member of a prohibited hate group, if you know that it is prohibited and you haven’t taken reasonable steps to end your membership, that’s an offence with a penalty of up to 7 years in jail! Directing the activities of a prohibited hate group can land you in prison for 15 years. There are other offences of recruiting for a prohibited hate group, training it or being trained by it, funding it or providing support for it, all with penalties ranging up to 10 or 15 years in prison. It’s also an offence to display any of the prohibited hate group symbols.

 

Now this brings us to the Criminal Code Prohibited Hate Group White Australia Regulations 2026. They state that White Australia, also known as WA, WAP or the White Australia Party, is a prohibited hate group. The regulations commenced on 16 May 2026.

 

The White Australia Party, of whose members were drawn from the since disbanded National Socialist Network, is an incorporated association registered in Victoria on 20th December 2025. Its registered purpose is:

 

“To advance the cultural, historical and ethnic interests of Australians of European heritage and advocate for immigration and population policies that serve the national interest and engage in lawful political advocacy, education and community activities to support candidates and policies aligned with its objectives.”

 

It claims to have 1, 779 members. It sought to become a registered political party at the Commonwealth level, but it’s not submitted the details of the names of its members as required. Presumably this is because it would provide evidence to the Commonwealth of its membership and of course membership, unless you take reasonable steps to get rid of your membership as soon as you find out that it’s a prohibited hate group, is a criminal offence! One would imagine that the number of party members is dropping rather quickly as a consequence.

 

On the 18th of May the White Australia Party lodged its constitutional challenge in the High Court. It’s arguing that Part 5.3B of the Criminal Code is invalid on three grounds.

 

One, the absence of a Head of Legislative Power to enact the law. Two, breach of the implied freedom of political communication. And three, breach of the separation of powers by vesting punitive powers in the Executive. Due to time constraints on doing these videos, I’m only going to discuss the first two.

 

The Commonwealth Parliament must have a Head of Legislative Power in order to enact a law. The White Australia Party claims that its position is similar to that of the Communist Party when it was dissolved by legislation. That legislation was found by the High Court to be invalid due to the absence of a Head of Power. In the Communist party case in 1951, it was claimed that the law dissolving the Communist Party was supported by the Defence Power and by what we now call the implied Nationhood Power, which includes protection of the nation.

 

The High Court disagreed, finding that neither power supported the law. The White Australia Party asserts that the current law is not supported by the Defence Power or the Nationhood Power. It adds that the corporation’s power is also not applicable to it because the party is an “incorporated association” and not a corporation. It claims there is no Head of Power to enact part 5.3B.

 

Now, three issues arise here. First, while the Defence Power was held in the Communist Party case not to support the relevant law, more recently in the case of Thomas and Mowbray in 2007, the High Court took a much broader view of the scope of the Defence Power, particularly in relation to terrorism and the protection of the people of the nation from violence.

 

The reasoning in the majority judgements is so poor that it’s actually quite difficult to pinpoint the rationale.

 

But it seems that the majority rejected the view taken of the scope of the defence power in the Communist Party case and that the Defence Power in section 51.6 of the Constitution now extends to matters concerning national security and the risk of internal violence within Australia. Whether it would extend further to the prohibition of a political party and whether such a law would satisfy a proportionality test would be a matter for argument.

 

Second, the scope of the Nationhood Power has also been expanded by the High Court, with a majority in the PAPE case regarding it as a power to deal with national emergencies. There might be scope for the Commonwealth to argue that the prohibition of hate groups is necessary to protect the Commonwealth against internal threats and that it’s a matter peculiarly adapted to the government of the nation that cannot otherwise be carried out for its benefit. Which is critical part of the test for the Nationhood Power. Again, however, a proportionality test may apply.

 

Reliance on either of these powers would prove difficult because it would be hard to satisfy a proportionality test in relation to either Head of Power, given the breadth and vagueness of the application of Part 5.3B, as explained earlier.

 

Third, we have the External Affairs Power. This is the power expressly relied upon in Part 5.3B of the Criminal Code. It states in section 114A.1 that:

 

“One of the objectives of the Part is to give effect to Australia’s obligations under articles 20 and, 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, known as the ICCPR, and Articles 4A and 4B of the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination, known as CERD.”

 

Articles 20 and, 26 require:

 

“The prohibition of incitement of racial hatred and the protection of people against racial discrimination.”

 

Part 5.3B, of course, goes much further than that! So they’re not terribly helpful.

 

The most relevant treaty provision, however, is Article 4B of CERD. It says that:

 

“State parties shall declare illegal and prohibit organisations which promote and incite racial hatred and shall recognise participation in such organisations as an offence punishable by law. Article 4A also requires parties to make an offence punishable by law the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof.”

 

A proportionality test also applies with respect to the implementation of treaties. The law must be:

 

“Reasonably capable of being considered appropriate and adapted to implementing the treaty obligations.”

 

In this case, Part 5.3B or at least most of it, would seem reasonably capable of being considered appropriate and adapted to implementing Article 4 of CERD.

 

So it’s likely that a Head of Power will be found to support it.

 

This is subject, however, to the key issue that arose in the Communist Party case. In that case, it was accepted that the Commonwealth Parliament could enact a law against subversion. But the Communist Party Dissolution Act did not itself prohibit subversion. It instead authorised the Governor General, acting on ministerial advice, to declare associations and individuals to be communists on the basis asserted in a recital in the preamble to the Act, that Communists engage in subversion. The connection between the law and the power was based on a decision of the Executive, the Governor General, on the advice of the Minister, not by a court!

 

Now, this led to the law being struck down as invalid. Part 5.3B of the Criminal Code sails perilously close to that same problem! It’s the Minister and the Governor General who determine that a body is a “hate group”, connecting the law to the power to enact it without there being any judicial determination that a hate crime has ever been committed.

 

But there are also differences. Part 5.3B, for example, applies generally, not just to a particular group. It doesn’t rely on recitals in a preamble. And there’s greater facility for administrative review of executive decisions than there was back at the time of the Communist Party case.

 

So it will be interesting to see what a court makes of those similarities and differences in the course of this challenge.

 

The next issue is the implied freedom of political communication. This is most likely where the Constitutional problems will arise. Would the designation of a group, including a political party, as a “prohibited hate group”, burden the implied freedom of political communication? Well, the answer to that must be, yes!

 

So we move on to the next part of the test. Does Part 5.3B have a legitimate purpose that is compatible with the Constitutional system of representative and responsible government? The High Court held in Farmer and the Minister for Home affairs in 2025 that:

 

“Prohibiting incitement of Discord in the Australian community was a legitimate purpose to the extent that this meant preventing harmful dissension or strife, including intimidation, vilification or victimisation on a large scale in the Australian community or within or amongst segments of the community. But it would not be sufficient if only the feelings or sensitivities of the Australian community, or a segment of the community would be hurt or adversely affected. Parliament cannot use its legislative power for the purpose of curbing political disagreement and debate inside Australia. The purpose must be directed at preventing material harm to the Australian community, or a segment of that community, rather than merely eroding social cohesion through disagreement and debate.”

 

The Objects clause in section 114A.1 of Part 5.3B, however, goes broader than that. It states that:

 

“The object is to protect the Australian community, or part of it, against social, economic, psychological and physical harm and from the promotion of violence by prohibiting organisations that engage in, prepare or plan to engage in or assist the engagement in, or advocate engaging in conduct constituting a hate crime and to give effect to those treaty obligations (that I mentioned).”

 

It will be a matter for argument in court about whether that actually is the purpose of Part 5.3B, and whether it’s a legitimate purpose, taking into account the qualifications given by the High Court in the Farmer case.

 

If the law has a legitimate purpose, the final question will be whether Part 5.3B is reasonably appropriate and adapted to serve the legitimate end, whatever that is, in a manner that is compatible with the Constitutionally prescribed system of representative and responsible government.

 

Now this is where all those problems that I raised at the beginning of this video about the breadth and the vagueness and the discretion in these provisions will become important. One could imagine that a far more narrowly tailored law could achieve any legitimate end without imposing such an extreme burden on political communication.

 

In short, there is a good argument that it is disproportionate in its application.

 

The outcome, of course, will depend upon how it is argued before the court, which none of us can dictate or predict. It will also require putting aside any personal objection to the plaintiff in this case and its ideology, and instead place the focus squarely on the long term application and the validity of this law.

 

Thank you once again for watching or listening to the Constitutional Clarion and I look forward to your company again next time. Goodbye.

 

[19:30]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

============================================

 

Youtube Comments

top

(Comments as of 5/25/2026 = 174)

@husaberg650
2 hours ago
But we can have Communist Parties.
13

@holobiont3197
3 hours ago
Not convinced they fully thought through the acronym WAP.
8

@richyglitched
4 hours ago
The primary function of discrimination for the group is enough to have it outright banned. Lumped with the Bikies
4

@benhall8172
6 hours ago
If WAP can be declared a hate group and then have every member jailed, so can any political party or group the Govt of the day doesn’t like when the language is so vague and broad anything can be construed as illegal: Three Felonies a Day
16

@farright118
6 hours ago
These laws are so undemocratic.
I’ll be shocked if these laws aren’t thrown out
27

@andhewonders
7 hours ago
I’m curious that if these groups form themselves into a religious body, will hate laws still apply?
8

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago
Probably yes. Section 116 of the Constitution says the Commonwealth shall not make any law for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion – but that has been interpreted as subject to limits (eg if it is part of your religion to engage in human sacrifice, etc). You cannot use religion as an excuse for engaging in criminal conduct.
8

Hide replies

@malcolmfletcher7295
8 hours ago
I find it interesting that the Federal Government spontaneously decided that such a law was a good idea.
7

@hillstrong715
8 hours ago
The problem with this is that an administration change can take out any and every group that the government of the day finds objectionable. So any group that objects to any of the policies of the government of the day can be banned by simply defining the objection as hatred. Bad news for everyone in this nation, most particularly anyone who is a citizen.
11

@obliviouz
9 hours ago
Thank you for another informative video. Given the fact that the law almost expressly provides for punishment without (full) involvement of the Courts, I would be interested in the third issue referred to, the separation of powers point. That was a point taken and relevant to a recent determination in a visa/immigration detention/terrorism case if I remember correctly.
3

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago
Yes, it’s a far more complex issue and would require quite a bit more work on my end. I just haven’t had the time for it so far. But maybe in the future.
1

Hide replies

@Lucid-AUS
9 hours ago
Very informative thank you

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago
You’re welcome.

Hide replies

@caboose00f76
9 hours ago
Man these comments are wild. The creepers coming in from Pauline’s lot and the Trumpers. What a mess these people are.
5

@lukepaul7931
10 hours ago
I dont like them but i wish the government didnt block them. They are a pressure relief valve that has been blocked.
2

@__Max-oe6zm
10 hours ago
It’s an interesting situation for sure.
1

@steveliveshere
10 hours ago
Considering everything that’s going on in the world a White Australia Party is more concerning than a communist Party.
2

@mahcooharper9577
10 hours ago
I’m sure you could find someone who is genuinely distressed by the presence of ANY group in this country.
It’s a very poorly thought out piece of legislation, and as mentioned a terrifying weapon for an authoritarian to use.
Irrespective of who the group is who is currently proposed to be banned, I hope they can succeed in having the law overturned.
6

@JamesThomas-n3q
11 hours ago
Thanks Anne for the informative video. Always a helpful watch for those of us who want knowledge on the laws both current and upcoming.
11

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago
Thanks. I very much appreciate it, as it does take quite a bit of effort to do these videos.

Hide replies

@therig.88
11 hours ago
If we don’t have freedom of political opinion.. do we really have freedom? Or free ideas in a democracy?
32

@richyglitched
4 hours ago
We don’t put up with criminal organisations like the Mafia or Bikies..

Hide replies

@not.rumple.stiltskin
11 hours ago (edited)
They really threw the toys out of the cot with this one.
sooo being unpleasant to someone is unlawful seems to be the goal.
also how is the reasonableness of a person measured?
17

@sylviaelse5086
11 hours ago
Is there anything to prevent the president of the group from being arrested and charged with directing the activities of a prohibited group while the group is litigating?
9

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago
That was an issue raised the other day when they sought interlocutory relief (which will now be dealt with in the first week in June). As Justice Jagot mentioned, it is likely that any prosecution would be stayed until the constitutional issue was resolved.

Hide replies

@CaptainKremmen
11 hours ago
You say that it could be misused by a “future authoritarian government”. Surely simply creating such a law working totally outside the judicial system means we already have a current authoritarian government.
50

@Pastor-of-muppets1985
11 hours ago (edited)
How does it operate outside the judicial system? It’s currently being challenged in the HCA.
1

@mahcooharper9577
10 hours ago
​ @Pastor-of-muppets1985 if the HCA rules it is valid there is no further review, and no review is applicable to a Minister’s decision.

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago

@mahcooharper9577 – No, that’s not quite right. If the HCA rules it is valid, then that just means the law is valid. It may still be the case that the Minister did not have reasonable grounds to make a decision and that this may be challenged on an administrative law basis.
1

@yt.personal.identification
11 hours ago
Don’t attribute to malice, that which can easily be attributed to stupidity.
3

@hs-yr1zu
7 hours ago
@yt.personal.identification Doesn’t apply here. You don’t accidentally form a govt that delivers the 2nd worst record for secrecy and transparency of any govt since federation, and you don’t accidentally use a historic mandate to dismantle FOI laws as a first order priority. The authoritarian govt is well and truly here. If their contempt for democracy wasn’t clear enough, the latest budget should seal the deal, regardless of your view of the budget itself.
9

Hide replies

@mendaciousferret819
12 hours ago
Instead of focusing on how effective our security services have been we get this. They failed and are now blaming it on insufficient power.
19

@AGoodYear-q2v
12 hours ago
Very interesting clip by this lady. Protecting freedom of political expression is critical – such an important decision for the High Court coming up.
28

@constitutionalclarion1901
12 hours ago
Thanks.
8

Hide replies

@scottn2046
12 hours ago
I’m curious – how much freedom does a Federal Government have to sign a Treaty and then use the External Affairs Powers to claim a Head of Power that otherwise wouldn’t exist? Can it be used as a “Magic Head-Of-Power Tree” potentially initiating a treaty with co-operative countries with the intent of creating a Head Of Power that it doesn’t have, but would like??
6

@constitutionalclarion1901
12 hours ago
The High Court has said that it must be a ‘bona fide’ treaty (see Tasmanian Dam case). You can’t just go shopping for a treaty or bribe a small country to enter into a treaty to give you a head of power. But so far there has been no case where the validity of a law has been struck down because the treaty was not a bona fide one – probably because the Commonwealth has not been game to push its luck on this point.
5

@andrewjgrimm
11 hours ago
One of the past CC videos touched upon it. Sorry I can’t tell you which one.

Hide replies

@EAFSQ9
12 hours ago
I’m just here before the comments get locked due to the PHON types and White Australia Party members brigading this video
6

@therig.88
11 hours ago
You afraid of different opinions may the best man win in the land of ideas.
23

@Pastor-of-muppets1985
11 hours ago
So no opinion then? Just wanted to get a comment in?
16

@steveliveshere
10 hours ago
@Pastor-of-muppets1985 its not an opinion mate its fascim.

@mahcooharper9577
10 hours ago
If Trump was in charge here and was banning left wing activism groups I suspect you wouldn’t mind those groups objecting.
You need to step outside who it is and whether you personally support them and think about what this law actually means.
3

@homelander-enjoyer
12 hours ago
Better not let them have opinions in our brave little democracy!
34

@trunkage
11 hours ago
​ @homelander-enjoyer Unfortunately, their opinions is taking everyone else opinions away
Either way, someone is going to lose their opinion
1

@ricochet2977
10 hours ago
@trunkage
Who is taking your opinion away, didn’t you just state your opinion?
4

@constitutionalclarion1901
12 hours ago
Yes – shut down will happen soon, as I don’t have the time to keep monitoring the comments. I’m afraid I have other work I have to do.
9

Hide replies

@duncancargill6371
12 hours ago
As opposed to any and all forms of racism as I am I see this legislation as a draconian over reach open as it is too absurd levels of abuse. Also it is puzzling that the same government that enacts this legislation for, inpart, to protect social cohesion at the same time acts to destroy social cohesion with it’s immigration detention policy?
19

@CaptainKremmen
11 hours ago
It’s especially ludicrous to make arbitrary laws aimed against the White Australia Party, a tiny group of around 1500 members. The group is so small that it would be sensible to just ignore it, unless it commits any actual crimes. This kind of heavy-handed legislation is more likely to give them free publicity and possibly even support.
8

Hide replies

@SuperLloyd84
12 hours ago
Forcing people to give up their association seems like such a smart idea. I’m sure this won’t anger any radical elements and drive them underground, or give them a grievance they need to resolve.
24

@CheekyJebus
10 hours ago
giving people 15 years in prison for wrong-think strips them of having a peaceful route to seeking change in the country, that’s never a good idea.
4

Hide replies

@Margarinethebutterlover
12 hours ago
Great vid, thanks. Under these same circumstances, your own media may well be under attack.
6

@constitutionalclarion1901
11 hours ago
I try to weed out the comments that would breach existing laws, but it’s always possible I will miss some, or judge incorrectly which side of the law they fall. It is a real risk of running a channel like this – but I do try hard to ensure that the channel stays within the law.
5

@nationalistpolitics
9 hours ago
@constitutionalclarion1901 How could you possibly be held responsible for what other people post in the comments?

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago
Unfortunately, there are a number of cases in which the person who owns/runs the channel (or facebook page or blog) has been held responsible for the comments, as they did not take action to delete a comment (where that comment breaches an anti-hatred law) in a reasonable time. I didn’t make the law – but I do have to obey it.

Hide replies

@mathewritchie
12 hours ago
Under the rules outlined all the major parties could be defined as hate groups.
21

@Robert-xs2mv
12 hours ago
Besides I don’t “ hate” anything, I just disagree
10

@phwbooth
12 hours ago
Excellent analysis, ma’am. Thanks.
11

@constitutionalclarion1901
12 hours ago
Much appreciated.
2

Hide replies

@phwbooth
12 hours ago
Hate is a sin, and has not in the past been a crime ( Matthew 5:43–44 ) Only when it resulted in action was such an action punishable, and then (in England) by the Ecclesiastical Courts.
2

@dodecahedron-r7d
12 hours ago
They have redefined biblical principles and turned things into thought crimes and crimes of perception
Instead of 1:1 cause and effect, they have decided now that something is s crime when it’s one step removed from reality, thus if someone is offended now they have been harmed. The next stage will be pre-crime or being born into the wrong lineage
My biggest objection is that all these laws that keep proliferating at a rate society cannot ascertain the long term effects of, are not being agreed to by those who are expected to be governed by these laws, or ANY laws for that matter
It is part time laws were wound back and we reassess the very notion of law and it’s so called right to govern others, especially when 99% of laws are never agreed to by those placed under them and are asserted by nothing more than the violence of the state or by implied rights
5

@hs-yr1zu
7 hours ago
@dodecahedron-r7d The joys of postmodernism. The only objective truth is that truth is an oppressive social construct, so reality is as defined by any given individual. Now it’s enshrined in law and the ideology of our ‘democratic’ government. We might be cooked.

@DizzyButler
10 hours ago
Not sure if a biblical reference was made in the video that gave this comment more context and I just zoned out during that bit, but the Bible doesn’t say hate is a sin in it’s entirety. Romans 12:9 “hate what is evil, cling to what is good.” This ‘hate what is evil’ has been used as justification for actual hate crime historically and currently.
1

Hide replies

@pmafi_eng
13 hours ago
Given Pauline Hanson’s past comments and actions against minority groups such as Muslims, Chinese etc.
Do you think it would possible for One Nation to be a banned group?
9

@LuckyLocust
12 hours ago
The laws are so vague and retroactive that likely any party could be banned. Just needs the minister to have the will to do so. Any party that said negrative things about the germans, italians or japanese during WW2 could be banned under these laws.
13

@mahcooharper9577
10 hours ago
Pretty much every political or activist group in the country has said something that could be considered hateful, on both the left and the right. This (aside from the legal issues) is the problem – it’s too vague and it’s antithetical to democracy.
2

Hide replies

@peregrineh1620
13 hours ago
Seems a bit fishy that it’s left to the minister to determine – and after what we know about the lack of info sharing…seems dodgy….ministers are not capable! This is not a good idea.
7

@tomo9224
13 hours ago
As much as I hate speech being silenced, this is probably one of those videos where the comments section should be shut down, Professor
2

@nationalistpolitics
9 hours ago
“This legislation silencing free speech is bad”
“We will disable the comments so that people cannot discuss it freely”
???
4

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago
Unfortunately, the law requires me to do so – it’s not my choice. There have been several cases in which the person who runs a Facebook page, blog or channel has been held responsible under anti-hatred laws for failing to delete offending posts made by others.
1

@CheekyJebus
10 hours ago
nothing says democracy and education like not allowing open discussion.
3

@constitutionalclarion1901
12 hours ago
Yes, I’ll do so shortly.
2

Hide replies

@jackhanley293
13 hours ago
We already give ministers too much power. Is this an attack on free speach
15

@worker-wf2em
13 hours ago
The antidote to hate speech is not censorship, but more speech. This is a lesson mankind consistently fails to learn. As soon as you hand those in power the ability to determine what constitutes acceptable and unacceptable speech, there is only one outcome. I vehemently disagree with everything White Australia stands for, but it is foolish to cheer any system of power censoring it.
19

@somluck2813
13 hours ago
Singapore and Malaysia use laws made by British to quash opposition groups.
2

@MrTiddalik
13 hours ago
Never a dull moment
1

@lauchlanguddy1004
13 hours ago
I trust the courts. The law already allows an elected crony to make these decisions.

@somluck2813
13 hours ago
Given that act applies to historical statements made by the relevant party, the Australian Labor Party has from since Australia was established to at least the 1960s made racist statement, the ‘White Australia’ was part of its platform up to the 1970s, it would seem that questions can be raised in relation to the ALP.
17

@Imagineering100
13 hours ago
This will cause nothing but problems.
8

@dancarmody3789
13 hours ago
If the challenge is succesful and the law is found unconstitutional, it will affect all the other groups listed so far…. Hizb ut-Tahrir. What a crazy world we live in that white supremacists might end up helping Islamic extremists. One has to wonder if that they’ve even considered that outcome.
3

@Jordz97
13 hours ago
No one has even heard of Hizb ut-Tahrir, once White Australia gets in Hizb ut-Tahrir will be deported lmao.
17

@dancarmody3789
13 hours ago
@Jordz97 Lol, White Australia aren’t going to get in.
2

@JamesThomas-n3q
10 hours ago
@dancarmody3789 if that’s what the government thought then they wouldn’t have banned the WAP.
2

@TheKrispyfort
13 hours ago
Misogynists and xenophobes helping other misogynists and xenophobes.
3

Hide replies

@williamhay3029
13 hours ago (edited)
Wondering if their arguments will be a mix of the best cooker material, mixed with badly misquoted sections from your videos and involve red/ green constitution.
Also coincidentally this has come out on the afternoon that John Safran has a new show on free speech in Australia, focussing on free speech laws such as this and whether it’s healthy to have these. And of course he then discusse and meets with NSN and learns how to give a decent Nazi salute
3

@jimmy12347654
10 hours ago
Isn’t doing the NS salute a crime in a lot of states in Australia ?

Hide replies

@davidsullivan4449
13 hours ago
This was both awesome and very disturbing. I saw Rupert Lowe in the UK talking about similar trends in law whereby judgements that were usually made by juries are now being made purely by judges or a judge. I don’t really know the details but you know what I mean.
12

@TheKrispyfort
13 hours ago
You should read up on NSW legislation and laws around compulsory possession of proceedings of criminal activity.

Hide replies

@NelleBligh333
13 hours ago
It irks me as the granddaughter of a member of the Communist Party of Australia who only ceased to be a member when the party disbanded, to see this kind of legislation brought in to ban a political group when they tried to ban the CP twice and each time the ban was overturned by the High Court. You would think current members of Parliament would be aware of this history. Stop impinging on our right to political expression!
35

@PhilipGissing
10 hours ago
This former member of the Communist Party, who also was around when the party disbanded, couldn’t agree more!

Hide replies

@2paulstacey
13 hours ago
A Nazi party won’t get many votes but any votes for it would be damaging to Australia.
2

@TheKrispyfort
13 hours ago
Apparently, “Nazi” was initially a derogatory nickname for Hitler’s political party.
Kinda like calling the Liberal Party the “Libs”
6

@CheekyJebus
10 hours ago (edited)
If they won’t get any votes why do we have to go out of our way to frantically ban them? (let alone criminalize any association with up to 15 years in prison)
2

Hide replies

@stephenwellstriggers
13 hours ago
Too many numbskull’s in the comments who dont care about the tyranny inherrent in this law, as long as it stops “muh Nazis”. As President Kennedy said “thiose who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable”. The former leaders of the NSN and White Australia Party explicitly condemed terrorism and political violence to achieve their goals. What do you think all the young men who followed them are going to do if they think that strategy has failed? Ultimately the Government has shown it doesnt trust the Australian people to reject the White Australia Party at the ballot box.
46

@jimmy12347654
10 hours ago
It’s such a weak move that only pushes people underground, We have so little faith in our people and ideas that they need to swing the ban hammer so pathetic
2

Hide replies

@supernoveau
14 hours ago
Which party has the burden of proof?
2

@hevsa1507
14 hours ago
This is just a test as to whether we live in a completely corrupt system, or not.
None of this passes the pub test.
38

@JimmyCall
14 hours ago (edited)
I posted a comment on this subject in previous video, but deleted it due to mistakes/poor structure. The topic is some of the most complicated argument/dilemmas of Constitutional law.
1

@SH-3274
14 hours ago (edited)
Professor Twomey, I have a question about the “future authoritarian government” concerns you mentioned.
Suppose that a ruling party wanted to illegitimately classify a well-established political party (GRN, ALP, LIB, NAT, ONE, etc.) as a hate group. Assuming that their caucus and ministers were entirely on-board with this*, how many well-placed cronies would they require, and how difficult would it be to place them? By my guess they’d require five – the director of ASIO and four High Court judges – but my understanding of this is quite shaky. I certainly don’t understand how difficult it would be to place them.
*I say this because a leadership spill would undoubtedly make this difficult to pull off.
(Edited for clarity and typo correction)
3

@constitutionalclarion1901
11 hours ago
I agree that it would be difficult. In the past, one would have thought it unthinkable. But the unthinkable has been happening in a number of countries around the world in recent years. So it is no longer unthinkable. In my view, at least, it is something we should be alert to and defend against. In particular, we should not pass laws that could be abused in the future.
5

@SH-3274
8 hours ago
​ @constitutionalclarion1901 thanks for the insight. One follow up: with the laws as they currently exist, if the government wanted to seriously abuse them, what would the minimum required number of cronies be? Would the head of ASIO and four High Court judges be enough?

@constitutionalclarion1901
2 hours ago
Another factor is that the regulation declaring a group to be a prohibited hate group can be disallowed by either House. So an authoritarian government would need majority support in the upper House to prevent disallowance.
2

Hide replies

@mrx6682
14 hours ago
They have a right to form a political party, thats just common sense.
27

@79gengen
13 hours ago
Sure, but they won’t even give their names…. Go figure
1

@lioncross1849
12 hours ago
@79gengen because if they do, they risk going to jail under these new laws. That is the issue at hand. That’s why we are having this high court case.
Shouldn’t that not be obvious to you mate?
11

Hide replies

@richardjohnston-bell476
14 hours ago (edited)
Free speech is the foundational right that all other rights are built upon and is worth protecting. I also believe that not only is ‘hate speech’ free speech, but that free speech cannot exist without it. Free speech is not just about the right to express an opinion or an idea, free from violence or government intervention, its the right to be able to listen to those ideas and opinions. As an adult, I find it insulting that the government thinks so little of my ability to reason, that they get to decide what information is too dangerous for my poor little brain to handle.
This is why I am voting for One Nation. They are the only party that is serious about free speech
17

@C0wCakes
14 hours ago
Australia isn’t the United States. There’s nothing in the constitution that guarantees free speech or makes it a foundational right. We have a very long history of common-law and case history. That includes that speech that is harmful to society and its people isn’t permitted, backed by the prior mentioned case law. That’s actually far better than a few lines in a constitution that are exceedingly diffult to change.
2

@supernoveau
13 hours ago
There’s a very big difference between speech that is advocating for physical violence, and speech that some identity group doesn’t want to hear because it’s contrary to their political interest.
4

@richardjohnston-bell476
12 hours ago
@C0wCakes why do people always confuse the concept of free speech and what it is in law. The US didnt invent free speech, they have just taken the concept and placed it in the constitution. If you base your argument defining free speech by what the laws say, then if we put the same rules as the US into our constitution, then your argument no longer exists, Would you then agree that ‘hate speech’ does not exist becasue the law says it doesnt?
3

@79gengen
13 hours ago
Sure, have free speech, but be prepared to face the consequences that go with it.
1

@FairyBreadforbreakfast
13 hours ago
@79gengen The only consequence that is reasonable is that someone disagrees with you. Any other state sanctioned punishment is not reasonable and means you don’t have free speech.
4

@richardjohnston-bell476
12 hours ago (edited)
@79gengen I assume you mean consequences that are within the law?

@79gengen
8 hours ago
​ @richardjohnston-bell476 I assume you mean free speech that is within the law.

Hide replies

@nicholassteel5529
14 hours ago

@learningmore8047
14 hours ago
This is a great video, well done. It gets me thinking about how this law and how the Indigenous peoples see their positions especially as they have taken the brunt of hatred since the arrival of the first fleet, throw that into the context of what the Uluru Statement from the Heart stated about their unceded sovereignty and mix that with Australia’s obligations under the ICCPR for example and then the intentions of Australia when it supported UNDRIP in 2009. You have really triggered ones mind with this video. Please keep up the great wotk especially with these videos.
3

@AustralianGrandmasForDemocracy
14 hours ago
Thanks Anne. I think this and related issues will be hotly debated for some time to come. Time for a Bill of Rights to balance it out I think!
9

@Pab_1967
14 hours ago
We have a Bill of Rights 1688, which the GovCo is breaching, it’s attached to our Commonwealth Constitution of Australia, Imperial law

@AustralianGrandmasForDemocracy
12 hours ago
@Pab_1967 According to Google that one only covers parliamentary privilege. The (4 I think) rights mentioned in the constitution are totally inadequate. There are a hodge-podge of rights mentioned in different acts of legislation in different states but I still think we need a fully fledged Federal Bill of Rights. Perhaps Anne can clarify?
2

@Pab_1967
12 hours ago
​ @AustralianGrandmasForDemocracy the Commonwealth Constitution of Australia was never about rules for the people, it was designed to keep Corporations and Parliament in line. Ours are given with the blessing of Almighty God, ten commandments.

Hide replies

@kipwatson
14 hours ago
They sound like a nasty, stupid party; and it sounds like a stupid, extremely dangerous law.
12

@JayGuitars1
15 hours ago
Why can’t we all just get along?
4

@dancarmody3789
14 hours ago
Some folks aren’t good at just minding their own business. The internet has made it worse.

@aussiegodx8629
14 hours ago
Bcus we tried that and it’s not working and never will
7

Hide replies

@Hansel_and_Grettle
15 hours ago (edited)
I think the best way to legitimise a far right movement is to ban them.
If you believe their ideas to be horrid and wrong (which I do), then you should be able to debate and beat them with ease.
Silencing them only incentivises them to move away from democratic means of pushing their agenda, which is far more dangerous and scary imho. So far Australia has mostly avoided large scale right wing terrorism, I’d like to keep things that way.
17

@seanlander9321
14 hours ago
Is it fair then to ban other groups who aren’t on the Right but which oppose Australia’s institutions, promote violence, hate, or prejudice? Because it really is a can of worms that’s being opened, and the prejudice of the Minister has too much sway in what should be the decision of a court.
7

@stephenwellstriggers
13 hours ago
From a former member of said party, I agree.
5

@uasj2
14 hours ago
This is it. The prof is not supporting this group but nevertheless we don’t want repressive laws to ban them, just well-crafted laws that target only extreme groups
4

@seanlander9321
14 hours ago
@uasj2 How then would a government that has funded a group that advocates hate or violence treat itself then?

@stephenwellstriggers
13 hours ago
​ @seanlander9321 you can make violence illegal, but if you make hatred illegal then everyone is a law breaker. Hate is a universal emotion and part of the human condition. You cant legislate it away.
4

@RSA_Liberty
14 hours ago
The system doesnt want open debate
4

@MrBlaygor
14 hours ago
In my opinion if the government really wanted to end extremism, they would have put in a clause ENCOURAGING any group targeted for designation to escape that designation by requiring them to participate in the electoral system.
3

Hide replies

@DeGuerre
15 hours ago
I hate that we have to think about “what this would be like in the hands of ȧ madman” because that’s not hypothetical any more.
16

@Teufeltusken
15 hours ago
This appears to be what happens when you make rushed laws. The intentions may be honourable, but by being sloppy you allow the targets of the legislation to make valid challenges.
4

@CheekyJebus
10 hours ago
Stripping free speech and your right to political expression is never “honourable”
1

@constitutionalclarion1901
15 hours ago
Indeed. Much better to do it carefully and sensibly.
6

@SethWAE
13 hours ago
​ @constitutionalclarion1901 Like Donald Trump?

Hide replies

@MartyH99
15 hours ago
Will the Labor party object when these laws are used against themselves?
10

@MartyH99
15 hours ago
It will interesting to hear how the government proved ‘hate’?
1

@lauchlanguddy1004
12 hours ago
They dont have to. Its not a court. All comes down to one person, seems

Hide replies

@zalzalahbuttsaab
15 hours ago
thank you. informative and well-researched as usual!
3

@constitutionalclarion1901
15 hours ago
You are most welcome.
2

Hide replies

@paulx3733
15 hours ago
Sometimes in this ” modern world” the best motives are easily undermined by those who try to hard to appease the people who are to easily offended…
Just cause your feelings are hurt, don’t make you right.
5

@hs9067
15 hours ago (edited)
I’m continually suprised by Labors attempt at overreach. Restrictive protest, speech laws etc Should we be worried are they trying to lay the foundations for Authoritarianism?
11

@constitutionalclarion1901
15 hours ago
It was supported by the Coalition too.
9

@hs9067
14 hours ago (edited)
@constitutionalclarion1901 Thats worrying two mainstream partys and than One Nation who is outright oligarchical. Thank you for all the work you do!
2

@AustralianGrandmasForDemocracy
14 hours ago
@constitutionalclarion1901 that isn’t at all surprising!
1

@JayGuitars1
15 hours ago
And trying to eliminate legal firearm possession at the same time…gee you could draw a conclusion.
2

@constitutionalclarion1901
14 hours ago
The law did not seek to ‘eliminate’ legal firearm possession. It imposed some restrictions – eg on the number of firearms that could be owned.
4

Hide replies

@robertwalker7924
15 hours ago
the largest ” hate group ” in Australia is the Australian population towards Australias indigenous peoples…its all very one sided
8

@justheretowatchatrashfire
14 hours ago
Yep
1

@AustralianGrandmasForDemocracy
14 hours ago
It’s shameful that antisemitism gets far more attention than the disrespect and violence that our First Nations people are subject to.
5

Hide replies

@aarondemiri486
15 hours ago (edited)
Will be excited to read what the High Court decides in their judgement.
They will likely discuss Latham’s dissent in the communist party case. Fullagar and Dixon’s separate judgements still stand the test of time.
2

@lylegc01
15 hours ago
Thanks again for your vids
1

@Robert-xs2mv
15 hours ago
Hate in it self is never a crime.
To state otherwise is an injustice!
And when injustice becomes law, the law becomes irrelevant!
11

@RSA_Liberty
14 hours ago
Which human emotion are they going to regulate and ban next?
4

@constitutionalclarion1901
15 hours ago (edited)
No one has suggested that hate itself is a crime. It is the public expression of that hate in particular ways (eg inciting violence, intimidating, humiliating others, etc) that is the crime.
1

@Robert-xs2mv
15 hours ago
@constitutionalclarion1901 . So being condemned and accused to be a sinner is a hate crime inciting violence? And you clearly accentuated the relevant minister has the ability to declare whether an expression of hate indeed is inciting ? Sounds like an extremely fine line.
8

@worker-wf2em
10 hours ago

@constitutionalclarion1901 There are already laws against inciting violence in this country. All I see here is overreach from government equating words with violence. Terms like ‘humiliating’ is a ridiculously broad and objective feelings based standard that will be abused by those in power to target dissenters, and anyone the Israel lobby doesn’t like if we’re being honest.
3

Hide replies

@StephenSkinner-k4w
15 hours ago
Who decides if the minister actually did have “reasonable Grounds” to prohibit a “hate group”?
Why, the minister of course!
What could possibly go wrong?
6

@constitutionalclarion1901
15 hours ago
It could be challenged in a court in an administrative law challenge.
1

Hide replies

@JOSEPHDANCE75
15 hours ago
Nothing to be ashamed about for being white. Same can be said for Black or Asian , what ever else is out their like us hybrids. For those that did bad in the pastis on them . Cannot blame so many today for the actions of some.
6

@tedknight2608
15 hours ago
Quick Question: If it is a criminal offence to direct the actions of a prohibited group, then isn’t someone committing a crime by directing the group’s legal challenge against the prohibition?
2

@constitutionalclarion1901
15 hours ago
Possibly. It depends on whether the law is valid, for a start. I think there are also exceptions which allow funds to be provided to lawyers for such a legal challenge – but I haven’t delved into all those provisions.
2

@yubnuts
14 hours ago
This is similar to the question that arose in Deripaska (2026) where the sanctioned person (Deripaska) argued that the sanction laws were invalid because to engage legal representation to contest the listing would have itself been a breach of the sanction laws. The High Court saved the sanction laws by reading them down so that they would not extend to prohibiting a person from engaging legal advice for the purpose of contesting the listing.

Hide replies

@michellefranklin3182
15 hours ago
Thanks for this.
4

@constitutionalclarion1901
15 hours ago
Much appreciated.
2

Hide replies

@DS91284
15 hours ago
Insecurities are so vague and should never be handled by double digits.
1

@Know_It_All
16 hours ago
Thanks
3

@constitutionalclarion1901
15 hours ago
You’re welcome.

Hide replies

==========================

See Also

top

 

 

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Jacob Hersant: So this is a video where I’m going to explain this new Bill that the Australian government is bringing out in the wake of the Bondi shooting where two Islamists went and shot a bunch of jewish people. And the jewish lobby has pressured the government to bring out these really extreme laws which practically nobody is happy about, really. Only the jews are really happy. Labor Party obviously draughted these laws on behalf of the jewish lobby. But everyone else seems pretty annoyed about it, so I’ll go through it. I haven’t seen any videos that comprehensively go through what the Bill says and what is so egregious and why it’s problematic. So I’ll do that in this video.

 

First I’ll give a disclaimer that I’m not a lawyer. No lawyer has gone through and talked about all of this stuff. So unfortunately I’m the best that you have. The only reason I’m interested in it is because it’s going to be affecting me and my organisation, the National Socialist Network. So that’s why I’m making this video.

 

I’ll be providing photos of the Exposure draught as I read it. I’ll also show the link so you can go read it yourself to make sure that I’m not misinterpreting it or I’m not making any mistakes. If I’m making a mistake, please message me, tell me how I’m wrong in my interpretation, and I’ll be happy to retract what I said and correct it for people, because I just want to try to give an honest assessment of what this law is and the effects it will have on society.

 

So this is a massive bill, they call it an Omnibus Bill. It is going to change a lot of things.

 

So a lot of its about to do with criminal law and hate speech. But it also does have some gun stuff. Not going to talk about the gun stuff because I don’t know much about guns. And this video is just going to be too long. I’m more interested and know more about the politics aspect of it and the hate crimes and hate speech and that aspect of it.

 

So that’s what I’m going to be talking about. I’m sure there’s someone that can talk about the gun aspect of it and in all likelihood the two are going to be split. The gun stuff will probably be chucked into its own Bill and the hate stuff will be bundled in its own bill.

 

I’m going to start off by talking about what this law does regarding hate and what they call “violent extremism, hate speech, hate crimes” and all the like. It’s all doublespeak. The bill’s called “Combating Anti-semitism, Hate and Extremism Bill 2026”. So in the title, they don’t even hide who it’s for. Obviously, on behalf of the jewish lobby, they’re the only ones that support this law currently. And because they have an outsized influence over Australia’s politics, that’s why this egregious Bill has even been introduced.

 

Part One is “Aggravated offences for preachers and leaders”.

 

So this just goes into the Criminal Code and it makes it so that there’s a bunch of laws where if a person is a religious official, or a spiritual leader, while they commit the offence, they can be imprisoned for longer. So it aggravates it makes the judge give them a more severe sentence. And the charges specifically are to do with encouraging violence and encouraging terrorism and all these kind of charges.

 

So when you look at the Bill here, it doesn’t specify what the crimes are, but those crimes are basically advocacy of violence and advocacy of terrorism. If this Bill passes, if you are an imam, or a priest [or rabbi?] or some other spiritual leader of a religion, you can be punished more because you advocate violence. So that’s part one.

 

And then I’ll move down to Part Six, bundled part six with part one, because it’s the same kind of thing, the same kind of change there. And it’s just for when these spiritual leaders, the charges are when you’re trying to get a young person, someone under 18, to commit violence as well. And more or less the same thing, though it is in a different section of the bill. They have changed the penalty to a person might commit an aggravated offence if the person is a religious official or other spiritual leader.

 

So in terms of grooming children for violence or for advocating terrorism or inciting violence against a particular group, if you are some sort of spiritual leader, religious official, you can be punished more severely. This is obviously going after Muslims. This is to punish Muslims more severely if they’re caught saying stuff about Israel and Palestinian resistance against Israel. This is pretty obviously what this is directed towards.

 

So Part Two is there’s increased penalty for using a postal or similar service to menace, harass or cause offence. And that’s been increased to five years in jail. So that’s what Joel Davis has been charged with and he’s still being remanded now. I think it’s been two months or maybe even more.

 

[06:09]

 

So Part Three is “Aggravated sentencing factor”. And this affects the Crimes Act 1914. And it basically makes it so all criminal offences can be aggravated by being racist. So if you commit a crime because you’re racist, you can be punished more severely by the judge.

 

Read out the specific part:

 

“The person’s conduct constituting the offence was motivated, whether wholly or in part, by hatred of another person, or a group of persons, and that hatred was because of the person’s belief that the target person or persons in the target group are distinguished by race or national or ethnic origin.”

 

So theoretically, if somebody raped a woman because he hated that woman’s race or nation or ethnicity, he can be punished more severely than somebody who rapes a woman for choice and noble reasons, like lust or hatred of some other kind.

 

Every single crime now, if you can be proven to be a racist, you get punished more severely. That’s basically what this aggravated sentencing factor is if the crime you commit is motivated by hate, well, racism or nationalism, then you can be punished more severely. That’s what this change means.

 

But basically every crime can be turned into a hate crime, essentially. So if you assault or rape or murder, then it can aggravate it if it’s proven that you’re a racist.

 

So Part Four is “Prohibited hate group”. And a prohibited hate group is a designation that the Home Affairs Minister can give out. So the current Home Affairs Minister right now is Tony Burke, for the Labor Party. This legislation allows the government to ban particular organisations. It can ban organisations, it can unban them as well, and they can add multiple names to a ban.

 

So if you ban an organisation, you can’t just rename it because that’s going to be banned as well. They’re just going to add it as an alias. So you can’t just get around the ban by rebranding.

 

So to be designated a prohibited hate group, that group has to have committed a “hate crime”. And they define what a hate crime is so here it is. 1 14. A. So definition of a hate crime:

 

“A hate crime is conduct that would constitute any of the following offences. Urging or threatening violence and offences against groups or members of groups to the extent that the targeted group is distinguished by race or national or ethnic origin.”

 

So either:

 

“Publicly displaying prohibited symbols or giving a Nazi salute.”

 

So a hate crime can either be threatening violence or it can be publicly displaying prohibited symbols, like the swastika or giving the Nazi salute. And then here it says:

 

“A hate crime is also conduct that was engaged in at a time before a provision referred to in subsection (1) commenced and would constitute an offence against the provision had the provision been in force at that time.”

 

What this means is that you don’t have to have committed a hate crime after this legislation passed. If you’ve given the Roman salute or you’ve displayed a swastika, as your group, then you’ve committed a hate crime and you can be listed as a hate organisation. So you can be punished retroactively. I will further explain this, but make no mistake, being listed as a hate organisation is a punishment in itself. So the process is the punishment!

 

And you got to remember, a hate crime can be just political expression, like flying the swastika or moving your arm in a gesture in a Nazi salute. That is political expression. And if you just do that, you can be banned for being an organisation that gives the Roman salute. So you can be banned for retroactive conduct.

 

This is insane, because laws aren’t supposed to be retroactive. Non-retroactivity is a fundamental legal principle. That law should only apply to actions occurring after the law was enacted, not before, preventing new laws from punishing past behaviour.

 

Everyone just takes that for granted. But when you have the jewish lobby demanding laws, they really don’t care about what we take for granted, obviously.

 

For banning an organisation, a conviction is not required. So:

 

“A person does not need to have been convicted of a hate crime in order for the AFP minister (which is the Home affairs guy, so Tony Burke) to be satisfied, an organisation has engaged in conduct of a kind mentioned in paragraph one.”

 

And then there is:

 

“No procedural fairness required. The AFP minister (so Tony Burke) is not required to observe any requirements of procedural fairness in deciding whether or not the AFP Minister is satisfied for the purposes of this section.”

 

So basically that means the people that are affected by the banning, so say the National Socialist Network was banned, we get no hearing, no say, no chance to respond, no recourse, no explanation about what’s happening. You’re just basically told:

 

“Tough luck! Like, enjoy being banned!”

 

So yeah, you get no hearing, you get no way to explain yourself or try to defend yourself in front of a judge or anything like that. And that’s what they’ve written right here, “no procedural fairness required”. Which is another legal principle that the jewish lobby don’t care about. They don’t care about what’s called natural justice or procedural fairness.

 

So:

 

“Director-General of Security advice to be provided before specifying an organisation as a prohibited hate group.”

 

So Mike Burgess has to give advice to Tony Burke or the Director General of Security has to give advice to the AFP minister and he has to be satisfied that:

 

“The organisation has engaged in activities, and that the activities or the like, the continued engagement in the activities would or are likely to increase the risk of politically motivated violence or of the promotion of communal violence.”

 

You have to use your intelligence here and think about what they’re saying. Obviously the logic that people like Mark Burgess are going to say is that because you’re engaging activities like giving the Roman salute that those activities are going to make it more likely that people go do terrorism.

 

[14:04]

 

So that’s what it’s saying and that’s what’s going to be argued. So if this Bill passes, Mike Burgess is gonna go tell Tony Burke:

 

“Well, yeah, giving the Roman salute makes it more likely that terrorism is going to happen in the future. They need to be banned!”

 

If Mike Burgess thinks that giving the Roman salute, giving the Hitler salute and saying “Heil Hitler” and wearing black clothes makes it more likely that someone is going to go out and blow up something or kill a bunch of people, well then your organisation gets banned.

 

So that’s what happens. So they can list an organisation. And when an organisation gets listed, then it opens up people to be charged with a number of offences that relate to that prohibited hate group.

 

Those offences are:

 

“Directing the activities of a prohibited hate group.”

 

Which can get you 15 years in jail.

 

“Membership of a prohibited hate group.”

 

And you have to keep in mind that being a member of an organisation you can be an informal member of the organisation and you can be charged with this because they define member of a prohibited hate group as:

 

“A member of an organisation includes a person who is an informal member of the organisation and a person who has taken steps to become a member of the organisation. And in the case of an organisation that is a body corporate, a director or an officer of the body corporate.”

 

So if you’re in so-called informal member of an organisation, you can be charged. So:

 

“Membership of a prohibited hate group”, 7 years.

 

“Recruiting for a prohibited hate group”, 15 years.

 

“Training involving a prohibited hate group”, 15 years.

 

“Getting funds to, from or for a prohibited hate group”, 15 years.

 

“Providing support to a prohibited hate group”, 15 years.

 

And most of these offences have a lower offence if you’re convicted for one of them while being reckless rather than, I guess knowingly doing it. So being reckless means that you’re aware of a substantial risk that you’re doing the crime, and it changes like the imprisonment from like 15 years to 10 years if you’re only proven to have recklessly done it.

 

And the only defenses that you have are either you didn’t do the crime or you were a government agent when you were doing the crime. So if you’re some sort of informant or secret agent infiltrating a hate organisation then you have a defence, but otherwise you have no defence.

 

This legislation is obviously directed towards having a chilling effect on advocacy and activism of organisations outside of the mainstream. That’s obvious.

 

And you gotta remember that there is no procedural fairness. The fact that your organisation gets banned and then you have 15 years hanging over your head, that’s the punishment!

 

And obviously having your rights taken away that you can’t politically associate or politically express yourself in that particular way, that’s the punishment!

 

And I’ll go off on a little bit of a tangent here. In my case, the Roman salute case that was brought against me in the Magistrates Court for which I was convicted and then I appealed. Went to the county court and was had had the conviction against me upheld. They argued that the Roman salute offences are very narrow and hence it could be justified taking away that form of political expression. They did admit it was political expression but they said they could take it away because it was relatively narrow what it was.

 

Well you know, now it’s having very serious consequences because that offence, giving a slew has been recategorized as a “hate crime” and it can be used to retroactively ban a organisation like a 300 man organisation and threaten its leaders with 15 year sentences if they continue. A lot of the judiciary get too focused. They get narrow minded, they don’t understand like how dangerous these laws you give them an inch, they’re going to take a mile. And this legislation is taking a mile. It is insanity! Also vindictiveness! Like I don’t know how it could occur to you to have a maximum of 15 years for some of these charges when you can be prohibited as a hate group because you moved your arm in a particular way that offends the jews!

 

And another case that I saw on the news today actually funnily enough was someone who’s been charged with threatening to kill the Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. And the charge for which he’s been charged, threatening to kill an MP is a maximum of five years.

 

So you get a maximum of five years for threatening to kill an MP. If you direct the activities of a prohibited hate group. A prohibited hate group that gave the Roman salute. You can be in prison for 15 years. That sounds perfectly reasonable!

 

So Part Five is “Racial vilification offence”. And this offence is:

 

“Publicly promoting or inciting hatred. A person commits an offence if the person engages in conduct in a public place.”

 

And to be clear, the Internet includes a public place.

 

Basically everywhere is a public place except for inside your own home where it can’t be seen by the public. But the Internet counts, as is sending it through the mail, some sort of business, or out on the street or something like that. All counts as a public place.

 

So the conduct is:

 

“Promote or incite hatred of another person, or a group of persons because of their race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, or disseminate ideas of superiority over or hatred of another person, or a group of persons because of the race, colour, or national or ethnic origin of the target or target group. And the conduct would, in all the circumstances, cause a reasonable person who is the target, a member, or a member of the target group to be intimidated, to fear harassment or violence, or to fear for their safety.”

 

And they call the “reasonable person test” as an objective test, but really it just comes down to the judge to decide who a reasonable person is, to describe who the reasonable person is so really, it isn’t actually a objective test. It’s just a subjective test. Like, it comes down to what the judge thinks. It’s not like there’s any empirical data about who this average person is based on polling or anything. It just comes down to the judge, who he thinks, he or she thinks this reasonable person of the group of a particular ethnic or racial group is.

 

[21:42]

 

And obviously you can be charged here with a criminal offence if you:

 

“Disseminate ideas of superiority over a group of persons because of their race, colour, national or ethnic origin.”

 

So you can’t say that particular nations are better than other nations. So if you say “Australia is better than China”, well, you could be charged. You could be charged with this. I’m not saying that that’s likely to happen, but with what this law says, I’m somebody who is disliked by the government. If I said that “Australia is a better society, Australia is a better nation than China”, well, that’s disseminating an idea of superiority over a group of persons because of their national origin. Maybe I could say that and someone feels intimidated or they feel fearful. And the issue is, there’s so many people in this society that feel intimidated or fear from the littlest things. We’ve become a very soft society. And judges love to rule based on sentimentality when it comes to these things! And you can be imprisoned up to five years for publicly promoting or inciting racial hatred. Yeah!

 

So:

 

“For the purposes of subsection 1, it is immaterial whether the target or members of the target group actually are distinguished by the particular race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, or the conduct actually results in hatred of another person or group of persons, or the conduct actually results in any person feeling intimidated, feeling harassment or violence, or feeling fearing for their safety.”

 

So what that says is that they don’t have to prove that any person of that particular race or nation or ethnicity was present and kind of a target of it. They don’t have to prove that hatred was actually kind of incited in somebody. They don’t need to prove that anyone was intimidated, felt harassed, or feared for their safety. None of that actually has to be proven because a judge can come up with this magical, reasonable person of that group, this imaginary person, and say:

 

“This person has been targeted. This imaginary person has been targeted. It could potentially have led to hatred being incited in other people and it could have potentially intimidated or made someone, this imaginary person, fear for their life.”

 

At least you have a defense here for religious teaching or discussion:

 

“Subsection (1) does not apply to conduct that consists only of directly quoting from or otherwise referencing a religious text for the purpose of religious teaching or discussion.”

 

So this is lucky for our Muslim friends who can quote directly from that Hadith saying that the stones and the trees are going to tell them where the so the Muslims are safe in that regard, and so they should be.

 

“Part 7. Hate symbols – Reversing the burden of proof for public interest elements of prohibited symbols offences.”

 

So it means that there’s already these hate symbol laws. So if you display a hate symbol or you display the swastika or give the Roman salute, there were defenses saying that you could do these things as long as there was a public interest like a religious, academic, educational, artistic, literary or scientific purpose that isn’t contrary to the public interest.

 

And previously the prosecution would have to prove themselves that this hate symbol or the salute wasn’t given for one of those legitimate purposes. So it’s been flipped now, that if you display this a symbol or give the salute or anything like that, then you can be charged. And then you have to prove that you did it for a legitimate purpose, like a religious, academic, educational, artistic, literary or scientific purpose.

 

And so basically this gets rid of the presumption of innocence, and so it makes it easier for the prosecution to charge people and drag them through the courts. Because if you post a picture of Hitler with the swastika, you can be charged. They don’t need to prove that you did it for hateful reasons. Actually you need to prove that you didn’t do it for hateful reasons.

 

So that’s what it literally does. It reverses the burden of proof. An example would be if I posted a photo of Hitler next to the swastika. I can be charged easier because the prosecution doesn’t have to prove that I posted it for a hateful purpose. I have to defend myself in court and say, perhaps I posted it for an academic purpose or to teach or something like that.

 

[27:15]

 

The other thing is the prohibited hate group symbols are added to the criminal offences. So it’s not only just terrorist symbols and the swastika and the Roman salute. So if NSN got banned, the converging arrows, for example, the converging arrows, flag or the patch, you’d be able to be charged with displaying that.

 

These laws also have a minimum one year in jail. So a judge has to give you a year in jail if you’re convicted of this.

 

I’ve went through all the hate speech stuff in this Bill with you. I think it’s clear that the people that wrote this Bill don’t care about the basic legal principles that are supposed to underpin the whole of our judicial system, like natural justice, presumption of innocence, freedom of speech, freedom of association, proportionality. Non-retroactivity.

 

So what has been the response? One Nation has come out opposing it, which is good for them. The Liberal Party have come out opposing it as well, but they’ve said that they want to come up with their own version of it, which I suggest would be far more watered down than this, which would be good.

 

But these laws don’t need to be passed. There are laws that stop people. Well, that criminalises terrorism. It’s not like the person who went and shot those people in Bondi is at liberty because there’s a fault in the laws. He’s going to spend the rest of his life in jail. Changing the laws isn’t going to fix any of this. It’s going to make it worse!

 

The real danger isn’t what we have to do to apparently solve “hate”. The problem is what are we going to do to solve the fact that we have a government that wants to destroy all the principles that are supposed to underpin our judicial system because they don’t like particular groups, opposition groups in society, whether they be National Socialist or Islamist.

 

The response from the entire online Right has been very positive. Like everyone is raging about this, like it’s all that anyone is talking about in the Australian Right-wing now. Everyone has come out against it.

 

We have the Home Affairs Shadow Minister, this guy, the dishonourable Jonathan Duniam, some total nobody no one’s ever heard of or cares about. And he was mocking the National Socialist Network for us, saying that this Bill is draconian.

 

Jonathan Duniam:

 

“Of course they cite in that statement that these laws ‘most draconian in the universe, making freedom of speech impossible, etc, etc’. Clearly they’ve seen this identification of formal groupings and hate group listing etc., as something to try and avoid, which is good in one sense.”

 

And then I think he went and checked the Internet and saw that everyone else was saying it as well and then he changed his positions.

 

What’s the response been from the Muslims? The Muslim response has been good. They’ve been coming out against it and you know, they shouldn’t be banned. There’s been like arguments that the problem with these laws is it doesn’t come out hard enough against Islam. These laws shouldn’t be passed at all! Even if they were going to be just confined to Muslims. These laws need to be opposed. We don’t need to ban any of these Muslims organisations. Now just because two Muslims went and killed 15 people, it doesn’t mean that we have to destroy the judicial system that governs 27 million people. Like the threat is not these two Muslim terrorists killing 15 people, it’s the Commonwealth that is unnecessarily going to destroy all of our freedoms. Proposing this supposed solution that’s not even going to do anything. It’s not going to do anything to stop terrorism.

 

And then we saw fat Ross who runs the White Rose Society, she’s an anti-fascist. She described it as “state oppression”. I think you’re right there for once. And then Socialist Alternative came out against it. Their front group for Palestine. So they’ve got a group they use to organise Palestinian activists. They came out against it, so good on them.

 

Jews say it doesn’t go far enough. To be expected. I don’t think I need to comment much more on that.

 

Mainstream media has largely came out against it as well. They’ve been publishing voices that come out against it. They haven’t really been publishing any voices that go for it other than the jews. And everyone, when it comes down to it, everyone hates this Bill other than the jews. And luckily I don’t think it’s gonna pass.

 

And the Greens have come out against it. But they said they might be open to just amending it. But I’m not sure how likely that actually is. But wouldn’t it be just a perfect summation of how stupid and disgusting this country is, if after a Muslim terrorist attack in Bondi they draughted these laws which go to severely persecute and oppress National Socialists and Islamists, if the Greens amended it so that it didn’t go after Islamists and then it only affected National Socialists! So White Australians and National Socialists would be the only ones who get punished for an Islamist terrorist attack. Stranger things have happened. That sounds like something the Commonwealth would do. And that just tells you how reprehensible it is.

 

But in the first place, the fact that we are under threat, the National Socialist Network is under threat from laws that are draughted up from a Muslim terrorist attack says all that it needs to. Why are we getting banned from for an attack that has nothing to do with us? I could at least understand the rationale, even though I’d disagree with it, if some sort of Right-wing or nationalist person went out and shot people, or shot an MP or something like that, I could understand the rationale. But for us to be banned for Muslim terrorism?

 

Yeah, with the Greens and the Coalition coming out against its looking more and more like it’s not going to pass, which is a good thing.

 

Nonetheless, the National Socials Network is disbanding. Some people are disappointed by that. I saw someone on Twitter, or X as it’s now called, said that:

 

“We should be martyrs and that we should continue operations until we get charged with these 15 year offences.”

 

He said:

 

“Just be the martyrs, bro!”

 

Well, perhaps you should do that in my stead. Maybe put on a converging arrows patch, make your own one, dress up in black and go out there, get arrested on our behalf. Just be a martyr, bro!

 

And there’s not going to be any way to get around this. Like they’re not going to be charitable, they’re not going to help you out. If you even slightly do something that could be perceived as continuing the organisation after it gets banned, you’re going to be arrested, charged, remanded and facing serious jail time.

 

[35:20]

 

There’s no oversight in terms of whether or not the listing is correct. Like you get listed, it’s a done deal! You go before a judge, if you are genuinely continuing or doing any of those offences, there’s nothing he can do. He has to find you guilty or you go before a jury. And if they find you guilty, then you’re getting punished severely. You’re getting probably half a decade in jail at the very least.

 

And there’s been people on the far-Right who love to engage in victim blaming. So they say:

 

“The only reason this is happening is because the National Socialist Network engages in street activism, dresses up in black, praises Adolf Hitler, gave the Roman salutes in the past.”

 

All of that kind of hard hitting, confronting street activism. But we’re not the ones that pass these laws. Like agency obviously belongs to the legislature and the people who control the people who run the legislature, so obviously the jewish lobby.

 

So if anyone is to blame for these laws, it’s not the groups that are being banned. And it’s being done in response to these two Muslim shooters in Bondi. But it’s not even their fault. It’s not the fault of Muslim preachers, it’s not the fault of National Socialist activists. And this is the thing. It’s taking the blame away from the actual agent that has perpetrated this, who has created this, and it’s pushing it on the people who are getting targeted and who are going to suffer the most from these laws.

 

The real blame is the jewish lobby and the Australian government. That is why these laws are coming through. The people that push for them, the people who wrote them up and the people that passed them. But the issue is even if we had better optics, these laws would still be being brought through and we would still be under threat of getting banned. And this has been proven by other countries where you have groups like Generation Identity in France that got banned by the French state. I don’t think anyone’s gonna argue that their optics were an issue. Their optics were pretty tame, yet they got banned.

 

So whatever represents the strongest force of nationalism in a particular country, the jewish lobby and the government is going to try to legislate them out of existence. That’s what’s going to happen. And if we were the Nationalist Network and we didn’t wear black clothes and we just wore regular clothes, I guess regular bourgeois clothes, maybe suits and ties and had said “Australia for the Australians”, if we were the biggest group, we would still be getting banned. That’s the truth!

 

In this regard, all roads lead to Rome, as I’m sure some of you have seen in the memes recently with the rabbit with its clock. You know, it doesn’t matter which road you go down, you’re eventually going to go to Rome and it doesn’t matter what road you go down when you have an unjust system, you’re eventually going to be banned by it if you’re a big enough threat to its agenda. So you need to stop bargaining with the system when it’s fundamentally unjust.

 

And the optics people, the only thing that would be different in this situation is these optics people, because of their particular ideas of activism, they would just be a bit more sympathetic.

 

But people should stand for principles and ideas and for an actual fair legal system more than just perception and optics, in my opinion.

 

We really don’t need to total our legal system. What angers the government and the jewish lobby is that we have deeply felt political conviction and that we want to do whatever we can to further our political agenda while staying on the right side of the law. So we’re trying to stay within the legal framework while pushing forward our political agenda, what we deeply, deeply believe in. And that is what angers them the most. And it angers them so much that they don’t care about their own rules, they don’t care about their own judicial system, they don’t care about any of this.

 

Of course, the jewish lobby never really cared. It shows you that the people that profess to be liberal Democrats in this government and one of their claims for legitimacy, how little they care about it. They don’t care about their own rules, they don’t care about their own system anymore.

 

And it’s pretty obvious that these people have no respect for the system of government that our ancestors erected at the beginning of the last century. I might have a so-called “violent extremist” opinion here, but I don’t think we should total our legal system. The legal system and the principles underpinning the judicial system of yesteryear, it’s actually one of the things I do like about this country. And they accused me of hating Australia. You know, I don’t hate Australia. I don’t hate the nation, I don’t hate the continent.

 

I do certainly hate the Commonwealth, because a government that cooks up legislation like this is reprehensible!

 

[41:19]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

============================================

 

Gab Comments

top

(Comments as of = )

==========================

See Also

top

 

 

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Blair Cottrell: If this is really ordinary quality, let me know and I’ll figure something out. I’m just streaming through OBS because the streaming services are really fucking annoying trying to work them out! Am I just a Boomer or are they really fucking annoying? They say you can sign up for free and stream for like 20 hours free or something, but then you sign up and I can’t fucking work out how to actually stream. If it’s good enough quality, I’ll just stick with this. If it’s good enough for you guys. Can you hear me okay? Give me some feedback on the audio.

 

I don’t usually stream by myself. Haven’t streamed by myself in probably three years. It makes me realise actually how much I was hinging off Joel’s initiative because I would just respond to Joel’s invitations. I wouldn’t set anything up. I don’t know how streaming works.

 

Okay, great! If the video and audio seems okay for you guys. God, every time before a stream starts, I can think of a hundred reasons not to do it. And I’m like, even when I was streaming with Joel.

 

But as I was saying, I was really hinging off Joel’s initiative because Joel had the Streamyard account. He understood how to set it up. He would just send me a link and I would just show up. That’s why I was always fine with Joel taking all the money that was raised through the streams. I didn’t care because he was the one who came up with all the talking points and did most of the talking as well.

 

But I’m basically just responding to requests that I should stream because he’s in jail now and people are used to seeing me on with Joel and they’re not getting their weekly fix of the Joel and Blair Show, right? Where else could I share the link for this? Is Gab still a thing? Does anyone use Gab? All the alternative platforms? [chuckling] I’m still completely banned from X. I was never emailed explaining why I was banned. If you ask Grok, X’s AI system why I was banned, it’ll come up with, oh, no, that’s not right. Hang on. It’ll give you some arbitrary reason about neo-Nazism, but they won’t give you an actual reason because there’s no reason accept ideology.

 

And I suppose that’s what I’ll begin talking about, ideology. Because that’s why Joel Davis is in jail! And that’s why pretty much everyone influential in nationalism is going to jail. Everyone’s going to jail1 Everyone you can think of in Australian nationalism will go to jail, myself included. They’re going to lock us up! And it was always going to happen. That’s not being black-pilled. That’s just observing things as they unfold. It’s just the objective reality.

 

Joel’s not in jail because of anything he said necessarily. No one was hurt. There’s been no serious crime committed. He’s been held in prison for ideological reasons. It’s pretty obvious, right?

 

I was thinking about playing the game that I usually play when I stream with Joel, so you guys could see what game I play. But I thought it might be too distracting. Usually it’s really helpful. It assists my thinking process to do something with my hands while I’m listening. Much to the dismay of school teachers. I was always told by school teachers that because I was scribbling on a book, I must not be listening. But actually it helped me to listen more. Can anyone relate to that? I found if I was looking at a schoolteacher as a kid, if I was watching the teacher while they said something, I was too busy picking up, like, intuitive signals, like facial expression, body language. I was reading how much they believed in what they were actually saying, whether or not they were feeling bored. All of that was coming through to me.

 

So in order to actually listen to the words they were speaking, not looking at them was important. Because if I was looking at the teacher, all I was getting was like, body language and facial expression signals, like intuitive signals. It was hard to listen to what the teacher was actually saying. Usually because teachers don’t believe what they’re saying. They’re just regurgitating bullshit from textbooks, right?

 

So here I was just scribbling in my book, trying to listen, and I’d be reprimanded for it. Obviously, I’m not listening if I’m scribbling in my book!

 

But it’s the same sort of situation when streaming with Joel or anybody else. I need to be doing something else in order to listen effectively.

 

Down? What am I down about? I’m not down. How do I seem down to you? Do I seem down in the dumps? Because I don’t really experience depression or any down sensation. To be honest, every day I wake up and I’m not surrounded by cops, every day I wake up and I don’t get dragged off to prison for hate speech or just some ideological reason, every day I’m not set up on charges and put in jail, it’s a great day! I get to be free for one nore day. That’s how I live my life. So I’m happy to be here, guys! [chuckling] I’m happy to still not be in jail despite believing the wrong things.

 

Yeah, I feel like I’m always pretty happy. I tend to be either happy or really angry! I kind of switch between those two states of emotion. It’s important that I’m kind. I have to make a strong effort to be kind because the alternative is not a great thing! Hasn’t produced great results for me. [chuckling]

 

Yeah, it does suck that Joel’s in jail. Did you guys see the article? I’ll actually post it here, if I can find it first. Hang on. Where? I sent it to a friend. Here it is here. Mainstream media creating paywalls, like expecting people to pay to read the shit that they write. Imagine paying for the Herald Sun or the Daily Mail! Check out that link there. If you guys haven’t read that already. We’ll go through this together actually.

 

[08:24]

 

Actually, if you guys are on your computer, phone, whatever, click this link. It should take you to a Daily Mail article. We have to use this link to get around the paywall because we’re not paying the Daily Mail to read this shit!:

 

“Crushing legal blow for the Bondi Nazi as we track down his girlfriend after she welcomed their first baby or first child while he was behind bars!”

 

The essence of this article is basically, should I bring it up on screen share? Does that make it better for everybody? It probably does, right? Let’s see if I can figure that out. What I’ve got to do is Joel usually does this stuff. What I’ve got to do is, I think, display capture.

 

Actually, I’m not going to bring it up on the screen because it has pictures of Joel’s girlfriend or the mother of Joel’s child. To be honest, I know so little about this relationship that I don’t know whether to suggest this is Joel’s girlfriend. So I’m just going to say this is the mother of his first child. And the pictures taken of her were taken without her knowledge or consent. How’s this? Right? How do we live in a country where a bunch of people with cameras can find out where you live, go out the front, go and wait out the front of your house indefinitely and just sit there taking photos of you and your house. You come out to put the trash out, they’re taking photos of you. They’re sitting there stalking you, waiting for you! Then they publish those photos publicly with personal information about where you live, personal circumstances about your family, your children. They publish all that publicly, and there’s no consequence. That’s really confusing to me.

 

There should be brutal consequences for doing that to someone’s family. Brutal consequences, man! I think it would do the mother of Joel’s child at disservice to share that article. But you guys can read it for yourself if you want. I just think it’s very disrespectful to hide behind bushes and take photos of someone’s partner. She’s just had a baby and you’re stalking her. That’s fucking weird, man! Who are these fucking journalists, actually, who wrote this article? I noticed some journalists don’t even put their names to their articles anymore.

 

Lucy Manley. Who’s Lucy Manley? I suppose I better be careful about what I say because I could be eroding. What am I doing? What are we all doing? We’ve been labelled “Nazis”, right? Everybody who’s ethnically White and believes that is significant and not negative. We’re all Nazis! And what are we doing?:

 

“We’re eroding the social fabric!”

 

Is that what that federal copper said? I’ve got to be careful because something I say may contribute to the erosion of the social fabric! Lucy Manley, senior news reporter.

 

To be honest, she probably didn’t take the pictures. It probably wasn’t Lucy Manley sitting at the front of this girl’s house, but she still publicly posted all this information. I suppose this is just like how paparazzi works, right? You can understand why people in Hollywood just hate journalists so much because they don’t have any respect. They’re like vultures.

 

But I think it’s always been that way, hasn’t it? It’s not really a new thing. I just didn’t expect this to happen so suddenly. Like, if you guys think about it for a moment, right? Joel is notorious for pushing boundaries with the language he chooses to use. Racial slurs are just part of Joel’s regular vocabulary, regular dialogue. I don’t think what he wrote on Telegram about that “rhetorical rape” comment, I don’t think that’s the worst thing he said in the past few years. I think he said worse stuff than that on streams. I actually think if he made that comment, the one he’s supposedly in jail for, if he made that comment, like, four or five months ago, I don’t think anyone would have bat an eyelid. I don’t think anyone would have cared. It would have just been standard Joel Davis. Because it is standard Joel Davis to say stuff like that isn’t it?

 

Everything’s just taken a dramatic shift since the government seems to have become very sensitive and frightened about this White Australia political party. The Home Affairs Minister after deporting that civil engineer guy, Matthew. What was his name? Matthew Gutter or Guther? [Matthew Gruter] He arrived back in South Africa recently. But Tony Burke said:

 

“If they’re going to put their numbers to the test (he’s referring to the White Australia party or community), then they will fail spectacularly!”

 

If that is true, then why not just let them put their numbers to the test and watch them fail? Why is it necessary for all the political policing and to put them in prison and to make laws that they can’t even express their ideology freely? If you’re so sure they’re going to fail when they put their numbers to the test democratically, why all the political policing? Why the aggression? I suppose political bureaucrats aren’t so sure that they’re going to fail spectacularly! They want to manipulate the system to make sure they fail, I guess.

 

I should solo stream more often. The problem is I don’t really like it, bro. I don’t think I like it anyway. Usually I get about half an hour in and I’m done. Maybe I’m fully like ADHD brain or something. It’s not that I don’t like streaming, it’s just before I’m about to start doing it, I can just think of more efficient things I can do.

 

Like right now I’m working on a video course which is going to be the primary product that I’ll be offering for my online coaching service.

 

[16:12]

 

But I want to make sure it’s an extremely good, polished product. What it basically is I’m thinking about every problem someone will have with getting their diet and their training right and I’m trying to solve those problems for the viewers, for people who actually download this product. I want to solve all your problems for you. I want it to be very good! And I’ve been working on that in my spare time. That’s just one of the things I can think of that I would rather do instead of stream. But I feel a bit of a duty, I suppose, to produce some stream content since you guys would usually watch Joel and enjoy what he’s saying.

 

Thanks for the donations, by the way. I don’t know how to access money through Rumble. I’ve never done it before. I don’t expect that it’s a good idea for me to try to extract any money from Rumble. My Australian bank account will probably just get deleted if I do that. I can tell you from experience, any money that comes from any overseas source, when you’re an Australian and you’re into ethnic nationalism like I am, your bank account just gets frozen and deleted, straight away, pretty much within a week of receiving the funds or before the funds actually clear. God, how many bank accounts have I lost? I don’t even know, I don’t remember.

 

But I think I was the first guy in Australia to have his bank accounts deleted because of his ideology. And now it’s just like a standard thing. Now it just happens every day to someone for some stupid reason. Maybe I should have tried to sue the bank or something to create a precedent. The problem is I’m not a court guy. I don’t want to go to court. I don’t want to take people to court and stand there and complain to a judge, you know, I’d rather just headbutt someone! Do you understand what I mean? I would rather just headbutt someone and crush their skull if I have a problem with them. I do not want to stand in court and say:

 

“Your honour, this person, blah blah, blah, I’m right, they’re wrong, please believe me. Have my money, have more of my money. $10,000, $20,000. Please rule in my favour, your honour!”

 

That’s really fucking gay in my mind! I can’t bring myself to do it. But that’s how the system works. If you don’t have money and if you don’t grovel to judges with a lot of money, well, you really don’t get anywhere, do you?

 

We have a problem in society though, don’t we? In post violence society. Everything still happens the same way it would when violence was a main feature of society. It just happens non-violently. So you still get humiliated, you still get targeted, people still get assassinated. It just happens socially and politically rather than physically. The problem with that though is everyone is just treating each other like shit because there’s no immediate physical consequence anymore. No one’s worried about getting their teeth knocked out. Nobody’s worried about getting their jaw broken and having to drink their food through a straw for three months. If people were worried about that, as they should be, everyone would be more kind. Everyone would be nice to each other. We would just have a more, how should I suggest? It would just be a more enjoyable place to live. It’d be a more tolerable place to live because everyone would be naturally kind for fear of having their jaws broken.

 

Everyone just does whatever they want because:

 

“Oh, you can’t touch me. That’s against the law. That’s a salt and pepper!”

 

That’s [chuckling] another aspect of modern society which is really gay.

 

Yeah. Interesting question, Oznat News:

 

“Do I have any comment on the Brisbane crew splitting from March for Australia? One of the organisers name dropping me.”

 

I have no idea what’s going on with that! No idea! Whenever there’s like drama and people are arguing and splitting and you know what I mean, I just back the fuck out! I can’t deal with that petty gay drama and people saying words because they don’t like each other online. It’s not my style at all, bro. I don’t know anything about that. I can’t comment. I don’t know why everyone can’t just have a rally against immigration. Like, shut up about this evil caricature of Nazis that everyone’s obsessed with. Just get over it. Have a rally to stop immigration. The subject shouldn’t be Nazis. Anyone who’s trying to divert the attention of the people interested in the rally to Nazis instead of the purpose of the rally, which is stopping immigration. They are an enemy of your country. They are a fucking enemy of your country! Everyone should just have a rally against immigration. Stop immigration! Anyone saying Nazis, they’re an enemy, ignore them.

 

The Nazis appear to be public enemy number one for the government in Australia right now! But what is that? What is a Nazi? What do you guys think? I mean, for the standard person, when you say the word “Nazi”, a certain image of something undesirable appears in your mind. That word “Nazi” is associated with genocide, is it not? Like the killing of large amounts of people through gassing and systemic execution of various kinds. But is that what history really tells us? And see, this is the issue.

 

I’ll tell you guys a story, right? I was at the gym yesterday doing some leg press and a guy approached me. And this happens all the time now. [chuckling] He’s about 6 foot 7, this guy. He’s really tall, but he’s only young. He tells me:

 

“Hey man, you look familiar.”

 

I said:

 

“Yeah, I get that a bit.”

 

And I outstretched my hand to shake his hand because he was just kind of staring at me. And he gave me a Roman handshake. And I’m thinking:

 

“Okay, this is one of the boys.”

 

And I noticed he’s wearing a T-shirt with a stencil of Hitler on it. This guy tells me he’s 18. For the last few years, he’s just been researching online and he’s on this trajectory. He discovers National Socialism and he explains it as just the truth! That’s what he says to me. He says:

 

“Mate, it’s just the truth! I don’t even see it as a philosophy necessarily. It’s just the truth of this world and how things are.”

 

And that’s when I realised, because this keeps happening, like young people keep approaching me and talking to me about stuff like this. Either they recognise me or they don’t. It’s literally just a subject matter in the public right now! It made me realise why the Australian government is trying to ban social media for people under 16 years old. The government will say it’s “for your safety”. [chuckling] Can you believe they’re still trying to sell that?

 

[22:27]

 

The fact that the government does anything for your safety. Like, imagine actually believing that! I suppose it’s comfortable to believe that if you’re a standard person:

 

“Government trying to protect me, keeping me safe. Thanks government!”

 

God, imagine actually believing that! Imagine buying into that, man. It freaks me out to think that people actually buy into that.

 

But anyway, the social media ban is, again, it’s about ideology, isn’t it? Because Hitler seems to have become this core feature of youth culture. A large section of the youth either think that Hitler wasn’t that bad or that he’s been lied about a great deal and he’s an interesting character. Like a massive amount of Generation Z, the Zoomers, they believe, they’re straight up. That’s what they believe to the extent where they’re in the gym, in a public gym, wearing Hitler T-shirts, and just talking to people about Hitler. I mean, you might think that this guy that approached me is unusual, but it doesn’t seem that way. It really doesn’t seem that way. It seems like these kids are everywhere.

 

And I think that’s what the social media ban in Australia is about. It’s about preventing new generation from accessing the nuance which leads to an appreciation for National Socialism and Hitler. Fundamentally that seems to be what it’s about.

 

Because the problem is, because I’ve read the Hitler’s book many times. To be honest, the first time I read it, I was really disappointed. When I saw it, I’m like, wow! I was only 18 when I first found it in a random bookshop in Fitzroy, which is a northern suburb of Melbourne. I was working there on an apartment building. I bought the book and was excited because I thought I was going to read, I was going to learn about the inner workings of this evil genius who mass murdered all of these jews and tried to take over the world. But then I’m reading the book and I’m like:

 

“Huh? There’s nothing in here about that!”

 

Okay. There’s a chapter on his early life, his service in the First World War, how propaganda works. Wow, that’s interesting. About race and how nation and race mean the same thing. How he wants to protect the Germans. Okay. There’s a bit in here about how the jews represent a threat to Germany.

 

And then there’s just a whole bunch of stuff on foreign policy. And I’m like:

 

“Where’s the genocide? Where’s the evil genius take over the world part? It’s not in here!”

 

But someone who’s still linked in with the Matrix might say:

 

“Well, of course he’s not going to admit that in his book, Blair. Otherwise, no one would have voted for him!”

 

Maybe you’re right. I don’t think that’s how it is.

 

But anyway, the reason I brought that up, because it is because in Hitler’s book, he writes. And first I’ll quote it word for word, then I’ll explain what he means. But he writes:

 

“As soon as an atom, or a glimpse of right is admitted on the opposing side, the process of doubting one’s preconceived ideas begins.”

 

I’ll repeat that so it sinks in. Right:

 

“As soon as an atom, or a glimpse of right is admitted on the evil side, or the side, the opposing side, the designated enemy side, then the process of doubting or beginning to doubt your own existing belief system begins.”

 

What does that mean? It means it is very important that an administrative government does not allow you to access any information which helps you understand the point of view of your enemy. You’re not supposed to understand your enemy’s point of view at all! You’re supposed to reject it as incontrovertibly evil! The moment any nuance is available to you that allows you to understand things from an enemy or opposition perspective, and the moment you’re actually able to understand even one thing that the enemy believes, the moment you’re able to sympathize with even one thing that the previously or an enemy stood for, a previously understood enemy stood for.

 

[26:59]

 

The moment you acknowledge that one thing an enemy did or represented was actually not that bad, then your whole worldview starts to tip. You eventually start to sympathize with an enemy, and you start to see what your previous beliefs were. You start to see them as potentially evil. That’s why when politicians talk about Nazism, they will not include even the slightest bit of nuance, ever! It will always be absolutely incontrovertibly evil! They will always associate Nazism with genocide, regardless of the facts. They will always reject Nazism as not even a real philosophy, but just a caricature of evil itself. Nazism and Hitler are evil incarnate, and you’re not supposed to look at it any other way. If you do, that’s a problem. And social media and the Internet, the age of the Internet has made it not only possible, but easy to see things from Hitler’s perspective. And the results you can see for yourself. It’s a whole fraction of the new generation which actually thinks that Hitler was the good guy, or maybe not even that bad. That’s like, some of them think he’s not that bad. The rest of them think:

 

“Oh, he’s actually the good guy!”

 

Right? That’s what happens when you allow free information, when you allow nuance. And naturally, if people start thinking that Hitler wasn’t that bad, then they end up thinking Hitler’s enemies might actually be bad. The people who oppose Hitler might actually be the bad ones. And that’s the mess that the social media system has created for the existing government. It’s allowed this nuance, which has transformed the perspective of the new generation. People are just kind of running wild with this whole new idea of recent history.

 

To summarize what I’ve said, just to wrap that up, there is a reason you will never hear a single government bureaucrat acknowledge that anything Hitler ever did, that anything the German National Socialist ever did was good. They will never acknowledge National Socialism even as a legitimate political ideology. They will always hold it up as evil incarnate. And they have to do that, because if they’ll contribute to a process where people begin to sympathize with National Socialism. Because that’s the way human psychology works. Everything is either good or evil. It’s either black or White. And the minute you allow nuance to enter that equation, everything begins to tip in the other direction. Black becomes White and good becomes evil. It’s really interesting process. And long story short, that’s what the social media ban is about, because all of the nuance, like, I’ll open up Instagram on my phone right now, for example, and I’ll see, let’s say three videos.

 

The first one will be about. It’ll be some girl who’s like 23 years old talking about how the Holocaust is just what they said happened with the Holocaust is logistically impossible. Then the next video will be about how the government murdered X amount of people with vaccines, how it caused heart conditions, nervous system disorders and premature deaths in infants.

 

And then the next video will just literally be a clip glorifying Hitler. That’s on Instagram right now! Like that’s what young people are being exposed to. 10 years old, 11 years old. Well, prior to the social media ban anyway. And that’s created a serious problem for administrative government, because all of that is going to undermine the dominating ideology of society right now, which is multiculturalism. It’s like the opposite ideology of National Socialism.

 

National Socialism represents the opposite to the current system ideology. It’s the opposite of multiculturalism. It’s the opposite of racial equality. Right. And that’s why people are in jail. That’s why Joel Davis is in jail. That’s why we’re all basically going to jail sooner or later. If you’re an influential person in ethnic nationalism, myself included, at some stage in the next year or two, the police are going to kick your door down at 4 in the morning. They’re going to take your computer, they’re going to set you up with some bullshit and put you in jail for political reasons, ideological reasons, because you represent a threat to the dominating ideology within government, media and police right now!

 

But, it can’t be any other way. I mean, just look at it the way it is. Put yourself in the position of the enemy and understand that they’re ruthless savages! They don’t give a fuck about your rights. You don’t have any rights. I’ve got no rights. I’ve got the right to die quietly and get replaced by Indians. That’s the way the government looks at it. That’s my foremost right as a White Australian. It’s to fucking shut up and die and get quietly replaced by an Indian family. One that won’t give this government as much trouble as we do. [chuckling] And that’s your right too. If you share my ethnicity and my viewpoints. That’s about as many rights as this government affords you right. Now if you think I’m wrong, just give it some time, man!

 

What can you do about it? Not a lot for the time being, I suppose. Like I said, every day I wake up where a gang of coppers haven’t kicked my door down and aren’t accusing me of some shit to put me in jail. That’s another good day. It was always going to come to this, though. It was always going to come to this:

 

“Have I thought about entering politics?”

 

In what capacity? Like, because I feel like I’ve been in politics for the last 11 years. Do you mean like official political process, like getting voted for and whatnot?

 

Of course I’ve thought about it, but it’s not really possible. You’ll find that Australian system is so corrupt, they’ll put you in jail before you can get to Parliament. But that’s part of a process that I think we need to pass through, that Australians need to pass through in order to work out or adapt to that environment, to work out a way where we can stay out of prison and actually arrive in Parliament somehow. I don’t know. I don’t like the idea of a Parliament. I’ll tell you right now!

 

[33:38]

 

I mean, look at Parliament. What is Parliament? It’s a group of hysterical women screeching about racism or other interpersonal nonsense which doesn’t actually matter. And if it’s not that, then it’s a group of men taking money from foreign lobbyists, climbing over each other to try to prove who can fill Australia with more immigrants faster. That’s what Parliament is! It’s just a snake den! It’s a rat’s nest! And anyone who goes into Parliament with good intentions will find that they have to become a snake, or a rat, in order to survive in that environment. I think we need to do away with Parliament as a country. It might be fun for someone like Joel to sit in Parliament because Joel really enjoys debating, doesn’t he? I mean, Joel thrives when he’s in an environment where he gets to argue his point with people who don’t like him. That’s why I think Joel would be excellent in Parliament.

 

But personally, I think I would get too frustrated by Parliament. I think I’m good at doing what I do now, which is just influencing from my small corner, what do you call people like me? Micro influencers? And I provide people with advice. I’m an advisor. I’m an advisor in the shadows. [chuckling] But I’m not really in the shadows, am I? I’m pretty public right now!

 

To be honest, since everything that’s happened in Australia over the past couple of months, like Joel going to jail, stacks of criminal charges being laid against activists left, right and centre, you know, nationalist activists, the Federal Police seemingly being converted into a political police, an ideological policing unit to prevent nationalism from taking hold. I’m not even sure what I should say! Like, I go to post something on Telegram and I’m thinking:

 

“Fuck, what can I even write that won’t just land me in prison right now?”

 

I don’t even know. I’m not really sure. The culture’s changed so quickly that I’m not really sure if I should write anything at all!

 

But then I think to myself:

 

“I’m probably going to go to jail anyway. So fuck it! I’ll just keep writing what I think. I’ll just keep doing what I’ve always done.”

 

All right, how far in are we? How long have I survived so far? I don’t think I can see. Oh, no, I can. No, I can’t see how long I’ve been streaming because I’m just streaming through OBS. I’m not using any of the streaming services. I couldn’t work them out man. I’m just going to close this blind. It’s like some brutal sun glare coming through there. Is that better or worse? Maybe I’ll open it again. Wow! Survived longer than half an hour. That’s nice.

 

Well, thanks for the appreciation, guys. Thanks for joining me. What else was there? There was another article or two that I wanted to discuss with you guys because there’s just been so much going on in Australia for the past couple of weeks, and I spend most of my time working and trying to, what do you call it? Trying to build this online coaching business. So my head hasn’t been as into the news as it should be. It’s like I have one day off. I get like a Sunday afternoon off every week, and that’s the time where I try to catch up on the news and what’s been happening.

 

I saw that Tom Sewell was streaming with, is it called the Fight Back podcast with Blizzerian and Jake Shields? That should be interesting. Isn’t it crazy The Times we’re living in where you can open a social media app and you got Dan Blizzerian talking about how Israel is the most evil thing in the world. And that guy is like, that guy’s watched by a lot of people. He’s someone who’s quite wealthy, according to my understanding.

 

Yeah, I know people want to speak to me about March for Australia, Queensland. Like I said, I’ve got no idea what’s going on with that. I know that there’s drama and there’s people on X who are like, and I don’t even know what’s happening.

 

As I said, I don’t know why everyone can’t just have a rally about a single issue. Single issue rallies are really easy! Anyone trying to complicate it to make it about something other than that single issue, in this case, stopping immigration. They’re an enemy. They’re an enemy! It’s that simple. Just keep them out, get away from them, don’t let them in, don’t let them anywhere near the organisation of the rally itself. Just stick to that one issue. It’s that simple! The moment someone says:

 

“Oh, but there’s Nazis over there!”

 

Shut the fuck up! Shut the fuck up! It’s about stopping immigration. It’s not about Nazis. Simple! Why can’t people figure that out? It’s like it requires the same kind of mental strength that is necessary to ignore arguing with people, or to not argue with people. Which is like when someone’s trying to compel you to argue with them, you literally just ignore them and go about whatever it is you’re doing. You learn to do that in politics. You have to be able to do that in politics. If you can’t ignore what people are saying, you’ll always be dragged into dirty little corners of tit for tat that are just going to waste your time. You have to be able to actually not care what people are saying. You have to actually be amused at people trying to derail you or detract you from your single purpose.

 

Politics is really simple and easy. You just have to stay on that one narrow, single purpose goal route. Very easy! It’s actually the stupidest business in the world, politics. I think Napoleon said that, because you’re literally in the business of influencing simpletons who really want and desire that one train of thought system, that one message that us against them dynamic. And the moment you make it more complicated than that with arguing about ideology and stuff, then you’re basically cooked. No longer are you appealing to the ordinary folk. You just need to keep things simple. It’s really easy.

 

[40:59]

 

 

I noticed I’m being called a “White supremacist” now in the press whenever I’m mentioned. I don’t know why I’m still being mentioned. I haven’t hosted or attended a protest in the capacity of actually participating in it in quite a while. All I do is appear on stream occasionally as a result of being invited onto it, but I still get mentioned in media articles on occasion. And I’m now White supremacist! I used to be far-Right activist, then I was far-Right extremist. Then I was accused neo-Nazi. Then they just took the word accused out and started saying neo-Nazi.

 

And now it’s neo-Nazi, but also White supremacist. It’s interesting, isn’t it? Because I’ve never actually described myself as White supremacist. It’s all very dirty language, curse language, designed to make you look, you know, evil, undesirable. Don’t listen to this person. What a horrible man. [chuckling] It’s probably illegal. I actually know that it is illegal. A former colleague of mine, Dennis Hutz, who was quite close to us during our early years of activism with United Patriots Front. I don’t know if it was Channel Seven or Channel Nine. It was one of the major media corporations, but they just called him a White supremacist after he did some sort of political activity. It was a stunt or something. He issued a legal notice or something like that opened up a lawsuit. And they settled with him before the court date. And they paid him out I don’t know, somewhere between 50 and $70,000. So he got a payout because they called him White supremacist without any basis.

 

I wonder what the basis for calling me a White supremacist is? It’s guilt by association, isn’t it? It’s because I’ve streamed or sat on a panel with people who might accept that identity. I don’t know. But what does White supremacist entail as well? It’s like if someone calls you White supremacist, right, what that means to the ordinary mind is they think that you’re the kind of person who walks around and just thinks you’re superior to everyone because you’re White. Like, it would mean that I would just walk past a Chinaman or something like that and just hate this person because he’s Chinese and not White. It’s like, imagine going through life like that. Imagine how exhausting that would be to have to hate everyone around you just because they’re not White all the time.

 

I mean, I’ve never really felt that way. To be honest, I don’t really feel anything towards people who aren’t White. I don’t really have any room to feel anything for them. It’s not like they’re not significant to me in any way. I don’t really live in a place where there’s a lot of people who aren’t White. So being a White supremacist is not really something that’s ever occurred to me. I’ve never really thought of myself that way.

 

But apparently Australian journalists, mainstream media journalists, they know more about me than I do! [chuckling] they get to decide my ideology and how to describe me, regardless of the facts. And that’s the country we live in, ladies and gentlemen. It’s also a country where you go to jail if you write the wrong thing on Telegram.

 

And if you go to a protest, a police approved protest, you don’t commit any crimes. You’re even a highly regarded civil engineer. And you’ve been in Australia for years without committing any crimes. But you went to one protest for ideological reasons the government doesn’t like, you’re getting deported! You’re out of here within a day or two. Well, I don’t think he was actually out of here within a day or two, but I know that he ended up in immigration detention within a day or two. God, that’s crazy, man! I don’t think that’s ever happened in the history of Australia. I actually tried to find another situation where someone was deported, like taken to immigration and deported that quickly. Not even serious rapists and murderers. No one in the history of this country has been apprehended and deported along with his family that fast! That’s never happened before.

 

Think about what that means. It means that a whole new precedent of political policing is now occurring in Australia. And it means everyone who was influential in nationalism is bound to go to jail at some point or another. That is the logical mathematical conclusion! So brace yourselves!

 

Like I said I was gonna play a game. I was gonna play a game for you guys that I usually play with Joel. You know what’s funny? Someone said in the comments on one of the last streams that I did with Joel before he was in jail, someone said:

 

“Oh, Blair’s losing hope! Blair’s so black pilled he’s even started playing a game while streaming with Joel. He’s not serious anymore!”

 

I thought to myself, bro, I’ve been playing a game while streaming with Joel for like three years. I just didn’t say anything because I thought maybe it’s rude.

 

[46:13]

 

But now I’m just being honest because it kind of explains why sometimes I’m a bit distracted. But that’s how I listen. As I explained at the start of the stream, I listen by doing something else with my hands. And so like some people do that. Some people need to be able to like do something else in order to intake information effectively. Like if I’m just sitting there staring at the screen, I get bored. It’s hard for me to actually listen. It’s easy to listen if I’m doing something else.

 

It is World of Warcraft hardcore, but it’s a private server called Turtle Wow! You guys know what that is? It’s like, how would you describe it? It’s like classic. Plus, it’s the original World of Warcraft, but it’s had all this additional content bolted on. It’s even got new raids and new dungeons, but it’s all at level 60. Because you can only play Classic World of Warcraft or Vanilla so many times before you know every single weapon that drops, every single item that drops. The good thing about Turtle Wow is its got like an array of new items and weapons and quests that you’ve never seen before added into places like Westfall and Elwyn Forest, and all the early human starting zones and beyond. There’s whole new zones as well. And it’s all based on what Blizzard was going to release with the original Vanilla, but they didn’t end up releasing it because they didn’t have enough manpower or time to actually implement those things into the game. But the original World of Warcraft, the original vanilla, that came out in like 2004, I think, or 2000, 2003, when I was like 13 or 14, it was basically an unfinished game.

 

If you look at the way the classes were set up, it wasn’t finished. Mage was finished, Rogue was finished, Warrior was kind of finished. The other classes weren’t finished and the game wasn’t finished, but they released it anyway and it still became an international phenomenon.

 

But it’s an easy game to play while you’re streaming because you don’t need to pay that much attention to it. It’s not a game like Doom Eternal, for example, where God, I’m like, that game requires 100% of your attention.

 

Nick Patterson. I don’t want to talk about individuals. I don’t want to talk about individuals. It’s not my style. What could I say, though in summary? I think Nick’s doubling down on his support for Israel because he probably got bullied for supporting Israel. And some people, when you bully them, they actually double down on what you’re bullying them for. That’s the way they respond. He’s probably copped a lot of shit online for being a bit of an attack dog for Avi Yemeni and the Israeli crew.

 

But eventually he’s going to realise, guys, eventually, you can’t stay ignorant forever. Eventually, Nick Patterson will realise that he’s not jewish and the jews laugh at him when he’s not there. Avi Yemeni would go home and laugh at him. He’s going to work it out eventually. It’ll just take him a bit more time. Bullying probably won’t work. Doesn’t work on everyone, bullying. Well, there’s probably a process people go through, but everyone’s different.

 

So the next March for Australia event is on Australia Day, is that right? It’s like everyone seems to be gearing up for Australia Day. Ever since the original March for Australia, there’s been some drama, hasn’t there? And it all seems to be, at the centre of that drama, seems to be this whole Nazi debacle! Like you’re sort of Zionist-conservatives trying to Reclaim Australian patriotism from the Nazis. That seems to be the main crux of the issue. I honestly just think it should be ignored and everyone should just get together again for the next march, like I said, for that single issue thing. If you consider yourself a conservative, if you consider yourself a Christian, even if you’re like a Zionist conservative Christian, if that’s still actually a thing, it shouldn’t be. But even if you are, if that’s what you consider yourself, or even if you’re a Nazi, or a regular Australian patriot or whatever, these are all just words! You’re just saying things.

 

At the end of the day, you’re still part of the same cultural, ethnic community. Like, just look at each other. It’s easy to tell who is one of us and who is not. And you should be, in my opinion, we should be united on that basis, not the basis of word identities. Like, I’m centre Right conservative and I’m far-Right Nazi and I’m centre kind of I don’t even know, like, what is this? It’s all just words. The political spectrum is just words. This is people saying words, making noises with their mouth, which, how is that more of an identifying factor than how we look, how we think and where we come from physically and biologically? To me, it’s just like I can tell who’s on my side and who’s not usually just by looking at them. That’s the way I tend to approach politics.

 

But apparently everybody’s more intelligent than me because they invest a great deal more in their political spectrum identities. That makes you smarter than anyone who’s using biology as an identifying factor first. It’s embarrassing how the tendency people have to believe they’re super intelligent can actually confuse the fuck out of them and can actually take them away from their fundamental identity because they’re so invested in the idea of their own intelligence that they end up identifying with something that is completely alien to their own biological identity because they’re so smart, right? They spend all of their time thinking about how to verbalise or structure their identity and how to explain it to people. I don’t know. I’ve always just thought, like, being a White Australian is not like a big deal. Well, it’s not a bad thing is what I’m trying to say. Like, what’s wrong with just being a White Australian? I don’t get it. I realise that the current system wants to kill you and replace you with a more manageable slave population from overseas if you’re a White Australian, I get it.

 

And so from the perspective of the administrative class, the institutional class, there’s a lot wrong with being a White Australian. If you’re a White Australian, you’re held responsible for everything bad that ever happened in this land, ever! Especially to Aboriginal people.

 

[53:21]

 

But even if you want to extend outside of Australia, you’re responsible for all suffering of the native Maori people! Evil White colonial barbarians are responsible for the suffering of South Africans! And the only way we manage to advance our civilisation as White people was by exploiting and dominating other cultures around the world like the cruel colonials we were. And for all the suffering we’ve caused around the world, we now have to pay! We have to pay by dying quietly and getting replaced!

 

That’s the attitude of the institutional class. And it’s kind of creepy, isn’t it, to live in an environment, in a civilisation where your own government essentially wants to kill you and they think it’s justified for racial reasons. There’s like this relentless race hate that’s motivating your own governing forces and they don’t even see it. Like, they don’t even realise if you’re someone who works for media, government, Ranking police officer, if you’re actually thinking this much, you won’t even realise that you’ve been spelled by race hate propaganda, which is anti-White in essence. Like, you’ll just look at White people and you’ll even look at yourself if you’re a White person with these kind of preconceptions, and you’ll just despise that ethnicity because of what you’re being led to believe has happened as a result of that ethnicity and colonialism.

 

So it’s interesting, isn’t it? They say that evil is a point of view and every way of man is right in his own mind. And that is so true. It is so true because the people in government who are actually in the process of punishing White people for being White evil colonials, they think that they’re doing a good thing. They think it’s justified because they do believe White people have caused all that suffering. So they think it’s all justifiable and it’s all just consequence of the evil things our ancestors did.

 

Every way of man is right in his own mind. It’s eerily similar to the story of Attack on Titan. If anyone hasn’t watched Attack on Titan, you should try to watch it. I understand the first season or two might be hard to get through and you might feel like you’re just watching some stupid cartoon about these weird looking giants, but god, as it gets into the final season, man, wow! I’m of the opinion that that show has the power to deprogram Leftists. It’s that powerful! It’s a story that teaches you about race hate propaganda and how it works and how it’s used as, or to establish an effective power dynamic to unite people against that single ethnic enemy. I don’t think I’ve ever watched a story as impactful as Attack on Titan. I can’t even believe some Japanese guy came up with a story that impactful. It’s fucking crazy!

 

Or maybe it’s just that I’m used to Western media just being so bland, just so full of pathetic propaganda. You know, I watched this movie, or I tried to watch this movie a couple of weeks ago called Frankenstein. Supposed to be a movie about Frankenstein. That was one of the worst movies I’ve ever tried to watch. It went for a long time and it’s like for perhaps for maybe two hours or at least an hour and a half, I just sat there waiting for it to get good. I’m thinking:

 

“Surely with this cast, surely with the material they have to work with the amount of money they’ve spent on this film, surely it’s about to get good. At any stage now it’s going to get good!”

 

But every decision made by the main characters doesn’t make a lot of sense. And every scene is just a crybaby story about poor Frankenstein! Everyone so mean to Frankenstein and he’s just so good and kind, the poor thing! And after you’ve just been hit with that scene after scene after scene after scene for almost two hours, you’re like:

 

“Where the fuck is this story going? I can’t even watch this anymore!”

 

I just turned it off. It is just so bland, uninteresting and weird! It’s weird!

 

And so you watch Japanese animation and you get really impactful, compelling stories about ethnic tensions and race hate propaganda and political power dynamics. And even involved in that is like time manipulation and shit on top of all that stuff put into this incredible, incredible story! And it really speaks volumes of the quality of Western entertainment when it’s being completely smashed in terms of quality, thoughtfulness, creativity by random Japanese cartoonists!

 

It’s getting really hot in this part of the house that I’m in the sun is beating down on this window in front of me. I’ve got the blind down, but maybe I’m just getting frustrated. I can never tell if it’s actually hot or if I’m just getting angry. I’m one of those people that when I get frustrated, my head turns bright red and I just start getting really hot. Mepola says:

 

“Yeah, Frankenstein was absolutely awful! I saw it with the missus. We both looked at each other throughout the film, cringing. It was insufferable!”

 

It was absolutely insufferable. It was. What else did I watch recently? I watched a show that was just absolutely miserable! And it had that Australian actor in it. What’s his name again? He’s in that movie Warrior with Tom Hardy. He’s Tom Hardy’s brother in the movie Warrior. What’s that guy’s name again?

 

[59:21]

 

Anyway, it’s a movie about this guy who loses his family. He loses his family and he kind of waits for his family to come back, but they never do because they died in a fire. And that’s basically the whole movie. It’s just really depressing. But there’s several elements of the film that I thought were interesting. You know what? I don’t remember it well enough to go through it. All I know is that was laced with low key propaganda. That was just “White man bad.” You know Joel Edgerton. That’s the guy. Thank you, Joel Edgerton. You guys might know the movie I’m talking about. I think it’s on Netflix or one of the major streaming services right now! It’s just the most miserable, pointless film laced with evil propaganda. I won’t even say evil necessarily. It’s just hostile propaganda. It’s hostile!

 

Like there’s one scene that doesn’t make a lot of sense. There’s just some guy because they’re all part of some tree logging company. And there’s a guy who’s just ranting about Jesus and stuff like that. He’s just some random White guy, kind of overweight. Then this black cowboy comes into the scene, asks if anyone’s seen this guy. And the overweight White guy, we’re talking about just starts running and the black cowboy shoots him and says:

 

“He killed my brother for no reason but the colour of his skin. Anyone got a problem with what I’ve just done, speak up and we’ll have it out now.”

 

And no one says anything. And the black cowboy just rides off. And that scene is just inconsequential to the rest of the movie. It was just completely fucking unnecessary! And you realise it’s only in the movie just to put that:

 

“Ha. White guy gets shot by a black guy for noble reason!”

 

I don’t even know, man! I won’t. Like I said, I don’t remember all the scene structure, the structures of each scene well enough to actually analyze it. I’ve noticed people get really famous from analyzing films. Like The Critical Drinker on YouTube. I always liked that guy.

 

I started watching him before he had the huge following too, that Scottish character. And it’s one of those things that I think I could have done quite well, analyzing films. I was just basically always so busy trying to afford rent, losing every job that I got after three months because someone would Google my name and some woman at the HR department of whatever company I was working for would take issue with me. I was too busy doing that to actually invest any time into analyzing film.

 

But it’s really easy to take a Western film and analyze it and just unpack the propaganda. In my opinion, it’s really easy. But there’s some good influences. There’s some good people on YouTube doing that right now! And yeah, I don’t like the heat. I’m not looking forward to summer this year. It’s officially summer in Australia, but it’s been raining a lot.

 

Anyway, again, thanks for joining me everyone. I expect that this stream will be available to watch after I’ve finished it. So if you have missed the start of it, I think it should still be there. I believe that I set it up in that way, but I’m not entirely sure. I’m here to streaming through OBS because I couldn’t work out Streamyard. And there’s this new one called Restream, I think. You connect it to your Rumble account and it says that it’s connected. But then there’s no stream key and there’s no source and there’s nowhere to put that stuff. And so I’m thinking how the fuck does this work? This is not intuitive at all! They pretend it’s like the easiest thing ever to set up, but it’s really not.

 

What’s a good movie? What’s a good movie? Give me a movie, guys, that’s worth watching, in your opinion. The last good show that I watched was called God, it’s getting so hot in here. I’m sweating. I can’t last much longer, lads. The last good show I watched was Ripley. Anyone seen Ripley? It was a black and white film, I believe, set in the 60s. I think it was on Netflix. I believe that Tom Ripley is almost like a folklore character in certain cultures, but it’s about identity theft. And it makes you realise when you watch the film how easy identity theft was or would have been in the 60s. It’s not so easy now due to all developing technologies, but in the 60s, all you needed was, yeah, you could just glue your passport photo on top of someone else’s passport photo and then that’s who you were.

 

Recommend anime solo leveling. I don’t know if I have it in me to sit there and watch another anime. It’s like after I did Attack on Titan. I’ve done Attack on Titan twice as well. Because I liked it that much. I watched it again gradually. Took me months. But, yeah, I don’t know if I have any more anime in me for another six months, but I’ll try.

 

When you get to a certain age, this is a sad reality, but it is a reality nonetheless. When you get to a certain age, it’s more difficult to intake new information. It’s not impossible, but it’s more difficult. So when you’re exposed to new things, it’s kind of like you get tired really quickly. Makes you miss being a kid where everything was just, your brain is just able to absorb everything so quickly and efficiently when you’re young.

 

[1:05:18]

 

I’ve heard about Nuremberg with Russell Crowe, but I haven’t watched it yet. I saw Russell Crowe on the Joe Rogan podcast. I actually clipped it. I clipped the part where Russell Crowe was talking about how, and this links back into what we were talking about earlier in the stream. Russell Crowe is talking about nuance regarding certain Nazi officials, specifically Hermann Goring, the chief of the Luftwaffe, the German Air Force. Nuance regarding him as a person looking into his life and the circumstances of Germany before and after the war. And I clipped that and tried posting it to TikTok, and it got instantly deleted! I thought maybe it was the song that I put on with it. So I deleted the song and tried to upload it without the music. Instantly deleted again.

 

And that takes me back to what I was talking about before, how nuance cannot be permitted by the existing administrative forces. The hand behind the government, you might say. It is their job right now to eliminate nuance, to ban nuance, or to limit your access to nuance, specifically on the subject of the Second World War and any revisionism or extra information that people are making available on the Second World War, on Hitler and the Nazis. Because nuance, once made available, is eventually and with mathematical certainty going to result in people having more sympathy for Hitler and the Nazis. That’s where nuance leads.

 

Have a cold beer. How the hell is beer gonna cool me down when I’m hot? You realise alcohol raises your body temperature. Beer! I shouldn’t judge people for drinking, though. Joel drinks. Joel enjoys a beer. He seems to handle it pretty well, too. Joel’s not one of those people who loses his shit when he gets drunk. He kind of becomes more entertaining. He loosens up a little bit, and it doesn’t seem to impact his intelligence at all! If anything, it just slightly sharpens it.

 

They’re incapable of allowing nuance. It’s not that they’re incapable, it’s that they’re absolutely unwilling because they understand the destructive power of nuance. That’s what I’m trying to get at. Anyone who is permitting nuance or encouraging nuance, that is more open discussion or objective discussion regarding Second World War and Hitler specifically, will be considered a dangerous enemy of the administrative forces of government right now!

 

It’s really important to understand that, too. They’re not just disregarding National Socialism as incontrovertibly evil out of ignorance. It’s not out of ignorance. It’s very deliberate. Because any open discussion on the topic is eventually going to lead to a broader and better understanding of the topic. And that is not in the interests of current government media alliance to have you actually understanding the Second World War in any broad capacity. You’re supposed to just write Hitler and the Nazis off as evil, and that’s it. You’re not supposed to look into it beyond that.

 

Basically, this whole society is built on not allowing nuance on this particular topic. [chuckling] Again, they’re going to lock down social media. I think I mentioned that, but I didn’t really unpack it fully. It begins with this whole:

 

“Oh, we’re protecting people under 16 by not allowing them on social media!”

 

That’s just them getting their foot in the door when they can work out how to accomplish that and force the social media companies to abide by that rule, they’ll take the next step. Not really sure what the next step will be, but the goal will be to lock down social media specifically. And the final goal will be to censor the Internet in entirety.

 

I actually saw a video recently of a guy who managed to get his hands on two smartphones from North Korea. And both of these phones were totally locked down. They already come with heaps of apps, but they’re several years behind the technology of the phones we have available to us. There is access to the Internet, but it’s like an internal Internet controlled by the government. And you have to put your details in. You have to punch in all your details before you can use it. So they know exactly who you are and what you’re looking at, even though what’s available is still censored and controlled by them. Just in case you find a way to use that Internet service to get beyond what they can control, then they know who you are and where to find you and I found it curious because when I was watching the video, the guy presenting this information to people, he was like:

 

“I wonder if we’ll ever see the fall of North Korea in our lifetime. I think we will?”

 

And I laughed because I thought to myself:

 

“Not only are you not going to see the fall of North Korea and the circumstances in North Korea, you’re going to see those same circumstances implemented in the West. It’s actually the opposite. You’re not going to see the fall of stuff like this. You’re going to see it becoming a widespread thing!”

 

But at least North Koreans have national pride laced into their particular brand of communism, which is kind of like. What do they call it? It’s like National Bolshevism. Nazbol. I suppose that’s how you would summarize the North Korean system. The kind of totalitarian system we’re going to end up with is an Internet that’s totally censored and controlled. But you’re also not allowed to express any national or ethnic pride because that exhibits opposition to the dominant ideology within Western society, which is multiculturalism, everyone’s equal, right? So national ethnic pride is a problem for the current ruling ideology. So that won’t be allowed.

 

It’s almost like North Korea will be a preferable alternative. The system of North Korea will be a preferable alternative to what’s around the corner for the West. But I don’t know, maybe even though we’re going to go through a time where everyone’s going to jail for no reason other than ideology. You’ve got America. I just saw in the news recently that America is like, probing Australia to try to gather as much information on how corrupt Australia actually is and how much damage like multicultural dogma and mass immigration has done to Australia, where that damage has been done specifically and who’s responsible for it, at an institutional level. America is apparently collecting data on that subject. I’d say they’re pretty late to the party. It’s been going on for a long fucking time!

 

[1:12:08]

 

And my guess is the reason they’re collecting data is to work out how bad the situation really is and whether it’s reversible. Well, certain elements of America, anyway. It could just be all like certain elements of American government pretending that they’re going to do something to help Western society, but really they’re powerless to do anything at all because they’re too under the thumb.

 

Yeah, people like Avi Yemeni won’t go to jail. Yeah, I’m talking about, like actual Australian nationalists, not T-shirt salesmen. Not your (((dual citizens))) who really just are champions of Israel and some sort of subversive foreign policy. Would I even consider Avi to be a champion of subversive foreign policy? I don’t know. All I know is that this guy, you can’t compare this guy to an actual someone like me, for example, we’re totally different.

 

I actually watched Avi Yemeni kick Hugo Lennon. Is it Hugo Lennon? Auspill. Try to remove him from a rally. He claims that it wasn’t him removing Hugo. It was Nick Patterson removing him.

 

But it’s clearly Avi standing there arguing with him, coming up with reasons why he should leave:

 

“You’re a Nazi. You’re wearing a Helly Hansen jacket. That’s Nazism. How dare you!”

 

I thought it was amusing how Hugo accused Harvey of schizophrenia because I think there’s a high rate of schizophrenia in the jewish population. I think that’s statistically fact. It’s got something to do with their breeding patterns, or a genetic variation that produces higher levels of schizophrenia on a per capita basis.

 

But I don’t know, I’ve got to watch that again. I haven’t actually. I don’t have in my mind an effective memory of that video. I’ve only watched it once, so I did notice that not many people were on his side, though. Not many people appreciated Avi just yelling “Nazi” at Auspill because of a jacket brand he was wearing and having him removed from a rally when he was just standing there on his own, not bothering anyone, trying to listen to the speakers. Yeah, everyone in the comments was against him. That’s understandable why.

 

As I said, any real Australian nationalist is going to be focused on a single issue right now, which is stopping immigration. If they’re focused on anything else, especially “Nazi hunting”, you should just treat them as an enemy to the cause, because all they’re doing is diluting and detracting from that single issue, which is going to unite everyone! People can only be united by a single issue. The moment they detract from that issue or they’re detracted from that issue by someone trying to drag their attention away elsewhere, then the whole cause begins to crash. It’s very simple.

 

Well, thanks for joining me, guys. First solo stream I’ve done in several years. MaybeNextTime I will play that game. But funnily enough, to my surprise, I didn’t have any trouble talking this long. Usually I would have gotten bored 40 minutes ago.

 

So we got Superchats, don’t we? Is that how it works? We read out Superchats. I think I’ve got them all here, but I’m not entirely sure. Philip Mellor gave $5 and says:

 

“Hail Boomer Tech. I’ve missed my fix of the Joel and Blair Show.”

 

Am I Boomer Tech? I am pretty old now. Neil tells me that all the time. Neil Erikson, if you guys know who that is, an old friend of mine. He keeps reminding me that:

 

“Bro, we’re old now. You realise that there’s a whole new generation of activists. We’re the old guys now!”

 

I’m thinking:

 

“Yeah, I suppose he’s right about that. Fuck, when did that happen?”

 

Pedro Escobar gives $20.

 

Thank you very much. He says:

 

“Shekels for you. Hail Australia. You are the vanguard for us all.”

 

I’m just a guy, man! I’m just a guy in a room right now! But thanks. I do what I can. The Queen’s Guard gave $5 and says:

 

“Do you ever think you’ll inevitably have to take up a more free frontline position in nationalism again? Like starting up UPF again or becoming a politician or something?”

 

First we have to get through this period of going to jail for what we believe and surviving the political policing. We need to adapt to that and work out how bad that’s actually going to be. So first we need to get our doors kicked in early in the morning, get arrested, go to jail for ideological reasons. Work out how we’re going to get out of jail and then develop a strategy for stopping them doing that to us in the future.

 

So that’s what’s in the immediate future for us activists of the nationalist cause. We’ll talk about taking more frontline positions up again after we’ve been through that and adapted to it. Queens Guard again says, Gives $2 and says:

 

“Tell us about UPF days, Blair. Staunching pedos, [word unclear], bashing Antifa, etc.”

 

What do I say specifically? It was all very, it was all very impulsive. The United Patriots Front, I’ll be honest, on my behalf at least, it was all very impulsive. I didn’t really have much of a long term plan. I just had a Facebook page. We had that idea, that single issue, as I mentioned several times in the stream beforehand. And we just ran with it. We ran with it and we tried to affect public discourse as much as possible. And we knew eventually we had to build a political party.

 

But interestingly, as soon as we segued into building a political party, that’s when all the trouble started. That’s when I got charged, me and two of my colleagues, actually, we all got charged with what was essentially a speech crime for a Facebook post, “intent to incite ridicule” on Facebook. My bank accounts got frozen and deleted. I got blacklisted from Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, all within three months. And I couldn’t even communicate with my supporters to tell them what was going on in court. And suddenly due to all that random intervention, the political party was basically bust. And we didn’t really know what to do, because we didn’t have like a physical place where we all went. We didn’t have a physical membership necessarily. All it was a Facebook page. We just had social media and that was it.

 

And that was the mistake we made, I suppose, because at the end of the day someone just pushed a button:

 

“Delete them off Facebook, delete their bank accounts, charge them with hate speech. Done!”

 

[1:19:23]

 

 

It was that easy for them to get rid of us back in the day. I gotta be honest though, actually, I’ll tell that story another time. That’s a little bit too much for how much brain power I have remaining. The Queens Guard again sends $2:

 

“You should start vlogging, Blair. I was just thinking of whether Nick Patterson would have the same balls to confront and try to kick you out if you decided to attend one of his Zio-Christ coming events.”

 

Personally, I’ve never had an issue With Nick Patterson. And I went to his gym once. It was probably three or four years ago. I went to his gym and we did some training. Kickboxing training. He used to do kickboxing, I think it was kickboxing or maybe some form of MMA. And, yeah, he used to rant about Christian stuff back then, too. So he’s always been into the same stuff. But I don’t know. I’m not really in a position where I’m attending protests in the capacity of participating. If I was going to attend something, it would just be to listen. But Hugo Lennon just did that. He attended one of these rallies these guys had, just to listen to the speakers. And he was ejected because Avi decided he was a Nazi as a consequence of his jacket brand [Helly Hanson], which is the same brand I’m wearing, by the way. It’s becoming quite popular. It’s good stuff, actually.

 

It reminds me of Kathmandu before Kathmandu got shit! Kathmandu used to be good, quality merchandise, but then it’s like they sold out to some cheap shit! There’s different qualities of Chinese merch, right? There’s some good factories in China, and but they’re only like 10% of the factories, then 90% of the factories just dirt shit!

 

And it’s like Kathmandu started in the top 10% and then they ended up in the 90% ones. And now. Now it just sucks! Their merch doesn’t really feel good anymore. But this stuff feels like the way Kathmandu merch used to feel. It’s good shit!

 

The Bearded Indian sends through $8. Thank you. He says:

 

“Nazi smears. I respond, the National Socialist German Workers party dissolved in 1945. So does that make you a commie? And people usually shut the fuck up!”

 

Right. Are you saying you call people a communist when they call you a Nazi? I don’t think that’s powerful enough, personally. You’re better off calling people, anyone who says you’re a Nazi you can presuppose that they support mass immigration into the West. And so you should just call them a rapist! Because the immigrants that are coming into this country are, per capita, they’re committing more rapes than, like, standard Australians would, by and large.

 

So if you’re an advocate for mass immigration, you’re an advocate for rape. So you need to use language which is a little bit more potent than communist. You see, Nazi and racists. Racist doesn’t carry the same weight as it used to, which is why the media stopped using it. Because it’s been overused. But Nazi, or neo-Nazi and White supremacists. These are curse words which have a particular bite to them. And you can only match that level of bite with something like rapists or murderer! Rapists might be a better one. But you don’t need to concern yourself so much with whether or not the word can be applied logically or truthfully, because your enemy is not concerned with that, you just need to be concerned with the impact the accusation has and the effect it has on your opponent in an argument. So they call you a Nazi. You say:

 

“Well, you’re a rapist. You’re a rapist dog!”

 

You know what I mean? You can practice stuff like that you need to use language which is just as strong or has an even stronger impact on them than the Nazi phrase or smear has on you. Broden Nielsen sends $10. Thank you and says:

 

“Hail from Sweden!”

 

Well, hello back to you from Australia, Sweden. The only person I know from Sweden is Marcus Follin, also known as the Golden One. I can’t say that we talk all the time, but we occasionally nod to each other from across the pond, that is almost the rest of the world. We’re very far away. But he’s always been someone I’ve appreciated and sort of looked up to, Marcus. So whenever I think of Sweden, I usually think of Marcus because he’s the only person I’ve spoken to from Sweden.

 

I’m not sure what “gifted subscription” means, but thank you. Thank you to Broden Nielsen for that. And look, guys, I’m like, roasting in here! I’m cooking, so I’m gonna go pretty soon. I hope the stream has been comparably as entertaining as it would have been with Joel. I know that I can’t provide the same level of intellectual discourse that Joel can. It’s funny, actually, when you sit on stream with Joel, you feel kind of dumb when you listen to Joel’s platitudes and how excellent he is at actually phrasing or piecing together an explanation or argument, especially when you already agree with him, by and large, you kind of just feel like nothing you can say is going to match the level of intelligence that Joel’s put out there or expressed.

 

[1:25:18]

 

So usually what I do is actually try to play devil’s advocate with him and act like I’m opposing him on a few things because that actually tends to open his mind up even more.

 

Well, thanks, guys. I suppose that’s it. Cheers for joining me. Was there anything I didn’t touch on that I wanted to? Well, I hope no one is like, disheartened or believes what I’ve said here is like a black pill or something like that it’s not that way at all! When I say that everyone who is influential in nationalism is going to jail, it’s not that much of a big deal. Like, we have good prisons in Australia and it’s relatively easy to spend time in prison. It tends to be a bit of a holiday in my experience. However, I’ve never been to jail in solitary confinement as a result of my ideology.

 

But when you look at everything, the way it’s happening, what the Federal police are saying, the way they’re targeting influential people who are advocates for our kind of ideology, the ideology that I’ve always advocated for, then you just need to be objective about it. You need to be honest with yourself and you need to be like, okay, we’re going into a new threshold of political policing where just being me is going to be illegal! You know, just being a nationalist of the ethnic kind is basically going to be illegal.

 

And I don’t think anyone should be too concerned about that, though. It’s just part of how politics goes throughout history. Things get pretty bad and then they sort of settle down and then they get pretty bad again. And you shouldn’t take things too seriously like that because, I don’t know, life goes on for most of us, [chuckling] but it doesn’t concern me that much. Like I said, it’s all just part of the game. I just do what I can to make sure that it’s not too easy for them to throw me in jail for ideological reasons. As you guys know, I’m pretty careful with the way I word things and I keep my nose clean, so that’s about as much as I can do.

 

I hope the quality of this has been okay. I hope the quality’s been okay. I use one of these little Bluetooth mics because, how strange is this? I have this huge Rode microphone which is like, it plugs into your computer, like, USB attachment so it uses your computer’s power supply.

 

But then you’ve got this little thing here, this little Bluetooth mic, which is it operates through a receiver and stuff. But that little thing is like, significantly better quality and more powerful than this. How does that work? That’s like alien technology, lads. I don’t understand it. I remember how much I was astounded by our technology had developed after I got out of jail when I was younger. I went to prison in 2011, I believe. I think it was 2011. I believe it was December 2011, and I got out for the first time. I got out November 2012, right before my birthday, I think. And before I went to prison, I was working for a building company and we just had work phones with buttons on them. Just your standard, like, button phone. The company gave everyone these phones. It was just part of working for the company. It was the deal. And then I’m remanded in custody for a while and I’m out on bail, but then I’m back in jail, whatever.

 

And then a couple of years later, I’m out of prison, I’m on parole, and everyone has these smartphones. A friend of mine gives me an old apple iPhone 4, and for the first time I’m exposed to Instagram and Facebook on a phone. And I’m like:

 

“Fucking, wow! Where the fuck did this technology come from? How does this even work?”

 

You know how people speculate that during the Second World War, Hitler must have been in touch with aliens or something, because how did he manage to develop all of this crazy technology that no one else has heard of? How did they build jet planes for the first time? And I don’t even know. There’s like a long list of technological developments that the Germans were responsible for during the Second World War.

 

And it’s like I feel the same about the development of all this micro technology, the smartphones, and how much data that they can actually fit on a solid state drive these days, which is like as big as your finger. Considering how fast it developed, it’s fucking incredible! It doesn’t make a lot of sense how we went from like Nokia brick phones when I was like 13 or 14 to literally like five years later, everyone’s got an iPhone. Like, how did it develop that quickly? I think the way, you know, someone in tech would explain it is everything just got like, shrunk down and multiplied, and they just kept shrinking things down and things kept multiplying, shrunk and multiplied over and over again!

 

All right, well, I’m glad the quality of the stream was good. I didn’t expect it would be going through just OBS. But 65 Stoney sends $20. Thanks, mate. And he said:

 

“Drop Turtle Wow Server and Faction Blair currently on classic anniversary.”

 

Hang on, I’ll have to look it up. Have to look it up. I’ll have to log into it. Hang on. What server am I in? Definitely I play Alliance because I’m not a degenerate mutant. Yeah, I’m Alliance Master Race.

 

[1:31:20]

 

I’ll probably show you guys actually. Let’s jump on. If I go display capture and I put this down here like that this is my hardcore character. I’ve got a few characters. I’ve been playing this server for about. I’ve been playing the server when it first came out, I think. Oh, shit! Hang on. Let me make sure I kill this guy. Just going to move my streaming thing over here to this screen so I can see what I’m doing. I’m getting lag. I don’t know. My bags are full.

 

So, yeah, this is my Paladin. He’s level 37. I made this character probably about two or three years ago. That’s how much chance I get to actually play this game. But I’ve had to be really careful. Had to be very careful with this character because if this character dies, he’s gone! It’s just over for me. As you can see. If you play actual Vanilla World of Warcraft, you might notice that the talents are slightly different and my abilities are slightly different too. In this one, you get a combination of strikes which actually make playing Retribution Paladin a little bit more interesting. You get Holy Strike and Crusader Strike, which share a cooldown. So you choose between them and they provide unique buffs. So you ideally want to use both of them when you’re fighting something. I’ll give you an example here.

 

So this is the best Seal you get, which is Seal of Command. It basically gives you a chance to do double damage on an attack. And because I just used. Because I just use Crusader Strike, it increases my attack and casting speed by 3%, which stacks three times. And then Holy Strike gives you strength increase, which is also stackable. I’m gonna die, man! What am I doing? Imagine if I died. This character, that’s years old, you forget how much. Oh, don’t heal! Fuck you! Don’t worry. I still have ways out here. I’ve still got bubble. Oh, I’m out of here. You can’t take any chances, guys, on these hardcore characters. Let’s get the fuck out of here before she comes back with her mates.

 

I really should do some work. I’ve got to start making money. Yeah, see, she’s coming back with her mates. I told you. And look at my health. This is what they do. These fucking mongrel half breeds! Look at them! Half horse, half human. What an abomination! I shouldn’t be here anyway. I don’t know what I’m doing around Moradin. Let’s head back.

 

I’m about to close the stream. I think of I don’t think I want to become one of those video game streamers. Someone said once, actually, that the day Blair starts streaming a game is the day Australia, …

 

[stream ends]

 

 

[1:34:14]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

============================================

 

Rumble Comments

top

(Comments as of 1/12/2026 = 57)

goyslopdesigns
2 days ago
blair is chronically correct and early on censorship and overreach. been a month tho buddy give us a stream

katana17
2 days ago
[Blair Cottrell – The Joel Davis Situation – Jan 9, 2026 – Transcript] https://katana17.com/2026/01/09/blair-cottrell-the-joel-davis-situation-jan-9-2026-transcript/ [In this video Australian pro-White activist Blair Cottrell gives us an update on Joel Davis, a political prisoner being held in Sydney’s Long Bay Correctional Complex, in a punishment cell without basic amenities, all for making a social media post critical of the politician Allegra Spender who had called for him and other NSN members to be jailed for a peaceful legal protest urging that the all-powerful jewish lobby in Australia be abolished. That lobby has had Davis denied bail and held in detention since he was arrested on Nov 20, 2025, at Bondi. – KATANA]
1
0

Delete
TheHender
1 week ago
I notice that you ask Joel obvious questions or devil’s advocate questions (the ones people think are ‘black pill’) so that Joel can lead off from there and expound on that topic. There is a reason for this and it seems a lot of people just don’t get that. It is that or you’re just a dumb dumb, Blair hahaha
1
0

TheHender
1 week ago
I enjoy playing games while listening to podcasts. Currently on a spreadsheet-like game, Football Manager 2024. Or I will be on Turtle WoW while listening to the backlog of you and Joel. Add me if you want: Waughloch

TheHender
1 week ago
The moment I heard about the Social Media Ban for young people, I knew immediately they were aware that the “H*tler Youth” is rising and the government knows it. They’re trying to get ahead of the game.

kitsubot
VerifiedSupporter
1 week ago
The far right whites worldwide should converge on the only white nation left with free speech and gun rights – namely the United States. We are the only nation with a chance, our right wingers are out breeding liberals, we out voted them several times recently, and the Australian stock are descended from people who left England and Ireland to build again. It is your heritage to leave when the government oversteps their bounds. As a heritage American myself i welcome the real Aussies to come build with us here where we still have a shot. We can always come back and conquer Australia with u again in the future but for now you are welcome here.

goyslopdesigns
2 weeks ago
one stream a month? I thought this dude was an influencer

leibekohne
3 weeks ago
Blair I would blame Australian melting Pot non-white situation women not because they are weaker vessel but because they are evil by not having children. Those young unvaccinated white bitches who hate men =misandry should fuck them and have every year child,saying “I do not know who the father is, there were few of them it was one day stand, I was drunk”. gov. will pay them and give housing at least that way they will blocked street shitters and other non-whites scum savage aboerectus out of free housing market. I know is bad advice but better then die young of alcohol drugs and be replace. Perhaps bastardized children will fight for us those treasonous filth politician and feminists.

leibekohne
3 weeks ago
Is jew? word allowed, Hitler is banned??in Australia??

SolarStormMan
3 weeks ago
Been waiting for you to do a solo stream while Joel is locked up. Hopefully the Joel and Blair show can return in early January
1
0

whitehonkymonkey
3 weeks ago
the thought police have arrived so its up to us to be smarter and find some other way to get around there BS laws.

goyslopdesigns
3 weeks ago
bro is an influencer but can’t stream once a week and only pulls up for an hour on other streams

Gabe0007
4 weeks ago
I’m at 31 minutes mark. Blair! YOU’RE WRONG..!!!!!!!! WRONG!!! >>>> There’s another way, big man! THE ONLY WAY FORWARD OR YOU, AS WHITE AUSTRALIANS WILL BE NO MORE!!!!!!! CLICK ON THIS PICTURE!!! : https://i.imgur.com/50D5YeO.jpeg You WHITE Aussie boys either UNDERSTAND this or you, as White Australians will be no more. ( I cannot type it more simple as this. ) And I don’t want it, you don’t want it, none of us WHITE MEN want it..!! But there will be no other peaceful option.

Gabe0007
4 weeks ago
Meanwhile here in the f.cked up UK…. : Woman’s little daughter was denied by LEFTIE ( all schools are fkn’ leftist here! ) SCHOOL, – because of her mother’s hurty words! LINK : https://freespeechunion.org/lucy-connollys-daughter-banned-from-new-school/?v=7885444af42e

TACTICALBOY88
4 weeks ago
Merry Christmas Heil Brother o/ 110

MigC
4 weeks ago
I could listen to this man talk all day. God bless you, Blair.

Sinagoglies
4 weeks ago
Oh, that’s why downplays Israhell and MoSSAD, glorifies war and unjust invasions; and doesn’t like conspiracies!? Occultist Joel & co always plays down soviet fake Israel and glorifies war Kosher Collett and Joel Davis (Antifa Man) https://www.bitchute.com/video/XsI7RgOHpdVG Joel Davis Baphomet Tattoo https://www.bitchute.com/video/ijm47i4rYBkd Thomas Sewell admits to Snitching (and Black and Tans in his family (British Bolsheviks) attacking and invading Ireland. https://www.bitchute.com/video/hoOljtlDj2vb Occult Forces (1943) National Socialist Anti-Freemasonry Film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW4NzVxhnUg The hard-line anti-occultist faction within the NS movement was concentrated in the SD, the Sicherheitsdienst or “security service” of the SS under Reinhard Heydrich (Roman Catholic). They were largely kept in check from 1933 to 1941 by other NS officials including the staff of Rudolf Hess Thomas Sewell wants esoteric Hitlerism! I see now– Joel loves his trance techno non music! Psytrance music bridges the divide between secular and religious Jews in Israel https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/community/articles/dancing-on-common-ground https://harvardindependent.com/kleztronica-how-techno-raves-modernize-traditional-jewish-music/ Jewish Techno Party https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ep_35FTnYVA&list=RDEp_35FTnYVA&start_radio=1 https://supertravelr.com/en/trip/israel/heres-ultra-orthodox-jewish-sect-israel-rave-trance-music-7E4A9E9D97/ In 1933, the Vatican signed a Concordat with the Hitler & the Nazi Party. This made the Vatican the first state of officially recognise Nazi Germany. Find out more on our online resource https://www.concordatwatch.eu/showkb.php?org_id=858&kb_header_id=752&kb_id=1211 HITLER SPEAKS OF CHRISTIANITY AND HIS AND GERMANY’S CHRISTIAN FAITH https://www.bitchute.com/video/vBiW14nRKDNI/ https://www.wikiart.org/en/adolf-hitler/mother-mary-with-the-holy-child-jesus-christ

IcarusWax
4 weeks ago
We will win.

jonkvh
4 weeks ago
Great stream Blair.

Bigboy6669
4 weeks ago
hail

DonaldDucktator
Supporter
4 weeks ago
Wow, you really nailed the ending of this solo stream Give yourself some credit this was very enjoyable.

TVR_
4 weeks ago
Great stream Blair

amundsentb
4 weeks ago
Great stream!

wyrdweasel
4 weeks ago
Haven’t seen the recent ‘Frankenstein’ but the director Guillermo del Toro is a leftist so not surprised it’s a fail with no balls. Try the 2014 film ‘Unbroken’ for the true survival story of a WWII airman who went through hell (surprisingly well directed by Angelina Jolie but don’t let it put you off).

loosifur
4 weeks ago
https://www.linkedin.com/in/lucy-manly-8a2aa851/

shorterboy
5 weeks ago
Use TOX or SimpleX to create online spaces

› Show 1 reply
shorterboy
5 weeks ago
Frankenstein was written by a woman, your supposed to feel sympathy for the alien because female sex preferences

shorterboy
5 weeks ago
buy yacht a starlink mini and make them work to catch you while sail the coast

TinyHatRemover
Supporter
5 weeks ago
“You’ve had too much to think” -Australia police
9
0

SomerledsBlood
5 weeks ago
here’s a movie recommendation for you Blair: The Proposition (2005)
3
0

› Show 1 reply
Goraxium
5 weeks ago
The funniest part of Joel’s arrest is that ASIO has warned the government about men who do not believe that there is a political solution to the bullshit the government is forcing on people, and the government is proving it. “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable”. ASIO needs to start arresting politicians for their deliberate attacks on social cohesion, because if there is no political solution…
3
0

Girnigoe
5 weeks ago
Good to find you streaming! Greetings from America. Joel will be avenged and return to erode the social fabric again! Here’s to the White Australia Party. The ZOG knows how popular it will be, and what a problem it will be for them, probably even more so than what happened in Germany recently. Hail!
8
0

Tachibana88
5 weeks ago
I watched The King on Netflix recently, and it was actually really good. it’s from 2019, about the rise of Henry V.
2
0

charliebrownau
5 weeks ago
Gday Blairs Solo Sunday Stream was really good I hope he continues it each Sunday No Victory without Struggle _________ Regards Charlie b * Email – charliebrownau@protonmail.com * Videos – https://poast.tv/c/charliebrownau/videos * Telegram – t.me/s/Charliebrownau
2
0

DJTriumph
Supporter
5 weeks ago
Blair watch Mr Inbetween, its a great Australian series
4
0

› Show 1 reply
WhiteBitchTripleSix
Supporter+
5 weeks ago
I prefer to fidget while learning as well. Especially when I had to sit in a class for 8 hours a day..
3
0

CovenantSolidier
Supporter
5 weeks ago
Hail from Montana brother
9
0

FellowComrade
Supporter+
5 weeks ago
I love how Blair is so measured in his perspective. He has seen shit and created things. Been through a lot, but still comes across as a good guy who has his mind in the right place. Gotta appreciate anyone who can handle the world coming down on them and retain the twinkle in their eye.
11
0

DJTriumph
Supporter
5 weeks ago
I genuinely sense a sadness in you Blair like you really miss your friends when they’re locked up, as a man you wanna be surrounded by your mates building something positive
5
0

TraskJackson
5 weeks ago
Heck-yeah. Glad to be here.
9
0

Cardiff4
Verified
5 weeks ago
Great Talk Blair. I empathize with your frustration of technology, it gets to me sometimes as well. Your mic/sound and video quality were really good. For a minute I thought you were in a jail cell…. solid white walls. haha. Glad your not. Cheers Mate. Looking forward to hearing from you again. FREE JOEL….. Helly Hansen
13
0

GreenGladeAryan
5 weeks ago
The Iron Claw 2023
1
0

Ethereal1562
5 weeks ago
Good to see you Blair. You mentioned the rapid development of technology after you got out of prison, and WW2 etc. You might find Diana Pasulka’s research on ‘human satellites’ and NASA’s secret programs, where they receive ‘downloads’ of information, interesting. Sounds schizo, but she is a legit professor and researcher.
2
0

TheShowgun
VerifiedSupporter++
5 weeks ago
Fuck i didn’t know you were streaming!! If you do this regularly I’ll definitely be here and donating my guy. I’ll pay attention to telegram for noti’s from now on. o/
15
0

AngloSaxon88
5 weeks ago
Even here in Scandinavia Blair and Joel are missed. It’s great to hear from you Blair!
30
0

Greatsouthern
5 weeks ago
Is anyone else being asked to “verify” their rumble account?
2
0

› Show 2 replies
Greatsouthern
5 weeks ago
Great to hear from you Blair.
33
0

› Show 2 replies
LachlanMD
5 weeks ago
Heil
14
0

==========================

See Also

top

 

 

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Joel Davis: We are live. It is 27th July, 2025. Another episode of the show this evening and there’s a lot to cover. Not because Australian politics, or world politics for that matter, has had a particularly interesting week. It’s actually been a relatively dead week, I would say, in both Australian and international politics by the standards of this year.

 

But it’s been a rather eventful week for us personally. And so like we are the news! Like that’s the lucky thing about this show is that because a lot of drama, political drama embroils us so often, even on a slow news week, it can be still be a good show.

 

So yeah, I’m here with Tom. Tom’s back on the show, regular guest again now that he’s off the non-Association and obviously Blair. And before we get into it, how are you boys feeling this evening? We’re going to talk about the fact that three different police agencies raided both of you guys on which day was it? Wednesday? Wednesday morning.

 

But before we get into that, how you guys feeling?

 

Thomas Sewell: Blair?

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, I’m feeling fine. I had to work some overtime last couple of days to make up for the days that I lost this week, so I’m feeling the fatigue.

 

Other than that, fine. How about you, Mr. Sewell? How’s the week been for you?

 

02 Tom’s Door Kicked in by Police

top

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, well, I gotta replace my door. That sucks!

 

But yeah, it’s just pretty usual state harassment, isn’t it? They kick doors in now and they don’t even charge you with a crime, either of us. Neither of us were charged with anything, so that’s fascinating!

 

Blair Cottrell: Are they gonna fix your door?

 

Thomas Sewell: It’s like they said:

 

“It’s a grey area of the law.”

 

I’ve got it on recording them saying that:

 

“Yeah, they’re kind of responsible, but just send us a Bill for the door.”

 

So it’s pretty fascinating!

 

Blair Cottrell: Right, you’ll have to do all the work to quote the new door and tell them how much it’s going to cost and source the trade.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, they said:

 

“Yeah, fix the door, send us the Bill and we might pay it. It’s a grey area.”

 

So it’s probably based off how strongly worded the lawyer’s letter is.

 

03 Blair’s Home Raided by Police

top

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, well they sent the real coppers to my house and I suppose you got the real coppers too, meaning the Aussies, the blokes who are relatively fit, kind of guys who aren’t easy to overpower.

 

So there was at least a dozen people in my house. They sat me down in my lounge room for about five and a half hours.

 

To be honest, it was all very boring. I just had to sit there while they tried to ask me questions the entire time. Forensics teams taking photos of everything in my house. Like a murder investigation! You ever watch one of those crime shows like Law and Order in Australia. People with forensics on the backs of their jackets, gloves, they were like, Post It noting each room and every item of interest they found. They took photos of Australia Day flyers, anything even remotely Right-wing. Some newsletters that I brought back from England after my visit to England, they photographed those. Keenly interested in those, they were.

 

04 Blair Accused of Doing a Nazi Salute at a University in Perth

top

 

And they seem to believe I’ve flown over to Perth, visited a university where a friend of ours used to go, a friend of mine used to go. He wanted to show us the architecture. They think that while I was there, I did a Nazi salute. Not just a Nazi salute, but my left hand was., … This is what they claim, that I put my left finger under my nose and extended my other arm out like a John Cleese style, you know, Hitler impersonation, a satirical Hitler impersonation. And I did it perhaps in full view of a Muslim woman in a burqa. It’s a sensationalist story that’s kind of ridiculous on the surface, but it seemed believable to Western Australia police. Believable enough for them to expend all the resources coming over here and taking all my stuff or taking my phone and photographing my whole house and asking me about it.

 

Someone hopes that I did it! Some government bureaucrat or series of government bureaucrats seems to hope that I did it. I don’t know where they got the notion that I did that. I didn’t even do those Nazi salutes when they were legal. It’s just never been my style.

 

So I would have thought I was the most unlikely candidate for a raid on the pretext of a Nazi salute.

 

But it’s just funny how things work out sometimes, I suppose.

 

But look, the way I see it is, I just don’t know what they’re up to. I don’t know what they really are up to. They could be up to something else, I don’t know. But time will tell, I guess.

 

05 Speculation on Police Motivation

top

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, I mean, on its face because naturally one would have to be kind of concerned about this. Like it wasn’t your average raid.

 

I mean, three different agencies like WA Police, Victoria Police and the Federal Police, all coordinating. How often does the Western Australian police conduct raids in Eastern states?

 

I mean, this is a pretty exceptional circumstance!

 

But I think it can probably be chalked up to the fact that if someone misreports you doing a Nazi salute because they’ve invented it in their mind or they’re just maliciously making up lies, there really is no bureaucratic mechanism for anyone to be realistic within like the contemporary police force of any state in Australia because it’s become so politically correct and it’s gutted everyone rational with red blood in their veins who isn’t just a yes man at this point.

 

[05:52]

 

And so if someone comes along and says:

 

“The evil Nazi did bad thing, illegal thing X!”

 

Who’s going to pull them up on it and say:

 

“Wait a second! Is this true? Does this check out?”

 

I think they would have to go along with it so they don’t be seen to be themselves a Nazi sympathizer or whatever. Right. So I could see how the kind of bad bureaucratic hubris could, …

 

Blair Cottrell: Maybe the Federal police in Western Australia just don’t have as much intelligence on me as an individual. That’s how I tried to understand it. Maybe they just have this paperwork that says:

 

“Blair Cottrell, Nazi fascist!”

 

And then they heard the accusation he’d done a Nazi salute in a university. They thought:

 

“Yeah, he probably did do it. Let’s go and ask him. Right, let’s go raid him!”

 

Something like that. Maybe, I don’t know. Like you said at the start of the stream, I haven’t been charged with anything, so I don’t really know.

 

06 Police Lie About Blair’s Phone

top

 

The only thing I’m concerned about is they were very keen on taking my phone with them and they told me that I had the right to go with them to supervise whatever they’re doing with my phone, some data extraction process or something like that. And initially I said:

 

“Well, yeah, I’ll go with you, I’ll supervise that.”

 

Because I’m not doing anything else. I can’t even go to work without my phone, so I might as well go supervise the process.

 

But when I said that, they got really sketchy. They looked at each other and they started to tell me:

 

“No, no, no one ever does that it takes forever. We have to book a room and there’s all this paperwork to fill out. It’s easier if you just let us take it back to the station and do it. We can get it back to you sooner if you let us do that.”

 

I said:

 

“Well, how soon?”

 

They said:

 

“Probably tomorrow morning. Usually it takes about a day.”

 

I said:

 

“All right, well, that sounds good. I’ll be able to get my phone back tomorrow.”

 

Then they said:

 

“Yeah, yeah!”

 

And they never came back. So they lied to me, but they lied to me in order to get me to waive my right to go with the phone. And I’m a bit concerned about why they would want to do that. I’m thinking:

 

“Well, what else are they lying about if they’ve lied about that?”

 

But I don’t know what to think.

 

07 Blair’s First Time to Be Raided for Political Activism

top

 

It’s strange, the first time I’ve been raided or had my house searched for anything in the realm of politics. I’ve been doing political activism, public speaking, for, what, 10 years now? Maybe more than 10 years. I’ve had some time off in that 10 years, but I’ve been at it pretty consistently. I’ve had the police come to my door to ask me questions about things, but they’ve never burst into my house. Certainly not Federal Police and Counterterrorism Agency or whatever they’re called. Never had them come into my house and search me like that and take stuff from me. So that’s all very new.

 

But, yeah, like, it’s just weird! I think maybe it’s just because there’s all this new resource being dedicated to “anti-semitic task force”, and there’s probably all these new coppers on the payroll and they’re all. They’ve got to produce something, they’ve got to do something to justify the money that they’re being paid. Right?

 

So that’s probably got something to do with it.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, absolutely!

 

08 Fear of Blair’s Potential as a Political Candidate

top

 

Joel Davis: How do you feel? I think maybe one of the objectives was to spook you out, get under your skin, because I think they’re afraid of your potential as a political leader and a political candidate for our prospective political party. And they know that Cottrell will get votes. They know Cottrell can produce followers, can appeal to the people. And they’re afraid because look at the garbage that is in Parliament at this point. I mean, it’s just a bunch of feminists in pantsuits, and immigrants, nerds, homosexuals, paedophiles!

 

I mean, they’re not sending their best. So a real Aussie battler like you comes along that people can relate to, who is going to stand up for the people against the establishment. I can see why they’d be afraid.

 

And to me, that probably explains a lot of this as well. A lot of the reason why they’re so heavy handed with us in general, whether it be with Tom, you, me, Hersant, everyone else in the organisation and other people in the nationalist movement, broadly, because they’re petrified of if we were able to get any momentum and we were able to have confidence to build a political movement that could challenge them. They’re terrified of what could be possible with the political movement like that.

 

And also they probably have successfully spooked a lot of people out of the movement over the years. I think we’re made of sterner stuff, but do you think there’s something to that?

 

09 Blair’s Been Deleted off All Social Media Since 2017

top

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah. And look, I’ve been deleted off all social media. I’m still censored to the same degree that I was back in 2017, now. I’ve lost bank accounts and I’ve had bank accounts closed down while I was trying to pay lawyers to defend me against a hate speech charge back when. I think that was like 2017, 2018. I’m no stranger to bias, unfair treatment, pressure, harassment from some element of government. I’m not even sure who’s responsible for it. I just know that I’m on a list of some sort. A list that affords me no rights and no dignity! Even though I’m an Australian citizen, I don’t get any rights or dignity or any specific freedoms that matter.

 

No one really does in this so-called democracy. But some people get to at least be comfortable with the illusion that they have these things. But I don’t get the illusion. So I’m kind of used to it.

 

I’ve always sort of operated on the basis that I could be rated any moment. Like I’m a dissident and so I don’t do anything illegal anyway, so I don’t know what they hope to gain out of it. Like I said, I don’t really know what they’re up to. It seems like they really do think I did that Nazi salute or they hoped that I did it. And just as a result of failed intelligence, they actually believe that I may have done it. So they’ll do their investigation. They won’t find any evidence and I’m not sure what’ll happen next.

 

[11:49]

 

10 Speculation Re Preventing Blair from Running for Office

top

 

Joel Davis: Of course there’s a carrot there too, because now the changes they made earlier this year to the federal legislation, if they charged you under the Commonwealth act and got a conviction, which they won’t because you didn’t do it, but let’s say for argument’s sake, you did, that’s minimum one year jail.

 

And so they’re probably thinking:

 

“Oh, well, if we can slap that on him, we can basically have him in prison and therefore not campaigning to run for office.”

 

And if you get convicted of a crime, you can’t run for office until you’ve finished your punishment in Australia.

 

Blair Cottrell: But just for the record, I never confirmed that I was planning to run for office or anything like that.

 

Joel Davis: Of course.

 

Blair Cottrell: And I would be surprised if this is some sort of like, pre-emptive conspiracy to stop me doing that in the future. Because the party you guys are making isn’t even registered yet.

 

11 Targeted Harassment and Lawfare Likely to Ramp Up

top

 

Joel Davis: Of course, but I think that’s factored into their thinking, I think, because I hear you see them talk about it a lot in the media and it’s a lot of what they try to ask about, whenever we’ve engaged or we haven’t engaged intentionally with the authorities, when the authorities have arrested us or harassed us in the time since we made it known that it was our intention, they always bring it up.

 

So I think that probably does. If you were going to comport any kind of strategic rationale, I think that’s part of it is targeted harassment and lawfare, basically. And that’s what’s probably going to happen as we move forward. The lawfare is going to ramp up. We’ve got to be very careful with our tax returns. We’ve got to be very careful with everything because they’re going to scrutinise everything and if we make one slip up, we’ll probably get punished. So!

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, the thing, I was never actually like, solidly planning to run for office or be a statesman, you know what I mean? I’ve never really put it out there that I was planning to do that. So like I said, I would be surprised if that’s the motivation. But, hey, who knows? Who knows?

 

12 Tom Raided Because He Allegedly Videoed Blair’s Alleged Crime

top

 

Joel Davis: Well, yeah, how do you see it, Tom? Because, I mean, you got raided as well, they took your phone as well, just because allegedly you took the photos.

 

Do you reckon maybe that was part of they kind of massaged that situation to get a chance to get your stuff.

 

Blair Cottrell: Took what? Hang on, what photos did Tom take?

 

Joel Davis: Well, they alleged that he took a photo.

 

Thomas Sewell: That’s what the police said when they came to my house.

 

Thomas Sewell: I said:

 

“What are you doing here?”

 

More or less after they kicked my door in and threatened a pepper spray me. They said that:

 

“They were here because they’ve got a warrant from a judge in WA saying that I potentially have evidence of you committing a crime.”

 

And they gave me a copy of the search warrant and on it had a whole number of clauses. And then it said clause three, which I think was uploaded by The Noticer, or maybe one of the others, maybe XYZ, someone uploaded or maybe you did. And it said that you’ve committed, they’re alleging that you have committed:

 

“An indictable offence against the Commonwealth, against the federal version of the law.”

 

And so they said because they’re alleging you’ve committed a crime. Part of their evidence is that I, they’re alleging that I videoed it. They didn’t say the details that you have said on stream. They didn’t mention the mustache hands, the John Cleese thing, the seven second hold. They didn’t mention the Muslim woman. They just said they had evidence. And so yeah, I, obviously I didn’t do an interview with them, I didn’t do a statement. I didn’t even say “no comment”. Normally I say “no comment”. But whenever they asked me a question I just said nothing.

 

13 Tom’s House Searched for 8 Hours

top

 

But then yeah, they were just talking random shit! While they were searching through my house for eight hours, they managed to find all the old like phones and electronics that got given back to me from the previous raid. So it’s funny that electronics, my old phones and old USBs are all just on this like infinite cycle getting captured by ZOG [Zionist Occupied Government]! So they took like a couple phones, a couple USBs the first time.

 

So then I had to buy a new phone and get new USBs. And then they took that the second time and then I got the first stuff back. And then when I got raided the third time they took two lots and then I got more stuff back and then I kept losing phones and hard drives. And so I built up over the years like 15 phones and like 20 USBs. And they just took like a whole bunch of old shit and they just tried to download everything off all the old stuff. And I was just like:

 

“Cool, it’s just going back in the rotation!”

 

[16:44]

 

14 Police Unable to Operate a Standard Trademan’s Ladder

top

 

Yeah, they couldn’t operate a ladder. They asked me, to borrow my ladder and I just laughed at them. And then they tried to use my ladder to get into my roof cavity. They wanted to like search the roof. And they couldn’t open the ladder. And I was just so embarrassed by the fact that they couldn’t open my ladder that I just walked over and opened it for them and I just said:

 

“Not a tradesman amongst you! Not an Aussie battler amongst you. Like, look at these nerds. They can’t even open a ladder!”

 

Every bloke on a work site has that exact ladder. It’s not like some sort of fancy, unique ladder. Everyone knows how to open those ladders. And, yeah, so I actually, I did. I shouldn’t have done that. Maybe I was a bit too compliant. But I opened the ladder as a matter of principle so they could search the roof cavity.

 

15 Police Find Tom’s Pants in Roof Space!

top

 

And then they found a pair of my pants. And then they were like, they made a big deal out of the pants. They were like:

 

“We’ve got the pants!”

 

And they, like pulled it [out]. Then four people, …

 

Blair Cottrell: They were the pants that you were wearing when you took a photo?

 

Thomas Sewell: That’s what they’re alleging. Yeah. They’re alleging that they found the pants that I was wearing on CCTV, when I allegedly was, … Well, they didn’t even allege that they have CCTV of you doing it. They said that they had CCTV of us at the university, of you and I.

 

Blair Cottrell: And a still image of that?

 

Thomas Sewell: And I was like:

 

“Do you have any CCTV of Blair committing a crime?”

 

And they refused to answer that question. They just didn’t know, …

 

Blair Cottrell: I asked them that as well and they said:

 

“They didn’t have it with them.”

 

And I thought:

 

“Yeah, why didn’t you bring it with you?”

 

16 Muslim Woman at the Uni Called Police

top

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, they’re full of shit! Otherwise they would have charged you. So it’s just a fishing operation. It’s just an attempt to disrupt the organisation, disrupt our morale. And, yeah, it’s a form of swatting. I think that’s what I said. This is a hoax and that it’s a form of swatting where you can just be a brown woman on the other side of the country and you can just make accusations.

 

Because my theory is that there was actually a Muslim woman. I don’t recall that. I don’t remember it. But my theory is that there was and that she’s recognised you and I walking through the uni and she’s made up this story just to be like:

 

“Fuck you!”

 

The last time we were here, we did an anti-Islam rally like 10 years ago, and I reckon she’s recognised us. She would have been some university Palestinian Lefty, and she’s just made up this nonsense to just see what would happen.

 

And I just hope that you know that there’s serious repercussions for these kind of false accusations.

 

17 Police Claim That the Muslim Woman was Fully Clad in a Burqa

top

 

Blair Cottrell: They said to the Muslim woman who was in the vicinity of where I was standing when I allegedly did this Nazi salute for seven seconds they said she was fully clad in a burqa, so only her eyes were visible. I thought:

 

“Aren’t women like that not even allowed to leave the house?”

 

They don’t even go out of the house without the husbands. What’s she doing at University of Western Australia in the middle of the day?

 

And I thought, I think I would have remembered if one of those walked past us. But I’ve got no memory of it. So that’s why I said it’s just a weird story. It’s a bizarre story! It’s like someone made it up and they were laughing about it while they made it up.

 

18 The Magistrate’s Name and Signature Were Redacted from the Search Warrant Shown

top

 

Thomas Sewell: Either the police are lying or there’s been a false allegation made by a political opponent. Either way, it’s disgusting! Either way, it’s disgusting that the police can come to your house on false allegations. That a judge would sign off on that when there’s no evidence. There’s no evidence!

 

Blair Cottrell: I couldn’t even see the judge’s signature. The judge’s name and signature were redacted.

 

Thomas Sewell: That was on the same as my search warrant as well. The judge’s name was not there. So I wonder if they even got a judge. But that form was meant to be signed by a magistrate.

 

Blair Cottrell: When they show you a document that’s meant to justify their access into your home to investigate a crime, that document is supposed to be signed by a magistrate. Right? And you’re supposed to be able to see that. But they said:

 

“For the safety of the magistrate, his name was redacted, his signature was redacted.”

 

There was just a big black rectangle over where his name and signature were. I’m thinking, wouldn’t that make the document illegitimate? [chuckling] Am I supposed to be able to see that a magistrate has legitimately signed this?

 

But yeah, that’s another interesting aspect of the whole ordeal.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, well, we’ll certainly take that up with the lawyers because fundamentally, it’s not signed. How can we prove that the police had any right to enter our homes in the first place?

 

Blair Cottrell: They claim that they did have the signed copy on them, but they could only show me the one where the judge’s name was redacted, but they had the signed copy. And I just had to trust them.

 

Thomas Sewell: That’s crazy! We can’t do, like secret search warrants. They’re just taking the piss.

 

Blair Cottrell: Especially because I’ve never threatened anyone.

 

[21:16]

 

 

[Remainder of Transcript in Progress]

 

 

[1:57:58]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

============================================

 

Odysee Comments

top

(Comments as of 8/3/2025 = 85)

HyperChat minimum:
$0.01

@auamoti
6 days ago
adam green is right about christianity

20
5
Hide replies
Lampshade Denier
6 days ago
Sure, but he’s a nigger lover.

5
12
Teutonic Truth
6 days ago
TheHolyNewTestament Word infuriates SatanicJeews more than anything else does, and there is nothing anyone can do about it. This isn’t rocket science.

3
7
King Tut
5 days ago
i agree, but I got banned from his channel for saying i don’t follow killstream bcuz the leader is a race mixer. he bans half his followers, including his regular donors who later come and give him superchats asking him to unban them. the way he acts, i can see why so many people say he’s a fed. fuck him!

alexdauginas
6 days ago
Im a pagan but i defends Christians because they are a target of jewish hatred

9
0
WhiteLightWhiteHeat
6 days ago
Wow! Doing a Roman with your finger under your nose is enough for a full police ride including destroying your front door? That’s completed sanity. Three different police agencies? Police this needs to be international news for every white person to understand how hated we are by government. It has to stop.

8
0
Thorne91
5 days ago
Maybe this can help. Verses to deconstruct kíke worship in modern Christians.
John
8:44
Jesus calls Jews liars, murderers, and the children of the devil
Matthew
27:25
Jews demand Pilate crucify Jesus, and say “his blood be on US and OUR children!”
1 Thessalonians
2:14
-16
Blatantly says Jews are responsible for murdering Christ
Acts chapter 7, Stephen the martyr criticizing Jews and being stoned for it
Revelation 2:9 & 3:9 (my personal favorites)
Jesus HIMSELF calling Jews the synagogue of Satan – which is exactly the same group of kikes pulling the strings today.
There are many many more. These are just some of the prominent ones. Use these to show Christians this judeo-bullshit does NOT belong in our Church
Less

6
0
Hide replies
Thorne91
5 days ago
Regardless what flavor of Christianity someone belongs to, these are solid scriptural verses attacking Jews right from the text of the KJV and nobody can deny it. Jews are the absolute enemy of Christianity. They’ve just subverted the church, the same way they subverted Hollywood, media, politics, medicine/pharma, food industry, pornography, every fucking thing we ever had they subvert. They did the church the same way. But the Bible itself refutes this, it takes bare-minimum research and it’s super easy to show judeo-Christians why they are wrong. Super easy. It’s right there for anyone to see.

3
0

@SpyroTheFascistDragon
6 days ago
Jewry in England by Peter Aldag

5
0

@SpyroTheFascistDragon
6 days ago
why are you still trying to interface with the anti-Islam movement? it is an entirely a Jewish diversion

5
0

@DarthGreenslade
6 days ago
Love you guys from london

6
0
Teutonic Truth
6 days ago
More than enough Abiding Christians know the Truth about SatanicJeews.

5
0

@david_smith
6 days ago
Rule 1 no poofters

4
0

@Jim
5 days ago
True, “Aussie Cossack” is not Russian, he isn’t White but Asian Mongol and kgb agent. There are no cossacks in the USSR/Russian Federation after 1945. They seems got another dumb non-White, some fat mongrel with a nigger wife for their channel, same as “Aussie Cossack” promoting Caucasus Asians, race traitors and anti-Whiteness

3
0
alexdauginas
6 days ago
anti islam movements are a cucking to the real struggle against jewish power which is responsible for all the problems we face

3
0
Hide replies

@Odeon3008
6 days ago
Those who haven’t moved on from the anti Islam counter jihad movement are either part of the establishment or they are not very bright or inquisitive.
Counter Jihad = Zionism

4
1
Hide replies
(((THEY))) want you enslaved, after that, DEAD!
5 days ago
Tell that to 1.5 million young white girls in the UK who have been raped, the jews have always used islam against the whites, now it’s full on, in every whites countires The broom of israel” . They are directing us against islam, the jews, but we both need to foucus on JEWS and ISLAM, nothing good comes from both.

2
0
Hide replies

@Odeon3008
5 days ago
I agree 100% the problem is the Tommy Robinson and Pat Condell types go on and on endlessly about the Islam issue and just have the Brits going endlessly in a duck duck goose game.
If we didn’t have counter jihad controlled opposition it could make the conflict slightly less difficult for us.
Counter Jihad is just endless complaining without getting us anywhere.

1
0
Hide replies
(((THEY))) want you enslaved, after that, DEAD!
5 days ago
Yup my brother, i get you…… Yet tommy ten names is even mentioning the jews now, ever so slighty though, due to everyone awaking to them so he has to gate keep, mate gaurd his followers, to keep them inline….. he’s paid via the jews. always has been, the EDL was a company, you can look into it, it was also another company, the JDL and we both know what that stands for my brother….. Even he knows that the game is up, he has to mention them, then says, well they aint the main players, my asss they’re not lol

ChainReaction
6 days ago
More

3
0
M88
6 days ago

@DawnBrowning
nick is a subversive jew lover.

3
0
Teutonic Truth
6 days ago
“Eminem’s very heartbeat is Noise Pollution.

3
0
Lampshade Denier
6 days ago
Nick sounds like a christ cuck faggot!

3
3
Dawn Browning
6 days ago

1
0
Teutonic Truth
6 days ago
Behold the absurdity of being censored by SatanicJeews.

2
0
M88
6 days ago
nick is a spiritual race traitor….

1
0
Dawn Browning
6 days ago
Pete Quinones’ reading & commentary of author: Israel Shahak’s “Jewish History, Jewish Religion” is eye opening.

2
0

@SpyroTheFascistDragon
6 days ago
it is well within the natsoc tradition to work with Arabs

4
2
Hide replies

@Ainïsse
5 days ago
for mutual goals, in our own regions, but the ‘enemy of my enemy dies second’ as they say. I would expect no semite to say “pray for Europe and her disparate Kindreds’.

1
0
Teutonic Truth
6 days ago
The Apostate church along with Everything else is accurately predicted in TheHolyNewTestament Word.

2
0
alexdauginas
6 days ago
Michael Jones books on jews and Christianity is a testament of how Christianity has failed to solve the Jewish question

2
0
Dawn Browning
6 days ago
Schofield Bible interpretation is the recent menace

2
0
Teutonic Truth
6 days ago
He’s Not a Cossack like Martin Luther was Not a low IQ black Communist.

2
0
Teutonic Truth
6 days ago
TheHolyNewTestament Word infuriates SatanicJeews more than anything else does, and there is nothing anyone can do about it. This isn’t rocket science.

2
0
Alice1488
3 days ago
White Unity never ever allie with nons! They want your land and your wife, never trust .

1
0
Lampshade Denier
6 days ago
Love you Aussies! Wish we had real men here in the US.

0
1
Hide replies

@Ainïsse
5 days ago
Not looking around enough, my dude. P.Front is the real deal, RTTL and Aarvoll are the real deal. NatVan is the real deal, RenegadeTribune = real deal. Volkish, also, the real deal.

Hide replies
Lampshade Denier
4 days ago(edited)
PF is more low key, however, I value what they do. As a woman, I want to see manly men and those are the Aussies. And Aarvoll is religious and that is a huge problem. I respect his work but christianity is a jew psyop and needs to die.

@RobertE.Pyle
6 days ago
HIT THAT FIRE EVERYONE

1
0
M88
6 days ago
nick is a jews bitch

1
0

@SpyroTheFascistDragon
6 days ago
yep, I’ve been reading it too, it is a treasure trove

1
0
alexdauginas
6 days ago
warstrike has been going though that lately

@SpyroTheFascistDragon

1
0

@SpyroTheFascistDragon
6 days ago
a must read

1
0
M88
6 days ago
Joel is 100% correct

3
2
M88
6 days ago
nick is surrounded by jews

1
0
Dawn Browning
6 days ago
Nick’s awesome. Purity spiral later?

0
1
alexdauginas
6 days ago
Blair has always been the best expression of Australian white expression in this era

1
0

@SpyroTheFascistDragon
6 days ago
Free Palestine

5
4
alexdauginas
6 days ago
avi yemini is a jew?

1
0

@DarthGreenslade
6 days ago
o/

1
0

@katana17
6 days ago
[Joel Davis – Zionist (Paedophile) Occupied Government – Jul 17, 2025 – Transcript]

Joel Davis – Zionist (Paedophile) Occupied Government – Jul 17, 2025 – Transcript

1
0
alexdauginas
6 days ago
I tried to sign up. Didn’t end well for anyone it seems.

alexdauginas
6 days ago
N 88

M88
6 days ago
to think nick made a mistake by removing the boys is naive at best

Dawn Browning
6 days ago
disappointing, Nick.

Dawn Browning
6 days ago

@kong
Aye

alexdauginas
6 days ago
Do you support Hamas killing jews Joel?

Dawn Browning
6 days ago
Woodsie followed my main & pinned my tweets in his early days….He knows the score. He’s playing Sargon, is all. Don’t discount him, yet.

M88
6 days ago
\o

alexdauginas
6 days ago
I know Tom is a strong Hitler supporter. Just wanted to know what their take was. I cant superchat sadly.

Dawn Browning
6 days ago
Drew would be awesome. I liked him when he was still at uni. WTF happened with him?

Cone of Silence
6 days ago
Devon Stack’s latest is sobering

1
1
alexdauginas
6 days ago
Brown people are not a threat really. The problem is white people lacking racial consciousness

1
3
Windham
3 days ago
weird, always political drama with wn ecelebs. internet drama? maybe you are a woman.

@EihwazUllrman
4 days ago
China has become a National Socialist State despite their claims to be Communist. This is why the Jewish Empire fear them. Why are you guys hostile to China? A remigration policy implemented in a fair and reasonable way, need not lead to poor foreign relations.

InReality
4 days ago
Blair? You okay buddy?

@Jim
6 days ago
Why be surprised they preemptively attacked you? In Russia they cut short Maxim “Tesak” Martsinkevich at a much earlier stage.

Cone of Silence
6 days ago
isn’t Kossack the muscle for that subversive Jew Yemeni ?

@tubeyou
6 days ago
it pays the bill best reason to go for a job.

Dawn Browning
6 days ago
We’d already decided tbh, but the affirmation was welcome.

Dawn Browning
6 days ago
8 fkn months going $ backwards. Thanks Blair

@david_smith
6 days ago

@alexdauginas
Probably, didn’t read it

alexdauginas
6 days ago
Do you disagree with Keith Woods article on Adolf Hitler?

MarcoEire
6 days ago
like they are streaming to 40 people and nobody afterwards can watch it

MarcoEire
6 days ago
Afternoon men. Why do they not post the replays anymore?

alexdauginas
6 days ago
Tom stole my moustache lmao

@david_smith
6 days ago
Non mongrel

@david_smith
6 days ago
Ping pong ding lo

@david_smith
6 days ago
Blair still has both of his guns

@david_smith
6 days ago
How would you feel if you didn’t have a loan with interest?

elfoffgazza
6 days ago
Fuck KOG

danzimmons
6 days ago
fuck zog

Dawn Browning
6 days ago
That WA uni states that they have 24/7 security with full-on CCTV.

Dawn Browning
6 days ago
It’s pathetic of the police.

@ItWasMadeUp
6 days ago
Gents o/

0
0

=========================

RUMBLE COMMENTS

43 Comments
0/2000
Comment
Jak_85
Supporter
6 days ago
I love White Christians, but damn they are subverted beyond belief.
14 likes

Report
‹ Hide 1 reply
Motion937
5 days ago
It has become ridiculous. This is why I cannot take endless denominations seriously. We are not all equally valid.
2 likes

Report
Bumble_Bee
6 days ago
I’m Christian Identitarian…. and my belief is that the majority of Zio-Christians are deceived because of the jewish falsification of the Christian message…. The Jews have successfully infiltrated and deceived the Church using cleverly contrived arguments eg: Equating Hebrews with Jews or Equating Israel with Jews or Even Judahites with Jews…. Secondly, no where in the bible does it say that the Jews were “the chosen people”…. the fact is that the Ruddy Red curly haired indo European tribes that became known as the tribe of Jacob became the lost tribes of European nations today…. they became the Gauls and German Tribes and the Pictish Tribes of Europe…. they have no association with “Jews” (except through the line of Esau whom was cut off by God for Race mixing and thus not the Heir to the Promise state in Galatians 3:29)…. Jesus said to the Jews…. “If you were of Abraham you would do as Abraham did” (ie: Your race is also your God, your race Belongs to your God….. ie: Your god was liar and murderer from the beginning…. ie: Jews were the race of the Serpent or “Cain”)
9 likes

Report
‹ Hide 2 replies
Bumble_Bee
6 days ago
The Children of the Devil John 8:44 …43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you are unable to accept My message. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out his desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, refusing to uphold the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, because he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me!…
1 like

Report
Neqis
6 days ago
Can you tell me about some sources where I could read/ learn more about these things? The real bible story and connection to ancient Europeans?
0 likes

Report
‹ Hide 4 replies
albion14
5 days ago
One good source of ancient European links to the Lost tribes can be found at christogenea.org under essays. Another useful site can be found at The Fellowship of God’s Covenant People. There are others but be this should get you started. God bless on your journey.
2 likes

Report
Cossack98
4 days ago
There is no real story. The bible is jewish mythology. It is judaism for gentiles and prepares our people as slaves for the jews worshipping the god of israel and hailing a dead rabbi as a mosciach
1 like

Report
‹ Hide 1 reply
Bumble_Bee
2 days ago
What is “Judaism”?…. can you even make any sense at all?… maybe start with foundational definitions.
0 likes
Report
Bumble_Bee
5 days ago
christogenea.org and Truthvids.net…. if you are truly a beginner and need a some dopamine fix and need some entertainment and your adhd is bad then just watch the “100 proofs” 1 minute shorts…. or the whole 100 proofs video (which is quite long), but if you are quite conscientious… then Christogenea.org has articles which have a audio button you can play.. very thorough and deep…. Lots of rabbit holes you can wonder down and a lot sources and research and speakers…
0 likes

Report
Dissident_Loner
Supporter
6 days ago
Fucking scum traitor police losing legitimacy and earning more hatred everyday. Hope to live to see them going on trial and trying their excuses out…
8 likes

Report
CreateAnArmyToSaveWhites
6 days ago
I love white people, but I just want to say to hell with you and your Christian white areas. Not only does this exclude mostly whites, but it also potentially excludes future atheists from the community. Nothing like kicking out your children in an all-white area or forcing them to live with nonwhites etc., all because they didn’t believe or think the same way as you. Christians have no place in any white advocacy, as they all believe with all their hearts that they will go to heaven someday, where they will live for an eternity with all their fellow whites and nonwhites, because God doesn’t exclude based on race. Nope. God only wants you if you believe. Why are Jews superior spiritually to the white race? Because their religion is entirely about them and their people. Christianity is about anyone that believes. You could alter it, but why share something in common with nonwhites in the first place? Something you knowingly altered but believe is from God at the same time should also create more atheists.
5 likes

Report
‹ Hide 3 replies
Motion937
5 days ago
I am pretty fed up with atheists subverting culture & making everything an unlivable multi-cultural nightmare. Then lecturing White Christians as though we are supposed to listen. You are damn right there will be exclusion.
2 likes

Report
Motown88
Supporter
6 days ago
If you think the Christian God isn’t race exclusionary you’re fucking cooked… try reading the bible before you cast assumptions or make false accusations about what it contains. And I’m not a Christian, I’m an empiricist – I stick to the facts and right now you aren’t representing the full facts.
1 like

Report
Bumble_Bee
5 days ago
Christians not Christianity…. don’t conflate these two things… Secondly Post WW2 Christianity is race cucked… where as the Old Church used to be Kinist…. there were Bishops to the races and the nations…. where race mixing was not allowed because the bible forbade it….
1 like

Report
palacepony
Supporter
6 days ago
These laws are beyond ridiculous. It’s sinister bullying, what’s gone down this week. We used to throw romans and Austrian painter moustaches as piss-takes during lunch & recess. I cannot get my head around the triviality and absurdity of this multi- state ‘TASK FORCE’.
4 likes

Report
Seppl88
4 days ago
NatSoc is the only solution to our problems, it will provide a just and stable society to the benefit of the people. AH understood remove J influence and power and a nation will thrive. The system is on the edge hence all the cop harassment.
4 likes

Report
Proofviewer
5 days ago
When are you cunts going to call out America. It’s all very well and good to waffle on about the Chinese Communist Party but they don’t run their economy like a communist country and our economic relationship with China yields us billions of dollars a year whereas our trade relationship with America costs us billions of dollars a year effectively meaning the profits we make from trading with China is handed over to America. You blokes haven’t said anything about the awful AUKUS submarine deal which will bankrupt and destroy this country. America considers Australia’s resources their domestic resources because we are the 51st state of the union. Our fighter aircraft are designed to only work in conjunction with American warplanes and not on their own. Australia is under American occupation so if you are true patriots call out the American occupation.
3 likes

Report
mharrison52
4 days ago
the struggle is ours our ancestors tried but uk traitor Churchill traded the future of the Anglo race for his business debts to jewish bankers
3 likes

Report
Cossack98
4 days ago
Those Christians arent the fringe. They are normal standard christians. Thats what Christianity is. It turns our people into slaves to serve a jewish empire. Hitler, Lane, Pierce, Rockwell all came to these conclusions. And it was Christians who eventually turned on our movements. They killed Rockwell. The only reason Jews are relevant is because Europeans adopted their faith system. If we stuck to our own native beliefs the jews would either be some backwater tribe or destroyed without mercy as Hadrian did.
2 likes

Report
katana17
6 days ago
[deleted]
1 like

Restore
katana17
6 days ago
[Joel Davis – Zionist (Paedophile) Occupied Government – Jul 17, 2025 – Transcript] https://www.katana17.com/2025/07/24/joel-davis-zionist-paedophile-occupied-government-jul-17-2025-transcript/
1 like

Delete
ParrhesiaTime
Supporter+
6 days ago
Christian nationalism is an oxymoron. Christians believe that after the Jews rebuild their 3rd temple and usher in the “antichrist” (meaning the Jews achieved their goals) after that, the Messiah (Jesus the king of the Jews) will return and rule the world from Zion. all Christians believe in the destruction of the nation states,….. except for Israel. Christianity is philosemetic.
1 like

Report
‹ Hide 3 replies
Motown88
Supporter
6 days ago
“Christians Believe” – Coming from a non Christian that doesn’t hold the weight you seem to think it does
0 likes

Report
albion14
5 days ago
The true oxymoron is when Christian Zionists say that they believe in judeo/christian values. However what most Jews believe in are anti-Christ in nature both the religious and atheistic Jew. I would disagree putting Christian nationalism in the same camp as the Crusades showed that when Christians are pushed eventually you will get a response. As a Christian nationalist myself the Jesus I believe in will be coming back having his garments stained in the blood of the Edomites (Jews) first then moving on to the other tares. At the moment all Western nations are flooded with the hordes of foreign people that come from the Dragons mouth as in Rev 12:15.
0 likes

Report
LutheranFascist
1 day ago
you’re a fucking retard, everything you just said has zero connection to historical Christianity. that’s all dispensationalism which is a modern heresy only showing up in the last 150 years
0 likes

Report
AaronWn
5 days ago
Montages of Indians being hit by trains
1 like

Report
fdgrdfg
5 days ago
God, what happened to Blair’s mic…
1 like

Report
DeadandWell
4 days ago
Blair my man, Christianity is from the middle east. It’s not of white genetics.
1 like

Report
ThigASteach
Supporter
6 days ago
99% of todays “Christians” have very little “knowledge” of what the Holy Bible (The Message) says. IT is very much encoded and takes a real look at language and basic math to interpret. If you are interested and not cowed by the “masses” gibberish, invest some time to learn. Knowledge IS power. #PeaceAndRespect #GodBless Alchemical Christ & The Zodiac as the Key to the Mysteries https://rumble.com/v6whyb2-marty-leeds-alchemical-christ-and-the-zodiac-as-the-key-to-the-mysteries.html
0 likes

Report
cowolf
6 days ago
American Evangelicals, who worship Jews and the state called ‘Israel’ with PM Netanyahu, are in fact pagans. And since they call themselves Christians that’s deception which is in fact Satanic. American Boomers is the worst generation ever, responsible for endless wars, the White Replacement and building the Israeli Empire while failing their own children and country. I am only concerned with the Catholic Church (all the protestant churches went woke beyond repair). The fundamental teaching of the Catholic Church’s is that Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit is ONE GOD, they are consubstantial and form the Holy Trinity. Since neither the Farther nor the Holy Spirit is a Jew then Jesus is not a Jew either. Mary was a virgin and there was an immaculate conception by the Holy Spirit so she was a surrogate in today’s terms. So the Catholic Church is not worshiping ‘a Jew’ (Jesus) or Israel. The new Israel is the Church itself according to the New Covenant. The Jews hate Christianity because it erases their ‘chosen’ status. True Christianity is in fact anti Jewish. In recent decades the Church got infiltrated and ideologically subverted, it has reached the very top of the hierarchy with Mr Bergoglio (the fake pope Francis) as the best example and a fake term ‘judeo-Chritstian’. So the Church doesn’t teach it’s most basic principles anymore, instead it became a tool of the globalists. The Church should serve and protect any local community just as the locally worshiped deity did in the pagan times. It doesn’t and instead it serves globalist agenda (mass immigration, covid tyranny, etc). A religion is the strongest bond you can have, just ask the Jews or Muslims. If you think any return to Thor, Zeus, Odin or whatever pantheon of White gods is realistic, wise and worth it you are delusional. Also building without any religion will not stand the test of time. In practice the official state Christianity have coexisted with popular local pagan traditions and folklore.
0 likes

Report
cowolf
6 days ago
Great discussion about the subverted Christianity from 1:22:53
0 likes

Report
Jak_85
Supporter
6 days ago
That bit about functional narcissism by Joel was too
0 likes

Report
ParrhesiaTime
Supporter+
6 days ago
1:34:00 tom makes claims about Christianity that show he doesn’t comprehend it at all. back to the drawing board mate.
0 likes

Report
Goraxium
6 days ago
Never forget that Australian pigs have the legal right under the “disturb and disrupt” bill to upload incriminating content to your electronic devices. If they didn’t want you there, there’s a damn good chance they’re planting something on the device they will try to use against you at a later date. THEY ARE ALL SCUM.
0 likes

Report
AaronWn
6 days ago
Does Blair mention the name of that book on the Talmud?
0 likes

Report
AaronWn
5 days ago
“A nazi rave” Not sure why I find that so fucking funny
0 likes

Report
Ri0Brav0
5 days ago
It’s afraid.
0 likes

Report
DeadandWell
4 days ago
Blair, dude stop trying to overthink and caveat every little thing. Joel has the better approach, pure expression of will and agenda. Appearing smart is inconsequential.
0 likes

Report
DeadandWell
4 days ago
Deconstruct it correctly? Bro, that is no different than liberal double think. Through it all away. It’s a burden you don’t need.
0 likes

Report
mharrison52
4 days ago
I feel like its shouldn’t be a crime to roman salute.. its infuriating, but you cant make that mistake especially on video
0 likes

Report
SpergNation
4 days ago
Nice to see all the boys together again on the same stream. Much love from Canada.
0 likes

Report
TombOfArminius
Supporter+
6 hours ago
It’s wild that in just 70 years we went from lists of traitors as enemies to the nation to lists of patriots as the enemies.
0 likes

Report
Howsitgoing
VerifiedSupporter
6 days ago
W stream!
-1 like

Report
DaveScribe
5 days ago
I had my car searched & phone taken, illegally by cops just for being in my car in the parking lot of my college. I got charged with trespassing & a felony. This is in the US. I had political flyers put up at my college, & the authorities came knocking at my door. Like you, I was searched & my phone was taken because of a woman’s false accusation. I’m brown, but at the end of the day, the problem seems to be this dishonorable effeminate behavior; not color. Yeah, Muslims are raping your girls while you blame Indians, but really the problem is this bitchmade culture. If you white males actually enforced traditional patriarchy, the W€$T wouldn’t be so cucked.
-1 like

==========================

See Also

top

 

 

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Joel Davis: Okay, we’re live in another episode of the show. It is the 30th of May, 2025.

 

And yeah, it’s been an eventful week. Sorry there was no show last week. Had a lot going on in my personal life, Close family member passed on. Mentally I was a bit all over the place, other things going on. We’re travelling. We were both actually down in Sydney last week and then I was in Adelaide this week and there’s been a lot going on. So there wasn’t a show last week, but it’s a show we’re back to. We’re back to regularly scheduled programming for you here tonight.

 

And yeah, the good news is I no longer have these onerous bail conditions, so there’s no longer any restrictions as to who can come on the show. And Thomas should be back soon, Jacob should be back soon. And yeah, so everything’s kind of going back to normal, business as usual. And there’s a lot to do for the rest of this year, a lot to dissect and break down and this week as well.

 

But before I guess we get into it, I had court yesterday and so did Tom and there were some interesting scenes in Adelaide. We can talk about that.

 

But we can have some small talk first, I guess. So how you feeling, dude? How you been? I saw you last weekend when we were in Sydney. We’re up in Sydney for friends going away. The friend of ours actually was in the Cronulla riots*. He’s a veteran, a veteran of the scene. He’s been around, 20 years in nationalism. He has scars on his body from the Cronulla riots, which is pretty fucking cool!

 

[* The 2005 Cronulla riots were a series of race riots in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. It began in the beachside suburb of Cronulla on 11 December, and spread over to additional suburbs the next few nights. The riots were triggered by an event the previous Sunday, when an altercation turned physical between a group of youths of Middle Eastern appearance and White Australian lifeguards on the beach. Wikipedia]

 

So it was nice to see him off. But yeah. How you doing?

 

Blair Cottrell: Good. That’s right, I spent a couple of days in Sydney over the weekend. Had dinner with a very old friend and supporter of Right-wing activism in Australia. Truly a veteran. That’s the right word to use. He’s moving out of the country. I’m not sure if we’ll ever see him again. So we saw him off, caught up with some of the boys for dinner. And other than that, work, business as usual, as you said. For me, that’s the way it’s been I pulled 250 on a deadlift. I pulled 250 kilos for two reps. Now that’s good for me because the last time I tried to lift heavy, I would only do singles after 240 kilos.

 

So that’s the first like multiple rep set that I’ve done beyond, 2040 kilos, meaning I’m stronger now, potentially stronger than I’ve ever been. This is good news. Good news for a weightlifting competition that I hope to do in a couple of months. So we’ll see how I perform.

 

But I’m pretty keen to get stuck into what was happening outside of Court in Adelaide. I saw the news reports, I thought they were amazingly fair!

 

Joel Davis: I don’t want to get straight into it. I thought we’re going to do some small talk.

 

Blair Cottrell: I do, I do! I’m just going to bring it up because, …

 

Joel Davis: We can cook on it. Sometimes it’s nice when you got a big story to like, let the audience come in a bit and talk a little bit of shit! I was going to talk to you about weightlifting. You kind of set me up there, but now, no.

 

Blair Cottrell: Oh, no, no, we can do that first. We can do that first. What do you want, to ask me about weightlifting, actually? Do you want to ask me anything or just want to talk at me about it? What do you want to do? [chuckling]

 

Joel Davis: Oh, well obviously we’ve got our national meet as an organisation, a winter meet coming up in a few months. You’re not officially a member, but you’re part of the family.

 

And yeah, we won a W for Victoria this year because last year the weightlifting tournament was actually won by a New South Welshman and we used to have Jimeone Roberts as one of our best lifters, but he has shredded down, got off the gear, frankly. Shredded down. I’m sure he’ll do well, but I don’t think he’s going to be topping the scales this year. And Thomas Sewell, who’s a pretty good lifter himself, used to be an Olympic weightlifter, almost went to the Commonwealth Games, back in the day. He’s not really like focusing on lifting too much anymore. I don’t think he’s going to be putting up his best numbers this year.

 

So we kind of need a big performance from Cottrell. In the last two years in a row you’ve injured yourself in the tournament because you didn’t train for. You’re kind of doing your regular training. You weren’t doing your powerlifting training, which was obviously a mistake. But this year you’re doing your powerlifting training.

 

So I’m very interested to see what you can do. I think you won’t get injured this year, that’s my prediction. Because you do your training and you’ll put up some serious numbers and hopefully win!

 

So there’s a lot of pressure. There’s pressure on you this year to bring home the bacon. Should be good.

 

[04:54]

 

Blair Cottrell: That pressure doesn’t get to me. It might get to me. Even last night when I was doing that deadlift that I just spoke about, I was nervous! I was nervous before trying to lift that weight for more than one rep, but I was surprised by how easy it felt. But you have good days like that it’s weird when you’re lifting heavy. Sometimes you just have good days where the weight comes up easily, and other days, even though you did everything the same, you’re just not as strong. And I don’t know why that is. I’ve never been able to work it out. It’s probably got something to do with central nervous system, how recovered it is. I don’t know how much sleep you’ve had, something like that.

 

But where are you at, Joel Davis? Are you feeling strong? How are your numbers looking?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, I’m gonna do. So last year was the first year I ever did powerlifting or really like weightlifting in a serious way in my entire life. Because we do it in the winter, we focus on combat sports in the summer. And combat sports I have some experience with, so I did pretty well in that. But the weightlifting, never done it before. Didn’t know how well I do. And I thought I put up some pretty good numbers considering it was my first year last year.

 

And this year I’m already getting pretty close to my absolute peak where I got to last year. But we’re like a few months out, so I’m confident I’m going to smash all my top scores from last year. I’m already kind of catching up to them. I’m on the precipice of them. So hoping my eye. These are my absolute goals. We’ll see if I can reach them. They are ambitious. I would like to get a 220 kilo deadlift, which is five plates. I don’t know if I can make it. I think I can get over 200 this year, but 220, that’s my ideal. If I can hit 220 at nationals, I’ll be ecstatic!

 

And when I get my bench press well over 120 kilos, I think I’m well on my way to achieving that.

 

Blair Cottrell: I’ve seen you bench and I think you’ll get 120.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. Last year I got 115, and I reckon, who knows, maybe I could even get up to 125. I’m feeling really good, but we’ll see. But I want to get into the 120s. If I can get those two scores, I’ll be stoked, absolutely stoked! You’re aiming to maybe get like 270 on your deadlift, right? That’s what you’re probably looking at, like a 270 dead. Or do you think you can go even higher?

 

Blair Cottrell: Man, I don’t really want to call any numbers right now because it all depends on how the next couple of months leading up to the competition pan out, whether I survive the warm ups. I’m gonna be fine though. I just have to not get injured. If I don’t get injured, I’m confident that I can bring it home. But I’m at that point where I’m strong, my muscles are strong, but my connective tissue, I’m not sure what it can take. And that’s kind of freaky because when you get to that point, if something is going to break a tendon, it’s just going to happen. You’re not going to feel it. It’s like there’s going to be no real warning. Just bang! When you’re trying to lift heavy, a tendon just snaps off the bone because the muscles are strong, the connective tissue isn’t as strong. That’s what happens.

 

But that’s not what’s going to happen this time. I’ve got to like brainwash that out of my mind. I’ve got to not think about that because I’ll manifest it! You know how people think that if they keep having the same thoughts that the universe will manifest that reality for them. I got to not think about it because then it’ll happen. [chuckling] That’s what I’m worried about.

 

But you, I reckon if you pull the numbers that you just listed off, you could be looking at a third place. I reckon that’s a comfortable third place. Maybe.

 

Joel Davis: I don’t know. There’s some big units in the Org. I don’t know if I’d be coming third, but I think I could get a respectable position. I get a respectable Ranking in the Ranking.

 

But yeah, there’s some boys that pull some heavy weights in the Org. I don’t think I’ll be getting third.

 

Blair Cottrell: Question for you, how do you go with losing? Are you comfortable with losing? Do you get a bit irritated? Are you competitive?

 

Joel Davis: Well, it’s all relative, right? So, like this, for example, weightlifting is new to me. So if I don’t win this weightlifting competition, I’m not going to be seething, particularly when there’s a lot of boys that are juice, and I don’t do that. And it’s my second year of doing it. I’m not expecting to waltz in and just smash everyone, right?

 

But if it’s something that I feel that I should, that’s like, based on my experience and my competency and so on, that I should be succeeding, if I don’t succeed, then I’m pissed, you know. So it’s all relative. Like, I’m sure you feel like that with weightlifting. Like you feel you got, because this is kind of your domain somewhat. You put the pressure on yourself.

 

But in another area where you don’t have much experience, if you had to go at something, you wouldn’t expect to be the best guy in the world at it immediately. That’s just unrealistic.

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, obviously.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah.

 

[09:43]

 

Blair Cottrell: I expect a lot of myself and others probably do too, in this particular field. So I don’t want to let myself down and I don’t want to let others down. So I feel the pressure, but it’s going to be fun! I’m looking forward to it. The nerves get to me a little bit thinking about the day.

 

And it’s funny because everything that I’ve experienced in life, I don’t want to go through it all. It’s just like being with a group of friends and trying to see who’s the strongest. It probably still makes me more nervous than anything else. I don’t know why that is, I think, I just hate losing so much, generally speaking, that that’s what rattles me a little bit about the whole process. But it excites me as much as it rattles me. When I think about the day, I can’t get the smile off my face.

 

So I suppose that’s it for the weightlifting subjects. We can probably move on from it.

 

Joel Davis: I would say this, though, I would say this, I really enjoy the process. For me, you got to be competitive. You want to do as well as you can. But I love the way that we do things in the Org, where in winter we bulk up, put on like an extra 10, 15 kilos, try and pick up heavy things, and then the winter shred back down and punch on. I love this cycle now. I’ve been doing it for a bit of time. It feels good. I love in the cold winter months to start stacking on some weight and some muscle. I feel great! I feel really healthy. I feel fantastic!

 

And so I would encourage those of you at home who haven’t tried getting into weightlifting in like, I’m talking about heavy like powerlifting type thing. Give it a crack. I think it feels good. I feel excellent!

 

A lot of people complain, oh my muscles are always sore and so on. I don’t really feel like that, like maybe like the day after, a little tight in the hamstring. If I just did deadlifts or something. But it’s not that bad. I feel great in general.

 

But yeah, let’s get into it. So why don’t I play this, the Channel 7 report. I shared it on Telegram. A lot of people might have seen it, but I’ll play this. It’s a quick one. It’s different tone than how they usually react when we do activism or whatever or go to court. And then I guess we can talk about what happened yesterday.

 

[Start of clip]

 

Reporter: (Deanna Williams) Thomas Sewell under arrest.

Thomas Sewell: They are arresting because I’m celebrating Australia Day.

Reporter: The leader of the National Socialist Network says he was addressing the crowd when officers moved in.

Thomas Sewell: That microphone was left in the front of a police vehicle and on it it recorded the police officer saying that they wanted to shoot us, that they wanted to kill us.

Reporter: He claims this audio published on the group’s own online site proves it.

Officer 1: I’m happy to shoot them.

Officer 2: Happy to? (laughs)

Reporter: Sewell was one of 17 members arrested on Australia Day.

Officer 1: I’ll be honest with you. I’m really not, … no I wanna hammer these guys, … just need to be shot.

Reporter: He and his right hand man, Joel Davis had a win in court. Prosecutors dropping a charge of displaying a Nazi symbol during the gathering. The pair claims the symbol isn’t a swastika and believe they were unfairly targeted.

Thomas Sewell: We’re prepared to take it all the way to the High Court. It doesn’t matter whether the charges have been dropped. The fact is that the law is unconstitutional.

Joel Davis: It definitely vindicates us that we didn’t do anything wrong on the day and the arrests were unjust.

Reporter: Sewell is still facing a charge of loitering. He plans to submit an unedited version of the audio as evidence when the case returns to court next week.

Thomas Sewell: Hail Australia!

Reporter: Deanna Williams, seven News.

 

[End of clip]

 

Blair Cottrell: Ever seen by how fair that report was? I’m kind of surprised by it.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. So it is surprising generally in the sense that like the media is never that nice to us. But let’s I’ll tell you guys the story of what happened.

 

So obviously Tom and I had court at the same time. Our lawyer I think got things bundled together because we have the same lawyer. And we decided to go to Adelaide because we started to get wind of the fact that they were dropping a lot of these charges. All the guys that have been going to court over the last couple weeks, all their charges are being dropped including Stephen Wells who got released and so on, as we discussed on the show a couple weeks ago.

 

So we thought we’d go there and kind of declare victory, you know. And we had the idea of going there actually in the NSN uniform that we wore on Australia Day with the patches, as you can see.

 

Anyway, so I’m waiting to go in. I was first before Tom and it was something called a pre-trial conference. And the idea is that in a pre-trial conference the media isn’t allowed in until the defence invites them in. But you’re supposed to talk about dropping charges first or negotiate dropping charges and then once that negotiation period is over the media is supposed to be allowed in. But they didn’t let him in for the whole thing. So the media is locked out. I’m sitting there waiting to go in.

 

I can see all the journalists, you know, talking to each other. There’s like a journalist from Channel 7, a journalist from Channel 9, a journalist from one of the newspaper, etc. They’re all sitting there.

 

And then this cop walks over and this cop starts talking to the journalists. And this police officer in full uniform starts complaining going:

 

“Oh, it’s so hard being a cop. You don’t understand how hard. It’s one of the hardest jobs anyone could ever do and you’re under so much scrutiny these days. It’s like it’s never been harder to be a cop because the community doesn’t respect you anymore. And you know, with you know, CCTV and phones, we’re always under scrutiny, we’re getting over scrutinised and like I sure no one scrutinises us harder than ourselves!”

 

And he was doing this whole thing, I’m thinking:

 

“What a faggot anyway!”

 

So I get called, I go to go in. And as I go to go in, Thomas tries to go in as well and they don’t let him in. Even though we have a joint case and we’re co-accused or whatever, he’s not allowed in. So he gets booted out. And so as he gets booted out, I heard about this later, he’s kind of like just surrounded by all these journalists that aren’t allowed in either. And this cop. And the cop goes to say hi to him and he basically just goes:

 

“I’ve got nothing to say to you.”

 

[15:55]

 

And then he keeps talking to the journalists. And he starts talking to the journalist, this police officer, about how if Channel 7 is holding on to some footage pertaining to some other case that they can, if they won’t share it with them, they can subpoena it. And trying to big dog the Channel 7 journalist over something. And just the previous day, there was some scandal in Adelaide where someone, like, died in police custody or something. And so there’s a little bit of hostility there.

 

And Tom kind of jumped in and said:

 

“Hey, what about the footage that we have of all of your guys saying that they want to kill us, saying that they weren’t inciting violence against us, saying they want to beat us up? What about that footage? What do you have to say about that?”

 

And apparently the police officer just freaked out! Went on his phone, kind of just basically ran off.

 

And then the journalists are like:

 

“What are you talking about? What footage?”

 

And so then Tom starts playing them the clip of the footage and explaining to them about everything that happened. And they said:

 

“What happened with Stephen Wells?”

 

And Tom’s explaining:

 

“Stephen was let out of jail a week and a half ago.”

 

And they were like:

 

“No one told us! What the hell?”

 

And then she said:

 

“Why are they dropping all the charges?”

 

Like the journalist woman. And he’s like:

 

“Because it’s not a swastika.”

 

And she said:

 

“What? The police were telling us that you guys were, like, waving swastika flags.”

 

And we were like:

 

“No, that’s not what happened!”

 

And then the journalists were having their mind blown, basically, how, according to them, the police had totally misled them about what happened. And the whole day was completely misframed. And now all the charges are getting dropped and they’re realising that Stephen Wells was an innocent man and he was held for four months for no reason in jail.

 

And anyway, I come out of court and Tom goes in and they’re super nice to me, and I start explaining everything from my point of view. And I’ve never seen journalists that nice! And these journalists, they’re all women. Sometimes in Melbourne, you get these really, like, soy, Lefty, ugly bitch journalists. Like, particularly ABC and SBS, their journalists are fucking ugly! Sometimes the Channel 7 and Channel 9 ones can be kind of cute. But the Adelaide journalists, they just kind of look like normal women. They didn’t look like freaks, like some of the Melbourne journalists. And they were just kind of treating us like normal human beings. It was really weird! And they were like:

 

“Oh, you know, wait for Thomas. When you guys come out, could you give us five minutes to get the camera down and we’d love to interview you.”

 

And they were just like super friendly and nice and I was like:

 

“This is weird!”

 

Blair Cottrell: Why do you think that is? Do you think that’s because they don’t have a lot of experience with Right-wings personalities in Adelaide? Why were they treating you like that? Because they don’t do that in Melbourne.

 

Joel Davis: Well, I think it’s for two reasons. One, because what happened in Adelaide on Australia Day with us was a really big story. It was like the biggest story out of Adelaide this year, basically. Everyone knew about it, everyone was talking about it. It was all over the news for a week.

 

And now all the charges that were laid against us are being dropped. Now it’s coming out that the police were., … We’ve got them on footage saying that they wanted to beat us up, they want to kill us and all this horrible shit!

 

Meanwhile the police aren’t in the good books of the journalists right now because they’re trying to cover up people dying in custody and there’s all these like scandals going on with the cops in Adelaide right now. And the journalists are going:

 

“Holy shit! Like these guys were actually treated super unfairly!”

 

And realising that they were fed all this by the police, you know, press officers or whatever. And now they’re trying to report on this court case and they’re trying to keep them out of the court and not allow them in to report on what’s happening. And all these people are getting let off and no one’s telling them. And they’re realising that there’s a cover up! They’re realising that the cops are trying to cover their arse and make this all go away quietly. And you know, we were there to be like:

 

“This ain’t going away quietly, we’re going to tell the story.”

 

So anyway, they gave us a pretty chummy interview and reported on it relatively accurately in the media. And they actually put up like the full interview on their website on all the news court papers and stuff. Which they don’t usually do.

 

So yeah, they didn’t ask any gotcha questions. They were respectful, nice, allowed us to explain ourselves. Yeah, it was a completely different energy.

 

[20:16]

 

 

Blair Cottrell: Well, let me ask you, do you believe in policing? Do you think it’s necessary to have a police force to run a state?

 

Joel Davis: Obviously you need a police force. What do you mean?

 

Blair Cottrell: Right. So when that police officer was speaking to the journalists, trying to express his personal grievances, how difficult it is being a cop because of all the oversight and the bureaucracy. You don’t empathise with that guy at all?

 

Joel Davis: No, because the South Australia Police are a bunch of scumbags! Look at how they treated us. So I’ve got no sympathy for them whatsoever! I told them off on the street when I originally got arrested. They’re more interested in trying to bend the rules to engage in this ridiculous, like, police operation, than they are in actually enforcing the laws on the books and doing their job. The police are becoming a joke in this country, all over this country, because they do a terrible job at policing actual violent crime. And I know that everything isn’t their fault because the court system doesn’t lock people up. And so on. And there’s deeper issues than just the police. But the police increasingly are trying to basically avoid confronting, you know, actual violent crime and serious crimes, and instead are wasting more and more of their time on bullshit!

 

And part of that is the bureaucracy and how they’re directed to deal with domestic violence, like family issues or whatever and shit like that! But there’s clearly a total failure at policing, like the African community or the Aboriginal community or whatever.

 

Meanwhile, look at how we were treated. So I would have more sympathy for them if I would have more sympathy for them if they spoke out about this openly and reasonably. I would have more sympathy for them if they treated us with respect. But neither of those happen, so fuck them!

 

Blair Cottrell: They only speak out against their command, on the way out. Like they were doing in covert. A lot of police, police officers resigned and did media interviews. A couple of prominent cops, actually, who had been with Victoria Police for quite a while. But on their way out, that’s the only time they criticised the police command and the bureaucracy at the top.

 

And look, police command, there’s a lot of politics there. No one really likes what’s going on at the top, but it makes it really difficult to sympathise with the individual officer who’s trying to do the best he can when you’ve got stuff like this happening. People being thrown in jail on “loitering” charges for just Trying to host an Australia Day march. You know, you’ve got recordings of police officers who, I imagine it as constables, these are regular cops having conversations about wanting to seriously hurt or kill protesters that they don’t like. You know, so maybe if there was a little more discipline in the ranks in the lower ranks and the boots on the ground cops, maybe if they were a bit more relatable. Obviously they’re losing their patience, probably with their own command.

 

Like, can you imagine being a cop right now out in this society where you can’t arrest the Africans because that’s racist! And the Africans that you do arrest because they obviously committed a violent crime, they’re back on the street tomorrow because they’re on their seventh count of bail, just because of the way the DPP and the judges work. Like, could you imagine being a cop out there right now? It would feel like your whole existence is pointless and you’re being paid peanuts for it anyway. It’d be really frustrating, it would!

 

But like I said, this kind of stuff that happened in Adelaide, you can’t expect the people, regular people, to empathise with those individual officers, so long as they’re behaving that way and expressing those kinds of opinions.

 

So, yeah, I believe the policing is necessary. I’d like to see a good police force, I’d like to see a fair police force, but I think there’s a lot of work to do before we can see anything, achieve anything like that. But it all starts at the top, doesn’t it? I think it all starts with politics, police command and what I suppose is a number of problems in that field.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, well, I mean, I was thinking maybe if there were swastikas on these machetes, like if the niggers put little swastikas on their machetes, maybe then the police would take it more seriously? Maybe then they would make sure that they were locked in prison.

 

Blair Cottrell: Did you see the kids or whoever they were fighting with machetes in, I think it’s Northland Shopping Centre in Preston. Did you see The Noticer article about that?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, of course I saw the video.

 

Blair Cottrell: And apparently one of those kids, one of those kids arrested who was chasing another kid through the shopping centre with a machete. He was African. He was already on bail for a similar offence.

 

[25:06]

 

 

Joel Davis: Yes. And he was released on bail again after chasing someone around a shopping centre with a machete. You know, it was random White jujitsu guys who jumped on him and started choking them out and grabbed the machetes off them and sorted the problem out. Otherwise it would have gotten a lot worse. Like random White guys. Like, basically the only thing holding together our society right now is White guys who train. Because police don’t actually do anything at this point. It’s White guys who train is like the thin line between like, total breakdown of society. Like every other week you hear a story about this machete. Blacks with machetes run through someone’s house and then they get bashed. They go into the wrong guy’s house and they get bashed and chased out by some dude in their underwear or some gang of Arabs try to start a fight with someone and get their shit rocked by a White guy who knows how to fight.

 

If we didn’t have White people who knew how to fight, we’d be fucked! It’s the only thing holding society together at this point. And you know, meanwhile, look at the if you watch the documentary of how we behave during Australia, look how disciplined we were, look how reasonable we were, look how calm, collected, orderly, respectful we were and look how we’re treated. So I got nothing but contempt for these police.

 

And if you really want to clean up the streets, you really want to fix the problems with crime in this country, you shouldn’t be joining the police force, you should be joining the fucking National Socialist Network! Because that’s the only way we’re going to get real change, is if White men get organised and create the political change necessary to bring it into being. Because the police, like you said, are basically neutered from actually doing anything about real crimes and increasingly directed towards “meme” crimes.

 

Let’s just like put all of this in perspective. This whole elaborate bullshit where we’re going to court back and forth and we were held in prison and everything. It’s about disputes over whether we had offensive articles of clothing! Like, what kind of society is this where like, clothes are illegal, like, it’s just retarded!

 

Blair Cottrell: I was thinking when I was watching your interview on Channel 7 News, the essence of your interview was describing the belt buckle that you’re wearing and why it wasn’t illegal to be wearing that belt buckle. That’s like, when you look at the grand scheme of things, how preposterous that conversation is! The fact that that conversation is being broadcasted to the Australian people. Like, whether your belt buckle is illegal or not? That’s what is prime time television. What’s going on? What’s going on in this country when you’ve got kids chasing each other, chopping each other up with machetes, breaking into people’s houses in the middle of the night with big knives. But what’s on TV is whether or not your belt buckle was offensive. [chuckling]

 

Joel Davis: User offended at my belt buckle. And then even then when I go and modify the belt buckle to remove the mean spinny wheel at the bottom, the swastika at the bottom of the belt buckle so that I don’t get thrown in jail over an unconstitutional law designed by jewish lobby groups because they get upset at what belt buckle I’m wearing. While we’re having all of this nonsense going on, the country’s getting flooded with savage niggers that are trying to slice people up at the shops every week, or run through people’s houses and take their cars and their TVs and shit at knife point.

 

And then what’s the response of the Victorian government?:

 

“We’re going to ban machetes!”

 

Like, as if the problem isn’t the niggers! Like as if the niggers aren’t going to get some other kind of weapon and continue stealing, shit! Like, niggers aren’t going to stop stealing shit! They’re niggers! We need to ban niggers not machetes! That’s the only solution. [chuckling] Why the fuck are niggers in Australia? And then we try to bring attention to issues like this and we’re treated as the criminals. You know, we live in a completely upside down.

 

Blair Cottrell: Saying mean words, Joel. And that’s worse. That’s worse than getting dismembered by a refugee wielding a big knife. What would you call a system like this? Like, how would you describe it?

 

Joel Davis: Well, the term, we’ve talked about it on the show many times before. Coined by Sam Francis, “Anarcho Tyranny”, where anarchy is enforced by a tyranny.

 

In other words, like lawlessness is enforced by a state that is tyrannical against anyone who tries to impose or promote a political ideology of restoring order. So usually tyranny and anarchy are seen as opposites, but they’re synthesised. The worst aspects of both are synthesised in our now increasingly decaying and degenerating society.