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

Harry Richardson: Multiculturalism in Australia, as elsewhere in the Anglo-sphere, is irrational and inconsistent. In order to perpetuate this monstrous ideology, its champions are compelled to attack free speech, that great Anglo tradition which exposes and ridicules such nonsense!

 

A recent example is Peter Drew, an Australian artist who produced a series of posters depicting people of non-European ethnicity who lived in Australia at the time of the so-called White Australia Policy. The posters all have the word “Aussie” underneath, implying that these people were Aussies because they’d lived here. These people faced difficulties because they were told that if they left Australia, they would not necessarily be able to return.

 

It’s a similar situation to that faced today by foreigners living in Thailand. European foreigners are known as “farang” and, unlike Thai people, they’re required to leave Thailand periodically and reapply to return. No guarantee is given that they will be allowed back into the country. These farang are not Thai, and nobody thinks that they are. Nobody thinks any less of Thailand for insisting on this policy, despite the inconvenience and upset that it causes many of these farang.

 

Peter Drew put up his posters around Melbourne without permission. Here he is explaining that in his own words:

 

“It’s a very popular project. It’s so popular that even though it’s illegal, I can put my name to it and I’m still allowed to do it, because people like it, whereas these copycat posters are done anonymously because nobody likes them.”

 

Peter Drew’s artwork is propaganda which reinforces the preferred narrative of the establishment elites who run the government, the media, the education system, the legal system, and the bureaucracies. And maybe it’s a coincidence, but it appears that Peter Drew has a picture of Chairman Mao on his wall. The establishment who are supposed to enforce laws don’t enforce this law, perhaps because they like what Peter Drew is doing. The rule of law doesn’t apply to propaganda that supports their narrative, apparently.

 

So fast forward to a short time ago, and a provocative young social media influencer decided to make a statement by creating posters in a similar style to those of Peter Drew. Instead of the faces of historical minorities, however, Auspill, as he’s known, put the faces of diverse Australians who’ve committed horrible crimes, as well as some others, including Donald Trump, with the word “Aussie” underneath them. The most confronting of these posters had the face of Naveed Akram on it. He was one of the two alleged perpetrators accused of the Bondi massacre.

 

Auspill then made a video of himself and a friend putting these posters up around Melbourne, as well as some of the reactions of establishment figures, with commentary from himself and his friend.

 

Full disclosure here: The BAC made two videos a couple of years ago about the Drew posters, and part of one of these was featured in Auspill’s video. We’ll post links to our videos in the description below, along with some references.

 

At this point, Dr. Dvir Abramovich stepped into the fray. Dr. Abramovich runs a well-known jewish defence and advocacy organisation called the Anti-Defamation Commission. Here’s what he had to say about Auspill’s posters:

 

“They should utilise every measure, every law, to make sure that these people end up behind bars. It was a kick in the guts. This is a hate crime, pure and simple. It’s dancing on the grave of those massacred in Bondi.”

 

Quote:

 

“They should utilise every measure, every law, to make sure that these people end up behind bars.”

 

And Dvir Abramovich again:

 

“It was a kick in the guts. This is a hate crime, pure and simple. It’s dancing on the grave of those massacred in Bondi. It’s psychological intimidation.”

 

Dr. Abramovich’s comments are interesting on a number of levels, especially in light of some of his previous statements. The first thing that strikes us is the severity of the punishment. He’s calling for. Prison time for putting up a poster? This is very extreme by Australian legal standards. Secondly, and perhaps most strikingly, is the way Dr. Abramovich has completely misunderstood the point of the posters. His statement characterises it as a deliberate attack on the grieving jewish community, when both common sense and Auspill’s own words suggest otherwise.

 

Peter Drew himself admits to attempting to deconstruct Australian identity and help ensure that anyone of any racial, religious, or cultural background can be an Aussie. To this end, he portrays a group of racially diverse people who lived in Australia and are perceived as positive for the nation.

 

Auspill has turned this concept on its head and made posters in the same style depicting racially diverse people who are either clearly bad for the nation or, in the case of Donald Trump, someone who’s never lived here. This dialectic is a form of discussion about the identity of the nation. It would seem that way to us, and Auspill appears to agree. Here he is explaining it in his own words:

 

“This project—this funny little Donald Trump, Naveed Akram—this is taking it to its natural conclusion. Naveed Akram—an Aussie; Donald Trump—an Aussie! It’s not exclusive, right? ‘No one’s illegal on stolen land! Everyone’s an Aussie! It’s a piece of paper!’ I don’t think many Australians the Anzacs or the founding people of this country, would agree with that. It is an invention—a very modern invention—that needs to be upheld by, literally, street propaganda. But we can counter it in the street and get people to look at the extreme conclusions of this ideology. And that’s what this really is about.”

 

Note that he also put up a poster of a Chinese man who’s believed to have deliberately scalded an Aussie baby with a boiling hot cup of coffee. This was a horrific attack on a vulnerable member of the Anglo community, but no one thinks that this was “dancing on the misery” of an injured baby. The image of Naveed Akram is well known because it has been shown repeatedly on mainstream media.

 

As far as we know, Dr. Abramovich had not complained about the image previously. It is understandable, however, that using this image to make a political statement could be upsetting. With that said, however, we feel that Dr. Abramovich is completely missing the point of Auspill’s video.

 

The reason I’m bringing up Dvir Abramovich’s comments is that he has a history of commenting on this topic. Back in 2016, TV personality Sonia Kruger made some remarks during a discussion on TV about Islamic immigration into Australia. I’ll quote from a news.com.au article at the time. She said, whilst talking about Islamic immigration:

 

“Personally, I would like to see it stop now for Australia.”

 

She referred to Japan, a racially homogenous country with a low proportion of Muslim migrants, and pointed out—correctly—that they don’t experience terror attacks by Islamic extremists. She also said that she would like to see freedom of speech. Bear in mind that Kruger made her comments in the wake of a horrific Islamic terror attack in France.

 

But we’d also had attacks in Australia. There was the Skaf [Bilal Skaf] rape gang of 50 Anglo girls in 2000; the Cronulla gang in 2005; the Endeavour Hills stabbings of 2014; the appalling Lindt Cafe siege, also in 2014; and the Parr a matter a shooting of a Chinese-Australian accountant who worked for the police in 2015.

 

In the same article, Ms. Kruger is given a severe dressing-down by none other than Dr. Abramovich, who said, and I quote:

 

“I am dismayed and concerned by this misguided and outrageous statement! Sonia Kruger’s call to ban Muslim immigration to Australia is deeply offensive, irrational and unacceptable.”

 

End quote. So I have to say, that statement didn’t age well at all! And, okay, maybe it was offensive to some Muslims, but “irrational” in light of recent events? Worse than that is Dr. Abramovich’s final claim that this position is “unacceptable.” In other words, no one should be even allowed to argue against this viewpoint. Freedom of speech should be suspended for this topic. Insisting on shutting down everyone else’s speech on a topic suggests a belief in one’s own infallibility. In this case, it turns out that Dr. Abramovich and his opinions were not as infallible as he’d assumed.

 

There’s a particularly sad irony to the staunch opposition to free speech expressed by some jewish community leaders, especially around immigration and diversity. For instance, parts of the organised jewish community were instrumental in draughting Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and defending it against Tony Abbott, who’d promised to repeal it.

 

The peak jewish national body were also consulted in the formation of the latest laws against anti-semitism, hate, and extremism, which gut the Anglo tradition of free speech, particularly where it includes criticism of minorities. During this consultation process, they advocated for stronger provisions and harsher sentencing.

 

Ethnic diversity tends to have serious and well-documented costs wherever it’s found, and this is true for all Australians. But in this latest tragic episode, it’s jews who have borne the brunt of these costs. This just Showcases the irrationality of multicultural minority politics. Australians are expected to suspend common sense when discussing minority interests. The policies of multiculturalism and its feed corn of indiscriminate immigration have never been discussed at an adult level. The shifting allegiances on which multiculturalism is based can shatter when people least expect it.

 

Dr. Abramovich continued his 2016 comment, stating that, quote:

 

“Banning anyone from entry to our country on the basis of their religion goes against long-standing Australian values of respect, inclusivity and religious freedom.”

 

End quote. What he fails to mention here is that for most of our history, Australian immigration policy restricted non-White intakes in order to minimise ethno-religious diversity. We did, however, have some jews in the colony from the beginning, and this was one of the safest and most welcoming countries for them. We had Sir Isaac Isaacs, who was jewish, as our first native-born Governor-General, which is the highest office in the land. General Sir John Monash, who was the pre-eminent Australian general in the First World War and was widely regarded as one of the finest Allied commanders on the Western Front, was also jewish.

 

Dr. Abramovich continued on in his criticism of Sonia Kruger. He said, quote:

 

“Such singling out and demonizing of Muslims is counterproductive and will only serve to foment fear and hatred. As we face the threat of radical Islamist terror, we must avoid falling into the trap of blaming individuals and communities.”

 

This just makes no sense at all! He admits that we face the threat of radical Islamist terror, but insists that we shouldn’t ban Muslim immigration because that will cause fear and hatred of Muslims. Bear in mind that he expressed this opinion after a string of Islamic-inspired attacks, and recent events simply emphasise how appallingly wrong-headed this approach is!

 

The only reason such weak arguments could prevail was the chilling of free speech, which put pressure on people like Sonia Kruger for opposing them.

 

The abolition of free speech means that influential people get to decide on vital policy directions for the whole nation. When these people are shielded from common-sense arguments, their fallibility is protected by a wall of censorship. Dr. Abramovich reinforced this approach when he continued, saying:

 

“Our nation is strengthened by diversity and it is crucial that all leaders stand united in combating any manifestations of bigotry and prejudice.”

 

End quote. This ideological nonsense just has to stop! Diversity is a strength? The fact is that our once peaceful nation of Australia is now riven by blood feuds that have been imported from around the world.

 

Unfortunately, minority advocates are not the only ones attacking free speech. Chris Minns, who’s the Leftist Premier of New South Wales, has been cheer leading the abolition of free speech for some time now. Why? Well, to protect diversity, of course:

 

Minns: When did I say ‘free speech is incompatible with a free society’?

John Ruddick: Mr Premier, you have said that on multiple occasions!

Minns: Would you mind repeating it to me where I have said it and what I said?

John Ruddick: Are you denying that you said it, Mr Premier?

Minns: I would love it for you to quote it back to me.

Minns: I recognise it and I’ve said it from the beginning, that we don’t have the same freedom of speech laws that they have in the United States. And the reason for that is that we want to hold together a multicultural community.

Minns: We don’t have the same free speech rules that they have in the United States. We’ve got strict interpretation of hate speech in the state. If that needs to go further in a legislative sense, that’s exactly what I’ll do!

Minns: We have to take steps to protect that. It can’t just be a willy-nilly race to the bottom where civic society turns a blind eye and says, ‘Well, look, freedom of speech reigns here. People can say what they want.’ That’s not the case in New South Wales. We don’t have the same freedom of speech laws that they have in the United States. And the reason is because we love the country that we’ve got here and we are going to take steps to protect what has been built up over decades.

Minns: And I don’t apologise for the fact that we don’t have the same free speech laws that they have in the United States. It’s clear that we don’t! We don’t have the same set of regulations. It’s not embedded in our constitution the same way it is in the US.

Naturally, he isn’t the only one, but he is arrogant enough to say the quiet part out loud. This has to stop! Because, as George Washington once said:

 

“If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the slaughter!”

 

A majority never wanted mass, indiscriminate, immigration. And the elites who insisted on it are now intent on shutting down our rights to free speech so that we can no longer voice opposition to it. And maybe if Peter Drew wants to abolish a national identity, he should have a go at the Indians or the Chinese or the Palestinians, just to show that it isn’t only Anglo-Celtic identity that he wants to abolish.

 

The whole point of this is that these posters represent free speech. Peter Drew’s posters express an opinion on who can be an Aussie, and so do Auspill’s. Both of them should be allowed to express their opinions.

 

Unfortunately, when we allow powerful elites to destroy free speech, then they will decide what can and cannot be expressed. This is a very slippery slope which leads to tyranny and oppression!

 

In the meantime, the British-Australian Community will continue to defend the identity, the interests, and the free speech rights of our people, just as the rest of the multicultural community defend their people. If you think that this is a worthwhile goal, then join us now!

 

Thank you.

 

[14:46]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

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

 

Youtube Comments

top

(Comments as of 5/4/2026 = 38)

@iksootm
1 day ago
If you don’t have a border, you don’t have a country.
30

@LucienCanon
1 day ago
You must upload more BAC. Thanks so much for your work.
32

@britishaustraliancommunity
1 day ago
Thank you Lucien, agreed. We are more active on X and Instagram however – youtube doesn’t like us very much.
8

Hide replies

@SirJad_
1 day ago
Multiculturalism will always degrade a society into totalitarianism as the state naturally needs to expand its power to ensure all groups remain cohesive and the overall structure of society remains functional. There is no coincidence as Australia becomes more ‘diverse’, it becomes less free.
21

@southern-samurai
23 hours ago (edited)
The fact that we cannot even have an open conversation about this without risking violating hate speech laws if someone decides to interpret one side as racially offensive highlights the erosion of basic freedoms and cultural norms in Australia as a result of protecting multicultural ideology.
7

@keilgre5319
17 hours ago
Freedom. Remigration.
7

@Zinnia-x9c
1 day ago
Peter Drew is still crashing out over Auspill’s art series.
13

@Generico301
1 day ago
Nice 1, Harry. Need more like it.
7

@Whats_newss
1 day ago
Great video
7

@user-di8gh5fw6d
23 hours ago
Africa 54 countries, SA is now kicking out other africans from their South Africa country because their not South African. Are they racist.
5

@what_social_contract
1 day ago
Cracking video
4

@leonhanford5560
4 hours ago
Peter Drew is a delusional lefty.Full regime backing.And don’t get me started on Dvir
2

@joelwhaley8182
23 hours ago
Where is your 1901 federal red flag. Where is your Commonwealth of Australia. Where is your townspeople. Where is your self determination. Lest ye forget is strsight out of the AKJV bible. A warning that rings true today as Australians forgot who they are and what their ANZAC even fought for at all.
2

@Cohen-cidenceinspector
1 day ago
2:47 ….. looks like the ghost of a mud slime woman floating down the street.

@Westyrulz
3 hours ago
The European Race could cease to exist as all European societies have opened up to mass Non-White immigration.

@masscreationbroadcasts
1 day ago
Why do you try to convince people? Sorry, I’m not being clear enough. These people got power by taking advantage of your good will and giving themselves power over you because they hate their own kind for status. Debate won’t fix this.
2

@Melbournelost66
1 day ago
Those posters I utterly despise. I have noticed them around inner Melbourne, in particular Fitzroy, Collingwood etc. Who said its popular? Have they taken a poll? What if we rip them down????
4

@John-p7i5g
17 hours ago
Multiculti society = logical contradiction = balkanisation
1

@persiandrum9871
1 day ago (edited)
Can you imagine the outrage and backlash, if China were to have an Australian-Anglo as its ‘Foreign Minister’, or if India were to have an Australian-Irishman as one of its parliamentary senators? Or if Israel were to have a non-Jewish, Australian Christian prime minister? Or if Saudi Arabia were to have an Australian atheist serve in its Council of Ministers? (continued below)
Why is it that we are expected to applaud all other nations of the earth for having their people represented by their founding stock, while White nations only are expected to prove their ‘diversity’ and ‘multicultural’ bonafides?
How log will this ridiculous canard be tolerated?
11

@Is_This_Really_Necessary
19 hours ago
Multiculturism only works when it’s NOT forced down everyone’s throats all the goddamn time. But because Western governments have chosen to impose multiculturalism onto everyone, as an Auzzie I choose freedom.
So I will say whatever I want, however I want, whenever I want, I don’t have a damn what anyone else thinks.
1

@raycap
2 hours ago
Minns is telling us we don’t matter, it’s, I will take away your freedoms, and you will keep your mouth shut, or it’s jail time. Slowly but surely, like any extreme left party, they are implementing communism.

@THEOFFICEOFHELP
1 day ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4YMXPiM6Jc

@insolent6702
15 hours ago
Mouse click sound effect is ruining this video
1

@australiasindustrialage689
4 hours ago
What Chris Minns said is a load of trash, he fails to understand that Australia was founded on Anglo-Australianism, free-speech was an implied right

@MELcontents.not.american
6 hours ago
You lost me in your first statement. Multiculturalism makes us strong, liveable, rich.
Multiculturalism is the kernel of the Australian experience.

@tsopmocful1958
6 hours ago
No, Australia and the entire West has gone downhill ever since multicultural policies were implemented as early as the 1970’s.
2

@MELcontents.not.american
4 hours ago
@tsopmocful1958 are you suggesting that for example, Vietnamese immigration has been a bad thing for Australia?

Hide replies
Top is selected, so you’ll see featured comments

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

See Also

top

 

 

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

Mark Collett: Hello everybody and welcome to tonight’s special stream live with Tom Sewell. We’re going to do a very quick introduction. This stream is live on Rumble and Odysee only. It’s also live on Entropy, but that is, if you want to send a Superchat. Please do share the Odysee and Rumble links. Whichever one’s your favourite, get it up on X, get it up on Telegram, get it up on Facebook, get it wherever you want, but please do share it. It’s very difficult for me to share things because I’m only allowed on Telegram and Gab. I’ve already shared it in those two good places. If you can share it, it’d be very much appreciated. If you are new to my channel, especially if you’re watching on Rumble, please do give me a sub if you can and help me build the channel. We usually have big streams when Tom is on and I’m looking forward to tonight very much.

 

Now, if you would like to support my work, if you’d like to contribute to what I do, please do consider making a Superchat either through Entropy or through Rumble. All donations go to a good cause and this is what I do every week, as well as all of the political work. If you like that, please do consider making a donation. $3, $5, $10, whatever you can afford. And if you’re watching on replay, you can also donate at any time through Entropy. You can also donate via Crypto. All the crypto links from the description below and you can write to me at mark@thefallofwesternman.com.

 

Now if you do give a donation in the second part of the show, we will read out all of the donations and ask any questions to myself or Tom, regardless of who they are directed to, or both give answers. We’re going to talk about the situation in Australia, some of the world politics.

 

This was going to be a PWR, but Tom couldn’t make it on Wednesday because of the super early start. So we’re doing it now and we’re going to discuss a range of different topics starting with the situation in Australia. So any questions you want to ask that have a donation attached, we will ask them. And if you support my work and you want me to keep doing the things that I’m doing, please do consider giving something.

 

Anyway, let’s get into the show right now! Tom, it’s been a while since we spoke. In fact, the last time we spoke we were talking about the NSN [National Socialist Network] being disbanded. You had led the NSN to a point where it had become a major national force and possibly the largest NS organisation in the whole world at the time, certainly the most active and the one that was probably the most covered by the media. You were getting a huge amount of coverage in Australia as well as here in places the UK, Europe and even in America. And you become, well, were becoming something of a household name. He’d had a couple of really big interviews with famous people, including with Dan Bilzerian, which was a pretty big one. That was something that really put you in the spotlight in the US. And it seemed at the time as if things were going so well for you that you were going to register your political party, White Australia. Then all of a sudden the state came in with this huge ban, something you’re fighting. And around the same time Joel Davis was sadly arrested and held on remand. He’s now being released.

 

So we’ve got a lot to catch up on, a lot to talk about. But you certainly are one of the world’s most famous National Socialist. You’re somebody who doesn’t hide that fact. You’re somebody who is very honest about what you do and you’re unashamed behaviour has made you somewhat of a hero in Australia. And now not only are they going after the NSN, they’re also apparently trying to jail you as well, which is not surprising considering all the good work you’ve done.

 

So how have things been since we last spoke? How have you been getting on and what’s the mood like there since the organisation was disbanded?

 

Thomas Sewell: Well everybody, thank you, Mark. That’s a very good introduction. And it’s been a very pleasant couple months for myself. It’s nice to focus on things that aren’t 100% politics all the time. Go, go, go!

 

So definitely slightly slower pace and time to reflect and think and focus on the future. I’ve spoken to Joel since he’s been out of jail almost every day or every second day. He’s doing really well! He’s very clear minded. Certainly the lack of stimulation and online chitter-chatter has closed a lot of tabs in his head and he can focus on the tabs that are open. And that’s definitely a key to concentration. And they do put you in a “concentration camp”, when they punish you for being a political prisoner. You get plenty of time to concentrate and think. And yeah, he’s doing really well! He’s in a really good mood.

 

I spoke to him yesterday, two days ago and as we were talking on the phone, the media put an article out about him saying that, like they found him at a 7/11 at a service station filling up petrol and he wasn’t with his missus and he must be fighting with his missus and he’s been kicked out of Bondi and he’s living with mum! And it was just this really nasty Daily Mail gossip article about him. And the bail conditions say he can’t live with his family, he’s got to live with his mother.

 

[05:43]

 

So these are like gutter journalists and we were just laughing about that on the phone. And they weren’t even honest enough to say who wrote the article, which we thought was pretty funny.

 

And obviously, yeah, he passes on his regards to everyone in the White community. He loves everything that’s happening, and he’s obviously like most of us he’s a bit upset that we’re going through a phase where it’s not so much about promotion. Joel’s a big promoter. He loves promoting the worldview, he loves promoting our opinions, our thoughts, our takes, our ideology. You know, he’s a very sharp guy that’s always on the money with geopolitics and these are things he loves talking about every day. He’s always running at full steam.

 

So he’s transitioning into concentrating all that energy into a book, and he’s been telling me he’s writing a book. And I won’t spoil it, I’ll let it, let the book be about him, but more or less it’s about geopolitics. He wants to talk about, I guess, Australia’s role in, and specifically White Australia’s role in the geopolitics of the multipolar world going forward. Like how America is going to respond to BRICS [Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa] and what he perceives Australia’s role in that dynamic.

 

So, yeah, he’s loving having access to., … He might not be able to post on the Internet or I don’t think he’s even got access to the Internet really, but he’s loving having access to just new sources and materials and more books and stuff like that. And just not being in a concrete box is always a pleasure. So he’s kind of got the best of both worlds in some ways that he’s not in jail. But then he’s got state mandated, like, concentration time and like he’s got state mandated focus time. Like he can’t get caught up in Twitter debates and debacles and all this nonsense! And, yeah, he can only focus on the important things and he’s actually kind of enjoying that as much as he, like, misses all the dopamine from being able to interact with the boys and cause a storm online. So each are given what they deserve in some way. What else? You asked about Joel.

 

Mark Collett: Joel’s an interesting one because sort of I’ve obviously met Joel. A lot of people won’t have because he obviously lives in Australia. But Joel is one of those guys that is. He’s very sort of how can I say this? I don’t want to say he’s hyperactive and make him sound like he’s some ADHD.

 

Thomas Sewell: No, that’s fair. That’s fair. He is full of he’s full of beans!

 

Mark Collett: He’s like a live wire and he’s constantly thinking, talking, and I kind of saw that online with him, that he was always replying to people, he was always interacting. And when our guys usually get released, whether it’s after a sentence or whether they’ve been on remand and they’re released before their trial, there’s usually quite heavy restrictions on what they can do online. And I didn’t know how that would affect Joel, but I hope he’s enjoying fatherhood as well, because that was something I wanted to mention because obviously becoming a dad changes you in so many ways. And Joel, he’s a lot younger than you and I, but he’s a dad now, and I hope that he’s had some quality time with his partner and their newborn.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. Yeah, he’s loving it. He says he’s got the best of both worlds, which I won’t go into too much detail on that, but young fathers or fathers of young children will understand what I mean by the best of both worlds. He gets to see his kid and gets all the privileges of that without the punishment of being woken up all night, you know, two o’ clock in the morning, to screaming babies. So, yeah, he’s getting the best of both worlds.

 

What else? Yeah, he said the funniest thing on the phone. He’s like:

 

“We go to the shops and I carry the baby and I’m like, ‘This is easy. What does everyone complain about?’ And then the baby cries and I’m like, ‘Oh, I’ve got someone for you’.”

 

He’s like:

 

“Just passes the baby off to mum because I don’t know why people complain about fatherhood. It’s pretty easy actually!”

 

And I’m like:

 

“Legend! Excellent! Thank you!”

 

So yeah, he’s loving it. Big strong boy he’s got. And yeah, he’s been spending a lot of time with the missus, and as much as he can. Sydney’s a really big place and it’s like state mandated that he can’t live, he can’t go into the suburb that she lives and obviously she’s like in her nest. So yeah, it’s pretty silly what they’ve done to him with these bail.

 

Mark Collett: Why can’t he go into the suburb where, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Because the Member of Parliament [Allegra Spender*] that he allegedly threatened is the member for Bondi or Wentworth.

 

[* Allegra Spender (born 1978) is not a jew; however, she represents the Wentworth electorate, which has a significant jew population, and she has been an advocate for the jewish community. Since her election in 2022, Spender’s policy platform has focused on strong action on climate change; economic reform; integrity in politics; and support for gender equity, humanitarian treatment of refugees, LGBTQs inclusion, and action on anti-semitism. The Division of Wentworth is an Australian electoral division in the state of New South Wales. The division encompasses the suburbs east of Sydney CBD, mostly Woollahra and Waverley councils in Sydney’s Eastern Suburbs. Wentworth is the smallest geographical electoral division in Australia with an area of just 31 square kilometres (12 sq mi), covering Woolloomooloo along the southern shore of Sydney Harbour to Watsons Bay and down the coast to Clovelly—an area largely coextensive with Sydney’s Eastern Suburbs. Since 2022 its MP has been Allegra Spender, an Independent. From 2004 to 2018, the seat was held by Malcolm Turnbull, who served as Prime Minister of Australia from 2015 to 2018. Source: Wikipedia]

 

Mark Collett: Basically he allegedly threatened his own neighbour and that’s got him out of nappy changes at 2 AM! Was this all part of his like evil master plan to make himself more famous and not have to change nappies?

 

Thomas Sewell: This is Joel Davis, 4D chess! Yeah. [chuckling] That’s the primary motivation. Yeah. So regarding other court nonsense, I won’t go too much into the High Court challenge, but that is “cooking”. These things don’t happen overnight.

 

A lot of people are being impatient and have been messaging me asking:

 

“What’s going on, what’s going on!”

 

And yeah, everyone just needs to be patient. It’s only been, I mean it’s what, April? I mean it’s been two months or something. Just everyone needs to chill. I’m talking about Australians, not yourself, Mark. A lot of Australians are messaging me like:

 

“What’s the update? What’s the update?”

 

Everyone’s just standing back and standing by.

 

[11:41]

 

But yeah, I’ll give an update when there’s an update to give. So there should be an update very soon. “Two more weeks!” So they say during Covid, two more weeks of lockdowns.

 

And regarding my court stuff, geez, I don’t know how much I want to say. We’ve got a court date coming up soon. It could get wrapped up within the next four weeks or we could go to trial. So the lawyers are still negotiating. It really comes down to the violent disorder, the so-called violent disorder which happened at the rally on August last year. And yeah, we’ll see what happens. I might have to do a little bit more jail time. We’ll see what the deal is. I might probably, worst case scenario, might have to go to jail for like three to six months. Best case scenario, probably time served. So, yeah, it is what it is. I got plenty of, I got plenty of books to bring with me this time, so I’m not too stressed.

 

And yeah, we’ve just been my little clique of guys we’re still training every day, we’re still hanging out. You know, nationalism is just localised now. We’re not able to organise, you know, 400, 500 people across the country into activism, into community events and political events. We’re not able to do that at the moment, but we are still allowed to have friends.

 

So obviously there’s a lot of do’s and don’ts. I had to tell a whole bunch of idiots off, I think two or three weeks ago there was a bunch of kids that were trying to do like a, “we’re not the NSN group”. And I just had to remind them about particular things that happen in the UK, and that that’s what they’re hoping you do and don’t do this. And we’re playing the game by the rules. And we have an opportunity here where we haven’t been prescribed. I want to make it very clear to everyone, we are not a banned organisation. We’re not a prescribed organisation. And we’re disbanded. But again, it’s a disbandment pending a High Court trial.

 

So it’s not like we’re giving up and we’re like:

 

“All right, back to the drawing board, guys!”

 

It’s pending a High Court trial. How long will they drag that out for? They can probably drag it out for a year, but these things actually move faster than you’d expect. And people just need to be patient. People need to build their local community. And that’s it. Everyone’s so focused on what’s happening in Iran and what’s happening in Israel and what’s happening on the other side of the country. And it’s like:

 

“How many nationalists do you know in your suburb?”

 

And so this is a really golden opportunity for people to just focus on their own area, their own close little circle of friends and build local connections.

 

And so it’s easy for me to say that because I’m a public personality, I’m a known face, and everywhere I go, that conversation arises. Like just yesterday I had two conversations with businesses in my area. And they recognised me and they started asking me:

 

“What do I think about the jews? Do you think there’s an anti-White agenda? What do you think about Iran?”

 

And so, like everywhere I go, it becomes political. You know, I talk to businessmen in the area, like shopkeepers the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker, so to speak. And these conversations arise. So I’m always, I’m constantly building community, I’m constantly networking. And if you’re not a known face, you can still do that. You’ve just got to do a little bit of foreplay first and see who’s your friend and who’s your foe.

 

And where I live is definitely like a White flight corridor. And so a lot of the local businesses, a lot of the people in my area, they recognise me and they’re honest enough and confident enough to admit that they recognise me and that they support what we’re doing.

 

So it’s really awesome! Like, Australia is massively polarised and people are so political in Australia. I mean, Australia had a really bad reputation of having an attitude of:

 

“She’ll be right!”

 

This laissez faire, politics is for dummies. Just focus on getting a Hilux ute and focusing on your trade and minding your own business. And the Australian dream is having a Hilux ute, or a Toyota Land Cruiser or both, a jet ski, a dog, 2.5 kids, a white picket fence, and four [weeks] holidays a year. And Australians are actually starting to, I can feel it, I can see it. I’m talking to people my age, older, younger, and I can see so clearly that Australians are putting that as a secondary principle now. And Australians are going:

 

“Well, hang on a minute. I’m not actually concerned about that idealistic dream anymore. I’m concerned about survival now. I’m concerned about the survival of our country. It’s clear we’re under attack!”

 

This fuel shortage thing that’s happening here in Australia and the price of petrol and the price of diesel going up like 1.5 or 1.7 times, like diesel almost doubled instantly, overnight. And so if you’re a tradesman, if you know you’re reliant on transporting yourself and goods around, that’s just smashed your business, because you can’t charge double for what you’re doing. So it just hits you. It’s just another tax. I noticed in Ireland there was some protests.

 

[17:08]

 

Here in Australia, we haven’t had any protests yet, but I assure you things are getting very tense. And the Australian government has set up Australia to fail! The current Australian government and previous administrations of this regime have set Australia up to fail! We are one of the least fuel secure countries in the world and we’re meant to be a developed nation. We’re meant to be a first world nation and we’re in a worse position than a lot of second world and third world nations when it comes to fuel security.

 

And so we haven’t even really felt the brunt of it yet. I think we’re going to start feeling the brunt of it in the next fortnight with this crisis in the Middle East, which I don’t want to talk about too much. Obviously it’s 6 am here and it’s a bit too early for geopolitics.

 

But what I will talk about is the feeling on the ground here in Australia is that the average Aussie is like, people just come up to me in the street and just say:

 

“The government has set us up to fail! The government set us up to fail!”

 

Basically it’s the same rhetoric as like Weimar Republic where people were saying:

 

“You know, we’ve been stabbed in the back! We didn’t lose the war, we’ve been stabbed in the back!”

 

It’s the exact same rhetoric like:

 

“We’re being betrayed from within, we’re being stabbed in the back, we’re being set up to fail!”

 

That’s like the Aussism of being stabbed in the back, is we’ve been set up to fail. And people are pissed off about that. They’re like:

 

“How did they not know that this was a liability? Oh, they did know! And they did nothing!”

 

They did absolutely nothing to make sure that we were secure.

 

So anyway, I could waffle on about that forever. What else? Mark, what do you want to talk about today?

 

Mark Collett: Well, I was going to ask. So in Australia, just before you guys disbanded, there’s a couple more things I wanted to ask about Australia. Before you guys disbanded, there seemed to be a sort of a real street movement coming about. Now we have a street movement in the UK which is quite small, that myself and Steve Laws and numerous other groups have sort of come together to try and get going with the ethno-nationalists. But our large scale street movement, Unite the Kingdom, is basically run by people that have a very dim view of ethno-nationalism. Tommy Robinson’s the front guy for that. He’s already said that:

 

“If he saw the sort of people who are at Charlottesville coming down his street, he would attack them, he would side with the far-Left rather than stand with us.”

 

You know that’s where he stands at.

 

Thomas Sewell: He’s an anti, …

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, effectively he’s a multiculturalist that just claims Islam is the problem because he’s pro-Israel. But you guys, your street movement doesn’t seem to have been co-opted in the same way. And when there was a big rally you guys turned up and you were actually welcomed there. And it seemed to be that normal people were there and they were like:

 

“Look, we’re all here together!”

 

And people like Avi Yemeni were told:

 

“We don’t want you here because you’re not here for Australia, you’re here for Israel!”

 

Now that was pretty heartening. From a UK perspective, I was over the moon for you guys because we have so many problems with Tommy Robinson, with these Civnats just the other day, people putting these big flags up and giving speeches in front of them saying:

 

“Britain was built on migration! It’s just gone a bit too far.”

 

Once you’ve got that message, you’ve lost already. Once you’re saying that, it’s like you’ve already lost. But you guys seem to have escaped all that. There doesn’t seem to be that big celebrity controlled opposition movement in Australia.

 

So you guys turn up, you get treated really well! It looks like things are going to take off. What’s happening with those sort of rallies at the moment in Australia? Are they continuing to be arranged? Have the organisers said we’re going to give those up? We or are they still doing it? And if they are still doing it, can your guys go along? What direction do you think those gatherings will take after these laws have come in?

 

Thomas Sewell: Well, ultimately I’m not a supporter of rallying for the sake of rallying. I think rallying has to be, you can have a planned rally. Rallies are always planned. But there has to be an organic will of the mass to come out and demonstrate. There has to be an energy, there has to be a really good reason to try to get hundreds of thousands of people out on the street across the country to demonstrate.

 

And that’s why a lot of these things, they migrate. Well, that’s probably a bad word to use, but they move from specific subject issue like immigration into:

 

“Well we can’t just keep rallying for anti-immigration, rallying for anti-immigration, rallying for anti-immigration. It doesn’t seem to be doing anything.”

 

And it has like a law of diminishing returns. And so where it’s moving to is more subject specific and it’s trying to branch out and instead of being a myopic movement, because in Australia it’s called March for Australia, that’s our equivalent. And they’re currently focused on things like what’s happening to Ben Roberts-Smith. I don’t know if in the UK you guys have seen with the decorated war hero, the SAS guy, Ben Roberts-Smith, most decorated or one of the most decorated soldiers in Australia’s history, the guy is genuinely a war hero.

 

[22:40]

 

Regardless of what people think about geopolitics and whether we should have been in Afghanistan or not, the reality is he was sent there and he got the job done. And there’s many, many famous stories about Ben Roberts-Smith. Like one of the most famous ones is about when an ANA soldier or when a Taliban soldier pretending to be an ANA soldier, which if you know, there’s really not much difference between the ANA and the Taliban. It was very easy for the Taliban to take back control of Afghanistan after the Americans, after the Allies withdrew, because the ANA was a fraud. It wasn’t a real army. It was just the Taliban on a government paycheck. And these guys dressed up as ANA, shot Australian soldiers in the back at a forward operating base. And they gave Ben Roberts-Smith a call to go hunt these guys down and find them, hunt this guy and his friends down and bring him to justice. And he did that. He hunted this guy down, he killed him and all his friends in his village. And now he’s being charged with war crimes, hunting this guy down.

 

 

I can’t, can’t remember the guy’s name. I don’t think he actually killed the guy that did it, but he managed to get all the fuckers that helped him in his village. And this is, it’s a dirty war. It’s a dirty war! I don’t believe, I mean, we don’t need to talk too much about the metaphysics of war crimes, but I don’t believe in a guerrilla war that the enemy can shoot at you and then put the rifle, … They’re wearing civilian clothes, they shoot at you, they put the rifle down and you know, they’re suddenly not an enemy combatant. And the Taliban laugh at our nonsense laws of warfare. They don’t follow the laws of warfare and so neither should we.

 

The laws of warfare are a contract between civilised People, in order to avoid civilian casualties. If Australia goes to war with New Zealand, we have laws of war and we say:

 

“You fucking New Zealanders! You know you’re gonna get it!”

 

And then you have a fight, but you have like a contract that you don’t do this and you don’t do that, and it’s to prevent innocent people dying. But if one side starts breaking the rules, the other side’s gonna start breaking it.

 

And the Australian government’s not punishing the Taliban. In fact they’re inviting them into the country and giving the Taliban money. So Ben Roberts-Smith is being charged with five counts of war crime murder. And he just got bail yesterday, which everyone was shocked at. I mean I did not expect that’s something weird is going on about that. I don’t know what is going on in the background. But the March for Australia and like that kind of whole scene, they seem to be rallying behind Ben Roberts-Smith at the moment. That’s like the subject issue of the day.

 

And people might think that that’s not as important as the anti-immigration sentiment. And I would argue it’s as important as the anti-immigration sentiment to rally behind national icons, to rally behind national figures. I mean, Ben Roberts-Smith represents the spirit of the hero, he represents the spirit of the Anzac. What you’ve got in this country is a complete lack of will to fight in general. You’ve got this laissez faire attitude, and we have politicians that are trying to stab us in the back by emasculating society. They’re trying to emasculate our men! They’re trying to denationalise our society.

 

They’ve done a really good job at destroying the army. Like the Australian army is like a politically correct cesspit now. The people in charge of it are more interested in being politically correct than they are in the strategic defense of the nation. I mean I consistently see in their speeches and I was even trying to read some policy stuff recently online, and it was a speech from one of the generals here in Australia, Lieutenant General. And he started the speech, the lecture and it’s about national security. He started it with a “Welcome to Country”, saying that:

 

“We’re on sovereign Aboriginal land and sovereignty was never ceded.”

 

And it’s like, hang on a minute, are you, like you’re a traitor! This is outright treason! We’ve got people that are leading us, and these are the people throwing Ben Roberts-Smith, under the bus.

 

And so it’s as Joel said in his interview:

 

“It’s emblematic of all the problems in this country!”

 

Where actual soldiers fighting for Australia are getting thrown under the bus by politicians and generals that are saying that Australia is not a sovereign nation, that it’s actually the sovereign territory of the “Kulin people” or some garbage like that. And yeah, that’s obviously very, I mean, offensive is one way to put it. It’s sacrilegious!

 

And it’s also an argument about the sovereignty of Australia we currently have. A sovereign is, as much as I don’t like the guy, it’s the King of England. The King of England is also the King of Australia. And I don’t like him personally. And I think the institution has become rotten.

 

However, I acknowledge that is the sovereign. He represents the British people and the British people are the predominant founding stock of Australia. We’re speaking English, and that’s the way our government works. The foundation of our Nation is in 1901 is a Parliament built on the sovereignty of the King of England. And that flag being stabbed into the soil of this continent in the antipodes in the southern hemisphere. And so to say:

 

“Well, hang on a minute. Actually, that’s not the sovereign. The sovereign is the local flora and fauna that did nothing with this place for 40,000 years!”

 

To say that we’re not sovereign here, they’re the sovereign, well, what defense force are they joining? What defense force are you joining? What Parliament are we sitting in? What, anything that we do. What tax are we paying? Are we just paying tax and serving in the defence force and serving in the institutions?

 

And so, yeah, I can see that’s where this ethno-nationalist movement in our absence, that’s where it’s focusing on. It’s topic specific.

 

Yeah. What else, Mark?

 

[29:13]

 

Mark Collett: Well, no, I want to respond to something, what you said about this soldier. And hear me out here, because when I see people like him, I’m not quite as enthusiastic about them as you are. Now I look at that man and he goes to Afghanistan. The Afghans essentially pose, especially the Afghans, you know, load of Afghan goat herders in Afghanistan. They pose no threat to Australia, Australian people or the West. This guy’s essentially at this point, a paid mercenary who points his gun at anyone his government tells him to. And if the allegations about him are true, that he did shoot civilians and he shot civilians and asked other young, impressionable soldiers to also.

 

Thomas Sewell: He’s not being charged. Yeah. He’s not being charged with shooting civilians. He’s been charged with shooting “disarmed combatants”.

 

Mark Collett: Okay. Disarmed combatants. Okay. Yes. Right. I take that on board!

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: Let’s say he’s actually done that. These are allegations, …

 

Thomas Sewell: I don’t doubt that he’s done it!

 

Mark Collett: Yeah. If he’s done that, though, he’s a bit of a piece of shit! And I’ll tell you why, because, …

 

Thomas Sewell: I disagree, but all right.

 

Mark Collett: Well, I’m going to tell you why. And I’m going to tell you why you’re wrong. With all due respect.

 

The Australian government decided the Afghan people were their enemies because the Australian government are basically a branch of ZOG.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes.

 

Mark Collett: The Australian government also believe that you are their enemy! And people like this Ben Roberts or Ben Roberts-Smith or whatever his name is, he’s the kind of person, the kind of, if this is true, unscrupulous person that the government will employ to police Australia and to clamp down on anyone that the government deems an enemy at any time. And one day, mate, it may well be that Australia’s falling to pieces and that your family are “disarmed combatants” sat with their hands tied behind their backs, staring down the barrels of guns held by ZOGbot enforcers employed by the Australian government. At that point, is it right for those guys to pull the trigger on your wife, your kids, or you? Because the Australian government don’t like you and they’re doing their job and you’re the enemy of the day because Nazis are taking over Australia.

 

Was it right for the men that firebombed Dresden, killed some 450,000 White women, children, elderly Germans and wounded soldiers? Was it right that the American GIs, in many cases shot disarmed young German boys who had been part of Hitler Youth and had signed up to the Wehrmacht? Was it right that Russian soldiers raped German women at the end of the war? Or that Eisenhower essentially starved hundreds of thousands of Germans that were disarmed? You know, people say:

 

“Well, they had it coming! We’re at war with them!”

 

I do believe there are rules. And I think for somebody like you, who is Australia’s arguably Australia’s best known political dissident, it wasn’t that long ago that police officers were brutalizing you and I believe two police officers even joked about killing members of NSN. They’re the kind of, …

 

Thomas Sewell: That’s true.

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, and don’t get me wrong, I believe those cops, if they’d had the chance and no cameras were pointed in their way and they thought they could get away with it, would have shot your lads because they were doing what the Australian government and their superiors thought was right in defense of multicultural Australia. Is that right?

 

I mean, all these ZOG enforcers, whether you fly off to Afghanistan to shoot Afghans because ZOG tells you, or whether you shoot Tom Sewell and the NSN members because ZOG tells you’re still a bit of a ZOG enforcer! And I look at you and I think to myself:

 

“Come on we’ve got to have this straight!”

 

A lot of these people who follow the government’s mandate as soldiers, as police officers, as people that would be used against us, may well one day turn their weapons on us in this way.

 

And I think we need to aim for sort of a higher standard because I firmly believe that if things start breaking down, people like you, myself, dissidents all over the world could well be facing down the barrel of Ben Roberts gun. And what if somebody like him was put in charge of breaking dissident political groups that his government said were a true threat to Australian or British or American democracy? Would it be right for him to kill us?

 

Thomas Sewell: Well, I appreciate the hypothetical, and I can certainly play the game, and play the hypothetical scenario with you, Mark, but I would put forward to you that’s a false equivalency. And that I’m not making an argument some Zogbots are different to other Zogbots. I’d make the argument that our war against Islam in the Middle East was partly justified.

 

Regardless of Israeli influence, I don’t have any sympathy for the Islamic world. I think that Islam is a giant rape gang on a global scale. I don’t care about dead Talibanos at all! I think what Israel’s doing in Palestine is disgusting, because of their moral hypocrisy and because of the fact that they’ve got such control over Western nations they can get away with sniping babies and toddlers and all the crazy stuff that’s going on.

 

[35:03]

 

But we’re not talking about Ben Roberts-Smith going over there as part of ZOG to go snipe babies. Ben Roberts-Smith was part of the Australian Defense Force. He swore an oath to defend the Crown, as I did. And he didn’t make the decision to be deployed to Afghanistan. He didn’t make that decision. He made the decision to be part of an elite unit of Australian soldiers to defend Australian interests, to be part of the Defense Force. And I don’t have any sympathy for these bachabazi, you know, boy fuckers! The Taliban are the most putrid, disgusting human beings on earth! The stories that come out, and it’s not war propaganda. The stories that come out of how these Afghanis live in Afghanistan and how they behave and how they treat their own civilians. I don’t care! And I think it’s a false equivalency to say:

 

“Oh the Taliban are just as noble and fair as the Germans fighting in the Second World War.”

 

I these. I’m not against people having pointy sticks, Mark. I’m not against the fact that he’s paid by the Australian government. You know, he’s technically a mercenary. He’s the same kind of guy that comes and kicks my door in. He might be of the same stock and he might be part of the same or very similar institution to the people kicking my door down, but he didn’t kick my door down. So he didn’t choose to kick my door down. He didn’t kick my door down. He’s not part of the police, he’s part of the SAS*.

 

[* The Special Air Service Regiment, officially abbreviated SASR and commonly known as SAS, is a Special Forces unit of the Australian Army. Formed in 1957 as a company, it was modelled on the British SAS with which it shares the motto “Who Dares Wins”. Expanded to a regiment in August 1964, it is based at Campbell Barracks, in Swanbourne, a suburb of Perth, Western Australia, and is a direct command unit of the Special Operations Command. The regiment first saw active service in Borneo in 1965 and 1966 during the Indonesian Confrontation, mainly conducting reconnaissance patrols, including secret cross-border operations into Indonesian territory.]

 

And I think we’re putting him on a false trial, moral trial here, because he followed the orders that he wanted to follow. I think that you vote with your feet. And if he was morally upset about the war in Afghanistan, he would have left the army. Just as if I was morally upset about the war in Afghanistan, I would have left the army. I wouldn’t have been trying to deploy to Afghanistan.

 

And so my opinion about war is you need men with pointy sticks, and you need men with pointy sticks fighting the enemy. You need men with pointy sticks facing outside, not inside. And I don’t support the men with pointy sticks pointing them inside. I’m totally against what ZOG, obviously, is doing to our own people in our own country, but I think that we should have gone to Afghanistan with the correct intentions. I’m not against the war in Afghanistan. I’m against this nonsense of spreading democracy and freedom and McDonald’s and sodomy to the Middle East. Well, they’re already doing sodomy, but LGBT rights to the Middle East. I think we should have gone to Afghanistan either not at all, or with the intention of absolutely, totally obliterating the Taliban, and completely eradicating the enemy!

 

And then you don’t need to install a new government. The old government is completely gone. And other people will come in to power, and they’re either aligned with our geopolitical interests or they’re not. They’re either allowing Al Qaeda training camps in their mountain hills or they’re not. And they’ll learn the hard way.

 

And I believe in force projection. I don’t believe in a universal morality. I think what’s right for my people is what’s right. I don’t think there’s a universal right and wrong. I think that the laws of combat apply to brothers wars. I don’t think they apply to people that don’t have our value system. The Taliban weren’t. Why should we treat the Taliban better than they were treating us? Well, because we’re in their country?

 

So I think it’s a false equivalency. I think you can’t put Ben Roberts-Smith on trial because the actions of police officers that kick down my door and threaten to kill me. I’ve been in ZOG! I was an Australian soldier, and I’m telling you, the world is changing. And less and less White men are joining the army. And I don’t encourage White men to join the army that much anymore. I tell people. I generally tell people not to. Some men, they kind of have to. They kind of get to get it out of their system. But I told them to focus on politics. I tell them, we got to fix the country, and then we can fix the army. We can’t fix the army from inside the armies. There’s no point joining.

 

But, you know, less and less men of our calibre that are patriotic and nationalistic are joining the army. And more and more, or police, and more and more are joining not to serve their community or serve their nation. They’re joining for a paycheck. And I don’t believe Ben Roberts-Smith is one of those people. And I don’t believe the SAS is that kind of institution. And I get a lot of messages on social media from guys, former SAS guys and current SAS guys. And they say to me:

 

“We all support what you’re doing. Keep up the good work. You’re a name with us. Like, people know who you are. They know that you’re fighting for, that you’re on the money.”

 

People know. And so the government is actually out. In my opinion, the government is at war with people like Ben Roberts-Smith. I don’t think Ben Roberts-Smith is their toy the way it’s been made out. I think they’re afraid of people like Ben Roberts Smith. They’re afraid of Special Forces guys that can’t be controlled. They’re ungovernable and they’re trying to break him. They’re trying to break him for what he represents. He represents these groups of elite soldiers that ultimately they could be a praetorian guard. They could in theory turn on the government. But they’re not going to do that without public support.

 

And so we have to do our job. I think everyone’s doing their job with politics and some people are in the institutions and some people are not. And yeah,

 

Mark Collett: But I’d argue like, …

 

[40:42]

 

Thomas Sewell: Okay, I can entertain the argument that we shouldn’t have been in Afghanistan. Like that we can just bomb the Al Qaeda training camps and we can just defund Israel and blah blah, blah, and ISIS will disappear. Or Al Qaeda at the time was the organisation prior to ISIS. But Al Qaeda will disappear if we bomb enough people, but then we’re bombing people. You know, it’s like, I don’t believe in this, Muslims are generally peaceful, blah, blah.

 

Of course, there’s 1.1 billion of them. There are nefarious entities with a lot of money in the Islamic world. And they want to hurt us and they want to engage in a war with the West. You know, they do want to engage in a war with the West. They don’t hate us for our freedom. I’m not an idiot! [chuckling] They hate us because we’re non-believers! We won’t submit to their God. That’s why they hate us. And yeah, don’t send men like Ben Roberts-Smith to occupy a foreign country unless you want that.

 

So the politicians should be on trial, not Ben Roberts-Smith. So I am going to defend the guy.

 

Mark Collett: But the point is the Taliban aren’t really your enemies.

 

Thomas Sewell: They are! 100%.

 

Mark Collett: No one is 100% your enemy. Your enemy are the people sat in Canberra. Your enemies are the people sat in Australian Parliament.

 

Thomas Sewell: I think they’re both. Both can be true.

 

Mark Collett: No, they’re not.

 

Thomas Sewell: Taliban is my enemy!

 

Mark Collett: No Afghan in Afghanistan poses you any threat whatsoever! Your government poses you the threat and they pay people like Ben Roberts Smith.

 

And I believe quite firmly that if tomorrow the government said to the Australian military, as I’ve said to the Australian police force and Civil Service and social services and all the other, all the other arms of sort of law enforcement in the state that you guys are the ultimate enemy. You would be facing off against those guys who are in Special Forces.

 

And unfortunately we’ve seen that if you look at all the elite police units, counter terror units, if you look at all the branches of the Secret Service who are extremely elite individuals, some of them are drawn from Special Forces. They are the people responsible for kicking nationalist doors in at 6 am and dragging us out of our houses. And I can tell you this, there’s not a single person in Afghanistan who’s ever done anything that has harmed me. But there are plenty of people who work for the British state that have harmed me, my friends, people that I’m close to and have worked to either malign, frustrate or shut down organisations in the UK that are fighting for the betterment of White people.

 

And I think this idea that you know, the Taliban and Al Qaeda and all these groups are our enemies is basically just ZOG propaganda to get young, strong White men out there fighting wars for Israel, when really young, strong White men should be joining nationalist groups and working to get rid of anti-White governments here in the West.

 

The war isn’t in the Middle East, it’s never been in the Middle East. There’s no need for us to be in the Middle East other than the fact that Israel’s there and needs our protection, because ultimately most of these soldiers are just pawns on the chessboard for a bunch of supremacist jews that run Israel!

 

My belief is young White men, they need to be at home pushing back against their government and they don’t need to be part of the government brainwashing machine.

 

And that’s another thing. When people join the army today and I know people who are in the army, I know people who work in different branches of the government, whether it’s social services, local council services, etc, these people are regularly indoctrinated, monitored, and they are told that the greatest threat to what they serve and the country that they work for is actually people like us and our thought processes.

 

Thomas Sewell: I know. I know. Do they believe it?

 

Mark Collett: Well, many do, or they wouldn’t be kicking our doors in, would they mate? You know those cops who wanted to kill you and your friends? They did believe it. And they are the people, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I think they’re a minority. I think the average cop that kicks my door in, because I ask them, I say to them:

 

“How do you feel about doing this to me and my family?”

 

And they are mercenaries for ZOG, and they admit that they’re mercenaries for ZOG, and they say:

 

“Well, look, mate, I wouldn’t be doing this if I won the lotto.”

 

That’s what they all say to me:

 

“Oh, look, mate, I gotta pay a mortgage.”

 

That’s what they all say to me. That’s their justification for doing it:

 

“I’m just following orders.”

 

And I say:

 

“That sounds familiar.”

 

So I know what you’re talking about. But I don’t equate the men with pointy sticks pointing outwards with the men with pointy sticks pointing inwards.

 

You know, I think men should be judged on their merits. I think men should be judged on their merits. And can we say that Ben Roberts-Smith is politically naive? Yes, of course. Absolutely! He’s politically naive. Is he in bad faith? No.

 

[45:56]

 

 

And I think that there’s a difference between people who have, I see what Ben Robert-Smith, what he’s done. I see it in the same moral paradigm as any man in this country that goes to work and pays tax and has a job. I don’t see his behaviour is any less moral than going to work and paying tax and paying a mortgage to international finance. Because every single man that I know, when I say:

 

“You should get more involved, you should be more political.”

 

You know what they say to me?:

 

“Oh, I’ve got a mortgage. Oh, I’ve got all these bills. Oh my job, my career!”

 

And it’s like your career in what? Who are you paying tax to? A government that’s destroying us. Who are you paying a mortgage to? A nefarious group of people that hate us and are trying to destroy us. So it’s easy to hate on Ben Robert-Smith for shooting the Taliban and in the back of the head while they’re in the killing field. It’s really easy to hate on him. But what about all the men that every day fuel the beast? Every day go to work and pay tax to a system that is just bringing in more and more migrants to ethnically replace us in our own country? I think, honestly, if I want to compare the two, I would say they’re more immoral! I would say the average man in this country that goes to work and pays tax is more immoral than Ben Roberts-Smith. Ben Roberts-Smith is overseas killing what I define as the enemy. That’s how I see it.

 

And so when you’re going to work, … Because I don’t think that they’re doing it for ZOG. I don’t think these men are doing it for ZOG and I think that he’s of a calibre, …

 

Mark Collett: He’s not making life better for Australians, has he? And that’s the point., …

 

Thomas Sewell: One less, one less Saracen jihadist on earth! So total happiness improves.

 

Mark Collett: Muslims living in the West must go. But some random goat herder who’s [chuckling] never going to leave Afghanistan is not our problem. And this is the issue. This is the, … You’re buying into the Tommy Robinson narrative.

 

Thomas Sewell: There’s a black and white here, Mark, and I don’t believe it’s black and white like that. I think there’s a hierarchy and I agree with you on your hierarchy. But you have to admit that it’s a hierarchy. It’s not black and white. These people aren’t a threat and these people are a threat. They’re both a threat. But obviously they, people destroying our society are in government, or they’re in banking, they’re in media, they’re in finance. This is obviously the major issue!

 

But I’m not going to hate on someone because he’s dealing with a lesser threat. And you can argue that it’s a much lesser threat. And I more or less agree with that argument. The average goat herder in Afghanistan is not the major threat.

 

Mark Collett: It’s a zero threat!

 

Thomas Sewell: It’s not zero threat. It’s not zero, because, …

 

Mark Collett: They’re never going to get here. The only reason they get here is because we’ve got traitorous governments. It’s like you don’t have a problem with people overseas until your government allows them to come in and welcome them in the Afghans are never going to invade Australia, until the Australian government gave them council houses and said:

 

“Come here and do as you please!”

 

The invasion isn’t even masterminded by Afghans. It’s masterminded by men and women sat in Canberra who are taking away your freedom of speech.

 

Thomas Sewell: Sure, Absolutely! Absolutely! But this idea that Islamists in the Middle East are not part of a civilisational threat to us, I think is wrong! If we’re looking at this isolated individual, if, for example, we’re saying this one little Afghan farmer, he’s no threat to us. It’s like, of course, he’s a little ant on the other side of the earth.

 

But you know, Alexander the Great, when he’s invading northern India, what did northern Indians do to Macedonia? I’m just looking at this from a, beyond geopolitics. I’m looking at this from a civilisational perspective. The Northern Indians didn’t do anything to Macedonia. So why is he there with 40,000 Macedonian, you know, phalanx? Why is he, why is he there with all his Macedonian soldiers all the way in Northern India, invading Northern India? I actually don’t care about the Northern India. I care about Alexander the Great! I care about the greatness of Western civilisation and the expansiveness of the Aryan race. Europe either breathes in or breathes out.

 

Now obviously these guys got played. They obviously got played, right? Don’t get me wrong, they got played, okay? And I agree with that they got played. But their intentions were righteous. And when we look at you brought up Dresden and stuff like that. My great grandfather was a Lancaster bomber pilot. But they joined the Air force and they fought for king and country for what was intended to be a noble reason. Obviously wars get dirty and it was a disgusting war, the Second World War. And obviously the British people, the Australian people, the American people and the Russian people as well. The Russians were co-opted by the Soviets. Obviously these men, they fought with an ounce of patriotism and nationalism and it was obviously manipulated against the interests of Western civilisation. It ultimately was not in the interest of Britain to engage in that war.

 

[50:58]

 

But I’m not going to say that the British soldiers aren’t heroes like in general for their courage. I worship, well, worship is probably a very strong word. But I respect the hero on the merit of heroism. And Ben Roberts-Smith isn’t just shooting civilians like in the field. Like there was encounters where Ben Roberts-Smith, they were in ambushes. The ANA betrayed them and ambushed them with the Taliban. And Ben Roberts-Smith in one encounter killed 50 of these people in one encounter by himself. You know, I mean the guy is just, he’s an archetype of the hero. The guy was running at machine guns with three steel plates on his chest. I can respect the heroism being on the battlefield and running at the machine gun and fighting tooth and nail. And that’s my belief system, Mark. And like we can agree to disagree on it. But I can appreciate, I can appreciate the warrior for the warrior. He’s not a priest! I’m not claiming he’s a priest. I’m not claiming he understands politics super well. I’m not saying:

 

“I’m not saying this guy is God, emperor, warrior, priest Ben Roberts-Smith!”

 

But what I’m saying is he represents the archetype of the warrior. Just like the British soldiers in World War II. We can agree that what they fought for ultimately has damaged Britain. But we can agree that they fought. Just like the Anzacs. Like, we worship the ANZACS here in Australia. We say the Anzacs are our foundation legacy, they’re a part of our civic religion. We have a civic religion here in Australia, where Australia’s foundation is built around the Anzac mythos.

 

But these men ultimately fought for Israel, for the creation of Israel. Like, they fought to break the Ottoman Empire in Gallipoli. In Turkey, they broke the Ottoman Empire that caused the British Palestine Mandate, which later caused Israel. So I should just throw all the Anzacs under the bus? I don’t believe in that. I can respect that, the hero for being the hero. I can respect the ANZAC for being the Anzac and at the same time say like, I can respect the 16 year old boys that died in Kokoda in the trail fighting the Japanese Empire and at the same time be like:

 

“We manipulated Japan into declaring war with the West. They could have just focused on China and extracted resources and blah, blah, blah!”

 

And those that wanted war with Germany created war with Japan and we never needed to go to war with Japan. They weren’t a threat. You know, the Japanese weren’t really a threat to Australia. They only declared war on America and Australia because they were forced into it.

 

And so we can have this take on geopolitics. That doesn’t mean the guys that fought at Kokoda weren’t heroes, Mark. No Japanese soldier ever shut down the bank accounts of the fascist movement in Australia in 1930. It’s like, so?

 

Mark Collett: But that’s an important point, because otherwise you fall down the Tommy Robinson narrative. So Tommy Robinson, he raises one valid point, that Muslims here in the UK do horrific things to young British girls and in some cases young British boys.

 

And I want to make it totally clear, I don’t want any Muslims in Britain at all! I want them all to go. I want every mosque to be closed down. I want this to be 95% White British country, where the few that remain are overwhelmingly of White European descent from elsewhere in the world.

 

So you have some White Australians here, some White Americans here some Germans, some French, but we’re 95% White British. But Tommy Robinson, he’ll raise this valid point and then he’ll say:

 

“Look, we need to have the warrior spirit, we need fighting men. And the best way to put it up the Muslims is to go and fight in places like Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan!”

 

He spreads that narrative. And then when we do go and fight there, it has three effects. The first effect is we spend lots of money and lots of our young men either die or come back with horrific injuries. The second effect is the Muslims here in Britain become far, far more radicalised and do far more horrible things to our people in terms of revenge.

 

And the third thing that it does is it creates a never ending stream of Muslims coming to the West as refugees, as translators. And for all the piss and vinegar from people like Tommy Robinson and all these “we’ve got to go and fight them abroad”, the net effect is British people suffer because money spent abroad. British people suffer because their sons and daughters go over there and fight and come back in body bags or maimed. And then British people suffer because more people come from Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East because we’ve kicked the hornet’s nest. Never once has one of these foreign wars that Ben Roberts has fought in resulted in a better world for Europeans!

 

In fact, quite the opposite. And we’ve got lots of people who are great warriors, wonderful with guns, expertly trained, incredibly fit, people who would make me wince with the physical feats they can carry out. And they went to Afghanistan, they went to Iraq, they’re probably on the borders of Iran as we speak. They’ve operated in places like Syria and Libya. And I’m sure they’re great warriors in your book, but their actions unfortunately have led to a greater demographic shift here.

 

And if you go and do something and you are part of a machine whose actions reduce us to a minority and make our life worse whilst only enriching one particular group of people who are the Zionists, the people that Tommy Robinson works for, how is that a good outcome for us?

 

[57:08]

 

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I stand by the point I made earlier that that is not the isolated fault and guilt and responsibility of one particular class of people just because they’re trained gunmen. Every single person in this society that’s not a full-time nationalist is contributing to the machine. I agree with a lot of what you’ve said on this subject, that it has. These wars have not helped us. Absolutely, you’re right. These wars haven’t helped us. These wars have harmed us. Absolutely! I 100% agree with you! They have harmed us, they have brought in a never ending stream of immigration. That wasn’t Ben Roberts-Smith’s decision. I assure you if Ben Roberts-Smith was Prime Minister or he was in Parliament, he would be trying to stop that. So, and I think that’s my central point is that it’s actually men like Ben Roberts-Smith that they’re taking out.

 

There’s a guy in government at the moment called Andrew Hastie and he is part of the machine and he was in the SAS and him and two of his buddies testified against Ben Roberts-Smith and that’s why he’s being put up on these war crime charges. And he is part of ZOG! He is part of the machine! He is responsible for destroying this country! And he is the deputy leader of the Liberal Party, which is our version of the Conservative Party, here in Australia. They pretend to be conservative to get votes, no different to yours. But like yours at least they kind of are conservative, which is a shit ideology. These people aren’t even agreeing with the shit ideology. They’re pretending to agree with the shit ideology.

 

And so Ben Roberts-Smith could become a political force in this country. I think it’s quite obvious the way Ben Roberts-Smith was gearing himself up after leaving the SAS. He was making political manoeuvres. Ben Roberts-Smith was getting on the boards of the Return Service League. He was getting on the boards of all these like ex-soldier organisations, community organisations. He was getting involved with the War Museum, he was getting involved culturally, he was getting active, he was getting political, Mark. And he wasn’t joining the Liberal Party because obviously he doesn’t like the Liberal Party. He doesn’t like what they’ve done to Australia. And he was looking at other options.

 

And I believe that Hastie, Andrew Hastie, sees Ben Roberts-Smith as a political threat to him. I think in a different timeline we could have had a Ben Roberts-Smith, you know, MP as opposed to an Andrew Hastie MP. I don’t think it’s as clear cut as everyone that’s in the army or everyone that fights in these wars is a Zogbot. I don’t think it’s as clear cut as that. I think some people like, am I a Zogbot, because I was in the Australian Army? Like obviously I came to my senses. I obviously came to my senses, but the point is that I joined the army. I applied to join the army at 17 years old because I loved my country and I wanted to fight for my country and I wanted to fight my country’s enemies and I wanted to put that to good use.

 

And so the soldiers on the ground, I think it’s a false equivalent equivalency to say:

 

“Well, you’re part of the beast, you’re responsible!”

 

And it’s, well, hang on a minute! They going over to Afghanistan because they don’t want Afghanis in Australia. And yes, you’re right, …

 

Mark Collett: But that results in more of them coming there!

 

Thomas Sewell: It has.

 

Mark Collett: That’s what’s happened!

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes, it has. Yes, it has. You’re right! That is what’s happened.

 

Mark Collett: It’s like me saying:

 

“I don’t want war!”

 

It’s like me saying, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Because they’re getting stabbed in the back!

 

Mark Collett: It’s like I don’t want more water into my house, but then I feed a hose through my window and turn it to max! That is not the way to go about drying the house out, is it?

 

Thomas Sewell: I think that’s a false metaphor or false equivalency. It’s like saying:

 

“I don’t like pit bulls.”

 

And then you go to the suburb over and go, kill a pit bull in the suburb over. And then somebody else is bringing pit bulls into your suburb because the suburbs not safe for pit bulls that you’re killing in the other suburb. That’s to me a more accurate metaphor. It’s like, Ben, Roberts-Smith is going over to Afghanistan because he doesn’t like pit bulls. He’s trying to get rid of them. He’s trying to get rid of this dangerous breed. And it’s like, meanwhile, he’s getting stabbed in the back. They’re bringing this dangerous breed into Australia!

 

And so it’s like he’s not pouring the water into his own house, Mark. He’s trying to deal with this issue externally because he’s pointing the pointy stick outside Australia.

 

Mark Collett: He’s pointing the pointy stick and chasing them into Australia, because that’s what happens. When these soldiers go abroad and fight these wars the undoubted end, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Roberts-Smith didn’t open the borders. And no one in the Australian army joins the Australian arm for that reason.

 

Mark Collett: And every time soldiers from Britain, America, Australia go to the Middle East, the net effect is more Muslims come to Britain and never once, …

 

Thomas Sewell: And how often Mark, how old are you? Mark, how old are you?

 

Mark Collett: I’m 45.

 

[1:02:04]

 

 

Thomas Sewell: And I’m 33. And we have the wisdom in our middle years. We’re definitely not old men. We’re fit, young, middle aged men or slightly younger than middle aged men perhaps. And we have the wisdom to know this. We have the wisdom to know this.

 

But you know, guys that are 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, like when do these guys join the army? You don’t join the army at 33 years old. You don’t join the army at 45

 

Mark Collett: Which is good.

 

Thomas Sewell: It doesn’t happen. When I was at basic training, the oldest guy like the “grandpa, gramps” at basic training was 25. A guy called Coxy, he was 20. That was the oldest guy at basic training. Everyone was 17, 18, everyone. The second oldest guy was like 22. And we were like:

 

“Whoa! It’s like a grown arse man!”

 

He’s as old as the corporals. We were like, you know what I mean? Like a 22 year old. When I was at basic training, a 22 year old was like an old guy that we looked up to and we were like asking him questions about shit! We’re like:

 

“What do you think of so and so? What do you think of this guy?”

 

You know, we were fucking kids, Mark! You know, we didn’t know joining the army that they’re going to be flooding Australia full of Muslims. We joined the army to fight Muslims! We thought that if we fight them on the front line in their country, they’re not going to be fighting on our turf.

 

Mark Collett: But the exact opposite happened.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes. And we can reflect on that now as older men and we can say:

 

“Hey, don’t join the army!”

 

And we can say to young guys, blah, blah, blah, we can steer guys in the right direction:

 

“The real issue, the real threat is government. The real threat are the traitors in government that are stabbing us in the back!”

 

And they’re not putting Ben Roberts-Smith on a pedestal and having him in the Liberal Party and soak in votes and say:

 

“We need to bring more Afghan refugees into the country.”

 

Like Andrew Hastie, his counterpart. Another guy that was in the SAS, that has stabbed Ben Roberts-Smith in the back! He’s testified against him, he’s ratted on his own boys! He’s the piece of shit! Andrew Hastie’s the piece of shit! So that’s my position on it.

 

Like Hitler talks about this in Mein Kampf. When you’re fighting on the front line, your focus is on the enemy. And so Hitler was so pissed off and he got involved in politics at the conclusion of the First World War because his focus was fighting on the front line, rightly or wrongly! You know what I mean? It’s like Hitler’s fighting on the front line. What? You know the British are there to defend the little countries, to defend Belgium and the Netherlands, and the Germans are there to fight for the empire, the German Empire. And it’s like, so you’ve got these young guys being manipulated to fight against each other. And then where this political energy comes from in this expansion of fascism in the 1920s and 1930s across Europe was like:

 

“Well, hang on a minute. While the warriors were not thinking about politics and just doing what they thought was the right thing and serving their nation, they were getting stabbed in the back by politicians and a political class and a communist class and a traitor class!”

 

And that creates the rise of fascism. And I can feel that happening in Australia, in America, in Britain, with people that are leaving defense or people that are fed up with these institutions, people that are leaving the police force. Look, Mark, you know how I feel about police officers. I’ve obviously been treated pretty badly by police officers. My men have been treated badly by police officers.

 

But there’s a lot of ex-police officers that come up to me in the street and say:

 

“I support what you’re doing. I’ve retired from Victoria Police now, so I can say it, blah, blah, blah, keep on track, I think you’re a good man, blah, blah, blah.”

 

And they’re sorry for what’s happened to us by the institution. It’s the leadership that are responsible. It’s the institution. These guys just obviously it’s changing and less and less good quality men are joining these institutions.

 

Is that a good thing? Yes, in some ways, it’s to and fro. There’s pros and cons to good men not joining these institutions. There’s pros and cons! I think there are some cons because if it sucks having your own kind of men, seeing men of your own calibre, seeing guys point machine guns at your family. But I have spoken to some of these special operations guys that have pointed guns at people’s families. And I have spoken to them. And I won’t go into too much detail. I don’t want to get them in trouble. But their position on it is:

 

“Hey, this is nothing compared to how bad it could be!”

 

And I know that sounds like a, I’m not saying this, like a defeatist thing, but what they’re saying is:

 

“It’s just your turn at the moment, and it’s not even that bad. Get over it, soldier!”

 

And that might be hard to accept at face value, but it’s like, can we turn this around? What does that look like? The possibilities are infinite. What does it look like?

 

I mean, you got Nick Fuentes saying:

 

“Join these institutions and subvert them from within. And un-subvert them from within and get involved in institutional power.”

 

You’ve got people like Jacob [Hersant] saying:

 

“Drain the beast, or Masons.”

 

You’ve got like “put the system under siege” mentality. You’ve got people saying the exact opposite of Fuentes. And I usually side with that mentality. I say:

 

“Don’t join the police, don’t join the army!”

 

But some people are going to do that regardless of whether we tell them to or not. And there’s a lot of good, spirited young men that aren’t listening to us. We have a relatively small audience compared to Tommy Robinson or compared to the mainstream media. And so they’re going to do it.

 

And so it’s like, how do we jujitsu that? That’s probably a bad way of putting it, but how do we mobilise that into political victory downstream?

 

[1:07:53]

 

And so, yes, they are getting lectured. They are getting lectured. But the Soviet Union, before it collapsed, lectured a lot of people on Soviet values. It doesn’t last! Their regime’s not going to last. You know, they can talk about LGBT rights and:

 

“The greatest threat to democracy are these neo-Nazi guys like Thomas Sewell!”

 

And there’s a lot of guys in these institutions that are secretly in the group chat going like:

 

“Thomas Sewell’s a legend!”

 

So they’re not falling for it. Those that are falling for it want to fall for it. You know that guy that threatened, that cop that threatened to kill my boys in South Australia? He’s a lil’ Reddit, you know, low IQ, fucking hive mind, you know, cuck boy! I would say he’s in the minority now. It’s a good point. Golden Dawn, it’s a good case study. Golden Dawn, allegedly 50% of the riot police in Greece were members of Golden Dawn. And the riot police still acted in regards to the Greek government in shutting down Golden Dawn.

 

But you know that that’s obviously a very bad statistic. You’ve got 50% control of the police members of your political party and your political party still gets banned? How do we deal with this, Mark? How do we move forward?

 

Mark Collett: I’ll tell you, I’ll tell you! I think you’re talking nonsense mate! And I’ll tell you why.

 

Here in Britain, the police force, and this is why you need to be slightly more open to what I’m saying. Here in Britain, the police force who are there to protect and serve, social services who are charged with specifically children’s welfare and looking after children, okay? They, between them, along with other government groups, conspired not only to cover up the greatest case of organised mass rape Britain has ever seen! Where more than a hundred thousand White British girls have been sexually abused, raped, trafficked, even murdered by Muslim men. And the police and social services conspired to cover it up.

 

But not only did they conspire to cover it up, they also worked relentlessly to brutalise, harassment, silence, arrest any people including parents groups, political organisations, who tried to blow the whistle on what was happening. Now I think the idea that secretly amongst these police forces that cover up these crimes, harass us, and silence genuine victims of anti-White crime, amongst these police forces there’s just ranks and ranks of them ready to take up arms with us. I think that is wishful thinking to the greatest degree!

 

And I think secondly, …

 

Thomas Sewell: I didn’t say about England, you know how I feel about British police.

 

Mark Collett: But I think the police force in Australia would be the same. And I think if push came to, …

 

Thomas Sewell: I think it’s turning that way. No, I think it’s absolutely turning that way!

 

Mark Collett: If push came to shove and the government declared you a terrorist group and told the police that anyone who’d ever been a member of NSN had to be rounded up tomorrow, the police would eagerly do it. And then I think if, …

 

Thomas Sewell: They would do it.

 

Mark Collett: If they ordered the army to assist, I think the army would do it too.

 

Thomas Sewell: They probably would too.

 

Mark Collett: So at that point, yeah, so at that point you’re dealing with hostile people.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: And I would say this, I don’t know what goes on exactly in Australia with non-White criminality or anti-White crime. But it wouldn’t shock me if there wasn’t cover ups going on now. And I’ll tell you why.

 

There have been cover ups in France with these church burnings. There have been mass cover ups in Germany around crimes specifically related to Turkish criminals, gangsters groups bringing in firearms from Turkey and controlling the criminal underworld in Germany. And I would find it to be very strange if all these cover ups were taking place in European nations, but weren’t taking place in Australia.

 

And I think we’re living in a world now where people who work for the system, especially those in law enforcement, are being specifically vetted to be against people like you and I, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes!

 

Mark Collett: And I see all of this as a package of people that are our enemies. And look, I believe in the warrior spirit. I believe in struggle, I believe in men being Hardy. I talk about this all the time. But if you’re going to be a warrior, you’ve got to fight the right enemy to be in my good books.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. Look, absolutely there is institutional corruption in Australia! Is it as bad as Britain? No! Did we have a mass rape epidemic in Australia like there is in Britain? There’s isolated cases, yes. But it’s not anywhere near on the same industrial scale. Did the police in Australia do their job? Mostly. They did. When these rapes started happening, the Australian police and the Australian court actually like threw all these Muslims in jail. And there’s some classic cases that were popularised in the media where they didn’t actually try to do that here in Australia. I don’t know why it didn’t work. I can only put it down to the fact that we have an old guard that are not child rapists. And I do believe there is an old guard in Australia. Is this old guard dying and retiring? Yes, absolutely, absolutely! They’re retiring from the police force or they’ve already retired. They’re retiring from, …

 

Mark Collett: Just to interject there, Tom, I think we sent all our actual real criminals, like hardened street fighters to Australia, but we kept the child abusing paedophiles here in Britain, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: And that’s why our entire establishment is run by child abusing paedophiles who obviously love the Muslim child abusing paedophiles. Whereas your criminals and your police, I will admit, may be cut from a slightly different cloth.

 

[1:14:05]

 

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. There are 27 high profile paedophiles in Australia that are being protected. Including a former Prime Minister. I can’t remember the name of the files, but some people call it “The John Howard Files”. It’s not John Howard that’s in it. Well, he probably is, but he’s not the paedophile that’s been accused. But John Howard, a former Prime Minister, put a 99 year seal on 27 high profile judges, senior police officers, politicians, and one prime minister, and probably people in defense as well, that are convicted paedophiles and they’re convicted in secret courts. For the sake of the Australian integrity of the system these people have not been named.

 

And so there is institutional corruption here in Australia. And that’s pretty heinous that it’s from the top down. The fish stinks from the top [head] down. And obviously the Australian political class were just as deeply involved with the Epstein scandal and the Epstein files. I think it was Paul Keating’s daughter was basically like one of Epstein’s little girls. So there’s many photos of Paul Keating’s daughter going in and out of Epstein’s Manhattan apartment. While she was in her, I think, late teens, an adult, but in her late teens.

 

And so who knows when that relationship started, how young she was. And when he sold his daughter to Epstein to be part of the political class here in Australia. No doubt there’s mass institutional corruption!

 

But yeah, again we are, yeah, things, it’s all coming out in the wash when it comes to the, as you say, the special units they’re using to hunt down political dissidents are being vetted for having particular Left-wing values. And they are being vetted to having particular anti-national and anti-White values. That is true. That is happening in real time. I’ve seen it transform in the time I’ve been involved in nationalism. I’ve seen it go from one end to this end over 10 years. And the reason why I continue to defend Ben Roberts-Smith is because if this was to have happened right now, where we’ve got a great awakening and a great zeitgeist of thought and understanding, I think the attitudes would be a little bit different.

 

But when we go back 15 years ago, I mean, who knew what was going on 15 years ago? A bunch of conspiracy theorists on the Internet. I mean there was some anti-war protesting, but it was from the Left-wing perspective. They were protesting war because they’re anti-war in general. I’m not anti-war in general. And obviously I wasn’t old enough or an, or intelligent enough or well read enough at the time to take a Right-wing anti-war position on say, Iraq.

 

So yeah, I think we should get off the topic. You’ve had your say. I’ve had my say.

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, look, I’ve got to say I want to thank you for being such a good sport. I like it when you come on and we have a bit of a back and forth. And to the people in the chat who some of them are saying like I love Muslims or Tom’s ZOGed, look, …

 

Thomas Sewell: I haven’t checked the chat.

 

Mark Collett: Two people having a reasoned debate, okay? As friends, neither of us are insulting each other. Both of us have been extremely respectful. No one’s even said the slightest insulting thing to one another. This is how movements deal with issues. Figureheads discuss them like adults. And if you’re in the chat insulting either one of us, you’re not really in the spirit of what we. Of what we’re doing here tonight. And I have muted a couple of comments who have said insulting things about both myself and Tom.

 

So if you’re one of the people who is saying that either, Tom’s a Zogbot or I’m a Muslim lover, well, I think that’s unfair and there’s just absolutely unnecessary to do so because this has been completely polite. And if figureheads in a movement can’t debate one another and have a reasoned discussion as friends, I don’t know what we can do.

 

But look, let’s move on. I think that’s about the end of the topics we were going to discuss anyway. We’ve gone an hour and, 20 minutes. We’ll do the Superchats. If you haven’t Superchatted yet and you’d like to contribute to the show, please do ask any questions. We’ll answer them. But please do be respectful. And the people have muted. I’ll unmute them after the show when they’ve calmed down and stopped acting like complete spergs.

 

Because I think both me and Tom can agree that part of being a White man is understanding how to control your emotions. When somebody says something that you may disagree with. If you can’t control your emotions and you have to start jumping around [chuckling] screaming and shouting like a madman, you probably not being the best avatar for our people.

 

Anyway, let’s do some of these Superchats. Thank you to everyone who’s donated so far. If people want to donate, that would be absolutely fantastic! It really helps me out and I think it’s been a really entertaining show tonight. And I love doing these chats with Tom, especially when we debate.

 

In fact, Tom is so good at these debates, I could easily schedule him for once a month to debate on a topic with me. If there was one, because I do enjoy it. It’s been a really good back and forth. Nationless Nationalist gave $5. Thanks so much. Said:

 

“Good interpretation of the subject.”

 

Thank you so much! UK granny gave $25 and said:

 

“Thank you, Mark.”

 

Thank you so much! Open Borders for Israel said:

 

“Tom is an Australian hero. Great to see his exchange with the female Channel 7 reporter the other night.”

 

What was that? I haven’t seen that.

 

[1:19:50]

 

Thomas Sewell: Sorry, what? I was reading the comments. What was the question?

 

Mark Collett: The Channel 7 reporter.

 

Thomas Sewell: Oh, that was months ago. That must have just popped up in whoever’s NewsFeed. The Channel 7 reporter outside the court that was like, behaving in a kind of fawning manner. Is that what he was asking about?

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, he said he liked seeing it.

 

Thomas Sewell: Well, I think we discussed this last time, or maybe I discussed it with somebody else on stream. But yeah, I mean, ultimately, you know, politics is so boring, mainstream media politics and women are not actually used to. I mean, the public is not used to, but especially women are not used to men just saying it as it is. And we don’t have a filter. We just say what we think the truth is. We just say our truth. And women find that absolutely tingling! Whether they agree with it or not.

 

And people need to stop being, … It’s just more proof that you can. What’s important is saying the truth and saying it confidently and strongly. It’s not. You don’t need to morally police yourself to appease women or appease the feminine masses. The feminine masses, Hitler describes the masses as being inherently feminine. They kind of go with the strongest force. And if you’re giving them negative tingles, it’s ultimately a good thing. That’s more powerful politics than being boring. There’s basically nothing worse in politics than being boring. So just say the truth, say it loud, say it strong. And even people that disagree with you, unless they’re revolting, like Lefties, like, with blue hair, and they look like freaks!

 

But if they’re just like a normal person that’s kind of brainwashed by the Lefty institutions, when they hear the other side some people call it juxtaposition. It’s like when they hear the other side in such a way, it kind of rattles them, but it rattles them in a good way. Like, it makes them excited, it makes them interested, it makes them, like, pay attention. And you can’t say that journalists are, they’re obviously horrible people, but you can’t say that they’re bored when they’re interviewing me, they’re just like:

 

“This is what I come to work for. This is awesome!”

 

And so then you can’t get silenced that way. No matter how many times Left academics write article saying:

 

“Stop promoting these people. You need to asphyxiate them! Stop interviewing them!”

 

They have to do it. They have to do it! And so how do you counter Leftist academics instructing the media to silence us? Obviously they’re going to manipulate what we say. You know, it is what it is. You just got to play your cards as best you can.

 

Mark Collett: What Tom is describing is an interesting quirk of the female personality. Whereas men are generally most happy when a female listens contently to what the man has to say and politely agrees and giggles at the right time, women actually don’t particularly like that. Women don’t look for partners who basically roll over and just listen to them Prattle on.

 

In fact, women quite like men who are strong, can challenge them and hold their own points and show themselves to be dominant. So men generally don’t look for., … Well, men who are wired correctly do not look for a dominant female. They look for a female that is going to be basically their support. The person who listens to them, agrees with them, learns from them. That is attractive for a male. The opposite is generally attractive for a female. The female wants a man who will stand his ground. And even when she’s saying:

 

“Well, I don’t think I like what you’re saying.”

 

If the man states it confidently, calmly, and doesn’t back down, that makes her melt inside. Because women, generally speaking, if they’re wired correctly, do desire an alpha male. They do look for a man who isn’t going to bow to their every whim. That’s why men who get friend zoned are generally guys that agree with the woman who they like, incessantly. So they agree with everything they say:

 

“Everything they do is great.”

 

They can never give them any criticism. And women get bored of that. And they see that man as a doormat. No woman’s going to see Tom as a doormat.

 

In fact, some of these liberal women who work in sort of TV studios are probably surrounded by gimpy little doormats all day. And Tom’s probably the first man that woman has met doing her job, that is actually an alpha, and that just blows her away!

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, a lot of the criticism I see from these kind of liberal men is the same dynamic as simping and White knighting. So even when you take the sexual or the sex of the journalist out of the equation, what you’ll find is that when nationalists stand up and they’re strong and they’re confident about what’s happening. The kind of men that agree with that are men that are wired correctly. There are other patriots, there are other nationalists and they’ll say:

 

“This guy gets it, this guy understands what’s wrong with the country.”

 

And they say:

 

“I support this guy.”

 

And then what you’ll find is the same snarky kind of like libtard Redditor beta males that would like try and snipe you in part of their beta. It’s part of their sexual, … Like you can’t actually separate sex and politics. Sex and politics are inherently tied together.

 

[1:25:22]

 

 

So when people see it on camera, when they see like a sexual energy within a political force, or a dynamic, it like obviously it excites them because it’s like:

 

“Oh, okay, I’m actually seeing this in real time, bleed together.”

 

But all politics is sexual. And so understanding that the weak men are always going to snipe the strong men, that’s what weak men do, they snipe. And it’s part of a strategy. They feel intimidated by the presence, so they’ve got to tear down the alpha. And it’s an attempt to White knight in order to win favour from the women. And ultimately the women don’t respect them.

 

Women don’t respect liberal men. Liberal men are like eight times more likely to see a therapist and they’re eight times, 10 times more likely to be on antidepressants and all this sort of like liberal men, they’re not breeding, they’re getting cucked they’re below replacement. They’re not wired correctly and they’re basically funneling themselves out of the gene pool.

 

Whereas like strong men, strong hearted men, whether you want to call that conservative men, patriotic man, nationalist man, whatever label you put on it, there are men that are wired correctly. And we’re reproducing, maybe not in our 20s, but most guys in their 30s and 40s are reproducing. We’re above replacement. You know, we’re having big families, we’ve got these strong values. And yeah, when the system says:

 

“Your values are wrong, I’m offended. Blah, blah, blah!”

 

Just treat it like the same you would in a relationship. It’s just like you don’t disagree with what I’m saying. You just don’t like the way I’m saying. It’s like, so just be quiet and do as you’re told! And that’s basically what fascism or National Socialism or ethno-nationalism, that’s ultimately a force that needs to be driving behind it.

 

Last night, I know you probably weren’t paying attention, Mark, and rightly so, but in Australia, there was a nonsense debate between Michael Nelson, one of the young Zoomers, and a Zoomer girl called Bass Blondie, who’s not actually blonde. And they had a Twitter space and it went on for hours. And I was losing brain cells. But I listened to it because I wanted to hear the dynamic because these are people in their early, very early 20s. And they were having an argument over, I guess, like, women’s role in politics. And it was entertaining, to some degree.

 

But, yeah, listening to that last night was, yes, fascinating! I could talk about that for a while, but I’ll spare you. But there is a lot of that. People are trying to find their feet and figure out what the right approach is for these energies. What is the right application of the feminine energy within the political sphere in totality. And what’s the right energy that men need to put forward. And yeah, I think nature is going to solve the problem. Birds and bees!

 

Mark Collett: So thank you. DerCherusker gave $5. Thanks so much. Said:

 

“Powerful episode. Hail to you, Mark and Thomas. De camp ist de vanta Aladinga. Struggle is the father of all things.”

 

Well, I couldn’t agree more. ThinRedLine gave $5. Thanks so much. Said:

 

“Secure the future of our people. One minute ago, Mark Collett. Mark, can you ask Tom if he thinks the Australian military would., …”

 

Oh, it’s sort of relating to our little debate. He said:

 

“Do you think the Australian military would open fire on Australians if ordered to?”

 

Thomas Sewell: Oh, I mean, that’s, … I think some would. I don’t think they, … I think some would. The Australian military, I mean, we’re talking about 60,000 people. I think some would. There’s a percentage that would be just straight goy cattle that would. What is that exact percentage? I don’t know. Somewhere between 1% and maybe 10%. I don’t think the average Australian soldier would do that. No, absolutely not! I think you’re more likely to find a police officer that would do it.

 

And I think that was proven during the Covid lockdowns. That the average police officer, like probably more than 50% of police officers, if it came, if push came to shove, they’ll point the spear at their own people, and they’ve just been conditioned to do that. You’ll find that Australian soldiers were put in Melbourne, they were put next to police officers at military style checkpoints in these like 5k radius zones trying to block people from like going and visiting their friends during Covid. And I got pulled over and it was a cop and a soldier. And the soldier had his rifle on him, which is pretty like:

 

“Oh, that’s pretty Orwellian!”

 

And they pulled me over because I was going for a drive to see a friend, and I was way outside, I was like 40km outside my radius, my 5k radius. And instead of showing my driver’s licence, I pulled out my old like 10 year expired military ID that I still had in my wallet and the soldier just looked at it and was like:

 

“This is expired.”

 

And I was like:

 

“Yeah.”

 

And he was like:

 

“What are you doing?”

 

And I was like:

 

“I’m just seeing a mate.”

 

And he was like:

 

“Anyway, have a nice day bro.”

 

And then just let me drove off. So, I don’t have much anecdotal encounters with ZOG like with the army and the police. But I’ll tell you this right now, like a police officer probably would have fined me $5,000, but the soldier looked at it and was just like:

 

“Oh, he’s one of the boys, I’ll just give him a pass.”

 

But you know, so many people have got these horrible stories where like soldiers and police officers are pulling them out of their car and assaulting them. And you know what I mean? So it’s like it’s fucked up! It’s a really fucked up situation. I don’t have an exact answer for you. It’s case by case. Yeah, there are pieces of, in society that would turn on their own people. Would they open fire? Well, let’s say they did. Let’s run the scenario. I think you’d find that it would probably cause a civil war! I think you’d find there would be more people in defense that would be like:

 

“Why are we shooting Australians? I didn’t sign up for this!”

 

And it would cause a civil war. So the likelihood of it ever happening is possible. Of course, on a long enough timeline, anything’s possible, but I don’t see it happening in the current conditions.

 

[1:31:34]

 

Mark Collett: I think one thing that we have to be very careful about is although we don’t want to sort of alienate people in the forces who do support us, we can’t sort of ignore the fact that the police has become sort of more and more anti-White to the point where it would be legitimate to see them as a whole, as a rather hostile group.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yep.

 

Mark Collett: But the really worrying thing is, I believe, and some people aren’t going to like what I’m going to say here, I think the army is going the same way and the powers that have transformed the police are now doing the same with the army.

 

Thomas Sewell: Absolutely!

 

Mark Collett: And if you look in Britain especially, there is a massive, massive drive to recruit soldiers, as there has been police, from ethnic minority communities, which I think by its very nature would create a situation where the military became more hostile to sort of indigenous Brits. And I think that’s a worrying thing in the future.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, absolutely!

 

And a lot of people don’t see much value in the argument of trying to separate individuals from institutions. And it is much clearer, it’s a clearer propaganda message or it’s a clearer perception of reality to just address an institution as a whole.

 

And obviously the defense force in Britain and Australia and the police force in Britain and in Australia, they are institutions that are destroying our country! That is true. That is true! And so separating the individual or separating individuals out of an institution becomes messy work. It certainly becomes messy work.

 

So you, yeah, Australia is going down the same path, where, as I was saying before, I’ve seen two speeches now, one written and one visually, on video. I’ve seen two speeches from two of the most senior people in the Australian army starting their lectures with a “Welcome to Country”. When you think about the significance of that these Welcome to Country’s started, I don’t know, in the 2010s, like mid 2010s, they appeared out of nowhere. When one Aboriginal group visited another Aboriginal group, the local council would put on a little smoking ceremony. And they would say like:

 

“Oh, one group’s welcoming the other group to their turf.”

 

And it was just like this LARP [Live Action Role Play], it was this little placation of these two little groups of people. Like in Melbourne, there’s probably like 10 full blooded Aboriginals, you know what I mean? Like, it’s a joke!

 

And so it’s like one group saying to the other group. And then it, in a five year period, it went from that to every school started doing it on Monday morning! You know what I mean? Like in five years I went from this thing that no one had ever seen or heard of to every footy match, every school! And then within five years of it being in every school, you’ve now got senior members of defense, who have sworn an oath to the sovereign. Like the whole military is a hierarchy. You follow orders, blah, blah, blah. The whole idea of being one of the top generals in the country is you are literally a direct servant basically of the Crown. You follow the direction of the Crown, slash the Parliament that represents the Crown.

 

And so then to say that all of that is nonsense, to say that none of that is sovereign and that this is actually the land of the Aboriginal people and not of Australians, like to start your speech and then go and lecture people on national security, the absurdity of that! The absurdity of that! It shows that the fish stinks from the head down! The whole thing is rotten because this is what the leadership are doing.

 

Now, can leaders change? Yes, but we have to address it at its root, at its source. I don’t think the army can be fixed from within the army. We have to focus on politics. That has to be our trade. People that are patriotic shouldn’t, as you rightly put before, they shouldn’t have their patriotic impulses manipulated into joining these institutions. The same way they shouldn’t have their patriotic instincts manipulated into barracking for their local football team and dressing up like a clown and worshiping the football hooliganism obviously needs to mutate into politics or mobilise into politics, and it needs to leave football hooliganism for teenagers. And then ideally the teenagers leave it behind and realise politics is more important than football.

 

But you’ve got grown men behaving like teenage boys. And clearly the football culture in Australia, in America, the sports ball culture is, and don’t get me wrong, Mark, and I’ve said this many times, I fucking love football! I do. I love AFL! I think it’s one of the greatest sports in the world. I played a grade soccer for 11 years. My boys are going to play soccer. My boys are going to play AFL as well, I’m going to make sure they’re playing lots of team sports. I think it’s really important for childhood development, but it’s important for childhood development. You know, when you become a fucking adult, you focus on politics, not fucking Richmond versus Hawthorne! Like that doesn’t fucking matter! What matters is who’s running the country and why is that? Why are they running it into the ground? We need new leaders.

 

So, yeah, that’s we got to address things at the root. We’ve got to address things at the root.

 

[1:37:23]

 

 

Mark Collett: Well, thank you. ThinRedLine gave another $25. Thank you so much, my friend. He said:

 

“I didn’t really hear what the situation is with Joel. Is he on probation?”

 

He’s not on probation. He was on remand. He is now being released and he has quite heavy restrictions which don’t allow him to use social media or even live with his partner and his child. A trial date has no doubt been., … Has a trial date been set for him?

 

Thomas Sewell: The Australian court system’s so slow. I don’t know, probably. Like sometimes, …

 

Mark Collett: He’s on trial and essentially, or he will be on trial. He was being held on remand. He’s no longer being held on remand.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, he’s now on 20, 21 bail conditions or something. Ridiculous!

 

Mark Collett: Yeah.

 

Thomas Sewell: So, yeah, he’s on bail to go to trial. Yes, he is fighting these charges. These charges are nonsense! Yeah, he’s been charged with basically a summary offence. He’s been charged with a very low level offence of basically, I think it’s “using a carrier service to harass”. So it’d be the same as, let’s say you lived in Australia, Mark, and I sent you a text message saying, I fucking hate you’re a piece of shit! Ben Roberts-Smith is a hero in this house. Fuck you! Let’s fight! Or something [chuckling] like that.

 

And then you just say:

 

“Leave me alone, Thomas Sewell. I don’t like these text messages.”

 

And I just keep messaging you and I keep harassing you. And then you go to the police and say:

 

“Thomas Sewell won’t leave me alone! He keeps menacing me! He’s a menace!”

 

And so Joel’s been charged with menacing. He’s been like, literally in the charge. It’s like using a carrier service to harass. But that’s just the title of the charge. It actually says “harass, menace, or intimidate”. And I think what the cops are going with is not harass, but menace. They’re saying he menaced Allegra Spender. And I think 94% of people that are convicted of this crime get like a $250 fine and told:

 

“Stop menacing this person.”

 

But they held him in solitary confinement in the most heinous conditions for 133 days or something instead. But I’m telling you, 94% of people convicted of this crime get a 250 fine. And for far worse things than texting, for posting naughty words on his Telegram saying basically:

 

“Go destroy this lady’s comment section. She’s a bitch!”

 

Mark Collett: Yeah. Although he could have worded that slightly better, [chuckling]

 

Thomas Sewell: I’m sure he could have! Of course he could have.

 

But I think the argument. I think the argument that he would be making. I’m not speaking on his behalf, but I’m making an assumption. And this is actually the argument that I’m making is that I don’t believe in the female gynocracy police force. I think what he said was crude, but I actually don’t disagree with what he said.

 

Mark Collett: Look, I think when he said “rhetorically”, [rhetorically rape] he made it clear that what he was saying was get in the comments and make her feel small, basically.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: And they have used one of the words that he said to basically throw the book at him as if he was actually threatening a heinous crime, which is clear., He wasn’t.

 

But I will say this, and I’m not ragging on Joel. No, I’ve got to say this, Tom, because like I said, …

 

Thomas Sewell: The locker room talk! The locker room talk won’t get us anywhere!

 

Mark Collett: No, I was gonna say, be careful! Like, when you do post things and you think, in a moment of madness, if you think something’s funny, or a little bit edgy, …

 

Thomas Sewell: He’s learnt the hard way. Yeah, like, he’s learnt the hard way. Everyone said that to him. You know, myself, I assure you, myself and Jack Eltis told him, like:

 

“Hey, dude, take it a little bit easy when you’re, … Differentiate between posting publicly and posting in the group chat.”

 

You know what I mean? Because this is how boys talk in the group chat. This is locker room talk. This is how. And like, women that are disgusted by what Joel said, basically, shut the fuck up! Go fuck yourself! Like this is how boys talk when women aren’t around. And what Joel’s issue was not the way he speaks in private, it’s that Joel spoke publicly the way that a lot of people speak privately.

 

And so you know, don’t police locker room talk, but also be careful that if you’re going to say locker room talk publicly, the gynocracy might throw you in a concrete box! And I don’t think anyone expected it because it’s the first time anyone in Australia has been thrown in a concrete box for locker room talk!

 

So yeah, men are never going to change. We’re always going to talk like this. Don’t police us! Women talk far more disgustingly in the women’s locker room and we don’t police how they talk in the locker room. I don’t police how women talk in the women’s locker room.

 

But yeah, what Joel did was he did it publicly and they wanted to make an example of him. And that’s the gynocracy and they can’t help themselves.

 

[1:42:39]

 

 

I mean, I remember being in primary school and saying something mean or my friends saying something mean and the teacher gave, I remember his name was Tom Matz and he said something, he back chatted this teacher and the teacher said:

 

“You’re getting detention!”

 

And so he said the same word again! I can’t remember what word it was, but he didn’t say “rhetorically rape”! You know, we’re talking primary school, we’re talking 10 year olds, but we’re in art class. And the art teacher was one of these Lefties and he said a particular word that I think he said “spastic”. I think he said spastic. He said the word spastic. He said to someone else like:

 

“Oh, that looks like a spastic!”

 

Like we’re in art class, we’re 10 years old and I think his name was Tom Matz. And he said:

 

“That looks like a spastic, the way you’re drawing.”

 

And the teacher said:

 

“You can’t say that word, you’re getting detention!”

 

And he said:

 

“Spastic! Spastic! I’m getting detention for spastic!”

 

And she was like:

 

“You’re getting detention, that’s two detentions now, how many detentions you want?”

 

And he was like:

 

“Spastic! Spastic! Spastic! Spastic! Spastic! Spastic! Spastic!”

 

And he just kept saying spastic and he ended up not getting detention. Like the coordinator, the year level coordinator or whatever, like stepped in and was like:

 

“No, you can’t give him like 40 detentions saying the word spastic.”

 

But like she was trying to police this like 10 year old boy saying:

 

“You’re not allowed to use that word.”

 

And he’s like:

 

“It’s not a naughty word, it’s not a swear word. I’m allowed to say spastic. Like what he’s drawn, it looks spastic, it looks dumb, it looks stupid. Like, I can’t say that?”

 

And so it was like a fascinating argument. I remember the same thing. I remember teachers saying:

 

“Now look, if you say these swear words.”

 

Obviously we got to have some decorum, but you know I think there’s a line in the sand. Obviously I believe in decorum, but one person’s version of decorum and another person’s are different.

 

And if you don’t like Joel’s decorum, don’t associate with them. I don’t mind it. That’s why I associate with him. I kind of like his, I kind of like it a little bit. There’s a lot of people that don’t like my decorum. They don’t associate with me, so be it. That’s part of living in a free society, a so-called free society. You have the right to not associate with people. No one’s forced to be my friend. So yeah. Should he have said it publicly? Well, he said it he said it! And he’s done the 133 days!

 

Mark Collett: Because you don’t want 133 days! The reason I say this though, and I’m not cucking, but there’s a lot of young lads out there that think they’re being funny online. And the police have got increasingly high tech ways of tracking people down who think they’re anonymous. And in the UK especially there are lots of young lads now that police, Prevent, even Counter Terror go after on these things. And I just hate to see people, especially young lads, end up in situations that we don’t want to see them in. So I’m not cucking!

 

Thomas Sewell: No, no, you’re right. The right advice is don’t say anything in the group chat, you don’t want read out in court. So be funny, be a funny cunt! But one day it might be read out in court. So be careful. If you’re important, if, look, if you’re important enough or they want a statistic, it’ll be read out in court.

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, I’m not sure how to pronounce this. Alcion. That’s what I’m going with, gave $55. Thank you so much for your generosity. Is very much appreciated. He said:

 

“Good points being made by both. But as an American, I empathize with the valourisation of those that serve. Ultimately, the day will come where soldiers may choose to shoot us or join us. If we take the hardline view that every soldier is personally responsible for all the evils of ZOG, we’re not doing much to encourage them to join us.”

 

And look, I concede that point. We do want soldiers to join us and I do agree with Tom’s assessment on that you know, good people within the forces or even in the police force, we’d like to join us. And it is a very difficult position to both appeal to the public but be ideological at the same time. And that’s why debates like this are important.

 

But I think you covered that. I don’t know if you want to say anything further about that. And also there is also a degree of kind of double standards with valourisation that certain people throughout history have been called war criminals, whereas other people have been called freedom fighters. Well it is a difficult situation to wade through.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. The only two things I’ll say is I’ll repeat the point that I think ultimately everyone that goes to work is propping up the system. And so I wouldn’t call any man a piece of, for providing for his family if he was a carpenter. I don’t blame the carpenter for being a carpenter, for paying tax as a carpenter. And therefore I’m not going to blame a soldier for being a soldier, who’s a soldier. Some people are built as soldiers. Some people are built as carpenters. Some people are built as both. We can’t all be priests! We can’t all be political leaders. Some men just do as they’re told. Society functions that way. You know, that’s the point I’ll repeat on that regard, I had another talking point, but it just, I like wandered somewhere in my head just then.

 

[1:48:14]

 

Mark Collett: Thank you. Well, look, we’ve got loads more Superchats to get through anyway. So Never Smile gave $5. Thank you so much! He said:

 

“Hello, Mark and Thomas. I wanted to ask Thomas what his thoughts were on Michael Nelson saying that young White men should be unemployed and instead focus on higher culture and politics. Is he secretly right, Thomas?”

 

Thomas Sewell: Sorry, I was reading the comment about Alexander the Great! [chuckling] What was the question? Sorry.

 

Mark Collett: He said:

 

“I wanted to ask Thomas what his thoughts are on Michael Nelson saying that young White men should be unemployed and instead focus on higher culture and politics. Is he secretly right?”

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, Joel brought this up to me on the phone, two days ago. Because I can’t talk to Michael. I can’t talk to Michael Nelson. We’re on non-Association. We’ve both been charged with “violent disorder”. And so I made a video about two or three weeks ago saying that young men should do manual labour. I talked about a whole list of things that I think young men should do. And part of that list was that I believe that young men should do a period of time doing manual labour. And Joel said to me:

 

“Oh, Michael was upset when you made that video because he thought it was a personal attack against the article he wrote, called ‘Against Employim’.”

 

So he kind of like changed the word “goyim” into “employim”. And he wrote an article saying “Against Employim”. And the thesis of his article is that young men should focus on higher culture, politics, philosophy, studying things.

 

And in my video, I said, and I hadn’t read his article yet when I made this video. And the video I made wasn’t in response to Michael Nelson. I want to put that on the table. But what I said in the video is you can tell the calibre of a young man that’s never done manual labour. You can just see it in his character. When you’re dealing with young men, like when you’re dealing with a spastic, nine times out of 10, he has never done any manual labour. That’s a fact. Right? It’s probably more than nine times out of ten. There’s a very high correlation with it. They’ve never done manual labour. They’re a spastic! There are some boys that have got an old soul and they were raised really well by their dad and they somehow they never needed to do anything actually difficult in their life. And they’re quite well rounded. These are diamonds in the rough. This is a very rare occasion.

 

Most young men that have their heads screwed on and are, very strong willed and have a good character, and I have a robust attitude and are respectable. Respectable from a Patriarchal perspective, that are respectable from the Patriarchy. They’ve gone through some sort of hardship. It doesn’t have to be like a trade, like you can be at university, but even if you’re at university, there’s this idea of you have to be the scholar-athlete. You don’t just be a scholar.

 

And so when I say “manual labour”, I mean physical exertion in general. And that comes in many forms. There’s many forms of physical exertion. And I think you should do a whole bunch of them as a young man. I don’t think it’s necessary at 40 or 50 or 60. I think you should keep healthy, I think you should run, I think you should stay fit. I think you should do all the things you need to do to keep your body vital.

 

But you know, it’s not important for you and I, Mark, obviously I’m a bit younger than you, but it’s not important for us to go dig holes and do all the shitty work. You know what I mean? There’s some shitty work out there that you don’t want to do, but when you’re young, that’s when you do it! Sometimes you got to dig pits, sometimes you got to dig trenches, sometimes you get to dig holes. I think it’s character building. Call me old fashioned.

 

And so he took this as a personal attack and I can’t communicate with him and say:

 

“No, Michael, it’s not a personal attack.”

 

Michael Nelson has done many years of manual labour. He’s a young man, but he has been working a trade. He has been doing landscaping, he has been doing manual labour. And he’s obviously going through a process where he’s like:

 

“I don’t need to do this anymore. I should be focusing on more important things.”

 

And so I agree with the thesis that young men should not be focusing on being a goyim. They should be focusing on being, if they’ve got political capacity, they should be studying, they should be reading. And not necessarily through the institutions, not necessarily through the universities. There’s so much to learn and study by reading the classics, by reading the greats, by reading political texts and getting engaged in politics. I just disagree with the idea that process starts at 17 and never ends.

 

And you know what I mean, you never do your time on the gun. Because I see these young men that never do their time on the shovel. And like in the army, we called it “do your time on the gun”. Like you got to do your time doing the hard things and you just got to get that done when you’re young. And it was not an attack on Mickel. It was an attack on the spastics that Mikkel hangs out with. You know, Mickel was actually done is he’s built his character. I actually really like Mikkel, but he hangs out with a lot of spastics that are like 17, 18 and you know, [chuckling] they got a lot of growing up to do!

 

[1:53:25]

 

Mark Collett: My advice, don’t focus on politics and culture when you’re young. Get yourself a trade, get yourself something that is a transferable skill. Wherever you go in the world, you’ll be set up and you can do things. You know all these people out there that are sort of like super book smart but can’t apply it in the real world.

 

But then there’s people out there who are trained electricians, plasterers, even people who can just do sort of odd jobs and they’re driving around in a white van. People need them. They’re making lots of money, they’re out there meeting real people. Those are the sort of skills. I mean, a while back it was all about coding. People were like:

 

“Look, young men, you got to be coders, you’ve got to be this. You got to be able to write your own programs.”

 

Well, AI does that for everyone now. But AI is not going to replace an electrician, or a plasterer, or a plumber. You know, these jobs are needed. My advice is get something like that under your belt. Be your own boss!

 

And then if you want to be political and you want to be more face out, you’re not having to report to somebody on Monday morning because you got filmed, you know, at a demo. I think that you know people out there who can work with their hands and have got these skills, it’s really good!

 

Anyway, so Trancealot gave $10. Thank you so much! She said:

 

“Donation. I’ll have to watch the rest on replay. Good discussion guys.”

 

Well, thank you so much! Antifa Smasher89 gave $3. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Hi Mark and Tom. I wanted to ask Tom if he’s ever going to release an official NSN workout manual or something. I’m trying to bulk up and struggling. I need some pointers from the best lads.”

 

Well, thank you so much! Yeah, eat lots of meat and train hard.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, it’s not on my list of priorities. I’ve talked about it on stream infinite amount of times. Just figure it out. There’s infinity resources on the Internet. We’ve got limited time, so work it out, dude. Thanks. Yeah, thanks for the question.

 

Mark Collett: If there is one thing that YouTube is good for young White men, it’s workout tips and sort of combos of sort of how to train your muscles and what your muscles need immediately following a workout. Me and Blair did a stream about that as well. So if you want to check that out, you can. Kurgan 86 gave $25. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“I very much enjoyed this discussion. As someone who deployed several times to the Middle East, I certainly appreciate, appreciate both your takes on Ben Roberts-Smith. Wishing you to only the best from the States. P.S. Mark, it’s not partner. It’s either wife or girlfriend. That’s feminist speak talk!”

 

Thomas Sewell: That’s an American thing. Yeah, the Americans make sense.

 

Mark Collett: The reason I said “partner” is because I didn’t know whether he’s married to her or not. And also, I don’t know why, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Baby mama. Baby mama! [chuckling]

 

Mark Collett: Joel’s baby [chuckling] mother’s out of control! Yeah, sorry, mate.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I got a baby mama. I’m not married on paper. I’m not married on paper. I just call her my wife. But we’re not married on paper. I don’t care what the government says. I don’t recognise their authority. Stay out of my family. I believe in the power of the family. I don’t believe in the power of government institutions over the family. I think they should stay the fuck away from families. I don’t think governments are designed to tell families what to do. I mean, maybe there should be a registry. Sure! But sign a piece of paper, it’s not the same thing.

 

Mark Collett: So we’ve got a Superchat here for $10 from Fight, Fight, Fight. And it might be a troll one, so brace yourselves. Well, thank you for the Superchat because I appreciate the $10, whether this is just a joke or not. He says:

 

“Hello, Mark and Thomas. I was wondering if any of you have ever heard of the ANM, the Australian Nationalist Movement and Jack Van Tongeren and what your thoughts are on him. There is a good movie called Nazi Supergrass about the ANM. And also a book. What could you learn from, …”

 

Thomas Sewell: He sent me his book. No, I write to Jack probably once a month. He sends me letters.

 

Mark Collett: Okay.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, so I know Jack. Yeah. I know Jack Van Tongeren*. Yeah, fascinating history. It’s fascinating history. I don’t condone the criminal allegations against him, of course, but it is fascinating history! And there were men in the 70s and 80s in this country. You know, Jack fought in the Vietnam War, and after the Vietnam War, he got involved in National Socialist politics here in Australia. And he’s almost like Australia’s George Lincoln Rockwell in a lot of ways.

 

But, yeah, he did a lot of time in prison, unfortunately, and he’s more or less retired politically now and corresponds with people. I don’t know how much more I can say about that. It’s a personal relationship.

 

[* Peter Joseph “Jack” van Tongeren (born 1947) is the former leader of the West Australian neo-Nazi group Australian Nationalist Movement (ANM), a white supremacist and extreme Right group. He served thirteen years, one month, and six days in prison from 1989 to 2002 for grand theft and arson, after robbing and firebombing businesses owned by Asians in Western Australia. It can be noted that he himself was half-Indonesian. Source: https:// alchetron.com/Jack-van-Tongeren]

 

[1:58:39]

 

 

Mark Collett: Okay. Well, I didn’t know who he was. I didn’t know whether they’re trying to stoke drama, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Jack, I think in the 80s, he got in trouble for burning down Chinese restaurants. Which caused a drop in immigration. It caused a drop in immigration to Western Australia tenfold from Chinese immigrants. So no comment on the effectiveness of his [chuckling] political activism, if you want to call it that. He got convicted of basically, politically, motivated violence. Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: Restore Australia gave a dollar. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Hi, Tom. Total dropout. Senomax or do a trade FIFO in the time while NSN is super banned?”

 

We’ve already answered that, I think. Get yourself a Trade, mate. Reese Beast 310 gave $5. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“The two best nationalists around.”

 

I agree! [chuckling] The Shogun gave $10 and had a little man waving his arm. Thank you so much! Santandex gave $20. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Thank you Tom, for waking up Australia and giving us hope. Hail Australia! Hail Thomas Sewell!”

 

Thank you very much. Santandex gave another $5. Thank you so much, she said:

 

“Did Tom see Andrew Hastie’s office get spray painted with the words ‘traitor goy’?”

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I did see that in the news. Yes, I did. Yeah. Andrew Hastie is the worst of the worst! Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: The worst of the worst!

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: Damien Demento gave $10. Thank you so much, my friend. Good to see you here tonight, he said. I’m a few minutes behind on this discussion, but the Taliban aren’t the Bacha bazi* organisers. The Taliban put a stop to that. Hence why we have the Afghan perverts in England who escaped justice.

 

[* Bacha bazi is a pederastic practice in Afghanistan and in historical Turkestan, in which men exploit and enslave adolescent boys, sometimes for sexual abuse, and/or coerce them to cross-dress in attire traditionally only worn by women and girls and dance for entertainment. The man exploiting the young boy is called a bacha baz and the young boy is called a bacha. Often, the boys come from an impoverished and vulnerable situation such as street children, mainly without relatives or abducted from their families.]

 

And one thing I’ll say to back that up is in Iran, there is very little sexual violence. And it’s essentially because all of the rapists and perverts who were in Iran now do live in England.

 

So if you look at the statistics for arrests, Iranians living in Britain are 18 times more likely to be arrested for a sexual crime than White British men. And in Iran, if you are convicted of either paedophilia or rape, you get hung from a crane. Whereas in Britain, if you’re convicted of paedophilia or rape, well, paedophiles regularly walk free from court and rapists get very lenient sentences.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, look, I do know that, like Turkey, for example, their prisons are empty, and Germany’s full of Turkish criminals. I do know that as a fact. Look, Afghanistan. Yeah, I never went to Afghanistan, but I was in the Senior Company in 5th Battalion and most of the guys in the company had just gotten back from Afghanistan when I rocked up as an 18 year old to battalion. And look, mate, you can believe whatever the fuck you want. Like you don’t know what you’re [chuckling] talking about! Like the guys that were over in Afghanistan came back and said:

 

“This is what’s going on in Afghanistan.”

 

And I was like:

 

“Interesting!”

 

Okay. Yeah, the Taliban banned bacha bazi! Yeah, dude, believe what you want, man! You believe that? Sure.

 

Mark Collett: Well, we do have another Superchat there on the same thing. I’ll just read out at the same time because obviously it deals with the same issue. It’s from Evon626. Thank you so much! He gave $10 and said:

 

“Taliban stand here. The Taliban are the exterminators of the bacha bazi guys. It was the people Ben Roberts-Smith was supporting who do horrible things to little boys. But what’s happening to Ben is unjust.”

 

One thing I will say, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Where are people getting this from? What’s it like? I don’t want to be the source guy. I don’t want to be like, source. But, …

 

Mark Collett: No, but you are wrong about one thing, Tom. And that is the Taliban did prevent heroin flowing out of Afghanistan.

 

Thomas Sewell: No, but I’m not wrong about that. I didn’t mention heroin once.

 

Mark Collett: Okay?

 

Thomas Sewell: I’m not wrong about that. I never mentioned heroin. I do know about the heroin.

 

Mark Collett: If I wanted a government in Afghanistan, I’d want a government like the Taliban that stopped drugs flowing into the West from that country. I would sponsor any government that killed drug smugglers and prevented heroin and other horrible substances reaching British children.

 

Thomas Sewell: The Taliban didn’t ban heroin because it negatively affected British children. The Taliban banned heroin because it was affecting Afghani children. So like that’s why they banned heroin. It’s not because they like got this universal morality and they want to like help Britain. The Taliban banned heroin because heroin was destroying Afghanistan. And I’ve actually heard that from Afghani taxi drivers over the last 10 years, multiple times, that:

 

“They had family members, blah, blah, blah. It’s a big problem, problem. And it was good that they did that they had public support. That’s what people wanted.”

 

But yeah, that’s heroin. That’s a different discussion. Once you get out of the major cities in Afghanistan, you get up into the mountains, doesn’t matter. Taliban, ANA, non-Affiliated. They’re all doing it. It’s in their culture. It’s in their culture! It’s not like it’s not a political party that is in agreeance of it and there’s a political party that’s against it. They’re all doing it! It’s in their culture. It’s man-love Friday. If they can’t get their hands on a boy, they’ll just get the youngest soldier and they’ll do it to him. Like it’s in their culture. It’s how they’re built. They’re sick! I don’t want anything to do with these people. Mark!

 

Turkey. Yeah, okay. You know, Turkish people are like 40%, Greek like ethnically they’re Muslims and you know, they’ve got a mix of DNA. They’re all mongrelized. There’s plenty of Turkish people that are civilised that want to try to pretend they’re an extension of Europe. And then there’s a whole bunch that are just rabid Arabs and Turkic people basically Central Asian people that have colonised that region. So Turkey’s a bit of a fuck-fight. And obviously they just deport all their sex pests. Iran probably deports all their sex pests or kills them. You know, the Middle East has a policy because they’re a giant rape gang of getting rid of, breeding out through their barbaric people. If they’ve got barbaric people and there’s another country that’ll accept them. That’s just how they expand. Now it’s somebody else’s problem. It’s a form of warfare. It’s a form of jihad. It’s in the Quran!

 

So yeah, I mean, Afghanistan, fuck! I don’t know, what is this BRICS propaganda Mark? What’s going on? Why are people defending bacha bazi enjoyers?

 

[2:05:54]

 

Mark Collett: No, they’re saying, … Look, I’ve actually looked this up and it does say:

 

“The Taliban officially banned bacha bazi, the sexual exploitation of young boys, doing their first rule in 1996-2001 and again upon their return to power in 2021. The practice is considered haram under their interpretation of Sharia law. And they have historically threatened perpetrators with severe punishment, including death.”

 

Thomas Sewell: They probably just. Again, it’s one of those selective laws that if you’re a political enemy of the Taliban, it’ll be used against you. But then they’re doing it themselves.

 

Mark Collett: I don’t know.

 

Thomas Sewell: I mean, the Taliban were doing this.

 

Mark Collett: There are lots of people in the chat saying that they outlawed it. I’ve looked it up and they said they have and I can’t, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: I’m not saying there isn’t sexual abuse that ever goes on, but it does appear to be dealt with far more seriously by the Taliban than it is by British courts. Let’s put it like that.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. Okay. I’d agree with that because British courts are fucked, certainly. Mark, I’m not against Ben Roberts-Smith being deployed to England to take out the British courts. [chuckling] I’m not against that!

 

Mark Collett: People who molested children faced a firing squad, I’d be a much happier man.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I think you’ll find that there’s a lot of people that, yeah, would agree with that within all walks of life. But, yeah, this idea that you know what’s written down on paper, … ChatGPT said that they banned it and it’s like:

 

“Okay.”

 

I think any government in Afghanistan would probably ban it. Except the one that we propped up. Yeah. At the end of the day, it’s like, what’s that meme where it’s like the two castles and it’s like, our castle is great and your castle sucks! And then they’re like, our castle is great and your castle sucks! It’s like the ANA and the Taliban. It’s like:

 

“You rape boys, you’re horrible people!”

 

And then it’s like:

 

“You rape boys, you’re horrible people!”

 

And it’s like:

 

“We don’t rape boys. We don’t rape boys!”

 

It’s like, ANA, Taliban. Same thing. Same thing, Mark. That’s what all these people in your comment section need to get through their head. ANA, Taliban, …

 

Mark Collett: No, I just agree with you. I think the people in the comment section are right over this. I think fundamentally, if the Taliban are killing child abusers and preventing heroin flowing out of Afghanistan, they’re two positives, and I’ve got to be on their side! [chuckling] You know, when it comes down to it, if there are people out there who have an intention of flooding the West with narcotics or shipping people to the West who abuse children, I’m against that. But if there are foreign groups who have some kind of honour system that results in paedophiles being dealt with in the most harsh way possible, I’m gonna call that out as a good thing.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, of course. I don’t want to get into the whole thing again, but I think if we go back to the West, getting involved, we have to go back to 2001 to flesh this whole thing out. If you go all the way back to 2001, you know, there was a list of demands. Obviously, it was a setup. You know, ZOG wanted to go in. I can’t say what would have happened or could have happened in 2001, … The Taliban have come to power. They won the war. Ultimately, they won. They’ve come to power again. They’ve won the war. They’re 20 years of struggle, and they won!

 

So it’s like the Viet Cong, they had the will to do it. I’m not going to sit here and say the NVA were the good guys, because the South Vietnamese were corrupt and they were serving ZOG and blah, blah, blah. Like, I’m just not going to do it, Mark!

 

I mean, I don’t think the NVA were the good guys. I don’t think the Viet Cong were the good guys. They won, but I don’t think they were the good guys.

 

Mark Collett: I didn’t say the Viet Cong were.

 

Thomas Sewell: But there would have been the same arguments. I don’t know what they would have been. But I’m sure at Woodstock, the same argument was made that the NVA they’re actually the ones stopping child exploitation, and they passed a law that said children can’t work in sugar mills, and that South Vietnamese government, they’re okay with child exploitation. Okay, next topic. You know what I mean?

 

[2:10:21]

 

 

Mark Collett: Well, I think that’s a slightly reductive thing to say.

 

Thomas Sewell: And the same thing. Heroin was coming out of Vietnam. It’s the same talk. In my opinion it’s the same talking points as the anti-war crowd, the peace movement, the hippie movement. That’s just my opinion. Yeah, people can decide what they want of it. I don’t want to get caught in the weeds about, I think an easier conversation is Saddam, all right, Saddam tortured people. Saddam did horrible things.

 

But ultimately like Saddam, like was good for us. I mean it was good having a Baathist party in the Middle East. I don’t think Saddam was the evil, horrible human that the ZOG made him out to be. I think it was a mistake going into Iraq. I think that’s a much easier conversation. The majority of, …

 

Mark Collett: Do you believe that the Twin Towers were blown up by Al Qaeda Muslims or do you think it was Israeli false flag?

 

Thomas Sewell: I believe both. I believe both are true at the same time. I think both are true at the same time. I think that they did do it. I think Al Qaeda was involved in it and that ZOG and Mossad, well, same thing. But I believe Mossad and the US State Department were in on it. They allowed it to happen. And I do believe there were explosives in the towers.* I think that’s the evidence points to that. And I believe that both things can happen simultaneously.

 

[* More than just “explosives”. The Twin Towers were wired top to bottom to blow out every floor to ground level, aka, “Controlled Demolition”. Dozens of planes could have hit the buildings and it would still be standing. Then we have the controlled demolition (bottom up) of the third building, Building 7, in the afternoon.]

 

I do believe that ASIO [Australian Security Intelligence Organisation] knew that these Muslim guys were going to shoot up Bondi. I believe 100% ASIO knew. I don’t think ASIO told them to do it, but I believe that there are people that want to go kill jews, and these two Muslim guys, I can’t remember their name, Navan [Naveed Akram and his father, Sajid Akram] or some shit, I can’t remember. But these two Indian Muslims in Australia went to Bondi and they shot up a bunch of people, especially jews, and they did it because they hated jews and they were sympathizers with ISIS. And I believe that ASIO and the police let them do it.

 

So I believe that both conspiracies, I believe that the mainstream story about what happened and the conspiracy, the so-called conspiracy theory, I believe they can be simultaneously true.

 

So I believe that 911* was organised by Mossad, but I do believe that there would have been like, … I don’t think Al Qaeda** was like these good guys growing candy in the forest in Afghanistan. [chuckling] Like I think they were bad guys on both sides. I think its hands across the Judeo-Muslim-Islam I believe its hands across the Great Satan to try to bring down the West.

 

You know, I think the passport thing is ridiculous!

 

[* 9/11: A false flag (foreshadowed in the earlier PNACx document stating that a ‘Pearl Harbor’ type event was required to get the American public on board for US hegemonic expansion] carried out by ZOG with Israel being the lead behind its planning and execution. The aim was to unleash the War OF Terror on the countries around Israel, among other aims. See Also links below, especially the work by Christopher Bollyn.]

 

The Realist Report with Christopher Bollyn – Sep 2018 — TRANSCRIPT

 

[** Al Qaeda was a CIA operation and it never claimed responsibility for anything to do with 9/11. Even the FBI never had Bin Laden as involved with 9/11. The “19 Arabs” narrative were just part of the false flag operation and were Mossad operatives to dupe the public.]

 

Mark Collett: Al Qaeda were essentially funded, built and armed by the West!

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes, yes, yes, that’s true.

 

Mark Collett: I think what we’re talking about here, where we’re definitely on the same page, or we should be, is I believe all of these interventions in Afghanistan, they were foreign policy failures. Whether we’re funding them, whether we’re killing them. Just leave them alone. Quarantine them. Never let them come here. We never need to go there. [chuckling] Leave them just to get on with, …

 

Thomas Sewell: I’ll never say never. I’ll never say never.

 

Mark Collett: I don’t want to go there!

 

Thomas Sewell: Well, look, if we clean up our countries, Europe must breathe out. Like I got no moral issue with we’re in Australia. New Zealand’s looking pretty yummy. It’s a nice place. I’m liking the look of New Zealand.

 

And once we got New Zealand, I don’t like PNG, but maybe we need it for some reason.

 

Mark Collett: What’s PNG?

 

Thomas Sewell: Papua New Guinea. This is one of the islands north of us. Where Kokoda was. We fought the Japanese and we got Australian blood bled into the soil there. There’s a moral imperative to take it, in my opinion. It used to be part of our protectorate. It used to be part of the Australian realm. You know, I don’t want to go too crazy, invade Poland and shit, then like start World War III, but you know what I mean I’m not morally against the Germans going into Poland. But yeah, I don’t want to get off topic.

 

But like, at the end of the day, it takes two to tango. It takes two to tango. We can I agree, yes. Al Qaeda was set up by the CIA. That is a fact. It was. Why? Because it was part of the Cold War and they were weaponizing the Mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Soviets. Yes, that’s a fact! Did they have a use for them after that? Well, ZOG did. The State Department, the majority of American foreign interests didn’t, but a particular group did. The CIA definitely still had an interest in them. But who housed them? Who homed them? Who allowed them to build training camps? I don’t think the Taliban are innocent, Mark!

 

You know, I think both things can be true simultaneously. And they were told, the Taliban were told when 9/11 happened. This is my understanding of the beginning phases of the war. The Taliban were told:

 

“Hand them over. If you hand over Al Qaeda, we won’t go in.”

 

That’s my understanding. Now, whether that’s propaganda or I don’t know.

 

Mark Collett: But you are missing one point. They said they didn’t have him to hand over, and he wasn’t in Afghanistan. He was in Pakistan.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes, he was later found in Pakistan. That’s true.

 

[2:15:36]

 

 

Mark Collett: It’s like me saying:

 

“Give me back my football. It’s in your yard!”

 

And you’re like:

 

“It’s not in my yard!”

 

I burn your house down, and then the football’s in my other neighbour’s.

 

Thomas Sewell: But we gotta watch Apocalypse Now! We gotta watch Apocalypse Now. Did you say you did a movie review of Apocalypse Now?

 

Mark Collett: I haven’t done one.

 

Thomas Sewell: All right, well, we’re going to do a movie review now, and we can have this discussion because:

 

“Oh, the Viet Cong, they’re not in Vietnam. The Viet Cong were found in Cambodia, Mark!”

 

It’s the same thing. It’s like okay, we should hunt them down into Cambodia. Like then we should have invaded to. If we want to follow this to its logical conclusion, do it properly. We should have invaded Pakistan, but we didn’t did that because they’re a nuclear power! We didn’t want to go all the way. We want to start these little wars and assert Western dominance, but we don’t want to go all the way. You got to go all the way, Mark. You got to go all the way down the river. That’s what Colonel Kurtz did. He goes all the way! And I’m Colonel Kurtz., …

 

Mark Collett: You would be a good Colonel Kurtz!

 

Thomas Sewell: I’m going all the way down the river, Mark. I’m going all the way down the river. Now, if I go batshit insane at the end of it, so be it. But he goes batshit insane because he’s not supported. You know, he gets cut off.

 

Now, I’m trying not to get cut off. I’m trying to stay connected to the my friends. I’m trying to make friends. Colonel Kurtz, bit of an autist, didn’t make friends, went insane! I’m trying to make friends. You know, that’s my strategy. I’m Colonel Kurtz, but I’m making friends, …

 

Mark Collett: Colonel Kurtz with friends, …

 

Thomas Sewell: I’m Colonel Kurtz with friends. You got to have friends. You got to make friends.

 

And it’s like, that’s the way I see. I don’t compromise on my values, but I’m following the Viet Cong all the way down the river. I’m following him into Cambodia. And it’s like the same in politically. And you know what should have happened because I don’t deny, I don’t doubt, like maybe he was in Pakistan at that exact moment. Maybe he was.

 

But the fact was that there was Al Qaeda in., … You know, we put Al Qaeda everywhere. There’s Al Qaeda in North Africa, there’s Al Qaeda in Syria, Al Qaeda in Iraq, Al Qaeda, we put Al Qaeda everywhere and, …

 

Mark Collett: We put Al Qaeda in power in Syria.

 

See: Putin: Who Created ISIS? — TRANSCRIPT

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes, yes, we have. Yeah, well, we haven’t. But yes, ZOG has. Yes, yes!

 

Mark Collett: But this sort of leads back to everything, I suppose for me that underlines this. Is everything that we see happening there is basically pieces on the chessboard being moved by ZOG not to our benefit ever! You know, it’s just like, … And that’s why I just want all of our troops out of the Middle East. It’s just why I can’t support these Middle Eastern jaunts.

 

But look, we’ll move on before we get into the weeds. White Triple Six gave $5. Thank you so much! And said:

 

“Catch this later. Have a good stream Gentlemen.”

 

Great to see you back, my dear. Thank you so much for your generosity. It Was Made Up gave $10. Thank you so much! And said:

 

“Interesting discussion about Ben Roberts-Smith. Thomas speaking with heart and Mark is speaking with rationale. I think on balance I’m siding with Mark on this one.”

 

Well, thank you so much! Seaga88 gave $5. Thank you so much! And said:

 

“When are we getting the Total War stream? Joke. Thanks for the evening stream. Hail Sewell! Hail White Australia!”

 

I agree with that and I would love to game with Tom. He knows that. Delvian gave $5. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Great discussion from both speakers. Absolute morals and role model function versus strategic political positioning.”

 

Well, thank you so much! IGS 22 gave $5. Thank you very much. And said:

 

“Mark influencer Marlon was in London with his girlfriend getting food when approached by feral youth in balaclavas, possibly armed. How would you deal with these ruffians if you were in power?”

 

Well, if they’re not our ruffians, it’s just instant deport! I mean, when it comes down to it, London has become a complete and utter cesspit! Because White Britons have been reduced to a hated minority and chased out.

 

But look, equally. Look, I’ve got to say this, and I don’t know what Tom’s take is on this because I’d be interested to hear what he thinks about this actually. So we are now seeing these widespread youth events in Britain where you see sort of dozens, sometimes hundreds of mainly non-White youths like flood into shopping centres, just rip everything off and run out. But there are a small proportion of Whites who live amongst these people, act like them and participate in these events.

 

Now obviously we need, we know that the non-Whites need to be deported. But what would you do with these White youths who have become completely alien to us and actually act like the ethnic minorities that they live amongst? Are these people redeemable? Do they need military service? Would you jail them? How would you deal with Whites who have essentially become like either the black community or whichever ethnic minority community they live among?

 

[2:20:50]

 

Thomas Sewell: Oh, absolutely 100% redeemable! Absolutely 100 redeemable! Wiggers, if you want to call them that. The young, the young wiggers, 100% redeemable. Penal battalion. You know, they just need to be put in the army specific penal battalion units.

 

 

I don’t believe in putting wiggers in prison. I’ve met a lot of wiggers in prison. And at the end of the day they just see how messed up society is and their survival mechanism is “I’m just gonna be a thug”. You know, that’s their survival mechanism. They’re post politics, they’re post morality. Like they’re just growing up in the dystopia. And if we can save as many of them as possible these are the 14 year old Spartan boys, you know what I mean? So what, they do a little bit of shoplifting or whatever. Like, of course they’re redeemable. That’s what 14 year old boys did in Sparta. And you have a society where shopkeepers are allowed to keep sticks and beat them over the head with it, you know what I mean? It’s part of the game.

 

There’s always gonna be rough poor kids. You know what Britain did in the past was it deported them to Australia. And I wasn’t part of that stock. I want to make it clear, I’m a first generation Anglo Saxon Australian. Like my grandparents, all of them are British. I come from British stock. I’m constantly reminded by the so-called Nativists that I’m not even an Aussie because ’m an import basically from Britain. But you know, that is what we did, that’s what we did. Like they got chain ganged or whatever it is called, I can’t remember the exact term, but they got press ganged into the navy and that’s why Britain became a superpower. We got these 14 year old ruffians shoplifting and doing this and doing that and acting like wiggers, acting beneath themselves and we press ganged them into the red coats and we press ganged them into the navy and we became a superpower. So yes, with good leadership, this is not an issue. We just need good leadership. We just don’t have good leadership.

 

Mark Collett: I largely agree. However, I do think it would have to be done on the case by case basis, whereby some of these would probably be too far gone. So if you’ve got a young White lad who shows potential and after he’s been separated from the bad influences in a military scenario, becomes good, I’m all for that.

 

But I think I will admit one of the big problems we’re going to have if we ever do become an ethno-state again is dealing with a lot of White people who unfortunately are very problematic in the way they act and behave. And if there’s one thing that really annoys me as a dad, well, there’s three things. First, if I go to the park and I see people smoking weed, they need thrashing! If I go to the park and I see dog poo everywhere, the people who have allowed their dogs to poo and haven’t clean it up need to be forced around with a leash around their neck and have their face smeared into the poo until they learn that. And people who bag the poo then throw the poo bags into the trees, they need to be told to climb the tree and get the poo bag out of the tree as I throw rocks at them.

 

And finally, there are people who litter! Now if you go to a park, or a beach or public area and you litter, especially when there are bins everywhere, you need to then be put as part of some kind of chain gang where you litter pick in the worst conditions possible until you have learnt your lesson. I think those are three good things for change.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, no, I agree with that, I agree with that. Yeah. Look, on my list of problematic demographics of White people, wiggers are, they’re the least problematic as far as I’m concerned. Leftoids, homosexuals, traitors, the political class, the police, you know what I mean? Like these people are like, this should be the central focus on when we take power, how are these kind of people going to be reintegrated into society? You know, how are we going to re-educate the people in Victoria Police? And how are we going to re-educate the people that are spreading “Welcome to Country”?

 

How do we deal with this sort of infestation in academia and in media? I mean like the universities, I mean it’s literally, you’re going to have to shut down the universities, like completely shut them down. No one’s going to uni for like a period of time and then just open up departments one at a time. So go:

 

“Okay, what do we need to reopen? Well, we need engineers. Okay, we need doctors. All right, so we’ll reopen the medical department within the university.”

 

And like, you know what I mean? Like you’re looking at the fucking curriculum with a fucking magnifying glass! Like:

 

“Okay, all right, that’s all good, that’s sorted, that’s back to normal. Well, let’s open the STEM again. Let’s open. Okay, that’s all good, that’s sorted.”

 

You know what I mean? And then you just don’t end up reopening 90% of the fucking uni! And you just convert them into useful things instead of jewish psychobabble.

 

So that to me, it’s easy to hate wiggers! It’s real easy to hate wiggers because they’re behaving unbecomingly, they’re behaving beneath us. It’s easy to hate wiggers. What’s hard and what’s courageous is to love wiggers! It’s hard to love wiggers. I love wiggers! I just, I have to, I love them because they’re just fallen men. They’re just falling men.

 

Like imagine I grew up like, I’ve got a father, right? I’ve got a father. And my father is extremely strong willed and my father has been raised very properly by his father. And my father went to a good government school. Like he went to a good public school. He got a good education and he’s got good values and he raised me well and he worked hard his whole life and he paid tax and blah, blah, blah, all that boring shit! And then I went to a good school and I was raised in the right suburb and so it’s easy for people that have had that privilege to be like, … I looked after “Resi” kids. So I was Ground Zero with the wiggers! I looked after the resi kids. And these kids, their mom’s a prostitute, their dad doesn’t exist. And like they, the primary school they went to, they were the only White kid in the class. You know what I mean, Mark?

 

Blair [Cottrell] said to me once in conversation, he said:

 

“But for the grace of God goes I!”

 

But for the grace of God goes I! When I look at a wigger that’s a White nigger, that’s what I say. That’s what I think.

 

[2:27:56]

 

Mark Collett: You’ve used the N-word twice now and I have to tell you, I thought the first was a mistake, but you got to sort of like yeah, because I don’t want to spend the rest of my life in jail because you got too excited on a stream.

 

Thomas Sewell: You can’t say the N bomb in Britain? Is that real?

 

Mark Collett: No, it’s illegal. You’ve said it twice.

 

Thomas Sewell: Oh, sorry. All right, well you’re gonna have to cut it out.

 

Mark Collett: You’re basically putting me in serious jeopardy.

 

Thomas Sewell: I’ve forgotten. I forgot. I apologise. I forgot.

 

Mark Collett: Let’s move on to the next point. The Bearded Indian gave $9. Thank you so much! And said:

 

“There’s a car parts store in Brisbane called Panel House that has been making the funniest jewish store videos. The jews are going wild. Lol.”

 

I don’t know what that refers to, but thank you. Evan626 gave $5. Thank you so much! She said:

 

“Re thread hierarchy. Alexander the Great didn’t provide South Asians impetus to organise and strengthen long before invading. If Afghans are a threat, it’s not strategic to fight them now.”

 

I’m not sure, what, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, again it’s the whole idea of doing that is because Macedonia is in order. You know what I mean? And I think Mark makes a good point. Like our countries are fucked so we shouldn’t be invading Afghanistan. And that’s a good point. I agree with it. You gotta clean up your house before you clean up your next door neighbours or before you start policing the end of the street. I agree and in defense of BRS and in defense of servicemen, they assumed that their country was all good when they joined the army. That’s why they joined the army! Otherwise they wouldn’t have.

 

So that’s why young men shouldn’t join the army because your country’s not in a good situation. We can’t have that energy manipulated into going and fighting these wars. I agree. But if you’ve done it, you know what I mean, it’s already done. We’re talking 15 years ago he allegedly committed these things. He shouldn’t be prosecuted.

 

Anyway, moving on.

 

Mark Collett: Thank you. The Ghost of George Lincoln Rockwell gave $20. Thank you so much, he said:

 

“Cheers, lads. Huge fans of both of you. I donate more often, but as a Canadian, my priority lies with Ferryman and the Dominion Society. Thomas, my book collection exploded thanks to you.”

 

Well, thank you so much! The Silent Nationalist gave $3. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Great stream bros. Thomas, I was wondering if you have a Monero address so I can donate to you directly.”

 

Thomas Sewell: No, I don’t have any crypto-currency. I don’t have any.

 

Mark Collett: You should change that, mate. People may well support you with that. That’s.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I don’t have a bank account, so I wouldn’t even know how to access it.

 

Mark Collett: That’s a good point. It is difficult. [chuckling] The Resident Baker gave $15. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Evening Mark. Hope you and Tom are both well. Looking forward to catching up later.”

 

Thank you so much! It Was Made Up gave $3 and I cannot read that. Superchat. My apologies. Doing so would be illegal in the UK. Down with ZOG gave $3. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Hello, Mark and Thomas, I’m going to ask you this question on behalf of Time Now. Do you need to be Christian to be a National Socialist?”

 

Thomas Sewell: Sorry, what was the question?

 

Mark Collett: Do you need to be a Christian to be a National Socialist?

 

Thomas Sewell: Oh, there was nothing before that? That’s the question?

 

Mark Collett: No, that’s the guy’s name. He’s asking on behalf of, …

 

Thomas Sewell: No.

 

Mark Collett: No, I don’t think you do. Look, I don’t think you need to be a Christian to be a National Socialist. I don’t think you need to be a pagan to be a National Socialist. But what you do have to be is not a retard!

 

So if you come to basically a nationalist, ethno-nationalist or National Socialist event and you spend the whole day wittering on about how you either hate pagans or hate Christians.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: That’s the kind of stuff that makes you not welcome at an event like that.

 

Do you know what? I don’t know whether you feel this or if we’re united on this issue. But I find little more tiresome than the people who just bang on about these arguments about religion. And worse still, like when you get some sort of fat retard in a toy Viking hat waving a me horn about talking about some transgression that happened to a Viking settlement some like 1200 years ago. And that’s the reason why you could never sit in a room with a Christian who’s also a nationalist. You’re like:

 

“Oh my God, this is just so retarded! Stop! Leave that at the door!”

 

We can argue about these issues once we’ve dealt with the issue of our country being demographically transformed. I hate arguments over religion. It’s like, yeah follow what you wish, promote it politely, but don’t turn it into a bun fight at my events. Your thoughts?

 

[2:33:04]

 

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I agree with that. And we’ve always run a secular organisation. There’s obviously always been Christians and pagans in our Org, whatever we’ve been doing. I think ultimately Christians and pagans are going to be two different ethnicities of White people. They seem to be the only people in the world, the only White people above replacement the conservative Christians and the conservative pagans. You know, the nationalist Christians and the nationalist pagans are the only people that seem to be above replacement.

 

So they’re the two predominant White ethnicities in any given country. Obviously some countries are obviously very heavily Christian and some are not. Australia is not very Christian at all! They’re a tiny minority. It is growing, it is increasing. But so is just a secular worldview, a secular nationalist kind of spiritualism.

 

So, yeah, it’ll be interesting to see in 50 or 100 years time. But ultimately what I say to people is that there’s a lot that Christians can learn from pagans and a lot that pagans can learn from Christians. And there’s a reason why the pagan world existed for so long. And like all the great Christian scholars studied Paganism. All the great Christian scholars, like from, I can’t pronounce his name, Beatty [sp], Thomas Aquinas, like these people, they studied, they studied what the Romans did, they studied what the Greeks did. They were like:

 

“This is fascinating!”

 

They were absolutely fascinated. The guys that preserved all the Norse Paganism that we have or the Germanic Paganism, obviously a lot of Roman historians preserved it and then it was preserved again by Christian scholars.

 

But all the Nordic stuff we’ve got is from Christian scholars in Iceland and Norway and the UK a little bit as well. And so there’s a reason why Christians preserved a lot of pagan theology and mythology and philosophy. There’s a reason why they did. And because there’s so much value in it. There’s so much value in it! And it should never, it should not be disregarded as:

 

“Oh pagans it’s just a gay orgy and blah, blah, blah!”

 

It’s like, well, that was the late stage of their civilisation. It collapsed. And the same argument can be made about the so-called Christian society we live in today, where it’s just like LGBT flags outside the Churches and “refugees are welcome”. The same argument can be made.

 

So I think pagans can learn a lot from Christians as well, vice versa.

 

So why did Paganism collapse? And I had this discussion actually last night with some friends about how in my opinion, Christianity is the cult of self sacrifice. And what Christ represents is., … And I’m not a Christian, although I do believe in self sacrifice. I think it’s a governing value. I think Paganism and the pagan aristocracies that were preserving the pagan religions, they were so focused on particularism and their own family and their own cult of their own family and their own way of thinking and their own way of doing things, they forgot that there is a universal force that they need to kind of be aligned with. And it’s not just about the particular. There’s a synthesis between the particular and the universal. But also they forgot the value and the virtue of self sacrifice. And it became this attitude:

 

“Well, that doesn’t affect my family!”

 

They almost became like a spiritual libertarianism within ancient Paganism, which I think led to Christianity.

 

And so Christianity in some ways actually completes the synthesis of White religious thought or theology because it’s kind of inverse to Paganism in some ways and it’s identical to Paganism in other ways. And so where Paganism lacks, Christianity flourishes. And where Christianity lacks, Paganism flourishes.

 

So I think if we can synthesize the values and we can learn from one another, I think actually Christianity can be stronger if it returns to vitality, if it returns to Aryan vitality, which Paganism was obsessed with vitality! So, but then what pagans need to understand is self sacrifice, not sacrifice for just the sake of idealism or heroism, but the idea of, for people outside of your family, for people outside of your community, for these sort of more universal values.

 

So that’s my position on it. It’s a bit more philosophical. Obviously the basics are, hey, if you’re not intelligent enough to discuss these things rationally don’t bring it to the table!

 

But I think there is a rational way to debate Christianity and Paganism. I just don’t see anyone doing it. I don’t see like all these people arguing over Christianity and Paganism. They’re just literally throwing feces at each other and it’s, I think it’s beneath us. I think it’s absolutely beneath us! I don’t do that. I have my critiques of Christianity and people have their critiques of Paganism, but I’m not interested in hearing people’s critiques of Paganism if it’s not actually an educated position. And I’m not interested in hearing critiques of Christianity that’s not coming from an educated position.

 

I mean, people can express their instincts if they instinctually don’t like something. Sure! But I think it should be done in a respectful way. I think there’s a way to discuss it respectfully and I don’t see that very often. But I would always be down to have this discussion if any Christian out, if any Christian nationalists wants that, wants to do a debate, or a stream attacking this, or maybe “attacking” is not the right word, but going after this specific subject, I’d always be down for it. And I think there should be a space for it. I think it is a conversation that people do need to have.

 

And yeah, the divide that the enemies of White people would want to exacerbate, if I was the enemy, the divide I would want to exacerbate would be this divide! The goal would be to turn Christians and pagans against each other and to make them identify more with that than with their race. So I’ll break bread with a Christian any day of the week!

 

[2:39:09]

 

Mark Collett: If people put race and ethnicity first, that’s the important thing.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

 

Mark Collett: That’s for me anyway. Trump has jewish DNA, gave $5. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Hello. I know this Superchat may be a bit late, but I was wondering, what are your thoughts on morals as nationalists? There are some nationalists that are more extreme than others, but where is the line drawn? Does it matter?”

 

Thomas Sewell: Oh, that’s. I need to have a break if we’re going to go into that. I don’t know if I have a short answer for that, but yeah, my morality is more pagan than it is Christian. So my morality is about particularism. I don’t really believe in universal morality. I think you can apply it. But what’s good for my people is my morality. What’s good for me, what’s good for my people, what’s good for my kind, I think is what’s good for life. I think there is a general goodness for life. There is a general universal morality. But I actually think that it’s beneath the morality of the particular.

 

So, for example, I want to turn Australia into a more European biome. I want to cut down the gum trees and I want to turn, I want to plant, you know, oak trees, for example, right? The greenies will say:

 

“That’s immoral!”

 

The greenies will be like:

 

“That’s disgusting! That’s immoral!”

 

They’d attack it on a moral level, you know what I mean? Because they’re so obsessed with this universal morality that it’s like, you have to let nature be what it is. And you can’t dominate nature.

 

So there’s, in my opinion, nationalism, fascism, National Socialism the moral structure is a will to power! There’s a will to power! Like, no, I don’t have to do what nature demands of me. I actually can’t control nature. There are areas where I’m in charge of nature.

 

So that’s you know, there’s more cut and dry conversations. I mean, obviously we’re all on the same page that raping children is immoral. You know what I mean? Because it’s bad for us! It’s like a society that does that is revolting! It’s disgusting and it’s a freak show! It’s ultimately evil!

 

But then, yeah, I don’t think you can separate morality from the soul. Of course I believe that we have a soul. I believe that every human being has a soul. I believe that every animal has a soul. I believe there’s a hierarchy of souls. I don’t believe that a dog has the same level of soul that a human has. And I likewise don’t believe that particular people have the same level of soul that other particular people have. I think some people have a higher, more developed soul. I think that there’s a soul supremacy.

 

And yeah, I think that morality is to do with that. Like, we do things as White people and we behave in particular ways and say particular things are immoral, that other races are just like:

 

“What are you talking about? That’s normal, it’s normal to behave in that way.”

 

And then we’re just like:

 

“Well hang on a minute, we believe in a higher standard. It hurts our soul to behave in that way.”

 

Or it should if you’re not a wigger. [chuckling] But you know what I mean. What do you think, Mark?

 

Mark Collett: Well, I’ve got probably a slightly different take to you on this.

 

So my opinion about morality, especially about Christianity is I view Christianity in a very similar way to how I view socialism. I think it works when you apply it to a specific closed bordered familial ethnic group. But once you extend it to people outside of that ethnic group, it ceases to work and starts to become your greatest weakness.

 

So for example, if I said we are going to have an English society and that English society is going to be both nationalist and socialist and that socialism is just for us because we see the fellow Englishman as family, it works. If we say we’re going to have socialism, we’re going to extend it to everyone who washes up on our shore from Africa, Asia or the Middle East. It no longer works. And I think the same is very true of Christianity.

 

So when nationalists who are Christians say that Christianity is a fundamentally European thing, the cathedrals, the arts, and that morality is for us, for our people and should not be extended beyond our people, I think it works.

 

But when you apply either socialism or Christianity universally, it immediately fails and becomes your greatest enemy.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes.

 

Mark Collett: And before anyone says:

 

“Well that’s why Paganism is so strong.”

 

But I will say this sort of against Paganism is, I know lots of pagans who are actually new age hippie types who [chuckling] extend their Paganism to everyone who washes up on these shores! And I think any sort of religion or sort of social grouping or sort of social morality, whether it be political, social or economic, needs to be kept to your in-group, and then it works.

 

So basically it’s for a family or an extended family, not to be given and extended to others.

 

[2:44:53]

 

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I agree with that. Yeah. Cool.

 

Mark Collett: Right, well we’ve got one last Superchat from totally awesome nationalist who gave $3.

 

Thank you so much! Said:

 

“My great grandfather joined the NSDAP in 1926. So he was an early supporter. That’s all I have to say. Hail Mark. Hail Thomas. Also it’s Hitler’s birthday in three days, so it’s time to party!”

 

Well, thank you so much! And we have one last, last Superchat. $10 from Delvian. Thank you so much! He said:

 

“On the Christian question, the space to discuss this is on CQ Radio X. Spaces on X.”

 

Well, thank you so much! I don’t really discuss religion other than furthering what I’ve said earlier because it becomes a bit of a mess. People get very upset and then they don’t like us.

 

But look, it’s been an amazing stream tonight and most of all I’ve got to thank Tom. It’s been really good! And I always like the fact that when Tom comes on we do have little back and forwards, but little debates. They’re very interesting. Tom, it’s been amazing! Is there anything you want to plug or anything you want to shoot out there before we close it down?

 

Thomas Sewell: Not really. I think we’ve had a good discussion. We’ve got to do Apocalypse Now. I’ll plug that. We’re gonna have to do a movie review.

 

Mark Collett: Booked for next month already, mate. Booked for next month.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, we’ll do that. Yeah, I think that’s probably the next. That’s one of my favourite films for obvious reasons. And I think it answers a lot of questions of philosophy, or it at least engages in a lot of philosophical questions, moral and philosophical questions.

 

So yeah, we’ll leave it there. We’ll leave it there. I hope everyone goes for a fucking run! And eat some meat! Yeah, eating meat. Stop asking me questions about what to do in the gym! [chuckling] Just fucking work out!

 

Mark Collett: It Was Made Up, gave $2. Thank you so much! Said:

 

“Excellent stream. Thanks, Tom and Mark.”

 

Well, thank you to you. I just want to thank Tom again. It’s been absolutely brilliant! I want to thank everybody who donated so very generously. Thank you so much! And I’d like to thank everybody who tuned in and supported and contributed to the stream. The couple of people I timed out for saying rude things, I have untimed them out. So you’re welcome back.

 

And finally I’d like to plug a couple of things before I go. First is I’ve got a new Substack. I’ve done four articles on my Substack and I’ve got a new Substack article out today if you want to check that out. It’s about the new anti-semitism and hate crime laws being passed in the Ukraine. It’s about 2,000 words. It’s a decent read. Go and check that out.

 

And I just want to issue one last final call. If you are enjoying this stream on replay and you would like to contribute, it would be very much appreciated. Please don’t leave it all to the people watching the stream live to do the Superchating. Tens of thousands of people watch these streams on replay. If you do want to contribute and you enjoy watching it on replay, you can contribute by becoming a subscriber on Rumble or leaving a donation through Entropy. They’re very much appreciated and that helps me to continue doing the vast amount of work I do. And just to add to that, not only do I do at least five streams a week, I am now committing to at least one. One new Substack article a week. At least one. So that’ll be another place where you can catch up with my work because I can churn out the articles far quicker than I can churn out the scripted videos. Thank you to everyone!

 

Thomas Sewell: I forgot one thing. I’m getting dairy goats, Mark.

 

Mark Collett: What? What?

 

Thomas Sewell: I’m getting dairy goats.

 

Mark Collett: Oh, dairy goats. Excellent!

 

Thomas Sewell: Dairy goats. I’m getting some Nigerian dwarfs. But I’m not breaking the world view. They’re just called Nigerian. They’re actually being selectively bred in America.

 

Mark Collett: After [chuckling] speaking all day about doing things to immigrant boys, Tom’s doing some Nigerian dwarfs!

 

Thomas Sewell: I’m getting some Nigerian dwarf goats. I’m breeding them up. 10% butterfat, Mark. Raw milk. Raw goat’s milk. And they got blue eyes.

 

So I’m going to rename them “Aryan dwarfs”. Not Nigerian dwarfs.

 

Mark Collett: Are you one of the raw milk, …

 

Thomas Sewell: I’ve been an OG raw milk cultist from the start. That’s why I had a fallout with Laura Towler and all this shit, because I was like:

 

“Don’t feed your baby, baby formula. Give them raw milk!”

 

And she was like:

 

“You’ll kill the babies! You’re gonna kill all the babies!”

 

I’m like, we did this for hundreds.

 

Mark Collett: You do realise that giving a baby raw milk would kill them. They can’t have anything except for breast milk.

 

Thomas Sewell: It’s so weird! My babies aren’t dead, dude! It’s so weird that I feed my babies, …

 

Mark Collett: Your wife didn’t breastfeed them?

 

Thomas Sewell: Oh, they did. They breastfed from 14 months.

 

Mark Collett: How long?

 

Thomas Sewell: The first one 14 months and the second one is still on the boob.

 

Mark Collett: Yeah, you can give them raw milk after a year old, but up until they shouldn’t have anything except mother’s milk.

 

Thomas Sewell: They were doing everything that the government says you shouldn’t do from like four months. Honey, egg. Raw egg. Honey. Raw honey. Raw egg and raw milk from like four months.

 

Mark Collett: Look, …

 

Thomas Sewell: They didn’t die Mark.

 

[2:50:04]

 

Mark Collett: I’m pleased your children didn’t die, …

 

Thomas Sewell: They’re doing well. The government’s lying, Mark! They’re not just lying. [chuckling] ZOG is lying to you, Mark! [chuckling] Look, what happened when people couldn’t breastfeed back in the day. What they did was they got raw goat’s milk. That’s actually what they did. There was no such thing as baby formula in 1930, Mark. They got raw goat’s milk. They got a goat and they got the baby on the teat. That’s what they did. It was raw goat’s milk. That’s a fact, Mark. Look it up! ZOG, the Rothschilds want you, … There’s no enzymes in baby formula, dude! There’s no enzymes. Baby formula is made in a factory.

 

Mark Collett: Enzymes in goat’s milk would be no good for a baby because, …

 

Thomas Sewell: It’s not as good as breast milk. You’re right. It’s not as obviously the ultimate thing for a baby to drink, …

 

Mark Collett: So [chuckling] you get enzymes, …

 

Thomas Sewell: You don’t understand goats, Mark.

 

Mark Collett: They’re tailored specifically to you.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yes, that’s correct.

 

But in the absence of your mother’s milk, the best, the next best thing is raw goat’s milk!

 

Mark Collett: Well, actually, when children couldn’t have their own mother’s milk, in England at least, they were given to people who were known as wet nurses.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, yeah.

 

Mark Collett: Other mothers breastfed sort of children within the community.

 

Thomas Sewell: In the absence of human milk, yes. Absolutely! They do wet nurse. And if you can’t find a wet nurse, guess what the next step was? They wouldn’t let the baby die, I’ll tell you that. And there was no such thing as formula. So I agree. If you can’t breastfeed your baby, find a wet nurse. Like because you can’t sell breast milk in Australia. It’s illegal. You can’t make an industry out of it.

 

But my missus, because we’re National Socialists, she was donating her breast milk to a White family. A mother that had an issue. She had a C section or something and so she couldn’t breastfeed because of her C section. And my missus was pumping extra milk. So breastfeeding on the boob our baby, but pumping extra milk for a White lady that lived around the corner from us that couldn’t breastfeed. And she was breastfeeding one of the neighbours kids, through pumping. Not like, their kid wasn’t on the boob, but like through the pumping. So yeah, I agree, absolutely! Like as a community, that’s what you have to do. If a woman can’t breastfeed, that’s what you have to do, in my opinion Mark.

 

Mark Collett: But you also have to remember, if you do feed a child under 6 months goat’s milk or cow’s milk, that child will grow up to be immensely weaker than a child that drinks human breast milk. Because a goat and a cow, they don’t, in their milk, the iron content is completely different to a woman’s breast milk.

 

And what’s more, a woman’s breast, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Breast milk, we went through this. Breast milk and cow’s milk need to have iron in it. A baby has iron from the placenta. But so that’s why babies suck the blood out of meat at six months old because you got to restore the iron. You don’t get iron from milk. You have to have meat to get iron. That’s why you feed your kid lamb chops. They can’t chew it, but they suck the blood out of it.

 

And also, I’m not arguing again, this is not, I’m a breast milk believer! This is not an argument against breast milk. This is an argument against baby formula. This is why I had the argument with Laura, because I was like:

 

“Baby formula is slop! Don’t feed your baby formula!”

 

And she took offence to that.

 

Mark Collett: Neither of my babies, they’ve not even had a spoonful of formula.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, no, mine haven’t either, but it’s not like I’m not encouraging, … There’s a straw man argument that I’m encouraging people not to breastfeed and to feed their babies like, cow’s milk instead. No! We just fed it on top of we didn’t introduce applesauce and banana sauce. That’s what some people do. That’s what a lot of people do. That’s what happened to me. I got taken off the boob at four months when I started teething and got put on formula and got fed fucking applesauce! And I am significantly weaker than the version of me that would have got boobs for two years, certainly.

 

[Tom could surely make up for those two missing years of boobs cs]

 

Mark Collett: You do baby led weaning.

 

Thomas Sewell: Like, yeah, we put a little bit of meat on their plate. You know what I mean? When we got them in the high chair, we put a little bit of meat, or a little bit of cheese, cream cheese. You know we make little smoothies, just full of butter and cream and raw eggs and stuff like that’s how we do it. So yeah, around the six month mark, around the five month mark.

 

Mark Collett: Yeah we started baby led, we sort of just give him anything that is in the house and see what he likes. I mean we’ve got a big chart of different foods, you know, chicken, beef, lamb, fish.

 

Thomas Sewell: We introduced avo pretty early, avocado. Avocados are really cheap here in Australia.

 

[2:54:51]

 

Mark Collett: My one doesn’t like avocado. His favourite thing is cheese. He’ll eat cheese all day. If you just give him blocks of mature cheddar, he’d just eat that all day. That and beef. He likes, he likes steak.

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. Well we found, I went and bought fancy raw cheese and I went and bought supermarket cheese and we found both our babies, they would, when they’re presented with both options, they would avoid the supermarket cheese and they would eat the raw cheese. And we found also their gut digestion was better.

 

But the reason why goats are better than cows for babies is the, it’s to do with the enzymes. The goat enzymes reflect human enzymes more similar. Cows enzymes and the cow. The protein is like. It’s something about the size of the molecules of the proteins in cow’s milk is much harder for babies to digest.

 

Whereas goat’s milk at a chemical level goat’s milk looks more similar to human milk. It’s more easy to digest. And a lot of people that are lactose intolerant and have issues with cow’s milk don’t have those issues with goat’s milk.

 

Mark Collett: So I’m just gonna Google:

 

“What is the closest milk to human breast milk?”

 

Let’s see what it says.

 

Thomas Sewell: What does it say?

 

Mark Collett:

 

“Donkey milk is considered the closest natural mammal milk to human breast milk in composition. However, for infant feeding, goat milk based formula is often considered the best functional alternative due to ease of digestion, naturally occurring prebiotics and closer fat protein ratios compared to cow’s milk.”

 

So unless you’ve got a donkey, goat is apparent best.

 

Thomas Sewell: I’m not getting donkeys! But I bought some goats, I got some Nigerian dwarfs, I’m going to breed them all into Aryan dwarfs.

 

And that’s just a little side quest I’m doing at the moment while I wait for the fucking High Court. So you’ll see how fucking prolific I become at fucking goat breeding and not in the fucking Taliban way! They do a different kind of goat breeding in Afghanistan. Yeah, I’m breeding for dairy. They’re breeding for love. So a bit different. [LOL]

[Image: Tom’s goats getting unwanted attention from some local “Aussies”.]

 

Yeah. Anyway, I thought I’d just throw that in there. That’s what I’m up to. Building the goat shack. It’s all happening! It’s all happening!

 

Mark Collett: Yes. But I’ve got to say, I do. I am going to put this out there because this is my show. Don’t give your kid anything, but it’s mum’s breast milk until six months.

 

Thomas Sewell: Listen to Lord Rothschild! Pasteurize your milk!

 

Mark Collett: No, because I’m not having anyone watching my show and then, …

 

Thomas Sewell: Their baby dies!

 

Mark Collett: Dying and saying it’s my fault. So my advice is that. And thank you to the two, three gifted subs from Donald Ductator. But I have to underline this and I say this with any medical advice. You know, I don’t give medical advice!

 

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, yeah.

 

Mark Collett: So don’t do anything [chuckling] that’s going to make your baby die and then blame me! I don’t want that on me!

 

Thomas Sewell: Don’t start your baby on the slop.

 

Mark Collett: Don’t ask him about vaccinations or anything either, because he’ll be off on one all night.

 

Thomas Sewell: All right. I got a piss. I’ll talk to you later. See you. Bye.

 

Mark Collett: Thanks a lot. See, that’s it!

 

Well, look, thank you so much, guys. It’s been a really fun stream. Oh, we have one last Superchat from Al Sign. Thank you very much for $25. Thank you so much! She said:

 

“I just have to step in without doxing myself. I can tell you authoritatively that what Tom’s saying is true. Goat and sheep milk does not have the concerns cow milk does. This is why lactose intolerant people have fewer problems with goat and sheep milk as well.”

 

Well, thank you so much! I did not know that and thank you for the generous Superchat.

 

I am now left here alone reading out the Superchat, so if anyone wants to bombard me with Superchats, I’ll stay up all night with you. Otherwise I will just answer the last few ones. We’ve got three gifted subs from Donald Ductator. Thank you so much! It’s very generous of you. Anyone that claims the gifted subs, please do keep them up. It has been three hours. Thomas has had to go before we get into all of the other things. It has been a fun stream. Thank you to Thomas, thank you to everyone who donated so generously, and thank you to everyone who tuned in and supported the stream in any way. I hope you have a great weekend. You know, I love you all. It’s been a lot of fun and hope to see you next Wednesday for Patriotic Weekly Review. And we’ll get Tom back for that review next month of Apocalypse Now.

 

Thank you, everybody and good night.

 

 

[2:59:29]

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

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

 

Odysee Comments

top

(Comments as of 4/19/2026 = 484)

Mark Collett
1 day ago
Pinned by @MarkCollett
If you would like to contribute to the stream, please use Entropy: https://entropystream.live/app/markcollett

5
1
Hide replies

@nationless8nationalist
10 hours ago
I will donate monthly. It will reduce complications in my understanding.

2
0
ThinRedLine
1 day ago
religious infighting is very counter productive

13
2
Hide replies

@TheyOwnYouAll
1 day ago
To be religious means turning OFF your brain. The rulling classes would not have it any other way.

1
4
Hide replies
Prison Ships
23 hours ago
Only Evil is repelled by the Light of The Cross. This isn’t rocket physics.

3
2
Hide replies

@TheyOwnYouAll
18 hours ago
The light of the cross, really, LMAO.

1
1
Hide replies
Prison Ships
15 hours ago
Ecclesiastes 7:4 The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, But the heart of fools is in the house of mirth.

@Theos19
14 hours ago
Idiot. You came straight from school with only one lens to see the world and have no idea what you are talking about.

@Zangle
4 hours ago
The ruling classes have directly sponsored irreligion to sterilise White birth rates and destroy their sense of community and spirituality. You’re a midwit.

Prison Ships
1 day ago
All AntiChrists are “in” with the SatanicJeews which are repelled by the words of Jesus•Logos, “in” that falsehoods are only illuminated by The Light of The Cross.

0
3
Sakiel
13 hours ago
Lol. First day being White?

Hide replies
ThinRedLine
11 hours ago
Blond hair , blue eyes a less buff version of Blair Cottrell

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
As a Heathen I would rather live in a White Christian theocracy than a multi ethnic pagan country

12
2
Hide replies

@TheyOwnYouAll
1 day ago(edited)
Paganism is European you dumb ass. And Christianity is a Jewish created HOAX used for thousands of years to have other groups of people do the Jews dirty work, while the Jews sit back and collect from both sides of the coin on everyone’s misery. Rinse and repeat.
White “Christian” theocracy, really, LMAO. You do know that most of Africa is Christian, as is Latin America. Dumb people like yourself don’t know that they are dumb, reason is they CONGREGATE with equally dumb people.
And for your information, no one with two functioning brain cells wants to live in mind destroying theocracy cult.
You Judeo Christcucks are the gift of stupidity that keeps on giving, and giving, and giving, and giving…….
And your jew Jesus character never existed, and neither do any bronze age God Gods Devil Devils mythological religious utter nonsense insanity.

3
5
Hide replies
Prison Ships
23 hours ago
TheHolyChristianBible rebukes/ infuriates SatanicJeews more so than anything else does, and there is Nothing anyone can do about it..The Light of The Cross with the words of Jesus repels SatanicJeews and all Evil doers. This isn’t rocket physics.

2
1
ThinRedLine
21 hours ago
I know all this I just want to remind you that most the 109 countries that expelled them were Christian

2
1
Hide replies
LottaSense
16 hours ago
the church let the jews back in and protected them 109 times, too

Hide replies
Prison Ships
13 hours ago
The ‘church’ can’t compel anyone, much less SatanicJeews to Love Jesus. One must first be drawn by TheHolySpirit. Pretending to Love Jesus doesn’t count in GOD’s eyes.

Hide replies
LottaSense
13 hours ago
you no read gud, huh? Or you are just babbling some insane cope in the face of the fact that the church has ALWAYS, always enabled and coddled jews. The common people/ aka normal people drive jews out and then the church brings them back. Every single time.

Hide replies
Prison Ships
4 hours ago
AntiChrists; unregenerate Queers; and c’rap’ listeners deserve an insurmountable Alien invasion.

@MaybeNextTime
12 hours ago
I hope you’re arguing for sport and not for logic.
Imagine having these people in charge of any society!

ThinRedLine
21 hours ago
I am not a Christian , a Heathen is a Norse pagan

2
1
Hide replies

@MaybeNextTime
11 hours ago
It must, as it does me, frustrate you to see fellow ‘Pagans and Heathens’ stuck in a loop of negativity.
You can try Your best but some won’t go beyond the finger pointing and ‘blame’.

Prison Ships
15 hours ago
Anti•War Christians like Pastor Chuck Baldwin’s Liberty Fellowship are the most potent Anti•Satanic vanguard..This Righteous information would never show up on an AntiChrist’s algorithms.

@MaybeNextTime
12 hours ago
Saar Do not redeem the Ancient Hindu Paganism Saar!

Green
6 hours ago
Why the putrid hate?

1
0

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Charles Lindbergh as President 1936 would have created a better world

9
0

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
All the ‘influencers’ creating friction between Pagans and Christians are themselves AntiWhite or at the very least supporting this divide.

7
0
Hide replies
Prison Ships
17 hours ago
Ones with the ‘gift of discernment’ will separate from All AntiChrists, not only their SatanicJeew vanguard. Intentional separation is no ‘divide’.

Jakim Boor
17 hours ago
Mark is absolutely right here. I love Mark and honestly there probably isn’t a person on the internet that I agree more with then Mark on basically everything or as close to everything that two people can agree… AND even though Mark himself won’t agree with me on what I am about to say, I will just come out and say it… Sewell is retarded… He is more or less a traitor to the white race… I don’t care how much he worships Hitler or whatever, he is showing support for “people” that would kill your white family on the orders of zog and not think twice about it.

5
1
ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 white people lost WWII

6
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f 100% agree I think jews are trying to make pagans and Christians fight.

5
0
Hide replies
Prison Ships
21 hours ago
Biblical Ignoramus/ False teachers are Legion.

0
1
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
The Taliban told the US government that They won’t hand over Bin Laden just for demands and that the US has to prove that Bin Laden committed a crime before the Taliban would consider it. That was the end of diplomacy. Maybe evidence was problematic to provide.

5
0
Hide replies

@katana17
1 day ago
Problematic as 9/11 was a false flag carried out by ZOG, engineered by Israel.
See: https://katana17.com/2018/09/11/know-more-news-christopher-bollyn-the-man-who-solved-9-11-transcript/

5
0

@vengeance
1 day ago
zog invaded afghanistan and installed a pedo govt that DID grow opium, both those things were outlawed under the talis

5
0

@ERASER
23 hours ago
Good on Mark for pushing back on Tom’s nonsense. He’s completely wrong on this issue and started gish galloping like crazy. If you start white knighting for a zogbot fighting destabilizing wars for Jews (which causes the refugees we don’t want) you’ve lost the plot. Just because the individual soldier is some brave physically alpha looking guy, that’s so small minded and actually pretty gay. The people to be venerated and respected are those who have the courage to sacrifice by saying no to Jews and to speak truth to power against the system, not those who mindlessly behave like mercenaries for zog and get off killing some peasants in a far off land that pose no threat to you or your country.

5
2
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Tribalism that could be redirected to real white tribalism. Not football.

4
0
ThinRedLine
1 day ago
fake tribalism

4
0
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f Yes. Like 60 years ago every day was ethnic free. Before the jews won WWII and took over all the media.

4
0
Hide replies
Prison Ships
21 hours ago
TheHolyNewTestamentCovenant allows Jesus’ Salvation for pagan tribe members, not solely to Jeews, which is the reason SatanicJeews reject Jesus. This isn’t rocket physics. It Stands Written.

@HowardLong
23 hours ago
This guys a retard. Why should we nationalists celebrate a ‘war hero’ Aussie who went to Afghanistan and murdered a bunch of local villagers.
Wow what a brave man. An illegal, neocon war which in the interest of the J€w$.
If that’s your ‘national icon’ you need to reconsider your direction.

5
3
ThinRedLine
1 day ago
You should only feed your children fresh blood , they will grow up strong

3
0

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
abrahamic dessert cults dont belong in north.

5
2
Green
6 hours ago
We here in America need a strong leader like Tom Sewell.

2
0
Caesar Avg
22 hours ago
My first thought about BR-S when the news first broke: He’s not one of us, who cares?
The way that the major civic nationalist outfits are defending this guy makes me as sick as their incessant Zionism. Do ethnonationalists have to fall for this nonsense, too?
Then that problem enters into this conversation. Sewell insists that the Taliban are or were ‘our’ enemy. The only enemies from Afghanistan are Afghani immigrants in the West. That’s literally it. No ‘terrorist’ in the Middle East is my enemy or my problem. No Taliban member who stays in Afghanistan is my enemy or problem. Never was and never will be. He only becomes an enemy if he develops designs on the West, and no sooner. He can kill as many Pakistani soldiers, Hazaras, indeed, whichever enemy he wants to kill, really, as he likes.
Amusingly, Sewell claims to reject a kind of universal morality… but then wants to kill off the entire ruling faction in a country totally irrelevant to Whites… all for what? It ends up being moral reasons: opposition to bacha bazi (which is a native, non-Islamic practice) and the like.
The point that guys like BR-S – an obvious ‘Zogbot’ – would gladly kill all of us here if ordered to by his government is the killing blow. Of course he would. Never defend anyone in the state, for any reason, ever. They ruin the lives of ‘extremists’ all the time: when they themselves end up on the losing end as ‘war criminals’ or whatever, that’s just desserts and not our problem at all. I’ve noticed that he’s already persona non grata in global media: some outlets are now only referring to him only by his initials, his name is being removed from everything within the country (a kind of late-modern damnatio memoriae), and the like. Clearly not a hill worth dying on.
Less

2
0

@ScaffoldWaffen
1 day ago
Well put me Collett

2
0
Hide replies

@What
1 day ago
Yea collett has a silver tounge ill give him that. Bald guy is either slow or stubborn.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f Goats that eat roofs need a stern talking to!

2
0
Sakiel
11 hours ago
“Boomer” really is a state of mind.

1
0
Wizened
21 hours ago
Great debate!!
I could sympathise with both sides….
Sewell’s argument was basically : forgive them Lord , for they know not what they do.
I do agree that soldiers may be able to plead a special case. Many times I’ve heard veterans say: you’re fighting for your buddies – the “esprit de corps” factor which is absent from civvie jobs.
But I also agree with mark , they are not worthy of our support any more than say a charity for abandoned pets …

1
0

@Gustav
22 hours ago
They will make you fight their Jewish wars, then prosecute you for following their orders. That’s the fate of anyone who serves this regime.

1
0

@What
1 day ago
jeezus, 40 minutes in and its hard to watch and realize this sewell guy and archtypes like him are either useful idiots or gladio type operators. And yea, its that black and white.

2
1
Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

Repost and like the Twitter if you can please!
https://x.com/Eagle_Pax_Max/status/2045247129140990168

1
0
ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MaybeNextTime:5 I think our enemies do exploit the Christian .pagan faultline

1
0

@JasonBarewater
6 hours ago
The Ben Roberts Smith case is tragic. Who is running the legal system in Australia? Do non-white countries have a legal system that attacks its own? I think not.

@JasonBarewater
6 hours ago

Kevin
12 hours ago
he made a lot of good points. disagree with the Islam focus. but his view about the warrior is 100%

Bleak
15 hours ago
109th like… Get in

LottaSense
16 hours ago
Its funny that dudes like Sewell think that ALL “strong men” are GOOD men. Its the height of delusional thinking.

SuperSquad88
19 hours ago
POSITIVELY FANTASTIC LADS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHAT A TERRIFIC SHOW HERE, NONE BETTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Konstrukt
21 hours ago
Great debate!!
I could sympathise with both sides….
Sewell’s argument was basically : forgive them Lord , for they know not what they do.
I do agree that soldiers may be able to plead a special case. Many times I’ve heard veterans say: you’re fighting for your buddies – the “esprit de corps” factor which is absent from civvie jobs.
But I also agree with mark , they are not worthy of our support any more than say a charity for abandoned pets

Wizened
21 hours ago
Great debate!!
I could sympathise with both sides….
Sewell’s argument was basically : forgive them Lord , for they know not what they do.
I do agree that soldiers may be able to plead a special case. Many times I’ve heard veterans say: you’re fighting for your buddies – the “esprit de corps” factor which is absent from civvie jobs.
But I also agree with mark , they are not worthy of our support any more than say a charity for abandoned pets ….

Hide replies
DaisyS
17 hours ago
Abandoned pets are worthy of our support

Wizened
21 hours ago
Great debate!!
I could sympathise with both sides….
Sewell’s argument was basically : forgive them Lord , for they know not what they do.
I do agree that soldiers may be able to plead a special case. Many times I’ve heard veterans say: you’re fighting for your buddies – the “esprit de corps” factor which is absent from civvie jobs.
But I also agree with mark , they are not worthy of our support any more than say a charity for abandoned pets

Cone of Silence
22 hours ago
Have to make this a two part series, but I will say, this thus far has been an excellent debate and I can understand completely in what you both are saying. I will say though that it’s part of the human condition to be at conflict.
As a minority race it vital that global clan be United. The trouble is, it’s also part of the human condition that there will always be traitors.
About Ben, no one has the right to arm chair the actions of soldiers in events that require them, for their lives, to be monsters.
For me it’s not about actions I can’t comprehend, it about a man who was true to his country and his country is letting him down.
Thanks for getting Tom on Mark and to Tom, I’m eternally grateful for what you’ve started.

Nationalist Book Reviews
1 day ago
I left Australia a long time ago and have observed the country facing numerous challenges. I hope that Tom and future leaders will be able to address these issues and help restore the nation’s strength.

danzimmons
1 day ago
g’night °/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Good night Brothers and Sisters

scoobyburn
1 day ago
O/

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Good night all 14 o/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
o/

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
o/

scoobyburn
1 day ago

@MaybeNextTime:5 lol mass deaths from live stream

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Lol nice stream!

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Chat has decided on feeding them the heads of our enemies

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago

@scoobyburn:1 Came for the news stayed for the milk

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
TOM ARE THOSE GOATS ARE THE ONES WITH THE SHAPELY BEHINDS?

scoobyburn
1 day ago
feck now we are milking donkeys

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST REVIEW: GOAT MILK VS HUMAN MILK.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MaybeNextTime:5 will give them the right values as well

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
Donkey for the win! AGAIN

scoobyburn
1 day ago
cows raw milk is mint,,, tastes so good

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MaybeNextTime:5 that is the best diet

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MaybeNextTime
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: I second that.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f or turn them into vampires.

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
Feed them the heads of your enemies

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
LOL

scoobyburn
1 day ago
although humans are the only thing that continues to drink milk after birth

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Yeah formula is crap. Jewish crap.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 they do

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
The Milk Quest!

danzimmons
1 day ago
grow like a horse

danzimmons
1 day ago
butterfat is where it’s at

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f They do??! Those bastards!

scoobyburn
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 preferabley just the two of lol

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@scoobyburn:1 I believe they are called udders

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Goats eat thatched roofs

danzimmons
1 day ago
goats are fun, & have best milk & cheese

scoobyburn
1 day ago
marks melting lol

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
Nanny Goats kept thousands of babies alive. Still do

scoobyburn
1 day ago
straight from the teat

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Tom is bringing in in Nigerians? Short ones?

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
Very fast over short distances those Dwarfs

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Niggerian dwarfs

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Waht?

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Great banter

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
“Hate Crime Laws” = You’re allowed to hate these people but not those people

scoobyburn
1 day ago
O/// good stuff

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
interesting discussion

Hide replies

@What
1 day ago
sowell is kinda thick in the head. “they’re not like the other zog bots” lol

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Great show

scoobyburn
1 day ago
directors cut 4 hrs lol

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
o/

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f o/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 a good meme I saved it

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
Theology and Real Politik do not mix

scoobyburn
1 day ago
green energy but cut trees down for wind turbines

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
o/ the great grand father

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
I just wish I had the better resolution one.

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
Mark would make a good Amish

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
True half of the pagans are hippies , maybe slightly less

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MaybeNextTime:5 I don’t agree with this’

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine
ThinRedLine save this meme if you don’t have it already. https://i.postimg.cc/3J0wSpZh/00000000000001.jpg

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MaybeNextTime:5 hmm

@George_Luther_Wickstrom
1 day ago
HaHa Sewell supremacy

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago
*like

@MaybeNextTime
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f I like fighting with both sides. I defend Pagans from Christians and Christians from Pagans. I just lie to fight

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@danzimmons:6 I suppose that was meant for me. Cheers mate o///

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Platonism

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
^^^

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Jagdtiger:b I had to google it. I only know Davy Crockett. I was a kid when Miami Vice was running.

danzimmons
1 day ago
utopia °///

@popovacianen
1 day ago
tbh i think most of NS guys now days are agnostic or atheist

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 Dude, Sonny Crockett.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
*who

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Jagdtiger:b wo is Sonny?

Long Knife
1 day ago
it’s not just that way when it comes to the Christianity Question, it’s that way when it comes to a lot of things (ie. no rational discussion to be had, just poo flinging)

scoobyburn
1 day ago
Christianity lakes race awareness, not ethics

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 Sonny had a pet one on his boat

@popovacianen
1 day ago
ey muslims are also people of the book lol

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Jagdtiger:b OH MY GOD THERE IS AN ALLIGATOR IN THE CHAT???? AAAAAAA!

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
a good explanation Thomas

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
See you later alligator @MilosM.:9

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 Good night

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 Good night Milos!

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@danzimmons
thx [:prohibited:] George.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
^^

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
Race first

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 Marlon Brando had to profusely apologize for that statement and he couldn’t work after that.

@MilosM.
1 day ago
Anyway, have to split off. ‘Evening, gents.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
yes

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
Midsummer is pagan

@popovacianen
1 day ago
im agnostic so i dont really care tbh

danzimmons
1 day ago

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 oh sorry

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f Well thank you I was saying good night to Nationless8nationalist. He is going to bed.

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 tbh, for how much truth pilled content can be found there, there is a ton on it that is schizo and spergy

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Jagdtiger
:prohibited: air Gorge. There is no wind Emoji.

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 i will watch it later.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 Good night

scoobyburn
1 day ago
no, just pro white on both sides O/

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@nationless8nationalist:1 bye good night!

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
No

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
George Floyd @utopia148800:6

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
TOM ONLY ACCEPTS PIGEON POSTS!

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Tired. Leaving chat

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
what the f is this

scoobyburn
1 day ago
mini tower sneaked in

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Philip.Kollberg
I just post :gorilla:

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
ok

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
:joy:

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Philip.Kollberg:0 don’t do it.

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
N

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 You missed out a lot of gems for not being on 4chan /pol/ Most of the based stuff on twitter originates from 4chan.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 A classic

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
With a steel brush

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
we do need a spring cleaning of unis

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MilosM.
starts at
0:21

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
a lot of the lefties are just opportunists and they will do what the system tells them

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 I’ll post the link

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
without gloves

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Weed smoking is very annoying

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 Is there any source on that?

scoobyburn
1 day ago
poop waffen

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 Is there any source on that.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
*Mark

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
HEIL MARKO O/

@MilosM.
1 day ago
the horror…the horror

scoobyburn
1 day ago
shave their heads make em dig

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MilosM.
he was and he said on Larry King that jews run Hollywood. :smiley:

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 Col Kurtz was based

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
He did change a lot.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Christopher “Hammer” from Blood Tribe was a wigger.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
re education or deportation

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
@utopia148800:6 agreed

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
Deport the wiggers too

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Being a hated minority is a real issue. Not a history lession

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
The Doors made some good music.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f I love that movie. All the NVA activity dropped to 0 where Kurtz operated. I wonder why. And I wonder why is that a problem.

scoobyburn
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f O/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@scoobyburn:1 smells like victory

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Col Kurtz with a wife

scoobyburn
1 day ago
love the smell of napalm in the morning

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Col. Thomas Kurtz

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 agreed

@popovacianen
1 day ago
why? this guy is a schizo lmao

@popovacianen
1 day ago
you can just trade you bald fockface lol

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
cannibal island

@MilosM.
1 day ago
Turks also have Slav blood in them. They still are not white.

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Yeah leave them alone. My space for us

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

Repost and like the Twitter if you can please!
https://x.com/Eagle_Pax_Max/status/2045247129140990168

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
The North Viet cong were for desegregation strongly. My race is my uniform. Still fighting in the war was a mistake. Distraction from ending the civil rights act

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f yeah I think 9/11 was allowed to happen.

scoobyburn
1 day ago
bbc found the 911 hi jackers, mossad remote controlled malarky

@popovacianen
1 day ago
not the taliban

@MilosM.
1 day ago
Afghanis send heroine to Europe and USA through CIA

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@scoobyburn:1 and the US government is arming them

@popovacianen
1 day ago
and no afgan was a part of 9/11 lol

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
they allowed it to happen

@popovacianen
1 day ago
truth is the truth wtf is he talking about i dont care if leftists were saying it

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
Yes @scoobyburn:1 in the 80s against the soviets

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
The funny thing is that the NVA forces committed a genocide against their native tribal population using the war as cover.

scoobyburn
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 beaners run coke lol

scoobyburn
1 day ago
cia funded the taliban against the russans in the 70’s

@popovacianen
1 day ago
nva were the good guys lol

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
oh thx

@popovacianen
1 day ago
afgan national army

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
what’s ana?

@popovacianen
1 day ago
ana and taliban are not the same wtf is this guy talking about lmao

@FriedrichC
1 day ago
sharia law aint so bad, we can get used to it

@popovacianen
1 day ago
your guys were working with pedofiles im sorry lol

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@scoobyburn:1 do they? I never heard that. What I did hear is that all the Mexican drug cartels are very pro israel.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
lol

Well Tickled Pickle
1 day ago
Muslims really hate gay sex

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Social politics is old school leisure politics

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
hijrah

scoobyburn
1 day ago
turks run the eu heroin trade

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
What???

scoobyburn
1 day ago
opium increased under the cia in the 2000’s it was still shipped to western countries

@popovacianen
1 day ago
taliban did ban bacha bazi and heroin your guys were working with pedofiles

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
life with your chooses. It is what it is.

@popovacianen
1 day ago
not telling shit to families is not very NS thing to do tbh

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Unless it’s an NS government.

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
The days of not training for work early in life are over. A self respecting life is a lot harder to get. Pleasure and entertainment is to much of a luxury for the white man

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f lol

scoobyburn
1 day ago
ask the apprentice to sweep up after the matter, see how they go

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
too many spastics

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
censorship of the system is very strict and hard. Self respect is truly tested now days.

@popovacianen
1 day ago
taliban do manual labor

danzimmons
1 day ago
true

scoobyburn
1 day ago
i pay someone to mow my lawn lol

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
because that’s the kind of “people” they are.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@nationless8nationalist:1 They do it for a paycheck. These coppers would throw off their neighbor’s kid from a roof for that paycheck.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
probably

Obscure Truth
1 day ago
True.

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Just like leaving the system. In the same way you can find a honest decent job no matter how long it takes

scoobyburn
1 day ago
physicality makes one strong

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Old saying I am just doing my job. No excuse to torture the British people

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
everyone loves fresh fruit!

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
I just use :grapes:

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
143 in detention for upsetting the teacher

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
The BS legal enforcement appears so risky. You self censor yourself for reasons you imagine are there.

scoobyburn
1 day ago
dummy / pacifier

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
o/ The madman!!!

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
True. It makes it easier for self censorship.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
How do women talk in their locker room?

@MilosM.
1 day ago
I noticed that kind of talk also attracts some women.

danzimmons
1 day ago
lol

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
JOEL GRABBED THAT TWEET BY THE P*SSY

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
It was clear that it wasn’t a threat

scoobyburn
1 day ago
they put a chick in charge of the military down under, crazy stuff

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@nationless8nationalist:1 I felt so disappointed after Elon Musk said he will sue the ADL and he backed out.

danzimmons
1 day ago
sportsball is great for children.

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
The ADL follows you around and make junk lawsuits. If the charges are challenged. You find out its BS

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
yeah hooligans need to grow up

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
A army guy told me this. they get in your face. You fight them you get punished. Or you back down and corporate

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
True the system humiliates and tortures the white people to keep the intelligent ones in line. A peasant uprising rarely works

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Sir-Trancealot:6 Good night!

danzimmons
1 day ago
they have power because they are traitors

scoobyburn
1 day ago
they shot rubber bullets at people in vic during convid

danzimmons
1 day ago
g’night

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
The old adage is: the only difference between a cop and a criminal is a badge.

Sir Trancealot
1 day ago
goodnight all, take care early work tomorrow

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Yeah I think the coppers are rotten to the core and they hire the most psychopathic people to be cops.

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
The officers are affirmative action hires. The ones who would not would face a lifetime of social torture.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 No problem

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 yes

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f Thank you Sir very kindly!

danzimmons
1 day ago
great stream

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine
Better keep training. Don’t want to be out of shape when the call comes in. :martial_arts_uniform:

@MilosM.
1 day ago
Women don’t like to have their opinions challenged. They like to circle jerk those in their own groups. The worst kind of women are those who always agree to what men say, without having their own opinions.

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@scoobyburn:1 yes agree

scoobyburn
1 day ago
news chicks love a bit of rough lol

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 I am optimistic as well, our time is approaching

Nazistka
1 day ago
o/

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
My grandmothers generation is when women had self respect. All the economic activity has been taken away from us.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
550 watching

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f We did. But the normie masses are waking up to jewish power and all the non whites used as a weapon against us. Now is the time to double down and not to relent.

scoobyburn
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f some things are to much for most peoples brains

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@nationless8nationalist:1 and racial awareness is selfrespect

danzimmons
1 day ago
with their dry wicks lol

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
mgtow

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
self respect is racial awareness

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
We all Appreciate Mark and Tom. And all people who fight for the movement.

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
You’re Welcome @utopia148800:6 I appreciate the work Mark Collett does. o/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
I agree

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@scoobyburn:1 yes, normies but we are making history they are not

scoobyburn
1 day ago
i got mates who will only talk about sport, stupidity is everywhere

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
Thank you for posting the stream!

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Sir-Trancealot:6 Yeah I think so too

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
True backing down is hard on the pride

@popovacianen
1 day ago
making west white is reasoned but then going after in mid east again is stupid as fock sorry lol

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
Can I agree with Mark?

Sir Trancealot
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 Maybe on Rumble chat

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
good discussion

Obscure Truth
1 day ago
Right.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
What?? Who said they love muslims?

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
Thank you very much @utopia148800:6 I appreciate it o/

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Being poor feels like your for sell. Nationalism gives me a sense of autonomy

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
done mate. Followed you on twitter too.

danzimmons
1 day ago
they’re most likely traitors also

danzimmons
1 day ago
fooks need to meet

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
good

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
If you could do me a favor @utopia148800:6 if possible could you follow my channel on Odysee?

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
lol, true Mark

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
Holly based Sir! o/

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Institution control of money. Always someone greedy enough to sell out. It seems hopeless sometimes.

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
No problem. Post away @utopia148800:6 I want to be noticed as a poster of Based Content o/

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
If you don’t want me to post your tweet’s link in chat please tell me and I stop. ( some people are nervous of bans)

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 are there ever an ethnic free day ?

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f I’m fine thank you minus all the darkies I saw today. And You fren was your day ethnic free?

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Anyone that tortures the British people for money to retire later is disguising

0KT0BER
1 day ago
do the Oz police have a ‘Common Purpose’ conditioning programme in place?

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 How are you Brother ?

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

Repost and like the Twitter if you can please!
https://x.com/Eagle_Pax_Max/status/2045247129140990168

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 o/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
o/

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
o/

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
You’re Welcome @TheThinRedLine:f o/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
Thank you

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Right on Mark. Its corrupt nonsense

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
hope that helps…

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
https://x.com/Eagle_Pax_Max/status/2045247129140990168

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
You can repost mine, I don’t know about others. Here’s mine one second….

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
Is there big accounts that posted the stream so I can repost it? Or I can repost your tweet.

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f o/

scoobyburn
1 day ago
it’s a healthy debate

Captain Myles Keogh
1 day ago
Sewell is too much of a hater. You do have to have a morality and there are some things that should be taboo.

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Gee why not be a gangster then retire as a regular honest guy later.

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
I just shared it on X too o/

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f If you would thank you but it is a bit fed posty

@popovacianen
1 day ago
and your leadership would be what? Make the west white again GREAT and then go fight in mid east LIKE WTF WHY

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@Eagle_Pax_Max
good

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Prostituting yourself to a system that tortures our people daily. Yhen after they get enough money they care about the issue

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 I can superchat it

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MarkCollett:6 Mark can you ask Tom if he thinks the AUS military would open fire on Aussies if they are ordered to?

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
I just shared this stream on Gab, Poa.st and Minds o/

@nationless8nationalist
1 day ago
Real issue is being a hated minority in our own countries. Not the social game of going to war overseas

danzimmons
1 day ago
yes those political types are the traitors

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
arent young men moore awake theese days?

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
and the cops that carry out the obviously traitor laws.

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@Sir-Trancealot:6 Hello Sir!

@popovacianen
1 day ago
afgans thought you guys were the russians when you came in there and im going to belive they were plotting against the west like gtfo

Sir Trancealot
1 day ago

@utopia148800:6 evening

Eagle Pax Max
1 day ago
o/

Ulrich22
1 day ago
yeah its super stupid

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Who’s the bald guy?

@hyggesecurity
1 day ago
Hes trying to absolve soldiers of their own responsibility for their actions. Soldiers are always trying to do that rather than accept that they were wrong to do what they did, from the start.

@popovacianen
1 day ago
this is idiotic lol

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 @TheThinRedLine:f Evening gents

Ulrich22
1 day ago
i cant listen to this

scoobyburn
1 day ago
99% of whites are not awake

Secure the future of our people
1 day ago
Dang I’m a bit late.

@vengeance
1 day ago
how many afghanis were coming to australia in 2001?

@vengeance
1 day ago
if you werent a zogbot whyd you have to come to your senses?

@MilosM.
1 day ago
Tommy is silly tool.

danzimmons
1 day ago
enemy within

@popovacianen
1 day ago
ok so he wants to make the west whit? ok great, and then go fight in mid east cuz reasons? am i getting this right

scoobyburn
1 day ago
the whole of the uk supported a fat drunk & communists in ww2

fartman
1 day ago
he has jewish name too?

danzimmons
1 day ago
western governments want a draft, but only for Whites

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Tommy is garbage

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
Mark is right

fartman
1 day ago
he is jewop

@MilosM.
1 day ago
These people would still come here, even if Israeli problem is quelled down.

fartman
1 day ago
japs were heroes

Ulrich22
1 day ago
just stop tom

Ulrich22
1 day ago
horrible take

@vengeance
1 day ago
^

@popovacianen
1 day ago
just so u guys know most spec op guys are psyhos trust me lol

fartman
1 day ago
on the right side

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
guarding border and trade

fartman
1 day ago
we fought with germans in ww2

@popovacianen
1 day ago
so he wants to go and fight afgans in afganistan after australia is white LIKE WTF WHY

scoobyburn
1 day ago
the only defense in this argument is the sas should be guarding our boarders not fighting abroad, but this is the world we live in

fartman
1 day ago
i mean granddad

danzimmons
1 day ago
gain knowledge tools skills etc.

fartman
1 day ago
my dad fought the soviets

@vengeance
1 day ago
that’s not true either, plenty of people join the military for money or jsut to hurt people. plenty of people join up for that

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
Alexander had an adventure

fartman
1 day ago

@danzimmons:6 you can do tax helping

@vengeance
1 day ago
the taliban arent the ones the govt invitees over either, it’s the liberal bacha bazi gay drug using rapist ones who were ALIGNED WITH ZOG AGAINST THE TALIBAN lmfao

danzimmons
1 day ago
doesn’t matter how much fiat you make they’ll find another way to tax you

fartman
1 day ago
the gov is in cahoots with jews

@popovacianen
1 day ago
why the fock care about afgans in afganistan like wtf is he talking about lol

@vengeance
1 day ago
we’re arguing that it’s not a threat at all

fartman
1 day ago
“bankers”

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
China took over the big airfield base Bagram too?

scoobyburn
1 day ago
china is now mining the minerals in Afghanistan, there is trillions there

danzimmons
1 day ago
both made legit points

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
real time history channel on youtube makes great videos, about afghan war

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@vengeance:9 i agree. i am considering moving to Rumble. new interface design is tosh

fartman
1 day ago
there is oil. but nothing else

@vengeance
1 day ago
the “at” function is broken

fartman
1 day ago
i have never even heard about afghanitan until usa wanted to invade there

@popovacianen
1 day ago
taliban dont give a fock about the west lol

@vengeance
1 day ago
i dont think the taliban even thinks abotu you at all, Tom

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@vengeance:9 right

fartman
1 day ago
zog wants us to make war against afghanistan and iran. why are we there

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
In such miserable country opium is needed to get by

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@Philip.Kollberg:0 and heroine

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
I think afghanistan is the largest producer of opium.

scoobyburn
1 day ago
its not about the soldier its the miss use of such hardened men by corrupt governments

fartman
1 day ago
what do they produce? opium

fartman
1 day ago
i think we boycott afghanistan even we do what so ever with them xD

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
Just boycott Afghanistan?

@vengeance
1 day ago
no, the question is why were you in their country lol

fartman
1 day ago
i don’t think possible to destroy taliban totally

fartman
1 day ago
how is 16 yo age verification?

@MilosM.
1 day ago
Just because they were following orders, their crimes are no less because they were fools.

@vengeance
1 day ago
the taliban outlawed bacha bazi, those paedo’s were on the side of zog

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
Agree with Mark, serving ZOG makes you an enemy of the White race

Rex Kwon Do
1 day ago
Conflate much

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
anti Australian

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
agreed

@MilosM.
1 day ago
A woman will lead Australian army.

0KT0BER
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 I saw about half of WolfCreek, seemed abit like another Hostel type nasty?

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@0KT0BER:9 an Aussie who was in former NSN hooked me on Wolf Creek. Saying Australia needs people like that, but picking up a different type of people instead in the film (and real life).

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MarkGreen:8 good to hear

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
NSN had a hero’s welcome from what I saw

0KT0BER
1 day ago
The Rover (2014) is an excellent less fantastic Oz post collapse filum

@MilosM.
1 day ago
Comment on ten Israeli haters issued by their government?

@cheflad
1 day ago
the same is happening in the UK.

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
Mad Max

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
sounds great , Aussies

Rex Kwon Do
1 day ago
o/ Thomas

@vengeance
1 day ago
the israel war is a perfect opportunity to make inroads with neighbors

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 hey Mate

@MilosM.
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f hey m8

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MilosM.:9 Greetings o/

@MilosM.
1 day ago
greetings everyone

danzimmons
1 day ago
yeah strict

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Joel is on probation ?

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@danzimmons:6 aqgreed

danzimmons
1 day ago
i miss their weekly streams

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
Joel is great

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
o7

@Philip.Kollberg
1 day ago
o/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@danzimmons:6 Hail Brother

Mark Collett
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f good to see you, I was worried aswe hadn’t seen you for a while!

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MarkCollett:6 sorry for the lack of reply

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
I have been busy

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@MarkCollett:6 Thank yo Mark

Mark Collett
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f hey, did you see my email? I hope you are OK!

Sir Trancealot
1 day ago
evening gents

danzimmons
1 day ago
Thinredline Brother

@Jagdtiger
1 day ago
o/

ThinRedLine
1 day ago

@danzimmons:6 o/

danzimmons
1 day ago
°///

Aryan Futurist Joker
1 day ago
o/

Cone of Silence
1 day ago
Good morning Tom

Cone of Silence
1 day ago
Hey Mark, off to work m8 have to catch later,.

Mark Collett
1 day ago

@TheThinRedLine:f Hey, I emailed you a week or so back! Did you recieve it?

ThinRedLine
1 day ago
o/

@TheGreatWillDo
1 day ago

@MarkCollett
Oh, yous have streamed together.. in that case excuse me then… you know what they say in that film lock stock: ‘assumption is the key of all f*** ups’ lol…

scoobyburn
1 day ago
O/

Mark Collett
2 days ago

@TheGreatWillDo:a I would love to stream with him, I have only ever said kind things about him and loved working with him when we have appeared together!

@TheGreatWillDo
2 days ago
If your willing to stream HT but write off Paul i find that really questionable or theres more to this situation then what im aware of…

@TheGreatWillDo
2 days ago

@MarkCollett:6 what ever your differences are with Paul miller (Gypsy crusader) i think you should put them aside & do a stream with him for the sake of exciting nationalist content. Hes got such a great story to tell that runs really deep & has a really sensible serious side to him whe its time to.

@TheGreatWillDo
2 days ago
Its good to see tom & mark smashing streams together. Like there was a period where you’s didnt do streams or seen on the same platforms together for years. its a shame that wasnt a situation that couldnt be avoided at the time. But what matters most is were all looking forward to agood friday night

@vengeance
2 days ago
o/

RUMBLE Comments

109 Comments

Seppl88
2 days ago
ZOG is our Number 1 enemy! Afghans in Australia is an enemy because they are part of ZOGs plan to decimate us.
31
2

‹ Hide 2 replies
pupli
2 days ago
exactly … just bizarre how bout strive for glory by giving your white children a real culture and no worshiping a jew on a stick is not real white culture
5
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
Seppl88
1 day ago
The worship of magic Jews is holding us back.
2
0

ProtectEurope
1 day ago
Yes, but Afghans in their native Afghanistan are NOT our enemy.
1
2

TTFOLEY1914
2 days ago
Sewell is bang on
33
7

‹ Hide 1 reply
AvidFan
1 day ago
They both make very good points. Sewell had a few bad takes though. The average tax paying working man is not as bad as the zog cop or soldier or intelligence officer or government hack – the average working man is completely brainwashed at worst or completely apathetic and distracted with bread and circuses at best. Those working for the police, army, intelligence services, government hacks are fully aware of the power they hold and the crimes against their people that they are covering up and their collusion with the state to silence patriots/nationalists. They are traitors. They are fully conscious of what they are doing. They are not the same as a tax paying plumber trying feed his family that lives at the bottom of the street. Sewell seems to have forgotten how treacherous, cowardly, and brutal the bullies in blue were during covid in Australia.
3
3

TuckerLimehouse
Supporter
2 days ago
I hate the term “partner” for spouse.
21
1

‹ Hide 2 replies
RoseRock444
Supporter
1 day ago
Australians and Brits love that word
2
1

‹ Hide 1 reply
TuckerLimehouse
Supporter
1 day ago
I’ve noticed. Americans generally use it when referring to a gay couple. Can’t imagine calling my wife my partner. so impersonal, like its a business transaction.
3
1

‹ Hide 1 reply
Beno777
1 day ago
It’s mainly used for unmarried couples of which there are many, otherwise you’d usually say wife/husband.
2
0
AliceEngland
7 hours ago
It’s very woke! Everything woke is jewified!!!

NeoSpartan1
2 days ago
I think these two do not understand each other’s domestic police situation very well. Both made great points but the disconnect here I think lies with how cucked each respective police force is on average. In England, the people joining the police are mostly fat subservient losers and in Australia, this is much less so the case. I will say, what we we in the west lack most are men of honor and courage. On that Sewell in completely right. But we also sorely lack well, men of honor and courage, who will refuse to obey the zog orders that are destroying all of our countries. It’s a very terrible situation, but I do think we are waking up. White men refusing to join the zog army is big indicator. In the US, it has fallen by 50% since oct. 7th, and whenever the army runs recruitment ads featuring White men, the overwhelming response always shows that people are starting to get it on mass. Their propaganda system is showing major cracks. The truth is winning. Sidenote, rumble now seems to be censoring certain words. The censorship noose tightens again. They learned from last time that going to hard with it is counterproductive so they now seem to be trying out a lighter version.
13
2

‹ Hide 4 replies
charliebrownau
Sub
2 days ago
Look at ((( WHO ))) in charge of these ‘platforms’ Hint Not our team * ODYSEE CEO ((( Jeremy Kauffman ))) – (Ashkenazi Jew) * Rumble CEO ((( Chris Pavlovski ))) – (Ashkenazi Jew) * Locals founder ((( Dave Rubin ))) – (Ashkenazi Jew) * DDG CEO – Gabriel Weinberg (Ashkenazi Jew) * Gettr – Jason Miller – (Ashkenazi Jew) * Signal – Moxie Marlinspike (Ashkenazi Jew)(Resigned Jan 2022)
4
0

AvidFan
1 day ago
They both make very good points. Sewell had a few bad takes though. The average tax paying working man is not as bad as the zog cop or soldier or intelligence officer or government hack – the average working man is completely brainwashed at worst or completely apathetic and distracted with bread and circuses at best. Those working for the police, army, intelligence services, government hacks are fully aware of the power they hold and the crimes against their people that they are covering up and their collusion with the state to silence patriots/nationalists. They are traitors. They are fully conscious of what they are doing. They are not the same as a tax paying plumber trying feed his family that lived at the bottom of the street. Tom seems to have forgotten how treacherous, cowardly, and brutal the bullies in blue were during covid in Australia. In America the army, cops, intelligence services, and government are literally gay and zog controlled. The white American people are overweight and in bad shape. Admittedly, I’m only 1 hour in to this debate. Again, Tom makes some excellent points. They both probably agree with each other more than they realise. I’d say Mark has the advantage because he has more of an anti-imperislist and anti-zionist analysis.
2
0

Tacitus14
2 days ago
Good points. Which words?

Keane55
VerifiedSupporter
2 days ago
Tom is right here and holds a much more coherent view here. Hail tom hail BRS
16
5

FancypantsandMP5S
VerifiedSupporter+
2 days ago
Would Ben roberts smith speak up for Tom. No he would probably denounce him ?
16
7

‹ Hide 2 replies
NeoSpartan1
2 days ago
I think Tom is banking on the bet that when/if a black swan occurs and state power becomes sufficiently weakened by own structural contradictions, that people like him would then side with the good guys, when/if such an opportunity arises.
8
1

DAVlDSMlTH
2 days ago
You are just making shit up, I don’t know either way. The idea that many SAS are not legit nationalists is simply wrong. I seriously doubt SAS would kill Aussie nationalists.
8
3

Anglojim4
1 day ago
What a great discussion and debate between two excellent White nationalist leaders.
8
0

Beno777
1 day ago
There’s a huge double standard in the ZOG media. They can intentionally bomb a school killing hundreds of girls and no one gets charged and it’s dropped as a story quickly, yet they’ll witch hunt Ben Roberts for killing disarmed combatants who helped kill Aussie soldiers. I agree our army shouldn’t have been in Afghanistan or any ZOG wars. We will still need heroes like Ben when we finally manage to disconnect from the ZOG empire.
8
1

‹ Hide 2 replies
TTFOLEY1914
1 day ago
Very good point
1
0

NathanElkana
3 hours ago
WHY CANT U PEOPLE. THE PEOPLE OF UR COUNTRIES PROTEST AND SAY NO TO ZOG WARS AND NO TO EPSTEIN CLASS WARS. LIKE NOW EPSTEINS WAR AGAINST IRAN

KingTut999
1 day ago
Thomas is 100% right about Islam. the problem with Mark, is that he hagns around NJP people like Mike Enoch, Striker, Warren, etc.. who are pro Islam that he doesn’t see all the degeneracy in Islamic shitholes like pedophilia, homosexuality, beastiality, etc.. if muslims had it their way, they’d take over every non-islamic country, and convert everyone by force or exterminate us. yeah, jews let them in but that’s besides the point.
12
6

‹ Hide 3 replies
ProtectEurope
1 day ago
Nope. Muslims in the Middle East are not our enemies unless they come to us. The problem is who is facilitating their arrival. Let them have self determination in their own homelands. They are Israel’s enemy, not ours, and that is precisely why jews have employed gentiles to fight their wars for them, using us as a means to an end. In fact the number one pretext for Islamic refugees brought into Europe are zionist wars. Without zionist motives destroying their native homelands, and our traitorous governments conspiring to give them residency in *our* nations, they are zero threat to us.
5
0

NoticeKING
1 day ago
Dude what are you talking about lol western culture pushes homosexuality and transgenderism 100x worse than any Muslim country’s … also our politicians are out right satanic and pedophiles and we are to cowardly to do anything about it or they will turn the fucking military on us tell me more about Muslims being the fucking problem clown , it’s Jews it’s always been Jews
4
3

‹ Hide 1 reply
BasedMofo69
1 day ago
like 50% of Afghan men practice Bacha Bazi. I think the fact that they practice child abuse on such a large scale makes the West far less degenerate, regardless of who pushes homo shit more.
2
1

RoseRock444
Supporter
1 day ago
Exactly. I wonder who the retards are that down voted you…
1
1

BrossefStalin
1 day ago
Stop saying partner, thats what homos say.
7
1

FancypantsandMP5S
VerifiedSupporter+
2 days ago
I dont think it’s that Ben Roberts Smith killed in Afghanistan when he was young and dumb . Its that we don’t really know his politics and he has not come out as are guy so he should be considered a Zog bot
9
4

‹ Hide 1 reply
farlycry
1 day ago
You think the guy should come out publicly as white nationalist during his 8 year war-crimes media witch trial? Lol
2
2

‹ Hide 1 reply
ProtectEurope
1 day ago
Not what he said.
1
0

Seppl88
2 days ago
BRS is a scion of the establishment, our government sent troops to support ZOG overseas. He served the system, the Left found him unpalatable and need to damage the patriarchy.
5
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
Tacitus14
2 days ago
Scion implies consent. I think you meant to use a word that more strongly implies a tragic case of being stabbed int he back. Scorpion and the frog etc. But I can’t think of a proper words that fits right now either… is there one? Tragic hero maybe. Something like that.

‹ Hide 1 reply
Seppl88
1 day ago
BRS is a product of the establishment, his father was Attorney General of Western Australia. No doubt that he was brave but he has the right background.

EthnoNationalist
Sub
1 day ago
I like Mark Collett takes but Tom Sewell is real White Power Race First o/
7
2

BasedMofo69
1 day ago
I have to disagree with all this “the enemy of your enemy is your friend” type of stuff. Sometimes you just have a lot of enemies. I’d say Sewell is right that Afghans are enemies of Whites, and preventing them from gaining any more power (at home and abroad) is in our interest. It’s a shame that that also serves Israel, but oh well.
8
5

‹ Hide 2 replies
ProtectEurope
1 day ago
No, it’s not “oh well”. They are not our enemies in their own homelands. They wouldn’t even be able to leave and infiltrate our countries without subversive governments and NGOs facilitating their immigration. They are Israel’s enemies and only Israel has the motive to remove them from the region because they are neighbors.
2
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
EmperorsChamp
7 hours ago
Europe has been at war with Islam since its inception. Israel has existed for less than a century.

TheBeeSting
1 day ago
30:10 – This will be a fun clash lol
3
0

ProtectEurope
1 day ago
“I’m not telling you some ZOGbots are better than others but let me tell you why some ZOGbots are better than others.” No, Tom. Those disarmed combatant 14 year old Afghan kids were not your enemies in their native homelands.
4
1

Tomthebeliever
1 day ago
Breaker Morant comes to mind when discussing war crimes
2
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
ZetaReticuli777
23 hours ago
BRS is today’s Breaker Morant, who has never been exonerated for doing his duty. It’s the same situation. They put Morant before a firing squad…If they could, they’d do the same to BRS today.
0
1

FLmetalhead
1 day ago
THATS SO CUCKED THAT YOU CAN GET ARRESTED FOR SAYING N WORD.
2
0

ProtectEurope
1 day ago
There are plenty of psychopaths employed in special forces who simply enjoy killing and have no true political conviction or even basic morality. Many of them. It is utterly foolish to not see them as traitors and dangerous to us by default until proven otherwise.
2
0

Norse_Waffen
1 day ago
You are right Tom 100% spot on…o/
2
1

Seppl88
1 day ago
I was in the ANM 1988-91 and I knew Jack v. T very well he was a true fighter and believes in NS. I am glad that Tom has correspondence with Jack, he is a good mentor despite his mistakes.
1
0

DeadandWell
23 hours ago
Mark, society has to have a place for it’s warrior class. They are your kin. They have to be somewhere, can’t be farmers or talk show hosts or activists like yourself mate. Sort your leaders out, your issue is solely with them. You can’t also compare killing foreigners in a war with killing kin at home.
1
0

kevinnormansavage
Supporter
19 hours ago
Mark needs to stop shouting when making his point. It’s putting me off listening to PA. And to stop repeating his argument to dominate the guest and their point of view.
1
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
DeadandWell
7 hours ago
He has become lazy and I don’t really blame him for it. It’s like he wants to rush through the show because he has to do it and get back to goyslop gaming asap. I don’t blame him because he has been at it for so many years and it’s a tall order to expect him to maintain the work ethic and openness to challenge after he has been sidelined for so long.
1
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
kevinnormansavage
Supporter
7 hours ago
I guess there is a lot of truth in what you say. I have followed Mark right back to his BNP days, so I like to think my criticism is constructive.

seesee123
16 hours ago
Just reading through the comments and it’s pretty sad to see that White Nationalism is basically just Zionist anti-Muslim slop.
2
1

Beno777
13 hours ago
Mark doesn’t delete comments on his podcast. Tom Sewell does on his podcast when you point out the holes in his quasi-religious views. W for Mark.
1
0

wincyincy
1 day ago
Incoherent Sewell waffle, for all his attributes, he often has some questionable perspectives.
6
6

bowes77
1 day ago
Toms right about goats milk it’s the closes to beast milk I bet Tom researches Barbara o’neals work she’s from Australia

lyndonbj
1 day ago
Good Stream. On the earlier segment about Ben Roberts, Mark didn’t just beat Tom he crushed his arguments in every way.

GreenGladeAryan
1 day ago
It is rather unfortunate that Mark got caught up on the use of the n word at a moment when Tom was making an excellent point with the Blair quote ” But for the grace of God goes I” My Great grandmother used to say this and in this context it is sublime. In the example Tom gave the White child’s brain has learnt to adapt to his surroundings to survive. Given respectable leadership this White child would undoubtedly be raised to excellence.
1
1

FLmetalhead
1 day ago
DESPITE WHAT YOU THINK OF BEN ROBERTS SMITH’S ACTIONS (I think warranted) THIS IS A TRIAL AGAINST WHITE MEN AND THROWING A MEMBER OF THEIR OWN ARMY UNDER THR BUS WHEN THEY PUT HIM THERE.
1
1

PugnaciousPatriot
1 day ago
As an American…. I think you Brits have become to complacent with the sand parasites that are raping your women! I agree with Sewell. F&@k those Arabzz ! Wherever they are !!
3
3

Sieger88
SubSupporter
1 day ago
If you are doing a review of Apocalypse with Tom, please have Nativist on as well.

Nationlessnationalist
22 hours ago
who took my name lol.

Beno777
20 hours ago
I get Tom didn’t bond with Christ, but he’s literally following Jewish Kabbalah here. Tom believes in higher soul levels, in Jewish Kaballah goyim and animals are Nefesh, the lowest level “animal soul”. Tom believes in a feminine god part, or goddess. This is Shekhinah in Jewish Kabbalah, from the Tree of Life, the “divine feminine” who receives from above and dwells among humanity. There are parallels here also to the Shakti Goddess in Vedic/Hinduism from India. Tom believes when we die we merge back into the hive-mind (or whatever he calls it). This is the recycling of souls called Gilgul Neshamot in Jewish Kaballah. Gilgul literally means “cycle” or “wheel,” referring to the transmigration of souls into new human bodies across lifetimes. The main reason for Gilgul is Tikkun (rectification or repair).
1
1

katana17
16 hours ago
[Mark Collett – The State of Australia – with Tom Sewell – Apr 17, 2026 – Transcript] https://katana17.com/2026/04/19/mark-collett-the-state-of-australia-with-tom-sewell-apr-17-2026-transcript/ [In this livestream video Mark Collett, leader of the pro-White British nationalist movement, Patriotic Alternative, talks with Tom Sewell, leader of the now disbanded NSN. Items discussed include: NSN context: Last time they spoke was around NSN (National Socialist Network) disbandment and Australia’s new huge ban Tom is challenging in court. Media profile: NSN had become highly covered; Tom had big interviews (e.g., Dan Bilzerian); plans once existed to register “White Australia” party. State pressure: New ban regime arrives; Joel Davis arrested and held on remand; is now out on strict bail conditions. Tom’s update: “Nice to focus on things that aren’t 100% politics… time to reflect.” Joel after remand: “Clear minded,” reduced online noise improved focus; speaks to Tom most days; in “really good mood.” Media smear: Daily Mail ran gossip piece; Tom and Joel laugh at errors; notes bail forces Joel to live with mother. Fatherhood: Joel enjoys being a new dad; “best of both worlds,” gets time with baby without 2 am wakeups. Bail geography: Joel banned from entering partner’s suburb (Wentworth/Bondi) because alleged threat target is the MP there (Allegra Spender). High Court challenge: “Cooking,” but slow; public urged to be patient; “two more weeks” Covid joking refrain. Tom’s case: Charged over “violent disorder” at a rally; outcome could be plea/time-served or 3–6 months in jail; possible trial pending negotiations. Localism: With NSN disbanded, nationalism “localised”; still training, socializing; “We are not a prescribed organisation.” Guardrails: Tom tells eager youths not to form a “not-NSN” group; warns about traps (UK examples); “play the game by the rules.” And more, …

Delete
AliceEngland
7 hours ago
I am anti jew and anti muslim. Team White

Maxim83
Sub
7 hours ago
For the record, more babies have been aborted since it was legalised in 1967 than the number of all humans who had thereto lived on planet earth since Anno Domini. i.e. over 6 billion- of which over 80% have been Caucasian. Also, the most common protein used in modern vaccines -all vaccines are built on animal proteins – are human foetal proteins. Hail science! Enjoy your breakfast.

Maxim83
Sub
7 hours ago
The average number of abortions per Caucasian woman in the UK has risen from 0.03 in 1971 to 1.7 in 2023. That is 1.7 abortions opposed to the 1.34 live births. If the ONS stats indicate otherwise, that is because they include all demographics. One demographic has to be in charge – and it is certainly not women.

palacepony
Supporter
1 hour ago
The govt directly betray us in a way that BRS does not.

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
Christian Pastor John Hagee: “Jesus Christ is coming as a Jewish rabbi to rule the world”: https://rumble.com/v78mwem-christian-pastor-john-hagee-jesus-christ-is-coming-as-a-jewish-rabbi-to-rul.html John 1:49 English Standard Version Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” Luke 2:21 English Standard Version And at the end of eight days, when he was circumcised, he was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb. Matthew 2:2 English Standard Version saying, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.” John 18:20 English Standard Version Jesus answered him, “I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret. John 4:22 English Standard Version You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. Romans 15:27 English Standard Version For they were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings, they ought also to be of service to them in material blessings. –
7
8

‹ Hide 8 replies
HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
The creation of the greater Israel The concept of “The Greater Israel” originates in biblical texts, particularly Genesis 15:18, where God makes a covenant with Abraham, promising his descendants the land “from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates.” This passage is central to the theological foundation of Greater Israel, portraying a divinely ordained territory that extends far beyond modern Israel’s borders. The promise is reiterated in other books of the Bible, including Deuteronomy 1:7, Exodus 23:31, and Joshua 1:4, each describing expansive boundaries encompassing parts of modern-day Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. Support by Christian Zionists Christian Zionist is a theological and political movement primarily among Evangelical Christians that supports the establishment and expansion of Israel based on biblical prophecy. Many Christian Zionists believe that the modern state of Israel fulfills God’s promise to the Jewish people and that supporting Greater Israel—which includes the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights, and all of Jerusalem—is essential to end-time prophecy. Support for Greater Israel is rooted in the belief that God promised the land to the Jewish people through biblical covenants, particularly citing Genesis 12:3 (“I will bless those who bless you”). Christian Zionists often interpret current events in the Middle East as signs of the end times, with Israel’s territorial expansion seen as a necessary step toward the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.
3
3

Agxmv
2 days ago
i love how you weirdos who cry about Christianity always leave out other passages that deny the jews as a chosen people and that the old Israel is no more. pick real battles like idk… other races who hate us instead of infighting
4
4

‹ Hide 6 replies
TTFOLEY1914
2 days ago
Trouble is Christianity is why these people are hurting us and here in the first place being tolerated
5
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
Exactly. And I’m not the one worshiping a Jewish rabbi as God, so obviously I’m not the weirdo here.
1
1
Pretorius88
2 days ago
Galatians 3:28 (NIV) states: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” This verse emphasizes that faith in Christ transcends traditional ethnic, social, and gender divisions, creating a new, unified identity. Christianity is the original multiculturalism
2
1

‹ Hide 3 replies
HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
1 day ago
Yep, ethnic nationalism contradicts the Bible. Welcoming the Stranger The New Testament strongly emphasizes welcoming the stranger as a core Christian duty, rooted in love, identity, and divine command. Jesus’ Teaching in Matthew 25:35–40 presents the most direct call: “I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” This passage frames hospitality to the stranger as an act of service to Christ Himself, with eternal consequences. The righteous are welcomed into eternal life because they cared for “the least of these,” including strangers. Paul’s Epistles reinforce this principle by affirming that in Christ, “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female” (Galatians 3:28). This universal equality implies that all people—regardless of background—are worthy of welcome and dignity. Hebrews 13:2 warns believers not to neglect hospitality: “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by doing that some have entertained angels without knowing it.” This reference to Abraham’s encounter with divine messengers (Genesis 18) underscores the spiritual significance of welcoming the unknown. The New Testament redefines “neighbor” to include the stranger, aligning with Jesus’ command to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31). The parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37) exemplifies this, showing that compassion transcends ethnic, cultural, and religious boundaries. Early Christian Practice reflected this teaching. Communities were known to care for refugees, the poor, and travelers, often opening homes and sharing resources, reflecting the biblical mandate to care for those who are vulnerable and displaced. In sum, the New Testament calls believers to intentional, sacrificial hospitality toward strangers—not out of obligation alone, but as a reflection of God’s own love and the transformative power of Christ’s grace.
HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
1 day ago
Colossians 3:11 New International Version Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all. English Standard Version Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all. https://biblehub.com/colossians/3-11.htm Hebrews 13:2 New International Version Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it. English Standard Version Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. https://biblehub.com/hebrews/13-2.htm
HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
1 day ago
Brotherly Love Continue in brotherly love. Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it. Remember those in prison as if you were bound with them, and those who are mistreated as if you were suffering with them.… https://biblehub.com/hebrews/13-2.htm Sons Through Faith in Christ For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-28.htm
HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
Deuteronomy 7:6 English Standard Version “For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. https://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/7-6.htm A Jewish sect Q: Did Christianity began as a sect of Judaism? A: Yes, Christianity began as a sect of Judaism. Christianity emerged in the 1st century CE as a Jewish messianic movement within Second Temple Judaism, rooted in the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish teacher and prophet. His earliest followers were all Jews or Jewish proselytes who believed Jesus was the promised Messiah. They continued to observe Jewish laws, customs, and traditions—such as Sabbath observance, kosher dietary laws, circumcision, and synagogue worship—while affirming Jesus as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy. The movement was initially seen as a sect within Judaism, often referred to as “The Way” (Acts 9:2), and it functioned as a Jewish religious group centered on Jerusalem. Key events that marked the gradual separation from Judaism include: The Council of Jerusalem (c. 50 AD), where it was decided that Gentile converts did not need to follow the full Mosaic Law. The inclusion of uncircumcised Gentiles as full members of the Church, which caused tension with more traditional Jewish Christians. The destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD and the subsequent Bar Kokhba revolt (132–136 AD), which intensified the rift between Jews and Christians. By the 4th century, Christianity had become a distinct religion, no longer viewed as a sect of Judaism by either religious or political authorities. While Christianity originated within Judaism and shared its foundational texts and beliefs, it gradually developed its own theology, identity, and institutional structure, eventually becoming a separate world religion.
1
1

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
There’s a reason why there are so many Christian Zionists. And if you think that over 1,600 years of Christianity haven’t influenced the way we think and act, think again. Matthew 5:40/5:41 English Standard Version And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-40.htm …if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well; and if someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.… https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-41.htm Matthew 5:39 English Standard Version But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-39.htm Matthew 5:44 You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘Hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-44.htm Colossians 3:11 English Standard Version Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all. https://biblehub.com/colossians/3-11.htm
1
1

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
18 hours ago
And also… Real-time observation of Evolution Direct observation of evolution in real time is well-documented through controlled laboratory experiments and field studies, particularly in organisms with short generation times. Bacterial Evolution: Richard Lenski’s Long-Term Experimental Evolution Project, ongoing since 1988, has observed E. coli bacteria multiply through over 59,000 generations, resulting in doubled size, faster mutation rates, and increased efficiency in glucose usage. Researchers have also visualized adaptive evolution in bacteria using “Mega-Plates” to track growth along antibiotic concentration gradients. Wild Adaptation: A 30-year study of marine snails (Littorina saxatilis) off the coast of Sweden documented rapid shape changes and genetic mutations as the population adapted to a new environment after a toxic algal bloom. Similarly, a longitudinal field experiment with Drosophila melanogaster (fruit flies) observed parallel phenotypic and genomic changes over just four months of seasonal change. Speciation Events: In 1981, an immigrant finch on the Galapagos island of Daphne Major established a new lineage that became reproductively isolated from local birds within just three generations, a process confirmed by full genome sequencing. Pesticide Resistance: Insect populations, such as the tobacco budworm and Colorado potato beetle, provide clear examples of evolution in action by developing genetic resistance to chemical pesticides within a few generations due to natural selection. These examples demonstrate that while evolution is often perceived as a slow process, rapid evolutionary changes can occur and be observed within a human lifetime when selective pressures are strong.

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
The Torah & The Old Testament The Torah corresponds to the first five books of the Old Testament, also known as the Pentateuch. These books are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. While the Torah is a specific subset of the Old Testament, the Old Testament as a whole includes these five books plus additional historical, poetic, and prophetic writings, totaling 39 books in most Protestant traditions. Genesis (creation, patriarchs, Joseph) Exodus (slavery in Egypt, the Exodus, the giving of the Law) Leviticus (laws regarding sacrifices, purity, and festivals) Numbers (the wilderness wanderings and census) Deuteronomy (reiteration of the Law before entering the Promised Land) In Jewish tradition, these five books are the core of the Written Torah (part of the Tanakh), whereas the Christian Old Testament encompasses the entire Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) plus, in some traditions, the deuterocanonical books (Apocrypha). The Torah is often referred to as the “Law” or “Instruction,” forming the foundation for both Jewish and Christian scriptures, though the broader Old Testament includes the Prophets (Nevi’im) and Writings (Ketuvim).
0
1

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
Q: Do modern Ashkenazi Jews share DNA with the biblical Jews? A: Yes, modern Ashkenazi Jews share significant genetic ancestry with ancient biblical populations, with studies confirming a common Middle Eastern origin dating back over 2,000 years. Shared Ancestry: Genetic analyses show that Ashkenazi Jews cluster closely with other Jewish groups (Sephardic and Mizrahi) and populations from the Levant, supporting the historical narrative of descent from ancient Hebrew and Israelite residents. Genetic Composition: While Ashkenazi Jews have a distinct genetic signature, their genome is an even mixture of Middle Eastern and Southern European (particularly Italian) ancestry, with estimates suggesting 40% to 60% of their DNA derives from Middle Eastern sources. Continuity: A 2010 study led by Harry Ostrer found that Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Mizrahi Jews share high levels of identity by descent (IBD), roughly equivalent to that of fourth or fifth cousins, indicating a shared genetic heritage that predates the diaspora. Medieval Evidence: A 2022 study of 14th-century Ashkenazi remains from Erfurt, Germany, revealed that medieval Ashkenazi Jews were more genetically diverse than modern Ashkenazi Jews, yet still consisted of groups with Middle Eastern and European ancestry that merged to form the homogenous modern population. Despite admixture with host populations (estimated at 30% to 60% European in Ashkenazi Jews), genetic markers remain distinct from non-Jewish Europeans, refuting theories that Ashkenazi Jews are solely descended from converted populations like the Khazars. –
3
4

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
The Khazar Theory Q: Is the Khazar theory true? A: The Khazar theory, which claims that Ashkenazi Jews are primarily descended from Turkic Khazars who converted to Judaism, is not supported by mainstream scholarship or genetic evidence and is largely considered debunked. Genetic studies have consistently shown that Ashkenazi Jews share a common ancestral origin with other Jewish populations in the Middle East, not Central Asia. Large-scale DNA analyses reveal strong genetic continuity between Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi Jews, tracing back to a shared Levantine population around 2,000–3,000 years ago. While minor admixture with European or possibly Khazar-related groups cannot be entirely ruled out, there is no significant genetic evidence linking Ashkenazi Jews to the Khazars. Historical and linguistic evidence also contradicts the theory. Ashkenazi Jews speak Yiddish, a language rooted in Medieval German, not Turkic languages. Their cultural, religious, and textual traditions align with Rabbinic Judaism from the Middle East and Europe, not a Central Asian origin. The theory gained popularity through books like Arthur Koestler’s The Thirteenth Tribe (1976) and has been promoted in some anti-Zionist and antisemitic circles to challenge Jewish historical ties to Israel. However, most historians and geneticists reject it as pseudoscientific. While the Khazar elite may have converted to Judaism in the 8th–9th centuries, there is no credible evidence that this group formed the basis of modern Ashkenazi Jewry. –
2
3

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
Forced upon us through violence and threats of punishment Forced conversion was a primary method used to Christianize Scandinavia, particularly in Norway and Denmark, where kings like Olaf Tryggvason and Harald Bluetooth employed threats of death, torture, exile, and the destruction of pagan temples to compel their subjects to convert. While early missionary efforts in the 9th century were largely peaceful, the process accelerated dramatically in the late 10th and 11th centuries through top-down coercion, with rulers using the new faith as a tool for political unification and control. In Norway, Olaf Tryggvason (r. 995–1000) is famously recorded for his “convert or die” campaign, where he burned pagan temples, executed priests of the Old Norse religion, and threatened torture or death for non-compliance. Similarly, in Denmark, King Harald Bluetooth forced the Danes to embrace Christianity around 965, an event commemorated by the Jelling Stones, which state he “won for himself all Denmark and Norway and made the Danes Christian.” In Sweden, the transition was often slower and more violent, culminating in the 1080s when King Inge the Elder burned the great temple at Uppsala and killed the pagan king Blot-Sweyn to end pagan resistance.
0
1

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
Defacing of pagan statues Christians frequently defaced pagan statues to neutralize perceived demonic influence and purify the images through the carving of crosses, often on the foreheads, noses, or chins, rather than solely destroying them. This practice, known as Spraghis or deconsecration, was driven by the belief that removing the “pollution” of sacrifice and marking the statues with the cross rendered them safe to keep as art or repurpose. While some early Christians simply removed cult statues to display them in public spaces, later actions often involved mutilation (cutting off hands, feet, heads, or genitals) or destruction to prove the impotence of the gods. Specific historical events include: The Serapeum in Alexandria (389 AD): Bishop Theophilus ordered the head of the statue of Serapis to be chopped off and carried in ridicule, while the rest was burned, leading to the destruction of the attached Library and Museum. Statues of Emperors: Secular statues and inscriptions of emperors like Maximian were destroyed or defaced by Christians who viewed them as reminders of a “foul monster,” with faces blacked out or statues thrown from heights. Temple Sites: Figures like St. Martin of Tours and St. Benedict smashed pagan statues (e.g., Apollo at Monte Cassino) to clear sites for new churches or monasteries. Archaeological evidence shows that many statues were preserved after the carving of crosses, which served as an apotropaic ward against evil, allowing the objects to transition from “demonic idols” to “cleansed art” within Christian society.
0
1

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
Killing of pagans in England Historical records indicate that the conversion of Anglo-Saxon England involved violent conflict and mass executions of pagans, particularly during the 7th century. King Caedwalla of Wessex is noted for the merciless slaughter of the pagan Jutes on the Isle of Wight in 686 CE, where he killed King Arwald and his two brothers, effectively exterminating the last major pagan kingdom in England. The Christianization process often involved destruction of temples, killing of pagan priests, and execution of those who refused baptism. Pope Gregory the Great initially authorized the destruction of pagan temples, though this was later modified to convert existing structures into churches while destroying pagan idols. Bede records that King Æthelfrith killed approximately 1,200 unarmed Celtic monks at the Battle of Chester in 616 CE, and the Execution Cemetery at Sutton Hoo suggests mass executions of Saxons who refused to convert. Legal codes and penitentials from the period reveal a systematic hostility towards pagan practices, with laws prescribing death for those who used witchcraft to kill others or who practiced “heretical” rituals. Charlemagne’s Ordinances concerning Saxony (c. 782 CE) mandated the death penalty for any Saxon who remained unbaptized, reflecting the broader European trend of using state violence to enforce religious conversion.
0
1

HoldTheHeathenHammerHigh
2 days ago
The Heathen: Worshippers of the Devil In the biblical context, the term “heathen” often refers to those who do not worship the God of Israel and are outside the covenant community. Throughout Scripture, heathen nations are frequently depicted as engaging in idolatry and practices that are contrary to the worship of Yahweh. From a conservative Christian perspective, these practices are often seen as tantamount to worshipping the devil, as they involve the veneration of false gods and idols, which are considered to be under the influence of demonic forces. https://biblehub.com/topical/ttt/t/the_heathen–worshippers_of_the_devil.htm 1 Corinthians 10:20 New International Version No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. English Standard Version No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/10-20.htm
0
1

TheNoticer88
Supporter
1 day ago
Lowest IQ takes iv ever heard from Mark
2
3

Gigatrollius
2 days ago
Mark is 100% right about everything.
10
12

‹ Hide 1 reply
Tacitus14
2 days ago
He’s a sharp guy, but he missed the boat on this one. Very few decent men are going to join the UK police at this point, but in the rest of the west, it was still an pretty honorable profession until pretty recently. It’s ajob that should draw strong men with a protective and somewhat selfless mindset, but in the UK… the rot is so deep there that their recruitment only draws fat cucks and lesbians and such. Remember, BLM and covid woke up many many millions of people, but they were a very recent phenomena. 5 years is a pretty short amount of time when the massses are concerned. We can never forget that they by and large go through life without ever deep diving into most things until they are directly affected by them, most people are ostriches with their heads in the sand until they are forced awake.
3
2

‹ Hide 1 reply
Gigatrollius
1 day ago
We will lose as long as people believe that ANY institutional power in the west is honorable. I understand that it will take at least 100+ years before the few white that are left fully go into the mindset of rebuilding on top of the ashes and not play sandcastle in with them. EVERY single military member of “nato” are traitors, every single policeman in the west is a traitor etc.. all of them. When you understand that, whites will MAYBE find a way to start to fix the west. But until then, well… Go ahead, believe that the honorable police officer wont rape and kill your children on command.
4
0

DeadandWell
23 hours ago
Why are you so antagonistic to your guests? Adam had to school you on the truth of your religion and now Tom has to politely correct your myopia. Remember Mark, you are no longer, if anything you can be an advisor to one
0
2

‹ Hide 1 reply
Beno777
17 hours ago
If Adam Greemberg isn’t a jewish psyop, he’s exactly what they would like to have undermining white Christian nations. He didn’t school Mark on anything LOL, he just repeats the same propaganda view he belatedly inherited from CJB who now calls him a plagiarist.
1
0

‹ Hide 1 reply
DeadandWell
7 hours ago
For the sake of the argument, try forming an opinion outside of the semitic frame. Can you?

ColinDRiddle
2 days ago
Mark is such a turd-wordlist lol
5
8

‹ Hide 1 reply
RoseRock444
Supporter
1 day ago
Don’t understand why he loves the goat shaggers so much
0
4

‹ Hide 1 reply
Spaceman69
1 day ago
how do kids say these days…..mark collett = totally BASED! this is the difference in wisdom from a 40+ yr old VS a 30+ yr old…. i was thinking of mickle the other day and the word spastic came to mind and i laughed and laughed.. the irony to hear that word on stream next to mickles name was just gold! hitler invented the 40hr work week and i think its fcked. blue collars work hard labor for 40hrs to earn min wage and white collars complain they did 60hrs sitting on their arse taking 3hr lunch breaks while starting and finishing when they please… to brag about 6 figure salary incomes! still i think a young man should “sacrifice” believe in altruism of hard work. the dream was suppose to be, by the sweat of your brow, you shall make it to the top… alas under capitalism, the harder you work THE MORE WORK YOU HAVE TO DO. fck capitalism. communism is the way. commie is the only force that can defeat capitalism. we are the 99% and the 1% have leached off the rest of us ENOUGH… and fck ben roberts. hes guilty…. if your OWN crew is ratting you out as evidence… ya gone and really fcked up hero! this video spells it out well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J896i3yrTbQ&t=193s always wondered how long joel could get away with hes public “locker room” talk.. lol those days are over… maybe he will switch back to being antifa like he was before, and once again show off proudly he’s “baphomet” tattoo on hes right arm from hes antifa days… a jooish tranny god… talk about 2 faced. cant believe he was NSN spokesman. guy should have been ball gagged. tommy dropped the ball with that one… wouldn’t be the 1st time
2
5

seesee123
1 day ago
Islam is not our enemy. Anyone that still says this shit is either an idiot or a bad actor. Jews are the enemy. That’s all. That’s the only focus.
5
8

‹ Hide 1 reply
charliebrownau
Sub
1 day ago
Both ((( Christianity ))) and ((( Islam ))) is Jewish Anti Goyim Anti Ethnic National Identity NWO tool
1
0

pupli
2 days ago
Clown shit take from Sewell
9
13

‹ Hide 2 replies
NeoSpartan1
2 days ago
No, they are both right. The problem is regional. UK army and police are more cucked than AUS so it’s a miscommunication based on perspective.
4
0

DAVlDSMlTH
2 days ago
Are you an Aussie? Have you ever met people from SAS? The idea that they would just do political assignations on people like Tom being the same as killing taliban is just insane.
1
2

farlycry
1 day ago
It’s bullshit that wars for zog are the reason for mass immigration. How many wars have we fought against India,Turkey and Pakistan recently? Why doesn’t Israel take in refugees if it’s an unavoidable consequence of destabilisation? Sending soldiers to Afghanistan is NOT the reason that there are afghanis in your neighbourhood.
1
5

‹ Hide 3 replies
farlycry
1 day ago
The reason is you are led by your enemies. If Britain was home to 50 million Jews, instead of 50 million white Brits, you could fight all the wars you like and have zero small boats.
2
0

ProtectEurope
1 day ago
Zionist wars are, in fact, the number one excuse for allowing Muslim refugees into Europe. War refugees have an streamlined process to residency. Without the wars there is no streamlined process.

Spaceman69
1 day ago
this is why thomas fails.. he’s end game is a white earth! destroying all else. the world will never let that happen. its because of men like tom we can NEVER have world peace! hes a true neo nazi, ill give him that. someone remind him the real nazi’s lost already… its over!
0
7

VikMortin
2 days ago
David Irvings book on Dresden is bar the funniest book he ever wrote. There are smiles to be had on almost every page. As I got towards the dn of the book, I reflected that David is a neo nazi, and I was left scratching my head why he bothered to write it. Why would he be so unacharacteristically kind, and write a book that would so entertain anti nazis like me.
0
17

‹ Hide 1 reply
klausbrecht
2 days ago
Good for you Jew, you bought a nazi book
12
0

VikMortin
2 days ago
In a 1982 interview with a former nazi SS guard, one who actually admitted the holocaust was real, he was asked why kill the women and children? He said, well we sometimes felt terrible, but those children would grow up into adults, and the women would nurutre or give birth to eve rmore of our enemies, as we thought of them in those days. The children killed at Dresden, would have grown into adult nazis, who would hav ejoined the German army, or the nazi women would supported hitlers evil war effort in many ways. The hitler youth were even closer to nazi scum, soon to fight for the nazi army in five years time. It is a pity ten times as many women and children did not sizzle like bacon at Dresden. Mark appears to skip over the matter that years before Dresden, the Germans bombed london 72 nights in succession, and laid waste to Covently, Liverpool, Plymouth and Manchester, and Warsaw and Stalingrad. Mark never ever mentions his sympathy for the women and children in this case. hitler started area bombing in spades, and for years before. Dresden was a delightful revenge. Collett on Dresden, is Mark at his most woke and most victimhood, worthy of any modern lefty pussy boy, with hurty feelings. War is war. Winning is all. We onw Dresden, there are NO Dresden deniers, we gloat over it. If neo nazis hate Jews that much, it baffles us why they dont glory in the holocaust.
0
20

‹ Hide 2 replies
micphoenix
2 days ago
Muh gas chamber narrative is legacy WW2 atrocity propaganda created by the British Psychological Warfare Executive in 1940/41
8

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

See Also

top

 

 

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