Many around the world, including me, have been for years warning about the Islamic invasion of the West. Prominent among them have been bestselling author Douglas Murray and Somali-born Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who has experienced the deadly religio-political ideology close up (see my previous comment). The refusal to confront the clear evidence for the bitter, relentless Islamic crusade amounts to abject betrayal – to treason.
What will it take to wake our governments up? For a start, Australians could vote for Pauline Hanson and One Nation, who have given an undertaking to take the fight up to the Muslims occupying their piece of Australian estate, and to the fanatical Marxists who give crucial support to the invaders.
Below is another spot-on video from ‘Oceania Unfiltered’. It makes all the right points about Muslims and the Islamic invasion of Australia. I highly recommend subscribing to Oceania Unfiltered.
The video below has allegedly gone viral. I made this brief comment:
Jeffrey Sachs is extremely one-sided. Everybody should know how Finland, Poland and the Baltic states regard Russia. Putin himself is not at all shy about Russia’s imperial ambitions. How often do we hear key people in Islam talk about converting the world – by violence if necessary? The symbol of Islam is the sword. Hasn’t Sachs noticed? Does he not know the history of Islam? What should Israel do about Islam’s stated objective to destroy the Jewish people? These are fundamental questions about which you don’t need a professorship to understand. War and defence of your country and culture are sometimes a dirty business. The Americans are far from infallible, but I’m on the side of those combating enemies who want to destroy the West. What skin does Sachs have in the game?
George Christensen outlines the perniciousness of ideological multiculturalism. This is an excellent presentation, and I recommend subscribing to his ‘Confidential Daily’.
*****
The Multicultural Con
Canberra sold Australians multiculturalism as neighbourly tolerance, but its own blueprint reveals a far bigger project to rebuild the nation around identity, language and bureaucracy.
Australia has spent the past week arguing about one word: “monoculture”.
Pauline Hanson said Australia should be a “monoculture”, not a multicultural society, and suddenly half the country’s public figures had something to say. Anthony Albanese had a swing. Angus Taylor chimed in. Former Governor-General Sir Peter Cosgrove weighed in. The media did what the media does, which is just to simply say that what Pauline Hanson said is wrong and pretend the argument begins and ends there. It does not.
The real question is not whether people like the word “monoculture”. The real question is whether Australia is still allowed to believe in one people, in one nation, under one flag.
That used to be normal. It was not a scandal. It was not a dog whistle. It was the basic idea of a country. People came here from all over the world, but they came to Australia. Not to an international airport lounge with suburbs attached. Not to a patchwork of separate communities, each flying its own flag, speaking past each other, and lobbying the government as permanent identity blocs.
It’s a sweet irony that the real Australian host of the channel ‘Oceania Unfiltered’ is a genuine brown bloke, while the obnoxious, unAustralian Mehreen Faruqi is the colour of a light tan. It’s about time Faruqi got the attention she deserves. This woman must not be elected ever again. I recommend subscribing to Oceania Unfiltered.
Although it’s a sour admission, biting satire used to be the weapon of the left. Now being so thoroughly indoctrinated, the left no longer has the intellectual breadth and wit for it. The ABC’s pathetic attempts at satire are a boring undergraduate rehash of the 1960s product. From the fortresses of their occupation of Western Society, they spout their meaningless slogans and doctrines.
No, keen, clever satire is now being produced by the accursed ‘far right’. (NB. Anyone right of the centre is now ‘far right’). Lisa Jane Spencer’s John-Clarke-like skits are as powerful as any satire now appearing. The current prize for satire, however, must go to those producing videos for Pauline Hanson. The latest is a beauty: ‘Dark Forces – Please Explain.’
Robert Hill is at the forefront of those powerfully challenging the stories concocted by government-funded groups who are furiously rewriting Australian history. A curse on those institutions that ought to defend Australia but are collapsing like a house of cards. Australians need someone like Pauline Hanson to have the guts not only to defend the truth but to stop the colossal amounts of money going to the fat cats of the Aboriginal industry.
indig giles
The ‘Wars’ That Weren’t
Robert Hill, Quadrant, Jun 23 2026
Reports and Senate Estimates evidence suggest there is a “Frontier Wars” display being developed within the Australian War Memorial’s pre-1914 treatment, with suggestions that the relevant pre-1914 gallery space may be around 400 square metres. The precise public plan remains difficult to identify, which is itself part of the problem.
There is no publicly available record that explains the evidentiary basis for the inclusion of such a gallery and its contravention of the AWM charter. No clear public criteria have been produced. No public account explains how the Memorial proposes to distinguish war from massacre, reprisal, murder, policing, punitive expedition, settler violence, food raiding, stock spearing or localised tribal conflict.
The War Memorial has attempted to justify the language of war on its own website. But in doing so it avoids the central problem. The Australian frontier was not a war merely because later writers called it one, or because violence occurred over a long period. On examination, the frontier does not meet the very tests the Memorial invokes: organised political violence, military purpose, identifiable belligerents, command structures, campaigns, warlike conduct against armed authority, or recognisable military outcomes.
The result is predictable. Something that was not Australian in any national military sense, and was not war in any ordinary military sense, is now to be memorialised without clear public criteria, without visible evidentiary justification, and almost certainly in a selective ideological form.
The Australian War Memorial is hosting a two-day conference on September 17/18 titled Imperialism and Resistance: Australia’s First Wars. It marks a profound institutional shift. The frontier is no longer being presented as a contested historical question. It is being framed as a settled conclusion. The conference appears designed to legitimise the illegitimate: to give institutional cover to a claim the Memorial has not publicly justified, and which sits uneasily with its statutory purpose of Australian military remembrance.
The title itself does the work: Australia’s First Wars.
Not frontier violence. Not colonial conflict. Not dispossession. Not massacre, reprisal, police action, local resistance or criminal violence.
Helen Andrews might not have fully demonstrated her thesis that women are at the centre or the cause of civilisational collapse, but much of what she asserts about the general difference between female and male moral thinking and decision-making makes sense and is observable. The script of this video is below.
Do you want to put it into a single sentence? You could say that feminisation equals wokeness. Everything you could think of as wokeness is simply an epiphenomenon (a by-product) of demographic feminisation.
‘Diversity is our strength’ is incoherent. It’s a political slogan dreamt up by the left to support their dominance. Unity is a nation’s strength and is won by agreements. Agreements cannot be established between people who hate each other or who are incompatible with the foundational agreements of unity.
The recent murder of a young girl in Alice Springs has raised, yet again, the spectre of Aboriginal domestic violence. It’s not new, of course. The appalling levels of physical and sexual violence against Aboriginal women and children have been known for a long time.
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price has spoken courageously about this problem for years. Louis Nowra’s 2007 Bad Dreaming sought to collect statistical and anecdotal evidence to attract attention to the scale of this national tragedy. Various investigations this century have found that sexual assault of children in Aboriginal communities was widespread, affecting both girls and boys:
♦ Child sexual assaults in the NT were four times the national average
♦ In Queensland, 10% of male Aboriginal youths were raped before they were 16
♦ In WA, the occurrence of gonorrhoea among Aboriginal children 10 to 14 years old was 186 times that of the general population
♦ In the NT, 30% of 13-year-old girls had gonorrhoea or chlamydia.
Nor is this problem limited to remote communities. In New South Wales, the Task Force found that child abuse was so widespread that no family in the 29 rural and urban communities surveyed had escaped its touch.
Contrary to blaktivist propaganda, the greatest threats to the lives of Aboriginal Australians are not white policemen but other Aboriginal Australians. Statistics spread across decades show the awful and unchanging reality. From 1989 to 2000, Aboriginal people were 15.1% of homicide victims in Australia and 15.7 of all homicide offenders, despite being about 3% of the population. Between 1989 and 2012, 951 Indigenous Australians were murdered, 765 of them (80%) by other Indigenous Australians, with a further 504 being victims of domestic violence.
Between 1989 and 2023, 476 Australian Indigenous women were homicide victims, seven times the national average. Almost all were killed by someone they knew (97%), most by their Indigenous male intimate partner (66%). Some 70% of Aboriginal people in jail are there for crimes of violence against their loved ones. Nor have the adults managed to contain this violence among themselves: in 2007-11, 26% of deaths among Aboriginal children were from physical abuse.
