This is actually very interesting. Especially the part from 25 minutes where they speak about 'woke', all three of them realise that it's at least to some degree counterproductive, absurd and retarded.

They'll say whatever bullshit that suits their agenda.

Yates, for all of his (at times) anti-Irish rhetoric, called it exactly. Whilst not a Nationalist per se, she's not hostile to us either, like a lot of Irish politicians are these days. Would be a good result if Verona gets the ceann comhairle slot.

F7ck, it's also f7cking tragic, seeing the state of the place too, hard to fathom just how dysfunctional places like Delhi are in comparison to Western cities ?

Only a couple of minutes in and this is already pretty funny ?

Virgin Media seem to be heavily promoting the trans agenda, their latest vehicle is to have useful idiot Lucy Kennedy hanging out with young people who identify as trans so as to normalise trannyism and propagandise our youth into considering becoming trans themselves.
To call this subversive would be an understatement.

VIEW POINT: The United Nations has a way of slipping controversial treaties over the line, many third world nations are two weak to scrutinise these treaties in any meaningful way, they are so dependent on UN largesse that under no circumstances do they wish to draw negative attention to themselves. In the developed world we often believe that these treaties have little to do with our day to day lives, we give them a free pass unaware of their significance. The UN bureaucrats must be laughing .

On the 22nd of September the UN adopted a ‘Pact for the future to transform global governance’. This pact is described as an ‘International system’ that ‘lays the foundation for a sustainable just and peaceful global order’. That’s probably the best definition of a global government that you can find. The ‘pact’ covers many areas of concern from security to ‘sustainability’ to gender issues and a whole new area on digital ‘cooperation’. This is described as ‘the first comprehensive global framework for digital cooperation and AI governance’. This is a commitment to make ‘on line spaces safe for all through the actions of government, tech companies and social media’. This is censorship and can be used to silence political opponents and those that hold views that are outside of the globalist vision of the world. So a nationalist perspective on migration would clash with the globalist UN vision and this aspect of the ‘pact’ could be used to silence legitimate opposition.

The ‘Pact for the future’ also sets a world target for net zero carbon emissions for 2050. Again this is the adoption of the climate agenda without reviewing the evidence.The official position is that climate issues have already been decided so there is no point in revisiting the evidence. All that is required is to set dates and ensure that those dates are enforced by the application of penalties. The preamble to the ‘Pact for the future’ states that ‘The entire Pact is designed to turbocharge implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals’. Furthermore the Pact states that it is about ‘accelerating measures to address the challenge of climate change’. At least one is left in no doubt about the UN view on climate.

Sustainable Development Goals were adopted by the United Nations in 2015. In 2018 ‘sexual and reproductive health and rights’ became part of those sustainable development goals. Reproductive rights include ‘women to be in control of their own bodies and decide if, when, with whom and how often to bear children’. Few could disagree with that and women in oppressive Muslim societies have few rights. But this language extends to include abortion as a ‘reproductive right’. Many western countries have debated the abortion issues, adequately or inadequately and have made choices that often polarised populations. But in the developing world a powerful organisation like the UN is able to force its will on less financially abundant societies. The same applies to forcing through LGBQT agendas into traditionally conservative societies. The trade off is often stark, sign up to UN policy and we will help you but the reverse is implied, if you don’t sign up you will be penalised by being overlooked.

It is time we uncoupled from all international treaties. One can still be supportive of a treaty or aspects thereof without been tied in to any treaty in its entirety. The Paris Protocols on Climate Change, the stalled WHO Pandemic Treaty, the numerous EU treaties aimed at undermining sovereignty and nationhood and no doubt in the future a ‘defence’ treaty to align us with NATO. None of these treaties have worked in our favour, we take all of the risk for few benefits. But we have the robustness to say no, our political class are the betrayers and I am confident that their treacherous reign is coming to an end as the people rise up but in the third world developing nations can easily fall victim to the culture imperialism of the UN. They need protection from the ‘stick and carrot’ approach of the UN, money for doing it our way. Call out the UN now and decouple.

Somewhat bleak but very informative video here, important not to let such information get you down, however it does reveal how tough an assignment it is to remove immigrants en masse from Western countries

Interesting though to see that they want populism to get more coverage, presumably so as to maximally demonise and delegitimise it, however that also has the effect of bringing the topic to more people, some of whom won't be gaslit by the propaganda and who will realise the "Populists" are often the ones who have it right and that we do need to protect our lands from demographic destruction

Legacy Of WW2

- 24 Sep 2024

? | More | N.A.R. ?