TIME RUNNING OUT: Privacy about to be criminalized in Australia - [MINISTRY] [PEACE] [CHILLING EFFECTS]

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 03:32:09PM -0300, Juan wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 22:27:35 +1000
> Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net> wrote:
> 
> > Our liberties are close to going up in smoke, folks!
> 
> 	So why do you say  that while at the same time daily spamming daily stormer garbage?
> 
> 	You don't make much sense do you? 


Race war is apparently wanted, and (((some folk))) seem to be pushing
real hard for it. Raising awareness of this is possibly useful - if
you want to avoid a civil war (or hell, if you want a civil war) then
guidance becomes self evident:

https://dailystormer.name/queen-ann-calls-out-nonsensical-jewsmedia-talking-point-that-only-brown-people-understand-rape-victims/

Queen Ann Calls Out Nonsensical Jewsmedia Talking Point That Only
Brown People Understand Rape Victims

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
September 30, 2018

  Throughout the process of the discussion by the Jewish media of a
  hearing with the mentally ill rape-hoaxer Christine Blasey Ford,
  the Jewish media kept talking about how bad it would look to have
  WHITE MEN questioning the woman.

  Although there is at least an argument to be made that men
  questioning an alleged “sexual assault” victim is somehow mean or
  something, the fact that they continually talked not about the
  optics of men questioning her, but WHITE MEN was never explained,
  and no explanation was even hinted at.

  In Ann Coulter’s latest op-ed, entitled “No More Mr. White Guy,”
  https://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-09-26.html
  she gives a list of quotes from media people bringing up the
  problem not only of the sex of the Senators who would be doing the
  questioning, but of the race.

  I will go ahead and underline those of these that are Jewish.

    “They know the optics of 11 white men questioning Dr. Ford … will
    be so harmful and so damaging to the GOP.” — Areva Martin, CNN
    legal analyst

    “They understand that you have all of these white men who would
    be questioning this woman … the optics of it would look
    terrible.” — Gloria Borger, CNN chief political analyst

    “Women across this nation should be outraged at what these white
    men senators are doing to this woman.” — Rep. John Garamendi,
    D-Calif.

    “There has been some discussion of the GOP senators who happened
    to all be … white men.” — Jim Sciutto, CNN correspondent

    “What troubles me is now there are … they’re all white men.” —
    Jennifer Granholm, former governor of Michigan, on CNN

    ”You’re seeing on display a metaphor for what this party is,
    which is basically ignorant white men.” — “Morning Joe”
    contributor Donny Deutsch

    “All these white men … stumbling all over themselves asking her,
    you know, aggressive and obnoxious questions.” — Asha Rangappa,
    CNN analyst

    “What are those — that collection of old white men going to do?”
    — Cynthia Alksne, MSNBC contributor

    “If she testifies in front of the Judiciary Committee, where 11
    members are white men …” — Susan Del Percio, Republican political
    strategist, on MSNBC

    “Once again, it will be all white men on the Republican side of
    the Judiciary Committee.” — CNN anchor Poppy Harlow

    “The optics for Republicans are going to be really tricky …
    You’ve got all white men on the Republican side here …” — Julie
    Pace, Washington bureau chief for The Associated Press, on CNN

    “The Republicans, it happens to be 11 white men still on that
    side.” — CNN host John Berman

    “The Republicans, it is 11 white men, talk to me about how you
    think the tone inside this hearing on Monday will be perceived?”
    — Berman, a few minutes later

    “On the Republican side, all 11 are white men.” — Berman, again,
    same show, several minutes later

    “What hasn’t changed is the number of white men questioning,
    certainly, on the Republican side.” — Dana Bash, CNN chief
    political correspondent

    “The Republican side on the Senate Judiciary Committee is all
    white men …” — Irin Carmon, senior correspondent for New York
    Magazine, on MSNBC

    “Only this crowd of clueless old white guys …” — The Washington
    Post’s Jennifer Rubin on Twitter

  Ann took it a step further than she’s probably ever taken it, and
  mockingly suggested a list of non-white men who could have been
  brought in to question Ford.Some suggestions (note: not all of the
  following individuals are Republicans, but none has any partisan
  profile that I am aware of):

   1. The Rev. Al Sharpton (Tawana Brawley affair demonstrates that
      he believes women).

   2. Bill Cosby (extensive, up-close experience with victims of
      sexual assault, albeit from a rapist’s, rather than a
      “rapee’s” perspective).

   3. Keith Ellison (likely good rapport with committee Democrats;
      has own transportation to Capitol Building).

   4. Matias Reyes (would undoubtedly throw himself into committee’s
      work as pleasant change of pace from prison).

   5. Sorry, I don’t remember the gentleman’s name, but that guy who
      kidnapped and raped the Columbia student, poured bleach on her
      and Krazy-Glued her lips shut. (This one is sort of a “wild
      card,” I admit; he could be absolutely great, or, judging by
      his history of poor impulse control, he could be too
      emotionally unstable to handle the committee’s important work;
      definitely a Person of Color, though; that I’m sure about.)

   6. Alton Maddox, attorney for black youth hired by Jewish
      landlord to slash a model’s face because she refused to date
      him. Maddox pioneered novel “she’s a manipulative slut who had
      it coming” defense. (Close relationship with the Rev. Sharpton
      a definite plus.)

   7. Lakireddy Bali Reddy, entrepreneurial Indian immigrant with
      strong experience with underage rape victims, having brought
      little girls to the U.S. purchased from their poverty-stricken
      parents in India as his private sex slaves. (His presence may
      bring Asha Rangappa on board.)

  That is brutal.

  Republicans eventually decided to bring in a female prosecutor to
  replace the men. But she was white.

  Ann was able to agree that the whole “men questioning women on sex
  assault thing” is at least something a person can process, but
  pointed out that the weird “white men” talking point seemed to
  suggest that if it was BROWN men it would somehow be better.

    “I get the logic of demanding women interlocutors.

    But what is the thinking behind snickering at “white men”
    judging an accusation of sexual assault? Chuck Grassley is a
    big rapist?

    You can be for rape or against it — I happen to be
    against it — but the idea that alleged sexual assault
    survivors need the loving care of black, Indian or
    Hispanic men to judge their stories flies in the face of
    crime statistics from around the globe.

    In the history of the world, there has never been a
    more pacific, less rapey creature than the white male
    of Western European descent.

    I realize it gives The New York Times’ editorial
    board (recent acquisition: Sarah Jeong) warm
    feelings every time someone throws in the word
    “white” as an intensifier, denoting extra
    hatefulness, but really, guys, it’s getting old.

    Can we please, for the love of God, drop the
    painfully trite, mind-numbing cliche about
    “white men,” as if somehow their whiteness
    makes evil even eviler?”

  And with that, I am sold on Ann being Tucker’s running mate in
  2024.