SEVERUS CHUD: Nothing more radicalising than rewatching old footage and realising your entire civilization has been stolen from you.

Nothing more radicalising than rewatching old footage and realising your entire civilization has been stolen from you. pic.twitter.com/ACiqtHdnsG

— Severus Chud (@SeverusChud) February 13, 2026

"Down Under," Men at Work, 1980. 

"We shall hold this country [Australia] and keep it as a citadel for the British-speaking race."

Northern Europeans can build advanced civilizations in just a few hundred years pic.twitter.com/QBx71Xk81L

— Cigarette Nostalgia (@CigsMake) February 3, 2026

That people have been sent to this hard, difficult, and welcoming land had forged a modern nation out of it and had seen a lot of sacrifice to do that.  

We shall hold this country and keep it as a citadel for the British-speaking race. 

ROMAN BYSTRIANYK: Year after year, decade after decade, medical “error” is the 3rd leading cause of death. Where are the murder trials then, or at least negligent homicide?

If you created a product that wasn’t a pharmaceutical and it killed so many people, wouldn’t you be on trial for murder or at least negligent homicide? Isn’t it strange that, year after year, decade after decade, medical “error” is the third leading cause of death? Why do we… https://t.co/wckQLZNqL2 pic.twitter.com/zXiTmy1nsu

— Roman Bystrianyk (@RBystrianyk) June 30, 2024

Here you've got Peter Dutton praising Scott Morrison, the great leader and official scumbag of Australia.  Is Peter Dutton gay?  By "sacrifice," does Peter mean payout?  I mean since all of these guys are in charge simply to protect both international and domestic rackets. 

ALEX NICOL: What a lot of people don't understand is that the Renewable Energy Act creates a subsidy environment where if you build wind turbines you are paid between $600,000 and 900,000 per turbine per year as a subsidy alone.

So they pay $12,000 to the farmer, but they get $600,000?  

So, he gets $12,000 a year, but if anything happens to it he's got to fix it?  

Yeah when they catch on fire, they're responsible for their neighbor's property going up in smoke.  That kind of thing.

Hilarious if not also terrifying.

You see, we have an opportunity to awaken.

A once in a generation opportunity to realize that we have been governed by LIARS. Not good intentioned people or midguided...but genuine LIARS.

Once you see it, you can never unsee it. https://t.co/B6NPZcqSVw

— 🔬 ))ay( 🚴‍ (@jjcouey) March 6, 2024

Alex Nicol.

Alex, now, you used to work for the federal government.

I did, yeah, for 7 years.

Doing what?

I was policy advisor for a liberal party senator.

Until you were saying that you were working about the windmills? 

Yes, the area that I was working in was renewable energy, and basically it was my job to uncover a lot of the stuff that was going on with renewable energies equipment that was put in in 2002 during the Howard government.  That was the Liberal Party put there in place, and I was looking at the mess that it had created.  What a lot of people don't understand is that the Renewable Energy Act creates a subsidy environment where if you build wind turbines you are paid between $600,000 and 900,000 per turbine per year as a subsidy alone.  

Well, if it's on your property?

No.  What happens is that the wind company comes in and leases they pay a lease to the farmer to build the wind turbine and that in effect makes sure that the farmer is still liable for the turbine and they pay a lease of $12,000 a year usually and the company gets paid between $600 and $900,000 per turbine per year.

So they pay $12,000 to the farmer, but they get 600,000?

Exactly.

Per turbine . . .  

Yep.

This is a big incentive to put in turbines.

Yeah, and the landowner takes the liability for the turbine.

So, he gets $12,000 a year, but if anything happens to it he's got to fix it.  

Yeah when they catch on fire, they're responsible for their neighbor's property going up in smoke.  That kind of thing.

Woooow.

And effectively that money, that that subsidy getting paid to the wind farms is draining $40 billion a year out of the Australian economy and it's paid by everyone, householders, schools, hospitals, everything, everyone.  It's not just coming out of your tax, it's coming out of your power bill.

Is this why power bills are going up? 

That's why power bills are going up . . . 

So power bills are going up to pay for wind turbines that don't work?

Exactly.

And why don't they work? 

They don't work because for a start they draw power off the grid so they have to have coal-fired power in order to turn.  They're not windmills, they're turbines.

Sorry, what do you mean, the power to turn, we see them turning . . . that's not the wind that's powered generating turning?

Essentially.  They have to draw power off the grid, so they have to draw coal-fired power off the grid in order to turn.  What happens when the wind picks up, they do start to create electricity of their own but that electricity is so intermittent and unreliable that when it gets back to the grid it has to be balanced on the grid which you can't do with your coal-fired power station, you can't ramp your coal-fired power stations up and down.  So the coal-fired power station stays at the same level because it takes 24 to 48 hours to get up to heat anyway, just let off steam as the wind comes on to the grid so there's absolutely nothing about them that works apart from draining that amount of money out of the Australian economy and it's going offshore.

That money's going offshore . . . 

THIS IS NOT 'FLATTENING' THE CURVE

This is not "flattening" the curve.

Therefore it would be wise to emulate the nations who have flattened their curve...with early treatment https://t.co/xKb11yFaaj

— Jennifer Depew, RD (@deNutrients) January 19, 2022

‘falling in love at first sight’ only goes one way

Thanks to Lew Rockwell at LRC. 

Researchers have found that men tend to overestimate how attractive a woman is based on just a brief glimpse, whereas women who catch a glance of a man are more likely to underestimate his handsomeness.

The findings, published last month in the Evolution and Human Behavior journal, suggest the cliche about ‘falling in love at first sight’ only goes one way. The study appears to confirm the concept of ‘first-impression bias’ in both men and women.

Conducted in Australia, researchers asked around 400 volunteers to evaluate the attractiveness of strangers from the opposite sex based on a blurry photo without a clear view of their facial features, and then again from a clear image.

The researchers also randomized the order of presentation, switching between first showing participants a blurry image or a clear image. Through this method, they were apparently able to “isolate the unique effects of uncertainty” – which was only identified when volunteers saw the blurred images first.

“When people have only incomplete information about a potential partner, they must make inferences about their desirability, leading to possible errors in judgment,” the researchers noted.

The study looked at how people “balance the risks” of these errors of misjudgment, and the differences between how men and women respond to this uncertainty.

The potential risks were described as either engaging in “regrettable mating behavior” when overestimating desirability or “missing a valuable opportunity” when under-perceiving attractiveness.

The results showed that men, on average, give women the benefit of the doubt when it comes to judging attractiveness, while the opposite held true when the roles were reversed.

Further analysis suggested “more nuanced biases” in that men appeared to specifically overestimate the attractiveness of unattractive (but not attractive) women, while women exhibited a bias against attractive (but not unattractive) men.

While noting that this was an “important finding,” the team said these were “broad quantitative effects” that needed to be studied further to understand why “first-impression bias” existed to begin with. They also highlighted the importance of conducting algorithm-based studies into cognitive biases.

The study noted that earlier research on perception bias, including examinations of men overestimating how interested a woman was in them sexually, had emphasized “between-sex” differences.

Reprinted with permission from RT News.

 

. . . as his 14-year-old son was hooked up to heart monitors after his [2nd Pfizer] shot, Dr. Shane Huntington says "I have a 9-year-old [and] he’ll be getting vaccinated as well.” Dear God . . .

Meanwhile, the brainwashing is complete in Australia, where child sacrifice without remorse is the order of the day. https://t.co/L9d1yKqSCj

— Jonathan Engler (@jengleruk) October 29, 2021

MELBOURNE: Cases are up 48,225% in the past 3+ months AFTER THE OUTDOOR MASK MANDATE, oh, and ah police brutality

"I'm from government and I'm here to help" in a nutshell 👇🏻 https://t.co/I9JyVxkmmn

— Chris Rossini (@ChrisRossini)  October 22, 2021

IT'S A LAND UP ENDED

Thanks to Martin Armstrong. 

This is literally about wearing paper masks

This is literally about wearing paper masks… pic.twitter.com/AJLx4PpLMR

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) September 27, 2021

For more about Australia's crazy COVID police, check out this post.  

Australia. A Horror Documentary.

Australia. A Horror Documentary. pic.twitter.com/66MFeiUVp3

— Maria Sederholm (on Gab too) (@Wordofbeak) September 25, 2021