Antisemitism, Antizionism, Jihadism and the Reunited Germany. News by Fred Alan Medforth
Canadian researcher Denis Rancourt studied the mortality rates in several countries following the COVID-19 global pandemic of 2020.
According to Canadian physicist Denis Rancourt “NO LIVES WERE SAVED” by the COVID-19 vaccines.
In fact, Rancourt and his fellow scientists found in their analysis that all-cause mortality INCREASED every time the COVID-19 shots were deployed.
The sensational trial concerning the bloody altercation in the Flensburg Galerie, in which several people were stabbed, has taken a surprising turn.
The defence lawyer for the 27-year-old defendant has demanded nothing less than an acquittal. According to a statement from the district court in Flensburg on the Baltic Sea, the defence argued that the defendant was in a supposed self-defence situation and therefore could not be held responsible for the injuries.
The background to the tragic crime in 2018 sheds a light on what happened: the accused, a Syrian citizen, felt that his honour had been violated after he had been beaten by one of the injured parties the day before – at least this is what his uncle, who is said to have arranged with his nephew to bring the “perpetrators” to justice, claims.
According to him, the altercation was a deliberate response to the alleged injustice done to the accused.
In the course of the fight, not only were the initial opponents injured, but two friends of the first victim also intervened and were seriously wounded.
One suffered a deep wound near the jugular vein, while the other sustained a stab wound to his upper body and even had to undergo emergency surgery to remove a kidney. The scene in the Flensburg Galerie resembled a scene from a horror movie as chaos broke out and blood flowed.
The public prosecutor’s office had initially charged both dangerous bodily harm and attempted manslaughter. However, the regional court only admitted the charge of grievous bodily harm. According to the court, there was insufficient suspicion for attempted manslaughter. This decision raises questions and is causing heated debate in Flensburg and beyond.
Tension is mounting as the verdict is expected on March 6. Will the defendant be acquitted, thus confirming the arguments of the defence lawyers? Or will he be found guilty after all and get off with a conviction for causing grievous bodily harm? The case of the bloody confrontation on the Baltic Sea will keep the municipality busy for a long time to come.
Ostsee: Nach Messer-Attacke – Freispruch wegen verletzter Ehre gefordert! – moin.de
The Electoral Tribunal of the Judiciary of Mexico (TEPJF) has convicted Congresswoman Teresa Castell of “gendered violence” towards a trans-identified male politician, Salma Luévano, for referring to him as a “man.” This incident shortly follows news that a former Congressman had similarly been convicted for the exact same “crime” against Luévano.
Castell’s incident date back to March 2023, when Luévano, a Deputy with the governing Morena Party, reported her to the National Electoral Institute for referring to him as “a man” on YouTube and X (formerly Twitter). Two months later, the Electoral Tribunal issued a ruling stating that Castell had been found guilty of “political gendered violence,” a conviction which was confirmed by unanimous vote this past week.
The ruling states that Castell’s views constituted “political violence against women because of gender due to several statements made on a YouTube channel … and several posts made on [her] Twitter profile … against trans women and a federal deputy.”
As punishment, Castell must take a course on political violence, both against women because of gender and against LGBTTTIQA+ people. She must also extend a public apology and publish an excerpt of the sentence on her X account.
In addition, she will be catalogued in the National Registry of Persons Sanctioned in Political Matters against Women for Gender Reasons of the National Electoral Institute, a registry that was created to protect female politicians from political violence. Her sentence will also be recorded in the Catalogue of Subjects Sanctioned in Special Sanctioning Proceedings on the website of the Specialized Chamber of the Electoral Tribunal.
In accordance with her sentence, Castell has posted her apology to X.
“An apology is offered to Salma Luévano Luna, because the statements that I proffered on a YouTube program, and on my [X] profile, the latter in collaboration with Oscar Limeta Meléndez, were offensive, stereotyped and generated political violence against his person on the basis of gender.”
Though forced to apologize, Castell immediately followed with clarification.
“Mere formality. We are going to international bodies. The good thing? MILLIONS OF MEXICANS have already turned to see what gender ideology is and are beginning to know the dangers for WOMEN and CHILDREN. A FORCED apology is worthless, and everyone knows I am being FORCED …. Nothing is forever,” she wrote.
Speaking to Reduxx, Congresswoman Castell said there was a silver lining to her conviction in that she felt Mexicans were now becoming aware of the dangers of gender ideology.
“The people of Mexico are beginning to realize what is happening, that this is not a simple matter of dressing as a woman and wanting to be called by a feminine name. No, it goes far beyond only dressing as a woman. It is our rights, it is our victories, and it is our liberties that are being appropriated, that today are being usurped and we have to put a stop to it,” she said.
“It is not a fight of woman against woman and man against man. Here we are fighting a totally unequal and unjust battle: it is a fight of women against men who believe, feel or disguise themselves as women.”
Castell went on to explain that the recent efforts of trans activists to pursue incidents of so-called hate speech have been “backfiring” in the eyes of the public, with more scrutiny being placed on the validity of the “trans genocide” they claim is taking place.
“In these last few months several [trans people] have died, and [activists] wanted to blame me for my hate speech. They vandalized Congress with the word ‘murderer’ and made a lot of fuss. But in the end, the only thing shown was that their deaths are caused either by each other or because of the lifestyle they were leading,” Castell said.
“The problem with them is that they call everything ‘hate speech.’ Well, I will not stop saying that the truth is not hate. What they really hate is the truth.”
Laura Lecuona, the head of WDI Mexico and author of Gender Identity: Lies and Dangers, praised Castell for being vocal in her opposition to gender ideology.
“Teresa Castell is not the only congresswoman who does not agree with the transgender doctrine, but she is the only one who dares to say it out loud, without fear of the consequences,” Lecuona told Reduxx.
Castell was not the first to be targeted by Luévano, who has a well-documented history of suing his political adversaries.
In April of 2022, he sued Federal Deputy Gabriel Quadri for “political violence against women based on gender and violence against LGTBQ people” for 11 posts Quadri made on X.
The court concluded that Quadri had committed political violence against women for calling Luévano “sir” and sentenced him to take two courses, one on political violence against women on the basis of gender and another on violence against LGBTQ people. He was also required to post a public apology to Luévano, and to refrain from “acts that generate violence or discrimination” towards any person.
Most recently, former Congressman Rodrigo Iván Cortés was also convicted of “gender-based political violence,” for social media posts on X and Facebook in which he referred to Luévano as a “man who calls himself a woman.”
Luévano filed a complaint against Cortés, arguing that 9 social media posts on X and Facebook violated his alleged right to be “recognized as a woman.” Cortés was also charged with “gender-based political violence” because Luévano is a deputy in the Mexican Congress.
Following his conviction, the Superior Chamber imposed a fine of $1,130 USD, and ordered Cortés to publish an apology daily on his social media accounts for 30 days.
Cortés was also ordered to take a course on “gender-based political violence” and was entered into the National Registry of Persons Sanctioned in Political Matters against Women.
Luévano celebrated the ruling against Castell on social media.
“Another blow to the far right and to transphobia! No freedom of expression should infringe on people’s rights, so misgendering and invalidating a trans woman’s identity is VIOLENCE and should be punished.”
Luévano is not the only trans-identified male representative in Mexico’s congress, and his Morena Party colleague, María Clemente, is similarly known for attacking those opposed to gender ideology.
The footage triggered a flood of responses. 10th of February, the music duo Shkoon performed on stage at the Bataclan in Paris. The group, which consists of a young German and a Syrian refugee, mixes Arabic sounds with electronic music. During their concert at the Bataclan, the Syrian-German duo took the opportunity to repeat the song “Yamma mwel el hawa”, which thematises the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The audience then began to chant “Free Palestine” during the concert to thunderous applause.
The images were recorded on film and circulated on social media, causing outrage. Hordes of left-wing Islamists chant “Free Palestine” at the Bataclan,” complained Jean Messiha. “They would have done better to hold a minute’s silence in memory of the 90 victims of Islamic terrorism who were killed, disembowelled and emasculated by their executioners,” he added. “In this terrible place of French pain, where the 90 martyrs of Islamic terrorism died, this demonstration is a desecration,” criticised MEP Gilbert Collard.
As a reminder, on November 13, 2015, there was an explosion at the Stade de France before shootings broke out on several terraces of cafés and restaurants in the 10th and 11th arrondissements of Paris. At the same time, terrorists had attacked the Bataclan, where 1,500 spectators were attending the Eagles of Death Metal concert. The massacre left 90 people dead in the concert hall alone.
Lors d’un concert au Bataclan, le public scande « Free Palestine » – Valeurs actuelles
German companies are increasingly choosing to transfer their manufacturing production to Poland, such as Germany’s appliance giant Miele. However, most of the companies interested in doing so are medium-sized companies.
The German publication Focus lists the French automotive spare parts Valeo as transferring its plant from Germany to Poland by the middle of this year, along with hearing aid producer Bernafon, which plans to transfer from Berlin to Szczecin.
Focus reports that there are larger enterprises looking to make the move as well. Volkswagen is transferring the production of their combustion engine Golf vehicle from Wolfsburg to Poland, and Mercedes is building an electric delivery vehicles plant in Jawor. IKEA is already producing most of its wooden furniture in Poland.
According to the German Federal Office of Statistics, Poland is now the most attractive country for European producers to relocate their production to. Twenty-three percent of those planning to transfer production are choosing Poland, ahead of Germany (19 percent) and Turkey (12 percent).
Currently, 6,000 companies with German capital are operating in Poland. These entities employ 430,000 people, and in the last few years, have invested €40 billion in the country.
Focus notes that Poland is currently the biggest exporter of electric buses in the EU and the largest producer of domestic appliances. According to the article, the Polish-German Commercial Chamber believes that Poland is so attractive to investors because of its cheaper energy, skilled workforce, and relatively lower labor costs.
The risk Focus perceives with regard to Poland sustaining this level of attractiveness is the growing cost of emissions-based energy that still dominates in Poland. However, the country is also sending the right signals on renewable and nuclear energy to reassure investors.
This is why any delay in the building of nuclear power stations would be damaging to Poland’s prospects while benefitting the country’s competitors. Still, the main takeaway is clear: Germany is increasingly unattractive to business as a result of its high energy prices and lack of skilled labor, and may in the long term be facing deindustrialization.
https://rmx.news/article/german-companies-shifting-their-production-to-poland-in-large-numbers/
On today’s #NCFWhittle we are joined once again by Laurence Fox, Leader of the Reclaim Party for a wide-ranging discussion covering his recent defamation court case, the state of the nation, the realities of a Labour government, reform of the education system, acting and the arts, and the upcoming election and the role Reclaim might play.
A Karnataka-like hijab row erupted in Rajasthan on Saturday (17th February) as female students at a government school in Jodhpur arrived in hijab instead of the prescribed dress code. The controversy erupted at Government Higher Secondary School No. 2 in Pipar City, located in the rural parts of the Jodhpur district in Rajasthan. Following instructions to refrain from wearing the hijab, students, accompanied by their parents, adamantly declared their intention to continue wearing it to school.
A video of parents arguing with the principal of the school over this issue has also gone viral. School authorities have reiterated the importance of adhering to the designated school uniform. Additional staff from Pipar police station was also called on the spot. Other parents also reached the school. All students were asked to adhere to the prescribed dress code.
The controversy erupted as more than 10 Muslim female students reached the school wearing headscarves. One of the teachers in the school intervened and told them that this is not prescribed in the school uniform. The girls were not allowed to be on the school premises citing dress code violation.
After this, the situation became tense as the female students brought their parents to the school who argued with the principal and said that they would continue sending their girls to the school wearing headscarves irrespective of the school’s rules.
The parents also accused the teacher of misbehaving with the girls. One of the parents claimed that the teacher called the girl wearing a hijab ‘Chambal Ki Daku’. However, the school principal maintained that they were barred from school citing dress code violation. Principal Ram Kishor Sankhala said, “We have only asked children to come to school wearing the government-prescribed school dress code. On this, some people from other communities came to the school and created a ruckus. The atmosphere of the school became tense. The situation was calmed down after the arrival of additional police personnel.”
He added, “Councillor Muzaffar Khalifa and the husband of the municipality vice-president staged a demonstration demanding information about the guidelines regarding the dress code. He also threatened that the government is there today, and tomorrow it will not be there, but the teachers are always going to be here, who will have to bear the brunt of it. After this, a complaint was made to the police. The police calmed the matter.”
On the other hand, Muslim parents reached the school and argued with the school administration seeking an explanation from them. These parents claimed that the students were only covering their heads and wearing face masks. Chief Block Education Officer Sumer Singh reached the school. He told people that children have to come to the school wearing the prescribed dress code.
Notably, Rajasthan’s Education Minister Madan Dilawar said a few days ago, “Uniforms have been prescribed by the state government in all government schools of the state. Even in private schools, students come to the schools wearing a dress code prescribed by that school. In such a situation, students will have to go to school in the prescribed dress. Apart from this, no other dress will be allowed. Students cannot come to the school wearing the desired dress. Religious conversion will not be allowed in any government or private school in Rajasthan, it will be strictly stopped.”
For several years now, the French news channel CNews has been in the crosshairs of the political authorities and the media because of its ‘overly right-wing stance.’ It is regularly accused of violating journalistic ethics on the grounds that it defends ideological positions opposing the dominant tone. Following a complaint from the NGO Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF, or Reporters Without Borders), the French Council of State asked that it be placed under tight control, with all the appearance of censorship.
The hostility towards the conservative television channel stems first and foremost from its pedigree. It is owned by billionaire Vincent Bolloré, France’s 14th richest man and a figure disliked bythe French Left. Descended from a deeply Catholic line of sailors and then paper manufacturers from Brittany, Bolloré and his family are now at the head of a huge media empire, owning the Vivendi and Lagardère groups, which between them control some of France’s most famous media companies—including the Canal+ channel, the HAVAS communications agency, the Dailymotion web platform, the Paris Match newspaper, the Europe 1 radio station, and many others. The actions of the Bolloré family are regularly scrutinised by the left-wing press, which takes offence at the fact that this highly cohesive dynasty still insists on functioning like a traditional Breton clan cemented by its Catholic faith. Vincent Bolloré is also known to support, often discreetly, all sorts of charities.
A golden nugget in the Bolloré family’s well-stocked portfolio is CNews. A 24-hour news channel founded in 1999 and initially known as I-Télé, it was given a new lease on life following its takeover by Bolloré in 2016, which gave it its new name and equipped it with an offensive strategy to win over a share of the French audience neglected by the major public media by taking a conservative line. It was soon dubbed the ‘French Fox News’ and managed to pull off the feat of becoming France’s number one channel in terms of audience in 2023, ahead of its much more politically correct rival BFM TV. At a time when the mainstream media are forming public opinion, its slogan is in itself a political programme: “La liberté d’expression n’a jamais fait autant parler.” (Freedom of expression has never been so much in the news.)
Unsurprisingly, with its track record and performance, CNews is a source of great annoyance and displeasure in high places. In the French broadcasting landscape, the channel stands out by offering programmes hosted by columnists with strong personalities who dare to use words to challenge the heavy-handed consensus of bien-pensance distilled by the public media—particularly on the thorny issues of insecurity and immigration.
In 2019, Éric Zemmour arrived on the French news channel to take over the 7 p.m. slot, in a programme that was soon to be a runaway success: “Face à l’info,” presented by a young and talented journalist from Guadeloupe, Christine Kelly. Audience constantly climbed, reaching 1 million viewers in November 2020.
CNews played a decisive role in the development of Zemmour’s political persona. Buoyed by his media popularity, he decided to take the plunge and enter the presidential race in 2022. The Left is not about to forgive the Bolloré-owned media outlet for providing a springboard for the candidacy of France’s most famous right-wing columnist.
Zemmour’s success on CNews was the catalyst for the first wave of attacks on the channel. At a time when his candidacy for the presidential election was not yet official, the initial question was whether he should remain on the air. Could his speech be considered that of a mere columnist? With his one-hour programme every day in prime time, didn’t he benefit from an exceptional sounding board that the other candidates were deprived of? In September 2021, he was invited by the CSA (Conseil supérieur de l’Audiovisuel or Superior Council for Audiovisual media) to withdraw from “Face à l’info.”
Once the Zemmour page had been turned—he no longer returned to the channel as a columnist, but as one of a number of political guests—the attention of the authorities on CNews did not let up. The channel found itself permanently in the sights of the public regulator. The comments made on its programmes—whether by columnists or guests on set—were severely scrutinised, and regularly gave rise to reprimands. Whether discussing the Second World War or COVID, the obsession with political correctness provides ample opportunity to track down any allegedly ‘deviant’ comments encouraged by the news channel.
Rima Abdul-Malak, former minister for culture in Élisabeth Borne’s government, took a dislike to CNews and had a hard time with the fact that it is still a place where free and iconoclastic speech can flourish. In two successive interviews, first with the newspaper Le Parisien and then in the columns of Le Monde, she directly attacked the channel and one of its successful mainstream programmes, the talk show “Touche pas à mon poste,” threatening to put pressure on the courts and ARCOM (the supervisory body that has since taken over from the CSA) not to renew the channel’s broadcasting licence: “When we arrive, in 2025, at the time of the analysis of their balance sheet for the renewal of their broadcasting licences, ARCOM will know how to look at how they have complied with these obligations.”
The Vivendi group, which owns the channel, was rightly outraged that the minister for culture should so openly assume that she wanted to set limits on freedom of expression. Unsurprisingly, left-wing MPs gave their support to the Minister, while right-wing MPs attacked her for “clearly stepping out of her role.” Since the incident, the Minister for Culture has left her post, but the sword of Damocles hanging over the head of CNews is the non-renewal of its broadcasting licences.
The constant and insistent pressure on CNEWS did not prevent the channel from continuing its inexorable progress. The truth is that Bolloré’s channel is one of the rare media spaces accessible to the public where an alternative discourse to the dominant narrative is permitted. It features a range of columnists and journalists from various organs of the conservative Right, including but not limited to Catholics: journalist Gabrielle Cluzel, editor-in-chief of the news website Boulevard Voltaire; journalist Aymeric Pourbaix, head of the magazine France Catholique; Alice Cordier, a feminist identitarian activist; Charlotte d’Ornellas, former journalist for Valeurs Actuelles … those people you can never find on any other channel in the French media landscape. The channel fills a void that no other audiovisual medium is willing to fill: that of a right-wing viewpoint that is uninhibited on issues of authority, security, immigration, history, or faith, ignoring the barriers erected between them by the right-wing parties or the ‘sanitary cordons’ of the system to give free rein to all sorts of politically incorrect figures.
In December 2023, CNews became the number one all-news channel, overtaking its rival BFM TV—the faithful sounding board for the official thinking promoted by Emmanuel Macron’s regime. It seemed inevitable that sooner or later the channel would have to pay for its boldness and success.
The attack came from the NGO Reporters Sans Frontières, which is supposed to “promote and defend the freedom to inform and be informed throughout the world,” according to its official website. Judging that the CNews channel had become a “media of opinion,” the NGO lodged an appeal with the Council of State—one of France’s highest judicial bodies, responsible for judging disputes between citizens and the administration. On Tuesday, February 13th, the Council of State issued an opinion ordering ARCOM to step up its monitoring of CNews, and to ensure “within six months” that CNews complies with its obligations “in terms of pluralism and independence of information.” The NGO’s secretary general, Christophe Deloire, welcomed this “historic decision for democracy and journalism.”
Since the publication of the press release by the Council of State, a tornado has awoken. The decision provoked astonishment and indignation in large sections of French opinion—not only on the Right in even the broadest sense of the term, but well beyond, because it has brought to light something that every honest person has been suspecting for years: the weight of censorship and the thought police on any possibility of expressing alternative opinions put on the Right in the French public sphere and media.
The Council of State explained that the media regulator would not only have to monitor the speaking time of political figures invited to appear on the channel—which is already the case—but will also have to monitor “the overall operating conditions” of CNews and “the characteristics of its programming.” From now on, the aim will be to compile files on journalists, contributors, and political columnists in order to determine which side they belong to and, if necessary, prevent them from speaking, even though CNews is a privately owned channel.
These actions—the state keeping a record of journalists’ opinions, controlling what they say, censorship—are not taking place in Vladimir Putin’s Russia, but in Emmanuel Macron’s France. And this time, censorship is no longer even masked, but is advancing openly, through a state court.
At the start of 2024, have the French thought police gone too far, at the risk of arousing the deep hostility of a public that, after several years of frequenting CNews, has acquired a taste for freedom of thought? In the land of Beaumarchais, we should remember the words of the barber Figaro, which have since become the motto of the newspaper of the same name: “Without the freedom to criticise, there is no flattering praise.” (Sans la liberté de blâmer, il n’est point d’éloge flatteur.)
In a forthcoming analysis, we’ll look at the reactions to the imposition of this trusteeship on CNews and the political upheaval it has caused.
In a confirmation of his moniker as “president of the rich”, at least half of Emmanuel Macron’s government ministers are reportedly millionaires while a quarter are so wealthy as to be classed in the top one per cent of French society.
A study of the recently reshuffled government in France conducted by the leftist L’Humanité newspaper, which used financial disclosures through France’s High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life (HATVP) alongside other publicly available data, found that at least 17 of the 34 government ministers in Macron’s government are millionaires.
The report, according to Le Point, went on to find that at least two-thirds of Macron’s cabinet have assets of €716,000 (£610,000/$770,000) or more, putting them in the top ten per cent of French society, while at least 25 per cent of ministers would be classified as being part of the one per cent, with assets of at least €2.2 million (£1.9m/$2.4m).
Topping the cabinet rich list is foreign trade minister Franck Riester who boasts assets of €10 million (£8.5m/$10.7m) after inheriting a slew of car dealerships from his family. He was followed by Sports Minister Amélie Oudéa-Castéra, a former tennis player turned insurance executive, who has been tasked with overseeing the upcoming Paris Olympics this summer, with a personal wealth of €7m (£6m/$7.5m).
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, who became France’s youngest PM and the first openly gay man to serve in the role after being installed by President Macron last month, is reported to have a net worth of around 1.5 million euros.
Attal replaced former Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne, who had drawn the ire of the public after she used a constitutional loophole last year to raise the age of the state pension age without a vote in the National Assembly.
The anti-democratic move was seen as an attack on the working class who were just recovering from years of lockdown restrictions, which conversely benefitted the rich and big business. Immediately following the diktat, unions announced strikes and took to the streets in protests that lasted for months in defiance of the “president of the rich”.
The strikes and protests saw widespread disruption, with garbage collectors refusing to clear the streets of major cities and protesters using the growing piles of trash as kindling for fires.
The elitist government of Macron, who earned millions during his time as a Rothschild banker, has long faced working-class rebellions, with the first major uprising beginning in 2018 with the start of the Yellow Vest movement.
Named after the yellow safety vests French motorists are required to keep in their vehicles, hundreds of thousands protested for months against Macron’s attempts to impose hefty carbon taxes, which would have had a disproportionate impact on working-class people, notably those who use vehicles in their jobs or commute to work.
The latest protest against the globalist Macron government occurred over the past month, when thousands of farmers took to their tractors to shut down major motorways across the country against the green agenda of the EU and supported by Macron, which the farmers have claimed is destroying their ability to do business and maintain their way of life.
Farming and the green agenda as a whole are set to be a major issue in the upcoming EU Parliament elections in June. According to recent polling, the two main French populist parties, the National Rally and Reconquest — both of whom have backed the farmers — are on pace to gain a record number of votes and more than double Macron’s share.
Satire is practically pointless nowadays. I’ve done plenty of satire over the years and I doubt that I could make up wilder headlines than the reality. Take this one up above. I’d like to say that I made it up, but we ended up living in a world in which it’s just everyday reality.
Sadiq Khan has been criticised for effectively blocking a statue of Queen Elizabeth II in Trafalgar Square until 2030 at the earliest – with “woke art” going there instead.
The London Mayor has signed off on the empty Fourth Plinth, where campaigners hope to erect the statue of the beloved late monarch, for “woke” art until the end of the decade.
The first piece to go up for six months will be a fixture of 850 faces of trans people who were mostly sex workers.
This goes back to 2022 when London’s Muslim mayor insisted on dedicating the fourth plinth to various anti-British, anti-Western and leftist materials rather than to Queen Elizabeth.
Calls have been made in recent days for the plot, currently used for a different monument every two years, to have a permanent statue of Queen Elizabeth II.
However, Mayor of London Sadiq Khan said the plinth would continue to be used for temporary installations, as it has since 1999.
The latest occupant of the Trafalgar Square corner was unveiled yesterday – a statue of anti-colonialist John Chilembwe by artist Samson Kambalu entitled Antelope.
Before that there had been a “sculpture” opposing the Iraq War, a giant blue rooster, and a disembodied grotesque nude. Next up will be this abomination.
“Casts of the faces of 850 trans people, most of whom are sex workers. She works closely with this marginalised community that sometimes is unable to access social care. The casts will be arranged round the plinth in the form of a Tzompantli, a skull rack from Mesoamerican civilisations (an area covering Central Mexico to northern Costa Rica). It was used to display the remains of war captives or sacrifice victims.”
Lovely.
Opponents of putting up a statue of Queen Elizabeth on the Fourth Plinth claim that it has become the “people’s plinth.” In no way does this represent anything that normal people actually want. The artwork is selected by an Arts Council which has nothing to do with any people, only with leftist activists out to destroy art and the UK.
London voters will have a chance to decide if this is the city and the country they want to live in.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/london-muslim-mayor-picks-tranny-hookers-over-queen/
