“[T]he use of hyperbolic terms to describe global warming has no effect on people’s perceptions of the urgency of climate change.”
As it turns out, all that hysterical language, tsk-tsk finger-wagging at we commoners to abandon our modern luxuries like personal vehicles and gas stoves, and temperature map graphics with exaggerated red shading to suggest that we’re in an emergency situation didn’t do anything but turn the people off of to the whole “urgency” of the narrative.
Here’s the story, from a new report out by Dr. Thomas D. Williams at Breitbart News today:
A report released Monday by USC’s Understanding America Study (UAS) suggests the use of hyperbolic terms to describe global warming has no effect on people’s perceptions of the urgency of climate change.
The study notes that climate crusaders like the UK’s Guardian newspaper have officially opted for expressions like ‘climate crisis’ and ‘climate emergency’ in an attempt to raise concern and convey urgency, yet it would seem that such efforts are in vain.
‘Instead of ‘climate change’ the preferred terms are ‘climate emergency, crisis or breakdown’ and ‘global heating’ is favoured [sic] over ‘global warming,’ although the original terms are not banned,’ the Guardian stated in 2019 on announcing updates to its official in-house style guide.
Now to backtrack a little bit: According to Williams, in April 2019, a “team of advertising consultants” published another study that suggested the climate terms commonly used at the time (“climate change” and “global warming”) didn’t do enough to whip the average media consumer into a panic—they suggested buzzwords like “climate crisis” and “environmental collapse” as it elicited a stronger “emotional” response. Yes, you read that correctly: They didn’t want to encourage a more rational response, or be more objective, but play to a person’s emotions… and exploit them. Without facts on your side, what else do you have?
Here’s more, per Williams:
The expression ‘climate crisis,’ for instance, got ‘a 60 percent greater emotional response from listeners’ than ‘climate change,’ the study found.
…
Of six different options, ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ performed the worst, beaten handily by ‘climate crisis,’ ‘environmental destruction,’ ‘weather destabilization,’ and ‘environmental collapse.’
The CEO of SPARK Neuro, Spencer Gerrol, said that ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ are both neutral phrases with nothing ‘inherently negative or positive’ about the words themselves, which could help explain why they elicit such a feeble emotional response.
Furthermore, both global warming and climate change are ‘incredibly worn out,’ Gerrol said, and no longer produce the reaction they might have once.
Across a national U.S. sample, we found that the more traditional terms ‘climate change’ and ‘global warming’ were rated as more familiar than the relatively newer terms ‘climate crisis’ and ‘climate emergency.’ Perhaps due to being less familiar, the terms ‘climate crisis’ and ‘climate justice,’ which were introduced to emphasize urgency … actually elicited somewhat less concern. Moreover, ‘climate crisis’ or ‘climate emergency’ did not elicit greater perceptions of urgency than ‘climate change’ and ‘global warming.’ The term ‘climate justice’ was least familiar and generally performed most poorly on all dependent measures. This may, in part, reflect low familiarity with the idea that climate change disproportionally affects vulnerable communities (Schuldt and Pearson 2023). Additionally, the term ‘climate justice’ may resonate less with people than the other terms.
Well, well, well, the propaganda and fear porn has a very limited shelf life.
Let me help out these not-so-brilliant researchers—it has nothing to do with unfamiliarity, but everything to do with the “worn out” sentiment noted by Gerrol in 2019.
We commoners don’t feel a sense of urgency because we see the pseudo-elites jetset around the world, to climate conference after climate conference, while they demand we stop using our modest personal vehicles.
We commoners watch Kamala Harris cook on a gas stove, while she and her colleagues demand we give up ours.
We commoners aren’t ignorant to the fact that temperature gauges are placed near airport blacktop to skew the results.
We commoners don’t care about a trivial rise in global temperatures in the centuries ahead when we need to feed our children now.
We commoners aren’t so stupid that we would actually believe carbon, a building block of life, to be a poisonous element.
We commoners have had it with the theft via taxation and devaluation to support the “green” agenda that is only destroying the environment.
We commoners have had one too many go-rounds with the mainstream media to treat its members like a serious and informed group of individuals.
We commoners are “worn out,” or sick and tired of being treated like we are the inferior class, mere subjects of globalist powerbrokers.
If credibility were important—and it should have been if they wanted to keep up the grift and control—it would have behooved them to have read The Boy Who Cried Wolf and they would have learned you can only lie for so long before the people ignore you completely.
A logo sign outside of a Planned Parenthood abortion center in St. Paul, Minnesota on October 25, 2015.Kristoffer Tripplaar/Shutterstock
While best known for abortion, Planned Parenthood is also deeply invested in the gender “transition” business, and its diversification has recently gained it a lawsuit from a young autistic woman it gave testosterone after a mere half-hour of consultation.
On August 7, The Free Presspublished the story of Cristina Hineman, who upon turning 18 in November 2021 went to a New York Planned Parenthood location to obtain the testosterone therapy she sought without the consent of her parents.
She had been dealing with a variety of issues, including self-harm, depression, anxiety, and autism, many of which were exacerbated by the social isolation of the COVID-19 lockdowns, and recalls being turned on to the possibility that gender was at the source from YouTube videos that led her to conclude, “trans includes all the things I’ve been feeling — my discomfort with my chest, my discomfort with being called ‘young woman,’ not being sure of who I was or what I wanted to be.”
After completing a consent form, answering a few questions, and going over “expected changes” from the hormone – a process taking less than 30 minutes – Hineman was given a prescription for testosterone gel. But after a year of hormone therapy as well as removal of her healthy breasts at age 19, Hineman regrets her transition.
“I was brainwashed,” she said. “A lot of people say that adults should be able to do whatever they want. But if you have mental illness that’s clouding your view, or you’re so misinformed about what gender dysphoria even means, then you cannot consent to such invasive treatments.”
Hineman says she remains left-of-center and in favor of legal abortion, but she is suing Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the PP staffers behind her consultation and prescription, the therapists who encouraged her transition, and the surgeon who performed her double mastectomy for negligence and failure to obtain informed consent.
“There’s a real belief among these plaintiffs and lawyers that this is the great medical scandal of our times,” said attorney Jordan Campbell, who is representing Hineman.
“Treatment without a competent evaluation shouldn’t be foisted on you whether you’re 15 or 30,” added attorney Kevin Keller, who is donating his expertise on other similar lawsuits across America. “Vulnerability is the issue. If there’s no comprehensive screening in place before a medical intervention that’s going to have permanent effects,” that’s a breach of duty, he argues.
A significant body of evidence shows that “affirming” gender confusion carries serious harms, especially when done with impressionable children who lack the mental development, emotional maturity, and life experience to consider the long-term ramifications of the decisions being pushed on them, or full knowledge about the long-term effects of life-altering, physically transformative, and often-irreversible surgical and chemical procedures.
Studies find that more than 80% of children experiencing gender dysphoria outgrow it on their own by late adolescence, and that even full “reassignment” surgery often fails to resolve gender-confused individuals’ heightened tendency to engage in self-harm and suicide — and may even exacerbate it, including by reinforcing their confusion and neglecting the actual root causes of their mental strife.
Many oft-ignored “detransitioners,” individuals who attempted to live under a different “gender identity” before embracing their sex, attest to the physical and mental harm of reinforcing gender confusion, as well as to the bias and negligence of the medical establishment on the subject, many of whom take an activist approach to their profession and begin cases with a predetermined conclusion that “transitioning” is the best solution.
“Gender-affirming” physicians have also been caught on video admitting to more old-fashioned motives for such procedures, as with a 2022 exposé about Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s Clinic for Transgender Health, where Dr. Shayne Sebold Taylor said outright that “these surgeries make a lot of money.”
While Planned Parenthood is best known as the nation’s largest abortion chain, it is also deeply involved in the LGBT movement. It advertises itself as a “safe and welcoming place to get transgender/nonbinary hormone therapy (sic),” including estrogen, anti-androgen, testosterone, and puberty blockers.
According to the abortion giant’s most recent annual report, 45 of its affiliates offered so-called “gender-affirming hormone therapy” in 2022. Its previous report said 30 affiliates participated in 69 medical studies, an unspecified number of which involved so-called “care” to reinforce gender dysphoria.
A female boxer has come forward to reveal that Imane Khelif had “male power” and used “male techniques” during a sparring match in Sofia, Bulgaria. Joana Nwamerue said she met Khelif in Bulgaria, and was told by members of the Algerian National Team that Khelif was a woman who had simply been biologically altered by living in the mountains.
Providing brief comment to Reduxx, Nwamerue, who is so far undefeated in her boxing career, said she felt it was important to speak out because of her support for women in her home country of Bulgaria.
“[Khelif] has some kind of internal issues. But he is a man. I will stay [by] my words until he/she does a test to prove to the world that he/she is a WOMAN. But we all know that won’t happen,” Nwamerue told us, asserting multiple times that she believes the Algerian is male.
Reduxx reached out to Nwamerue after she appeared on a podcast with her friend Georgi Petkov to discuss the situation with the women’s boxing controversies at the 2024 Paris Olympics.
While speaking with Petkov, Nwamerue revealed she had been matched to fight against Khelif during a sparring session in Sofia, which took place in February ahead of the annual Strandzha Cup. During their time in the ring, Nwamerue says Khelif was “impudent” during the session, mocking her by sticking his tongue out and smiling at her.
“I think we played 3-4 sparring sessions. I have a record of everything. I can confirm that this is a man to me. Male power. Men’s techniques, everything,” Nwamerue explains. While she notes she was not injured during the match, she says she had concerns for the safety of the other female boxers Khelif would face.
“I’m a tomboy, I take a lot of hits and I know how to hold on. But the other girls are not so strong.”
Khelif [R] and Nwamerue [L] during their sparring session in Sofia at Dianabad Boxing.
The issue of Khelif’s sex came up during the Sofia training session, with members of the Algerian National Team apparently playing defense for Khelif and insisting to other participants that he was a woman who had somehow been biologically altered by living in the mountains.
“[Khelif’s] teammates came to me and told me ‘Imane is not a man. She is a woman and just lives high in the mountains with her relatives and parents and so there may be a change in her testosterone or chromosomes and the like,’” Nwamerue says. “So myself and my coach watched [Khelif] and I said ‘that can’t be possible.’ Everywhere has people living in the mountains. It’s absurd.”
Nwamerue adds that her coach replied incredulously, questioning the “mountain” theory of Khelif’s physical abnormalities by noting that other world and European boxing federations had implemented bans on him, and that “only the Olympics” was allowing Khelif to compete.
“Obviously there’s some competition between federations and they’re shitting on one another, but it’s extremely unfair. It’s like pitting a motorcycle against a bicycle,” Nwamerue explains. “For people who don’t understand combat sports. Motor vs bicycle. Will the bicycle be faster and win, or the motorbike?”
Nwamerue is in the same weight class as Khelif, and had been one of the female boxers selected by Bulgaria to go to the Olympic qualifiers in Bangkok. But, despite intensive training, Nwamerue did not make the final Olympic pick. Her colleague Svetlana Staneva moved ahead to represent the nation in the 66KG category instead, and fought Khelif on August 4.
“It was one of the strongest matches I watched. I congratulate Staneva and say that I am proud to know her,” Nwamerue said, adding: “What impressed me the most was her gesture.”
Staneva launched an international movement following the match with Lin after making an “XX” symbol at the crowd using her fingers, a clear nod to the chromosome controversy that had surrounded Lin and Khelif.
🚨TODAY🚨
Taiwan's Lin Yu-Ting, who was previously found to have XY chromosomes, has defeated Bulgaria’s Svetlana Staneva 5-0. Lin is now guaranteed a women's Olympic medal.
“I think that for me both of the current cases in boxing – Imane Khalif and Lin Yu-Ting – are men. Even if they have childhood photos in dresses, to me they are men,” Nwamerue says, ending by calling for a separate federation to be made for those with issues surrounding their gender identity or biological sex.
“People who have internal problems, so to speak, should not compete against women and should fix their problems before taking any initiatives. If [Lin] is a woman with male characteristics, this is still not okay. Once you have been tested for internal problems and you are not a ‘clear woman,’ if I may say so, then these things remain. You are a woman according to documents and photo, but to me you are a man. It’s not fair to us women.”
As previously reported by Reduxx, it is known that other national boxing teams expressed concerns about Khelif long before the Algerian’s controversial Olympic appearance.
Speaking to Radio Marca, Rafa Lozano, former Olympic boxer and the Technical Commissioner of the Spanish boxing team, stated that at a training camp in Spain, Khelif caused injuries to every women he fought.
“They were doing a retreat at Blume and we couldn’t put [Khelif] with anyone. We put [Khelif] with Jennifer Fernandez and it hurt her. Whoever we put [Khelif] with was injured.”
The situation became so dire that the team found it necessary to place Khelif with a male boxer during sparring matches in order to “make it even.”
Despite some supporters claiming otherwise, extensive information has been repeatedly provided by the International Boxing Association and numerous sports scientists, coaches, and doctors, who have confirmed that neither Khelif nor Lin are genetically female.
Abrahamson revealed that the tests “concluded the boxer’s DNA was that of a male consisting of XY chromosomes.”
Khelif’s trainer, Georges Cazorla, has similarly confirmed that a French endocrinologist found a “problem with [Khelif’s] hormones” and “with [Khelif’s] chromosomes.” Describing Khelif’s reaction to the test results he stated, “this poor young girl was devastated, devastated to suddenly discover that she might not be a girl.”
As the number of knife attacks continues to rapidly grow in Germany, Interior Minister Nancy Faeser has proposed a stricter knife-carrying ban than the one already in place. Critics argue, however, that an even stricter ban will not hinder perpetrators, mostly migrants, from committing heinous crimes, and the state should instead focus its efforts on putting a stop to illegal immigration from Africa and the Middle East.
Germany already has stringent regulations on carrying knives in public, with blades over 12 cm banned except in certain circumstances. However, the ban visibly does not seem to have any effect. This has not deterred Social Democrat interior minister Nancy Faeser from suggesting on Sunday, August 11th that the legal limit for knives carried in public should be shortened to 6 cm.
German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser has said she wants to "further restrict the use of knives in public," amid a marked rise in knife crime.https://t.co/XeMlxlIBwG
Faeser told the Sunday edition of the German daily Bild that the left-liberal coalition government is aiming to “create a general ban on handling dangerous flick knives.” She said she also wants more police surveillance at train stations.
The interior minister of the southern state of Bavaria, Joachim Herrmann—of the centre-right CSU party—criticised the plan, saying “It is doubtful that further knife bans can solve the problem of knife crime.” The recent stabbing and murder of a police officer in the south-western city of Mannheim, for example, was committed with a knife that was already prohibited under current law, he added.
None of the mainstream politicians are willing to name the real cause of the problem: the influx of illegal migrants from Africa and the Middle East, some of whom are accustomed to ending disputes with physical violence.
As conservative publication Apollo Newscommented on the issue:
Measures such as prohibition zones or knife bans have so far only been sufficient—if they have been sufficient at all—to combat symptoms. Faeser does not address the causes that lie in migration policy.
As The European Conservative has reported for the past few months, knife-related attacks have spun out of control in Germany, with almost daily news reports about life-endangering attacks being carried out in different parts of the country.
Most recently three separate stabbing incidents happened within 24 hours in the capital, Berlin. A 39-year-old man was stabbed in the Berlin-Mitte district at a subway station, and a 34-year-old man in the Neukölln district, which is mainly inhabited by migrants. The victim of the second attack is in life-threatening danger. Nothing is known about the nationalities of either of the perpetrators.
In a third incident, fifteen to thirty men are said to have gotten into a dispute with five other men. The attackers hit the men with stones and beer bottles, beat them and sprayed them with gas. One of the victims was also wounded with a stab to his shoulder blade.
Most of the perpetrators of violence in Berlin “are young, male and have a non-German background. This also applies to knife violence,” Barbara Slowik, the police commissioner of Berlin recently said in an interview.
The Charité hospital in Berlin said last week that the number of patients treated for stab wounds this year has already reached 50 to 55—a number they usually tend to in a whole year. According to police statistics, close to 13,844 knife-related attacks were committed last year throughout Germany, a significant increase compared to the 10,131 cases recorded a year earlier.
Police have registered an increasing number of knife attacks at railway stations: last year they recorded a total of 777 knife attacks, while in the first six months of this year the number has already reached 430. The majority of the perpetrators are “non-German.”
Stepping directly into American domestic politics, the European Union demanded Monday that X owner Elon Musk abide by Brussels’ speech restrictions during his planned uncensored interview with Donald Trump.
In a letter addressed to tech billionaire Elon Musk on Monday, ahead of his planned uncensored interview with former President Donald Trump, Thierry Breton, the European Commission’s chief censorship czar, threatened to deploy all powers available to him under the Digital Services Act (DSA) against X if the U.S. presidential candidate breaches EU restrictions on speech.
“I am writing to you in the context of recent events in the United Kingdom and in relation to the planned broadcast on your platform X of a live conversation between a US presidential candidate and yourself, which will also be accessible to users in the EU,” the French Eurocrat opened in his letter to Musk.
Breton said that because the Trump interview will be broadcast live throughout the EU on X, Brussels will “monitor” the “dissemination of content that may incite violence, hate and racism in conjunction with major political – or societal – events around the world, including debates and interviews in the context of elections.”
The EU censorship chief demanded, therefore, that X implement “mitigation measures” against the “amplification of harmful content” that may “generate detrimental effects on civic discourse and public security” in Europe.
Breton claimed that social media had fomented the recent anti-mass migration riots and protests in the UK following the mass stabbing at a children’s dance party in Southport last month and thus demanded restrictions be put in place on X during the Trump interview and other major world events.
“This is important against the background of recent examples of public unrest brought about by the amplification of content that promotes hatred, disorder, incitement to violence, or certain instances of disinformation,” he wrote, adding: “I therefore urge you to promptly ensure the effectiveness of your systems and to report measures taken to my team.”
The top Eurocrat said that his office will be “extremely vigilant” in looking for any breaches of the DSA speech codes and vowed to “make full use of our toolbox, including by adopting interim measures, should it be warranted to protect EU citizens from serious harm.”
According to the EU, “interim measures” can include “orders to terminate or remedy alleged infringements,” meaning that the bloc may demand that Musk remove or censor his interview with the former American president.
Large platforms found to be in violation of the DSA face fines of up to six per cent of the firm’s “total worldwide annual turnover in the preceding financial year” and even face a potential suspension from operating within the European Union. Musk’s X is already under investigation for supposed breaches of the bloc’s “disinformation” policies.
Responding to the Frenchman’s letter on Monday, Mr Musk replied: “Bonjour!” and added in a separate post: “Thierry always reminds me of the French taunter from Monty Python.”
EU Censorship Tsar Says Social Media Sites Face Ban if They Don’t Remove ‘Calls for Revolt’, Footage of Riotshttps://t.co/tj9PM9wVlt
A British man’s unique rendition of a classic pop song has gone viral, stirring a significant response as it captures his take on the U.K.’s long-standing “open borders” immigration policy.
The man’s version of Lewis Capaldi’s ‘Someone You Loved’ in which he used alternative lyrics to highlight the U.K. government’s crackdown on free speech has attracted millions of views on social media.
The song criticizes Sir Keir Starmer’s left-wing government and its handling of protests against mass migration from Africa and the Middle East, which have recently erupted following the mass stabbing in Southport by the son of two asylum seekers which saw three young girls murdered and several others injured.
In the song, he expresses disillusionment with the current state of the U.K., citing chaos and neglect by authorities, which are unresponsive to the people’s call for tighter borders. The lyrics also make a controversial mention of Hugh Edwards, a Welsh journalist forced to resign as one of the highest-paid presenters for Britain’s public broadcaster due to child sex offenses, adding a layer of critique on the media and public figures in the country.
The chorus of the song highlights Poland as a potential safe haven for Brits seeking refuge from their country’s turbulent social climate. He labels himself as “far-right” merely for speaking his mind and suggests that moving to Poland, where he perceives the streets as safer, might be the better option.
“When I say what I think, I’m labeled ‘far-right’; I might as well start packing my bags and head to Poland, where the streets are safe…” the man sings.
The song emerges amid a wave of riots in the U.K. following the tragic stabbing in Southport that left three children dead by Axel Rudakubane, a 17-year-old of Rwandan descent. This incident has sparked widespread protests and riots, with counter-protestors and media framing the unrest as driven by extreme right-wing racism and extremism.
Meanwhile, Poland remains relatively safe, attributed by some to its conservative approach to immigration compared to Western European standards.
However, this could change if current Polish left-liberal authorities adhere to the European Union’s migration pact, which involves relocating migrants across all member states, including Central and Eastern Europe.
Prime Minister Donald Tusk has stated that Poland will not accept illegal immigrants, a stance met with skepticism by opposition parties such as the Law and Justice (PiS) and Confederation parties.
Shocking news out of the Olympic boxing controversy as the Technical Commissioner of the Spanish boxing team reveals that Algerian boxer Imane Khelif was reportedly considered too dangerous for women to train against during a boxing retreat in Spain.
Speaking to Radio Marca, former Olympian boxer and Olympic boxing trainer Rafa Lozano revealed that he thought the inclusion of Khelif in the women’s category was unjust and dangerous to females. “I don’t see it as fair. Everyone can think what they want, but that’s how I see it,” Lozano said, recalling his observations of the Algerian during a training retreat at the sport centre CAR Blume in Madrid.
“They were doing a retreat at Blume and we couldn’t put her with anyone. We put [Khelif] with Jennifer Fernandez and it hurt her. Whoever we put [Khelif] with was injured.”
Lozano says that to avoid further injury to the women, the coaches ended up pairing Khelif up with Jose Quiles, who is one of Spain’s top male boxers, during the retreat. Quiles, 26 and one of Spain’s top boxers, was considered a more equitable match for Khelif to spar against, with Lozano noting that Khelif was only “even” after being matched against the man.
Lozano continued that he believed that allowing Lin and Khelif to compete in the female category was not appropriate, “from my point of view I don’t see it as fair.”
But Lozano is not the only sport expert who weighed in on Khelif’s ineligibility to compete against women, with another being Khelif’s own trainer.
In an exclusive interview with Le Point magazine, Khelif’s coach confirmed that the Algerian has a male karyotype and high testosterone.
Georges Cazorla told the magazine of Khelif’s distress when disqualified by the IBA in 2023, confirming that biological tests had been carried out by the IBA that revealed that Khelif may not be female.
Cazorla is the President of the Association for Research and Evaluation in Physical Activity and Sport (AREAPS), a scientific advisor, and a former lecturer University of Bordeaux who supervised the master’s thesis of Khelif’s manager, Nasser Yefsah. At the end of 2022, Yefsah contacted Cazorla to assist with Khelif’s training for the world championships, the African championships and the Olympic Games.
“The [disqualification] was based on tests. Frankly, I found it disgusting. Regardless of the results of these biological tests and, without going into detail – that is a matter for biologists and doctors – this poor young girl was devastated, devastated to suddenly discover that she might not be a girl,” Cazorla said.
He goes on to continuously assert that Khelif lived as a girl and has a “girl’s sensitivity,” but adds that Khelif has a “special” body type. When asked if individuals with “XY profiles” have specific physical advantages over those with “XX profiles,” Cazorla refused to say whether males were generally stronger than females.
“Some say that special categories should be made, but even within a group of hypoandrogenic or hyperandrogenic people, there are differences between them. There is such a large variation that we cannot constitute categories,” Cazorla said, appearing to bizarrely reject the validity of sex-based sport categories.
During the revealing interview, Cazorla claims that Khelif did not understand the meaning of signing the letter acknowledging the IBA’s test results, but says that the Algerian boxer was still taken to the Kremlin-Bicêtre Hospital for assessment by endocrinologists.
Cazorla said that a doctor confirmed that there was a “a problem with [Khelif’s] hormones” and “with [Khelif’s] chromosomes,” but continued to insist during the interview that Khelif “is a woman.”
Following the meeting with the endocrinologist, Khelif was placed on testosterone suppressants in an effort to circumvent any potential testosterone-level checks made by the IOC. The IOC had not submitted athletes to chromosomal testing since 1999 and, at the Paris Olympics, only document checks were competed for the women’s boxing competitions.
“Currently, she can be compared on a muscular and biological level to a woman-woman-woman,” Cazorla says, suggesting Khelif is not seen as fully female by the coaching team.
This may finally confirm the speculation by sports scientists, who have roundly claimed that Khelif is a genetic male with a Disorder of Sexual Development (DSD).
Following the initial Reduxx report which broke the news that Khelif and another previously-disqualified athlete, Lin Yu-Ting, had been included in the Women’s Boxing at this year’s Olympics, a media storm has surrounded the two boxers. Both obtained gold in their respective categories this past week.
🚨BREAKING🚨
Taiwan's Lin Yu-Ting has defeated Poland's Julia Szeremeta for Women's Featherweight gold, representing the second women's boxing gold that has gone to a biological male at the Paris Olympics.
Over the course of the past two weeks, the International Boxing Association, which had been responsible for Khelif and Lin’s 2023 disqualifications, has stood firm in support of their past decision. The IBA has released evidence, statements, and even held a press conference to explain the reasoning for the boxer’s disqualification and had released details of the 2023 correspondence between the IBA, the boxers, and the International Olympic Committee.
During the August 5 press conference, IBA officials discussed the reasoning for the boxers being disqualified, and informed the audience that bothboxers had not appealed the decision to the Court of Arbitration in Sport despite facing no financial burden to do so.
The IBA also detailed their attempts to warn the IOC of the dangers of including the boxers in the female competition in an email which the IOC replied to and then allegedly ignored until the recent media storm.
It was also clarified by the IBA that the boxers were found to be ineligible due to their chromosomes, and that they were being prevented from releasing the results of the tests by the boxers’ respective National Olympic Committees of Algeria and Taiwan. But the IBA told those in attendance to “read between the lines” indicating the boxers do not have XX chromosomes and to come to their own logical conclusions.
🚨HAPPENING NOW🚨
The International Boxing Association is holding a press conference in Paris to address the issues surrounding Algerian boxer Imane Khelif and Taiwanese boxer Lin Yu-Ting.
Dr. Ioannis Filippatos, the former Chair of IBA Medical Committee and an OB/GYN with… pic.twitter.com/VC7H5xiSZN
Clarification was also given by Dr. Ioannis Filippatos, the former Chair of IBA Medical Committee who spoke at the conference and confirmed that the blood and medical tests found the boxers were male. It is reported that during the conference, BBC journalists walked out in protest.
In an IOC press conference in response to the scandal, Thomas Bach articulated that the IOC only used the legal sex of an athlete, such as that documented on their passport, to determine their eligibility to compete in the women’s category.
At one point, Bach was forced to issue a correction of an erroneous statement he made in which he said that the cases of Lin and Khelif were “not a DSD case.” A hasty clarification changed “DSD” to “transgender,” all but confirming the previous speculation on the two.
Speaking at a Sex Matters Press Briefing on the topic of the inclusion of males in women’s sports and the Olympic Boxing eligibility controversy, Dr. Emma Hilton, a developmental biologist, explained that “allowing a male into the female boxing ring is kind of the equivalent of letting a heavyweight into the ring with a lightweight.”
Dr. Hilton continued by stating that people underestimate the “chasm” of difference between male and female strength, adding: “a female has to be well over 30 kilograms heavier than a male to match strength levels.”
Further evidence of Khelif’s disproportionate strength compared to female boxers was illustrated in an interview with Mexican boxer Brianda Tamara Cruz, who boxed Khelif at the Golden Belt Series Finals in Guadalajara in 2022, the year before he was disqualified.
“When I fought [Khelif], I felt it was very out of my reach, I was hurt a lot by [the] punches, I think I had never in my 13 years as a boxer felt like this, not even in my sparring with men.” Cruz went on to tell the outlet that she felt she narrowly escaped a potentially fatal situation, and the disqualification came in time to prevent such a scenario recurring, “Thank God, that day I came out of the ring well and it’s good that they finally realized.”
EDIT: A previous version of this article incorrectly named the French hospital where the endocrinology test on Khelif was completed due to a mistranslation. The article has been updated to re-label “Greater Paris University Hospital” to “Kremlin-Bicêtre Hospital.”
With hundreds of Hindus and Christians killed and thousands more attacked and wounded, violence on minorities in Bangladesh finally calls western attention to what happens when an Islamist majority is left unchecked to terrorise non-Muslims.
At last, Western selective sensitivity should open its eyes to a state of affairs that manifests itself not only in Bangladesh, formerly known as East Pakistan, but also in Pakistan and elsewhere.
The Bangladesh crisis should act as a belated wake-up call. It must alert us to the fact that brutal violations of human and civil rights occur all over South Asia – and especially in countries dominated by Muslim majorities and ruled by Islamists.
Whereas Afghanistan, of course, is nothing short of a modern-day theocratic dystopia and a rogue state which has cut ties with the rest of the world, it is high time we took a closer look at what is happening in Pakistan.
After all, we have lately been seeing many Pakistani flags flying in European cities, where Muslim immigrants, who showed up in EU countries as asylum-seekers, are now calling for the sharia law to be enforced in the old continent. We see this in the latest unrest in the UK, where Pakistanis have been playing a central role.
It is imperative that the West realises that many people who arrive in Europe as illegal migrants claiming to be escaping from danger and demanding that we respect their rights, share the values of backgrounds which show zero tolerance for diversity and no interest at all in multiculturalism or inclusiveness.
It is also important that states that harbour and nourish exclusion, oppression and violence as cultural and institutional characteristics are held accountable.
Last March an international conference was held at the United Nations Palais de Nations in Geneva, aiming at calling attention to violations of human rights and prosecution of Hindus in Pakistan-administered Jammu Kashmir and the region of Gilgit Baltistan. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, it did not attract much attention and publicity.
The situation in Balochistan is also dire. According to the Asian Human Rights Commission, enforced disappearances have become a routine occurrence accepted by the authorities as a normal practice of law enforcement agencies.
Almost two decades ago, some of these perspectives were highlighted for the first time in a comprehensive EU report published in 2007. However, since then sensitivity over the matter has not gained traction in Brussels.
On the contrary, the EU is the second largest trading partner of Pakistan and a major donor through a plethora of NGOs, while EU member states, such as Greece, have signed agreements with Pakistan in order to facilitate immigration of workers into Europe. No real conditions have been set for this cooperation.
For some reason, the prosecution of Hindus in South Asia is a bit like the purge of Christians in the Middle East or Africa. We all agree it is wrong and then we look the other way.
In fact, the slogan “all eyes on Gaza” seems to be quite accurate indeed. All eyes are where the woke establishment commands them to look. No eyes are on places like Pakistan, Nigeria, or Bangladesh – at least not until a full-scale massacre breaks out.
So when things in Bangladesh calm down, as it fortunately appears to be happening at the moment, let us not forget that Hindu and Christian lives do not matter only when their loss makes the news. Pressure must be put on governments so that innocent people stop suffering.
And let us keep in mind that immigrant communities in Europe, such as the Pakistani one, are in no real position to wag the finger at us over issues of rights and liberty.
Barely a month after the elections, and the new Labour Party government is dragging Britain into serious civil conflict, while destroying the preciously little that remains of British freedoms, especially freedom of speech.
The teenage son of a Rwandan migrant family stabbed three little girls to death at a Taylor Swift-themed dance workshop in Southport, a city near Liverpool, on July 29. The murders triggered protests and riots by Britons who have apparently had enough.
Within a day of the first protests, Prime Minister Keir Starmer gave a speech in which he barely mentioned the murdered little girls, yet painted those who protested as “far right thugs” who had come from outside Southport to stir up trouble. He thus dismissed all the concerns of the majority of the British and their worries about the mass migration that is affecting the safety of their children, families and communities. Incredibly, Starmer’s first act after the murders was not, as one might expect, to deal with concerns over the safety of British citizens, but to dedicate funds to new emergency security for mosques.
“A gang of thugs, got on trains and busses, went to a community that is not their own… And then proceeded to throw bricks at police officers… Whether it’s in Southport, London – or Hartlepool… These people are showing our country exactly who they are. Mosques targeted because they are Mosques. Flares thrown at the statue of Winston Churchill. A Nazi salute at the Cenotaph.”
He added that he was creating a special Violent Crime Unit, dedicated to fighting — guess who — the protesters:
“And so I’ve just held a meeting with senior police and law enforcement leaders… Because let’s be very clear about this. It’s not protest. It’s not legitimate. It’s crime… We will put a stop to it… A response both to the immediate challenge, which is clearly driven by far-right hatred… And so — to that end I can announce today, that following this meeting we will establish a national capability, across police forces to tackle violent disorder.”
Not letting the crisis go to waste, he also announced that the government would be expanding the use of facial recognition technology:
“These thugs are mobile. They move from community to community, and we must have a policing response that can do the same… Wider deployment of facial recognition technology… preventive action – criminal behaviour orders to restrict their movements before they can even board a train.”
Starmer could have stopped the demonstrators in their tracks by listening to — and addressing — the concerns of “ordinary” people in the wake of the murders. Instead, he chose to brand them as “far right thugs”, thereby inflaming an entire country, with protests and rioting spreading from Southport to other cities. Police further inflamed matters by setting their dogs on harmless protesters, arresting many, and handcuffing a 73-year-old lady with a pacemaker who had never been arrested before, and was guilty of just peacefully protesting the murders of young girls.
“I’m 73 years old and I’ve here because of them babies that has died and I’m being arrested,” said the woman, who was surrounded by riot police.
In Plymouth, according to one report, while leftist radicals were destroying a church, taking stones from its wall to throw at the protesters, police were not stopping the radicals, but instead beating the protesters.
Immediately clamping down on the sad remains of British free speech, the director of public prosecutions of England and Wales, Stephen Parkinson, chillingly warned that sharing and retweeting online material of the riots was a serious offense that would lead to arrest. “We do have dedicated police officers who are scouring social media to look for this material, and then follow up with arrests,” he said.
Around the same time, Northampton police posted on X that they had “received reports of a hate crime regarding a post published on social media” and in response had arrested a 41-year-old woman “on suspicion of inciting racial hatred.”
So, retweeting posts on X now gets you sent to the pokey. A Muslim brandishing an AK-47 assault rifle on social media, however, while threatening to blow people’s heads off, is apparently acceptable. Equally acceptable, evidently, are Muslim radicals vowing on social media that any members of the “English Defense League” (an anti-Islam group that was disbanded around a decade ago) who show up to Walthamstow in northeast London will be murdered, and their bodies “disappeared” in the woods. In fact, Muslims and radical leftists didmobilize in Walthamstow over rumors of an anti-mass migration protest — which did not take place — brandishing Palestinian flags. The crowd cheered, as local Labour councilor Ricky Jones gave a speech in which he called for the murder of Britons who protest against mass immigration.
“They are disgusting fascists and we need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all,” he said. After the video circulated online, police eventually had no choice but to arrest Jones.
Peter Kyle, Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, summoned representatives from social media giants and told them to clamp down on users deviating from the government narrative.
“I expect platforms to ensure that those seeking to spread hate online are not being facilitated and have nowhere to hide,” Kyle said. Elon Musk, the owner of X (formerly Twitter), was condemned by the British government for stating that the UK was heading towards civil war.
Within a few days, Starmer’s ramped-up special unit had managed to arrest, try and sentence a British rioter to three years in prison for punching a police officer. Yet, the murderer of the three Southport girls, Axel Rudakubana, will only go on trial next year, while rape victims in the UK, including little children, wait an average of 358 days before their rapists go on trial.
Police launched “dawn raids” on protesters after having “scoured thousands of hours of footage to identify people who engaged in violent behavior.”
What the police did not do was arrest the gangs of armed Muslim men who took to the streets across British cities. In Birmingham, Bolton, and Middlesbrough, “Muslim patrol” members beat white people, whom they accused of being part of the anti-mass migration protests. In Sheffield, machete-wielding Muslims roamed the streets in search of white “far right” people to attack.
In Birmingham, the UK’s second-largest city, Muslim gangs armed with swords went looking for white protesters — with not a policeman in sight. A Sky News reporter was forced to end her broadcast after a masked man approached her shouting “Free Palestine” while other men surrounding her made shooting signs with their hands. The gangs violently attacked an innocent man, beating him to the ground in front of a Birmingham pub he had happened to visit. They also shut down roads and attacked cars, after checking them to see that there were whites inside. No police officers were to be seen.
Why were no police officers present? When West Midlands police were asked why they did nothing about “an awful lot of people armed with various weapons” (Muslim gangs) in Birmingham, the answer was that the Muslim communities had been allowed to “do their own policing”.
West Midlands Police Superintendent Emlyn Richards said:
“We have really strong business and community relations [with the Muslim communities]… we had the opportunity to meet with [Muslim] community leaders, meet with [Muslim] business leaders… to kind of understand the style of policing that we needed to deliver… So we knew there was going to be a large amount of people out on that counter protest, we knew who the vast majority of who those people were.”
He then went on to note that the counter-protesters (the Muslim gangs) had “the right intentions” and that only “a small minority” of people had been intent on causing “either criminality, disorder or fear within our communities.”
Curiously, British police did not acknowledge “right intentions” of those protesting the Southport murders and that only “a small minority” had engaged in violence and riots against the police, hotels hosting illegal migrants, and mosques.
Richards concluded:
“What we saw was a response from our [Muslim] communities where they were kind of trying to make sure that was policed within themselves as well and trying to deter people from taking part in that disorder,”
Translation: huge parts of the UK are no-go zones where the police no longer hold authority.
Contrary to what the police said, Muslim “elders” appeared to incite members of their community in Birmingham, telling them to “protect the house of Allah” against the “far right” and messaging Starmer that they were fully able to “defend themselves”.
“[W]hen the call is made, we will defend ourselves. We are not ashamed of this, inshallah, and we will openly say the takbeer [“Allahu Akbar”, “Allah is the greatest”] whenever we feel like it,” the Muslim elder told a crowd which proceeded to break out in shouts of “Allahu Akbar!” A threat?
Not according to the Chief Constable of the West Midlands, who released a video statement addressed to the Muslims in the region, greeting them deferentially with “Salam Alaykum,” and reassuring them of the police’s support and giving “huge thanks” to their “elders” for their “cooperation.”
In Stoke-on-Trent, the police nicely asked a crowd of armed Muslims gathered outside a mosque to please “discard” their weapons inside the mosque. No arrests.
“Don’t give anybody any reason to have any interaction with the police, so if there’s any weapons, get rid of them, we are not going to arrest anybody,” the police officer said.
In Croydon, London, Muslim gangs went on a rampage apparently in search of white people to attack, but finding none, they instead proceeded to smash up whatever they could find. The police posted a deceiving message on X in which they claimed that the Muslim riot in Croydon had nothing to do with the protests but was a separate issue.
The list goes on. The legacy media barely reported the Muslim violence. The BBC claimed — as most of the media did in the US during the fiery summer of rioting in 2020 — that although a Birmingham pub had been attacked, the Muslim protests had been “largely peaceful.”
In contrast to this blitz of an authoritarian crackdown, Starmer, when he was leader of the opposition in Parliament, showed nothing but understanding for the people participating in the large-scale riots that Black Lives Matter (BLM) unleashed on the UK after the death of George Floyd in 2020. Large-scale violence and destruction, dozens of policemen wounded by BLM protesters and property damage, including damage to the Whitehall cenotaph and defacement and destruction of historical statues, apparently did not bother Starmer. Instead, at the time, he released a photo of himself “taking a knee” in support of BLM along with a statement in which he asked the British government to “ensure that our exports are not being used in the suppression of democratic rights in the US.”
Ten months of weekly protests across the UK in support of the terrorist group Hamas — and orchestrated by Hamas-affiliated organizations, calling for “Jihad!” and for Israel to be cleansed of its Jews “from the river to the sea,” while waving jihadist, Al Qaeda flags, and celebrating terrorists who murdered, raped, mutilated and burned innocent people alive — have had no consequences whatsoever for those involved, who continue their demonstrations, even though, in the UK, both Hamas and Al Qaeda are proscribed terrorist organizations and supporting them can carry a prison sentence to imprisonment for up to 14 years.
Meanwhile, however, the Greater Manchester police, following a complaint, removed posters of kidnapped Israelis, an act for which, after a severe backlash, they later had to apologize. In London, the Metropolitan Police also removed posters of Israeli hostages, to, as they said, “avoid any further increase in community tension” and out of “a responsibility to take reasonable steps to stop issues escalating.” Then calls for Jews to be killed, according to the British police, do not “escalate issues” or “increase community tension”?
Starmer, following in the footsteps of his Conservative predecessor Rishi Sunak, has evidently felt no need to clamp down on jihadists, on calls for an intifada or on cries to “free Palestine from the river to the sea,” a chant widely understood to be calling for the destruction of Israel.”
The terrorist threat of jihadi mobs continues to this day, yet the former head of counter-terrorism policing, Neil Basu, opined that the current UK protests against the murder of little girls and illegal migration were the ones that had “crossed the line into terrorism.”
Many of the places that have seen protests and riots are towns and cities such as Rotherham, where inhabitants rightfully fear the consequences of continued mass migration. Those cities were the scenes of sexual abuse on an unbelievable scale and equally unbelievable deliberate failures by authorities to deal with that abuse. In Telford alone, Muslim grooming gangs raped, abused and tortured more than 1,000 little children and teenagers beginning in the 1980s, and, in some cases, even murdered some.
Similar horrific acts by grooming gangs took place – and still are taking place — in Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford, Peterborough, Keighley, Newcastle and Birmingham. Today, many illegal migrants, almost all men from outside the European Union, are housed in hotels, courtesy of British taxpayers, who reportedly pay £8m a day for their accommodation, in some of those very cities, and reportedly continue to stalk and harass local English children. According to one former child victim of the grooming gangs, British police are still trying to cover the whole wreck up.
Almost the only figure of authority to talk any sense since the protests and riots began, is Donna Jones, Police and Crime Commissioner of Hampshire and Isle of Wight, who urged for calm and for the country to work together, calling on the government to listen to the legitimate grievances of those who are protesting:
“The announcement of the Prime Minister’s new Violent Crime Units have lead to an accusation of two tier policing, which has enflamed protestors who state they are battling to protect Britain’s sovereignty, identity and stop illegal immigration… Whilst the devastating attacks in Southport on Monday were a catalyst, the commonality amongst the protest groups appears to be focused on three key areas: the desire to protect Britain’s sovereignty; the need to uphold British values and in order to do this, stop illegal immigration…
“The government must acknowledge what is causing this civil unrest in order to prevent it. Arresting people, or creating violent disorder units, is treating the symptom and not the cause. The questions these people want answering; what is the government’s solution to mass uncontrolled immigration? How are the new Labour government going to uphold and build on British values? This is the biggest challenge facing Sir Kier Starmer’s government…
“We all need to work together to stop this mindless criminal behaviour committed by a small number of people, whilst understanding the views of those attending rallies who feel strongly but don’t cause disorder.”
Using the ongoing protests across Britain to crack down — one-sidedly — on basic rights, Starmer has successfully exacerbated racial conflict, inflamed tensions, created division, penalized free speech and neatly sneezed at legitimate concerns.
The attack on an ex-politician from the Social Democratic Party in the Mariahilf neighbourhood made headlines yesterday, Sunday. A group of “guests” of the mayor of Vienna presumably didn’t like his sexual orientation.
Former SPÖ district councillor Dorian Ramme was allegedly attacked and injured by a group of “people seeking protection” at Vienna’s Naschmarkt on Sunday morning because of his sexual orientation. He commented on the incident on Instagram as follows:
‘Scuffle with a couple of very homophobic men who deliberately knew how to invoke Islam. A bit of a defence discussion and you’re already suffering these days.
A finding that sounds almost Islamophobic and xenophobic, as one would say in Rammer’s circles.
Because in such cases, the usual attempts at appeasement are made to play down the problem: perhaps the “refugees” have not yet been allowed to attend an integration course or they are still traumatised by the terrible “refugee experience” they had to endure. Perhaps they also felt provoked by him and insulted in their honour.
In any case, Mr Rammer was able to feel the consequences of the welcome policy of his party and its Viennese party leader, Mayor Michael Ludwig (SPÖ), which the Viennese population is now exposed to on a daily basis.
The incident did not go unnoticed by Vienna FPÖ press spokesman Leo Lugner. He wrote on Facebook:
‘It shows once again that the revolution always eats its own children: those who shouted “Refugees Welcome” the loudest and ignored our warnings are now becoming victims themselves.
Despite justified criticism of the rampant LGBTIQ propaganda, this heinous violence should be strictly rejected, Lugner added. He wished Ramme a speedy recovery.
