Crisis Update - Aboriginal Peoples Resist

Binjari, Rockhole clearances; monetizing diversity; Botswana's new variant

A playgroup in Katherine. Photo Emily Dienhoff / Save the Children.

Nov 25, 2021

The Australian military continues to seal off indigenous lands, chasing residents into the bush and hauling them out of buildings where they’ve found refuge, trucking them to the Centre For National Resilience.

From the headlines you’d think the clampdown is new. But for more than a year the residents of the remote Binjari and Rockhole settlements, located approximately 20 km from the township of Katherine in the Northern Territory, have faced roadblocks that closed off their communities. [1]

If isolation was a tactic to push the Covid jabs, the take up was “much lower than 70 per cent,” says Northern Territories chief minister Michael Gunner. Time for tougher measures: house-by-house searches. (Government officials and politicians are excluded from forced jabs for “constitutional reasons.”)

This week he used the excuse of “the level of movement that has been happening in some communities” leading to the assumption that the residents are spreading the “virus.” Strange, given they’ve been isolated by roadblocks.

Of course testing is a pretext for the “hard lockdown” and the removal of positive cases from the community.

Since the PCR and lateral flow tests are of questionable accuracy this means large numbers will find themselves imprisoned arbitrarily. GAVI, the cuckoo that Bill Gates has landed in the Geneva nest of the World Health Organization, stresses the risk of false negatives. The site Medical Device Network has a long discussion on the discrepancies between LFT and PCR tests, fails to explain why one should assume false negatives as opposed to false positives, gives up and blames it on the labs. [2]

Homeland redefined

It’s interesting that the word homeland, once understood as tribal lands, has been appropriated to the federal state, what Joost Coté in an article “Terra-ising the Homeland” calls the “historical imaginary.” [3]

This is consistent with the communitarian view of individual rights as subservient. Thanks to the urgency of Climate Change and the Pandemic, the individual’s rights no longer take primacy under God or the universe but merely human rights under the Earth, as I explained on Nov 23 in The Great Reset Is Complete: A future retrospective.

This view of community does not mean respecting the rights of every member, however. The concept is the greater good. It also contains a moral judgement. The Earth is by definition virtuous. Your life is the process of becoming that virtue in everything you do: in your responsibility to the Earth by leaving no trace, to the community by working always and only for the good of the whole.

Do they even have the right to life?

The people behind the Pandemic-Reset have a direct connection to the eugenicists who brought you the U.S. Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor, 1910-1940; Planned Parenthood; who inspired the German experiment of the 1930s and continued it after the war in Tuskegee and MK-Ultra.

To bureaucrats and eugenicists these small nations are simply a problem to be swept away. It's hard to miss a similarity with the Reich that wanted "hygiene and purity" and ended up breeding Lebensborn. But my imagination is running away... surely it's just about keeping everyone safe from the parasites, sorry, viruses.

Friedrich Engels also hated "Völkerabfälle" so the first nations get blasted by the fascists and the communists.

Diversity for me, not thee

There is a strange paradox at the heart of diversity. It is lauded as a concept but not in practice.

Eugenicists such as the Rockefeller Brothers and Bill Gates preach about protecting the diversity of species and pay The Guardian and the BBC to publish stories, like the 200 species that go extinct every day.

Yet humans soon will look the same — an interbred hue of a single, United Colour of Benetton. [4]

Or maybe we’ll all be cyborgs [5]

It's a schizophrenic view of diversity: one minute you celebrate it, next you try to extinguish it. The truth is it's all about money.

Monetizing diversity

Wall Street has just launched natural asset companies (NAC) that will own, licence or operate Green technologies like carbon sequestration on particular territories. Presented as a goodwill venture in the interests of the Earth the proponents admit the driver is profit. They haven’t yet worked out how to earn from every type of nature — that’s why the taxpayer has been asked to pony up subsidies to get the concept off the ground. [6]

Britain’s Prince Charles, in launching The Great Reset in Jun 2020, listed the trillions of assets held by asset managers like Vanguard (which is the largest shareholder in) Blackrock, and State Street. But the Church of England and the Vatican have also agreed to deploy “their” assets.

NACs are being driven by Intrinsic Exchange Group, in which the Rockefellers are major investors, and the Inter-American Development Bank, which is the same institutions as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and numerous front organisations like the Caribbean Development Bank. See the work of Dr Richard Werner, author of Princes of the Yen (book and documentary) on how these vested interests are stalking horses to seize the wealth and assets of foreign nations.

Under the guise of the UN Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, these interests aim to turn 30 per cent of the world into protected areas. A study in the journal Nature concluded this could displace 300 million people. It is already happening in the Amazon under the guise of Green energy, where forest is leveled to plant soy. It is happening in Central America under the pretext of the War on Drugs, where land is “vacated” by the military so that mining companies can move in. See Oswaldo Zavala: Drug Cartels Do Not Exist: Narcotrafficking in US and Mexican Culture (2022).

When we witness indigenous Australians being dragged off their lands, you should remember the following quote:

“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.”
— Henry Kissinger, 1973

(More stories follow for paying subscribers)