Video: ‘I’ll Start Packing my Bags and Head to Poland, Where the Streets are Safe’ — Viral Video Takes Aim at UK Free Speech Clamp Down
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 whole World needs to hear this song
Britain is not OK pic.twitter.com/nie6ulIdoh— Concerned Citizen (@BGatesIsaPyscho) August 9, 2024
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.
“It Didn’t Sound like Joe:” Pelosi Suggests Biden Didn’t Write Letter to Party
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has suggested that Joe Biden didn’t write a letter last month that indicated his desire to stay in the presidential race.
In an interview with New York Times columnist Ezra Klein last week, Pelosi said that the letter, which was sent to Congressional Democrats to address concerns about the President’s cognitive decline in the wake of his disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump, “didn’t sound like Joe Biden to me.”
“I didn’t accept the letter as anything but a letter. I mean, there are some people who are unhappy with the letter,” the former Speaker said.
“Let me say it differently. Some said that some people were unhappy with the letter. I’ll put it in somebody else’s mouth. It didn’t sound like Joe Biden to me. It really didn’t.”
Pelosi’s initial response to the letter was taken as a clear message that Democrat top brass wanted Biden to go; although Pelosi disputes this. She appeared on MSNBC two days later and said, “It’s up to the president to decide if he is going to run,” despite the fact that Biden had just indicated his willingness to do so. “We’re all encouraging him to make that decision because time is running short.”
Insiders have suggested that Pelosi gave Biden an ultimatum in a phone call and a deadline of “three weeks of the easy way.”
According to journalist Seymour Hersch, Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries plotted with Barack Obama and Kamala Harris to use the threat of the 25th Amendment to get Biden to step away from the race.
“By Saturday, July 20, former President Barack Obama was deeply involved, and there was talk that he would place a call to Biden,” Hersch explained on Substack. He describes how a well-placed official told him that Pelosi, Schumer and Jeffries conspired with Obama to invoke the 25th Amendment, leading to a phone call with Biden in which the former president said, “Here’s the deal. We have Kamala’s approval to invoke the 25th Amendment.”
Pelosi has remained adamant that she “never called one person,” but she came very close to admitting her central role in removing Biden in an interview with The New Yorker’s David Remnick last week.
“I love him [Biden] so much. I think he’s been really a fantastic President of the United States,” Pelosi said.
“So I really wanted him to make a decision of a better campaign, because they were not facing the fact of what was happening. Just a little background. I’ve never been that impressed with his political operation… I’m not. I just haven’t been. I mean, it just happened. They won the White House. Bravo.
“So my concern was, this ain’t happening, and we have to make a decision for this to happen, and the President has to make the decision for that to happen.”
The President himself gave a clear indication in an interview on Sunday, his first since being deposed, that he holds Pelosi responsible for his withdrawal.
“A number of my Democratic colleagues in the House and Senate thought that I was going to hurt them in the races,” Biden explained.
“And I was concerned if I stayed in the race, that would be the topic—you’d be interviewing me about why did Nancy Pelosi say [something]… and I thought it’d be a real distraction.”
Pandemic 2.0 will See Police, NATO Forcing the World to Get Vaccinated
The latest version of New Zealand’s pandemic plan, which serves as a blueprint for the rest of the world to follow, includes provisions to allow law enforcement and even NATO to enforce the government’s mandatory vaccination agenda.
Published on July 12, the updated plan arrived just one week after the Bill Gates-bankrolled World Health Organization (WHO) sent Dr. Peter Hotez to tell the world that both the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) should be allowed to punish “anti-vaxxers” in the United States. Hotez also mentioned deploying NATO as a weapon against domestic populations that refuse to get jabbed.
A modified version of the Civil Defense Emergency Management Act of 2002, the updated plan grants special powers to government officials to override the law during an “epidemic” or “emergency” to keep the public “safe” from harm.
The updated plan specifies three special powers that are allowed during a “threat:”
1) The power to detain, isolate, or quarantine persons, places, buildings, ships, vehicles, aircraft, and animals
2) The power to prescribe preventive treatment like pharmaceutical drugs or vaccines to people – those who refuse will fall into the first special power category
3) The power to allow police forces to “do anything reasonably necessary (including the use of force) to help a medical officer of health or any person authorised by the medical officer of health in the exercise or performance of powers or functions under sections 70 or 71”
That third bullet point is especially threatening in that it allows weapons-brandishing state agents to harm people who refuse to submit to the enforcement of these special powers.
(Related: New Zealand is leading the way in depopulating the world through mass vaccination.)
Get ready for medical martial law, coming soon to a town or city near you
New Zealand initially decided to make these changes on March 19, 2020, right before the Wuhan coronavirus (covid-19) was declared to be a global “pandemic.” At the time, The New Zealand Herald published an entire article about the need for an updated pandemic plan, which has now arrived.
The first pandemic plan in New Zealand was introduced in 2006. It was then updated in 2017 to reflect the passage of new legislation as well as changes in population and demographics. Now, version three of the plan has been unleashed, and it is a real doozy.
Imperial College London created a model that New Zealand used to assess how to recreate its pandemic plan. British physicist Neil “Professor Lockdown” Ferguson is credited with masterminding it, though there is much controversy surrounding his lack of accuracy.
“Ferguson is one of a small group of global ‘scientists’ whose job is to control the narrative,” reports The Exposé about who Ferguson really is. “The real driving force behind updating pandemic preparedness is WHO.”
No longer is the word “influenza” included in the title of New Zealand’s pandemic plan, thanks to Ferguson’s input. This means the range of what can be considered a “pandemic” has expanded to include pretty much anything.
According to The Exposé, the first time “special powers” were actually used in New Zealand was for covid, also known as “the dummy run.” The next time around will be a hell unlike anything the people of this world have ever seen or could ever comprehend.
“The updated pandemic plan covers the health system response,” the Ministry of Health ominously said in a statement about the changes. “It does not cover the all-of-government or wider societal response to a pandemic. It is also only one tool for developing the health system’s preparedness.”
The latest news about the globalist effort to unleash a second fake pandemic can be found at Plague.info.
Germany Considers 6cm Knife Ban Amid Stabbing Surge
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
— dpa news agency (@dpa_intl) August 11, 2024
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 News commented 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.”
US Carrier Strike Group Rushed To The Middle East Prepared For Iran Attack
A US carrier strike group has been rushed to the Middle East as new Israeli intelligence suggests that Iran will launch an attack within the next few days. US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered a […]
The post US Carrier Strike Group Rushed To The Middle East Prepared For Iran Attack appeared first on The People’s Voice.
The Pro-Family Movement is Winning in Europe, with Recent Victories in Poland, the UK and Italy
(LifeSiteNews) — It has been a good summer for pro-family forces in Europe.
First, on July 12, Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s attempt to decriminalize abortion during the first three months of pregnancy failed after almost the entire caucus of the Polish People’s Party, the most conservative faction of his shaky coalition government, voted against it. Since his ascension to power last year, Tusk has been using the full force of the state to target conservatives in the media and the judiciary as well as his political opponents. He had promised to reverse the policies of the previous government, Law and Justice, by spearheading a rollback of Poland’s pro-life regime.
Thus far, he has failed. Abortion activists, who see Tusk’s shaky coalition as a golden opportunity to ramrod their agenda through, are livid. Thousands of protestors gathered, with activists screaming profane chants from a stage in front of parliament. Tusk had made his socially liberal agenda central to his bid for leadership, stating on X on July 10 that: “We will vote to decriminalize abortion. We will vote for civil partnerships as a government project, although not everyone was convinced. We’re done discussing, it’s time for decisions.” After the failed vote, a furious and shaken Tusk suspended two of his own MPs who had voted against decriminalization and dismissed another from the post of deputy minister.
Tusk will try again, of course. But he faces an uphill battle, because he cannot govern without conservatives in the coalition – and they are not eager to anger Poland’s pro-life majority. Abortion activists are urging Tusk to dismiss Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz of the Polish People’s Party from the position of deputy prime minister – but Kosiniak-Kamysz pointed out that in all of the polls, pushing an abortion agenda and LGBT rights ranked rock bottom as a voter priorities.
Then, on July 23, Italy’s constitutional court formally refused to recognize the so-called “non-binary” sexual identity, stating in a ruling that Italian law:
establishes the principle of correspondence between name and sex and that, therefore, only a legislative intervention could overcome or change this rule. Its clarification is based on the fact that the binary nature of human sexuality of man and woman characterizes the varied and most disparate realms of social life, governed by the legal system, such as family law, labor law, sport, and the civil state and that, therefore, the legal recognition of an alleged third non-binary gender would disrupt the entire Italian legal and social system in such a way as to be incompatible with the faculties and attributions of the Constitutional Court or of any judge.
In short, to create a “third gender” or recognize “non-binary” as a valid legal concept would transform the entire social and legal system of Italy. Again, LGBT activists saw the ruling as a significant setback, especially due to the fact that it contributes to a growing consensus in Europe that the transgender agenda in particular should be rejected.
On July 29, the high court of the United Kingdom dealt a devastating blow to transgender activists when they ruled that the emergency ban on puberty blockers implemented by the Tory government on May 29 in the wake of the Cass Review revealing the damage they cause to minors. As Mrs. Justice Lang wrote:
In my view, it was rational for the first defendant to decide that it was essential to adopt the emergency procedure to avoid serious danger to the health of children and young people who would otherwise be prescribed puberty blockers during that five- to six-month period. Under the emergency procedure, there is no requirement to hold a consultation procedure… In my judgment, the Cass review’s findings about the very substantial risks and very narrow benefits associated with the use of puberty blockers, and the recommendation that in future the NHS prescribing of puberty blockers to children and young people should only take place in a clinical trial, and not routinely, amounted to powerful scientific evidence in support of restrictions on the supply of puberty blockers on the grounds that they were potentially harmful.
This ruling followed a July 20 UK government report debunking claims by trans activists that the ban had caused a spike in the suicide rate—and actually accused trans activists of behaving irresponsibly in making such claims.
Add to that Bulgaria’s vote to ban LGBT propaganda in schools – which I covered in this space earlier – and it is clear that defeat is not a given, as LGBT activists and abortion advocates would like us to believe. These victories are extremely important, and the defeats they represent are perhaps even more so.