Hate Free Speech Bill

The purpose of this to create a legal weapon of mass destruction and genicide is so you can’t defend yourself from any of the invasion and planned destruction of your whole world and all that you hold dear.


Peeps need to push the boat out a little more on the long game intentions.

Protected charatcteristics - MAP (remember I told you they’re pushing for as a recognised sexual orientation) Minor Attracted Person aka Pedo.

So game it out peeps, you’ll go to prison for speaking out against pod’s, that’s the tyrannical self gift this legal weapon of mass destruction will give to the regime.

Everyone should immediately write to their local TD’s / Senators etc (you have the lists here) ands ask them “can you guarantee you will not add MAP or similar fake sexual orientations as a protected characteristic”.


Full spectrum war.

More on MAP

Insiders not at all comfortable with the regimes plans.




Come on, come on. You women are the picture of perfection out in public, but annoying as ringing bells in your parlors and like wild-cats in your kitchens. When you’ve been hurt, you act like saints, but when you’re offended you act like devils. You all fool around when you should be doing your housewife duties, and you are hussies in bed.

Shakespeare in modern Ireland would be banged up by the Junta for daring to write such words.
The madness has to stop.

Call me pessimistic, but I’ve a sneaking suspicion that misogyny against “cis” women (or misandry for “cis”men) won’t be seen as a hate crime by those who end up interpreting the legislation.

Come on, come on. You Gays are the picture of perfection out in public, but annoying as ringing bells in your parlors and like wild-cats in your kitchens. When you’ve been hurt, you act like saints, but when you’re offended you act like devils. You all fool around when you should be doing your housegay duties, and you are hussies in bed or elsewhere. .

Careful now, someone might think you’re the FEDS


It would the same situation in Ireland as it is in Denmark. It is illegal for women to defend themselves in Ireland. Who are the main users of pepper spray and mace for personal protection. Pepper spray works great against would be attackers. The women usually just need to take out the pepper spray dispenser to make the attacker back off.

I love the quote by the minister about the Guards - “The protection of life and property is a function of the Garda Síochána and civilians are only entitled to use reasonable force to protect themselves and their property,"

Especially the “reasonable force” bit.

Because anyone who has ever had to deal the real threat of serious street violence knows that the only way of avoiding very serious injury when all attempts at avoidance and de-escalation have failed - i.e you are dealing with some psycho who badly wants to hurt you - the only effective defense is immediate and extreme escalation. You keep stomping them and hitting them with anything to hand until they stop moving. Or go away. Because if you don’t they will do the same to you until you are beaten unconscious. Or worse.

“Reasonable force” will just get you very badly hurt. With serious life changing injuries.

It must be nice to live in the safe well protected world the mister has lived in all her life. With her Garda driver most of that time.

The other thing to remember is that in common law countries the police have no duty to protect you. Its not even a case of when you need help now the police are minutes away. US court cases have tested the common law principles of police forces and police duty on multiple occasions and there is no actual specific legal obligation of an officer of the law to protect any specific individual

“police have a general “public duty,” but that “no specific legal duty exists” unless there is a special relationship between an officer and an individual, such as a person in custody.”

Do the Police Have an Obligation to Protect You? - FindLaw.

And if a test case ever came up in Ireland the results would be pretty much the same. As a common law jurisdiction

Its stuff like that that has converted me over the years into a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment. Because when push comes to shove you are on the own. The state and its apparat really does not give a fuck about you or your physical protection. Unless you are member of some special protected group. Which is always at the discretion of the state.

So of course they want to keep ordinary people disarmed, defenseless and unable to defend themselves. Totally at the mercy of the state.

Funnily enough the most orderly and safest country in Europe (and most democratic) is the only one where almost everyone is heavily armed. With genuine assault rifles in most homes. There is a real correlation here. The safest places in the US are the places with the highest gun ownership rates, the highest rates of concealed carry, and with open carry.

But you would never guess that from the BS that is published by the MSM.


Keith Woods makes it to Stew Peters which means more people outside of Ireland are probably watching this now… REPEAL II



Excellent summary - he speaks very well


Notable comment. and again most people don’t even know about this like the gender recognition act and so on. Such is the nature of occupational regime.


1 Like

For the comments

For whatever reason the comments are not loading but they are present in the archive link here and yes they are fun and mostly worth reading - https://archive.is/lvqQ5

BorgNine comment… :rofl:

BorgNine 2 hours ago

Ireland is gone. Joining the parade of extinct indigenous cultures of history. Only this time they have done it to themselves.

I said it, and I’ll say it again. It all truly begun with smoking bans in pubs. When I saw that the irish are such cucks to put up with it, and not only that to scramble to be among the first, I knew they were gone.

You think I’m exaggerating? Smoking bans created the precedent which is now used in all aspects of our lives - individual liberty is subservient to the perceived well-being of others. You say that if you don’t like my tweets you don’t have to look at them - but the precedent has been set with smoking bans. If you didn’t like smoke in a pub, you simply didn’t have to enter it. However the mouth-breathing antismoking brigade was so taken with righteous anger that they didn’t care what this would mean for the future of our individual freedoms and the relationship between the individual and the state. Covid lockdowns would have been much more difficult to implement without preparation work from smoking bans.

…someone else gets it, the Smoking Ban yoke :sweat_smile: