Women and Guns


After seeing day after day legions of overweight, pink-haired, hairy, sour-pusses with orangutan armpits, groaning on about being oppressed while being the most undeservedly privileged class of useless know-nothings in the known universe, what does it take to produce real women? Israel knows.

Military service—that’s what. As cultural Marxism and feminism continue to poison the relations between the sexes and society, in a superbly interesting screed from the Council of European Canadians (yes, Canada was founded by Europeans, despite what the Premier Mangina may say), our writer suggests that instead of the propaganda peddled by our fake universities, a real education in the real world would be of much greater benefit. For example, in Israel…

All 18-year old women serve two years in the army along with the men. When they get out guess what happens? They get married and start a family. The fertility rate in Israel reached 3.13 children per female in 2015, the highest rate in the industrial world.

Although there have been objections to women in combat, a definite plus would be a rapid reassessment of where one’s real interests lie. As Dr Johnson said, “Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.”

The effect of combat on women (and men) is to make them suddenly feel a group identity with their fellow soldiers. The local tribesmen with their colourful clothing, bad teeth and exotic beards would be revealed as ruthless killers willing to do almost anything to rape, mutilate and murder any White woman they get their hands on. Women, as a group, tend to think of the personal before the theoretical and so the issue of racial, religious and cultural differences would be transformed into fire, blood and dirt.

Good point. And to appeal to women’s altruism, if they did not want to serve in the military, two years of service in a Peace Corps type of organization in, say, Chad, the Congo, Somalia dishing out AIDS awareness, vaccinations, and clean water and other good things. On top of that, they would get a real education.

This will result in very little actual progress, but it will expose these women to the most horrific social pressures, customs and situations. Child marriage, honour killing, female genital mutilation, polygamy, slavery, second-class status; it’ll be a real education. Some of these women will become casualties, even as some female Peace Corps workers have become rape victims, and the stories of how really, really bad these places are will eventually seep into the public mind.

Almost certainly some of the conscript soldiers referred to earlier will have to be brought in to rescue some of the aid workers just mentioned. We could have a situation of armed women rescuing unarmed women, a scene too delicious for words.

No kidding.

Read the whole piece, you’ll love it. You could bring it up at the next squat-in at the transgender fat collective.

Rebel Yell

Subversion—Democrat Style



Ion Pacepa was the former boss of the Foreign Intelligence Service in the Securitate, the feared, and highly efficient, secret police in the Ceausescu regime in Romania before the fall of communism. He defected to the US in 1978. He knows a few things about subversion.

In an interesting snippet on PJMedia, Pacepa notes that the tasks of the Securitate included the vilification of any and all who could oppose the ‘Conducator’ in word or deed. The intelligence agencies could fabricate criminal intent in anyone.

Forty years ago, I paid with two death sentences from my native Romania. I had publicly revealed that Ceausescu’s highly praised independence from Moscow was in fact an undercover intelligence dictatorship, designed to transform Romania into a monument to him by annihilating his critics and enemies. “I’ll give you a name, and you’ll build a criminal record for him,” Ceausescu used to tell the head of the Securitate — his Marxist version of the FBI. For him, lying was the first step toward stealing and killing.

Pacepa thought he had escaped state subversion against its own people but was shocked to find that the use of corrupted intelligence services to vilify politicians in the West, and in America, was being resurrected. When noting the oily rhetoric of Obama and the suppression of his past (all in line with communist tactics) he writes…

In 2008, however, I suddenly had the feeling of watching Ceausescu’s ghost haunting my adoptive country.
“We are the ones the world is waiting for,” proclaimed Barack Obama during his campaign, while his spiritual adviser Jeremiah Wright was caught on video screaming “God damn America.” The Democratic Party put the icing on the cake, proclaiming Obama an American Messiah. The senator agreed. On June 8, 2008, during a speech in New Hampshire, Obama stated that his presidency would be “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet to heal.” Earlier, an indiscreet video showed a picture of communist idol Che Guevara hanging on a wall behind Obama.
Our media and our political sages regarded Obama’s outrageous rhetoric as just millennial generational talk. For me, it was thinly veiled Ceausescu talk. My former boss’s version usually was: “A man like me is born only once every five hundred years.” Ceausescu also kept a picture of Che in his office.

No wonder Obama was enthusiastically endorsed by the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). In a column entitled “Big Political Shifts Are Underway,” Joelle Fishman, the chairman of the CPUSA Political Action Committee, emphasized that the CPUSA was now part of Obama’s coalition. Nor is it any wonder that when Obama became president, the first open member of a Communist Party was working at the White House. Van Jones (now a CNN contributor) had belonged to an organization named “Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM).”

Is it any wonder that the so-called Russia probe is uncovering more and more nefarious deeds of the agencies corrupted by Obama? Pacepa knows whereof he speaks.


Rebel Yell

Addendum: Interview with Ion Pacepa

Anglican tourism

One of the pleasures of being in a nearly world-wide religion associated with the British Empire and its offshoots is to go into a church and know roughly what sort of people you will meet (educated and pleasant), what sort of religious thought you will be exposed to (Christian eclectic), and to be among the faithful. I have been at St. James in Paddington, London, St Patrick’s Cathedral in Dublin, built in 1191 (the established church kept the cathedral at the time of the Reformation), and elsewhere across the planet.

Today it was Christ the Redeemer in Sarasota, Florida, where our hosts are congregants. By happenstance, we ran into an organist practising there, who welcomed us in. We were treated to Bach’s Prelude and Fugue in A-minor, BWV 543, described by the organist as a mature work of the great master, and a transcription of Fredrick Delius’  “On Hearing the First Cuckoo in Spring”, appropriate because the composer spent time in Florida. It produced in me a spiritual stillness for which one longs but seldom finds.

A youtube version is found here.

The organist is James Walton. He referred me to his youtubes, one of which is here.

Finally, I give you Robin Williams’ ten top reasons for being Episcopalian.

Top Ten Reasons for being an Episcopalian:

10. No snake handling.

9. You can believe in dinosaurs.

8. Male and female, God created them; male and female we ordain them.

7.You don’t have to check your brains at the door.

6. Pew aerobics.

5. Church year is colour-coded.

4. Free wine on Sundays.

3. All of the pageantry, none of the guilt.

2. You don’t know how to swim to get baptized.

1. No matter what you believe, there’s bound to be at least one other Episcopalian who agrees with you.

A more serious and profound set of reasons in presented here.

Canada’s Premier Mangina

No doubt you have heard the latest from the leading sanctimonious piffle-meister in the Great White North, Trudeau himself. At a townhall, he rebuked a woman (no less) for using the term ‘mankind’ in a question. Trudeau, always a bootlicker of the bitter feminoids, said ‘peoplekind’ should be used as it is more ‘inclusive’.

Of course, the bastardization of language and of clear thinking is a hallmark of leftists everywhere, particularly in our Dominion. In lefty Newspeak, as in Orwell’s original, the object is to destroy language to render thought impossible. Ideas cannot be expressed and articulated if the language is debased.

This fatuous mountebank, this drama school dropout, whose only claim to fame is a rich daddy, should be reminded that ‘we’, that is, Canadians, use the Queen’s English (and whatever French Quebecers deem correct), not some Bolshevized duck-speak from the gibbering minions of the Liberal Party.

Piers Morgan of the UK Daily Mail has an excellent take on this latest assault on common sense. It seems that Canada is spreading its new reputation around the world as a nation of pompous poseurs and PC-addled cretins.

Rebel Yell

The Hate Speech Fraud

Back in 1960s and before, we had free speech in the West. In that decade, the assault on freedom started in earnest.

When “hate speech” laws were first introduced, we were assured by governments that they would never be used to suppress freedom of speech or the expression of unpopular views. But, because of the pliable and dubious definition of “hate”, critics warned that there would be unintended consequences of these laws, namely, that they would be used by politically motivated groups to suppress criticism and exposure of the truth about various political and religious groups or organizations.

[Under the Criminal Code of Canada, “Hate propaganda” means “any writing, sign or visible representation that advocates or promotes genocide or the communication of which by any person would constitute an offence under section 319.”]

The critics, however, were wrong about one thing: using the laws for the suppression of political dissent was not an unintended consequence, but the primary objective of those laws.

Hate speech was the pretext; censorship, the objective.  All else was deceit from the government.

The amount of “hate propaganda” in Canadian, or any Western, society is vanishingly small, and can be dealt with quite easily under already existing laws concerning incitement to violence, insurrection, threats to public order etc.

The primary objective of the multicultural globalists comprising the Deep State is to destroy Western Civilization, free nation states, and liberal democratic societies by means of mass Third World immigration and the destruction of the fundamental rights and liberties of free citizens.

Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms says:
“Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.”


Since “hate speech” has now expanded to mean anything that can cause offense, always in unlimited supply with some groups, suddenly, all the freedoms you thought you had under the Charter have now essentially evaporated. Now, anyone who feels that his feelings have been hurt is entitled to seek financial compensation using the “Human Rights Commissions” for a variety of claims “including restitution for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect”.

There is no pretense of due process in these kangaroo courts, as the claimant is supported by the commissars and the defendant has to pay all costs and is presumed guilty. Naturally, many groups, particularly Islamic organizations, have used these laws to attempt to suppress criticisms and the truth about Islamic behavior around the world, particularly towards women and gays. In a famous, or infamous, case, the Canadian Islamic Congress filed a complaint against Maclean’s Magazine in 2007. According to Wikipedia…

“The substance of the complaint was that Maclean’s was publishing articles (a column by Mark Steyn) that insulted Muslims. The Congress filed its complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal and the Ontario Human Rights Commission.[13] The Ontario Human Rights Commission ruled that it did not have the jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal dismissed the complaint 10 October 2008.[14] The Canadian Human Rights Commission dismissed the complaint on 26 June 2008.”

But not until Maclean’s and Steyn had spent a good deal of money on lawyers. They should never have had to; the complaint was pure intimidation.

In Britain, a small sign in a living room window saying “Islam out of Britain” was enough to bring a SWAT team police squad to intimidate that person, whereas public demonstrations calling for the murder and beheading of people who do not support Islam,(here) have, to my knowledge, never resulted in any prosecutions. In Rotherham, gangs of Muslims had been raping young girls for a decade while the police did nothing about it. The Labour Party councillors knew all about it, and did nothing. No-one in authority has been held to account for this collusion with crime, and, it is still going on. But, rest assured, the British police have plenty of time and money to intimidate law-abiding members of the British National Party.

The British police are now the Thought Police working for Islam. [Pat Condell has an excellent video on the corruption of the British police.]

This is how far our rights have been eroded by unscrupulous politicians. By giving arbitrary meanings to “hate”, they have legitimized suppression of any view that any of the approved grievance groups do not approve of.

The latest thought control assault is against anyone who disagrees with all the transgender poppycock. You are now required by law to lie. There are two sexes in the human species: that is simply a medical fact. It can not be changed by the decree of some vapid nonentity in Parliament. This is the level of absurdity in our governments.

As for rights and freedoms, freedom of conscience and all that: the Charter is now vaporware.

Rebel Yell

Fake News In Spades

Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept is not someone I usually agree with (and that’s not just because he’s a lefty), but he gets full marks for his latest analysis of the unspeakable tripe that passes for news and analysis in the US Media.

The latest “story” or “bombshell” that CNN, MSNBC, CBS (all the usual suspects) came up with was the claim that proof had been uncovered that the Trump Team had colluded with “the Russians” prior to the election. Fevered and deranged “analysts” discussed the impending end of the Trump presidency, double shots of glee were passed around fuelling the already hysterical atmosphere.

Then, REALITY hit. You know, the real world. That one made up from stars, planets, atoms, people, not the fantasies of CNN hacks. The email that was supposedly going to rewrite history was from a concerned citizen to the Trump Team suggesting that they look at the documents recently released by Wikileaks. Greenwald says…

The email was a smoking gun, in CNN’s extremely excited mind, because it was dated September 4 — 10 days before WikiLeaks began promoting access to those emails online — and thus proved that the Trump family was being offered special, unique access to the DNC archive: likely by WikiLeaks and the Kremlin.


There was just one small problem with this story: It was fundamentally false, in the most embarrassing way possible. Hours after CNN broadcast its story — and then hyped it over and over and over — the Washington Post reported that CNN got the key fact of the story wrong.
The email was not dated September 4, as CNN claimed, but rather September 14 — which means it was sent after WikiLeaks had already published access to the DNC emails online. Thus, rather than offering some sort of special access to Trump, “Michael J. Erickson” was simply some random person from the public encouraging the Trump family to look at the publicly available DNC emails that WikiLeaks — as everyone by then already knew — had publicly promoted. In other words, the email was the exact opposite of what CNN presented it as being.

Read the whole thing here.

The story was passed around the networks (all colluding with one another) with claims that “multiple sources” had confirmed it, blah, blah. Of course, nobody checked the date on the original email. All the “corroborations” were nothing but lies invented to pretend to credibility.

What will drive into the thick heads of the TV apparatchiks of the Democrat Party that their credibility long ago went up in smoke? Who knows? People that deluded need treatment. Nurse Ratched, here’s a job for you.

Back in the days after the fall of communism in Russia, there was a line going around something like this…. “We knew that the Communists were lying about life in the Soviet Union, but we didn’t realize they were telling the truth about life in the West!”

Doesn’t sound so far off now, does it?

Rebel Yell

Random Thoughts of a Fascist Hyena

When the Kissing Had to Stop was a political fiction novel published by the British/American writer Constantine FitzGibbon in 1960, in the darkest days of the Cold War, the days of megatons, throw-weight, missile superiority, and mutual assured destruction; the days of “running dogs of US imperialism”, “bourgeois lackeys”, and, as the Soviets described West Berlin, “that cesspit of fascist revanchism” (definitely my favorite).

At the time, nuclear disarmament was all the rage in progressive circles, and a mass movement in Britain, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), which advocated unilateral nuclear disarmament for Britain, had a good deal of public support. It was a force to be reckoned with in the Labor Party, indeed it almost captured it at one time, and, naturally it was riddled with communists who were pushing the Soviet line. Of course, the Soviet Union was all in favor of unilateral disarmament for Britain!

The plot of When the Kissing Had to Stop runs something like this. There is the usual cast of characters: the ditzy upper class do-gooders, witty actresses, ambitious schemers from the leftist unions, student mobs, and, of course, the caring intellectuals “working for peace”. A left-wing government assumes power and society decays, and Britain has become (as one reviewer said),

“…a diseased island where the police have turned leathery and brutal, juvenile delinquency has flowered into public perversions and the uncontrollable rule of crime. The H-bomb agitators trick the government into defeat. The white-haired do-gooders and the steely climbers take over and, slowly, step by step, surrender honour and the ancient sovereignty to a Russia that plans, with a preternatural wisdom, each step and cynically takes advantage of each high-minded act of stupidity and treachery….It ends in a night time of brutality [as the Soviet military occupies the country] that is made the more appalling by the green fields and the country houses… The charming people are all swept away.” And so on.

The book created a huge furor. Shrieks of protest came from the left, the CND, the unions and even the British Communist Party, who claimed that they, too, were patriotic Britons. FitzGibbon was decried as a right-wing extremist, a reactionary, and a “fascist hyena” by the communists. Far from being insulted by that, he relished it, and threw it back in their faces by publishing, a few years later, a book of short essays entitled Random Thoughts of a Fascist Hyena.

That book contains a highly illuminating chapter, “Unilateralism and All That”, which discusses the leftist reactions to the novel, the nuclear disarmament movement, and takes to task prominent leftists of the day like Betrand Russell and Sir Herbert Read, the self-professed anarchist art critic. It is an analysis of what we call nowadays the progressive mindset, and it is remarkable how little the left has changed in the intervening half century.

CND and others of the left championed the causes of “civil disobedience” to achieve the political goals they could not achieve through the ballot box. Their claim, so familiar to us all, of a “higher moral authority” outweighed any commitments to parties and elections, entitled them to disrupt society and to break the law. FitzGibbon continues…

“…when, in the past century, parliamentary democracy has been destroyed in the great Eurpean nation-states this has usually been done by, and in the interests of, a movement that claims to be above the political parties and to speak for the nation as a whole: Bonapartism in 1851, Bolshevism in 1917, Fascism in 1922, ….I would point out further that these are precisely the claims the nuclear disarmers are repeatedly making for themselves: they are simultaneously above party and yet would wreck the Labour Party to achieve their ends. They are, in fact, a bewegung.

That they are a purely negative bewegung, even more devoid of constructive or falsely constructive ideas than those others, is neither here nor there. The job of mass-movements is always to silence democratic dialogue. Once that has been done, a monologue always follows the transitory cacophony.”

How remarkably similar to the aspiring movements of today, the anti-White racists in Black Lives Matter, the crazed students in Antifa, the street mobs of radical Islam, which, although only minor pustules on the body politic at the moment, could create greater havoc if given the opportunity by our weak and flaccid leaders.

The silencing of democratic dialogue that FitzGibbon refers to in the 1960s is today brought about by the claim that any frank discussion of problems, real problems that is, not the fake problems that so concern the Fake News Media, is “divisive”. Or “hate speech”. Or any other fake word that is solely designed to intimidate and suppress discussion. Moreover, the rather comical and civilized “civil disobedience” of the 60s, which involved little more than sitting down in front of traffic in Trafalgar Square [“Come along, sir, time to go home for a nice cup of tea” as a friendly policeman would say], has transmorgrified into violent mobs assaulting right-wing speakers, shouting down university lecturers, and even shooting Republican Congressmen in the US.

“…The recourse to direct action, even if it merely takes the form of police-baiting, sets a very unpleasant precedent. Any minority may think it knows the right answers and that the majority, and the political parties, are wrong. But to attempt, by force, to compel the acceptance of that view is the first step towards tyranny.”

How far we have come along that dangerous road today. Indeed, many Western governments are aiding the leftist mobs by refusing to enforce the law on our streets and in our colleges. Many universities have been taken over by these aspiring tyrants, particularly in the US, UK and Canada, and so far precious little has been done about it. In Canada, it is now up to brave graduate students and a few professors who still value our educational institutions, to carry the flag. The foppish nonentity of a Prime Minister and his execrable “Liberal” Party remain silent.

Although he was no Orwell, FitzGibbon had a keen sense of what the left was all about. Under the guise of “caring” and “love” lay the all-too-real spite and envy, forces that are so obvious in the left today. In the essay The Future of the Extreme Left, …

“Perhaps never have a group of soi-disant intellectuals been more totally wrong, and been proved more totally wrong, than the British dotty Left as 1962 nears its end….Only the other day, forty of them, all, in theory, members of that Labour Party which the dotty Left has succeeded in castrating—to the immense regret of all clear-thinking democrats—were writing the usual nonsensical screed to The Times, while their ancient mascot, Lord Russell, praises the Chinese for their moderation in invading India. What rubbish will think up next?”

If he were around today, FitzGibbon could have a field day with the disaster that is the current British Labour Party under Corbyn—a reincarnation of the dotty Left of the sixties.

Was it Mark Twain who said, “History may not repeat itself, but at least it rhymes”?

Rebel Yell

A Review of Mein Kampf

Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler’s book describing his early life, wartime experiences and the early development of the National Socialist Movement, continues to be one of the best-selling political books in the world.  In fact, the more it is condemned, the more it seems to fascinate.  Just google ‘sales of Mein Kampf‘.  Rational analysis is in far shorter supply.

In that vein, I ran across an interesting review of Mein Kampf the other day. The reviewer pointed out that prefaces in the English editions of Mein Kampf, published in the 1930s, were quite sympathetic to Hitler, no doubt due to the fact that the Depression-level unemployment in Germany had been greatly reduced, and the nation seemed to be getting on its feet again after its calamitous defeat in the First World War. Also, the 1936 Olympics in Berlin were a huge propaganda victory for the Hitler regime.

It is no use saying that hate, bigotry and madness and whatever else strikes your fancy are the reasons for the success of the fascist movements, and the Hitler movement in particular, in the 20s and 30s, as millions of ordinary, decent people supported them, not only in Germany but throughout Europe and as far away as India. And it is easy to say that Hitler was supported by big business to crush the socialist and communist parties of the time, but that would not have happened had he not “talked a great movement into existence already.”

In the 1920s, there was a multitude of left- and right-wing parties, movements and aspiring demagogues vying for attention and power. Why did Hitler succeed when so many others failed? Our reviewer continues….

“But Hitler could not have succeeded against his many rivals if it had not been for the attraction of his own personality, which one can feel even in the clumsy writing of Mein Kampf, and which is no doubt overwhelming when one hears his speeches…The fact is there is something deeply appealing about him.”

Obviously, some deep psychological need was being addressed, something way beyond mere opinions about political parties or national policies.

“One feels, as with Napoleon, that he is fighting against destiny…”

Indeed, there are numerous references and appeals to Destiny in Mein Kampf and no doubt Hitler felt that was his purpose, either to fulfill it or thwart it.

Prior to the First World War, or the Great War as it was then known, Europe possessed many powerful socialist movements. At times, it seemed that the old imperial orders across Europe were approaching their end. But when war broke out in August 1914, the international socialist parties across Europe folded like straws in the wind before the onrush of Nationalist Awakening. Nation and race have a far deeper psychological appeal than watery internationalism (something our reviewer noted elsewhere) and Hitler and Mussolini rose to power largely because they could recognize this fact and their opponents couldn’t.

But there were nationalist leaders before that never evoked anything like the adulation that was awarded to Hitler and Mussolini. There were also reasons for this….

“…Also he has grasped the falsity of the hedonistic attitude to life. Nearly all western thought since the last war, certainly all “progressive” thought, has assumed tacitly that human beings desire nothing beyond ease, security and the avoidance of pain. In such a view of life there is no room, for instance, for patriotism and the military virtues.”

At least intermittently, people yearn for struggle, self-sacrifice and devotion to a higher cause. Whether one considers these passions desirable is beside the point, they exist and are powerful. Hence…

“…however they are as economic theories, Fascism and Nazism are psychologically far sounder than any hedonistic conception of life. The same is probably true of Stalin’s militarized version of Socialism….whereas Socialism, and even capitalism in a grudging way, have said to people ‘I offer you a good time’, Hitler has said to them ‘I offer you struggle, danger and death,’ and as a result a whole nation flings itself at his feet.”

As if you hadn’t already guessed, “our reviewer” is, of course, George Orwell, probably the most prescient writer on politics in the twentieth century. Orwell’s essay (here) is not really a review of Mein Kampf, but an essay on the psychological basis of Hitler’s appeal to millions of ordinary people. It is an important essay because it is written honestly and without fear, not of Hitler, but without fear of bullying and censorship in his homeland. Orwell was a man possessed of a terrible clarity of vision and a crystalline honesty, qualities entirely lacking in our current world of conformity, cowardice and mediocrity.

It is important to note that his essay was published in England, in March 1940, during a period of wartime censorship, when England was at war with Germany. It is highly unlikely that such an essay, analyzing Hitler’s appeal to the good, as well as the bad, in people, would be able to be published in this country in peacetime, when, supposedly, we are guaranteed freedom of speech.

Rebel Yell

Lindsay Shepherd—Heroine of Freedom

nullYes, heroine, because she’s a real woman, not one of these whining phonies who soak up air time on the Fake News Media these days.

Lindsay Shepherd, a graduate student at Wilfrid Laurier “University”, was hauled before a kangaroo court of left-wing Marxist bullies simply for showing a video of Professor Jordan Peterson as a subject for discussion. Watch it; it will show you what a poisonous cesspit Canadian Academia has become. Far from encouraging the young to tackle the great problems of our age, it is all about submitting to the Marxist commissariat that controls most Canadian universities. The postmodernist drivel that forms the substance of “Gender studies, Black studies, Any-type-of-Weirdo Studies” is passed off as education. It is in fact left-wing propaganda, not any form of academic endeavor.  In the Christie Blatchford article in the National Post, take a look at the photo of one of her advisers, Herbert Pimlott, so typical of the sanctimonious oily worms that dominate the PC establishment.

Lindsay acquitted herself perfectly in this assault on her academic integrity. Congratulations, Lindsay—and double congratulations on your foresight for recording the whole thing so that the wider world can be informed of the rot in our academic institutions. If she hadn’t, they would have lied through their teeth as they always do.

Lindsay is now up there with Professors Jordan Peterson and Janice Fiamengo as torch-bearers of freedom in the darkness of academic conformity and decay. She has done a great service for us all and I know she’s up for whatever the future may throw at her.

If I ever run into her, the drinks are on me.

Rebel Yell