Tory Party Conference Protest 2 October 2022

This was a fun day.

Let’s start with who was there.

Save Our Rights

As promised, there was a small contingent of anti-lockdown/scamdemic protesters from the group Save Our Rights. They are now putting some of their focus on authoritarian bills being passed by the Tory government, and were out there to oppose that.

This guy won the sign of the day award.

The Anti-Brexit Liberals

Yes, the anti-Brexit liberals were there and they did some dancing around too.

A group of people opposing smart motorways.

Jewish people supporting Palestine.

This group was protesting the attempts by the Tories to prevent boycott of Israeli goods.

A group of people protesting against what is going on in Tigray.

The People’s Assembly.

Extinction Rebellion.

A whole cavalcade of left leaning political groups and unions.

There was also an anti-Iranian government protest in a completely different place that converged on Centenary Square later on.

…and me, there to represent the Free Julian Assange message.

The leftist groups were in Victoria Square, and the others were in Centenary Square. (For those who don’t know the geography these are 5min away from each other).

The left-wing protest in Victoria Square was due to kick off at 1pm. The other protesters in Centenary Square were there earlier. The left wingers also went for a march around the city centre before convening on Centenary Square about 3pm.

I was hanging around Centenary Square between about 11.20 and 12.30 (mostly) and was able to get film footage of many of the different groups and their causes. I went to Victoria Square to film there. Just before 1pm, Jacob Rees-Mogg walked right next to the protest where he predictably got heckled. I followed the hecklers round from Victoria Square to Centenary Square and the entrance to the Tory Party Conference. Lots of lovely messages got yelled at Rees-Mogg as you can see from these clips (he is visible in the second video, but not the first).

Rees Mogg Being Heckled.
More footage of Rees-Mogg being Heckled.

By the time I got back to Victoria Square some of the speeches had started. I didn’t bother filming all of these. It was a similar lineup to the Enough is Enough protest of activist trade union types. Instead I was able to get some footage of RMT boss Mick Lynch liaising with his supporters:

I also have lots of footage of the crowd at various different points, there are some bits and pieces of the speeches on them. I also have some footage of Mick Lynch speaking to the crowd, as he was the most high-profile person in attendance.

RIP NHS protesters.

Then there was the march, which went round the city centre and then looped back to Centenary Square.

It was the biggest protest in Birmingham I had seen in a while. For further footage of the events see my youtube/odysee/rumble/bitchute channels.

Enough is Enough Rally Birmingham 1st October 2022

I attended the rally organised by Enough is Enough outside New Street Station in Birmingham.

I was there early in order to leaflet attendees about Julian Assange, and in particular the event in London on the 8th October. Every obscure leftist political party was there handing out literature and selling their papers. The RMT and the other rail unions were there for a picket line alongside the protest.

The turnout was pretty decent to be fair.

The demands of the Enough is Enough movement can be seen here. In summary, it’s standard soft-left fare: higher wages and lowering energy bills, as well as supporting the current rail and postal strikes. It was mostly a mix of fringe leftist groups, striking workers, millennial types with rainbow badges, the usual sort of people who turn up to these kinds of events. As far as I know, there was no presence from Labour Party MPs or councilors.

The speeches were the usual thing you get at these kinds of events. Several union workers stood up and spoke about the strikes, such as the rail strikes and the postal office strikes. A couple of female activists spoke on the issues of foodbanks and rented housing, respectively.

With the speeches and placards at these kinds of events, they are always framed in a particular way that I think is misleading. In other words, they talk about ‘the Tory government’. Now, as is pretty obvious from this website, I hate the current incumbents in Westminster. But the subtext here is that if we had a Labour government – things would be different. No, they would not. Look at Keir Starmer, for god’s sake. The man openly declares that he is ‘Zionist without qualification’ and his Crown Prosecution Service told the Swedish government not to drop the fraudulent ‘rape’ investigation into Julian Assange. If you think he is going to do a damn thing for you, you are naive beyond belief. He might be a bit less brazen than Liz Truss but that is about it.

Furthermore, the word ‘lockdown’ was not mentioned by any of the speakers. Lockdown is obviously a massive cause of the current economic crisis, but the unions were happy to support it as it meant they got furlough money (let’s just be honest here). If you know anything about how economies work, you will know that you can’t disrupt local, national and international supply chains via lockdowns for months on end and have no economic consequences from that. Instead, the left cheered lockdowns and in fact, demanded harder lockdowns, and those of us who pointed out that lockdowns would crash the economy were mocked as ‘valuing the economy over human life’.

I don’t want ordinary people to have to suffer economic hardship, but I also feel like the kind of speeches on display narrow the focus in a way that is unhelpful. One thing that was not mentioned, for example, is the push towards Central Digital Bank Currencies on the part of a multitude of states. Governments around the world are looking to abolish cash as a means to increase control. Why not bring this up? After all, this would hurt vulnerable people the most, such as people who are homeless. The answer is because the debate is corralled into a limited framework in which broader causative factors are not considered, instead being reduced down into the personal evils of ‘the Tory government’.

Or what about the fact that a year or so ago, care home workers were fired if they refused to take an extremely dangerous experimental injection proven to cause strokes, myocarditis and sudden death? Why not bring that up as an example of a monstrous policy pursued by these psychopathic elites? Well, that would contradict the fact that the left has done nothing but push the Covid scam for two years and to be honest, I think a lot of them would rather quietly forget about it. Basically no one was wearing a mask or bothering with any ‘social distancing’ at the protest, so they are clearly not worried about the ‘threat of Covid’ they told us we were monsters for ignoring for two years. In my view the left’s compliance with this scam cannot be forgotten so quickly and so easily. I personally will never forget how us ‘granny killers’, ‘conspiracy theorists’ and ‘anti-vaxxers’ were treated.

I would almost always rather that people protest than don’t protest, but the limitations of these kind of events are abundantly clear unfortunately. The left will not get anywhere until it admits its mistakes and that is something that is very unlikely to happen, as it would require an honesty that does not exist within the milieu, whether from sinister motives (such as sheepdogging) or simply ignorance or ideological blindness.

The Fundamental Misogyny of Transhumanism


Transhumanist ideology has been growing in prominence over the past several years, as global elites (such as Klaus Schwab), businessmen (such as Elon Musk) and those who promote synthetic sex identities (such as Martine Rothblatt), publicly defend such a view. This ideology is the exultation of the anti-human and the unhuman over the human and nature. Transhumanism is at its root a misogynistic ideology that seeks to purge the female, associated with nature in male typologies of the world, from existence.

What is Transhumanism?

Transhumanism can be defined as an ideology that seeks to overcome humanity through augmentation: genetic engineering and a melding with technology. This is pushed by a wide spectrum of players within the elite. Klaus Schwab, the leader of the World Economic Forum, has openly said that he desires “a fusion of our physical, our digital, and our biological identities.” Elon Musk, a businessman who is admired even by some in the alternative media, founded ‘Neuralink’ to create human-brain interfaces. Martine Rothblatt, a man who pretends to be a woman, on the other hand, promotes synthetic sex identities and the creation of ‘billions of sexes’ as a method of overcoming human biology.

The concept is pushed by more than crank billionaires but also by governments. It is well known that the US Defense Advance Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is interested in genetic engineering. The mRNA ‘vaccines’ were another way for governments to advance this agenda, as it has meant that the category of vaccination has been redefined to include genetic engineering products that force the human body to produce the unnatural spike protein. Furthermore, the US government just announced a Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation Executive Order:

For biotechnology and biomanufacturing to help us achieve our societal goals, the United States needs to invest in foundational scientific capabilities. We need to develop genetic engineering technologies and techniques to be able to write circuitry for cells and predictably program biology in the same way in which we write software and program computers; unlock the power of biological data, including through computing tools and artificial intelligence; and advance the science of scale‑up production while reducing the obstacles for commercialization so that innovative technologies and products can reach markets faster.

White House

A Misogynist Driver of Transhumanism: Synthetic Sex Identities

In the transhumanist ideology/pathology, man conquers nature so extensively that he is able to subvert/overcome even his own nature. So how does transhumanism link to misogyny? At first, the link doesn’t seem obvious, as couldn’t woman adopt transhumanism just as much as men could? In fact, there are some female thinkers who have advocated aspects of transhumanism.

However, when we look under the hood of transhumanism, we see that it is in fact a deeply misogynist ideology. I will start by briefly outlining the fact that the concept of synthetic sex identities is being used to drive transhumanism, by psychopathic ideologists such as Martine Rothblatt. Rothblatt is a pharmaceutical CEO and cultist, who started his own religion, the Terasem movement, to push transhumanism. As detailed by Jennifer Bilek, Rothblatt is one of the key ideologists driving forward these two concepts. In his book From Transgender to Transhuman, Rothblatt claims that “choosing one’s gender is merely an important subset of choosing one’s form.The man even made a ‘robot’ of his wife, Bina48, the ultimate representation of Andrea Dworkin’s ‘Men Possessing Women‘.

This ideology – that biological sex is something to be muddied and ultimately transcended – is misogynistic because it seeks to destroy the category of woman. While it seeks to destroy sex categories altogether, there is much more emphasis on the driver of destroying the word woman and making it into a meaningless term that anyone can opt into or out of. For example, the mantra ‘trans women are women’ is repeated much more often than ‘trans men are men’. The inclusion of males in, for example, female sport, is driven much more intently than its opposite. This destruction of the concept of womanhood is then used to drive transhumanism.

Womb Envy and the War on Mother Nature

Death as part of what makes the regenerative process of life possible seems to have escaped these predominantly male transhumanists. They seem inordinately focused on colonizing the reproductive capacities of females for their own purposes, helping to institutionalize the reduction of our half of humanity to period havers, menstruators, chestfeedersbodies with vaginas, and non-men in an effort to dehumanize women toward this colonization process.

Jennifer Bilek

It is a basic fact of biological reality that only females can gestate life and give birth. This, of course, despite the attempts to muddy the waters, applies as much to human beings as all other species that reproduce sexually. This fact makes males inherently reliant on females to reproduce and create life. This fact has driven patriarchal regimes to control women, in order to exert power over their reproductive capacity and to ensure the preservation of their male lineage. Misogynist men seek to assert this control to this day, although the mechanisms of this control are more diffuse than when human beings were living under the Divine Right of Kings.

Now we have a new form of misogynist ideology: the idea of overcoming womanhood entirely via transhumanism. Patriarchal constructions of reality see man as associated with reason and woman as associated with nature. Transhumanist man seeks to use reason to create life, something previously only given by nature, and by this method finally defeat their reliance upon nature and thus upon woman.

This is the sort of insanity that Rothblatt envisages for his future world.

(1) A conscious analog of a person may be created by combining sufficiently detailed data about the person (a “mindfile”) using future consciousness software (“mindware”),


(2) that such a conscious analog can be downloaded into a biological or nanotechnological body to provide life experiences comparable to those of a typically birthed human.


Transhumanism considers the ideal person is one that has overcome biology. This means overcoming the biological reality that only women can create life, to allow men to be able to do so via artificial intelligence.

‘Vaccine’ Side Effect Narrative Management and the Mainstream Media


Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ side effects are extremely common. According to Pfizer’s own documentation, there is a 9-page list of possible side effects of the mRNA jabs. The state, media, and international actors, however, were determined to get the entire population jabbed. Some of this involved direct coercion, such as sacking care home workers and threatening to sack NHS staff. However, a large part of convincing people to get ‘vaccinated’ for Covid relied on the mainstream media, and in particular how that media dealt with claims of side effects from the Covid jabs.

The Function of the Media

Despite various protestations from the media that their job is to present the truth and hold the establishment to account, in reality they act as a crucial part of that establishment. Their role is to present narratives that support the establishment in a palatable way, and to keep any debate within very narrow grounds (the territory of what Ryan Cristian has dubbed the ‘two party illusion’). The mainstream media’s compliance with government narratives is ensured in multiple ways, including overlap of interests, financial incentives via advertising, cultural commonality and plain laziness (such as it being easy to spout government press releases as ‘news’). In the last analysis, it can also be maintained through state force – witness what happened to Julian Assange when he released information about US war crimes.

The Beginning of the Jab Rollout

The UK mainstream media – with very few exceptions (Peter Hitchens is the only example that comes to mind) – backed lockdowns from Day 1, and in fact pushed for harder and longer lockdowns. Lockdown sceptics were smeared as conspiracy theorists and mocked. But this was only a taste of what was to come with the miracle jab.

The idea of a vaccine has always been promoted by some people as the ultimate way out of lockdowns. Initially, the government itself did not put as much emphasis on ‘vaccination’ as the way out of lockdowns, given that they were still pretending lockdown would be only short term. This narrative became more and more important as lockdowns dragged on, with the government and media trying to encourage compliance with the lockdowns by urging that we would soon have the ‘vaccine’ and give it to enough people and that the nightmare would then be over.

The media portrayed the ‘race for the vaccine’ in a positive way, as the hero pharmaceutical companies that were going to save us from the deadly plague. Any problems, such as a case of transverse myelitis during the Oxford/AstraZeneca ‘vaccine’ trial, were quickly smoothed over and forgotten about. The media was happy to repeat claims from the manufacturers of the injections. This BBC article, while it does suggest in a mealy-mouthed way that the data is limited further down the article, it does say that it is safe and likely to be highly effective (referring to the Pfizer product).

With the availability of the jab, this started to go into overdrive. The first man to be given the jab in the UK outside of clinical trials was called William Shakespeare. This was manufactured and used in order to give a positive view of the ‘vaccine’. While a BBC article contained many puns on Shakespeare works, the actual purpose of this propaganda was to associate the ‘vaccine’ with one of the greatest British figures in history. The respect that a large number of British people have for Shakespeare is subconsciously transferred to the jab by this manipulation (or at least, that is the intention). There are also further attempts to use patriotic ideas as a means to promote the jab, in particular by bragging about the British ‘vaccine success’ compared to the continent, as Britain had given the vaccine to many more people early on in the rollout.

Drips and Drabs: The Beginning of the Catastrophe

Despite the constant praise for the jabs, the extreme danger of these injections was clear to anyone paying attention very quickly. Testimony quickly popped up online alleging mass death in care homes after the jabs. Vaccine injury stories began to pop up on TikTok, Facebook and Twitter from January 2021, for example testimony from Shawn Skelton, Angelia Desselle and Kristi Simmonds, interviewed by Del Bigtree back in April 2021. Death and injury reports in the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) began to skyrocket early on in the rollout. In other words, anyone paying attention could figure out these jabs were extremely dangerous by February 2021.

How did the media deal with these reports of side effects from these novel mRNA injections? The most obvious response is to stonewall all cases of major negative side effects, and indeed we do see aspects of this. If I search on google (as this is what non-conspiracy theorists are likely to be using) for ‘covid 19 vaccine side effects’, I find standard pages from the NHS downplaying the risks of the jab.

Holding Back the Flood?: The Case of the Astra Zeneca Blood Clots

However, a strategy of denying all side effects (other than the minor ones like a sore arm) was not credible. Instead, the mainstream media employed a strategy well known in the media: to acknowledge the critique but focus down on a very small aspect in order to whitewash the whole.

This technique of narrative management was identified by Chomsky and Herman in their famous work, Manufacturing Consent. They give an example from the Vietnam War. When criticism of the war in 1960s America began to become more prominent, the media could not completely ignore the crimes being committed against the Vietnamese people. So, the media focused in on one atrocity that took place during the war, the massacre carried out at My Lai by American soldiers. The point of the media drawing so much attention to this crime was to isolate it from the rest of the war, to make it into an exceptional event. This served to whitewash the fact that the complete destruction of Vietnamese villages and murder and rape of civilians were standard American practice.

It is this form of narrative management that we first observe when the reports of adverse events start to drip out over the first few months of the rollout. They picked one specific side effect – the blood clots reported after the AstraZeneca jab – and used that to obscure all of the other side effects being reported after both types of ‘vaccine’ (the beginning of the rollout in the UK was AstraZeneca and Pfizer, with some Moderna added later). They looked only at the risk of this one side effect, declared it to be rare, and then claimed based on this that the ‘vaccines’ were safe. Simply ignoring all claims of side effects would cause them to lose credibility, while acknowledgement of this one point allowed them to maintain credibility and make it look as if they are allowing some degree of criticism and debate. We must remember that this period in time was crucial, as it was important to the establishment to get as many people to take the jab as possible, and at this point, only older age groups had taken the ‘vaccine’.

As such, reports such as the following cropped up in the mainstream media:

Unusual blood clots in the brain have been detected in a handful of people after they were injected with the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. […]

The organisation [European Medicines Agency] has to figure out whether the reported clots are a side-effect or a coincidence that would have happened naturally. This is incredibly hard when dealing with rare events. If, on the other hand, one in every 10,000 people was having serious blood clots then the answer would be obvious.


The British Government’s website contains a statement addressing the AstraZeneca jab from the 7th April 2021:

There have been reports of an extremely rare adverse event of concurrent thrombosis (blood clots) and thrombocytopenia (low platelet count) following vaccination with the first dose of AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222). There has been no signal for thrombosis/thrombocytopenia following receipt of other COVID-19 vaccines approved for use in the UK (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna).

Note the declaration that this side effect has not been observed with the Pfizer or Moderna ‘vaccines’ – which is false. It is however convenient, as it allows the establishment to scapegoat the AstraZeneca jab for all problems, while pushing the Pfizer and Moderna.

The media also went as far as to publish testimonies of those injured by Vaccine Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia, while stressing the rarity of such a side effect:

Osteopath Joseph Robinson, 32, suffered brain damage from a rare blood clot after his first AstraZeneca dose in February.

He had to quit work after VITT – vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia – left him with memory loss and speech and language impairments.

Today’s Reality: Sudden Adult Death Syndrome

The media strategies worked on the vast majority of people. Official data on the number of people in the UK who took a Covid jab can be debated, with conflicting numbers from different sources, as well as some exaggeration of numbers jabbed for propaganda purposes. However, it is clear that the majority of people took at least the first 2 doses of the covid jabs.

Nowadays, we have a different type of media propaganda, focusing on reassuring the minds of people who have taken the jabs that it was the right decision. No one is trying to convince the unvaccinated with rational argument at this point – if they ever were. Meanwhile, a massive amount of unexplained death is happening all across the world. Mark Crispin Miller on Substack has been chronicling the masses of people who are now ‘dying suddenly’, often with no cause of death mentioned in the news coverage. These include people of all ages, races and a large number of different countries.

The media, on the other hand, is trying to ignore this mass death as much as possible, while also trying to normalise random heart attacks and dropping dead. The ‘health story’ has been a long-term fixture of the British media – with the fact that the Daily Mail always runs stories about everything causing cancer being a running joke. (That said, in retrospect, given how toxic everything is perhaps they had a point). Now, these often-bizarre health stories are focusing on heart attacks, with a number complied here by Naked Emperor:

BBC – Devoted football fans experience ‘dangerous’ levels of stress

Express – Heart attack: Does skipping breakfast increase your risk?

Daily Mail – Expert warns that shovelling snow can be a deadly way to discover underlying cardiovascular conditions as straining the heart with physical activity could cause sudden death

Of course, none of these articles mention the ‘vaccine’ even though the British government admit that the jabs can cause heart issues.

Most likely these stories are being published because more heart attacks are being observed by ordinary people in their lives and it serves to associate the heart attack with anything other than the jab. Even if the reader thinks these stories are stupid, they may still have a subconscious effect somewhere. (Though, sometimes, these stories are so idiotic that I wonder if they almost want you to know subconsciously what has been done to you – if you took the jab – and for you to live in terror of dropping dead any minute.)

The media are also playing a role in normalising ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ (SADS) meaning when an adult suddenly dies with no clear cause of death. A large number of these deaths are most likely jab induced. As Mark Crispin Miller has observed in his series, no cause of death being listed is becoming much more common in death articles in the mainstream media. The media is currently running generic articles on SADS, claiming that people should get their heart looked at if they are at risk:

People aged under 40 are being urged to have their hearts checked because they may potentially be at risk of Sudden Adult Death Syndrome. 

The syndrome, known as SADS, has been fatal for all kinds of people regardless of whether they maintain a fit and healthy lifestyle.

Daily Mail


The media serves as an important way to manage the narrative around the Covid-19 ‘vaccines’: both in order to encourage uptake, deflect from side effects and normalise the carnage being caused by these extremely dangerous products.

Validation of the Impossible: The Trans Cult and the Glorification of Rape by Deception


Transgender activists believe that it is ethical, and should be legal, to lie about your biological sex when engaging in a sexual act with someone. In fact, some transgender activists openly advocate for this kind of dishonesty. This article will discuss the organisations looking to legalise rape by deception and the motivations behind the desire to lie about one’s biological sex in sexual interactions.

Rape by Deception

Currently, rape by deception is a criminal offense under British law. Usually, this applies to cases where people do not disclose a sexually transmitted disease before intercourse.

While there are limits on what can be classed as rape by deception, deception about biological sex can qualify as such:

When considering the issue of consent as part of the evidential stage of the Full Code Test prosecutors should be aware that the Court of Appeal in Justine McNally v R [2013] EWCA Crim 1051 determined that “deception as to gender can vitiate consent” (paragraph 27).

CPS guidelines

There is thus a hypothetical possible basis in British law for a transgender-identified individual to be prosecuted in a case where they lied about their biological sex, even though the cited guidelines go out of their way to be as nice to the transgender-identified as possible:

Whether there has been deception as to gender will require very careful consideration of all the surrounding circumstances including:

How the suspect perceives his/her gender;

What steps, if any, he/she has taken to live as his/her chosen identity; and

What steps, if any, he/she has taken to acquire a new gender status.

Transgender activist organisations are not happy about this precedent. Next, we will look at some of the arguments they have made regarding this issue.


Stonewall used to be a UK charity that focused on equal rights for lesbian, gay and bisexual people, and was founded to tackle homophobia. Since 2015, it has become an organisation solely devoted to transgenderism and so called ‘trans rights’, which can be better conceptualised as institutionalising compelled speech and belief and male domination over women.

So what do they have to say about rape by deception? In a document called ‘A Vision for Change: Acceptance without Exception for Trans People’ Stonewall lays out the legal changes they would like to make. Along with well-known bugbears, such as the fact that the Gender Recognition Act doesn’t allow anyone to self-identify at will, it also includes laws on sex by deception. Stonewall state:

Recent ‘sex by deception’ cases involving trans people and gender identity issues have revealed an alarming lack of clarity around trans people’s rights and obligations to disclose or not disclose their trans history to their sexual partners. These cases demonstrate that it is possible for non-disclosure of a person’s trans status to impair the validity of consent. This leaves a great many trans individuals at risk of prosecution for a criminal offence. It is, however, still unclear as to whether the courts regard this to be the case for a trans person who has undergone medical transition, and it is further greyed by whether or not an individual can be defined as trans, based on their appearance, by the court. Clarity is urgently needed.

Stonewall’s solution is:

Stonewall will support calls for a judicial review to clarify prosecution policy and guidance, and amend it where necessary with due regard to the trans person’s right to privacy

In other words, Stonewall believes that it is a ‘right’ to conceal your biological sex from someone that you are having sex with. They use the language ‘transgender history’ as if it is possible for human beings to change sex.


Cliniq is another transgender organisation, that claims to be a “wellbeing service for all trans people, partners and friends”. What do they have to say about rape by deception? Well, a few years ago they published a document called Cruising: A Trans Guy’s Guide to the Gay Sex Scene. While they did remove this document from their website, seemly because of the scrutiny some gay men were subjecting it to, it survives in the Wayback Machine.

The insanity in this document begins with dehumanising definitions, including ‘front hole’ for vagina and using the term ‘cock’ to refer to arm skin stitched to the crotch of a woman as well as the actual male organ.

The document acknowledges that gay male saunas do not want women present, but of course, advocate lying rather than staying out of gay male spaces:

Saunas and clubs often have a men only policy. Some are formally enforced and neither welcome or understand trans guys. Some guys choose to go stealth if it is possible for them.

Having got into these saunas by deception, the document also states that biological sex does not have to be disclosed when participating in sex acts:

Deciding if and when to tell people you are trans can be tricky. Some guys might not tell their sex partners. Others might tell them straight away. Some of us might not have a choice based on our identity, presentation or stage of transition. It helps to work out what feels right for you.

So this is another transgender organisation advocating rape by deception.

The Transgender Fantasy

It isn’t surprising that some transactivist groups and individuals would advocate for allowing rape by deception. Fundamentally, transgender ideology is based on the fantasy that one can be, or become, the opposite sex. This fantasy, in order to be maintained, requires deception. Transgender-identified individuals are seeking to deceive the entire world about their sex. They call this concept ‘passing’. In reality, the idea of ‘passing’ is largely a mirage due to the large number of differences between male and female bodies. Nevertheless, ‘passing’ remains the aim of transgenderism, and these activists do believe that it is possible. Trans ideologists will say things like “Trans women were always using women’s toilets, but you just couldn’t tell that they were trans”, thus implying the ‘passing trans woman’ exists.

The desire for ‘passing’ is because it gives the trans activist what they really want, which is validation. Every time the ‘gender identity’ of a transgender-identifying individual is ‘affirmed’ by using the ‘correct’ pronoun, this is validating (and in the case of autogynephiles, sexually stimulating).

The ultimate transgender fantasy is the idea that one can ‘pass’ as the opposite sex not just in social situations where clothes can be used to hide reality, but in the bedroom. A short clip from trans-identified male Samantha Lux sums up the desire for validation by sexual deception (It’s worth noting that Lux is not some obscure figure but has well over 600,000 subscribers and is known for getting people cancelled who criticise him). In the clip, which features some obnoxious music in the background, Samantha shakes his head at the idea of ‘thousands of guys who know I’m trans trying to get with me’ but nods his head to the idea of ‘tricking straight men into being with me’. In other words, Lux has little sexual interest in people who know that he is a male claiming to be a woman but are nevertheless sexually attracted to him. Instead, he is interested in deceiving straight men into sex, because it ‘validates his identity’ as a woman.


There is a concerted campaign to undermine sexual consent by trans activists. This is all in the name of validation for their transgender identification, as being able to trick someone in the bedroom is the ultimate affirmation that one is the opposite sex.

What’s Going on in Ukraine? Part 4: The Corona Connection (2)


The previous parts of this series have discussed the Western and Russian narratives surrounding the conflict in Ukraine. The Western narrative, as usual, is full of untruths about the situation in Ukraine, ignoring intervention by the West and pretending that the bombing of civilians in Donbass doesn’t exist. The Russian narrative is more in line with reality as it acknowledges Western aggression and the suffering of people in the Donbass. However, the Russian government’s promotion of the Official Covid Narrative, including lockdowns and forced ‘vaccinations’, mean scepticism of the Russian government is warranted. This situation has led people to speculate about the role of orchestration in the Ukraine conflict.

The Model Before the Official Covid Narrative

One of the key questions relating to the current situation in Ukraine is how we assess foreign policy – and particularly questions of international collusion – in the wake of the Covid 19 scam. Prior to Covid 19 it was accurate to frame foreign policy around Western imperialism and resistance to that imperialism as the model. Imperialist invasions took place in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan, imperialist subversion in Syria, imperialist occupation in Palestine, and imperialist coups in Honduras and Bolivia. All of these events had significant economic and resource gains for Western elites. On the other hand, independent minded governments resisted this subversion. This included Islamic governments (like Iran), right wing governments (like Russia), secular Arab governments (like Iraq or Syria) and left wing governments (like Cuba, Venezuela, or Bolivia).

In particular, once Russia began to regain some economic and military strength after the disaster of the 1990s, they began to slowly push back against the West. It is worth noting, however, that Putin’s views have become more hostile to the West over time and he did not begin his tenure as implacably anti-Western. For example, in a New York Times interview in 2003, Putin expressed his desire for good relations with the US, while considering the war in Iraq as an error:

I have already mentioned strategic stability. The United States and Russia remain the strongest nuclear powers. Our interests in the sphere of fighting radicalism and terrorism coincide, and we are very much concerned about the radicalisation of certain countries and certain regions. Our common interest lies in counteracting one of the main threats of the 21st century – proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.


You know our attitude toward the war in Iraq; I have made it public. I said from the very beginning and still believe that it was a mistake. This is why there is no surprise for us about the situation that has taken shape because we foresaw the development of the situation there just exactly as it is developing now. First of all, this has to do with the political aspect, the collapse of the statehood, as you correctly mentioned. How could one imagine a different course of events in case the Saddam Hussain regime is dismantled? Of course, statehood is destroyed. How can it be otherwise? But what do the special services have to do with it?

Vladimir Putin

Putin became more hostile as the lack of cooperation from the West and the disdain for Russian interests became more and more obvious with the expansion of NATO and the undermining of the government of Bashar Al Assad, a long time Russian ally. Russia militarily intervened in Syria (with the permission of the Syrian government) to fight the Western supported terrorist groups such as ISIS, Al Nusra and the White Helmets.

Collusion and Competition?

However, both sides complying with the Covid Narrative raises questions about this model of geopolitical competition. The fact is that almost all countries (excluding Belarus, Sweden, and some African countries whose leaders died in mysterious circumstances) went along with lockdowns and all Western countries, Russia and China supported the jabs. The question at issue here is the idea of global conspiracy in the creation of a fake pandemic in order to institute a global control grid of digital IDs, transhumanism, and full spectrum authoritarian control, broadly called ‘The Great Reset’.

The fact that the vast majority of countries complied with these anti -health directives in the name of health has to arouse suspicion. If a few countries had done lockdowns, or many countries had done them but for a short period, incompetence would seem a more plausible explanation, but the sheet length of the life destroying lockdowns combined with sinister legislation suggests the possibility of conspiracy.

In reality, there is evidence that both phenomena exist simultaneously: geopolitical maneuvering is real, but so is a push towards some sort of ‘great reset’ type scenario among certain elite groups. The best model to adopt to understand the current scenario is one in which countries are competing within themselves (largely the West, Russia and China) while all supporting some aspects of a digital control grid. Groups like the World Economic Forum have relevance within this matrix, as they drive an ideological agenda forward and facilitate liaison between different elites (Davos, etc.).

The best analogy I can think of is this: In the 19th century, all the major European states (France, Germany, Britain et al.) supported the concept of having colonies. However, they all competed over who had the most colonies and therefore the most access to natural resources, cheap labour etc. Sometimes these countries would come together and make agreements regulating colonialism (a form of collusion) but they would also try to undermine each other’s imperial power. In this analogy the belief in colonies and the collusion would equal agreeing on the great reset and colluding at meetings such as Davos, whereas the competition plays out in areas such as Ukraine and Syria for dominance by different powers.

Relevance of Imperialism

Only seeing one side of the coin as real leads to mistakes in analysis. Ultimately I don’t think all geopolitical competition has disappeared with the Covid narrative, regardless of the elements of bizarre international agreement on the issue. Different interests of different countries – such as economic or geostrategic – still function as a relevant mode of analysis.

The Western (that is, US and its lackey countries such as the UK, etc) imperialist drive inevitably brings it into conflict with other countries. The imperialist nature of the West – that is, their need and ability to exploit peripheral countries – is not something that can be arbitrarily abolished as it evolved out of the capitalist system and the dominance of these powers over that system. In fact, there is ample evidence of the continuation of imperialist warfare and exploitation despite ‘Covid-19’ (see my previous article on ‘Mass Murder ‘In The Middle of a Deadly Pandemic”).

One of the countries it must come into conflict with is Russia, despite the similarities in domestic policy between the two powers when it comes to Covid 19. Despite some claims to the contrary, Russia is not an imperialist power, and it is misleading to portray it as such just because it invaded Ukraine. Just because one country militarily intervenes in another does not automatically make that intervention ‘imperialist’ unless you want to argue absurdities such as Vietnam being an imperialist power (as they invaded Cambodia in the 1970s). Russia is not economically powerful enough to compete as an imperialist state and it does not have masses of finance capital it can use to exploit other countries through neocolonialism. Instead, it is a middling country that finds itself in conflict with the West because they constantly threaten Russia’s borders.

These conflicting interests remain real and cannot be ignored as a driver of Western and Russian actions. The fact that these conflicting interests exist means that theories of direct collusion (such as collusion to create a distraction in Ukraine, for example) are less plausible unless there is direct evidence. There is enough reason for the two powers to compete without having to use direct collusion as an explanation.

Relevance of Global Elites

While we should be careful in attributing every action during the ‘Covid-19 pandemic’ to conspiracy, there is some evidence for that position. The fact that the US government ran a pandemic exercise called Event 201 “which predicted a global pandemic caused by a novel Coronavirus just months before the Covid-19 outbreak” – is suspicious. (Interestingly, there was also a Monkeypox simulation exercise). Ultimately I find it difficult to explain the Covid-19 scam through opportunism alone, given the fact that a large number of states went along with it for such a long period of time. Particularly the clear transhumanist drive present within all aspects of the Covid agenda shows a unified elite ideology being driven by individuals like Klaus Schwab, leader of the World Economic Forum.

Organisations like The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum are using Covid-19 to push sinister global agendas. In fact, this barely qualifies as a ‘conspiracy’ since they are open about the fact that this is what they are doing (Schwab literally wrote a book called ‘The Great Reset’, how much more open do you want?). Bill Gates clearly wants to use the ‘pandemic’ to push vaccines, one of his most notable interests, and there is also evidence he has an interest in depopulation. Schwab argues for a transhumanist future under the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution‘, where human beings meld with technology and where genetic editing is normalised. Covid-19 is considered a method to bring about this future. Groups like the WEF and BMGF infiltrate and fund initiatives within states (for example, the WEF uses the Young Global Leaders program to groom people into its ideology, whereas the BMGF uses money to fund initiatives it supports).

The weaknesses of focusing mainly on these organisations is that they do not have direct methods of enforcement (militaries, police forces, etc.) that can force the population to obey. Only states have those. States have to have some interest in imposition of the policies also to ensure their implementation. So what we have, in my view, is a system based on mutual overlapping interests. This includes between governments, global institutions (WHO, WEF, BMGF etc) and big corporations such as Big Pharma, Big Tech and the arms companies. These mutual overlapping interests involve means by which to control the population (vaccine passports, Digital ID’s, lockdowns, smart cities, technocracy) as well as transhumanism (the US and UK governments are interested in ‘human augmentation’), and of course the big corporations benefit through increased profit and mandated markets for their products.


There are both circles of overlapping and competing interests when it comes to understanding the operations of the modern world and neither can be dismissed out of hand as an influence on the behaviour of states. Ultimately Russia’s behaviour in Ukraine can be explained via traditional geopolitical motives. However elites in most countries (including Russia) have an interest in the transhumanist digital control matrix being pushed by such elites. Contra to some claims in the independent media, I see no evidence that Russia is opposed to the fundamentals of transhumanist technocracy.

Roe vs Wade & Abortion Rights Protest 26th June 2022

There was a protest called at short notice after the overturning of the Roe vs. Wade ruling in the US. For clarity, the overturning of Roe vs. Wade doesn’t make abortion illegal, it means it isn’t a constitutional right. It will be banned in all the hardcore conservative states but will remain legal in the liberal states.

Bad Takes from Right Wing Men

In the wake of this ruling there have been a billion bad takes on Twitter from pro-life men, quite a few of whom I follow due to their anti-lockdown and anti-forced jab stance. Most of them are making the argument that it’s people’s fault (primarily women, obviously) for having constant promiscuous sex with a bunch of unknown partners.

This of course completely ignores the reality of rapists and abusive men who will use sabotaging birth control as a means of coercive control over their partners. It also ignores the fact that the ‘young people are going around shagging lots of different people’ is more of a media constructed reality than actual fact. The highly sexualised culture and 24/7 access to violent, misogynist pornography makes the current generations such as millennials look as if they are having loads of sex. Surveys however do not back up that contention, instead they show that millennials have less sex than previous generations. Of course I’m not claiming there is nobody doing this before someone steams in with the strawman.

Then of course, there is the classic of men going around calling pregnancy an inconvenience. Note guys: if it can literally kill you, it doesn’t qualify as an inconvenience.

Supporting or Opposing ‘The Great Reset’?

People are arguing whether this supports the current agenda which we could broadly called ‘The Great Reset’. I use this term for convenience, broadly meaning the pushing of digital identity and transhumanism. Some people are arguing that the ruling is against the great reset because it opposes the depopulation agenda, others because it leads to more decentralisation (as it allows states to decide on abortion and not the federal government).

I’m not really convinced by such arguments for a few reasons. I acknowledge that depopulation is a goal of some members of the elite and that there is elite interest in the topic. For example, Bill Gates’ famous claims:

If we do a really great job on new vaccines, healthcare, reproductive health services, we could perhaps lower [projected population growth] by 10-15%…

Bill Gates

[Note: contrary to ‘fact checker’ claims, I am not making any claim in this particular argument other than that Bill Gates wants population growth to decrease and that he has an interest in these kinds of topics].

There are of course also examples of deliberate sterilisation policies that have been carried out by certain governments, examples of which are too numerous to list. However these efforts have generally been targeted at certain groups especially racial minorities and disabled people so they would not qualify as a full on depopulation plan.

There is also the new evidence coming out about sperm quality and the Covid 19 jabs which has been widely publicised on outlets such as Children’s Health Defense and Substack. Igor Chudov has also highlighted declines in birth rates after the jab rollout. However whether this is a depopulation plan is not proven. There are other explanations – for example that they were determined to push this product obsessively for other reasons (vaccine passports and other control measures) and because it wasn’t tested properly it had this effect.

The downsides to any depopulation argument occur when we look at things from a country based level. A country will be in a weak position if it has a low military/working age population compared to its elderly population. This has been a significant problem in countries such as Russia. Despite some claims to the contrary which completely dismiss the idea of geopolitics, different countries do have different interests despite agreement on the Covid Narrative. This can be seen in the current situation in Ukraine. This would provide an incentive for any country to avoid going along with a deliberate plan. (Depopulation arguments probably deserve their own post).

I can understand a ruling towards decentralisation being seen as a positive but there are difficulties here as well. I don’t know why we would consider state governments any less corrupt than federal to be honest.

It seems much more likely that this ruling will fit in well with what the psychopaths want to achieve. The actual original ruling in Roe vs. Wade used logic that is not intuitive:

the Court held that a set of Texas statutes criminalizing abortion in most instances violated a woman’s constitutional right of privacy, which it found to be implicit in the liberty guarantee of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

Overturning a privacy rights based ruling doesn’t seem like a good thing.

I am not a lawyer and I don’t have a particular expertise in assessing legal arguments but this article seems worthy of note.

The state in which Jessica lives prohibits and criminalizes abortion for any reason, defining a fertilized egg as a person. Jessica tells her friends and family that she had a miscarriage at 11 weeks of pregnancy. One of her roommates doesn’t believe her and reports her to the local police for having had an abortion.

The local police investigate Jessica for what they believe is a possible violation of the state’s law criminalizing abortion. Based on the initial investigation, police officers determine that Jessica wanted to terminate her pregnancy and was trying to find the “abortion drug.” They obtain a warrant to search her phone. On her phone, they discover evidence that she searched for information about abortion and purchased mifepristone and misoprostol. These drugs can cause an abortion, but they are also used to help women complete the process of miscarriage. They also find evidence of when she had her last period on a period-tracking app, which further substantiates that she was pregnant for 11 weeks. The evidence obtained from Jessica’s phone is used to prosecute her for violating the state’s law criminalizing abortion.

There is also the question of creating divisions within the country and trying to undermine any possible unity, which could be a motive. As well as a further pile on to the Covid/Ukraine/Monkeypox/God-knows-what narrative mixer we are currently part of in 2022.

Protest Footage

Footage is available from this protest on my Youtube and Bitchute accounts. The protest was a short event, about 45 minutes long, with a pretty good turnout for a short notice protest. I have footage of a few of the speeches on the channel about abortion rights in Latin America, disability and abortion and the strategy being pursued by anti-abortion activists.

Postscript: An Actual Solution

Youtube content producer A Slightly Twisted Female posted the below on her channel for a new project that she will be producing:

Roe v. Wade has been overturned.

As such, I will now turn my attention towards developing a menstrual extraction protocol which would allow women to safely, and inexpensively, extract menstrual contents of their uterus. This is an old midwifery technique that has been used to traditional caregivers since time immemorial, and it’s time to return this wisdom back to women, where it belongs.

I will be reaching out to my contacts of traditional midwives, particularly midwives who serve the Amish and Mennonite communities local to my area in order to develop a protocol for menstrual extraction that can be shared with women across the globe.

Please please consider helping to support my mission by sending a donation so I can develop this protocol for vulnerable women.

I am posting this here to give this project more amplification as it is the kind of solution that we should be supporting – reliance on ourselves and not big pharma and returning to these forms of traditional knowledge that have been taken away from women. In fact we need this kind of knowledge to spread for things other than just this one issue.

Leicester Protest With John O’Looney: 4th June 2022

I saw this protest advertised on the Stand Up X website and thought I’d go being as Leicester isn’t far away and there were actually trains running. The main focus of this protest was a 20 minute or so speech from John O’Looney.

For anyone who is not familiar with John O’Looney, though I assume most readers are, he is an undertaker who came to question the Covid Narrative through his work. Basically, his main observations are as such:

  • O’Looney states he observed no increase in overall death in 2020 while we were allegedly ‘in the middle of a deadly pandemic’;
  • He also states he saw a massive increase in death for the first 12 weeks of 2021 (i.e. during the beginning of the Covid 19 jab rollout).

He did an interview which was posted on Bitchute and got a large amount of views which outlined his perspective as an undertaker. It was originally published in September 2021.

It was a small protest in Leicester city centre, at the ‘Clock Tower’. 100-150 people standing around in a circle in the square. I recognised some attendees from Birmingham protests I have been to before.

This was the only anti-covid narrative protest I have been to where there was quite a lot of people disagreeing with the protesters. There were quite a few people who shouted stuff like ‘follow the science’ and ‘you want to kill people’ at the protest. Yes those literal actual tropes. Some guy even ripped up a copy of ‘The Light’ Paper. There were some other people who were more willing to take the leaflets and papers. Someone else engaged one of the protesters on the topic of collapsing athletes, due to the below sign:

There were some overlap in attendees and speakers with the Birmingham and Wolverhampton protests I previously attended.

If you want to watch footage from the protest, it is uploaded on my Youtube and Bitchute accounts, including the full speech by John O’Looney.

The Psychological Quirks of Complicity Theorists

R. M. Allen, 2022


Given the high level of compliance with official narratives advocated by the state and the mainstream media, it is worth analysing the psychological basis for such beliefs. There are several reasons why people may be psychologically prone to believing in these complicity theories. These fall under the categories of economic motivations, a desire to avoid cognitive dissonance, and high levels of mainstream media consumption.


According to polling data, 25% of Americans believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman in the assassination of President Kennedy (Jensen, 2013). Furthermore, 16% of Americans believe that elite pedophile Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide (Shamsian, 2019). These are examples of complicity theories – “a theory that unquestionably accepts the standard explanation for an event offered by the political, religious, social or economic apparatus of the time or the main stream media” (Urban Dictionary, 2020). This article will examine the psychological basis of these beliefs. Many articles – both popular and academic – have been written regarding psychological motivations for belief in so called ‘conspiracy theories’ (for example, Cichocka, Douglas, and Sutton 2017). However, much less critical work has been done analysing complicity theories. Nevertheless, there are important hints in the literature on conspiracy theories that elucidate the psychology of complicity theorists.

Economic Reasons

Economic and educational factors are a key driver in complicity theory belief. Evidence indicates that more highly educated and economically well off people are more likely to be complicity theorists (Zitelman, 2020; Pierre, 2019). There are important psychological reasons for this. Being economically well off discourages criticism of the current political and economic system, as one is not inclined to criticise a system one is personally benefiting from. This drives those better off financially to be more accepting of the latest narrative from the government and mainstream media. Economic gain can also drive some groups – particularly those such as journalists, politicians and bureaucrats – to believe complicity theories. For example, journalists who bring forward evidence of conspiracy are much less likely to be published in the mainstream media, meaning that they will lose out financially. Higher levels of education also predispose one to complicity theories, partly for the economic reasons outlined above, but also because it gives one a longer period of exposure to official government narratives, therefore ingraining those narratives more closely into the individual psyche.

Levels of Mainstream Media Consumption

The mainstream media is the main disseminator of complicity theories in Western societies. The function of the mainstream media in Western society is to provide effective ‘narrative control’ for the current rulers (Johnstone, 2022). Furthermore, mainstream media serves as an effective echo chamber, with only a very narrow range of debate allowed. For example, in March 2020, questioning of lockdowns was practically non existent in the mainstream media. High levels of consumption of this complicity theory content will have the psychological effect of reinforcing belief in complicity theories, as well as the belief that everyone else believes in complicity theories (Seong, 2021).

A Need to Believe

A need to believe in the fundamental goodness and worthiness of the state and nation that they have been taught to believe in is a key influence on the complicity theorist. Entertaining the notion of conspiracy – such as, for example, that the CIA had John F. Kennedy assassinated – causes cognitive dissonance in the complicity theorist (Cherry, 2022). The complicity theorist cannot both hold that the American state is democratic and free and that a deep state exists that is capable of murdering the President. The underlying needs of the complicity theorist to both maintain their belief in the generally good (if imperfect) nature of the current state of affairs and to avoid cognitive dissonance causes them to unfairly dismiss evidence of conspiracy.

When do Complicity Theorists Become Conspiracy Theorists?

Nevertheless, there are certain conditions under which a complicity theorist will consider an explanation that could be classed as a conspiracy theory by any reasonable definition. These cases usually occur when the complicity theory supports one side of the ‘two party illusion’, that is, one side of the false paradigm that has been set up within the extremely limited debate allowed within the mainstream media (Cristian, 2020). Another circumstance under which conspiracy may be considered is when it involves another country constructed as an ‘enemy nation’ by the mainstream media – for example Russia, Iran, or Venezuela. For example, the idea that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to get elected in 2016 is an excellent example of these phenomena. By definition, this claim, if true, involved a conspiracy. Yet a large number of people who are usually complicity theorists believed in this conspiracy wholeheartedly, despite the fact that many other conspiracies they reject are backed by far more evidence.


The topic of complicity theories and the kind of individuals that believe them requires much more research to draw substantive conclusions. Nevertheless some preliminary conclusions can be drawn from the literature which suggest important reasons for beliefs in complicity theories separate from their truth.

Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

The author received no pay for this article and therefore has no conflicts of interest to declare.


Cherry, K. (2022) ‘What Is Cognitive Dissonance?’, VeryWell Mind, at, accessed 29th May 2022.

Cichocka, A., Douglas, K., and Sutton, R. (2017) ‘The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories’, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26 (6), pp. 538-42, at, accessed 29th May 2022.

Cristian, R. (2020) ‘Jimmy Dore Interview – Voting In A Broken System, The Two-Party Illusion & Tulsi Gabbard’, The Last American Vagabond, at, accessed 2nd June 2022.

Jensen, T. (2013) ‘Democrats and Republicans Differ on Conspiracy Theory Beliefs’ Public Policy Polling, at, accessed 29th May 2022.

Johnstone, C. (2022) ‘They’re Worried About The Spread Of Information, Not Disinformation’ at, accessed 30th May 2022.

Mantik, D. (2022) ‘Gagné Desperately Dispenses CPR for the Lone Gunman (Part 1)’, Kennedys and King, at, accessed 29th May 2022.

Pierre, J. (2019) ‘What Makes People Believe in Conspiracy Theories?’, Psychology Today, at, accessed 29th May 2022.

Seong, J. M. (2021) ‘Who Believes in Conspiracy Theories? Network Diversity, Political Discussion, and Conservative Conspiracy Theories on Social Media’, American Politics Research, 49 (5), pp. 415-31, at

Shamsian, J. (2019) ‘Almost half of Americans now believe the conspiracy theory that sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was murdered’, Business Insider, at, accessed 29th May 2022.

‘UtterSpace’ (2020) ‘Urban Dictionary: Complicity Theory’, Urban Dictionary, at, accessed 29th May 2022.

Zitelman, R. (2020) ‘How Many Americans Believe In Conspiracy Theories?’ Forbes, at, accessed 29th May 2022.

Palestine Protest 15th May 22

I attended a protest for Palestine on the 15th May. The day before, there was a protest in London that had been planned on the anniversary of the Nakba of 1948. I didn’t go to London but some footage can be seen here.

The protest also took place after the killing of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh.

It was a pretty small protest. It was due to start at 2pm, but at this time there was hardly anyone there.

More people began to trickle in after 2pm, so the crowd became closer to 150 people.

Initially the protest was in the square proper, but it was moved to make it more visible to passers by.

There was both chants being led and some speeches. Some children (I’m guessing under the age of 10) also led chants, which I didn’t film as I don’t want to put that online (I try to avoid filming children if possible).

Footage can be found on my Youtube and Bitchute accounts.