Uploaded May 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
Northern Territory upstanding citizen Jefferson Lewis allegedly abducted and killed a five-year-old girl and has since been charged with her murder. Police effectively acted as a human shield for Lewis, extracting his unconscious body from a group of locals who had already begun their own form of sentencing. The police and paramedics were also assaulted during the intervention.
The locals were so incensed at being prevented from delivering their own brand of traditional Aboriginal payback that they rioted outside the hospital; rocks and projectiles were hurled, and police vehicles were set ablaze. As Northern Territory Police Commissioner Martin Dole stated: “Four of the five ambulances available were taken out of action and damaged.”
This effectively mothballed 80% of the local ambulance fleet, ensuring that while the mob sought their version of justice, actual medical emergencies were left to fend for themselves. Traditional payback, it seems, is nothing if not thorough.
As many of you noted in my previous video, there was also looting. Police have since published details as reported by the ABC: “Police release CCTV of ‘outright looting’ of Alice Springs businesses.” Apparently, a nearby supermarket and service station were “allegedly looted by rioters” causing $200,000 in damage and stock losses.
Even though they were caught on camera, we have to stick with “allegedly” for now—it’s entirely possible they all just forgot their wallets and intend to return later to settle the bill once the rioting dies down. Cultural grief is expressed in many different ways.
Night shift staff had barricaded themselves in while their shelves were being looted. Obviously, the owners and employees of these shops had absolutely nothing to do with the death of the girl, and even less to do with the arrest of Jefferson Lewis—but for some reason, their businesses were deemed suitable targets for a bit of collateral retribution.
Commissioner Dole was refreshingly direct in his refusal to entertain the usual excuses: “What you will see in this footage is not people processing grief in relation to the death of baby Kumanjayi, what you will see is not people trying to practise traditional lore, what you will see is criminal behaviour, plain and simple. It’s abhorrent, it’s disgusting, and it will not be tolerated or accepted by the Northern Territory Police, and it should not be accepted by the community.”
Detective Acting Superintendent Michael Ordelman suggested the Alice Springs watch house is suddenly experiencing a bit of a population boom, stating: “To date we’ve had two people hand themselves in, yesterday there were five arrests in relation to the behaviour. There’s currently six extra people that have been arrested today and are in the watch house awaiting charging.”
The ABC interviewed Greens Mayor Asta Hill who described the unrest in Alice Springs and the allegations of looting as “extremely complex.” Yes, apparently the concept of “not stealing things” is a nuanced philosophical debate when viewed through a Green lens. To be fair, she did call out the looting, saying: “This should never happen to a child and no family or community should be put in a position of processing this. That doesn’t discount the fact that our front-line workers should be able to do their job safely so they can help those in need, or that businesses should be safe from looting.”
According to the Police’s latest media release as of yesterday, “Update – Charges – Riotous behaviour,” Police have charged another 13 people, with a fairly balanced mix of males and females. It’s heartening to see that when it comes to riotous behaviour, the community has finally created a bastion of equal opportunity.
The Greens would be proud… of the equality, I mean. Not the looting.
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn
Northern Territory upstanding citizen Jefferson Lewis allegedly abducted and killed a five-year-old girl and has since been charged with her murder. Police effectively acted as a human shield for Lewis, extracting his unconscious body from a group of locals who had already begun their own form of sentencing. The police and paramedics were also assaulted during the intervention.
The locals were so incensed at being prevented from delivering their own brand of traditional Aboriginal payback that they rioted outside the hospital; rocks and projectiles were hurled, and police vehicles were set ablaze. As Northern Territory Police Commissioner Martin Dole stated: “Four of the five ambulances available were taken out of action and damaged.”
This effectively mothballed 80% of the local ambulance fleet, ensuring that while the mob sought their version of justice, actual medical emergencies were left to fend for themselves. Traditional payback, it seems, is nothing if not thorough.
As many of you noted in my previous video, there was also looting. Police have since published details as reported by the ABC: “Police release CCTV of ‘outright looting’ of Alice Springs businesses.” Apparently, a nearby supermarket and service station were “allegedly looted by rioters” causing $200,000 in damage and stock losses.
Even though they were caught on camera, we have to stick with “allegedly” for now—it’s entirely possible they all just forgot their wallets and intend to return later to settle the bill once the rioting dies down. Cultural grief is expressed in many different ways.
Night shift staff had barricaded themselves in while their shelves were being looted. Obviously, the owners and employees of these shops had absolutely nothing to do with the death of the girl, and even less to do with the arrest of Jefferson Lewis—but for some reason, their businesses were deemed suitable targets for a bit of collateral retribution.
Commissioner Dole was refreshingly direct in his refusal to entertain the usual excuses: “What you will see in this footage is not people processing grief in relation to the death of baby Kumanjayi, what you will see is not people trying to practise traditional lore, what you will see is criminal behaviour, plain and simple. It’s abhorrent, it’s disgusting, and it will not be tolerated or accepted by the Northern Territory Police, and it should not be accepted by the community.”
Detective Acting Superintendent Michael Ordelman suggested the Alice Springs watch house is suddenly experiencing a bit of a population boom, stating: “To date we’ve had two people hand themselves in, yesterday there were five arrests in relation to the behaviour. There’s currently six extra people that have been arrested today and are in the watch house awaiting charging.”
The ABC interviewed Greens Mayor Asta Hill who described the unrest in Alice Springs and the allegations of looting as “extremely complex.” Yes, apparently the concept of “not stealing things” is a nuanced philosophical debate when viewed through a Green lens. To be fair, she did call out the looting, saying: “This should never happen to a child and no family or community should be put in a position of processing this. That doesn’t discount the fact that our front-line workers should be able to do their job safely so they can help those in need, or that businesses should be safe from looting.”
According to the Police’s latest media release as of yesterday, “Update – Charges – Riotous behaviour,” Police have charged another 13 people, with a fairly balanced mix of males and females. It’s heartening to see that when it comes to riotous behaviour, the community has finally created a bastion of equal opportunity.
The Greens would be proud… of the equality, I mean. Not the looting.
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn
![NSW Police: “English Optional, Virtue Signalling Mandatory”
This is the New South Wales Police recruitment page, and this is their latest campaign: “You Should Be A Cop.” Like so much in modern Australia, the focus is squarely on diversity. Just look at the images:
• Woman.
• Woman.
• Woman.
• Ethnic minority.
I think the women have it.
But this is the specific campaign we’ll be focusing on today—and thank you to the viewer who sent this in: “Be a Cop in Your Community.” It sounds innocuous enough. Well, here is the ad they’ve been running on Instagram and wherever else.
Now, I’m not going to play the video because I always get stung when I do that, but I will play the audio. See if you can notice the pattern.
[Audio Clip]
And to be clear: no, this is not an April Fools’ joke.
As you heard, they are speaking in every language other than English. Apart from Mandarin—which I study—I don’t even know what languages they were speaking.
Now, the first question is: Why? What is the purpose of running an ad in foreign languages? Look, I’m a realist; there are many different languages spoken in Australia, and I’ve got nothing against people speaking their own. However, there’s one language that bonds us all together: English. You can’t get by in Australia just speaking Swahili. You can’t get by just speaking Japanese. If I walk into a Woolworths and start speaking Chinese, I’m just going to get a blank stare and a very awkward silence.
Not to mention, anyone living in Australia who is proficient enough to become a police officer would surely already know English. If they aren’t proficient in English, they’d be a liability as a police officer. How can you serve the broader community if you only speak Hindi?
So, who exactly are the police targeting with this ad? Well, I think the answer is simple: virtue signalling. “Look at us! We’re inclusive!”
They state in the blurb that they’re looking for recruits who can speak another language. Okay, fine—but couldn’t they have just done that in English? By sticking to only four languages, they were actually being quite exclusive.
Obviously, what they should have done was have these same people speak in English:
“Hi, I’m from China, but now I’m an Australian citizen and I can speak Chinese. Look at me! I’m a police officer now. If you’re from China, you too can become a police officer… as long as you’re not a spy for the Communist Party. But hey, even if you are, I won’t tell anyone. It’s our little secret… I hope that wasn’t recording.”
According to the “Be a Cop in Your Community” page, they are seeking “applicants who identify with one of our targeted cultural or language groups.” They provide a list of very specific languages, including Arabic and Syrian.
But why these languages? Well, they note:
“The Be a Cop in Your Community program is focused on four Priority Areas in the South West Metropolitan Region: Auburn, Burwood, Cumberland, and Liverpool. These Police Area Commands serve some of NSW’s most culturally and linguistically diverse neighbourhoods.”
So, apparently, “community” only matters in specific postcodes. Are they suggesting that if you live in the Northern Beaches or The Shire, you don’t need a “community connection”?
Or perhaps it’s just that those residents don’t have the “right kind” of diversity.
But of course, being a “diverse” police officer involves special skills that require reimbursement. As they note on their page:
“You may be entitled to allowances, such as the Community Language Allowance Scheme.”
Yes—it certainly sounds like a “scheme” to me. While most people get paid for what they do, these recruits get a bonus for what they are.
And finally, remember the all-important motto: “Your culture is your strength.” Yep. As long as you’re not “just” Australian, your culture is super-duper important. You may have thought the “strength” of a police officer was their ability to uphold the law, maintain physical fitness, and display courage under pressure.
But no. You were wrong.
Apparently, it’s your “culture” that is the most important thing. Forget about your black belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu; being able to order a kebab in Arabic is far more important.
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn NSW Police: “English Optional, Virtue Signalling Mandatory”](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/aoHKnuT3S4k/mqdefault.jpg)





![The “Controversial” New Olympic Rule: Biological Reality
Ever since the second modern Olympic Games held in Paris in 1900, Olympians have been broken into two distinct categories: male and female. I know—that sounds absurd in the modern world. But it’s true; people back in 1900 thought that men and women were different when it came to sports. They were sexist, they were transphobic, they were probably even—dare I say it—racist.
But fast forward 120 years or so, and biological reality is now questionable. Now, in the name of inclusivity, we’ve seen a push to allow athletes to enter female-only competitions based on how they identify.
For example, my male stallion—who identifies as a female human—recently entered the Queensland 100m final. Not only did she win the age championships, but she also broke the world record. See? Women can do anything!
But enough joking around. Let’s get back to the real world, where the new strategy for breaking female records apparently involves being a biological man.
But in the year of our Lord, 2026, something strange has happened—something that went completely against the approved script. As the ABC simply put it: “Trans athletes banned from competing in Olympic Games.” Apparently, the IOC has decided that only biological females will be allowed to compete in female events from now on. What? That’s crazy! Only females can compete in female events?! Who could have possibly seen that coming? Unsurprisingly, this “return to reality” has caused absolute chaos and controversy—at least in some circles.
The new IOC president, Kirsty Coventry—the first female and the first African to hold the office—made her decision very clear. She said:
“At the Olympic Games, even the smallest margins can be the difference between victory and defeat. So, it is absolutely clear that it would not be fair for biological males to compete in the female category. In addition, in some sports, it would simply not be safe.”
In classic, “impartial” ABC style, they’ve questioned the move with headlines such as: “Warnings of abuse as trans women banned from Olympic female events,” and “Australian Olympic Committee backs Olympic transgender rules despite human rights concerns.” Human rights concerns? What about the rights of women to actually have a fair competition in their own category?
The Conversation, of course, got in on the sanctimonious moralising, claiming: “The Olympics’ transgender athlete ban is a legal and moral minefield.” And we can’t forget The Guardian: “Human rights experts raise concerns over Olympics transgender women athlete ban: Critics say new IOC guidelines violate fundamental human rights.”
That’s right—I was born a man, went through puberty as a male, and have increased bone density and other physical advantages, but now, as a trans woman, it’s my “fundamental human right” to dominate biological women in the Olympics!
Just to be clear, nobody is saying trans women can’t compete. They just can’t compete in the female category.
Unsurprisingly, The Guardian brought race into this. They actually claimed: “Athletes who are intersex or have differences of sex development, including cisgender women, will be overly affected by the new guidelines, with women of colour likely to be disproportionately targeted due to their appearance.”
What are they even saying here? That “women of colour”—whatever that means this week—are more likely to “look like men” and therefore face more scrutiny?
So, is this Korean sprinter more likely to be tested? What about this Indian tennis player? Who exactly are they talking about? It seems the only ones “targeting” women based on their appearance are the very journalists claiming to protect them.
The Guardian also interviewed human rights lawyer and former Olympic swimmer Nikki Dryden, who is firmly against the move. She warned:
“If these rules are adopted… your daughter… may be subjected to sex testing just to participate. Worse, it creates a culture where [someone] feels entitled to question whether your daughter ‘looks female enough’ to belong. That is not protecting women’s sport. That is policing girls’ bodies… The IOC’s new guidelines will be unlawful in Australia… Moving towards exclusionary, invasive rules is not only unnecessary, it is a step back over 25 years.”
But exactly how “invasive” are we talking here? The Conversation spells out the process:
“The screening will be done via an athlete’s saliva, a cheek swab or blood sample. Any athlete whose test shows the presence of the SRY gene [the gene associated with men’s sexual development] will be banned from the women’s category.”
So, a cheek swab. One time. To ensure the category for biological females actually contains… biological females.
So, what do you think? Has the IOC finally made the right move here? Or is the very fabric of human rights and the future of civilisation at risk because we’ve gone back to defining a woman as… a woman? Let me know your thoughts in the comments—I’m sure they’ll be civil.
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn The “Controversial” New Olympic Rule: Biological Reality](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/cokAfcq6phA/mqdefault.jpg)



