A Few More Thoughts about Corbyn, Labour, and Their Prospects

I have blogged previously about Corbyn, Labour etc. About Corbyn, I have not much changed my view, which is that

  • Corbyn is someone with an almost pathetic level of formal (and also, judging from his pronouncements, informal) education, someone with what at least appears to be a poor knowledge-base even in respect of those areas where he seems to think himself knowledgeable (eg the 1930s, Fascism, National Socialism, Marxism, Mosley, the Second World War and so on);
  • Corbyn was never expected to be more than a back-bench Labour MP and (in the view of many) an infantile crypto-Communist nuisance (perhaps more “anarcho-Communist”), and who was more likely to appear in the now-all-but-defunct pages of Militant (now, The Socialist), Tribune, Lobster or Private Eye than in the commentary columns of the more serious newspapers;
  • Corbyn’s election as Labour leader had something supernatural about it, in that he was only able to get the necessary 35 nominations to stand in the contest because he was nominated by a number of MPs who had no intention of voting for him!
  • Corbyn’s nomination was (to use the Leninist metaphor) the spark that created a raging conflagration in Labour;
  • Corbyn has, on the one hand, energized Labour’s activist base and “created” a party of between 500,000-600,000 members (though pre-2015 Labour did have a total of about 550,000 full members, affiliated members and registered supporters, of which 147,000 were full members); on the other hand, there is no evidence that Corbyn-Labour has solid support in the country as a whole;
  • The Jewish-Zionist element has tried to unseat Corbyn several times, by holding a second leadership election, as well as by a relentless msm and social media campaign;
  • As I predicted throughout would happen, Corbyn saw off all challenges despite his being a poor leader (indeed, scarcely a leader at all) and despite the relentless Jew-Zionist assault on his leadership; this again indicates the supernatural nature of, not Corbyn himself, but his placement as Labour leader. Corbyn is there for a reason;
  • Despite his strange fuzzy “sort-of-Marxist” or almost anarcho-syndicalist ideology (as it seems to me), Corbyn is actually not as alien a figure to many voters as are or were the “entitled” trustafarians David Cameron-Levita, George Osborne (both part-Jew, in fact) and Nick Clegg, with their cosmopolitan sheen of wealth, easy road to fame, inherited money and foreign origins. Corbyn is in fact, as I have said before, a recognizable English/British type, with his Lenin-meets-engine-driver caps, his vegetable-growing allotment, his non-Oxbridge bicycling etc. At any point from the 1920s or even the Edwardian age to the present day, such a figure might be encountered on, indeed, local allotments, in local Labour constituency parties, at the Tolpuddle Martyrs’ commemoration, the Durham Miners’ Gala, at steam fairs or on heritage railway lines, not forgetting marches and demonstrations in solidarity with this or that obscure foreign cause.

I have thought for some time, certainly since 2015, that voters in England (and maybe Wales, and even Scotland) today are voting (if at all) against and not for this or that party. I now see more mainstream commentators taking up that baton. Someone on the BBC World Service radio made the same point in the past week.

The Jew-Zionist lobby has thrown everything at Corbyn from “antisemitism” (which may even have rebounded to his advantage!) to his silly pro-IRA linkage in the 1970s and 1980s. Nothing has worked. Labour has not overtaken the Conservative Party by much (if at all) but has not collapsed in the opinion polls either. Likewise, the shambolic performance of the Conservative Party in government has not collapsed the Conservatives in the polls. To my mind, that is because there are huge numbers who are going to vote against parties rather than for them. That means tactical voting to exclude the most disliked party in any given constituency.

To me, it is telling that, when asked to give a thumbs-up or down re Corbyn as PM, he scores only about 25%; Theresa May scores slightly better, maybe 35%, but “Don’t Know” beats both of them at about 40%.

The odds must favour a hung Parliament. Neither main System party is now in a position to deliver a killer blow, though much depends on whether the SNP vote continues to decline or whether it holds up enough to maintain a serious voting bloc. It looks as if the SNP will hold on to at least 30 MPs, maybe more.

What is holding Labour back more than anything is the corona of “deadhead” MPs (many, though by no means all, black or brown) around Corbyn. The “Diane Abbott effect” has been seen in spades recently, with the Fiona Onasanya and Kate Osamor scandals.

In the end, I think that Corbyn has a good chance of being the next Prime Minister, though at the head of a minority government, so long as the next general election occurs before boundary changes kick in in 2022.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/21/deadhead-mps-an-occasional-series-the-fiona-onasanya-story/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/02/troop-cartload-barrel-or-family/

Update, 19 April 2020

“Man proposes, God disposes”…as someone (Mark Twain?) once wrote. My blog post was right in almost everything but its main prediction! In fairness, it was written over a year before the disastrous General Election of 2019, which propelled Boris-idiot into real power as Prime Minister, a role which, at time of writing, he has been unable to fulfil with any credibility.

What Can Be Done To Create A Social-National Movement in the UK?

I was just reading a few appreciations of Paddy Ashdown, the one-time LibDem leader, who recently died. I tend to adhere to the saying de mortuis nihil nisi bonum, but when it comes to political people, kindness must sometimes give way to clarity.

In fact, I rather liked Paddy Ashdown, at least in parts (not that I ever actually met him). I certainly feel more respect for him than I ever could feel for the idiots who preceded and followed him (Thorpe, Steel, Kennedy, Campbell, Clegg etc, though I do have time for Jo Grimond, whose interesting and erudite memoirs I reviewed on Amazon years ago; Grimond was by far the best of the Liberal/LibDem leaders, to my mind).

I feel that Ashdown was a great deal more honest than most System politicians, for one thing. Also, he was an idealist, and someone willing to put a mission above his (and his family’s) comfort: not many men in their mid-thirties would leave a comfortable and perhaps promising SIS/FCO career to get involved in the hurly-burly of UK politics, particularly for something as marginal as the then Liberal Party (at the time it had only 13 Commons seats, despite having garnered nearly 20% of the popular vote in both of the two 1974 General Elections). Ashdown gave up a pleasant diplomatic/intelligence near-sinecure based in Switzerland to take ordinary jobs in the Yeovil (Somerset) area while pursuing his political mission. When his employer folded, nearly a decade later, Ashdown applied unsuccessfully for 150 jobs. When elected MP for Yeovil in 1983, he had been unemployed for 2 years and was doing unpaid volunteer work as part of a programme for the long-term unemployed.

Not that I agreed with much of Ashdown’s policy-set: an Ashdown is a politician for an England which was disappearing even in the 1970s. He seems to have been sanguine about mass immigration, for one thing. I doubt that he was ever anti-Zionist in any sense (certainly not my sense). Ashdown was no intellectual and not (to my mind) a policy person. Neither was Ashdown intellectually honest in a way that might match what I still perceive to be his personal integrity (leaving aside the “Paddy Pantsdown” episode). Certainly, amid the pathetic rabble called the LibDems, Ashdown could hardly fail to be seen as a star, just as the young Bill Clinton, with his Georgetown, Oxford and Yale academic background, could not fail to shine in the intellectual backwater that is Arkansas.

Yes, much can be laughed at in Ashdown, not least his absurd sense of his own importance and weight, as when he was or tried to be (using my own parody-title for him) “the Lord High Panjandrum of the Balkans and Afghanistan”, but without at least some elevated sense of self-worth, Ashdown would never have tried to be a political leader in the first place, I suppose.

So why am I talking about Ashdown, when this blog piece is supposed to be about the creation of a social-national movement?

What caught my attention about Ashdown as politician was that he only got elected as MP in 1983, after about 8-9 years of trying; also, once he was an MP, it only took him 5 years to become the leader of his party (admittedly tiny in terms of MP numbers).

One of the precepts of the American “self-help” guru Anthony Robbins is that “most people overestimate what they can accomplish in a year and underestimate what they can achieve in ten years.” That is very true. Examples are all around in history.

Famously, Hitler joined the NSDAP as “Member no.7” in 1919. A year later, it was still of little importance even in its home city, Munich. By 1923 Hitler had attempted the Beer Hall Putsch, which went down in shambolic ignominy; by 1928, 9 years after its foundation, the NSDAP could still only raise a national vote of 2.6%. However, Hitler had built a party and beyond that, a whole volkisch movement. It only needed the right conditions in which to flourish. The Depression provided that, together with the widespread feeling against the Jewish exploitation of the German people: by 1930, the NSDAP had a vote of 18%, by 1932 of 33%, and by 1933 of nearly 44%.

Lenin’s serious revolutionary political activity could be said to have begun with the establishment of Iskra [The Spark] in 1900. Though by 1910, Lenin was still politically marginal, he was considered to be one of the leaders of the Marxist tendency, at least. However, both Bolsheviki and Mensheviki together numbered only 8,400 by 1910 (perhaps 75% of whom were under 30 years of age). Once again, though, the important point is that a party, albeit split, existed and, once the disastrous Russian participation in the European war of 1914 onward had destroyed the strength of the Tsarist government and society, that party could take over the existing uprising in 1917 and perform a coup d’etat later the same year.

Other examples? How about “Solidarity” in Poland? Founded by a small number of workers in Gdansk (former Danzig) in 1980, by 1989 it was the governing party in Poland.

UKIP was formed in 1993 and had become an organized though marginal party by 2003. UKIP never did break through. It peaked in 2014 and deflated from 2015. What stopped UKIP from taking power was not only the UK’s totally unfair First Past the Post electoral system (though that did not help). What stopped UKIP was, first, that it was and (to the extent that it still exists) is not a revolutionary, nor even radical, party/movement; also, there has been no truly “triggering” event comparable to the First World War, the Great Depression etc in the UK of the late 20th/early 21st centuries.

Even if the future for the UK and Europe is a kind of multifaceted civil war, a political party or movement must exist. It is the sine qua non. In a year, it would achieve nothing, but in ten years it could achieve everything.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paddy_Ashdown

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo_Grimond

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_mortuis_nil_nisi_bonum

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/16/paddy-ashdown-i-turned-to-my-wife-and-said-its-not-our-country-any-more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_Hall_Putsch

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party#German_Reichstag

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jo-Grimond-Memoirs/dp/B0015L8O0G

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_(Polish_trade_union)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin#Revolutionary_activity

Further Thoughts, 28 December 2018

As to practical steps, I have blogged before about these:

  • Focus on one, two, or a very few areas of the UK at first;
  • Establishment of safe zone(s) which can develop into a germinal ethnostate;
  • “Tithing” as a way of building up operational funds.

“Mark Lewis Lawyer”: Latest Update

Update, 22 December 2018

Jewish Zionist extremist Jonathan Hoffman (of “Sussex Friends of Israel”) has now set up a petition to the effect that the verdict and sentence in the Mark Lewis case should be declared “null and void”.

https://www.change.org/p/edward-nally-justice-for-mark

So far (at time of writing), only 224 persons have signed the petition supporting Lewis. That’s about 1 out of every 300,000 people in the UK, or to put it another way, 1 out of about every 1,200 Jews in the UK.

Hoffman seems to imagine that all that is required to void the proceedings and result of them is for the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal to make a declaration! The couple of dozen other Jew-Zionists (several of them lawyers!) who have tweeted similarly appear to be under the same delusion.

In reality, the Tribunal panel member objected to was only one of three, and was not even the Chairman of the panel. If Lewis thinks that the verdict or sentence should be set aside, he need only lodge notice of appeal by 3 January 2019. No doubt the Administrative Court will do exactly as he and/or his extremist “claque” and clique of supporters would wish (ha ha!— I am of course being heavily ironic or satirical, and quite possibly sarcastic…).

Again, I fail to see what even Lewis himself would gain from either any successful appeal (highly unlikely though such success would be) or from some unilateral act of hara-kiri by the Tribunal.

Lewis was not struck off the solicitors’ roll by the SDT; he was not even suspended. His £10,000 costs penalty (which the Tribunal implied would almost certainly not even be collected by the SRA by reason of his impecuniosity) has been crowdfunded, as has his fine of £2,500. The SDT finding and sentence does not stop Lewis from working as a solicitor, if (a big if!) he can get any law firm to employ him, or alternatively if he complies with the necessary regulations to practise as a sole practitioner.

In reality, Lewis was leaving the UK for Israel anyway. One can see why (and it is not because he and his ghastly partner/carer are in the slightest afraid of British “anti-Semitism”): Lewis has a progressive/degenerative medical condition, MS, which has worsened in the past few years. He is unable to walk properly and has either to use a mobility scooter, or to be pushed in a wheelchair, or (until he left for Israel) to drive himself in the car supplied to him (thanks to the “antisemitic” British taxpayer…) by Motability in lieu of Disability Living Allowance.

Lewis had not attended his place of work (at Seddons, the London law firm) since March 2018, by reason of his medical condition, which was made worse by some kind of traffic accident. He became unable to write. When Seddons heard of the complaints against Lewis to the SRA (or when the upcoming Tribunal hearing was publicized), Seddons terminated Lewis’s employment, in September 2018, on 6 months’ notice, though presenting it at the time as if the reason, or sole reason, for the termination was that Lewis was emigrating permanently to Israel.

While of course I do not know the details of Lewis’s billing performance etc at Seddons, he was on a pay package of £10,000 a month (gross), presumably (educated guess) with the possibility of a bonus or percentage if he exceeded that amount of billed work over a period. In Tribunal, it was said by Lewis’s Counsel that his assets as of November 2018 were just his clothes, his mobility scooter and a pension which was worth £70 a week or less. That, and his £10,000 a month pay, payable only until March 2019.

Reading between the lines, one can see that, while Lewis’s assiduous courting of the “occupied” UK mass media brought Seddons publicity (a mixed blessing, I should have thought!), Lewis obviously was not bringing in or doing much billed work. In short, he was not worth his salt even before he stopped actual work (or even attending his office) in March 2018. Seddons seem to have treated Lewis rather well, inasmuch as they carried him totally for six months before terminating his contract, and then carried him for another 6 months (until March 2019), despite his being just a dead weight to Seddons, a useless person and in fact a liability to his employers. To be frank, I was astonished to read, in 2015, that a well-known firm such as Seddons had taken Lewis on. I expect that they lived to regret it.

To return to the main point, Lewis had already decided to leave the UK for Israel. He knew (probably years in advance, as I did when Jew-Zionists made malicious complaint against me to the Bar Standards Board, an analogous situation) that he was going to be “put on trial” at Tribunal and that Seddons would probably not keep him on, so he (again, educated guess and I may be mistaken) kept it quiet from Seddons as long as he could, to keep getting the £10,000 a month (before tax, assuming that he paid it, so about £7,000 a month net).

Lewis now has little future as a lawyer, but that has really nothing to do with the verdict of the Tribunal. Lewis never denied posting the violent and crazed messages wherewith he was charged. Indeed, he justified himself in respect of the non-Jew victims, though he was willing to crawl a bit to the father of the 18-y-o Jew victim.

In other words, Lewis’s behaviour was exposed at Tribunal, and even were he to appeal and to win any appeal (unlikely anyway), any potential employers or clients will be aware of what he wrote; also aware that Lewis has been and presumably still is sometimes non compos mentis by reason of either his medical condition, or its effects on the brain, or the medication used in respect of that. I would not want a lawyer like that; few would.

Lewis has also stated that he will not be making application to join the Bar of Israel.

I can only assume that Lewis will be living off a number of income sources while living in Israel:

  • his partner/carer is apparently a buy-to-let parasite in the UK and/or has other business interests; she has stated that she will be buying property in Israel;
  • Lewis will still be able to get some UK Disability Living Allowance (paid for by all those “antisemitic” British taxpayers…) in Israel, indefinitely. Yes, only up to maybe £100 a week or so, but hey!…;
  • I have no idea what disability benefits Israel offers, but I suppose that there are some;
  • Lewis has a £70 a week private pension, apparently;
  • Israel offers considerable “Aliyah” (emigration/immigration) benefits (see Notes, below), which, by the way, include a one-way free flight to Israel, financial help, housing benefit etc;
  • I would not be surprised to discover that his Jewish Zionist supporters in the UK will be covertly remitting him some charity monies informally; indeed, it is not beyond the possible that some wealthy Jews will remit him larger sums, who knows?

This individual, Lewis, is the Jew Zionist who, having conspired behind the scenes against me for years (certainly since 2013, possibly since 2011),

  • was one of the Jews covertly behind the malicious complaint about me to the Bar Standards Board by “UK Lawyers for Israel” (where he is or was a leading member);
  • was involved in the malicious complaint against me to Essex Police by the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” (where he is still an “Honorary Patron”, oddly described as Dr. Mark Lewis, maybe because he was given an honorary degree by his alma mater, Middlesex Poly/Uni, a few years ago); and
  • repeatedly tweeted about me that I was or am “a sad unemployable git” and “failure as barrister, failure as human being”!

Now look who’s talking! An incoherent, medicated, washed-up, foul-mouthed, disgraced and twice-divorced Jew Zionist, living in Israel on benefits, on charity and off his “partner/carer”, and incapable of doing anything except tweeting and being pushed around in a wheelchair.

http://www.jewishagency.org/aliyah-benefits/program/8231

https://www.nbn.org.il/

https://www.gov.uk/claim-benefits-abroad/where-you-can-claim-benefits

https://antisemitism.uk/about/patrons/

https://www.motability.co.uk/

Further thoughts

When the cabal called “UK Lawyers for Israel” made their malicious complaint against me (in 2014) to the Bar Standards Board, one of their leading lights was Mark Lewis. One of the “Patrons” of UKLFI was one Baroness Deech, a Jewish Zionist and life peer, whose parents were from Poland, though she was born in the UK. The “baroness” was also, at the time of complaint against me in 2014, the head of… the Bar Standards Board!

When the BSB decided to “prosecute” me at a Bar Disciplinary Tribunal (for a small number of tweets about society), the “baroness” was still in post.

When the Deech person ceased to be head of the BSB, and before my Tribunal hearing was held in late 2016, another person took over as Chairman of the BSB, but he was a former British diplomat who just happened to be a former ambassador to Israel, and whose interests and other work included “restitution” of property seized in the 1930s and 1940s (and now claimed by Jews wanting “restitution” —or huge compensation— from European states and companies)!

When I made the point, both before my Tribunal hearing and at the hearing itself, that “justice must not only be done but be seen to be done” and that the whole decision-making process in my case was fatally-flawed, both a High Court judge (on preliminary application) and the Tribunal chairman (a retired Circuit Judge) turned me down, on the basis that the fact that “baroness” Deech was both a Patron of the organization which complained against me and the most important official of the organization deciding on whether I should be “put on trial” or not, was not relevant!

Needless to say, no Jews ever tweeted to say how unjust this all was. Typical…

In other words, my Bar Disciplinary Tribunal case and hearing (though conducted relatively fairly on the day by the retired judge chairing it) was a “stitch-up” from the very start. The result was, in reality, never in doubt because of the Jewish Zionist influence and the perceived “need” to kow-tow to “them”. Yet the Zionists on Twitter etc now say that Mark Lewis was judged unfairly at his similar Tribunal because one of three SDT panel members once made a few anti-Israel remarks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Deech,_Baroness_Deech

Update, 2 January 2019

Lewis shown on Israeli TV, saying that “they [British people] wanted us out of England, and we are glad to be out of England.”

Hopefully he will not come back, but I bet that he is still getting part of the Disability Living Allowance that he was being paid in the UK, though he has had to give up the free Motobility car that the “antisemitic” British taxpayers provided for him even when he was dragging down £10,000 a month as a partner in Seddons, the London law firm!

3 January 2019

Allegations that Mandy Gargoyle made implied threats to people and even tweeted photos of their houses…

4 January 2019

Seems that Mandy Gargoyle should have been investigated by the UK police…

 

Update, 13 January 2019

Hoffman’s absurd online petition to the SRA demanding (ignorantly) that the SDT or SRA “overturn” the verdict in the Lewis case has now effectively come to its end, with 411 signatories. 411 out of about 250,000+ Jews in the UK (and about 65,000,000 non-Jews).

Some of the tweets Lewis sent to Alison Chabloz. He must be psychotic, or maybe the MS not only afflicts his body but affects his mind…or was it the drugs?

170217-lewis-die-e1533384703639 

Update, 23 October 2019

Seems that Lewis’s ex-wife, Caroline Feraday, has also fallen on hard times, living in a “Nowheresville” in California with her young daughter (Caroline Feraday is now a single mother). She says that she is unable to raise a mere $10,000 [£7,700], despite having some kind of (“office bod”?) job, and so has turned to GoFundMe. Strange. She was featured, in the past (in newspapers), a decade ago though, as having property of considerable value both in the UK and Brazil (in Copacabana, Rio de Janeiro) as well as (since 2013) in California.

Surprisingly, she has, and within only one day (at time of writing), managed to raise nearly $2,000 of the $10,000 for which she asks.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/legal-fees-dealing-with-stalkerharassment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agoura_Hills,_California

Update, 19 February 2020

[above: the latest picture of Lewis]

ds5

Deadhead MPs, An Occasional Series: The Fiona Onasanya Story

Prologue

I have, in the recent and fairly recent past, blogged about various MPs in a House of Commons where, increasingly, to be mediocre is a standard few can reach. See Notes, below. I have now decided to blog from time to time about a few more deadhead MPs, starting with recently-convicted Fiona Onasanya.

Now let us be clear: people in the UK, especially in the mainstream media [msm] tend to bend over backwards to be fair to ethnic minorities and especially blacks. You see it on quiz shows and in TV interviews and elsewhere. You see it even more in that echo-chamber of the pathetic “me too” “socially-liberal” multikultis, Twitter.

Some of the deadhead MPs (indeed, most) are white; however, the black ones can rely on getting a fairly easy ride from the msm until they really push the boat out in terms of stupidity, aggression or general uselessness. See, for example, Diane Abbott, Dawn Butler, Kate Osamor and now Fiona Onasanya.

Fiona Onasanya

Fiona Onasanya, a black African (Nigerian origin) but born in Cambridgeshire, and now 35 years old, is usually described as having been “a commercial property solicitor” prior to having been selected as a Labour PPC (prospective Parliamentary candidate) then elected as MP. I suppose that most people merely accept that bland potted bio, but in fact it is only superficially true.

Fiona Onasanya was Admitted to the ranks of solicitors in November 2015, at the age of 32. Prior to that (but exactly when, I do not know) she attended the University of Hertfordshire on an LL.B course, and then the University of Law (former College of Law) in order to qualify as a solicitor.

So what did Fiona Onasanya do between the ages of 18 and 32? A first degree and then Solicitors’ course together add up to about 4 years. That leaves 10 years outstanding. Her constituency website is not at all illuminating. Her Wikipedia entry states that she was a County Councillor in Cambridgeshire from 2013. That of course pays an allowance these days, as well as expenses (such as fuel for a car). Fiona Onasanya was also Deputy Leader of the Labour Group on that council, which pays extra (exactly how much, I do not know, but there are councillors with “extra responsibilities” that make a modestly good living out of it). At any rate, there seem to be 8-10 “missing years”, for which there may or may not be a good explanation.

Fiona Onasanya’s (self-drafted?) Wikipedia entry states that “She worked as a solicitor at Eversheds, Howes Percival, Nockolds and DC Law, specialising in commercial property law”, but she can have been little more than an office gopher. She worked for 4 different law firms in only 18 months! Probably no good and did little more than make coffee and read up on “diversity” regulations etc…

As for her selection as Parliamentary candidate, it seems to me that to have selected Fiona Onasanya, especially for somewhere like Peterborough, was almost an insult to the people of that city, 82.5% of whom are white, while only 2.3% are black (and little more than half of those are black African).

It now appears that there was no proper selection process. Here are tweets from the Political Correspondent of Channel Four News, Michael Crick, on the subject:

Fiona Onasanya was prosecuted for perversion of the course of justice, a charge which has brought a number of MPs to a prison cell, among them Jonathan Aitken and Chris Huhne (the latter on very similar facts to the present case).

Fiona Onasanya was lucky in her first jury, when the jury could not agree, even on the required 10-1 majority basis (one juror became unwell during trial). There must have been blacks and/or Labour Party partisans on that jury! Its prolonged deliberations and weekend adjournment brought hundreds of mocking tweets (heedless of “contempt of Court”), such as one which suggested that the jury would be sequestered for the weekend “in the local mental hospital”, so open-and-shut was Onasanya’s case. In fact, the second jury did not take long to find her guilty.

Since then, Fiona Onasanya has compared herself to Biblical figures who faced courts, such as Jesus Christ and Daniel, and to others who (apparently unknown to avid Nigerian church-goer Fiona) never faced courts at all (Moses, Joseph etc).

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/fiona-onsanya-labour-mp-compare-jesus-moses-pervert-course-justice-speeding-charge/

Future Developments

Fiona Onasanya faces a prison sentence. Though perversion of the course of justice carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, the relevant judicial guidelines indicate between 4 months and 36 months, with 12 months not uncommon in cases where the defendant lied about the identity of a car driver. Chris Huhne got 8 months, and that was on a guilty plea and far simpler facts (a simpler conspiracy). Jonathan Aitken got 18 months, also on guilty pleas, but his offence, in fact 2 offences, were intrinsically more serious, arguende.

If Fiona Onasanya is sentenced to a year or more in prison, she will be forced to vacate her seat (though in theory an MP so forced out can re-enter if again elected). The judge’s sentence will therefore either trigger a by-election, or keep Fiona Onasanya in her seat (at least until the next General Election). Jeremy Corbyn has given a broad hint that she faces deselection before that election anyway. Without the Labour label, she would probably get only a handful of votes.

My guess, albeit an educated guess, is that Fiona Onasanya will get a year or more of imprisonment. Why? Apart from the bare offence, she not only pleaded Not Guilty in both trials but also made up a complicated story with her brother (guilty of several similar offences), part of which was to blame an entirely innocent young Russian of whom they knew. He was saved from possible (indeed probable, arguably) prosecution only because he was visiting his family in Russia at the material time. The failure of the first jury to agree was plainly perverse and flew in the face of a plethora of convincing circumstantial and other evidence.

As to Fiona Onasanya’s future outside politics, it looks bleak: if imprisoned, she will undoubtedly be struck off the solicitors’ roll (that is a likelihood in any case). She is now 35. If imprisoned, she could be 37 when released. It looks as if the dole queue beckons. Either that or digging up potato from the heavy soil of Cambridgeshire.

Notes

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/02/troop-cartload-barrel-or-family/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/10/15/system-mps-in-the-uk-parliament-mediocrity-at-best/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/11/the-government-of-complete-imbeciles/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Onasanya

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/fiona-onasanya-gets-tough-on-crime/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-46636932

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/labour-mp-who-lied-to-avoid-speeding-charge-compares-herself-to-jesus-a4022876.html

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25638/fiona_onasanya/peterborough

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25638/fiona_onasanya/peterborough

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Huhne#Conviction_for_perverting_the_course_of_justice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Aitken#Perjury_conviction_and_imprisonment

https://www.channel4.com/news/out-of-order-politicians-who-ended-up-behind-bars

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/jan/11/criminal-mps-expelled-from-commons

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/a-z_of_parliament/h-l/82467.stm

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmstnprv/1215/121503.htm

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8046631/labour-mp-fiona-onasanya-taxpayers-cash-hotels/

Update, 5 January 2019

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6558757/Shamed-ex-Labour-MP-pretends-snort-cocaine-bizarre-video.html

Update, 29 January 2019

On today’s date, Fiona Onasanya MP was sentenced to 3 months’ imprisonment, which means that she will actually be in prison for about 6 weeks minus days in court and in police custody, so probably about a month in the end, if that. Her brother got 10 months.

I am surprised at the leniency of the sentence, in that she deliberately set out on a course of deception, tried to blame someone else for the offence and pleaded Not Guilty despite overwhelming circumstantial evidence, thus necessitating two expensive trials (the first jury being unable to agree on a verdict).

In his very similar trial a few years ago, Chris Huhne got 8 months on a Guilty plea! As a former practising barrister who has (long ago, in the early/mid 1990s) conducted Crown Court criminal trials (though I was always more civil and commercial), I am aware that every sentencing is different because every defendant is different, but the anomaly here is stark. Fiona Onasanya gets about a third of Huhne’s sentence despite her crime being worse on the facts, despite having pleaded Not Guilty (twice). Is it because she is black? Or because she is a black woman? Vicky Pryce (see below) was a woman, after all, and she got 8 months, not 3, and for less. I read much about “white privilege”. Hardy ha ha.

Vicky Pryce got 8 months for having done less than either her husband or Fiona Onasanya. Vicky Pryce and Chris Huhne both actually served 9 weeks in prison before being released early, not the strict 4 months as might have been expected.

Reading the judge’s remarks in the Onasanya case (see tweet below), it is clear that he was floundering in trying to find a reason to suspend the sentence, but in the end could not, so made the sentence as lenient as he felt was possible.

Except that an ordinary citizen might have got a sentence of anything up to a year (maybe more) on similar facts.

On a side point, look at her brother’s “previous” (aka “form”)! Why do we allow such creatures to exist in our British society?

The lenient sentence means that, until removed by the electors of Peterborough, Fiona Onasanya will continue to collect about £1,000 a week after tax, whether in prison or not. She will also continue to get her flat rent, utilities etc paid for via Parliamentary expenses!

The only way to remove her early would be for 10% of Peterborough electors to demand that via a Petition of Recall, which would trigger a by-election. She has been expelled by Labour, which supports such a petition. However, it will take months both to organize the petition and then for a by-election to be held.

In fact, latest news is that the Recall Petition cannot even be started until Fiona Onasanya has finished her appeal process, which might be months or even (potentially) years. For all that time she will be dragging down £1,000 a week after tax, despite the fact that her assistant has said (to a newspaper) that she did no work as an MP whatsoever, and had 5,000 emails unanswered until she employed said assistant (via expenses, of course).

I suppose that there will be a General Election soon anyway and that, if this waste of space stands, she will get only about 10 votes, or at least only a few hundred (depending on how many Africans in Peterborough are totally stupid).

The Onasanya case proves yet again what a load of useless trash many MPs are now. In this case, her only known jobs are 18 months working as trainee (making the tea?) at a few law firms. At the age of 35. We should find some island somewhere and start deporting. Tristan da Cunha? Target number? In the millions.

Further Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Huhne

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Huhne#Controversy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicky_Pryce#Conviction

Update, 31 January 2019

Well, I had no idea that the Attorney-General reads and takes account of my blogging! Only joking…but it seems that the A-G is considering whether to refer Fiona Onasanya’s sentence to the Court of Appeal as “unduly lenient”.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6650437/Jailed-Labour-MP-Fiona-Onasanya-faces-having-sentence-extended.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-47071120

Update, 26 February 2019

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6744321/Speeding-fine-lie-MP-FREED.html

Fiona Onasanya, still an MP and likely to remain one until the next general election, was released after only 28 days in prison. I guessed right on that.

Update, 5 March 2019

Fiona Onasanya lost her appeal, in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) against conviction. In theory, she might appeal to the Supreme Court, but it is unlikely that that would be allowed, there not being (as it seems) grounds for such appeal. It is doubtful too whether legal aid would be forthcoming for it, and Fiona Onasanya has no means with which to pursue a privately-paid appeal, though it occurs to me that it is in her financial interest, possibly, at least to make application to appeal, in that, as noted here above, she is getting (net of tax) about £1,000 (in pay) and a similar amount for her London rent, utilities etc paid to her (on Parliamentary expenses) for every week in which she still sits as MP, despite disgrace, despite conviction, despite imprisonment, despite the fact that “her assistant has said (to a newspaper) that she did no work as an MP whatsoever, and had 5,000 emails unanswered until she employed said assistant (via expenses, of course)“. Typical. Most of Africa is in near-chaos for the same reasons, because most blacks are incapable of organization…

So far, there have been no active moves made to start the procedure of recall, because the criminal appeal process is still active, even if only notionally. I expect that Fiona Onasanya will be able to hang on as MP until the Summer, if not until the end of the year. To stop her clinging on until the next general election, there has to be the political equivalent of stamping on her fingers, meaning

  • an end to the appeals process;
  • a Recall Petition in proper form;
  • a petition signed by at least 7,000 people in Peterborough;
  • a by-election.

https://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2019-03-05/onasanya-how-can-an-mp-be-recalled/

Update, 18 March 2019

The deadhead has now made a video appealing to Peterborough voters to keep her as MP. She really must think that the people of Peterborough are as thick as she is! My guess? If there is a recall petition before a General Election, then I think that it will be voted for overwhelmingly, and that, in the subsequent by-election, she will get a vote of somewhere around 2%. Of course, in the meantime, because she is appealing her conviction, she is still receiving her over £77,000 p.a. salary, plus expenses such as a paid-for London flat (with all utilities, Council Tax etc also paid for).

https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/18/disgraced-mp-fiona-onasanya-films-odd-video-begging-voters-save-job-8933948/

ps. I liked the bit where she says that, if kept on as MP, she will use “all her veracity”! I thought that Pinocchio was Italian, not Nigerian!

Update, 4 April 2019

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/03/fiona-onasanya-discriminated-against-disabled-employee-had-use/

The creature (Fiona Onasanya) could not pronounce “eligible” or “ineligible”, saying “illegible” (i.e. did not know the difference!).

She is still on Twitter, and still tweeting as if the axe will not soon fall on her whole life and lifestyle!

Update, 30 April 2019

It seems all but inevitable that tomorrow a recall petition will approve the sacking of Fiona Onasanya and the calling of a by-election which might result in Brexit Party scoring a hit:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6975823/Nigel-Farages-Brexit-Party-plans-bid-MP-Commons.html

Update, 1 May 2019

It would be incredible if Farage stood for the seat and captured it (despite the fact that “Brexit Party” is obviously rather far from my position ideologically).

Update, 7 May 2019

The by-election will be held on 6 June 2019 (the anniversary of the Normandy Landings of 1944! You couldn’t make it up!) and, while Nigel Farage will not be standing, the Brexit Party will be putting up a candidate. Nominations close on 9 May. Look at the rally below. According to local newspapers, nearly 2,000 people. In a provincial city. In England.

(In fact, the photo there may not be of Brexit Party’s meeting)

As for Fiona Onasanya, she has now been removed as MP, and will almost certainly be expelled (struck off) from the solicitors’ profession (in which she only practised for about a year anyway). She is already effectively forgotten and will soon be back on the dole.

Update, 8 August 2019

Fiona Onasanya has, as expected, now been struck off the solicitors’ roll.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/aug/06/former-labour-mp-fiona-onasanya-struck-off-as-a-solicitor

Update, 16 June 2020

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8423841/Disgraced-ex-MP-Fiona-Onasanya-slams-Kelloggs-using-MONKEY-mascot-Coco-Pops.html

Update, 19 June 2021

A few people have looked at these pages today, so I decided to look at the Twitter output of Fiona Onasanya. I found that she still tweets:

The fact that creatures like Fiona Onasanya were and still are selected as Labour candidates was one major reason why Labour started to slide from being a major party to becoming a niche party appealing to blacks, browns, public service workers and a few other groups.

Self-Publicizing Supposed “Top Lawyer” Mark Lewis: Full Transcript of Disciplinary Hearing Judgment Now Released by Tribunal

Full transcript of the judgment in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal hearing

http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/sites/default/files-sdt/11856.2018.Lewis_.pdf

Background

Regular readers of this blog will have noticed that I have recently blogged several times (see Previous Blog Posts on Mark Lewis, below) about one-time supposed “top lawyer” Mark Lewis (supposed to be such at least by an uncritical Zionist-influenced msm). The Jew-Zionist solicitor has now emigrated to Israel. His years of self-publicizing and abusive behaviour have finally resulted in his being brought to justice: he has been found guilty on charges brought by the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority (though the sentence was far too lenient). No matter. He has finally been brought into a measure of well-merited disgrace; at least some —a very small percentage of— his abusive activity has been recognized officially and he has been, so to speak, branded or tattooed accordingly.

He will almost certainly not now practise law again. In England and Wales, a solicitor engaged in UK-centred work has to be either a partner or other member of a firm of solicitors (or the legal department of a company, government office etc), or must be approved and properly regulated as a sole practitioner. Lewis is neither, and has already stated that he will not be seeking Admission to the Bar of Israel. There are also other factors here.

In my opinion, the story spun by Lewis and promoted (and/or not challenged) by his friends in the UK Jewish Zionist lobby including those in the Press and on TV, is largely a construct. I don’t just mean about his abusive social media presence, but his “back-story” in general.

Lewis was brought up in Manchester. A recent documentary about him (covering his medical treatment in Israel etc) interviewed some old woman one-time neighbour who had helped him much when he was young. She said that Lewis’s father had abused him as a child, physically. Was that when he himself became an obstreperous bullying lout?

Later, Lewis attended what was then Middlesex Polytechnic, rather than Oxford, Cambridge, any London university college or even the University of Manchester. The reason is unclear. Maybe he was not so good academically, maybe he had other reasons; as a fair judge, I do not discount that possibility: I myself was offered places at Oxford, Reading and University College London, but chose, for several reasons too collateral to waste space on here, to attend a less-prestigious university (Westminster). In England, these things are sometimes given undue weight. For example, the highly “successful” billionaire, Lord Ashcroft, attended what was at the time called, apparently, Mid-Essex Technical College.

Lewis commenced articles as a solicitor in 1988 but little seems to be known about his first 13 years as a solicitor (certainly I myself know nothing of it). Lewis eventually joined a firm of solicitors in Manchester as a partner, in 2001, at the age of 35. The events between then and his leaving that firm in acrimonious circumstances are opaque but it is not disputed that by or about 2009 he was either divorced or separated from his first wife, and had left that Manchester firm. He gave a newspaper interview in 2011 in which he seemed to be saying that he had had a near nervous breakdown, during which time he had a “punk” hairstyle, dressed in like manner and (if I recall aright) had a ring through either his nose or his ear. He also drove an open-top sports car. At the age of about 44…He himself has said that his earnings in or about 2009 were only about £9,000. The Disciplinary Tribunal heard that in fact he had spent nearly a year unemployed.

“Lewis was having a crisis. “I’ve got peroxide blond hair, an earring and am wearing skinny jeans to the office because I don’t give a f**k. Everything has gone wrong. Apart from losing the house and everything else, I’ve also got MS. It’s horrendous. I could have claimed benefits, but I chose not to.” [Evening Standard interview, 2011]

Lewis added, in that same interview:

“I was devastated,” he says. “I’d been turned down for so many jobs, I’m thinking to myself, I can’t go on any more, you can only get so many knockbacks. I’m giving in and going to my flat in Israel and retire in Eilat.”

Lewis joined the small London law firm, Taylor Hampton, which over the years has had mixed reviews. Even so, Lewis was only taken on as a “consultant”, i.e. a kind of semi-freelancer working on commission. This firm handled most of the briefly-notorious “phonehacking” cases. Lewis got a retainer of £6,000 gross per month. Later, he (as before) fell out with his employer and ended up years later suing them for, as he grandly told the Press, “a seven-figure sum”, but had to settle for virtually nothing in the end. The senior partner of the firm testified, diplomatically, that he “was unsure what work Mark Lewis had been doing” on the occasions when he actually attended the office!

There is a pattern here: Lewis talking big, swaggering around in showy but cheapish clothes (such as his infamous £149 Zara orange short overcoat…), telling the Press all about what huge work he is doing, what a legal star he is etc, as in a 2013 interview with an online legal site called, perhaps not so accurately, “Superlawyers”!

“I keep getting offers for my story, which is amusing,” Lewis says. “Hollywood has started talking. I guess we will soon find out who does the story. It is rather funny to see discussions as to which actor will play me in a film.” [Superlawyers interview, 2013]

So uncritical were the interviewers that their article started with:

Don’t be surprised if a film is soon made about Mark Lewis, a media law, libel and privacy lawyer with Taylor Hampton Solicitors in London. Think All the President’s Men, except, instead of a newspaper uncovering the dirty tricks of politicians and lawyers, you’d have a lawyer helping uncover the dirty tricks of certain newspapers. Instead of the president of the United States resigning (along with collateral damage), you’d have the largest circulation newspaper in the country folding (along with collateral damage).

The interviewers were perhaps unaware that the “superlawyer” being interviewed by them lived at the time in one room (a London “bedsit”)!

Another leitmotif of “Mark Lewis Lawyer” (his one-time Twitter handle), along with big self-promoting talk, is a deflated balloon at the end. So

  • Lewis was going to sue and did sue Taylor Hampton for £1M-£2M, but ended up with little more than a kick in the rear;
  • likewise, he posed as the great libel specialist: members of the public are probably unaware that defamation is not, in actuality, a very difficult area of law intellectually (and judging purely from those of his cases I myself read about, such as the elementary “Jack Monroe”/Katie Hopkins matter, the law was straightforward and the facts simple);
  • he made up a lot of nonsense when he married Z-list one-time “celebrity” Caroline Feraday (most famous perhaps for having been sacked from her BBC Radio London job via a text message!); Lewis was, they both told their tame “journalists”, going to service his American clients from their new Hollywood home, while she had been cast in an American TV sitcom, and was also writing a book in which “several studios” were interested. Why do people make up such lies? And did Lewis actually have any American clients? Possible but doubtful. A New York Times profile mentioned three possible cases with a New York nexus. As he soon discovered, he was not permitted to offer legal services in California, being unqualified in any US state. He seems not even to have known that! Or was it all just a farrago of lies and nonsense? (the marriage soon collapsed, within about a year: I am speculating, but wondered whether the pair had not in fact unconsciously or semi-consciously conned each other, the one posing as the great celebrity lawyer and the other as the famous celebrity radio and TV presenter…);
  • as a partner at the well-known medium-sized London law firm, Seddons (from 2015), on a retainer of £10,000 a month (gross), he —as at his previous firms— stopped going to the office, in this case in April 2018, apparently following a traffic accident (I myself am rather shocked that someone in his physical and mental condition was even allowed to drive a car);
  • oh, and there of course never was a Hollywood film about Lewis and/or phonehacking. In fact, tweet threads from 2013-2014 between Lewis and American lawyers revealed not only that they suspected that he was trying to get work in California while unqualified, but that they had never previously heard of him! Phonehacking was a purely UK obsession (now superseded by technology, of course).

A further leitmotif of the Mark Lewis case, along with how credulous the msm is or was about Lewis (often calling him “renowned libel lawyer”, “foremost media lawyer” etc), has been how ready they were and still are not to print anything detrimental about him, such as reporting the recent Tribunal verdict…Guilty…

The Disciplinary Tribunal Judgment

The judgment can be read in full via the link I have provided. I have examined some of the evidence, and in at least some detail, in my previous blog posts about Lewis.

Lewis told the Tribunal that he now —in the Judgment’s summary– “had no assets…owned no house…owned no car, just his clothes and a mobility scooter which he valued at about £1,200.” Also:

He had no job. His employment was terminated by Seddons [in] September 2018.

Note that last: not “he resigned”, but “his employment was terminated by” [his employers]…

I suspect that Seddons are relieved to be shot of him. “Never went to the office after April 2018…unable to write because hand paralyzed” (because of MS) etc…all that and also violently abusive while medicated (or while not medicated, as I myself discovered around 2013!). Not exactly a welcome addition to any law firm, I should have thought. [#WashedUp…]

The Judgment continues:

The Respondent [Lewis] received a Mobility Car in lieu of Disability Living Allowance.”

He appears to have given up his contemptuous dismissal of State benefits, on display in that narcissistic 2011 interview…yes, you cannot judge others until you have walked a bit in their moccasins…

Lewis’s own Counsel asked the Tribunal to take into account the fact that “[Lewis] was someone with no means at all”…

Another point made in the Judgment is that the £10,000 costs awarded against Lewis will in all likelihood not be collected, because in hardship cases like his, the Authority does not press for them. In any case, the Judgment sums could never be collected from him now that he is in Israel permanently (supposedly). I believe that I read somewhere that the monies (over £13,000) collected on Lewis’s behalf by (mainly) Jew wellwishers on crowdfunding sites will be refunded. Possibly. Or maybe the donated monies will keep him and Mandy Gargoyle in hummus and pitta bread for a while.

Previous Blog Posts on Mark Lewis

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/19/the-latest-revelations-about-zionist-supposed-top-lawyer-mark-lewis/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/13/more-details-about-mark-lewis-lawyer-and-his-abusive-social-media-presence/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/11/mark-lewis-lawyer-disciplinary-case-now-updated-to-11-december-2018/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/23/mark-lewis-lawyer-tries-to-have-part-of-the-case-against-him-thrown-out/

Notes

http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/sites/default/files-sdt/11856.2018.Lewis_.pdf

http://www.lordashcroft.com/about/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ashcroft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglia_Ruskin_University

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Ashcroft_International_Business_School

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/mark-lewis-my-ms-consultant-told-me-not-to-do-anything-stressful-so-i-went-after-murdochs-phone-6370688.html

https://www.timesofisrael.com/uks-foremost-libel-lawyer-sets-his-sights-on-israels-enemies/

https://www.timesofisrael.com/europe-is-finished-leading-lawyer-says-as-he-leaves-uk-for-israel/

https://www.superlawyers.com/london/article/one-rogue-solicitor/2320f264-f989-4888-9cbb-bd3d43703ba9.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00m3x6b

https://www.bcllegal.com/the-brief/a-day-in-the-life-of/a-day-in-the-life-of-mark-lewis-media-law-libel-privacy-reputation-management-confidentiality-and-intellectual-property-solicitor-at-taylor-hampton

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2184723/RICHARD-KAY-DJ-Caroline-Feradays-brief-encounter.html

http://www.richard-designs.com/magazine/as-seen-in/caroline-feraday-ties-the-knot

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2257251/Axed-radio-presenter-Caroline-Feraday-hits-BBC-dropping-text-months-Danny-Bakers-infamous-air-tirade.html

I wonder if this report (below) was true? If so, someone made a pretty silly decision back in 2002 …but that was about a decade before she made an even sillier one (getting involved with “top lawyer” Lewis)

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/oct/31/broadcasting.bbc2

170217-lewis-die-e1533384703639

Even Jews are (again) tweeting against Lewis

[For those who are unaware, Gideon Falter is, or wants to be considered as, a leading UK-based Jew-Zionist. He has given “disputed” testimony in a number of civil and criminal matters.

Falter has not been convicted of anything (as far as I know)].

In fact, since it became known that Lewis was abusive to a Jew (rather than non-Jews only…) his support from Jews generally has largely dried up. Et tu, Brute?

Link below: Lewis tried to get money this way too! Maybe the company below would like to redesignate him now as a Great Israeli Speaker, now that he is an Israeli citizen (though he was almost incoherent the last time I saw a clip of him making a statement…)

https://www.greatbritishspeakers.co.uk/mark-lewis-media-lawyer-leveson-inquiry-speaker

Update, 21 December 2018

https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/exclusive-judge-in-mark-lewis-case-compared-israel-to-nazis/

The Jewish lobby has managed to turn up one member of the SDT panel who was not a complete doormat for Israel, and the whole cabal is now screaming and screeching about how Lewis was unfairly judged and how the Tribunal should “reconsider” its verdict etc. The behaviour of these screeching creatures is itself likely to create “anti-Semitism”!

I am wondering what the “claque” wants. After all, Lewis was not struck off the roll (as he surely would have been, decades ago…), nor even suspended. The fine was small and covered by crowdfunding. As for the costs (also crowdfunded), they will not be pressed anyway.

So what this clamour is for is to make some kind of Jewish Zionist propaganda point. Lewis will still be unemployed and unemployable even if the SDT verdict and sentence is overturned (it will not be). Lewis will still be perambulating along the Corniche (or whatever it is called) in Tel Aviv, whether on his mobility scooter or pushed in his wheelchair, whatever transpires re. any appeal.

Lewis has no reputation left, surely, not in the London legal community. I cannot see any law firm actually wanting to employ him. His best bet is for one of the Jew Zionist billionaires in the UK (or Monte?) to stake him to the tune of a hundred grand or so. Perhaps he will strike lucky that way… Come to think of it, if his fellow Zionists (“standing with Israel” from North London armchairs and Twitter accounts) value Lewis so much, they can all send him a fiver a month. Surely he has 100 admirers? Oh…

Lewis has the right of appeal (to the Administrative Court), and 21 days from 13 December (when the Judgment was published) in which to lodge an appeal. So until 3 January 2019. I doubt that he will appeal, though. It would surely be pointless (even were he to win) and might result only in another multi-day “trial” with a similar result.

http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/constitutions-and-procedures/appeals

Update, 22 December 2018

Jewish Zionist extremist Jonathan Hoffman (of “Sussex Friends of Israel”) has now set up a petition to the effect that the verdict and sentence in the Mark Lewis case should be declared “null and void”.

https://www.change.org/p/edward-nally-justice-for-mark

So far (at time of writing), only 224 persons have signed the petition supporting Lewis. That’s about 1 out of every 300,000 people in the UK, or to put it another way, 1 out of about every 1,200 Jews in the UK.

Hoffman seems to imagine that all that is required to void the proceedings and result of them is for the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal to make a declaration! The couple of dozen other Jew-Zionists (several of them lawyers!) who have tweeted similarly appear to be under the same delusion.

In reality, the Tribunal panel member objected to was only one of three, and was not even the Chairman of the panel. If Lewis thinks that the verdict or sentence should be set aside, he need only lodge notice of appeal by 3 January 2019. No doubt the Administrative Court will do exactly as he and/or his extremist “claque” and clique of supporters would wish (ha ha!— I am of course being heavily ironic or satirical, and quite possibly sarcastic…).

Again, I fail to see what even Lewis himself would gain from either any successful appeal (highly unlikely though such success would be) or from some unilateral act of hara-kiri by the Tribunal.

Lewis was not struck off the solicitors’ roll by the SDT; he was not even suspended. His £10,000 costs penalty, which the Tribunal implied would almost certainly not even be collected by the SRA (by reason of his impecuniosity), has been crowdfunded, as has his fine of £2,500. The SDT finding and sentence does not stop Lewis from working as a solicitor, if (a big if!) he can get any law firm to employ him, or alternatively if he complies with the necessary regulations to practise as a sole practitioner.

In reality, Lewis was leaving the UK for Israel anyway. One can see why (and it is not because he and his ghastly partner/carer are in the slightest afraid of British “anti-Semitism”): Lewis has a progressive/degenerative medical condition, MS, which has worsened in the past few years. He is unable to walk properly and has either to use a mobility scooter, or to be pushed in a wheelchair, or (until he left for Israel) to drive himself in the car supplied to him (thanks to the “antisemitic” British taxpayer…) by Motability in lieu of Disability Living Allowance.

Lewis had not attended his place of work (at Seddons, the London law firm) since March 2018, by reason of his medical condition, which was made worse by some kind of traffic accident. He became unable to write. When Seddons heard of the complaints against Lewis to the SRA (or when the upcoming Tribunal hearing was publicized), Seddons terminated Lewis’s employment, in September 2018, on 6 months’ notice, though presenting it at the time as if the reason, or sole reason, for the termination was that Lewis was emigrating permanently to Israel.

While of course I do not know the details of Lewis’s billing performance etc at Seddons, he was on a pay package of £10,000 a month (gross), presumably (educated guess) with the possibility of a bonus or percentage if he exceeded that amount of billed work over a period. In Tribunal, it was said by Lewis’s Counsel that his assets as of November 2018 were just his clothes, his mobility scooter and a pension which was worth £70 a week or less. That, and his £10,000 a month pay, payable only until March 2019.

Reading between the lines, one can see that, while Lewis’s assiduous courting of the “occupied” UK mass media brought Seddons publicity (a mixed blessing, I should have thought!), Lewis obviously was not bringing in or doing much billed work. In short, he was not worth his salt even before he stopped actual work (or even attending his office) in March 2018. Seddons seem to have treated Lewis rather well, inasmuch as they carried him totally for six months before terminating his contract. To be frank, I was astonished to read, in 2015, that a well-known firm such as Seddons had taken Lewis on. I expect that they lived to regret it.

To return to the main point, Lewis had already decided to leave the UK for Israel. He knew (probably years in advance, as I did when Jew-Zionists made malicious complaint against me to the Bar Standards Board, an analogous situation) that he was going to be “put on trial” at Tribunal and that Seddons would probably not keep him on, so he (again, educated guess and I may be mistaken) kept it quiet from Seddons as long as he could, to keep getting the £10,000 a month (after tax, assuming that he paid it, so about £7,000 a month net).

Lewis now has little future as a lawyer, but that has really nothing to do with the verdict of the Tribunal. Lewis never denied posting the violent and crazed messages wherewith he was charged. Indeed, he justified himself in respect of the non-Jew victims, though he was willing to crawl a bit to the father of the 18-y-o Jew victim.

In other words, Lewis’s behaviour was exposed at Tribunal, and even were he to appeal and to win any appeal (unlikely anyway), any potential employers or clients will be aware of what he wrote; also aware that Lewis has been and presumably still is sometimes non compos mentis by reason of either his medical condition, or its effects on the brain, or the medication used in respect of that. I would not want a lawyer like that; few would.

Lewis has also stated that he will not be making application to join the Bar of Israel.

I can only assume that Lewis will be living off a number of income sources while living in Israel:

  • his partner/carer is apparently a buy-to-let parasite in the UK and/or has other business interests; she has stated that she will be buying property in Israel;
  • Lewis will still be able to get some UK Disability Living Allowance (paid for by all those “antisemitic” British taxpayers…) in Israel, indefinitely. Yes, only up to maybe £100 a week or so, but hey!…;
  • I have no idea what disability benefits Israel offers, but I suppose that there are some;
  • Lewis has a £70 a week private pension;
  • Israel offers considerable “Aliyah” (emigration/immigration) benefits (see Notes, below), which, by the way, include a one-way free flight to Israel, financial help, housing benefit etc;
  • I would not be surprised to discover that his Jewish Zionist supporters in the UK will be covertly remitting him some charity monies informally; indeed, it is not beyond the possible that some wealthy Jews will remit him larger sums, who knows?

This individual, Lewis, is the Jew Zionist who, having conspired behind the scenes against me for years (since 2013, if not before that),

  • was one of the Jews covertly behind the malicious complaint about me to the Bar Standards Board by “UK Lawyers for Israel” (where he is or was a leading member);
  • was involved in the malicious complaint against me by the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” (where he is still an “Honorary Patron”, oddly described as Dr. Mark Lewis, maybe because he was given an honorary degree by Middlesex Poly/Uni a few years ago) to Essex Police; and
  • repeatedly tweeted about me that I was or am “a sad unemployable git” and “failure as barrister, failure as human being”!

Now look who’s talking! An incoherent, washed-up, foul-mouthed, disgraced, twice-divorced Jew Zionist, living in Israel on benefits, charity and off his “partner/carer”, and incapable of doing anything except tweeting and being pushed around in a wheelchair.

Notes

http://www.jewishagency.org/aliyah-benefits/program/8231

https://www.gov.uk/claim-benefits-abroad/where-you-can-claim-benefits

https://antisemitism.uk/about/patrons/

Update, 13 January 2019

Hoffman’s absurd online petition to the SRA demanding (ignorantly) that the SDT or SRA “overturn” the verdict in the Lewis case has now effectively come to its end, with 411 signatories. 411 out of about 250,000+ Jews in the UK (and about 65,000,000 non-Jews).

Update, 7 March 2019

More about the “Mark Lewis Lawyer” whom his Jew-Zionist cronies on Twitter etc always refer to as “top lawyer”, “top defamation specialist” and such nonsense; “Mark Lewis Lawyer”, such a “top lawyer” that his income is now zero and his sole assets are his cheap clothes and a mobility scooter! Sacked by his last three (or four) employers. Oh, and here is another dissatisfied former client…

https://twitter.com/RealNatalieRowe/status/1103432273272160256

Update, 23 October 2019

Seems that Lewis’s ex-wife, Caroline Feraday, has also fallen on hard times, living in a “Nowheresville” in California with her young daughter (Caroline Feraday is now a single mother). She says that she is unable to raise a mere $10,000 [£7,700], despite having some kind of (“office bod”?) job, and so has turned to GoFundMe. Strange. She was featured, in the past (in newspapers), a decade ago though, as having property of considerable value both in the UK and Brazil (in Copacabana, Rio de Janeiro) as well as (since 2013) in California.

Surprisingly, she has, and within only one day (at time of writing), managed to raise nearly $2,000 of the $10,000 for which she asks.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/legal-fees-dealing-with-stalkerharassment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agoura_Hills,_California

Update, 23 February 2020

Following the publication of the above article and updates, Lewis arranged to be a “partner” (a flexible term) at a small, mainly if not wholly Jewish law firm based in mews somewhere in or near Notting Hill, in West London. He seems to spend most of his time at his flat in Eilat, Israel (though at the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal in 2018, Lewis’s Counsel told those judging him that Lewis had no peoperty…).

Lewis was retained by two notorious Jew-Zionists (an actress and a daytime TV game show presenter) to hunt down and sue ~70 Labour Party members alleged to have tweeted libellous matter. So far, no case has actually come to court, as far as I know.

Lewis also, with others (I understand from an account read that there were three law firms and also six barristers on the winning side, if I understood correctly), was recently instructed in an employment case in the High Court at London, and where the claimant was awarded substantial damages, with about a million pounds of legal costs awarded or (as I think) agreed. So presumably he will get a good cut of that.

marklewislawyer

[above: Lewis interviewed recently in London by an Internet (YouTube) “TV station”]

ds5

The Latest Revelations About Zionist “Top Lawyer”, Mark Lewis

Many will have read my previous blog posts about “Mark Lewis Lawyer”

download

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/13/more-details-about-mark-lewis-lawyer-and-his-abusive-social-media-presence/

and

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/11/mark-lewis-lawyer-disciplinary-case-now-updated-to-11-december-2018/

and

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/23/mark-lewis-lawyer-tries-to-have-part-of-the-case-against-him-thrown-out/

The Law Society Gazette has now published more news about Lewis and his “trial” in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal etc.

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/mark-lewis-judgment-reveals-sdt-considered-reprimand/5068711.article

Lewis only had to pay a third of the fine considered by the SDT panel because:

“In its full decision published this week the SDT said it eventually came to the conclusion that a reprimand would not be a strong enough punishment and that a fine would be the most appropriate outcome. However, it reduced the fine from an initial estimate of £7,500 to £2,500 on account of Lewis’s financial struggles.”

The disciplinary panel judging and sentencing Lewis considered that:

“In mitigation, the tribunal accepted Lewis’ submission that he had limited means. He did not own his own house and [his] monthly expenses exceeded his liabilities.”

[“…expenses exceeded his liabilities”? The Law Society Gazette either needs a (literate) sub-editor or one with better hearing, unless the SDT panel themselves do not speak English properly! No matter. Illiteracy is par for the course in online newspapers…]

The Law Society Gazette says that the SDT panel added that:

 “Although his former firm Seddons is paying him £10,000 per month before tax this was due to end in March [2019].”

What’s this? The “top lawyer”, “top libel and reputation specialist” etc has “financial struggles”? When for most of the past decade he has been tweeting and telling newspapers all about what a big success he is, with his classic cars and international client-base?

Either Lewis is not quite the “top lawyer” and huge success he has been claiming to be for the past 7+ years, or he was “economical with the truth” at the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal. One way or another he has been telling what the Cockneys call “porkies”! That’s not very kosher!

So the “top lawyer”, with his supposed millions from the “phonehacking” racket and well-publicized libel cases etc, does not own his own house? (in London, that is— he does have or had an apartment in Israel, according to a newspaper article several years ago).

Still, the fact that the SDT thinks that someone getting (after tax) pay of about £7,000 a month is “financially struggling” says more about London law firms than about Lewis, arguende! (that pay is in fact considerably less, in real terms, i.e. taking inflation into account, than I was once paid, when active as an offshore lawyer many many years ago).

So much for the “top lawyer” who now seems to be (to use one of Lewis’s insults to me) just “an unemployable git”!

The way Lewis managed to bamboozle the UK msm and so the poor duped UK public into believing that he was —or even still is— a “top lawyer” etc reminds me rather of the front once put up by another Jewish Zionist, the not so late and certainly unlamented “Robert Maxwell”, who has now also “relocated” to Israel, though he is not quite in a position to enjoy it. Maxwell never fooled me (even when I was in my late teens, in the mid-1970s); neither did Lewis.

19 December 2018: A few more thoughts

I just realized that the “British” Press, which for years has been publishing Lewis’s self-publicizing bull and pronouncements on legal issues as if he were a cross between Lord Denning and Oliver Wendell Holmes (with a dose of George Carman), has not seen fit to report on the supposed “top lawyer” being found guilty of online abuse; neither, therefore, has the (Jewish-Zionist-owned or strongly influenced) UK msm reported the fact that Lewis was let off lightly because he

  • was under the influence of prescription drugs (or so he testified to the Disciplinary Tribunal: strange that his unprovoked online abuse aimed at me —see previous blog posts— started years before he was on any experimental trial in respect of his MS condition and therefore before he was on the drugs used by his advocates in Tribunal to mitigate his bad behaviour);
  • “is of limited means” and “is struggling financially”.

Only the specifically Jewish “community” Press (eg the Jewish Chronicle) and the legal profession’s newspapers etc reported the outcome of Lewis’s “trial”. Quite a contrast with what happened to me in 2016 (anyone interested should just Google “Ian Millard barrister”…)! 

“They” certainly look after their own…

And a further thought yet…

If Lewis is “struggling financially” and has no real property in the UK, it must (?) be presumed that he never did get the £1 Million or more damages he claimed from his former firm (he was a “consultant” there), Taylor Hampton.

Lewis claimed the money in respect (mainly, it seems) of various “phonehacking” cases prior to his departure (supposedly to live in Los Angeles) in 2013 (see previous blog posts about that particular piece of Lewis BS…).

Either Lewis failed in his case against Taylor Hampton solicitors, or he settled for a very very great deal less than the “seven figure sum” he briefed about at the time to the tame UK Press…

The managing partner of Taylor Hampton solicitors was reported by the legal press as having testified that he “was unsure what work Lewis actually did” while engaged (on what seems to have been a generous retainer) by the firm, which countersued Lewis in that case (which seems to have settled at the last minute on a non-disclosure basis).

More Lewis BS, in other words…thank God we seem to have seen the end of him.

Are the UK Police the New Lawmakers? Where Are the Limits of the Law?

My attention was caught by the Daily Mail report below.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6500245/Thames-Valley-Police-not-punish-caught-heroin-cocaine-controversial-scheme.html

In fact, the practice of not arresting or charging those caught with various “illegal” drugs has been going on for years in the UK. The Thames Valley force may have extended it to a previously unheard-of extent but the rot (if that is what it is) set in decades ago, when some police chiefs decided that the terribly-valuable time of their officers was wasted in arresting persons found in possession of small amounts of cannabis. Subject to correction, I believe that it was London Metropolitan Police officer Brian Paddick [see Notes, below] who, as Borough Commander of the bandit country which included Brixton, first introduced the policy.

Let’s pause right there. A police officer —fairly senior, so be it— decides, arbitrarily, that he is not going to enforce a law, or not always going to do so. There are arguments to be made in favour of decriminalizing some (or all) now-generally-illegal drugs, but that is a decision for the legislature, Parliament, to make, not a police officer.

Now there has always been a measure of “police discretion”, as when (forgive any possible anachronism around a policeman actually patrolling an area and so actually being in a position to catch someone doing something forbidden) a policeman finds a child “scrumping” (technically, stealing) apples or pears from an orchard or garden, that policeman then deciding to deliver a stern on-the-spot warning rather than arresting the child. Likewise, the motorist getting a ticking-off from a traffic cop rather than a speeding ticket for travelling a few miles per hour over the set limit. However, the examples given are minor crimes by any estimation. Possessing forbidden drugs may be considered minor by some, but not by most, even today. That becomes even more so when the drugs are “harder” than marijuana.

There is the other point that a distinction can be made between a policeman deciding to exercize discretion in a particular case, and a policeman (at higher level) deciding not to enforce certain laws as a matter of his own decision and in the geographic area under his command.

This is of course a grey area, but it is troubling when a police force decides, on its own initiative, to abrogate the plain words of valid legislation. True, there are many laws still on the statute books which are no longer applied, crimes which are no longer prosecuted, but they are mostly those which have fallen into desuetude by reason of effluxion of time: one good example of a crime which has not been prosecuted for several hundred years (if ever) is that of “entering the precincts of Parliament while dressed in a suit of armour”. For other bizarre examples, see the links in the Notes, below.

Those old crimes, still technically criminal but never prosecuted, are an amusement. What, however, about things which are not crimes at all, but which the police, under the influence of political correctness or pressure (usually from the Jewish lobby) have decided to treat as crimes or quasi-crimes? Another grey area? I have blogged previously about how Jew-Zionists made malicious complaint against me to Essex Police (about 2 years ago, in late 2016/early 2017):

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/13/when-i-was-a-victim-of-a-malicious-zionist-complaint/

In that case, the police were notionally acting in pursuance of a wrongheaded, badly-drafted but technically valid and quite recent law: Communications Act 2003, s.127, but were trying to stretch its ambit so that views expressed which were dissenting, dissident, controversial and (according to some Jews, at least) “offensive”, became “grossly offensive” and so could in principle be caught by the Act.

In “my case”, the prosecution never happened because (it now appears) the Crown Prosecution Service [CPS] (and at a high level, in Whitehall…) took the commonsense view that a successful prosecution was both unlikely to succeed and not in the public interest. Leaks from the police, however, now make plain that some of their officers were completely in the pocket of an aggressive Jewish-Zionist cabal (the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” or “CAA”); one police officer in particular seems to have acted effectively as an advocate on behalf of the CAA to the CPS, advocating for me and others (persons unknown to me) to be prosecuted. He lost his professional objectivity completely, it seems; thankfully (for me and for the rule of law) he was over-ruled. Bitter herbs for him, perhaps.

The “Campaign Against Antisemitism” or “CAA” is now itself the subject of various police investigations around misuse of its charitable status; also, as some readers will be aware, one of its leading members, Stephen Silverman, was said (it was admitted) in open court (and by the CAA’s own lawyer) to have been an anonymous (pseudonymous) and sadistic Internet troll who stalked various women online.

More recently, in Summer 2018, I was harassed by a police constable based at Barnet, North London (which is effectively occupied territory), at the behest of a Jewish woman who had been firmly put in her place by Andrew Torba, CEO of the online GAB platform. That Jewish individual had demanded that Torba remove various accounts from his GAB platform (which is based in USA and Caribbean) and she had had the gall to threaten Torba online and publicly with “Scotland Yard”! Torba posted all the conversation on GAB and told her in very blunt terms to, er, “get lost”! Many GAB and Twitter account-holders also told her to “get lost”!

I was accused of having reposted one reply to that woman from Torba (which repost would in fact not be a crime in the UK anyway), but that did not stop PC…well, let’s just call him Plod…from sending me an (undated!) “Warning Notice” re. “harassment”, which under English law has to consist of at least two incidents, both of which have to be unlawful, whereas here was one (alleged) incident and that entirely lawful even on its face!

It was clear to me that the Jewish Zionist woman complainant, smarting from the whipping given to her online by Andrew Torba, had decided to make an entirely malicious complaint against me. I should add that she is or was a member or supporter of the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” and at one time used to tweet prolifically and negatively about me. The point is that the police should have realized that her complaint was both malicious and had no basis at all in law. They did not. They chose not to. Very alarming…

It is worrying when the police not only do not know the law they purport to be applying, but actually try to continue to insist that what is not the law actually is! Plod not only telephoned me at least once, but emailed me intimidatingly (as he thought) and, as said, sent a semi-literate, undated and completely ineffective (legally ineffective) “Warning Notice” to me.

What made that incident worse was the feeling that the police in Barnet were running wild and were not acting properly under law. I heard (though this was never confirmed) that “the said Jewish woman” is the ex-wife of one of the “Shomrim” faux-police or private Jewish police, who are based, it has been said online (correctly or not), at the building(s) of the Barnet Police! A private tribal militia operating out of London police stations? It would have been thought incredible only a few years ago.

I could have taken the above-mentioned matter further via official complaint against PC Plod, who, in my view, came close to committing “misconduct in a public office”, but contented myself with writing a detailed letter both to the Borough Commander in Barnet and to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner. Even then, after some time, Plod harassed me via email once more! Only when I provided a face-saving way for him to get lost, did he.

I perceive a degree of drift here: the police deciding not to apply some laws on a blanket basis, in other cases as good as making up the law as they go along. Taken further, those tendencies could together collapse the rule of law in the UK entirely.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Paddick,_Baron_Paddick

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3107160/No-armour-Parliament-never-handle-salmon-suspiciously-drunk-pub-ILLEGAL-Bizarre-Medieval-laws-stand-Britain-today.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-strangest-weird-laws-enforced-christopher-sargeant-sturgeon-armour-a7232586.html

https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/religion/overview/witchcraft/

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06411

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/03/police-harassment-warning-notices-diane-louise-jordan

http://www.heritageanddestiny.com/revealed-how-britains-leading-jews-lobbied-prime-minister-to-block-faurisson-and-leuchter/

Update, 24 January 2019

https://www.infowars.com/uk-hate-crime-police-investigate-mans-thinking-after-he-criticized-transgenderism/

https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/humberside-police-transgender-twitter-thinking-2466084

Update, 20 May 2019

I saw a couple of Peter Hitchens articles…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7019091/PETER-HITCHENS-country-slowly-choked-death-rights-wrongdoers.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6993553/PETER-HITCHENS-time-view-police-just-like-failed-industries.html

and this: it seems that the police now see fit to interfere in actual elections!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7046749/Politicians-tone-Euro-vote-speeches-avoid-stoking-hate-crime-says-police-chief.html

The Exploding UK

The population of the United Kingdom is considered an example of a population that has undergone demographic transition – that is, the transition from a (typically) pre-industrial population with high birth and mortality rates and slow population growth, through a stage of falling mortality and faster rates of population growth, to a stage of low birth and mortality rates with, again, lower rates of population growth. This population growth through ‘natural change’ has been accompanied in the past two decades by growth through net international migration into the United Kingdom.” [Wikipedia]

I recently saw a pro-immigration poster put out, I think, by some trade union in the NHS. It said that the group of people shown on the poster (mostly but not all black/brown) were all NHS personnel who had come to the UK from other countries. The poster also said that, in the London Borough of Haringey, where the group had been photographed, there were (in round figures) some 82,000 persons who had come from other countries to the UK. The implication was that only thus is the (in Britain, near-sacred) NHS able to function.

Well, I am, in principle, pro-NHS (though I think, with reason, that quite a lot of the NHS system is barely functioning). I have no problem conceding that some of the foreign personnel in the NHS are excellent (though some others are hopeless). I am aware that the NHS has always been a major recruiter of immigrant labour. However, is that the whole story (as pro-Remain, pro-immigration people always pretend)? I say not.

The London Borough of Haringey has about 282,000 inhabitants, only 60% of whom are “white British” or Irish. If you were to take away the 82,000 immigrants already mentioned (even disregarding their offspring, and those non-English/Irish etc who are also resident in that borough), you would automatically have something like —and at the very least— something like 20,000 dwelling units available! Now multiply that appropriately across the whole of London, the whole of the UK…An end to the absurd property price valuations, an end to overcrowded hospitals, schools, transport —including roads—, an increase in pay across the board.

There is no doubt that the UK would be better off, the people of the UK would be better off, without the immigrant hordes and their offspring. Yes, on paper, the economy would perhaps be less vibrant, but most of the benefit of that at present goes to a tiny percentage of the population, just as a relatively small number of buy-to-let parasites and speculators profit from the overheated UK property market.

As for foreign NHS personnel, one has to bear in mind that the migration-invasion has placed enormous burdens on the NHS. The balance of convenience is by no means in favour of immigration. Without mass immigration, the UK NHS could easily handle the demand, particularly by training British people as doctors, nurses and ancillary personnel. Fewer British medical staff would leave (to emigrate to Australia, New Zealand etc), thus saving the State the cost of their education and training.

The same is true of all areas of society. Mass immigration penalizes the vast bulk of the British people. Big business loves mass immigration because it increases the number of consumers, results in higher prices for goods and real property, and reduces pay per labour unit.

When I was born in 1956, the UK population was estimated to be around (possibly below) 50 million. In 1990, 34 years later, the estimate was 57 million, a still very considerable increase. In 2018, the estimates have become less accurate because of the huge influxes of “migrants” (migrant-invaders) and their birth-rate, but anywhere from 66 million to 70 million. By, say, 2022? No-one knows. 75 million? This is totally unsustainable. Only those who knew England (especially) in the 1960s can appreciate what a difference and (mostly) a negative difference those extra 20 millions have made to the quality of life, environment etc in the UK and, again, particularly in England.

It is all very well saying that, because of Brexit and the stalling economy, ever-lower pay and State benefits, that the net immigration figure now is “only” about 400,000 a year instead of the half million or more per year in the past 15-20 years, but 400,000 is still the size of a very large town. Also, “net” means not 400,000 in but maybe 800,000 non-Brits in, and 400,000 desperate Brits out, fleeing the multiracial/multicultural society, desperately trying to find a basically white “Aryan” society in which to live (though most scarcely admit that even to themselves).

The UK is exploding and something has to be done.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Borough_of_Haringey#Demographics

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/overviewoftheukpopulation/mar2017

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/mid2017

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/

More Details About “Mark Lewis Lawyer” and His Abusive Social Media Presence

download

[photo: Mark Lewis, a Jewish Zionist solicitor who has emigrated permanently to Israel. He testified at the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal in London —where he was a defendant found guilty on several charges—that at times he did not know what he was doing because of medications prescribed for him]

Some reading this may have already read my blog post about the “trial” of self-publicizing Jew-Zionist solicitor Mark Lewis, whose Twitter account @mlewislawyer was once @MarkLewisLawyer:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/23/mark-lewis-lawyer-tries-to-have-part-of-the-case-against-him-thrown-out/

That blog post dates from the first day of the hearing in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal and has been updated to (so far) 12 December 2018.

Now more information has become available about the abuse that [prescription] drug-sozzled Lewis handed out, not only to social-nationalists (like me, who had to block the bastard on Twitter a number of years ago!), not only to supposed “neo-Nazis” (as if their political orientation made death threats acceptable!), but also to a Jewish boy aged only 18! The father of that victim has now revealed some of those details to the Jewish Chronicle:

Mark Lewis, the solicitor who was ordered to pay £12,500 for sending abusive social media messages to online trolls, also told a young Jewish man he hoped his father “would sit shiva for you soon”, the JC can reveal.

Note: To “sit Shiva” is a ritual that Jews perform after a death:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_(Judaism)

The Jewish Chronicle report continues:

“Mr Lewis was fined and ordered him to pay thousands in legal costs for “wishing death” on people on social media, many of whom had sent him antisemitic abuse or wished similar on him.” (so he said…)

“The decision prompted outrage in the Jewish community and several crowdfunders quickly raised the money for him.”

“But the JC has seen Facebook posts Mr Lewis wrote to an 18-year-old who was supporting the Labour Party during the 2017 general election campaign, telling him to “f**k off you stupid c**t”, adding that his father “should have worn a condom”.”

“Lawyer sent abuse to [a Jewish] 18-year-old, telling him to ‘f**k off you stupid c**t’. The exchange was one of the allegations that was the subject of a formal complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), which has still not published its full judgment. Offensive messages Mr Lewis sent to people who had sent him antisemitic [messages] were reported separately.”

Mr Lewis responded by saying the SRA was “faced with a choice between Holocaust denying neo-Nazis and a Jewish lawyer… It chose to side with the neo-Nazis”.”

“The father of Mr Lewis’s 18-year-old victim told the JC he came forward with the details because the “record needs to be set straight”.”

“He said he was frustrated Mr Lewis, who made Aliyah last week, was “being treated like a hero” in the wake of the judgment because people believed he had only been abusive to neo-Nazis.”

“The father added: “It was inappropriate behaviour from a solicitor. It was inappropriate for an adult, especially because it was directed towards someone who was only a few days away from legally being a child.”

“And also for someone who is allegedly a voice for the community – you don’t use that sort of language. It was my son, and it was abusive.”

“What frustrated me is that he was being treated like a hero. I want the story to be known that he’s not a good guy and that people shouldn’t give him any money. The record needs to be set straight.”

[Lewis] blamed his outburst on Clonazepam, a sedativeside effects of which include aggression and hallucinations.”

Following the ruling, two separate crowdfunding pages were established to support Mr Lewis raising more than £13,000 in total – in excess of his £12,500 costs.”

Notes

Lewis has now emigrated to Israel and is an Israeli citizen.

I intend to blog more fully about this Lewis character in due course.

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/revealed-mark-lewis-told-young-jewish-man-he-hoped-his-father-would-sit-shiva-for-you-soon-1.473886

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/23/mark-lewis-lawyer-tries-to-have-part-of-the-case-against-him-thrown-out/

Some Twitter Reaction:

and here is more: by the way, the “Ian” mentioned in Lewis’s threatening tweet of 4 November 2018 is not me but another Ian. We are legion…

Here we see “Labour Left Voice” noting, satirically and rhetorically, equally abusive and threatening tweets sent by Mandy Gargoyle:

Even some of the actively Zionist Jews in the UK are shaking their heads at Lewis’s behaviour:

In fact, people were talking about Lewis’s abusive tweets etc years ago:

The blog below purports to detail some of Lewis’s lesser known tweets, threats etc: 

https://debatingculture.wordpress.com/2017/04/16/unhinged-mlewislawyer-bile-bullying-slander-threats/

Does Lewis claim to have been in a state of prescription-drug intoxication when tweeting the horrific stuff detailed in that Debating Culture blog above? Was his mind not quite…normal…for some other reason? We do not know.

Update, 16 December 2018

Here below, at the foot of this section, is one of Lewis’s tweets about me, from over 2 years ago. As you, the reader, will see, he refers to me as “failure as a barrister and as a human being”, among other things.

I suppose that most people who read that tweet were unaware of the irony: until Lewis got onto the “phonehacking” wagon, he himself was at rock-bottom. He had parted company with a firm of solicitors in Manchester under unclear circumstances (rather a theme…see below), had been divorced (ditto), and in or about 2009 was only making about £9,000 a year (as he admitted to a newspaper interviewer a few years later). Lewis was not exactly a hot property, as he admitted in a newspaper interview at the time of the “phonehacking” stories:

“I was devastated,” he says. “I’d been turned down for so many jobs, I’m thinking to myself, I can’t go on any more, you can only get so many knockbacks. I’m giving in and going to my flat in Israel and retire in Eilat.”

 The phonehacking stuff paid off, and soon Lewis was busily creating a legend as “top lawyer”. Phonehacking work did not last long, of course. Technology moved on and phonehacking is now just a footnote in legal history (it’s a purely UK story anyway: hardly anyone in the USA has heard of it). Lewis left his next firm, in London (where he was a “consultant”), under acrimonious circumstances (he much later sued that firm and they countersued, but it is not publicly known how that ended, the matter presumably having been settled and sealed).

In 2013, Lewis married for the second time, his new wife being one-time local radio presenter Caroline Feraday. “Top lawyer” marries “celebrity” was how Lewis and Feraday presented the event. Stories were seen in the Press about how Lewis “had clients in the USA” to where he and la Feraday would be relocating (to her new apartment in West Hollywood, no less). She, in her turn, seemingly had various Hollywood opportunities lined up, the newsreading public was told.  She already had a part in a TV sitcom arranged —had “been cast” in it—, the gullible (?) readers were told. More than that! She was busy “writing a book”, which was to be turned into a film and “several studios are interested…”* 

Lewis, the Daily Mail’s tame showbiz reporter was told by Feraday, had clients in the U.S. and would “commute” between LA and London. As 1950s people were wont to say, “get you!”…

Lewis and Feraday moved to West Hollywood, flying Virgin Upper Class (well, after all, they were, er, “celebrities”, weren’t they?) to LA. They joined the West Hollywood branch of the Soho House club, on Sunset Boulevard.

https://www.sohohousewh.com/

“Celebrities” have more than a few thousand Twitter followers, of course, so they both “acquired” tens of thousands of new “followers”, Lewis ending up after a week or so with about 80,000! When caught out, Lewis claimed, ludicrously, that he had been “hacked” (yes, that makes sense! Naturally, his enemies would want him to seem more important and influential…oh, no, wait…). The Legal Cheek online news service reported it brilliantly deadpan. Very clever…

https://www.legalcheek.com/2014/06/phone-hacking-lawyers-twitter-gets-hacked-and-he-becomes-most-followed-member-of-uk-legal-profession/

Of course, that would (pretty much) have to mean that someone, for no immediately-obvious reason, also bought tens of thousands of fake Twitter followers in the same week for Lewis’s then wife, Caroline Feraday…[Update, 18 May 2019: Caroline Feraday’s tens of thousands of fake —bought— Twitter “followers” have now dwindled to “13,000” but the real number must be a few thousand at most; a brief look at her tweets https://twitter.com/CarolineFeraday shows that hardly any Twitter users bother to “like” them, let alone retweet or reply. Many have no interaction at all, a few have 1 or 2 “likes”… When I was on Twitter, I had about 3,000 followers (all real) and had many many retweets, likes and replies]. 

Sadly, all that hype seemed to disappear like a mirage in Death Valley. La Feraday never did get into an American sitcom (or if she did,it must have bombed or been pulled immediately…there never was one, I am guessing). I have no idea whether she ever got any part in American film or TV. Her breathless “look at me, people—a celebrity in sunny Hollywood!” Twitter account said nothing (that I saw, anyway) about her getting a acting part, but that is unsurprising. After all, why should an acting part on American TV, or in a film, go to someone without any acting experience and who was nearly 40? The supposed book deals and film options also vanished without trace.

OK Magazine had already described Caroline Feraday as looking “a bit past it” even in 2010! https://www.ok.co.uk/lifestyle/356263/samsung-pink-ribbon-celebration-best-and-worst-on-the-pink-carpet

As for Lewis, his brave new Californian world crumbled into ashes. American lawyers soon realized that Lewis (unlike, er, me) had never qualified at the Bar of any American state and so was not qualified to practise in California (or any other state). Those lawyers made sure that the California Bar was aware of the foregoing. The upshot (whatever the causes…and I have heard a few stories) was that the marriage foundered after only a year (including a few months in LA) and Lewis returned to the UK in 2014 with his tail between his legs.

By the following year, Lewis had joined the well-known London law firm, Seddons, as a partner. At the time, I was surprised that Seddons had taken him on, but there it is. He left in 2018, just as it became known that he was coming up for “trial” in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal (where he was found guilty on all charges). Seddons’ statement was that Lewis had resigned as a partner because of his upcoming “aliyah” (emigration) to Israel (he is now an Israeli citizen).

Lewis’s second ex-wife, Caroline Feraday, stayed on in LA, did some amateur comedy appearances there and a few 2-minute reports about the Oscars etc for the UK local TV news show, BBC South-East Today (cheaper than actually sending someone, I suppose), and eventually had a child in 2017 by another man.

Lewis is now an Israeli citizen and resident (he has or had a flat there). He is not now a partner or employee of any law firm in the UK and has stated that he will not seek admission to whatever Bar may exist in Israel. He has a degenerative progressive medical condition and is, apparently, on medication.

[note: much material about Lewis, including some newspaper coverage, particularly about his marriage to and divorce from Feraday, has mysteriously disappeared from the Internet, or at least from Google searches].

I wonder about whom this recent tweet by Caroline Feraday was…

It should be added that, for someone with (supposedly) 13,000 Twitter followers, Caroline Feraday very rarely seems to get retweeted or even “liked”. I have never quite understood why people buy Twitter followers. She had about 5,000 one week, in about 2011 or 2012, then, in the course of a week or so, suddenly jumped to about 55,000! Lewis’s Twitter follower-count jumped from about 7,000 or 8,000 to nearly 80,000 (in the same couple of weeks). Still, Caroline Feraday is at least an animal lover, which counts for something (with me, anyway).

* Irony klaxon (re. tweet below)…

Further thoughts, 17 December 2018

In another tweet from a year or two ago, Lewis referred to me as, inter alia, “a sad unemployable git”. Well, we have seen that until he tapped into the “phonehacking” racket, he himself was virtually unemployable at the age of 40-something (and even Taylor Hampton, the law firm which brought the phonehacking claims, would not make him a partner but only retained him as “consultant”).

[above, Lewis’s tweet, not the first either, about me having been disbarred at the instigation of the UK Jew-Zionist lobby. His tweet was posted six months after the disbarment and is purely abusive. “Dave”, aka “Slatfascists”, is a Twitter troll with mental health problems (and on medication, just like, er, someone else…)].

I might add that my tweets from early 2017 about UKIP are now even more obviously true!

Now look…

Mark Lewis

  • has now been found guilty of serious breaches of the Code of Conduct for solicitors in England;
  • has admitted in his testimony in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal that he at times was unaware of what he said, did or wrote, by reason of ingestion of prescription drugs;
  • has “left” the law firm, Seddons, where he had been a partner for the past 2-3 years, and so is, er…in a word…unemployed;
  • has emigrated permanently to Israel but has stated that he will not be seeking admittance to the Bar of Israel [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Bar_Association];
  • cannot work in any case as a solicitor in England unless approved as such by the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority as a sole practitioner or until such time as he is again employed by a law firm (neither seems to be the case at present anyway);
  • presents (eg at Tel Aviv Airport recently, filmed by RT News) a shambling, limping figure, able to walk for short periods using a stick, otherwise having to be pushed around in a wheelchair, his eyes bloodshot, his short statement (at Tel Aviv Airport) almost incoherent.

One has to ask the simple question, “so just who is the sad unemployable git?”...

“What goes around comes around”…

After Lewis’s admissions at his recent Disciplinary Tribunal, I commented, in a previous blog post, that “he is on the way out”. I was too kind. He’s finished.

(I shall probably blog at a later date about some of Lewis’s “forensic triumphs”, such as the Katie Hopkins/Jack Monroe case, but suffice to say right now that a lobotomized student would have been incapable of losing that one…) 

Further Update, 19 December 2018

The Law Society Gazette has now published more news about Lewis and his “trial” in the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal etc.

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/mark-lewis-judgment-reveals-sdt-considered-reprimand/5068711.article

So much for the “top lawyer” who now seems to be (to use one of Lewis’s insults to me) “an unemployable git”!

Lewis only had to pay a third of the fine considered by the SDT panel because:

“In its full decision published this week the SDT said it eventually came to the conclusion that a reprimand would not be a strong enough punishment and that a fine would be the most appropriate outcome. However, it reduced the fine from an initial estimate of £7,500 to £2,500 on account of Lewis’s financial struggles.”

The disciplinary panel judging and sentencing Lewis considered that:

“In mitigation, the tribunal accepted Lewis’ submission that he had limited means. He did not own his own house and [his] monthly expenses exceeded his liabilities.”

The Law Society Gazette says that the SDT panel added that:

 “Although his former firm Seddons is paying him £10,000 per month before tax this was due to end in March [2019].”

What’s this? The “top lawyer”, “top libel and reputation specialist” etc has “financial struggles”? When for most of the past decade he has been tweeting and telling newspapers all about what a big success he is, with his classic cars and international client-base?

Either Lewis is not quite the “top lawyer” and huge success he has been claiming to be for the past 7+ years, or he was “economical with the truth” at the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal. One way or another he has been telling what the Cockneys call “porkies”! That’s not very kosher!

So the “top lawyer”, with his supposed millions from the “phonehacking” racket and well-publicized libel cases etc, does not own his own house? (in London— he does have or had an apartment in Israel, according to a newspaper article several years ago).

Still, the fact that the SDT thinks that someone getting (after tax) pay of about £7,000 a month is “financially struggling” says more about London law firms than about Lewis, arguende! (that pay is in fact about the same, in real terms, as I was once paid, when an offshore lawyer many years ago).

The way Lewis managed to bamboozle the UK msm and so the poor duped UK public into believing that he was —or even still is— a “top lawyer” etc reminds me rather of the front once put up by another Jewish Zionist, the not so late and certainly unlamented “Robert Maxwell”, who has now also “relocated” to Israel, though he is not quite in a position to enjoy it. Maxwell never fooled me (even when I was in my late teens, in the mid-1970s); neither has Lewis.

Update, 23 October 2019

Seems that Lewis’s ex-wife, Caroline Feraday, has also fallen on hard times, living in a “Nowheresville” in California with her young daughter (Caroline Feraday is now a single mother). She says that she is unable to raise a mere $10,000 [£7,700], despite having some kind of (“office bod”?) job, and so has turned to GoFundMe. Strange. I thought that (she said) she was a “celebrity”? 15 minutes of fame? She was featured, in the past (in a few London newspapers), a decade ago though, as having property of considerable value both in the UK and Brazil (in Copacabana, Rio de Janeiro) as well as (since 2013) in California. What happened to those properties?

Surprisingly, she has, and within only one day (at time of writing), managed to raise nearly $2,000 of the $10,000 for which she asks.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/legal-fees-dealing-with-stalkerharassment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agoura_Hills,_California

A reminder of the sort of deranged messages that sick Lewis has sent to people

170217-lewis-die-e1533384703639

marklewislawyer

[above: the most recent photograph of Lewis, taken in London in February 2020]

ds5

The Race Is On To Replace Theresa May— What Else May Now Happen?

Those who have read my recent blogs on Brexit and Theresa May will have noted that I predicted (in the posts and/or in the Comments sections to the posts) that, if the Commons vote on the Theresa May Brexit “deal” were to go against the Government, as always seemed probable, one likely consequence would be that there would be a revolt among Conservative Party MPs, with the aim of ejecting her from her leadership position. That has now happened, though the Commons vote on the Brexit “deal” has not been taken, and may never be.

Theresa May as Prime Minister

I do not conceal that I am very opposed to Theresa May.

  • She has had passed repressive legislation, both as Prime Minister and in her former office as Home Secretary;
  • She is very pro-Jewish, very pro-Zionist, very pro-Israel and is a member of Conservative Friends of Israel;
  • There are indications that she herself may be of partly-Jewish origin;
  • She has continued the Con Coalition (and, even before that, Gordon Brown Labour) demonization of the poor, unemployed and disabled, even to the extent of promoting dishonest and thick-as-two-short-planks Esther McVey to Cabinet as Work and Pensions Secretary;
  • She failed, both as Home Secretary and as Prime Minister, to stop or even slow mass immigration;
  • She has shown no strategic grasp.

CnLGOc5XYAALLJd

[Theresa May became Prime Minister after all other candidates “killed” each other]

I will say that, for a few days after having become Prime Minister, Theresa May looked like a slightly better choice than David Cameron-Levita had proven to be. She made statements in the “One Nation Conservative” vein and seemed to be willing to revisit the obviously not-working bits of Con Coalition policy, such as Dunce Duncan Smith’s pathetic and misconceived Universal Credit fiasco. However, it soon turned out that Theresa May had few ideas of her own and yet was completely inflexible.

Theresa May worked for 20 years, before entering Parliament, as a back-room bureaucrat at the BACS cheque-clearing organization. She is out of her depth as Prime Minister (in fact she was no good as Home Secretary either).

Theresa May’s brittle persona, which might be described as “barely-concealed hysterical panic”, disguised under a “Wicked Witch” outer layer, became very apparent during the General Election campaign of 2017. Afraid to show herself in public, even to the limited extent of her predecessors, her “campaign speeches” to carefully-vetted tiny groups in aircraft hangars etc were every bit as fake as those of US Presidents, and were seen as such. Her hysterical “Nothing has changed! Nothing has changed!” screech turned her from a perceivedly “solid” Prime Minister to an embattled and weak one. Immediately. The 2017 election was probably lost right there.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/video/2017/may/22/nothings-changed-may-claims-as-she-announces-social-care-u-turn-video

After the 2017 election, Theresa May was a lame duck PM, dependent on the Democratic Unionist Party votes, which were bought at great expense. Without those DUP votes, Theresa May is totally powerless. The EU establishment saw that and has taken full advantage of Theresa May’s political weakness.

How Has Theresa May Survived This Long?

The answer, in my view, is that there has not been seen to be an obvious challenger for her position. She is second-rate. All right, but most of the would-be leaders and prime ministers are third-rate:

  • Clown Prince Boris Johnson: completely unfit for any public office, being acquisitive, greedy, lazy, incompetent, often rather stupid, narrowly-educated, unethical, untrustworthy, callous, as well as cosmopolitan in his origins (part-Jew, part-Turk, a bit of this and a bit of that, born in New York City); Conservative Friends of Israel; a poseur and overall a fake, a £3 note who attempts to present himself as “Prime Minister in Waiting” via an am-dram reprise of Winston Churchill, but with none of the intellectual depth or personal steel; supported Remain but turned coat;
  • Sajid Javid: A Pakistani by origin, cosmopolitan business type by pre-political career; his earnings at time of departure from Deutsche Bank in 2009 are said to have been £3M a year; he owns 4 homes in the UK; someone whose judgment is very questionable, as witness his support for the masked “antifa” thugs (a remarkable stance for someone now posing as Home Secretary!); connected with that is Javid’s doormat-level support for Jews and indeed Zionists —and Israel—; Javid and his English wife took their honeymoon in Israel; member of Conservative Friends of Israel; supporter of American neo-con adventurism and “intervention”; an Ayn Rand devotee…it just gets worse; incompetent in office; supported Remain;
  • Jeremy Hunt: dark horse; smarmy snake type; possible front-runner; multi-millionaire (tens of millions); property speculator; supported Remain, but has turned coat;
  • Michael Gove: has a Jewish or part-Jewish wife, and is a member of Conservative Friends of Israel; one of the most egregious expenses cheats of the pre-2010 Parliament; arguably more intelligent than most of the other likely successors to Mrs May, but often wrongheaded; dishonest; supported Leave;
  • Amber Rudd: member of Conservative Friends of Israel; complete doormat for the Israel/Jewish/Zionist lobby; wants to pass even more repressive laws targeting British patriots etc, making even reading dissident literature online a criminal offence (!); despite her financial services background, pretty thick; incompetent and dishonest in office; personally involved with African and Old Etonian MP, Kwasi Kwarteng; Remain Queen Bee;
  • Philip Hammond: dull but predictable and therefore perceived as “safe”; supported Remain;
  • Dominic Raab: a half-Jew, Raab has worked in diplomatic activity; there have been some controversial news reports about his personal behaviour; supported Leave;
  • Jacob Rees-Mogg: may or may not be a candidate; multi-millionaire and Leave luminary; may not want to give up his big City of London wealth fund operation to become PM, but the lure of the highest office is powerfully magnetic.

The above seem to be the most likely candidates to vie for the succession to Theresa May, if she cannot get 158 MPs to vote for her this evening (50% of the total).

Incredibly, some even less suitable names may want to be on the ballot paper, including

  • sex pest and doormat-for-Israel Stephen Crabb;
  • Esther Mcvey (another, yawn, Conservative Friends of Israel member); an evil associate of Dunce Duncan Smith;
  • dull nobody Andrea Leadsom;
  • even Penny Mordaunt! (but this is a contest for leadership of the Conservative Party, it is not a swimsuit competition…).

It has been the lack of alternative and credible leadership candidates that has kept Theresa May from having to face a leadership challenge; that and the fact that, should she get 158+ MPs to support her, she will be safe from challenge for a year.

At present it seems that about 110 MPs have pledged to support Theresa May, but the ballot is secret, so their support cannot be confirmed or checked. The vote is a Yes/No one.

A month ago, I should have thought (and did think) that Theresa May would win any confidence vote fairly easily, though perhaps not convincingly. Now, I doubt it, though the outcome must still be seen as uncertain. Her authority as PM, let alone as Conservative Party leader, is in shreds. Her power is non-existent, now that the DUP have as good as pulled the rug from under her government. She is disrespected by the EU, the public, her own party. She must surely go. If she does not, the Conservative Party will ebb away to nothing with her.

Life After Theresa May

Life for the UK has become very uncertain. It might even be said that the British are starting to follow Nietzsche’s dictum, and are living dangerously. It seems to be not unlikely that any successor to Theresa May might want to revoke the invocation of Article 50, thereby stopping Brexit in its tracks. After that, a new Referendum could be held. Not that I favour that course of action. I myself should prefer Britain to wake up, kick out the traitors and unwanted cuckoos in our nest, and leave the EU completely, finally. However, I am not Prime Minister.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theresa_May

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Johnson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sajid_Javid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hunt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gove

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Vine#Expenses

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gove#Expenses_claims

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amber_Rudd

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Hammond

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominic_Raab

 

 

 

 

 

Update, 12 December 2018

Well, as I have repeatedly written over months and years in this blog, the “glorious uncertainty” of the racecourse is replicated in British politics. I thought, only this afternoon, that the outcome of the no-confidence vote would be close, somewhere around 50-50. In the event, Theresa May won by 200-117, so 63% of Conservative Party MPs backed her or at least were unwilling to get rid of her (at present), as against 37% who voted to dump her.

I see the vote not as MPs having confidence in Theresa May, but in having no confidence in any of the likely candidates vying to replace her.

What Now?

Theresa May now cannot be challenged in any no-confidence vote of her party for a year, i.e. until December 2019.

Theresa May still has no credibility, politically. She still has no chance of any substantial revision of her EU exit “deal”; the DUP are distancing themselves from her, which may completely paralyze her legislative programme (such as it is); she now knows for sure that 117 of her MPs have no confidence in her. In reality, few have confidence in her but are not willing to eject her right now.

Theresa May should realize that, just as she became Conservative Party leader and so Prime Minister by default and not by reason of her own merit, so she has now survived the no-confidence vote for the same reason.

There is uncertainty now as to whether the Brexit “deal”, with minor EU concessions as a figleaf, will be put to the House of Commons soon (or at all). As for revoking Article 50, that seems to be not unlikely, perhaps if any revised Brexit “deal” is voted down by the Commons, whatever Theresa May now says.

We must never forget that ZOG/NWO wants the UK to either stay in the EU or to leave the EU but on a basis of effectively still being tied to it.

Afterthought, 14 December 2018

It may be thought surprising that I left out the name of David Davis from the list of possible leaders. Back in 2008, I predicted that he might return to government as Cabinet minister and even Prime Minister. I have subsequently been proven correct in the first part; as to the second, that is now unlikely though (things being what they are…) not impossible. Davis is now 69, but the main obstacle to his being elected as Conservative Party leader and notionally then Prime Minister is that he is for Leave, most MPs are for Remain. That, and his more traditional type of Conservatism.

Update, 15 December 2018

“It’s over. If Brexit happens at all – and for the first time I’m beginning to think it won’t – it will be on terms that keep the worst aspects of EU membership. Britain will be humbled in the eyes of the world, having tried to recover its independence and been faced down. The largest popular vote in our history will be disregarded, and the nation that exported representative government exposed as an oligarchy. Plus – and I know this sounds almost trivial next to those calamities, but it matters to me – the Conservative Party might never recover.” [Daniel Hannan MEP, in the Daily Telegraph]

Update, 1 April 2019

Incredibly, Liz Truss, who only became an MP on her back, is now spoken of as a potential Conservative prime minister! This is madness!

Note

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Truss