Brecon and Radnorshire By-Election 2019

Recent events in Brecon and Radnorshire

A by-election is to be held in Brecon and Radnorshire constituency (formerly Brecon and Radnor, 1918-1997). Unusually, this by-election has been triggered by the conviction for (what amounts to) fraud relating to the Parliamentary expenses of the sitting MP. Christopher Davies, who had held the seat since 2015, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 50 hours of community service and a fine of £1,500.

The relative leniency of the sentence may reflect the fact that the £700 wrongfully claimed by way of expenses by Davies could have been claimed legitimately (whether approved or not); the way in which he went about it (creating two false invoices amounting to the sum in question) made it unlawful. On a kind interpretation, Davies was stupid or incompetent more than (very) dishonest. Still not very good for him, I would have thought.

The position of the MP and the calling of the by-election

The events around this by-election raise interesting issues.

The news reports say that the seat “has been vacated”, but I have seen nothing about the Speaker declaring it so, a problem which previously arose during the Fiona Onasanya case, when that MP, despite having been sentenced for perversion of the course of justice, and despite a recall petition having been approved by more than the requisite 10% of eligible voters, still sat and voted as MP for Peterborough (including, crucially, in a significant Brexit debate and vote), also getting paid for months.

Davies may or may not, at time of writing, still be an MP. Even the more serious newspapers and the specialized websites (eg Politics Home) have not clarified the position. The Wikipedia entry for Davies says that his removal as MP was “automatic” once the results of the petition were known, but such is not the case. Wikipedia also says that “the seat was declared vacant on 21 June 2019” (today). Perhaps.

The Conservatives must “move a writ” to start the by-election process. In Britain’s unwritten or (more accurately) uncodified Constitution, this is supposed to happen within (usually) 3 months of the seat being declared vacant. After that, the by-election usually happens within 27 days (of the writ having been moved).

In other words, while in theory this by-election could happen by the end of July 2019, it might not happen until late October or, if the Conservatives really stretched the Constitutional proprieties to the limit, even later. Parliament rises for its Summer Recess on 25 July, so if the writ is not moved by then, the very earliest date on which the writ could be moved would be 3 September, after the Commons return, making the earliest by-election date one in late September.

If Davies is still nominally the MP, then he is entitled to his salary and expenses until such time as he is declared (by the Speaker) not the MP.

Christopher Davies, remarkably (bearing in mind that he pleaded guilty to the charges), seems to be breezy about the matter, and has invited his constituents to his local office, in the small Welsh town of Builth Wells, to view and enjoy the 9 landscape photographs which were the subject-matter of the expenses claims in question! I daresay that many of his constituents might wonder why Parliamentary expenses cover such purchases anyway (surely he or the local Conservative Association should have paid?).

Even more remarkably, Davies says that he intends to stand again! The local Conservatives, meanwhile, have not pronounced on whether Davies will be allowed to stand as a Conservative Party candidate! One can see their difficulty: if Davies stands as Conservative candidate, their chance of success is weakened, contaminated by his candidature, but if Davies stands as Independent Conservative or some such, he may draw off at least a few hundred, maybe even a thousand or more otherwise “Conservative” votes. None dare call it blackmail?

Still, one would have thought that simple ethical standards might have come into play, but in the contemporary Conservative Party, it seems not.

Another strange aspect: one would have thought that the two contenders for the Conservative Party leadership would have condemned Davies for his offences, or at least mumbled something neutral, but it seems that both have been “very supportive”.

The constituency

Before 1939, the constituency, under its Brecon and Radnor name, had as MPs persons from the Labour, Liberal, Conservative, Unionist, National and National Liberal parties (the latter three effectively Conservative coalition candidates).

Labour held the seat between 1939 and 1979. From 1979 to 2019, the Conservatives won 3 times, the Liberals/Liberal Democrats 3 times.

The post-WW2 Labour vote peaked in 1964 at just under 58%; its lowest was 10% in 2010. In general, the Labour vote has declined over the years, having not exceeded 20% of votes cast since the General Election of 2001.

The LibDem vote peaked in 2010 at 44.8% (1st placed), since when it declined to about 28% in 2015 and about 29% in 2017; however in both 2015 and 2017, the LibDems were placed 2nd.

In 2017, the Conservative candidate, Davies, achieved a vote of 48.6%, a post-WW2 record for Conservatives in the seat.

The only other (slightly) significant party contending over the years has been Plaid Cymru, which however has rarely retained its deposit in recent decades. Its typical vote share in recent years has been 2%-3%, though it reached 4.4% in 2015 (3.1% in 2017).

A few other parties have stood over the years. UKIP got 8.3% in 2015 (its best in the seat), but slumped to 1.4% in 2017.

The joker in the pack is Brexit Party.

Conclusion

There are some uncertain factors here: will Christopher Davies really stand again, and if so will it be as Conservative Party candidate or as some type of Independent? Will Brexit Party put up a strong candidate? Whatever happens, the Conservatives must be toast here. If Davies stands as Independent, and with Brexit Party now standing, then the Conservative vote will (probably though not necessarily) be even lower than if Davies brazenly stands again as Conservative. Davies does seem to be quite embedded locally, as a former livestock auctioneer, Royal Welsh Show ring commentator and manager of a veterinary practice.

The LibDems are currently strong favourites. The only thing that would or might upset the applecart would be the Brexit Party, now (announced today) entering the fray. Looking at 2015/2017, the LibDem core vote in the seat is below 30%. Even so, the LibDems must be in pole position here. It’s their election to lose.

Further factors

It is plainly in the Conservative interest to delay this by-election as long as possible. Their notional working Commons majority, even with DUP support, is now only four. If Brecon and Radnorshire goes LibDem or Brexit Party, that will reduce to three. Some Conservative MPs are ready to abandon support if Brexit no-deal looks likely. Boris Johnson may be a very short-lived Prime Minister.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brecon_and_Radnorshire_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Brecon_and_Radnorshire_by-election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_Watkins,_Baron_Watkins

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48720176

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Davies_(Conservative_politician)

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

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/104734/convicted-tory-mp-chris-davies-booted

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/21/petition-to-recall-convicted-tory-mp-chris-davies-succeeds

https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

Update, 24 June 2019

The Brecon and Radnorshire Conservatives have reselected Christopher Davies as their candidate.

Davies faces an uphill struggle. While his offence was only marginally dishonest, it was still dishonest. It also showed Davies as both lacking in judgment and as simply inept. Apart from that, there is the point that the Conservatives have rarely if ever been lower in public estimation. Also, this is a by-election and the Conservative Party is in government.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48736879

Update, 27 June 2019

The position has now been clarified. Davies is no longer the MP and the writ is expected to be moved today, Thursday 27 June, having failed two days ago. The by-election is now or soon will be set for 1 August 2019.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48764106

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48777219

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-brecon-radnorshire-byelection-date-17264118

In a sense, I am surprised that the Conservatives did not play this more tactically, in view of their situation re. the numbers in the Commons, but there it is.

Now that Brexit Party is standing, the chance of the Conservatives actually winning (especially with a rather discredited candidate) has shrunk accordingly. If Brexit Party gets half of the 2017 Conservative vote, that would give them about 24%. The LibDems are unlikely to get less than the c.29% they got in 2017. Labour got over 17% in 2017.

If Labour does better than it did in 2017, and if Brexit Party does well too, and the LibDems do at least as well as they did in 2017, then all four serious contenders might well get vote shares in the 20%-35% range. If the Conservative vote were to collapse to, say, 10% or 15%, then the other three parties in serious contention might well end up getting about the same vote shares as each other.

This might turn out to be quite close among LibDems, Brexit Party, Labour, and maybe Conservatives too, with the likelihood of placings in that order.

Update, 29 June 2019

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48798705

The Brexit Party has announced its candidate, a retired senior police detective. Ouch! (in view of the Conservative Party backing a convict!)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48810457

Meanwhile, minor Remain-friendly parties look like not contesting the seat, in order to give the LibDems a clear run. Green Party, Renew, Change UK (probably, if they even bother to make a statement, they are already so marginal), Plaid Cymru (maybe).

Renew has never contested this seat, though it scored about 4% in Newport West recently; Change UK is already a “dead parrot” party, marginal, negligible in support (below 1%); the Greens last contested this seat in 2015, scoring 3.1%; Plaid got 3.1% in the seat in 2017.

If Plaid get on board the non-contest train, the boost to the LibDems must be worth several points, maybe as much as 7%, though more realistically about 5%. Worth having, anyway.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1146794/brexit-news-brexit-party-brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-renew-party-remain-coalition

Update, 3 July 2019

There are so far 4 candidates standing (LibDems, Conservatives, Brexit Party, Labour), with less than 48 hours until nominations close. Plaid Cymru has “indicated” that it will not be standing, in order to give the pro-Remain LibDems their best possible chance. The other pro-Remain parties, meaning Greens and Renew, are both not standing and for the same reason. Any late entries are likely to be vanity or joke candidates and will not at all change the outcome of the by-election.

The LibDems must be in an even stronger position to take the seat now that the smaller parties are not standing. In the last few elections, minor parties accounted for between 5% and 10% of the total vote.

Update, 4 July 2019

My eye was caught by the latest YouGov national opinion poll, as reported by Britain Elects.

If this poll is in any way accurate (and Ipsos Mori put out a very different result only a week ago, which shows how volatile UK politics is becoming), then Brexit Party would actually be the largest party in the Commons after a general election:

https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html

Brexit Party 196 seats (130 short of Commons majority), Labour 148, Conservative 169, LibDem 66. That would mean a Brexit Party government with, almost inevitably, Conservative support; possibly a coalition government. Large numbers of both Conservative and Labour MPs would be gone, including half of those recently vying for Conservative leadership.

Thinking about how that might apply to the Brecon and Radnorshire by-election, it may be that most of the 2017 Conservative votes in the seat will go to Brexit Party, but they might not. There is uncertainty. Personality often means more in rural constituencies than in urban and suburban ones. Much depends on whether voters regard the Conservative, Christopher Davies, as an “expenses cheat” and/or “fraudster” after his criminal conviction, or whether they will “forgive and forget” his sin/error because they (do they?) regard him otherwise as OK and his offence a technical one.

My view is obviously no more than an educated guess, but I should think that many locals will think that £700 is a ridiculous sum to pay out for 9 photographs anyway. Others will see the dishonesty aspect; yet others may think that the former MP should be given a second chance. Much depends on his personal vote, on his local popularity.

I find this by-election hard to call. However, it must be done. On present facts, I think that Labour has no chance, realistically. It is seen as the party of the blacks and browns now, for one thing. They are few in number in that part of the world, unless it has changed hugely since I was last there. Also, Remain voters will go LibDem here, not Labour, whereas committed Leave/Brexit voters will go Brexit Party or maybe Con.

I think that it is quite possible that at least half the 2017 Conservative vote will defect to Brexit Party. The LibDem vote will be solid now that the party is bouncing in the polls; also, in this seat, the LibDems are not seen as a wasted vote, Brecon and Radnorshire having had LibDem MPs from 1997 until 2015.

If the LibDems can build on the 29% they got in 2017, and I think that they will, then they are in with a very good chance. They might get a vote between 30% and 40%.

I doubt whether Labour will get more than 10% or so.

The Conservative vote may collapse, though I remain unconvinced that it will go much lower than 20%.

Brexit Party, if it can capture disaffected Conservative votes, might go as high as 30%. There is another point, which is whether people who prefer Conservative or Labour will vote tactically for Brexit Party. Hard to say. The LibDems must get at least 30% and may get 40%, so Brexit Party has to get around 40% to have a chance of winning.

Provisional Conclusion (with nearly 4 weeks left to run):

  1. LibDems
  2. Brexit Party
  3. Conservatives
  4. Labour

Update, 5 July 2019

With weeks left to run, the online betting market shows the LibDems as heavily odds-on (about 1/5), Labour (oddly, but the market is thin) on 2/1, Conservatives on 9/1, Brexit Party at 12/1. Political betting is a minefield. The favourites often go down. Labour on 2/1 looks like exceptionally poor value! Brexit Party, however, looks like fairly good value at 12/1. My own valuation of the odds would be nearer to: LibDems 1/2, Brexit Party 2/1, Conservatives 3/1, Labour 10/1, but we shall see.

In the meantime, msm commentary has started:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/05/pro-emain-parties-strike-brecon-and-radnorshire-byelection-pact-to-fight-conservatives

11 July 2019

The confirmed final list of candidates shows the four expected parties (Con, Lab, LibDem, Brexit Party) and two late entrants, namely UKIP and Monster Raving Loony. The UKIP entry will obviously eat into Brexit Party’s chances; to what extent we shall see, though even 500 or 1,000 votes might be enough to sink Brexit Party in the by-election. Looks more like a spoiler than a serious candidature.

https://www.countytimes.co.uk/news/17756758.brecon-radnorshire-by-election-candidates-confirmed/

The Guardian interviews locals. One part stands out:

Given that 19% of the local electorate signed the recall petition, almost double the 10% threshold, a surprising number of locals of different party allegiances express sympathy for Davies’s plight. Yet there are some who are adamant that he should have stood down. One council worker tells me that, owing to her job, she’s in electoral purdah and can only speak off the record. “I signed the petition against Chris Davies because he tried to shaft a friend of mine who works in his office, by blaming the expenses mistake on her,” she says. As far as this council worker is concerned, Davies, whom she voted for in 2017, was given a second chance for cynical reasons. “Everyone knows that they didn’t want to put any promising new candidate in,” she says, “because they know they’re going to lose the seat.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/07/brecon-byelection-battle–remain-alliance-quiet-revolution

Meanwhile…

http://www.brecon-radnor.co.uk/article.cfm?id=110936&headline=Homebase%20store%20in%20Brecon%20to%20close&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2019

Update, 19 July 2019

Had a look at Oddschecker betting array. LibDems are hugely odds-on (1/9), Conservatives second at aroung 7/1, Brexit Party about 12/1, Labour 100/1. Not noted were UKIP and Monster Raving Loony. I expect that anyone wanting to throw away a few pounds could ask for and get 500/1 against either of those.

Betting is not always a sure indicator of a election or referendum result, but the LibDems have, as previously said, a lot going for them here: a fairly recent history of providing the local MP, the fact that the Conservative candidate is damaged goods, the fact that those who would have voted for the parties that have voluntarily withdrawn (Green, Plaid Cymru, Renew) will vote LibDem in a contest where Labour is anyway a wasted vote.

Update, 29 July 2019

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/convicted-tory-chris-davies-is-a-no-show-at-brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-hustings-zlrn0p80l

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-wales-49090993/brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-a-history

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/29/lib-dems-quiet-bollocks-to-brexit-brecon-and-radnorshire-byelection

Update, 31 July 2019

Well, “the moment of truth”, meaning that the by-election will be held tomorrow, Thursday 1 August 2019. This blog post has so far had, in about 5-6 weeks, 600+ views, far above the norm for my blog. Brecon and Radnorshire is having its 15 minutes of fame…

The BBC Wales take on it all:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-wales-49170677/brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-voters-highlight-issues

The LibDems are in pole position, hugely odds-on with the bookmakers (1/20 in some quarters), with the Conservatives in 2nd place (about 9/1) and (perhaps surprisingly) Brexit Party in 3rd position (as high as 50/1, which may be, at those odds, a value bet); Labour seems out of it at odds of 150-1.

A month ago, I was predicting, provisionally, LibDems to win, followed by Brexit Party, Conservatives, Labour, UKIP (a pure spoiler candidature, it seems) and the inevitable joke candidate, a Monster Raving Loony calling herself Lily the Pink (presumably after the comic song of 1968).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_the_Pink_(song)

I see no reason to think that the LibDems will not win Brecon and Radnorshire. They have all the Remain votes and so many of the votes of the highly-subsidized local farmers, though no doubt some of the latter will remain loyal to the Conservative Party and its recently-convicted candidate. I do not know what sort of campaign Brexit Party put up in the constituency, but I should imagine that BP might still come second, notwithstanding the bookmakers. If it does not, Brexit Party’s balloon deflates a little more, but many will be looking at the result of the by-election to see whether the Conservative might have won were there no Brexit Party candidate. If the Brexit Party candidature alone meant that the Conservative could not win, alarm bells will sound at CCHQ.

Update, 1 August 2019

Polling day. The betting odds, for what they are worth are (best odds) LibDems 1/18 odds-on; Conservatives 7/1, Brexit Party 100/1, Labour 150/1. The bookmakers, at least, think that Brexit Party is heading for 3rd place. Perhaps.

It may well be that tactical voting is taking place, in particular that Labour supporters, recognizing that Labour has no chance here, are going with the LibDems in order to ensure defeat for the Conservatives (and Brexit Party).

The only significant changes in the betting are the Conservatives taking closer order (yesterday 8/1 or 9/1, today 6/1 or 7/1, and Brexit Party sliding from 50/1 to 100/1.

Looks as if the LibDems have probably nailed it and that the Government’s majority, even with DUP support, is now 1 MP vote.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/01/the-view-from-brecon-and-radnorshire-voters-byelection

Update, 2 August 2019

The LibDems won fairly decisively, but with a smaller majority than the betting might have been suggesting. I have posted links here below.

For me, the most important aspect beyond the headline result is the fact that the Conservative ex-MP would have won, even handsomely, were it not for the candidature of Brexit Party, which received 3,331 votes.

The LibDem majority over the Conservatives was only 1,425. In other words, had Brexit Party not been standing, the Conservatives would almost certainly have won by nearly 2,000 votes. I shall be blogging separately later about the by-election and the implications of that Brexit Party aspect for the national political picture.

The Labour vote had suffered a general decline in the constituency over the years (all-time high was 57.69% in 1964), but this was its lowest-ever vote-share (5.3%). I attribute that partly and perhaps mainly to tactical voting: Labour supporters voting against the Conservatives (mainly) in a situation where Labour had no real chance anyway: the Labour vote here has not exceeded 20% since 2001 (21.4%).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brecon_and_Radnorshire_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-49200636

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/voters-head-to-the-polls-for-brecon-and-radnorshire-byelection-live-a4202956.html

https://news.sky.com/story/liberal-democrats-win-brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-as-johnson-suffers-first-defeat-as-pm-11775356

The Monster Raving Loony Party got 1% (334 votes), the UKIP spoiler candidate (or was she just irredeemably stupid?) only 0.8% (242 votes).

There is not much sunshine for the Conservatives in this result. Still, ex-MP Christopher Davies can always return to auctioning cattle; and he has some lovely landscape photographs (the subject-matter of his criminal case) for his Builth Wells office. Something to think about as he endures his community service serf-labour…

“Always look on the bright side of Life”

Update, 13 May 2020

Prior to the 2019 General Election, Christopher Davies was selected to fight the Ynys Mon [Anglesey] seat [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ynys_M%C3%B4n_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s] but stood down after criticism.

Ynys Mon, a constituency which (sub nom Anglesey) goes back to 1545, was won by the Conservative Party at the 2019 General Election, only the third time a Conservative Party MP had been elected there, and only the second Conservative MP (the first having been the multikulti supporter, Keith Best [MP 1979-1987], who was convicted, while MP, on charges of having made fraudulent share applications).

As to Brecon and Radnorshire, the Conservative Party won easily, with a vote-share of over 53%, at the General Election. Brexit Party had not stood (rather, withdrawn) a candidate after Nigel Farage stabbed his own supporters in the back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brecon_and_Radnorshire_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

The present MP for Brecon and Radnorshire is Fay Jones, a rather obscure and youngish woman (34/35 y-o) whose father was also once a Conservative Party MP (and is a prominent freemason in Wales).

Alison Chabloz Lost a Battle, But the War Goes On— and She is Winning It!

Many reading this will have heard of Alison Chabloz, the satirist and singer-songwriter, who has been persecuted by a Jew-Zionist pack for years.

alison

I daresay that many readers will also know that, having been privately prosecuted by the gang known as the “Campaign Against Anti-semitism” [CAA] under the notorious “bad law” of the Communications Act 2003, s.127, Alison’s prosecution was taken over by the Crown Prosecution Service [CPS]. She was finally convicted in June 2018 and was sentenced to 20 weeks (on one reading, 12 weeks) of imprisonment suspended for 2 years, a financial penalty amounting to £700, days of “rehabilitation”, 120 hours of “community service” slavery and a social media ban for a year. All because of a few songs satirizing “holocaust” fakes such as Elie Wiesel and Irene Zisblatt etc. [for a small selection of “holocaust” fakery and fraud, see the Notes, below]

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/04/18/alison-chabloz-the-show-goes-on/

Alison Chabloz is now taking her appeal further, via judicial review of the decision of the Crown Court ruling in her failed appeal from the first instance conviction in the Westminster Magistrates’ Court a year ago.

We shall have to wait and see what is the result of Alison’s judicial review application (it’s a 2-stage process). As to other developments, a year has now passed since the social media ban was imposed.

It is an open question, legally, whether the social media ban imposed on Alison Chabloz was lawful or valid. However, she complied with the “ban”, though managing to sidestep its effect almost entirely by simply continuing to post on her WordPress blog and website!

https://alisonchabloz.com/

“They” must have been wailing (wall or no wall) and gnashing their teeth!

So the “social media ban” was never effective. A dead letter.

What about the suspended sentence and financial penalty? Appealed and now, in effect, further appealed. The suspended sentence period still has a year to run.

What about the “community service” slavery? Alison at first did not comply because of her appeal. The bad-joke privatized probation idiots went back to court and Alison had hours added on, but now she has been told that she need do no more than the few days she has already done (picking up litter in wet Derbyshire churchyards!). So that part of the original sentence (confirmed on appeal rehearing) is also a dead letter.

Meanwhile, of course, the privatized probation outfits have all lost their contracts. Presumably, the people who worked in them will have to find other work. There’s at least one vacancy in Derbyshire, picking up litter in wet churchyards!

Oh, and Alison was sentenced to “rehabilitation” days (20, I believe). Turns out that she is immune from being brainwashed (I mean “rehabilitated”) so she has not done much if any of that. So that part of the sentence is also a dead letter.

So there is not much left of the conviction and sentence the CAA Jew Zionists worked so hard to procure!

In fact, as explained already, all that is left is the conviction and suspended sentence itself, and the £700 financial penalty, both of which are being further appealed (in effect).

When l’affaire Chabloz started, she was almost unknown. Now, mainly by reason of the “Campaign Against Anti-semitism” and its attempts to persecute her (both online and offline), Alison Chabloz is known worldwide and has been invited to —and has visited— Canada, France and other countries to talk and sing.

Even some Zionist Jews, indeed even some Zionist Jews who applauded her conviction, now wish that Alison Chabloz had never been prosecuted. Her conviction has brought into the open the disbelief that very many have in respect of the “gas chambers” fable and other parts of the “holocaust” mythus.

“Winning”?…

Notes

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/04/18/alison-chabloz-the-show-goes-on/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/13/alison-chabloz-the-fight-for-freedom-of-expression-goes-on/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/the-knives-are-out-for-freedom-of-expression-and-more/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/26/tommy-robinson-banned-on-facebook-the-repression-of-free-speech-online/

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

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2010/01/irene-zisblatt-diamond-girl-fact-or.html

https://carolynyeager.net/holocaust-scholar-finds-%E2%80%9Cdiamond-girl%E2%80%9D-be-work-fiction

https://sites.google.com/site/spielbergshoax/

https://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/irene-zisblatt-yet-another-holocaust-memoir-hoax/

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/holocaust-memoir-is-a-fraud-1.238917

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/why-would-any-writer-make-up-stories-about-the-holocaust-1803275.html

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n5p39_ushmm.html

http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/tag/holocaust-fraud/

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

https://newrepublic.com/article/117764/misha-defonseca-pays-22-million-history-fake-holocaust-memoir

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/24/holocaust-survivor-lied-joseph-hirt-auschwitz

https://www.thedailybeast.com/seventeen-charged-with-holocaust-fraud

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/3998664/Holocaust-survivors-love-story-exposed-as-a-fraud.html

https://stopacthr1226.org/holocaust-restitution-a-dubious-fraud-filled-enterprise-unworthy-of-the-support-of-a-us-president/

http://www.bu.edu/bostonia/summer09/hoax/hoax.pdf

http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/

 

CnDUXkuVMAExy6n

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7802608.stm

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n5p15_Weber.html

https://www.artforum.com/news/artist-s-memoir-of-life-during-holocaust-allegedly-fake-72296

There are literally thousands more “holocaust” frauds and fakes, but space prevents inclusion of more than a sample. A huge “holocaust” industry has been created in the past half-century.

More

Some of the Jews are now claiming that I too am a “convicted” “Neo Nazi”!

No, I never was “convicted” of anything (bar the odd speeding ticket) but the “CAA” Jew-Zionist group did try, in early 2017, to get the tame police of Grays, Essex (the area where Stephen Silverman, self-styled “enforcer” of the CAA, lives and from where he makes his false allegations) to arrest and/or charge me, but failed in the end. No arrest. No charge. No trial. No conviction. Nothing. Here is my experience of the emergent UK police state (under Jewish-Zionist influence and pressure):

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

“They” did manage to get me disbarred though…in 2016, 8+ years after I had ceased practice!

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

Alison Chabloz on social media and her own website

https://alisonchabloz.com/

https://gab.com/AJCTmuse

Update, 19 June 2019

Below, rent-a-mouth BBC ignoramus James O’Brien defends disgusting Jo Brand. Apparently, it’s OK to “joke” about Nigel Farage having battery acid thrown at him, because “it was on a comedy show”. Funny, I never saw O’Brien and his type stand up for Alison Chabloz and her comedic songs…Must be that it’s OK to joke about acid being thrown —on a named person who has already had other stuff thrown on him— but not OK to lampoon the proven Jewish frauds and fakes of the “holocaust” mythus…(we really are just “occupied” now…)

Below, Alison Chabloz performing in France recently, at the annual Bal des Quenelles, a Summer event held at the country residence of Dieudonné , the famously “anti-Semitic” African entertainer, who has had his own clashes with a contaminated legal establishment, permeated by Jew-Zionism.

https://alisonchabloz.com/2019/06/23/quenelle-des-quenelles/

Update, 8 July 2019

The evil Jew-Zionists of the so-called “Campaign Against Antisemitism” [“CAA”], using backstairs manipulation as always, seem to have complained to the Ministry of “Justice” and the privatized probation “service” that Alison Chabloz is in effect getting off lightly, in that the ban on her using social media for a year has been avoided (by her posting only on her own website) and that she has done only a few days of picking up litter unpaid (instead of nearly 2 months!) etc. They wanted their pound of flesh! Instead of which, they are eating bitter herbs…

Today, Monday 8 July 2019, having been summonsed, Alison Chabloz appeared at court, representing herself, regarding the fact that the privatized probation “service” had notified the court that the “Unpaid Work Order” (i.e. picking up litter etc) part of her 2018 sentence (now well over a year in the past) had not been fulfilled. She faced an amendment of her 2018 sentence, which might have been some period of immediate imprisonment, a fine, or other possibilities.

I have it on good authority that the district judge (i.e. magistrate) was at first minded to impose a penalty of a curfew and electronic tag.

This is not the place to explore the lazy and pointless use of curfews and tags on what sometimes seems to be all and sundry defendants, as when Jonathan Aitken, the MP-perjurer, finished his prison sentence early and was tagged and made subject to curfew. Why? In case he sneaked out at night to commit perjury again? What a mad country “we” have become!

Anyway, in today’s matter, Alison Chabloz told the magistrate that she would refuse a curfew and tag. She spoke of some of the surrounding circumstances: police negligence and/or collusion, death threats, harassment by the “CAA” Jews (including death threats appearing on their own social media pages).

The magistrate put it to Alison that, if he were to amend the sentence, then it was a matter either of “immediate prison, or a fine – do you have anything to say?” Alison Chabloz, with great courage, replied that if the British authorities saw fit to jail a singer for her artistic productions, then so be it! At that, the magistrate suspended the Unpaid Work Order (in effect, chucked it in the bin), and told Alison that she was free to go! So that’s an end to that.

alisonchabloz3

[above, Alison Chabloz at Chesterfield (Derbyshire) railway station today, in good spirits].

A complete victory for Alison Chabloz over the CAA. (((They))) really must be wailing (wall or no wall) and gnashing their teeth!

[below, the satirist at her piano]

15665739_1184903491616743_478715631373459860_n

Update, 11 July 2019

Latest:

Alison Chabloz talks from her piano…

https://alisonchabloz.com/2019/07/11/fighting-back-and-winning/

Update, 31 July 2019

Alison Chabloz is still under attack by “them” (((them))). In the meantime, one of the pseudonymous Jew-Zionists on Twitter has seen fit to claim, entirely falsely, that Alison Chabloz has “served prison time” [see tweet below]. No, her sentence (handed down in mid-2018 and presently under higher appeal) was a suspended one. Alison Chabloz has never “served prison time”. Seems that “Wealden Girl” is indulging in a little wishful thinking. Well, in any case, and as said on previous occasions, do you really expect the truth from any of “them”?

Update, 11 August 2019

Well, the Jew-Zionists have renewed their attack on Alison Chabloz and have brought pressure to bear on the politicized and disgraceful (and misnamed) “Ministry of Justice”, which in turn has pressured the privatized probation  idiots and the equally-(((pressured))) Crown Prosecution Service to summons Alison Chabloz again, this time for allegedly breaching the one-year social media bar imposed at her sentencing hearing in mid-June 2018 (and which has therefore expired). (((They))) must be getting desperate!

In view of the fact that the trial has now been set down for 3 hours in late September, I shall say no more (for the sake of form, even though it will be just before a District Judge (Criminal), i.e. sole magistrate).

In the meantime, you can hear Alison in interview here:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/cdjNhkesCjUa/

or here:

https://twitter.com/MarkACollett/status/1159037714349604865?s=20

and there are reactions to that interview here:

https://alisonchabloz.com/2019/08/09/reactions-to-my-interview-with-shazia-hobbs/#more-7668

Update, 14 August 2019

Alison Chabloz has, apparently, now been banned from entering France for 40 years! The Jews are (oh, how predictable they are!) already crowing about it

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/holocaust-denier-alison-chabloz-barred-from-entering-france-for-40-years-1.487393

The usual “antifa” idiots are onto the story too, people like “Dr” Louise Raw (the doctorate seems to be not medical but an academic one, though as far as I am aware she is not in any academic post). An agency that books her for speech-giving slots merely says that ” Louise is a writer, speaker and writer, and the acknowledged authority on the Bryant & May Matchwomen’s strike of 1888” and she herself is coy about her academic background: see https://womenalsoknowhistory.com/individual-scholar-page/?pdb=982

She wrote a book in 2011, under the name Louise Raw (no “Dr”): https://www.bloomsbury.com/author/louise-raw

Not that I doubt that she has a “doctorate”, but it has always been infra-dig in England to use it as a rank or title unless one is either a medic or an academic. Still, there it is. The habit is creeping in of all sorts of odd people calling themselves “doctor” just because they have a “doctorate” in obscure bits of history or sociology from this or that “university”.

Others have questioned this tendency, which questioning seems to hit a raw nerve, so to speak:

Here is the “doctor”, whose usual platform is a monthly column in the Morning Star, speaking about the 2019 gathering commemorating the historically-noteworthy Bryant & May match-factory women’s strike of 1888:

The event seems to have attracted at least 20 people! Well, with both “doctor” Raw and self-promoting one-trick-pony Caroline Criado-Perez there (you remember her: father ran Safeway supermarkets in the UK, and she herself got an OBE for demanding more women on banknotes etc…the female equivalent of a pub bore), it is surprising that even 20 turned up! (I’m being kind, as usual: the photo shows only 13 in the audience).

Here is what the “fighter for freedom” (or should that read “for repression”?) has to say about Alison Chabloz being banned from entering Macron’s France:

It seems that the “historian” has failed to note that the Crown Court judge [HH Judge Hehir] who heard Alison’s initial appeal made the points, in his judgment, that

  • “holocaust” “denial” is not a crime in England;
  • “anti-Semitism” is not a crime in England; and that
  • broadcasting “holocaust” “denial” or “anti-Semitism” is not in itself a crime in England.

Another “historian” (this is epidemic!): Australian grifter, “antifa” fan and self-styled “historian”/”journalist” Mike Stuchbery, seen below having a meltdown after one of his incitements to political violence backfired…

Stuchbery

Grifter Stuchbery (at present touring Germany, thanks to the idiots who keep sending him donations), takes time off from his latest subsidized holiday to enjoy Alison Chabloz being barred from France. Another supporter of State repression.

Here’s a very confused woman, below, commenting on Alison Chabloz being barred. Her Twitter account is called “TellDramaUK”. Her tweets bear a remarkable resemblance to those of a certain Indian (I think Goan) hysteric and “drama queen” who (laughably) pretends to be an expert on “counter-terrorism” rather than the sort of nuisance who wastes the time of her local police station staff. Be that as it may, the Twitter profile of “TellDramaUK” says that “True liberals support #FreeSpeech. U.K. hate crime and hate speech laws must be repealed. Amend Communications Act 2003“; and yet now tweets that:

Well, returning to the main point, of course France has had a problem with Jews for a long long time. Despite their whining, most “survived” WW2 and in fact a great many lived out the war comfortably in places such as Monaco as well as, for several years, unoccupied (1940-1942) Vichy France (many also moved to Spain or Portugal for a few years, or, as in the famous film Casablanca, Vichy French Morocco).

Paris is now the centre of the largest Jewish population in Europe. “Their” influence is huge, and that particularly applies to the financial and political realms, as well as “French” TV and film. Macron was bankrolled by Jewish Zionist circles even before he started to pose as President: see https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/01/09/on-recent-events-in-france/

This (notionally) 40-year bar has nothing to do with French people as such but is the result of pressure brought to bear by the large “French” Jew-Zionist lobby on an “occupied” French legal and political establishment.

Meanwhile, one Zionist Jew, a retired “silk” (QC) resident now in Israel, puts another Jew (Twitter troll @rattus2384 aka @grubstreetsteve aka house-husband and occasional film critic Stephen Applebaum) right as to the legal impact of the 2018 criminal case against Alison Chabloz:

…and here below, yet another Jewish Zionist asks whether a very recent Alison Chabloz post on GAB is a breach of the ban imposed on her re. “social media” (whatever “social media” is— there is, I believe, no legally-precise definition). The lawyer in question seems to be unaware that in any case Alison Chabloz was sentenced in mid-June 2018, so whatever she was barred from doing online for 12 months ceased to be a barred activity a couple of months ago. She was therefore not in breach by posting in August 2019.

The “CAA” is becoming ever more desperate in its witch-hunt against Alison Chabloz.

Update, 1 December 2019

The judicial review of the original conviction and sentence was heard at the Divisional Court (the High Court by another name) in late October and resulted in a dismissal of the application.

The next hurdle for Alison Chabloz is her appeal against sentence for breach of condition. That is to be heard in January 2020 at Derby Crown Court. If the appeal fails (though there is every reason to suppose that it will not), Alison Chabloz may be returned to prison to serve the remaining part of the sentence for breach (in real terms, she would have to stay there for a further 19 days), though the Crown Court might substitute a greater or lesser sentence, in which case a lesser one would be (in my view) far more likely than a greater one, in all the circumstances.

Notes

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/09/24/the-persecution-of-alison-chabloz-latest-news-from-the-kangaroo-courts/

Repulsive Jo Brand, Repulsive BBC

For those who have never heard of her, Jo Brand is a terminally unfunny comedienne, the sort of artiste the BBC have specialized in for the past 20-30 years.

Jo Brand is highly political and supports the Labour Party.

Recently, Jo Brand made comments that she excused later as “a joke”, to the effect that Nigel Farage and other basically (even mildly) nationalist political candidates should have acid thrown over them. Wikipedia has the following description of the matter:

In June 2019, Brand was featured in the BBC Radio 4 comedy show Heresy, after a number of  European election candidates had been doused with milkshakes during campaign walkabouts the previous month. Brand said “Why bother with a milkshake when you could get some battery acid?” She later added: “That’s just me, sorry, I’m not gonna do it, it’s purely a fantasy, but I think milk shakes are pathetic, I honestly do. Sorry.”[32] The BBC later defended Brand, explaining “the jokes made on Heresy are deliberately provocative as the title implies” and that they were “not intended to be taken seriously.”[33] Acting Prime Minister Theresa May said the BBC should explain why a Jo Brand joke about throwing battery acid was “appropriate content” for broadcast[34] and the BBC later announced that the remark would be edited out of any future broadcasts. The Metropolitan Police confirmed that it had “received an allegation of incitement to violence that was reported to the MPS on 13 June”.[35] and that they were investigating the matter.[36][37] Appearing at an event in Henley, Oxfordshire, on the same day, the comedian was said to have apologised for making the joke, saying “Looking back it probably was somewhat a crass and ill-judged joke that might upset people.” It was understood that the allegation reported to the police was not made by Nigel Farage or the Brexit PartyOfcom said it has received 65 complaints about the episode of Heresy.[38] The police dropped the investigation two days later.” [Wikipedia]

Jo Brand was talking (no doubt well-paid for it too) on a BBC radio show hosted by the Jewess Victoria Coren.

Afterwards, the BBC removed the clip from public access. The Jew comic David Baddiel (the show’s “creator”, again no doubt very well paid for all of this degenerate nonsense) said that the BBC was “cowardly” in removing the comments.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48640411

Strangely enough, Baddiel is often heard complaining about jokes….about Jews.

Jo Brand is obviously a disgusting woman (I thought that a long time prior to the recent “joke” and still think it). Britain is in the midst of a spate of horrible acid (and strong alkali) attacks, in which victims have been killed or seriously injured and/or disfigured for life by criminal attackers.

These types of attack were unknown until mass immigration destroyed Britain. Even the massaged statistics of the System say that white people (still the large majority of the population) only perpetrated about 30% of the attacks; non-whites, despite being only a minority of the population, perpetrated 70% of such attacks. White people (i.e. real British people) were the victims in about 50% of cases. This type of crime has been imported from other parts of the world, and the UK courts are only now, belatedly, starting to hand down suitably condign sentences.

Coming back to the repulsive Jo Brand, she thinks that throwing milkshakes over political opponents is “just pathetic”, by which she plainly means that the attacks do not hurt or damage enough. How could someone with her attitudes ever have been a psychiatric nurse, as she is said to have been for a decade?

In fact, the “milkshakes” (which are mostly not even milk-based but are a glutinous mixture sold to the masses by McDonalds and the like), do considerable damage to clothing, and more importantly are an affront to the victim’s dignity and rights as human being and as citizen. Which, of course, is why the perpetrators do it. The attackers are always smug, narcissistic “me too” types like Jo Brand. They are always Remain whiners, always pro-mass immigration, and usually have jobs in the mass media or public services (when not students).

To imply, as Jo Brand does, that to throw a fast-food “milk”-shake over someone is nothing, and by no means painful enough, is to incite violence for political motives. There is no other explanation for it.

As to Brand’s “apology”, designed as a fig leaf so that BBC etc can carry on giving her (via her tax-dodging private company) licence-payers’ money so that she can carry on boring and repelling the public, it carries no weight whatever. Would any “ordinary” (in fact, far more valuable) citizen be let off so easily by the police on the plea that “I only said that acid should be thrown because I was joking”? I think not.

Let us look at a few people whom the police or professional bodies have not let off for making remarks, or for singing amusing songs etc:

  • Alison Chabloz sang amusing satirical songs about, inter alia, the many proven “holocaust” fakes.

alison

CnDUXkuVMAExy6n

She was prosecuted and eventually convicted, though is appealing her conviction and sentence; see

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/04/18/alison-chabloz-the-show-goes-on/

  • Jez Turner made a humorous speech in Whitehall in 2015, during which he suggested that Jews should be (again) ejected from the UK. Prosecuted in 2018 and actually imprisoned (!) for a year (released on licence after 6 months);
  • Vlogger Mark Meechan, aka “Count Dankula”, was convicted in Scotland of having taught his pug dog to give the “Hitler” salute, then posting the film online. Fined £800 and refused permission (needed in Scotland) to appeal; the fact that I regard him (and other “alt-right” vloggers) as complete wastes of space does not change the fact that he should never have been prosecuted;
  • I myself was questioned by the police after politically-motivated Jews complained that tweets I was said to have posted were “grossly offensive” (they could not bag me, though, and I continue to post as I see fit, though not on Twitter: the Jews managed to procure my expulsion from that platform); in a related case, effectively the same pack of Jews (though notionally different because using a different organizational name), had me disbarred

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

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

The Jo Brand case is another item in the indictment against the BBC, the degenerate msm milieu in general (cf. the Gove confession) and UK society today. There must be, some day soon, a chistka or purge (a “cultural revolution”, if you like) to destroy msm degeneracy and its practitioners and profiteers, to wipe out evil of this kind and restore European culture to TV, radio, Press and book publishing. Online too.

In the meantime, I wait to see whether Jo Brand herself will be confronted by a milkshake. I wonder whether, in that event, she will see the “joke”?

News reports and what people have been saying

First, a half-hearted defence of Jo Brand from (yet another) Jewess, this time in The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/16/jo-brand-joke-are-we-all-disgusted-tunbridge-wells

and here [below] is the Jew Baddiel defending Jo Brand (and of course his show, from which he makes yet more money from the BBC…and as he will, no doubt, in future); but where was he when my free speech was trashed? Where was he when Alison Chabloz was persecuted and prosecuted for singing songs?

…and (what a shock) here is Ricky Gervais, another one who has never stood up for Alison Chabloz etc (though admittedly he did so for the waste of space “Count Dankula”, and his silly saluting dog film….); and, on another but not directly relevant point, I do like his support for animal welfare etc.

Yet another System-subsidized “humorist” (apparently— I’ve never heard of the idiot) below:

That one [above] seems to ignore the fact that both milkshake and acid attacks occur all too often; semi-conservative politicians like Nigel Farage are in fact not “picking up rifles”.

Here’s another one, Gyles Brandreth , defending Jo Brand. Funny how these bastards all make large amounts of money from the BBC…

…and [below] yet another defender of Jo Brand: Jew, atheist, gay, and…yes, as expected (I had to look up the bastard on Wikipedia) another who makes his income from BBC work. The BBC is now a corrupt mess and should be dropped down a black hole.

And here is another member of the London msm club, Adam Boulton, of Sky News. Strange, I must have missed his defence of, say, Alison Chabloz and her songs (or, for that matter, his defence of my tweets of years ago). That’s right, Adam Boulton did not defend freedom of expression. “They” would not have approved…

Fucking doormat for Zionist Jews…

While this silly woman, below, thinks that Jo Brand is a saint, apparently. You stupid creature, the BBC will still not employ you, you thick plank!

[Update, 4 September 2020. Seems that I was wrong; the BBC has now thrown a few crumbs her way: “In 2020, she and fellow comedian Fern Brady started a podcast for the BBC called Wheel of Misfortune, which is obviously based in [sic] the Wheel of Fortune.” [Wikipedia]]

“Count Dankula”/Mark Meechan [below] exposes the hypocrisy of those who defend Jo Brand but not, er, him! Fair enough, but where were you, Mr. Meechan, when Alison Chabloz was facing persecution and prosecution? Where were you, on your precious “social media”, when I myself was traduced in the msm? Nowhere. So that’s where you are and will stay: nowhere!

This one (below) apparently reviews newspapers on Sky News sometimes. Seems that she cannot reach even their usual low standards, never having heard (it seems) of Alison Chabloz, Mark Meechan, or the fellow whose family was subjected to a police raid because they made a joking remark about a Guy Fawkes bonfire in their own garden. Or are edgy “jokes” OK unless they mention Jews and Gypsies?

Here, below, the columnist Allison Pearson answers the tweet of Jew Zionist scribbler Hugo Rifkind:

In fact, it seems that a great number of people do not approve of the so-called “joke” by Jo Brand (the bitch wouldn’t know a joke if it splattered all over her…). Strangely enough, few if any of her critics make money out of the BBC…

and here’s another BBC hypocrite: Jimmy Carr. Makes millions (literally) from the BBC and other msm, was exposed as a tax-dodger in 2012, but tries to pose as both somehow “radical” and as terribly “edgy”.

Here’s another example of Jimmy Carr humour, laughing at British service personnel who have been badly-injured:

“In October 2009, Carr received criticism from several Sunday tabloid newspapers for a joke he made about British soldiers who had lost limbs in Iraq and Afghanistan, saying that the UK would have a strong team in the London 2012 Paralympic Games.[34] Carr defended his own joke as “totally acceptable” in an interview with The Guardian.”

[Wikipedia]

Why is he still around? The little bastard only jokes at the expense of those who cannot fight back. Why has no serving soldier or ex-military person *explained* the matter to Jimmy Carr?

Alexander Nekrassov not mincing his words! Go, Sasha!

Nekrassov with another point which applies not only to Jo Brand but a hundred or more others:

https://twitter.com/StirringTrouble/status/1139864753424216064

A stray thought: does Jo Brand fantasize about acid being thrown on people she dislikes, or with whom she disagrees, because her own face already looks as though acid has been thrown on it?

Notes

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/5d38c003-c54a-4513-a369-f9eae0d52f91

Update, 19 June 2019

Below, rent-a-mouth BBC ignoramus James O’Brien defends disgusting Jo Brand. Apparently, it’s OK to “joke” about Nigel Farage having battery acid thrown at him, because “it was on a comedy show”. Funny, I never saw O’Brien and his type stand up for Alison Chabloz and her comedic songs…Must be that it’s OK to joke about acid being thrown —on a named person who has already had other stuff thrown on him recently— but not OK to lampoon the proven Jewish frauds and fakes of the “holocaust” mythus…(we really are just “occupied” in this poor country…)

…and now look at who’s looking for trouble!

His ancestors “died fighting” what he is pleased to call “this shit” (meaning white civilization), he says. Thus speaks David Lammy MP, barrister of Lincoln’s Inn, to which I myself belonged before the Jew Zionist cabals procured my disbarment in 2016, an injustice no doubt applauded by barrister Lammy (he only practised actively at the Bar for a few years).

When did his “ancestors” “die fighting”? In African tribal wars, attacking the police at the Broadwater Farm riots, or in more recent gang activity? I do not know the bastard’s background in detail, so cannot guess. Lammy seems to want a fight himself, judging by the inflammatory nature of his tweets. He obviously has a violent nature. In fact he supports corporal punishment too. He is out of place in the UK, in Europe.

I think that at one time Lammy hoped to become the first black Attorney-General, but was beaten to it by Patricia Scotland (who was rubbish, and went on on to be rubbish at the Commonwealth Secretariat as well, but that is another issue). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patricia_Scotland#Expenses_controversy . The price of so-called “diversity”? Labour’s travails since 2009 and his own odd behaviour seem to have put paid to Lammy’s ministerial ambitions. He was (briefly) a Minister of State (non-Cabinet) under crazed bully and psycho case Gordon Brown, but now is just a backbencher and will stay one. Still, not a bad little earner for someone whose huge ignorance is regularly highlighted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lammy#Controversies_and_criticism

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

One has to question whether a society like that in the UK can survive, when its key and/or prestige institutions prefer such as David Lammy to someone like me, when the BBC and its highly-paid drones pay lip-service to incitement to horrific violence, when those guilty have mostly so far got away without having been taken down.

Update, 11 July 2019

Latest:

Alison Chabloz talks from her piano…

https://alisonchabloz.com/2019/07/11/fighting-back-and-winning/

Update, 28 January 2020

Predictable System bias.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7935063/Jo-Brands-joke-unlikely-incite-crime-rules-Ofcom.html

Boris, A Story for Our Times…

The time has come for me to write about the most incredible charlatan and mountebank the UK has seen since the days of Horatio Bottomley.

The background we all know (though when I say “we”, of course I diplomatically pretend to mean “all British people” but in fact mean “the tiny minority who take a serious interest in how the country and society they themselves live in is run”).

In outline, therefore: the UK has a combined political and electoral system that no longer really works. Part of that is the sclerosis of the major political parties of the System.

The LibDems, heirs to the great late 19th and early 20th Century Liberal Party, failed in 2010 to demand (as they had the power to do) some form of proportional electoral system. They are flagging, though may benefit from not being Conservative or Labour, if Brexit Party grows stronger.

Labour is doing well within its boundaries, as the party of the public services and of the “blacks and browns”. In terms of MP numbers, Labour under Corbyn is doing about as well as it has generally done in the past, if one excludes the Tony Blair years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)#UK_General_Elections

though it may struggle to get a popular vote much above 30% in future.

Then we have the Conservatives, for long considered “the natural party of government”, but which now struggles to attract votes from anyone much under pensionable age, or from those not in the most affluent 10%-20% strata of the population. Its MPs are mediocre or worse, and its ministers no better. The leading contender to take Theresa May’s purple is now Boris Johnson. He is the leading contender because the Conservative Party is terminally sick. In its healthier days, someone like Boris Johnson would not even be an MP, let alone promoted (briefly, disastrously) to Foreign Secretary; the idea of someone like him becoming Prime Minister would be a joke, rather like that of The Simpsons, c. 1993, casting Donald Trump as a future President of the USA. Jokes are dangerous!

A serious point from Lewis Goodall. It has been a long time since the Conservative Party had anything like a solid majority in the House of Commons (1992; arguably, 1987). 27 or even 32 years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)#UK_general_elections

So we now consider the candidate considered most likely to lead the Conservative Party after July-August 2019.

I have in fact already blogged about Boris Johnson and some of the other would-be Conservative Party leaders:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/09/the-conservative-party-leadership-contenders-in-outline/

Boris Johnson: a few tweets from journalists, commentators etc

[Below, Boris Johnson, the part-Jew public entertainer, clowning and posing as the great patriot…]

After the briefest of honeymoons,” he wrote, “the voters would quickly start to wonder how this spectacularly incompetent braggart, with a Churchill complex but no Commons majority, had ended up in Downing Street in the first place.”

There was a Mafia leader in New York once, John Gotti, who at one time enjoyed the newspaper-invented title “The Teflon Don”, because he was always being arrested and even charged with serious crimes, but who always seemed to get away with whatever. No charges stuck. There is something of that in Boris Johnson.

Matthew Engel in The Guardian notes [Bottomley’s] ability to charm the public even while swindling them; one victim, cheated of £40,000, apparently insisted: “I am not sorry I lent him the money, and I would do it again”. If London had had a mayor in those days, says Engel, Bottomley would have won in a landslide.”

A transparent reference to the (one-time) Mayor of London, Boris Johnson. Johnson seems able to shrug off, not so much allegations against him, but allegations proven beyond all doubt and repeatedly, against him.

Boris Johnson, journalist trainee (sacked), journalist (sacked), Spectator editor (hopeless, largely absent), MP twice, Shadow minister (sacked), Foreign Secretary (“resigned”), Mayor of London (useless). That’s before we even look at detail, or about his personal failings (easily available elsewhere, so no need to again detail them here).

One of the most risible aspects of Boris Johnson is his am-dram reprise of Churchill. Johnson affects not only the voice (slightly) at times, but (also occasionally) the solid buffalo-like massed body posture, hunched, looking down etc. I may have my trenchant criticisms of Churchill’s historical role, but the man was a titan compared to Boris Johnson!

There is something sick here about the Conservative Party, the UK, and the UK’s political system. The Conservative Party consists now of between 50,000 and 120,000 mostly elderly, mostly affluent persons, who are going to vote on a leader. The majority will vote and a majority of those will elect the leader. In other words, about 40,000 or so of those elderly people will, in effect, elect the next Prime Minister of the UK, a position which the “elected” candidate may hold for nearly three years, until 2022!

What kind of fake “democracy” is that?!

What will happen if Boris Johnson wins this contest?

Either Boris Johnson will take the UK out of the EU without a trade “deal” with the EU in place (I am sanguine on that score), in which case there is every chance of his losing a House of Commons confidence vote either immediately or not very long afterward, or Johnson will renege on his meaningless “pledge”, in which case he will be giving Brexit Party a gift worth rubies. Either way, the Conservative Party will be toast. Any loss of a confidence vote will result in a general election in which the Conservative Party might well be wiped out.

The Daily Express (meaning the Jew who owns the Daily Express) has been pushing an opinion poll which says that a Boris Johnson Conservative Party might win a landslide 140-seat House of Commons majority. That is very unlikely, for several reasons.

What Britain needs is a powerful social-national movement. So far, there have been mere straws in the wind only. No movement, no party exists, as yet. An inevitably-disastrous Boris Johnson government might create the socio-political conditions for one to emerge.

Notes

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

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gotti#%22The_Teflon_Don%22

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/12/boris-johnson-is-every-bit-as-dull-and-evasive-as-his-minders-hoped

(“It’s quite something when Liz Truss, Gavin Williamson and Chris Grayling are three of the brightest people in the room.“)

(“No, he didn’t want to talk about his record at the Foreign Office. Probably because his tenure had been an unmitigated disaster. Rather, he wanted to claim other people’s achievements during his time as London mayor as his own.”)

(“Just as the event threatened to unravel, Johnson remembered his instructions and dashed for the exit. Some journalists shouted that the whole event had been a total disgrace, but for Boris it had done the business. He had got through the day more or less unexamined. Onwards and downwards, further into the cesspit of Tory party politics.”)

https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/16/boris-johnson-said-f-families-7-7-terror-attacks-9970567/?ito=article.desktop.share.top.twitter?ito=cbshare

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-tory-leadership-contest-brexit-steve-baker-conservatives-a8955631.html

(“This was the Tory party in survival mode, reduced to its basest instinct. Things were serious now. The Tory party had decided it must live, and so everything else must die.”)

(“All dignity dispensed with. All integrity gone. Survival is everything.”)

(“The most telling fact of the speech was how bad it was. Boris Johnson is on his best behaviour, but bad behaviour is all he is.“)

(“What was he offering exactly? There was something or other on “investing in the infrastructure this country so badly needs”. His current record on infrastructure is an utterly pointless cable car in east London that recent TfL research showed is used by precisely six actual commuters. ​It now serves alcohol in the evenings to try and stay afloat.

Then there are the rolling windowless sauna buses, and his decision to make himself chief executive of the London Legacy Development Corporation, and personally see through the execrable Olympic Stadium deal with West Ham United – the only aspect of London 2012 over which he had any executive control, and the only aspect considered to be an utter failure.”)

https://twitter.com/ToryFibs/status/877583434184609796

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/06/why-conservatives-deserve-face-extinction-if-they-make-boris-johnson-prime

We keep hearing that “Boris Johnson has the ability to be Prime Minister, but does he have the necessary character?”

My response is “where has Boris Johnson proven that he has the ability?”; on the contrary, he has, if anything, proven that he has not the ability.

Afterthought, 20 June 2019

It occurs to me that some readers, on reading my assertion that Boris Johnson is the most egregious charlatan and mountebank since Horatio Bottomley, may object “what about Robert Maxwell?”, and it is true that Johnson does invite comparison with “Maxwell”.

However, Maxwell was a far more organized and intelligent figure, and in some respects far more sinister (he is supposed to have been Israel’s chief secret operative in Europe). Also, though “Maxwell” was indeed an MP (in the UK) for 6 years (1964-1970), Britain in those days was still decently “anti-Semitic” and (rightly) somewhat “prejudiced” against “Maxwell” (though Britain still allowed him to become an MP, defraud pensioners etc). No-one would ever have even thought of “Maxwell” as a potential Prime Minister.

It is true that Maxwell was every bit as much of a charlatan as Boris Johnson is, but there was an element of seriousness or even tragedy in Maxwell that does not exist in Boris-Idiot. I don’t suppose that anyone would entrust Boris with millions to invest, neither would he know what to do with it, though his incompetence in every sphere would still ensure that every penny was lost! One could ask, “then why is Boris being entrusted with the fate of the whole country?” God knows. I don’t.

Update, 21 June 2019
Seems that Boris-Idiot and his girlfriend/fiancee (?) had what the police used to call “a domestic”, the neighbours then calling the police emergency line 999. “Our” next Prime Minister”… He is as fit for that position as I might be to take Olympic gold (in any sport).
Update, 22 June 2019
Surprise! (not)
Update, 25 June 2019
Update, 30 June 2019
Johnson may never become Prime Minister even if he wins the absurd contest with Jeremy Hunt:
Update, 24 July 2019
Well, the idiot has been appointed Prime Minister, most of the Cabinet of Theresa May has resigned, others have been sacked. I shall blog separately about this disastrous new Cabinet of “kings and queens for a day” when it is complete. I just note now that Boris-Idiot has appointed, as Home Secretary, one of the traditional “Great Offices of State”, Priti Patel, who is non-European, thick as two short planks, and a proven Israeli agent. We no longer have freedom of speech in the UK; otherwise I would express what I think should happen to her. I therefore content myself with observing that, had it not been for Idi Amin, she would now be serving customers from behind the counter of a Kampala grocery shop.
Britain is now officially in big trouble.
Ctdcka4WAAApkQ6

The Main Conservative Party Leadership Contenders in Outline

First words

One of the 5 tweets that got me disbarred at the instigation of a pack of Jews was that describing Michael Gove MP as “a pro-Jew, pro-Israel expenses cheat”. I am very glad to be able to post the key words yet again (as I do from time to time), now with the addition “who is also a dishonest, cocaine-snorting little degenerate with a Jewish wife.”

Major Candidates

I have decided now to blog about the main rivals for Theresa May’s threadbare purple as leader of the Conservative Party. I start with Gove.

Michael Gove

currie-janner-and-gove

[above, Gove enjoys the company of Jew paedophile and rapist, the now-deceased one-time Labour MP and (later) “lord”, Greville Janner, at a Zionist social gathering]

Gove was adopted, his origins not publicly known. He was a journalist before becoming an MP. At that time, he showed his adherence to the Israeli cause by participating in a pro-Israel demonstration in Trafalgar Square.

It seems that, like —sadly— too many of “our” mainstream media scribblers, Michael Gove was a fairly frequent abuser of cocaine before (only before?) his Jewish Zionist backers got him onto the System political racket as an MP.

For several years, Gove had a relatively low public profile as MP, despite his promotion to Shadow Cabinet in 2007, after only 2 years as a backbench MP. He was one of the most blatant (though far from the worst) expenses cheats and blodgers exposed in 2009: he and his Jewish or part-Jewish wife, Sarah Vine (a Daily Mail columnist), claimed as detailed here:

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

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

Gove is an active member of Conservative Friends of Israel. He is a non-Jewish Zionist, completely in the pocket of the Jewish Zionist lobby. He has always supported UK “intervention” in the Middle East and elsewhere (eg Libya).

Gove was Boris Johnson’s campaign manager (in effect, Johnson’s deputy) in the Conservative leadership contest of 2016, but stabbed Johnson in the back at the crucial moment, causing maximum damage to the leadership bid that he, Gove, had been supporting until that moment.

Gove’s wife has said that he cannot do as much as boil a kettle. Well, Einstein was like that and look how he benefited humanity. Oh, no, wait…

Conclusion: A doormat for Zionism and the Jewish lobby; intelligent, but not as intelligent or cultured as he and his backers believe him to be. A driven careerist. Completely untrustworthy. Not reliable in any way (except in his support for Israel, which for me is a negative). Administratively, probably competent. Otherwise unfit for the office of Prime Minister.

Boris Johnson

Ctdcka4WAAApkQ6

[above, Boris Johnson “praying” at the “Wailing Wall” in Jerusalem]

Boris Johnson, aka Boris-Idiot, has wanted to be Prime Minister for a long time. A melange of different ethnicities, he is partly-European, partly-Turkic, partly-Jew: his maternal great-grandfather was an Orthodox Jewish rabbi in Lithuania! Three generations on, the Eton and Oxford “fiddler on the roof” was born in New York City to a father who worked for the World Bank and was later a Conservative MP.

Boris Johnson has been a backbench MP twice, without having distinguished himself. He has been Foreign Secretary and was terrible at it, incapable of doing the job properly. He has been a journalist-trainee (at the Times— sacked for making up a quotation), a journalist (at the Telegraph— where he was known for making up news) and an editor (The Spectator-— where he was notorious for absenteeism, lateness, making the staff make up for his defaults, also rude and unpleasant to the staff, and spent much of his time, in office hours, out of the office screwing lightweight airhead Spectator scribbler Petronella Wyatt).

Johnson has always had to face accusations of incompetence, complacency, laziness, lack of serious thought and application, as well as charges of dishonesty. These traits have characterized Johnson from his days at Eton right up to his shambolic and quite brief time as Foreign Secretary. A further trait has been appointment by reason of connections, rather than merit.

Johnson, who spent his childhood and youth amid the wealthy without himself really being of (very/extremely) wealthy background, is obsessed with scrabbling for as much money as he can get, and apparently gets (on top of MP salary and expenses) £250,000 per year for writing garbage in the Telegraph, which garbage he cobbles together once a week in about one and a half hours. One has to wonder at the motivations of the Telegraph’s editor or, perhaps being more significant, owners. The Telegraph is owned by the Barclay Brothers [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_and_Frederick_Barclay] who both favour Brexit and would no doubt find it very useful to have a UK Prime Minister obligated to them. Johnson tried to be Mayor of London and MP at the same time, in order to double his salary.

Boris Johnson is not prepared to do the preparation necessary to avoid egregious and avoidable mistakes. Two that come to mind are the water-cannon he bought as Mayor of London (unusable because not approved by the Home Office, a fact that Johnson did not bother to find out in advance) and Johnson’s painful mishandling of the Zaghari-Ratcliffe case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazanin_Zaghari-Ratcliffe#Boris_Johnson_intervention

Johnson will do almost anything to become Prime Minister. Though probably genuinely at least cynical or sceptical about the EU, he has fluctuated between Leave and Remain for most of the past two decades, and only committed himself to Leave when it became politic so to do.

He’s lied his way through life, he’s lied his way through politics, he’s a huckster with a degree of charm to which I am immune

[Anon., said to be a Cabinet minister, quoted in The Times of Israel]

Johnson, like 80% of Conservative MPs, is a member of Conservative Friends of Israel. In 2017, an Israeli employed by the Israeli Embassy in London, Shai Masot, was covertly filmed talking about how he had a million pound slush fund for “friendly” Westminster MPs, and how he wanted to have others “taken down”.

The Jew Masot talked to a “British” traitress and/or agent, one Maria Strizzolo (an aide to Jew Zionist “Conservative” MP Robert Halfon), about Boris Johnson, who, said Masot, was OK. “Ah, Boris…Boris…is good; he is solid on Israel. Of course, Boris is an idiot…” (and smirks…).

After being openly talked about like that, Boris Johnson just laughed it off in the Commons. He knows that he needs the Jew-influenced “British” msm to publicize him and support him. What’s a few insults from his Jewish “friends” anyway?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1387955/Al-Jazeera-Investigations-film-Shai-Masot-undercover.html

As MP and as Mayor of London, Boris was rumoured to have been an occasional drug abuser and, more often, a stalker of women in supermarkets etc. After having been (in the Minder appellation) “‘Er indoors” for many years, his (second) wife, a half-Indian woman, finally chucked him out in 2018.

Apparently, Johnson rarely if ever reads a book or anything beyond newspaper opinion columns. His pathetic attempts to pull rank on the plebs and make himself seem cultured by using Latin or classical Greek words fell flat after a few years. People saw through it.

Johnson’s latest girlfriend, whom he will probably marry, is a Conservative backroom PR woman who has smartened him up, cut his hair, put him on a diet and generally made him look less like a clown. She cannot do much about what is in his head, though.

Johnson has something in common with Donald Trump. Nothing that he says can be taken at face value. In fact, the sharp-eyed Jews have not had difficulty noticing that:

Johnson’s…actions have done little to assuage liberal Britons. Last year, he came under heavy attack from Jewish community leaders after he described Muslim women wearing burkas as looking “absolutely ridiculous” and like “letter boxes” and “bank robbers.” The Jewish Leadership Council said Johnson’s words were “utterly disgraceful,” while a leading rabbi accused him of “racism with a smile.” The Jewish Chronicle compared the former foreign secretary to a “bar-room bigot”.” [The Times of Israel]

Now we see that Johnson is again trying to run with the fox and hunt with the hounds.

Conclusion: Boris Johnson is a basically rootless character. Ethnically somewhat “diverse”, born in New York City, brought up in Belgium and England, educated with the (very) wealthy while not being quite one of them [cf. David Cameron-Levita, who was heir to a fortune in the tens of millions of pounds], Boris is always the slight outsider. He is pro-Israel mainly because it is convenient to be so (though he is part-Jew). His am-dram Bertie Wooster impression is no doubt an attempt to fit in with an England where he still does not wholly belong. The same is true of his equally am-dram but totally empty Winston Churchill impression and mimicry (he even affects a slightly-hunched posture at times). As a politician, he makes a good public entertainer. Driven. Unreliable. Incompetent. His Uxbridge seat may not be safe. Unfit to be Prime Minister, however looked at.

 Jeremy Hunt

The most serious main contender for Conservative Party leader, as I identified some time ago.

From an English background, Hunt is distantly related both to the Queen and to one-time Labour government minister and founder-leader (1930s) of the British Union of Fascists and (1950s) Union Movement, Sir Oswald Mosley. Born into an old Establishment family (his father was an admiral).

Politically, Hunt has had a fairly meteoric career. Elected as MP in 2005 (at age 39), he was made a Shadow minister almost immediately, promoted to Shadow Cabinet minister in 2007 and, as soon as the Conservatives formed the Con Coalition in 2010, appointed Cabinet minister (Culture Secretary 2010-2012, Health Secretary 2012-2018, Foreign Secretary 2018-present).

Hunt has by far the widest experience of government of the present contenders.

Hunt’s wife is Chinese, yet he has on occasion criticized the Chinese government.

Hunt is (predictably) pro-Israel:

https://cfoi.co.uk/foreign-secretary-jeremy-hunt-affirms-israels-unconditional-right-to-self-defence-at-cfi-parliamentary-reception/

Conclusion: Probably the most serious contender for Conservative leader if one forgets about level of public profile (Boris Johnson’s trump card). A smarmy snake type, but (despite gaffes here and there) reasonably competent (when compared to Johnson, especially). It would be surprising were he not one of the final two candidates.

Sajid Javid

CYHP3gvWYAArn3_

By origin Pakistani Muslim, Javid could be described as an apostate, having said that:

My own family’s heritage is Muslim. Myself and my four brothers were brought up to believe in God, but I do not practise any religion. My wife is a practising Christian and the only religion practised in my house is Christianity.” [Wikipedia]

Javid is not a practising Muslim and he drinks alcohol. One of his brothers died from ingestion of alcohol and codeine.

Javid has been a devotee of the “philosophical selfishness” of so-called “Objectivism”, the “philosophy” invented by Jewess Ayn Rand.

Philosopher and theologian John Milbank commented [about Javid]: “It is extraordinarily disturbing that any mainstream politician should express any admiration for Ayn Rand. We should be concerned that someone like Sajid Javid can now hold high office within the United Kingdom.” [Wikipedia]

Javid was an international banker for about 18 years, rising by 2009 (when he quit to pursue his political ambitions) to an income of some £3 million a year. At least it can be said for Javid that his political career is not motivated by money-grubbing (cf. Johnson and, to some extent, Gove). Whether being an international banker is quite as impressive as it sounds, after the debacle of 2007-2008, is a matter for debate.

It was a shock to many that Sajid Javid, as Home Secretary no less, expressed support for the “antifa” thugs and snoopers. It shows either malice or, more likely (?) ignorance. I saw a Twitter photo of Javid at a Metropolitan Police event at which some of the most notorious Jew-Zionist trolls and troublemakers were in attendance.

Javid is yet another Conservative MP who belongs to Conservative Friends of Israel.

Javid is regarded as one of Israel’s staunchest supporters in the Cabinet and is a long-time supporter of Conservative Friends of Israel.” [Wikipedia]. He even went there on his honeymoon!

Javid’s strong record of speaking out against anti-Semitism has earned him plaudits from leading Jewish communal figures” [Wikipedia]

In 2015, at a Board of Deputies of British Jews hustings event, Javid stated that publicly funded cultural institutions that boycott Israel risk having their government grants cut.[81] Citing a boycott of the UK Jewish Film Festival[82] by the Tricycle Theatre in Kilburn, Javid said: “I have made it absolutely clear what might happen to their [the theatre’s] funding if they try, or if anyone tries, that kind of thing again.” [81] British playwright Caryl Churchill raised concerns about political interference in the arts and questioned: “All Charlie Hebdo? Except when freedom of expression means freedom to criticise Israel.

[Wikipedia]

Conclusion:

Sajid Javid seems to be a genuine Leaver/Brexiteer. Put another way, a convinced globalist…in favour (unsurprisingly) of immigration into the UK. A complete doormat for the Jews and Israel, too. Intelligent…up to a point. Seems to be another one who is either narrow or has idees-fixes: Israel, Ayn Rand etc. May be administratively competent. As potential Prime Minister, a Pakistani-origined capitalist-globalist who supports Israel, the Jewish lobby, the mindless “antifa” idiots and the outlook of Ayn Rand, is not my idea of the right selection.

Dominic Raab

Raab is half-Jewish (and half-English) but was brought up culturally mainly English, including Church of England, and in –perhaps appropriately– Gerrard’s Cross, Buckinghamshire, the next rail stop from Beaconsfield, one-time seat of deracinated Jew Benjamin Disraeli, later Lord Beaconsfield, who became both Conservative leader and then, in 1868, Prime Minister.

Raab has a background in law (a degree and solicitor’s qualification, as well as a 2-year training term with Linklaters, a leading City of London firm), the Foreign Office (5-6 years) and as adviser for 3-4 years to Conservative Shadow Cabinet ministers. He was elected MP in 2010.

Raab has had a turbocharged career in Parliament, being involved with numerous serious policies and initiatives, including cross-party ones. Evenhanded (on the surface) re. Israel, he has criticized the most egregious excesses of the Zionists, in particular the settlement movement. He reached the Cabinet in 8 years.

Raab was involved with the Britannia Unchained booklet, which might be said to endorse what some have termed  a “Zionist slavemaster agenda” for the British people.

Raab is a sincere Leaver/Brexiteer.

I assess Raab as hard and indeed ruthless.

Conclusion: Another rather rootless person. Not quite Jew, not quite full English. Probably competent in terms of administrative and executive ability, but there have been allegations that he bullies his staff. Seems doubtful whether he can much impress the British voters, and his suggestion of forcing a WTO Brexit through via the prorogation of Parliament (something not done, for purely tactical political reasons, and as far as I know, since Cromwellian times), must give pause to those who would support him as potential Prime Minister.

Other candidates

There are a number of other candidates, though it may be that few if any can get 8 MPs (increased from 2 to cull the numbers) to support their candidatures. I have already blogged, a while ago, about Rory Stewart, arguably the most interesting candidate individually:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/will-rory-stewart-mp-be-prime-minister/

though I note that some msm commentators have now expressed some of the same doubts as I did some time ago, and wondering whether his whole adds up to the sum of his parts, basically.

Should other candidates get through the initial process, I shall also examine them (or should that be “turn on them”?).

Overview

The Conservative leadership contest is yet another “shitshow” (in the elegant word of Johnny Mercer MP). The Conservatives cannot organize Brexit, cannot even organize their own leadership election effectively! They certainly cannot run the country properly. I wonder how long they can cling to government.

Another point comes to mind, in relation to various issues but, for example, Gove’s cocaine abuse. MSM commentators and talking heads all saying that the public don’t really mind if journalists, MPs, Prime Ministers, snort drugs. I wonder. There may be plenty of people who think that frequent abusers or users should be machinegunned , if only as a public health measure. I merely pose the question…

There is a real and growing rift between the “socially liberal” metro-people and the other “tribes” in the UK.

[example: the Political Correspondent of Sky News does not regard it as significant that at least two of the main contenders for the Conservative Party leadership were habitual cocaine abusers!

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1138085102808965121 ]

and

As for the Conservative Party, it seems bizarre that a few hundred MPs, and then what amounts to about 40,000 70 and 80 year olds, can elect a party leader who will then automatically become Prime Minister and may serve until 2022 without any need to be endorsed by the whole people. 

Notes

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9236464/tory-leadership-election-security-measures-ballots/

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/British-PM-contender-Dominic-Raab-has-Jewish-father-who-fled-the-Nazis-590730

https://www.timesofisrael.com/meet-the-frontrunners-to-become-britains-next-pm-and-their-stances-on-israel/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1387955/Al-Jazeera-Investigations-film-Shai-Masot-undercover.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazanin_Zaghari-Ratcliffe#Boris_Johnson_intervention

Afterthought, 10 June 2019

Boris Johnson has just “pledged” (whatever little weight that carries in the mouth of a congenital liar like him) to cut taxes for the 5%-10% of the adult population with gross incomes above £50,000 a year. He thus addresses directly the affluent and wealthy people who, as members of the Conservative Party, are about to elect the leader of that party. People who would benefit from any such policy.

To put it another way, Boris Johnson has just made it more likely that he will be elected Conservative Party leader, but at the same time has made it even less likely than it already is that the Conservatives will win the next general election. In fact, they will probably not even be the largest party in the Commons after a general election. They might not even be the second-largest party.

I wonder what the mass of voters (90%+) who earn less than £50K a year gross will think about a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson that prioritizes tax cuts for the affluent and wealthy 10% at the expense of the other 90%? If only 10% of voters vote Conservative next time, it is “Goodnight Vienna” for the Conservative Party; and Boris Johnson, in his modest-majority Uxbridge seat, will be one of the first to fall.

Tweets and updates

Update, 13 June 2019

After the first ballot, the three least-supported candidates have been eliminated: nonentity Andrea Leadsom, ex-accountant Mark Harper, and dishonest (and thick-as-two-short-planks) Esther McVey.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_McVey#Out_of_Cabinet_(2018%E2%80%93)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Leadsom#Alleged_exaggeration_of_pre-government_jobs_and_responsibilities

As previously said, you can have any Model T Ford car as long as it is black, and you can have any Conservative MP as leader so long as he or she is pro-Jew and pro-Israel. In fact, the voting record of the candidates shows identical voting on a number of important issues; for example [see tweet below]

Update, 14 June 2019

“Suited thug” Matthew “Matt” Hancock MP has withdrawn.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48631706

Rory Stewart MP on Marr. It seems that, in polling of Conservative Party members, he is now second-placed (after Boris-Idiot). That would seem to prove what I have previously written, that Boris Johnson’s “popularity” is no more than the outcome of his 20 years of publicity largely generated by himself. Stewart has matched that, or tried to match that, via a social media blitz.

I have written about Stewart individually and I see no reason to alter anything I wrote then (except that I thought then that Stewart would have more MPs behind him), at the beginning of May of this year:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/will-rory-stewart-mp-be-prime-minister/

Stewart only received 19 votes in the second ballot, thus coming last. Matt Hancock MP (who had received 20 votes) then withdrew.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election

Stewart has more self-belief than Hancock (and more intelligence). He is still standing and may be gaining ground. For him it is all or nothing. He has ruled out serving in a Boris Johnson Cabinet, and it is hard to see Boris appointing him anyway. Boris does not like to see his idiocies floodlit.

To me as an observer, it seems that Gove is probably out of the running now, as is Sajid Javid. Be grateful for small mercies. That leaves, realistically, Johnson, Hunt, Raab and Stewart.

I had thought that Stewart would find more support among MPs than he has done so far. However, assuming that Johnson will be in the top two, Stewart now has a 3/1 chance of being there too. I had thought Hunt the obvious second-place candidate at the end. Now, well, we shall see.

Stewart is basically pro-EU, so it is hard to see Conservative Party rank and file members voting for him on that basis, but on most other bases he scores over Johnson.

Whoever becomes Conservative Party leader, this is a party going nowhere but down.

Update, 17 June 2019

Well, as I guessed a couple of days ago, Rory Stewart has gained ground, at least in the betting, though the betting exchanges’ and bookmakers’ odds are often not a reliable guide to political results (see the EU Referendum, the Trump election, the recent Peterborough by-election etc).

Stewart is now at 2nd place in the betting to be next Conservative leader, though only at 16/1. Boris Johnson is favourite at around 1/5 odds-on (Hunt 20/1, Gove 46/1, Raab 85/1, Javid 120/1).

By all accounts, Stewart did well in the TV debate (Johnson the sole absentee, obviously afraid of being exposed as an idiot and incompetent, as well as wanting to seem to  be the “presidential” figure above the fray).

Update, 19 June 2019

The latest “debate” on TV was held. I heard a few minutes. Boris Johnson…what a complete idiot. Is that really the best that can be offered for potential Prime Minister? God help the UK…

The tax plans of both Johnson and Hunt are mad. Anyway, there it is…

A piece in The Guardian (see below), by Jessica Elgot, a Jewish Zionist journalist (who used to block me when I had a Twitter account). She refers to Rory Stewart as a “Black Watch veteran”. Not sure what the hard core of that very tough regiment would say to that; after all, Stewart only spent 5 months, if that, in that regiment (as a probationary short service 2nd lieutenant). Still, the inside track on the Con leadership campaign is interesting. Seems that my 3 May blog about Stewart hit the spot, pretty much.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/18/rory-stewart-the-black-watch-veteran-shaking-up-the-tory-leadership-race

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/will-rory-stewart-mp-be-prime-minister/

Update, 19 June 2019

Well, Rory Stewart is out of the race, which means that, until or unless Boris Johnson leaves frontline politics, his career is stalled again. He pledged not to serve in a Johnson Cabinet, and, as I blogged previously, it is doubtful that Johnson will appoint him to anything significant.

That leaves Johnson, Hunt, Gove, Javid.

Gove has said that he would serve under Johnson. As usual, willing to do whatever it takes to keep the career going and the salaries rolling in (a Cabinet minister gets about £75,000 a year on top of the MP salary of about £80,000; also, a ministerial car, a large and staffed country house in several cases).

I doubt whether Gove will be one of the final two; neither can I see Sajid Javid making the cut. That would leave Johnson and Hunt. The assumption is that Boris-Idiot would be be given a triumph by all those retired affluent Conservative Party members across the UK, all 100,000 or so of them (about 1 in maybe every 500 UK people belong to the Con Party). The assumption may or may not be right. If Hunt is the alternative, he may yet be in with a chance.

As to Boris-Idiot, this completely incompetent and clueless fool may well be posing as Prime Minister soon. Good grief…

Update, 20 June 2019

The final ballot having been held, the two candidates still standing are Boris-Idiot and Jeremy Hunt. Exactly what I predicted at the start (see above), though I was beginning to wonder whether Rory Stewart might make it into the final showdown.

Everyone is now assuming that the conclusion is already cut-and-dried. Probably, though Hunt may do better than expected as runner-up.

I find myself wondering about why it is that Boris Johnson has managed to shrug off all the (entirely justified and proven) allegations about his drug abuse, sex life, incompetence, lies etc. I think that the answer(s) are as follows:

  • Boris took drugs. Gove took drugs. Boris has been unaffected, while Gove has been diminished, ending up looking like a squalid and rather silly little figure. Why? I think because people are not comparing like with like. If Mick Jagger, at age 65 or for that matter (and as now) 75, plays around with some young girl, well, people just shrug and say “that’s what he’s like, he’s always been so”, or “that’s rock music for you”. Now, if some, say, respectable vicar, bank manager or headmaster does the same or even somewhat less, he will be pilloried, because people do not expect such behaviour from their local vicar or whatever. I think that that is part of the answer. People assume that louche Johnson might have snorted cocaine, but few not in the know thought it of apparently straitlaced Gove;
  • Gove has policy in mind. He is at home in the world of policy. Johnson has no real policy (or indeed ideology, or indeed belief in anything). So why do most people prefer Boris-Idiot? Because emotion is stronger than intellect, and will is stronger than emotion. Boris does not appeal on the intellectual level (how could he?!) which is Gove’s stronghold; he, Boris, appeals to emotion, whether to people liking his public persona, or his “dogwhistling” re Muslims, those two combined neatly and amusingly in his “Muslim women looking like” pillar-boxes or letter-boxes. It could even be said that Boris is appealing to the Will, to an inchoate Englishness (even though Boris himself is, at highest, only part-English);

Of course, the political fusion of all three parts of human mentality and being, meaning Will, emotion and intellect, was personified by Adolf Hitler. Obviously Hitler “bestrides the narrow world like a colossus”, even today, and was a titan compared to a silly creepy grubber like Boris Johnson, but there we are: “history repeats itself, first tragedy, second time farce.”

Poor UK…

Update, 25 June 2019

Update, 30 June 2019

Even if Boris Johnson wins the absurd Conservative leadership contest, he may be prevented from becoming Prime Minister:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/30/boris-johnson-might-never-enter-no-10-if-mps-withdraw-support

A Few Peterborough Afterthoughts About The LibDems

I blogged about the LibDems and the EU elections only a week ago:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/29/eu-elections-2019-in-review-the-libdems/

After their overall 2nd place in the EU elections, there was much talk about (another) LibDem revival, which echoed the chatter of 2010 and (as Liberal Party) right back to Orpington in 1961.

I was unconvinced by the talk of LibDem “revival” or “surge”, despite the post-EU elections polling which (in one case) made the LibDems the most popular party re. the next general election.

I also covered the LibDems, inter alia, in a piece about the Peterborough by-election, written a few weeks before polling day:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/notes-from-the-peterborough-by-election/

As I predicted, the LibDems came 4th there.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/07/peterborough-by-election-post-poll-analysis-and-thoughts/

So what now? Well, I still think that there is not and will not be any LibDem surge or revival, as such. What I do think will or may boost the LibDems is the Brexit Party surge, if it happens.

In the 2017 General Election, the LibDems won in 12 constituencies and came second in 37. If the Brexit Party continues to grow stronger and if it gets at least 15% nationwide at the next general election, many of those seats will see a significant fall in the Conservative vote-share by reason only of the existence of the Brexit Party, in addition to any fall for other reasons. In many, perhaps most cases, the beneficiaries will be the LibDems. It is not unreasonable to suppose that the LibDems will win seats. They might win 20 or 30, they might win 50. They might even win many more. However, this will mostly not if at all be a surge in enthusiasm for the LibDems as much as a victory by default, the result of Brexit Party taking Conservative votes, together with a more general fall in support for the Conservative Party.

Having said the above, if the LibDems win seats, they win seats, whatever the reason.

Notes

Peterborough By-Election: post-poll analysis and thoughts

Well, I got it wrong vis a vis the headline result. I thought that the Brexit Party would win and indeed enjoy a near-walkover. In the event, Brexit Party had to accept a close 2nd place. As the Americans are supposed to say, “close but no cigar”.

The result of the Peterborough by-election

The result was:

  • Labour 10,484 votes, a vote share of 31% (down from 48% in 2017);
  • Brexit Party 9,801 (29%);
  • Conservative Party 7,243 (21%, down from 46% in 2017);
  • LibDems 4,159;
  • Green 1,035;
  • UKIP 400.

All others, nine in number, received fewer than 200 votes each, most below 100.

In retrospect, my own prediction was badly misled by the betting (which even on the day showed Brexit Party as very heavily odds-on) and by the large and impressive meetings Farage held in the city (one with 2,000 in the auditorium).

I was right about the Conservatives coming third and the LibDems in fourth etc. Still, irritating to have misread the main contest, close as it was. No cigar for me, either.

Why did Brexit Party lose at Peterborough?

In my previous blogging on the specific subject of this by-election, and on other topics, I have made the point that the UK now has cities (including London) where the white population (let alone the British white population) is less than 50%. Peterborough still has, supposedly, about 80% white population, but at least 10% are from other parts of Europe. The white British part of the population is below 70% of the whole, possibly as low as 60%.

There is also the point that the city and constituency are not delineated the same; part of the city is not within the constituency.

When a city has more than a token non-white presence, a nationalist party of any kind will struggle to win elections there, and that applies even if (as is the case with Brexit Party) the party is not social-national, has no racial or ethnic principles or policies, and even if (as with Brexit Party) some of its actual candidates are black or brown.

It is not only that, in general, the “blacks and browns” will not vote for even a mildly (and notionally) “patriotic” party such as Brexit Party (let alone a social-national party) because they fear that party. The point is that the vast majority of ethnic minority voters have little or no real connection with Britain, its society, its history, its culture etc. They are, in a word, alien to Britain. Look at how even those adhering to the far-longer-standing Jewish community are always “threatening” (“promising”?) to flee from the UK if their demands are not met. They are not really rooted here; the roots of the “blacks and browns” are shallower yet.

Thus, in Peterborough, one can surmise that few blacks, Muslims etc voted Brexit Party. Why should they? Why would they? Brexit Party is hardly the British National Party. It offers no implied threat to the minorities, but it is broadly conservative-nationalist in ethos, and that is enough for the ethnic minorities to vote elsewhere, mainly for Labour.

I have been blogging and tweeting for several years about how the UK part of the “Great Replacement” (of whites by non-whites) means that elections become a no-win situation in much of the UK. That was true, for example, in the Stoke-on-Trent Central constituency in 2017. In the by-election of that year, Gareth Snell, a spotty unpleasant Twitter troll, was the Labour candidate. Paul Nuttall stood for UKIP. Snell beat Nuttall, Labour beat UKIP, by only 2,620 votes. The Pakistani Muslim community locally, numbering over 6,000,  almost all (always) vote Labour, a cohesion enforced by dodgy postal ballots and “community” exhortations (eg in local mosques) to vote Labour. Local Muslims 6,000+, Labour majority 2,620…

In other words, without those 6,000 or more Muslims (and others), Nuttall and UKIP would have won Stoke-on-Trent Central easily. As it was, UKIP faded and, at the General Election of 2017, Labour won again, against the Conservatives in 2nd place. Labour won by 3,897 votes. Point made, I think.

Now look at Peterborough. The postal votes were very high (who knows who really fills in the forms?) but even leaving that aside, we see that Brexit Party lost to Labour by 683, in a constituency where the non-European ethnic minorities number perhaps as many as 20,000. “It was the w**s wot won it!”, to paraphrase the famous Sun headline of 1992.

Non-white ethnic minority population in the constituency—10,000-20,000. Votes for Labour in the by-election—10,484

In fact, Labour only won Peterborough by 607 votes at the 2017 General Election, thus propelling useless African ex-“solicitor” Fiona Onasanya into Parliament.

The Future

Labour is, as I have often noted before, now the party, in terms of core vote, of the ethnic minorities (excluding Jews), of the metropolitan “socially liberal” types, of public service workers or officials. The real hard core is mainly the blacks and browns, and the public service people. Labour struggles to win votes wider than that core. Labour won Peterborough in the by-election on a vote-share of only 31%.

Brexit Party has suffered a bad blow. Had it won at Peterborough, its momentum would have carried on. Now, its future seems unclear. It may continue and may yet win seats, but Peterborough was a very good chance despite the ethnic minority vote, and Brexit Party fluffed it.

The LibDems almost quadrupled their 2017 3.3% vote to about 12%, but are still well behind the 2010 days of “Cleggmania”, in which they scored nearly 20% at Peterborough. My opinion? There will be no LibDem revival, at least not on a big scale. Most voters are getting angry. “Centrism” is not the flavour of the times.

The Conservatives were the big losers, as in the EU elections. They achieved what might be regarded as, had it been elsewhere, a respectable 3rd place on a vote-share of 21%, 7,243 votes, only 3,000 or so behind the Labour victor; but Peterborough has mainly been a Conservative seat since 1945. It had a Conservative MP as recently as 2 years ago.

If this result were to be replicated nationwide, there would be little left of the Conservative bloc in the House of Commons. Seats would fall either to Brexit Party, or to Labour (or in a few cases, to LibDems).

Final words

Strategically, a Brexit Party win would have been my preference, in that, down the line, it would expedite the break-up of the “LibLabCon” “three main parties” scam. Having said that, the Conservatives were rightly cast down, while at least the Labour MP elected seems to be to some extent against the Jewish Zionists (though pretty invertebrate when “challenged” on that).

Tweets etc

Below, illustrating my point that Labour’s core vote is now “the blacks and browns”

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterborough_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoke-on-Trent_Central_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/notes-from-the-peterborough-by-election/

https://gab.com/Fosfoe/posts/YldMYkx4cXRRdlpGM2NqWE40QjNYZz09

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Forbes_(politician)

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/peterboroughs-new-mayor-says-prison-stint-should-be-forgotten-as-he-prepares-to-become-citys-first-citizen/

http://participator.online/articles/2019/06/peterborough_byelection_postal_voting_questions_20190611.php

A Few Thoughts About 6 June 1944 and also (mainly) About 6 June 2019

Foreword

Well, here we are on 6 June 2019. Peterborough by-election day, but also the 75th commemoration of the Normandy Landings, aka D-Day. There has been wall-to-wall coverage on BBC News, ITV News and Sky News.

Preamble

This is not the place in which to discuss whether the Second World War could have been avoided (on the Western Front, in Western Europe generally; I think that it could have been). This is not the place in which to discuss whether the British Empire and the German Reich could have concluded an honourable armistice after the Fall of France (I think that they might have done; Germany made about ten separate offers).

It is important to note that these anniversaries are made use of by the Jewish Zionist element. Which is partly why they are pushed so hard on TV. Another chance to remind the masses about “the Nazis”, about how bad they supposedly were, and about how “necessary” it was to declare war on Germany, and eventually to defeat “the Nazis” (and so, Germany).

My own father was too young to be in the armed forces for much of WW2, though he was, near the end of the war, recruited by lot as a “Bevin Boy” (he was born and brought up in County Durham), and worked both in coal mining and later a shipyard (after the war, he became a professional footballer). Ironically, that service, far from the front lines of the war, killed him about 70 years later (via exposure to asbestos in a shipyard).

My maternal grandfather served as a soldier throughout WW2 and was both at Dunkirk and, rather later, in Burma.

Overview of my outlook re. the Second World War

My view of the war, even leaving aside my general sympathy with National Socialism in terms of ideology and aspiration, is that, on the Western Front, it need not have happened and should not have happened. I believe the same about the First World War, incidentally.

More

Born in 1956, I was brought up, as people were then, with “the War” as a constant backdrop. My grandfather talked scarcely at all about his war service with the British Expeditionary Force in 1939-40, or with the Army in Burma for much of the rest of the war, though it affected his health. He did give the odd bit of advice when I, aged maybe 7 or 8, was laying out my little Airfix plastic soldiers (various armies, but including, I think, German, British Eighth Army, Japanese and US Marines). I remember a couple of his comments, such as that patrolling soldiers should always be following one another in a line if in jungle, never abreast.

Had my grandfather not already been in uniform by reason of having been in the Territorial Army in 1939, he might never have served actively in the war at all, being at the time 38 or 39 years old (the usual cut-off age was 41). That’s Fate…

As mentioned above, people of my age who were brought up in the 1950s and 1960s always had “the War” there, around, like the woodsmoke and burning leaf smell of autumn in those days. The Germans were regarded by children of my age as honourable enemies (unlike the Japanese) and not some force of malign and almost cosmic evil, as the Jews try to make out now.

The Jewish “holocaust” propaganda and historical distortion that is now pervasive had not then really started in a big way. Also, the unspoken narrative was that Britain had suffered and struggled and “won the war”. The —in fact, overwhelming— input of the USA and the Soviet Union was popularly regarded (not only by children) as being at best no more (even taken together!) than that of the UK.

Churchill (as myth) hung over the scene like a Mount Rushmore presidential sculpture or —with apology to Jane Russell— like a thundercloud, only equalled by the leader of the “German hordes”, Hitler.

In the early 1960s, my grandparents never missed All Our Yesterdays (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Our_Yesterdays_(TV_series) and I usually watched it with them.

The UK at that time (1960s) was still basically homogenous racially, certainly outside London or some port cities. In places like Reading, where I was born, and on the edge of which I lived until age 10 (my family was then in Sydney for 3 years), there were few blacks and browns (in fact, barring a family of Anglo-Indians whom we knew, there were almost none). The only black I recall seeing in England in the early/mid 1960s was the NHS consultant at the Royal Berkshire Hospital in Reading who treated me for hearing impairment at age 7 or 8. He was from somewhere in the Caribbean. The country was then still a nation. The various war anniversaries were just part of the landscape, along with Trooping of the Colour, the Royal Tournament (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Tournament), the University Boat Race, Ascot, the Queen etc.

Today

Today, the UK is split and fissured racially, ethnically, economically, ideologically. It is scarcely a nation at all.

Today, with the “D-Day” ceremonies, the old Establishment or old Britain had its day in the sun: the unthinking royalists, the BBC and other msm, the remnants of the British armed forces (both of WW2 vintage and from today’s depleted armed services).

Though today’s ceremonies were in similar format to those of the past, there was, despite the wall-to-wall BBC/ITV/Sky news coverage, an end of the season feel. I wondered how many millions were really watching the seemingly endless TV.

I very much doubt that any but a tiny percentage of the ethnic minorities watched the shows today. Fewer will have understood the background even in the cartoon form presented by the TV people (Good v. Evil etc).

I would be prepared to bet that less than 1% of the population under 25 years of age watched more than a minute or two of the news coverage about the ceremonies in England and France. Same applies to most persons of non-European origin.

What we see here are two UKs: there is

  • the official, Establishment UK, together with the msm and the Jewish Zionist element (who latch onto anything “Second World War” as an opportunity to re-demonize National Socialist Germany); and the few now very elderly people who were at least in their teens in 1944; and there is also
  • the real UK, which is vastly more numerous and mostly has no interest in what happened in 1944.

In fact, it occurs to me that that division (between those who regard today’s ceremonies as hugely important, and those who regard them as of no interest or importance) reflects the change in UK society, and also that in UK politics. There is a chasm between what, say, the BBC or Sky think important, and what the bulk of the public think. A difference of orientation, of what is in the emotional life and which will eventually change political life.

Notes

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Expeditionary_Force_(World_War_II)

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

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

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/aug/31/secondworldwar.nationalarchives

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/10336126/Nazis-offered-to-leave-western-Europe-in-exchange-for-free-hand-to-attack-USSR.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1940_War_Cabinet_Crisis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill,_Hitler_and_the_Unnecessary_War

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1940/07/19/Hitler-offers-Britain-peace-or-destruction/6824181303557/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2433733/How-Nazis-offered-peace-treaty-World-War-II-meant-selling-Russians.html

Update and further thoughts, 8 June 2019

As I write, Trooping of the Colour, held today, is not trending on Twitter (not that Twitter is the world) anything like as much as the Michael Gove cocaine scandal. Point made, I think. These events (Trooping of the Colour, WW2/WW1 anniversaries etc) have some significance for the elderly, perhaps to some extent for those who (like me, aged 62) prefer not to think of themselves as elderly quite yet; for some (a minority) of white (i.e. real) British/English people, but not at all for the “broad masses” and certainly not, speaking in group terms, for the ethnic minorities.

Yet the System is still trying to interest the people in such things. Look at this tweet by Tom Newton Dunn of the Sun “newspaper” [below]: May Bank Holiday changed date next year.

The fact is, that moving a one-day holiday to a different date is not going to have much if any impact on the public, whatever amount of “news coverage” (propaganda) is pumped out. It just does not now have much emotional impact on most people in the UK, not even those of (real) British origin (and let’s not pretend that the Africans, West Indians, Pakistanis, Chinese etc in the UK are somehow at one with the descendants of the Huguenots or those of long-ago Viking/Norman origin etc…).

As the Second World War recedes in memory and time, these commemorations become ever less relevant. The Jewish Zionist element has latched onto them in a parasitic way, as a method of pursuing its anti-Third Reich, anti-anti-Semitism message, along with pushing the “holocaust” fable and industry. It has less resonance with every year that passes, though.

It is the measure of the national self delusion still abroad that the question as to whether “D-Day” could be mounted today, in 2019 [see tweet below], could ever be asked!

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9232117/tobias-ellwood-calls-for-defence-budget-increase/

“Struggle” to mount D-Day again?! Ha ha!

Tobias Ellwood MP [Con, Bournemouth East] may have reached the exalted rank of Army captain (Royal Greenjackets), but either is ignorant of history, strategy and geopolitics, or (far more likely) is talking in this manner in order to boost the MOD budget. He cannot seriously imagine that Britain could ever mount another Normandy Landings operation! In fairness to Ellwood, he does write:

But we must not kid ourselves. Pressures on the defence budget since the end of the Cold War have left us with one deployable division of 35,000 personnel who could not fight a sustained campaign without allied support.” [The Sun]

In fact, Britain on its own would have been unable to do “D-Day” even in 1944 without huge American, Canadian (etc) assistance. The very first day, ie “D-Day” itself,  airborne soldiers (mainly British, American Canadian) numbering 24,000 were dropped into battle. Behind them, the rest of the 150,000-strong assault force.

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

That of course was not the entirety of Allied forces, which numbered in the millions across the world. The total of engaged participants on all sides has been estimated at 100 millions.

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

Britain now (as Ellwood writes) has 1 deployable brigade of 35,000. That, leaving aside rear echelon and headquarters contingents of every kind, is pretty much the usable British Army now, though official figures state 81,500 regulars and 27,000 reserves (former TA):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Army#Modern_army

Compare the figures: in 1945, over 3 million (in the Army alone, not including other arms); in 1980, just before the Falklands campaign, 222,000 (mostly regulars, at that); even in 2010, 155,000. Now the Army (regular and reserves) numbers about 108,000 officially and probably greatly fewer in reality. The Army, Navy, Air Force are losing 2,000 men and women a year.

Then there is the lift capacity, by air and sea. Hugely depleted.

The fact is that the UK could not even repeat the Falklands re-invasion today, the British Task Force fleet then consisting of 127 ships, including 43 Royal Navy vessels (the last figure not being the whole of the Royal Navy by any means). Today, the Navy only claims about 74 ships worldwide, and only 31 of those are large combat vessels and submarines (the rest are small vessels such as minesweepers, patrol launches etc).

In 1939, the Navy had over 1,400 ships. That figure did not include supply ships. “By the end of the [Second World] war the Royal Navy comprised over 4,800 ships, and was the second largest fleet in the world” [Wikipedia].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Navy#1939%E2%80%931945

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War#British_Task_Force

I get the impression that there is a sizeable and entirely ignorant part of the British public (and it seems to include Gavin Williamson MP, until recently Defence Secretary!)…

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/02/deadhead-mps-an-occasional-series-the-gavin-williamson-story/

…which actually believes that the UK could “take on” Russia, or China, or both! I see tweets urging British intervention in Syria, for example. Even in the (madly stupid) British bombing of Libya some years ago, the UK was dependent on French and Italian help.

These delusions have political consequences.

Update, 11 June 2019

Point proven? [see tweet below]. Note how this Bengali woman, Ash Sarkar, persists in saying “we” and “us” and “our” [British], just because she was born in the UK (assuming that she was)… talk about “cultural appropriation”!

and see: https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/01/01/disordered-and-infantile-people/

Update, 21 July 2019

Well, the Iranians have seized British-registered ships in the Gulf of Hormuz. Bad boys. Oh, wait…turns out that not one of the officers and crew are British, and anyway this is tit-for-tat because the British seized an Iranian ship at Gibraltar “on suspicion” that it might be breaking the sanctions regime imposed basically by the USA. In fact, this whole incident was caused at root by that idiot Trump having torn up the agreement with the Iranians re. uranium enrichment. Looks like “perfidious Albion” has been superseded by “unreliable Yankee-Doodle”…

The relevant point here is that the UK Foreign Secretary (Jeremy Hunt) is talking about “consequences” for Iran, but in reality all that the UK can do is rattle sabres a little and freeze funds in the City of London. Britain cannot do much in terms of gunboat diplomacy for a very cogent reason— Britain has few gunboats.

How Long Before UK Society Breaks Down?

I happened to see comments of General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith, the Chief of the General Staff [see Daily Telegraph link, below]:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/06/04/british-military-risks-irrelevance-doesnt-adapt-future-army/

The British military risks becoming irrelevant if it continues to focus on “missiles and tanks” as the main threats to the UK, the head of the Army has warned.

“The army must “update and change the rules of war” according to the Chief of the General Staff, to be able to tackle new threats like cyber attacks, whilst also deterring countries that rely on heavy firepower.”

General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith said a focus on high-tech weapons that are no use against low-level threats like fake news and subversion “leaves us close to a position of dominant irrelevance”.”

The main threat is not missiles and tanks, it is the weaponisation of globalisation, and those elements of globalization that have hitherto made us prosperous and secure: the mobility of goods, people, data and ideas.”

“Secure borders, or living on an island, are no guarantees against the corrosive and intrusive effect of disinformation, subversion and cyber.”

“The Army head suggested that traditional concepts of warfare were “increasingly redundant”.”

General Carleton-Smith fails to mention, at least specifically, mass immigration (and the subsequent and consequent births) as a factor impacting the very survival of the UK as a state, a country, a society.

Of course, if he did mention it in that context, he would be sacked.

At one time, the UK was a fairly cohesive society. Now it is not. It is a seething volcanic caldera, disguised only by a thin and disintegrating crust.

Look at what happened just today (4 June 2019):

A baying mob of anti-Trump “protesters” bait and then attack what seems to be a lone middleaged man. A porcine woman leads the abusive and violent multi-ethnic pack, shouting “nazi scum!” repeatedly into his face. I suppose that he was brought up not to punch a woman in the face, even one like her.

Look at the policewoman (or PCSO) who not only does not attempt to arrest the milkshake-thrower but looks terrified, before she is pushed aside by the crowd as an irrelevance. The police are just useless these days. That “officer” made no attempt to protect a citizen standing in the street outside Parliament itself. Well, in the end, she is just one woman in a clown outfit.

Incidentally, I am not exactly a Trump fan myself; that is another issue.

We often think that the UK is becoming a police state. How is that reconciled with the imminent social breakdown I am predicting? In fact, the two go together, and both are linked to the now-fragmented UK society.

As society becomes fragmented, the easy-going policing of the past has to change to try to contain the chaos just below the surface. In addition, anything which disturbs the surface calm, or relative calm, has to be criminalized. So we see that, as the foreign invading hordes and their offspring have multiplied in number, so have the penalties increased for anyone who suggests that they should not be in the UK, or should be removed one way or another.

This started in the 1960s with the first Race Relations Act (1965), and became increasingly more oppressive with subsequent Acts (1968, 1976, 1985, 2000, 2003). It is clear why: the threat of public order upheaval, as more and more “blacks and browns” (and others) arrived in the UK and started to breed.

Free speech, freedom of expression generally, freedom of choice (eg in offering employment, or housing or whatever) “had” to be curtailed for reasons of “preserving the Peace” and in order to keep up the pretence that the multi-ethnic/multicultural society can work, albeit at the expense of a certain loss of civic freedom.

There was also the realization that, as the non-British and indeed non-European populations expanded in size, they had to be pandered to, not “offended” etc, not because the reverse would be impolite or undiplomatic, but because those increasingly huge populations might rise up against the white British people who “allowed” them to come to the UK (though most of the British opposed mass immigration; it was always the System and its politicians etc that caused the influx and its problems).

It was and still is the Jewish Zionist element that was and still is behind much of the legal repression and the “ethnic” influx itself (“The Great Replacement”).

Over the years, the censorship of speech and restriction of actions has expanded from races and “ethnicities” to other parts of the general population: religions, sexual orientations etc.

You can now say, or post online, relatively innocuous views, only to find that you are not only faced with a virtual (online) mob baying for your blood, but also quite likely with a policeman at your door or on the telephone. My own experiences include this:

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

If you say something that offends the general orthodoxy, you may lose your job, your professional status, your liberty.

The satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz lost her job —singing for a cruise line— simply because her views supposedly offended some Jews, even though her views had nothing to do with that job. Later, she sang satirical songs about some of the hundreds (if not thousands) of “holocaust” fake stories. That resulted in a farcical cycle of police persecution, prosecutions, eventual trial, conviction, sentence, appeal and now (at time of writing) further appeal.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/04/18/alison-chabloz-the-show-goes-on/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/13/alison-chabloz-the-fight-for-freedom-of-expression-goes-on/

Jez Turner set up the London Forum discussion group. He also made a speech in Whitehall in 2015, recalling how the Jews had been expelled from England more than once (and hoping that they might yet be removed again). Put on trial in 2018. Convicted. His punishment? A year in prison (he served 6 months).

I too was subject to action (by the same Jew-Zionist element): see above, and also

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

The Zionist campaign against free speech and free historical enquiry is being resisted, but the mere fact that such repression of free speech exists is very significant.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/01/12/the-campaign-against-antisemitism-caa-takes-a-serious-hit/

In the last few years, the privatization of public space has led to the abuse of power by the main online platforms (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube etc), and even the organizations behind or around such platforms: paypal, patreon, and so on.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/the-knives-are-out-for-freedom-of-expression-and-more/

When Twitter started to remove “unwanted” opinion from its pages, many turned to GAB, only to find that there was a strong and focussed attempt by the ZOG powers to destroy GAB. So far, it has survived. However, the campaign against free speech continues, and shows no sign of abating:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/26/tommy-robinson-banned-on-facebook-the-repression-of-free-speech-online/

Indeed, even a joke made (and posted online) about a Guy Fawkes event in a suburban garden can result in a police raid, evidence “bagged up” as for a murder case etc. Am I making this up to prove my point? No.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/06/a-country-gone-mad/

Measures against free speech and freedom of expression are just, overall, a symptom of what is happening. By that I mean the fragility of civil society generally. We see that, as the police “crack down” on social media posts or stickers put up on university campuses (incredibly, some young people got 4 years in prison for the latter, quite recently), comments made in blogs etc, in the real world of the UK, crime and especially violent crime is getting out of control: London infested by mainly black and brown “moped raiders” and “scooter raiders” and muggers, “road rage” incidents, brawls etc. The courts are far more lenient, usually, on those real crimes than they are on the fake crimes or notional crimes of pretended offence.

I have seen over the years how thin the veneer of society is in the UK. As long ago as the petrol protests of 2000, I noticed that that veneer was already very very thin indeed. Fights breaking out over the fuel pumps etc.

The police cover has been reduced, and while the police seem to be enthusiastically noting and acting upon reports of anyone seriously (or even unseriously, thinking of the dog taught to do a “Hitler” salute! The owner got a heavy fine…) criticizing the failing multikulti society (or the Jews that are mainly behind it), they seem far less interested in the traditional role of the police, i.e. investigating real crime and keeping safe the citizenry.

As for the armed services, they seem to be going the same way. Reduced in numbers, and with their focus on the approved shibboleths of the “multi-everything” society: multi-ethnic, multicultural, LGBT-whatever friendly, with confused aims, ever-lowering standards and little ability to counter either conventional threats or new dangers.

There again, what are the armed forces actually defending? We are now at the 75th anniversary of the Normandy Landings. There may be disputes about whether the Second World War ever need have happened, about whether an honourable armistice between the British Empire and the German Reich might have been concluded in 1940, but leaving all that aside, the British servicemen and civilians of that era (albeit bamboozled by Churchill and his cabal, so be it…) knew, at least in their own minds, what their own society was! Something like the picture given in the popular song There’ll Always Be An England:

Is there a British society at all now? There are bits and pieces still operative, but the society as a whole is now a jigsaw. There are fissures and rifts and splits everywhere. Racial, ethnic, religious, ideological, sexual, economic etc. Some always existed, but not to this extent.

So we see a situation where, at the very time when the society itself is not a coherent whole, the forces which might compel civic obedience and discipline are not numerous or powerful enough to do so, despite theoretically strict laws relating to various areas.

What will happen in a situation (which might come sooner than many imagine) in which the population is without luxuries or even necessities? Who will control those seething and uncontrolled masses? Not the depleted Army. Not the very depleted police.

A social national movement does not exist in the UK. It may be that the only way for one to exist will be for its existence to become the only way for the whole society to exist.

Notes

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/may/06/strange-death-europe-immigration-xenophobia

https://gab.com/ianrmillard/posts/47468129

https://gab.com/LionoftheNorth/posts/47563842

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

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9831912/I-feel-like-a-stranger-where-I-live.html

 

 

EU Elections 2019 in Review: Brexit Party

Cl3KWpkWQAAP-lJ

So we come finally to the summit: laurels and oak leaves to the victor. Brexit Party rode its tank over the prostrate bodies of the other parties.

In the EU Elections 2019, Brexit Party was in 1st place, received 5,248,533 votes, a vote-share of 30.7%, resulting in 29 new MEPs. A party which scarcely existed a month or so before the poll.

The Brexit Party vote numbered over one and a half times the vote of the second-placed party, the LibDems, far more than double that of the Labour Party (which was 3rd), about 3x the vote of the Greens, and between 3x and 4x the vote of the Conservatives. As for UKIP and Change UK, which scraped in together in 6th/7th place (excluding SNP, Plaid Cymru and Northern Irish parties), the Brexit Party vote was 10x higher than that of either of them.

Brexit Party was 1st in 9 of the 11 (ex-Northern Ireland) EU constituencies. In Scotland and London it came in 2nd and 3rd respectively.

Brexit Party emerged, apparently from nowhere (perhaps not entirely so, though) and was soon holding rallies where thousands of people turned up to hear Nigel Farage (mainly). They even paid to hear him.

Here is Farage talking in Peterborough, where the vital by-election will be held this Thursday 6 June 2019:

I find it amusing that the Peterborough by-election will be held on 6 June 2019, 75 years to the day after the Normandy Landings of 1944. I have not seen Brexit Party making much of that, but it may have at least a limited effect.

Brexit Party has somehow managed to run an incredibly professional campaign including social media campaign, as with this ad for the EU Elections:

There is no doubt about it, though: Brexit Party must win the Peterborough by-election to keep its momentum going. So far, its campaign has gone well, resulting in Brexit Party, which started as 5/4 second favourite (after Labour), now quoted by bookmakers and on the betting exchanges as not only favourite but very heavily odds-on, (this morning at 1/5, but now, as I write, already yet firmer at 1/6!). https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics for updates.

I am updating my own [first written 9 May 2019] look at the by-election on a daily basis:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/notes-from-the-peterborough-by-election/

So what is the future for Brexit Party and what is its effect on other parties?

Well, as I write, an opinion poll has Brexit Party as the most popular party for voters intending to vote in the next UK general election:

According to Electoral Calculus [https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html ] , the approximate result of that, if applied in the real next general election, would be Brexit Party 322 seatsLabour 129 seats, Conservatives 93 seatsLibDems 26 seats (I have assessed the main Scottish votes as SNP 40%, Con 20%, Lab and LibDem 15% each).

In the above scenario, Brexit Party would be only 4 seats short of a Commons majority.

Another poll  (they are both very recent) comes to slightly different results in the poll but hugely different results in the Commons! Indicative of the volatility creeping or seeping into UK politics.

On the immediately-above scenario, Brexit Party would still be largest party in the Commons (Brexit Party 219 seats, Lab 177, Con 156, LibDems 47) but would be 107 seats short of a majority.

Many may say that all either of the above polls would mean in practice (apart from Nigel Farage as Prime Minister!) would be a quasi-Conservative (real Conservative) minority or coalition government and no big change politically in the end. I disagree. The Conservative Party has nearly 200 years of history (some would say more, including its informal origins long before the 1830s). Brexit Party has no history, no traditions, no roots. A shallow plant. Labour too has long tradition and history.

Once those corrupted old parties are mainly uprooted, once people see that there is a world beyond utterly corrupt LibLabCon and its mirages, the way becomes a lot easier for near-future social nationalism and for pan-European real co-operation of free nations for a new world and a new Europe. For race and culture!

Notes, musings and updates

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2019_European_Parliament_election_in_the_United_Kingdom

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/12/what-is-brexit-party-why-does-it-exist-what-are-its-chances/

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/european-election-results-tories-brexit-party-farage-no-deal-eu-a8931561.html

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/02/peterborough-prepares-for-byelection-that-could-see-first-brexit-party-mp

Brexit Party is certainly not social-national, even if it is a way-station on that journey.

Brexit Party is planning a large rally on 4 June 2019, two days before the actual by-election at Peterborough. The last one they held in the city attracted 2,000 people who actually paid to attend! This one? We shall see. This one is free, so who knows, though the auditorium which seems to be the largest space at the chosen location (The Cresset, Bretton) only has 850 seats: https://www.cresset.co.uk/functions-and-events/conferences/

It may be that the exhibition space at the same place is larger.

The Remain whiners are still desperately tweeting against Brexit Party. See, for example (below) a tweet by angry lesbian scribbler and msm “celebrity” Emma Kennedy, who tweets endlessly on things she thinks she knows about (she used to get angry at me on Twitter until I muted the silly woman). Her “Brexit supporters are ignorant knuckledraggers” viewpoint is very very typical of Remain whiners, who so often imagine themselves to be well educated and intelligent and Leave partisans to be the reverse. She has evidently not considered the alternative view, i.e. “anyone who keeps voting for the LibLabCon parties, who have detailed policies sometimes but rarely carry them out, is a fucking idiot”! Discuss.

In fact, in that regard, stand up, Emma Kennedy! She now supports the LibDems, who fooled millions in 2010 with a lot of talk about human rights, helping the disadvantaged, having a fairer voting system. They betrayed every single one of their manifesto promises!

Someone answers the same tweet of Emma Kennedy, who evidently has time on her hands…(but she herself does not deign to answer the tweeter; of course not— he disagreed with her kneejerk flawed view and lack of logic…)

Actually, Emma Kennedy never replies to those who contradict her nonsense, as here, where she had tweeted that some black Remain nonentity should have stood at Peterborough (I agree. He should have: when he lost, it would have provided a laugh, and in the unlikely event that he won, he would at long last have a job!)

Oh, dear. Seems that most people disagree with Emma…

and

Seems that some people do not give angry scribbler Emma the respect that she thinks that her “ideas” (derivative, flawed) deserve. Don’t they know that she is a “celebrity“?! I mean, she was on Celebrity Masterchef only, er, 7 years ago (in 2012)…and was writing children’s books from 2007 to, it seems, 2011…Ah, well, time can be cruel…

I really should not waste too much time on someone unknown to most people, but it seems to me that Emma Kennedy is rather typical of the Remain whiners: abusive, unable to see that the EU is no guarantor of human rights or civil rights (in reality), sure that she and her Remainiac colleagues are both right and far far more intelligent and better-educated than the Leave/Brexit “fucking idiots”.

What would she make of me? Well, in fact I already know, because (before Twitter expelled me in 2018) she tweeted to the effect that I am a “Nazi” etc (and even if so, does that mean that I am always wrong??). She of course has no idea that I once had my IQ tested at 156, and was (like her) a lawyer (a practising barrister as well as an expat international lawyer; she was a failed solicitor in the 1990s: she did 3 years in the City of London but admits that she was “no bloody good”).

Likewise, Emma Kennedy of course has no idea that I have visited (and even lived in) countries all over the world, from Kazakhstan to the USA, and Egypt to Australia, from the Caribbean to Southern Africa, from the Arabian Gulf to Russia, Poland etc etc (to name but a few places). That would not fit her constipated Hampstead/msm world-view, in which the typical Leave/Brexit supporter is someone of low IQ, poorly-educated, who has never travelled beyond his home in a “left behind” town such as Clacton or Margate, and has of course never met any persons of other race or culture.

By the way, this (below) is the African loudmouth that Emma Kennedy and various other idiotic Remain whiners, pro-immigration whiners etc wanted to see stand as a candidate at the Peterborough by-election:

His name is Femi Oluwole (from the name, I presume Nigerian origin). Who/what is he? Until the EU elections, I had never heard of him. His Twitter account (@Femi_Sorry) says that he is a “law grad”. That seems to be the sum total of his life achievement to date. Age? 20-something; maybe 30. He does not appear to have a job, as such, or a profession. He works for “Our Future Our Choice” [https://www.ofoc.co.uk/], which says (in small print and buried in its website) that “OFOC is powered by: Best for Britain, Open Britain, and The European Movement”.

Powered by”? In other words, “funded by”. The EU is funding “OFOC” (and him), in other words. It has several people working full-time for it, and its office is in very expensive Millbank Tower, where the Labour Party, Conservative Party, EU and UN organizations etc have or have had offices.

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

http://www.millbanktower.co.uk/

This Femi person may pretend to be some kind of semi-amateur social media activist, but the big guns of the EU propaganda machine are behind him, broadcasting to his 177,000 apparently rather silly Twitter followers. Ironic that here we have a directly-involved organization, paid ultimately by the EU, and involving itself in a by-election (not for a party but against a party —Brexit Party), yet the Femi person and others make much of the supposed foreign funding for that party!

Below, a tweet from “Femi”, which to me shows that logic is not his strong point.

Another? It seems that “Femi” does not understand the UK political system or the British Constitution:

I wonder whether this Femi will ever get a real job? Doubtful. Another example of the wonderful multikulti “diverse” UK. He does not seem to have understood that Peterborough (where black Africans are “only” 1.4% of the population) had an African MP until quite recently. It was not a successful experiment.

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

Still, there it is. “Femi” is going around Peterborough, loudly talking mostly at (and insulting) the locals, filming himself and unwittingly causing even more voters to vote Brexit Party on 6 June…I suppose that he assumes that he will be offered a political position by a System party, or even become an MP at some point. Ha ha. Don’t count on it.

 

Proposals for a new society…

%d bloggers like this: