Morning music
Talking point
Quite. Look at the Allison Pearson case. Oh, wasn’t she shocked when the police came to her door and questioned her about a few online comments. Yes, shocked. She put all her outrage in her next newspaper column scribblings, and the “usual suspects” in the “free speech” milieu all formed up to march behind her— Toby Young, the “Free Speech Union” he put together, the Spectator, the Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail etc.
As a matter of fact, I myself think that the police behaved outrageously in that instance.
Where, though, was Allison Pearson when others suffered from similar or worse behaviour at the hands of the police and those behind the police, and indeed Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), who have wormed their way into positions of influence, sometimes having suborned those stupid “elected” Police and Crime Commissioners brought in a decade ago by David Cameron-Levita.
Much of such backstairs manipulation can be lain at the door of the very malicious Jew-Zionist org known as the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” or “CAA”, a pro-Israel pressure group (effectively a volunteer arm of the Israeli Embassy in London) whose self-styled “Director of Investigations and Enforcement”…well, let’s just call him “Slitherman”…is not infrequently to be found broadcasting his lies and propaganda on the “usually, no-one watches” Talk TV and GB News and even, sometimes, on Sky News.
At the foot of this part of the blog can be found a few blog articles detailing some of my own experiences. First, though, let us look at Allison Pearson’s [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allison_Pearson] experience.
“Jew haters tweet“[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allison_Pearson#%22Jew_haters%22_tweet]
[“In November 2024, Pearson was visited at home by Essex Police asking her to undergo a voluntary interview after a complaint that she had incited racial hatred with a tweet posted in November 2023. During a period of scrutiny on British policing of pro-Palestinian protests during the Gaza war, Pearson had posted a photo of Greater Manchester Police officers standing besides supporters of former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan‘s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party waving the party’s flag. However, despite the flag including the word “Pakistan”, she called the flagbearers “Jew haters” and misidentified the officers as Metropolitan Police officers, citing an incident where that service had not met with an Israeli-advocacy group. These errors were corrected by a Community Note and Pearson deleted the tweet.[15][16]
After the visit, Pearson wrote a Telegraph column criticising the incident and saying that the police had said it was a non-crime hate incident. Essex Police reported The Daily Telegraph to the Independent Press Standards Organisation, saying that it had body camera footage proving that they had never said it was a non-crime hate incident.[15][16]
Suzanne Moore writing about the incident and its implications in The Telegraph likened the Police’s treatment of Pearson to Ruhollah Khomeini‘s Fatwa against Sir Salman Rushdie in the wake of the Satanic Verses controversy.”]
[Wikipedia]
You see from that Wikipedia article that Allison Pearson criticized people as “Jew-haters“. She herself is not Jew, or even (as far as I can see) “part-” or “crypto”. A provincial scribbler by origin, who blagged a poor 2:2 in English at university and, as “journalist”, gets most of her facts wrong.
Allison Pearson has made common cause with the “CAA” snoopers and “lawfare” abusers. She said nothing when the Jewish lobby abused law and professional regulation to have me wrongfully and unlawfully disbarred in 2016; neither did she speak up for me when I was on trial for writing this blog (on trial in late 2023, sentenced in March 2024).
The police have been at my door about 5 or 6 times since 2013, always because some Jew or other has made up a contrived complaint. See the blog articles posted below. A few telephone calls too. The last time was only about a year ago, when some policeman at the door confronted me with Twitter/X posts, which (apart from the language used, which never could have been from me) were from, I think, 2024, and I have not posted on Twitter/X since I was permanently “suspended (expelled) in 2018, when —once again— a pack of Jews combined to “complain” about me.
Seems that the police (posing as a poundland KGB or Stasi) think that I am the only Ian Millard in the world, or in the UK, or posting online. Are they really so ineffective and unthinking? No wonder (real) crime is exploding.
Allison Pearson has also never said a word supporting other victims of Jew-Zionist lawfare, such as Alison Chabloz (imprisoned for posting satirical songs and cartoons), Jez Turner of the now-defunct London Forum (imprisoned for making a short speech in Whitehall saying that Jews should be removed from the UK), or Sam Melia of Patriotic Alternative (imprisoned for distributing completely lawful stickers).
The same is true of other controlled opposition types—Toby Young, the Free Speech Union, GB News, Talk TV, Farage, “Prison Planet” Watson, Matt Goodwin etc, not to forget Katie Hopkins herself…
Ms. Hopkins has never said a word in support of me (or any of those others mentioned).
See also:
Tweets seen
The first test of that will be the by-election at Runcorn and Helsby on 1 May 2025, i.e. 4 weeks this Thursday.
Only total dummies are going to vote foe Starmer-stein’s fake Labour, but there are plenty of dummies out there, especially in the North of England where many vote Labour automatically, even today (because their great-grandfather always voted Labour…).
Leaving dummies of that sort aside, though, who will vote Labour now? Pensioners? Hardly! The young (under-30s)? Doubtful. Anyone on any State benefits? Very doubtful.
Not that Con is any sort of alternative, now that Labour is doing what the “Conservatives” used to do, and worse…
Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride wants to ditch the Triple Lock on State Pensions, so the over-60s voting “Conservative” would be turkeys voting for Christmas.
Reform is really the only game in town in the by-election, if one were to take seriously the “democratic” Schauspiel.
London. Zoo. More so…
Talking point
Thus perish all my enemies.
More music
More tweets seen
I find it hard to believe that any or many would vote Lib, Lab, or Con after the past 15-25 years…
These latest figures would translate to a Commons with 223 Con MPs, 170 Reform, 130 Labour, 56 LibDem (SNP 43 etc). Underwhelming. Con minority govt. (supported by Reform?).
Still, would be good to see so many “Labour” careerists culled.
Among those kicked out would be that horrid little bastard Stephen Kinnock, Angela Rayner, Mary Creagh, Ed Miliband, Wes Streeting, Rachel Reeves, Liz Kendall, Sarah Champion, Kim Leadbeater, Torsten Bell, Lisa Nandy (it just gets better!), and Emma Reynolds.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html
However, showing how volatile now is the public mood, another poll has just been released:
That one would mean Lab 197 MPs, Reform 194, Cons 141 (etc), so maybe a minority Reform government.
What is holding back Reform is that it is not social-national, just conservative-national.
Aux armes, citoyens!
NATO’s days are numbered.
[“Johnson: Europe is heading for war with Russia, but it has neither the military power nor the resources to do so Larry JOHNSON: The main reason for the aggressive policy towards Russia is the loans that France, Great Britain and Germany gave to Kiev. If Ukraine is defeated, that money will disappear. And the Russian army will destroy all foreign forces that find themselves on the territory of Ukraine. All those soldiers will be dead. All that will remain is to count their bodies After the summit of the “coalition of the willing (to help Kiev)” held in Paris on March 27, French President Emmanuel Macron said that several members of the coalition plan to send “deterrence forces” to Ukraine. As he emphasized, these forces, which will operate under the direction of Paris and London, will allegedly not replace Ukrainian troops and will not become peacekeepers. Their task will be to contain Russia, and they will be deployed in strategic locations agreed in advance with Kiev.“]
[“How about tax cuts to parents so that the mother can actually stay at home for the 1st 5 years of their child’s life to raise them, instead of handing over their 6 month old baby over to strangers so that they can work & pay taxes. All you want is both parents working so you can get as much tax as possible. Scientifically babies are not supposed to leave their mother at all until the baby is 3 years old. Exactly the same as Apes. This is an attack on the nuclear family.“]
At first, I thought that that tweet from Zoe Williams was uncharacteristically sensible, but soon realized that this is a different Zoe Williams, not the very silly Guardian scribbler [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoe_Williams].
Repression spreads across Western Europe
“Germany could ban far-Right politicians from running for office. Draft agreement seeks to ensure convicted extremists from parties such as the AfD cannot contest elections.
Far-Right politicians in Germany could be banned from running for office under plans by the incoming government, echoing a decision in France to block Marine Le Pen from a presidential bid…“
[Daily Telegraph]
Well, there it is. NWO/ZOG cabals are planning to remove even the fig-leaf of “democracy”.
Of course, “convicted” is but a (not-very-cunning) lie. All that that means is that the System will ensure that troublesome dissidents are indeed convicted, under some or another repressive anti-free-speech “law” or other. Then, abracadabra!, they are barred from standing in elections in the supposedly “free” countries.
Well, if implemented (whether in Germany, in France, or elsewhere) that will only leave action directe as a way forward, as President Kennedy noted about 65 years ago…
Late tweets
A nuclear (?) attack on Iran? That would put the whole international order, as it now is, into the hazard. Anything could happen.
Seems my thoughts are echoed quite widely.
Those American aircraft carriers are incredible, both in themselves and as global power-projection tools. I once met an American carrier commander in the Caribbean. He and his wife were on leave. A funny little man to look at, a bit like the Penguin in the 1960s TV series, Batman, he carried his rank and responsibility lightly. I used to have a few drinks with them once the sun was going down.
Late music
Ian Robert Millard 
Lovely girl in that Tik-Tok video. She put it nicely and concisely.
Changing the subject here is an article from Al Jazeera about the failure of the negotiations between Russia and USA. The idiot of Trump, who behaves like a thug, believes he can treat Russia like a tiny South American country.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/31/why-is-trump-very-angry-with-putin-and-who-will-secondary-tariffs-hurt
LikeLike
Claudius:
As I blogged some time ago, Trump is a businessman; he thinks like a businessman. He way of thinking is contractual (“you give, I give, we both get something”) albeit that he is not above pressuring his fellow contractors, or using unequal power in the bargaining situation.
The problem is that world politics is not like that, not always anyway. There is relative altruism and also relative brutal selfishness. Sometimes nations or peoples give —and want to give— more than they receive or expect to receive. Sometimes, though, nations are actuated by a self-belief that does not bargain, but goes all-out for victory, at any cost, or at all costs. Putin’s world.
Two different world-views, two different philosophies of life.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very good observation. Many years ago, a friend of mine who is very well read and specialises in Political Science and Military History told me: “The British kept together a huge empire for nearly 200 years with minimum force; the Americans tried the same but failed miserably because they are bullies. They believe they can boss everyone around” I think that is a very good definition of the American “diplomacy”
LikeLike
Claudius:
When I was living in Almaty (1996-1997), at that time the Kazakh capital, the British Embassy, with which I had quite frequent contact, shared an embassy building with the German and French embassies. The British had a small staff and a small suite or part of the building, despite UK companies and firms being prominent in the country. The French had a larger presence diplomatically, I think, but less of an impact in terms of economic activity. The Germans likewise, but they had pumped far more money into the embassy and the shared building, and the armed guards and security inside the shared entrance hall were *all* German.
Meanwhile, the US Embassy was in the same street, but was massive. Huge telecommunications aerials on the roof, and the building was several times the size of the combined UK/France/Germany embassy. I never went inside, but I imagine they had their usual US Marine guards etc. I knew a Russian girl who did line-dancing with them.
I was slightly acquainted with the son and daughter (in their mid-teens) of the American lady Ambassador, and I met her too, once or twice, at diplomatic receptions (Almaty had only a few hundred, at most, Western people resident at the time, only a few dozen of which were Brits). I was invited to quite a few such receptions, and also met the ambassadors of some other countries (Pakistan, Australia etc, and of course the British one).
LikeLike
Today is April 2nd and here we remember the day our troops landed on the Falklands/Malvinas. Did you know that the most ironic thing about this conflict/war was that officially “never happened”? Yes, two nations fought each other for 47 days at the cost of 900 dead (650 Argentinians and 255 British) and nearly 2.500 wounded (1.687 Argentinians and 775 British) but officially “we were friends” what a cruel, horrible situation.
I have been reading declassified Argentinian documents, and the level of ignorance and incompetence of the Argentinian leadership was baffling. To begin with, Galtieri did not know anything about the plans to recover the islands because these were made and kept under wraps by the Navy. The fool commanding the Air Force asked, “Would the Air Force be involved in this operation?” Unbelievable! Galtieri ended up accepting the plan of the Navy because “we need to unite the people and give them a cause”.
The war would not have happened. I discovered that Margaret Thatcher was in favour of transfering the administration of the Falklands to Argentina because the cost of maintaing a miliatry base there were crippling. In September 1980, Nicholas Ridley, head of the Foreign Office, met in secret with his Argentinian counterpart in Switzerland and agreed to hand over the islands after 99 years. Thatcher was in favour of this, but the House of Commons rejected the agreement unanimously.
The rest is history; Galtieri acted like a bull in a china shop, and Thatcher, put in a difficult position, like Galtieri, gave way to popular pressure. I am sure none of them wanted the war. It is well known that Galtieri, in his stupidity, believed that Reagan would support him against the UK. How naive can you be?
LikeLike
Claudius:
Having read that, it seems that the Argentine Navy thought that the plans would leak if shown to, or shared with, the office of the then president, or the Army (which I suppose came down to the same thing, the president being a general). Perhaps it was feared that British MI6/SIS had an agent at the top of the political set-up.
As for Reagan’s stance, he would never have damaged the anti-Soviet Anglo-American front by backing Argentina, though some of his circle did (Jeanne Kirkpatrick etc).
In the UK, most people had never heard of the Falklands, let alone their Argentinian name, Malvinas, but supported the war (most of them) because they felt that the decision should be that of the islanders, who were virtually all of British origin or ancestry and completely determined to stay with Britain. Having said that, I wonder what would have been the answer had they been offered a million pounds each (£10M in the money of 2025) to leave.
Sounds as though it is still a live issue in Argentina. Here, not, and I was unaware of the significance of the date.
Ironic that neither side could reprise today. Argentina could not invade, Britain could not re-take after any (successful) invasion.
LikeLike
In 2018 appeared a book entitled “Britain and the Dictatorships of Argentina and Chile, 1973–82” its author is Grace Livingstone, professor at the Centre of Latin American Studies in Cambridge. I have read a good review of her book and some of her conclusions are quite surprising.
In September 1979, Lord Carrington had recommended the transfer of sovereignty followed by leasing as “the best option”; in January 1980, the DOP in Thatcher’s cabinet had agreed to seek “the agreement of the islanders to begin talks with Argentina.” With that endorsement, Nicholas Ridley held exploratory talks with the islanders and the Argentines in April 1980.
Among the many documents declassified by the FCO that Grace Livingstone read is quite clear that leaders of the Falklands government were not unanimously against the proposed leaseback.
“British embassy officials in Buenos Aires reported that four island councillors were prepared to consider the leaseback, four had not made a decision and two were against it.”
Who had an interest in sabotaging the negotiations? The great oil companies, of course! The Department of Energy told Thatcher: “Such a transfer of sovereignty would undoubtedly make it more difficult to establish an oil regime that ensures Her Majesty’s government’s control over those rights.”
No wonder the MPs unanimously “murdered”, as Thatcher said, the leaseback. The bastards must have received lots of money from the oil companies to kill the deal. Of course, they pretended to be worried for the fate of the “poor islanders” to whom in private they contemptuously called “kelpers”.
LikeLike
99.8% of Falklanders voted to remain British.
LikeLike
Here is a profile of Lord Ridley.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Ridley,_Baron_Ridley_of_Liddesdale
LikeLike
Claudius:
I remember him. Not a pleasant man.
LikeLike
LikeLike