Afternoon music
GB News
I have been puzzling for some time regarding the ideology, if any, of GB News. Pseudo-nationalist, obviously largely “controlled opposition”, willing to help move the “Overton Window” re immigration, the failed “multicultural society”, immigration and migration invasion etc, yet painfully pro-Jewish lobby and pro-Israel.
GB News even allows the mendacious “Campaign Against Antisemitism” or “CAA” Jew-Zionists to spout their lies unopposed, as does the “does anyone actually watch?” Talk TV (now online only). Why? (especially since “Slitherman”, the chief spokesperson for the “CAA”, was exposed several years ago, in open court, as a serial online troll and harasser of others, mainly women).
So I was interested to see the following tweet from Matt Goodwin, former academic, who is now more or less a Reform UK propagandist and, more recently, also a GB News presenter and commentator:
That person, Paul Marshall, is not only extremely wealthy (apparently, £875M as of last year, so probably far more by now), but also the mainstay of GB News.
In the financial year 2022-2023, GB News reported a loss of no less than £42M, and would certainly have disappeared had not Paul Marshall invested £41M at that point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Marshall_(investor)
So from where comes the pro-Jewish, pro-Israel bias of GB News? I happened to notice that the said Marshall is married to a Jewish woman [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Marshall_(investor)#Personal_life], of which Wikipedia says more on its page about Paul Marshall’s son, one Winston Marshall, of whom I had not previously heard, but who is apparently a successful folk-rock banjoist and guitarist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Marshall#Early_life_and_family.
It is impossible to say for sure, on facts known, whether that personal connection has influenced the editorial line of GB News; I should say, though, that it is more likely than not.
The above reminds me that several other UK-based news outlets are owned by Jewish, pro-Jewish or pro-Israel families or groups. LBC radio is another such: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Media_%26_Entertainment; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Media_%26_Entertainment#History; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_Tabor-King.
Incidentally, the “does anyone actually watch?” Talk TV is owned, ultimately, by the aged pro-Israel cuckold, Rupert Murdoch.
More tweets seen
I would rather pay the expenses of the actual dog than those of the millions of metaphorical dogs.
A similar picture to all other recent opinion polls, though the Cons here are higher (the last opinion poll, from a different polling org, had them on only 16%).
Projection: Reform 345 MPs, and a substantial majority; Labour 131 MPs, LibDems 56, Cons 53, SNP 36 [etc]. https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html.
On that basis, the Cons would be 4th-largest party in the Commons. Other recent predictions have had them as 5th-largest. Amazing, for a party which, only a year or two ago, was still at times spoken of as “the natural party of government” in the UK.
More music
Late tweets seen
828 of the bastards. In a single day— and it is not yet even summer, when the Channel is sometimes as calm as a millpond…
Stop them.
The fact is, Britain was on the wrong side…or should have at least declared neutrality.
Yes. I noticed the anti-white bias in a BBC News report by one Sarah Smith this evening.
Ah, just saw Wikipedia about her. Turns out she is the daughter of the now-deceased Labour Party leader John Smith, who might have and probably would have become PM had he lived longer [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Smith_(news_reporter)#Family].
Fact is, I was right, when halfwit Nelson Mandela took over in South Africa: I said then that South Africa would go the way of the rest of black-ruled sub-Saharan Africa (corrupt, violent, shambolic), but that SA would take longer to fall into the swamp because the proportion of whites in the population was far higher than had been the case in any other African country. At one time, it was as high as 22%; at present somewhere around 5%, probably:
“Statistics South Africa asks people to describe themselves in the census in terms of five racial population groups.[167] The 2022 census figures for these groups were: Black African at 81%, Coloured at 8.2%, White at 7.3%, Indian or Asian at 2.7%, and Other/Unspecified at 0.5%.[9] The first census in 1911 showed that whites made up 22% of the population; this had declined to 16% by 1980.”
[Wikipedia]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa#Demographics.
Proportion of whites in SA population: 7.3% in 2022. Now? Maybe 5%, maybe still 6%, but declining, as Europeans find living in a black-ruled (though not run) country impossible.
As witness the bleating of Guardian scribblers.
Yes, Goodwin— with you on all that, but don’t forget to mention that the Jew/Zionist/Israel lobby is the major anti-free-speech bloc in the UK, and works 24/7 to repress free speech and freedom of expression.
(Ha, some hope, looking at GB News and its ownership. Goodwin knows which side his bread is buttered on…).
I suppose I am wavering between dark red and light blue on that poll.
If Britain can find its way to real social nationalism, we could even go to dark blue, but at present, the dark red is certainly more likely.
She is as thick as two short planks.
Late music
Ian Robert Millard 
It only goes to show how bloody THICK not just in a philosophical sense but in a political one as well those Tory social liberals were and are that they think being liberal on borders/immigration and some other social issues would bring electoral support to their party.
Apart from most of the LGBT rights, social liberalism is NOT popular and never has been. Ordinary people were only attracted to the Conservative Party on account of its perceived social conservatism.
The REAL dividing point between the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party/Liberal Democrats was always supposed to be social values. In the distant past there were also fundamental economic differences as well eg past Tory PMs like Chamberlain and Baldwin had no huge objections to a carefully targeted and moderate level of protectionism whereas the Liberals were in favour of free trade mania.
The Conservative Party was not just ‘the party of business’ but the ‘party of BRITISH business’ in particular.
LikeLike
John:
Britain today is, I should say, at least a third, maybe to a half, not the same country that I knew, say, in 1975 or even 1985.
The country has not just become one of strangers and strangeness but also one where one feels cast adrift. Many reliable old things, institutions, ways of behaving, simply no longer exist or, if they do still exist, exist in name only, or as a facade with nothing much behind— the monarchy, the armed forces, the Bar (which is now just a “diverse” and low-standards dustbin), the NHS etc. The trade unions. Jobs that actually pay enough to live upon. The Conservative Party and Labour Party too, both of them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reform UK has hit its limit. Were it to ‘win’ (no party has actually ‘won’ a general election since the Conservative Party did in 1935) a general election it would have trouble governing. No doubt one reason this vile, virulently anti-British, utterly useless and despicable Labour misgovernment has plunged in support already it that it basically has no real moral authority to govern since it started out with 66% of people on a pathetic turnout of just 59% being against them right from the start.
To have real moral authority to govern I would suggest a single party government needs, at the bare minimum, 40% plus support if not 45% plus.
https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk
LikeLike
John:
Perhaps, but “never say never”.
Fact is, if Labour continues to slide in public confidence (which seems almost inevitable), and if the Conservative Party does the same, and (not being the government) is also seen as a useless irrelevance, the two together might get say 45% of the overall vote cast; then Reform will be in a position to pick up a high proportion of the 55% not going to the other two. That might be 40%, 35%, 30%, or some lower percentage. In desperate times (which might well exist), I would certainly not rule out 35%. Not overwhelming in terms of popular vote, but as much as many UK parties “winning” a general election have had in the past half-century.
LikeLike
The same percentage that complete open borders supporting globalist scumbag war criminal Tony Bliar ‘won’ on in 2005! Oh, the irony if it happened!
LikeLike
I can’t see any possibility of the Tories going under 14% of the vote or Labour falling below 19%.
LikeLike
John:
I am sure that you are right, but 14%+19%=33%. That leaves anything up to 67% for others, and the main “other” at present is Reform UK.On that basis, even if the LibDems and Greens together get about 20%, the remainder is around 47%. I doubt that Reform could get anything like that, but 35% must be at least a possibility.
LikeLike
The case of Paul Marshall, and others like him, makes me wonder, what the hell is going on with these bloody millionaires? There are many millionaires (I am talking about people with a fortune of at least 100 million euros/pounds). How is it possible that NOT ONE of them is a genuine nationalist, and by that I mean a national-socialist?
Why do we not have a proper platform on the Internet? And, before anyone makes a stupid or sarcastic comment, I am not expecting or asking for videos or programmes glorifying the Third Reich. I would like to see current affairs analysed and discussed by well-educated, well-informed people who are fully aware of who are “the enemies of Mankind” as Julius Streicher called them.
I can only think that most millionaires are greedy bastards whose only interest is making more money. The few who might sympathise with our ideas (assuming they do exist) must be cowardly creatures who are terrified of being considered or exposed as “racists” or “nazis”.
LikeLike
Claudius:
You have to bear in mind that, in the UK, also in the EU states, there are “regulators” which monitor broadcasting, and now online platforms. They all have “anti-racism” written into their “codes of conduct” etc. Guess which (((group))) drafts many of those…
Also, remember the words of Engels: “capital has no country”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for reminding me of that. I forgot that in the UK, there is an organisation called OFCOM that keeps an eye on TV and radio programmes and presenters. Here is a very revealing description of its functions and power (from Wikipedia):
“Ofcom has wide-ranging powers across the television, radio, telecoms, internet and postal sectors. It has a statutory duty to represent the interests of citizens and consumers by promoting competition and protecting the public from harmful or offensive material.”
Of course, it is up to (((them))) to decide what is “harmful or offensive”. Bastards…
LikeLike
Claudius:
Quite. Were I in possession of tens of millions or more, I might feel inclined to find a country where the ruling circles would allow me to broadcast internationally on my own radio station, one with a powerful transmitter, such as the old Radio Moscow, or the German station of the 1930s and 1940s, the Deutschlandsender (as well as online, of course).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Zionist fanatic hypocritical Jews! Their basic line is ‘Nationalism/national awareness for me but not for you awful goyim (cattle)’ Is it any wonder they rub people up the wrong way so much so infact even the ever dim ‘Left’ is tiring of their antics ie the Israel-Palestine issue?
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is very weird. I do not care if Starmer is homosexual or not; the fact that he is a criminal and a traitor is more than enough. However, Dutton makes a good case about Starmer´s homosexuality and his desperate attempts to hide it, which prove he is a pathological liar. What surprised me was the speed with which the police arrested the suspect. Have you noticed how the MSM has buried this piece of news?
Dear God, man! 🤢🤮 – YouTube
LikeLike
Claudius:
There is speculation on Twitter and elsewhere, but the msm has not amplified it, possibly in part because charges have been brought. Thus, under English law, the matter may be, in part at least, sub judice and unable to be discussed in detail in published form.
LikeLike
Thank you very much. That legal disposition is understandable. Here we have something similar, if not the same, it is called “secreto de sumario” (secrecy of summary) “Sumario” is the name given to the file that contains all the information and documents related to a case. The legal definition in Argentina is this one:
“Secrecy of summary is a procedural measure that restricts access to the judicial proceedings of a case during the pretrial phase, with the aim of protecting the investigation, preventing information leaks, and ensuring the effectiveness of the proceedings. Only the judge and authorised parties may access the file.”
A friend of mine who is a lawyer explained to me that this also extends to the lawyers of both parties, who are not allowed to discuss or reveal anything related to the case. That is why when the journalists try to get them to talk about an important ongoing case, they say: “I cannot discuss this with you, it is under secrecy of summary”
LikeLike
Claudius:
Thank you.
LikeLike
Whilst one should avoid the use of lethal force to repel unwanted invaders when possible if push comes to shove violent means must be used in order to defend one’s borders. That is the basic right of any sovereign country.
Fake globalist ‘Tory’ Churchill (in reality a duplicitous, two timing, flip flopping, Liberal Party man) wanted to use WW1 stocks of poison gas to prevent German Nazi troops from landing in 1940. If lethal means were good enough for that Liberal they are good enough for me. This constant mass invasion MUST stop by any means possible.
Frauke Petry of Germany’s excellent nationalist/national-conservative AfD party said her country’s border guards should be able to use lethal force to repel illegal migrants as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frauke_Petry
LikeLike
John:
Already, the migration invasion (inc. “legal” migration) has badly damaged every aspect of this country. If we have (as seems likely) another 5 years (or more) of it, you can kiss England/Britain goodbye as we know it or have known it. There will be a kind of social collapse, followed either by some form of civil war or by the imposition of dictatorship (demanded by the people).
LikeLike
A dictatorship that will not be allowed since soldiers and police swear their allegiance to His Majesty whose political views seem to be as loony liberal globalist ‘Tory’ as his late mother’s were.
They do not make Monarchs like King Edward VIII or the late Queen Mother any more.
LikeLike
John:
An oath, in our age, is just a jumble of words…
LikeLike
The EU’s leaders may well be dim but nowhere near enough as our so-called ‘leaders’. After all, Starmer has managed to be taken in by them and effectively trashed Brexit through his ‘death by a thousand cuts’ so-called Brexit ‘reset’. All that national debate and argument and trouble for business people in order to be sold down the river. A ‘Brexit’ effectively still born where the EU still has us within its orbit and where we have no leverage to improve matters in the future. They do not even want us to return anyway and would veto a future application so the ‘reset’ is utterly pointless on every level.
LikeLike
Northern Ireland was held hostage from day one of Boris The Buffoon’s ‘Brexit’ and still has not been released from the grasping hands of Brussels:
https://www.tuv.org.uk
Traditional Unionist Voice is the only unionist party in NI worthy of the name and unlike the DUP they are politically astute enough to collaborate with a party from the mainland UK ie Reform UK.
LikeLike
Thank you for the information about Paul Marshall. I read his biography on Wikipedia carefully, and I noticed a couple of very interesting and revealing facts.
A) “He is the co-founder and chairman of Marshall Wace LLP, one of Europe’s largest hedge fund groups.[15] Marshall Wace[16] was founded in 1997 by Marshall and the financier Ian Wace.[17] At the time, Marshall Wace was one of the first hedge funds in London.[13] The company started with $50 million, half of which was from George Soros“
B) “Marshall Wace manages $50 billion and has recently[when?] opened an office in China.[19] Prior to founding Marshall Wace, Marshall worked for Mercury Asset Management, the fund management arm of S. G. Warburg & Co.“
Paul Marshall´s wife is half-Jewish and only from her father´s side. She is the daughter of Robert Zellinger de Balkany (1931-2015), a “French” billionaire who was so desperate to hide his Jewish roots that he dropped his father´s real surname (Zellinger) to use a French version of the fake Hungarian nobility title bought by his father (Balkányi). His father was Aladar Zellinger (1900-1984), the French version of Wikipedia describes him as: “an entrepreneur d´origine hongrois”. Aladar married Elena Davidovic/Davidovich in 1926
Like many other Jewish billionaires, Robert Zellinger was a snob who tried to hide his roots and marry into the European nobility. His first wife (1957-66) was Genevieve Francois-Poncet, daughter of the famous French diplomat André Francois-Poncet, who was ambassador in Berlin between 1931-38. His second wife (1969-90) was Princess Maria Gabriela de Savoia, daughter of the last King of Italy. Sabina (Marshall´s wife) is her daughter.
I have to dig fairly deep to find this information. Robert Zellinger de Balkany´s biography on Wikipedia (in French) is extremely brief, but it contains a link to a vital source: Encyclopédie de la fausse noblesse et de la noblesse d’apparence (1994) by Pierre-Marie Dioudonnat. It was there that I found his Jewish origins. Although it does not say that the Zellingers were Jews, the fact that they are described as “financiers” and that they fled Hungary in 1938 (Horthy´s regime was very anti-Jewish) to settle in France says everything.
LikeLike
Claudius:
Thank you.
LikeLike