Afternoon music
Tweets seen
Israel-puppet “Tommy” seems unable to distinguish between a definitely-decided-upon plan of invasion and a mere contingency plan. The “plan” to invade the UK, Seelowe (Sealion), was a contingency plan. Under the right circumstances, it might have been actioned, and enough resources put in to make it feasible, but that never happened in or after 1940.
Hitler’s grand strategy, as of 1939-40, was either for the German Reich to join with the then-great British Empire (which Hitler admired) to rule much of the world (Britain as a seaborne empire and the Reich as one ruling northern Eurasia), or for there to be an uninvolved peace between the Reich and Britain (and also between the Reich and defeated France, along with its own widely-scattered colonies), giving the Reich the great possibility of defeating Sovietism and achieving huge Lebensraum (living-space) in the east of Europe and European Russia (especially the rich black-earth agricultural lands of the Ukraine, a country the same size as France).
The “Battle of Britain” arose out of the battle for France, which ended in German victory that same summer of 1940. The Germans were focussed on destroying the RAF airfields both in Northern France and in the southeast of England.
Why could German forces not invade England after the Fall of France? Several reasons.
Firstly, Hitler ideally wanted the British Empire as an ally or, failing that, as a hands-off bystander, not as a defeated enemy.
Secondly, and more practically (and as the British successes of the Battle of Britain proved), the Luftwaffe was simply unable to attain air supremacy, leaving any invasion fleet open to merciless RAF and Royal Navy (Fleet Air Arm) attack from the air.
Thirdly, the German army and navy were unable to source sufficient carrying or ferrying capacity to land an invasion force large enough to be likely to be able to establish and hold a bridgehead in the southeast of England.
In fact, this was known to the British government at the time; Churchill was well aware of it, but it suited him to keep the British population in a state of invasion-fear and panic, as well as spy-mania (the view, popularly held, that German spies were everywhere— yet another war myth only dispelled several decades later).
Seelowe (Sealion), was only a contingency plan, but not a merely “paper” one. It might, under more favourable circumstances, have been upgraded to a genuine operational plan ready to be put into effect. Never happened.
I was unaware that “Tommy Robinson” took an interest in WW2 grand strategy; or are (((those))) behind him the ones who take an interest?
More tweets
For a brief happy moment, I thought that that referred to the UK…
At best parasites, usually criminal or with criminal links, sometimes also terrorists.
Forget prison sentences. Wall. Squad. End.
British people are homeless while hostile and/or useless parasite untermenschen take much of the available social housing. A million more, every year, are arriving. Something will have to give. Society is starting to break apart in this country.
Those who know me know that farmers (eg in the UK) are not my favourite people, as a general group, but it is obvious that fake “Labour” is hitting them for one reason only (apart from grabbing money), which is that the farming community is almost entirely English/British, i.e. white Northern European.
Labour, on the other hand, has become a party dependent on non-white voting blocs: the Muslims, of various sorts, and blacks. I have not seen the opinion polls for a few days, but the last couple I saw had Labour on 15% and 20%. Pretty clear that very few white English people are now going to vote Labour.
Wall. Squad. End.
Quite.
There is little point in Reform doing a deal with the plainly-disappearing Con Party. At present, few Con MPs are likely to survive the next election.
My own use of Electoral Calculus comes to a slightly different result: Reform about 379 seats, Labour 82, LibDems 61, SNP 44, Cons 35, Greens 13 [etc]. A very solid Reform majority.
“Who’s afraid of the big bad wolf?” (arguende)
Zelensky’s ricebowl is about to be taken away.
The ludicrous “Your Party” (currently opinion-polling at somewhere below 1%) is, in microcosm, the alliance seen more widely between the more “socialist” white Labourites and the Muslim (not infrequently, Islamist) voting bloc. It could never work. Ideologically, the two main components of “Your Party” have little if anything in common.
Even were the above to be left aside, the fact that “Your Party” has split before even having been fully launched will turn off 99% of voters. I never thought that “Your Party” (which may be renamed something else in the end, maybe “Party McParty Face Party”) would score more than a couple of Westminster seats, but now it looks as though it will just be Corbyn himself sitting there.
Of course, as that scribbler says, the Muslim voting bloc will not be going away, if only because somewhere around 11% of the whole UK population (no-one seems to know the real figure) is now Muslim.
More music
More tweets
Disgraceful, but par for the course in the contemporary UK.
I was sorry to see today that that young man has been incarcerated for his tweets (as I understand was the case; I am unfamiliar with the details of the matter, except that it seems to have been instigated by the usual pack of malicious Jew-Zionist fanatics).
A Crown Court case, but Morgan apparently pleaded guilty. Often a mistake. He may well have been better off taking his chances with a British jury (while they still exist).
I remember Morgan’s tweets from a couple of years ago; while I did not agree with all of them, many were worth seeing, and no-one should be imprisoned for socio-political tweeting, particularly when the prosecution is basically a Jewish-Zionist put-up job.
[“Got called a Nazi for being against trans ideology. Got called a Nazi for saying the illegals are a problem. Got called a Nazi for saying that Islam isn’t compatible with the West. Got called a Nazi for saying legals are scamming our visa system and government systems in general. Got called a Nazi for not wanting the English to become a minority in their own country. Got called a Nazi for calling for Remigration. Got called a Nazi for questioning foreign influence in our government and institutions. I really don’t care. Words are meaningless. England for the English. Britain for the British. Europe for Europeans.”]
Brava!
[“The government intends to replace most trials by jury with trial by judge alone. A judge from Leeds dealing with criminal cases, Recorder Simon Myerson KC, repeated on here the claim that I was the scum of the earth who was responsible for someone’s suicide. The claim was entirely false and my view is that Myerson is an obnoxious buffoon. I infer that Myerson was irrationally prejudiced against me, possibly over my views on Israel or because I annoyed his mate Mark Lewis. In what was an essentially secret process between judges, Myerson was investigated by another judge from Leeds, Lady Justice King. Despite the obnoxious and false claim, Myerson was only given a slap on the wrist by the Lady Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor (a politician). Myerson continued sitting as a judge. Nice work if you can get it. The government intends to take away most decisions on whether someone is guilty of a serious criminal offence from a jury of 12 ordinary people. The plan is to give the decision to a judge alone, perhaps someone like Myerson. No doubt there are other judges like him, each with their own prejudices. Juries of 12 ordinary people play an essential role in ensuring justice is done and seen to be done. Public participation both legitimises the criminal process and functions as an essential check on state power. Abolishing trial by jury will lead to many more miscarriages of justice. No matter what your politics are, what is proposed is genuinely terrifying and cannot be allowed to happen.”]
Of course, Myerson was sacked in the end, not so long after he was appointed Recorder (p/t criminal judge).
Late music
Ian Robert Millard 
Arnold Böcklin (1827-1901) was one of the last great European painters who kept working within the tradition of classical or academic painting that reached its zenith in the late 19th century. His most famous work is “The Isle of the Dead”, of which he painted six versions, one of which was owned by Hitler, who greatly admired him. Interestingly, Lenin, who also admired Böcklin, had a framed reproduction of the same painting in his office.
Arnold Böcklin – Wikipedia
LikeLike
Claudius:
Thank you.
Steiner (Rudolf, not the SS general) wrote about Bocklin, I think in one of his Karmic Studies.
His paintings often, of course, feature a wild sea and shoreline, often dark skies, and slightly unearthly people and/or animals, such as horses.
LikeLike
Yes, you are right. He painted many seascapes and scenes involving horses and mythological characters.
LikeLike
In any decent country, a cheat and a liar like Mark Lewis would have been disbarred and jailed a long time ago. The fact that this vile human being has escaped justice tells you a lot about the ethical and moral bankruptcy of the British legal system, which you, Ian, have covered in great detail.
PS: His mates at Patron Law are no much better…
LikeLike
Claudius:
Quite right,though Lewis is not and never was a barrister (he is a solicitor) so would not be disbarred. The usual term is “struck off” or “removed from” the “roll” of solicitors. Same in effect, of course.
LikeLike
Thank you for reminding me that Lewis is a solicitor, not a barrister. I have just found this in an article discussing the differences between British and American lawyers. What do you think?
“Many US firms expect their associates to bill 2000 hours a year as a minimum, which is achieved by having fewer associates per team. Whilst work-life balance is very much dependent on the firm’s culture, amongst other things, top UK city firms, like those in the Magic Circle, do tend to have more reasonable working hours than their US counterparts.
Moreover, when it comes to training, UK firms have a reputation for investing in high-quality training for their trainee solicitors, unlike US firms. Whilst attempts are being made by US firms to redress this balance, they retain a reputation for prioritising billing hours over the development of their associates.”
LikeLike
Claudius:
Hard for me to answer, because I was only an employed lawyer for about 2 years, about 6 months for a large British (City of London) law firm (all but about 2-3 weeks in Almaty, Kazakhstan, only a couple of weeks in London), and 12 months or so for 2 American firms, one a very large one (Baker & McKenzie) and entirely in Almaty, the other a small niche firm based in Charleston,South Carolina, doing ex-Soviet and other offshore work; I was the head of its activities in London but also travelled to Charleston, Liechtenstein, the Channel Islands and elsewhere. I also worked in the Caribbean for a third firm.
In other words, my experiences were not at all typical. Also, as an employed barrister, my experiences were not the same as they would have been as a solicitor in the same or similar employment.
The “billed hours” are very important to such law firms, though, whereas a self-employed practising barrister organizes his time differently.
LikeLike
Thank you very much. I should have remembered that your career was fairly atypical. However, the impression I have got is that American law firms seem to put an emphasis on “billed hours”, which, in a way, drives the solicitors to work VERY hard. Is a bit like the story of the carrot on a stick, only that, instead of a donkey, there is a solicitor, desperately trying to get the carrot. 😁😁😁 In fact, I remember an American film from the 1990s that analysed the exploitation of young lawyers by a big firm, which offered huge salaries but demanded them to be available 24/7.
LikeLike
Claudius:
That is very typical of large law firms, both in the US and UK.
I was told (1990s) that many young solicitors were almost driven mad by their pace of work in the first 1-3 years. If they got through those years, they were on a better level (less frenetic work, more money), and then maybe (after 5-10 years) they might get up to salaried partner level (in today’s money, hundreds of thousands of pounds a year in some firms), then to “equity partner” (a share of the profits, in some firms a million pounds or more per year even in the 1990s).
As you say, some large American law firms, inc. those in London, offer some young ppl £100,000+ per year (even in the first year), but they want blood for it…
LikeLike