My attention has been caught by a recent tweet from a Brexit Party MEP previously unknown to me:
My colleague in the European parliament @MagicMagid arranged a charity dinner in support of @RefugeeRescue saving refugees in the Mediterranean. I could not attend the dinner but have instead made a donation. I urge you to do the same!
At first, I thought that that tweet was a fake and/or a parody, or perhaps tweeted in a spirit of satire. No. It is real and it is meant to be taken at face-value. The bastard really is urging Brexit Party members, supporters and voters (of which I am not and have never been one, by the way) to give money to one of the organizations ferrying migrant-invaders across the Mediterranean from North Africa to civilized Europe.
When many people who support —or did until now support— Brexit Party criticized Nielsen’s support for this people-ferrying soi-disant “charity”, the new MEP’s response was textbook System-politician:
For all those who made racist remarks in response to my earlier tweets about a charity I have supported- you have no place in the Brexit Party. We are an open, diverse and inclusive party with no space for discrimination or abuse. Get on board, or get out.
The thread of further comments on Twitter is worth reading. All UK political life is there, from well-meaning but stupid ladies (sitting in suburban or rural comfort) who just want to emote about “saving children”, and the sort of basically malicious “anti-racist” idiots (Jewish or otherwise) who want as many non-Europeans as possible to invade the EU and especially the UK, to more sensible people who see that the UK’s population has increased from about 55 million in the 1980s to about 65 million or even 70 million now, most of which is via immigration and from births not only to immigrants but also now to their children and indeed to those children’s children (a demographic time-bomb: experts now say that European-race, i.e. white, people will be in the minority in the UK by 2070 at latest. My guess? 2040. Already some British cities are minority-white).
That does not, it seems, alarm Henrik Nielsen.
Nielsen was born in 1959 in Copenhagen, is 60 years of age and was at one time the head of the anti-EU campaign in Denmark. Why he opposes the EU I do not know. He seems rather at home as an MEP.
Nielsen is married to one Sharon Ruth Bierer, also a dentist, born in London and who has been a director of dental-oriented companies in London. The name Bierer is often of Jewish origin, but not always. Nielsen and his wife have two adult children, Jacob and Laura, the latter of which is, remarkably, the policy director of Labour Leave, the Labour Party pro-Brexit organization.
Nielsen and his wife own a rather pleasant-looking villa in Puglia (Apulia), southern Italy, which they rent out at £300+ per day.
I agree there with tweeter “Reimer Bard”. Brexit Party is faux-nationalist even as compared to its previous incarnation, UKIP.
Finally, the person that Nielsen is supporting in his tweets is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magid_Magid . A Somali immigrant who claims to have funded a “gap year” by working for only 9 weeks (at 12 hours a day). I suppose that it is just about possible.
Brexit Party
I have blogged several times before about Brexit Party, about its stellar explosion onto the UK political scene, about Farage’s impressive public meetings, about its possible impact on the Conservative vote etc; its EU elections success. I have also chronicled its lack of direct success so far in Westminster by-elections: Peterborough, and then Brecon and Radnorshire. That “close but no cigar” aspect has deflated the Brexit Party bubble somewhat, as has the noise around the person I am pleased to call Boris-Idiot and around the whole current Brexit hullabaloo.
Let’s look again at Brexit Party. It is or is owned by a private company itself controlled by Nigel Farage. In that it has similarity to Momentum, the Labour Party group, which is, or is owned by, a company itself controlled by a couple of Jews.
I have blogged before about the fact that Brexit Party is a party without policy (save for leaving the EU). That is both its strength (i.e. a clear message) and its weakness (the voting public has concerns other than just the EU and Brexit).
I have blogged about not only the strange policy-free nature of Brexit Party but also about its strange mixture of candidates. No less than three out of the Brexit Party EU elections candidates were former Revolutionary Communist Party members (one, Claire Fox, a defender of the IRA Warrington bombing, is now a Brexit Party MEP). Some Brexit Party candidates were of non-European ethnicity, and some of those are now MEPs, including a couple of Jews and a Pakistani.
It is hard to see the ethnic, cultural or ideological ties binding the Brexit Party MEPs inter se. Even the faux-“libertarian” “small state”-ism of many of them does not seem to fit all.
There seem to be more than just a few links between Brexit Party and the Trump set-up.
What is really behind Brexit Party? There is already a Brexit Party Friends of Israel organization. What is the gameplan? To offset any real nationalist upsurge by containing it in the Brexit Party box? Possibly. It worked with UKIP…
Brexit Party electorally
To my mind, the Brexit Party upsurge bubble has been, if not burst, then somewhat punctured, and so partly-deflated. Farage has made the mistake of sitting on the fence between outright support for Boris-Idiot’s supposed Brexitism, and opposition to the Conservative Party. That has weakened Brexit Party to some extent. All the same, and crucially in a situation where is is no real social-national or even small-c conservative-national party, voters in England and Wales are going to have the usual false choice in the next general election: the System parties, or joke candidates such as Monster Raving Loonies and tiny socialist or other parties, or…Brexit Party. It may be that, in desperation, many will vote Brexit Party.
At present, Brexit Party is not breaking through re. Westminster. The latest two polls (published today and yesterday) put the figures as:
make a Conservative majority of either 38 or 46 (I have taken the Scottish results as 50% SNP).
This is frightening. It means that, were there no significant change in the polling, there could be a Boris-Idiot ZOG/NWO [Zionist Occupation Government/New World Order] dystopian regime, an elected dictatorship, in place by the end of the year. If that happens, democracy in any real sense will have died and only determined non-electoral resistance will be able to fight against it.
Having said that, polling often narrows before an election, but Labour is going to have to pull its socks up “majorly” (to use a Trump-ism) if it is going to keep even its present complement of MPs. I suppose that the silver lining would be that many pro-Zionist Labour MPs would go, but that would be little comfort to the British people ruled over by a ZOG dictatorship.
What about Brexit Party itself? Its polling is running between 10% and 15%, which is nowhere. At present, it has no prospect of getting MPs and would have to raise its game to about 25% across the board before getting even a small bloc of MPs. That is not impossible, but if British people see Brexit Party MEPs (who may not even be British by origin…) lecturing them on the supposed “goodness” of supporting migration-invasion etc, the polling will not improve and may even decline in percentage terms.
No social-national party, no conservative-national party, the Conservative Party a ZOG/NWO regime in the making, Labour the party mainly of the blacks and browns, the LibDems supporting both finance-capitalism and migration-invasion, and fake-nationalist Brexit Party joining the multikulti “celebrations”…
The Remainers’ intellectual dishonesty, exposed in a tweet from an emeritus Professor of Government, no less; nailed by Andrew Neil…
Both sides fought the referendum on the basis they would regard the result as binding; and it was on that basis that people voted. Show me any Leaver or Remainer who said it was just a big state-sponsored opinion poll and could be ignored. https://t.co/ElwoARYP9X
“If you look at the more genuinely Welsh areas, especially the Welsh-speaking ones, they did not want to leave the EU,” Dorling told the Sunday Times. “Wales was made to look like a Brexit-supporting nation by its English settlers.”
I wonder what The Guardian would say about any analysis of UK voting patterns (in general elections, as well as referenda) that called areas with huge numbers of blacks and browns etc “not genuinely English”? Or described the blacks, browns, Chinese etc as “settlers”…For that matter, what about any analysis of voting patterns in North London that referred to “its Jewish settlers”?
A few more tweets
The real problem here was that direct populist democracy, i.e. the 2016 Referendum, was grafted onto the longstanding system of representative democracy (elected MPs, political parties, Parliament). It’s like a train trying to run on lines of the wrong gauge. Or to put it another way, trying to graft a pear to an apple.
WATCH | "There has been an active conspiracy by the political class to stop a real Brexit. There was a clear majority for Brexit in the referendum, however we have a House of Commons that was 75% Remain" – legendary historian David Starkey hits the nail on the head! pic.twitter.com/F1LX5Y4ICa
I just made a donation to support @noahcarl90's legal action against St Edmund's College, Cambridge. For the sake of academic freedom, I hope you will consider doing the same. https://t.co/PgIz7cczGJ
The Indian woman noted above, Priyamvada Gopal, is apparently an academic at Cambridge University. An out and out enemy of freedom (for white Northern Europeans). She does not want compromise, dialogue, let alone academic or civil freedom of thought and speech. She is an enemy.
Last tweet for the afternoon. Fuck Ambivalence.
There should be no 'ambivalence' where the crude structures of supremacy are concerned–whether those are white, patriarchal, heterocentric, able-ness or caste.
In fact her Twitter timeline is a useful resource, where enemies of the British people expose themselves, in effect confessionally. As I have written in other contexts, Twitter is a good reservoir of open source intelligence about many of the enemies of Europe’s future.
Since I wrote the above (some weeks ago), Douglas Murray has written this:
An interesting and valuable piece, though I have to say that I never saw Douglas Murray (very pro-Jew, pro-Zionist) standing up for my rights of belief or expression when a pack of Zionist Jews pressured the Bar Standards Board to have me disbarred a few years ago. See:
There is more than one group trying to repress opinion (or even personal belief) in the UK at the moment. I have already mentioned the Jew-Zionists, and they are probably the most dangerous, because they have infiltrated over decades into the msm, as well as law, politics and, of course, business, as well as its offshoot, advertising. There are others travelling the same way, but the Zionists are driving most of this. The “antifa” idiots, the “multikulti” partisans, the Tooting Popular Front-style self-described “leftists”, post-Marxists etc are also involved, but on the lower levels, usually; they are far less effective because far less “connected”. “Useful idiots” for the Zionists.
I described in one of the links above how I was disbarred because the Jews wanted to punish me for my expressed views, views mainly expressed then on Twitter. In fact, I had ceased practice some 7-8 years previously, so “they” did not damage my professional and other life as they intended (which is no doubt why they then tried to manipulate tame Essex Police into doing their dirty work), but that is scarcely the point. The point is that (((they))) used (misused) the Bar’s Code of Conduct (now very much more restrictive than it was in the past, when professional standards were in fact far higher….) as a political bullying tactic.
The same thing has happened to a UK-based Palestinian activist, Nazim Ali:
In short, the police and Crown Prosecution Service [CPS] declined to charge or prosecute Nazim Ali. The malicious Jew-Zionist “Campaign Against Antisemitism” [CAA] then launched a private prosecution, only for the CPS to take over that private prosecution and (as is their prerogative in law) discontinue it:
When I was disbarred, Gideon Falter, the obsessed head of the CAA, crowed that people like Ian Millard, who had the temerity to criticize Jews, would “face devastating professional consequences”, which rather proved my point that that Bar Disciplinary Tribunal case was not really about me at all, but about trying to create a precedent which could be weaponized against others, not only at the Bar but elsewhere.
The CAA tried to do somewhat the same against Alison Chabloz, the satirical singer-songwriter, inasmuch as the CAA Jews, in her case, were trying to create a precedent in respect of “holocaust” “denial” (historical revision and revisionism). The CAA director, Falter, once studied law at Warwick University, but I have no idea whether he got a degree or not (and I have not seen it said anywhere that he has any professional legal qualifications).
Now we see that Nazim Ali is going to be “tried” by the professional regulators of the pharmacists’ profession. I wonder whether Zionists drafted the no doubt quite-recently-changed equivalent of their “code of conduct”? I wonder whether Zionists are employed in key posts?
The CAA pressured the relevant professional body. That is not some “conspiracy theory”; the CAA Zionists admit it [see link above] and in fact are proud of having done so!
The Zionists are far more dangerous enemies of freedom of expression than are odd UK-based Indian “academics”, however venomous they may be.
My view can be put simply, and is that there should be complete freedom to express, to adult citizens, one’s views on politics, society and history, as a minimum. However, such civilized freedoms have their enemies, and we must deal with them, before it is too late.
Here is a case which illustrates how far the UK has gone down the path of repression: someone imprisoned for 2.5 years for putting a few stickers on lamp-posts! That, in a country where violent thugs, abusers of the elderly, and other social evildoers are routinely given non-custodial sentences!
Neo-Nazi imprisoned for two-and-a-half years over threatening sticker campaign and possession of swastika-emblazoned underwearhttps://t.co/ngSNvZufVB
Germany is already treading such a path, and has been for many years. Laws against freedom of expression politically, socially, even historically (“holocaust” “denial” laws, laws against mentioning the many positive aspects of the [Third] Reich etc). Now such repression is intensifying.
Here we see the approaching reality of “White Genocide”. It does not happen overnight. First, a few non-European immigrants, then more and more, all breeding fast. At the same time, freedom for British (or other European) people is eroded by “race relations”, “community relations”, “hate speech”, or “malicious communications” laws aimed in reality only at white people. The Jews are behind much of it, and they of course have their own agenda: to close down criticism or even plain disbelief in the “holocaust” fable and its fakery; also, to prevent opposition to Israel.
We see now (I saw 40+ years ago) where this leads: to a Britain where white people have no real political expression (just a shadow political life, ruled by Jewish influence); no freedom of expression even on legitimate political, social or historical questions; eventually, no right to exist at all.
Whites are not breeding; non-whites are. White Genocide. It’s real, it’s happening (gradually, but becoming ever-more apparent), and anyone sticking up for freedom (even in art or music) is repressed, even imprisoned. Look at the famous “banksters” mural,
now painted over because said to be “anti-Semitic”. Look at Alison Chabloz, prosecuted and persecuted for singing satirical songs. Look at me (and others), disbarred for a few tweets critical of Zionist Jewry and the way the UK is fast-declining.
Action has to be taken if any decent future in Europe is to be saved.
Good…but he should never have been harassed by the police in the first place.
Update, 14 October 2019
Below, radio loudmouth and ignoramus Julia Hartley-Brewer defends free speech. Strangely enough, she spoke not a word when I was disbarred at the instigation of a malicious pack of Jews, when Alison Chabloz was persecuted, prosecuted and convicted by connected pack of Jews, when Jez Turner was actually imprisoned by the same pack of Jews. I must be missing something. Or maybe not…
Julia Hartley-Brewer
✔@JuliaHB1
When does it all stop? People trying to get other people sacked by pretending to take offence at them expressing their perfectly reasonable and honestly held opinions. We all know where this ends… https://twitter.com/pinknews/status/1183300102062067712 …
PinkNews
✔@PinkNews
Thousands call for Piers Morgan to be fired by Good Morning Britain for ‘dehumanising’ trans people https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/10/13/sack-piers-morgan-petition-itv-good-morning-britain-transgender/ …
Below, what this politically-correct “offence” culture leads to: police (on the ground, the usual po-faced, politically-correct WPC…) threatening to investigate and arrest those who copy a definition out of the Oxford English Dictionary!
A comment about me, only seen by me on 24 October 2019
Strangely enough, “free speech” devotee James Delingpole seems unwilling to respond to someone’s tweet mentioning me. The Spectator and other places where he scribbles are all under Jew-Zionist influence or control, though, so it really is not so strange that his support for “free speech” has its limits…
I learned last night from a lawyer friend that to become a QC you have to show commitment to all the various 'diversity' shibboleths. This confirms my suspicion that being a QC is no longer a badge of quality but merely another form of woke enforcement.
(btw, Twitter account @ChequeShanghai seems well worth reading)
While browsing around the above, I happened to see the tweet below, in which the Jew scribbler Finkelstein (now, absurdly, elevated to the House of Lords!) makes a nuisance of himself to a young woman who retweeted me when I was still on Twitter (the Jews had me expelled in 2018). Another example of how (((they))) try to control free speech. The sad thing is that so many people fail to stand up to (((them))). I think that that will change, though…
@TracymOshea Without commenting at all about your debate with Kate Godfrey could you consider un retweeting Ian Millard?
Looks like the Shomrim (Jew private police operating out of a couple of real police stations in North London and even operating cars got up to look like real police cars and with their personnel dressed exactly like police —which is an offence, but a blind eye is turned—) may have had to find alternative accommodation…
The police, CPS etc, but especially police, seem incapable of distinguishing, or unwilling to distinguish, between “grossly offensive” (unlawful) and merely “offensive” (lawful) and tend to treat all “offensive” communications as “grossly offensive”, which runs counter to Court of Appeal and Supreme Court case authority.
This is what happens when plainly bad law, such as Communications Act 2003, s.127, is drafted and passed into statute.
I expect that their preference would be for Ali’s business and home to be demolished, as often happens in their beloved Israel (to which, however, few of “them” seem to want to relocate!).
The Jews’ next move was to get their (many) lawyers working on persuading the Professional Standards Authority to take the disciplinary part of the General Pharmaceutical Council itself to the High Court! See this jubilatory blog post by David Collier, a prominent Jew-Zionist activist for Israel who was one of only two “witnesses” against Nazim Ali: https://david-collier.com/jewish-community/
The aim is for the Nazim Ali case to be reheard and/or the “sentence” replaced by a far more severe one.
From the Jews’ point of view, the ideal outcome would be for Nazim Ali to be struck off the roll of pharmacists and also fined heavily. He would thus be deprived of profession, business and home. Almost as good as what would happen in “Israel” itself…
Update, 4 February 2024
After six years, @TheGPhC has finally admitted that pharmacist Nazim Ali's comments at a pro-Hizballah rally in 2017 were antisemitic, but the regulator still lets him off with just a warning.
Below, we see the supporters of the now-again-imprisoned activist known as Tommy Robinson, scuffling with police and msm employees on College Green by the Palace of Westminster and Westminster Abbey a few days ago.
Police move in as ‘Tommy Robinson’ supporters attack BBC broadcasters on college green. Chants of “We want our country back” pic.twitter.com/CaZszLxqVl
Reporters reported these events as though at the Storming of the Bastille, whereas in fact the clash shows a few dozen, or at most a hundred demonstrators (though the police estimated the crowd of protestors outside the Old Bailey earlier the same day as having numbered about 200).
I do not want to comment on the rights and wrongs of the Tommy Robinson contempt case, but to examine the protests to launch a wider-ranging article. I have in any case written previously about Tommy Robinson:
I should make my own position clear: Ideologically, I am not much on the same page as Tommy Robinson. For one thing, Robinson makes it clear that, like his supporters Katie Hopkins and the tribe of Anglo-American “alt-Right” wastes of space (the main British ones being “Prison Planet” Paul Watson, Carl Benjamin “Sargon of Akkad” and Mark Meechan “Count Dankula”), he is pro-Israel and pro-Jew. This despite the fact that 99.9% of Jews in the UK despise and hate him and his followers. The American “alt-Right” have a word for people like that: “cucks”. Ironic, in view of the pro-Israel stance of many “alt-Right” persons. In fact, in the clip above, you can see some idiot waving a Israeli flag!
Tommy Robinson, however, parts company with the “alt-Right” in that he is able to mobilize fairly large (by UK standards) and very combative (by UK standards) partisan followers. Admittedly, 200 is not very many, but this was on a weekday, when the bulk of Robinson’s supporters are probably working on building sites or driving white vans, if that is not too patronizing. Also, Robinson’s support seems stronger in the North West and Midlands than in London.
I have a sneaking regard for Robinson, in that he is willing to put himself out at the front, is willing to lead “in action”, has a certain courage (others disagree and say that any courage is fortified by others backing him up), and is not by any means stupid, despite some of his behaviour. Also, he has been able to create at least a loose (and undisciplined) street army, or at least a sizeable street “troop”.
Having said the foregoing, Tommy Robinson is not a serious political figure. Even leaving aside the pro-Israel-ism, a few hundred or a few thousand marchers and bottle-throwers do not a revolutionary army make. I blogged about this quite a while ago, in relation to the connected “Football Lads’ Alliance”:
A figure such as Tommy Robinson needs to lead, if anything, not a political movement but the street army of such a movement. In other words, he should be not the overall or political chief but the “street” head of a movement, and subordinate to one with a proper political programme. He himself should understand that.
When Tommy Robinson stood as “Independent” MEP candidate for North West England, he was humiliated, getting 38,908 votes out of 1,744,858 (2.24%). A couple of the “alt-Right” wastes of space also stood, notably “Sargon of Akkad” (Carl Benjamin), who stood in the South West England EU constituency for “dead-parrot party” UKIP, whose group (Benjamin was one of 6) received 53,739 out of a possible 1,676,173 (3.24%).
Tommy Robinson and the “Alt-Right”— dependence on Internet platforms
An important point is that both Tommy Robinson and the “alt-Right” vloggers are highly-dependent on the Internet, and particularly social media. Those are the platforms they use in order to get views out to the public, as well as to receive donations, subscriptions etc. These are the platforms which are now being removed by the System (notionally by the platform-owning companies themselves, but this has all been co-ordinated behind the scenes, mainly by the Jewish lobby that the “alt-Right” and Robinson claim to support…).
Tommy Robinson and the “alt-Right” vloggers are not alone in now having their online platforms removed. The persecuted singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz has already been barred from Twitter and YouTube, many others including ex-BNP leader Nick Griffin have gone from some platforms (though so far Griffin is still on Twitter) and I was expelled from Twitter after a co-ordinated Jew-Zionist campaign in 2018 (and am not on Facebook; neither do I have a YouTube channel).
Many others have also had video and payment platforms removed arbitrarily (usually via a fig-leaf of “you are in breach of our rules” nonsense). The Jew-Zionists are behind most of this repression of free speech.
One such is the vlogger “Millennial Woes” (Colin Robertson). Removed from YouTube though still occasionally on Twitter (not posting much and presumably only keeping an account for use as as a private message facility).
There is a general move online to restrict and, in slow stages (thus deflating resistance) to remove, in particular, nationalist or social national people and organizations from the major platforms. That applies also to the “Alt-Right” and its offshoot known as the “Alt-Lite”. In fact, it goes further than that. We have seen how the social media platform GAB was almost taken down by a concerted campaign by Jews and “antifa” terrorists acting in concert with System forces. That almost worked, but GAB managed to survive by switching providers etc. The System has not given up, however…See:
There are now other “free speech” fora emerging, such as “Free Speech Extremist”[https://freespeechextremist.com/main/all] but these have few users compared to Twitter, Facebook etc.
As far as Twitter is concerned, in the UK the Jewish-Zionist element, the mindless “antifa” element, and the politically-correct perpetually-offended element, which all love to “report” and denounce anyone social-national or even mildly nationalistic, have managed to reduce an interesting online platform to a boring and predictable echo-chamber. I certainly do not miss my own Twitter account, though it may be that my followers (3,000 at last count) are impoverished by not having sight of my tweets.
“Freedom” online has been diminished by, primarily, the Jewish-Zionist element. I imagine that many of my readers on WordPress will know of my own experiences in this regard:
The thing here is not just that there is a Jewish lobby, or a Zionist lobby, that tries to shut down free speech (as we now see “them” once again trying to do within the UK Labour Party), but the fact that there is a huge amount of collusion between that lobby and those who might protect freedom of expression but, increasingly, do not: the police, most journalists, professional bodies generally, the Press, the msm generally.
As I write this, there is a backlash from the Press because Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Neil Basu (half–Indian, half-Welsh, and the head of police “counter-terrorism”) warned the “free Press” not to publish leaked documents that might embarrass the government. He has been put back in his box for that, but only in respect of the Press. The general crackdown on freedom by, or with the collusion of, the police continues. In fact Basu, in the police vernacular, “has form” here. He has interfered with free speech issues on previous occasions:
Looking at his background and known history, he has no reason to be kind or even objective as far as British social nationalism is concerned. He is not alone, in any case. The police are now ceasing to be protectors of the British people and are looking more and more like their zookeepers.
Free speech and its ever-more restricted limits
In fact, we hear more and more in the msm about how “legal free speech” could and should be shut down in order to more easily police and/or pacify the crazed multikulti society being created by the forces of evil in the UK. Or as the conspiracy puts it, the “necessity” to “prevent” “legal extremism” which does not reach as far as anything prosecutable (even as far as the cobbled-together recent prosecutions of young persons engaged in political activism: juries are beginning to reject the State’s attempts to crucify young social-national activists, I note). I blogged about this a year or so ago:
In the UK, though the “antifa” idiots have made a number of violent attacks here and there, they are no doubt well-infiltrated by the State monitoring organs and have not attained the level seen in Germany, the USA etc.
However, there are some in the UK who hide behind the false label of “journalist” or “historian” and who use online accounts to incite violence by “antifa” idiots (while themselves hiding away). One such is failed supply teacher (he was sacked some years ago from his last teaching position) Mike Stuchbery, an Australian with mental illness problems (about which he tweets in order to get sympathy), and who is a notorious beggar and grifter, always asking for money from those who read his material. Below, one of his more notorious tweets (despite which Twitter has not expelled him. Ah, I see…he did not say anything about Jews. Of course…)
Mike: I’m not extreme violent left wing antifa communist who from bio loves everyone and hates no one
Stuchbery retweeted the tweet(s) below only an hour before I wrote these words.
They actually don’t care how history remembers them. What they care about is what will happen to them personally in the immediate future. Remind them. https://t.co/0JuF7SI3Of
(for “anti-intellectuals” in those Jews’ tweets, read perhaps “those with whom I disagree” or “those with another view to me and my Jewish antifa friends”).
As seen above, Stuchbery loves to imagine those with whom he disagrees having their skulls broken in, or otherwise killed or injured. It was a different matter, however, when he set up Tommy Robinson’s wife and children for a kind of pseudo-legal “home invasion” (which failed, in the event). Robinson later turned up at Stuchbery’sown Luton-area house, at which confrontation Stuchbery had a meltdown. The “brave” keyboard warrior and “antifa” propagandist was suddenly again just an Australian ex-schoolteacher on the scrapheap, a begging grifter and fake “historian-journalist” with mental problems, blubbing because he cannot control the situation that he himself has created.
In fact, I have discovered that almost all the Jewish/Zionist, “antifa” and other nuisances on Twitter who have obsessively denounced me (and others) have mental health problems and are on medication for them, but I shall blog about them separately. Something for them to look forward to.
In parts of the USA, this “antifa” nonsense has reached levels not seen even in Germany or France. See below.
Like something out of the state of Gilead in The Handmaid’s Tale.
In relation to this, it was disturbing to many to see pro-Israel tool Sajid Javid MP, an ex-Muslim (in effect), not only appearing (as Home Secretary) at Scotland Yard and apparently being on good terms with fake charity “Campaign Against Antisemitism” members such as Stephen Silverman of South Essex (exposed in open court as a serial troll and harasser of several women) but even expressing support for “antifa”! Sajid Javid might not be the brightest tool in the box but that really was hard to believe!
When the Home Secretary of the UK openly supports violent sub-terrorists, when the police or elected officials in the UK and USA collude with Jewish manipulators and/or violent extremists of various other kinds (cf. the recent “Extinction Rebellion” demonstrations in London), “democracy” as we know it is on the way out.
So Scotland yard's new Commander is Basit Javid, who conveniently happens to be the brother of none other than Sajid Javid who as Home Secretary is in control of Scotland Yard. See how this works yet? https://t.co/GWN1Z2ZtLM
— CK #SearchingForTheTruth (@ck1984ishere) June 7, 2019
In tone, the Sun’s “report” is not unalike to the hysterical condemnations seen in the Soviet newspapers at the time of, say, the purges of 1937, the Yezhovshchina.
As for the “democracy” expressed in our system of parties and elections, it has failed. The boundaries of constituencies are rigged to create a faked “balance” between two or three similar parties, as shown below:
Then there is the selection process for candidates (PPCs). Anyone in the slightest social-national is excluded from all three “main parties”, i.e, System parties.
The House of Commons has become the home of, mostly, the very mediocre, often the uneducated, uncultured and stupid. One only has to look at the last few leadership elections of the two main System parties (the LibDems are even less impressive, though that may be hard to believe).
Take Labour: Corbyn is himself not very inspiring or impressive: poorly-educated, effectively a school dropout and, later a dropout from a polytechnic, who has very little real employment or work history, a poor grasp of history and whose wives claim that he never reads a book. Telling. Leaders are readers:
[above, Hitler reads on the terrace of the Berghof]
[immediately above, the library of Vidkun Quisling]
[some people have a bookworm, others have a book-cat…]
[above, parts of the library I once had]
Having said the above about Corbyn, look at those who tried to seize his crown! Chuka Umunna (I, admittedly rudely but oh! how truthfully!, call him Fathead Chuka), Liz Kendall (thick as two short planks and quite likely part-Jew), Andy Burnham (I suppose the best of an appallingly-poor group opposing Corbyn), Yvette Cooper (would-be dictator, hypocrite, freeloader and expenses cheat)…Later, Owen Smith MP, a little Welsh windbag, also tried to topple Corbyn and, like the previous rebels, failed.
Would any of the above-named really have had more electoral success than Corbyn? I doubt it.
Labour is now the party of the “blacks and browns”, the public service workers, and those dependent on State benefits.
Then we have the misnamed “Conservatives”. In 2015, the leadership contest to replace David Cameron (Cameron-Levita-Schlumberger) contained:
Theresa May (a hopeless Home Secretary, previously a local councillor and back-room person at the BACS cheque-clearing body; possible part-Jew);
Stephen Crabb, exposed as a serial sex-pest (and ineffective even at that) as well as so pro-Israel that he could well be termed “an agent of influence”; very poor employment record before getting into the MP racket; expenses cheat; in fact, Crabb is a complete deadhead and will probably find a place in my blog category “Deadhead MPs”;
Liam Fox: unreliable, dishonest, expenses cheat, very pro-Israel, with many links to Israel and covert US centres; considered to have generally “dodgy” lifestyle (see Notes, below);
Michael Gove: expenses cheat, pro-Israel extremist, unreliable, dishonest (and in 2019 revealed as having been a frequent cocaine abuser when he was a pro-Zionist Times scribbler prior to latching on to the MP racket);
Andrea Leadsom: nonentity.
What a useless, mostly dishonest and mostly (in fact, all) pro-Israel pack!
Then we have the 2019 Conservative leadership contest, about which I have blogged extensively already, and which, at time of writing, looks certain to be won by Boris Johnson over Jeremy Hunt. I have also blogged re. Johnson, and if I say that I think of him as Boris-Idiot, my view will be clear enough…(though I do favour leaving the EU).
We have seen, particularly in the past decade, institutions which were basically meant to be “non-political”, politicized: Civil Service, police, armed forces, the courts, the Bar (as witness my own unjustified disbarment). Below, the Financial Times agonizes about the “Conservative” approach to the Diplomatic Service, Parliament and the British Constitution.
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) April 4, 2019
Somehow, I cannot recall “The Secret Barrister” (((The Secret Barrister?))) or any one of “his friends and his relations” (with apologies to Gilbert and Sullivan’s Trial by Jury; in fact, I have no idea of the identity of The Secret Barrister or his connections) at the Bar standing up for my rights, freedoms and civil liberties when I was wrongfully disbarred at the instigation of a pack of manipulative Jews, but “that’s life” (and what goes around comes around…eventually):
Still, his tweet gives an idea of what has happened to the justice system, at least the courts, in outline. There is also the crisis in the underfunded, undermanned, badly-run prisons, and the collapse of the Chris Grayling-idiot privatized probation service(s).
“They” are interfering with the justice system, of course, and even with how judges and magistrates are trained to handle supposed “anti-Semitism”:
Citing CAA research, Judicial College adds International Definition of Antisemitism and section on use of ‘Zionist’ as a slur to its handbook for the @JudiciaryUKhttps://t.co/qBkFwgmhlA
As we have seen (see above), the UK police (certainly some areas or parts of the police) are well-infiltrated now, and politicized to a degree never seen before:
Thank you to our friends at the @JewishPoliceAs for hosting us at their annual #Chanukah party at New Scotland Yard, where we discussed concerns over antisemitism and the Chanukah message of hope and resilience with @MetPoliceUK Commissioner Cressida Dick pic.twitter.com/VoT7hx1DK0
— Campaign Against Antisemitism (@antisemitism) December 7, 2018
[above, Gideon Falter of the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” group and fake charity, with Commissioner of Metropolitan Police, Cressida Dick…]
What about the people?
The British people as a whole have been, in the now much-used phrase, “left behind”, and in fact ignored, as well as being repressed, bullied, lectured to. Whether it is the exploitation of the people as employees or private renters, by speculators, whether it is the epidemic of (mainly) Muslim rape conspiracies, or the dishonouring of the votes of the BRITISH majority who voted Leave/Brexit in 2016 (and if you took away all the non-white votes and those of Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and Gibraltar, the Leave vote would have been at least 70%…and if you took away the cosmopolitan exclave that is contemporary London, Leave would probably have won 80%), whether it is the banning of free speech (by which I mean free speech on matters of history, society and politics), the real people of the UK are being ignored, the needs unmet, their wishes for a better life laughed at.
The Labour Party is the party of the blacks and browns and other (non-Jewish) ethnic minorities, as well as of the entrenched public service employees. It cannot help the British people.
[above, Diane Abbott MP, lampooned during her attempt to become Mayor of London in 2015. She came third, netting 16.8%, in the selection process to be Labour candidate. If Labour form the next government, she will probably be Home Secretary. Have we fallen down the rabbit-hole?]
[above, Emily Thornberry MP, Labour Shadow Cabinet member, at a Zionist dinner in London, photographed with the Israeli Ambassador. formerly a major Israeli government spokesperson, Mark Regev (centre); her husband, a High Court judge, is half-Jewish]
What about the “Conservatives”? The name is every bit as much a bad joke as “Labour”.
[above, Sajid Javid tries to use his brain]
The cartoon, below, from the George Osborne days of 2010-2015, puts the position succinctly
There is every prospect now that a Boris Johnson (“Boris-Idiot”) “Conservative”-label government will plunge the UK into crisis. I am not talking about Brexit alone (which I supported and still support, but it has been criminally mishandled) but about the sheer ineptitude not only of Boris Johnson himself (bad enough) but of those likely to be made Cabinet ministers around him, deadheads like Matt Hancock (a mediocre suited thug), Priti Patel (a proven Israeli agent as well as being as thick as two short planks), Liz Truss (who basically only became an MP on her back), Chris Grayling (a sociopath who has failed in every single government job he has been given) etc.
There is a real and pressing need now for a proper social-national party and organization in the UK. Anything is possible within the next 10 years.
Soon, sooner than many imagine, those of us still alive will be called upon to re-establish European civilization and culture. That may be hard and may be harsh, but it must be done. God mote it be!
The enemy know that the blacks and browns are breeding fast and will soon make “election politics” a waste of time for social-national parties. Look at the tweet below and its photos. Four young London-resident voters…and three out of four non-European, with the fourth possibly partly-European, maybe something such as Cypriot.
and look at these tweets below, look at the crowd registering to vote in South London! Not a white face anywhere (yes, in the cartoon there are a few whites, but not in the real crowd photographed…).
Some of yesterday's highlights from our voter registration drive at Trinity Baptist Church, South London. 😃
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.
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]
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!
“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.
just type in alison chabloz on bitchute, or vimeo and you'll find most of her work (i hope) and if not i have the songs on my computer and can send them your way
— The Caucasian Sensation (@thecaucasianse1) June 13, 2019
Alison Chabloz did nothing wrong, she just sang satirical songs about the Holocaust, so what? The real problem here is well funded Zionist lobbies are being used by israel to shut down free speech in order to hide Zionist deception and crimes from public attention.
After the prosecution of Alison Chabloz on criminalising forms of "hate speech" including Holocaust denial. Watching her audience share increase because of the prosecution changed my thinking.
Alison Chabloz wasn't convicted for holocaust denial, she was convicted for using holocaust denial in what certain powers deemed as a grossly offensive manner. i.e for taking the piss. This conviction was very very wrong
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):
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…)
Jo Brand's joke about battery acid was on a comedy show. Cue calls for a police investigation & manufactured outrage on an industrial scale. This clown talks about death warrants to a member of the public, in public. Cue silence. 'Double standards' doesn't really cover it. https://t.co/ivH19ci3Gr
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.
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.
[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!
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”?
Holocaust denier and antisemite Alison Chabloz served prison time but continues to incite others on Gab and continues to make false allegations. https://t.co/mQzji08UK0
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:
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
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
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:
Yes, it’s happened AGAIN- the now-legendary misogynistic trope of questioning women’s PhDs on twitter! I even spoke about it at #MatchFest19– but STILL they come! Thanks for being our 5,476th player, Richard. https://t.co/tW2OSmwdvE
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:
Alison Chabloz’s songs claim the holocaust was fake. She was given a suspended sentence for broadcasting them. She just tried to visit France, where they’re not fans of Holocaust denial. They’ve kicked her out & banned her for 40 YEARS. Tres bien 👍🏻
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…
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.
Oof, they tend to take Holocaust denial very seriously across the Channel. Holocaust denier and thoroughly awful sort Alison Chabloz has been excluded from France until *2059*.
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:
5/ Chabloz need to be challenged and mocked. Until hate speech laws are repealed, Chabloz will have to celebrate the restrictions imposed upon her – as she championed restricting others. I witnessed Chabloz viciously target women on Twitter. My sympathy is entirely with them.
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.
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 Party. Ofcom 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.
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.
She was prosecuted and eventually convicted, though is appealing her conviction and sentence; see
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
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:
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?
“I am suspicious of outrage, because I think, ‘are you really outraged? Are you really stomping about in your house furious, or are you just wanting to be heard on social media?’” – Comedian David @Baddiel on the reaction to Jo Brand's battery acid joke.#newsnightpic.twitter.com/SpT7IGJsAw
…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.
It's obvious to me that Jo Brand would never actually throw battery acid on anyone. It's even more obvious that she would never waste any of her fucking milkshake.
Yet another System-subsidized “humorist” (apparently— I’ve never heard of the idiot) below:
"Can you imagine the reaction if I had said the same thing as Jo Brand?" says Nigel Farage, a non-comedian who has non-jokingly endorsed the use of rifles in front of non-joking crowds in non-joking rooms full of non-joking people who non-jokingly defend rape jokes.
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…
Talk about over-reaction! Jo Brand is a big-hearted & brilliant person – and her joke was OBVIOUSLY a joke. (I heard it at the time.) https://t.co/DdmsSTr1k0
…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…
No. Jo Brand is a decent and funny woman. She miscued with the way she expressed herself and has apologised. She was not trying to advocate violence just as Danny Baker had no racist intention. Try not being so priggish. We all make mistakes and pay the price. https://t.co/vDl1XPA0NF
[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!
I'm honestly really enjoying all the hypocrisy coming from people who came after me but are defending Jo Brand.
"Jo is a comedian and free speech in comedy is important"
"What about Dankula?"
"Well you see that's different because *verbal diarrhea*"
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:
I don’t mind what Jo Brand said. I do mind that the double standard is: Leftwing makes nasty remark: oh, free speech, no one cares Rightwing does same: Hate speech! Sinister! Fascist! Get them sacked. https://t.co/aoPK8m278p
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…
Here is the moment Jo Brand mocked Carl Benjamin for making an offensive joke promoting a police investigation. "I think it shocking that politics has been reduced to vile personal attacks" she added. pic.twitter.com/0E9xthuvjc
I just think #jobrand and others who inhabit these right-on patronising middle class circles and say things just to get cheap laughs from their metropolitan elite pals, should think about what they are saying and maybe realise ‘it’s not all about them’https://t.co/mYQgwePD0h
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!
Jokes aside that ugly leftist cunt #JoBrand did incite hatred against Farage and his party. Mind you, the whole #BBC network incites hatred daily against whites, conservatives, followers of 3 major faiths, normality, sanity and common sense. Disgusting cesspit of far-left filth.
— Alexander Nekrassov (@StirringTrouble) June 13, 2019
Nekrassov with another point which applies not only to Jo Brand but a hundred or more others:
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?
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…)
[Update, 4 November 2021: Looks as though the BBC had O’Brien delete his tweet. No surprise there; I would only be surprised had O’Brien the courage of his convictions].
…and now look at who’s looking for trouble!
Tim so you are clear. I would pour whatever I can get my hands on, on an avowed White Supremacist. My ancestors died fighting this shit. I don’t give two bloody hoots what your apologist arse thinks about it. (that’s me being polite) You lay down with dogs you get fleas. https://t.co/njmNNmzq8p
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, and at a very low level, doing the simplest criminal cases).
When did his “ancestors” “die fighting”? In African tribal wars, or attacking the police at the 1980s 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.
One has to question whether a society like that of 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, and when those guilty have mostly so far got away without having been taken down.
Cowardly #JoBrand moves from encouraging people to post shit through letterboxes to #acidattacks – literally & legally terrorism, but don't expect PC Plod to lift a finger. If it makes you angry, stop paying the #BBC licence fee!https://t.co/7ANhESvxee
Never say never: cretinous “diversity hire” David Lammy is now Foreign Secretary! What an insult to the white people who built this country! He is a total idiot, and totally ignorant. Just a puppet on a stick, marked “diversity”.
I interrupt other blog writing to address an immediate issue. The activist known as Tommy Robinson has now been banned from Facebook, he having already been barred from Twitter. That news highlights again something that I have been writing about, blogging about, speaking about (at the London Forum in 2017) and tweeting about —before I myself was banned or rather expelled from Twitter in 2018— for years, the privatization of public space.
In past ages and, indeed, until about 20 years ago, public space was literally that: the agora of ancient Athens, the forum of ancient Rome, the barricades of revolutionary France, the brief outbursts of free speech in the Russia of 1917 or the early 1990s, and Speakers’ Corner by Hyde Park in London, where a youthful Millard (aged about 21) spoke to fickle crowds a few times in the late 1970s.
Today, the traditional fora of free speech, eg in the UK, are very restricted. Jez Turner (Jeremy Bedford-Turner) made a speech in Whitehall in 2015. He mentioned Jews a few times. That alone was enough (triggered by the malicious Jewish Zionists who denounced him, the supine police who are now so often in the Zionist pocket, the wet CPS who are not sufficiently resistant to the Zionists’ endless whining demands, a Zionist-controlled System-political milieu, and a Bar and judiciary which are frightened of their own shadows and even more of those of the Zionists) to have Jez Turner imprisoned for a year. He served 6 months and was only recently released to live for months more under considerable restriction.
The “public space” which is now most significant is online space. Twitter, Facebook, blogging platforms etc.
I myself was expelled from Twitter last year. I had been the target of both the Jew-Zionists and mindless “antifa” (aka “useful idiots” for Zionism) for about 8 years. I have also had my freedom of expression taken away in other ways, as well as having been interrogated by the police (again at the instigation of malicious Jew-Zionists) for having posted entirely lawful comments on Twitter. I was also disbarred, quite wrongly, for similar reasons.
Alison Chabloz was persecuted, prosecuted and convicted for singing satirical songs in the manner of 1920s Berlin. She is appealing her conviction and the result of her first-stage appeal. She has also been expelled from Twitter (as well as being made subject to a court ban from social media, which bars her from posting until mid-2019).
If Twitter or Facebook ban you, you may have some limited right of appeal, if they so choose to extend it to you. You have no legal right to stay on Twitter or Facebook despite the fact that, in real terms, they are near-monopolies. Yes, I am now on GAB, but GAB has only 500,000 users, if that, whereas Twitter has perhaps 500 million! The fact that, as I believe, Twitter is largely a waste of time, is beside the point.
The point is that, beyond your very limited contractual or other rights qua customer, you have no rights in respect of Twitter or Facebook (etc). Qua citizen, you have no rights at all. You have no right to post, and if the owners or executives of those companies decide to bump you off, off you go, whether you have 50 followers, 3,000 (as I did) or a million.
The Blair law of 1998 [nb: 1998 = 666 x 3…], requiring political parties in the UK to be registered, all but killed any semblance of real political-party democracy in the UK. Now, free speech both online and offline is being, on the one hand, criminalized or subjected to other State repression (at the instigation of the Jewish-Zionist lobby), and on the other hand choked off at source, by companies (under Zionist control or influence) barring dissidents or known activists from even posting dissenting or radical views online.
As to Tommy Robinson, I am not personally one of his supporters, and I deplore his attempt to play the sycophant for Israel and Zionism, but he has some views which are valid, in my opinion.
In any case, freedom of expression is indivisible. It is facile to make arbitrary distinction between some free speech, calling it “hate speech” and so unacceptable, and other speech which is labelled “acceptable” (politically approved) speech. That is mainly hypocrisy. Even my own relatively mild postings are and always have been targeted by the enemies of freedom, of which the Zionists are the worst.
So we have, not only in England but elsewhere (eg in France, under Rothschilds cipher Macron) the same repressive tendency. Sajid Javid, Amber Rudd, Theresa May, others, are enemies of the British people and enemies of freedom of expression. They seem to want to ban all political activity and all political or socio-political expression which does not support the existing System. It is immaterial whether you call it that or “ZOG”.
The System in the UK, in France seems to think that it can slowly turn the screw on repression, controlling the political parties (or setting up “controlled” new ones, as with Macron in France and, perhaps, the “Independent Group” in the UK), preventing free speech by putting the fix into Twitter, Facebook etc, only having controlled news on or in the msm (controlled mass media outlets).
The Soviet Union tried a less subtle form of all that, and it still collapsed in the end. What the System politicians, msm faces and voices etc, fail to see is that a head of steam is building up in the UK (and France) and, if bottled up by the State and those behind the curtain, will eventually explode.
Another example, taken almost at random from Twitter:
As well as censoring our content over the past few weeks, Twitter have now deleted all the people we were following, which in turn means we have lost a ton of followers
Please RT and follow if you’re still right behind us – we have no idea why Twitter is doing this pic.twitter.com/opwxMMr6fX
Another example. A typical pseudonymous Jew-Zionist tweeter (troll), below, exults that a very prominent pro-Corbyn Twitter account, “Rachael Swindon”, has been “suspended” (probably, like me, expelled):
In fact, Rachael Swindon has been reinstated, though only after Twitter’s vice-President for Europe intervened. Why should such people control the online public space? Again, why should the police barge in with large boots and interfere with free speech when no threats are involved? It’s all wrong.
The pro-Jewish lobby freeloader and careerist Tom Watson MP, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Watson_(Labour_politician) who has wormed his way to becoming Deputy Leader of the Labour Party (with his eyes on Corbyn’s purple day and night), has attacked Tommy Robinson in the House of Commons and asked YouTube to take down Tommy Robinson’s YouTube channel, which is his last online platform of any importance.
The excuse for Watson’s actions and statement has been the apparent fact that Robinson came to the house of one Mike Stuchbery, a failed (and sacked) supply teacher who poses as both “historian” and “journalist” online, and whose main activity seems to be online advocacy of opposition (including violence, though he usually uses weasel words) to any form of British or other European nationalism. Tommy Robinson has exposed the apparent fact that Stuchbery colluded with others to visit Robinson’s wife or ex-wife at her home. Robinson’s response seems to have been to do something similar to Stuchbery. Tom Watson, in his Commons statement, referred to Stuchbery as “journalist”, based presumably on Stuchbery’s politically-tendentious scribbles for HuffPost and other, smaller, online outlets.
In the end, if someone is prevented from making socio-political expression, that person can either subside into silence, or take other action. That other action might be peaceful, it might not be. When the repressed individual is a public figure with many thousands of supporters, those supporters may also take other action. That might include, potentially, and in the French term, “action directe” somewhere down the line.
Those (of various types: Jew Zionists, the politically correct, “antifa idiots etc) in our society, who crow at shutting down the freedom of others to make socio-political expression should, in the well-worn (Chinese?) phrase “be careful what they wish for”. The Spanish also have a phrase, a proverb in fact: “Do what you will, and pay for it.” Repression of views, not “allowing” people a public platform (and anyway, who is, for example, a blot like Tom Watson to decide who should or should not be allowed to speak?) can only lead to upheaval in the end.
It will be interesting to observe the UK political scene in the coming months and years.
A few tweets seen
A tweet with a few examples of the frequent passive but malicious incitement of violence against white people by “antifa” bastard Mike Stuchbery of Luton:
@MikeStuchbery_ is the coward who Doxxed #TommyRobinson's wife and children accompanied by the Media and a Crackhead. He is a Far Left Antifa Thug who needs exposing to the Whole country.
Below: self-described (fake) “journalist” and “historian” (failed supply teacher and house-husband) Mike Stuchbery inciting serious political violence but trying to deny it…
Below: fake “historian” and “journalist” Mike Stuchbery threatens minor Northern Ireland politico David Vance with a lawsuit. Does he have any idea how much a defamation action (for example) costs? He must have got the idea of constantly threatening to “sue” from the Jewish Zionists and their useful idiots on Twitter, who are always threatening legal action, and who often invoke the “sainted” name of Israel-based “Mark Lewis Lawyer” in this regard. In reality, Lewis is a wheelchair-bound blowhard fake, recently fined by a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal for his behaviour. At the Tribunal, he admitted that he often had no idea what he was doing because of his intake of prescription drugs. Oh…and Lewis’s own Counsel said that “he has no assets” and that “his sole possessions are his clothes and a mobility scooter”! See:https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/?s=mark+lewis
This individual has been proven to be an unhinged, hate-filled extremist, who has whipped-up his followers to engage in violent acts. this pathetic weasel should be charged with incitement to commit a hate crime on this evidence – pic.twitter.com/Ec2Yr9AAMM
Something called “Press Gazette” also refers to grifter Stuchbery as a “journalist” (does he have an NUJ card? I suppose that, these days, any wannabee can scribble for peanuts or for free in the HuffPost, silly little online “news” agencies, or for the (now often semi-literate) online msm “newspapers”, and then to call himself “journalist”…and in Stuchbery’s case, “historian”, too!…)
The more serious point here is that “Culture Secretary” Jeremy Wright MP thinks that he is entitled to ask YouTube to take down Tommy Robinson’s videos, Tom Watson MP having already demanded the same. Freedom? Free speech? Free country? Hardy ha ha…
Update, 11 March 2019
and still the tweets keep coming…
You are my favourite tweet thus far. Mike is just an observer? Excuse me for hooting with laughter. Mike is an extremist. It’s documented all over Twitter. He earns a living from incitement not observation. Yet he refuses to take ownership of the effect he has on others.
and Stuchbery has hit back with the piece below, posted on yet another of the plethora of new “news and comment” websites that pose as quasi-newspapers, in this case calling itself the Byline Times
Stuchbery (and many others on Twitter etc) really should refrain from using legal terms wrongly or pointlessly, eg, in that piece averring that Tommy Robinson defamed him. Well, that may or may not be the case, in the lay sense, but any actionable defamation requires publication. I have no idea whether in this case, Robinson published (meaning said or wrote to third parties) any of the allegedly defamatory material via video streaming etc. It seems not. Then there are all the other factors, such as the defences, one of which is that the statements, even if defamatory on their face, are true…
In any case, it costs vast amounts to sue for defamation, though in some open and shut cases it may be possible to find “no win, no fee” lawyers (in the old American parlance, “ambulance-chasers”) willing to take it on, with the help of specialized legal “insurance” (which in my view comes close to champerty, in the old Common Law sense)
…and here we see some supposed “comedian” (comedienne? Never heard of her), by name Janey Godley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janey_Godley , saying that those exposing Stuchbery are “a danger to free speech”:
In fact, I also must have missed seeing any support from Janey Godley for Jez Turner, imprisoned for making, in Whitehall, a humorous speech mentioning Jews and their history in England; neither did I notice the aforesaid Janey Godley (I had never heard of her in any regard until today) tweet anything in support of satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz, persecuted by Jewish Zionists, then privately prosecuted by them before being prosecuted by the CPS (under pressure to take over the matter…) and then convicted, in effect, of singing songs.
An example, below, of the muddled thinking of many on Twitter and elsewhere: this idiot, calling himself/herself “66ALW88” (what?) thinks that the way to preserve free speech online is for the online platform companies to “crack down” on, er, free speech online…
Below, a tweet not at all significant in itself (there are literally thousands of unthinking, purselipped nobodies like this Irish “academic”, one Fergal Lenehan, around, all waiting for the chance to denounce people, to “report” to Twitter, Facebook or police, or wanting to ban the free speech of others not signed-up to the System/ZOG mental straitjacket). It is the trend, the existence of a large bloc of such nasty idiots that is of importance.
and here (below) is a well-funded basically Jew-Zionist organization which admits that it wants, inter alia, to stop the historian David Irving from conducting lecture tours. I think the reverse: that those who oppose freedom of speech on political, social and historical topics should themselves be stopped…
The fact that Irving has done this before does not mean that we should allow him to do it again. We have plenty of advance notice to prevent it this time.
Let’s try & stop this grotesque event from happening ever again.
— Anti-Fascism & Far Right 🥤 (@FFRAFAction) March 17, 2019
Update, 18 March 2019
Now the cowardly and mentally-disturbed grifter, Stuchbery, continues to try to claim the moral high ground, which is laughable (and note the support from a political cretin, “Leftwing Revolt”, in the thread below, who is a member or supporter of “Resisting Hate” and sees nothing wrong with someone he might disagree with being attacked with an axe! Resisting hate? You could not make it up…). I might not “support” Tommy Robinson, but I prefer him a hundred times over to Stuchbery and the “useful idiots” of “antifa”!
and (below), another little shit like Stuchbery, this time a New Zealander, who positively welcomes censorship and repression (and he is, wait for it…a “writer/director” of film and theater”!). One of the weird aspects of the present time is that those most eager to see censorship and ideological repression are “creative industries” drones, writers, film and TV people etc, and journalists.
and he retweets, approvingly, this (below) announcement of New Zealand governmental censorship. I personally have no wish to see footage of the recent New Zealand massacre, but that should be my choice, not the New Zealand (ZOG) government’s.
Chief Censor David Shanks has officially classified the full 17 minute video of the fatal Christchurch shootings as objectionable.
It is illegal for anyone in New Zealand to view, possess or distribute this material in any form, including via social media platforms.
and…again: the same little shit, one Andrew Todd, does not want the accused to be allowed to defend himself in case he says something the New Zealand government (ZOG) does not want people to hear…
Not everyone on Twitter agrees with the idea of censoring views and people being found guilty as soon as they are accused, however:
So you believe in a system where your proven guilty before your convicted by a judge and group of your piers. Let me give examples of places this has happened: Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela, and Uganda during the rule Idi Amin.
Here’s another one, below, a New Zealand journalist positively gagging for censorship (I had no idea that NZ was so ZOG-occupied):
FYI, more useful detail on how the big tech companies are failing to weed out hate speech videos and how they missed out on white supremacist videos https://t.co/lYdO10D2Nr
and yet another virtue-signalling “journalist” who is, it seems, an enemy of both freedom of expression and of the future of the European peoples…
I spent a good part of 2 years reporting on ISIS internet and how the group uses social media — in 2019 it's mind-boggling to me how well the coordinated cross-platform effort to remove them from the internet worked and how there hasn't been a similar one for white supremacists.
The grifter actually makes a joke out of his begging and scavenging!
It's been a challenging – and expensive(!) – couple of weeks, so if you enjoy the written pieces, the history threads, or whatever, you can always make a small tip through my Ko-Fi… https://t.co/Xd2iEmxucQpic.twitter.com/OJ7UGuAzPr
Tommy Robinson has now been banned from Twitter (welcome to the club…) despite (because of?) his being a candidate in the European elections (North West England).
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” [John F. Kennedy]
Update, 5 June 20199
Another random example of how the quasi-monopolies of youtube, Twitter, Facebook etc have arrogated to themselves the right to censor and banish: [Update, 22 July 2022: the tweets etc noted have now been completely deleted]
Update, 18 June 2019
More…
A Dr Who writer @OldRoberts953 is expunged from a book by the BBC because he won’t conform to the latest transgender ideology. His views on transgenderism are probably shared by 90%+ of Brits but he’s now a Non-Person for the BBC. The net tightens around free speech. Please share https://t.co/G9fM2BK1e4
Grifter, “antifa” supporter, fake “journalist” and “historian” Mike Stuchbery is desperate to close down free speech for those with whom he disagrees politically. See his recent tweets, below. This is one of the worst enemies of freedom of expression in the UK.
YouTube shut down four major US white supremacist channels in the last 24 hours.
If they're serious about reversing the spread of radicalisation, here's four accounts in the UK they could shutter today… https://t.co/nNG4sk938a
The latest news is that some odd woman tied up with both “antifa” nonsense and Jew-Zionists has created a GoFundMe appeal on behalf of Stuchbery, supposedly so that he can sue the political activist known as Tommy Robinson.
I prefer not to comment on the proposed legal claim until I read more about the foundations for such claim. I presume that Stuchbery is doing this (the woman mentioned above may be raising funds for him but only Stuchbery himself can actually sue) because:
he knows or believes that Tommy Robinson has assets sufficient to satisfy any successful claim;
he has seen that others are already suing Tommy Robinson;
he thinks, perhaps, that a civil legal action will damage Tommy Robinson by starving him of funds;
if successful, Stuchbery will make a great deal more money than he gets at present via online begging or his part-time work in Stuttgart, where he now resides.
Were I the defendant, and leaving aside the potential substantive issues that might be in issue in the proposed case, I suppose that I should focus firstly on the fact that Stuchbery is
resident outside the strict jurisdiction (albeit still in the EU);
is a foreign national (as I understand, an Australian citizen);
has no real or other property in England and Wales;
has no means with which to satisfy any judgment on costs or in respect of any counterclaim or setoff that might be claimed by Tommy Robinson, should the Court decide against Stuchbery on one or more issues or otherwise.
I doubt that this claim will get off the ground. I certainly doubt that it will clear the probable first hurdle, as explained above, but we shall see. It appears, however, that plenty of mugs are donating to the said GoFundMe appeal at present.
Update, 25 November 2019
Stuchbery’s solicitors, Eve Solicitors (the firm is a limited company in fact, possibly in effect a one-man operation), are operating out of a rundown Victorian terrace in Bradford; several other small legal and other firms are operating nearby. The operation has only been in operation since 20 May 2019, at earliest:
The “firm” has only been at its present address since 28 September 2019, before which, i.e. from its incorporation in May until September 2019, it operated out of a tiny Victorian terraced house in a “Coronation Street” lookalike, Hudswell Street, Wakefield (Yorkshire).
The principal (and only named) solicitor is one Waseem Ahmed.
Where the name “Eve” came from, God knows. My only guess is “Adam and Eve”, as in the Cockney rhyming slang, “you wouldn’t Adam and Eve it!”
Only joking.
Having said that, when I was a practising barrister in London in the early-mid 1990s, I knew of Pakistani and other ethnic-minority solicitors (in London, in Luton and elsewhere) who used “English”-sounding names for their small firms. Some of them still owe me money! (Unpaid fees). I am sure that Stuchbery’s solicitor is not like that.
I looked earlier at the GoFundMe appeal set up to collect money for Stuchbery’s proposed legal claim against Tommy Robinson. So far, 262 mugs have donated a total (as of time and date of writing) of £5,209 to start the claim. I wonder whether they or others will donate the rest of the £15,000 asked for? Frankly, I doubt it, though the amount so far raised has been raised in only three days.
I doubt that the proposed lawsuit will either launch or get anywhere.
Further thoughts
The woman who is fundraising for Stuchbery, and who seems to have all day to tweet etc, has tweeted that “As many of you know, Mike Stuchbery is about to sue #TommyRobinson for harassment. He is backed by #ResistingHate and a full legal team.“
A “full legal team”? So that would be someone called Waseem Ahmed and…?
I do not say that “Eve Solicitors” (i.e. Mr. Ahmed) is a one-man-band (though it certainly seems to be), and I cannot say that there are no legal people offering advice etc from the sidelines (what used to be known at the Bar as “cocktail party advice”), but I do know, having been at one time a practising barrister who (in the 1990s) regularly appeared (weekly, at least) in the High Court, as well as in County Courts, and more occasionally other types of court and tribunal (both then and in the 2002-2008 period), that GoFundMe £20,000 will only serve to kick off such a case and claim, if I have understood its likely nature properly. Costs rapidly escalate.
Solicitors vary in their fees, barristers likewise. Simply to issue proceedings in a High Court action (which I suppose the proposed case would probably be) would be several hundred pounds as a minimum, and many thousands of pounds in some cases:
As a rule of thumb, a barrister will get anywhere from (as minimum) £500 a day on a small civil matter in the County Court, up to many thousands of pounds per day for almost any High Court matter, though there is no “limit” as such, and some barristers, eg the top commercial silks (QCs) will be on £10,000 a day or more. The spectrum is very wide.
As those who enjoyed Rumpole of the Bailey will know, a barrister usually gets a “brief fee” (to cover all preparation and the first day, if any, in court), then daily “refreshers”. How much are they? How long is a piece of string?
One of my own last few cases was a County Court commercial matter involving a large amount of cattle feed. Now that it is long ago since I last appeared in court (December 2007; this case was not long before that), I think that I can reveal, by way of illustration, that I was paid, that time, £5,000 as a brief fee and £1,000 a day for refreshers (in fact there were no refreshers, because the matter settled on the first day in court).
I have no real idea how much the case of Stuchbery v. Robinson might cost Stuchbery in legal fees if it is ever pursued to court, but my semi-educated guess (“semi” because I have not been involved with the Bar for over a decade) is that whoever presents it in court (unless doing it for free or on the cheap) will probably want a brief fee of perhaps £5,000 (at least) and (at minimum) £500 per day refreshers. Maybe £10,000 and £1,000 per day. It can be seen that, even at the lower estimate, a 2-week hearing (10 days in court, which this well might be) is going to cost £9,500 for Counsel’s fees alone.
Solicitors’ fees also vary widely. When I myself worked (overseas) for law firms (as an employed lawyer), the firms charged for my work at anything up to USD $500 (or about £400) an hour (I myself didn’t get that, sadly, the firms did); and that was over 20 years ago. I suppose that Stuchbery’s solicitors will not be very expensive, but will probably still charge maybe £50 an hour at absolute minimum. Solicitor case preparation might take hundreds of hours. 100 hours @ £50 p.h. = £5,000.
Then there are what solicitors term “disbursements”, i.e. the expenses of the case such as issue fees, witness expenses, whatever.
You can see how £20,000 can be quickly exhausted…
However, even if Stuchbery’s solicitors (solicitor?) can launch the proposed matter and fund a couple of weeks in court (and don’t forget that the solicitor, if in attendance, will also be charging for his time there), there is the matter of what happens if Stuchbery loses. No, that is not left to chance. The lawyers for the proposed defendant, Robinson, will in that event have to have their costs covered too. Even if they only come to the same level as Stuchbery’s (which I doubt), that puts Stuchbery (and possibly others who have funded the claim) £20,000+ in the hole. It could be a great deal more. Maybe even hundreds of thousands.
Stuchbery is an Australian citizen, maybe also a German one now (I do not know). He has no real property in the UK or, as far as I know, even in Germany, where he now lives. He has no, or no substantial, monies in the UK (or anywhere?). He does not have a substantial income or a full-time job.
On the above facts, and if Robinson applies in court for that, Stuchbery is almost certain to have to provide “security for costs”, i.e. [see above] monies “paid into court” (into a court-controlled account) to cover Robinson’s costs should Stuchbery lose his case. Likewise, on the above facts, that would almost certainly have to be the whole of Robinson’s likely outlay in defending the case. Certainly tens of thousands of pounds. Possibly over £100,000.
If Robinson applies for security for costs, if the court agrees with the application, but then Stuchbery cannot come up with whatever sum is demanded (I cannot think that it would be lower than £20,000; probably far far more), then the claim (the case) will be struck out, possibly with costs awarded to Robinson.
Stuchbery will probably have to raise £40,000+ even to start his case.
I think that my readers will understand better now why I think that Stuchbery has no chance of success regardless of the merits of his case (if any).
Presumably, Stuchbery does understand that, in a case like this, witnesses (he himself, Robinson, others) will have to give evidence, be cross-examined on that, all the while with Stuchbery staying in the UK, perhaps for weeks or even a month or more.
Many will have seen the newspaper reports, not all accurate, about the result of the Crown Court appeal from Westminster Magistrates’ Court, which ended today. Already the malicious “Campaign Against Antisemitism” supposed “charity” (Zionist propaganda, snooping and repression organization) has been spinning fake news. Gideon Falter, its Chairperson, has been quoted as saying that the verdict by a Crown Court judge in the appeal “sets a precedent” and means that “holocaust” “denial” (i.e. critical examination of the “holocaust” narrative) is now effectively illegal in the UK. That is of course nonsense.
Firstly, this was a decision by a Crown Court judge and so sets a precedent only in the most marginal sense.
Secondly, there will now almost certainly be a further appeal, on point of law, to the Divisional Court and, perhaps, yet higher. There are points of law in the Alison Chabloz case which are of general public importance and might even have to be considered by the Supreme Court in due course.
Thirdly, the learned judge [H.H. Judge Hehir] emphasized in his judgment that “anti-Semitism” is not a crime in the UK, and that “holocaust” “denial” is also not a crime:
“We emphasise that anti-Semitism is not a crime, just as Holocaust denial is not. Nor can the fact that somebody is a Holocaust denier or an anti-Semite prove that anything she writes or sings is grossly offensive”
Alison Chabloz is expected to appeal her conviction and sentence further, initially to the Divisional Court. The fight for freedom of expression goes on!
It is reported in the System “newspapers” that some people made an “effigy” of Grenfell Tower and then burned it as a Guy Fawkes Night stunt. In fact, this first of all shows how standards in journalism have fallen through the floor, because “effigy” means a model of a person, strictly speaking. Leaving that aside, this is another example of how the UK continues to sink into madness.
The alleged act may have been in poor taste, but only in a country gone mad could it be called crime! The UK police waste their resources on this? While serious real crime skyrockets! The UK is becoming like Stalin’s Russia, complete with me-too idiots.
In fact, if you read the reports, you see that neighbours and even family members of those arrested (and, yes –incredibly–, five people have actually been arrested over this nonsense) all feel obliged to distance themselves from the terrible crime (thought-crime?) committed; they all virtue-signal like mad. “Oh, no, guv’nor, I’m not like that!” or “I never had any idea that enemies of the people were living next door to me!” or “I’m afraid now that I know that bad people live near me” (etc…).
The msm reports show detectives at the house of these ordinary folk (who have now been exposed as “enemies of the people”), the detectives solemnly bagging-up evidence as if at the scene of murder or terrorism!
Meanwhile, in the real world outside the “fake news” newspaper offices, outside the Twittersphere and the milieu of the virtue-signallers, London has an epidemic of murder and knife crime, with hundreds stabbed or shot each year. In fact, the real situation is worse, because many killings which are really murder are reclassified as “manslaughter”. Large areas of the UK are becoming lawless zones, the police are not responding to emergency calls and many crimes not only go unpunished but uninvestigated and indeed all but unreported. Pakistani “grooming” and rape gangs are found everywhere in the UK, preying on white British children, Islamist terrorism is likewise widespread now.
The UK police nonetheless have the resources, it seems (and despite their constant whine about lacking such resources), to investigate comments made on Twitter (especially about Jews), to track down those posting cartoons mocking Jews, Muslims and others, and now to arrest persons who make the wrong sort of “effigy” on Guy Fawkes Night. Mad or what?
The ancients said that “those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.” Be afraid, be very afraid, Britain…
The Daily Telegraph report, in which it is revealed that this petty incident of “offence” is being investigated “fully” by “a team” of detectives headed by a Chief Superintendent, no less! If only Lewis Carroll were still alive!
(“Free speech” in the Britain of 2019! Note the robotic refusal of Humberside Police to apologize or even engage with the free speech argument, even now. Sinister is the right word for this.)
The trial of Paul Busetti in relation to the events described above has been set down for 29 July 2019 (estimated duration unknown, possibly longer than 1 day, at an educated guess).
Well, the farcical process of investigation, arrest, charge, prosecution and trial is over. I was right about the duration of trial: 2 days. The result? Acquittal before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Emma Arbuthnot.
The prosecution was a politically-motivated farce, but the laugh is at least partly on the taxpayers, because tens of thousands of pounds have been laid out by police, CPS and the MoJ in taking to trial someone who just made a joke (tasteless, yes, so be it).
Meanwhile, in similar news, the South Wales Police have reinforced their longstanding and well-deserved reputation for thick-as-two-short-planks woodentop-ery by actually arresting and locking up a man who simply flew a flag from his own house!
55 year old man arrested “on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence" after flying a swastika flag on the back of his house in Wales https://t.co/bPueK4tnGR
“A spokesperson for South Wales police stated, “we are aware of images circulating on social media of a flag with a swastika on it being displayed in Neath.”
“We would like to reassure you this flag has been removed and a 55-year-old local man has been arrested on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence.”
Well, “long live freedom”…(but not in South Wales, it seems…)
I hope that the accused fights this latest attempt to repress civil rights, an attempt made on behalf of the Jew-Zionist lobby. The police are now becoming actively hostile to the British people.
Update, 5 February 2020
“A man who displayed a large red flag with a swastika on the side of a house in Wales will not face charges, it has emerged. People living in Neath were said to be ‘absolutely disgusted’ by the flag on a property near the A474 flyover. One shocked passer-by had taken a picture of the flag and posted it on social media. A 55-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence. South Wales Police said a file of evidence was submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service who decided no further action should be taken against the man.” [Metro newspaper]
So the (London) Metro newspaper sees fit to insert nonsense about how locals were “absolutely disgusted” by the flying of the Swastika banner. I doubt that that is true. However, the nub of the report is at the end: no further action. So just more police time and money (and that of the innocent man arrested) wasted because the Jewish lobby will not shut up…
In the past, by which I mean as far back as you want to go, but particularly the 1920s, 1930s etc, the primary method of opposing a political movement or tendency was to do so directly. Political battles on the streets, electoral contests involving propaganda and shows of strength etc; books might be written, too. One thinks perhaps of Trotsky’s book Terrorism and Communism, largely apolemic against the social-democrat Karl Kautsky. That was then. Today, while elements of the former methods still exist, new ones have come to the fore. One of these, applied particularly to (deployed against) the nationalist wing of politics, is the fake party, fake movement, fake tendency (call it what you will).
Fake Movements: example
It may be that the modern “fake movement” tactic had its genesis in the repressions of the Russian Empire in the period before the First World War. The Tsarist secret police, the Okhrana, established agents as “dissident” voices, attracting to those agents genuine dissidents. Thus society had “safety valves” and could blow off steam safely, with no danger of serious damage to the overall society or the government’s hold on the people.
There were many examples. The famous Father Gapon became one such, though it seems that, like his even more famous predecessor, Judas Iscariot, he started off as an “honest dissident” or believer in social justice. Likewise, the assassin of Stolypin was another “double agent” or double player, being both a revolutionary and an agent of the Okhrana.
Fake Movements Today: UKIP and how it was used to beat down the BNP; the Alt-Right fakery now joins with UKIP to prevent the rise of any new and real social-national party…
It is of the essence of a “fake” movement that it starts off or seems to start off as a genuine manifestation of socio-political frustration. UKIP was like that. It started life as the Anti-Federalist League, the brainchild of a lecturer at the London School of Economics, Alan Sked, whose first attempt at electioneering led to a 0.2% vote (117 votes) at Bath in 1992. UKIP itself was created in 1993. At that stage, UKIP’s membership could be fitted into one or two taxis.
By 1997, UKIP was able to field 194 candidates, yet still only achieved 0.3% of the national vote, perhaps equivalent to 1% in each seat actually contested, the same result as had been achieved in the 1994 European elections. In those 1997 contests, the Referendum Party funded by Franco-Jewish financier James Goldsmith was its main rival (beating UKIP in 163 out of 165 seats). The BNP was another rival, on the more radical, social-national side. However, the votes of all three combined would have amounted to only a few percent in any given seat.
It is at this point that an early joiner, Nigel Farage, emerges as leader. Alan Sked left UKIP, fulminating about “racism” and Farage’s meetings with BNP members etc. Farage had been the only UKIP candidate to have saved his deposit in 1997 (getting 5% at Bath, Sked’s old test-bed). Goldsmith died; most of the Referendum Party joined UKIP. “Major donors” emerged too.
In the 1999 European elections, UKIP received 6.5% of the vote; not very impressive, but enough (under the proportional voting system in use) to win 3 seats in the EU Parliament. From that time on, UKIP slowly gathered strength. In the 2001 general election, it still only had 1.5% of the national vote, but 6 of its candidates retained their deposits.
On a personal note, I missed much of UKIP’s rise. I was living out of the UK for much of 1990-1993 (mostly in the USA), again in 1996-97 (in Kazakhstan) and after I left Kazakhstan again spent much time overseas (many places, from North Cyprus to the Caribbean, the USA, the Med, the Canaries and Egypt, among others). In any case, I was not much interested in UK politics at the time. I had lunch with a girl in a pub at Romsey in Hampshire in the Spring of 2000. She told me that most of her time was spent “working on behalf of something called UKIP. Have you heard of it?” Answer no. When it was explained to me, I have to admit that I thought, secretly, that something like that had no chance. I suppose that I was both right and wrong at once.
Now, at the time when UKIP was gaining strength, after 1999, the BNP under its new leader, Nick Griffin, was also gaining strength and –in Westminster elections– doing better overall than UKIP at first. In 2001, it got over 10% of the vote in 3 constituencies (16% in one). It is important to note here that the BNP was a genuine party, proven as such by the hatred it engendered in the “enemy” camp(s): Jewish Zionists, “antifascists” (many of whom are also Jews, though some are naive non-Jews), and the System (a wide term but certainly including existing MPs, the BBC, the journalistic swamp etc).
The anti-BNP forces were trying constantly to repeat their success in destroying the National Front in the 1970s. It lived on after the 70s, but as a shell. Internal factionalism was aided and abetted by skilled enemies. Akin to cracking marble in Carrara.
Whatever may be said of Nick Griffin (and I am neutral on the subject, though certainly more sympathetic than hostile), it cannot be denied that he gave the BNP its only chance of becoming a semi-mainstream party in the manner of the Front National in France. A strategic thinker, he managed to bring the BNP to the brink of success by 2009.
Within UKIP itself, there were social-national elements as well as what I would call conservative nationalists and others who were really Conservative Party types who, being anti-mass immigration, anti-EU etc, had defected. Two of the last sort later became UKIP’s 2 MPs, both initially elected as Conservatives: Mark Reckless, Douglas Carswell. Their kind of pseudo-“libertarian” “Conservatism” was exactly the wrong position for UKIP to take and positioned UKIP somewhere near but beyond the Conservative Party, when, to really break through, it needed to go social-national.
When the BNP imploded after the disastrous post-Question Time 2010 General Election, UKIP was able to get the votes of most of those who had previously voted BNP, if only fuelled by frustration or desperation, or “better half a loaf than none”.
UKIP beat all other UK parties at the 2014 European elections, getting 27 MEPs. OFCOM then awarded UKIP “major party” status, enabling it to get huge amounts of airtime (and people still talk about Britain’s “free” mainstream media…).
UKIP however, was unable to beat its way through the British fair-seeming (but in fact as good as rigged) “First Past the Post” electoral system at the General Election of 2015. 12.6% of national vote (nearly 4 million votes), but only 1 seat (Carswell’s, at Clacton, Essex). Meanwhile, the BNP vote had collapsed even from its 2010 level (1.9%, 563,743 votes) to effectively zero (1,667 votes).
I myself had already tweeted and blogged from 2014 that UKIP had peaked. I paid virtually no attention to the BNP, which by that time was already yesterday’s news. The 2017 election brought UKIP 1.9%, whereas the BNP bumped along with statistical zero (despite having tripled its individual votes to 4,642).
Douglas Carswell, the “libertarian” Conservative faux-nationalist resigned before UKIP’s 2017 failure to take up lucrative “work” in the City of London. His work with UKIP was done, let us put it that way. As for Farage, he reinvented himself as a touring talking head, while keeping his hand in as a “nationalist” by referring to his concerns about the “US Jewish lobby” (strangely, he failed to mention the Jew lobby in the UK or France…).
Today, in 2018, with neither main System party commanding firm support, we see the System, the Zionists in particular, “concerned” about the “resurgence” of the “far right” (i.e. worried that the British people might awaken and turn to a real alternative).
So what happens? The System “operation” revs up a little: the “Alt-Right” talking heads –who rarely if ever criticize the Jewish Zionist lobby– are now flocking to join UKIP! Milo Yan-whatever-he-is-opolous, “Prison Planet” Watson, “Sargon of Akkad”, “Count Dankula” etc…all the faux-“nationalist” fakes and fuckups are going to UKIP, have in fact gone to UKIP, have all suddenly joined as members of UKIP.
Conclusion
Naturally, all this could be co-incidence, but it is very odd that the events that I have chronicled seem to have happened at just the “right” time:
UKIP rising at the same time as the BNP which was, at that time, a rapidly-growing potential threat to the System;
Nick Griffin ambushed on BBC TV Question Time;
BNP marginalized in msm while UKIP was promoted as a “threat” to LibLabCon;
UKIP given endless msm airtime so long as it was “non-racist” (it now has quite a few non-whites as prominent members and is pro-Israel etc…);
Conservative Party MPs defecting to UKIP and so (in the absence of any elected UKIP MPs) bound to take leading roles in UKIP and steer it into capitalist, “libertarian” backwaters;
as the people look ready to follow any new credible social-national party (were one to emerge a little further down the line), suddenly dead-and-nailed-to-its-perch UKIP gets a boost from those fake “Alt-Right” figures…;
Former msm “radical” talking heads such as Paul Mason turn up shouting about the UKIP/Alt-Right convergence as if the SA were marching down Whitehall.
It is just all too convenient.
Still, God moves in mysterious ways. Maybe the System, in its cleverness, will score an “own goal”. After all, that’s what the Okhrana did in pre-revolutionary St. Petersburg…
I suppose that most people reading this will have heard of Nick Griffin, formerly of the British National Party. For the benefit of those who have not, this is what Wikipedia says about him:
I have never met Nick Griffin, I have never spoken with him. My view of him is, in a nutshell, that he did very well with the BNP to make a large part of a silk purse out of what was mostly a sow’s ear. He made the BNP at least half-credible (up to 2009). He and Andrew Brons got elected as BNP MEPs. He has courage. He has intelligence, too.
On the more doubtful side, Griffin was naive enough to think that he had been invited onto BBC Question Time because the BNP had all but broken through into the magic circle of “major parties” and was being treated as such; instead, he was ambushed and trashed in a totally planned way. All those who took part in that ambush are enemies of the people. That finished the BNP.
As to what Griffin writes, I agree with much of it and in particular with much of his recent attack on the corrupted “Alt-Right” and other [what some call] “kosher nationalists”.
Griffin has reposted one or two of my tweets (though I am now expelled from Twitter) and GAB posts. I must have retweeted or reposted a couple of dozen of his.
I think that Griffin is basically right to say that the purely political fight, in the manner of the BNP, UKIP etc in the UK (he says throughout Western Europe) is now not possible. He has a point. Encroaching State/ZOG repression, Jewish Zionist influence and control, the ever-increasing hordes (armies?) of blacks and browns in the urban areas. Still, God works in mysterious ways…
Mark Collett
I had not heard of Mark Collett until this year, or possibly, peripherally, 2017. He once worked with Nick Griffin and was tried –and re-tried– (and acquitted) with him:
I have read The Fall of Western Man, Collett’s book. I agreed with almost all of it, though I was slightly underwhelmed. I do not think that Adolf Hitler, Alfred Rosenberg or Oswald Spengler have much to worry about.
I have from time to time reposted and (prior to my expulsion) retweeted Collett’s comments online. He, however, has (as far as I know) never reposted any of mine.
Leadership
Nick Griffin led the BNP; Collett led part of the BNP (the “youth wing”) and, obviously, wants to be seen as a nationalist leadership figure generally. Both men do seem to take the view that they must cultivate a slightly aloof persona in order to achieve their purposes. I have no quarrel with that, so long as the attempt does not look silly. At present (again, as far as I know) they are both generals without troops, and the fact that they both have about 35,000 Twitter followers means almost nothing. I myself, not a leader of or even a member of any party or group, had 3,000. I wonder how many of my 3,000 Twitter followers would follow me into battle– or even to a meeting in a pub? Not too many, anyway.
My point is that a political leader must of course have the aura of leadership, of slight mystery, of slight aloofness (as ever, we look to Hitler), but that must be based on the real, not merely or only that which is the result of cultivation.
Kameradschaft
In the past year or two we have seen numerous social nationalists persecuted by Zionist Jewry. I myself was disbarred in 2016, then questioned by the police in 2017, at the instigation of connected packs of Zionist Jews. Others have to date suffered more: satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz; Jez Turner of the London Forum. Turner is right now sitting in Wandsworth Prison and will not be released until Autumn.
I have seen no word of support from either Nick Griffin or Mark Collett for any one of the above-named people.
Leadership demands fealty and loyalty: the leader demands both fealty and loyalty from his troops. However, loyalty works both ways. The leader must give more than he receives. Those who would be first must be the servant of all. The duty of those who would lead social nationalism is to support all social nationalists who remain true.
Afterword
In the short time (about 5 hours) since the above was published, I have been made aware that in fact both Mark Collett and Nick Griffin have expressed support (on Twitter and GAB) on at least two occasions for Alison Chabloz, though not (as far as I know, to date) for Jez Turner. Anyone knowing differently is welcome to comment in the Comments section below.
Ian Robert Millard 