Category Archives: David Icke

Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, Brexit, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Carl Benjamin, Count Dankula, David Icke, free speech, Ian Millard, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, London Forum, Mark Meechan, Reminiscences and Musings, Sargon of Akkad, society, The Great Replacement, Uncategorized

Repulsive Jo Brand, Repulsive BBC

11 Comments

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

alison

CnDUXkuVMAExy6n

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

News reports and what people have been saying

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fucking doormat for Zionist Jews…

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

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

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

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

https://twitter.com/LovattMo/status/1139286012058882050

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

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

https://twitter.com/DVATW/status/1139417967400144897

https://twitter.com/DVATW/status/1139258131333169152

https://twitter.com/JackBMontgomery/status/1139947205681393665

https://twitter.com/AndraSneddon/status/1139441404231475200

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”.

https://twitter.com/DVATW/status/1139244350402113536

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

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

[Wikipedia]

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

Alexander Nekrassov not mincing his words! Go, Sasha!

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

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

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

Notes

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

Update, 19 June 2019

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

[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!

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.

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

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

One has to question whether a society like that 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.

Update, 11 July 2019

Latest:

Alison Chabloz talks from her piano…

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

Update, 28 January 2020

Predictable System bias.

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

Update, 27 June 2025

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”.

Alison Chabloz, Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, Brexit, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Carl Benjamin, David Icke, David Irving, elections, free speech, historical revisionism, Ian Millard, immigration, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, London Forum, Mark Lewis, MPs, Nick Griffin, Party Politics, Paul Watson, Prison Planet, Reminiscences and Musings, Sargon of Akkad, society, Tommy Robinson, Uncategorized, white flight

The Knives Are Out for Freedom of Expression (and more)

11 Comments

Introduction

I tweeted (before Twitter expelled me) in the past about freedom of expression and how it is now under attack across the “West”; I have also blogged about it. It is not a straightforward issue but clarity is possible. The same is true when talking about the enemies of freedom.

Below, I link to a BuzzFeed “report” (propaganda piece) promoting the views of Jess Phillips MP, one of the worst MPs in the present House of Commons, who has now said (of a UKIP candidate, Carl Benjamin):

“The Electoral Commission should surely have standards about who can and can’t stand for election. If Facebook and Twitter can ban these people for hate speech how is it they are allowed to stand for election?”

It is hard to imagine being back in 1999, let alone 1989, 1979, 1969 (or any time before that right back to the 18th Century), when a Member of Parliament, even one as profoundly ignorant, uneducated and uncultured as Jess Phillips, would say that a civil service body should decide who should be allowed to stand for election!

Now there are certain kinds of people who cannot stand for election in the UK, and there is a debate to be had about whether those rules are too restrictive, but it has never been seriously suggested before that a candidate should be barred from standing simply because of whatever he or she has said!

https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/jess-phillips-carl-benjamin-new-rape-comments?utm_source=dynamic&utm_campaign=bfsharetwitter

Now, those who read my blog etc know that I have rather little time for “Sargon of Akkad” (Carl Benjamin) or his fellow “alt-Right” vloggers (“Prison Planet” Watson etc) but I think that they have the right to speak, to speak online, and to stand for elections. As to Benjamin’s “rape” comments about Jess Phillips, well they were in very poor taste and certainly not chivalrous (though Jess Phillips has no time for courtesy and, still less, for chivalry, in any case), but I do not think that he should be arrested, questioned by police etc about them, nor prevented from carrying on his doomed attempt to become an MEP.

The general assault on freedom of expression in the UK and across the “West”

The attack on what might loosely be called “free speech” is being led and largely carried out by the Jewish or Jewish-Zionist lobby, monitored and supported by the Israeli state. This can be illustrated by a few examples from the UK, starting with my own experiences:

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

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

Alison Chabloz sang satirical songs which were posted online; she placed a link on her blog. She was persecuted, lost her job as a result, further persecuted, then privately prosecuted by the fake “charity” called “Campaign Against AntiSemitism”, which then led to prosecution by the CPS and conviction under the bad law of the Communications Act 2003, s.127. At present she is still appealing:

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

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

Jez Turner made a speech in Whitehall in 2015, in which speech he suggested that Jews should be cast out from England as they had been on several occasions in the past (eg under Edward I). After a long legal struggle with the Jewish lobby, more particularly the “CAA”, the CPS caved in and prosecuted Jez Turner. He received a 1 year prison sentence in 2018 (he was released on strict conditions after 6 months).

Tommy Robinson

The activist known as Tommy Robinson has been banned from both Facebook and Twitter.

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

The Privatization of Public Space

I have written and spoken many times about the “privatization of public space”. In my case, I have been disbarred because Jews wanted to stop me tweeting and/or punish me for exposing them. I have been interrogated by the police at Jewish instigation. I have had other problems with the authorities in recent years. All the doing of Jew conspirators.

In the past, printed matter was the medium of political propaganda. Today, it is online matter that counts, but the online platforms and internet services are in few hands, and most of the hands that matter are Jewish.

An individual can now be effectively silenced by being banned from Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, which can be the decision of a single capitalist “owner”, a manager or executive, or even some deskbound dogsbody.

In addition, that decision-maker, or a couple of such, can deprive the individual of money donations via removal of his or her Paypal, Patreon or other money-donation service.

Likewise, an organization can now be all but wiped out simply by the same methods. Just as I was expelled from Twitter (albeit that Twitter is just a waste of time and effort, really), so have been expelled (“suspended”, in Twitter’s weasel word) Alison Chabloz, Tommy Robinson and innumerable others. They have also been removed from Facebook, YouTube etc (I have no accounts on those platforms) and from donation sites, Paypal etc.

I see that Facebook has now removed Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam organization too (for “anti-Semitism”). The Jews are crowing. Maybe prematurely.

It is clear that power online is in very few hands. One decision by some Jew like Zuckerberg and an organization with literally millions of followers, such as InfoWars, can be sent spinning into outer darkness, with no right of appeal or legal redress qua citizen.

In the USA, these facts also mean that the Constitutional right to free speech is scarcely worth the paper it is printed on. I was always sceptical about it, on the basis that, yes, you can speak freely in the USA, so long as you do not mind losing your job, profession, business, home etc…Now the near-uselessness of the Constitutional freedom of speech is even more stark: by all means speak freely, but you are restricted to howling in the dark, or at least in the street. Your online “free speech”, meaning your communication with anyone not your immediate neighbour or family, is monitored, censored and can be completely taken away from you, not by the State, even, but by online platforms pressured by or owned by the Jewish Zionist lobby. We see that there are moves afoot in the UK even to prevent our taking part in already-stacked elections!

Conclusion

As European people and social nationalists, we can no more rely on online platforms than we can rely on getting elected in a rigged system, on fair reportage from the msm, or on getting justice under rigged legal systems.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/facebook-ban-infowars-alex-jones-milo-yiannopoulos-louis-farrakhan-islam-a8897221.html

Notes

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/16/twittering-to-the-birds/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/category/free-speech/

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

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/02/08/my-visit-to-the-london-forum/

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

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/03/18/when-britain-becomes-a-police-state/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/11/18/the-war-on-freedom-of-expression-in-the-uk-usa-and-eu-states/

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

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

https://alisonchabloz.com/

Special Note:

Believe it or not, this idiot, Paul Bernal (see below), is a law lecturer! I feel sorry for his students at the University of East Anglia! According to his definition, even Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s China had “free speech” (because you could *say* whatever you liked, but as a consequence might get shot…)

What an idiot! Absolutely prize…!

Stray tweets etc

This blog post is not primarily about the Jess Phillips idiot-woman, but it is frightening to see the tweets of her supporters, showing the intellectual dullness even of the supposedly educated these days: see the tweet by one @docsimsim of Richmond, below

Others, however, have seen through the Jess Phillips Empty Vessel performance

https://twitter.com/MTellum/status/1124332812818165761

https://twitter.com/NiallPFleming/status/1124346821025980416

https://twitter.com/BigAlsWisdom/status/1124353519803338762

Here’s an American, one “Chris”, who seems to find it unobjectionable that some “authority” persons should “decide” on whether a candidate can be “allowed” to stand:

https://twitter.com/great_jantzitsu/status/1124378800308015108

and here is Jess Phillips trying to make more publicity for herself while trying to squash down what little freedom of expression still exists in the UK:

For those who are unaware, since being elected in 2015, Jess Phillips has squeezed every penny she can out of the taxpayers: not satisfied with a salary of nearly £80,000 and very generous “expenses”, she even “employs” her husband on £50,000 a year as “Constituency Support Manager” (he stays at home and is, presumably, a “house husband”). Yet she, this ignorant, rude, uneducated, uncultured creature, has the cheek to talk about “people with literally no discernible skills” getting high pay! That may be so, but she should look in the mirror, if she can bear it!

https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2019/jan/31/jess-phillips-on-skilled-workers-ive-met-high-earners-with-literally-no-discernible-skills

Update, 5 June 2019

Another example of arbitrary censorship online:

Update, 18 June 2019

Just one more random example of the slide into censorship and quasi-official lies or falsity:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/meet-academics-hunted-hounded-jobs-having-wrong-thoughts/

Update, 15 October 2019

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/14/police-response-transphobic-stickers-branded-extraordinary/

Update, 19 November 2019

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/18/transgender-people-agree-using-terms-men-women-afraid-speak/

Update, 21 November 2019

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/20/right-offended-does-not-exist-judge-says-court-hears-police/

Update, 23 November 2019

https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/police-offensive-useless-acaster-beswick-3482095

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.

Alison Chabloz, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, David Icke, David Irving, free speech, historical, Ian Millard, Jewish lobby in UK, Mark Lewis, Reminiscences and Musings, Stray memories of life at the English Bar, Uncategorized

Letting Off Steam About Libel

1 Comment

My attention was caught by this news report:

https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/1118518659830505472

Now many who read my blog will know that I was, in the 1991-2008 period, at various times a practising barrister (in England) and an employed barrister (mostly overseas). Defamation was not one of my specialisms. I would have liked it to have been. It is an interesting and lucrative field, often involving interesting and/or famous people, though certainly not demanding the highest legal skills or intellectual gifts (contrary to the general public belief).

I did a few cases of libel while at the Bar, though all were advisory; none reached a substantive court hearing. I did advise, pro bono (unpaid), and when only a student, on a libel matter the result of which made the front pages of the more serious newspapers: Flegon v. Solzhenitsyn [1987].

Unable (as a mere student) to appear before the judge and civil jury (all defamation cases then had a jury), I nonetheless attended court most days, sometimes all day, wrote (mostly ignored) instructions and good advice for the plaintiff (now dumbed-down to “claimant”), and advised generally on tactics etc (also mostly ignored). I was told by another attendee that once, I having told Flegon’s assistant to give Flegon a note while he, Flegon, was (speaking very loosely) “cross-examining” a witness, I bowed myself out of [High] Court, only for the judge to demand of Flegon, as soon as I had gone, “to see that note that you have just been given”. Apparently, the judge read the note and told Flegon (who was proving a massive pain to the judge in various ways) to “listen to the good advice that you have been given, Mr. Flegon”! My first commendation by the Bench!

The Daily Telegraph said, when Flegon died (16 years later, in 2003):

“His remarkable success at repeatedly getting manuscripts out of the Soviet Union led to the widespread view that he must have had contacts in the KGB; but in 1987 he won £10,000 libel damages in the High Court from Solzhenitsyn over an allegation to that effect in the Russian version of The Oak and Calf. Unable to afford a barrister’s fees, Flegon conducted his case himself, in faltering English.”

Well, returning from the past to the present, we often see people, usually on Twitter, either talking about suing this or that person (often another “tweeter”) or expressing an opinion on defamation cases before the courts.

The average Joe has no idea about legal matters, and yet many opine about the law and practice of defamation, perhaps because it tends to attract msm publicity. For example, the tweet below betrays no hint that the tweeter knows that people have never been allowed to get legal aid for matters of defamation.

Despite having been expelled from Twitter, I read the tweets of others, particularly those whom I consider “persons of interest”. Often, en passant, I see tweets by various idiots either threatening others with legal action or recommending that others sue —often named— other parties in defamation. Few seem to understand either the relevant law (which has changed somewhat in recent years) or the practical aspects.

In the Kezia Dugdale case reported today, the Scottish judge decided that the words written were defamatory, but that the defendant, Ms. Dugdale, had a defence (that of fair comment). By the way, note that that defence has now been replaced, in England and Wales, by a defence of “honest opinion”, but this case was heard in Scotland under Scottish law.

Now the claimant in that Kezia Dugdale case, a Mr. Campbell, obviously does not understand the law, having tweeted only today that the law or legal system is, in effect, asinine because the judge decided that the words were defamatory and yet had decided against him! Like many many others on Twitter etc, the said Mr. Campbell does not seem to understand that even if words are defamatory on their face or by implication, the defendant might yet have one or more of the available defences.

Time and again on Twitter (I am not on Facebook) I see people, innocent of any useful legal knowledge, claiming that words which are not defamatory anyway are defamatory, or (where the words might be defamatory) ignoring the available defences.

Prominent among the above are Jews on Twitter, who often invoke the name of “Mark Lewis Lawyer” (the Jew-Zionist lawyer who recently fled to Israel after being found guilty of professional misconduct: see Notes, below). In fact, his publicized defamation cases were all (the ones I saw anyway) very simple and straightforward, requiring little real legal expertise. My honest opinion is that he is a copper-bottomed self-publicizing poseur.

Take a look at the above paragraph. It might or might not be considered in part “defamatory” (or it might be considered as a whole or in part a “mere vulgar insult”, which would not be actionable in any event). Also, even if the statements above, or some or one, were to be considered defamatory, I have defences open to me should the supposed “top defamation specialist” reach out from his mobility scooter or wheelchair in Israel to sue me (he has so far not done so in respect of any of the rather many blog posts which I have written about him in the past months). I have the defences of, inter alia, “Truth”, “Honest Opinion”, and “Publication on a matter of public interest” available to me.

There again, the armchair lawyers of Twitter rarely consider other factors, chief amongst which is whether the defendant has any funds. If not, large sums (in some cases, hundreds of thousands of pounds) might be expended in pursuit of a defendant who (like me) would simply declare bankruptcy if faced with a money judgment. Bankruptcy in England is now little more than an inconvenience lasting for a year (in most cases) for someone without capital (whether in cash or real or other property) or income. There are few advantages to being broke (as I now am and, incidentally, as “Mark Lewis Lawyer” now is); one of them, though, is the useful one of being effectively “unsueable”.

There are other factors, but this is a blog post, not a legal treatise.

It is usually the case that the best advice that can be given to a potential litigant in defamation is “don’t”! Three examples:

  • Oscar Wilde. Wilde need not have brought the libel action which eventually led to his disgrace, imprisonment, exile and early death;
  • David Irving. A fine and persecuted (by the Jew lobby) historian, but not a lawyer. Need not have brought the case against Deborah Lipstadt, an American Jew-Zionist academic supported and funded by the worldwide Jewish/Zionist lobby. Insisted on appearing for himself. Said to have lost £2M in costs to the other side, at least on paper. He also, more importantly, had his books removed from large bookshop chains; some were even pulped. Large publishers dropped him;
  • Count Nikolai Tolstoy. The only one of the three whom I have ever met (once). The only one of these three who was the defendant (there was also a co-defendant in his case). He lost, but eventually paid only £57,000 of the £1.5M awarded against him initially; he paid the £57,000 years later and only after the death of the plaintiff, Lord Aldington.

So, Twitter armchair lawyers and the perpetually outraged: don’t put your daughter on the stage, never wear brown in town and stop threatening libel suits against people, even if you can get lawyers you can rely upon…

Notes

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%BD,_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA

https://www.dworskibooks.com/index.php?route=information/news&news_id=3

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/1430648/Alec-Flegon.html

https://www.scotsman.com/news/kezia-dugdale-this-case-was-never-about-the-definition-of-homophobia-1-4909617

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17580304.kezia-dugdale-releases-statement-after-winning-defamation-case/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Wilde#Wilde_v._Queensberry

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving#Libel_suit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Tolstoy#Controversy

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Books-David-Irving/s?rh=n%3A266239%2Cp_27%3ADavid+Irving

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/section/3/enacted

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/crossheading/defences/enacted

Blog Posts About “Mark Lewis Lawyer”

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/01/11/update-re-mark-lewis-lawyer-questions-are-raised/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/22/mark-lewis-lawyer-latest-update/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/20/self-publicizing-supposed-top-lawyer-mark-lewis-full-transcript-of-disciplinary-hearing-judgment-now-released-by-tribunal/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/19/the-latest-revelations-about-zionist-supposed-top-lawyer-mark-lewis/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/13/more-details-about-mark-lewis-lawyer-and-his-abusive-social-media-presence/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/11/mark-lewis-lawyer-disciplinary-case-now-updated-to-11-december-2018/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/23/mark-lewis-lawyer-tries-to-have-part-of-the-case-against-him-thrown-out/

 

Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Count Dankula, David Icke, free speech, historical revisionism, Ian Millard, Jez Turner, society, Uncategorized

Alison Chabloz— The Fight for Freedom of Expression Goes On!

39 Comments

alison

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!

Updates

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

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/alison-chabloz-lost-a-battle-but-the-war-goes-on-and-she-is-winning-it/

11 July 2019

Alison Chabloz talks from her piano

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

Alison Chabloz, Alison Chabloz, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Conservative Friends of Israel, David Icke, David Irving, free speech, historical revisionism, Ian Millard, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, Labour Friends of Israel, Mark Lewis, Nick Griffin, Reminiscences and Musings, society, Uncategorized

A New Director of Public Prosecutions Takes Up His Role as Head of the Crown Prosecution Service

2 Comments

scan25

Max Hill Q.C. is on the brink of taking up his role as D.P.P., in succession to Alison Saunders. It is too early to say what his official attitude will be in relation to political “crime”, “thought crime” and freedom of expression. While he has made some quite liberal remarks in the past in connection with Muslims, Islamists etc, he has also referred to “far right fanatics”, a meaningless phrase which is often used by Zionists and their msm doormats to label social nationalists and others.

Already, the unpleasant Zionist fanatics of the so-called “Campaign Against AntiSemitism” or “CAA” (themselves under police investigation for stalking, harassment and abuse of charitable status) have taken to Twitter etc in an attempt to put pressure on the new DPP. They want him to prosecute anyone criticizing Zionist individuals and groups under the UK’s draconian laws against so-called “hate speech” etc. Indeed, one of their doormats in the msm (himself apparently a Jew) has already publicized on Twitter and on the LBC (radio station) website a file relating to various “cases” where the police and/or CPS have not prosecuted mostly rather innocuous tweets and other online postings.

The Zionists of the CAA are using the entirely unrelated shooting event in Pittsburgh, USA to try to shut down legitimate freedom of expression in the UK…and are being aided and abetted by other Zionists in the decadent UK mass media milieu.

The new DPP, before he listens to any of the CAA’s nonsense, should bear in mind that, quite apart from the various alleged illegalities perpetrated by CAA persons (and which are currently under police investigation), the CAA has made a number of frivolous and indeed malicious complaints (to the police, to the CPS, to Twitter etc) against quite a large number of people, including David Icke, Al Jazeera TV, the Jewish anti-Zionist Gilad Atzmon, and even against me. In fact, in its 4+ years of operation, the CAA has only scored two “victories” of any significance, to wit against Jez Turner (Jeremy Bedford-Turner) and against the singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz (who is in any case presently appealing both conviction and sentence).

The CAA’s membership numbers are secret, but thought by many to number only a few hundred, certainly not many more if its Parliament Square and other demonstrations are anything to go by. Crowds numbering between 50 and 200 individuals.

In order to assist Max Hill Q.C. and his staff in any deliberations, I commend my own experience of victimization by these Jewish-Zionist and pro-Israel fanatics. The events described took place in January 2017, so nearly two years ago now, and the blog post dates from about 18 months ago.

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

Notes

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/anti-corbyn-charity-and-petition-under-investigation

Update, 19 February 2020

The Jew Stephen Silverman of South Essex, the so-called “Head of Enforcement” at the “CAA” (“Campaign Against Antisemitism”) fake charity,  and who was exposed in open court (Westminster Magistrates’ Court) as a pseudonymous troll and stalker of women, has recently been complaining that the DPP will not meet with Silverman or his colleagues (who include Joe Glasman, an evil snooper, and Stephen Applebaum of Edgware, North London, soi-disant “film critic” and house husband; Applebaum was also a very malicious and pseudonymous troller and stalker of women before he was exposed).

If it is true that the DPP will not agree to have his ear bent by the CAA trolls, it must be because, at long last, the CPS (and police?) are waking up to the maliciousness of these Jews, and to their politically-motivated “lawfare” against those with whom they disagree (“those whom they hate” would be more accurate).

Alison Chabloz, Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, David Icke, David Irving, free speech, historical, historical revisionism, Ian Millard, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, London Forum, Reminiscences and Musings, Uncategorized

Special Blog Post, To Honour Professor Robert Faurisson [1929-2018]

Leave a comment

A (arguably the) pre-eminent revisionist historian, and a man of great integrity, Robert Faurisson has died at the age of 89. Predictably, the usual tasteless jackals took the opportunity to gloat and laugh on the Twitter echo-chamber and elsewhere. (((They))) give themselves and their character away so easily. Ignore them.

The work of this courageous fighter for truth will now be disseminated to ever-wider readerships. I start that here and now by posting the English-language edition of his unpublished book about the “holocaust” controversy etc.

https://www.historiography-project.com/books/faurisson-on-the-holocaust/index.php

Notes

Faurisson’s Wikipedia entry (obviously, Wikipedia is tainted on certain topics by having been infiltrated by Jewish Zionists, but the more basic biographical facts are usually correct):

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

Biographical details from a more sympathetic source:

http://www.revisionists.com/revisionists/faurisson.html

Comment by the Jewish anti-Zionist Gilad Atzmon:

https://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2018/10/23/robert-faurisson-and-the-study-of-the-past

Books and other writings by and about Faurisson can be readily found on Amazon etc.

Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Carl Benjamin, Colin Robertson, Count Dankula, David Icke, free speech, historical revisionism, Ian Millard, immigration, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, London Forum, Mark Meechan, Millennial Woes, Nick Griffin, Party Politics, Paul Watson, Prison Planet, Reminiscences and Musings, Sargon of Akkad, society, The Great Replacement, Tommy Robinson, Uncategorized

The Leadership Principle v. the Attitude of the Prima Donna

Leave a comment

Nick Griffin

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:

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

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:

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

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.

Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, animal welfare, David Icke, Defence, free speech, historical revisionism, Ian Millard, immigration, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, Nick Griffin, Party Politics, Reminiscences and Musings, society, The Great Replacement, Tommy Robinson, Uncategorized

One Man’s “Extremism” is Another Man’s Struggle for Liberty and Justice

70 Comments

I had occasion to visit a small NHS facility recently. It was a lovely, quiet unit, with only about a dozen or so patients, those patients living, prior to discharge, in several large “bays” and a few individual rooms. The unit was surrounded by flower gardens with small flowering trees and a few classical statues. Beyond that (out of sight) was a very small town (little more than a village) and the countryside of Southern England. If you have to go to a hospital, you could do worse. So why am I blogging about this?

While waiting to go in to see the patient in question, I perused the literature rack by the nursing station. One leaflet caught my eye. I have it before me as I write. Under the NHS logo and the name of the NHS foundation trust running the unit at the strategic level, the title:

PREVENT

[the words contained within a shield device; with two hands –dark blue and light blue (the old KGB colour..ironic) and perhaps (?) representing white and non-white– clasped]. The leaflet was then sub-headed:

Preventing vulnerable people from being drawn into terrorism

Inside the leaflet:

What is Prevent? Prevent is part of the government’s counter terrorism strategy; aiming to prevent people of all ages from being radicalised and drawn into terrorism.

The leaflet continues:

What kind of extremism does Prevent aim to deal with? It aims to deal with all forms of extremism; for example far right extremism, animal rights extremism and religious extremism.

So we see that “terrorism” has already been conflated with or replaced by “extremism”, an even less easily-defined idea. Moreover, we see that Islamist terrorism, the only kind actually posing even a slight threat to public order in the UK, is not mentioned by name (no doubt that would be called “Islamophobic”…) and only coyly implied, sub nom “religious extremism”. No doubt the Jewish Zionist fanatics, who go in their hundreds to be trained by the Israelis in Israel, are not considered “extremists”, “terrorists” etc. No, they just go to an alien society to be trained in the use of weapons and in the techniques of killing with bare hands (oh, and of course, how to “bring down” British MPs thought not to be pro-Israel or pro-Jew…).

Who are these “extremists” in pole position in the Prevent leaflet? Ah, yes, the “far right” (also left undefined, presumably social nationalists, those who hate mass immigration and the trashing of the UK by certain groups and types) as well as those who hate the cruelties inflicted on the animal kingdom by some humans and by human society; but let us now return to the leaflet:

What are some of the possible signs of radicalisation?

  • you may notice changes in the person’s behaviour or mood;
  • the person’s appearance may change and they may spend excess [sic] time on the internet;
  • the person may start to express extreme political or radical views;
  • the person may become withdrawn or have a change in their circle of friends.

So now we have travelled from “terrorism” and even “extremism” to people who have or may have merely “radical” points of view about, say, the disastrous effect that mass immigration has had on the UK, or about the exploitation and cultural contamination carried out by Jew-Zionists, or even about animal welfare.

The leaflet then asks what the reader might do should he or she actually suspect that another person has changed lifestyle or perhaps have acquired “radical” views:

  • NOTICE: Be aware of an individual’s vulnerability to radicalisation, any change in behaviour or ideology. An ideology is a set of beliefs an individual may have. [this section of the leaflet also contains the iconic alien-looking “all-seeing eye” motif…]
  • CHECK: If possible and appropriate check out any concerns with the individual…your line manager and the [NHS] safeguarding team. [this section of the leaflet contains a motif of a magnifying glass with a little humanoid figure inside the lens…]
  • SHARE: You need to share your concerns with the [NHS] safeguarding team. They can advise you on any relevant partner agencies who will need to be contacted. [note “will need to be contacted” not “may need”…presumably police, MI5 etc].

The leaflet then goes on to list telephone numbers and internet contact details, before ending with these dystopian remarks, which would not have been out of place in an early 1970s BBC Play For Today, or perhaps George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four:

What happens to my referral? [“my referral”, note, not “my denunciation”, “my informing”, my accusation” etc…]. Prevent referrals are shared with the MASH (multi-agency safeguarding hub) or [name of city] SPA (single point of access) depending on where the individual lives. Referrals are then screened for acceptance in to the channel process.

What is channel?

Channel is a multi-agency process whereby professionals and partner agencies can share resources and expertise. The aim of channel is to work with the individual to reduce risk. If your referral is accepted into the channel process you may also be asked to attend the channel meetings to share relevant information as part of effective multi-agency working.

I have sometimes been accused of being, inter alia, a “grammar Nazi”, and am, of course, (also) appalled by the poor English displayed in the leaflet. I have no idea by whom the leaflet was written. Perhaps the Home Office and MI5 are now less likely to recruit graduates from Oxford or Cambridge, or perhaps the near-illiteracy shown is just a function of the UK’s sliding educational standards. The main impression given, though, is that of a police state operation which would be recognizable to an official of Stalin’s Russia or any similar society. The saving grace is probably that it is not (though I am guessing) very efficient.

Indeed, shorn of the millennial “nudge”-government, fake “sharing caring” and armchair psychology nonsense, the leaflet could be seen simply as a method of recruiting agents…

Finally, think about where this leaflet was found– not in a prison, a government office, nor even in a university library, but in a normal NHS clinical environment in the heart of the South of England…

Notes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

Addendum, 25 January 2019

https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/humberside-police-transgender-twitter-thinking-2466084

Addendum, 4 February 2019

http://www.salisburyreview.com/articles/going-to-prison-for-having-the-wrong-thoughts/

scan25

Update, 2 September 2019

So there we are: once the chistka starts, it takes on a life of its own…

Alison Chabloz, Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, David Icke, elections, ethnostate, free speech, historical, historical revisionism, Ian Millard, immigration, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, London Forum, Nick Griffin, Party Politics, Reminiscences and Musings, safe zones, society, The Great Replacement, The Great Reset, Uncategorized

The Political Situation, Social Nationalism and the “Alt-Right”

1 Comment

Preliminary

I write in a condition of profound dissatisfaction with the situation on the broadly nationalist wing of British, European and world politics. Yesterday, someone whom I have only met twice but who has made a favourable impression on me, Jez Turner [Jeremy Bedford-Turner] of the London Forum, was found guilty of incitement to racial hatred under the Public Order Act 1986 after a Crown Court trial, being then sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, meaning that he will be incarcerated for nearly 6 months, all for making a harmless speech about Jews.

Also yesterday, the latest hearing in the Alison Chabloz case took place, legal argument prior to the judgment, which is expected on 25 May.  Most reading this will know that Alison Chabloz is being prosecuted, in effect, for singing songs.

https://alisonchabloz.wordpress.com/

As with the Turner case, that of Alison Chabloz has been promoted by the malicious Jew-Zionist group calling itself the “Campaign Against Anti-Semitism” or “CAA”, which organization has previously (and unsuccessfully) tried to have others, including me (and David Icke, and Al Jazeera TV etc…) prosecuted:

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

The outcome of the Alison Chabloz trial is of huge importance not only for the future of free speech in terms of socio-political expression, but also in terms of artistic expression. A “guilty” verdict (from the single magistrate) would chill lampooning, making fun of politicians and events and, frankly, would cause the UK to become something pretty close to a police state.

Nick Griffin’s Booklet

I have no particular animus against Nick Griffin (whom I have never met). He did well, alongside Andrew Brons, to get the BNP into the position where it could get two MEPs (Griffin and Brons) elected in 2009, but in my view he underestimated the sheer dishonesty (and determination) of those who opposed him and the BNP. He also seems to have thought that soft-pedalling on the “holocaust” revisionism would mean that the Jew-Zionist element would lay off a little. That was naive, as was assuming that he was invited onto BBC Question Time just like many another guest, when the object of the exercise was to ambush him and trash him and, via him, the BNP.  Having said that, Griffin was one of the outstanding people in a party not over-endowed with the well-educated and reasonably credible.

I mention Griffin here because I was sent, yesterday, a pdf version of a booklet by him:

http://altrightnotright.com/

I found the contents disturbing and challenging. I agreed readily with some of them, indeed the majority; with others, particularly the attack on Jez Turner, I disagreed, though I concede that I am in no special position in terms of inside knowledge.

Griffin’s main arguments against many of the “alt-Right” personalities and entities struck a chord with me. I have from the start been suspicious of any and all “nationalists” who are pro-Israel, loudly “anti-Nazi” (though Griffin himself is guilty of a certain amount of that latter) or who somehow find a way of squaring the circle and reconciling being a “white nationalist” with support for Israel. This pathology is particularly seen in the USA, where it is not seen as odd to be a “nationalist”, a pro-Israel blockhead (“holocaust” belief and all…) and a kind of anti-government “rebel” all in one, mixed in with a bit of Bible study and membership of the National Rifle Association.

Griffin correctly points out the Zionist/System infiltration into nationalism in Europe too: Front National, Geert Wilders etc. In the UK, we have seen the so-called “nationalism” of UKIP and smaller offshoots, of which the one now promoted most widely is the “For Britain” party, headed by an Irish lesbian ex-secretary called Anne Marie Waters. To paraphrase-quote a general in the film Lawrence of Arabia, For Britain is a sideshow of a sideshow, a one-trick pony “party” which has no prospect of mass appeal or electoral success.

Many see the promotion of so-called “kosher nationalists” as a way of diverting the nationalist torrent. My problem with that analysis is that, so far at least, there is no nationalist torrent (in the UK). That may change, but at present the single great fact of British nationalism or, as I prefer, social nationalism, is that its support in the wider population is minimal. Again, that may change: in 1928, the NSDAP received only 2.6% of the national vote in Germany, lower than it had managed several years before; however, by 1932 that vote had become 33% and in 1933 (by which time Hitler was already Chancellor) 44%. In the UK, there have been governments –with working majorities in the House of Commons– which have been elected on less than 30% of the popular vote.

The Alt-Right

I have had no personal contact with the “Alt-Right”, unless there is included my February 2017 talk to the London Forum (which was on YouTube until that organization caved in to Jewish-Zionist pressure and removed the London Forum YouTube channel in its entirety…”long live freedom”…). I find myself in sympathy with much of what Nick Griffin says in his booklet about odd young men with odd lifestyles, swinging (if such be the bon mot) between braindead “libertarianism” and a (sort-of) white nationalism mixed with pro-Israel sympathies. These people set off alarm bells for me. I find it telling that such people are all in favour of “free speech” until it comes to those such as Jez Turner and Alison Chabloz (and me) who are hated by the Jewish Zionists. We are, at best, ignored, even when on trial or in other peril. Big alarm bells…

The Answer

The answer, for me, is straightforward in principle but complex and difficult to put into effect:

  1. A political organization must exist. Voters cannot vote for a party that does not exist. It may be that such a party faces insuperable obstacles in a rigged system, but it must exist. At present, no such party exists;
  2. The social national population must cluster in one or more “safe zone” areas of the UK. I have blogged fairly extensively about this on WordPress.

The present situation is intolerable: Jew-Zionists and “anti-fascists” (often the same) try to shut down even the limited free speech that exists now in the UK. Meanwhile, the major cities are going black-brown, with births to those populations outpacing those to the white northern Europeans. A new way forward must be found.

Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Conservative Friends of Israel, David Icke, ethnostate, free speech, historical revisionism, Ian Millard, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, Labour Friends of Israel, London Forum, MPs, Nick Griffin, Party Politics, society, Tommy Robinson, Uncategorized

When Britain Becomes A Police State

2 Comments

Repression of Opinion in the UK

Had I written an article with such a title in 1978 or 1988, or even 1998, the reader might have been justified in laughing. However, since (to specify a year) 1989, when –or soon after which– President Bush snr proclaimed openly the American/ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government) New World Order, and especially since Tony Blair’s ascendancy in 1997, the British state and society has slid ever faster down the slope towards what amounts to a muffled totalitarianism.

The Blair government introduced a number of repressive statutes, including the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (extending snooping powers)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2000

the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (controlling political parties in various ways)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_Parties,_Elections_and_Referendums_Act_2000

and the Communications Act 2003, which has provisions (s.127 etc) under which tweets, emails, Facebook posts etc can be criminalized as, inter alia, “grossly offensive”. It is this Act which is currently being used against the satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz.

The Blair government was not persuaded that it should introduce a “holocaust” “denial” law in the UK (or could easily pass one through Commons and Lords), but the Jewish Zionist organizations and lobbyists are currently using existing laws such as s.127 of the Communications Act 2003 to introduce one by the back door, in co-ordination with the misnamed “international definition” of “anti-Semitism”.

I have previously written about my experience of being interviewed by the police for tweeting socio-political tweets

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

and have also written about how the Jewish Zionist lobby (and the Theresa May/Amber Rudd government of clowns in the pocket of that lobby) is abusing the ever-tighter “regulation” of professions (another Blair/Brown era feature) to suppress freedom of expression, as when I was disbarred in 2016:

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

Now the suppression or repression of opinion becomes both harsher and stealthier. The large platforms for opinion have been persuaded to remove dissenting voices. Youtube, in the past week, has removed numerous popular and broadly “nationalist” channels, including that of the London Forum, which had 7,000 subscribers and had had 500,000+ views. Singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz has had her youtube channel removed from many countries, including the UK. Others have suffered similarly. Facebook and even Twitter are also caving in.

What to Do

There are no “digital rights” to speak of that go beyond simple contract law. If a quasi-monopoly such as ebay, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon wants to expel a user or prevent his opinions being seen, that can be done at will (and is being done, now). Several years ago, at the behest of the Jewish lobby, I was prevented from posting further book reviews on Amazon (UK and US sites, by the way…so much for American “freedom”!): on the UK site, a third of my reviews were removed, quite arbitrarily (many were non-political) and I was barred from posting, despite having been a “top 50” reviewer. I have one Jew (it was only one, at first) to thank for that, he having involved the Jewish Chronicle, which then wrote against me, nagging at Amazon UK; on the Amazon USA site, all my reviews were removed without warning (one can guess why: a Jew-Zionist working for Amazon USA…).

The same is true of Facebook and Twitter: if they decide to remove someone, however popular, that person has no right of appeal (certainly no legal right, in any court).

So what to do as this ZOG repression intensifies… I have written previously on this blog about how I believe that the main chance for social nationalism is to concentrate its people and forces in one area of the UK (I have suggested the South West of England). I firmly believe that. It is a way to cluster, to defend and to infiltrate the social and political key points. To some extent, it removes the need for social media. In any case, social media can only assist a political movement, not create one, nor sustain it to victory. We need boots on the ground.