For those new to this blog, I shall briefly outline my view: I have always favoured Leave/Brexit, certainly since about 2010. The EU, which was originally the EEC, a group of nation-states in mainly North and West Europe co-operating together and trading freely, has become a monster.
The EU has allowed millions of non-whites from Africa and Asia to invade its shores. It has encouraged that invasion and has attempted to resettle those millions and their offspring in countries and places. The EU permits Roma Gypsy thieves and scavengers free movement from their nests in Eastern Europe to the West. The EU Commission, the body which really directs the EU (the Parliament providing mainly a mere facade of “democracy”), has had its tame lawyers and most of the tamed EU states pass laws against “holocaust” “denial” etc, which echo the laws against heresy and blasphemy promulgated in the late Middle Ages. It is clear that the EU is on a course, planned from the beginning, of centripetal convergence. The aim is a “European” (meaning geographically European) superstate whose controlled and monitored citizens will be largely non-European and/or of mixed race, as provided for under the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan:
At the same time, I am extremely opposed to Boris Johnson and his pack of mainly non-British idiots and schemers posing as a Cabinet. They are just a manifestation of ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government).
The above positions have created a conflict, because Boris Johnson has tried to hijack the Leave/Brexit cause, calculating that, in such a polarized political environment, he and the Conservative Party might count on the support of perhaps 50% of the voters, whereas otherwise, Conservative Party electoral support now only amounts to about 35%, at most.
So now, Boris-Idiot has been railroaded into asking the EU for an extension of time, which he has done, despite his brave words about how he would rather “be dead in a ditch” than make any such request.
I suppose that any other Prime Minister of the UK would have complied with the newly-imposed legal requirement; a few might perhaps have considered refusing to comply. Boris is once again unique in having come up with a schoolboy “plan” to send a photocopied letter to the EU, while not signing it! In what world is that the act of a statesman? It is the act of a naughty schoolboy trying to be clever. Did Boris-Idiot think it up alone, or did his mad adviser, Dominic Cummings (see Notes, below) assist?
In any case, surely it is clear to me that merely failing to sign such a letter in such circumstances does not invalidate the request. To take a similar type of case, if two heads of state or government meet to sign a treaty already agreed in all details, is the treaty ineffective if one such VIP, as a joke, signs in invisible ink, or pretends to sign using a pen without ink? To my mind, the answer must be in the negative. The formal signing is merely the public show. True, in that case, the VIP would have at least mimicked the required act. Having said that, who but a charlatan public entertainer posing as politician and statesman would try such a stunt? I can only think of one, off-hand…
In my opinion, the sending of the letter, albeit in rough photocopied format, albeit unsigned by the person posing as Prime Minister, is still a valid request, a valid request from one EU government to the EU, not from one individual. If the Supreme Court of the UK pronounces upon these questions, no doubt they will first be analyzed in detail.
I predicted from the start, as soon as the 2016 Referendum was held, that the EU ZOG/NWO matrix would work to defeat the intention of a majority of the voters. The idea would be either to remain in the EU or to leave in name only. I see no reason to change that view. The Boris “deal” is no better and indeed arguably worse than that finally achieved by Theresa May. Even “No Deal” would be a scam in the hands of Boris and his ZOG/NWO colleagues. The only difference would be a bias toward the USA and not so much toward the EU part of the NWO/ZOG conspiracy/consensus. The ultimate result would be the same.
What now?
Electorally, this in itself may not harm the Conservative Party. Perhaps even the reverse. The “broad masses” of voters are in any case not only interested in Brexit. What is giving support to the Conservative Party is not anything that that party is doing or not doing, but what Labour is doing or not doing. The weakness of Labour is the main factor. The opinion polls are now all very firmly putting the Conservative Party well ahead of Labour, in some cases by more than 10 points. Unless Labour can pull its socks up pretty soon, it is toast, unless events move on the ground: economic collapse, any chaos via No Deal Brexit etc. Even should that happen, it is not clear that Labour would or could reap any electoral benefit. The Conservatives might, in those circumstances, be damaged, but not enough.
What about Brexit Party? My sense is that it has “lost its mojo”. It might get 15% in any general election held soon, it might get only 10%. Enough to take the gloss off any Conservative win, but not enough to prevent it. One should never completely write off the egregious Farage, but in the end he has had no Westminster success, at least to date.
For me, it is clear that a social-national movement must arise. At present it cannot, because the basic conditions do not exist: no germinal social-national party exists, no revolutionary situation which that party might both exploit and command exists.
Twitter is a very unreliable guide to the public mood. If you only took Twitter into consideration, you would imagine that 90% of the population want the UK to remain in the EU (most polls put it at or below 50%).
“Hate”: we hear a lot about “hate” from certain groups, whereas in fact those groups are themselves the chief purveyors of hate:
Remain whiners;
Jew-Zionists;
post-Marxists and pseudo-“socialists”, such as the “HopeNot Hate” and “UAF” crowds.
Not infrequently on Twitter are encountered individuals manifesting all three of the above.
Part of the delusionary tendency of Remain is the idea that people who want out of the EU are poorly-educated, have never travelled (save to somewhere such as Magaluf) and are extremely stupid. I suppose that such ideas bolster the Remain whiners’ sense of self-worth. Sadly for them, their ideas about this are, like their ideas on other subjects, suspect. I myself was once measured at 156 IQ, have a degree from somewhere at least semi-decent, have post-professional qualifications in law (in three countries) etc. I once had a personal library of 2,000+ books, have lived in, worked in or visited dozens of countries, speak a foreign language etc…Should I feel inferior to Remain whiners, most of whom are in every way less intelligent, educated, travelled and experienced than me?
Remain whiners are, in my opinion, often the kind of people who, in the 1950s and thereafter, carefully read books to make sure that how they lived and behaved was certified “U” and not “non-U”. In other words, Remain whinerdom seems to be yet another manifestation of British suburban snobbisme… See, for example, the tweet below
Expecting a pro-Brexit march of a million people any day now! Where are they all? I only saw a small group of drunk men – one almost completely toothless – outside a pub near Trafalgar Square singing "We love you Boris, we do!" I wonder what they love about him. Maybe… racism?
Silly Remain woman comes from Oxfordshire to march (pointlessly) with hundreds of thousands (we are told) of others, contra Brexit. Sees a group of drunks in a pub who claim to be pro-Boris Idiot. That gives her the chance to tweet (the main purpose of the day) about how they are or may be “racist” (which of course would be terrible…). One of the drunks has no teeth. Ha ha! Look at him! What a hillbillie! The woman does not fail to note on her Twitter profile that she worked for the DTI, BBC and Reuters. She forgot to mention that she reads the Observer (well, probably—if she can guess about people, so can I).
As for the “million-strong” march, its effect will be the same as all other large marches in London. Zero.
Also:
I’ve no idea whether it was 1 million or 78,000 on the Remoaner march yesterday but this is worth a look. https://t.co/lJSogqgxBI
It is pretty clear that most of the hysterical young Remain whiners of 2016 have grown up a bit, but that the middleaged and elderly Remainers have not quite understood that the times have left them behind. I would be prepared to bet that all those Wallingford Remainers support mass immigration, and fake or other “refugees” as well! After all, those elderly Remainers will not live long enough to see Wallingford (a pleasant Thames-side small town which I knew as a child) turned into yet another urbanized or suburbanized black/brown multikulti hellhole…
Looked at a few more tweets by Sarah Hurst; here’s one just seen (so I was right —see above— give that man a cee-gar!):
Why is the government constantly lying about wanting an independent trade policy that can't benefit us? Because the real reason for Brexit is immigration, and they can't say that.
I should add that, while for me it is important to get out of the EU, my main socio-political focus is on the racial and cultural future of the UK and, beyond the UK, Europe (EU and non-EU). There is no point stopping free movement from the EU if the UK is still going to be importing blacks and brown (etc) in huge number. Another point of huge importance (for the UK and beyond) is the necessity for a “cultural revolution” and chistka.
Update, 30 November 2020
The Jewish or half-Jewish anti-Brexit Remainer woman from Wallingford, mentioned in the body of the blog post above, is an enemy of “English nationalism”:
Good luck to Wales playing England at something just because I can't stand English nationalism.
Actually, she is comedy gold, reading some of her tweets. Dual nationality (UK/USA, apparently), and she celebrates Thanksgiving in Wallingford because she spent 12 years in the USA but “cannot afford” to return there (implying that she wishes that she could).
She apparently stockpiles tinned food (buying extra regularly), in which I am with her— it is a good idea if you can afford to do so and have storage space (see also Dennis Wheatley’s memoirs, Drink and Ink, in which he says that he not only did the same in the years 1938-40, in case food was rationed should war break out, but urged the readers of his newspaper column to follow suit).
As to her recent tweets to the effect that Brexit might result in food shortages, the incompetence of Boris-idiot’s government might indeed cause such shortages now. Her tweets are, however, often just unintentionally funny, as when she cries poverty while also spending over £300 at a go in Waitrose.
Oh, and she thinks that Lord Sumption, until fairly recently a Supreme Court justice, is “a dangerous lunatic”!
This dangerous lunatic is constantly given a platform by the BBC. And then they ask where is misinformation coming from! https://t.co/XuRu9pWi4N
I have my own idea as to who might be a dangerous lunatic…and I am not alone in that…
This is where she stashes her Brexit food, and she actually thinks that this makes her sound normal. A psychiatrist really needs to step in https://t.co/Jui9ifOpiE
That woman reminds me of several things, such as “why are persons of Jewish origin always alien, ‘strangers in a strange land‘ as the Old Testament has it? More than just strangers; hostile strangers.
Also, why are “Remain whiners” also, almost invariably, facemask and “lockdown” zealots?
Incidentally, the woman in question also poses as a expert on Russia. Here is an example of her “expertise”:
Our policies are now the same as Russia's: put flags on everything, build more warships and blame the EU for our economic problems.
“And rival storms abroad are surging
From sea to land, from land to sea.
A chain of deepest action forging
Round all, in wrathful energy.
There flames a desolation, blazing
Before the Thunder’s crashing way:
Yet, Lord, Thy messengers are praising
The gentle movement of Thy Day.”
[Archangel Michael, from the Prologue in Heaven, Faust, by Goethe]
(Today is Michaelmas)
Greetings to all good-willing readers of my blog! Slava!
*Und Stürme brausen um die Wette
Vom Meer aufs Land vom Land aufs Meer,
Und bilden wüthend eine Kette
Der tiefsten Wirkung rings umher.
Da flammt ein blitzendes Verheeren
Dem Pfade vor des Donnerschlags.
Doch deine Boten, Herr, verehren
Das sanfte Wandeln deines Tags.
The satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz has been imprisoned.
Yesterday, 23 September 2019, Alison Chabloz was sentenced, at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court, Derbyshire, to 8 weeks’ imprisonment for breach of condition of the suspended sentence which was pronounced in June of 2018. The oddest aspect of that is that that particular condition was a “social media” ban lasting one year, so it actually expired in mid-June 2019. For the entire year, i.e. up to mid-June 2019, Alison Chabloz did not post on what everyone (except, it seems, minor “judges” —formerly called stipendiary magistrates— in the magistrates’ courts of Derbyshire) regards as “social media”, fora such as Twitter, Facebook, GAB etc. She did, however, continue to comment on her own WordPress website blog, on which she had disabled the readers’ comments section.
It is, admittedly, a long time since I was a practising barrister (2008) but certainly I have never seen a legal definition of what is or is not “social media”, by which I mean one accepted by the higher courts. What I do know is that virtually no-one thinks of a person’s own website as “social media”.
Apparently, the required Notice of Breach was only sent to Alison Chabloz after the year-long “social media” ban had actually expired! In other words, she was allowed (should she wish to and be able to) to post on Facebook or Twitter etc at any time after mid-June 2019; the Notice of Breach referred back to the time when the “social media” ban had been in place. It was like someone warning a second person, as it were, in arrears, in such terms as “do not breach this condition but you can breach the condition now or in future (because it has expired), just don’t breach it in the past”! It was a nonsense “warning”, in short.
Background
In fact, it is clear that the moving force behind this latest persecution-prosecution of Alison Chabloz had almost nothing to do with the privatized probation people, who are obviously just “pay peanuts get monkeys” doormats. The malicious Jew-Zionist “charity”, the “Campaign Against Anti-Semitism” or “CAA”, has in fact admitted that it was their pressure on the Ministry of Justice and on (now-washed-up) politician (MP, Secretary of State for Justice and so joke “Lord Chancellor” until July 2019) David Gauke, that caused the probation monkeys and the CPS suddenly (after more than a year…) to get agitato about Alison Chabloz continuing to post on her own blog website. See Notes, below.
Gauke is now sitting as Independent MP, having recently been sacked by the Conservative Party. He is married to a woman called Rachel, a lawyer, and lives in the “Borshch Belt” of South Hertfordshire, near London. He is, or has been, a noted expenses-blodger. A freeloader. He was an active member of Conservative Friends of Israel. His political career is now washed-up.
Here is what the “CAA” had to say about Alison Chabloz being imprisoned:
“District Judge Jonathan Taaffe found Ms Chabloz guilty of breaching the conditions of her suspended sentence after blog posts that she published since June 2018 were found to constitute a breach of a social media ban. Ms Chabloz was handcuffed in court to begin her sentence as her parents, who were in attendance, looked on. The trial in Chesterfield today follows contact between Campaign Against Antisemitism’s lawyers and the National Probation Service.“
Note the (((typically))) sadistic tone: “they” love the fact (if it is a fact) that Alison Chabloz was apparently handcuffed in court post-trial, and that her aged parents had to see that. Despite that, it seems that some of the Jew-Zionists gleefully discussing the matter on Twitter have not quite had their pound of flesh. They want Alison Chabloz to be imprisoned for longer, suffer more etc.
Shakespeare was in some respects the greatest Englishman.
The “CAA” admits to interfering in the probation conditions of Alison Chabloz (see above). The CAA was also the instigator of the original case against her, which was later taken over by the CPS. It was during the preliminary proceedings being taken by the CAA against Alison Chabloz that Stephen Silverman, “Head of Investigations and Enforcement” at the CAA, was exposed as a sadistic and pseudonymous troller of (mainly) women online, Alison Chabloz being one such. I have blogged about this previously. Please refer to Notes, below.
It seems that what happened here is that the CAA or its contacts pressured venal David Gauke in some way. He, at the time, was Secretary of State for Justice (absurd though that was); Gauke then wrote to his officials in the Ministry of Justice, who then gave both the CPS and the privatized probation monkeys a kick. Says a lot about “justice” in contemporary Britain…
So what now for Alison Chabloz?
[Update, 25 September 2019: Please see tweet by Mark Collett at foot of this article; it seems that Alison Chabloz is not at Foston Hall prison, but at New Hall prison]
Well, the sentence handed down was imprisonment for 8 weeks. Alison Chabloz will thus be in prison for 4 weeks minus the day of trial and the day of the preliminary appearance. By my calculations, she should be free on —or possibly before— 19 October 2019, having spent 26 days —possibly fewer— in prison.
Those days will be spent, it seems (subject to confirmation), at Foston Hall, Derbyshire, a closed prison for women. That sounds grim, but the place seems to be a more serious kind of Girls of Radcliff Hall boarding establishment (the former aspect not too literally, I’m sure).
[Update, 25 September 2019: Please see tweet by Mark Collett at foot of this article; it seems that Alison Chabloz is not at Foston Hall prison, but at New Hall prison; I have posted the details of that prison below, at or near the end of this article]
After Alison has spent her mandated 3-4 weeks in prison, she will be free (as I understand the sentence handed down yesterday) to post both on her own website and on “social media” (as until yesterday understood) because, as explained here above, her “social media” ban expired in June 2019 anyway.
The unpaid work part of the original sentence (i.e. the most obviously punitive part of it) has already been chucked in the bin. The original conviction and sentence itself is now going to judicial review, having failed on appeal at Crown Court level; it may be that yesterday’s decisions will be joined to that review; Adrian Davies, Counsel for Alison Chabloz, has told the newspapers that yesterday’s verdict and sentence will be appealed. In the meantime, Alison is sitting in prison. Whether her legal people can get her released on bail pending appeal or review, I do not know.
Whatever happens in respect of appeal or judicial review, Alison Chabloz will be back posting views and, perchance, songs next month. “They” may be crowing over “their” victory, but what goes around comes around. Already, months ago, some quite high-profile Jews have tweeted (and in one or two cases, published in the Press) their view that Alison Chabloz should not have been prosecuted at all because her public profile has thus been raised greatly. Such persecution also awakens the sleeping masses to the Zionist strategy of trying to destroy freedom of expression in the UK.
The Zionists and their (often mentally-afflicted) “antifa” “useful idiots” have been waging a campaign to destroy Alison Chabloz’s access to online donation platforms (by making “complaint” to those websites), but that is a mere inconvenience which will not stop her.
One thing is sure: if Alison Chabloz was determined to pursue her ideals and beliefs before, she must now be absolutely determined to nail them to public consciousness.
— Lady Charlene of Corrupt UK 🐶 #backto60 (@longtallshazza) April 2, 2016
Another Tory liar & expense cheat @DavidGauke Lies about house building Claimed expenses on a flat in London, but has house in the suburbs pic.twitter.com/Y0ZT0EkP7m
— Anyone But Tories (@AnyoneButTheTor) May 20, 2017
If that is correct, then any cards, letters or books [books must be new, paperback, and sent direct from Amazon UK] should be sent to the following address:
Alison Chabloz,
HMP New Hall,
5 New Hall Way,
Flockton, Wakefield,
West Yorkshire,
WF4 4AX
(prisoner number not known to me, but the name should be enough in her case).
As explained above, it now appears that Alison is at HMP New Hall prison in West Yorkshire. See below for information about that prison, again a closed prison. The authorities seem to have resources aplenty to make sure that Alison is in very secure conditions, unable to terrorise “them” by singing further songs for a few weeks! What a farce this country now is! An emerging dystopia (((contaminated)))…and at present headed by a complete idiot posing as a Poundland Churchill.
It appears that over a third of prisoners at New Hall are (notionally) sentenced to 4+ years and that a small number are even doing life sentences! I wonder what bureaucrat thought to send Alison Chabloz (a singer-songwriter sentenced, in our “free country”, to a notional 8 weeks), to such a place of incarceration? Was it deliberate, to try to make her 3+ weeks of actual imprisonment seem harder? Who, I wonder, was the decision-maker? What was his or her motive?
“A lot of prisons are quite beautiful, in an angry, Victorian sort of way. Not this one, with its hodgepodge of buildings, randomly thrown up at the end of a long lane. True, it was snowing last week, which makes everything look different – quieter, more isolated. But it is definitively outside society, invisible from the road, invisible to the world. It is a remarkable thing, what the people within it have built: a community that is at times very difficult, but also rich and warm.” [Zoe Williams, The Guardian].
Oh well, hopefully it will not be too unpleasant for Alison, and at least she should be out by 19 October. In the meantime, I would urge anyone reading this to send her a book, a letter, or at least a postcard.
Below, tweets about a known Jew Zionist who has tweeted that Alison Chabloz should be murdered in prison. Will the tame (suborned) UK police do anything about such incitement? No. Not if, as here, it is perpetrated by a Jew against a non-Jew.
Martin Hizer wants #AlisonChabloz stabbed (shiv) in prison, he is also a big fan of Irgun and Lehi (Jewish terrorists )…why do @MetCC, @CST_UK and @antisemitism completely ignore Jewish nationalism, these extremists are doing a lot more than just singing an offensive song? pic.twitter.com/FiHYTfajgd
It seems that Counsel for Alison Chabloz, Adrian Davies, is going to try to get Alison bail pending appeal and so will be making preliminary application before the same District Judge (Criminal), District Judge Taaffe, today. The chances are that that will be refused, but after today application can be renewed in front of a real judge (a Circuit Judge), probably at Derby Crown Court, with at least a reasonable chance of success, bearing in mind that
the sentence (in reality less than 4 weeks) is short enough that any appeal would probably not come on before Alison has completed her 26 days in prison, thus rendering the appeal otiose;
the probation people, on the relevant form, were expressly not thinking in terms of a custodial sentence (indeed had, literally, ticked another box); the “judge” did have discretion to ignore that fact, but only if he did so reasonably;
a judicial review of the original sentence and subsequent appeal is already lodged.
Some of Alison Chabloz’s persecutors and me-too stonethrowers:
Mike Stuchbery: Sacked supply teacher (the reasons seem “a little unclear”); self-styled “historian” and “journalist”, who has incited “antifa” violence for several years, a habit which backfired after he helped to organize a form of “home invasion” at the house of Tommy Robinson’s wife. Stuchbery then had a “poor little me” meltdown (see amusing photo, below).
He grifts by begging for donations constantly (to pay his rent, his bills, his trips to Germany etc…), but has now decided that it is easier to live off State benefits in Germany (he’s Australian, but has a German wife), so is leaving the UK soon. Good riddance to the horrible fuck-up.
This, below, is what Stuchbery bravely tweeted after Alison Chabloz was imprisoned (and he says that Alison Chabloz was sent back to prison. She was never previously in prison). Not much of an “historian” (one of his poses) and cannot even get contemporary facts right.
Alison Chabloz, notorious Holocaust denier, sent back to prison after violating a social media ban… pic.twitter.com/V76kQmcenQ
Stuchbery is brave enough when kicking a woman who is down, and unable even to comment about his unpleasantness…
“Slatfascists”: This particular online “antifa” idiot and nonentity is so brave that he once had a near-breakdown when he thought that he was no longer anonymous (he may in fact not be quite as anonymous as he imagines). Here he is, loving the idea of Alison Chabloz suffering in prison:
Hush, moron.
What tasteless stodge do you think Alibobs is eating off a plastic plate with plastic utensils for dinner tonight? https://t.co/58kcD4T9QF
Like Stuchbery, “Slatfascists” tweets and retweets dozens of times daily. Like Stuchbery (and many other “antifa” and pro-Zionist online trolls), “Slatfascists” has mental health problems and is on medication for them. Looks like that medicine is not strong enough.
“Dr” Louise Raw: her “doctorate” (which by English convention she should of course not use as a title, she being neither an academic, a medical doctor, nor a scientist in an official institute— and I suppose that I should add to that list priests and bishops etc in holy orders) is apparently the result of a study about a strike by women in a match factory in 1888); she is an active “antifa” nuisance, another person who seems to spend all day on Twitter, despite her Twitter profile saying “historian” and referencing BBC Radio London (on which she once spoke, apparently). She seems to be anti-Israel yet at the same time supports the Zionists in the UK, as here below, where she retweets a tweet about Alison Chabloz from the malicious CAA “charity”. Very odd.
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 👍🏻
Well, there are numerous others of similar type, all or almost all Zionist Jews and/or “antifa” idiots . They must hate it that here we are, only 3 days after sentencing, and Alison Chabloz has already served about 12% of her sentence! Her total sentence is, in real terms, 26 days.
Update, 26 September, 1900 hrs
Alison Chabloz is released on unconditional bail pending appeal.
Alison Chabloz got unconditional bail The judge accepted that since the appeal will not be heard any time soon, she should not be kept in prison pending appeal, as to do so would render the appeal nugatory. She’s out of prison –
Looks as though “Slatfascists”, Stuchbery and a few hate-filled Jewish women in North London and elsewhere will have to increase the dosage of their medication to get through this trying time. Ha ha! Perhaps “Dr. Tim” will suggest that they use the medication he himself is on…
…”and at CAA HQ, bitter herbs were eaten”…
Update, 27 September 2019, 1900 hrs
This (below) really is funny! All the Jew-Zionist know-alls (well, several) vying with each other to say inaccurate things about Alison Chabloz’s situation, the law, the prisons, her bail conditions (there are none: she is on unconditional bail). 1930s people would say “it’s a scream”! “Frankiescar” (Andrew Roberjot, unqualified “legal people” groupie), shows off his defective legal knowledge and reasoning, “Husker_Ju” and others get it almost all wrong (until the truth dawns), while “Rattus2384” (Stephen Applebaum, soi-disant “film critic” and/or house husband…and publicly-exposed Twitter troll) has to tell the others in the end that Alison Chabloz is out of prison, not subject to any conditions, not electronically tagged, able to post freely online (and rather unlikely ever to have to return to prison for the remaining 21 days of her sentence, but they have not cottoned-on to that yet).
(Click on and read the whole thread for the full joke-value)
Alison Chabloz has already blogged in brief about her time “inside”. Turns out that the Jew knowalls tweeting about how she would be subjected to “the full Prisoner Cell Block H experience” could not have been further from the mark!
“All in all, my third experience of loss of liberty was the least unpleasant thus far. Indeed, compared to my first two lock-ups in November 2016 (six hours) and in October 2017 (48 hours) both in police cells, my short time at HMP New Hall was a joy ride.
Single, warm cell; TV, kettle, pillow, thick quilt, mattress, e-cigarette; a view over the prison wall of trees and the occasional glimpse of a squirrel or wood pigeon. Being in need of a good rest (not having been able to enjoy a few days’ holiday thanks to my aborted trip to Paris last month), I lazed, feet up; watched the news and a couple of films; drank endless cups of tea and vaped nicotine, in moderation…“
Likewise, the sick fantasy of some ignoramus (a “Hope not Hate” idiot), to the effect that Alison would be (he implied) attacked by prisoners when incarcerated, was as inaccurate as was his designation of which prison she was being held in.
I believe that Alison Chabloz is expecting to have her main appeal, in fact a judicial review of the decisions of the lower courts (Westminster Magistrates’ Court and Southwark Crown Court), heard by the Divisional Court, i.e. in effect the High Court (presumably at the Royal Courts of Justice in London), on 31 October 2019.
It may be (and I am assuming that such is the case) that Alison’s appeal against the (now partly-served) 8-week imprisonment sentence for breach of condition, handed down by Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court recently, will be joined to the application set down for the 31st.
If the review is successful as a whole, then the prison sentences (suspended and immediate) will fall. If not, and if the consequential immediate imprisonment sentence is left unchanged, then Alison will be returned to prison to complete her sentence, which by my calculations would be a further 21 days actually in the prison.
Beyond that, the only date of importance in relation to Alison’s case would be 14 June 2020, which is when the 2018 suspended sentence ceases to have effect. 8 months from now, Alison will be free from the legal effects of the CAA’s chicanery and will no doubt be singing in satire once again.
Update, 7 October 2019
Alison Chabloz discusses her prison sentence for daring to question an alleged historical narrative. https://t.co/JRuzOcLHST#BitChute
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…
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://t.co/8fNYvCfXIy
The main news is that, by order of a judge at Derby Crown Court last week, the appeal against the conviction and sentence for breach will be heard in January 2020 before that court. I should have thought that it would be logical to join that to the judicial review hearing presently set down for 31 October 2019, i.e. one week from today, but maybe I am missing some procedural reason why that cannot be done. I have not practised at the Bar for 11 years now, and not appeared on a judicial review (which at one time I did about once weekly) for 24 years! Tempus fugit…
France the country of Charlie Hebdo and #JeSuisCharlie mass protests, has banned Alison Chabloz for 4O years. No tweets from @PrisonPlanet supporting her..
Pack of Jew-Zionist trolls, sub nom “Gnasher Jew”, supporting “Conservative” General Election candidate Robert Largan.
Largan is contesting High Peak, Derbyshire, but is otherwise an accountant who works for Marks & Spencer. His apparent fervent support for Zionist Jewry may be misplaced in that constituency. We shall find out on 12 December.
“Gnasher Jew” again repeats the lie that Alison Chabloz was “imprisoned for hate speech”, when in fact she was given a suspended sentence at Westminster Mags in June 2018 in respect of some amusing songs satirizing “holocaust” hoaxes and fakery, as well as Zionism.
The conviction and sentence is now subject to judicial review (in effect, appeal) this very day in the Administrative Court (High Court) in London.
Her brief imprisonment for breach of one condition of that sentence, imposed more recently at Chesterfield Mags, is also being appealed and that appeal will be heard at Derby Crown Court in January 2020. In the meantime she is free on bail and free to post songs and comment; on paper, she still has about 19 days to serve in respect of that latter sentence, having spent three days in prison and a few days in court.
Adding that Kasey Carver is a well known long term associate of Alison Chabloz, an infamous Neo-Nazi and Holocaust Denier, imprisoned for hate speech.
Alison Chabloz blogs about various matters including the odd behaviour of Robert Largan, the unimpressive little man who is the “Conservative” candidate for High Peak, Derbyshire and who is now making up stories about Alison Chabloz’s supposed connection with the Labour candidate (and present MP) Ruth George via another Labour Party member:
Following the failure of the judicial review application on 31 October 2019, the next court date for Alison Chabloz will be her appeal against the notional 8 weeks’ imprisonment for breach of sentence condition handed down at Chesterfield Mags. The appeal will be heard in January 2020 at Derby Crown Court.
Meanwhile, here is a transcript of the judgment in Alison’s recent judicial review application hearing:
Alison Chabloz will be at Derby Crown Court on 10 January 2020 to attend her appeal hearing against the 8 week sentence handed down by Chesterfield Mags in respect of a charge of breach of condition of her original sentence.
In theory, Alison might, if unsuccessful, face being imprisoned for the remainder of her 8 week sentence (in reality, it was 4 weeks actually in prison, minus days in court, meaning about 23 days, of which she has now served 3 days).
The Crown Court might allow her appeal. If not, then it can impose whatever sentence it decides upon, which might be custodial or non-custodial, and which might be a greater or lesser term than the ~19 days which are presently “outstanding”.
Alison Chabloz has penned a few pre-hearing words on her WordPress blog:
All believers in socio-political freedom of expression should support Alison Chabloz.
Update, 10 January 2020
Alison Chabloz was at Derby Crown Court for the hearing of her appeal against both conviction and sentence for “breach of condition”. The judge was told that “a voluble lobby” (((lobby))) was persecuting her. The judge wants evidence of that [see below!]
The matter has been adjourned until 25 June 2010, and set down for two days.
In an unexpected move (well, unexpected to some), Alison Chabloz, having been released until 25 June on unconditional bail, was then arrested by Derbyshire police drones outside Derby Crown Court, in respect of the (bad law) Communications Act 2003, s.127 (brought in under Blair’s elected tyranny).
I think that we can guess (((what))) and even (((who))) is behind this latest manipulation of the UK police and English law. In fact, Alison was arrested on a previous occasion by Derbyshire “officers”, who seem to have plenty of resources to throw at her and free speech when (((you know who))) make malicious complaint.
This latest crookery seems to prove her point…
Update, 11 January 2020
Further to the main article, David Gauke, the joke “Lord Chancellor”/Secretary of State for Justice (until someone was got at, her alleged “breach of condition” was not going to be prosecuted) lost his Commons seat at the recent General Election. At least that’s one disgusting corrupt blot removed from Parliament. He will not suffer much though, I regret to say. He ripped off the taxpayers royally via fraudulent or semi-fraudulent expenses over the years, and still lives in the South Hertfordshire “Borshch Belt” with his wife (a lawyer called Rachel…) and is, no doubt, scarcely feeling the pinch. He was a very mediocre solicitor prior to becoming an MP, but no doubt “they” will get him a well-paid sinecure in the City of London. Still, one gone.
Further update, 11 January 2020, 1500 hrs
Yesterday’s (10 January 2020) hearing at Derby Crown Court was presided over by HH Judge Egbuna, who remarked that it was “vital” to ascertain whether the decision of the National Probation Service to press for prosecution of Alison Chabloz on the ground of breach of condition had been taken “professionally” or whether the decision had been a result of “political motivation”.
The judge was informed by Prosecution Counsel that the decision to proceed with a prosecution (and so trial for breach) was not taken or initiated by Alison Chabloz’s probation officer, as would be the normal situation; neither was that decision taken by his supervisor. It was the decision of someone above those levels.
Sounds as though the judge is seriously worried by possible interference in the judicial and quasi-judicial processes by (((someone))) or (((some organization)))…
The judge declared that Alison’s trial could not proceed until it had been established on what basis or bases the decision to prosecute had been taken, and by whom. The matter has now been adjourned until 25 June 2020.
That, however was not the end of (((their))) manipulations for the day. Alison Chabloz was arrested at court and taken to Derby Police Station, where she was “interviewed” (interrogated) by detectives about a complaint made by ((( ))). At length, late in the evening, she was given police bail until a date in February, but only on the condition that she not post on her blog or even (unsure; I await further details) the Internet itself. That disgraceful “police-state” prohibition will, I apprehend, be challenged in court before very long.
Well, there we have it. A contrived “complaint” with the sole (main) aim of preventing Alison Chabloz from exercizing her right to free speech (which right “they” have almost destroyed in the UK, aided by “me too” rabbits on Twitter and elsewhere). What other objective? Well, I suppose that it also inconvenienced Alison Chabloz, and their little minds love to do things like that, as witness the false and malicious complaint the same “people” made about me three years ago:
It is about time that the police and CPS woke up to the fact that they are being manipulated and used by the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” fake charity.
England has now become a country in which a police desk sergeant in deepest darkest Derbyshire can decide not to allow a British citizen the right to post on the Internet! “They” have destroyed freedom for their own tribal ends.
Update, 6 September 2020
Well, here we are, a year since Alison Chabloz spent a couple of days in a not-uncomfortable women’s prison before getting out on bail pending appeal.
A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then, as I have explained in other blog posts, but the most relevant fact pertaining to this blog post is that, a few months ago, the Crown Prosecution Service informed Derby Crown Court that the CPS would not be opposing Alison’s appeal.
In short, Alison Chabloz beat both the CPS and the malicious Jew-Zionist “charity”, the so-called Campaign Against Antisemitism, which had instigated all persecution and prosecution(s) against Alison.
Alison will therefore not be returning to prison to serve the unserved 2 weeks or so of her sentence. In simple terms, she won.
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.
The UK is in an extraordinary political and Constitutional mess. What is more extraordinary is that the person who should be trying to sort it out, as Prime Minister, is not only not doing so (and is in any case incapable of doing so, being totally unfit for his office), but is actively making the situation worse.
I do not often support the words of pro-Israel drone Douglas Murray, but he has it at least largely right here [see below]:
I have been saying for years that Boris Johnson is unfit for any office. Finally, after a decade or more, much of the the msm and also the more aware part of the public are catching up with me. I despise pretty much everything about Boris Johnson, who has been puffed for years as “Prime Minister in Waiting” by a dozy, complaisant or conspiring Press, radio and TV.
Boris is an idiot, the very words used to describe him by Israeli Embassy political intelligence officer Shai Masot, caught by Al Jazeera TV conspiring with former Labour MP Joan Ryan. The exact words? “…Boris is busy, you know. You know he is an idiot, but so far he has become the minister of foreign affairs without any kind of responsibilities…We like Boris”. Of course (((they))) do! Boris-Idiot will do anything that the Jewish lobby, Israel, or the “tail-wags-dog” USA want.
Re Pete Willsman and Israeli Embassy plot to interfere in UK politics This is Israeli spy (now expelled) talking to Labour traitor Joan Ryan of @_LFI Ryan : "What happened to the names we put into the Embassy, Shai" Masot : "We've got £1m…"pic.twitter.com/QekirLRyU0
— ICJ says Israel is guilty of Genocide (@TheBirmingham6) May 31, 2019
What is it about the UK, that an idiot is suddenly thought some kind of minor genius if he went to Eton and Oxford and can recall some of the Latin and Greek he learned at school? What is there in Boris behind the rote-learned classical Greek and the carefully-cultivated, careless “English” “upper class” persona? Which of course is largely a fake, because Boris is part-Jew, part-Circassian Turk, part God-knows-what, born in the USA, brought up partly there and also in Belgium.
Behind all the playacting, behind the Eton and Oxford, behind the pathetic am-dram reprise of Winston Churchill, what is in the middle of the onion? Anything? Nothing?
Boris Johnson, as I have repeatedly said (and with increasing frustration as he has been repeatedly promoted to the level of his incompetence— the Peter Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle), Boris is unfit to be in public life at all. In fact, he has outdone the Peter Principle, in that he has been incompetent in all of the jobs he has ever had (with the arguable exception of the editorship of The Spectator), yet has talked his way, with a fair wind from connections and msm, to become journalist, editor, MP, Mayor of London, MP again, Cabinet minister, and now Prime Minister, despite having been incompetent in all or almost all of those roles.
This government is an entirely illegitimate pro-Israel regime. All of its ministers and most of its MPs are members of Conservative Friends of Israel. Some are part-Jew, some full, e.g. Grant Shapps, dodgy business type from the Hertfordshire Borshch Belt, who was head of the youth wing of UK “Bnai Brith”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%27nai_B%27rith
This government is undoubtedly the least impressive in living memory. Few of its members, if any, have real or substantial achievement to their name. Some, notably East African Asian Priti Patel, incredibly now again a Cabinet minister after having been sacked by Theresa May, are or were Israeli agents, certainly agents of influence, possibly more.
There is no doubt that the Boris Johnson government is set to increase the repression of free speech where it affects Jews and Zionism. There are probably secret plans to introduce the mediaeval-style laws against “holocaust” “denial” that we see in several other European states. That alone means that Boris-Idiot and his Cabinet and his government have to be removed. Whatever it takes. At present, Boris Idiot would find it hard to introduce such repressive laws (unless with the help of Labour Friends of Israel MPs), tightening even further the repression introduced (mainly) under Tony Blair and also Theresa May. The Commons votes might not be there for that. However, were the —misnamed— Conservatives to win a Commons majority, we should expect all sorts of police-state actions to increase as the “Conservative” ranks would be padded out with unthinking newly-elected lobby-fodder.
That horrible bastard John Mann, who might well soon have been deselected by his local Labour Party anyway, has now accepted a well-paid role as the Government’s “anti-Semitism” “tsar” and will not be standing for re-election :
“Mann, who will be based in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, claims his sole aim is to make the UK a haven for the Jewish community.” (it already is, and that is a major problem).
“In her last act as prime minister, Theresa May appointed Mann, who backed Brexit and this week voted with the government to try to block emergency legislation intended to stop no-deal, as an independent adviser to the government on tackling anti-semitism.”
“Boris Johnson has since upgraded the role, underlining the importance the government attaches to the issue.” [The Times].
There you have it: Theresa May and Boris Johnson (both of part-Jew origins: one of Johnson’s great-grandfathers was an Orthodox Jew rabbi in Lithuania!) head and headed the two most pro-Jew and pro-Zionist governments in British history. Arguably the two worst-ever from other points of view too.
What about Brexit?
I have been pro-Brexit for years, well before the 2016 Referendum. Britain must try to get out of the EU “lobster-pot” (easy to enter, almost impossible to exit). I tweeted (until the Jew-Zionists had me barred from Twitter in 2018) and have blogged (since late 2016) about these matters.
Other states have voted not to go further into the lobster-pot. They were forced to “rethink” and “vote again”…Likewise, if states like Portugal and Austria elected any “far right” MPs, the EU cold-shouldered them until the “mistake” was “corrected”. The same squeeze is now being put onto Hungary and Italy. This is a tyranny, though —so far— of the “iron fist in velvet glove” variety.
As soon as the 2016 Referendum was over, I was predicting a long campaign by NWO/ZOG/EU to reverse the Referendum one way or another. Either Remain, or “BRINO” (Brexit In Name Only). I have no idea to what extent the criminal mishandling of the Brexit negotiations was deliberate, but I have my suspicions. Anyway, there it is.
The EEC was supposedly a matter of intra-Europe free trade and a customs union to facilitate that. When the UK joined the EEC and then voted (in a fixed referendum, in which the pro-EEC side had 10x the money to buy publicity etc…) to remain, in the 1970s, the bloc was still mainly beneficial. However, just as Bismarck’s Zollverein paved the way for a German unitary (unified) state in the late 19th Century, so the EEC paved the way for a transformation of the free states of Western and Central Europe into the EC and then, via Maastricht, the EU. The precursor to a one-Europe state.
I might not even object to that, were that EU superstate to be a true federation of equals and not under sinister “New World Order” [“NWO”] control, but that is not the case. NWO and “ZOG” [“Zionist Occupation Government”] work together to impose, over time, a ghastly and repressive tyranny, one that encompasses both Europe and North America and which aspires to control the whole world in time. George Orwell was a prophet. The EU is only part of the way towards the ultimate destination.
We are therefore left with a paradox: I want the UK to get out, fully out, of the EU, but also want an end to the present Boris Johnson “Conservative” government.
There is no place for my views in the present black-and-white msm narrative being put before the public, which narrative has room only for a binary choice:
No Deal Brexit + Boris; or
Remain/Brexit In Name Only/EU-approved “deal” + No Boris.
I reject that binary choice. It is just a couple of flickering shadows on the wall of the cave.
The best thing would be for the UK to leave the EU, and for the Conservatives to be heavily defeated at a general election.
There is no prospect that Corbyn and his deadheads can run a successful government either, so that might well open the door for a real social-national movement and party (which latter does not exist at present; it must first exist, naturally).
Desperate times, desperate measures. Only when people need real leadership from a social-national party and leader can that party and leader arise from obscurity to their true stature.
I wrote the words below some three months ago, in an earlier blog post about Boris-Idiot. They have worn rather well, if I say so myself. Give that man a cee-gar!
“We keep hearing that “Boris Johnson has the ability to be Prime Minister, but does he have the necessary character?”
My response is “where has Boris Johnson proven that he has the ability?”; on the contrary, he has, if anything, proven that he has not the ability.”
The above photo shows a police officer, I think a “Special” (volunteer part-time “officer”), looking at her hat, with its chequered line. Presumably a lesbian. Now, there are several points about that photo: first and perhaps most important, who in authority, or should I say “leading beyond authority”?…
…allowed police officers to take part in what, in the broad sense, is a political, meaning socio-political, or cultural-political, march or demonstration?
Common Purpose
This, below, is the very dangerous woman who is or has been the figurehead for much of such socio-political tendency in the past three decades:
Reverting to the photo at top, can the public have trust in such partisan police personnel? I think not.
This goes beyond the personal proclivities of the individuals. It is a question of the police, both institutionally, and as individual officers, espousing, publicly, controversial socio-political positions. Also, the police operating in a biased manner.
Many of those on the social-national side of UK radical politics have, in recent years, been subjected to the results of this kind of one-way-street policing, policing which is in other words biased, politically biased. I myself have had a couple of instructive encounters of the sort.
Zionist pressure groups
In early 2017, the Jew-Zionist fanatic Stephen Silverman, who styles himself “Head of Investigations and Enforcement” at the small but (((well-connected))) “Campaign Against Antisemitism” [“CAA”] pressure group, complained about me (on behalf of that group or cabal), to the police at Grays, in estuarial South Essex, and not far from where he lives.
[below, Grays Police Station, surely one of the ugliest buildings in England].
My experience there was the subject of a blog post a couple of years ago:
Silverman himself was unwittingly exposed as a serial troll by the CAA’s own lawyer in a preliminary hearing of the Alison Chabloz case. It turned out that Silverman had been trolling people on social media —mostly women— for years, using a number of pseudonymous Twitter and other social media accounts. “Gloating sadism” was his overall persona. He and a group of other Jews, together with a couple of part-Jew doormats, all in or connected with the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” [CAA] pressure group, joined in that campaign of online and offline bullying.
That group loved to make malicious and false accusations to Twitter, Facebook etc, as well as to the police and to professional organizations. Their posts frequently predicted (((with typical sadism))), that numerous anti-Zionist people would be arrested, charged, convicted, imprisoned. The bullying campaign started around 2012 and built up to a crescendo, though as they were one by one identified, they (((typically))) backpedalled and tried to play the “victim”…
Meanwhile, now-disgraced Jew-Zionist solicitor Mark Lewis gave an interview to the Jewish Press in which he openly admitted that his intention was to “take homes away from” those he called “Nazis”, by means of “lawfare” (abuse of the laws of England for Zionist political purposes).
One person, David Carter, of Cardiff, a former executive with decades of experience working for transnational companies, and an unblemished record (i.e. no police record) was actually arrested and his home searched by duped or colluding police. He was later released “on police bail” (where he stayed for months, which was still lawful then though not now, the law on “police bail” having since been changed); his computers, used for consultancy work, were not returned for further months. He never was charged with anything.
Others were subjected to “voluntary” interviews, which in fact are scarcely voluntary at all (belatedly, and in fact fairly recently, Silverman himself was eventually asked to submit to such an interview, and agreed, but at very short notice got CAA lawyers to write to Essex Police declining; seems that he got away with it, so far).
A lady called Jo Stowell, a professional photographer from Clifton, Bristol, was not only trolled online by the same group of Jews, but was sent unwanted goods etc from sale or return operations, and was subjected to other offline bullying. She too was “asked” to attend a “voluntary” interview with the police by reason of malicious complaint(s). She agreed, attending with her solicitor. No charge was ever made. The Jewish-Zionists did manage to ruin her previously successful photography business though.
Jo Stowell
The experiences of Alison Chabloz, persecuted singer-songwriter and satirist, have been well-documented both in these blog pages and elsewhere, indeed in the national and international Press (and on TV and radio). I commend her own blog:
My own 2017 experience with the Essex Police is linked above, near top; I was also bothered, though much later, in 2018, by telephone calls from a P.C. Plod (his real name was something else…I think!) from the police of one of the most (((occupied))) parts of London. It appears that I was “accused” of having reposted, in fact completely lawfully, on the GAB social media site responses also completely lawful in themselves, posted by the owner of GAB, Andrew Torba, to a malicious Jewish woman “activist” in North London.
That Jewish woman had, laughably, attempted to intimidate Torba, a U.S. citizen whose GAB site operates from the USA and Eastern Caribbean, by threatening Torba, who is resident in the USA, with Scotland Yard! Torba’s responses started off polite and then went downhill as the woman persisted (((typically))), culminating with Torba’s suggestion that she “fuck off” or some such. She did (she had no choice!), but then tried to find scapegoats in the UK from those many who had reposted Torba’s posts (finding them funny; the tweets also rather well illustrated Hitler’s obiter dicta about the Jews being, despite what they and others often say, a very stupid people).
P.C. Plod had obviously been “got at” in some way. In fact, after having been harassed by him, I had to write to his own Borough Commander and to Cressida Dick, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, detailing both why nothing that I had done constituted anything unlawful under English law, and as to why the complainant herself was (in relation to me) certainly wasting police time (quite deliberately); a crime, albeit minor, and possibly coming close at times (in her complaints against others) to attempting to pervert the course of justice, a far more serious crime.
Even after that, Plod still had the cheek to email me (again)! Eventually, I gave him a face-saving way out, which he took. The experience was however unsettling beyond my personal inconvenience and anger. It showed that the police in the UK now have little understanding of either the boundaries of their powers or the limits to the authorized discretion customarily granted to the police. It showed that a UK citizen not doing anything unlawful could nonetheless have his private life and rights of expression interfered with by the police— the police at the lowest level of rank, at that.
The police equation for idiots seems to go something like: “Racism” is bad, so anything we are told is “racist” should not be allowed, so alleged “racism” is to be at once treated as “hate crime” or “hate speech”, so use of the word “Jew” is probably wrong or unlawful (if used by a non-Jew or someone who is anti-Zionist), so the police should assume that any online post (by someone not Jewish) and using the word “Jew” is both racist and unlawful, so the police should immediately take action of behalf of a complainant (if Jewish) against the alleged “racist” (if not Jewish) and this gives the police the right and power to censor anything they like, whether actually lawful or not…It’s mad.
More than that. The said Plod was unwilling to accept that I (a practising barrister at one time) knew more about the relevant law than he did (I did) but I still had to detail it in my letter to his superiors in case even they were unwilling to accept that the law is what it is and is not a “leading beyond authority” instrument of flexible socio-political repression, “useful” for repressing the entirely lawful views of those whom the police institutionally, or the personal acquaintances of police individually, may wish to hit out at. I might add that P.C. Plod’s manner was impertinent and smug, as well as rather aggressive.
This tendency, of the police to go well beyond their actual powers as authorized by or under law, has started to spread in recent years. In 2013, a police sergeant in Hampshire actually tried to strongarm a local newspaper after it printed material critical of a councillor!
“Padraig Reidy, of the freedom of speech campaign group Index on Censorship, said: ‘It’s not the sort of thing that should happen in any democratic country. It’s political policing.’ Mr Satchwell added: ‘Hopefully, before it’s too late, people at the top of politics and policing will wake up to what is happening in what is supposed to be one of the most revered democratic countries in the world.’” [Daily Mail]
In respect of the malice of the Zionist CAA cabal, relatively unknown people such as me have been attacked, but so have those far better known, such as Al-Jazeera TV, Gilad Atzmon (the Jewish but anti-Zionist jazz musician) and David Icke (who scarcely needs introduction, at least in the UK).
However, as far as I know, they have not been harassed by the police. I suppose that it would backfire on the police themselves to harass those who are too famous.
The Blair-Brown governments were those that brought in the obsessive “anti-racism” which is now so pervasive. It is why we now have incidents such as the schoolgirl disqualified from an exam by an exam board because she wrote a few things about cruel “halal” slaughter of animals, which comments might be thought critical of Islam or Muslims!
and note that OCR (the exam board) weaselled thus:
“OCR said in a statement: “OCR takes all incidence of suspected offensive material against a religious group in exams very seriously and must apply rules which are set out for all exam boards in such cases.
“We accept that initially we did not reach the right conclusion and were too harsh.“
In other words, there is no freedom to say what you wish against any religion (or ethnic group) now, no matter what its adherents or members might do or how they might behave, but “we were too harsh” (in the way in which censorship of students was actually carried out…). Even the girl’s mother, while angry at what happened, blamed “an over-zealous, over-righteous examiner“, rather than the prevailing miasma of politically-correct and grey-area semi-legal repression.
We should remind ourselves that many of the greatest minds, saints and heroes of Western Civilization would probably have their words censored now in the UK. They would probably have some policeman improperly telephoning them and annoying them!
It is the web of bad law that has been the acid corroding our liberty in the UK. The Communications Act 2003, s.127 has been the facilitator for much of the repression online. It has strengthened the petty denouncers, the complainers to the police, those for whom Twitter is their little world, to be patrolled and “monitored” and from which any dissenting voices (particularly the defenders of European race and culture, and freedom) are to be removed. You can now add to Twitter the other main platforms: Facebook, YouTube etc.
When the police are not impartial arbiters, to whom can we turn? Quis custodiet custodes ipsos?
In the United States, it is often said that the bedrock of civil liberty is the famous Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the “right of the people to keep and bear arms”, alongside the First Amendment (freedom of religion, Press, speech, expression, assembly).
I have always been sceptical of the quasi-holy U.S. Constitution, that is, the way in which this man-made document, cobbled together in a tavern by a bunch of freemasons nearly 250 years ago, is regarded as Holy Writ by the Americans of today. Its “rights” have always seemed to me more apparent than real. For example, you (an American in the USA) have the right to free speech. Very true. So try exercizing it…
If you try to say something negative in the USA about the lobby of the Jews, or about their hugely disproportionate power or influence in the USA or the wider world, or about the “holocaust” hoaxes and fakery, you will almost certainly not face (direct) action from the local or state police, or from the FBI. In that respect, the USA is better than the UK and much of Europe. You may well, however, lose your job, face professional difficulties and, consequent upon those, even lose your home by reason of financial problems as the Jews and doormats thereof gang up against you, so your “freedom” is, in real terms, very constrained indeed. America, “land of freedom”?…
Likewise, yes, a United States citizen or resident may, with variations depending on what state or city he/she lives in (eg New York City as compared with most of the rest of New York state) “keep and bear [some] arms”, but your pistol or revolver, shotgun or rifle, though it may protect you against (some) criminals (ordinary or political) in your home or car (always assuming that you can both handle the weapon and deploy it in time), will certainly not protect you against the state (meaning here not the individual state but mainly the Federal Government).
If the Federal Government of the United States wants to move against an individual or a group, that person or group has no chance. SWAT squads, helicopters, even armoured cars! And that is before the main US military machine is even involved! Your pistol will not help you much under those circumstances. That is why I have only limited faith in weapons.
Past history
When the NSDAP started to gain a little local (in Munich) traction in 1920 and 1921, its meetings were routinely broken up with great violence by “Red Front” (Communist/pro-Communist) thugs, the sort that (though in rather farcical reincarnation) might be called “antifa” today. That is when the nascent NSDAP formed the SA (Sturmabteilung or Storm Detachment), though at first informally:
“The precursor to the Sturmabteilung had acted informally and on an ad hoc basis for some time before this. Hitler, with an eye always to helping the party to grow through propaganda, convinced the leadership committee to invest in an advertisement in the Münchener Beobachter (later renamed the Völkischer Beobachter) for a mass meeting in the Hofbräuhaus, to be held on 16 October 1919. Some 70 people attended, and a second such meeting was advertised for 13 November in the Eberl-Bräu beer hall. About 130 people attended; there were hecklers, but Hitler’s military friends promptly ejected them by force, and the agitators “flew down the stairs with gashed heads”. The next year, on 24 February, he announced the party’s Twenty-Five Point program at a mass meeting of some 2,000 people at the Hofbräuhaus. Protesters tried to shout Hitler down, but his former army companions, armed with rubber truncheons, ejected the dissenters. The basis for the SA had been formed.” [Wikipedia, though note the (((influence))) in Wikipedia: Communist thugs are “hecklers”! The same is true of most of what you now read or hear about Mosley’s BUF rallies of the 1930s].
Also, note that Hitler’s first attempt at a “mass meeting” attracted an audience of only 70! When I gave a talk to the London Forum in 2017, there were about 100 or so there. Maybe there is hope…
“A permanent group of party members who would serve as the Saalschutzabteilung (meeting hall protection detachment) for the DAP gathered around Emil Maurice after the February 1920 incident at the Hofbräuhaus. There was little organization or structure to this group.” [Wikipedia]
“The future SA developed by organizing and formalizing the groups of ex-soldiers and beer hall brawlers who were to protect gatherings of the Nazi Party from disruptions from Social Democrats (SPD) and Communists (KPD) and to disrupt meetings of the other political parties. By September 1921 the name Sturmabteilung (SA) was being used informally for the group.” [Wikipedia]
Interesting too that even Wikipedia recognizes that the purpose of the SA was the protection of meetings, and not the breaking-up of the meetings of opponents.
“The Nazi Party held a large public meeting in the Munich Hofbräuhaus on 4 November 1921, which also attracted many Communists and other enemies of the Nazis. After Hitler had spoken for some time, the meeting erupted into a mêlée in which a small company of SA thrashed the opposition. The Nazis called this event the Saalschlacht (“meeting hall battle”), and it assumed legendary proportions in SA lore with the passage of time. Thereafter, the group was officially known as the Sturmabteilung.” [Wikipedia]
The SS [Schutzstaffel, or Protection Squad] was formed in 1925, with a similar defensive or protective function:
“In 1925, Hitler ordered Schreck to organize a new bodyguard unit, the Schutzkommando (Protection Command).[1] It was tasked with providing personal protection for Hitler at NSDAP functions and events. That same year, the Schutzkommando was expanded to a national organization and renamed successively the Sturmstaffel (Storm Squadron), and finally the Schutzstaffel (Protection Squad; SS).[10] Officially, the SS marked its foundation on 9 November 1925 (the second anniversary of the Beer Hall Putsch).[11] The new SS was to provide protection for NSDAP leaders throughout Germany.” [Wikipedia]
One can well imagine that any such bodies as the SA or SS formed in the Britain of 2019, even if not uniformed, would soon be banned and their members subject to show trials.
Contemporary happenings
In fact, we have seen the like, in the past couple of years, especially in relation to “a certain group of young people” the name of which I do not think that I shall use here, which young people have been put on trial for allegedly belonging to such a group. Oh yes, teenagers and other young people put on trial, and not in the local magistrates’ courts but at the Old Bailey and elsewhere! The “evidence” of their supposed organization, or at least political allegiance? Such items as cookie-cutters shaped like Swastikas, pillowcases with slogans on them etc, even the Christian name given by the parents to a baby! It seems that the ethos of Matthew Hopkins, Witchfinder-General in the 17th Century, is not dead and indeed has found a home in the British police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)!
Thankfully, the (usually) good sense of the British jury has meant that most such defendants have been acquitted so far; perhaps that is why some politicians, notably Rosie Cooper MP [Lab., West Lancashire] have called for the use of “Diplock courts” (i.e. trials without juries) in political cases. If that happened, that type of court would be the first such court authorized in England itself in hundreds of years (though the Criminal Justice Act 2003, a typical piece of Tony Blair repressive legislation, does open the door to such trials). A Star Chamber for our times…
Conclusion
In a situation where self-defence, whether organized or individual, is criminalized by a hostile and partisan state, the only solution for social-national people is to cluster in “safe zones”, as I have blogged in the past: see https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/category/safe-zones/
In the UK, where even personal self-defence weaponry is generally unavailable, and where the police are rapidly becoming the strong-arm section of the multikulti “diverse” (non-white non-diverse) society, the formation of a germinal ethnostate is the only way forward.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplock_court “[Lord Gardiner‘s Minority Report as part of the Parker Report in March 1972 found “no evidence of [intimidation] or of perversity in juries”.[7] The report marked the beginning of the policy of “criminalisation”,[8] whereby the State removed legal distinctions between political violence and normal crime, with political prisoners treated as common criminals. The report provided the basis for the Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973, which, although later amended (with the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1974 and subsequent renewals), continued as the basis for counter-terrorist legislation in the UK.” [Wikipedia]
As I write, persecuted singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz is once again in court, being sentenced after a notorious Jewess supported by the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” (yet again…) made a malicious allegation against her, using (as noted above) the “bad law” known as Communications Act 2003, s.127.
I myself quite recently had to chase off the Jew nuisance who calls himself “Head of Investigations and Enforcement” for the “CAA”; a ludicrously grand title for someone who is one of only a handful of Jews posing as an important organization. The whole pack really consists of only a few dozen (if that many) fanatical Jew-Zionists.
The Jew paedophile, sex predator, rapist etc Jeffrey Epstein has committed suicide, it is claimed. The circumstances seem mysterious, as when that other Jew disgrace, “Robert Maxwell”, supposedly fell off or jumped off or was pushed off his motor yacht in the region of the Canary Islands.
The Jew Epstein has been in the firing line (not literally, as he should have been) for years:
When “Robert Maxwell” died, his daughter, Ghislaine, who was completely mixed up with Epstein for decades (from age 29 or 30; she is now 57), said that she believed her father to have been murdered. Now Epstein’s death also raises questions. He too was mixed up with some of the most famous and/or powerful figures in the US and UK: Trump, Clinton, Prince Andrew…
Robert Maxwell was thought to be a (perhaps the) major MOSSAD operative in Europe. Now we see that his daughter was intimate or at least friendly with many of the world’s powerful and uber-wealthy. That does not mean that she was operating or partly operating on behalf of the Israeli state or the world Zionist conspiracy, but it does raise questions.
One has to ask why Ghislaine Maxwell has not (at least not yet) been arrested either in the UK or USA. Apparently, some of the young girls abused by the Jew Epstein used to refer to the Jewess “Maxwell” as “the Madam”. Say no more…
So why no action against her? Is this the Jew-Zionist lobby working behind the scenes of our “democracy” again?
Prince Andrew
As far as I am concerned, Prince Andrew is a useless fellow, a complete waste of space. People always say “but he fought in the Falklands!”, as if a few weeks in action (in fact merely observing; he was never under direct fire) gave the prince a free ride for life (his birth already gave him that, I suppose). Admittedly, Andrew did serve for a number of years as Lieutenant, but his service is said to have been generally underwhelming. On retirement from the Royal Navy, he was given the rank of Honorary Captain, rather than promoted as substantive Captain. In 2015, Andrew was made Honorary Vice-Admiral (I have no idea whether he gets a toy battleship to go with that).
Typical British cap-doffing, always bending over backwards to show deference to “royalty”, is still endemic in the UK. People less enamoured of the royals have commented that the Press and royal PR people have also rather (in the vulgar phrase of today) “bigged-up” the WW2 service of Andrew’s father, Philip [see Notes, below]. He has lived off the public weal and his wife’s money for 70 years!
Prince Philip and that clan may not be actual lizards (as David Icke is said to have once claimed), but looking at Philip, I can see from where the idea might have originated…
This morning, I saw an account by Sky News about the Epstein scandal that somehow contrived to avoid the use of the words “Prince Andrew”! Incredible. Needless to say, the facts that Epstein was a Jew and Ghislaine Maxwell is a half-Jewess are also absent from all TV and Press reports. (and yes, many British people, in particular, are so naive that they might not realize).
Andrew, of course, married “Fergie”, with all the consequent scandal that entailed. Now, he is or was involved with a very wealthy woman called Goga Ashkenazi, born in Kazakhstan, and who is part-Jew, part-Muslim.
Andrew finished his official time with the Royal Navy in 2001 at the age of 40, since when he has played golf, flown around the world on rather easy “missions” for charity or government (more or less freeloading, hence his nickname of “air miles Andy”) and enjoyed himself.
“The Duke of York receives a £249,000 annuity from the Queen.[68]The Sunday Times reported in July 2008 that for “the Duke of York’s public role,… he last year received £436,000 to cover his expenses.”[69] On 8 March 2011, The Daily Telegraph reported: “In 2010, the Prince spent £620,000 as a trade envoy, including £154,000 on hotels, food and hospitality and £465,000 on travel.” [Wikipedia]. “Not a bad little earner”…
“Earlier in 2010, it was revealed that the Kazakhstan President’s billionaire son-in-law Timur Kulibayev paid the Duke of York’s representatives £15 million – £3 million over the asking price – via offshore companies, for the Duke’s Surrey mansion, Sunninghill Park. Kulibayev frequently appears in US dispatches as one of the men who have accumulated millions in gas-rich Kazakhstan.[100]
In May 2012, it was reported that Swiss and Italian police investigating “a network of personal and business relationships” allegedly used for “international corruption” were looking at the activities of Enviro Pacific Investments which charges “multi-million pound fees” to energy companies wishing to deal with Kazakhstan.[101] The trust is believed to have paid £6 million towards the purchase of Sunninghill which now appears derelict.[101] In response, a Palace spokesman said “This was a private sale between two trusts. There was never any impropriety on the part of The Duke of York”.[101]
Libby Purves wrote in The Times in January 2015: “Prince Andrew dazzles easily when confronted with immense wealth and apparent power. He has fallen for ‘friendships’ with bad, corrupt and clever men, not only in the US but in Libya, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tunisia, wherever.”
In May 2016, a fresh controversy broke out when the Daily Mail alleged that the Duke had brokered a deal to assist a Greek and Swiss consortium secure a £385 million contract to build water and sewerage networks in two of Kazakhstan’s largest cities, while working as British trade envoy, and had stood to gain a £4 million payment in commission.[102] The newspaper published an email from the Duke to Kazakh oligarch Kenges Rakishev, (who had allegedly brokered sale of the Prince’s Berkshire mansion Sunninghill Park), and claimed that Rakishev had arranged meetings for the consortium. After initially claiming the email was a forgery, Buckingham Palace sought to block its publication as a privacy breach.[103] The Palace strongly denied the allegation that the Duke had acted as a “fixer” calling the article “untrue, defamatory and a breach of the editor’s code of conduct.” [Wikipedia]
This is, however, not meant to be an attack on Prince Andrew, however well-merited. Let’s look at a few others in the useless rabble that now constitutes the “royals”.
Prince Charles
I once met the Prince of Wales, at the official Residence of H.M. Ambassador in the capital city of a foreign country “East of Suez”. There were about 30 people at the reception, though I myself knew only a couple of the guests and a few of the diplomats (including the ambassador). HRH moved through the groups of informally arranged guests, saying hello to almost everyone and speaking with a few favoured people, of which I was one (my time with him probably lasted all of three minutes, though having drunk about a bottle of red wine, I cannot be sure!).
My impressions? Shorter than I expected from having seen photographs and TV news footage for much of my life. I was somewhat taller than him. I was also surprised to see that he was almost bald in places, especially the top of his head (which I could look down on as he turned away). As to personality, I should say pleasant, slightly mocking or humorous (he made a joke about the city and country, which was unexpected). Not someone difficult or rude.
I can support some of what Charles does for animal welfare and the environment, though some of the lustre rubs off when one thinks of his “sporting” slaughter of birds, foxes and other creatures (I let him off as regards salmon and trout!).
Charles has made (with expert help of course) a big success of the Duchy Originals brand, and has in general advanced the cause of organic agriculture. I do think that he in general means well, but his self-pity and preciousness (retailed in various newspaper anecdotes) does make him hard to much like as far as the public is concerned (and that is leaving aside the whole Diana and Camilla saga).
Prince Edward
What can one say? I suppose that the, er, fag-end of a royal house always has a few “princes” of this sort. After dropping out of the Royal Marines fairly quickly, Edward decided, as Wikipedia puts it “on a career in entertainment”. A royal prince playing the theatre manager? Unglaublich… He married a public relations woman and they, apparently, have had two children together.
Princess Anne
Someone who seems to have all the charm of her father. Nuff said. In fact, I have over the years heard some inside track, but I prefer to leave that out of this article (not least because some sources, though thought reliable, may not be).
It has been asserted that Prince Albert was half-Jewish, his real or natural father having been a Jew banker. I do not know whether there is any truth in that, but certainly some members of the Royal Family have looked quite Semitic. Princess Margaret looked very Semitic indeed. Lord Snowdon, her husband, used to make bitter remarks to her face, and about how she looked like an old Jewess, in the years when their marriage was disintegrating.
If reports can be believed, until the 21st Century dawned, all male children of the first rank of the Royal Family were actually circumcised and not even merely by a surgeon, but by a Jewish religious expert. It’s all very strange.
Freemasonry
The links between the Royal Family and freemasonry are well-known and documented.
Overall view
One can see that the British monarchy, qua monarchy (i.e. not qua a function of the “celebrity” culture), is running into the sand. The oldest generation, meaning the Queen and Prince Philip, are now not far from 100 years of age. Prince Charles is now 70 and will soon be 71.
As for Princes William and Harry, “tame thick princelings” pretty much covers it, though they are now perhaps a little old to be called “princelings”— William is now 37.
William’s marriage to Kate, though outside normal royal tradition, could be presented as sort-of within it. Kate is said to be part-Jewish, and so through the matrilineal side, i.e. which the Jews themselves accept as conferring “Jewishness”. However, that sort of thing goes over the head of the public and so, if you like, “caviar to the general”. Not so Harry’s marriage to Meghan, aka the Royal Mulatta (previously married to a Jew in California). That has the possibility (especially when combined with the couple’s absurd recent antics), to sever any bond of affection or respect still binding monarchy to “the people”.
My view
What strikes me increasingly about the Royal Family is its sheer irrelevance both to the UK as a whole and to the people of the UK. When most subjects (as they were; now citizens) had gone through the Second World War, good and bad times economically, had only 2 or 3 TV stations, and everyone wore poppies in November, there was some kind of bond or at least link. Now, the only thing linking the “royals” with the people is that of prurient interest (of the latter in the former), a link no more strong than the people have with pop stars, Katie Price or the cast of the latest braindead “reality” show. As for the proliferating population of “blacks and browns”, very few these days have any interest in the “royals” (now that few have come directly from former colonies).
I have no great animus against monarchy as a system. It is sometimes the best system, whether absolute monarchy or constitutional monarchy. However, Britain now is outgrowing this long-established institution. There is, perhaps, still a place for a constitutional figurehead, but beyond that I think that the time has come to say goodbye.
A few tweets…the role of the BBC in covering up for Prince Andrew and for the likely-MOSSAD-linked Jewish-Zionist web comes in for much criticism.
My goodness I’m really starting to hate the BBC….. “Questions like these alluded, without evidence, to a malevolent conspiracy and fed the feverish speculation on social media.” Jeffrey Epstein: How conspiracy theories spread after financier's death https://t.co/cfROny79OD
The big takeaway from the #Epstein story is the mammoth credibility gap that now exists between the powers that be and the people. We have reached the stage where the automatic response to the official narrative on anything is scepticism. And no wonder.https://t.co/zTGrC7QAZZ
What worries me is that we do not trust anything. Some people think he is still alive. Some people think he was murdered. Some people think his body was replaced with a homeless man. None of us know do we? We are only passing on information that we have received from someone else
There it is: The Jews Epstein and “Maxwell” both admitted that they were gathering blackmail materials on the rich and famous. This must be connected with Israeli Intelligence.
Better make it quick, before the bitch flees to Israel…
Ah…: “Her current whereabouts are unknown and sources close to her claim she planned to ‘totally disappear’.” [Daily Mail]. Right…to bloody Israel! I guessed right. Give that man a cee-gar! I wonder how long it will be before the (half)-Jewess starts screaming about “anti-Semitism”?
The Daily Mail today has an exclusive on the scandal. Beyond even the details, the photograph of “royal prince” Andrew, peering round the front door of the Jew’s mansion, is a stunning indictment in itself. Andrew, Jew’s flunkey (or should that be “Jews'”? They seem to be numerous around him)…
…it is all rather reminiscent of the 1940 German film, Jud Suss [The Jew Suss]!
note: The full version of the 1940 film Jud Suss is now censored, completely removed from YouTube (as indeed I predicted, a few years ago, would happen…). Only a few short clips (such as the one above) and the —far less hardhitting— 1934 film version of the (true) story, are still up.
However, Jud Suss is still on the Internet, though it must be sought out in quiet corners. It is well worth seeing (why else would “they” try to “disappear” it?). Here is one good copy:
Buckingham Palace PR people have released a truly pathetic exculpa on behalf of Prince Andrew, saying how “appalled” he is at the “revelation” that his friend, the billionaire Jew Epstein, was a sex criminal etc. Really, how strange. So in 2011 and 2012, when Andrew was visiting and perhaps staying in the Jew’s Manhattan mansion (and acting as the Jew’s flunkey at the door), he, Andrew, was unaware that Epstein had been convicted and imprisoned in 2008 over such matters? Hardy ha ha…It was the subject of publicity at the time and thereafter…
In fact, Epstein’s money and connections had greatly helped the Jew himself in 2008: a light sentence, mostly spent on “day release” (so prison was just somewhere less comfortable than, say, the Pierre, or the Waldorf-Astoria, in which to doss down in overnight); then early parole. The fix was in, somewhere, that much is obvious.
In other, connected, news, the Queen seems to have required the “royal prince” to fly home early from the traditional Summer break at Balmoral.
Andrew is now exposed as, at best, a complete fool and grifter; at worst (and the worst is more likely than the best), a user of procured young girls, procured for him by both the Jew rapist Epstein and Epstein’s one-time “ho”, the half-Jewess Ghislaine “Maxwell”, daughter of MOSSAD operative and fraudster “Robert Maxwell” (and herself quite likely “connected”). Israeli Intelligence and the Jew-Zionist web worldwide must have learned a lot and suborned many, taking the operation as a whole. The Royal Family has probably lost most of its own secrets via Andrew.
In other news, thick princeling Harry, and the Royal Mulatta, have just vacated the UK on their third private-jet jaunt in less than a month (the first was, laughably, to go to Sicily to a “climate-change” event!).
It occurs to me that, at one time, the “royals” of the various European states were the acme of European society, but now absurd end-of-line “royals” want to ape the Hollywood film-star lifestyle.
Worse, Harry has become a figure out of American sitcom-land, the henpecked husband whose petulant young wife runs him ragged with her absurd demands. “Royal Married With Children“…(though in fact, in this case, she is about 4 years older than her husband, 38 compared to his 34).
The royals are now squandering their life’s gold heedlessly.
and now, reverting to Andrew’s very strange behaviour and lifestyle, it turns out that Andrew hosted Epstein at Balmoral, while the Monarch was in residence, at that!
Thick Andrew (all the royals are both painfully thick and cringingly uncultured) is of course “appalled” at the behaviour of his Jew billionaire “friend”, so appalled that he stayed at the Jew’s mansion, used the young girls there (almost certainly) and had nice chats with the Jew while walking in Central Park…2 years after the Jew had been convicted of sex crimes.
Update, 20 August 2019
Yet another “ho”, this time Australian.
Woman in video of Prince Andrew at Jeffrey Epstein's house 'is daughter of ex-Australian prime minister'https://t.co/R3k7YOjdmM
“Time and again, Andrew, who a courtier once reportedly described as having “a pompous level of self-importance”, has demonstrated an eye-watering lack of judgment. Palace staff have rated him the rudest of royals, according to reports. A secret cable, published on WikiLeaks in 2010, revealed a US ambassador describing Andrew speaking “cockily” during one official lunch,leading to a discussion that “verged on the rude”.” [The Guardian]
“Rightly, or wrongly, there is a perceived air of arrogance about Andrew, and he is described by various people as boorish and very self-centred,” said Joe Little, managing editor of Majesty Magazine. “Perhaps we shouldn’t be judging the book by its cover. But, certainly, that’s the impression he has given for a very long time.” [The Guardian]
The Guardian’s piece ends with an almost “sympathetic” paragraph:
“His fate is that of the typical second son, struggling to find a role. “I think despite knowing he was always going to go down the line of succession, the fact that in his youth he was second in line to the throne, and now he is wherever he is, that must be quite a blow to your confidence and feeling of importance,” said Little.”
On the other hand, the stupid arrogant bastard might actually show a little humility (I mean to the British people who have been subsidizing him all his rotten life, not to the wealthy Jews for whom he seems to behave like a doormat), not to mention gratitude to the British people (and to Fate or God, or the gods, without whose largesse “Prince” Andrew would just be a very very mediocre naval officer who would struggle to rise beyond the rank of lieutenant).
…and still it continues, with painfully thick Andrew still trying to say that he had no idea that the Jew Epstein had been convicted a couple of years previously for sex crimes (as if the police would not have known!)
Daily Mail: “A source said that when working as Special Representative for International Trade and Investment between 2001 and 2011, Andrew was asked to travel regularly to the US. Since relinquishing this role in 2011, they maintained Andrew had continued to travel to the US, but claimed that his focus, particularly with Pitch@Palaces, had been on ‘other markets’.”
A “royal prince” trying to play the Internet “entrepreneur”? Ha ha! It would be tacky even if successful. As it is, it just looks pathetic, like thicko Andrew himself and the whole “right royal” circus!
As the Irish say, “Jay-sus!”— There’s even more! “Prince” Andrew looks more and more guilty every day.
Several articles from the 90s and early 00s about Jeffrey Epstein, well before his dark secrets were exposed, have been scrubbed fr the internet in recent years. We obtained several of them & when you read them, its easy to see why they were taken offlinehttps://t.co/NLlFFsTUp5
…and it looks as if I was right about the connection with Israeli Intelligence!
“In light of what is now known about Epstein’s sexual blackmail operation and sex trafficking activities, several reports from the late 1990s and early 2000s contain details long since forgotten regarding Epstein’s relationship with Prince Andrew.
“One particularly censored article that appeared in London’s Evening Standard in January 2001, for instance, gives several indications regarding the apparent entrapment of Prince Andrew as part of Epstein’s sexual blackmail operation, which is now known to have been connected to intelligence — specifically Israeli military intelligence, according to recent revelations in the case.” [Mint Press News]
Prince Andrew caught “bang to rights” (again). A useless, charmless, pretentious idiot who thinks that he is terribly important. Had he not been born where and “who” he was, Andrew would be —at most— a small businessman, and an unsuccessful one at that.
Prince Andrew thought that “it was the right and honourable thing to do”, to stay with the convicted Jew sex predator Epstein. In the immortal word of “Manuel”, “Que?”.
Prince Andrew was not only able to remember his visit to the Woking branch of Pizza Express, but was able to say with certainty that he went there on the very day on which he is alleged to have screwed the American 17 y o trafficked by the Jew Epstein and the half-Jewess Ghislaine “Maxwell”!
Remarkable memory, to be able to recall the exact date, 18 years in the past…
Call Detective Columbo…
Apart from that, it made me laugh that Andrew went to Pizza Express. I mean, I do not expect a “royal prince” to eat drumsticks at a banquet every evening, casting the half-eaten ones over his shoulder in the manner of Henry VIII as played by Charles Laughton, or to eat only slices of cucumber washed down by champagne, like one of the cavalry officers in Anna Karenina, but…Pizza Express?…at…Woking?!
Update, 18 November 2019
Looks like thick and dishonest Andrew has dug himself deeper into a hole…
Seems that Andrew met the “ho” “madam” Ghislaine “Maxwell” as recently as June 2019! Looks as though they were discussing legal strategems, aka “how are we going to get out of this?”
Well, they could always take a cruise off the Canary Isles together…
…and the popular prints are just not giving up; here (see below), a TV doctor rubbishes Andrew’s claim that he, Andrew, cannot or could not sweat by reason of having “been shot at” in the Falklands (and that’s even leaving aside the —apparent— fact that Andrew never was shot at during the few weeks that he spent in the Falklands, and that the nearest that he came to being in peril that way was when he observed from a helicopter a ship being shot at):
According to the New York Post, the “ho” “madam”, Ghislaine “Maxwell”, wanted to become la Contessa Cicogna, but failed in that. I presume that the Italian’s family were appalled at the prospect of a Jewess (actually, half-Jewess) polluting the family escutcheon…
Now it turns out that the arrogant stupid bastard has been pocketing bungs worth millions. I suppose that he wanted to try to keep up financially with his billionaire half-Jew, half-Muslim girlfriend from Kazakhstan. He must be binned (the rest of his family too). Time for some kind of republic.
Well, give that man a cee-gar! Turns out that I guessed right (I usually do, if I myself say so):
“Jeffrey Epstein’s socialite ‘madam’ Ghislaine Maxwell ‘is being hidden from the FBI in a series of safe houses because of the information she has on powerful people’“
Maxwell has remained incognito since Epstein’s arrest and death behind bars
New report claims both she and Epstein were ‘assets’ for a foreign government
Source says they funneled dirt on the rich and powerful to foreign spies
Now Maxwell may be hiding in a safehouse in Israel, the new report claims
She is a British and US citizen, and daughter of an alleged Mossad operative.“
“An explosive new report has asserted that deceased sex criminal Jeffery Epstein and his alleged ‘madame’ Ghislaine Maxwell were foreign intelligence ‘assets’, and that she is currently hiding in a safehouse in Israel.“
“She is not in the US, she moves around. She is sometimes in the UK, but most often in other countries, such as Israel, where her powerful contacts have provided her with safe houses and protection,’ the source said.“
“Born in France, Maxwell is both a U.S. citizen and British subject. Her family’s alleged ties to Israel’s national intelligence service, Mossad, have been well documented.
Maxwell’s father, Robert Maxwell, was a Czech-born British media mogul whose financial fraud in raiding the Mirror Group pension fund was discovered after his death in 1991.
Also a British member of parliament, Robert Maxwell reportedly had ties to British intelligence, the Soviet KGB, and Mossad — and was suspected of being a double or even triple agent by British Foreign Office officials.“
Western world, wake up to the Jew/Zionist/Israel conspiracy. It’s everywhere…
Update, 7 January 2020
Seems that the “ho” “madam”, Ghislaine Maxwell, “is reportedly in hiding and being guarded round the clock by former US Navy SEALs amid fears her life is in danger.” [Daily Mirror]. In Israel? Some US Navy Seals are Jews, perhaps surprisingly. I met one myself once.
Latest about the half-Jew “ho” madam, Ghislaine “Maxwell”:
Ryan Dawson@RyLiberty
British Spoiled Brat and Child Rapist Ghislaine Maxwell is hiding in Israel. Over 8000 pages of her e-mails have been hacked. US media is doing triple back flips to avoid mentioning the entire ring was Jewish and financed by Jewish supremacists.
Well, there is not much “British” about the aforesaid “ho”: born in France of one Jew and one French parent, though educated in England (Marlborough College and Balliol, Oxford).
The story is interesting, though. I wonder whether this alleged telephone hacking had a connection to the Saudi Crown Prince, like other hacking exposed in recent weeks? I speculated some months ago that the “ho” Maxwell was hiding out in Israel, presumably under MOSSAD or Aman control.
What strikes me here is #PrinceAndrew ‘s penchant for being cruel to animals as a child. Now I’m not a psychologist but I think that says something about the man he became. Just sayin’ @VRSVirginia#Epsteinhttps://t.co/WYc9CSAguG
Prince Andrew was so naughty as a kid the footmen used to throw him into piles of manure and once gave him a black eye – and the Queen agreed he deserved it – The Sun#PrinceAndrew @VRSVirginia Keep thinking about your children’s books… 😊❤️ https://t.co/Bc3rgLz56k
EXCLUSIVE: 'I look for Jeffrey's type and I bring 'em home.' Prince Andrew's cousin tells how Ghislaine Maxwell bragged she recruited girls for Epstein from trailer parks and was intent on eventually marrying him https://t.co/xm9Jaj9cI9pic.twitter.com/Pybfil1gxP
#Anonymous is currently trending at #1 worldwide with 1.69 MILLION tweets after the hacktivists revealed shocking information about supermodel Naomi Campbell; the murder of Princess Diana and child trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and the Royal family’s involvement in the sex ring. pic.twitter.com/KYgNHcbK1f
These Naomi Campbell accusations have been around for years… her links to Epstein and his circle of child traffickers/rapists.. she dated Jeffrey Epstein’s good friend and even had him and Virginia Roberts (Prince Andrew accuser) and Ghislaine Maxwell attend her bday party pic.twitter.com/PAUvoBmBBj
Interesting find – a Sun newspaper feature on ‘Randy Andy’, Prince Andrew from 1992.
One of the 20 facts was that he used ‘fixers’ to arrange dates with ‘suitable women’ after his affair with Koo Stark ended…. pic.twitter.com/AfXoqrCoVj
“It is claimed in the unsealed papers that an island orgy was one of three occasions when Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sex with Andrew. The other locations were Maxwell’s London flat and and in New York.” [The Guardian]
Andrew’s motive is obvious: to try to exculpate himself; what, though, of Dershowitz? He is said to have visited the Epstein island and travelled on Epstein’s jet. He may have abused young girls himself. Whether that was so or not, was that and is that the whole story?
We know that the Jew who was mainly known as “Robert Maxwell” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell was a major MOSSAD operative. His daughter, Ghislaine, is now the prime focus of the post-Epstein inquiry, and is on trial in Federal court in New York. She, it is said, was also an Israeli agent, either MOSSAD or Aman, or both. Epstein (who has now “gone up the chimney”) the same.
We know that Israeli Intelligence co-opts Israeli and other Jew “civilians” as operatives when necessary. Look at the Dikko case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dikko_affair): “Though Israel, at the time, did not have formal diplomatic relations with Nigeria, there were less visible ties between the two nations. In particular, Nigeria was an important source of oil for Israel, and Israel was a significant supplier of arms to Nigeria. The Israeli intelligence agency Mossad was tasked with locating Dikko and bringing him back to Nigeria to stand trial.” [Wikipedia]
” Mossad recruited Levi-Arie Shapiro, an Israeli doctor who was a consultant anesthetist and director of the intensive care unit at HaSharon Hospital. He was to fly to London and participate in the operation. Shapiro’s job would be to drug Dikko, and insert an endotracheal tube to keep him from choking on his own vomit while being transported in a crate.” [Wikipedia]
A Jew (whether Israeli or any other nominal nationality) may be a doctor, a lawyer, or whatever, but is first and foremost a Jew and likely to do whatever Israel and its “services” want…
It may well be that the successful Epstein blackmail and suborning operation, likely to have been very productive for Israeli Intelligence, was in part facilitated by the Jew Dershowitz. I imagine that his role was, precisely, to shield Epstein (and so Maxwell and/or others) from legal inquiry from both USA and UK.
Meanwhile, Ghislaine “Maxwell”, the half-Jew (Mischling) “ho” “madam”, is pulling out all the stops to get released on bail in he USA. Seems that she is married to a Jew “tech millionaire”. The bail suggested by her legal team may be USD $30 million. Where do the Jews get such money? Is the “husband” stumping up? Is any of it from monies stolen from UK Mirror Group pensioners by the “ho’s” repulsive father, Robert Maxwell?
“Borgerson was involved with the Council on Foreign Relations.” Well, well, was he really? A slightly unusual connection for someone who spent 4 years as a US Coastguard officer, though others have said that he was a US Navy SEAL. A Jew as Navy SEAL may sound odd, but there are some; I myself met one such, about 18 years ago, at Charleston, South Carolina.
I thought that Ghislaine “Maxwell” would have played the “antisemitism” card by now, but admittedly that would be hard to justify in New York City, especially when the judge is herself Jewish! Indeed, the judge is more Jewish than Ghislaine Maxwell, who is genetically only half-Jew: her mother was a French Protestant, who “converted” to Judaism (and became fanatically pro-Jew and pro-Israel) after meeting the MOSSAD asset “Robert Maxwell”.
Update, 25 April 2021
Ghislaine Maxwell now charged with further and even more serious offences:
[President Clinton, a complete NWO/ZOG puppet, mired in sleaze of all kinds, greets the paedophile Jew criminal and Israeli Intelligence asset Epstein, and his “ho”, the half-Jew Israeli asset Ghislaine Maxwell, at the White House in 1993]
A rather sympathetic American documentary, by ABC:
The trial of Ghislaine Maxwell is apparently scheduled for November 2021, so it is interesting that quite sympathetic documentaries are now appearing…
I notice that that ABC doc features Robert Maxwell’s son, Ian [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Maxwell], as well as journalists who are either Jewish or at least perceived by many as generally pro-Jewish.
Having said that, the film does contain material not entirely exculpatory of Ghislaine Maxwell. On the other hand, turning it around again, it might be argued that, bearing in mind what has already been exposed, the only thing for Ghislaine Maxwell to do is to limit the damage— to accept a hit, but a limited hit.
[the Jew Epstein, smugly smirking in front of one of his private jets. It is good to know that the evil Jew exploiter was sent “up the chimney” not so many years later]
Update, 9 December 2021
Below, a photograph admitted into evidence in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, showing her giving the Jew exploiter Epstein a foot massage on one of his private jets:
Guilty on 5 out of 6 charges. Forecast to be sentenced to (up to) 65 years. These being Federal offences, parole chances are minimal. An appeal has been or is in process of being lodged.
Update, 15 January 2022
Ghislaine Maxwell may get a retrial, based on apparent procedural and other problems to do with some of the jurors. Meanwhile, sentencing has been set down for 28 June 2022.
In other news, Andrew Windsor, the thick bully and freeloader (etc) formerly known as “Prince”, has lost a number of military and other titles and ranks (including effectively, though not officially, “HRH”), and may even lose his title “Duke of York”.
If and when Andrew is completely reduced to the ranks, it may send a shiver down the spines of other “Royal Family” members on the right royal gravytrain, especially but not exclusively the minor ones.
“Seems that the person formerly known as Prince (Andrew) is probably going to request a civil jury in the case brought against him by one of the victims of the Jew Epstein. To my mind, this is a strategy unlikely to succeed. I am still nominally an attorney at the New York Bar, though I have never practised law in that state (I passed the exam 32 years ago), but my view about this matter comes more from my knowledge of Americans themselves.
Andrew Windsor is on the wrong side tactically: British, as against his accuser, an American. A man as against a woman, in a generally feministic part of the world. An older man as against a younger woman. An hereditary foreign “royal” as against a US-born-and-bred US citizen. Very wealthy, as against someone without inherited wealth, and brought up in either a “trailer” or a very modest house.
Does Andrew Windsor really think that a civil jury in New York City will be on his side? Maybe this is a tactic to gain time while his lawyers find out how much the lady’s price might be. A great deal more than the rent of a Manhattan apartment and a free seat on a private jet, anyway.“
So Andrew Windsor, “formerly known as Prince”, has settled the civil suit brought in New York by Virginia Giuffre (as was). Rumours abound that the settlement is around £12M in British money.
“EXCLUSIVE: Bill Clinton’s special advisor who let Jeffrey Epstein into the White House seven times and flew on the Lolita Express dies at 59 – the latest associate of the former President to suffer an early demise“
"These are the people that were on Epstein Island confirmed by multiple sources." pic.twitter.com/J2j5lmn47E
— Paul James O'Brien (@PaulJamesOBrie1) July 24, 2022
Ehud Barak…[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehud_Barak]. Now there’s a name not quite in sync with the others. I wonder what he was up to, bearing in mind the Israeli Intelligence connection with both the Jew Epstein and the half-Jew Ghislaine “Maxwell”.
Unless either an appeal happens (and is successful), or a pardon is granted by the U.S. President, Ghislaine Maxwell will be incarcerated until she is 80 years old (2041). There is no parole, as such, in the U.S. Federal system, only in individual states’ systems. However, an inmate can get nearly 2 months “credit” for every year served, dependent on behaviour, so on a 20-year sentence a couple of years might get shaved off.
Update, 31 May 2023
New trove of Epstein documents reveal the pedophile scheduled meetings with the following people:
Bill Gates, Peter Thiel, Chris Rock, David Blaine, Prince Andrew, Woody Allen, Irina Shayk, Sean Parker, Wendi Murdoch and Richard Branson. https://t.co/id1dqqpUn8
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) May 30, 2023
It is all starting to come out. Names are being revealed. I notice that a very high proportion of the guilty are Jews. I think well over half. Yet in the American population, only 2.4% “identify” as Jewish. So the proportion of Jews visiting the Jew Epstein’s island was about twenty times their proportion in the US population…
Of course, the main traffickers have already been well and truly dealt with. Epstein himself has gone “up the chimney”, and the half-Jewess Ghislaine Maxwell is likely to be in US Federal prison until she is over 80 (she is presently 62). She still faces a further Federal trial (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghislaine_Maxwell), so may be sentenced to a further term, though she will probably be released while still under 85…
I am sure that the Israelis would welcome her back. After all, they allowed her unpleasant and fraudulent Jew father, Robert “Maxwell”, to be buried on the supposedly sacred Mount of Olives in Jerusalem (presumably for his services to MOSSAD etc), though Ghislaine Maxwell is said to believe that MOSSAD or other Israeli agency murdered him and then passed it off as suicide or accident (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell#Death).
“Prince Andrew is ‘terrified’ to visit the US in case he is arrested amid calls for a fresh FBI probe into the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, sources claimed last night.
The disgraced Duke of York has barely left Britain in nearly six years, with insiders claiming he fears arrest, civil lawsuits, or being subpoenaed if he travels abroad.
The 64-year-old’s anxiety has only deepened following the release of court documents that have sparked demands for a fresh criminal probe into Epstein’s network.
Andrew has always denied allegations of sexual misconduct but paid millions in an out-of-court settlement to Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre in 2022.
In 2020, the FBI asked the Home Office for assistance in questioning Andrew, but the investigation was put on hold last year.
However, fresh scrutiny has emerged after High Court documents last week revealed an email exchange between Andrew and Epstein in February 2011, in which the prince wrote: ‘We’ll play some more soon.’
The Duke of York sent a bombshell email pledging to ‘keep in close touch’, despite claiming he had ceased all contact with the American financier weeks earlier, it has emerged.
The new evidence suggests Andrew may have lied in his infamous Newsnight interview.
He insisted to Emily Maitlis in the disastrous 2019 grilling at Buckingham Palace that he had stopped seeing Epstein in early December 2010, when they were photographed walking through New York’s Central Park.
The Duke said: ‘I never had any contact with him from that day forward.”
[Daily Mail]
Update, 17 March 2025
What? Apparently the incoming President of the International Olympic Committee Sebastian Coe visited Epstein’s Island 11 times!! pic.twitter.com/HebCwV40u5
April 25 (Reuters) – Virginia Giuffre, one of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's most prominent accusers, has committed suicide, her family said on Friday. https://t.co/q95UCFenMY
Mossad are relentlessly hunting survivors of Epstein since the Trump administration is highlighting his cases. It's rare we survive our rapes as children. But we are being hunted now.
Meanwhile, useless and nasty parasite “Prince of the Blood” Andrew was invited recently to attend Church with Charles, Camilla etc. Semi-rehabilitation exercise?
Update, 11 June 2025
Former Mossad agent Ari Ben-Menashe confirms that Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli intelligence agent… pic.twitter.com/IEFNNLBZXv
— Sprinter Observer (@SprinterObserve) July 10, 2025
Update, 13 July 2025
Jeffery Epstein's accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell is ready to reveal 'truth' of the pedophile client list, say insiders. So, why are Republicans blocking her? https://t.co/o6fQaUv4x6
Trump purportedly sent a note with a drawing of a naked woman as a gift for the 50th birthday of US financier Jeffrey Epstein, who was accused of sex trafficking minors and committed suicide in 2019, the WSJ has claimed:https://t.co/zdM7xbS8aWpic.twitter.com/lL6kofZXZS
Ghislaine Maxwell wasn’t eligible to be transferred to a minimum-security prison in Texas, but the Bureau of Prisons waived the rules to make it happen. -MSNBC pic.twitter.com/VarET5wO0c
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) August 1, 2025
The US FBI has erased the names of Trump and a number of other prominent individuals from documents related to the case of financier Epstein, who was accused of sexually abusing minors, Bloomberg reported, citing sources:https://t.co/WcIs4I5snapic.twitter.com/xgsHv04SXa
“Jeffrey Epstein was a very wealthy man, but exactly how wealthy and where that money came from remains shrouded in mystery.
Newly unearthed emails last week shone light on Epstein’s role as freelance client development officer, acting as a channel between political figures and business titans, greasing up the former with lifestyles they could not afford and the latter with avenues of political influence.
…the questions about the source of Epstein’s wealth have never been fully resolved. He was worth nearly $600m at his death, thanks mostly to two wealthy billionaire clients – Victoria’s Secret founder Les Wexner and, later, Apollo Global Management co-founder Leon Black – as well as Johnson & Johnson heiress Elizabeth “Libet” Johnson, sister of former US ambassador to the UK Woody Johnson.
Between his collection of lavish homes in New York, Palm Beach and Paris, two private Caribbean islands, two jets and helicopter, Epstein held nearly $380m in cash and investments, according to his estate.
That wealth arrived suddenly. According to associates, until the end of the 90s, Epstein was living in a two-bedroom apartment on Manhattan’s Upper East Side close to the river. It was only when Maxwell arrived from London that his lifestyle was dramatically elevated.
Epstein moved to a townhouse on 68th Street and later to a 28,000-sq-ft mansion on 71st Street, later transferred to him by Wexner in 2011.
Steven Hoffenberg, a former business partner of Epstein convicted of running a Ponzi scheme, claimed that Maxwell’s father, disgraced press baron Robert Maxwell, introduced his daughter to Epstein in the late 1980s.“
“Revealed: 100 new Epstein emails ‘that could destroy’ Prince Andrew: Cache of ‘devastating’ messages between the Duke and convicted paedophile unearthed in US probe“
“Fergie’s Epstein lies exposed in bombshell email: She publicly apologised for taking abuser’s cash and vowed to cut ties with him, then weeks later told him: I only said it to save book deals.”
Apparently, that was the Jew Ehud Barak, whose presence at “Lolita Island” has been known for years. An evil bastard once part of Israel’s special forces attack and assassination group.
If any of us did what Prince Andrew has, we would be stripped of our liberties, not titles. And, while “stripped of titles” SOUNDS dramatic and causes a lot of chatter, all it REALLY means is after everything he’s done, Andrew just has to order new stationery. #PrinceAndrewpic.twitter.com/Hau5gqPra9
King Charles urged to read Virginia Giuffre's memoir following its release – by the woman who co-wrote the book with his accuser Virginia Giuffre. And there are now politicians saying Andrew be evicted from his Royal Lodge home on which he pays zero rent https://t.co/nfbkdF1gXl
It seems that the intellectual power behind the Boris Johnson throne is one Dominic Cummings, someone who only came to my attention recently. His new eminence put me in mind of a few similar people in the recent and not so recent past.
Brendan Bracken
Churchill had the egregious Brendan Bracken as his adviser and amanuensis. Bracken was, as such people often are, very strange indeed. He was born into modest but not poor circumstances in Ireland, drifted around Australia, attended Sedbergh School at age 19 (though claiming to be just 15), paying the fees himself, then left after one term, having acquired what the later KGB would have called a “legend” as an Anglo-Irishman who had attended a well-known English school (he let people believe that he had been there for years).
Armed with the Sedbergh “old school tie”, Bracken became a schoolmaster at Bishop’s Stortford College in 1921, but by 1922 was a magazine publisher and editor in London. He became wealthy quite rapidly. Puzzling. Here was a young man who had presumably saved some money while in Australia, and may have had a part-share in whatever his father left, but all the same Bracken’s swift rise to wealth is a puzzle. Still, there it is.
Having attached himself to Churchill, Bracken was instrumental at the vital moment when Chamberlain resigned in 1940:
” When Bracken became aware of Churchill’s agreement to nominate Lord Halifax, he convinced Churchill that the Labour Party would indeed support him as Chamberlain’s successor, and that Lord Halifax’s appointment would hand certain victory to Hitler. Bracken advised Churchill tactically to say nothing when the three met to arrange the succession. After a deafening silence during which Churchill was expected to nominate Halifax, the latter obligingly ruled himself out and Churchill was put forward as Britain’s wartime Prime Minister, having avoided any appearance of disloyalty to Chamberlain.” [Wikipedia, and see Notes, below].
Thus this odd man “from nowhere” was not only present at the pivotal moment, but can be said to have altered the course of the Second World War on the strategic level. Had Churchill not become Prime Minister, Britain would have agreed peace with the German Reich in 1940. The whole history of Europe and indeed the world was thus altered in its course by this now-forgotten man (forgotten by the public, at least).
Bracken was MP for Paddington North (1929-1945) and for Bournemouth (1945-1951). He was Churchill’s PPS from 1940, later promoted to Minister of Information (1941-1945) and was briefly First Lord of the Admiralty in 1945. He was one of the chiefs of the Political Warfare Executive. He was elevated as a viscount in 1952. He was the publisher of, inter alia, the Financial Times, The Economist and History Today.
Bracken was rumoured to have been Churchill’s illegitimate progeny, though this seems to have been a myth not discouraged by Bracken himself. The viscounty granted was hereditary, but Bracken was unmarried and without issue. He died in 1958.
Was this the story only of a remarkably talented self-made businessman and politician or was there more to it? There are hints of the then-concealed New World Order about it all. We shall probably never know.
Steve Hilton
[As with Cummings –see below— Hilton felt the need to display his “I’m an off the wall maverick genius” persona by wearing beachwear or surf dude getup to Downing Street…]
Wikipedia says of Steve Hilton the following:
“Hilton is the son of Hungarian immigrants whose original surname was Hircsák[7] (which some sources spell “Hircksac”),[8] who fled their home during the Hungarian Revolution of 1956. They came to Britain, initially claiming asylum, and anglicised their name to Hilton. Steve Hilton’s father, István, had been goaltender for the Hungarian national ice hockey team and was considered one of the top ice hockey players in Europe in the 1930s.[7][9] After arriving in Britain, his parents initially worked in catering at Heathrow Airport. They divorced when Steve was five years old[7] leading to what he has described as a struggle and great financial hardship; his mother worked in a shoe store to earn the little money they had, and the two lived in a cold, damp basement apartment. He won a scholarship to Christ’s Hospital School in Horsham before studying Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at New College, Oxford.”
“After graduating, Hilton worked at Conservative Central Office, where he came to know David Cameron and Rachel Whetstone, his future wife and Senior Vice-President of Policy and Communications for Uber.[11] He liaised with the party’s advertising firm, Saatchi and Saatchi, and was praised by Maurice Saatchi, who remarked, “No one reminds me as much of me when young as Steve.”[8] During this time Hilton bought the “New Labour, New Danger” demon eyes poster campaign[12] for the Conservative’s pre-general election campaign in 1996, which won an award from the advertising industry’s Campaign magazine at the beginning of 1997.[13] The Conservatives went on to experience their worst election defeat for more than half a century, with some journalists speculating that the poster contrasted unfavourably with Labour’s more positive campaign.[14] In 2005, Hilton lost out to future Secretary of State for EducationMichael Gove in the selection process for the Surrey Heath constituency.”
“Hilton talked of the need to “replace” the traditionally minded grassroots membership of the Conservative Party, which he saw as preventing the party from embracing a more metropolitan attitude on social issues.”
So he was at first, in the 1990s, little better than a gopher, but then he met his wife, Rachel Whetstone. Who is she? She is described in Wikipedia as having been head of communications for Uber taxis. For a number of years until 2015, she was in a similar position at Google. She has more recently joined Netflix.
“In February 2013, Whetstone was assessed as one of the 100 most powerful women in the United Kingdom by Woman’s Hour on BBC Radio 4.[4] Whetstone has been featured on PRWeek’s Power List several times, most recently in 2016 at number 14.” [Wikipedia]
“Whetstone is married to Steve Hilton, whom she met after an affair with Lord Astor (stepfather to Samantha Cameron, wife of former Prime Minister David Cameron) in the lead-up to the 2005 election. Cameron is no longer on speaking terms with Whetstone or Hilton.” [Wikipedia]
More interestingly, Rachel Whetstone’s grandfather was one Antony Fisher, not much known to the public, though extremely influential behind the scenes:
“Sir Antony George Anson FisherAFC (28 June 1915 – 8 July 1988), nicknamed AGAF, was a British businessman and think tank founder. He participated in the formation of various libertarian organisations during the second half of the twentieth century, including the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Atlas Network. Through Atlas, he helped establish up to 150 other institutions worldwide.”
Antony Fisher may have been at least part-Jew, and was certainly a Zionist, pro-Israel to the hilt.
Hilton was thought by many to be half-mad. He was lucky to escape with a caution and a small fine after having assaulted someone on a railway platform in England. He had been arrested after the assault and after shouting “wanker!” at staff and police. At the time, this useless creature was being paid £200,000 a year from public funds. There were other incidents of aggressive behaviour during his time at No.10.
“Andy Coulson, the former communications chief who was later jailed over phone hacking, recalled recently in the Telegraph: “I would ask, ‘So how does that work then?’ If I got an answer at all, it was along the lines of, ‘It’ll be fine – just you see.’ That was mildly irritating, as it was my team who would have to get out and sell the latest product from Steve’s dream factory.”” [The Guardian]
“Hilton’s rightwing, free-market ideas certainly infuriated Lib Dems who worked with him, as chronicled in David Laws’s book about the coalition. One Lib Dem former adviser said: “I was unfortunate enough to spend some time in Steve’s thought wigwam and it was not a pretty place. I remember him suggesting we should scrap maternity laws and invest in cloud-busting technology to improve the British weather. I certainly do not remember at any time him raising any points about the immigration policy he is now criticising.”” [The Guardian]
Hilton accomplished nothing, certainly nothing concrete, at Downing Street, and eventually decamped to the USA, where he was, laughably, taken on as some kind of visiting “professor” at Stanford:
“In March 2012, Downing Street announced that Hilton would be a “visiting scholar” at Stanford University‘s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies for a year.[21] His last memo concerned the advocacy of severe cuts in the number of civil servants in the United Kingdom[22] and further welfare cuts.” [Wikipedia]
At time of writing, Steve Hilton is on the American TV network, Fox News, as a talking head, and is apparently a Trump partisan.
“Had Bernie Sanders been the Democratic nominee, Hilton “probably would have supported him”. Hilton says he is not really a conservative or a liberal: “It’s hard to pin me down because I’m a bit of Bernie Sanders, a bit of Rand Paul, bit of John Kasich.” He’s pro-Trump simply because he was the candidate most likely to “shake things up”” [The Guardian]
Someone who actively likes and promotes chaos, in fact, just like Dominic Cummings [see below]
Steve Hilton, in other words, like the others examined here, is connected with cosmopolitan finance-capital and its intellectual superstructure of “think tanks” (which have proliferated over the years) and with supposed “institutes”, mostly carrying the same sort of message: internationalism, multikulti “get rich quick”-ism, destruction of tradition, race and culture, combined with State repression of those without money.
Dominic Cummings
[above, Dominic Cummings: note the “I’m Too Important To Wear A Tie Or A Jacket” affectation, as with Steve “Hilton”]
As stated at the start of this blog post, I know of Cummings only what I have read. The links are either posted here below or are available easily via Google.
One thing that did interest me was the Wikipedia statement, taken from a biography of Michael Gove, that “Cummings speaks Russian and ‘is a Russophile'”. It seems that he tried to start an airline with the single route line of Samara (a large city on the Volga) to Vienna, an interesting choice of route. We are told on Wikipedia that: “After university, Cummings moved to Russia from 1994 to 1997, working on various projects. In one Russian venture, he worked for a group attempting to set up an airline connecting Samara in southern Russia to Vienna; however, the venture fell foul of the KGB, and was abandoned after only one flight.“
Well, the “KGB” bit is wrong in exact terms, because the KGB was disbanded (reorganized) in 1991. The bulk of the “internal” work of the old KGB was given to the “FSK” which later became the FSB. As to why the revamped FSK/FSB would want to interfere in the activities of a foreign or foreign-connected airline, I wonder. There are, and have been for 2-3 decades now, numerous foreign airlines operating in the former Soviet Union, flying between Russia and other states.
In the 1990s, new “babyflots” (bits of the old Aeroflot) were emerging all the time, as were ad hoc operations such as the German airline “Luftbrucke” (Air Bridge), which transported tens of thousands of “Volksdeutsche” from Kazakhstan and Siberia to new lives in the reunified Germany (those people were mostly the descendants of Germans invited to Russia by Russian tsars, notably Catherine the Great, then deported East by Stalin). Luftbrucke, if I recall aright, also flew from Samara, as also from a host of cities in Western Siberia and Kazakhstan, such as Semipalatinsk.
I find the history of Cummings interesting. He graduated from Oxford in 1994 aged 22-23, his degree being in Ancient and Modern History. The very same year he moved to Russia “where he worked on various projects” including the idea “to set up a new airline”.
I admit that I myself have never set up an airline, but I know that you cannot do it without rather a lot of money, even in the conditions of post-collapse Sovietism (I myself was briefly in Moscow in 1993 and also dealt with legal and business matters in Russia and Kazakhstan for several years).
Cummings is said to be the son of an oil rig project manager and a special needs teacher. There is no suggestion of any heavy family wealth. Cummings only left university in 1994, yet by —at latest— 1997, so 0-3 years later, was setting up an airline? In fact, how did he get into Russian-oriented business anyway, with no obvious connections or personal monies. He is able to speak Russian, though. That too raises questions.
I lived in Almaty, Kazakhstan for a year (1996-1997), meeting dozens if not hundreds (and over the years, certainly hundreds) of businessmen, lawyers etc doing work in the various ex-Soviet republics. While most of the diplomats I met spoke at least some Russian, the vast majority of businessmen and lawyers encountered knew no Russian at all really (that was true of both British and Americans). Certainly unable to undertake even simple discussions. I even met some unable to order simple food and drink.
So Cummings leaves university in the UK, where he studied ancient and modern history, somehow speaks Russian (or learns it on the ground), and is at once involved with business activities which seem to go beyond being a mere gopher for others. I have to say that I wonder whether Cummings was up to something other than just being a British graduate drifting about and getting into Russian business speculations almost by chance. Maybe the Russian security people were right to be suspicious of him, as is suggested in his Wikipedia entry.
Anyway, he is now considered to be Boris Idiot’s eminence grise, and looks it (meaning “grey”, if not particularly eminent). In fact, despite being only 47, he looks 10+ years older than me, and I am now 62. His political career is summarized here:
I have to say that I agree with his view of many of the leading political and official figures (he described Iain Dunce Duncan Smith as “incompetent”, for example).
It seems that Cummings married a lady of the North Country gentry who is or was Deputy Editor of the Spectator. They live in Islington, in what the Daily Mail is pleased to call a “£1.6 million house” (though in London, what does that mean? I lived for years in a house in Little Venice now (over)valued at £4 million! Madness). Other details about Cummings are few.
“What is clear is that this character is right now in the maelstrom of chaos and action that he loves so much. A defender quipped that he’ll be thrilled with upheaval – it’s the only way he sees people being forced into action. His friend once heard him quote Lenin: “The worse the better.” [Reaction magazine]
The Prophets of Dystopia
These “advisers” (of whom I have selected a mere few from a larger pool) and their connected “think tanks” etc are, even when some of their critique of society is justified, basically destructive. The same applies to the people themselves. Admittedly, Brendan Bracken left a less obviously destructive legacy, but then, after the huge and unnecessary war which he, from the shadows, did so much to bring about, what more need he do to be adjudged a negative force?
Look at Steve Hilton, Dominic Cummings etc. Where are their real achievements? Leaves blown away by the wind. These people may themselves have acquired riches, but only or mainly because they married wealthy wives, then used their own political attachment and profile to become highly-prized TV, radio, press and online “gurus” . They themselves have not established anything solid, whether in commerce, industry, academia, the arts, the sciences, charitable work or anywhere else. They are creatures created from the chaos and decadence in society. They prosper from the decadence and weakness of the political system in the UK and attach themselves to stupid, weak, posturing politicians vainly trying to reach to statesmanship, people such as David Cameron-Levita and Boris-Idiot. They are a symptom of dark days ahead. Social nationalism must rise up to exterminate evil and to found a better and better-organized society.
Is it fanciful to compare the sliding society we now have (look at the past few days…) and the prominence of these odd characters such as Hilton and Cummings, whose academic and patchy work histories are at best underwhelming, with the sliding Russia of the last few years before the Revolution(s) of 1917? Perhaps, but in late-Tsarist Russia too the government, civil service, certainly the politicians, were paralyzed, helpless to do anything positive, and so the influence grew of odd characters: tarot practitioners, mystics and occultists, fortune-tellers of all kinds, persons believed to have arcane knowledge and unorthodox ways to make politics work via persuasion and peculiar ideas and methods. The starets (he was never a monk or priest) Rasputin was only the most important of a whole host.
In fact, I agree with some of what Cummings has said:
“We should stop selecting leaders from a subset of Oxbridge egomaniacs with a humanities degree...” That is true, though I have nothing against degrees in the humanities, but the whole idea of the “generalist” (almost always armed with a degree from Oxford or Cambridge) has blighted UK political, cultural and even industrial life for 70 years, perhaps 100 years. The Soviet Union tended toward the same behaviour (the politically-OK “Man From Moscow” who could “direct” anything from a tyre factory to a Young Pioneer camp or the building of the Moscow Metro), and look what happened there (the Metro in Moscow admittedly being a —rare— success of the Soviet system).
Of course, the worst single example of the generalist might be Cummings’ present employer, Boris-idiot, who has proven that he is incapable of doing anything properly, but who can do it while quoting a bit of rote-learned Ancient Greek, or using an English word no-one else has ever heard of (he must trawl the OED for those silly words, I expect…what a complete waste of space he is!). As the journalist writes,
“All evidence goes out the window. The grandest ever Oxbridge egomaniac of them all (with not even a very good humanities degree, as it happens) is seeing only the flickering shadows on the news on the wall. It is not even day 14 and already we have beaten a hyper-accelerated march to the world of crap policy for political gain.“
The journalist continues, citing a recent Times article by Cummings:
“Elsewhere, in that same Times article, we read: “We must train aspirant leaders very differently so they have the skills and experience of managing complex projects.””
“And here he is, bringing in policies that would make Norman Tebbit look enlightened, working for a leader whose skill at “managing complex projects” so far extends to some rolling windowless sauna buses, a cable car to nowhere, and a ghost garden bridge that may or may not take you to a demented airport that has never and will never be built.“
Seems that my blog was (again) prescient, if I say so myself: not a day or even part of a day goes by now without someone publishing something in the newspapers about Dominic Cummings (though Steve “Hilton” is old news and Brendan Bracken ancient history).
'Sources close to the prime minister tell me that he cried when he heard the news' – fascinating @jennirsl insight into the moment Boris Johnson heard his brother was resigning in the national interest https://t.co/LUNDmcPJeR
“Through his system, as yet unexplained – “I will go into what I think this vision could be and how to do it another day” – he will turn a nation of average people into one of the most successful countries in the world. He will sweep away the suffocating postwar mainframes of politics, and build something capable of withstanding the unknown crises ahead. Or so he would wish. In truth, he may be little more than a survivalist in the woods, soldering wires together in the belief he is saving us all.
Is Dominic Cummings a visionary or a fool? The remarkable fact is that the Conservative Party has risked its future, and the country’s, on which one Cummings turns out to be.” [Harry Lambert, writing in The New Statesman]
Dominic Cummings dresses down (even more) in Downing Street on the day of the Saturday sitting of the Commons (today). Not sure whether the bimbo is Boris Johnson’s girlfriend or a lookalike.
All he lacks is a few copies of The Big Issue and a plastic cup for tips. Oh, no, wait, he’s holding the cup…
Update, 3 November 2019
I very much doubt that Dominic Cummings works or worked for Russian Intelligence…au contraire.
I was just watching one of the seemingly endless re-runs of the early 1970s historical documentary series, The World at War, and in particular the episode named Barbarossa (from Fall Barbarossa or Operation Barbarossa, named after Friedrich I, the Holy Roman Emperor of the 12th Century who led the Third Crusade against the infidels).
I of course remember watching the TV series when it first was broadcast, in 1973. Many will say that it is in many parts contaminated by what amounts to Jew-Zionist propaganda, and I do not dispute that. Others point out, in a connected critique, that every alleged wrong done by the German Reich and its forces is given great prominence, whereas the cruelties and barbarities of the Soviet regime are barely mentioned (I suppose that it could be argued that the most famous chronicles of those terrible times were not published in English until after The World at War was made: GULAG Archipelago, for one). The criticisms are valid, but one cannot write off The World At War because of those flaws.
The strength of The World at War was that many of the leading personalities on all sides, such as German, English and other general officers, admirals etc, some members of Hitler’s circle (eg Speer), and a host of lesser-ranked people, were all still alive in 1973, giving their filmed testimony weight and immediacy.
Anyway, this article is not meant to focus on The World at War alone, but to examine a couple of “what if?” situations, both in the war years of 1939-45 (for Russians and Americans, 1941-45) and at other times.
The drive to Moscow in 1941
When I was first in Moscow, in 1993, my assigned driver, Pasha (an insolent loutish youth, apropos of nothing) pointed out, as we drove into the city from Sheremetyevo airport, the tank trap memorial, 23 kilometres from the Kremlin on the Leningrad Highway (Leningradskoye Shosse). The memorial marks the supposed furthest point of advance of the German forces in 1941. We drove near to the Kremlin only about 15-20 minutes later.
In 1941, the town of Khimki (now effectively a suburb of Moscow) had only just (1939) been administratively created, and was little developed. Now, hundreds of thousands live close by. Even since I drove through in 1993 there has been further development. Indeed, in the photograph below, taken in a recent year, there can be seen an IKEA warehouse. What would Stalin have had to say about that?!
The proximity to central Moscow amazed me. Even if not true (as some say) that some German advance-reconnaissance motorcyclists advanced yet further, to a point where they could see the golden domes of the Kremlin churches, it is incredible to see how close the forces of the Reich came to capturing Moscow.
In 1941, flush with the victories in the West in 1940, Hitler intended to advance in Russia against 3 main objectives: Leningrad, Moscow, and also the Ukraine generally, with its huge natural resources of grain crops etc and (in the Don Basin or Donbass), coal.
Hitler at first prioritized Leningrad, followed by the Donbass, and only then Moscow. His generals disagreed, arguing that only a decisive blow against Moscow could achieve victory. There were cogent arguments for all three main objectives:
Leningrad: reasons based around morale (the city of the two 1917 Revolutions and in particular the second, Bolshevik, one; the city bearing the name of Lenin); also, the city without which the all-weather port of Murmansk could probably not be held. If Murmansk fell, there could be no Allied resupply of the Soviet Union except via the Soviet Far East. At that stage of the war, that alone might sink the Soviet regime;
Ukraine: grain supplies, coal, even oil (should German forces be able to advance beyond Ukraine; also, protection for the Romanian oilfields supplying Germany);
Moscow: in the highly-centralized Stalinist system of the Soviet Union, everything came from the centre. Indeed, in the earliest hours of Barbarossa, Soviet officers were heard in German intercepts begging Moscow for orders: “we are under attack; what shall we do?”…It might be that, were Moscow to fall, the Soviet Union would fall. Hitler himself had said that “all we need do is kick open the front door and the whole rotten structure will come tumbling down.”
I have to say that (of course with the knowledge of the decades since 1941) I would favour the Moscow option. Had Moscow fallen, the bubble of the regime would have burst. In a small way, the open panic of the NKVD and CPSU when they thought the Germans would soon be in Moscow, and which led to open rebelliousness on the part of ordinary Moscow inhabitants, leads me to think that a German capture of the city would have led to a rapid fall of the Soviet regime in all of European Russia and perhaps beyond.
In any case, without Moscow under Soviet control, Leningrad must surely have fallen too before very long.
Hitler thought that it was more important to defeat the Soviet armies in the field. European thinking, thinking from the constricted lands of Central and Western Europe. In the Russian space, those otherwise valid ideas become less valid. New armies can be (and were) raised from the vast areas beyond the Volga, beyond the Urals.
As for going for three objectives at once, it might, under other stars, have worked, but the cautious Russian proverb says “chase two hares and you will not catch one”…
Still, what if? What if Moscow had fallen in 1941? Without a two-front war, Germany could not have been defeated in the West. There could not have been the Normandy Landings of 1944, certainly not successfully. European Russia would have been under German control, and the wider expanses of the Soviet Union would probably have been invaded and taken by a Russian but anti-Soviet army such as the Vlasov Army, which might have been expanded to a formidable force. Also, the forces under Rommel in North Africa would have been able to have been hugely reinforced, with the heady strategic possibility that Rommel might have been able not only to take Alexandria, Cairo and the Suez Canal, but Jerusalem, Damascus and then drive up through the foothills of the Caucasus towards Baku and its oilfields, linking up with the forces of Army Group South driving South-East from Ukraine; German forces did occupy part of the Caucasus and even part of Kalmykia in 1942 (occupying Elista briefly).
Mainland Europe would, in that overall scenario, have avoided most of the destruction of 1941-1945. In time, there would no doubt have been peace made between the German Reich and the British Empire. The calamitous decolonization in Africa etc would have been avoided, at least until such time as it would not have had such terrible effects on human and animal inhabitants. There would be either no State of Israel, or one which would not be the hub of a worldwide Jew-Zionist web. The forces of Stalinism would never have invaded Eastern and Central Europe. There would have been no Korean War, no Vietnam War, no Cuban Missile Crisis, and Castro himself would have been seen as just another Latin American tinpot dictator (which is all he was anyway, once Soviet backup was removed) and unable to pose as a world “statesman” (BBC and Labour Party idiots please note).
What if? If only…
And now for something completely different…
What if…Beeching had never happened? Alternatively, what if rail lines had been closed but maintenance of track continued?
I wonder how many British people of the post-1960s age, let alone the (often vacant-seeming) “millennials”, have even heard of Dr. Beeching, his reports and his “Beeching Axe”? [see Notes, below]. In outline, then:
“The first report identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles (8,000 km) of railway line for closure, 55% of stations and 30% of route miles, with an objective of stemming the large losses being incurred during a period of increasing competition from road transport and reducing the rail subsidies necessary to keep the network running; the second identified a small number of major routes for significant investment. The 1963 report also recommended some less well-publicised changes, including a switch to containerisation for rail freight“. [Wikipedia]
Note those figures: 2,363 rail stations to be closed! Not to mention 5,000 miles of track.
“Protests resulted in the saving of some stations and lines, but the majority were closed as planned, and Beeching’s name remains associated with the mass closure of railways and the loss of many local services in the period that followed. A few of these routes have since reopened, some short sections have been preserved as heritage railways, while others have been incorporated into the National Cycle Network or used for road schemes; others now are lost to construction, have reverted to farmland, or remain derelict.” [Wikipedia]
“Beeching’s reports made no recommendations about the handling of land after closures. British Rail operated a policy of disposing of land that was surplus to requirements. Many bridges, cuttings and embankments have been removed and the land sold for development. Closed station buildings on remaining lines have often been demolished or sold for housing or other purposes. Increasing pressure on land use meant that protection of closed trackbeds, as in other countries (such as the US Rail Bank scheme, which holds former railway land for possible future use) was not seen to be practical. Many redundant structures from closed lines remain, such as bridges over other lines and drainage culverts. They often require maintenance as part of the rail infrastructure while providing no benefit. Critics of Beeching argue that the lack of recommendations on the handling of closed railway property demonstrates that the report was short-sighted. On the other hand, retaining a railway on these routes, which would obviously have increased maintenance costs, might not have earned enough to justify that greater cost. As demand for rail has grown since the 1990s, the failure to preserve the routes of closed lines (such as the one between Bedford and Cambridge, which was closed despite Beeching recommending its retention) has been criticized.” [Wikipedia]
The above long extracts from Wikipedia lay out the facts quite well. What is missing is perspective. The postwar period in the UK, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s, was one of almost wholesale destruction of old buildings, streets, villages, towns and cities. In fact, postwar redevelopment changed London a great deal more than the oft-cited depredations of the Luftwaffe (most of which bomb damage was concentrated on the Thames dock areas and nearby areas which suffered collateral damage). Naturally, demolitions are sometimes inevitable and sometimes an improvement [see Notes, below], but much that was valuable has gone.
In fact, the 5,000 miles of track closures earmarked by Beeching were in addition to about 3,318 miles of railway track closed between 1948 and 1962 and also a further 1,300 miles of passenger railway between 1923 and 1939! Over 9,000 miles of track!
So “what if”? What if, for example, the rail track had been maintained? That way, were (as now are) different ideas, new technical ideas, possible (eg robot trains, no-staff trains, small ultralight trains, trains made with lighter materials, trains using solar power etc), those tracks could be the basis for new transport links and could be further linked with new track.
The expense of a railway is mostly in the staff pay, pensions etc; after that, the cost of actually running trains (fuel etc); after that, maintenance of trains, track, bridges, tunnels etc. The core maintenance can be relatively little. In the USA, this is the policy (see Wikipedia in Notes, below). Political policy which is also a national insurance policy.
Not that the trekking ways, cycleways and nature walks which often have replaced the old railways are not useful too, but most rail track destroyed has been simply ploughed over, built over or abandoned. Pity.
Today is the 75th anniversary of the attempt made to assassinate Adolf Hitler at his headquarters in East Prussia, the Wolfsschanze (Wolf’s Lair), now situated within the borders of post-1945 Poland.
I blogged last year about matters around the event and around those times more generally:
What is there to add? Perhaps a reminder that human manifestations on this Earth do not last forever. The film, below, shows what the sprawling headquarters of 1944 is like today: as abandoned and lost as the cities of the Aztecs or the Mayans.
On the other hand, the devastated cities of the Germany of 1944 and 1945 are today thriving governmental, commercial, cultural and residential centres, with populations again in the hundreds of thousands or even millions.
[above, Dresden in 1945]
[above, Berlin in 1945; area shown is the Unter den Linden boulevard in central Berlin]
[above, Berlin in 1945; area shown is the Reichskanzlei or Reich Chancellery]
The above photographs show the devastation resulting from war. Today, those same areas are prosperous, busy, thronged with inhabitants. Some of the old has been replaced, some kept, adapted to contemporary usage.
The same is true of ideas. Both the practical and the spiritual-cultural achievements of National Socialism were huge, enormous, particularly when it is considered that they were achieved within only 6 years of peace, the years 1933-1939. SIX YEARS!
We do not need to copy or indeed defend everything that was done by, or in the name of, the Reich. Indeed, many of the flaws of the Reich, or supposed flaws, existed and in fact were even more glaring in both the West and the Soviet Union of the 1930s. The Zeitgeist streamed over the world as a whole, like the jetstream.
In 2019, we honour what was good in the Reich, what worked for the German people and the peoples of all Europe. The rest, we do not need. Times move on. Some challenges remain; others, newly emerged, have to be faced for the first time.
We honour the past and stand ready to create the future.
Ian Robert Millard 