It is reported that, yesterday, 3 people died, in the whole of the UK, from or at least with Coronavirus. Three people. Out of nearly 70 million in the country. Out of several thousand being tested every day now as having Coronavirus.
It follows that there now is no substantial public health threat in the UK from Coronavirus; what does exist is panic and unwarranted fear, being stoked up deliberately by the UK government and its advisers.
The facemask nonsense has nothing to do with public health. It is as divorced from reality as the Dutch Tulip Craze of the 17th Century.
The same is true of the quarantine nonsense, which has already led to a rash of stories about how ingenious Brits have made it back to our sceptred shores with minutes to spare before they would have had to “self-isolate” (quaere: does the government really believe that people are going to “self-isolate”? It’s another “fantasy law” from Boris-idiot).
As to those just beating the quarantine deadline, we have had, in the msm today, bicycling families just breasting the tape with minutes to spare, and an octet which, having performed in a monastery in Normandy, hired a French fishing boat to get back to Newhaven in time. Stylish. In all, a Dunkirk-lite reprise. As Marx said, “first time tragedy, second time farce”…(and cf. Churchill/Boris-idiot…).
A quarantine (even an ineffective “self-isolation” one) might have had some logic behind it in March or April, but not now. Like the facemask nonsense, it is completely pointless.
Another point worth noting is that the countries now seeing upsurges in “the virus” are the very ones stupid enough to have imposed severe “lockdowns”: Spain, Italy, France. Hello? Is anyone listening?
Of course, it's perfectly acceptable for the police to invite you down to the station to talk about your YouTube and Facebook accounts. They want to ensure you're thinking correctly. https://t.co/xjl1idByHY
This is what Britain now is, a place where people can be questioned by the police, not for anything truly criminal, but for posting about matters online, even posts which the police themselves accept, and in advance of interview, are not criminal! This is what the police now are— socio-politicized, biased, and riddled with Common Purpose drones at a high level.
Note that that letter was from the Nottinghamshire Police, a force which has one of the least-impressive records in dealing with real crime; the same is true of Derbyshire Police, who have been snooping on and persecuting the satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz for years.
Snowden was obviously not an agent of Russian Intelligence at the start, meaning at the time of his flight from Hawaii. The Russians would have extracted him much more efficiently if he had been an agent. Instead, he went to Hong Kong and messed around there for days, risking capture and/or extradition.
Still, interesting that Trump is considering the possibility of a pardon. Unless, of course, the news is just bait, to interest Snowden in returning to the USA.
Tweets seen
BREAKING: #GazaUnderAttack Israeli Airstrikes Have Just Hit Sites East Of Al-Bureij Refugee Camp. Five Protesters Also Shot In Malaka (Eastern Gaza).
This is the fifth night in a row Israel has bombed Gaza. No rockets or bullets fired at Israel! pic.twitter.com/aAXUPaqM1N
It is 'Mr Hitchens' to you @markmegaz. And please show me the hard experimental evidence (RTCs preferred) which shows that I would save lives by wearing a loose cloth muzzle, and how I would do so. Or you can just go away. I don't tell you what to wear… https://t.co/gzDuhOSw9C
But they will not be stopped and returned @natalieelphicke, and you know it. So they will not come to an end. And your Party is greatly to blame for the crazy interventions in Iraq, Libya and Syria which are the real cause of the crisis. https://t.co/Bjgh3una3h
Very strange: a woman who, in effect, “inherited” her seat from her husband (who was recently convicted of some pretty silly sex crimes). A travesty.
Very little @joe_363_. Nothing is often a more sensible approach than a misdirected and damaging policy such as that followed by our present government. During previous outbreaks of disease, such as the much larger Mao Flu of 1968-9, none of these measures was taken. https://t.co/tAB64NszyY
Not for you to say @argybargy? Dod you believe the wild tales you were told to persuade you to stay at home and accept the shutdown of the economy? Do you now wear a muzzle in shops or on public transport? Panic takes other forms than screaming in the street. https://t.co/lMZk3GWMVS
'Even the fatuous Health Commissar Matt Hancock had to accept that for months, his department had been publishing bilge as if it was information.' https://t.co/dV90rM8ZJA
I was abused on an Oxfordshire bus last night by some silly snowflake for not wearing a muzzle. She refused to allow the bus to move whilst screaming at me, then she decided she would call the police to have me arrested! Discusting behaviour from those the woke brigade..
'Actually, I have had enough. So should you have had enough. The time has come for real discontent, or there will be no end to our mistreatment and humiliation by this Government'.
Facts and figures about the big lies of lockdown, and the fearmongers behind the wrecking of our society by a clueless cabinet of panicking buffoons. https://t.co/dV90rM8ZJA
Never forget that stupid irresponsible wars and destabilisations, in Iraq, Libya and Syria, by the appalling Cameron as well as the ghastly Blair, created the migration crisis we now cannot solve: https://t.co/dV90rM8ZJA
PETER HITCHENS: My suspicion is that the wrecking of the economy and the state-sponsored panic of these times has killed more people than Covid ever did https://t.co/dV90rM8ZJA
As I have written previously on this blog, I repost quite a few Peter Hitchens tweets, not because I am a “supporter” or “fan” of Hitchens, but because he is quite often correct. That especially applies to his views about the “virus” panic and the absurd (and either mistaken or malicious) governmental over-reaction to it.
That you don't think being ordered to wear a mask, not leave the house, not to see your friends or family, not to travel, not to comfort the dying and not to go to work are genuine, realised threats to freedom are the sign that PH is right. You've allowed it all to become normal
What is that supposed to mean? Marijuana possession, a deliberate act, has been a crime for decades, made so by a free Parliament. Now an arbitrary decree imposes fines for what has been normal behaviour since the beginning of time.. https://t.co/h0hl6fyADB
People are just submitting to social pressure, the majority never wore one through the first 4 months & the evidence hasn't changed. Sorry but no moral high ground should be claimed.
Of course, Hitchens is right to say that discontent should grow and be expressed now that the State is seriously restricting freedoms such as movement, association, personal clothing, as well as free speech; and the fact is that Parliament now scarcely exists except as a rubber stamp. However, if I were to state my hopes for what might happen, I should no doubt have evil and malicious snoopers reporting me to the “authorities” in what has become a toytown police state. So I stay silent, or at least superficially silent.
Free speech on historical topics again under attack by Jews
We see repeatedly that, in the UK, voters vote only for parties, not for individuals. One example was the ignominious defeat of Simon Danczuk in Rochdale in 2017. His first election, in 2010, resulted in a vote-share of about 36%. His second election, in 2015, gave him a vote-share of about 46%. Both times under Labour label. After Danczuk had been deselected by Labour, he tried to get elected as Independent in 2017. Result? 1.8% (883 votes). Fifth place (out of six). The new Labour candidate won, with 58% of the vote.
Another example. Anne Milton was Conservative Party MP for Guildford from 2005. She also won the elections of 2010, 2015 and 2017, at the last of which her vote-share was nearly 55%.
An important distinction from the Danczuk case was there had been no scandal attaching to Anne Milton; she was deselected (the whip taken away by Boris Johnson) purely because of her opposition to “no-deal Brexit” and she was given the chance to stand again as a Conservative Party candidate at Guildford if she dropped her opposition. She refused and stood as Independent.
Anne Milton’s principled stance availed her naught; neither did her 14 years as MP for Guildford, nor her uninvolvement in any expenses scandal (or any other scandal). She got only 7.4% (over 4,000 votes, a 4th place out of 5) at the 2019 General Election. The new Conservative Party candidate won, with about 45%.
While Anne Milton’s defeat in 2019 was more honourable than that of Danczuk, the result, in bottom-line terms, was similar, a bad defeat. Her only consolation: she retained her deposit.
The “main parties” (and that really means just Labour and Conservative) still have a complete stranglehold because the sleepy voters are still voting mainly for a label.
How ignorant are you of politics @argybargy1950, on a scale of one to 10? MPs are selected by closed committees of the major parties (which would never pick me), and then obediently confirmed by voters in safe seats. No truly independent candidate is ever elected. https://t.co/Hf35nUScg7
I’m a teacher, I just resigned. There’s 1470 kids where I work, in a mainstream secondary – we’re not allowed to wear masks or gloves. It’s absolutely insane to believe that somehow by magic, the virus won’t spread here. It’s utterly illogical.
This is a very good example of the pathology, not of “the virus” itself, but of the fear of it. A teacher in a State secondary school resigns because he fears that he might contract “the virus” by being in the same building or room as children or young persons. Well, it is possible, of course, though unlikely; any such school students infected would probably themselves not show any symptoms and be in no danger.
As for the teacher, yes, he might pick it up from those pupils, though it is probably a thousand to one chance. If the teacher were unlucky and were infected, his chance of needing any medical intervention would be small, hundreds to one. His chance of being seriously affected would be tiny. His chance of dying from “the virus” would be even smaller. His age is not mentioned, but probably under 60, probably under 50. His fear is misplaced.
Thus we see the way in which the fear whipped up by the government of clowns and its ludicrous “SAGE” advisers has led many rather unthinking people to make panicked decisions.
In any case, the alternative is simply to have no schools open until an effective vaccine is found and deployed, which might be months, years, or never. I have little respect for the UK educational system as it is, but the result of, in effect, having no education at all given to the young, would be worse (probably).
Straw man @imdsm . Do you perhaps accept there is something new and important about a government compelling people to wear a garment, not to preserve modesty but to indicate compliance with a contentious policy, and spread exaggerated fear? https://t.co/cIxzi4cxEP
“The good folk are unaware when the Devil sits on their shoulder…” [Goethe, Faust]
What HM government really thinks and recently said about the loose cloth muzzles it plans to fine you £3,200 for not wearing pic.twitter.com/9G8Dqy0T2N
Lest we forget – fear was deliberately, consciously used by the government to achieve compliance with its policies. And now? Why are you all wearing muzzles the same government admits are of little use?? pic.twitter.com/dWnnkuGujc
Covid Mortality rates , as in deaths per million population, can be found at this useful site, a great corrective to the BBC's moronic coverage(which does not seem to grasp that figures – unless given in context, reveal little) : https://t.co/SbZlIAX0X9https://t.co/EqHpmGYx5s
I tried a quiz I saw online: “which [existing] government most closely matches your political views?” and got “Saudi Arabia”! Ha ha! I think that their site needs a little bit of a tweak or two! https://www.quotev.com/quiz/8888999/t
Tom Watson and Keir Starmer
Well, wouldn’t you know it? Tom Watson (Jewish lobby mouthpiece), is going to get a peerage after all, proposed by Keir Starmer (Jewish lobby mouthpiece). How utterly disgusting.
.@elaina22475794@MLewisLawyer After Watson made the lives of people who Carl Beech falsely accused, he should not be given a peerage.
Personally, I prefer to keep out of this “Labour Party antisemitism” stuff, not because I am afraid of being sued (least of all by the extreme Jewish lobby solicitor of choice, Mark Lewis) but because I am not a Labour supporter or member, and am well-known for being an independent anti-Zionist, overall, and a social nationalist.
I am confident that I can defend myself, should it be necessary, against any charge of defamation by anyone, but I have a copper-bottomed armour anyway, inasmuch as I have no money or real property now, so anyone who sues me will lose out (hugely, I would make sure of that) even if (unlikely) they were to win in court. Checkmate.
Ha ha! I typed, in error, “unkikely” instead of “unlikely“. I suppose that a psychologist could make something of that!
If anyone wants to see what I have written about that self-promoting fake, Mark Lewis, please use the search function on my blog. There are a number of what I think are interesting articles (certainly many thousands of people have seen them). They are quite hard-hitting (though accurate) and date from late 2018 and early 2019 .
Lewis had the chance to sue me in 2018 or 2019 if he thought that I was libelling him. He was well aware of my blog posts. He never did sue, he never threatened to sue. My impecuniosity may have been part of the reason, but I maintain that another reason was because my blog tells the truth. It is not a pack of lies but true right the way through.
Remind me again why face masks are mandatory now this excuse from @MattHancock has been debunked and the virus is practically non existent? Who the bl..dy hell is running this Govt?
I’d love to believe there were real journalists out there but not one has challenged Govt on the restrictions imposed on us taking away our civil liberties/freedoms in the name of this now non-existent virus. Huge gulf between Govt and public who are fed up with the scare tactics
We in the UK are now living under a repressive “elected” dictatorship. That would be bad enough were that all it is; however, it is also incompetent, and to a degree hard to believe even after the experience of the past 10 years.
The shutting-down of freedom of expression
“Tartan Pakistani” shutting down freedom of expression in Scotland:
It can easily be seen that this whole “Coronavirus” thing (more precisely, the government’s “lockdown” shutdown) has destroyed ordinary radical or social-national political life. Political meetings, even small ones, are effectively banned, as are the traditional means of spreading a message, such as rallies and demonstrations (though the System has accommodated the nonsense of the “Black Lives Matter” swine).
In fact, the latest “measures” from the government of Boris-idiot give even local authorities the power to shut down whole tracts of the country and whole cities on “health” grounds. Don’t tell me that such powers cannot be and will not be abused.
They will never be used irresponsibly, it's as if people think they'll use these powers like they use the RIPA act to surveil beach dog walkers or something. That almost never happens!
To quote the Bard, “Aye, there’s the rub”…even I was surprised at the zeal and relish with which Britain’s mostly rather ineffective toytown police took to their new role as bulliers of lone sunbathers, solitary swimmers and retired couples walking their dogs on beaches or in national parks.
The barking of “orders” through megaphones from inside police jeeps and helicopters, the deliberate polluting of a Derbyshire “blue lagoon” (to deter visitors), the drones following elderly fell-walkers so that the real “Covidiots”, the police, might then “shame” (as the police thought in their little brains) those walkers by having the footage posted on Twitter or Facebook.
The present government may be one composed of idiots but, thanks to an 80-seat majority in the Commons (and the absence of any effective Opposition there), the Government rules supreme. Indeed, there is more dissent from disenchanted Conservative Party people than there is from Keir Starmer’s joke “Labour” official Opposition (Jewish lobby Potemkin village), which merely supports the Government and tries to put a gloss on whatever that government orders.
A white couple are brutally set upon in an airport & the white man desperately tries to protect his girlfriend as what appear to be airport security simply stand & watch.
I doubt this will be covered by the media, but you can bet that it would have if the races were reversed! pic.twitter.com/bFgDcxicvZ
[above: a “chimp-out”, in the American vernacular]
Black Lives Matter & the Jewish Terrorist A convicted terrorist sits on the board of a Black Lives Matter fund raising group – but why are the media ignoring this? This is a @bitchute exclusive, please support the platform.https://t.co/SugwzAz1PDpic.twitter.com/sfjY790NqX
Analysis, propaganda, and reasoned argument are all very well (and I engage that way myself, mainly now via this blog) but in the end, I think that we know that Europe is not going to be saved by such methods, however necessary and inescapable they are.
I make no claim to 'objectivity' @robinsall. I'm plainly biased against incompetence and stupidity, disproportionate action, mindless conformism and the bossiness of jacks-in-office such as Mat Hang Kok. The ones to watch out for are the ones who claim falsely to be impartial. https://t.co/7PYDdnVO64
“Commercial property prices look set to plunge as white-collar workers shun the office, the Treasury watchdog has warned…If the OBR’s dire prediction comes to pass, it could wipe £230 billion off the value of commercial property such as offices and shops across Britain” [The Independent]
When the wealthy Jews start jumping from the windows, as (supposedly) in 1929, after the Wall Street Crash, wake me up again…
Late tweets seen
It may only be one straw but there comes a point where any association with this government must end. This is not only the most incompetent government of my lifetime, it is the most authoritarian. It is not remotely conservative. https://t.co/hhMRcdDP0Xpic.twitter.com/5hjDwXez3O
I argue, in this post for the UKHR blog, that the 'lockdown' regulations are incompatible with the ECHR and thus unlawful: https://t.co/sC2vkAIfMC. This is a version of a more detailed paper published here: https://t.co/Y4J3yPMvu3
Only guidance. No limit on any numbers at a wedding in a public building or in a private building which is not a dwelling. Receptions of over 30 outside can go ahead if there has been a risk assessment. Please stop conflating guidance with law.
I noticed some tweets by Twitterati using a test or quiz similar to the one below, which indicates (supposedly) one’s political orientation. I have tried such tests previously and obtained similar results, perhaps closer to dead centre.
[above: the copy function does not seem to work properly on this graphic; at the top should be written “—social— conservative”, on the bottom “woke”; “left” and “right” on the lateral axis]
So it seems that I am not very “woke”. Quelle surprise…
200 migrant-invaders “caught” in just one day and brought to Dover! The untermenschen, having been “caught” in the Channel ( meaning “rescued”, or in reality “escorted”), will now be registered, given accomodation, money etc, and will batten off the British people forever. Whoever supports this is a traitor and should be treated as such.
The action from #Dover has been non-stop today. An estimated 200+ ILLEGALS have crossed in inflatables & kayaks and its still ongoing
THIS MUST BE STOPPED. THE GOVERNMENT ARE FAILING US !!
People still tend to think that the “Conservative” Government and its ministers somehow want to stop the migration-invasion. No they don’t. They are slaves of the Zionist money-power, of ZOG and the New World Order (NWO). They want to import blacks, browns, and others in huge numbers. Wake up, people, for God’s sake! Look at the way Boris-idiot has just now invited as many as four million Hong Kong Chinese to settle on our overcrowded islands…
A Gurkha like that has earned the right to live here, but I should have thought that he could live better by far on the same money (military pension etc) back in Nepal.
Tweets seen
Boots and John Lewis announcing thousands of job losses today. Places like London are deserted – shops, offices, stations etc empty. Public are scared and public transport dysfunctional. Govt must stop Project Fear or our cities will suffer permanent damage.
Well, the “government” of Boris-idiot is now actually reinforcing the misplaced fear in the population by mandating (not yet official, but almost certainly) the muzzling of shoppers as well as travellers. The ridiculous “lockdown” shutdown should have been for a few weeks only, to rub in the message of caution to the population.
This 4+ months of “lockdown”/shutdown is trashing the economy, and that will continue, despite the official lifting of the “lockdown”, because the Government insists on muzzling the population, which makes many people think that they are still in danger from “the virus” despite the fact that most people are in no danger anyway, and never were; the wave has passed now, and there is no compelling evidence that there will be any “second wave”. There may be, there may not be. Probably, there will not be. In any case, most of the most vulnerable in the UK have succumbed already.
Once more: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CANCEL CULTURE. There is free speech. You can say and do as you pls, and others can choose never to deal this you, your company or your products EVER again. The rich and powerful are just upset that the masses can now organize their dissent.
The black man [above] is presumably a U.S. citizen. Even so, his belief in the U.S. Constitutional “free speech” rights (as amended by statute and case law) is frighteningly naive (or disingenuous) for someone who, according to his Twitter profile, is a columnist for the New York Times. Reading his tweet, maybe he is just rather stupid.
I am still, though purely nominally, an attorney of the Bar of the State of New York, and have lived and worked in the USA (New York, New Jersey, South Carolina), as well as visited the country for leisure and pleasure (Florida, mainly). The fact is that, yes, in principle and subject to exceptions, you have “free speech” in the USA to a greater degree than exists in the UK or EU. That “free speech”, however, only protects you (to some extent) from arrest and imprisonment; not from other, socio-economic, sanctions or penalties.
It is cold comfort that, in the USA, someone might be —relatively— immune from arrest for holding or expressing the “wrong” views on politics, society, religion, history, but yet might, because of the Jew-Zionist influence, lose his or her job, profession, and so (quite possibly) income, home etc.
In most EU states, expressing the “wrong” view about the Jewish “holocaust” narrative is illegal, actually forbidden by law, just as, in the mediaeval period, expressing the “wrong” (even if accurate or “right”) view about religion, astronomy etc was illegal, and might be punished by death as a capital heresy.
In the EU today, to examine modern history, and to revise the popular or “brainwash” view even in a limited way, is illegal and termed “holocaust” “denial”. A modern heresy law.
The NWO/ZOG nexus has moved from trying to criminalize free speech (though that is still part of the plan, especially in the EU and UK) to making the big moves over the glasses of Champagne (or bowls of chicken soup?) with the aim of simply having huge capitalist enterprises remove “account-holders”, thus “deplatforming” them.
Those “alt-Right” accounts whose holders were making a living from being dissidents have mostly now been removed from most platforms of importance, meaning mainly YouTube, Twitter, Facebook. These platforms are not classical monopolies, but are effective monopolies; quasi-monopolistic enterprises, if you like.
An “account-holder” on Twitter and the rest has no real rights, certainly none qua citizen; only —almost non-existent— consumer or contractual rights.
The joke is that the bulk of the Twitterati, for all their supposed “socialism”, “human rights”, and —in some cases— quasi-revolutionism etc, end up bleating that Twitter, YouTube etc have every right to remove unwelcome dissidents, because those dissidents signed up to get a account in a private-enterprise company, and so signed up to (no doubt Jew-Zionist-drafted) “Terms and Conditions of Service”.
In fact, the pitiful weakness of the “woke”, of the supposed “socialists” etc is made manifest very plainly in respect of this question. Very instructive. It is why the pseudo-socialists have no traction politically, as seen in the 2019 UK General Election. Ideological weakness. You could even call it an ideological vacuum.
The “alt-Right” wastes of space thought that they could both put forward views and make a living online, relying on “free speech rights” and on being doormats for the Jew-Zionist lobby. I suppose that the Breitbart crowd led the way. Paul Joseph Watson etc. “Prison Planet” Watson. He perennially kow-tows to the Jews and Israel, even though many and perhaps most despise him and laugh at him. He still had his YouTube channel removed, and there is nothing he can do about it but beg and plead and stamp the foot.
Katie Hopkins. Similar. Very similar. “Alt-Right” “conservatism”. Pro-Israel. Pro-Jewish lobby. Despised by the Jews, most of them. What happened? Removed from Twitter and, I believe, YouTube.
The lesser “alt-Right” wastes of space went the same way, or are going there. “Sargon of Akkad” etc. Without their “mainstream” online platforms, they are unpersons. The Jews and their “antifa” puppets are laughing. Why? Because they know that “Prison Planet” Watson, Katie Hopkins, “Sargon of Akkad” etc are not going to raise an army to annihilate them. In fact, they are not going to do anything except bleat and stamp feet on the small and uninfluential platforms to which they still have access: GAB, Parler, Telegram, Minds etc.
The reader will get my point readily enough: these “alt-Right” people are men of straw and indeed (in the case of Katie Hopkins and lesser-known ladies) women of straw. Their online “armies” of “followers” will not gather together offline, but will just surf other online accounts. It is hard to escape the conclusion that, in one respect, the Jewish and “antifa” cabal(s) are correct: without those online platforms, these fake “conservative”-“nationalist” people have nothing, and are nothing.
What of “Tommy Robinson”? He, to some extent, has bridged the gap between the online world and the offline “real” world. Yet without his online presence, all that he can command is a loose army (a small one, at that) of drunks and bottle-throwers.
In fact, for what do the “alt-Right” wastes of space stand? Nothing really. Certainly nothing tangible. They are against a few things, such the migration-invasion, the Islamist element, the “Black Lives Matter” nonsense. On all these matters, I stand on their side. The problem resides in the fact that they have no positive ideology.
Not having an ideology is a characteristic of the contemporary political scene in the UK. The “Conservative” Party government of Boris-idiot, Cummings etc has no real ideology, not even the pro-private enterprise quasi-“libertarianism” of Mrs Thatcher and her like.
As for the “Labour” Party, equally misnamed now, can it be said to “have an ideology”? No, unless bleatingly pathetic “wokeness” can be said to constitute one.
Other tweets seen today
A tweet below re. the recently-trending #JewishPrivilege Twitter hashtag from the malicious “CAA” [“Campaign Against Antisemitism”] Jewish pressure group (heavily involved in ZOG activities and especially the devising of false complaints to police and social media organizations):
Twitter should have acted immediately to ban the hashtag, but given the platform’s long record of enabling racism against Jews, it is unlikely to do so unless forced. This is yet further evidence that social media networks must be regulated.
— Campaign Against Antisemitism (@antisemitism) July 13, 2020
Condemned out of (((their))) own mouths. “They” want to “regulate” social media, meaning control and censor accounts and content.
How accurate that is, I mean the assertion that Jews controlled, eventually, much of the transatlantic slave trade, I cannot say, though I have seen (purported) evidence before. It seems plausible. After all, there was big money to be made out of slavery before the British banned it.
Musical interlude
Tweets seen
I’ve just had an epiphany that explains why so many people on the Left behave like stroppy toddlers. It all makes so much sense now. The Left largely live in echo chambers – on social media, the news they consume, their jobs (largely public sector or woke media) – so they 1/
I had to correct Julia Hartley-Brewer once on Twitter, some years ago, after the radio loudmouth tried to correct me (a former practising barrister) on a matter of law or legal procedure. I was right; she was wrong. After she realized that she was making herself look stupid, she just gave up and blocked me. So much for her listening to other views (and in that case, my “view” was not an opinion but verifiable and —for anyone knowledgeable— indisputable fact).
Having said the above, she is right on the issue here in question, i.e. the echo-chamber of the “woke” types, something about which I have been writing for years. Julia Hartley-Brewer only just realized? Well, after all, she is a great deal less intelligent, educated and aware than she imagines…Still, at least she agrees with me on something.
The nonsense of huge transnational tax-avoiders has to be addressed now: Amazon, Google, Facebook, to name just three.
Amazon is one of the world's richest corporations. It paid very little in tax last year. Now it's offering unpaid time off for workers who are sick and only two weeks' paid leave for workers who test positive for the Corona virus.
#shamblesstayathome Johnson……prepare to lose loved ones, herd immunisation then no herd immunisation, no testing then testing, don't go to pubs or cafes but keep them open, don't go out but go out to exercise. Not exactly inspiring confidence.
I have been writing for some time in my blog pages about the creeping infantilization of Britain, which affects people of all ages, but mainly those under 50 and especially those under 40.
The woman in the tweet above is merely one egregious example. According to her own words, she is a mother —which makes one tremble to think of what monster(s) she is bringing up— and “works in financial services”, which, again in her own words “is…like…investment banking, basically”! I presume that she is somewhere near the bottom of the pile, but even so…
What strikes me in that clip is the sheer “Me Me Me, Want Want Want” rage. She is more like a 2 year old than a (?) 20-something. This goes beyond one young woman’s lack of class. It has political implications. Still, “always look on the bright side of life”…maybe there is some way of utilizing these factors.
[update, 26 March 2020:sadly, the video clip to which I referred has been deleted now; the message too. It was shocking]
Seemingly taken in the North East of England. It makes me wonder whether I myself am being too cautious, not going out, not socializing, not going anywhere inessential, driving out only after dark and to shop in places which are almost deserted, obsessively applying my small stock of travel hand-sanitizing gel even after pumping fuel or touching a shopping trolley at Waitrose.
Maybe I am being a bit of a fool at that (too cautious), but I prefer to be my kind of fool than that of those in the bus photo above, who may well be dead in a month’s time. It can come to any of us at any time, but we can at least play the odds and try to bias them in our favour.
Reality v. Government and msm fantasy
The Daily Mirror report, below, shows the reality of what is happening, not the fantasy of a multikulti, “caring, sharing” “community” where people all care for and help each other, a kind of large-scale Deal Or No Deal, complete with waves of ersatz and completely meaningless emotionalism. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/coronavirus-gran-says-sick-husband-21740261
Another thing. We are told that the UK will be put into “lockdown”. Only essential trips out of the home will be permitted. The Army will, we are told, keep “1.5 million vulnerable people” on some list supplied with food and medicine.
So the police, who seem unable to do much about burgeoning crime (except the invented “crimes” on social media), will enforce “lockdown”? Pretty hard task, when many towns, at night, actually have not one policeman or car patrolling.
As for the Army, it is a pretty depleted body these days. About 70,000 personnel, of which by no means all are fit for even limited duty. Will all of the 70,000 be delivering food? No. 50,000? I doubt even that. One and a half million “vulnerable” people (officially), serviced by even 50,000 soldiers works out at 30 “customers” per soldier. Maybe far more. It sounds to me more like fantasy than reality, but we shall see.
Well, I needed bread, the staff of life, so went on a little ratissage after darkness had fallen. The little village shop a couple of miles away now closes at 1800, so I was too late there. A few miles of driving brought me to a Waitrose. No loaves of bread (of any type), but I was able to get a couple of packs of pitta bread. The pasta aisle was empty bar a couple of packs of unwanted odd-shaped pasta (tiny short tubes). No pasta sauce. A few eggs still available. Milk available. Mineral water too. I don’t eat meat, so the completely stripped shelves of lamb, pork and chicken did not concern me. Plenty of steak for those willing to pay; same for smoked salmon etc. I did not see whether there was loo paper on sale. Probably not.
Still hoping to get some brown bread, drove 6 miles to the nearest Tesco. No bread available there either (I’m convinced that the guilty parties are affluent milfs and pensioners, with large freezers). Still, managed to get the last few bottles of pilsner beer. Beer? Why is beer in short supply? This really is madness. Bottles of Inspector Morse-type beer, however, with names such as Catweazle and Monk’s Nose (I made those up…similar ones were there though) were plentiful. Even fine-ground sea salt was gone!
I see that, overall, the panic-buying is slackening slightly. Eggs, milk, kitchen roll were all on sale at both Waitrose and Tesco. I was able to buy my usual shower gel (“Sea Moss”) for the first time in weeks. If I run out of hand-sanitizer for the car and cannot get rubbing alcohol anywhere, I shall have to use cheap vodka, though some is as low in alcohol as 37.5%, and hand sanitizer should be 60% or more. Still, better than nothing. No ordinary vodka is 60%. Even Krepkaya, which in any case is almost impossible to buy in the UK now, is only 50%.
China
The fact is that, conspiracy theories about the virus notwithstanding, the Chinese do and should have a burden of guilt about this. It is their behaviour toward animals which created the conditions for the existence and the flourishing of the virus. In many ways, the Chinese are socially and psychologically backward.
“Out of touch? Moi?…“
Fiona Bruce, who is said to be paid about £600,000 a year by the BBC, was apparently surprised by the anger many of the audience of Question Time feel. That is a good part of the UK’s problem, that so many in System politics and the System mass media simply do not understand why the British people are angry.
After all, Fiona Bruce has no reason to feel angey and aggrieved: she joined the BBC after meeting a BBC producer at a wedding; he got her a job. She is now said to be paid as much as £600,000 per year. Why should she feel angry?! Gratitude would surely be more appropriate… It does raise questions about her understanding of the society in which she lives, though.
“The British military risks becoming irrelevant if it continues to focus on “missiles and tanks” as the main threats to the UK, the head of the Army has warned.”
“The army must “update and change the rules of war” according to the Chief of the General Staff, to be able to tackle new threats like cyber attacks, whilst also deterring countries that rely on heavy firepower.”
“General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith said a focus on high-tech weapons that are no use against low-level threats like fake news and subversion “leaves us close to a position of dominant irrelevance”.”
“The main threat is not missiles and tanks, it is the weaponisation of globalisation, and those elements of globalization that have hitherto made us prosperous and secure: the mobility of goods, people, data and ideas.”
“Secure borders, or living on an island, are no guarantees against the corrosive and intrusive effect of disinformation, subversion and cyber.”
“The Army head suggested that traditional concepts of warfare were “increasingly redundant”.”
General Carleton-Smith fails to mention, at least specifically, mass immigration (and the subsequent and consequent births) as a factor impacting the very survival of the UK as a state, a country, a society.
Of course, if he did mention it in that context, he would be sacked.
At one time, the UK was a fairly cohesive society. Now it is not. It is a seething volcanic caldera, disguised only by a thin and disintegrating crust.
Look at what happened just today (4 June 2019):
A Trump supporter is milkshaked by a hostile crowd in Parliament Square.
A baying mob of anti-Trump “protesters” bait and then attack what seems to be a lone middleaged man. A porcine woman leads the abusive and violent multi-ethnic pack, shouting “nazi scum!” repeatedly into his face. I suppose that he was brought up not to punch a woman in the face, even one like her.
Look at the policewoman (or PCSO) who not only does not attempt to arrest the milkshake-thrower but looks terrified, before she is pushed aside by the crowd as an irrelevance. The police are just useless these days. That “officer” made no attempt to protect a citizen standing in the street outside Parliament itself. Well, in the end, she is just one woman in a clown outfit.
Incidentally, I am not exactly a Trump fan myself; that is another issue.
We often think that the UK is becoming a police state. How is that reconciled with the imminent social breakdown I am predicting? In fact, the two go together, and both are linked to the now-fragmented UK society.
As society becomes fragmented, the easy-going policing of the past has to change to try to contain the chaos just below the surface. In addition, anything which disturbs the surface calm, or relative calm, has to be criminalized. So we see that, as the foreign invading hordes and their offspring have multiplied in number, so have the penalties increased for anyone who suggests that they should not be in the UK, or should be removed one way or another.
This started in the 1960s with the first Race Relations Act (1965), and became increasingly more oppressive with subsequent Acts (1968, 1976, 1985, 2000, 2003). It is clear why: the threat of public order upheaval, as more and more “blacks and browns” (and others) arrived in the UK and started to breed.
Free speech, freedom of expression generally, freedom of choice (eg in offering employment, or housing or whatever) “had” to be curtailed for reasons of “preserving the Peace” and in order to keep up the pretence that the multi-ethnic/multicultural society can work, albeit at the expense of a certain loss of civic freedom.
There was also the realization that, as the non-British and indeed non-European populations expanded in size, they had to be pandered to, not “offended” etc, not because the reverse would be impolite or undiplomatic, but because those increasingly huge populations might rise up against the white British people who “allowed” them to come to the UK (though most of the British opposed mass immigration; it was always the System and its politicians etc that caused the influx and its problems).
It was and still is the Jewish Zionist element that was and still is behind much of the legal repression and the “ethnic” influx itself (“The Great Replacement”).
Over the years, the censorship of speech and restriction of actions has expanded from races and “ethnicities” to other parts of the general population: religions, sexual orientations etc.
You can now say, or post online, relatively innocuous views, only to find that you are not only faced with a virtual (online) mob baying for your blood, but also quite likely with a policeman at your door or on the telephone. My own experiences include this:
If you say something that offends the general orthodoxy, you may lose your job, your professional status, your liberty.
The satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz lost her job —singing for a cruise line— simply because her views supposedly offended some Jews, even though her views had nothing to do with that job. Later, she sang satirical songs about some of the hundreds (if not thousands) of “holocaust” fake stories. That resulted in a farcical cycle of police persecution, prosecutions, eventual trial, conviction, sentence, appeal and now (at time of writing) further appeal.
Jez Turner set up the London Forum discussion group. He also made a speech in Whitehall in 2015, recalling how the Jews had been expelled from England more than once (and hoping that they might yet be removed again). Put on trial in 2018. Convicted. His punishment? A year in prison (he served 6 months).
I too was subject to action (by the same Jew-Zionist element): see above, and also
The Zionist campaign against free speech and free historical enquiry is being resisted, but the mere fact that such repression of free speech exists is very significant.
In the last few years, the privatization of public space has led to the abuse of power by the main online platforms (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube etc), and even the organizations behind or around such platforms: paypal, patreon, and so on.
When Twitter started to remove “unwanted” opinion from its pages, many turned to GAB, only to find that there was a strong and focussed attempt by the ZOG powers to destroy GAB. So far, it has survived. However, the campaign against free speech continues, and shows no sign of abating:
Indeed, even a joke made (and posted online) about a Guy Fawkes event in a suburban garden can result in a police raid, evidence “bagged up” as for a murder case etc. Am I making this up to prove my point? No.
Measures against free speech and freedom of expression are just, overall, a symptom of what is happening. By that I mean the fragility of civil society generally. We see that, as the police “crack down” on social media posts or stickers put up on university campuses (incredibly, some young people got 4 years in prison for the latter, quite recently), comments made in blogs etc, in the real world of the UK, crime and especially violent crime is getting out of control: London infested by mainly black and brown “moped raiders” and “scooter raiders” and muggers, “road rage” incidents, brawls etc. The courts are far more lenient, usually, on those real crimes than they are on the fake crimes or notional crimes of pretended offence.
I have seen over the years how thin the veneer of society is in the UK. As long ago as the petrol protests of 2000, I noticed that that veneer was already very very thin indeed. Fights breaking out over the fuel pumps etc.
The police cover has been reduced, and while the police seem to be enthusiastically noting and acting upon reports of anyone seriously (or even unseriously, thinking of the dog taught to do a “Hitler” salute! The owner got a heavy fine…) criticizing the failing multikulti society (or the Jews that are mainly behind it), they seem far less interested in the traditional role of the police, i.e. investigating real crime and keeping safe the citizenry.
As for the armed services, they seem to be going the same way. Reduced in numbers, and with their focus on the approved shibboleths of the “multi-everything” society: multi-ethnic, multicultural, LGBT-whatever friendly, with confused aims, ever-lowering standards and little ability to counter either conventional threats or new dangers.
There again, what are the armed forces actually defending? We are now at the 75th anniversary of the Normandy Landings. There may be disputes about whether the Second World War ever need have happened, about whether an honourable armistice between the British Empire and the German Reich might have been concluded in 1940, but leaving all that aside, the British servicemen and civilians of that era (albeit bamboozled by Churchill and his cabal, so be it…) knew, at least in their own minds, what their own society was! Something like the picture given in the popular song There’ll Always Be An England:
Is there a British society at all now? There are bits and pieces still operative, but the society as a whole is now a jigsaw. There are fissures and rifts and splits everywhere. Racial, ethnic, religious, ideological, sexual, economic etc. Some always existed, but not to this extent.
So we see a situation where, at the very time when the society itself is not a coherent whole, the forces which might compel civic obedience and discipline are not numerous or powerful enough to do so, despite theoretically strict laws relating to various areas.
What will happen in a situation (which might come sooner than many imagine) in which the population is without luxuries or even necessities? Who will control those seething and uncontrolled masses? Not the depleted Army. Not the very depleted police.
A social national movement does not exist in the UK. It may be that the only way for one to exist will be for its existence to become the only way for the whole society to exist.
I tweeted (before Twitter expelled me) in the past about freedom of expression and how it is now under attack across the “West”; I have also blogged about it. It is not a straightforward issue but clarity is possible. The same is true when talking about the enemies of freedom.
Below, I link to a BuzzFeed “report” (propaganda piece) promoting the views of Jess Phillips MP, one of the worst MPs in the present House of Commons, who has now said (of a UKIP candidate, Carl Benjamin):
“The Electoral Commission should surely have standards about who can and can’t stand for election. If Facebook and Twitter can ban these people for hate speech how is it they are allowed to stand for election?”
It is hard to imagine being back in 1999, let alone 1989, 1979, 1969 (or any time before that right back to the 18th Century), when a Member of Parliament, even one as profoundly ignorant, uneducated and uncultured as Jess Phillips, would say that a civil service body should decide who should be allowed to stand for election!
Now there are certain kinds of people who cannot stand for election in the UK, and there is a debate to be had about whether those rules are too restrictive, but it has never been seriously suggested before that a candidate should be barred from standing simply because of whatever he or she has said!
Now, those who read my blog etc know that I have rather little time for “Sargon of Akkad” (Carl Benjamin) or his fellow “alt-Right” vloggers (“Prison Planet” Watson etc) but I think that they have the right to speak, to speak online, and to stand for elections. As to Benjamin’s “rape” comments about Jess Phillips, well they were in very poor taste and certainly not chivalrous (though Jess Phillips has no time for courtesy and, still less, for chivalry, in any case), but I do not think that he should be arrested, questioned by police etc about them, nor prevented from carrying on his doomed attempt to become an MEP.
The general assault on freedom of expression in the UK and across the “West”
The attack on what might loosely be called “free speech” is being led and largely carried out by the Jewish or Jewish-Zionist lobby, monitored and supported by the Israeli state. This can be illustrated by a few examples from the UK, starting with my own experiences:
Alison Chabloz sang satirical songs which were posted online; she placed a link on her blog. She was persecuted, lost her job as a result, further persecuted, then privately prosecuted by the fake “charity” called “Campaign Against AntiSemitism”, which then led to prosecution by the CPS and conviction under the bad law of the Communications Act 2003, s.127. At present she is still appealing:
Jez Turner made a speech in Whitehall in 2015, in which speech he suggested that Jews should be cast out from England as they had been on several occasions in the past (eg under Edward I). After a long legal struggle with the Jewish lobby, more particularly the “CAA”, the CPS caved in and prosecuted Jez Turner. He received a 1 year prison sentence in 2018 (he was released on strict conditions after 6 months).
Tommy Robinson
The activist known as Tommy Robinson has been banned from both Facebook and Twitter.
I have written and spoken many times about the “privatization of public space”. In my case, I have been disbarred because Jews wanted to stop me tweeting and/or punish me for exposing them. I have been interrogated by the police at Jewish instigation. I have had other problems with the authorities in recent years. All the doing of Jew conspirators.
In the past, printed matter was the medium of political propaganda. Today, it is online matter that counts, but the online platforms and internet services are in few hands, and most of the hands that matter are Jewish.
An individual can now be effectively silenced by being banned from Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, which can be the decision of a single capitalist “owner”, a manager or executive, or even some deskbound dogsbody.
In addition, that decision-maker, or a couple of such, can deprive the individual of money donations via removal of his or her Paypal, Patreon or other money-donation service.
Likewise, an organization can now be all but wiped out simply by the same methods. Just as I was expelled from Twitter (albeit that Twitter is just a waste of time and effort, really), so have been expelled (“suspended”, in Twitter’s weasel word) Alison Chabloz, Tommy Robinson and innumerable others. They have also been removed from Facebook, YouTube etc (I have no accounts on those platforms) and from donation sites, Paypal etc.
I see that Facebook has now removed Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam organization too (for “anti-Semitism”). The Jews are crowing. Maybe prematurely.
It is clear that power online is in very few hands. One decision by some Jew like Zuckerberg and an organization with literally millions of followers, such as InfoWars, can be sent spinning into outer darkness, with no right of appeal or legal redress qua citizen.
In the USA, these facts also mean that the Constitutional right to free speech is scarcely worth the paper it is printed on. I was always sceptical about it, on the basis that, yes, you can speak freely in the USA, so long as you do not mind losing your job, profession, business, home etc…Now the near-uselessness of the Constitutional freedom of speech is even more stark: by all means speak freely, but you are restricted to howling in the dark, or at least in the street. Your online “free speech”, meaning your communication with anyone not your immediate neighbour or family, is monitored, censored and can be completely taken away from you, not by the State, even, but by online platforms pressured by or owned by the Jewish Zionist lobby. We see that there are moves afoot in the UK even to prevent our taking part in already-stacked elections!
Conclusion
As European people and social nationalists, we can no more rely on online platforms than we can rely on getting elected in a rigged system, on fair reportage from the msm, or on getting justice under rigged legal systems.
Believe it or not, this idiot, Paul Bernal (see below), is a law lecturer! I feel sorry for his students at the University of East Anglia! According to his definition, even Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s China had “free speech” (because you could *say* whatever you liked, but as a consequence might get shot…)
What an idiot! Absolutely prize…!
Time for the regular reminder that freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from the consequences of your speech.
This blog post is not primarily about the Jess Phillips idiot-woman, but it is frightening to see the tweets of her supporters, showing the intellectual dullness even of the supposedly educated these days: see the tweet by one @docsimsim of Richmond, below
Jess Phillips my shero. She should be in the shadow cabinet atleast and possibly the next labour leader should she want the job. #StopBrexithttps://t.co/v0goH4HsOw
Others, however, have seen through the Jess Phillips Empty Vessel performance
Ignorance. Just ignorance. Sad indictment of how poorly ideas/policies are communicated. The MSM only interested in sound bites & those who produce them. The mouthpieces, eg Jess Phillips, always available for comment & contribute nothing. #BBCQT adds nothing to the discussion.
Jess Phillips and Tom Watson have undermined Corbyns leadership at every opportunity. With help from their pro Israeli lobby pals in the Tinge party and remain celebrities pushing the AS bullshit smears, @UKLabour was set to fail. #LocalElection19
Here’s an American, one “Chris”, who seems to find it unobjectionable that some “authority” persons should “decide” on whether a candidate can be “allowed” to stand:
Unless I completely missed it, it sounds like she's questioning why he should be allowed to run, not opening a police investigation. That's different.
and here is Jess Phillips trying to make more publicity for herself while trying to squash down what little freedom of expression still exists in the UK:
Happy to discuss indeed. Personally I think we need a code of conduct that cannot be breached by those who stand as public representatives. I'd say saying you would rape someone if forced I'd say was a clear breach. I'll contact you for a meeting. Thanks https://t.co/iMlQvYIOBn
For those who are unaware, since being elected in 2015, Jess Phillips has squeezed every penny she can out of the taxpayers: not satisfied with a salary of nearly £80,000 and very generous “expenses”, she even “employs” her husband on £50,000 a year as “Constituency Support Manager” (he stays at home and is, presumably, a “house husband”). Yet she, this ignorant, rude, uneducated, uncultured creature, has the cheek to talk about “people with literally no discernible skills” getting high pay! That may be so, but she should look in the mirror, if she can bear it!
YouTube have banned me for 'hate speech', I think due to clips on Nazi policy featuring propaganda speeches by Nazi leaders. I'm devastated to have this claim levelled against me, and frustrated 15yrs of materials for #HistoryTeacher community have ended so abruptly.@TeamYouTube
— Mr Allsop History (@MrAllsopHistory) June 5, 2019
Update, 18 June 2019
Just one more random example of the slide into censorship and quasi-official lies or falsity:
A Dr Who writer @OldRoberts953 is expunged from a book by the BBC because he won’t conform to the latest transgender ideology. His views on transgenderism are probably shared by 90%+ of Brits but he’s now a Non-Person for the BBC. The net tightens around free speech. Please share https://t.co/G9fM2BK1e4
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 interrupt other blog writing to address an immediate issue. The activist known as Tommy Robinson has now been banned from Facebook, he having already been barred from Twitter. That news highlights again something that I have been writing about, blogging about, speaking about (at the London Forum in 2017) and tweeting about —before I myself was banned or rather expelled from Twitter in 2018— for years, the privatization of public space.
In past ages and, indeed, until about 20 years ago, public space was literally that: the agora of ancient Athens, the forum of ancient Rome, the barricades of revolutionary France, the brief outbursts of free speech in the Russia of 1917 or the early 1990s, and Speakers’ Corner by Hyde Park in London, where a youthful Millard (aged about 21) spoke to fickle crowds a few times in the late 1970s.
Today, the traditional fora of free speech, eg in the UK, are very restricted. Jez Turner (Jeremy Bedford-Turner) made a speech in Whitehall in 2015. He mentioned Jews a few times. That alone was enough (triggered by the malicious Jewish Zionists who denounced him, the supine police who are now so often in the Zionist pocket, the wet CPS who are not sufficiently resistant to the Zionists’ endless whining demands, a Zionist-controlled System-political milieu, and a Bar and judiciary which are frightened of their own shadows and even more of those of the Zionists) to have Jez Turner imprisoned for a year. He served 6 months and was only recently released to live for months more under considerable restriction.
The “public space” which is now most significant is online space. Twitter, Facebook, blogging platforms etc.
I myself was expelled from Twitter last year. I had been the target of both the Jew-Zionists and mindless “antifa” (aka “useful idiots” for Zionism) for about 8 years. I have also had my freedom of expression taken away in other ways, as well as having been interrogated by the police (again at the instigation of malicious Jew-Zionists) for having posted entirely lawful comments on Twitter. I was also disbarred, quite wrongly, for similar reasons.
Alison Chabloz was persecuted, prosecuted and convicted for singing satirical songs in the manner of 1920s Berlin. She is appealing her conviction and the result of her first-stage appeal. She has also been expelled from Twitter (as well as being made subject to a court ban from social media, which bars her from posting until mid-2019).
If Twitter or Facebook ban you, you may have some limited right of appeal, if they so choose to extend it to you. You have no legal right to stay on Twitter or Facebook despite the fact that, in real terms, they are near-monopolies. Yes, I am now on GAB, but GAB has only 500,000 users, if that, whereas Twitter has perhaps 500 million! The fact that, as I believe, Twitter is largely a waste of time, is beside the point.
The point is that, beyond your very limited contractual or other rights qua customer, you have no rights in respect of Twitter or Facebook (etc). Qua citizen, you have no rights at all. You have no right to post, and if the owners or executives of those companies decide to bump you off, off you go, whether you have 50 followers, 3,000 (as I did) or a million.
The Blair law of 1998 [nb: 1998 = 666 x 3…], requiring political parties in the UK to be registered, all but killed any semblance of real political-party democracy in the UK. Now, free speech both online and offline is being, on the one hand, criminalized or subjected to other State repression (at the instigation of the Jewish-Zionist lobby), and on the other hand choked off at source, by companies (under Zionist control or influence) barring dissidents or known activists from even posting dissenting or radical views online.
As to Tommy Robinson, I am not personally one of his supporters, and I deplore his attempt to play the sycophant for Israel and Zionism, but he has some views which are valid, in my opinion.
In any case, freedom of expression is indivisible. It is facile to make arbitrary distinction between some free speech, calling it “hate speech” and so unacceptable, and other speech which is labelled “acceptable” (politically approved) speech. That is mainly hypocrisy. Even my own relatively mild postings are and always have been targeted by the enemies of freedom, of which the Zionists are the worst.
So we have, not only in England but elsewhere (eg in France, under Rothschilds cipher Macron) the same repressive tendency. Sajid Javid, Amber Rudd, Theresa May, others, are enemies of the British people and enemies of freedom of expression. They seem to want to ban all political activity and all political or socio-political expression which does not support the existing System. It is immaterial whether you call it that or “ZOG”.
The System in the UK, in France seems to think that it can slowly turn the screw on repression, controlling the political parties (or setting up “controlled” new ones, as with Macron in France and, perhaps, the “Independent Group” in the UK), preventing free speech by putting the fix into Twitter, Facebook etc, only having controlled news on or in the msm (controlled mass media outlets).
The Soviet Union tried a less subtle form of all that, and it still collapsed in the end. What the System politicians, msm faces and voices etc, fail to see is that a head of steam is building up in the UK (and France) and, if bottled up by the State and those behind the curtain, will eventually explode.
Another example, taken almost at random from Twitter:
As well as censoring our content over the past few weeks, Twitter have now deleted all the people we were following, which in turn means we have lost a ton of followers
Please RT and follow if you’re still right behind us – we have no idea why Twitter is doing this pic.twitter.com/opwxMMr6fX
Another example. A typical pseudonymous Jew-Zionist tweeter (troll), below, exults that a very prominent pro-Corbyn Twitter account, “Rachael Swindon”, has been “suspended” (probably, like me, expelled):
Delighted to hear that the account “Rachel Swindon”, which pumped out antisemitism and whipped up hate to the delight of the Labour leadership, has now been suspended by twitter pic.twitter.com/YcSLnH16Aq
In fact, Rachael Swindon has been reinstated, though only after Twitter’s vice-President for Europe intervened. Why should such people control the online public space? Again, why should the police barge in with large boots and interfere with free speech when no threats are involved? It’s all wrong.
Below, one tweeter tells her story…
"Well i won't get arrested for joking so we can still police free speech", until it happens to you, shut up! It nearly happened to me. Heres my story and why I'll be voting Ukip from now on. I am still terrified of police to this day because of the situation i was put through pic.twitter.com/3FH9mtxvnC
The pro-Jewish lobby freeloader and careerist Tom Watson MP, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Watson_(Labour_politician) who has wormed his way to becoming Deputy Leader of the Labour Party (with his eyes on Corbyn’s purple day and night), has attacked Tommy Robinson in the House of Commons and asked YouTube to take down Tommy Robinson’s YouTube channel, which is his last online platform of any importance.
The excuse for Watson’s actions and statement has been the apparent fact that Robinson came to the house of one Mike Stuchbery, a failed (and sacked) supply teacher who poses as both “historian” and “journalist” online, and whose main activity seems to be online advocacy of opposition (including violence, though he usually uses weasel words) to any form of British or other European nationalism. Tommy Robinson has exposed the apparent fact that Stuchbery colluded with others to visit Robinson’s wife or ex-wife at her home. Robinson’s response seems to have been to do something similar to Stuchbery. Tom Watson, in his Commons statement, referred to Stuchbery as “journalist”, based presumably on Stuchbery’s politically-tendentious scribbles for HuffPost and other, smaller, online outlets.
In the end, if someone is prevented from making socio-political expression, that person can either subside into silence, or take other action. That other action might be peaceful, it might not be. When the repressed individual is a public figure with many thousands of supporters, those supporters may also take other action. That might include, potentially, and in the French term, “action directe” somewhere down the line.
Those (of various types: Jew Zionists, the politically correct, “antifa idiots etc) in our society, who crow at shutting down the freedom of others to make socio-political expression should, in the well-worn (Chinese?) phrase “be careful what they wish for”. The Spanish also have a phrase, a proverb in fact: “Do what you will, and pay for it.” Repression of views, not “allowing” people a public platform (and anyway, who is, for example, a blot like Tom Watson to decide who should or should not be allowed to speak?) can only lead to upheaval in the end.
It will be interesting to observe the UK political scene in the coming months and years.
A few tweets seen
A tweet with a few examples of the frequent passive but malicious incitement of violence against white people by “antifa” bastard Mike Stuchbery of Luton:
Nobody says he isn't. But this Mike Stuchbery is a proponent of White genocide. He would literally have Richie murdered for giving a platform to @MarkACollett, @DrDavidDuke and Alison Chabloz. Here are some of his tweets…. pic.twitter.com/0nzkIrZg0O
— Leopold Strauss 😏 (@leopold_strauss) March 7, 2019
@MikeStuchbery_ is the coward who Doxxed #TommyRobinson's wife and children accompanied by the Media and a Crackhead. He is a Far Left Antifa Thug who needs exposing to the Whole country.
Below: Mike Stuchbery of Luton exposed yet again as a fake…
I just double-checked. He is not on 'Historical Abstracts', or 'Bibliography of British & Irish History'. These are the two main databases you would expect him to appear on. He doesn't. He isn't an historian.
Lots of tweets by @MikeStuchbery_ include "Punch a nazi" … when Andrew tate came to his door he cried like a little girl. Why not open the door and punch? Is it because Andrew's half black? … spineless fat coward. https://t.co/DrAD4hWGkE
Below: self-described (fake) “journalist” and “historian” (failed supply teacher and house-husband) Mike Stuchbery inciting serious political violence but trying to deny it…
Have a read of this pathetic sob story by Mike Stuchbery.
Stuchbery is a grifter who has brought all his current misfortune on himself and continues to put stuff out there to ensure the same bad karma keeps coming his way. Boo hoo https://t.co/dKY8ZarY8m
Below: fake “historian” and “journalist” Mike Stuchbery threatens minor Northern Ireland politico David Vance with a lawsuit. Does he have any idea how much a defamation action (for example) costs? He must have got the idea of constantly threatening to “sue” from the Jewish Zionists and their useful idiots on Twitter, who are always threatening legal action, and who often invoke the “sainted” name of Israel-based “Mark Lewis Lawyer” in this regard. In reality, Lewis is a wheelchair-bound blowhard fake, recently fined by a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal for his behaviour. At the Tribunal, he admitted that he often had no idea what he was doing because of his intake of prescription drugs. Oh…and Lewis’s own Counsel said that “he has no assets” and that “his sole possessions are his clothes and a mobility scooter”! See:https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/?s=mark+lewis
above, Stuchbery, who accuses others of being “precious little flowers”… (“ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee”…)
Spin it as you like, The facts are Mike tweeted punch them, punch them, never stop punching them and the hope that ANTIFA turn up to crack skulls. Disgusting Man calling for violence. Like I say Mike's a scrounging Fraud.
This individual has been proven to be an unhinged, hate-filled extremist, who has whipped-up his followers to engage in violent acts. this pathetic weasel should be charged with incitement to commit a hate crime on this evidence – pic.twitter.com/Ec2Yr9AAMM
Something called “Press Gazette” also refers to grifter Stuchbery as a “journalist” (does he have an NUJ card? I suppose that, these days, any wannabee can scribble for peanuts or for free in the HuffPost, silly little online “news” agencies, or for the (now often semi-literate) online msm “newspapers”, and then to call himself “journalist”…and in Stuchbery’s case, “historian”, too!…)
The more serious point here is that “Culture Secretary” Jeremy Wright MP thinks that he is entitled to ask YouTube to take down Tommy Robinson’s videos, Tom Watson MP having already demanded the same. Freedom? Free speech? Free country? Hardy ha ha…
Update, 11 March 2019
and still the tweets keep coming…
You are my favourite tweet thus far. Mike is just an observer? Excuse me for hooting with laughter. Mike is an extremist. It’s documented all over Twitter. He earns a living from incitement not observation. Yet he refuses to take ownership of the effect he has on others.
and Stuchbery has hit back with the piece below, posted on yet another of the plethora of new “news and comment” websites that pose as quasi-newspapers, in this case calling itself the Byline Times
Stuchbery (and many others on Twitter etc) really should refrain from using legal terms wrongly or pointlessly, eg, in that piece averring that Tommy Robinson defamed him. Well, that may or may not be the case, in the lay sense, but any actionable defamation requires publication. I have no idea whether in this case, Robinson published (meaning said or wrote to third parties) any of the allegedly defamatory material via video streaming etc. It seems not. Then there are all the other factors, such as the defences, one of which is that the statements, even if defamatory on their face, are true…
In any case, it costs vast amounts to sue for defamation, though in some open and shut cases it may be possible to find “no win, no fee” lawyers (in the old American parlance, “ambulance-chasers”) willing to take it on, with the help of specialized legal “insurance” (which in my view comes close to champerty, in the old Common Law sense)
…and here we see some supposed “comedian” (comedienne? Never heard of her), by name Janey Godley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janey_Godley , saying that those exposing Stuchbery are “a danger to free speech”:
In fact, I also must have missed seeing any support from Janey Godley for Jez Turner, imprisoned for making, in Whitehall, a humorous speech mentioning Jews and their history in England; neither did I notice the aforesaid Janey Godley (I had never heard of her in any regard until today) tweet anything in support of satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz, persecuted by Jewish Zionists, then privately prosecuted by them before being prosecuted by the CPS (under pressure to take over the matter…) and then convicted, in effect, of singing songs.
An example, below, of the muddled thinking of many on Twitter and elsewhere: this idiot, calling himself/herself “66ALW88” (what?) thinks that the way to preserve free speech online is for the online platform companies to “crack down” on, er, free speech online…
It's also not good for the social media platforms, either – there are already calls for regulation due to the toxicity. If they had any sense, they'd crack down on it.
Looking at @YouTube in particular, as they're still enabling SYL to do this stuff.
Below, a tweet not at all significant in itself (there are literally thousands of unthinking, purselipped nobodies like this Irish “academic”, one Fergal Lenehan, around, all waiting for the chance to denounce people, to “report” to Twitter, Facebook or police, or wanting to ban the free speech of others not signed-up to the System/ZOG mental straitjacket). It is the trend, the existence of a large bloc of such nasty idiots that is of importance.
and here (below) is a well-funded basically Jew-Zionist organization which admits that it wants, inter alia, to stop the historian David Irving from conducting lecture tours. I think the reverse: that those who oppose freedom of speech on political, social and historical topics should themselves be stopped…
The fact that Irving has done this before does not mean that we should allow him to do it again. We have plenty of advance notice to prevent it this time.
Let’s try & stop this grotesque event from happening ever again.
— Anti-Fascism & Far Right (@FFRAFAction) March 17, 2019
Update, 18 March 2019
Now the cowardly and mentally-disturbed grifter, Stuchbery, continues to try to claim the moral high ground, which is laughable (and note the support from a political cretin, “Leftwing Revolt”, in the thread below, who is a member or supporter of “Resisting Hate” and sees nothing wrong with someone he might disagree with being attacked with an axe! Resisting hate? You could not make it up…). I might not “support” Tommy Robinson, but I prefer him a hundred times over to Stuchbery and the “useful idiots” of “antifa”!
and (below), another little shit like Stuchbery, this time a New Zealander, who positively welcomes censorship and repression (and he is, wait for it…a “writer/director” of film and theater”!). One of the weird aspects of the present time is that those most eager to see censorship and ideological repression are “creative industries” drones, writers, film and TV people etc, and journalists.
New Zealand's biggest ISP has blocked access to 8chan (among other sites) in the wake of the attacks. Just like that.
and he retweets, approvingly, this (below) announcement of New Zealand governmental censorship. I personally have no wish to see footage of the recent New Zealand massacre, but that should be my choice, not the New Zealand (ZOG) government’s.
Chief Censor David Shanks has officially classified the full 17 minute video of the fatal Christchurch shootings as objectionable.
It is illegal for anyone in New Zealand to view, possess or distribute this material in any form, including via social media platforms.
and…again: the same little shit, one Andrew Todd, does not want the accused to be allowed to defend himself in case he says something the New Zealand government (ZOG) does not want people to hear…
Do not let him represent himself, Jesus fucking Christ
Not everyone on Twitter agrees with the idea of censoring views and people being found guilty as soon as they are accused, however:
So you believe in a system where your proven guilty before your convicted by a judge and group of your piers. Let me give examples of places this has happened: Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela, and Uganda during the rule Idi Amin.
Here’s another one, below, a New Zealand journalist positively gagging for censorship (I had no idea that NZ was so ZOG-occupied):
FYI, more useful detail on how the big tech companies are failing to weed out hate speech videos and how they missed out on white supremacist videos https://t.co/lYdO10D2Nr
and yet another virtue-signalling “journalist” who is, it seems, an enemy of both freedom of expression and of the future of the European peoples…
I spent a good part of 2 years reporting on ISIS internet and how the group uses social media — in 2019 it's mind-boggling to me how well the coordinated cross-platform effort to remove them from the internet worked and how there hasn't been a similar one for white supremacists.
The grifter actually makes a joke out of his begging and scavenging!
It's been a challenging – and expensive(!) – couple of weeks, so if you enjoy the written pieces, the history threads, or whatever, you can always make a small tip through my Ko-Fi… https://t.co/Xd2iEmxucQpic.twitter.com/OJ7UGuAzPr
Tommy Robinson has now been banned from Twitter (welcome to the club…) despite (because of?) his being a candidate in the European elections (North West England).
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” [John F. Kennedy]
Update, 5 June 20199
Another random example of how the quasi-monopolies of youtube, Twitter, Facebook etc have arrogated to themselves the right to censor and banish: [Update, 22 July 2022: the tweets etc noted have now been completely deleted]
Update, 18 June 2019
More…
A Dr Who writer @OldRoberts953 is expunged from a book by the BBC because he won’t conform to the latest transgender ideology. His views on transgenderism are probably shared by 90%+ of Brits but he’s now a Non-Person for the BBC. The net tightens around free speech. Please share https://t.co/G9fM2BK1e4
Grifter, “antifa” supporter, fake “journalist” and “historian” Mike Stuchbery is desperate to close down free speech for those with whom he disagrees politically. See his recent tweets, below. This is one of the worst enemies of freedom of expression in the UK.
YouTube shut down four major US white supremacist channels in the last 24 hours.
If they're serious about reversing the spread of radicalisation, here's four accounts in the UK they could shutter today… https://t.co/nNG4sk938a
The latest news is that some odd woman tied up with both “antifa” nonsense and Jew-Zionists has created a GoFundMe appeal on behalf of Stuchbery, supposedly so that he can sue the political activist known as Tommy Robinson.
I prefer not to comment on the proposed legal claim until I read more about the foundations for such claim. I presume that Stuchbery is doing this (the woman mentioned above may be raising funds for him but only Stuchbery himself can actually sue) because:
he knows or believes that Tommy Robinson has assets sufficient to satisfy any successful claim;
he has seen that others are already suing Tommy Robinson;
he thinks, perhaps, that a civil legal action will damage Tommy Robinson by starving him of funds;
if successful, Stuchbery will make a great deal more money than he gets at present via online begging or his part-time work in Stuttgart, where he now resides.
Were I the defendant, and leaving aside the potential substantive issues that might be in issue in the proposed case, I suppose that I should focus firstly on the fact that Stuchbery is
resident outside the strict jurisdiction (albeit still in the EU);
is a foreign national (as I understand, an Australian citizen);
has no real or other property in England and Wales;
has no means with which to satisfy any judgment on costs or in respect of any counterclaim or setoff that might be claimed by Tommy Robinson, should the Court decide against Stuchbery on one or more issues or otherwise.
I doubt that this claim will get off the ground. I certainly doubt that it will clear the probable first hurdle, as explained above, but we shall see. It appears, however, that plenty of mugs are donating to the said GoFundMe appeal at present.
Update, 25 November 2019
Stuchbery’s solicitors, Eve Solicitors (the firm is a limited company in fact, possibly in effect a one-man operation), are operating out of a rundown Victorian terrace in Bradford; several other small legal and other firms are operating nearby. The operation has only been in operation since 20 May 2019, at earliest:
The “firm” has only been at its present address since 28 September 2019, before which, i.e. from its incorporation in May until September 2019, it operated out of a tiny Victorian terraced house in a “Coronation Street” lookalike, Hudswell Street, Wakefield (Yorkshire).
The principal (and only named) solicitor is one Waseem Ahmed.
Where the name “Eve” came from, God knows. My only guess is “Adam and Eve”, as in the Cockney rhyming slang, “you wouldn’t Adam and Eve it!”
Only joking.
Having said that, when I was a practising barrister in London in the early-mid 1990s, I knew of Pakistani and other ethnic-minority solicitors (in London, in Luton and elsewhere) who used “English”-sounding names for their small firms. Some of them still owe me money! (Unpaid fees). I am sure that Stuchbery’s solicitor is not like that.
I looked earlier at the GoFundMe appeal set up to collect money for Stuchbery’s proposed legal claim against Tommy Robinson. So far, 262 mugs have donated a total (as of time and date of writing) of £5,209 to start the claim. I wonder whether they or others will donate the rest of the £15,000 asked for? Frankly, I doubt it, though the amount so far raised has been raised in only three days.
I doubt that the proposed lawsuit will either launch or get anywhere.
Further thoughts
The woman who is fundraising for Stuchbery, and who seems to have all day to tweet etc, has tweeted that “As many of you know, Mike Stuchbery is about to sue #TommyRobinson for harassment. He is backed by #ResistingHate and a full legal team.“
A “full legal team”? So that would be someone called Waseem Ahmed and…?
I do not say that “Eve Solicitors” (i.e. Mr. Ahmed) is a one-man-band (though it certainly seems to be), and I cannot say that there are no legal people offering advice etc from the sidelines (what used to be known at the Bar as “cocktail party advice”), but I do know, having been at one time a practising barrister who (in the 1990s) regularly appeared (weekly, at least) in the High Court, as well as in County Courts, and more occasionally other types of court and tribunal (both then and in the 2002-2008 period), that GoFundMe £20,000 will only serve to kick off such a case and claim, if I have understood its likely nature properly. Costs rapidly escalate.
Solicitors vary in their fees, barristers likewise. Simply to issue proceedings in a High Court action (which I suppose the proposed case would probably be) would be several hundred pounds as a minimum, and many thousands of pounds in some cases:
As a rule of thumb, a barrister will get anywhere from (as minimum) £500 a day on a small civil matter in the County Court, up to many thousands of pounds per day for almost any High Court matter, though there is no “limit” as such, and some barristers, eg the top commercial silks (QCs) will be on £10,000 a day or more. The spectrum is very wide.
As those who enjoyed Rumpole of the Bailey will know, a barrister usually gets a “brief fee” (to cover all preparation and the first day, if any, in court), then daily “refreshers”. How much are they? How long is a piece of string?
One of my own last few cases was a County Court commercial matter involving a large amount of cattle feed. Now that it is long ago since I last appeared in court (December 2007; this case was not long before that), I think that I can reveal, by way of illustration, that I was paid, that time, £5,000 as a brief fee and £1,000 a day for refreshers (in fact there were no refreshers, because the matter settled on the first day in court).
I have no real idea how much the case of Stuchbery v. Robinson might cost Stuchbery in legal fees if it is ever pursued to court, but my semi-educated guess (“semi” because I have not been involved with the Bar for over a decade) is that whoever presents it in court (unless doing it for free or on the cheap) will probably want a brief fee of perhaps £5,000 (at least) and (at minimum) £500 per day refreshers. Maybe £10,000 and £1,000 per day. It can be seen that, even at the lower estimate, a 2-week hearing (10 days in court, which this well might be) is going to cost £9,500 for Counsel’s fees alone.
Solicitors’ fees also vary widely. When I myself worked (overseas) for law firms (as an employed lawyer), the firms charged for my work at anything up to USD $500 (or about £400) an hour (I myself didn’t get that, sadly, the firms did); and that was over 20 years ago. I suppose that Stuchbery’s solicitors will not be very expensive, but will probably still charge maybe £50 an hour at absolute minimum. Solicitor case preparation might take hundreds of hours. 100 hours @ £50 p.h. = £5,000.
Then there are what solicitors term “disbursements”, i.e. the expenses of the case such as issue fees, witness expenses, whatever.
You can see how £20,000 can be quickly exhausted…
However, even if Stuchbery’s solicitors (solicitor?) can launch the proposed matter and fund a couple of weeks in court (and don’t forget that the solicitor, if in attendance, will also be charging for his time there), there is the matter of what happens if Stuchbery loses. No, that is not left to chance. The lawyers for the proposed defendant, Robinson, will in that event have to have their costs covered too. Even if they only come to the same level as Stuchbery’s (which I doubt), that puts Stuchbery (and possibly others who have funded the claim) £20,000+ in the hole. It could be a great deal more. Maybe even hundreds of thousands.
Stuchbery is an Australian citizen, maybe also a German one now (I do not know). He has no real property in the UK or, as far as I know, even in Germany, where he now lives. He has no, or no substantial, monies in the UK (or anywhere?). He does not have a substantial income or a full-time job.
On the above facts, and if Robinson applies in court for that, Stuchbery is almost certain to have to provide “security for costs”, i.e. [see above] monies “paid into court” (into a court-controlled account) to cover Robinson’s costs should Stuchbery lose his case. Likewise, on the above facts, that would almost certainly have to be the whole of Robinson’s likely outlay in defending the case. Certainly tens of thousands of pounds. Possibly over £100,000.
If Robinson applies for security for costs, if the court agrees with the application, but then Stuchbery cannot come up with whatever sum is demanded (I cannot think that it would be lower than £20,000; probably far far more), then the claim (the case) will be struck out, possibly with costs awarded to Robinson.
Stuchbery will probably have to raise £40,000+ even to start his case.
I think that my readers will understand better now why I think that Stuchbery has no chance of success regardless of the merits of his case (if any).
Presumably, Stuchbery does understand that, in a case like this, witnesses (he himself, Robinson, others) will have to give evidence, be cross-examined on that, all the while with Stuchbery staying in the UK, perhaps for weeks or even a month or more.
In Pittsburgh, someone has apparently shot some Jews in a synagogue. His motives need not concern us. What does concern me is how the System has seized upon the event as an excuse to censor social media comment. In particular, the enemies of freedom have taken the opportunity to attack and try to shut down GAB [https://gab.com/home], at which the alleged shooter is said to have maintained an account.
Within hours of the shooting, both GAB’s hosting service, Joyent [https://www.joyent.com/] as well as Paypal [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayPal] withdrew services from GAB in a blatant attempt to destroy GAB, which is a small (and freer) version of Twitter.
The rationale for this censorship conspiracy (and of course it is obvious which tribe is behind it) is that GAB is somehow (unspecified) responsible for the Pittsburgh shooting event because the alleged shooter had a GAB account!
Now these days almost everyone has a social media account. The mass killer, Anders Breivik, had a Facebook account. There was no conspiracy or clamour to shut down Facebook after he shot about 80 people a few years ago.
In fact, it turns out that the alleged perpetrator of the Pittsburgh event also had accounts on both Facebook and Twitter! However, neither Facebook nor Twitter are facing any threat of close-down, unlike Gab; neither are the hardcore Jewish Zionists on those platforms calling for any such shut-down. Only Gab is facing destruction…Surely even the “antifa” idiots can see that there is something fishy here?
In other words, the attack on GAB is purely political and is being led, basically, by the Zionist element, which is trying to remove any space wherein social-national or “white nationalist” views can be expressed. Twitter has already purged thousands of its most interesting accounts (including my own) after Jews complained. Now GAB is under threat for not purging the same sort of views. It has nothing to do with violence or supposed incitement to violence. Most GAB posters do not incite violence (far less than do the more extreme Jewish Zionists and their “antifa” “useful idiots”). It is a purely political attempt to prevent any social-national or even traditional-type nationalist views from being expressed anywhere.
It is sobering to look at Twitter and see how the mob is baying for the blood of GAB. Many of the most fervent supporters of censorship are those whose predecessors would have gone to the barricades in defence of freedom: journalists, TV presenters, academics, writers, film directors etc. Many are not Jews but “useful idiot” types, completely bamboozled (but withal aware that to stand against Zionism is often not a good career move in a milieu where “they” have a stranglehold…).
What happens when people are denied a voice, even where that voice is small? Let history judge.
Addendum
When I spoke at the London Forum in February 2017, I used the last part of my talk to raise the point, only since then raised by others (both in UK and especially USA), about what I called “the privatization of public space” online. As I explained in that talk, what I meant was that a very few huge online enterprises now act as near or quasi-monopolies: Facebook, Twitter, Amazon (in respect of book reviews etc), ebay. If the citizen is thrown off those sites and/or barred from expressing opinion, his right to self-expression has been denied him, and that remains true even if there are small websites where he can still comment. The citizen has no right of redress qua citizen, only as a “customer” of those sites. That amounts to no right at all when it comes to freedom of expression.
There should be a right of appeal to an independent agency or tribunal, or to the courts. At present, the large online companies can arbitrarily remove a person from posting, without appeal even in-house in most cases. Those who say that these are private enterprises and have the right to remove whomsoever they wish are missing the point. Risibly, such unthinking and/or malicious people often think of themselves as the “tolerant” and “freedom”-loving ones…their glee at GAB being shut down tells the true story, though. They simply wish to repress freedom of expression for those with whom they (in, often, their smug ignorance) disagree on political, social or historical matters.
Below: Gab comments via its Twitter account (and retweets supporters)
There are like 3-4 total companies who decide if you exist on the internet or not. In the future that will mean they decide if you ever existed at all.
Facebook and Twitter began banning people, sometimes for no reason at all, they ran to something like Gab, so they're trying to ban that too. Will there be no vestige of free speech on the internet? #GABshutdown
The ENTIRE internet had the same freedoms of @getongab from 1991 until about five years ago. Despite free speech being fettered everywhere online in the past few years it has not made the world safer – crazy people still commit acts of violence even if you silence them online…
Well now I know never to do any business with @GoDaddy since they're in the business of "playing God" now and deciding who gets to have a site and who doesn't based on what they think is appropriate free speech. I think there needs to be some @FCC intervention for public sites.
Meanwhile, the Jewish-Zionist element is holding conferences about how to “manage” the news and how to present those whom they hate…it seems that the spirit of Pravda and Komsomolskaya Pravda is not dead…
Really excited to be taking part in the Media Forum on "Normalising hate – how should journalists cover the far right?" @goldsmithsuol
If you're in London on the 14th of November, come and join us for this timely discussion!https://t.co/iANULyb7vl
“Free speech” in the Britain of 2019! Note (in the above newspaper report) the robotic refusal of Humberside Police to apologize or engage with the free speech argument, even now. Sinister is the right word for this.
Believe it or not, this idiot (Paul Bernal, see tweet below) is a law lecturer! I feel sorry for his students at the University of East Anglia! According to his definition, even Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s China had “free speech” (you could *say* whatever you liked, but as a consequence might get shot..). What an idiot!
Time for the regular reminder that freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from the consequences of your speech.
The video of my talk to the London Forum on 4 February 2017.
The Zionist evil had the whole London Forum youtube channel closed down, but brave patriots have now reposted this video. Please spread this video as widely as possible to kick the Zionists in the snout, as they deserve!
Update, 19 July 2019
I just noticed that that YouTube channel has now also been closed. The basically Jewish Zionist censorship continues and intensifies. I think that we all know that there is only one way to restore freedom of socio-political expression to the Western world…
Recent events have sharpened my already-keen interest in freedom of expression. On Twitter, the premier socio-political short-comment website, those regarded in the USA as “alt-right” have had their “blue ticks” removed, signalling that they are not very approved of by whomever decides policy at Twitter. In the UK, several people are currently about to be put on trial for saying or singing things of which the Jewish Zionists disapprove. Also in the UK, David Icke has just (17 November 2017) had his event at the Old Trafford facility owned by Manchester United (itself owned by a clan of American Jew-Zionists) cancelled. In the EU, the already considerable online censorship in Germany, France, Scandinavia has been intensified and new EU rules control online platforms as never before (and behind such restrictions, once again, “them”…).
Many reading this will be aware that, by reason of the activities of a pack of Jew-Zionists, I was disbarred in 2016. I have blogged about that and may do so again. Even before those events, I was prevented, I think in 2011 or 2012, from posting book reviews on Amazon (UK and US) because one (at first only one) obsessed Jew complained to the Jewish Chronicle about me. Other Jews joined in, the original one trolling anyone who liked my reviews (enough liked them to propel me to the top 40 reviewers), leaving stupid and unpleasant comments, many both defamatory and untrue). Once the Jewish Chronicle and other Jew-Zionist organizations piled in, Amazon caved in…
In fact, this censorship, largely exercized by the Jewish-Zionist element, predates the Internet era. I recall trying to advertize a small organization in The Spectator, around 1978. I was advised that I had to supply a precis of its political view. I did that, only to be told that my advertisement would not be printed. Same at that bastion of well-heeled and hypocritical Home Counties free-speech-ism, Private Eye. This at a time when these publications carried both “Conservative” and “socialist”, even Communist adverts!
The Internet opened up a window of freedom of expression, but “they” are rapidly moving to close it. Free speech is being shut down.
USA
The free speech provisions of the US Constitution are as outdated and superseded as those governing arms in private hands and other matters. At present, with certain exceptions, the State (meaning government) will not (there are exceptions) criminalize something said by an individual in the street, on a placard, in print, but that does not prevent that individual losing his job (if an employer dislikes what he has said or written, or where the employer has been pressured by external forces, such as the Jewish Lobby, with its campaigns of boycott etc). The US Constitution, in other words, cannot save the individual from losing his job, home, family, if his employer decides to penalize him because of his “free expression”.
Likewise, the writer who writes that which is disliked by the Jewish lobby will not be arrested in the USA, but may find that he cannot get books published by mainstream publishing houses. The academic who tries to expand the boundaries may find that tenure is denied, or employment terminated.
Now, in the Internet age of social media, we find that the major platforms for freedom of expression are not properly public, but private organizations, private enterprises, which can decide on almost any basis to prohibit any named individual from posting. Amazon, ebay (which e.g. allows Soviet but not German Third Reich memorabilia), Facebook, Twitter. These organizations are either owned or largely owned or strongly influenced (and staffed) by Jewish Zionists.
I spoke in February 2017 at the London Forum about, inter alia, the “privatization of public space” in this regard. Now, the “alt-right” personality Richard Spencer has echoed me from the United States, talking about how the fora of the past were public, but the (online) “fora” of the present age private, thus able to exclude those whose views are not approved by the owners of the websites (or the commercial advertizers thereon).
UK and EU
The above “privatization of the forum” (or fora) applies not only in the USA, but in the UK and other EU states. The EU has already (in most states) criminalized “holocaust” “denial” (examination and/or revision of that historical narrative). It has also forged ahead (under Jewish-Zionist control or influence) with plans to penalize Twitter, Facebook etc if the “wrong” symbols, cartoons, views are hosted.
In the UK, several people are now facing trial at the instigation of Jewish-Zionists: Alison Chabloz, Jez Turner, others. Whatever happens to them will be of significance for freedom of expression.
We now hear that Twitter is planning further purges, this month (November 2017), and on or about 22 December. Those changes may well mean the end of Twitter as a useful place online on which to exchange ideas. We shall see. I myself am half-expecting to be removed.
In the end, the consolation must be to remember that no revolution or takeover of any state has ever happened via social media, though online propaganda has helped one or two offline campaigns to achieve success. Boots on the ground are what count.
Update, 23 December 2018
I was expelled from Twitter in mid-2018. No reason given (beyond weasel words), no appeal, no clarification. Many others have gone the same way. The only consolation has been the realization of how totally pointless and self-defeating tweeting is!
Update, 13 January 2021
Since my last update, over 2 years ago, the war on freedom of expresson has intensified. See my later blog posts.
Ian Robert Millard 