Now we see what NWO/ZOG means on the ground. French dissidents being brutalized on the streets, civil rights being cut back too, while anyone saying anything about the Jews or the “holocaust” farrago is being prosecuted. What a co-incidence…
So Harry has flown off to Vancouver, to be the modern Vronsky. I wonder whether he understands that, without the royal and other titles (not to mention the £30M he apparently has inherited from his mother and/or been given by his father) he would be a complete nullity. In his own person, he is of no interest: a former young and high-spirited officer of insufficient intellect and talent to be promoted beyond major.
Has this whole episode damaged the UK Royal Family? Well, it has not improved its image…the danger that the royals face is neither outright “revolutionary” hostility nor even a republican surge, but simple indifference as they become irrelevant to the people. The antics of Harry and for that matter Andrew do spike actual hostility, but it is indifference that kills the relationship between ruled and (nominal) rulers.
“Lie-detectors” and terrorists
This sounds like a pretty silly idea to me. So a “terrorist” (let’s just take that as given) is in prison. He is eventually released and as part of a “monitoring process” is subjected to polygraph testing. Such “lie-detectors” can be beaten. Whatever some Americans say (and the USA is the only country where they are routinely used) this is not a reliable way of assessing veracity:
Also, what will happen if a “terrorist” is released from a prison sentence, shows no other indication of further similar offending, but fails the polygraph test? Will he be incarcerated again simply on that basis, because he failed the test? It seems unsafe and likely to damage the image of “British Justice”.
Mike Stuchbery
Readers may have seen my earlier blogging about Mike Stuchbery, “antifa” inciter, self-described “journalist”, “historian” and tour guide, who tweets now from Stuttgart cafes about how “Nazis” (social nationalists, conservative nationalists and others of whom he disapproves) should be violently attacked (by others).
Leaving aside the rights and wrongs (and I think that Stuchbery was the author of his own fate), his legal action against “Robinson”, to my mind, has little or no chance of success (see above articles).
The GoFundMe launched by Stuchbery’s UK colleague or fellow “antifa” idiot, one “Roanna” (aka, on Twitter, the “Witch of Peace”), failed in November/December 2019 even to get to the halfway point of the original £20,000 target, at which point that failure was spun to a narrative that Stuchbery’s wife (supposedly or notionally German) would be joining him as claimant (what was once known as “plaintiff”). The GoFundMe has restarted, but has run into the sand. I suppose that there are only so many mugs around…
I notice that, as of today, the fund stands at £11,514. In the past few days, a grand total of £50 has been donated. In the past 24 hours? Nothing. I cannot say whether this funding appeal and the proposed legal action are just a scam (perhaps not entirely) but I am sure that the proposed lawsuit will either never get off the ground or will be prevented from continuing, if ever started, by the lack of money for Security for Costs (see my main blog articles).
above: Stuchbery having a meltdown when “Tommy Robinson” apparently turned up at his, Stuchbery’s, then house at Luton, UK, following Stuchbery’s (and others’) attempt to send peculiar people to Robinson’s wife’s house (also at Luton).
Not much sign of the “antifa” “warrior” who urged people to “keep punching Nazis. Never stop.” or the Stuchbery who recommended that “they should bus in some German antifa; they really know how to crack skulls“…and who, even in the past week, has tweeted that anyone questioning the absurd “holocaust” farrago should be “decked and laid out“.
Stuchbery has also been tweeting in commendation of some little “hoes” who, in 1940-41 Holland, pretended to like young German soldiers in bars, then lured them to quiet places where gangs of terrorists (often Jews) could murder them. The Provisional IRA tried that tactic in early 1970s Belfast, and a few British soldiers were killed but the public reaction (even on the Republican side) was so negative that the Provos dropped the idea (also, the British started to infiltrate plainclothes military intelligence and special forces soldiers into pubs and bars, as a precaution).
Now look again at the pathetic creature above, crying his eyes out. “What goes around comes around” [American saying].
On a side issue, Stuchbery’s appeal does show the limitations of Twitter slacktivism. Here we have Stuchbery with his nearly 88,000 Twitter followers. I am prepared to accept, in his case, that they are all genuine, unlike those of, say, “Mark Lewis Lawyer”, the Jew-Zionist legal scammer, who in 2010 had about 8,000 followers but then bought about 70,000 “followers” back around 2013 (he still claims about 27,000).
If Twitter followers meant much, you might expect at least 4,000 of Stuchbery’s 88,000 Twitter followers to give £5 each (the minimum amount) to his GoFundMe, thus reaching his £20,000 target sum effortlessly. In reality, only about 700 have donated. Slacktivism. Clicktivism.
Labour leadership
Loudmouth idiot Jess Phillips has had to pull out of the contest to avoid total humiliation. Good riddance.
I hesitate to say that Britain is a land of cretins, because I have lived in a number of other countries. Even so…
More thoughts about Harry
Harry and the mulatta have enough money to live rather luxuriously indefinitely. What Harry does not have is a role, even that of “businessman”. He has no profession save that of arms, and in any case does not need an income. He needs a reason to exist. His intellectual life is no doubt limited, so he needs a “job” of some kind to replace the “royal prince” one.
Well, nearly midnight UK time, so maybe time to say goodnight to my blog readers
The 2019 General Election has been called, enabled partly by the LibDems and SNP, as John Rentoul, the only System journalist-commentator usually worth listening to, has written.
I was surprised that Labour did not block the vote, but I suppose that, with the Government ready to repeal, in effect, the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, using a one-page bill, Labour had little choice but to appear unafraid to address the electorate.
So what now?
It it has been axiomatic, since Harold Wilson pronounced his famous dictum, that “a week is a long time in British politics”.
[Harold Wilson as Prime Minister, pictured in 1967 on the quayside at Hugh Town on the island of St. Mary’s, Isles of Scilly; the young Millard, 9-10 years old, at left]
Harold Wilson was sceptical of opinion polls. When he was in discussion with Lyndon Johnson about the Vietnam War, the U.S. President asked “what are the polls saying?” Wilson later recalled that he had thought that Johnson was referring to the Poles, and that he, Wilson, had tried to recall recent speeches by Gomulka!
That was then. Since then, British politics has given up the realms of commonsense thinking and has taken refuge in ideological spiderswebs and in the reading of electoral tea-leaves.
The opinion polls at present seem to be predicting a Conservative Party victory of as great as a 150-seat majority. Even mainstream commentators are talking in terms of a 70-seat Conservative majority. To me, that would be disastrous. Nothing to do with Brexit (which I favour). For me, to allow the present ZOG/NWO Cabinet of idiots, traitors, aliens and Israeli agents real power would be a calamity for the people of the UK. I have previously blogged about this: see Notes, below.
I am talking about domestic policy and, to some extent, foreign policy. I am talking about the imposition of an elected dictatorship on the British people. I am talking about rule by a concealed Jewish-Zionist lobby. I am talking about worse pay, pensions, State benefits, working conditions, living conditions etc. I am talking about destruction of free speech, too.
Is a Boris-Idiot government (with real power) inevitable? I do not know. Maybe not, but things are looking black.
The first thing to note is that polls usually narrow towards Election Day. At present they point to a Conservative majority of maybe 60. However, if Labour can pull itself up by a few points, that majority might shrink to single figures. Then there are the other parties (in England, mainly) to consider: LibDems and Brexit Party.
Labour
The Jewish lobby has weakened Corbyn and Labour via incessant attacks over four years. Some of the poison has seeped into public perception. The attacks continue. Only today, the “MP for Barrow and Furness —and Tel Aviv”, John Woodcock, was again attacking Corbyn and Labour, under the banner of which he scraped back into the Commons in 2017, though he has now left Labour amid charges of sex pest behaviour, and will soon no longer be an MP (no doubt “they” will find him a well-paid position). Again, I happened to see “former Labour Party adviser” John McTernan today on Sky News All Out Politics. Sky’s Adam Boulton was too polite to point out that McTernan’s advice proved disastrous for Labour in the past, and also for the Australian Labor Party. McTernan on Sky again derided Corbyn. With “friends” like those, Labour needs no enemies!
Labour’s more serious problems are, firstly, that it is unclear about what it stands for. Not just on Brexit. No overarching narrative. In the past, Labour’s position was a given: the voice of the “workers”, meaning the industrial proletariat, other manual and low-paid workers, renters rather than “owners” of freehold or leasehold property.
In those days, meaning until the 1970s, there was no serious racial aspect. Though there had been an influx (ultimately calamitous, by reason of breeding) of blacks and browns since the 1950s but mainly in the 1970s (and of course later), the percentage of blacks and browns and other non-Europeans was small until the 1980s; there was no constant wave of immigration in the hundreds of thousands, as there now is.
In the 1980s, Labour lost its way. The industrial proletariat started to disappear along with its industries. Immigration and births to immigrants started to create raceless and cultureless “communities”, including huge numbers of mixed-race individuals. British culture on TV and radio started to be overtaken by the Americanized cultural takeover that started in or immediately after WW2. The stalwarts of traditional Labour in the Commons and in constituencies started to be replaced by those who were influenced by the anti-white politics of post-Marxism, by the feminist and/or lesbian “sexual politics” movements, by persons who were unaware of the fight that Britain had with Jewish extremists in Palestine in the 1940s.
Such Labour activists were brought up in the 1960s and 1970s and had been indoctrinated by “holocaust” hoaxes and nonsense, such as the films of the faked “diary” of Anne Frank, of Schindler’s List (many people now think, quite mistakenly, that it is a “true story”, unaware that it was an adaptation of a novel, Schindler’s Ark, which was written in 1982 by an Australian who was only a child during WW2, having been born in 1935; he was brought up in New South Wales).
Gradually, Labour became the bastion both of the politically-correct ideologues and of the careerist “centrists” such as Tony Blair and his wife, both affluent barristers with no connection to Labour’s history (Blair’s father was a Scottish professor; Cherie’s father was a dissolute Liverpudlian TV actor). Labour went from being led by elderly Marxist hypocrite Michael Foot to, at first, a middling position under, in turn, Neil Kinnock and John Smith, then to Blair’s neoliberalism, with the Jewish-Zionist element firmly in control.
Labour lost connection with the “working class”, first because the old monolithic, unionized industrial proletariat had gone, and because the new concerns of former Labour areas (mass immigration, race and culture, poor conditions of non-unionized and precarious employment, sexual abuse of English girls by, mainly, Pakistanis, drug abuse) were simply ignored and, indeed, denied by the Labour Party.
Labour, in short, was becoming, under Blair, what it now is: the party of non-Europeans (the “blacks and browns” etc), of those dependent on public funds (public service workers, council employees, NHS people, those living on State benefits). These Labour voters were ruled over by a dictatorial pro-multikulti Common Purpose stratum, above which sat the Labour Friends of Israel MPs and above all the Jewish-Zionist “fixers” of the Lord Levy sort, who arranged the funding, doled out peerages and other “honours” to the compliant and “liaised” with Blair and his courtiers.
Meanwhile, Labour’s leadership became a cosmopolitan and finance-capitalist clique, “intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich” as one of its degenerate creatures, the Jew “lord” Mandelson put it. By 2010, it seemed to many that there was little difference in substance (as distinct from style) between Labour and Conservative. Labour lost to the Conservatives led by David Cameron-Levita.
Corbyn, though poorly-educated and no sort of leader, gave hope to the “children of the proletariat” (speaking ideologically: many are from rather comfortable backgrounds). His almost miraculous accession to leadership seemed to be a return to old Labour values: community, nationalization, State funding, workers’ rights. I have blogged about the “Hand of God” aspects to Corbyn’s election, eg his getting exactly the number of nominations required, some of which were from MPs who had no intention of even voting for him!
Labour now is a house divided. The Jewish-Zionist lobby may have attacked Corbyn-Labour, but that is only part of the story. Most Labour MPs date from the pre-Corbyn era, most from the pre-2010 era. Some MPs are volubly anti-Corbyn and closer to a careerist “Blairite” or “Brownite” position, such as Jess Phillips (ironically, only elected in 2015).
Labour gives an impression of being split two or three ways, and that is even before Brexit is mixed into the equation. This plays badly, electorally.
A normally loyal Labour MP on Corbyn and prospects for #GE19:
‘We’re led by a lunatic. He’s a nice but dim man who is being controlled by truly evil people.’
So are Labour’s prospects dead? Maybe not. Firstly, it has the support of the non-whites, to a large extent, though that tends to be concentrated in relatively few constituencies. Then it has most of the public service people. Finally, it has the young. Very few under-25s vote Conservative now, only about 4%. Only about 15% of under-35s vote Conservative. The rub is that younger eligible voters tend not to vote. So far.
Corbyn’s policies on utilities, transport and fares, rights for tenants etc may play well for him, if Labour can get them heard amid the Brexit noise and the Boris-The-Idiot-Star clowning and posturing.
Where Labour is undermined is in its disconnect, in visceral terms, from its former core communities: eg in the black-brown MPs Labour has, some of whom seem almost half-witted. Diane Abbott would be Home Secretary under a Corbyn government…
Corbyn’s lack of leadership is also a factor, as is his asinine support for Roma Gypsy thieves and scavengers and for the horrible “tinker”/”traveller” element. That must alienate millions.
In the end, Labour now has no real reason to exist in its present form. It is somewhat neo-socialist, but not at all “national”. It divides rather than unifies, because it prefers non-Europeans to the white British people among whom and for whom it was founded.
“I am a socialist, but a white man first.” [Jack London]
The above parody tweet was sent to me by a blog reader. It does rather set the scene for the past decade, the “austerity” (inflicted by part-Jews David Cameron-Levita and George Osborne and continued by Theresa May and now —so far— by Boris Johnson, again both part-Jew…) upon the poorer half or more of the UK, while the more affluent half and especially tenth of the population have been “doing rather well”
I have blogged rather extensively about the Conservative Party and about its leading members, particularly Boris Johnson aka “Boris-Idiot”.
The Conservative Party, like Labour, has travelled far from its roots, even far from where it was in the 1970s. The old country Conservatives scarcely exist in MP terms now. Like Labour, the Conservative Party is now packed with pretty mediocre MPs, most in it for the money. In fact, many would be flattered to be as good as mediocre. Like Labour, the Conservative Party has ceased to be representative, not only of the country as a whole but even of its traditional supporters. In the 1950s, nearly 5 million people were members of the Conservative Party. Now? About 140,000. Boris Johnson was elected by about two-thirds of those. 92,000 people in a UK which now holds some 70 million. Only 1 in about 500 adult inhabitants of the UK is a member of the Conservative Party.
The trump card of the Conservative Party in this election is that it is not the Labour Party. It has little else to offer, except the Brexit “deal” that Boris-Idiot fluffed and which is worse than that offered to Mrs May 18 months ago. It is only the clown-image, of Boris the Clown, which, bizarrely, is keeping the Cons high in the polls. That, and Corbyn’s rock-bottom ratings.
So Johnson has once again gambled. The gamble is that he can win more Leave-supporting seats than he loses Remain-supporting seats.
Stress points for the Conservatives? Privatization, by the back door, of the NHS; Johnson’s character; the wealthy getting wealthier, the rest getting poorer; privatized rail and utilities; poor pay; the cruelty of the post-2010 benefits system.
LibDems
Ironically, the key to the LibDems taking seats might be Brexit Party taking away Con votes in the South of England, and so letting the LibDems in. That might happen even more if Labour voters in strongly Con areas vote tactically. I do not have much time for Jo Swinson, a pro-finance capitalist and Orange Book LibDem who pays lip service to the Jew-Zionist lobby, but I have to concede that she has put in a couple of stellar performances in the Commons recently.
The LibDems are pro-EU, pro-Remain, anti-Brexit. They are the only party unequivocally Remain. That clarity has to help them. How much it will help them is unclear. They need to get an across the board 20%+ even to regain the number of seats they had in 2010 and 2005. They are presently polling around 18%, but the night is young.
Brexit Party
Brexit Party has lost its mojo somehow. Its stellar start, with the rallies and speeches and huge enthusiasm, seems a long time ago already. I think that the reason is that Brexit is really its only policy, though others will no doubt appear soon. It is largely “the Conservative Party at Leave”, and people do have concerns other than Brexit. I doubt that it can poll much above 10%. It might manage 15% across the board. Chance of gaining more than one or two stray seats seems minimal at present. However, that may change, but BP needs to start attacking the Conservatives, not forever saying how much they want to play ball with them.
UKIP; Change UK
Both washed up, as I have long predicted. Polling at statistical zero. Dustbin of history zone.
Thoughts
There are 6 weeks to go. In 2017, turnout was below 69%. In 2015, turnout was 66% and in 2010, 65%. 2005: 61%. 2001: 59%. Since the 1990s, turnout slumped in 2001 and has gradually increased again but is still several points below the 1990s figures. If there were an unexpectedly high turnout, particularly among the younger voters who generally favour Labour or the LibDems, that could change the picture completely.
At present, the smart money is on the Conservatives. The smart money was on Remain in 2016, on Hillary Clinton to beat Trump, on anyone but Corbyn to replace Ed Miliband. You get the picture. I do not think that Labour can do well on its own merits, but devotees of the Turf will know that frontrunners rarely win. The election is Boris’s to lose, and he may yet do just that, counter-intuitive though that now appears.
This is an example of where Britain went wrong during the 1980s, 1990s and particularly under the 1997-2010 Blair-Brown era, and which continued on into the 2010-2019 years:
News heard on the early Today Programme on BBC Radio 4:
Farage has been reported as possibly going to direct Brexit Party to stand in as few as 20 seats, all Labour-held, 2016 Leave-voting seats;
Could it be any clearer that Brexit Party is not a serious party, not even a semi-serious protest party? I think that Brexit Party can probably be written off at this point.
The news, if accurate, does reinforce my previously-blogged point that Farage, despite his people skills, speaking skills and public profile, is not really very knowledgeable or effective politically. After all, UKIP was in the end a big Westminster zero after 25 years of operation and, so far, Brexit Party has underwhelmed. No by-election successes, and its polling for Westminster has dropped from 20% at one point to 12% now. My feeling is that Brexit Party could have gone the distance, but missed its moment to morph into a real party.
The other piece of news so far today is polling that, incredibly, shows
Boris Johnson “more trusted on NHS” than Corbyn!
Whatever one thinks of Corbyn, this is just mad and bolsters my view that the UK has gone mad, socio-politically. Already, we have had polling, from a month ago, to the effect that part-Jew, part-Muslim origined Johnson, whose father was a part-Jew who worked for the World Bank and was an MP, Boris Johnson who had a U.S. passport until recently, who was born in New York City, was brought up in USA and Belgium before attending Eton and Oxford, and who even belonged to the wealth-saturated and degenerate Bullingdon Club, “has the common touch” more than Corbyn!
On the campaign trail
Soon-to-be-ex-PM Johnson 'booed out of Addenbrooke's Hospital' during Cambridge visit.https://t.co/aIBA8I7Uud
The latest Ipsos MORI poll gives Conservatives 41%, Labour 24%, LibDems 20%, Brexit Party 7%, Greens 3%.
“Ratings for the Government as a whole are low, with just 19 per cent of voters happy with how it is running the country, including only a third of Conservatives, while 74 per cent are dissatisfied. Gideon Skinner, head of political research at Ipsos MORI, cautioned: “As Theresa May knows, a poll lead can be lost during a campaign and this puts the Conservatives at the upper margins compared with other polls. Nevertheless it confirms the Conservatives are starting in a strong position.” [Evening Standard]
If the above poll is accurate, we are staring down the barrel of a Conservative majority of 196, according to my use of Electoral Calculus (I gave Scottish results as likely SNP 50% and LibLabCon 15% each). That 196-seat majority would be disastrous for the UK.
Still, the starting gates have only just opened. All the same, Labour needs to hit hard now. For example, instead of weakly accepting that “antisemitism must be addressed” etc, Labour should start defending the British people; point out that many exploiters and parasites in the UK—by no means all, of course– are Zionists. Take the fight to the enemy and Labour might well find that many many British people want the Zionists taken down, their influence and power reduced greatly.
The opinion polls are proving to me that what so many British people want and need is social nationalism of the right sort.
Below, “Conservative” and, quelle surprise, not entirely English (part-Indian?), judging by photos found elsewhere than on her Twitter profile, freelance scribbler seems to have been living under a rock (or under the protection of a trust fund or affluent family) for the past 10+ years.
"Understandable, but will lead to economic armageddon"
The <40s are already living with "economic armageddon", stagnating wages, insecure jobs, spiralling housing costs. All under the watch of the #Selfservative party of 'fiscal responsibility'#GE2019#VoteLabour2019#JC4PM
Ms. Gill does seem to understand that there is the possibility of radical change inherent in the dispossessed UK young (and, indeed, the not so young). She does not want such change and does not exactly identify what change it might be (“economic armageddon” sounds to me suspiciously like socio-political illiteracy), but the change in question could as easily be social national as post-Marxist.
Strange. Perhaps I was too critical. She seems to take a different and more sympathetic view here (or is it just that she is more concerned about things when they affect her own and personal life?): *click on it and read entire thread…
These are FAQs if you complain about the housing crisis.
1. Why don't you move outside the South?
Yes that's a good idea as there are more houses, but one in three jobs are created in London. From a personal perspective, I need to be near newspaper offices + Westminster
Below, a very accurate though totally obvious view of what has been happening over the past decade in the UK. Though I would not want any Jew to be Prime Minister, I did like the way in which Ed Miliband had time for ideas, for policy, and for the results of applied policy; a holistic view. That used to be the norm in UK politics, before the rise of socio-political idiocy in or around 2005-2010, the Iain Dunce Duncan Smith-type of nonsense.
Lots of objections to class war appearing. Totally agree. Assault on welfare state, slashing top rate and corporate tax while imposing cuts on everyone else, driving people to food banks, Universal Credit, pay freezes, growth in zero hours. Where will it end? FFS.
For those new to this blog, I shall briefly outline my view: I have always favoured Leave/Brexit, certainly since about 2010. The EU, which was originally the EEC, a group of nation-states in mainly North and West Europe co-operating together and trading freely, has become a monster.
The EU has allowed millions of non-whites from Africa and Asia to invade its shores. It has encouraged that invasion and has attempted to resettle those millions and their offspring in countries and places. The EU permits Roma Gypsy thieves and scavengers free movement from their nests in Eastern Europe to the West. The EU Commission, the body which really directs the EU (the Parliament providing mainly a mere facade of “democracy”), has had its tame lawyers and most of the tamed EU states pass laws against “holocaust” “denial” etc, which echo the laws against heresy and blasphemy promulgated in the late Middle Ages. It is clear that the EU is on a course, planned from the beginning, of centripetal convergence. The aim is a “European” (meaning geographically European) superstate whose controlled and monitored citizens will be largely non-European and/or of mixed race, as provided for under the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan:
At the same time, I am extremely opposed to Boris Johnson and his pack of mainly non-British idiots and schemers posing as a Cabinet. They are just a manifestation of ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government).
The above positions have created a conflict, because Boris Johnson has tried to hijack the Leave/Brexit cause, calculating that, in such a polarized political environment, he and the Conservative Party might count on the support of perhaps 50% of the voters, whereas otherwise, Conservative Party electoral support now only amounts to about 35%, at most.
So now, Boris-Idiot has been railroaded into asking the EU for an extension of time, which he has done, despite his brave words about how he would rather “be dead in a ditch” than make any such request.
I suppose that any other Prime Minister of the UK would have complied with the newly-imposed legal requirement; a few might perhaps have considered refusing to comply. Boris is once again unique in having come up with a schoolboy “plan” to send a photocopied letter to the EU, while not signing it! In what world is that the act of a statesman? It is the act of a naughty schoolboy trying to be clever. Did Boris-Idiot think it up alone, or did his mad adviser, Dominic Cummings (see Notes, below) assist?
In any case, surely it is clear to me that merely failing to sign such a letter in such circumstances does not invalidate the request. To take a similar type of case, if two heads of state or government meet to sign a treaty already agreed in all details, is the treaty ineffective if one such VIP, as a joke, signs in invisible ink, or pretends to sign using a pen without ink? To my mind, the answer must be in the negative. The formal signing is merely the public show. True, in that case, the VIP would have at least mimicked the required act. Having said that, who but a charlatan public entertainer posing as politician and statesman would try such a stunt? I can only think of one, off-hand…
In my opinion, the sending of the letter, albeit in rough photocopied format, albeit unsigned by the person posing as Prime Minister, is still a valid request, a valid request from one EU government to the EU, not from one individual. If the Supreme Court of the UK pronounces upon these questions, no doubt they will first be analyzed in detail.
I predicted from the start, as soon as the 2016 Referendum was held, that the EU ZOG/NWO matrix would work to defeat the intention of a majority of the voters. The idea would be either to remain in the EU or to leave in name only. I see no reason to change that view. The Boris “deal” is no better and indeed arguably worse than that finally achieved by Theresa May. Even “No Deal” would be a scam in the hands of Boris and his ZOG/NWO colleagues. The only difference would be a bias toward the USA and not so much toward the EU part of the NWO/ZOG conspiracy/consensus. The ultimate result would be the same.
What now?
Electorally, this in itself may not harm the Conservative Party. Perhaps even the reverse. The “broad masses” of voters are in any case not only interested in Brexit. What is giving support to the Conservative Party is not anything that that party is doing or not doing, but what Labour is doing or not doing. The weakness of Labour is the main factor. The opinion polls are now all very firmly putting the Conservative Party well ahead of Labour, in some cases by more than 10 points. Unless Labour can pull its socks up pretty soon, it is toast, unless events move on the ground: economic collapse, any chaos via No Deal Brexit etc. Even should that happen, it is not clear that Labour would or could reap any electoral benefit. The Conservatives might, in those circumstances, be damaged, but not enough.
What about Brexit Party? My sense is that it has “lost its mojo”. It might get 15% in any general election held soon, it might get only 10%. Enough to take the gloss off any Conservative win, but not enough to prevent it. One should never completely write off the egregious Farage, but in the end he has had no Westminster success, at least to date.
For me, it is clear that a social-national movement must arise. At present it cannot, because the basic conditions do not exist: no germinal social-national party exists, no revolutionary situation which that party might both exploit and command exists.
Twitter is a very unreliable guide to the public mood. If you only took Twitter into consideration, you would imagine that 90% of the population want the UK to remain in the EU (most polls put it at or below 50%).
“Hate”: we hear a lot about “hate” from certain groups, whereas in fact those groups are themselves the chief purveyors of hate:
Remain whiners;
Jew-Zionists;
post-Marxists and pseudo-“socialists”, such as the “HopeNot Hate” and “UAF” crowds.
Not infrequently on Twitter are encountered individuals manifesting all three of the above.
Part of the delusionary tendency of Remain is the idea that people who want out of the EU are poorly-educated, have never travelled (save to somewhere such as Magaluf) and are extremely stupid. I suppose that such ideas bolster the Remain whiners’ sense of self-worth. Sadly for them, their ideas about this are, like their ideas on other subjects, suspect. I myself was once measured at 156 IQ, have a degree from somewhere at least semi-decent, have post-professional qualifications in law (in three countries) etc. I once had a personal library of 2,000+ books, have lived in, worked in or visited dozens of countries, speak a foreign language etc…Should I feel inferior to Remain whiners, most of whom are in every way less intelligent, educated, travelled and experienced than me?
Remain whiners are, in my opinion, often the kind of people who, in the 1950s and thereafter, carefully read books to make sure that how they lived and behaved was certified “U” and not “non-U”. In other words, Remain whinerdom seems to be yet another manifestation of British suburban snobbisme… See, for example, the tweet below
Expecting a pro-Brexit march of a million people any day now! Where are they all? I only saw a small group of drunk men – one almost completely toothless – outside a pub near Trafalgar Square singing "We love you Boris, we do!" I wonder what they love about him. Maybe… racism?
Silly Remain woman comes from Oxfordshire to march (pointlessly) with hundreds of thousands (we are told) of others, contra Brexit. Sees a group of drunks in a pub who claim to be pro-Boris Idiot. That gives her the chance to tweet (the main purpose of the day) about how they are or may be “racist” (which of course would be terrible…). One of the drunks has no teeth. Ha ha! Look at him! What a hillbillie! The woman does not fail to note on her Twitter profile that she worked for the DTI, BBC and Reuters. She forgot to mention that she reads the Observer (well, probably—if she can guess about people, so can I).
As for the “million-strong” march, its effect will be the same as all other large marches in London. Zero.
Also:
I’ve no idea whether it was 1 million or 78,000 on the Remoaner march yesterday but this is worth a look. https://t.co/lJSogqgxBI
It is pretty clear that most of the hysterical young Remain whiners of 2016 have grown up a bit, but that the middleaged and elderly Remainers have not quite understood that the times have left them behind. I would be prepared to bet that all those Wallingford Remainers support mass immigration, and fake or other “refugees” as well! After all, those elderly Remainers will not live long enough to see Wallingford (a pleasant Thames-side small town which I knew as a child) turned into yet another urbanized or suburbanized black/brown multikulti hellhole…
Looked at a few more tweets by Sarah Hurst; here’s one just seen (so I was right —see above— give that man a cee-gar!):
Why is the government constantly lying about wanting an independent trade policy that can't benefit us? Because the real reason for Brexit is immigration, and they can't say that.
I should add that, while for me it is important to get out of the EU, my main socio-political focus is on the racial and cultural future of the UK and, beyond the UK, Europe (EU and non-EU). There is no point stopping free movement from the EU if the UK is still going to be importing blacks and brown (etc) in huge number. Another point of huge importance (for the UK and beyond) is the necessity for a “cultural revolution” and chistka.
Update, 30 November 2020
The Jewish or half-Jewish anti-Brexit Remainer woman from Wallingford, mentioned in the body of the blog post above, is an enemy of “English nationalism”:
Good luck to Wales playing England at something just because I can't stand English nationalism.
Actually, she is comedy gold, reading some of her tweets. Dual nationality (UK/USA, apparently), and she celebrates Thanksgiving in Wallingford because she spent 12 years in the USA but “cannot afford” to return there (implying that she wishes that she could).
She apparently stockpiles tinned food (buying extra regularly), in which I am with her— it is a good idea if you can afford to do so and have storage space (see also Dennis Wheatley’s memoirs, Drink and Ink, in which he says that he not only did the same in the years 1938-40, in case food was rationed should war break out, but urged the readers of his newspaper column to follow suit).
As to her recent tweets to the effect that Brexit might result in food shortages, the incompetence of Boris-idiot’s government might indeed cause such shortages now. Her tweets are, however, often just unintentionally funny, as when she cries poverty while also spending over £300 at a go in Waitrose.
Oh, and she thinks that Lord Sumption, until fairly recently a Supreme Court justice, is “a dangerous lunatic”!
This dangerous lunatic is constantly given a platform by the BBC. And then they ask where is misinformation coming from! https://t.co/XuRu9pWi4N
I have my own idea as to who might be a dangerous lunatic…and I am not alone in that…
This is where she stashes her Brexit food, and she actually thinks that this makes her sound normal. A psychiatrist really needs to step in https://t.co/Jui9ifOpiE
That woman reminds me of several things, such as “why are persons of Jewish origin always alien, ‘strangers in a strange land‘ as the Old Testament has it? More than just strangers; hostile strangers.
Also, why are “Remain whiners” also, almost invariably, facemask and “lockdown” zealots?
Incidentally, the woman in question also poses as a expert on Russia. Here is an example of her “expertise”:
Our policies are now the same as Russia's: put flags on everything, build more warships and blame the EU for our economic problems.
I was so pleased that Alison Chabloz got bail this afternoon (after having had to spend three days in prison) that I nearly forgot to blog about Labour’s recent conference, which ended yesterday.
[On Alison Chabloz, by the way, she is free pending appeal, which will not be heard for months in all likelihood. In the meantime, she can post on her website, sing songs, whatever. It seems that her bail is unconditional. She has now spent a total of 5 days or part-days in prison or in court on the breach of condition matter. That means that even if she fails on appeal (which itself will be another day taken off any time to be served in prison), she will only have 22 days to serve including day of release. So really 21 days. Unpleasant but bearable for her, though perhaps not for her persecutors, who have been desperate for their pound of flesh.]
So back to Labour and its chances in the upcoming general election.
I think that we have to start from the baseline that Labour is now a joke. There always were joke elements in Labour, thinking of that old hypocrite Michael Foot and his “donkey jacket” etc. Corbyn in some respects personifies that late 1970s or 1980s Labour. As I have blogged previously, Corbyn is a familiar English “type”, the middleaged-to-elderly and probably white-bearded “socialist”, with his “Lenin” cap and copy of (in the past anyway) the Morning Star, Tribune or at least The Guardian; to be found at allotment gardens, socialist commemorations such as the Durham Miners’ Gala or the annual remembrance of the Tolpuddle Martyrs, at steam rallies or heritage railway stations. I think of Corbyn as one of those Edwardian caricatures, with an outsize head and a little descriptive and humorous caption.
The picture I have of Corbyn is more the amiable type described above than the Corbyn of the 1980s, of the IRA sympathies and crypto-Communism. Like so many of his type then, Corbyn must have found it hard to reconcile the “Green Fascism” (as some term it) of the Provos with the “social rights” bleating of the inner-city Labour Party, let alone whatever back-of-postcard “Marxism-Leninism” Corbyn may have picked up from his truncated course (he dropped out after a year) in Trade Union Studies at North London Poly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn#Early_life , and then to mix that in with some attachment to the British form of representative Parliamentary democracy.
Again, I have tweeted and (after the Jews had me expelled from Twitter) blogged from 2016 about Corbyn’s rather poor intellectual and cultural level, how he is a poor leader (in fact, no leader at all), and about his cartoon political level: “Jews good, Zionism bad; wars bad except for the war against Hitler’s Germany and any wars conducted by Marxists”; “The Battle of Cable Street” in which “the people of East London” “defeated” Mosley and the [British Union of] Fascists; “!No pasaran!” (and other pathetic misunderstandings of the politics of the 1930s).
It is easy to laugh at Corbyn as a politician or generally, though if he is thought unfit to lead a major party or the British government, then he is no more so than have been others, such as David Cameron-Levita, Theresa May or, now, Boris-Idiot.
As the days go on, it is clear that very few people in this country think that Boris Johnson is a fit and proper person to be Prime Minister. Every day that goes by reduces him as a prime ministerial, let alone statesmanlike, figure. It has nothing to do with Brexit. I favour Brexit. I do not favour Boris-Idiot, who is doubling down on Brexit as the only way to keep a bloc or constituency of voters voting Conservative. Johnson’s Cabinet is entirely composed of Conservative Friends of Israel members, who want to impose a ZOG/NWO tyranny on the UK. Most of them are also complete deadheads.
I believe that, for several years now, the voters have been voting against the party they hate most, rather than for the party they support most.
What are Labour’s positive points for voters? What are the negative points?
Labour has a number of policies which might appeal to those voters not completely hostile: promises to tenants, the young generally, the elderly generally, commuters, those faced with ever-higher utility bills etc.
As to the negatives, well, I did not watch much of the recent Labour Party Conference on TV, but a few things did strike me. I saw a wild-eyed and fanatical young man (in fact he looked completely mad) who wanted to abolish all independent schools (was he a teacher? Good grief! I suppose that that is why the main teaching union is called NUT). I also saw the delegates vote to, in effect, open Britain’s borders to almost all immigrants, as well as keep free movement of labour (in reality, that would include “Roma” Gypsy thieves and scavengers) within the EU, as part of keeping the UK within the EU. They also voted to allow all immigrants to receive State benefits, to work, and to vote.
Opinion polls are strongly against abolition of independent schools and against open borders. Most voters also oppose more immigration. The Labour policies (not yet official) would mean yet further hordes of backward immigrants from all over the world coming to the UK, either being supported by the State or driving down pay levels (probably both), occupying housing sorely needed for British people, using stretched services such as NHS, schools, trains, roads etc. Those immigrants would be able, if Labour were in power, to vote (so no truly British party would have a chance), and to import “family members”, so increasing the non-white population even more. Those would then breed. It would mean the end of this country as a decent place for white British people.
Then we look at who would be in a Labour Cabinet. We have already mentioned Corbyn. What about this absurd drunken “ho”?
Emily Thornberry, aka Lady Nugee (her husband being a half-Jewish High Court judge); the photograph below shows the couple at a Zionist dinner, alongside the Israeli Ambassador to the UK.
Then we have Angela Rayner, who wants to abolish non-State education, as likely Secretary of State… and what about the blacks around Corbyn? Kate Osamor? She might be in Cabinet (she was in the Shadow Cabinet until recent scandals) if Corbyn can form a government. I blogged about her a while ago, after her son (employed by her at £50,000 a year via her MP expenses) was convicted but not imprisoned for drug dealing. He was kept out of prison because his mother pulled strings. I have heard of “the political jungle”, but really…
When you look at all the negatives, you can see why even those who hate or mistrust the Conservatives are often now unwilling to vote Labour. These deadheads in the highest seats of government…and voting for even more mass immigration. Nein danke.
The opinion polls are all over the place, and in the past month have veered from giving the Conservatives a Commons majority of 200 right through to Labour being largest party but without a majority. Incredibly, Boris-Idiot is still way ahead of Corbyn as Prime Minister material. Truly, Eton and Oxford are the materials that make stupidity shine! Even unpleasant Jo Swinson is ahead of Corbyn, though!
The Survation poll above puts the Conservatives as largest party but (via Electoral Calculus https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html) a huge 54 votes short of a majority (but with the LibDems on 61 seats, a second Con Coalition is possible). The ComRes poll puts Labour ahead, but even further from a majority: 57 short. The LibDems under Jo Swinson have ruled out a coalition with Labour under Corbyn (a sign of how embedded the Jewish lobby now is in the LibDems), but Labour could still just about form a minority government with the votes of SNP, Plaid, Green and some Northern Irish MPs.
Conclusion
Boris Johnson is trying to weaponize Brexit in the hope that it can be his chariot back to power and with a majority. It might work. Certainly, without the Brexit vote, Johnson is toast, the Conservative Party is toast.
Labour has almost caught up with the Conservatives in the opinion polls. That seems to augur well for Labour in the sense that it means that a complete collapse is less likely despite the contempt in which many voters seem to hold the party. As always in the UK, the FPTP voting system, the contrived boundaries of constituencies and the existence of “safe seats” (a high majority of seats are considered “safe” in most circumstances) make the election hard to call. At present, I think that a hung Parliament is still the most likely result. A majority for the Conservatives is also possible. Labour? Hard to be dogmatic, but their best result would probably be to be largest party in the Commons, with a plurality but not majority of seats.
and other tweeters notice her hypocrisy: Shami Chakrabarti favours abolition of independent schools, yet sends her son to Dulwich College! A bit like Diane Abbott, who sent all her children to fee-paying schools while decrying private education…
#shamichakrabarti So you support the abolition of Independent schools. How is your son getting on at Dulwich College? You are a typical left wing Hypocrite.
💥 BREAKING – Labour Pledge to Scrap Universal Credit AND The DWP@jeremycorbyn set to announce scrapping #UniversalCredit & DWP as official Labour policies.
Benefit cap, two child cap and more set to go too.
This is certainly going to be a vote-winner for Labour as well as being the only right and proper thing to do. Having said that, most people likely to be benefited (literally) by this policy either vote Labour already or do not vote. Only complete idiots would vote Conservative or LibDem if they are reliant on State benefits; they would be turkeys voting for Christmas. Will others, floating voters not on benefits, vote Labour because of this? Some might, but in my view not enough to be very significant electorally, though I might be wrong.
Update, 28 September 2019
The latest opinion poll published (by YouGov, from work done 3-4 days ago, so not quite up-to-date in a fast-moving and volatile political environment).
That would give the Conservative Party a Commons majority of perhaps 48. However, the two other recently-published polls (see above), which were far more favourable to Labour, took their soundings on the same days as did YouGov. Just shows how uncertain is the public mood now.
I happened to see this, from The Times, tweeted by one of the active Jew-Zionists on Twitter (involved with the anti-Corbyn-Labour GnasherJew cabal) and others:
Of course, the Jews want rid of Corbyn and having been trying to depose him for 4 years now, using every lever of influence they have in the msm, as well as over many suborned Labour Party MPs (eg Tom Watson). That despite Corbyn having paid lip service to the “holocaust” fakery etc.
Having said that, there is no doubt that Corbyn is not resonating as much as he might with former Labour voters. The Jewish lobby campaign against Corbyn has, of course, had an effect, though that is not the whole story. Corbyn is associated with the kind of Labour stances that most English people (especially) instinctively know are detrimental to them: mass immigration, fake “equalities” laws, backward-looking 1980s Labour Party socialism etc.
That is rather unfair (it was Tony Blair’s social-democratic Labour that imported the really huge waves of recent immigration after 1997, for example), but there it is. The people have the instinctive feeling that Corbyn-Labour is somehow anti-British (though I myself see it as no more so —in some ways less– than “centrist” pro-Israel Blairite Labour, or indeed the Zionist-ruled “Conservative Party).
Ultimately, my view is the Labour and Conservative parties are both sliding. A new wave will rise up.
…and Angela Rayner wants the voting age to be 16. Well, why not? After all, she herself managed to get knocked-up at 16, so she was certainly sensible…oh, no, wait…
In fact, why not reduce the voting age lower yet, so that the in-school brainwashing about the multikulti society can really have an electoral effect…
This is desperate. It’s just the toss of a coin now as to which of the two largest System parties collapses first.
Update, 2 October 2019
John Rentoul is ideologically far from me, but is always worth reading all the same; probably the best-informed of the System commentators:
Average of 4 most recent polls from different companies (ComRes, Survation, Opinium & this YouGov, polling from 24 Sep): Con 31% Lab 24% Lib Dem 21% Brexit 14% Green 4% There isn't going to be an election until after 31 Oct, but these vote shares would gain Cons 5 seats vs 2017
I saw this tweet (the thread is worth reading; click on the tweet):
Astonishing how many people assume if you support Corbyn you are; a) Stupid b) Crazy c) Tribal d) Require educating on politics (generally from people who evidently know a lot less than you) In the main none of these things are true, it simply shows the power of propoganda.
— J T Beckett CEng MCIBSE 💙 💚 #Antifa #BLM (@carbonsaveruk) October 28, 2019
What I take away from the tweet, mainly, is the first sentence: many (most?) people that that lady meets think that she is basically silly (and in the minority?) for supporting Corbyn-Labour. The tweeter’s Twitter profile reveals that she is from Leeds, which has 8 MPs, 5 of whom are Labour MPs. I do not know Leeds, but know that it is not natural Corbyn territory: e.g. the highest ratio of private to public sector jobs of any major UK city (77% private, 23% public). Leeds is (officially) 85% “white”.
Even so, the comments (and those of other tweets in the thread) are telling. Corbyn-Labour is just not breaking through beyond Labour’s core vote, and maybe not even there, much.
From the same thread:
In my office, the widely held belief is that only people on benefits vote labour!!!
My attention has been caught by a recent tweet from a Brexit Party MEP previously unknown to me:
My colleague in the European parliament @MagicMagid arranged a charity dinner in support of @RefugeeRescue saving refugees in the Mediterranean. I could not attend the dinner but have instead made a donation. I urge you to do the same!
At first, I thought that that tweet was a fake and/or a parody, or perhaps tweeted in a spirit of satire. No. It is real and it is meant to be taken at face-value. The bastard really is urging Brexit Party members, supporters and voters (of which I am not and have never been one, by the way) to give money to one of the organizations ferrying migrant-invaders across the Mediterranean from North Africa to civilized Europe.
When many people who support —or did until now support— Brexit Party criticized Nielsen’s support for this people-ferrying soi-disant “charity”, the new MEP’s response was textbook System-politician:
For all those who made racist remarks in response to my earlier tweets about a charity I have supported- you have no place in the Brexit Party. We are an open, diverse and inclusive party with no space for discrimination or abuse. Get on board, or get out.
The thread of further comments on Twitter is worth reading. All UK political life is there, from well-meaning but stupid ladies (sitting in suburban or rural comfort) who just want to emote about “saving children”, and the sort of basically malicious “anti-racist” idiots (Jewish or otherwise) who want as many non-Europeans as possible to invade the EU and especially the UK, to more sensible people who see that the UK’s population has increased from about 55 million in the 1980s to about 65 million or even 70 million now, most of which is via immigration and from births not only to immigrants but also now to their children and indeed to those children’s children (a demographic time-bomb: experts now say that European-race, i.e. white, people will be in the minority in the UK by 2070 at latest. My guess? 2040. Already some British cities are minority-white).
That does not, it seems, alarm Henrik Nielsen.
Nielsen was born in 1959 in Copenhagen, is 60 years of age and was at one time the head of the anti-EU campaign in Denmark. Why he opposes the EU I do not know. He seems rather at home as an MEP.
Nielsen is married to one Sharon Ruth Bierer, also a dentist, born in London and who has been a director of dental-oriented companies in London. The name Bierer is often of Jewish origin, but not always. Nielsen and his wife have two adult children, Jacob and Laura, the latter of which is, remarkably, the policy director of Labour Leave, the Labour Party pro-Brexit organization.
Nielsen and his wife own a rather pleasant-looking villa in Puglia (Apulia), southern Italy, which they rent out at £300+ per day.
I agree there with tweeter “Reimer Bard”. Brexit Party is faux-nationalist even as compared to its previous incarnation, UKIP.
Finally, the person that Nielsen is supporting in his tweets is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magid_Magid . A Somali immigrant who claims to have funded a “gap year” by working for only 9 weeks (at 12 hours a day). I suppose that it is just about possible.
Brexit Party
I have blogged several times before about Brexit Party, about its stellar explosion onto the UK political scene, about Farage’s impressive public meetings, about its possible impact on the Conservative vote etc; its EU elections success. I have also chronicled its lack of direct success so far in Westminster by-elections: Peterborough, and then Brecon and Radnorshire. That “close but no cigar” aspect has deflated the Brexit Party bubble somewhat, as has the noise around the person I am pleased to call Boris-Idiot and around the whole current Brexit hullabaloo.
Let’s look again at Brexit Party. It is or is owned by a private company itself controlled by Nigel Farage. In that it has similarity to Momentum, the Labour Party group, which is, or is owned by, a company itself controlled by a couple of Jews.
I have blogged before about the fact that Brexit Party is a party without policy (save for leaving the EU). That is both its strength (i.e. a clear message) and its weakness (the voting public has concerns other than just the EU and Brexit).
I have blogged about not only the strange policy-free nature of Brexit Party but also about its strange mixture of candidates. No less than three out of the Brexit Party EU elections candidates were former Revolutionary Communist Party members (one, Claire Fox, a defender of the IRA Warrington bombing, is now a Brexit Party MEP). Some Brexit Party candidates were of non-European ethnicity, and some of those are now MEPs, including a couple of Jews and a Pakistani.
It is hard to see the ethnic, cultural or ideological ties binding the Brexit Party MEPs inter se. Even the faux-“libertarian” “small state”-ism of many of them does not seem to fit all.
There seem to be more than just a few links between Brexit Party and the Trump set-up.
What is really behind Brexit Party? There is already a Brexit Party Friends of Israel organization. What is the gameplan? To offset any real nationalist upsurge by containing it in the Brexit Party box? Possibly. It worked with UKIP…
Brexit Party electorally
To my mind, the Brexit Party upsurge bubble has been, if not burst, then somewhat punctured, and so partly-deflated. Farage has made the mistake of sitting on the fence between outright support for Boris-Idiot’s supposed Brexitism, and opposition to the Conservative Party. That has weakened Brexit Party to some extent. All the same, and crucially in a situation where is is no real social-national or even small-c conservative-national party, voters in England and Wales are going to have the usual false choice in the next general election: the System parties, or joke candidates such as Monster Raving Loonies and tiny socialist or other parties, or…Brexit Party. It may be that, in desperation, many will vote Brexit Party.
At present, Brexit Party is not breaking through re. Westminster. The latest two polls (published today and yesterday) put the figures as:
make a Conservative majority of either 38 or 46 (I have taken the Scottish results as 50% SNP).
This is frightening. It means that, were there no significant change in the polling, there could be a Boris-Idiot ZOG/NWO [Zionist Occupation Government/New World Order] dystopian regime, an elected dictatorship, in place by the end of the year. If that happens, democracy in any real sense will have died and only determined non-electoral resistance will be able to fight against it.
Having said that, polling often narrows before an election, but Labour is going to have to pull its socks up “majorly” (to use a Trump-ism) if it is going to keep even its present complement of MPs. I suppose that the silver lining would be that many pro-Zionist Labour MPs would go, but that would be little comfort to the British people ruled over by a ZOG dictatorship.
What about Brexit Party itself? Its polling is running between 10% and 15%, which is nowhere. At present, it has no prospect of getting MPs and would have to raise its game to about 25% across the board before getting even a small bloc of MPs. That is not impossible, but if British people see Brexit Party MEPs (who may not even be British by origin…) lecturing them on the supposed “goodness” of supporting migration-invasion etc, the polling will not improve and may even decline in percentage terms.
No social-national party, no conservative-national party, the Conservative Party a ZOG/NWO regime in the making, Labour the party mainly of the blacks and browns, the LibDems supporting both finance-capitalism and migration-invasion, and fake-nationalist Brexit Party joining the multikulti “celebrations”…
The Remainers’ intellectual dishonesty, exposed in a tweet from an emeritus Professor of Government, no less; nailed by Andrew Neil…
Both sides fought the referendum on the basis they would regard the result as binding; and it was on that basis that people voted. Show me any Leaver or Remainer who said it was just a big state-sponsored opinion poll and could be ignored. https://t.co/ElwoARYP9X
“If you look at the more genuinely Welsh areas, especially the Welsh-speaking ones, they did not want to leave the EU,” Dorling told the Sunday Times. “Wales was made to look like a Brexit-supporting nation by its English settlers.”
I wonder what The Guardian would say about any analysis of UK voting patterns (in general elections, as well as referenda) that called areas with huge numbers of blacks and browns etc “not genuinely English”? Or described the blacks, browns, Chinese etc as “settlers”…For that matter, what about any analysis of voting patterns in North London that referred to “its Jewish settlers”?
A few more tweets
The real problem here was that direct populist democracy, i.e. the 2016 Referendum, was grafted onto the longstanding system of representative democracy (elected MPs, political parties, Parliament). It’s like a train trying to run on lines of the wrong gauge. Or to put it another way, trying to graft a pear to an apple.
WATCH | "There has been an active conspiracy by the political class to stop a real Brexit. There was a clear majority for Brexit in the referendum, however we have a House of Commons that was 75% Remain" – legendary historian David Starkey hits the nail on the head! pic.twitter.com/F1LX5Y4ICa
The Jew paedophile, sex predator, rapist etc Jeffrey Epstein has committed suicide, it is claimed. The circumstances seem mysterious, as when that other Jew disgrace, “Robert Maxwell”, supposedly fell off or jumped off or was pushed off his motor yacht in the region of the Canary Islands.
The Jew Epstein has been in the firing line (not literally, as he should have been) for years:
When “Robert Maxwell” died, his daughter, Ghislaine, who was completely mixed up with Epstein for decades (from age 29 or 30; she is now 57), said that she believed her father to have been murdered. Now Epstein’s death also raises questions. He too was mixed up with some of the most famous and/or powerful figures in the US and UK: Trump, Clinton, Prince Andrew…
Robert Maxwell was thought to be a (perhaps the) major MOSSAD operative in Europe. Now we see that his daughter was intimate or at least friendly with many of the world’s powerful and uber-wealthy. That does not mean that she was operating or partly operating on behalf of the Israeli state or the world Zionist conspiracy, but it does raise questions.
One has to ask why Ghislaine Maxwell has not (at least not yet) been arrested either in the UK or USA. Apparently, some of the young girls abused by the Jew Epstein used to refer to the Jewess “Maxwell” as “the Madam”. Say no more…
So why no action against her? Is this the Jew-Zionist lobby working behind the scenes of our “democracy” again?
Prince Andrew
As far as I am concerned, Prince Andrew is a useless fellow, a complete waste of space. People always say “but he fought in the Falklands!”, as if a few weeks in action (in fact merely observing; he was never under direct fire) gave the prince a free ride for life (his birth already gave him that, I suppose). Admittedly, Andrew did serve for a number of years as Lieutenant, but his service is said to have been generally underwhelming. On retirement from the Royal Navy, he was given the rank of Honorary Captain, rather than promoted as substantive Captain. In 2015, Andrew was made Honorary Vice-Admiral (I have no idea whether he gets a toy battleship to go with that).
Typical British cap-doffing, always bending over backwards to show deference to “royalty”, is still endemic in the UK. People less enamoured of the royals have commented that the Press and royal PR people have also rather (in the vulgar phrase of today) “bigged-up” the WW2 service of Andrew’s father, Philip [see Notes, below]. He has lived off the public weal and his wife’s money for 70 years!
Prince Philip and that clan may not be actual lizards (as David Icke is said to have once claimed), but looking at Philip, I can see from where the idea might have originated…
This morning, I saw an account by Sky News about the Epstein scandal that somehow contrived to avoid the use of the words “Prince Andrew”! Incredible. Needless to say, the facts that Epstein was a Jew and Ghislaine Maxwell is a half-Jewess are also absent from all TV and Press reports. (and yes, many British people, in particular, are so naive that they might not realize).
Andrew, of course, married “Fergie”, with all the consequent scandal that entailed. Now, he is or was involved with a very wealthy woman called Goga Ashkenazi, born in Kazakhstan, and who is part-Jew, part-Muslim.
Andrew finished his official time with the Royal Navy in 2001 at the age of 40, since when he has played golf, flown around the world on rather easy “missions” for charity or government (more or less freeloading, hence his nickname of “air miles Andy”) and enjoyed himself.
“The Duke of York receives a £249,000 annuity from the Queen.[68]The Sunday Times reported in July 2008 that for “the Duke of York’s public role,… he last year received £436,000 to cover his expenses.”[69] On 8 March 2011, The Daily Telegraph reported: “In 2010, the Prince spent £620,000 as a trade envoy, including £154,000 on hotels, food and hospitality and £465,000 on travel.” [Wikipedia]. “Not a bad little earner”…
“Earlier in 2010, it was revealed that the Kazakhstan President’s billionaire son-in-law Timur Kulibayev paid the Duke of York’s representatives £15 million – £3 million over the asking price – via offshore companies, for the Duke’s Surrey mansion, Sunninghill Park. Kulibayev frequently appears in US dispatches as one of the men who have accumulated millions in gas-rich Kazakhstan.[100]
In May 2012, it was reported that Swiss and Italian police investigating “a network of personal and business relationships” allegedly used for “international corruption” were looking at the activities of Enviro Pacific Investments which charges “multi-million pound fees” to energy companies wishing to deal with Kazakhstan.[101] The trust is believed to have paid £6 million towards the purchase of Sunninghill which now appears derelict.[101] In response, a Palace spokesman said “This was a private sale between two trusts. There was never any impropriety on the part of The Duke of York”.[101]
Libby Purves wrote in The Times in January 2015: “Prince Andrew dazzles easily when confronted with immense wealth and apparent power. He has fallen for ‘friendships’ with bad, corrupt and clever men, not only in the US but in Libya, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tunisia, wherever.”
In May 2016, a fresh controversy broke out when the Daily Mail alleged that the Duke had brokered a deal to assist a Greek and Swiss consortium secure a £385 million contract to build water and sewerage networks in two of Kazakhstan’s largest cities, while working as British trade envoy, and had stood to gain a £4 million payment in commission.[102] The newspaper published an email from the Duke to Kazakh oligarch Kenges Rakishev, (who had allegedly brokered sale of the Prince’s Berkshire mansion Sunninghill Park), and claimed that Rakishev had arranged meetings for the consortium. After initially claiming the email was a forgery, Buckingham Palace sought to block its publication as a privacy breach.[103] The Palace strongly denied the allegation that the Duke had acted as a “fixer” calling the article “untrue, defamatory and a breach of the editor’s code of conduct.” [Wikipedia]
This is, however, not meant to be an attack on Prince Andrew, however well-merited. Let’s look at a few others in the useless rabble that now constitutes the “royals”.
Prince Charles
I once met the Prince of Wales, at the official Residence of H.M. Ambassador in the capital city of a foreign country “East of Suez”. There were about 30 people at the reception, though I myself knew only a couple of the guests and a few of the diplomats (including the ambassador). HRH moved through the groups of informally arranged guests, saying hello to almost everyone and speaking with a few favoured people, of which I was one (my time with him probably lasted all of three minutes, though having drunk about a bottle of red wine, I cannot be sure!).
My impressions? Shorter than I expected from having seen photographs and TV news footage for much of my life. I was somewhat taller than him. I was also surprised to see that he was almost bald in places, especially the top of his head (which I could look down on as he turned away). As to personality, I should say pleasant, slightly mocking or humorous (he made a joke about the city and country, which was unexpected). Not someone difficult or rude.
I can support some of what Charles does for animal welfare and the environment, though some of the lustre rubs off when one thinks of his “sporting” slaughter of birds, foxes and other creatures (I let him off as regards salmon and trout!).
Charles has made (with expert help of course) a big success of the Duchy Originals brand, and has in general advanced the cause of organic agriculture. I do think that he in general means well, but his self-pity and preciousness (retailed in various newspaper anecdotes) does make him hard to much like as far as the public is concerned (and that is leaving aside the whole Diana and Camilla saga).
Prince Edward
What can one say? I suppose that the, er, fag-end of a royal house always has a few “princes” of this sort. After dropping out of the Royal Marines fairly quickly, Edward decided, as Wikipedia puts it “on a career in entertainment”. A royal prince playing the theatre manager? Unglaublich… He married a public relations woman and they, apparently, have had two children together.
Princess Anne
Someone who seems to have all the charm of her father. Nuff said. In fact, I have over the years heard some inside track, but I prefer to leave that out of this article (not least because some sources, though thought reliable, may not be).
It has been asserted that Prince Albert was half-Jewish, his real or natural father having been a Jew banker. I do not know whether there is any truth in that, but certainly some members of the Royal Family have looked quite Semitic. Princess Margaret looked very Semitic indeed. Lord Snowdon, her husband, used to make bitter remarks to her face, and about how she looked like an old Jewess, in the years when their marriage was disintegrating.
If reports can be believed, until the 21st Century dawned, all male children of the first rank of the Royal Family were actually circumcised and not even merely by a surgeon, but by a Jewish religious expert. It’s all very strange.
Freemasonry
The links between the Royal Family and freemasonry are well-known and documented.
Overall view
One can see that the British monarchy, qua monarchy (i.e. not qua a function of the “celebrity” culture), is running into the sand. The oldest generation, meaning the Queen and Prince Philip, are now not far from 100 years of age. Prince Charles is now 70 and will soon be 71.
As for Princes William and Harry, “tame thick princelings” pretty much covers it, though they are now perhaps a little old to be called “princelings”— William is now 37.
William’s marriage to Kate, though outside normal royal tradition, could be presented as sort-of within it. Kate is said to be part-Jewish, and so through the matrilineal side, i.e. which the Jews themselves accept as conferring “Jewishness”. However, that sort of thing goes over the head of the public and so, if you like, “caviar to the general”. Not so Harry’s marriage to Meghan, aka the Royal Mulatta (previously married to a Jew in California). That has the possibility (especially when combined with the couple’s absurd recent antics), to sever any bond of affection or respect still binding monarchy to “the people”.
My view
What strikes me increasingly about the Royal Family is its sheer irrelevance both to the UK as a whole and to the people of the UK. When most subjects (as they were; now citizens) had gone through the Second World War, good and bad times economically, had only 2 or 3 TV stations, and everyone wore poppies in November, there was some kind of bond or at least link. Now, the only thing linking the “royals” with the people is that of prurient interest (of the latter in the former), a link no more strong than the people have with pop stars, Katie Price or the cast of the latest braindead “reality” show. As for the proliferating population of “blacks and browns”, very few these days have any interest in the “royals” (now that few have come directly from former colonies).
I have no great animus against monarchy as a system. It is sometimes the best system, whether absolute monarchy or constitutional monarchy. However, Britain now is outgrowing this long-established institution. There is, perhaps, still a place for a constitutional figurehead, but beyond that I think that the time has come to say goodbye.
A few tweets…the role of the BBC in covering up for Prince Andrew and for the likely-MOSSAD-linked Jewish-Zionist web comes in for much criticism.
My goodness I’m really starting to hate the BBC….. “Questions like these alluded, without evidence, to a malevolent conspiracy and fed the feverish speculation on social media.” Jeffrey Epstein: How conspiracy theories spread after financier's death https://t.co/cfROny79OD
The big takeaway from the #Epstein story is the mammoth credibility gap that now exists between the powers that be and the people. We have reached the stage where the automatic response to the official narrative on anything is scepticism. And no wonder.https://t.co/zTGrC7QAZZ
What worries me is that we do not trust anything. Some people think he is still alive. Some people think he was murdered. Some people think his body was replaced with a homeless man. None of us know do we? We are only passing on information that we have received from someone else
There it is: The Jews Epstein and “Maxwell” both admitted that they were gathering blackmail materials on the rich and famous. This must be connected with Israeli Intelligence.
Better make it quick, before the bitch flees to Israel…
Ah…: “Her current whereabouts are unknown and sources close to her claim she planned to ‘totally disappear’.” [Daily Mail]. Right…to bloody Israel! I guessed right. Give that man a cee-gar! I wonder how long it will be before the (half)-Jewess starts screaming about “anti-Semitism”?
The Daily Mail today has an exclusive on the scandal. Beyond even the details, the photograph of “royal prince” Andrew, peering round the front door of the Jew’s mansion, is a stunning indictment in itself. Andrew, Jew’s flunkey (or should that be “Jews'”? They seem to be numerous around him)…
…it is all rather reminiscent of the 1940 German film, Jud Suss [The Jew Suss]!
note: The full version of the 1940 film Jud Suss is now censored, completely removed from YouTube (as indeed I predicted, a few years ago, would happen…). Only a few short clips (such as the one above) and the —far less hardhitting— 1934 film version of the (true) story, are still up.
However, Jud Suss is still on the Internet, though it must be sought out in quiet corners. It is well worth seeing (why else would “they” try to “disappear” it?). Here is one good copy:
Buckingham Palace PR people have released a truly pathetic exculpa on behalf of Prince Andrew, saying how “appalled” he is at the “revelation” that his friend, the billionaire Jew Epstein, was a sex criminal etc. Really, how strange. So in 2011 and 2012, when Andrew was visiting and perhaps staying in the Jew’s Manhattan mansion (and acting as the Jew’s flunkey at the door), he, Andrew, was unaware that Epstein had been convicted and imprisoned in 2008 over such matters? Hardy ha ha…It was the subject of publicity at the time and thereafter…
In fact, Epstein’s money and connections had greatly helped the Jew himself in 2008: a light sentence, mostly spent on “day release” (so prison was just somewhere less comfortable than, say, the Pierre, or the Waldorf-Astoria, in which to doss down in overnight); then early parole. The fix was in, somewhere, that much is obvious.
In other, connected, news, the Queen seems to have required the “royal prince” to fly home early from the traditional Summer break at Balmoral.
Andrew is now exposed as, at best, a complete fool and grifter; at worst (and the worst is more likely than the best), a user of procured young girls, procured for him by both the Jew rapist Epstein and Epstein’s one-time “ho”, the half-Jewess Ghislaine “Maxwell”, daughter of MOSSAD operative and fraudster “Robert Maxwell” (and herself quite likely “connected”). Israeli Intelligence and the Jew-Zionist web worldwide must have learned a lot and suborned many, taking the operation as a whole. The Royal Family has probably lost most of its own secrets via Andrew.
In other news, thick princeling Harry, and the Royal Mulatta, have just vacated the UK on their third private-jet jaunt in less than a month (the first was, laughably, to go to Sicily to a “climate-change” event!).
It occurs to me that, at one time, the “royals” of the various European states were the acme of European society, but now absurd end-of-line “royals” want to ape the Hollywood film-star lifestyle.
Worse, Harry has become a figure out of American sitcom-land, the henpecked husband whose petulant young wife runs him ragged with her absurd demands. “Royal Married With Children“…(though in fact, in this case, she is about 4 years older than her husband, 38 compared to his 34).
The royals are now squandering their life’s gold heedlessly.
and now, reverting to Andrew’s very strange behaviour and lifestyle, it turns out that Andrew hosted Epstein at Balmoral, while the Monarch was in residence, at that!
Thick Andrew (all the royals are both painfully thick and cringingly uncultured) is of course “appalled” at the behaviour of his Jew billionaire “friend”, so appalled that he stayed at the Jew’s mansion, used the young girls there (almost certainly) and had nice chats with the Jew while walking in Central Park…2 years after the Jew had been convicted of sex crimes.
Update, 20 August 2019
Yet another “ho”, this time Australian.
Woman in video of Prince Andrew at Jeffrey Epstein's house 'is daughter of ex-Australian prime minister'https://t.co/R3k7YOjdmM
“Time and again, Andrew, who a courtier once reportedly described as having “a pompous level of self-importance”, has demonstrated an eye-watering lack of judgment. Palace staff have rated him the rudest of royals, according to reports. A secret cable, published on WikiLeaks in 2010, revealed a US ambassador describing Andrew speaking “cockily” during one official lunch,leading to a discussion that “verged on the rude”.” [The Guardian]
“Rightly, or wrongly, there is a perceived air of arrogance about Andrew, and he is described by various people as boorish and very self-centred,” said Joe Little, managing editor of Majesty Magazine. “Perhaps we shouldn’t be judging the book by its cover. But, certainly, that’s the impression he has given for a very long time.” [The Guardian]
The Guardian’s piece ends with an almost “sympathetic” paragraph:
“His fate is that of the typical second son, struggling to find a role. “I think despite knowing he was always going to go down the line of succession, the fact that in his youth he was second in line to the throne, and now he is wherever he is, that must be quite a blow to your confidence and feeling of importance,” said Little.”
On the other hand, the stupid arrogant bastard might actually show a little humility (I mean to the British people who have been subsidizing him all his rotten life, not to the wealthy Jews for whom he seems to behave like a doormat), not to mention gratitude to the British people (and to Fate or God, or the gods, without whose largesse “Prince” Andrew would just be a very very mediocre naval officer who would struggle to rise beyond the rank of lieutenant).
…and still it continues, with painfully thick Andrew still trying to say that he had no idea that the Jew Epstein had been convicted a couple of years previously for sex crimes (as if the police would not have known!)
Daily Mail: “A source said that when working as Special Representative for International Trade and Investment between 2001 and 2011, Andrew was asked to travel regularly to the US. Since relinquishing this role in 2011, they maintained Andrew had continued to travel to the US, but claimed that his focus, particularly with Pitch@Palaces, had been on ‘other markets’.”
A “royal prince” trying to play the Internet “entrepreneur”? Ha ha! It would be tacky even if successful. As it is, it just looks pathetic, like thicko Andrew himself and the whole “right royal” circus!
As the Irish say, “Jay-sus!”— There’s even more! “Prince” Andrew looks more and more guilty every day.
Several articles from the 90s and early 00s about Jeffrey Epstein, well before his dark secrets were exposed, have been scrubbed fr the internet in recent years. We obtained several of them & when you read them, its easy to see why they were taken offlinehttps://t.co/NLlFFsTUp5
…and it looks as if I was right about the connection with Israeli Intelligence!
“In light of what is now known about Epstein’s sexual blackmail operation and sex trafficking activities, several reports from the late 1990s and early 2000s contain details long since forgotten regarding Epstein’s relationship with Prince Andrew.
“One particularly censored article that appeared in London’s Evening Standard in January 2001, for instance, gives several indications regarding the apparent entrapment of Prince Andrew as part of Epstein’s sexual blackmail operation, which is now known to have been connected to intelligence — specifically Israeli military intelligence, according to recent revelations in the case.” [Mint Press News]
Prince Andrew caught “bang to rights” (again). A useless, charmless, pretentious idiot who thinks that he is terribly important. Had he not been born where and “who” he was, Andrew would be —at most— a small businessman, and an unsuccessful one at that.
Prince Andrew thought that “it was the right and honourable thing to do”, to stay with the convicted Jew sex predator Epstein. In the immortal word of “Manuel”, “Que?”.
Prince Andrew was not only able to remember his visit to the Woking branch of Pizza Express, but was able to say with certainty that he went there on the very day on which he is alleged to have screwed the American 17 y o trafficked by the Jew Epstein and the half-Jewess Ghislaine “Maxwell”!
Remarkable memory, to be able to recall the exact date, 18 years in the past…
Call Detective Columbo…
Apart from that, it made me laugh that Andrew went to Pizza Express. I mean, I do not expect a “royal prince” to eat drumsticks at a banquet every evening, casting the half-eaten ones over his shoulder in the manner of Henry VIII as played by Charles Laughton, or to eat only slices of cucumber washed down by champagne, like one of the cavalry officers in Anna Karenina, but…Pizza Express?…at…Woking?!
Update, 18 November 2019
Looks like thick and dishonest Andrew has dug himself deeper into a hole…
Seems that Andrew met the “ho” “madam” Ghislaine “Maxwell” as recently as June 2019! Looks as though they were discussing legal strategems, aka “how are we going to get out of this?”
Well, they could always take a cruise off the Canary Isles together…
…and the popular prints are just not giving up; here (see below), a TV doctor rubbishes Andrew’s claim that he, Andrew, cannot or could not sweat by reason of having “been shot at” in the Falklands (and that’s even leaving aside the —apparent— fact that Andrew never was shot at during the few weeks that he spent in the Falklands, and that the nearest that he came to being in peril that way was when he observed from a helicopter a ship being shot at):
According to the New York Post, the “ho” “madam”, Ghislaine “Maxwell”, wanted to become la Contessa Cicogna, but failed in that. I presume that the Italian’s family were appalled at the prospect of a Jewess (actually, half-Jewess) polluting the family escutcheon…
Now it turns out that the arrogant stupid bastard has been pocketing bungs worth millions. I suppose that he wanted to try to keep up financially with his billionaire half-Jew, half-Muslim girlfriend from Kazakhstan. He must be binned (the rest of his family too). Time for some kind of republic.
Well, give that man a cee-gar! Turns out that I guessed right (I usually do, if I myself say so):
“Jeffrey Epstein’s socialite ‘madam’ Ghislaine Maxwell ‘is being hidden from the FBI in a series of safe houses because of the information she has on powerful people’“
Maxwell has remained incognito since Epstein’s arrest and death behind bars
New report claims both she and Epstein were ‘assets’ for a foreign government
Source says they funneled dirt on the rich and powerful to foreign spies
Now Maxwell may be hiding in a safehouse in Israel, the new report claims
She is a British and US citizen, and daughter of an alleged Mossad operative.“
“An explosive new report has asserted that deceased sex criminal Jeffery Epstein and his alleged ‘madame’ Ghislaine Maxwell were foreign intelligence ‘assets’, and that she is currently hiding in a safehouse in Israel.“
“She is not in the US, she moves around. She is sometimes in the UK, but most often in other countries, such as Israel, where her powerful contacts have provided her with safe houses and protection,’ the source said.“
“Born in France, Maxwell is both a U.S. citizen and British subject. Her family’s alleged ties to Israel’s national intelligence service, Mossad, have been well documented.
Maxwell’s father, Robert Maxwell, was a Czech-born British media mogul whose financial fraud in raiding the Mirror Group pension fund was discovered after his death in 1991.
Also a British member of parliament, Robert Maxwell reportedly had ties to British intelligence, the Soviet KGB, and Mossad — and was suspected of being a double or even triple agent by British Foreign Office officials.“
Western world, wake up to the Jew/Zionist/Israel conspiracy. It’s everywhere…
Update, 7 January 2020
Seems that the “ho” “madam”, Ghislaine Maxwell, “is reportedly in hiding and being guarded round the clock by former US Navy SEALs amid fears her life is in danger.” [Daily Mirror]. In Israel? Some US Navy Seals are Jews, perhaps surprisingly. I met one myself once.
Latest about the half-Jew “ho” madam, Ghislaine “Maxwell”:
Ryan Dawson@RyLiberty
British Spoiled Brat and Child Rapist Ghislaine Maxwell is hiding in Israel. Over 8000 pages of her e-mails have been hacked. US media is doing triple back flips to avoid mentioning the entire ring was Jewish and financed by Jewish supremacists.
Well, there is not much “British” about the aforesaid “ho”: born in France of one Jew and one French parent, though educated in England (Marlborough College and Balliol, Oxford).
The story is interesting, though. I wonder whether this alleged telephone hacking had a connection to the Saudi Crown Prince, like other hacking exposed in recent weeks? I speculated some months ago that the “ho” Maxwell was hiding out in Israel, presumably under MOSSAD or Aman control.
What strikes me here is #PrinceAndrew ‘s penchant for being cruel to animals as a child. Now I’m not a psychologist but I think that says something about the man he became. Just sayin’ @VRSVirginia#Epsteinhttps://t.co/WYc9CSAguG
Prince Andrew was so naughty as a kid the footmen used to throw him into piles of manure and once gave him a black eye – and the Queen agreed he deserved it – The Sun#PrinceAndrew @VRSVirginia Keep thinking about your children’s books… 😊❤️ https://t.co/Bc3rgLz56k
EXCLUSIVE: 'I look for Jeffrey's type and I bring 'em home.' Prince Andrew's cousin tells how Ghislaine Maxwell bragged she recruited girls for Epstein from trailer parks and was intent on eventually marrying him https://t.co/xm9Jaj9cI9pic.twitter.com/Pybfil1gxP
#Anonymous is currently trending at #1 worldwide with 1.69 MILLION tweets after the hacktivists revealed shocking information about supermodel Naomi Campbell; the murder of Princess Diana and child trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and the Royal family’s involvement in the sex ring. pic.twitter.com/KYgNHcbK1f
These Naomi Campbell accusations have been around for years… her links to Epstein and his circle of child traffickers/rapists.. she dated Jeffrey Epstein’s good friend and even had him and Virginia Roberts (Prince Andrew accuser) and Ghislaine Maxwell attend her bday party pic.twitter.com/PAUvoBmBBj
Interesting find – a Sun newspaper feature on ‘Randy Andy’, Prince Andrew from 1992.
One of the 20 facts was that he used ‘fixers’ to arrange dates with ‘suitable women’ after his affair with Koo Stark ended…. pic.twitter.com/AfXoqrCoVj
“It is claimed in the unsealed papers that an island orgy was one of three occasions when Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sex with Andrew. The other locations were Maxwell’s London flat and and in New York.” [The Guardian]
Andrew’s motive is obvious: to try to exculpate himself; what, though, of Dershowitz? He is said to have visited the Epstein island and travelled on Epstein’s jet. He may have abused young girls himself. Whether that was so or not, was that and is that the whole story?
We know that the Jew who was mainly known as “Robert Maxwell” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell was a major MOSSAD operative. His daughter, Ghislaine, is now the prime focus of the post-Epstein inquiry, and is on trial in Federal court in New York. She, it is said, was also an Israeli agent, either MOSSAD or Aman, or both. Epstein (who has now “gone up the chimney”) the same.
We know that Israeli Intelligence co-opts Israeli and other Jew “civilians” as operatives when necessary. Look at the Dikko case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dikko_affair): “Though Israel, at the time, did not have formal diplomatic relations with Nigeria, there were less visible ties between the two nations. In particular, Nigeria was an important source of oil for Israel, and Israel was a significant supplier of arms to Nigeria. The Israeli intelligence agency Mossad was tasked with locating Dikko and bringing him back to Nigeria to stand trial.” [Wikipedia]
” Mossad recruited Levi-Arie Shapiro, an Israeli doctor who was a consultant anesthetist and director of the intensive care unit at HaSharon Hospital. He was to fly to London and participate in the operation. Shapiro’s job would be to drug Dikko, and insert an endotracheal tube to keep him from choking on his own vomit while being transported in a crate.” [Wikipedia]
A Jew (whether Israeli or any other nominal nationality) may be a doctor, a lawyer, or whatever, but is first and foremost a Jew and likely to do whatever Israel and its “services” want…
It may well be that the successful Epstein blackmail and suborning operation, likely to have been very productive for Israeli Intelligence, was in part facilitated by the Jew Dershowitz. I imagine that his role was, precisely, to shield Epstein (and so Maxwell and/or others) from legal inquiry from both USA and UK.
Meanwhile, Ghislaine “Maxwell”, the half-Jew (Mischling) “ho” “madam”, is pulling out all the stops to get released on bail in he USA. Seems that she is married to a Jew “tech millionaire”. The bail suggested by her legal team may be USD $30 million. Where do the Jews get such money? Is the “husband” stumping up? Is any of it from monies stolen from UK Mirror Group pensioners by the “ho’s” repulsive father, Robert Maxwell?
“Borgerson was involved with the Council on Foreign Relations.” Well, well, was he really? A slightly unusual connection for someone who spent 4 years as a US Coastguard officer, though others have said that he was a US Navy SEAL. A Jew as Navy SEAL may sound odd, but there are some; I myself met one such, about 18 years ago, at Charleston, South Carolina.
I thought that Ghislaine “Maxwell” would have played the “antisemitism” card by now, but admittedly that would be hard to justify in New York City, especially when the judge is herself Jewish! Indeed, the judge is more Jewish than Ghislaine Maxwell, who is genetically only half-Jew: her mother was a French Protestant, who “converted” to Judaism (and became fanatically pro-Jew and pro-Israel) after meeting the MOSSAD asset “Robert Maxwell”.
Update, 25 April 2021
Ghislaine Maxwell now charged with further and even more serious offences:
[President Clinton, a complete NWO/ZOG puppet, mired in sleaze of all kinds, greets the paedophile Jew criminal and Israeli Intelligence asset Epstein, and his “ho”, the half-Jew Israeli asset Ghislaine Maxwell, at the White House in 1993]
A rather sympathetic American documentary, by ABC:
The trial of Ghislaine Maxwell is apparently scheduled for November 2021, so it is interesting that quite sympathetic documentaries are now appearing…
I notice that that ABC doc features Robert Maxwell’s son, Ian [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Maxwell], as well as journalists who are either Jewish or at least perceived by many as generally pro-Jewish.
Having said that, the film does contain material not entirely exculpatory of Ghislaine Maxwell. On the other hand, turning it around again, it might be argued that, bearing in mind what has already been exposed, the only thing for Ghislaine Maxwell to do is to limit the damage— to accept a hit, but a limited hit.
[the Jew Epstein, smugly smirking in front of one of his private jets. It is good to know that the evil Jew exploiter was sent “up the chimney” not so many years later]
Update, 9 December 2021
Below, a photograph admitted into evidence in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, showing her giving the Jew exploiter Epstein a foot massage on one of his private jets:
Guilty on 5 out of 6 charges. Forecast to be sentenced to (up to) 65 years. These being Federal offences, parole chances are minimal. An appeal has been or is in process of being lodged.
Update, 15 January 2022
Ghislaine Maxwell may get a retrial, based on apparent procedural and other problems to do with some of the jurors. Meanwhile, sentencing has been set down for 28 June 2022.
In other news, Andrew Windsor, the thick bully and freeloader (etc) formerly known as “Prince”, has lost a number of military and other titles and ranks (including effectively, though not officially, “HRH”), and may even lose his title “Duke of York”.
If and when Andrew is completely reduced to the ranks, it may send a shiver down the spines of other “Royal Family” members on the right royal gravytrain, especially but not exclusively the minor ones.
“Seems that the person formerly known as Prince (Andrew) is probably going to request a civil jury in the case brought against him by one of the victims of the Jew Epstein. To my mind, this is a strategy unlikely to succeed. I am still nominally an attorney at the New York Bar, though I have never practised law in that state (I passed the exam 32 years ago), but my view about this matter comes more from my knowledge of Americans themselves.
Andrew Windsor is on the wrong side tactically: British, as against his accuser, an American. A man as against a woman, in a generally feministic part of the world. An older man as against a younger woman. An hereditary foreign “royal” as against a US-born-and-bred US citizen. Very wealthy, as against someone without inherited wealth, and brought up in either a “trailer” or a very modest house.
Does Andrew Windsor really think that a civil jury in New York City will be on his side? Maybe this is a tactic to gain time while his lawyers find out how much the lady’s price might be. A great deal more than the rent of a Manhattan apartment and a free seat on a private jet, anyway.“
So Andrew Windsor, “formerly known as Prince”, has settled the civil suit brought in New York by Virginia Giuffre (as was). Rumours abound that the settlement is around £12M in British money.
“EXCLUSIVE: Bill Clinton’s special advisor who let Jeffrey Epstein into the White House seven times and flew on the Lolita Express dies at 59 – the latest associate of the former President to suffer an early demise“
"These are the people that were on Epstein Island confirmed by multiple sources." pic.twitter.com/J2j5lmn47E
— Paul James O'Brien (@PaulJamesOBrie1) July 24, 2022
Ehud Barak…[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehud_Barak]. Now there’s a name not quite in sync with the others. I wonder what he was up to, bearing in mind the Israeli Intelligence connection with both the Jew Epstein and the half-Jew Ghislaine “Maxwell”.
Unless either an appeal happens (and is successful), or a pardon is granted by the U.S. President, Ghislaine Maxwell will be incarcerated until she is 80 years old (2041). There is no parole, as such, in the U.S. Federal system, only in individual states’ systems. However, an inmate can get nearly 2 months “credit” for every year served, dependent on behaviour, so on a 20-year sentence a couple of years might get shaved off.
Update, 31 May 2023
New trove of Epstein documents reveal the pedophile scheduled meetings with the following people:
Bill Gates, Peter Thiel, Chris Rock, David Blaine, Prince Andrew, Woody Allen, Irina Shayk, Sean Parker, Wendi Murdoch and Richard Branson. https://t.co/id1dqqpUn8
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) May 30, 2023
It is all starting to come out. Names are being revealed. I notice that a very high proportion of the guilty are Jews. I think well over half. Yet in the American population, only 2.4% “identify” as Jewish. So the proportion of Jews visiting the Jew Epstein’s island was about twenty times their proportion in the US population…
Of course, the main traffickers have already been well and truly dealt with. Epstein himself has gone “up the chimney”, and the half-Jewess Ghislaine Maxwell is likely to be in US Federal prison until she is over 80 (she is presently 62). She still faces a further Federal trial (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghislaine_Maxwell), so may be sentenced to a further term, though she will probably be released while still under 85…
I am sure that the Israelis would welcome her back. After all, they allowed her unpleasant and fraudulent Jew father, Robert “Maxwell”, to be buried on the supposedly sacred Mount of Olives in Jerusalem (presumably for his services to MOSSAD etc), though Ghislaine Maxwell is said to believe that MOSSAD or other Israeli agency murdered him and then passed it off as suicide or accident (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell#Death).
“Prince Andrew is ‘terrified’ to visit the US in case he is arrested amid calls for a fresh FBI probe into the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, sources claimed last night.
The disgraced Duke of York has barely left Britain in nearly six years, with insiders claiming he fears arrest, civil lawsuits, or being subpoenaed if he travels abroad.
The 64-year-old’s anxiety has only deepened following the release of court documents that have sparked demands for a fresh criminal probe into Epstein’s network.
Andrew has always denied allegations of sexual misconduct but paid millions in an out-of-court settlement to Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre in 2022.
In 2020, the FBI asked the Home Office for assistance in questioning Andrew, but the investigation was put on hold last year.
However, fresh scrutiny has emerged after High Court documents last week revealed an email exchange between Andrew and Epstein in February 2011, in which the prince wrote: ‘We’ll play some more soon.’
The Duke of York sent a bombshell email pledging to ‘keep in close touch’, despite claiming he had ceased all contact with the American financier weeks earlier, it has emerged.
The new evidence suggests Andrew may have lied in his infamous Newsnight interview.
He insisted to Emily Maitlis in the disastrous 2019 grilling at Buckingham Palace that he had stopped seeing Epstein in early December 2010, when they were photographed walking through New York’s Central Park.
The Duke said: ‘I never had any contact with him from that day forward.”
[Daily Mail]
Update, 17 March 2025
What? Apparently the incoming President of the International Olympic Committee Sebastian Coe visited Epstein’s Island 11 times!! pic.twitter.com/HebCwV40u5
April 25 (Reuters) – Virginia Giuffre, one of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's most prominent accusers, has committed suicide, her family said on Friday. https://t.co/q95UCFenMY
Mossad are relentlessly hunting survivors of Epstein since the Trump administration is highlighting his cases. It's rare we survive our rapes as children. But we are being hunted now.
Meanwhile, useless and nasty parasite “Prince of the Blood” Andrew was invited recently to attend Church with Charles, Camilla etc. Semi-rehabilitation exercise?
Update, 11 June 2025
Former Mossad agent Ari Ben-Menashe confirms that Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli intelligence agent… pic.twitter.com/IEFNNLBZXv
— Sprinter Observer (@SprinterObserve) July 10, 2025
Update, 13 July 2025
Jeffery Epstein's accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell is ready to reveal 'truth' of the pedophile client list, say insiders. So, why are Republicans blocking her? https://t.co/o6fQaUv4x6
Trump purportedly sent a note with a drawing of a naked woman as a gift for the 50th birthday of US financier Jeffrey Epstein, who was accused of sex trafficking minors and committed suicide in 2019, the WSJ has claimed:https://t.co/zdM7xbS8aWpic.twitter.com/lL6kofZXZS
Ghislaine Maxwell wasn’t eligible to be transferred to a minimum-security prison in Texas, but the Bureau of Prisons waived the rules to make it happen. -MSNBC pic.twitter.com/VarET5wO0c
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) August 1, 2025
The US FBI has erased the names of Trump and a number of other prominent individuals from documents related to the case of financier Epstein, who was accused of sexually abusing minors, Bloomberg reported, citing sources:https://t.co/WcIs4I5snapic.twitter.com/xgsHv04SXa
“Jeffrey Epstein was a very wealthy man, but exactly how wealthy and where that money came from remains shrouded in mystery.
Newly unearthed emails last week shone light on Epstein’s role as freelance client development officer, acting as a channel between political figures and business titans, greasing up the former with lifestyles they could not afford and the latter with avenues of political influence.
…the questions about the source of Epstein’s wealth have never been fully resolved. He was worth nearly $600m at his death, thanks mostly to two wealthy billionaire clients – Victoria’s Secret founder Les Wexner and, later, Apollo Global Management co-founder Leon Black – as well as Johnson & Johnson heiress Elizabeth “Libet” Johnson, sister of former US ambassador to the UK Woody Johnson.
Between his collection of lavish homes in New York, Palm Beach and Paris, two private Caribbean islands, two jets and helicopter, Epstein held nearly $380m in cash and investments, according to his estate.
That wealth arrived suddenly. According to associates, until the end of the 90s, Epstein was living in a two-bedroom apartment on Manhattan’s Upper East Side close to the river. It was only when Maxwell arrived from London that his lifestyle was dramatically elevated.
Epstein moved to a townhouse on 68th Street and later to a 28,000-sq-ft mansion on 71st Street, later transferred to him by Wexner in 2011.
Steven Hoffenberg, a former business partner of Epstein convicted of running a Ponzi scheme, claimed that Maxwell’s father, disgraced press baron Robert Maxwell, introduced his daughter to Epstein in the late 1980s.“
“Revealed: 100 new Epstein emails ‘that could destroy’ Prince Andrew: Cache of ‘devastating’ messages between the Duke and convicted paedophile unearthed in US probe“
“Fergie’s Epstein lies exposed in bombshell email: She publicly apologised for taking abuser’s cash and vowed to cut ties with him, then weeks later told him: I only said it to save book deals.”
Apparently, that was the Jew Ehud Barak, whose presence at “Lolita Island” has been known for years. An evil bastard once part of Israel’s special forces attack and assassination group.
If any of us did what Prince Andrew has, we would be stripped of our liberties, not titles. And, while “stripped of titles” SOUNDS dramatic and causes a lot of chatter, all it REALLY means is after everything he’s done, Andrew just has to order new stationery. #PrinceAndrewpic.twitter.com/Hau5gqPra9
King Charles urged to read Virginia Giuffre's memoir following its release – by the woman who co-wrote the book with his accuser Virginia Giuffre. And there are now politicians saying Andrew be evicted from his Royal Lodge home on which he pays zero rent https://t.co/nfbkdF1gXl
I am impelled to write a few words about Peter Hitchens after having just seen an interview with Owen Jones [see below], which interview dates from 2017.
I have already written a blog post about Owen Jones:
To examine the views and influence of Hitchens in detail would necessitate a blog article of inordinate length, but Wikipedia has a considerable amount of information about him:
I should like to focus mainly on a few matters raised in that interview.
As to Hitchens himself, he is an odd fellow, apparently fairly well-educated. His family background had elements of tragedy (his mother bolted with an unfrocked priest, and the couple later died via a suicide pact in an Athens hotel). Not mentioned in the interview is that Hitchens (like Owen Jones) has part-Jewish roots, his maternal grandmother having been half-Jewish, in that her mother was Jewish. It was on that basis that Hitchens’ even more eccentric brother, Christopher, declared himself in latter years to be “Jewish” (taking the traditional Jewish course of deciding via the matrilineal side alone).
The interview mentions his having attended a naval school, but that must have been in early years, he then having attended The Leys School, Cambridge, an institution which has schooled a number of well-known people: at least one Rothschild, a few kings (albeit from Bahrain and Tonga), a number of MPs and journalists (in some cases both, as with Martin Bell).
Hitchens then went on to the City of Oxford College (a college of further education) and finally to Alcuin College, part of the University of York.
It may be that the university education and milieu that Hitchens found in Alcuin College permanently influenced his attitude. Wikipedia says of Alcuin College that,
“From early days of the college an uproar for secession of the college from the remainder of the university has been present.[3] It is a self-styled Separatist Movement and at times presented as a running gag at the University of York about Alcuinites….For many years Alcuin College was very much the outcast on the university campus, the only college physically separate from the others except for a bridge from the library…“
The photograph of Alcuin College in winter shows an almost Soviet bleakness and isolation.
Hitchens, though characterizing himself in the Owen Jones interview as having been a “joiner” in his youth, has also been an outsider, defector and maverick. I wonder whether he applied to the University of York because Oxford and/or Cambridge (in both of which cities he had attended school) refused his application, or perhaps he made no application to Oxbridge because (I speculate) his developing extreme socialist views made him reject such “bourgeois” places of learning. A better interviewer than Owen Jones, such as the late and great Brian Walden, might have explored all that.
Hitchens was from 1968 (aged 17) to 1975, a member of the Trotskyist “tendency” called the International Socialists [IS], the forerunner of the Socialist Workers’ Party [SWP]. He joined two years before he went to York. Later, in his forties, he became a card-carrying member of the Conservative Party, but only for the six years 1997-2003, and —typically— at the very nadir of Conservative fortunes, which is interesting, psychologically. Does he court unpopularity? Does he deliberately express unpopular or contrary views?
Hitchens is known as what might fairly be called a “reactionary”, someone who thinks that Britain was a better place in the 1950s, no ifs no buts. In fact, I believe that I watched him say that or something like that on TV once. My own view is different, that some aspects of life in the UK are better now, though many are certainly worse. This blog post is about Peter Hitchens, not Ian Millard, but in my view, things that are better now than in the 1950s (which I scarcely remember, having been born in 1956) or the early 1960s (which I certainly do remember) would include
central heating as the norm;
wider selection of fruits and vegetables (and in general a healthier or at least more varied diet);
less antiquated snobbism;
more understanding of animal welfare;
far easier access to information (via Internet);
Whereas, on the other side, the aspects of British life now that mean that UK life is worse (than in the early 1960s, anyway) are (and Hitchens has a point, because it is a longer list by far)
the general pressure of life now (of course, I was a child in, say, 1963, so my perception is affected to that extent but I think the judgment is still valid);
pervasive lack of freedom of expression;
pervasive “political correctness” etc;
the cost of living, though that is a complex question; it includes
the cost of real property both for sale and rent, and the impossibility for most people to buy a property without family money;
British people swamped by mass immigration;
real pay and social benefits etc generally reducing;
hugely less choice of employment for most people;
many people in full-time work unable to live on the poor pay offered;
unwanted millions of immigrants and their offspring;
congested roads and railways (and refer to the above line);
a huge new mixed-race population;
a huge amount of crime;
public and private housing shortages (refer to immigration, above);
huge numbers of drug-contaminated persons;
workers exploited in terms of having ever-shorter lunch breaks etc, “on call” after hours etc;
public services near to collapse in some respects;
intensive farming, with consequent harm to wildlife;
standards in all areas (NHS, schools, social security, Westminster MPs, police etc) falling like a stone
We often hear (eg from very young Remain whiners) that, eg, “foreign travel is easier now”, whereas that is mostly illusion. True, there were some silly aspects “back then”, such as being restricted as to foreign currency taken on holiday (you even had to have the amount, bought from somewhere like Thomas Cook, written in your passport!), and that silliness (a kind of postwar sacred cow) lasted until Mrs Thatcher stopped it in 1979 or 1980! Yes, true, but that was about it.
If you listen to Remain whiners (esp. the under-30s), you read or hear that Brexit will mean either no visa-free travel to the EU states, or no travel allowed at all! They really believe that, pre-1972, British people were almost imprisoned, as if Cuban, Chinese or Soviet citizens!
Until blacks and browns abused it in the 1980s to import relatives illegally, you used to be able to get a “British Visitor’s Passport” from post offices for a small amount; the passport was valid for short visits to almost all Western European states (not many people went to Eastern Europe as tourists until the 1990s). I had one in 1978 or 1979, in between possession of two ordinary passports, when I wanted to travel to France at short notice. I think that it cost about £5 and took about 5 minutes to be issued at Lanark Road Post Office, Little Venice.
Transport to the European mainland: true, there were no budget airlines as such in the 1950s, 1960s, but there were routes and ways not now in existence: in the 1950s and 1960s, people could take their cars by air to France! The main route was Lydd (Kent) to Amiens. This was not only for the rich: 5,000 cars (20,000 passengers) as early as 1950, and over 50,000 cars (250,000 passengers) by 1955 (incredible when you recall that rationing lasted until 1955!):
The idea that some Remain whiners have that young people will be unable to travel if the UK leaves “Europe” (meaning the EU) is laughable to those who know. As a child I travelled with parents; and then (from 1971) as a teenager, I travelled alone to Paris, Amsterdam etc. No visa required, UK not in EEC (the then EU).
I might add that it actually takes longer to fly to Paris in 2019 than it did in 1970 or even 1960!
One cannot say that Hitchens approves of that aspect of 1950s lifestyle, though, and (if I understand him aright), he thinks that the British war against Germany could have been avoided, but I may be mistaken here. He certainly thinks that of the First World War, which he says, surely rightly, destroyed British naval supremacy and economy.
Where Hitchens is certainly mistaken is in saying (in the interview) that Churchill’s refusal to countenance the German peace proposals of 1940 was “unquestionably the right and moral thing to do”. Oh really? Right and moral, to continue a war only started because triggered by a treaty obligation that could never have been fulfilled (the Anglo-French worthless “guarantee” to Poland) and when an honourable peace via armistice was on the table?
Such a peace might have been bought at the price of German victory in the East, but would that have been so bad? The destruction of the Stalin/Bolshevik regime? The saving of most of Eastern Europe from both wartime destruction and post-1945 Stalinism? The prevention of the enormous damage, loss of life and hurt across Western and Southern Europe and North Africa? Hitchens says, however, that he is “sceptical” about Churchill overall.
Hitchens is on surer ground when he says that British history has gone, in that no-one knows British history. He cites David Cameron-Levita being unable to translate the two words “Magna Carta” from Latin! After 6 years at Eton! That was when “Scameron” was a guest on the Letterman Show. Shaming for the whole country. Not just the Magna Carta bit. Cameron came over more like a part-Jew public entertainer (and not a good one) than a British statesman. Oh…wait…
[the bit about Magna Carta starts around 8 minutes in]
Scameron was also proven, though I think on another occasion, not to have heard of the Bill of Rights! Hitchens cites an apparently intelligent 6th-former whom he met, and who had passed exams in English History, and yet who did not know which side Oliver Cromwell was on during the English Civil War!
I have had similar encounters. Few people under 40 now know even the most basic facts about British history, and less about European history generally. An indictment of the British educational system. One should, though, be wary of thinking that this kind of ignorance developed overnight. I recall having a brief conversation with a South London couple I met by a swimming pool in Sousse, Tunisia, in 1986, and who, it transpired, had no idea at all that what is now Tunisia had been (part of) a Roman imperial province. Not knowing who was Nelson or Drake, though, is arguably of a different order.
Hitchens says, again correctly, that “we” “have no idea now what it means to be English or British”, but does not go on to examine the racial implications. Come to think of it, that may be one reason why so many people in the UK want to denounce others to Twitter, Facebook, the police, employers etc for holding the “wrong” views, i.e. because the denouncers have no idea of the English historical struggle for free speech (John Hampden etc…) and no respect for it.
Owen Jones talks about how open-minded (he says…) Corbyn is, and implies that he, Jones, is the same. Oh yes? Take a look at my blog post about him…
Hitchens himself is really little different. He once had a short and at first reasonable discussion with me on Twitter about the early Zionists, in 2017 or 2016, but then a Jew tweeted to him about how I was apparently an evil “neo-Nazi”, after which, just like Owen Jones, inter alia, Hitchens blocked me. I was unaware then that Hitchens is part-Jew, though not to the extent that would have rendered him liable to sanctions under the 1936 Nuremberg law(s), his maternal grandmother having been only part-Jew (Mischling) and his maternal grandfather not a Jew. In fact, under those laws he would even have been able to work as a journalist.
Hitchens says that Enoch Powell’s so-called “Rivers of Blood” speech “was a disgrace”. Why? He dislikes its tone, it seems. What about its truth, though? He also says that “the intermarriage [resulting from immigration] is great”. I begin to wonder what major part of modern British society he does dislike, when push comes to shove! To be fair to Hitchens, he does disapprove of the ghetto communities established by Pakistanis and others in, mainly, the Midlands and North of England. He is certainly not “white nationalist”, let alone social-national. If he were, he would be sacked at once. Long live freedom!…
An area in which I do find myself largely in agreement with Hitchens is in intervention by the “West” (in my terms, “NWO/ZOG”) in the affairs of the Middle East. Iraq, Syria, Libya. He opposes it. That’s something.
As to Russia, Hitchens seems to take an objective view (informed by better historical knowledge than most msm scribblers), eg:
I apprehend that Hitchens likes the social conservatism of most Russians.
So what is my overall view of Peter Hitchens? I should say that he is someone of considerable intellect, though nowhere near as intelligent as he himself imagines. Someone of considerable education, but who imagines that he knows more and better than almost anyone else, and believes that it is his role in life to pronounce on the truth of any given social, political, historical or ethical topic. Someone who harks back to a supposed golden age prior to, perhaps, 1959, or 1989 (at very latest). Someone who sees what is wrong in the present society but appears to have no programme or (Heaven forbid!) ideology to move from here to there (to a better society).
Hitchens takes a reasonable view such as “the family is a good thing” and tests it to destruction. Likewise, in his critique of both socialism and the contemporary Conservative Party, he goes to an extreme, saying that the Conservative Party is “extreme Left-wing”, by which he means “socially liberal”. He defends traditional marriage and his arguments here have force.
Hitchens thinks that the Conservative Party is dying (understandable, looking at its MPs and ministers) but, yet again, goes to an extreme, wishing that it could have lost the 2010 General Election so that it might have died, and so made room for a new and socially-conservative party. I wish that it had lost too, but for other reasons!
Hitchens reminds me of two other scribblers of note, Peter Oborne and (now rather forgotten) Paul Johnson.
All three are often intuitively correct on some issues, risibly mistaken on others. They are alike in other ways, too. As the Russians say, they are all “Maximalisti”.
Hitchens (like Owen Jones) blocked me on Twitter for ideological reasons. Hitchens (like Owen Jones) makes a very comfortable living from the System msm. Hitchens (like Owen Jones) poses no danger to the existing state of affairs, despite making much noise. Hitchens (like Owen Jones) is a mass media pussycat pretending to be a tiger.
I like to read Hitchens’ words occasionally. He is often right, not always. However, his words are commentary, not inspiration. He says in the interview that Britain is finished and that the only serious history of contemporary Britain will one day be written in Chinese! Maybe, but God moves in mysterious though sometimes sanguinary ways. As a Christian and a student of history, Hitchens should know that.
Hitchens’ recent book (which I have not yet read, but which promises to be at least as myth-shattering as those of the unjustly neglected historian Correlli Barnett)
Update, 18 September 2020
Since the above was written, Peter Hitchens has been almost a lone voice struggling against the “Coronavirus” panic and the allied government-proclaimed fear propaganda.
Update, 24 April 2022
Hitchens is now in the small minority of public figures unwilling to go along with the msm noise against Russia, and for Ukraine (meaning the Kiev regime of the Jew-Zionist Zelensky).
The British people were told that they and they alone would decide by referendum whether to stay in or leave the EU. Remain or Leave. No nonsense about “the Irish backstop”, no nonsense about “deals” with the EU, no ever-more complex rejigging of the UK-EU relationship, no second vote years after the Referendum (i.e. no “people’s vote”, to be held in 2019, 2020 or even later), no asking to remain in the EU for weeks, months, years after the set departure date.
Yes, the relationship between the EU and the UK is complex, but sometimes, with Gordian Knots, you just have to cut the knot. You can tie new knots later.
As I predicted at the time, Remain would immediately launch a kind of quite long term damage-limitation operation, building on the Operation Fear pre-referendum propaganda. The fear propaganda had a number of aspects:
No-one would be allowed to travel from the UK to EU states;
Before the UK was in the EU, no-one from the UK was allowed to travel to France, Germany, Italy etc without a visa;
No UK people could live or work in, eg, France, Spain, Italy, Germany before 1973;
Anyone voting Leave hates Europe and Europeans;
A vote for Leave is a vote for hate;
A Leave win would reduce most British people to poverty;
This propaganda was fuelled by even more than usually inept and wrong forecasts by hugely well-paid and hugely overvalued “erudite idiots” such as the Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, a globalist Bilderberg participant of probably part-Jewish origins (see Notes, below). Ex-Goldman Sachs and carrying Canadian, British and Irish (and other?) passports, Carney and others claimed that Brexit would immediately shrink the UK economy. In reality, such forecasts did that, by causing fear and uncertainty.
Many young people, meaning loosely anyone under 30 but especially the 16-24 age group, badly let down by their pathetically poor education, really seemed to believe the above bullet-points. They really believed that a Leave result would mean that they would not even be able to visit EU countries without onerous visa requirements. In fact, listening to them (bleat) on BBC radio, one realized that many seriously believed that, if the UK left the EU, they would not be allowed entry to EU countries at all! Yes, those who believed that were/are stupid, ignorant and poorly-educated, but the immediate blame must be placed on the Remain propagandists.
There were reports in the msm and on social media about pathetic teenage girls bleating and crying because “their whole future” had been “destroyed” (by older Leave voters)! Now they would never be international models, pan-EU entrepreneurs etc! In reality, of course, 99% of the young Remain whiners never were going to get well-paid or indeed any jobs “in Europe” (as they always mis-designate the EU). The few who might, always could (I myself once had a girlfriend who, in her 1960s youth, had been on the cover of the French edition of Vogue).
The Remain fightback started immediately. Project Fear was kept going, along with new lines: “the Referendum was not really valid because it was so close” was one. Another was “turnout was only 72%, so the Leave vote was really only about 37%”…
As Leave supporters countered, what if we applied that to General Elections? Or by-elections? We have just had a by-election at Newport West. I blogged about it and later added the result details:
In that by-election, Labour won, with a vote share of 39.6% of votes cast. However, turnout was only 37.6%. In other words, nearly two-thirds of eligible voters, many no doubt disgusted by the charade of “democracy” being played out, refused to or at least did not vote. Should we say that the result is invalid, because Labour was only voted for by about 15% of the eligible electorate?…
The same is true of the vast majority of constituencies where MPs have been “elected” despite having received less than 50% of the votes. Some MPs were “elected” on votes of 30%, the result of 3-way or 4-way splits. In view of the often low turnout in elections, that means that many MPs were voted for by only a fifth or even a tenth of the eligible voters!
People who could not be bothered to vote either way in 2016 must accept the result. Leave.
We should recall that every single referendum region in England, except London, votedLeave, most by very nearly 60%-40%. In fact, in the UK only London, Scotland and Northern Ireland voted Remain.
If you were to take out Scotland, Northern Ireland, London, Gibraltar and all non-white voters, Leave would have won, in England, by something like 75%-25%.
If there were to be another EU/Brexit referendum any time soon, Leave might in fact win all over again:
The point is that a promise was made to the British people and has been broken. Now we see that
The “Conservative” government has badly mishandled the 2-3 years of negotiation with the EU (was that deliberate? was that sabotage?);
An attempt has been made to have a “Brexit In Name Only” via a so-called “deal” which would be actually worse than just staying in the EU officially;
attempt(s) are made to revoke Article 50 and so to stay in the EU;
requests for extensions of time for departure (why?);
a House of Commons “legal coup d’etat” has been made, passing a law to all but outlaw Brexit, and passed by one vote, that of African convict Fiona Onasanya MP, who was recently released from prison and soon will not even be an MP! The Commons coup was arranged between Oliver Letwin MP, a Jew and former Rothschilds employee, and pro-Zionist would-be dictator Yvette Cooper MP.
In fact, the Rothschilds connection is interesting, because puppet President of France, Macron, a complete agent of Zionism, NWO and ZOG, also worked for Rothschilds.
Conclusions
There is effectively no or almost no real democracy in the UK now. People are waking up to that via the Brexit saga;
There is no political party, let alone one which is powerful and/or credible, which speaks for the British people;
Most MPs are useless, not even mediocre, and/or are just freeloading traitors; they are also, most of them, direct enemies of the British people. Many belong to secret groups of cosmopolitan manipulators. Many are pro-Zionist and/or have Jewish-Zionist connections, spouses, sponsors etc.
There must be a new and better society and a better system of government.
Update, 12 April 2019: a few thoughts about the near-future EU and local elections
The Brexit mess, so spectacularly mishandled by Theresa May and the idiotic careerists around her, may save UKIP from immediate collapse as a party, inasmuch as many British voters will want to punish the Conservative Party one way or the other. There may be a “perfect storm” for the Conservative Party, pressured on two fronts by both the Leave and Remain sides.
There will soon be elections for the European Parliament, on 23 May 2019. Recent opinion polling seems to be saying that Labour will have a landslide: initial voting intentions show Labour on 37.8% (up from 24.4% in 2016); Conservatives at 23.1% (unchanged), Brexit Party (Nigel Farage’s new party) 10%, LibDem 8%, UKIP 7.5%, Change UK (the recent Lab/Con defector MPs’ vehicle) around 4%, among others.
One has to be cautious in assuming that the above opinion poll reflects the likely outcome. The same poll seems to indicate that, after discussion, many pro-EU voters prefer Change UK (which would hit Labour and LibDem levels), while anti-EU voters may prefer either UKIP or Brexit Party.
Before the EU elections (in which the UK may not participate at all if the UK leaves the UK before 23 May), there will be local elections, on 2 May 2019. The indications are that, in those elections, Labour may also sweep the poll, with Labour benefiting not only from the “pendulum” or “see-saw” effect of elections in a system using FPTP voting, but also from abstentions by usual Con voters (or by their voting for Brexit Party or UKIP).
As far as the local elections are concerned, Labour starts the campaign with several advantages. The decade of spending cuts has finally impacted even the most true-blue Conservative areas. Labour has a army of local activists, thanks to its membership surge under Corbyn. It also has funds from the same source.
The Conservatives have few local activists now and most are beyond retirement age. The party looks tired. The Brexit mess can only be laid at the door of Theresa May and her Cabinet. The Cons will be lucky to avoid a wipeout in the areas voting on 2 May.
There are also strategic factors. The Conservative Party claims 124,000 members, which seems high (average 200 members per constituency). Most are elderly. Few are active. The median age for Conservative voters has also risen, to 52. Recent polling has shown that only 16% of voters under 35 support the Cons, and only 4% of those under 25 do so.
Not for nothing is (or was) France called La Belle France. If I had to name a country which, for me, challenges the better parts of England for its countryside, it would be France, where I myself lived for 4 years (in North Finistere, Brittany), commuting by car ferry to the UK every week or so. My first holiday away from my parents was a 3-week stay in Paris in 1971, aged 14/15. I stayed in the –at the time, not very smart– Rue de l’Arbalete, in the 5th Arrondisement on the Left Bank, near the Sorbonne, the Ecole Normale Superieur and the Jardin des Plantes, in which park I spent quite a lot of time looking at chess games, wandering about, sometimes drinking a strange green carbonated mint-drink. In other words, I like France (and often its people) very much, despite French bureaucracy and, at times, hugely irritating inflexibility.
The Present Situation
Now we see that many of the French cities are intermittently burning, that there are violent clashes between protesters and riot police in the streets, including the Champs-Elysees and the Boulevard St. Germain. There have been mobs running through the Tuileries, a ministry stormed, at one point the Jeu de Paume (museum/gallery) on fire. The number of protesters on the streets before Christmas 2018 was around 30,000. Now, in early January 2019, we are are seeing 50,000 and more. What is going on?
Macron and His Regime
We must understand that the current President of France, Macron, is the evil “genius” whose “reforms” have caused the uprising (for such it is becoming). However, the present situation is one which has roots going back to 1989 (when socialism in various forms died across the world), to the establishment of the Fifth Republic in 1958, to that of the Fourth Republic in 1946, and indeed to the fall of the Third Republic in 1940, with the consequent establishment of the Vichy government (in power from 1940 to 1944 and governing about half of the territory of France itself, as well as overseas possessions).
The “democratic” basis of the Fifth Republic has always been shaky, but it is arguable that France is more “democratic” now than it has ever been, at least since 1940: the President is now elected every 5 years (changed from 7 in 2000), and is elected directly by the voters, whereas from 1958-1962, the President, at that time de Gaulle, was elected by an “electoral college”. This “democratic” accolade is perhaps an omen, however: the last very “democratic” France, the Third Republic, collapsed from its own weakness and division, first amid an undeclared civil war between the Popular Front and its many and various opponents, then from external invasion, as the German forces swept across Northern France in 1940.
Macron and his pop-up “movement”, En Marche, did not come out of nowhere. Like other fake “movements” across Europe and the former Soviet Union (eg the “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine), Macron’s was funded by Jewish cosmopolitan financial circles. Macron himself worked for Rothschild et Compagnie Banque from 2008-2012. In those four years, and another after he left Rothschilds, Macron is said to have made about (possibly more than) 3 million Euros.
Let’s retrack and look at Macron more personally. He went to a Jesuit school, where, aged 15, he met a woman teacher, married with children and aged 39. This woman became romantically and sexually involved with him (sexually —supposedly— only after he turned 18, by which time she was 42 —and if you believe that, you will believe anything…), and left her husband and three children, later marrying Macron (in 2007, when he was 30 and she 54).
Macron only stopped being a student when aged 27, in 2004. He became an “inspector of finances”, a post at a high level in the civil service. He formed a strong connection with a Jewish businessman called Alain Minc, who lent Macron 550,000 Euros in order to buy an apartment in Paris. When Macron left the ministry, he had to buy himself out of his contract. That cost 50,000 Euros. Did that sum also come from Minc?
Here is what puzzles me about Macron: he reminds me of the young Faust, whom Mephistopheles calls “an intelligent youth whom it is easy to instruct”, if I recall the quotation aright. Thus we have the still-young Macron, only 29 and from, though not a poor background, not one of wealth either. He graduates, from the last of several institutions, aged 27, and within 2 years is lent over a half million Euros by a Jewish businessman, not even for a business idea but to buy personal real property. Not just any Jewish businessman, though. Minc has been on the supervizory board of Le Monde and has also been an advisor to several leading politicians in France, including Nicolas Sarkozy.
The oddness does not end there. In the same year, 2006, one of the wealthiest women in France, Laurence Parisot, who was head of MEDEF, the French equivalent of the CBI in the UK, offered the young Macron, who at 29 was still only 2 years from having been a student, the job of managing director of MEDEF (he declined). Laurence Parisot was also head of the bank BNP Paribas.
What else of note do we know about Macron? Well, in 2018 he was awarded the annual Charlemagne Prize, the first recipient of which (in 1950) was none other than Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, the evil mind behind the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan! Other recipients of the Prize have included Jean Monnet, the godfather of the EU, who received it in 1953, Konrad Adenauer (1954), Winston Churchill (1955), Edward Heath (1963; he brought the UK into the EEC, predecessor of the EU, in 1973), Henry Kissinger (1987), Tony Blair (1999), Bill Clinton (2000), Jean-Claude Juncker (2006), Angela Merkel (2008), Donald Tusk (2010), Martin Schulz (2015), Pope Francis (2016) and the very influential globalist and supporter of finance-capitalism (and alleged to have been an agent of the British SIS), Timothy Garton Ash (2017).
Macron’s En Marche “movement” was, it is alleged, initially bankrolled by the Rothschilds. 5-6 months before the foundation of En Marche in April 2016, Macron visited Israel.
Macron came to power because the French were tired and disaffected, estranged from the System parties. Marine le Pen of the Front National was thought to have a good chance of victory in the 2017 Presidential Election, so perhaps En Marche was formed by the System and Zionists partly in order to head her off.
Macron and those behind him intended to destroy much of what remains in France of “socialist”/social democratic policy as well as the relaxed lifestyle (including restricted business hours, hours of work etc) which is so much part of France’s appeal for those who live there.
Macron conceals his harshness behind a superficially-pleasant manner, but his mask has dropped, repeatedly. He said, for instance, that there are only two types of people, the “important” and the “nothings”. Such words have not been spoken openly in France for many many years. They call to mind 1789 without the cake!
Macron seems to despise the French people and to be sanguine about their replacement by blacks and browns, another thing that links him to Coudenhove-Kalergi, Tony Blair, Angela Merkel (etc) and to the Jewish-Zionist lobby.
There has been a migration-invasion of France and it continues. It was foretold in fiction decades ago, in the book The Camp of the Saints, by Jean Raspail.
The French people have woken up to Macron and to the cosmopolitan finance-capitalist globalists behind him. His approval rating was said to be 25% in late 2018, and may now be as low as 15%. 80% of French approve the Gilets Jaunes or Yellow Vests.
What Now?
What happens now is an open question. The Yellow Vests appear to have wide popular support, far beyond the 50,000 who are fighting on the streets, demonstrating, or standing vigil by roads etc. The government is about to take severe and even harsh measures. It remains to be seen whether such measures contain dissent or whether they will ignite an uprising of the poor and middle classes against the wealthy (relatively) few, against the powerful Jewish-Zionist lobby, and against the EU and other manifestations of the NWO (New World Order) and ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government).
[Addendum, 10 January 2019:I should add that what may prevent the Yellow Vests from developing beyond a mere protest movement is that they appear, as a group, to have no real ideology and little organized direction (not sure about the latter), but something more organized (in both senses) may develop.
Since the original blog post was published, the Yellow Vests have faded away, and Macron has been re-elected (2022), with 58.55% against Marine le Pen on 41.45%. A good result for Ms. le Pen, but nowhere near good enough.
What is written here should be taken in the context of my own belief about historical cycles and in particular that of 33 years. For me, the 33-year cycle is now of great importance. 1923, 1956, 1989, 2022. The last great change in the world took place not so much in as pivoting around the year 1989, and was, in its major effect, the fall of socialism (of all kinds) and its replacement by what might be characterized as globalized finance capitalism. By “socialism”, I mean every kind of socialized socio-political ideology and its practical application.
Soviet socialism and its historical offshoots (whether in China, Albania, Cuba, South-East Asia etc) fell to pieces, replaced by a basically capitalist ethos (sometimes ruled by the same or similar people and even keeping some of the same symbols and slogans, as in China and Cuba).
Soviet-style (Marxist-Leninist) socialism fell, in and after 1989, but it did not fall alone. Social-democratic “socialism” also fell, or just fell apart. Across Western Europe (the same is generally true in Central and Eastern Europe), social-democratic parties have been in decline since 1989.
Socialism, Social-Democracy and Globalist Finance-Capitalism in the UK from 1989
In the UK, the Labour Party erased Clause IV of its Constitution (the clause providing for a socialized society) in 1995. For the next 20 years, the UK Labour Party was not only “socialist” only in implied name, but increasingly also only “social-democratic” in implied name. By 2010, there was virtually no clear water between the Labour and Conservative parties. Both espoused similar globalist finance-capitalist principles, even openly. Indeed, though this blog post is not the place in which to detail it, both Labour and Conservative competed to shout the loudest about how much they loved transnational business and wanted to attract the wealthy and uber-wealthy to the UK, while making a sport of demonizing the poor, the unemployed and disabled, many of whom are reliant on State benefits and services etc.
It may be that the Corbyn phenomenon, resisting going further down the globalist finance-capitalist path, is a sign that that the 1989-2022 era has now run out of steam in the UK, as elsewhere. Much of Corbynism is a nostalgic attempt to go back to the 1970s, but its importance lies not in what it is but in what it is not.
Transnational Enterprises Profiting from Europe
Europe (EU and otherwise) has failed to properly address the profiteering of huge transnational enterprises, whether traditional or Internet-age. They have not been taxed properly or effectively, have played the various European legal and taxing jurisdictions off against each other, and have often treated their employees shabbily.
It should not be forgotten that large-scale capitalist enterprises profit from mass immigration, which provides millions of new consumers, i.e. potential customers, lowers rates of pay, and helps to create, in the American phrase, a “hardscrabble” society which favours finance-capitalism.
It will be recalled that Adolf Hitler referred to “the Aryan ideal of creative work”. As against that, there stand the two pillars of non-Aryan time-employment— on the one hand, various forms of coerced work, ranging from outright slavery to “wage slavery” doing mechanistic labour or running after numbers and/or money; on the other hand, idleness (either unemployment with no cultural or other opportunities and little money, or the luxurious idleness of the decadent wealthy).
Transnational and Other Large Enterprises Promoting the Multiracial Society
There has been a long-term conspiracy to destroy the racial basis of Europe. This goes back at least as far as Coudenhove-Kalergi and his notorious Plan. The international conspiracy is heavily embedded in the so-called “European Union”. One only has to look at the last few years’ “migration-invasion” of Europe. It has been encouraged by all the usual System suspects, from Yvette Cooper and other MPs of the UK, to Angela Merkel, to Jewish groups who have actually organized “aid” to bring “refugees” to the EU and UK! One active example has been the Labour Party “peer” and Jew “lord” Alfred Dubs (an expenses cheat, apart from anything else), who himself came to the UK in 1938 as a child of 6 (his father having bravely fled from Prague and abandoned his family).
There again, when the flow of migrant-invaders was not fast enough for the purposes of the conspiracy, Angela Merkel made her (in fact illegal under EU law) invitation to “refugees” to invade Europe, triggering an even greater and sudden influx from Africa and Asia.
Equally egregiously, we have seen so-called “humanitarian” organizations and actual navies (such as the British) ferrying migrant-invaders to Europe across the Mediterranean. This was presented to the UK/EU public as “rescue at sea” when the reality is that many of the migrant-invaders were picked up by EU naval vessels or those of NGOs only a few miles from the coast of Libya and ferried to Italy, France etc.
There has been a massive campaign in mainland Europe to make the migrant-invaders (mostly young or young-ish men) acceptable, particularly to girls in Germany, Scandinavia etc. Government agencies in Germany, Sweden etc have even put out sex instruction booklets showing cartoon Africans having sex with blonde European girls in various positions! We must be clear about this: this is treason to Europe’s future. The harshest penalties are appropriate. Those who put out such propaganda are evil and must face justice.
Turning to the UK (I do not know whether it applies elsewhere; it probably does), we see that every or every second or third TV ad now shows a mixed-race couple (usually black man with white woman) and/or family, as if that is the norm in the real world. Of course it is not, but it is that kind of demography that is the aim of the thought-manipulators in the msm, ad agencies etc. How many of those are, shall we say, “members of a certain tribe”? Many, to say the least. Such television advertisements do notreflect society as it now is, but attempt to create such a mixed-race society by normalizing the production of mixed-race children, and normalizing the mixed-race family in the collective mindset.
This admixture to the European DNA is justified to fools by the idea that Europeans are not having enough children, so that the “Great Replacement” of Europeans by non-Europeans (via migration-invasion and high birth rate) in Europe is somehow justified. That kind of dummy reasoning leaves out the fact that Europeans are specifically discouraged from having children (especially with each other): promotion of birth-control, abortion, the LGBT-whatever narrative, all of which making it impossible economically — and even socially— for women to be stay-at-home mothers, and making it impossible economically for most European-race men to afford to support a family through paid work.
Resistance
The present situation has to be reversed. Safe zones throughout Europe, leading to the creation of germinal ethnostates, must be part of the solution. After 2022, a New Order will start to arise in Europe. We shall be the masters then.
Ian Robert Millard 