Tag Archives: Ushakov

Diary Blog, 3 December 2025, including a few brief thoughts around the year 1940

Afternoon music

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Peel]

Tweets seen

Israel-puppet “Tommy” seems unable to distinguish between a definitely-decided-upon plan of invasion and a mere contingency plan. The “plan” to invade the UK, Seelowe (Sealion), was a contingency plan. Under the right circumstances, it might have been actioned, and enough resources put in to make it feasible, but that never happened in or after 1940.

Hitler’s grand strategy, as of 1939-40, was either for the German Reich to join with the then-great British Empire (which Hitler admired) to rule much of the world (Britain as a seaborne empire and the Reich as one ruling northern Eurasia), or for there to be an uninvolved peace between the Reich and Britain (and also between the Reich and defeated France, along with its own widely-scattered colonies), giving the Reich the great possibility of defeating Sovietism and achieving huge Lebensraum (living-space) in the east of Europe and European Russia (especially the rich black-earth agricultural lands of the Ukraine, a country the same size as France).

The “Battle of Britain” arose out of the battle for France, which ended in German victory that same summer of 1940. The Germans were focussed on destroying the RAF airfields both in Northern France and in the southeast of England.

Why could German forces not invade England after the Fall of France? Several reasons.

Firstly, Hitler ideally wanted the British Empire as an ally or, failing that, as a hands-off bystander, not as a defeated enemy.

Secondly, and more practically (and as the British successes of the Battle of Britain proved), the Luftwaffe was simply unable to attain air supremacy, leaving any invasion fleet open to merciless RAF and Royal Navy (Fleet Air Arm) attack from the air.

Thirdly, the German army and navy were unable to source sufficient carrying or ferrying capacity to land an invasion force large enough to be likely to be able to establish and hold a bridgehead in the southeast of England.

In fact, this was known to the British government at the time; Churchill was well aware of it, but it suited him to keep the British population in a state of invasion-fear and panic, as well as spy-mania (the view, popularly held, that German spies were everywhere— yet another war myth only dispelled several decades later).

Seelowe (Sealion), was only a contingency plan, but not a merely “paper” one. It might, under more favourable circumstances, have been upgraded to a genuine operational plan ready to be put into effect. Never happened.

I was unaware that “Tommy Robinson” took an interest in WW2 grand strategy; or are (((those))) behind him the ones who take an interest?

More tweets

For a brief happy moment, I thought that that referred to the UK…

At best parasites, usually criminal or with criminal links, sometimes also terrorists.

Forget prison sentences. Wall. Squad. End.

British people are homeless while hostile and/or useless parasite untermenschen take much of the available social housing. A million more, every year, are arriving. Something will have to give. Society is starting to break apart in this country.

Those who know me know that farmers (eg in the UK) are not my favourite people, as a general group, but it is obvious that fake “Labour” is hitting them for one reason only (apart from grabbing money), which is that the farming community is almost entirely English/British, i.e. white Northern European.

Labour, on the other hand, has become a party dependent on non-white voting blocs: the Muslims, of various sorts, and blacks. I have not seen the opinion polls for a few days, but the last couple I saw had Labour on 15% and 20%. Pretty clear that very few white English people are now going to vote Labour.

Wall. Squad. End.

Quite.

There is little point in Reform doing a deal with the plainly-disappearing Con Party. At present, few Con MPs are likely to survive the next election.

My own use of Electoral Calculus comes to a slightly different result: Reform about 379 seats, Labour 82, LibDems 61, SNP 44, Cons 35, Greens 13 [etc]. A very solid Reform majority.

Who’s afraid of the big bad wolf?” (arguende)

Zelensky’s ricebowl is about to be taken away.

The ludicrous “Your Party” (currently opinion-polling at somewhere below 1%) is, in microcosm, the alliance seen more widely between the more “socialist” white Labourites and the Muslim (not infrequently, Islamist) voting bloc. It could never work. Ideologically, the two main components of “Your Party” have little if anything in common.

Even were the above to be left aside, the fact that “Your Party” has split before even having been fully launched will turn off 99% of voters. I never thought that “Your Party” (which may be renamed something else in the end, maybe “Party McParty Face Party”) would score more than a couple of Westminster seats, but now it looks as though it will just be Corbyn himself sitting there.

Of course, as that scribbler says, the Muslim voting bloc will not be going away, if only because somewhere around 11% of the whole UK population (no-one seems to know the real figure) is now Muslim.

More music

[The Castle, Nuremberg]

More tweets

Disgraceful, but par for the course in the contemporary UK.

I was sorry to see today that that young man has been incarcerated for his tweets (as I understand was the case; I am unfamiliar with the details of the matter, except that it seems to have been instigated by the usual pack of malicious Jew-Zionist fanatics).

A Crown Court case, but Morgan apparently pleaded guilty. Often a mistake. He may well have been better off taking his chances with a British jury (while they still exist).

I remember Morgan’s tweets from a couple of years ago; while I did not agree with all of them, many were worth seeing, and no-one should be imprisoned for socio-political tweeting, particularly when the prosecution is basically a Jewish-Zionist put-up job.

[“Got called a Nazi for being against trans ideology. Got called a Nazi for saying the illegals are a problem. Got called a Nazi for saying that Islam isn’t compatible with the West. Got called a Nazi for saying legals are scamming our visa system and government systems in general. Got called a Nazi for not wanting the English to become a minority in their own country. Got called a Nazi for calling for Remigration. Got called a Nazi for questioning foreign influence in our government and institutions. I really don’t care. Words are meaningless. England for the English. Britain for the British. Europe for Europeans.”]

Brava!

[“The government intends to replace most trials by jury with trial by judge alone. A judge from Leeds dealing with criminal cases, Recorder Simon Myerson KC, repeated on here the claim that I was the scum of the earth who was responsible for someone’s suicide. The claim was entirely false and my view is that Myerson is an obnoxious buffoon. I infer that Myerson was irrationally prejudiced against me, possibly over my views on Israel or because I annoyed his mate Mark Lewis. In what was an essentially secret process between judges, Myerson was investigated by another judge from Leeds, Lady Justice King. Despite the obnoxious and false claim, Myerson was only given a slap on the wrist by the Lady Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor (a politician). Myerson continued sitting as a judge. Nice work if you can get it. The government intends to take away most decisions on whether someone is guilty of a serious criminal offence from a jury of 12 ordinary people. The plan is to give the decision to a judge alone, perhaps someone like Myerson. No doubt there are other judges like him, each with their own prejudices. Juries of 12 ordinary people play an essential role in ensuring justice is done and seen to be done. Public participation both legitimises the criminal process and functions as an essential check on state power. Abolishing trial by jury will lead to many more miscarriages of justice. No matter what your politics are, what is proposed is genuinely terrifying and cannot be allowed to happen.”]

Of course, Myerson was sacked in the end, not so long after he was appointed Recorder (p/t criminal judge).

Late music

[Arnold Bocklin, The Surf]

Treason is a Matter of Timing

ds5

“Treason is a matter of timing”, Talleyrand is supposed to have said. A remark which perhaps goes down better in some countries than others, though really it has universal application. I suppose that it has two basic elements: treason; timing.

We all think that we know what “treason” means, but in fact there have been various definitions throughout the world and throughout history. We hear, in Robin Hood films and the comments columns of newspapers, the term “high treason”, for example, but outside the ranks of (some) lawyers, linguists and historians, the “high” seems just hyperbole to most people. The meaning, to most, can be said to be “caviar to the general”, above their heads.

In Germany and other Germanophone countries, there were traditionally two types of treason, Landesverrat [“Country Treason”] and the more serious Hochverrat [“High Treason”].

In fact, in the past, the main difference between the two, from the point of view of the captured perpetrator, was that he would be put to death in a somewhat less unpleasant manner for “Landesverrat“! Cold comfort, perhaps.

High Treason was doing such acts as to take over the State, or place the State under the rulership of another state; the lesser kind of treason would be to do acts such as helping the enemies of the State, giving secret information to those enemies, fighting on their side etc.

I suppose that one could, cynically, add the word “attempt” before the above “to take over the State”, inasmuch as a successful attempt to take over a state is not regarded as “treason” by the successful new rulers, and so the State itself, but as merely an incident of history. Only unsuccessful (“high”) traitors are punished; the successful ones punish others…

Other countries have other definitions of treason.

The British law of treason is entirely statutory and has been so since the Treason Act 1351 (25 Edw. 3 St. 5 c. 2). The Act is written in Norman French, but is more commonly cited in its English translation.

The Treason Act 1351 has since been amended several times, and currently provides for four categories of treasonable offences, namely:

  • “when a man doth compass or imagine the death of our lord the King, or of our lady his Queen or of their eldest son and heir”;
  • “if a man do violate the King’s companion, or the King’s eldest daughter unmarried, or the wife of the King’s eldest son and heir”;[28][29]
  • “if a man do levy war against our lord the King in his realm, or be adherent to the King’s enemies in his realm, giving to them aid and comfort in the realm, or elsewhere”; and
  • “if a man slea the chancellor, treasurer, or the King’s justices of the one bench or the other, justices in eyre, or justices of assise, and all other justices assigned to hear and determine, being in their places, doing their offices”.

Another Act, the Treason Act 1702 (1 Anne stat. 2 c. 21), provides for a fifth category of treason, namely:

  • “if any person or persons … shall endeavour to deprive or hinder any person who shall be the next in succession to the crown … from succeeding after the decease of her Majesty (whom God long preserve) to the imperial crown of this realm and the dominions and territories thereunto belonging”.

[Wikipedia]

These “heads of treason” are now largely of historical interest, and the acts commonly charged via other laws, but it will be recalled that, after the 1994 book, Princess in Love, by the Jewess Anna Pasternak, about the affair between Princess Diana and the (by then, ex-) Guards officer James Hewitt, was published, an enterprising reporter from the Sun “newspaper” tried to make a citizen’s arrest of Hewitt for treason, for “violating the wife of the King’s eldest son and heir”! That would have made for an interesting incident, but Hewitt kept his front door firmly shut.

Treason. Were the officers involved in the 20 July 1944 plot to kill Hitler “traitors”? Hitler thought so! German law (as it was in 1944) also said yes. In fact, I am not convinced that German law as it now is would acquit the plotters (though I concede that my knowledge of German law is at best fragmentary). I blogged once or twice about those events:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/07/20/the-20th-of-july-2019-thoughts/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/07/20/the-20th-of-july/

These matters have been discussed more in Germany and France than they have in the UK. Nuances of loyalty have been tested more on the European mainland. The events around the Reich and the Second World War led to shades of meaning not always understood in the UK. In France during WW2, there was a spectrum of loyalties ranging from monarchist (!) and extreme conservative, through Gaullist and moderate conservative, to social democrat, to socialist, to Communist (pro-Stalin) and Trotskyist. Not all were hostile to Vichy and/or Germany. To give just one example, Francois Mitterand was supposedly both a “resistantand part of the Vichy government, peripherally.

Some Frenchmen were not only pro-Vichy but pro-National Socialist. A relative few, perhaps 11,000, volunteered for SS Charlemagne:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33rd_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_Charlemagne_(1st_French)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_de_la_Mazi%C3%A8re

Honourable pro-German Frenchmen such as Christian de la Maziere were not, in their own eyes, “traitors”, any more than were, in their own eyes, German officers such as von Stauffenberg.

Of course, the masses like simplicity. In the UK, they were told that Mosley was a traitor (though of course never tried as such), and I suppose that a number of simple people still believe what they have heard based on that wartime propaganda.

Take another case: “George Blake” (born Behar, a half-Jew). Traitor? Many would say so, on the basis that he was in British service and even had a British passport:

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

Blake himself would say not a traitor, his allegiance being to the Communist ideal.

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2017/dec/08/cell-mates-a-good-traitor-the-extraordinary-life-of-george-blake-the-spy-who-went-into-the-cold

These nuances seem rather un-British, but they would not perplex the spymasters of the 16th Century, such as Walsingham, used as he and his opponents were to ideological allegiance crossing national or state lines; in that era, allegiance based, usually, on religion.

What about timing? Well, of course, sometimes timing, as Talleyrand expresses, is what makes treason, treason. The officers who plotted against Hitler and survived became acceptable in postwar West Germany.

Timing is important in so many things. I was rereading a book I had not seen for about 25 years, In the Gunsight of the KGB. A quite compelling story of how a professor of Marxism-Leninism, Ushakov, was arrested for anti-Soviet agitation (being a dissident), released by administrative error, then fled to avoid re-arrest and certain long imprisonment. The half of the book that deals with his flight and then escape across the heavily-guarded Soviet-Turkish border is a good read; the rest, which deals with his views about Sovietism and upcoming events, is rather poor.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gunsight-KGB-Alexander-Ushakov/dp/0394562844

Timing is especially instructive here: Ushakov fled in 1984, if memory serves. Now, today, we know that had he avoided arrest in some lawful way, he would have been able to travel freely in about 7 years. Had he been imprisoned, he would have been released by the late 1980s if not before. He, however, did not know that!

How could he have guessed that the whole Soviet system (which he still fears in his book, regarding it as almost all-powerful and able to hoodwink the West easily: the Golitsyn syndrome) would crash to nothing after 1989, the State itself being dissolved by 1991?

In fact, Ushakov was unlucky also in that his book came out in August 1989, only a couple of months before the collapse of the Berlin Wall, followed by that of socialism across Eastern and Central Europe and then in the Soviet Union itself. Ushakov’s book was therefore obsolescent by the time it hit the bookshelves (though the adventurous first half is still, even today, of interest). Ushakov therefore fell into obscurity, whereas he might well otherwise have followed, in a minor way, in the footsteps of more famous dissidents, escapees and defectors, such as Bukovsky.

We all stand within the bounds of time and space. At present, our world seems almost immutable, but beware the hubris of thinking that our Western society will continue forever (“The End of History” fallacy). In fact, I should say that there is every chance that the world we know will not be around in its present form for much longer.

Forget treason. Concentrate on timing.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/01/26/the-tide-is-coming-in-reflections-on-the-possible-end-of-our-present-civilization-and-what-might-follow/

Notes

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landesverrat

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hochverrat

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason#United_Kingdom

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/9812978/Anna-Pasternak-I-met-my-Wizard-ina-yurt…-sobbing-my-heart-out.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2257828/Anna-Pasternak-The-ridiculed-writer-linked-Dianas-lover.html

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Francois-Mitterrand

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ashes-Honour-Christian-Maziere/dp/0855230398/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gunsight-KGB-Alexander-Ushakov/dp/0394562844

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

http://antisoviet.imwerden.net/bukovsky_v_to_build.pdf