There's info which is no one else's biz ... and info which needs declaring

There's certain baseline information a political analyst must give in order to be taken seriously. From the days of Richard Nixon, the question constantly asked was: "How much did he know and when did he know it?"

Dates are important, names less so ... the crucial thing, if it's political analysis of troubled areas, is the "tribe" he or she is from and if he's a normie, dissident, lone wolf, any of that.  When you see a name such as Shanaka Anslem Perera, then a reader needs to know "where he's coming from" in the sense of what are his tribal affiliations?

He can argue that he's "independent", so the question is irrelevant.  Sorry ... no it's not irrelevant, and that's borne out by one of the core search questions people ask ... just that ... what are his tribal affiliations?

I just wrote, over on X, above his analysis of the Hormuz situation:

There's a scholastic etiquette in this field as to how info is posted ... your background is deliberately and completely hidden, which renders your analysis useless. You could be Muslim, Tamil, anything. It is crucial to always show your background In political analysis.

On X, many fly their flag or flags in their name-line, which certainly helps. Seasoned campaigners on the antiWoke side give much out over time but newbies often hide crucial information as "protection" from being hit.

I quite agree that name, address, phone, bank details are sacrosanct ... there are sections of govt which must have them though and it's also clear from GovdotUK and Companies House that privacy there is shoddy to say the least. There is incompetence, then there is deliberate incompetence ... oh, sorrr-ee, our bad, lessons have been learnt.

All of that is one thing ... but political or religious analysis of a hot potato is quite another ... to be taken seriously, esp. as this man wishes to be ... see his Amazon book ... he must background why he thinks that way.

Across at Unherdables, I'm about to run an analysis by this man of the Hormuz and related situations, brought by "one of ours" over there.

Why do that, given his lack of honesty in giving key background? The analysis itself seems sound to me, seems independent in this case, of affiliation. Whatever tribal affiliation he has ... he seems to have migrated to Australia from Sri Lanka afa I can see and is viewing things from there.

Another is the ongoing Erika (1988) v Candace (1989) thing. Last evening, Candace came out with a defence of EK, strangely ... namely that the FBI wiretap (audio), from 2006, was a dud factor in the debate.

Ethnicity in this case seems quite subordinate to religious affiliation ... which particular cult or mish-mash are they? And how committed?

And what of Ben Habib? Which bkgd is vital to ustd "where he's coming from"?

The rise of the Karen Stasi in 2020 and the new unvaxxed serfdom

Very tricky, messy post today from me, cyber-logistically. It takes one of Jacqui Deevoy's posts she put on X but to be legible, I have to run it column under column, from screenshots, using the "Read more" line.  It's about that time of Vaxxes and lockdowns, lockups, the way people's nastiness came out, the rise of the term "Karen" to describe the type.

It's also about how the authorities, who knew exactly what they were planning in 2015 and again at Johns Hopkins in October, 2018, then gulled a public who were perfectly happy, in order to save themselves, to incarcerate us disbelievers on the say-so of the globo-PTB, the Gateses, Faucis and Fergusons, Whittys, Hancocks ... to make our lives second class, miserable, using the Karen Stasi to support them.

It's about the TikTok, choreographed ward dancing in empty hospitals.

The Establishment Will NEVER Admit They Got This One Wrong

Essential to the case against Jeremy Bamber is the question of whether or not a silencer was used in the killings, then removed from the rifle and hidden. If so, it was argued in court, Sheila Caffell was clearly not the killer.

It's something I've come to belive more and more, the more I read about this case.  

When Justice Drake, who died in 2014, said the silencer only contained blood belonging to Caffell he misled the jury.

And shockingly, that isn't enough these days to ensutre an appeal succeeds. Nor was it just one slip. 

There was also a second blood group found in the baffles that didn’t match any of the deceased’s blood groups, or Bamber’s, although it was a potential match for David Boutflour. The jury were told none of these facts. On multiple occasions during his summing up, Justice Drake said that the blood in the silencer was a match “for Sheila alone”.

And when you look at the performance of Essex Police, the incompetence of the judge is matched and surpassed! 

Essex police announced that they had found a “heavily bloodstained silencer hours after the gruesome massacre” at a press conference on 16 September 1985. This was reported in at least a dozen newspapers, including on the front page of the Daily Mirror. The police now claim they never said this.

Yes, and they have never faced any consequences for such a blatent lie. So what else to do but go on lying: 

At the trial, David Boutflour said the police had not seized his silencer before the trial. But in the New Yorker’s epic 2024 investigation into the Bamber case, he told journalist Heidi Blake that they had taken it away for “months and months” before the trial, supporting the claim that Essex police were in possession of more than one moderator before the 1986 trial, despite their 40 years of denials.

This is why the Establishment will never, ever grant an appeal; this case shows, perhaps more than any other, the abject incompetence of the tools and institutions of the establishment. 

The only chance he has of the authorities admitting the trial was flawed will be after he and everyone else in the case is long dead.

"Handful of senators don't pass legislation"

In the US in March, 2026, the Senate is holding out, under its corrupt "leader" against what the majority of voters wanted ... so what's changed since July, 1965?

Here's the second half of the lyrics by P.F. Sloan:

Interesting twist on "and marches alone can't bring integration" in that the overwhelming young, white population were certainly for that pipedream, whereas the blacks were after something quite different.

F fwd to 2026 and look at the streets and what's being visited upon the "indigenous society constructors" since the 1600s.

And blocking the way, as ever, are The Senate and their paymasters.

Well, Catherine, Do You Really Want An Answer?

 Because I don't think you'll like it...

While it's a joyous thing when the lanyard class gets its noses rubbed in the glorious diversity and lack of public decorum they are so keen to subject the rest of us to, it's a bit of a wasted opportunity if they seemingly don't learn anything frtom it. And Catherine doesn't appear to have learned anything from it.

Last Friday, the local councillor rang the doorbell, doing impromptu and – for me at least – unprecedented doorstepping, so I told her what had happened. She looked appropriately revolted and carried on. The council’s first priority, she said, after children’s services, was parcel theft. That’s great. But while it’s possible to get big post diverted to the newsagent, it’s rare our short walk to school doesn’t become an obstacle course of lethal paving, crack dealers and stool samples, not all of them animal.

So what are you suggesting to her? Remigration? More cops on the beat?  

Perhaps some public loos could be rebuilt, I said. To give people privacy for those last two activities, at least.

Of course! God forbid the druggies and public defecators lack privacy for their antisocial actions, eh, Catherine? 

Whatever might have caused this?

By and large, we're not doctors and even if we were, there's immense pressure from someone or some organised directives from above ... there've been various whistleblowing nurses who've gone online, there are also reports from up and down each country, plus footage.

Against that, yes, there are trolls, using reusable footage of something else, to enable "community notes" to declare them fake, therefore ALL evidence is fake.  These people are also out in force.  Yet we've seen those planes before the total grey cloud covered many parts of the country ... we get the reports every day:

I'm in the north-west and we get the same. Some will mock: "Duh, it's winter, it's March," same shots appearing in the US and downunder via our fellow onliners.  It's harder to argue the thick cloud cover in Britain but far easier to report the crisscross chemtrails, photos abounded.

Which brings us to a type of mind which flatly refuses to acknowledge, to even look up.  Sometime back, a delivery driver was chatting, I asked him to look up at the noughts and crosses pattern of three or four planes ... "Off on holidays," he smiled.  Either he did not want to appear foolish (same with the "racism" slur) or he could do without any potential aggravation.

A friend of mine said a few years back: "I don't want to go there." Her choice, fair dos.  A lady two days ago wrote:

Yes it does.  But what about if you were to see this sort of thing:

... or this:

Her migraine might be from anything though, might it not?  But what if many report nose running after being outside a length of time, what of me always being ill after being outside longer than half an hour?  What of persistent cough?

Well yes, it could well be from the winter, from food additives, from meds, medical rehab ... yes, it might be.  Up and down the country, in every country in the west with internet?

🍿🍿🍿

"And once again I ask, what made you think there'd be a living in sheep?"

While most upland farmers still keep sheep on their land, the changes here have been mirrored across not just the Dales but the entire British farming industry. The shepherd's life has never been an easy one, but for many it's getting tougher and more difficult than ever to make a profit.People who work sheep know that it's some of the hardest farming there is. A former shepherd once told me that sheep are only ever trying to do one of three things: "Escape, or die, or escape and then immediately die."

Mark Knopfler put it better, frankly: 

.

Globally, lamb consumption is expected to grow by 15% between now and 2032, according to a report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the Food and Agriculture Organization. But changing tastes in the UK mean mutton, made from mature sheep, is no longer eaten in the same volume it was by previous generations and lamb has seemingly gone from a weekly staple to a meat more often eaten on special occasions, with "white meat" like chicken being increasingly chosen over lamb and beef.

And that't a pity, becase large parts of the country are suitable for nothing else and have, in fact been shaped by centuries of upland sheep farming. Of course, there are always those so shortsighted or blinded by spite they can applaud this:

Extremely tight margins mean growing numbers of younger people can't see a future in farming.And some welcome the decline in sheep farming. "Fewer sheep means less suffering […] a sheep's life in the wool and mutton industries belies our reputation as a nation of animal lovers," says Mimi Bekhechi, senior vice president at the UK's People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta).

But trust the BBC to see a posssible upide, thanks to their imported pets: 

But there is a ray of sunshine for the industry, according to Phil Stocker from the National Sheep Association. He believes the domestic market for sheep meat is going to keep driving forward, in large part thanks to demand from the increasing number of Muslim people in the UK.

.Sheep or Muslims, what a dilemma.

Those whom we trusted

Not exactly news ... most deep divers knew "of" it but maybe not the fine detail.

Issues of ethnicity

... which really do need sorting. This is an expanded version of yesterday's post at UHC, with added confusion.  First, some screenshots:

Let's sort "Britishness" first.  In one sense, Mahmoud is right ... the UK is a political construct, whereas Briton, Celt, Anglo-Saxon, Dane ... they're ethnicities. Mahmoud claims to be part of Westminster's political construct and as far as that theatre goes, it's what the Whitehall and Westmibster clowns say.

However, certain invading ethnicities are predatory and destructive to the others, and that is the aspect so many do not want to face up to, even in the society's death throes.

There's a bizarre unreality going on here. I know some ladies who are dead against this invading cult or religion but it contains a few ethnicities ... that is, people from various nations who themselves were swamped in the past by the predatory cult.

Yet they staunchly stick with a party, under Farage-Yusuf et al which, along with LibLabConGreenFabianUniparty are determined to try to "coexist" with the destructive cult.

Why on earth?  Why?  It's a sort of middle-class "respectability", a sort of nicely-nicely "embracing of the alligator as it eats you".  It's not sane.  It's a sort of wishful thinking, a hoping against hope, with no plan to escape it.

It's an inability to face reality.

Don't let govt or bureaucrats get their claws into anything vital

Most interesting:

Things work far better for us if no "planning" is involved whatever.