When abuser enablers cast themselves as angels for good

Before even getting to the issue itself, the use of tactics is apparent - the statement by the child porn enablers is presented in white, with black typeface, front and centre, with its weasel words, whilst that of detractors is cast to one side in a blackened sidebar to the right.  

That is quite similar to casting Trump as orange man by excessive manipulation of colour, an old tactic. I call that many things but two things it is not is transparency and fair dealing. That's before we get to the actual shadow banning.  These people are criminals, inc. those who "resigned".

"Trust and Safety"?  "Digital safety"? Then it gets to what they mean by that ... reducing "hate speech".  What the hell does that mean?  Read on:

Firstly take the lady Code of Vets.  What was her crime against these three, plus that first cow sacked?  She attacked the treatment of veterans, ex service personnel, too many on the streets, homeless, when govt should at least have looked after them. She and fellow ex service personnel coordinated help for those vets.  

That was a crime in the eyes of that gang of four ... yet read that blurb in white background and they'd have you believe they were working for "good".  If you go into the background of that lady, a grandmother for goodness sake, you get quite a different picture to that presented by the gang of four.

And there it is above ... they were happily allowing Twitter to be used for child porn and all sorts of sicko, inhuman things, whilst banning, suppressing, people such as PD railing against child abuse. Go to the post on pizzagate, go to comments and there you see PD's works and those of many who concur.

Those decrying child abuse enablers such as Hewitt and Harman for example (PIE) ... what does this gang of four do?  It bans the whistleblowers and calls it "hate speech".  Who are the disingenuous here?  Community guidelines?  Enabling child abuse?  Systematic, global, elite child abuse?

To my mind, it's too kind speaking only of prison.  And they know it full well.

Verily, whoever said “you’ll know them by their fruits” knew what he was talking about. People … we really must look beyond the woven spell of weasel words and look at the fruits of these people’s mindsets and actions … at what they’re really about.

We've Seen How Other Economies 'Succeed', Julia And Winsome...

The cost of living crisis affects all of us, but it doesn’t affect us equally. One of us struggles to afford the spiralling price of the weekly shop, while the other can shop as before, unaffected by rising food prices. One of us fears turning on the heating to keep her house warm, while the other can heat her home and travel for some winter sun without a second thought.

This isn’t how an economy succeeds.

...and while it might be good for the wall-building trade, I don't much fancy it in my country.

Instead of squeezing low earners, the chancellor should have matched his actions to his rhetoric and taxed wealth at the top.

Here you go, Julia! If you don't think you're taxed enough, the nice people at the Treasury will gladly accept your voluntary payment at that link.

Do be a dear, though, and come back to the 'Guardian' and tell us all when you've done it, eh?

Person of the year and Condemned of the year

1/7 The “news” of Zelensky’s “Person of the year” award (Poty) triggered a raw-throated guffaw in many. Poty, instead of the mass-murdering, money-laundering creep he is … it’s in the same area as Kathleen Hobbs supervising and eventually certifying her own election by shutting out voters who were certain not to vote for her.

2/7 I wrote that just then because if you strongly disagree with what it says, its tone, then odds are you’ll not like my suggesting we run our own awards and see what happens.  I suggest we run Person of the Year but also its diametric opposite … Condemned of the Year … and not have it as any particular site’s awards but in general, across, say, our sites, Gab, Twitter, via email, however you like to send your entries.

It started last evening, suggested end date is next Tuesday evening. As some bunny will have to collate all votes, best we get some structure to it and thus I suggest:

3/7 Those you are nominating for the two awards

1. In each case, nominate three people only, max, for each award.  
2. It must be a person, a human who lived on earth in 2022, not an organisation nor group.
3. It need not be three but no more than three, and in no particular order, seen as equally good or equally bad.
4. You can nominate for one award but not the other, or both, or none, as is your wont.  
5. You can change your entry any number of times up till the end.
6. It finishes Tuesday evening, December 13th, results the following day.

4/7 Those nominating

1. You do need one moniker only, real or invented, not changed thereafter.
2. It can be family members but remember - each entrant must have a moniker, real or made up, voting only once.

5/7 Method

1. I'll advertise it on Twitter, Gab, at sites I post at, you can too, wherever.
2. They are not any site’s awards per se, just "the" awards. 
3. Entries can be sent any which way - by comment at a site, then that blogger sends the numbers to me, or by friend, by email, telephone, skype, whatever.
4. There's no list to choose from.
5. I'll continue to advertise it until Tuesday evening.
6. There'll be interim reports.
7. Results will be just overall numbers, not anyone's moniker, next Wednesday.

6/7 Person of the Year

Any field of endeavour but please describe lesser known people and why you're nominating them, no need to do that with well known figures.

7/7 Condemned of the Year

What they're sentenced to need not be specified, just that they are condemned.  Feel free to say why though.

In both awards, although it concerns 2022, they may have been doing this a long while.

Any questions if unsure ... please ask. Entries close next Tuesday evening.

Remember, 'They Work For You'...

...while the police, who won't bother to turn up for your burglary unless the criminals are injured in the course of the crime, well, they work for them, clearly:

Retired teacher Fran Swan and yoga instructor Beverley Glock both tried to register for a meeting in a nearby village, hosted by West Dorset MP Chris Loder. But after they submitted questions about sewage in the online registration form, Mr Loder wrote to say the meeting was specifically for villagers in Chideok - but said he would 'see what he could do'.

And what could he do to ensure democracy was upheld? Well...

And at 7.30pm last Thursday, the night before the meeting was due to take place, a police officer arrived at Ms Swan's home to ask the 70-year-old about her intentions.

What a snivelling little weasel of a man. And what a misstep by the police. 

And it gets worse: 

Mr Loder told the Mail it was necessary for him to inform the police about 'anything out of the ordinary' as he and his family have received threats in the past.

The Tory MP added that it was 'unusual to receive the interest of two people who were not invited to attend a localised surgery', and cited the murder of Sir David Amess who was stabbed to death at a constituency surgery in 2021.

But not by a retired yoga instructor and teacher from a nearby village, Chris, so even the bumpkin farce down there in Dorset should have performed a better risk assessment.

A Dorset Police spokesman said officers from its neighbourhood policing team 'wished to understand the intentions' of the women 'to ensure that public safety was preserved and any lawful protest could be facilitated'.

He added: 'Dorset Police would like to apologise if the attendance of a police officer to the home address of individuals going to the meeting caused alarm.'

I suspect that was exactly what they wanted to cause.  

Stupidity as a genuine factor in the malaise

Guest post by Lord T.

[JH: The first video displays in full … the others will be shown one by one over a few days.]

This is the stupidity stuff:

1. Everyone underestimates the number of stupid people
2. The probability that a person is stupid is independent of any other characteristic
3. A stupid person causes loses to others without gains to themselves (consistently)
4. Non stupid people underestimates the danger of the stupid
5. Stupid people are the most dangerous people

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O9FFrLpinQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFL5NoM9GVE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn8atxGyb-k

Looks Like The Mermaid Is On The Hook At Last...

...time to get the gaff out, and land her:

The commission said it was yet to draw any conclusions and the escalation of the investigation was not indicative of a finding of wrongdoing.

Sure, sure... 

It is not clear whether the unexpected and unexplained resignation of the charity’s chief executive, Susie Green, on 25 November was prompted by the commission’s decision to launch a statutory inquiry, which was made public on 28 November.

Sure, sure...  

Mermaids has faced heightened public scrutiny in recent months. It is involved in court hearings after launching an appeal against the Charity Commission’s awarding of charitable status to LGB Alliance, which has been critical of “gender ideology’’. It is understood to be the first time one charity has attempted to strip legal status from another.

They always overreach, don't they? It's always that which brings them down at last... 

Forever playing catch up

This post has been rewritten and added to since yesterday.

The imagery I wanted to use was n*g**r in a woodpile but of course that's too -ist ... I was trying to describe false prophets but that's too Jesus-freak for those with psycho-blockage over Christendom, even coming up to Christmas, so it needs some other terminology to get the idea across.

What the article I was reading was saying was that the baddies watch for any revelations to accidentally go public, they then put out knowingly-wrong information, immediately accusing us of disinformation ... the aim being of course to confuse, confound and discredit before it gets off the ground.  

That takes massive organisation and a legion of false lackeys in place, all having drunk the kool-aid.  Seems totally implausible as it’s straight out of conspiracy theory 101 and yet I’ve quoted Senstor William Jenner a few times from 1954, where he said that that was exactly the case, quoting examples at the time.

Point he made was that this vast organisation was notable, not for its ideology as such … steal that which is not yours … but for the very tight, disciplined, interlocked organisation, by which they stay ahead of the unherdable cattery of conservatism, which never protects itself, forever two steps behind.

In short … the baddies have the game sewn up with any new outrage upon us … sewn up before it’s ever sprung on us … they know whom to immediately marginalise, suppress, mock, incarcerate on spurious grounds, they’ve factored any opposition in and have bought off most of it with trillions in ill-gotten wealth, largely on porn, paedo and drugs.

They ensure the average Joe or Jo has not the slightest idea about any of it ... neither about the gilets jaunes in France, the truckers in Ottawa, the millions in the streets in Brazil, the 3000 farmers driven off their farms in the Netherlands, govt sending heavy gear to topple the tractors blocking the roads … the average Joe (Jo) is oblivious.  All he’s told is what’s needed is change, change, change. The MSM is bought, lock, stock and barrel.

Anyone remotely liable to expose something, e.g. Elon with Twitter … they use that same game plan of blending into any truths he might come out with, the kookiest things he’s said, e.g. about Mars.

Similarly, in this article last evening which had actually been lifted from someone called Dr. Josh, the hatred was for someone called Stew Peters.  I immediately searched for some reference to Dr. Josh and yep ... there it was.  When I’d pointed out previously that one was Jewish and the other Christian-radical, a revamped sort of bible-belt hardliner, I was taken to task by one of our own ... yes and what's wrong with being Jewish?  Did I have a problem with that?

In strictly biblical terms, no prob at all ... there's a reference to those who call themselves Jews and who are not.  So who are this other lot who are not?  Some have called them Khazars or Ashkenazis. Ladies and gentlemen, this is quicksand, it's a minefield.  In our Julia's words ... I'm not going there (down that path).  You'd need a total grounding in the past two thousand and a bit years to make sense of it.  

But what is bleedin' obvious is that the baddies are able to identify what known dissidents and agitators such as us are going to come out with, e.g. bloodclots, e.g. many other undeniable phenomena such as young people suddenly dying ... and as the article said, they have "plants" or controlled opposition within the vanguard ready and waiting to make "highly respected" conservative noises, using detail which dazzles the masses. Controlled opposition like Ben Shapiro or anyone with a Dr. Title slapped before his name.

And they get him on the left- field nonsense, which immediately damns the whole in the public eye.

A good example was many years ago when Dr. Colin Ross exposed the psychiatric old boys network ... names like Jolyon West, Sid Gottlieb and many others ... Dr. Ewen Cameron, Dr. Selwyn Leeks ... it goes on ... and two successful prosecutions came out of it, on top of the 1973 MK Ultra trial.  Colin Ross spilled the beans in no uncertain terms, just as Elon has started to do.

Fast fwd some years when Wiki is now around and the Wiki bio of Colin Ross is now that of yet another swivel-eyed loon. In short, they did for him, which of course let the miscreants off the hook … the sandy hook.

And so to today:

According to the Telegraph, the Government has tabled an amendment to the Higher Ed Bill in the House of Lords that would significantly dilute the new protections it creates for free speech in English universities.

A free speech law designed to prevent universities from cancelling controversial speakers has been watered down, the Telegraph can reveal. The Government has made concessions to universities over new powers it had drawn up to enable academics and students to sue institutions for breaching their free speech rights.

It has tabled amendments that would require academics and students to only seek compensation in the courts as a last resort, after first pursuing complaints through the procedures of the relevant university and the higher education regulator. Claimants would also have to prove they had suffered a loss.

Similar tactics of anticipation have been going on, not unlike “Protection of Marriage” or similar guff where you were doing nothing of the kind … your aim was to wreck marriage as it had been observed since the beginnings of Christendom at least. This one is about “free speech” and is so vague, so pushed by people not believing in the least in it, many paedos and sodom and gomorrah fans, that it only needs the inevitable amendments and it’s effectively dead or toothless … “but at least we tried, eh?”

We are up against professional baddies whose tactics are eons old, fanatics having the whole gameplan at hand … and us?  We react too late.  We are “reactionaries”.  Vilified, kept right away from any part in this “commendable” free speech act … wonderful theatre, nothing to do with protecting free speech.

Get rid of the whole shower of corrupt crims?  That’s sedition, that is, even thinking of wuestioning the sovereignty of parliament over that of the people.

Hunter & Joe Biden, & How Twitter helped elect a Crook

As an English commentator on British and American Politics with, I must admit, a somewhat limited readership; I really thought that some stories about the American Left, the Democratic Party: and their influence upon what America reads, watches and learns were, to put it bluntly, exaggerated. 

But the decision of a maverick billionaire, rich beyond dreams, to buy outright Twitter, the premier Social Media organisation, has proved, beyond any doubt that the Democratic Party, the governing Party of America, was and still is, totally corrupt in its efforts to hide the truth about Hunter Biden, and his father President Joe Biden from America and the wider world.

I ask if my readers would view this particular Tucker Carlson video, where he interviews James Woods, a good actor who, because he raised his voice in protest, was literally targeted and cancelled to the extent that he no longer worked in Hollywood. I found it both astonishing and deeply troubling: because these were the actions of a Political Party desperate to cover up wrongdoings of the son of an aspiring U.S. President just before that critical election.

The "little people"

No doubt, readers, that social media has good parts and bad.  Facebook is bad for all the reasons posts passim, TikTok etc., Twitter was turned vile due to cows like this Vijaya who suppressed the Hunter laptop story ... an Indian in America interfering in an election ... interesting.

But even within our own soc-med sphere, there are issues when the timeline model is used:

An example is this Kathy who was not endorsed by Trump, who endorsed Oz instead ... and over here, I quite like Kemi ... I want to hear from such "little people", I don't trust major spokespeople "appointed" to lay it down.

Which is not to acknowledge the role of "big people":

If you build it, they will come.

I'm Not Very Good At Sums...

...but even I can spot that these things never add up:

Children need nourishing school dinners more than ever before, as many families struggle with the cost of living, a leading expert has warned. BBC News has been speaking to families and schools as they try to tackle the problem.

The Raza family​...

*rolls eyes* 

... - dad Ali, mum Simran and their eight-year-old daughter, Alishah - live in one of Bradford's back-to-back, two-up-two-down terraced houses. The heating is off upstairs to help manage rising bills and Ali tells me: "We're just managing, and not very well."

So, what do you do for a living, Ali? 

Ali is a self-employed wholesaler. He mainly buys fruit and vegetables in bulk before selling them on - but there is a limit to what small local shops are prepared to pay, so as costs rise his profits decrease.

And have you considered that if this Del Boy of the Cabbages lifestyle won't support your family, you could maybe get a better paying job? 

It means they can only afford to buy school lunch for Alishah once, or sometimes twice, a week. Each meal at her school, Dixons Marchbank Primary, costs £2.10.

Weekly child benefit is £21.80 per week. Where's the rest going? 

As Simran prepares pasta and a salad for Alishah's evening meal, she says she wishes they could afford more frequent school lunches, as sometimes Alishah does not eat her packed lunch of cold leftovers.

She's not hungry then, is she?