Sunday, 25 January 2015

Babies should not be ignored in the hunt for racism!

On 7 July 2008, The Daily Mail told us what a Government-funded advisory group calling itself the National Children's Bureau had in mind for our children: 
"Toddlers should be taught about racism and singled out for criticism if they have racist attitudes… nursery teachers, playgroup leaders and childminders (must) record and report every racist incident involving children as young as three…

Nurseries are encouraged to report as many racist incidents as possible to local councils. Even babies should not be ignored in the hunt for racism… 
Anyone who disagrees is racist themselves!”
The 366-page guide, ‘Young Children and Racial Justice’, also warned:
"CHILDREN MIGHT… REACT NEGATIVELY TO A CULINARY TRADITION OTHER THAN THEIR OWN BY SAYING 'YUK'."
By saying 'yuk'.

Is there anyone out there who agrees with this totalitarian nonsense? ‘Young Children and Racial Justice: Taking Action for Racial Equality in the Early Years Understanding the Past, Thinking About the Present, Planning for the Future’.

That’s what the little, red book Jane Lane wrote is called.

Do you believe that someone who could create something as Orwellian as this would be happy to sing along as Rule Britannia or Land of Hope and Glory is being sung? I think Ms Lane would recoil in horror from bloke who still thinks that 'Britons never, never, never shall be slaves'.

The foreword to this document was penned by none other that Lord Hermann Ousely, a West Indian immigrant who owes his career, his status, pension, bank balance and title to political correctness, positive discrimination and 60 long years of liberal establishment treachery. The former Chief Executive of the Commission for Racial Equality, a government quango that employs more than 50,000 people, informs us in his foreword that toddlers can, indeed, be 'racists.'

He believes that children of different races should be encouraged to play together 'from day one' in order to prevent bigotry and help them, and I quote 'unlearn any racist attitudes and behaviour they may have already learned.' That’s 'from day one', ladies and gents! Lord Herman seems to be suggesting that we white folks can develop unsavoury, politically incorrect thoughts in the womb! Before we’ve actually been born!

Jane Lane, herself, has defended her work thus:

"In my book I have tried to unpack racism and expose it for the evil that it is… As Michelle Obama, wife of the US Democratic Presidential nominee, says: 'Real change comes from having enough comfort to be really honest and say something very uncomfortable'."

Well, I would very much appreciate it if Jane Lane would allow me to say something here that might make her feel 'very uncomfortable'. I, too, would like to 'unpack' the term 'racism' and 'expose' the 'evil' behind it.

Leon Trotsky did more than any other to make the Russian Revolution happen. He raised many millions of dollars from American businessmen, without which there wouldn't have been a revolution, and, through the campaigns of terror that he ordered and organised as Head of the Red Army, all resistance was crushed and Bolshevik rule was entrenched. Millions of innocent Russians lost their lives as a result of Trotsky’s bloodthirsty revolutionary zeal.

Trotsky was the first person ever to use the word 'racists' in its pejorative sense. It can be found in his 1930 essay, The History of the Russian Revolution.

Magnus Hirschfeld, a cross-dressing 'sexologist' who liked to describe himself as the 'Einstein of Sex', introduced us to his magnum opus in 1934. It was titled 'Racism.' This was first published in English 4 years later by Victor Gollancz.

The adjective 'anti-semitic' was seen in print as long ago as 1860. The Austrian bibliographer, Moritz Steinschneider, was the first to use term.

Now, I suspect that Jane Lane, Herman Ouseley and Michelle Obama would tell you that I was a 'racist' for informing the world that a mass-murdering Russian revolutionary invented the word. I think they might also say that I would have to be a 'racist' and possibly a 'homophobe' for telling you that a German pervert popularised the term.

But if I dared to point out that Steinschneider, (left) Hirschfeld, his publisher, Victor Gollancz, (above left) Trotsky AND Jacob Schiff, (below left) the American businessmen who was the principal monetary sponsor of the Russian Revolution, were ALL JEWISH, I’m as sure as God made little, green apples that Jane Lane, Herman Ouseley and Michelle Obama would swear blind that I was an anti-Semite who ought to be locked away forever from decent people like them, and you, forever.

They’d say this despite the fact that what I’ve just told you is 100 per cent accurate.

As for the woman whom Jane Lane was so happy to quote in defence of her work, well, here is something else that Barack Obama’s wife has said along the way:
"There was no doubt in my mind that as a member of the black community, I am obligated to this community and will utilise all of my present and future resources to benefit the black community first and foremost."
'First and foremost.' And that, ladies and gentlemen, isn’t racist. Because Michelle Obama is black. And, as we all know, black people just cannot be racist. No matter what they do, no matter what they say, no matter how they say it, the word racism was not invented to do them down. It wasn’t invented to bother Jews or Muslims or anyone else who isn’t white. It was invented to marginalise and disenfranchise us. And it has, hasn’t it?

A lady by the name of Jane Lane, an 'early years equality adviser' produced a 'government-funded' document which dared to suggest that our 'babies should not be ignored in the hunt for racism'.

I say this: those who have consistently sought to unjustly shame, degrade and brainwash the British people into thinking and doing things that have only ever promoted and encouraged the immigrant do not, and never have had, the best interests of the indigenous majority at heart.

An agenda was forced upon the kindest, most fair-minded, most trusting and well-intentioned people on the planet. It was an agenda that only the do-gooders, only those who saw further and knew better, only the bleeding hearts whose hearts never bled for us and the sinister, destructive forces behind them all, ever wanted.

You know, it might be your child or your grandchild who reacts 'negatively to a culinary tradition other than his own by saying yuk’. If your three-year-old refuses to eat his curry, because it’s too hot, do you really want him standing in the corner, wearing the dunce’s cap, whilst all the other children are encouraged to call him names?

If there is anyone out there who is comfortable with the idea that our little boys and girls might be designated 'racist' because they have offended the Arabs by refusing to eat a sheep’s eyeball, you should keep on voting for New Labour, who gave the National Children’s Bureau 12 MILLION POUNDS in 2007 to produce, Brit-bashing, Stalinist nonsense like this!

And remember, ladies and gents, according to Jane Lane and Hermann Ouseley, 'anyone who disagrees' with any of this 'is racist themselves'!

On 14 September 2008, The Mail on Sunday told us what a government-funded advisory group calling itself 'No Outsiders', had in mind for our children.
"CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS FIVE SHOULD BE TAUGHT TO UNDERSTAND THE PLEASURES OF GAY SEX."
So now you know. Now you know what the politicians and their government-funded advisory groups have in mind for our children and grandchildren. Now that you know what their plans are, who are going to vote for?

I stood for parliament as an Independent in 2010 and received just 1-in-125 of the total votes cast. Which suggests to me that 124 out of 125 people who now inhabit this island wouldn't be that bothered if their kids were taught 'the pleasures of gay sex' at five and had the on-message, PC teacher scolding them for being 'racist' at the tender age of three.

Trust me, folks, the lads who died in the two world wars did not fight for this.

We are not what we were, that's for sure.

Saturday, 24 January 2015

The BBC have an unofficial pro-Israel policy

On 17 February 2012, top financial journalist and media commentator, Max Keiser, said this on his own blog:
“What we can confirm from working with the BBC is that they have an unofficial pro-Israel policy…

We were told repeatedly from our BBC executives while producing ‘The Oracle with Max Keiser’ on BBC World News, that any mention of Israel was completely off limits and that this was a matter of unofficial policy.”
He repeats this assertion on 9 May 2013 in episode 443 of The Keiser Report:
“When we were doing a show for BBC World News called The Oracle with Max Keiser a couple of years ago we only got one editorial direction and that is we could not mention Israel, in any context. That’s the only direction we got from the BBC.”

The BBC's Creative Director is Alan Yentob; the Head of News is James Harding; the Director of Television is Danny Cohen and Newsnight's editor is Ian Katz.

All are Jewish.

Jews comprise just 1-in-200 of the British population.

An executive run place for idiots

Child sex/porn allegations against ex-Home Secretary Leon Brittan

Documentary producer and author, Tim Tate, is interviewed here for Bristol (BCFM) Radio's 'Politics Show.'

Tim offers us his informed opinion on the recently deceased Leon Brittan and his potential involvement in child abuse. Here's what he says:
"I sat for two hours with a senior detective involved in historic child sexual abuse enquiries. It was not the first time we had met, but on this occasion... he had decided to be open about the progress of the investigation into allegations about Leon Brittan.

His openness, of course, went only so far: we were not speaking on the record, but on conditions of anonymity. I have no way of independently verifying what he told me, but I did not feel at any point that he was either deliberately misleading me...

The backdrop to our meeting were allegations in the media that a former Customs Officer had seized child pornography films or videotapes in the early 1980s, one of which 'featured' a former Conservative cabinet minister. The customs officer was called Maganal Solanki, who is now in his 80s and in poor health. Mr Solanki’s name was on a 1982 Customs seizure notice which impounded obscene or indecent material sent, by mail, to the UK by a British paedophile based in Holland.

A reporter from Express newspapers had tracked down Mr Solanki, doorstepped him and recorded an attempt at interviewing him about the Tricker material. The subsequent reports of this encounter stated that Mr Solanki had claimed that the films or videos depicted the former cabinet minister involved in child sexual abuse. Although the politician was not named, it was evident that he was Leon Brittan.

The detective told me that officers had subsequently visited Mr Solanki and asked him about these allegations. According to the detective, Mr Solanki had denied the press version of events and insisted that he could not remember the Tricker seizure, much less had he ever identified Brittan as a participant in filmed child sexual abuse.

However, Mr Solanki did – according to the detective – recall stopping Brittan on another occasion as he came into the UK at Dover. Further, Mr Solanki had searched Brittan’s car and had found child pornography tapes. He viewed these and was able – with some embarrassment – to describe their contents: boys and girls, under the age of 12, being filmed having sex with each other. He impounded the tapes as indecent or obscene material."

Friday, 23 January 2015

Fiona Woolf, Leon Brittan and institutionalised conflicts of interest

On 14 September 2014, The Daily Mail told us this:
“Historic sex abuse inquiry chief Fiona Woolf has connections going back at least a decade with Leon Brittan, who is accused of involvement in a cover-up when he was Home Secretary… The top commercial lawyer sat in the same magistrates’ court as Lord Brittan’s wife Diana for three years. Mrs Woolf was also a senior figure at the Law Society when it hosted a conference addressed by Lord Brittan…

Last night campaigners accused Mrs Woolf of treating the investigation with contempt, and called on both her and the Home Office to explain how well she knows Lord Brittan. She has refused to say if she declared her potential conflicts of interest in advance, despite calls in Parliament…

Mrs Woolf, 66, has lived in the same upmarket street as the Brittans since 2005; sits on the board of a City conference with the former Minister; gave a £50 donation to his wife for a fun run last year; and judges a business award with her.
Lord Brittan is a key figure in the inquiry because of his involvement in the scandal of hundreds of files on child abuse that the Home Office admitted had been lost or shredded.
Lord Brittan was handed a now-lost dossier in 1983, which he insists he passed on to officials.

Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP who exposed Cyril Smith as a child abuser, said:
‘Both the Home Office and Fiona Woolf need to explain exactly what her relationship is with the Brittans. The more they stonewall, the more suspicious people, particularly victims, will be.’

Mr Danczuk told the Commons he was ‘disturbed’ by the links but his call for a debate was slapped down by William Hague. Now Leader of the House, Mr Hague succeeded Lord Brittan as MP for Richmond in North Yorkshire in 1989 and previously wrote speeches for him. Last night Mr Danczuk said ‘people will draw their own conclusions’ about Mr Hague’s decision.
Peter Saunders, of the National Association for People Abused in Childhood, added: ‘The links between Mrs Woolf and the Brittans will totally undermine the credibility of the inquiry.’
The Judicial Office confirmed Mrs Woolf had sat on cases at City of London Magistrates’ Court when the chairman of the bench was Lady Brittan. Mrs Woolf became a Justice of the Peace in 2007, while Lady Brittan was chair of the bench until 2010. Officials said it would take too long to check if they ever sat on the same cases.

Meanwhile, records show that in October 2005, Leon Brittan gave the opening speech at a conference at the Law Society where Mrs Woolf was vice-president.

Mrs Woolf was questioned about her links to the Brittans last week, but refused to answer…

A spokesman refused to say if Mrs Woolf had declared her links to the Brittans or not, but said: ‘She is an exceptional and highly qualified candidate for this demanding role'."
I guess they would say that, wouldn't they?

And, come to think of it, from their point of view, just like the insider that preceded her, she appears to be the perfect choice. An establishment figure almost guaranteed to obstruct the emergence of the most embarrassing anti-establishment information.

In Elizabeth Butler-Schloss' case, her own brother Michael Havers, a former Attorney-General no less, has been implicated. And Fiona Woolf appears to be an intimate of the Brittans.

Do we think the powers-that-be chose these people by accident? Do we think they were unaware of their embarrassing associations? One presumes they, stupidly, imagined that the press wouldn't find out, or that they could be persuaded to keep these matters dark.

That is often the case. But not here. The media, it seems is out for blood.

Fair play.

'... his call for a debate was slapped down by William Hague... Hague succeeded Lord Brittan as MP for Richmond... and previously wrote speeches for him. 

Mr Danczuk said ‘people will draw their own conclusions’ about Mr Hague’s decision.'

They sure will, Simon. William Hague, like the aforementioned Michael Havers, has been mentioned in paedophilic dispatches. As for his Richmond predecessor, check this out:


Frank Maloney is NOT the greatest interviewer.

More than once I found myself yelling at the monitor during the course of the above interview. 'Shut the f*** up and let the man speak,' was par for the course. However, notwithstanding his interview technique, it is down to the dogged, obsessive and dauntless determination of good-hearted men (and women) like like Frank that the bestial nature of many those who have exercised power over us in recent times is now, slowly, being exposed.

Without such indomitable truth-seekers/tellers as him, the routinely practiced evils discussed in the above interview would never be revealed.

Chris Fay is the epitome of a credible witness. He has, without success, been trying to get the police to investigate the claims he makes for many decades now. They didn't ignore him because the tales he had to tell weren't believable. They did so because, in an age where the lie and the liar rules, he was all too 'credible.'
"Carol Kasir... showed me, I think it was eight photographs of people. There was two of Leon Brittan, there was once of Harvey Proctor (MP) and she had hundreds more in this shoebox...

The Leon Brittan photograph, he was... naked apart from like a little apron and one of those waitresses caps... with a boy aged about twelve sitting on his lap... The boy was naked... I mean, it was an obscene photograph by anybody's description...
Carol Kasir, as I keep trying to tell people, was not some sort of innocent victim in all this, she was a conniving, cunning bitch of a woman, she really was. She knew exactly what she was doing so she would only give us enough to keep us involved, if you know what I mean. To keep on our good side...

And I said to her ‘It’s not good enough Carol I can’t just y’know’, unless you give me the stuff. She wouldn’t do it. What she did eventually agree to do I think about six, eight weeks later she said I could come round and photograph them myself, but unfortunately, of course, shortly after that she was murdered...

(Special Branch was) sitting in a car outside... I mean this shows you how contemptuous the security services and Special Branch were of people... they could do whatever they liked."
It takes a certain kind of man to seek out children to exploit and abuse.

If you ever wondered how we got from what we were and what we had to where we are now and what we have become, it occurs to me that those who would bugger a defenceless child would be just the kind you might wish to recruit if you wanted to bugger up a country.

The controlling evil at the heart of the governance of this country is as ancient as it is profound. Only now, largely because of the ever-increasing, hopefully unstoppable, power of the social media, are the facts emerging.

Thank God and Tim Berners-Lee for the internet.

Just in case you weren't paying attention, here's how you might 'bugger up a country' if you were thus inclined:

It goes without saying that those who aren't 'paying attention' are the second favourite folk of the elite perverts who abuse our children.


Thursday, 22 January 2015

I would have done anything for them

On 13 July 2014, The Daily Mirror quoted former Conservative party activist, Anthony Gilberthorpe, thus:
“I was just 17 when I first went to a conference in Brighton in 1978. I couldn’t believe I was rubbing shoulders with all these important people and I couldn’t believe that they were taking such a keen interest in me. I would have done anything for them because I was so desperate to make it in politics.

During the years I was attending conferences between 1978 and 1985, I was a full-time political activist. At the same time I was running for office in district and county council elections…
Dr Smith, who I looked up to at the time and was the most important Tory in Scotland, told me to go and fetch some ‘entertainment’, which was code for young boys and handed me a handful of bank notes. There was about £120…
It was a norm and an open secret that these older members of the Tory party, like Dr Alistair Smith, paid for young men to join them at sex parties… There was a well known and used cruising area close to the Imperial Hotel, which was a conference hotel. The hotel was not open to the public.

I was expected to find the youngest and prettiest boys. It was what those men wanted. In fact it was all they wanted. So myself and another Tory candidate walked down there and sat on some benches underneath an archway in the Pavilion area of Blackpool and waited…

I asked him (‘a guy aged about 20’ called James) if he wanted to come back to the hotel and he said ‘yes’. We asked if he had any mates and he went away and came back with two boys who were aged about 15 and no older… We took them straight upstairs and into a room where Dr Smith and other MPs were waiting for them at the party. They were given drinks and cocaine to snort and then they were all moved into the centre of the room…

All MPs, members of the National Executive and chosen delegates were given name badges that allowed you access to the conference hotel. Some of them had a small Oscar (in honour of Oscar Wilde) sign in the corner which was a code to allow others to know you were allowed into these secret parties…

In 1981 I was invited back to the Imperial Hotel by a Conservative councillor. He was a big player in the… Monday Club… I was led through a tiled changing room where there were piles of clothes strewn across the floor. We then walked into an area where there was a large pool and lots of men either stood around naked or simply wrapped in towels…

There were a couple of glass tables set up as a mini bar with bottles of spirits on them and there was cocaine on several tables. I saw several boys who were clearly aged between 15 and 16 down there and I saw that a few were performing sex acts on MPs…
Among the MPs I recognised in there were Keith Joseph and Rhodes Boyson. I saw the Attorney General Michael Havers down there as well…
There were several men walking from one room to another and enjoying sex acts with other naked men, including boys who were clearly only about 15 or 16 years old. I saw Keith Joseph there and a politician who is now still a serving MP. It was held on the night before the bomb went off and afterwards one MP crudely joked that it was a good job it was, or there would have been rent boys falling through the floor.

I was a teenager when I first met these men and they manipulated me and groomed me to do their bidding. Because they were the most powerful men in the land, I was led to believe it was all OK…

It is time this came to light before anyone else is abused. They didn’t think they were doing anything wrong and it was the norm then. They felt untouchable.”
In the 13 July edition of The Mirror, Gilberthorpe told us that he had informed Margaret Thatcher of what he had seen:
“I outlined exactly what I had witnessed and informed her I intended to expose it... I believed she had to know...

I made it very clear to Mrs Thatcher most trusted ministers had been at these parties with boys who were between 15 and 16. I also told her of the amount of illegal drugs like cocaine that were consumed.

I underlined the names of Keith Joseph, Rhodes Boyson and one MP still serving today. I also said I had seen Michael Havers at a party in Blackpool held at the hotel pool in 1983...

I have no idea why William Hague was chosen to deal with my allegations. He ­introduced a high ranking civil servant who was also there. Then the civil servant turned to me and said, ‘Now what is this all about?’ I felt very uncomfortable and surrounded, so I loudly told them, ‘What this is about is the way I’m being treated’.

The civil servant told me ‘I’ve been made aware of your letter and the very serious ­allegations in there. Can you ­substantiate any of the claims?’ I told him I was flagging up things I had seen. He then said ‘Why you are writing to the Prime Minister about these matters is beyond me’.

I was asked if there was any evidence and I told him it would emerge in time. The civil servant then said ‘What you’ve said is extremely libellous and ­slanderous. This meeting is finished’.

Mr Hague hardly said anything. I was ushered out and that was that. I was angry. I thought I’d hit a brick wall and there seemed no other place to go.”
The Mirror added:
"A source close to Mr Hague yesterday said the Foreign Secretary (Hague has since been demoted and is now the Leader of the House) 'has no ­recollection of ever meeting this individual'... (Hague can be seen with Gilberthorpe here)

Last night the civil servant, who we are not naming, did not reply to requests for a comment. Meanwhile speculation is growing over claims Mrs Thatcher must have been aware of rumours about ministers and under-age boys.
Her former Parliamentary Private Secretary Sir Peter Morrison has already been named in connection with a probe into the Bryn Estyn children’s home in Wrexham where Jimmy Savile allegedly molested boys.
Mrs Thatcher lobbied for Savile to be given a knighthood and he visited her at Chequers on at least 11 occasions."

The aforementioned Michael Havers, was Attorney General from 1979 to 1987.

In other words, he was the top lawman in the land at the time the events described above were happening.

He was also in position when Geoffrey Dickens passed the files on elite paedophilia to Home Secretary, Leon Brittan.

Baroness Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, the ancient Justiciar (and Jimmy Savile lookalike) originally chosen by the current Home Secretary, Theresa May, to oversee the enquiry into parliamentary paedophilia, is the sister of Sir Michael Havers.

Don't think you can just walk away!

Friday, 16 January 2015

All reported rapes in Oslo 2007-2010 were committed by foreigners!


I repeat, ALL reported rapes in Oslo 2007-2010 were committed by NON-WESTERN foreigners!

That's diversity for you.

That's the Multicult.

That's what LibLabCon, at the behest of their global masters, have foist upon us here. Just as, in Norway, those the Norwegian people voted for have done so there.

Our world is run by traitors. The European peoples should hate them. They should want them strung up.

Instead of which they vote for them.

Will you vote for the same old traitors again in May?

You will?

Then you must expect more, much more, of the same.

As must your daughters.

David Shayler (ex-MI5) speaks out on the cost of whistleblowing

On 29 September 2014, former MI5 agent, David Shayler, told us this at the Neon Nettle blog:
"It was at Clapham Junction station two days ago I saw her. Standing there with my carrier bags, dressed like a tramp, I looked up and yes, it was without doubt her, the woman who had made my life hell for a couple of years in the mid-90s.

Here was Wendy Probit, the name I gave her in my novel, my boss when I was in MI5's T2A, countering the Provisional IRA on the British mainland. Remarkably, it was exactly twenty years to the day that I had left her section in MI5 to go and 'have a crack at the Towelheads', as the Muslims were occasionally referred to by the more irreverent members of the Security Service.

She looked pretty much the same – that bob hair was unmistakable, though grey now. She looked up, saw me, chuckled, then pretending she hadn't seen me, quickly began to tap away at a text, presumably to a fellow MI5 officer to bring them up-to-date with this hot, new intelligence. I chuckled involuntarily too.

After waiting for about ten minutes – without ever catching each other's eye – we got on the same train, the 17:45 to Sutton, stood in the same carriage for the ten minute journey to Streatham Hill, where we both got off without ever speaking a word or exchanging a glance.

This chance and brief encounter got me thinking. Twenty years ago, we were both MI5 officers, theoretically working to protect the British people. Now here we were on the same station platform but coming from very different worlds. Her in her smart office attire, mildly browbeaten from another day 'at the coalface' in Babylon; her life not much different in terms of routines and outcomes – I imagine – from the way it was when I worked in MI5.

Me, on the other hand... Well, I really didn't look my best. I'd been at Runnymede Eco-village for a month without access to a bath or shower. My clothes were thick with dirt. I imagine Wendy may have thought I was a downandout, the just fate awaiting anyone who 'betrays' the secret state – at least in her mind.

In my mind, it just made me relieved that no matter how dishevelled I looked, I wasn't now on the side of terrorists, torturers and war criminals – unlike Wendy.The self-same day, my editor at Neon Nettle had asked me to do a piece on the costs of whistle-blowing to those who venture into this uncharted territory. This, combined with my chance encounter with my ex-boss, got me thinking: 'Was whistle-blowing worth it?'

The answer came back to me in seconds: 'Of course it was. In fact, it was so the right thing to do that it was a no-brainer'. Don't get me wrong. Being a Whistleblower is not for the faint-hearted. It has meant two spells in prison for me; countless attempts on my life; sustained ill-health, due to stress; and periods of being virtually destitute, induced by the real powers-that-be in an attempt to make me give up and go away.

I even lost the then love of my life, Annie Machon, although to this day I thank God that he chose to show me at that point how shallow her love for me was.Yet despite having my character blackened, my relationships destroyed and my livelihood taken away, I have absolutely no regrets about what I did. It has always of course been clear that I have never broken the law because I have not caused harm, loss or injury to anyone.

'But you betrayed MI5, MI6 and the country,' the munchkin retorts.

And I retort back: 'If your country is built on murder, terrorism and lies, then perhaps it is they, not I, who betray you. If you believe in 'My country, right or wrong', then you have ceased to be a moral human being and have become a dangerous automaton likely only to cause suffering to your fellow man.'
I, after all, blew the whistle on MI6 funding our terrorist enemies and murdering innocent people. The foreign secretary of the day, Malcolm Rifkind has made it clear that he did not give permission for any such attack. This makes an already heinous crime prosecutable under English law, although the Blair government failed to call in the police in a timely fashion.

Rifkind then invested in the war industry and has made enormous amounts profiteering from unlawful wars in the Middle East. So unlike BLiar, Rifkind and the British taxpayer, my conscience is clear.
I wonder though how people like Harriet Harman, Clare Short and Jack Straw – or indeed my ex-boss, Wendy Probit – sleep at night. These ex-government ministers are the very quintessence of the lefty, do-gooder liberal who believes himself to be the very epitome of modern morality. But when push came to shove, they committed war crimes and have ironically only got way with it because they left a legacy of Zionist repression which has fatally undermined the rule of Law.

In any decent society, they would have swung from a rope for their extreme crimes. After all, they failed to deal with my evidence of how MI6 tried to replace a moderate regime with Islamic Extremists then promoted wars in Iraq and subsequently Libya which did exactly that. That is one of the reasons why we now see Islamic militants not just beheading Westerners on TV almost every night but in charge of the abundant Iraqi oil supply.

If they had taken my evidence in 1997, imagine how different the world would now be. Imagine if:the intelligence services had been reformed in the late 1990s to stop them inducing the media to support their war plans or put out propaganda about 9/11. An enquiry had established that MI6 had funded Islamic militants in Libya to assassinate Colonel Qadhafi and those murderers and terrorists had been brought to justice.

Parliament had scrutinised my evidence about MI5 making assessments on the basis of little or no reliable intelligence.the people knew how MI5 had conspired to let 10,000s of Islamic militants into the UK in the 1990s to create what the CIA dubbed 'Londonistan' and which has aided the activities of anti-Western groups who wish us harm.

Around the same time, the people had given New Labour a majority of 179 in the House of Commons, one of the biggest landslides in our history, to a party standing on a platform of human rights, freedom of information and an ethical foreign policy. If there was one subject which potentially ticked these boxes, it was my disclosures about MI6's funding of our terrorist enemies.
Instead, the New Labour administration turned on me, leaking information designed to discredit me, briefing the left wing press (The Guardian) that I was a right wing nutter who wanted to increase the power of the secret state.When I used a legal route to alert the Bliar government to MI6 funding Al Qaeda, I was the one put in prison, with a view to extradition.

Can you imagine how I felt when a cell door slammed shut on me for the first time and I heard the distinctive rattling of a key in a lock, wondering why I, the witness to the crime, had ended up incarcerated, when its perpetrators still went free?

Think I'm making a big deal? How would you feel if you reported a heinous crime and you were the one who finished up deprived of your liberty and treated like a common criminal. In this instance, the munchkins can't even call on their usual refrain of 'You signed the Official Secrets Act...' because in this case, I had used a legal route to alert ministers – specifically set up as a result of my whistle-blowing.Even now, I'm astounded by the psychopathic tendencies of those who believe a rule of the UK Parliament like the 1989 Official Secrets Act takes precedent over human life.

They would never of course advance this argument if their children had been murdered by MI6, proving they are hypocrites. It really makes you want to fund a terrorist attack in which their children are horrendously murdered just so they know what it feels like. At this very moment, the war criminal David Cameron is compounding his crimes by arguing that the coalition should bomb the IS, even though it is well-embedded within Iraqi cities,meaning any bombing raid will inevitably cause civilian deaths.
Given the nature of his investments, Dave will of course be increasingly his personal wealth as a result of the bombing and continued manufactured war. But doesn't that put him into a conflict of interest under the Law and the rules of Babylon?

I sometimes wish someone would bomb little Flora Cameron into smithereens – so Just Call Me Dave and his pushy wife would know what it is like to lose a loved one in a terrorist attack -- bringing to an end the mass slaughter which has been going on in the Middle East since Al Qaeda was wrongly blamed for 9/11.

I only think these things of course. I don't persuade Parliament to induce our armed forces to actually commit war crimes. As yet, thought crime is not an offence – even under their system.

When I blew the whistle, I thought I was taking on MI5 and the British government. I knew I could beat them because I had seen just how dumb, unwieldy and intransigent they really were. Of course, I eventually came to realise I was taking on an international conspiracy, which manipulated governments; assassinated dissidents like Dr David Kelly or Princess Diana; and took great delight in perverting the course of justice.

In the run-up to my trial five years after I'd blown the whistle with my health failing and looking at wrong end of six years in prison – all for telling the truth – I was truly tested. Up until this point, blowing the whistle had been exhilarating.

But as the frequency of the attempts on my life increased and the unfairness of my upcoming trial became ever more apparent, as an atheist I had to deal with the very real fear that shadowy forces were going to keep on trying to assassinate me until they were successful.

Most people would of course in these circumstances, simply give up. But I didn't. I resolved shortly after I left prison to tell the whole truth about what I knew, which I did in Spies, Lies and Whistleblowers – written by me but published under Annie's name for legal reasons – even though I knew it would most likely result in my death, even though I then believed death was the end. For an atheist, it was a remarkably spiritual act.

You cannot know if you are a truly moral human being until you have been tested. So for me, whistle-blowing made me – as a man. Without the persecution and suffering at the hands of BLiar and the dark elite which gave me an opportunity to truly be tested, I genuinely don't know how I would have found myself on the true journey to redemption as a man of faith.
Unlike Bush and BLiar, I actually began to live my life by the teachings of Jesus Christ in the Gospels, heeding his message to 'Love your neighbour as you love yourself'; and to stand up for truth, justice and peace without reward or fear for the consequences to yourself.

Crucially, I also learnt from the biblical Christ to know my enemy so I might be in a better position to defeat evil – before realising that that was what my life had been all about. God had taken me on an extraordinary journey of injustice and suffering at the hands of the enemy so I would know how to defeat them, unlike the millions of activists who continue to use the old-fashioned forms of protest, which simply don't work and are directed at the wrong targets.

So though I have no assets to my name, no proper home and little means of support, I do – as a result of my whistle-blowing – hold the key to bringing down Babylon and ushering in an age of peace which will make the world a safer place for all God's children, including little Flora Cameron, to grow up and fulfil their potential. Going on that journey of redemption has made my heart braver and gladder than any decision to walk away from this fight knowing my own life would be easier.

So to anyone considering blowing the whistle, I say: 'Just do it!' You'll never make a better decision."
David Shayler, a courageous and honourable Englishmen at a time when such are in short supply.

UKRAINE: American lies


Brother Nathanael may be an oddball but, if so, he's a courageous one.

He dares to air off-limits truth and opinion when so many do not.

When he talks about Jewish machination he ought to know what he is talking about. This convert to the Russian Orthodox religion was born Milton Kapner in Pittsburgh, USA.

He is Jewish.

CIA admits using news to manipulate the USA (1975)


So it's on record that the US has been wilfully deceiving its citizens for more than forty years now.

What else is new, you may ask?

Nothing. Nothing at all.

But it does make you wonder why those they routinely misinform seem so content to put up with it.

Doesn't it?