Gunpowder, treason, and plot

Every child knows the ditty by heart (or they used to, back in those halcyon days of yore, when children still engaged in that antiquated endeavour known as ‘playing out’):

Remember, remember, the 5th of November;

Gunpowder, treason, and plot;

I know of no reason;

Why the gunpowder treason;

Should ever be forgot!

The recounting of these words has, historically, famously been followed up by the fiery immolation of a life-sized doll known as ‘the Guy’, in reference to Guy Fawkes, the notorious state dissident who plotted to blow up the Houses of Parliament, and murder the King.

When the plot was foiled by authorities, Fawkes and his co-conspirators were tried, found guilty of treason, and sentenced to death. But this was to be no ordinary death. According to historian Antonia Fraser:

“They were to be “put to death halfway between heaven and earth as unworthy of both”. Their genitals would be cut off and burnt before their eyes, and their bowels and hearts removed. They would then be decapitated, and the dismembered parts of their bodies displayed so that they might become “prey for the fowls of the air.“

Effectively, the most gruesome, gory, and gratuitously unpleasant end one could imagine - such, we are led to believe, was the enormity of their crime. Although they were unsuccessful in their aspirations to explode parliament and murder the monarch, the mere intentions to commit such monstrous acts - to challenge and overthrow state authority - were enough to qualify them for the most hideous punishment society had to offer.

Of course, as for all of recorded history, we can never be completely certain that the official account of the gunpowder plot, as has been related to us over the centuries, is true, and that there isn’t a degree of mythology or embellishment involved. However, where it comes to the enduring power of this exceptionally famous narrative, then, as for most historical legends, its absolute veracity matters less than whether people believe in it - which, of course, they do, and have done for the past four centuries.

Belief in the gunpowder plot, its foiling by authorities, and the subsequent torture and execution of the conspirators - symbolically re-enacted every year, by the burning effigy of Guy Fawkes - represents extremely powerful propaganda: propaganda that is embedded in our minds from our earliest years, regarding what happens to people who challenge the state.

Not only are they ruthlessly tortured and destroyed, but the public raucously celebrates this destruction, with a big party, fireworks, and a feast, just as happens every year on November 5th.

(An event that many parents and pet owners have come to dread, because of terrified babies and animals cowering in fear at the loud explosions.)

Bearing the above in mind, what would we conclude about an apparently very well-known individual who quoted the ‘Gunpowder, treason, and plot’ verse as their personal bio, whilst co-hosting a podcast entitled ‘Chasing Dissent‘ with a (”retired”) police sergeant?

In the above linked episode of the podcast, the hosts, Ed Chanter (’Ed The Techie’) and John Porter (’Sgt Grumpy’) are indeed ‘chasing dissent’, or more precisely, chasing dissenters, and, in particular, me, for daring to dissent from the state line regarding the relentless promotion of the Lucy Connolly character, and the ongoing high-profile psyop claiming that she “went to prison for a Tweet so you’d better be careful what you say, or you could too”.

Ed explains to ‘Sgt Grumpy’ that the Lucy story is definitely true because someone he’s never met called Nat the Twat allegedly sent him some ivermectin in the post.

Nat the Twat (the name she chooses for herself online) has been one of the most vicious and abusive critics of those who challenge the Lucy Connolly operation, and has also claimed that she visited Connolly in prison. As Ed confirms in the linked episode of ‘Chasing Dissent‘, I invited “Nat” to conduct a private Zoom conversation with me to validate her story, which she at first agreed to, but then backed out of, and took to abusing me at length instead.

Ed then talks about how ludicrous it is for people to speculate that he and his colleagues might be police officers, whilst presenting a podcast with a literal (”retired”) police officer.

Ed also says that, whilst he’s enjoyed my work in the past, there’s “such a thing as too much paranoia” and it’s “a bit mental”.

He then confirms that, when people online “piss him off”, he doesn’t “argue”, but instead instructs them to “eff off”, before “muting them”, so they can “scream into the void”.

Ed did not in fact “mute” me, he instead blocked me, but it is true that he told me to “fuck off“ first, and instructed me that he “didn’t have time for [my] paranoid nonsense“. It was our first and only interaction.

Ed also labelled sceptics of the Lucy Connolly narrative “maggot cunts“, whilst making an unprintably crude “offer” to one man who politely challenged his story.

Most of my regular readers are familiar with the work of Francis O’Neill, and are aware that Francis has recently compiled a three-part article series, focusing on Ed, who reportedly died on April 27th of this year, and his relationship with satirical cartoonist, Bob Moran.

If you have yet to read Francis’ investigations, please do set aside some time to do so, with particular reference to the third part of the series, covering Ed’s alleged funeral, and its claimed attendees.

What Francis appears to have uncovered with his diligent research is a large, interlinked network of state operatives and actors who are engaged in psychological operations to manage and subdue the dissident class. ‘Chasing Dissent‘, as police sergeant John Porter’s podcast puts it.

The tentacles extending from ‘Ed The Techie’ and his large, coordinated cabal of online “friends” take us to some very dark places, where certain influential individuals would clearly very much prefer we do not go. These individuals have tried very hard to prevent Francis from continuing with his work, deploying all manner of non-lethal psychological warfare, including extensive personal abuse, questioning his mental health, and even employing AI to generate puerile songs about him.

The one thing they won’t do, of course, is answer his questions.

(Conversely, Francis - and I, for that matter - are quite happy to answer questions and address apparent anomalies if they are put to us.)

I started this article referencing an ancient cultural totem, Guy Fawkes and Bonfire Night. But to close, I’d like to reference something rather more recent.

The Truman Show.

We really do seem to be, in a very literal way, in it, and as that powerful example of revelation of the method programming invited us to question:

“How’s it going to end?”

Thanks for reading! This article was originally published at miriaf.co.uk, which is entirely reader-supported, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, meaning your support is what powers this site to keep going. If you enjoyed this article, and would like to read more in the future, please consider…

1. Subscribing monthly at Substack or Patreon (where paid subscribers can comment on posts)

2. Making a one-off contribution via BuyMeACoffee

3. Contributing in either way via bank transfer to Nat West, account number 30835984, sort code 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA (please use your email address as a reference if you’d like me to acknowledge receipt).

Your support is what allows these articles to keep being created and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.