This is not an article specifically about the thirteen thousand or so people on Twitter who constantly claim they are going to "sue me for defamation" (and, who knows, maybe also thcweam and thcweam until they're thick!
Miri, you language is always as good as a trusted surgeon's scalpel: sharp and precise. Do not stop; it should eventually come through to tear apart the thick skin of personal self-importance of the masses and clear out the illnesses of lack of individual responsibility the society is suffering from.
I am sorry to hear that you are being bombarded by twitter people. Trusting that you are handling that without too much bother. I don't live in the UK and therefore, no need to closely follow the psychos in that parliament, but I do know of a few of them, bridgen and unfortunately, hancock. (Have enough of the politicians where I live...the pathetic glorious leader here being the most hated man on the planet.) Hancock is a wretched thing, another soulless creep in the greed and fake fame club.
I am wondering if by chance these two are buddies in the underground (I am currently reading Abuse of Power, mentioned by you. A truly insightful read.)
Thanks Miri, for this info. Might come in handy one day!!
Many thanks, Farleyboy, and yes, whatever the outcome of this "trial", I'm sure Hancock and Bridgen will be enjoying a celebratory drink together in their local private member's club (or Lodge) - all at the public's expense!
I've nearly finished 'Abuse of Power', on Miri's recommendation. It's a shocking story, exposing how well-known politicians like "Sir" Keith Joseph and "Sir" Michael Havers were predatory paedophiles, yet even today virtually no one knows it (I certainly didn't until reading it).
Grotesque creatures, both of them. And it's not just these ingrates,
who couldn't give a shit about us - or the public at large. It's the
whole Westminster 'Big Top Productions' The circus that passes
for a parliament.!! Never was it more apparent than during our
incarceration/Lockdown - early in 2020. When we witnessed, what was
tantamount to a 'Coalitition/conspiracy/collusion, OF ALL members of the 'House'
And, THEIR Lords and Masters much further up the food chain: the Corporations, NGO's, Financial institutions et al... [who're still kicking ass and taking names]. A proper joke. 'We're all in this together' they told us !!.. It's Fascism on steroids; parading as 'democracy'. And, our
'elected representatives' are well aware; which side their bread is buttered on.!!
No longer is there: A 'Left/Right' paradigm going on down in The Palace of Westminster.
It's quite simply: Them and Us !!!
.... Anyone seen 'Wag the Dog' ?? Mildly entertaining.
Thanks for another brilliant article. It's really odd that Bridgen, who's certainly aware of the cold hard facts of the pantodemic and spells them out very well in his speeches in Parliament (and I've cheered him on while doing so), should have launched such an obviously hopeless case. Even though some of his corrupt business dealings have landed him in the mire, he still has several millions and (as you point out) lots of rich friends, so he can't be doing it for the money. As things stand, and as I'm sure his lawyers have pointed out, he also has zero chance of success. So, as I see it, the alternative outcomes are:
- he doesn't bring it to trial and just pockets the money, even though he doesn't need it. This is the best-case scenario, and therefore the most unlikely.
- he brings it to trial and loses, in which case it will be used to debunk, denigrate and deride all "anti-vaxxers", whether or not they agree with (or have even heard of) him, and even though the case is supposedly about anti-semitism. I suppose this is possible, giving the MSM another stick to beat "anti-vaxxers" as "anti-semitic conspiracy theorists" with, but given all the other weapons in their arsenal, it hardly seems necessary. In which case Bridgen is exposed as a busted flush, controlled opposition, and consigned to the dustbin of history (although I'm sure he'll still be well-rewarded for his pains).
- he brings it to trial and wins. This would seem impossible, unless some other evidence were to emerge during the course of the trial. Like, hypothetically, what were those phone calls for £50,000 of "pizza" to that obscure 11-seater restaurant in East London really for? Yes, I think that would do it, even though it's got nothing to do with the supposed subject matter of the trial. And the result would be, as you say, nobody would be allowed to criticise politicians (or potentially anyone else in the public eye) ever again.
Thanks, Mike, a most astute analysis. They've had "episode one" of the panto trial today and it was even more farcical than expected - Hancock didn't even turn up! His team are trying to get it thrown out on a technicality, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they succeed. Guess we'll have to wait until the season finale to find out though...
Thanks, Mike, a most astute analysis. They've had "episode one" of the panto trial today and it was even more farcical than expected - Hancock didn't even turn up! His team are trying to get it thrown out on a technicality, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they succeed. Guess we'll have to wait until the season finale to find out though...
Yes very interesting Miri. Hadn’t connected the idea that if he wins it may well have a “knock-on” effect for free speech. I also found this interesting reading given today’s news about politicians fearing “mob rule” and not “democratic rule” as people most likely have become so fed up politics and politicians. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68429902 . I think this may well be somewhat connected. Rather than accept they are in the wrong and have wronged us all, they call for more power and greater protection to carry out their bullshit agendas.
Miri, you language is always as good as a trusted surgeon's scalpel: sharp and precise. Do not stop; it should eventually come through to tear apart the thick skin of personal self-importance of the masses and clear out the illnesses of lack of individual responsibility the society is suffering from.
Thank you.
Many thanks, Dmitri, that is very kind indeed and much appreciated.
I am sorry to hear that you are being bombarded by twitter people. Trusting that you are handling that without too much bother. I don't live in the UK and therefore, no need to closely follow the psychos in that parliament, but I do know of a few of them, bridgen and unfortunately, hancock. (Have enough of the politicians where I live...the pathetic glorious leader here being the most hated man on the planet.) Hancock is a wretched thing, another soulless creep in the greed and fake fame club.
I am wondering if by chance these two are buddies in the underground (I am currently reading Abuse of Power, mentioned by you. A truly insightful read.)
Thanks Miri, for this info. Might come in handy one day!!
Many thanks, Farleyboy, and yes, whatever the outcome of this "trial", I'm sure Hancock and Bridgen will be enjoying a celebratory drink together in their local private member's club (or Lodge) - all at the public's expense!
I've nearly finished 'Abuse of Power', on Miri's recommendation. It's a shocking story, exposing how well-known politicians like "Sir" Keith Joseph and "Sir" Michael Havers were predatory paedophiles, yet even today virtually no one knows it (I certainly didn't until reading it).
Yes, an utterly shocking scandal, and as you say, still very much under the radar, despite Daly's book.
Grotesque creatures, both of them. And it's not just these ingrates,
who couldn't give a shit about us - or the public at large. It's the
whole Westminster 'Big Top Productions' The circus that passes
for a parliament.!! Never was it more apparent than during our
incarceration/Lockdown - early in 2020. When we witnessed, what was
tantamount to a 'Coalitition/conspiracy/collusion, OF ALL members of the 'House'
And, THEIR Lords and Masters much further up the food chain: the Corporations, NGO's, Financial institutions et al... [who're still kicking ass and taking names]. A proper joke. 'We're all in this together' they told us !!.. It's Fascism on steroids; parading as 'democracy'. And, our
'elected representatives' are well aware; which side their bread is buttered on.!!
No longer is there: A 'Left/Right' paradigm going on down in The Palace of Westminster.
It's quite simply: Them and Us !!!
.... Anyone seen 'Wag the Dog' ?? Mildly entertaining.
Something for the Weekend, perhaps.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=steA_PZPkc8
Thanks for another brilliant article. It's really odd that Bridgen, who's certainly aware of the cold hard facts of the pantodemic and spells them out very well in his speeches in Parliament (and I've cheered him on while doing so), should have launched such an obviously hopeless case. Even though some of his corrupt business dealings have landed him in the mire, he still has several millions and (as you point out) lots of rich friends, so he can't be doing it for the money. As things stand, and as I'm sure his lawyers have pointed out, he also has zero chance of success. So, as I see it, the alternative outcomes are:
- he doesn't bring it to trial and just pockets the money, even though he doesn't need it. This is the best-case scenario, and therefore the most unlikely.
- he brings it to trial and loses, in which case it will be used to debunk, denigrate and deride all "anti-vaxxers", whether or not they agree with (or have even heard of) him, and even though the case is supposedly about anti-semitism. I suppose this is possible, giving the MSM another stick to beat "anti-vaxxers" as "anti-semitic conspiracy theorists" with, but given all the other weapons in their arsenal, it hardly seems necessary. In which case Bridgen is exposed as a busted flush, controlled opposition, and consigned to the dustbin of history (although I'm sure he'll still be well-rewarded for his pains).
- he brings it to trial and wins. This would seem impossible, unless some other evidence were to emerge during the course of the trial. Like, hypothetically, what were those phone calls for £50,000 of "pizza" to that obscure 11-seater restaurant in East London really for? Yes, I think that would do it, even though it's got nothing to do with the supposed subject matter of the trial. And the result would be, as you say, nobody would be allowed to criticise politicians (or potentially anyone else in the public eye) ever again.
Thanks, Mike, a most astute analysis. They've had "episode one" of the panto trial today and it was even more farcical than expected - Hancock didn't even turn up! His team are trying to get it thrown out on a technicality, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they succeed. Guess we'll have to wait until the season finale to find out though...
Thanks, Mike, a most astute analysis. They've had "episode one" of the panto trial today and it was even more farcical than expected - Hancock didn't even turn up! His team are trying to get it thrown out on a technicality, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they succeed. Guess we'll have to wait until the season finale to find out though...
Yes very interesting Miri. Hadn’t connected the idea that if he wins it may well have a “knock-on” effect for free speech. I also found this interesting reading given today’s news about politicians fearing “mob rule” and not “democratic rule” as people most likely have become so fed up politics and politicians. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68429902 . I think this may well be somewhat connected. Rather than accept they are in the wrong and have wronged us all, they call for more power and greater protection to carry out their bullshit agendas.