Tip - If you are using a phone, set the "Desktop Site" option in your browser   

Featured

The Cultural Battleground Cometh

Details
Category: Free Citizen
Hits: 235

 2025-11-30

We have been here before, but never as deeply nor pervasively .

The British Isles as history will attest has never been immune from trouble and strife, most recently in Northern Ireland, and before that the previous matter was settled at Culloden - but not truly settled until the English Ordnance Survey mapped the territory of Scotland so that any further rebellions could be pursued through mapped and understood terrain. Our highly prized Ordnance Survey maps beloved of ramblers and campers alike were born of conflict.

Which is no reason to want another such conflict.

Yet governments around the western world seem hell-bent on creating circumstances likely to lead to conflict anew, by importing others of any culture but our own and any religion but our historic Church of England - and by historic I don't necessarily mean merely Henry VIII and his "split" from the Holy Roman Empire under the Vatican.

Our response has been essentially (a) to blame the government (correctly) and (b) to demand protection by law and order (at least partially misguidedly).

Why is it misguided to demand protection through the proper administration of law order and justice?

Simply put, because law order and justice is currently administered by the same governing powers that are busy creating the problem in the first place - it is beyond question now that importing "diversity" of all shades is a government priority which isn't going to change under a different political party.

The principle of demanding respect for law and order isn't wrong, but under the current system of governance the practice is essentially misguided and doomed to fail unless it is allied with additional measures that do not depend upon the current system of governance.

We may also remark in passing that current law and order appears no longer to be impartially administered without fear or favour and is therefore unreliable. Placing all our eggs into this basket is not likely a viable way forward for anybody.

Could we change the current system of governance?

Yes in theory, but in practice we would be fobbed off with cosmetic change that changes nothing significant (eg: "rejoin the EU", "proportional representation", "new political party":- already in train!). With a bit of encouragement it may yet fall apart under its own manifest contradictions, but given lack of an appropriate Act of God, the only way through the current electoral system is to spoil every ballot paper by writing "None of these candidates" across it, politely but unambiguously. 

If there are more of these rejection slips than votes for the leading candidate, then legally "None of these candidates" is elected. Note that simply not voting at all doesn't cut it, as there are no such votes to be counted.

Whilst I wouldn't discount such a sea-change in public opinion, it's unlikely at the next general election, but we should make a start.

If we don't like that idea, then we could vote for independent candidates only. But that still creates MPs, many of whom would still be open to control by corrupt parties behind the scenes, by fair means or foul - it would merely be marginally more difficult.

Could we appeal to the diversity already here?

Whilst there are a lot of them, they are still numerically in the minority overall, although within certain conurbations they are already in the majority.

They are however still human, and most humans want to live and raise their families in peace and prosperity. They don't want to fight and despoil their neighbours (even if some of our leadership may be less wise), because we are carefree safe and prosperous when we work together for mutual benefit, and unsafe worried and poor when we fight amongst ourselves. 

So we should foster amicable and productive relations with those already here who value peace and prosperity above strife and tension. We should talk with them, understand our strengths and weaknesses, and agree to work together rather than to fight over spoils.

That means that we should first identify where we are in agreement, and agree to work together on these matters, whilst setting aside cultural differences (such as religious dogma) in favour of non-interference. That may upset some people but is there any reasonable alternative?

Thereby we can build trust toward "live and let live". Trust that may ultimately allow further voluntary progress on our differences, in both directions, in due time.

 

Operation Five Year Anniversary!

Details
Category: Free Citizen
Hits: 324

2025-11-29

Lei reminds me that I missed a trick back in October, but I never set out to make this site about me, so it's just what comes naturally.

I am today very happy to feature Lei's five year anniversary video, she has made a huge contribution to the social media scene with her authentic in-depth analyses and independent self-directed investigations on all topics Chinese.

Watch and celebrate with Lei - and her unseen team, who provide her with the necessary unstinting support. Let us hope that they are a model for how our future world will be created.

(27 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

 

Operation Talla Exposed as Unconstitutional

Details
Category: Covid
Hits: 415

2025-11-29

(11 minutes)

2025-11-28

It is now common knowledge, or at least knowledge in the public domain, that the police forces nationally were ordered not to investigate allegations and evidence of unlawful activity in connection with the 2020/21 and later Covid vaccination drives.

They are alleged to have behaved as an arm of government rather than as impartial enforcers of the law.

Ian Clayton (Ethical Approach UK) and Mark Sexton (retired police constable) have been investigating how this came about.

They now address the top tier responsible for Constitution and Justice (the Lady Chief Justice, the Secretary of State for Justice, the Attorney General for England and Wales, the Chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, and the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service) to invite their views.

"Why were all vaccine-related crime reports, including CRN 6029679/21, shut down under an unlawful national directive?"

"The evidence proves a systemic collapse of constitutional safeguards and the rule of law."

“The police must be seen to be enforcing criminal law, not to appear to act as the coercive agents of ministers.”

“ ... public health advice was incorrectly enforced by the police as though it were law.”

"The gravity of these issues ... requires immediate and direct action. Every other avenue of reporting has been exhausted and involved institutions have simply engaged in a circular loop of non-accountability, which is why this current correspondence to yourselves is an essential step"

"Given the criminality, concealment and constitutional implications, this matter cannot be delegated to subordinates. We require a direct response from each of you"

Although marked "Private and Confidential" this (redacted) document is in the public domain and  sourced from Mark Sexton.

Read the (redacted) communication.

It has also to be noted that the events of 2020/21 and subsequent were driven globally but probably primarily from within the United States. That cannot excuse guilty parties within the UK, since we are not member of the United States. 

 

 

"We Can Do This the Easy Way, or ... the Ugly Way"

Details
Category: Defence
Hits: 172

2025-11-27

Once more Alex Krainer shares his view of the on-going negotiations posturings over Ukraine, and whither the Donald's new "peace plan" (same as the old "peace plan") is likely to lead.

Venezuela also features ... along with the same playbook that kicked off WW1 ...

As always, he is worth listening to -- except for the mention of the Hallett Inquiry, of which our readers are already aware, although there may be more to this than meets the eye ...

(90 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

 

Stand With Us!

Details
Category: Covid
Hits: 317

2025-11-26

First up, a plea from Mark Attwood to those NHS and other medical staff who now realise that maybe, just maybe, inoculating the public at large with novel medical technology that

  • had been developed "at warp speed" within months whilst earlier vaccines had required years of testing,
  • had not been approved for general use except under an Emergency Use Authorisation,
  • to allegedly defend against the "emergency" of a deadly "pandemic" that had no statistically significant effect upon the normally expected rate of "deaths from all causes", 
  • which overwhelmingly "killed" people with comorbidities at around their expected lifespan, and  had no measurable effect on children who were nevertheless inoculated anyway,
  • which was administered without any pretence at "informed consent", and indeed for some people under coercion, 
  • and for everybody, under a pervasive institutional psychological campaign to instill an unwarranted pathological fear of "the pandemic" 

was

a) Not a good idea
b) Would likely entail unacceptable risks
c) Would leave doctors and medical staff open to criminal charges under the Nuremberg Codes

If you now realise this failure, it's not too late to come clean, admit it, and act accordingly. It will drive another nail into the pandemic narrative's coffin, and it really is your own judgement that will now count.

Think on.

Secondly: Following on from a previous article, Interest of Justice reminds us how the pandemic was a fraud, that the WHO failed to defend itself in Costa Rica:

"The significance of this institutional testimony lies in its establishment of mens rea—the requisite mental element for establishing that the violations were not inadvertent policy failures but rather deliberate institutional actions undertaken with full knowledge of the legal and medical implications"

"The Costa Rican Constitutional Chamber has rendered decisions establishing that governmental actions violated constitutional protections. International litigation mechanisms are now examining state obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Disciplinary proceedings against governmental and institutional actors are proceeding through multiple jurisdictions. The vindication, though delayed, is becoming institutional reality."

Quite so.

Stand with them if you can. This won't happen without public support. Not only do "many hands make light work", in this case "many hands make legal history".

Be part of it!

 

Page 89 of 408