Setting Up a Narrative: Tyranny In Action.

The latest news is that that MI5 is saying that Russian spies are trying to create mayhem on the streets of the UK.

I assume this is a direct reference to the recent riots.

I also assume this is another attempt to de-legitimise the protests, now that the "far-right" narrative has largely failed to gain traction because it's patently obvious the people involved weren't far-right and they actually had legitimate concerns.

The independent media in the form of blogs and videos has largely debunked the far-right narrative. Those of us that are working class saw through that straight away. It could be us on the streets if kids in our town were murdered.

The government and media then went on to try and make Tommy Robinson some far right arch villain, directing the riots from abroad. Except it's quite clear on his videos, if you care to look, that he was doing no such thing and was advising against violence as it plays into the hands of the corrupt government.

So the latest narrative is (in an attempt to gain some sympathy from the working class) that the rioters weren't far right (as we all are aware), but instead they were pawns in some 3D chess game between Putin and the West. Or Iran and the West. Or something. If they were innocent pawns, why are they serving maximum sentences in jail. Or is this now some way to wind back the narrative once the lawsuits and appeals start winning for unlawful arrests and imprisonment?

Yeah, try again MI5. If the rioters were duped by anyone, it was the Policemen dressed up in dark clothes wearing facemasks that directed the riots towards the migrant hotels and started kicking the doors in. 

The real reason why Tommy Robinson is now such an existential threat to the authorities is he's learned and adapted to their tactics. There may have been a time when he would have been kicking the doors in and having a good old scrap himself. But that was back then. 

Nowadays, Tommy has learned to protest peacefully, he has learned to Police those that attend the peaceful protests so that they remain peaceful. During the last two protests, he has banned facemasks, so that those causing trouble can be identified. 

Lo and behold, no violence. Because the undercover Police that would have been geared up and pretending to harass the Police, so the Police could start to charge in and make arrests, have been neutralised.

If you don't believe what I'm saying there are videos of various protests where you get someone threatening Police (as you would in a training exercise) but never getting battered or arrested, but the people beside them are arrested.

If the Police go in and snatch people, they will have the optics of snatching clearly peaceful protesters. So the authorities now have to make up some new excuse to de-legitimise the protesters. They are  not patriots, they are acting on the orders of Russian spies. If you join them, you are siding with Russia, Iran or some other country we don't agree with.

Tommy is due to come back into the UK any day now. He's cleverly stayed away from the UK as the authorities feverishly try and come up with a reason to hold him under terror laws or some such.

Terror laws that were used to hold Tommy at a port before he left the UK. Terror laws that have been used against reporters reporting the truth about the Israel-Gaza conflict. Basically terror laws that have been used against anyone not adhering to the government narrative. 

Ignore political differences, the people held under terror laws would I assume not like each other's viewpoint. But look at the common denominator: the government. Both sides conflict with the government narrative and so have to be silenced. 

That is tyranny, right there.

As an aside, were the machete-wielding Muslims that turned out when it was said that there were going to be 100 far-right protests Russian patsies? 

Was the Pakistani guy that spread the rumour that the guy that killed the kids in Southport was a Muslim a Russian Patsy? 

Really, MI5? Is this the best you can do? 

Journalism is an Act of Terrorism??

I now know of three journalists that have been arrested under the terrorism act in the UK.

The first is Tommy Robinson who although not known as a journalist, is still making journalism on the topic of extremist Islam in the UK.

The second is Richard Medhurst, an independent journalist covering the war in Gaza.

The third is Sarah Wilkinson, also covering the war in Gaza.

But what do they have in common? After all, I doubt you'd be hearing Richard or Sarah singing the praises of Tommy's viewpoint, nor vice-versa. So what is the common denominator?

These are three people that are independently reporting on news that is inconvenient to the Government's managed narrative.

Managed narrative? I hear you ask. Well, the narrative that the government tell the media to report. 

I can't emphasise that today's news is a carefully curated collection of media pieces, managed to steer your opinion in a certain direction.

This is not news, this is propaganda, or even worse, it's mind manipulation.

The question is why are such disparate reporters being arrested under terror legislation?

What specifically is it in the legislation that the Police are using that they can't get any other way.

Tommy Robinson has gone into great detail about his arrest and the Police seemed very interested in the information on his phone. They especially were interested in who was funding Tommy.

I do wonder if the same applies to Richard and Sarah. 

The common thing is all three are briefing against the government narrative. I may not agree to support the Palestinians, but I can see that adverse information coming out of Gaza would be damaging to the government narrative about that area. 

But the use of terror legislation in these cases is a massive overreach. Phones, computers and documents have all been confiscated in these cases to be interrogated by the Police. To what ends? What will they do with the information? This isn't a fishing exercise to support Mossad. The inclusion of Tommy rules that out.

However, there is third party at large that the government would really like to be at the centre of this contra-narrative briefing: Russia.

They would quite like for there to be a nugget of information somewhere all all of these journalists devices that point to a state actor and Russia is the current bogyman.

I think that they wanted to blame Russia for the disinformation regarding the Southport stabbings, until it was inconveniently revealed to be a Pakistani man in Pakistan saying the stabber was a Muslim. 

And this is where it comes to the nub of the question: this is about control of information, not just locally, but globally. 

But I hope, with the inclusion of Richard and Sarah, that people will begin to understand it not the side you are on the matters to the government, they will abuse legal process to intimidate you whatever your political viewpoint. This is not about left or right. 

This is now a clear sign of extra-democratic forces trying to control a narrative, to convert the news into propaganda, to spoon-feed you a curated view of the world, so you begin to think how they want you to think.

The Tyrrany of Tony Blair.

 I've blogged before about the changes to the Police Role and to law in general under the Blair government.

The introduction of Anti-Terrorism laws that have been misused time and time again by Police forces.

The introduction of "absolute" crimes that have no extenuating circumstances.

The introduction of fixed penalty notices for such crimes making the Police tax collectors.

The removal of Double Jeopardy allowing the Police to prosecute ad infinitum.

The changes to Legal Aid availability.

The introduction of the Violent Porn laws introducing laws who's wording allows mission creep to outlaw virtually any book, image etc.

I'm sure there are more that I have missed. But the above mark the Blair governments as the one that made the most serious changes to law enforcement and the rule of law for decades.

The removal of Double Jeopardy being one of the more egregious. It now allows for sloppy Police investigations. If the first investigation fails for whatever reason, then the Police and CPS can bring a new prosecution. Ostensibly there should be significant new evidence in order to bring the second prosecution, but we all know that the threshold for "significant new evidence" is pretty low. 

The thing is that while the Police and CPS have infinite funds with which to prosecute, the defendant doesn't. Legal; Aid has been withdrawn for a large proportion of instances and even if it were applicable, the quality of the legal support provided by legal aid is somewhat substandard. Unless you know how to work the system, as with all government funded programs.

So, the Police and the CPS can and have prosecuted maliciously in order to wear defendants down. I've been warned before of "causing mischief" by an MP regarding various issues, lest I be targeted by the Police and they start a version of "lawfare" against me. 

The various court appearances by Tommy Robinson are a case in point. The Police have conducted a state of lawfare against him as they have prosecuted him repeatedly. I see recently a a YouTube "auditor" is now being prosecuted because the Police are a bit fed up of him videoing them and holding them to account. It looks like they've finally found something to maliciously whack him with to teach him a lesson. No-one questions the Police, they are above the law, so it seems.

The Blair government did more to usher in this authoritarian state then any other Government before or since, although the following Coagulation of Cameron and Clegg with Mrs May as Home Secretary deferred to the Police too many times as well.

Successive Home Secretaries are also complicit, allowing the Police to overstretch their authority on numerous occasions. 

The misuse of various laws and Police powers has not been challenged at all by successive governments. We really need the Government to hold the Police to account. I've lost count of the number of times Cressida Dick has been in hot water, but she appears to be untouchable.

I just wonder if this is what a Tyrannical Police State actually looks like. At least we know who to blame: it was started by one Anthony Blair Esq. Oh, and he's getting a knighthood for his endeavours, including an illegal war. Fucked up or what?

When is a Vaccine not a Vaccine?

When it's a genetically modified Simian virus that doesn't stop you getting the virus it's supposed to prevent and it doesn't prevent transmission of the virus it's supposed to.

So, lets state the facts.

The government itself has stated the Covid-19 "vaccines" don't stop you getting the virus, nor do they stop you passing it to others. The "vaccine" actually just lessens the risk of you personally being hospitalised. 

So I'm a bit confused by the narrative that it's selfish not to get the vaccine. Especially when the only person it benefits is you. That's a fact. 

It's also a fact that you are more likely to die from the virus if you don't get vaccinated, but surely that's a personal choice. It's your informed choice to accept the higher risk of serious complications from covid-19 rather than accept injection of a  genetically modified simian virus into your body.

I'm also confused by the narrative that getting the vaccine makes you less transmissible, it makes you less likely to infect others.  That certainly isn't a fact. 

This then leads on to mandatory vaccination for people in certain jobs. Initially I'm talking about carers, many of whom themselves have health issues. So they cannot take the vaccine on health grounds. Should they be sacked because of a health issue? Even if they refuse vaccination on religious grounds, or just personal choice, should they be sacked?

Especially if they can get the virus, take it into a care setting and pass it onto their residents even if they have been vaccinated. Why is the vaccination mandatory?

Are we looking at low hanging fruit? Are we seeing the persecution of a section of society to test the reaction of the population? Are we seeing the persecution of poor, low-paid workers who can't afford to fight back in order to establish employment case law? Will we see the case law then rolled out to include the suspension or sacking of anyone for transgressions of arbitrarily established rules?

So the authorities don't like your health status? Sacked.

They don't like your Political stance? Sacked.

Don't like the words you are using on Social Media? Sacked.

Don't like the company you keep? Sacked.

Think it can't happen? Just extrapolate what is happening right now and understand that government NEVER uses legislation for it's original purpose, no matter how narrowly defined. 

The anti-terror laws have been abused, the violent porn laws have been abused, the offense laws have been abused, the communications act has been abused. ALL of those laws, all of that legislation has been used in way it wasn't originally intended for. Call it mission-creep, call it overstepping the mark; it still boils down to the abuse of law. 

The rules being proposed now essentially are work permits. You will not be permitted to work unless you fulfil certain criteria. Initially it's based on your vaccination status, but very quickly could include political status, mental health status, family status, loyalty to the party, loyalty to the state, eh comrade?

If the government gets away with mandating vaccinations or allowing discrimination against unvaccinated people, then we will truly deserve the tyranny that will follow.