How do you get a revolution in the UK? The Sex Pistols thought Anarchy might work but that got them no further than Joseph Conrad had long ago predicted.
“It is this country that is dangerous, with her idealistic conception of legality. The social spirit of this people is wrapped up in scrupulous prejudices and that is fatal to our work.
England of course had long since had it’s Glorious Revolution.
To understand why James II’s most powerful subjects eventually rose up in revolt against him we need to understand the deep-seated fear of ‘popery‘ in Stuart England. ‘Popery‘ meant more than just a fear or hatred of Catholics and the Catholic church. It reflected a widely-held belief in an elaborate conspiracy theory, that Catholics were actively plotting the overthrow of church and state. In their place would be established a Catholic tyranny, with England becoming merely a satellite state, under the control of an all-powerful Catholic monarch, (in the era of the Glorious Revolution, identified with Louis XIV of France). This conspiracy theory was given credibility by the existence of some genuine catholic subterfuge, most notably the Gunpowder Plot of 1605.
Four hundred years later we have the European Union and the Muslim Caliphate to frighten us. Will the English become a Revolting Nation again? England certainly has been being painted as a revolting place for quite a number of years now. Cast your minds back as to how Blairism and New Labour arose on a tidal wave of sleaze by the highest in the land. Then, there was Jonathan Aitken and his famed ‘Sword of Truth’.
Jonathan Aitken’s downfall began in April 1995 when he decided to sue for libel over a series of allegations made against him by The Guardian and World in Action… Standing in Conservative Central Office, the former journalist famously declared he would cut out the cancer of bent and twisted journalism with “the sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play”… The Guardian’s source for the Aitken story was Mohamed al-Fayed, the owner of the Ritz and Harrods. Furious at the government’s refusal to grant him a UK passport, Mr al-Fayed made sleaze allegations against Aitken and several other Tory MPs.
Like some apparent crazed Oscar Wilde of the 20th Century, Aitken had drawn his sword in the British Libel Courts and promptly jumped on top of it himself. Dead. What was he thinking of? But he wasn’t the first, or the only one.
The allegations followed on from similar claims made about Mr Hamilton and another Tory MP, Tim Smith, in The Guardian in 1994. Mr Smith admitted asking questions for cash and resigned as a junior Northern Ireland minister.
Being the writer of an apparently futile Blog myself,I was bound to be attracted to another blog the old crone upstairs pointed me to a week or two ago. The website she led me to has a much longer pedigree of futility than mine. This one seems to have been hanging about on the internet since that fateful year of Our Lord, 2001!
The Guardian newspaper’s “Cash for Questions” story marked a turning point in the fortunes of the British Conservative Party. When it hit London’s newsstands in October 1994 it dominated the news agenda. In October 1996 it raged again. It reappeared the following January and again in March, stubbornly persisting in the run up to Labour’s General Election landslide of 1 May 1997. Since then it has resurfaced repeatedly.
These pages show how The Guardian had not, as it claimed, exposed a story of “Tory sleaze”, but had printed a concocted tale in an increasingly feverish effort to oust the Conservatives from power. This is a story of corruption and cover-up within the British Press. The culprits thought that they had got away with it. Now they hope they can rely on the British media to protect them for as long as this website is broadcast.
But this website will be here for years. In the following pages the guilty are named, the evidence condemning them is laid out, and the mechanism by which they duped the British nation is exposed. The truth cannot be buried forever. So it’s merely a question of time before the perpetrators are brought to book and the history books are rewritten.
I’ll let you look for yourself to judge whether the bloggers valedictory words are a Sword of Truth or a Sword of Damocles hanging over his head, as David Hencke suggests they could be, should David finally gird his loins and enter the Libel Arena, accompanied by his trusty Guardian Angel. A large part of the nub of the evidence lies in the teasing apart of the schemes hatched between Mohamed and The Guardian.
“[Jonathan Boyd Hunt] created a website documenting the Guardian’s role in the “cash for questions” affair that is so mad that it is not even worth talking to libel lawyers to gain redress.”
‘Cash for questions’ author David Hencke, writing in The Guardian of 12 Dec 2001, following Louis Theroux’s TV documentary ‘When Louis met the Hamiltons’,
It was the combination of David and Louis that really drew me in personally, because David Hencke and his Exaro News Agency has been at the forefront of the political offspring of Operation Yewtree:Operation Fernbridge.
Louis seems to have done so many TV programmes about those who are now in the lowest dudgeon of public regard: Jimmy Savile for one, but also Max Clifford and The Hamiltons. Louis has now left this country and instead is living the dream in the USA: Coincidence?
Max Clifford became snarled up in Operation Yewtree and was probably it’s most unlikely victim. Max Clifford impaled on a sword of truth?! [Ed: Shome mistake here shurely?] Max was one of the very men who, according to his own autobiography, dreamed up the seismic revelations that led to thetidal wave of sleaze which overwhelmed the seemingly invincible Tories back in the 1990’s. Remarkably, Max also tells of being on a retainer from Mohamed Al Fayed, and blow me down, what do I find on page 256 of his book?
In December 2003 Charles Wardle, an ex-Tory and former minister who Max originally met through their mutual connection with Mohamed Al Fayed, asked Max on behalf of Nigel Farage, the front man for the anti-EU United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) if he would handle the …
The recent inexorable rise of UKIP has been against a backdrop of a complete loss of public belief in the British Establishment. The media had already convinced us all that all of our elected representatives were “on the take” and more recently we are now being convinced that they are likely all paedophile child murderers to boot!
David Hencke is classed as a political journalist. Take a look at his output on Exaro. Where is the politics? Then take a backwards glance at Nick Davies, another foremost Guardian journalist. He of course became especially lauded as the 2010 election approached and the Murdoch Hacking Scandal proceeded. The public imagination was said to be grabbed when it was reported that the Mobile Phone of a Child Murder victim had been cynically edited by someone in the Murdoch group, giving rise to a forlorn hope in her parents that she was actually still alive.
From that story all else followed, but we do now know that this crucial turning-point in the story was untrue, just as Jonathan Boyd-Hunt contends that “Cash For Questions” was essentially untrue. Poor Milly’s phone was just edited by the automatic Technology.We also now know that the Murdoch Press was by no means unique in exploiting the security gaps in the answering machine/mobile phone technology in the past. What is also very apparent is that where David Hencke is a political journalist obsessed with child abuse, Nick Davies was a political journalist who used to be obsessed with child abuse.
If the English are as immoveable by Politics as Conrad suggested in his novel all those years ago, how else can they be moved? The answer has always been obvious and the list very long.
Political scandals in the United Kingdom are commonly referred to by the press and commentators as “‘sleaze”.
But, are the stories always actually true? And why are all the same old faces seeming to be popping up all the time recently, one moment as Hero and the next moment as Zero. Are we the people merely pawns in a game played by those in the media with the right friends in the right places at the right times. Is it the politicians we should be living in loathing and fear of? Or is it those who claim to carry the Sword of Truth – the Journalists?
How do we know what politicians say? The media tells us.
How do we know what politicians do? The media tells us
How exactly does a politician even function without the media?
Who really has their hand on the tiller of our ship of State?
Time perhaps that we put away foolish things and started to be men and women who do our own thinking, and listening. And it was then that another quote from Conrad’s cynical book of the past caught my attention.
“The terrorist and the policeman both come from the same basket. Revolution, legality – countermoves in the same game; forms of idleness at bottom identical.”
I looked back at where I had started…
“It is this country that is dangerous, with her idealistic conception of legality.”
How do you make a revolution in a country so idealistic about the concept of Legality?
The answer is startlingly obvious. You get the legal establishment to lead the revolution.
But what if the revolution all rests on lies, including the most recent one: Operation Yewtree.
And, just as the next election comes due… so does the next wave of Sleaze.
Right on cue.
You say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know we all wanna change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well, you know you better free your mind instead.