There’s an old English saying that people quite understandably get judged by the friends that they keep, and in line with that tenet therefore I personally don’t buy the load of crap emanating in belated and unconvincing, lame excuses from the likes of Harriet Harman, Patricia Hewitt, Adrian Fulford and other dubious characters of their ilk within the British Establishment, who now that they’ve been metaphorically caught with their knickers or trousers around their ankles, want to con those of us with functioning brains in our heads that chalk is actually cheese.
Well-brought up five year olds instinctively know right from wrong because they’re taught the significance of both these viewpoints in their lives and consequently are likewise positively encouraged and instructed how to eschew the latter; adults who’re prominent and influential in any society, and that should include our own here in Britain, who’re either tasked as elected politicians with framing the country’s laws or as senior judges with upholding, without fear or favour, those very laws, and who as supposedly responsible persons – else they shouldn’t have been appointed to those important posts in the first place – let alone individuals entrusted with holding the aforesaid positions should have known, and furthermore are expected to infinitely know better than any five year old child what’s loathsomely immoral and downright illegal to any right-thinking person that is.
And even fantasizing about having sexual intercourse with considerably underage children, who’re no more than babies themselves, much less grotesquely manipulating the law of the land to facilitate such abhorrent conduct is, I believe, beyond the pale; and no genuinely moral person - regardless of what high and mighty position they hold or which hereditary monarch they’re appointed as an advisor to or who conversely hold no such rank or personally wouldn’t care for any such dubious honour or recognition – would conscionably, even in the remotest sense, want to much less openly associate themselves with a collaborative grouping of odious paedophiles – Establishment or otherwise – as the smarmy and euphemistically named PIE – the Paedophile Information Exchange – calls itself, and is generally known as by those who despicably cavort with it, irrespective of its tenuous legal status; but rather would sensibly give it a wide berth.
Patricia Hewitt, Harriet Harman, Adrian Fulford and Co clearly didn’t do any of the above as they sensibly should have done and responsible individuals not only in
but anywhere else come to that would have expected them to; and as such one is perfectly entitled to ask why not? Yet they’d be among the first, if the boot was on the other foot, to condemn others either engaged in or connected, however loosely, with activities that they personally found abhorrent or even objected to, doing so on the basis that such activities - if they were as transparently so as paedophilia most definitely is - were significantly detrimental in physical, psychological, moral and societal terms to the fabric of the nation as well as the victims involved. Britain
And one such example comes readily to mind - knife crime, especially when with that racist mindset of theirs it’s prejudicially, erroneously but exclusively associated with one particular segment of our British community - the Black one! And who’re then collectively as an ethnic group targeted, vilified and severely punished. Not so, however, the white Caucasian, British Establishment, notwithstanding how heinous or multifaceted their individual or collaborative crimes are or who are directly responsible for them. And one only had to observe the raucous baying of MPs in the House of Commons quite recently when the contentious matter of knife murder was uppermost in the news. But they would, wouldn’t they?
And it’s also a safe bet from the perspective of these MPs and others of their Establishment ilk that if one of these utterly detested knife wielding adherents, of whatever ethnic group that they belonged to, were to have killed someone, either gratuitously or in a gang fight, in the presence of their close friends who did nothing at all to stop the actual knife wielder but on the contrary were very supportive of his or her actions; and what’s more these loyal or sympathetic friends then resolutely refused to give any evidence to the police against the killer, they’d be instantly arrested for intentionally thwarting a police enquiry and obstructing the course of justice. Or much more likely, simply because of whom they were and where they were at the time of the murder, be likewise charged with being accessories after the fact. And no one needs to acquaint Harriet Harman or Adrian Fulford, who’re both lawyers and him a senior judge as well, about this; as they’re both fully aware of this entrenched legal practice, as does Patricia Hewitt.
Yet for all that they quite superciliously expect the rest of us to buy the load of hogwash they pompously and utterly unconvincingly serve up about their connections with PIE, and mixing metaphors don’t want for us to smell let alone observe the demonstrably dead rat that’s in the swill being poured into the pig’s trough - something that in other circumstances as MPs they know a great deal about. And as far as being accessories after the PIE fact, just as would be the case in the aforesaid fictional knife stabbing scenario, these Brains of Britain – I honestly don’t think – don’t even want for the rest of us to go down that particular path as far as they’re personally concerned.
How’s that you might well ask relative to their quite hubristic but all the same contemptibly perceived notion of Establishment exceptionalism and indispensability? And while there are many of you who will undoubtedly and even, dare I say, inevitably fall for it because of who these people are coupled with your own stupidity or perhaps naïveté, let me quite candidly and unapologetically say I don’t buy any of that exceptionalist and indispensible crap of theirs, or am I ever likely to.
Four year olds are basically babies with no comprehensive knowledge of the world that they’re in; who’re not in any position at all, or do they have the kind of developed mental capabilities to make valued or objective judgments in relation to their personal lives or anything else that’s even tenuously connected to or important to them. Furthermore, they’re nowhere near puberty in physical or emotional terms and wouldn’t have the slightest clue or any discernible grasp of what puberty is even if one were to ludicrously attempt to explain it to them; that’s provided of course that the individual concerned were capable of retaining that child’s miniscule attention span. So how on earth then can these PIE perverts and their Establishment supporters logically emphasize and moreover maintain that by lowering the sexual age of consent to FOUR or even scrapping it altogether society as a whole would benefit significantly, because effectively it would be liberating its children.
From what? Their innocence? Because that’s essentially what these paedophiles and their sick apologists would be doing; and I don’t see anything that’s either remotely beneficial or in the least constructive about that. Can you?
Brian Kerr exonerated Adrian Fulford in the light of the Daily Mail expose of him on the basis that the accusations against Adrian Fulford were “allegations without substance.” In the given circumstances of that report by Brian Kerr, quite seriously what other outcome could one have expected? And to paraphrase Mandy Rice Davies – who more than most was well aware of the contemptible and contemptuous disingenuousness that the British Establishment has vis-à-vis the ordinary members of the public - Brian Kerr would obviously say that wouldn’t he? Yet neither Brian Kerr nor the Westminster regime - rather understandably from their skewed point of view - has had either the bloody courage or the decency to publish that report that all sensible persons instinctively and with that gut feeling deep inside know was a comprehensive whitewash, both literally – since all the participants other than perhaps apart from the hapless victims were white Caucasian Establishment figures – and metaphorically so.
And one would quite reasonably have thought that public interest aside, but nevertheless with such serious, very damaging and utterly revolting allegations circulating extensively about one of our most senior Appeal Court judges that the enshrined and purportedly valued principle of justice not only being done but demonstrably as well seen to have been done – evidently what the likes of Brian Kerr and Adrian Fulford ostensibly like to dupe the rest of us into trustingly believing when it transparently doesn’t impact on their sort - would meticulously have applied and most crucially, publicly seen to have been done in of all cases that of Adrian Fulford. And the fact that neither Brian Kerr, the government nor others within the judiciary didn’t see that it was fit or proper to do so blatantly leaves a number of questions unansered and from my point of view questions the so-called integrity of all those involved.
Can’t say I’m surprised though by Brian Kerr’s spurious conclusions, poor man; as I’m not; coming as they do from someone who emanates from a society where an internecine and longstanding civil war there isn’t even recognized as such and is asininely and euphemistically referred to by all an sundry as the “Troubles!” Since it’s likewise the customary conduct of a rather corrupt, secretively appointed, entirely unaccountable, downright hypocritical and an absolute master class of double-standards operatives that run our so-called judicial system. And frankly you’re most welcome to them, as you’re the targeted assholes who sycophantically know your own station in life and “cap-doffingly” suck up to them believing all the claptrap they tell you; and overwhelmingly so because these unelected, unaccountable to the citizenry of our country and prized Establishment jerks are judges. While in return they cynically and disdainfully pull the wool over your eyes, do whatever it is they want to and in the process treat you all with the utmost contempt. And on reflection if you want to know what I really think; it’s that they and you thoroughly deserve each other.
I’m absolutely convinced that Elizabeth Butler-Sloss’ conclusions at the end of the so-called enquiry she’s been put in charge of will be identical to those of Brian Kerr, relative to Adrian Fulford: “allegations without substance.” But whatever; doesn’t it make you sit up and think and also have a smug smile in the bargain - those of you who like me don’t give a toss about these feral and in terms of human worth trivial individuals - at their discernible inadequacies, that the only conceivable way - quite palpably sick as it is - that these patronizing, pretentious, self-perceived exceptionalist and indispensible white Caucasian, British Establishment figures, and particularly its male component, can get their rocks off is to screw very vulnerable young children and/or babies?
Can’t say I’m the least bit shocked by any of the above, since to those in the know these are the same ineffectual bastards who for several generations now have rather ridiculously but all the same blithely, although somewhat pathetically to observe, been roundly deluding themselves that they’ve successfully and manfully, as the macho males they both see and regard themselves as, proudly fathered the children they either unwittingly didn’t or couldn’t have sired – because they’re unknowingly azospermiacs; shooting blanks in other words – with their clandestinely cuckolding wives more than content to let them erroneously and imaginarily, but oh so haughtily like the chump cuckolds they patently are, carry on sporting and risibly accrediting themselves with the cherished but illusional prestige – relative to themselves anyway – of biological fatherhood.
And then, of course, there are those Establishment “men” who’re well aware of their wives’ infidelity, even privately encourage it and welcome the bastard offspring that result, known only to the two of them and perhaps the respective wives’ lovers and amorously produced from these wives’ sexual liaisons. And why? Because the husbands to these wives are closet homosexuals that use marriage and even bogus “fatherhood” – never mind they’re not responsible for the real thing - as a handy guise or subterfuge to publicly conceal the fact that they’re hardcore homosexuals. A most cowardly artifice, in my opinion, on the part of these “men” in what after all is a country where homosexuality and homosexual marriages are quite legal among consenting adults.
And research shows that there’s a lot of that about particularly among those of the sexually repressed public schools – both male and female – brigades; that’s why the women that these men intentionally for societal reasons and appearances but often lovelessly marry, are very much complicit in what they do; except for those occasions when their cuckolding enterprises cause them to clandestinely and from the heart go freelance. But if you ask me, both these women and their “men” are one and the same immorally!
That’s why you don’t or won’t see these women castigating or walking out on their paedophile men; and why it is too that white Caucasians per se, and of both genders, are exceedingly muted in their condemnations when it comes to criticizing white paedophiles, for fear it’ll be interpreted by other races as a damning indictment of their race, which they ludicrously and totally fallaciously like to self-opinionatedly portray as inherently and exclusively the most civilized on earth and a beacon for others to follow. And that’s not possible to continue doing if you’re forced to admit that you’ve some pretty nasty and horrific skeletons in your cupboard, is it?
And with my Afro-Caribbean and brutally enforced slavery ancestry background at the savage hands of these utterly distasteful people, maybe in permitting what’s going on to occur, God is perhaps demonstrating that He also has the same wry sense of humour as I do.
For in the days when Britannia ruled the waves these immoral breed of men and women were the same scum that with impunity carried out these very same iniquitous and utterly criminal activities among the so-called natives. Now apart from a few controversial rocks in the South Atlantic referred to as the Falkland Islands and, of course, that southern European one called Gibraltar there’s no substantial, thank God, British Empire left – no matter how many OBEs, CBEs, MBEs or the rest of it that these demented empire loyalists still like doling out to each other; and like the dogs that belonged to Martin (40) and his wife Rebecca Clifton (34) of New Houghton, Derbyshire that ate each other after their owners went off on holiday to Skegness in Lincolnshire and left them unattended, that identically barbarous and feral mindset pervades our white Caucasian, British Establishment and their toadying hangers-on. And what we’re now witnessing, without an empire where these people could give vent to their utterly sick, sexual perversions, are the proverbial chickens, as will the inevitable blowback from their likewise loathsome and criminal foreign policies, coming home to roost.
And it’s not just Britain; Australia where many of our country’s much vaunted kith and kin are located and with them having appropriated that massive land from its indigenous Aborigine population, that identically virulent, sick mindset endemic among our own white Caucasian Establishment at home also sadistically affects their Australian counterparts with an Australian District Court Judge - one Garry Neilson - publicly advocating not only paedophilia as such but also untrammelled incestuous relationships between siblings and other close biological family members, emphasizing that just as homosexuality has become legal and is generally acceptable too, in the foreseeable future paedophilia and incest will likewise enjoy the same privileges. No need to ask what he gets up to within his own biological family and possibly too among the kids and other extremely vulnerable underage family members of friends and work colleagues; when he’s not freelancing with children who’re total strangers to him, that is.
And when a senior Cabinet minister in the Con-Dem regime of David Cameron and Nick Clegg – Michael Gove, the Education Minister no less, while industriously objecting to any attempt at holding a rigorous and full-scale enquiry of these Establishment criminalities on the basis that what happened then occurred in a different cultural era and therefore we should all get used to it, forget it and move on.
Unsurprisingly to me no coverage or criticisms are to be found of Garry Neilson or Michael Gove’s remarks in the western media; but even though I’m absolutely sure that no such sick or utterly insensitive comments would emanate from similar office holders as Michael Gove and Garry Neilson in let’s say Iran, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Venezuela, Syria or Russia, can you imagine what in marked contrast the furore would be from the west’s political Establishment – the likes of William Hague, John Kerry and Victoria Nuland for example and throughout the entire western corporate media together with their rent-a-mouth pundits – both black and white – if these loathsome comments were coming out of the previously mentioned countries? Boy, we wouldn’t hear the last of it!
Which simply and rather categorically goes to show what a lousy bunch of hypocrites and slick double-standards operatives those within our Establishment along with their like-minded ilk that control and work in the western media are, and why too it’s not rocket science to work out why Elizabeth Butler-Sloss - with her own identifiable skeletons of sex abuse cover ups in her particular cupboard - was put in charge of this so-called enquiry, or what her findings will be.
And it’s this human detritus that would like to con the rest of the world into believing that they are the Master Race. Give us strength!