Just as the US media finally had to come clean about the capacity of Joe Biden to lead the country, the UK media went into full dirty tricks mode, salivating over the “racism” of Reform candidates and party workers.  According to Nigel Farage this included sending in an actor to tell a Channel 4 crew that Rishi Sunak is “a fucking paki”.

We have been here before.  During the 2015 general election campaign a UKIP candidate named Richard Blay, allegedly a ‘former’ Tory called Richard Blay confided in a complete stranger that he held violent racist views.  The complete stranger turned out to be an undercover reporter who was able to catch it all on camera.

This time round Farage used a BBC Question Time appearance to defend his corner:

Nigel Farage has repeated claims that a canvasser caught on camera branding Rishi Sunak a ‘f****** p***’ is actually an actor playing his part in ‘a total and utter set-up’, during a fiery appearance on Question Time.

The Reform UK leader’s much-anticipated appearance on the BBC Leaders’ Special at the Midlands Arts Centre in Birmingham came just hours after the Prime Minister lashed out at him over the slur.
At the centre of the furore is Reform activist Andrew Parker, who made the remark about Mr Sunak during a secret recording made by Channel 4 News in Essex.

He also suggested that migrants should be shot by soldiers as they arrive on UK beaches and called for Muslims to be ejected from mosques so they can be turned into Wetherspoons pubs.

Unfortunately, other Reform folk who are not actors have also been caught out wrong-thinking out loud.  This time Farage folded:

Elsewhere, Mr Farage was faced with laughter from the BBC Question Time audience when he said he has ‘no idea’ why candidates who have made racist comments are still standing for Reform.

He was read racist or xenophobic comments made by Reform candidates, including Leslie Lilley, candidate for Southend East & Rochford, who reportedly said he would ‘slaughter’ migrants and ‘have their families taken out’ in a Facebook post about small boat crossings.

Edward Oakenfull, candidate for Derbyshire Dales, who tweeted derogatory comments about the IQ of ethnic minorities, and Robert Lomas, candidate for Barnsley North, who claimed ‘black people of Britain’ were ‘grifting the race card’, were also referenced.

Mr Farage said: ‘In most cases, they’ve been disowned. People like (Leslie) Lilley, honestly, what he said is criminal.’

When asked: ‘So why is he your candidate?’ Mr Farage said: ‘I have no idea’, prompting laughter from the audience.

He said: ‘I inherited this. It was a start-up party. I paid a professional London vetting company to weed this out. The work wasn’t done.’

Asked if he would withdraw support from the three referenced candidates, Mr Farage said: ‘I wouldn’t want anything to do with them’.

So another opportunity to take the initiative goes begging.  Were I Farage’s advisor I would have urged him to go on the attack.  The answer I would have written for him is:

“An awful lot of proud and loyal Englishmen are absolutely furious that they have never been asked if they want what the Establishment euphemistically terms diversity. They do not accept the Establishment’s dictate. They will never accept it. They want the question of the English people’s future to be front, left, and centre of public debate. They see the sneers and smears from Establishment politicians and journalists as just a means to avoid that and impose silence on the lot of us. They’ve had a belly full, and sometimes it shows. Sometimes they don’t express themselves with the authorised political niceties. Well, not everyone writes for the Guardian. Perhaps politicians and journalists should show some humility before the English people, stop hiding behind confected moral outrage, and have the courage to engage honestly.  And if that means some very frank blow-back for the last twenty-five years of one-way political traffic, so be it.”

Perhaps he might have added to that a couple of new policy announcements to the effect that a Reform government would repeal all anti-free speech laws and get the debate started.

Sleepy Joe, meanwhile is down on both knees, and won’t be getting up.  He cannot be allowed to run in November.  The immediate problem is that if he stays in office until November or even the January hand-over it means admitting that the world’s most powerful nation is in the hands of a mental incompetent.  If he goes it means four months of care-taker president Kamala Harris followed, one would suppose, by the campaign for her re-election.  Democrats might prefer almost anybody else, and there is some Republican precedent for them here.  The politically dead and buried Richard Nixon was kept in place until Spiro T Agnew could be relieved of his vice-presidential role on 10th October 1973.  Might it, time-permitting, be vice president Newsom, followed by Biden’s rapid retirement and Trump vs President Newsom in November?

Alexey, a 47-year-old Russian and a teacher by profession, shares his perspective on Putin’s war in Ukraine.  Among other things, he explains why he believes Ukraine should not cede territory, and questions whether the West is really the great enemy to Russia:

“We have China right next door and it’s many times scarier.

... China’s policy is that the whole world, that is, the globe, is China.  And all those who think otherwise simply do not understand the magnitude of the imperial scheme of the Chinese and their emperor”

Video from HEADSHOT, who specialise in bringing the vox populi of that vast country to the internet.

Last weekend’s F1 event in Miami was a palm-scanning every fan for who visited.  The revolution starts here!

After the implanted chip then the Health Passport ...the next iteration of the digital control project

Believe or not, there is a trade publication for people working “to make us all safe”.  It’s called Biometric Update, and it has just run a piece on the emergence of palm-printing at retail point of sale:

J.P. Morgan Payments’ system leverages a familiar one-time mobile biometric enrolment process in which users can register their palm or facial scan, which is then matched at point of purchase, either at an on-site shop or via a newly launched e-commerce retail store. Takis Georgakopoulos, global head of J.P. Morgan Payments, says the company’s biometric tools will “demonstrate how a modern, unified payments system can help businesses grow by reimagining their entire retail experience.”

Part of that reimagining involves making better use of data. The expanded relationship also gives SFM access to J.P. Morgan Payments’ Commerce Center, which allows the company to configure payment settings, search transaction history and access customer purchase data. In other words, it brings aspects of fintech into a trusted banking ecosystem, allowing merchants to tailor experiences based on insights and trends.

… The biometric payment machines will simplify payment processes to reduce transaction times, leading to shorter lines and a more streamlined shopping experience. Cost, of course, is also a factor, and Telpo says the P105’s interface requires minimal training and can replace human workers to reduce labor expenses.

… What makes the contactless biometric system unique is the magic of its scanning mechanism, which enables customers to “effortlessly hover their palm over a device to make payments.” Designed for easy integration into existing POS systems, the service promises biometric palm authentication that is 1300 times more secure than facial recognition methods.

For the avoidance of doubt, cash bestows anonymity; anonymity bestows freedom.

This last week the Oklahoma legislature has joined Louisiana in passing a law prohibiting the enforcement of dictates from supranational bodies within state boundaries.  Most particularly, it nullifies the monopoly power over global health sought by the World Health Authority.

SECTION 1. NEW LAW

A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 6301 of Title 74, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

A. The World Health Organization, the United Nations and the World Economic Forum shall have no jurisdiction in the State of Oklahoma. The state and its political subdivisions, including, but not limited to, counties, cities, towns, precincts, water districts, school districts, school administrative units, or quasi-public entities, shall not engage in the enforcement of, or any collaboration with the enforcement of, any requirements, instructions, mandates, recommendations, or guidance provided by the World Health Organization, the United Nations or the World Economic Forum.

B. Any mandates, recommendations, instructions, communications or guidance issued by the World Health Organization, the United Nations or the World Economic Forum shall not be used in this state as a basis for action, nor to direct, order or otherwise impose, contrary to the constitution and laws of the State of Oklahoma any requirements whatsoever, including those for masks, vaccines or
medical testing, or gather any public or private information about the state’s citizens or residents, and shall have no force or effect in the State of Oklahoma.

SECTION 2.

This act shall become effective June 1, 2024.

SECTION 3.

It being immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health or safety, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, by reason whereof this act shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and approval.”

Passed the House of Representatives the 24th day of April, 2024.

In a number of countries there has been opposition to the WHO’s pandemic treaty, some governmental, some not.  All see in it a naked bid for technocratic totalitarianism in health:

■ New Zealand’s new coalition government will reserve against proposed amendments to IHR.
■ Slovakia’s prime minister announced the government will not support strengthening the WHO.
■ A comprehensive bill by a congressman is gaining traction and public support in the Philippines.
■ Two South African parliamentarians champion the WHO Withdrawal Bill and mobilise on it.
■ A Parliamentarian in the Netherlands filed a letter making a reservation due to lack of due process.
■ Eleven European Union parliamentarians are formally challenging procedural failures in IHR amendments.
■ Bill HR 79 (to defund and exit WHO) was introduced by United States Congressman Andy Biggs.
■ Parliamentarians continue advocating to reject IHR amendments and question the WHO in Japan.
■ A letter from the Australian people communicates rejection of the WHO’s proposed amendments to the IHR.

Inevitably, the British government describes itself as a leading force in the formation of the pandemic treaty.  It was a signatory to the original joint-letter proposing the treaty.  The other signatory governments were a motley group of twenty-two, namely Fiji, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Kenya, France, Germany, Greece, Korea, Chile, Costa Rica, Albania, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Netherlands, Tunisia, Senegal, Spain, Norway, Serbia, Indonesia, and Ukraine.  The Chinese and US governments did not sign but indicated strong support.

The date for agreeing the text of the new instrument is at the World Health Assembly at the UN in New York in May 2024.

Moscow_concert_terror.bmp
Moscow’s concert terror, as seen by one of those in the hall.

Just before the start of a performance by the popular band Piknik at the Crocus City Hall outside Moscow, as many as five armed men, said to be heavily bearded and in camouflage, entered the building and opened fire on the crowd. An expanding fire has led to the collapse of the building’s roof.  The Moscow Region Health Ministry published a list of 145 casualties of the attack.  At least forty are dead.  Nine of those hospitalized are reported to be in a critical condition.  An unknown number are still in the building.

Dmitry Medvedev has jumped in as usual, which is only to be expected:

“Terrorists understand only reciprocal terror. No trials or investigations will help if force is not answered with force, and deaths with total punishment of terrorists and repression of their families. That’s our worldly experience. If it can be established that these terrorists were from the Kyiv regime, it’s impossible to deal with them and those who have been inspired by their ideology any other way. They must all be located and ruthlessly destroyed as terrorists. Including official representatives of the state that committed such an atrocity.”

Office of the President of Ukraine immediately stated: “Let’s get it on the record. Ukraine had absolutely nothing to do with these events.”  Likewise the Russian Volunteer Corps, which is fighting for Ukraine in the Belgorod region, stated that “It definitely wasn’t us, of course.”

An Islamic State group has claimed responsibility.

Earlier this month, the US embassy in Moscow issued an alert warning of a potential terror attack.  The alert advised US citizens to avoid large gatherings, including concerts.  The Kremlin duly dismissed the warning as a “provocation” designed to destabilise Russian society.

Soren’s frequent use of irony if not sarcasm predisposed me to take something he said as less than serious.
He was serious.
Deadly serious.

Don’t jest on this topic. god is awake. time for a cut (prolog)
the right way to view the entire history of life is as a swarm of renormalizing dreams—our world is a dream. god’s dream. And when he is awake, fully awake, one will have won.

His reference to “prolog” is a pun, of sorts, on our mutual interest in programming languages—particularly logic—as mathematical metaphysics.  “cut” in the context of the Prolog logic programming language, terminates search for alternative paths to the goal, accepting the one at hand.

In all likelihood his death was a suicide.

He missed his wife, Judith.

Terribly.

Fatally.

From the PA website this afternoon:

An Open Letter to Michael Gove

Today in parliament you listed Patriotic Alternative as one of five groups in Britain that are being assessed as to whether they fall under the Government’s new definition of ‘extremism’. The fact that such actions are being taken without due diligence or parliamentary oversight or debate is anti-democratic in itself, but more worrying is that from this point onward anyone rejecting what the Government terms ‘liberal democracy’ could fall foul of this draconian legislation.

This presents a major threat to both freedom of speech and freedom of association and is a dangerous step toward a totalitarian state where those who do not adhere to state doctrine are silenced and have their human rights curtailed.

This would all be bad enough; however you went further and used your parliamentary Privilege to make several completely misleading claims about Patriotic Alternative, which we seek to rectify here.

Your first false claim is that Patriotic Alternative seeks ‘forced repatriation’ of ethnic minority groups. This is completely and demonstrably false; we have a policy of voluntary repatriation for settled immigrants and the only people we seek to forcibly deport are illegal migrants and foreign criminals – something that the Conservative Party have repeatedly pledged to do but failed to make good on. We also oppose mass immigration – a view that is held by a large section of the voting population and something that the Conservative Party have again repeatedly pledged to get under control whilst in reality increasing net migration to new highs.

Your second claim is that Patriotic Alternative seek a ‘White ethnostate’. To clarify this, we state in our policies that:

“The British people are made up of the English, Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh. These are the indigenous peoples of the United Kingdom and only they have an ancestral claim to it. The United Kingdom is the only place where the British people, and they alone, can realise their natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination. As such, we will pass a Nation State Law to enshrine this principle and ensure the British people never become a minority or second-class citizens in their ancestral homeland.”

In short, we stake a claim to the ancestral homeland of our people and declare that our homeland should be governed for the benefit of our people.

You are an ardent supporter of the state of Israel, a state that has a nation-state law worded in a very similar way to the proposal that we are in favour of. If you support such a law for the Israeli people, why are you so offended that the indigenous people of the British Isles would also campaign for a similar law in order to protect our cultural and ethnic interests?

This would not be the creation of a ‘white ethnostate’ as you put it, but in fact ethno-states for the constituent nations of the British Isles – on the mainland that would be the English, the Scottish and the Welsh.

We believe that the indigenous people of these islands should never become a minority and should remain what we term a ‘super-majority’, this however does not mean that those of migrant descent would not remain here or that such people would be forcibly removed (unless under the conditions that they were here illegally or had committed crimes on British soil).

Your third claim was that we endorse ‘neo-Nazi ideology, we reject this claim. In fact, we have repeatedly attempted to register Patriotic Alternative as a political party in order to participate in the democratic process and stand in elections. It is however the Home Office, which currently operates under your very government, which has pressured the Electoral Commission in order to prevent us from registering as a political party – effectively denying us our democratic rights to stand in elections and also denying the public the right to vote for us. This represents a bureaucratic impediment to the democratic process that you claim to be in favour of.

Your final claim is that we ‘target minority groups for intimidation’. This is a complete and total fabrication. We are a lawful community group that campaigns on a range of issues. We have never targeted any group with violence or carried out acts that are intimidatory. In reality the very opposite is true. What’s more, we have members and supporters from ethnic minority backgrounds and have repeatedly reached out to other ethnic groups for discussions on issues such as immigration and multiculturalism.

Patriotic Alternative is wholeheartedly opposed to violence or confrontation and through our lawful activities we seek to engage with people who hold similar views and give those people a healthy and peaceful outlet for their justified frustrations with the current British political establishment.

Patriotic Alternative wish to be involved within the democratic process and the claim that we are ‘extremists’ is as absurd as it is worrying. To include peaceful community campaigning groups under this legislation is not only a threat to our human rights, but represents the creeping totalitarian nature of a government that brands itself as ‘Conservative’.

This is nothing more than communism via the back door.

We respectfully request that you remove our name from this list and that you put an end to this anti-democratic power grab that threatens to infringe on the rights of all British citizens who wish to speak freely and organise democratically.

Yours Sincerely.

“Unwilling to rest on the foot of conscience, my Russia took a few big leaps, pushing everyone around, but them slipped and collapsed with a crash, destroying everything around it. And now it is floundering in a pool of either mud or blood, with broken bones and the poor, robbed population, surrounded by the tens of thousands of victims of the most stupid and senseless war of the XXI century.”
- Navalny, 20th July, 2023.

Claimed details of Navalny’s treatment at Correctional Colony 3, Yamalo Nenets here.