Bounce back better?

By June 11, 2021June 14th, 2021No Comments


Since the year 2000 various disasters have occurred for which the official
government explanations are not believable. Notably 9/11 – the collapse of the
World Trade Building in New York in 2001 – and 7/7 – the terrorists’ bombings in
London in 2005. More recently, in 2018, the Salisbury poisoning. The narratives
of these and similar events put out by those in charge and faithfully reported by
the media are inconsistent and incoherent but nevertheless doubled down upon
and generally believed by the public because alternative explanations are almost
too horrible to contemplate: surely the movers and shakers of this world cannot
be more evil than the occasional crazed suicide bomber or the malign but
laughably inefficient ex-Soviet assassin?

In the aftermath of the mysterious poisoning of the Scripals in Salisbury in
March 2018, the government had some difficulty in making the official narrative
stick. So at the G7 meeting in June of that year, Prime Minister Theresa May
announced that “G7 leaders have agreed to establish a new Rapid Response
Mechanism”. This meant that all the G7 nations would automatically accept the
version of such events given by one of their members and react appropriately. To
put it cynically: gold-plating the lies!

Some years earlier, in a speech at the United Nations, Prime Minister Cameron
had characterised the questioning of official narratives by “conspiracy theorists”
as being a form of right-wing terrorism that needed to be dealt with. Since the
onset of Covid 19 the government has become frantically busy dealing with
alternative narratives, setting up its own bodies such as the Integrity Initiative,
bullying online platforms like U-tube and Facebook to self-censor and now with
the Online Harms Bill threatening to criminalise any serious search for the truth.
It is a decade now since the Behavioural Insights Team was set up as an official
body answerable to the Cabinet Office. Otherwise known as the Nudge Unit, its
function is the psychological management of the public perception of any
current issue that it cares to address. Since when has this kind of thing been the
proper and acceptable business of government? Interestingly, its remit is not
limited to the UK but is worldwide. Are there any comparable organisations
based in Moscow, Beijing or Teheran and how would Westminster react if such
foreign governments dropped their pearls of wisdom in front of the British

SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) is a similar body set up to
advise the Cabinet Office together with its subgroup SPI-B (The Independent
Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours). In March 2020 SPI-B stated that:

A substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally

and in a later document:

The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those
who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging.

Thus we see government, totally outside of democratic norms or parliamentary
control, ramping up the fear factor to ensure that the public at large accepts its
messaging on Covid 19.

The Conservative Party is no longer conservative in any meaningful sense. It has
no interest in maintaining our traditional Christian civilization. On the contrary,
David Cameron’s “Big Society” plan was based on the successful community
organiser movement established by Saul Alinsky. Conservative Party
publications state this frankly but they do not go on to elucidate that Alinsky
was a neo-Marxist on the Gramsci model who taught how to bring in left wing
globalism gradually, step by step, infiltrating the system from within. His
definitive work, Rules for Radicals was published in 1971 and dedicated “to the
very first radical… Lucifer.” In it Alinsky shows what a good pupil of his master he

The first step in community organisation is community disorganisation…
Present arrangements must be disorganised if they are to be displaced by new
patterns. (p116)

In Cameron’s first administration, Nick Bowles, a naive junior minister, came out
with the claim that the government was intending to bring in a phase of “creative
destruction” in the public services. “Creative destruction” is a concept of
American neo-Conservatism but it is in line with the above quote from Alinsky.
Today we are not in charge of our own country: we have a government of
occupation which creates its own “truth” and spins events in line with a
preconceived narrative. The old Soviet Union had its all-embracing party
newspaper called Pravda (Russian for truth but meaning the exact opposite).
Pravda’s mantle has fallen to the BBC, where George Orwell once worked and
we can see his dystopian vision in 1984 coming to fruition.

Managing the pandemic, it seems, has taken over Britain and most of the world.
However the whole thing is built on false foundations. Covid 19 is a nasty new
species of influenza but it is not a pandemic: it is not a plague threatening human
life on Earth. There are no bodies on the street. Funeral directors are not
working overtime. Overall annual death rates have not risen significantly if at all.
Over 99% of those who catch the disease survive it and the average age of death
for those for whom it proves fatal is 82. The current “Test and trace” system is a
nonsense because, as accepted medical authorities advise, it is not a proper
diagnostic test: it gives rise to a huge number of false positives and healthy
people who have no symptoms and are not infectious are forced into quarantine.
Why then the lockdowns? Why the closure of our industry , of our business and
social life? In 2011 in the wake of the Swine Fever scare, national governments
were encouraged by the WHO to prepare plans in readiness for any future
pandemics. The UK plan was commended as excellent but it did not include
lockdowns. However in 2020 lockdowns were decreed and are now a semi-permanent feature.

Their real objective is not to curb the pandemic but to destroy small and medium business, discourage individual enterprise and initiative and to make the whole of society more helplessly dependant upon big government and the big billionaires.

Mass vaccination is the supposed remedy for the crisis that has been conjured up
but it is not a true remedy: rather it is huge crime that is being committed
against the nations. The peoples of the world are being treated as guinea pigs to
trial new sets of experimental vaccines that have adverse symptoms on a
horrifying scale. Testing a new vaccine properly takes several years and involves
a “double blind” system where half your volunteers get the jab and half get a
placebo without either group knowing which one they belong to. Then after a
year or so the scientists can begin to check how effective the vaccine is. But to
give an emergency ok to the vaccine after only a few months is a nonsense
especially when you have lost your placebo group by vaccinating them soon
afterwards! In the UK there is a “yellow card” system for reporting adverse
symptoms but it is underused and hidden away on the government website. The
statutory body, MHRA, has wilfully ignored its duty to investigate these reported
symptoms. UK Column ( has done the nation a service by
making the yellow card file readily available.

By law vaccination is voluntary and every adult should have access to the
relevant information before giving “informed consent” but this does not happen
in the vast majority of cases. Being over the age of 85, I was amongst the first to
be offered the jab but refused it – with a definite “No”. Vaccine hesitancy does
not apply to me!

The government is steamrollering its narrative through with no regard for
dissent. There is a wide range of expert medical opinion but the government
only listens to “the science”, ie, its own pet scientists who are on board with the
approved narrative. The government and their lackeys in the mass media like to
pretend that it is only a handful of ignorant anti-vac freaks who oppose them.
The many qualified virologists who speak out against this mass rollout of Covid
vaccination are ignored , censored and threatened. Even worse it is now
proposed that children should be vaccinated although the under-18s are at no
risk from Covid 19 but could be gravely harmed by vaccine adverse effects. The
first rule of the medical profession is: Do no harm! 93 doctors from Israel have
just added their voice to the chorus of senior medical professionals pleading :
Keep this Covid vaccine away from our children.

Those who oppose the drastic and unprecedented curtailing of our liberties on
the grounds of this phoney emergency are demonised as selfish and stupid. The
BBC shows us pictures of a gravely ill patient rebuking, from his hospital bed, a
hypothetical Covid-denier who fancies that his sickness is imaginary. But no-one
is claiming that Covid 19 is not real and serious: we are simply saying that the
whole nation, indeed the whole world ought not to be thrown into turmoil to
combat it. If, at the beginning of this year, the BBC had given us similar heartrending stories of people who had suffered blood clots or fatal strokes as a result
of the Covid jab, they could have halted the whole mass vaccination rollout in an

Hold on a minute, you may say! Where is all this going? National governments
may be efficient or they may blunder but surely they have the best interests of
their people at heart or what is the point of it all? I can only reply that what is
happening today has not sprung out of nothing. The plan for global governance
has been maturing for more than a century. It started with a group around Cecil
Rhodes although after the first world war the locus moved from the British
Empire to the USA. For a long time it has been an open secret although people
don’t care to take note of it. Antony C Sutton, in two books he wrote in the

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution (1974) and
Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler (1976)

has shown us how the big financiers in New York supported both political
extremes in the 1930’s with the intention of creating war and disruption which
could only be resolved in the long run by the formation of a one-world

Until now Western civilization (and, by extension, world civilization) has been
based on Christendom. Christendom has provided a supernatural/international
framework within which individual sovereign nations could operate and
hopefully recognise a common standard of ethics and behaviour. Of course
Christendom was fractured by the Reformation 500 years ago and has now been
reduced to a skeleton of its former self by the general erosion of personal faith.
Nevertheless this skeletal framework has continued to provide a benchmark for
human behaviour. This is why the attack by the old Soviet Union and its
satellites, by the Chinese Communist Party and by the neo-Marxists and neo-Cons in the West on Christian belief and practice has been unrelenting. Their aim
is to create a new kind of human being and they need to obliterate the old-fashioned benchmarks for how we should behave.

A prime example is the attack on the family: the family unit – father, mother and
children – is the basic building block of human society. In Christian tradition it is
hallowed by the Holy Family – Joseph, Mary and Jesus – and that is why there is a
diabolical drive to do away with even a sentimental attachment to the traditional
Christmas. Back in the 19th century, Marx and Engels frankly saw Christian
marriage as an obstacle to their ideal of a new Socialistic society: in 2013 David
Cameron, with no warrant from the Conservative Party manifesto, introduced his
new gay marriage law, clearly designed to undermine Christian marriage. But
not content with that the “movers and shakers” of our day have now taken the
whole lethal process a step further: they have intruded into our primary schools
and invited our young children to choose whether they want to continue as little
boys or little girls or whether they might prefer to change their gender!
This is simply child abuse. But the zombies who train our teachers and run our
Ministry of Education cannot see it. Parents who protest come up against a brick
wall. In some towns both Christian and Moslem parental groups have come
together to resist this appalling nonsense. In the way the story is often spun on
the BBC, etc, the Christian side is left out and the situation is explained away as
Islamic extremism. Islamic extremism exists of course and is deplorable. But this
protest is grounded in common sense not extremism.

Machinery is at work to divide and disrupt our society. Those whose aim is to
“build back better” want to knock everything flat first. So women are set against
men; children against adults; gays against straights; blacks against whites; takers
of the knee against those who refuse to kow-tow to the BLM; extinction fanatics
against global warming deniers; pro-vaxxers against anti-vaxxers; mask-wearers
against those who refuse to cover their face. Solemn reports come out
denouncing sexism, racism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and disinformation/
misinformation on social media. If, by accident, the authors of a particular
report come out with a bit of common sense, as in the recent one that announced
there was no evidence of institutional racism in the UK, that report is loudly
denounced and binned before there is time to read it through and digest it.

I, personally, am dismayed by how passively and sheepishly the great majority of
the British population have gone along with this ideological manipulation and
with the unprecedented deprivation of our basic freedoms which the
management of the pandemic has brought about. The recent local and regional
elections saw virtually no push back against the politicians in charge: Boris
Johnson and the Conservatives in England, Mark Drakefield and Labour in Wales
and Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP in Scotland. A commentator on a middle-of-the-road online blog – Unherd – suggested this could be an example of “Stockholm
syndrome”: a strange condition where a group of kidnap victims come to love
their captors!

Nevertheless there have been massive protest marches, filling the streets of
London and our other great cities. Mostly they go unreported by the BBC and
other mainstream media. There is also a wealth of useful information to be
found online despite the growing censorship being exercised by the billionaire
controllers of U-Tube and Facebook, etc. Not all the commentators will be in
agreement with one another of course. Different people come at issues from
different angles and it is easier to know what you are against than what you are for.
This is especially true today when all the structures of rational thought have
been pulled down from round about us. We owe a huge debt of gratitude to
Brian Gerrish, Mike Robinson and their colleagues on UK Column for their
patient and persistent work over many years and their invariably courteous and
moderate approach.

We all have to do what we can to resist this new world order that is threatening
to sweep us all away into servitude. Just putting our heads down and trying to
get on with our private lives is not an option. Write letters – to MPs, to local
officials, to the papers; use the complaints channels provided by official bodies;
be a little more forceful in conversation with friends and neighbours: when the
next lockdown comes along (as it will!) defy it.

Hamlet – that Everyman figure created by Shakespeare at the dawn of the
modern age – was not keen to rise to the challenge but he knew he could not
shirk it:

The time is out of joint. O cursed spite
That ever I was born to set it right.

Dennis Whiting