Its wakey wakey time children!

  • 0 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4128
  • +75/-0
Its wakey wakey time children!
« on: February 14, 2013, 08:37:21 PM »
Its wakey wakey time children!

As a very young man I was once told by an adult, that any moron can reach a high rank in the police service because intelligence is not a requirement. All that is needed is a high degree of deductive logic. ?If you have that attribute, you can be as thick as a brick and still make Chief Constable. If you want to get higher than that you have to be politically minded, au fait with funny handshakes and play golf a lot.? At the time this was said to me I laughed, thinking that this was a rather cruel and bitter joke. However, I have often wondered since then if that comment contains elements, at least, of the truth.

I say this because I have heard some truly astounding comments come from the lips of senior (as well as rank and file) police officers through my many years on this earth. Enough to make me very nervous every time we rush to increase police powers over the public. It is clear already that there are a number of psychopaths in the force who are being given guns to play with and that fact should make any Brazilian tourist using the underground train system very nervous. To the police today the phrase, ?First Aid Kit? has a whole different meaning to the one you and I place on it and which can allow at least some of them to literally get away with a murder. It is a meaning that people ought to be made aware of. To discover more I recommend reading McLagan's book detailed at the foot of this article.*

I also remember an old villain who said to me that ?The truly smart crooks join the police service before embarking on a criminal career.? Judging by the astonishing amount of police corruption I have personally witnessed and read about, I would say that that old lags statement is another truism.

You may, by now, be wondering what all of this has to do with the Leveson Inquiry but be patient with me, I am getting there.

One of my more bizarre personal memories concerns an incident in my local chip shop a number of years ago, when I had an unexpected encounter with a drunken Ms Eve Pollard and one of her female friends.

Ms Pollard, a Journalist, author, broadcaster, Jewess and mother of Claudia Winkleman, also has an OBE. A fact I find astonishing. Presumably, she got it for her favours to the rich and famous, going by her recent announcements on one of Andrew Neil's political programs on the BBC I think. A program in which she claimed that the police arrest of Charlie Brooks (Rebekah Brook's husband) was ?childish? because they carried it out on the day he was supposed to attend a prestigious horse race and thus ruined his day. She seems to view the rich as an elite who should be given preferential treatment by the police because of the size of their bank balance and regardless of their criminal activities. A position also held by many senior police officers, judges and quite a few politicians themselves until recently, it seems. Can my readers imagine a local burglar being given the same consideration Pollard seems to want for her rich and morally suspect friends?

On the Winters evening in question I went to my local 'chippy' to get a fish supper. As I stood in the queue to be served, two loud women entered and made a bee-line for me. I recognised Pollard instantly, but who the other was remains a mystery.

At that time I was doing quite a lot of TV and Radio interviews, putting the alternative viewpoints to the Marxist-Feminist mush that surrounds much of our gender politics today. Pollard and her friend, seemed to have travelled across London to ambush me, as representatives of the outraged ?sisterhood.? Either that, or an equally outrageous coincidence was occurring. In any event, they stood in the chip shop and harangued and mocked me publicly. My order was ready for collection and the shop owner, a friend of mine, quick to see what was going on, placed it in the heated box ready for me to get later. I stepped backwards out of the queue to draw an aggressive Pollard and her friend away from the other customers.

Former Sunday Mirror and Sunday Express editor and Feminist,

Pollard and her daughter Claudia Winkleman

A revealing article about Winkleman appears here:


Vicky Pollard. No Relation. Same Attitude.

Once I had recovered from my shock, I acted dumb and fielded most of their remarks and questions with shrugs of my shoulders. My eyes fixed on the floor. It was a good strategy. Once they realised I was not going to be baited into an angry outburst they could use against me in the press, they quickly got bored and wobbled out into the street and towards a local pub as I followed them, carrying my supper.

Was it a coincidence that this happened soon after I had been involved in a minor row in a TV studio with Rebekah Wade (As Brooks, former editor of the Sun and News Of The World, was then known)? I doubt it. The very well connected feminist ?sisterhood? Mafiosi is nothing if not vengeful, as many a man who has dared to stand up to them can testify. You understand, I am not referring to most politicians, newspaper editors, many social commentators lawyers and judges, but real men.

Ross Kemp. Abused Ex husband of Marxist-Feminist Rebekah Wade (Now Brooks)

Denied Justice by the Police.

Rebekah Brooks Domestic Abuser. Feminist ?Sister?

and friend of the Prime Minister.

Brooks, Domestic Abuser. Corrupt Journalist.

Feminist Sister and all round good egg.

With rich husband and friend of the prime minister, Charlie.

A Police Horse of a kind similar to that loaned by the Police

to Rebekah Brooks, uncharged domestic abuser and Marxist-Feminist friend of many Police Officers.

This horse is NOT a friend of the Prime Minister but Rebekah Brooks' loaned horse was.

DCI Clive Driscoll giving evidence to the Leveson Inquiry. Relationship with the Prime Minister and Rebekah Brooks unknown. Was in charge of Domestic Abuse Investigations Unit at the Metropolitan Police and such officers are often trained in that role by Marxist-Feminists. Feminists also often indulge in abuse of BOTH genders but are rarely charged with abuse.

Hmm. Funny that!

Definition of Corruption. Gain, of course, can also mean position or influence.

Feminism: You Scratch Her Back And She'll Rip Yours Apart.

Now we get to the points I wish to make concerning the Leveson inquiry into ?Culture, Practice and Ethics of [some] of the Press.?

I spent a long night last night watching the evidence presented to the Inquiry on their web site. The evidence in question was given on Thursday March 15th in both the morning and evening sessions. I take such a personal interest in this Inquiry because of my own experiences concerning the often dishonest activities of the media. However, my interest covers the whole spectrum of the media and that includes the activities of broadcast journalists, who are, it must be said, among the worst offenders when it comes to dishonesty. Something this Inquiry seems at pains to ignore and in doing so, causes the title of the Inquiry itself to be misleading.

Several witnesses to the Inquiry have pointed out that there are journalists in broadcasting also, but the silence that meets their protestations and remarks is crushingly deafening. Leaving observers of the process, such as myself and many others, feeling as if the Inquiry is deliberately staying away from the culture, practices and ethics of the electronic media. One is forced to ask why and perhaps, if someone from the Inquiry reads this, they could let me know the answer?

Among the witnesses giving evidence on the day in question was DCI Clive Driscoll. One of the funny highlights of his evidence was when Mr Jay QC said to him, and I quote: ?In terms of the Metropolitan Police Service. Can you identify, without naming names, the limited number of people who had this information?? Emphasis mine. (Point 20:12 in the evidence stream here: ) He then goes on to list six names he had been asked not to name. It was impossible not to chuckle given his apparent confusion as to how police leaks happen.

Perhaps though, to be fair to him, he simply failed to hear the word ?without? in Mr Jay's question or even, perhaps, he saw no reason for secrecy. In any event, he comes across as an honest copper but, tragically, and perhaps cynically, they all do until corruption is found in them. It is a part of their training to appear honest at all times in public and that training is backed up by the police force's own version of the Omerta code of silence with reference to their less savoury colleagues. A trait that damages the police in the eyes of the public more than any other.

Other evidence to the Leveson 'semi-Inquiry' into 'some' of the press came from Journalist Michael Sullivan. (Point 88:02 in the evidence stream here: ). Sullivan, of course, like almost every other journalist interviewed for the Inquiry so far, knows nothing about any impropriety whatsoever and expressed outrage at the idea he might have received tip off?s concerning up and coming arrests of celebrity figures from the police.

In fact, the stunning degree of innocence expressed by all the professional witnesses of any form of wrongful act, except in cases where they have been caught, 'bang to rights,' as the saying goes, is quite remarkable. As are the outbreaks of what I call, 'selective memory syndrome.'

This syndrome makes an appearance when awkward questions are asked relating to past events. A person, who may be able to relate remarkable details about matters that happened a very long time ago when they tend to place him or her in a favourable light, suddenly becomes forgetful when asked about something that places him or her in a more 'shady' position. I have heard the severity of this syndrome is related expressly to the amount of repressed or hidden guilt a victim may be carrying. My first conscious memory of it occurred when listen to Oliver 'Ollie' North give evidence on his involvement in corruption in the States. I would hesitate though to say that Mr Sullivan suffers from this complaint. However, it should be born in mind that he was recently arrested by the police in connection to a bribery and corruption investigation. He was one of four arrested at the time. My readers can read about it here:

Of note in this report are the words, ?limited search.?

Try to imagine if you will, your local car thief or drug dealer being able to dictate to police where they can search and what they can look for, while an army of lawyers stand by to make sure they did not look in the wrong places for evidence. At the same time, other drug dealers or car thieves in your area then provided lawyers to help them with their defence as News International are doing for these journalists as part of their commitment ?to drain the swamp? at the company. Now perhaps my readers can understand my references to the American Mob and how they operate. I refer those readers to the definition of corruption given above.

There is however another interesting aspect to this point in the Inquiry. At time point 88:02 in the stream Mr Jay QC asked the following question of Mr Sullivan.

?The inquiry has received evidence of Photographers turning up when celebrities are arrested. Do you know anything about that??

This elicits a statement of denial from Mr Sullivan. (No news there then). A few minutes later, Lord Justice Leveson, a man of powerful intelligence, says in reply to Sullivan's evidence on the question:

?It is not uncommon [for photographers to turn up at celebrity arrests] though is it??

At this point my mind screamed in protest, 'So bloody what if they do!'

Does becoming a ?celebrity? mean that a new set of laws apply to you? It would seem that many think so and Eve Pollard is just one of them. Remember the defenders of Jonathan Ross and his stupid little ?comic? mate, Ross Brand? A celebrity is just an ordinary member of the public who happens to be well known and often rich.

When it comes to the rest of us, we are not in any way privileged when it comes to police arrests and cameras being present. The TV channels are soaked in programs such as ?Police, Camera, Action? where entire film crews go out with the police to film the public behaving badly and getting arrested and to spin the police violence against them as ?necessary for the protection of officers.? What makes these spoilt little celebrity fools who get nicked special in the eyes of the law, commentators and journalists?

The workings of the legal system are supposed to be non selective and impartial and even though everyone knows that they are not and they are as corrupt as every other branch of society these days, that does not mean they should escape the gold standard of truth they are supposed to adhere too. Many of our social problems today stem from the fact that that gold standard is being ignored by just about everyone whose job it is to enforce it and they are in complete denial about those problems because they appear to be too gutless to deal with them.

We have in our country today, it seems, two standards of law and two standards of lawlessness. Street lawlessness is one the police react towards with often extreme violence. Rich man's lawlessness is reacted to by those same police with kid gloves. The standard of law if you are rich and famous is that you can be arrested by appointment to give you time to get rid of any embarrassing evidence. If you are a working class, the police will kick your door in at 4:00am and then kick your head in. Unless there is a camera crew present of course. Then they restrict themselves to swearing, cussing and throwing more discreet punches and ?restraint techniques? at you, but nicking you if you try to do the same to them. This is what passes for justice these days in this second rate, corrupt, third world country of ours. It is no wonder there is growing anger and confusion in our society.

The tabloid media's consistent argument through this Inquiry is that the readers of their papers are to blame for its content. Mr Sullivan offers the same defence of the rubbish the Sun prints. He points to their anti crime crusades as if they are always something to be proud of. However, what he neglects to point out, is the way in which the tabloid press first stir up hatred in their readers BEFORE they launch their crusades. Manipulating them into a state of mob-like fury and then unleashing their own brand of self righteous indignation onto those stirred up readers.

This can be extraordinarily dangerous and is as removed from any reasonable definition of responsible journalism as it is possible to get. When they did this in relation to sex crimes against children, a paediatrician was attacked by a furious mob who did not understand the difference between his job title and the word paedophile. They were too angry to think and the Sun made them that way.

A decent journalist would not spend his or her time pandering to the mob, but instead trying to raise the mob to a new level of understanding that is good for society as a whole. This can be done by the use of simple argument and education and not downright social manipulation designed to create news to perpetuate the newspaper. Perhaps that is why there are so few decent journalists in the tabloid press business. Because those that are there are the dregs who cannot raise themselves to any higher level! They are simply the journalistic equivalent of a thug, perhaps?

By now, the more astute among my readers may be asking themselves why I keep referring to feminists in my writings. Well, the current rot started to gain a foothold in our country with the arrival from the States in the late nineteen fifties and early nineteen sixties of what is known as the Frankfurt School's teachings and the vanguard of that wave of Marxist political undermining of our democracy was feminism, a product, in its current form, of Frankfurt School Marxist teaching.

And you thought feminism was a noble cause that was all about women's rights didn't you?

Read more here:


And here:


And here:

And last, but by no means least, for those with patience:


Feel free to pass this, unabridged, around your contacts if you wish.

George Rolph
17th March 2012

*Recommended reading: ?Bent Coppers? By BBC Crime Expert/Journalist, Graeme McLagan. Published by Orion.

Info on the author Graeme McLagan.


Alteri serviens consumor - "In serving others, I myself destroy:"

Share this topic...
In a forum
In a site/blog

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk