Skip to content


May 2, 2022

POOR people in the decaying, death rattling terminally blighted South Wales valleys – no buses after 6pm or on Sundays, jobless youths congregating menacingly while stealing, dealing and reeling, household bills escalating with no hope of an end – are today fretting and worrying, tossing and turning unable to sleep so up and about in the early hours of the morning racking their brains for a solution to that horny old problem of just how we keep Chris Bryant safe from being touched up in the House of Commons.

“Come back to bed, Dai, it’s no use fretting and crying at 4am when you could be soundly asleep, love,” Mrs Jones says to Mr Jones in the kitchen at number 49.

“I know, I know, Myfanwy……. but in the morning we’ll still have Chris being wolf-whistled at and touched up by some back-bencher watching porn. ……and think of all those lovely, attractive, virtuous women, love, having to put up with all that sexism and misogyny in the Commons and the Senedd, eh. They’re not safe….not safe, I tell you.”

If only Chris could get out of his plush, lavish London abode and go to number 49 to reassure Mr and Mrs Jones that he will somehow stay safe in his taxpayer-funded houses on generous pay and expenses so they can enjoy a good night’s sleep – safety not exactly being something which was uppermost in his mind when he posed “HORNY AS BUGGERY” in his tighty whities on Gaydar and appealed for someone, somewhere to give him a “GOOD, LONG FUCK”.

Former church priest Bryant, who quit after deciding that being a cleric and being gay were incompatible, claimed over £92,000 in expenses over five years leading up to the expenses scandal in 2009 and he flipped his second-home expenses twice. He claimed mortgage interest expenses that started at £7,800 per year before rising (after flipping) to £12,000 per year. He also claimed £6,400 in stamp duty and other fees on his most recent purchase, and £6,000 per year in service charges.

Being lectured by Chris on sexual or financial matters is rather like having to attend a seminar on pacifism and non-violent solutions run by the Kray twins in a 1960s Bethnal Green public house.

Rhodri Morgan’s comment to the Guardian in 2003 that it was “one of those stories that gay people have to put up with from time to time” is hugely illuminating. Was the story about Tory Neil Parish viewing porn on his mobile then “a story that straight people have to put up with from time to time” or is it one rule for straight people and another for gay, bi and trans people now?


April 29, 2022

PORNOGRAPHY is not something men DO to women, it is not illegal nor does it constitute an offence on women (if anything, it is more offensive to those men hopelessly addicted to it’s toxic secret power which always degrades and demeans them, often ruining their lives and that of their families).

BBC Radio Wales’s Sian Lloyd joined Radio Four’s Women’s Hour’s Emma Barnett in whipping up a furiously indignant, deeply disgusted sisterly cloyingly confected and cripplingly compromised reaction yesterday to the news that an MP was “watching” porn on his mobile phone at Westminster and some female MPs had complained though, it appears, not named him (how brave is that, eh, it must have taken such commendable courage for them to anonymously do that! Thank God we have richer working girls at the BBC to fight for fairer pay and conditions and support all these other richer working girls at Westminster doing the same for privileged elites who don’t have to tittilate nor turn anyone on like poorer working girls do).

First we had female journalists appearing to look and sound genuinely absolutely shocked to their core (sounding for all the world like Claude Rains in Casablanca when he discovers gambling is going on in a back room at Cafe Rick’s) when some will go home after their shift to find their mothers, sisters and daughters, brothers, fathers and sons either “trawling” for free thrills on their mobiles or earning a “bit on the side” by setting up a camcorder in the spare bedroom, locking the door and logging on to Chaturbate to have a watched wank which now keeps the bailiffs away and may even settle that escalating gas bill (hard times call for hard measures, sisters, especially when “non-essential” physical contact was outlawed by governments using emergency health and safety powers).

Then, they decided that porn is purely a gender issue and an assault on sisterhood, totally neglecting the inconvenient truth that some of their sexy sisters are doing more than just keeping afloat in these desperately hard times but actually living a life of luxury thanks to wealthy followers constantly adding to their bank balances with generous donations (that, above all, is what incenses the sisterhood……that poor women have always turned to stripping and whipping because it is so effortlessly easy and so endlessly profitable – especially now we have an always-on 24/7 internet).

Were female politicians at our Senedd treated to the same obvious assaults on their modesty and virtuousness, Sian wanted to know, presumably much, much more concerned about the effect this was likely to have on impressionable females seeking a career in politics or journalism than on the sad, inadequate males turning on to be turned on or, of course, the equally sad and inadequate young girls and older women secretly stripping and whipping for cash on porn sites (if we are going to name and shame the MP then surely they should be, too). No effort was made to speak to any male addicts to establish how cripplingly destructive the addiction had been for them nor to establish the effects on their families and friends.

Sian Lloyd spoke to a female spokesperson from the charity Chwarae Teg (Fair Play), who was able to offer only the usual measly platitudes when asked for evidence by saying that porn was now hopelessly endemic – pandemic even – with absolutely no hope of a vaccine and, of course, was completely contagious as our mobile phones and all digital devices are now completely saturated in it (we know that, love, tell us something we don’t know!)

A young woman who had some connection with Plaid Cymru (which, of course, once housed Simon Thomas, who was convicted of viewing child porn though not, presumably, while in Westminster or the Senedd, though he, of course, was not asked to comment to give us some genuinely insightful and illuminating input and ensure balance) also spoke meaningless and vapid twaddle about “calling it out” and “something’s got to change”.

I have never heard such abject misunderstanding allied to such abject misappropriation and misinformation for blatantly political purposes by an entitled elite.

Because pornography is now a “radical feminist” issue and a lethal weapon in the hands of the increasingly potent VAWG, violence to adult women and girls, brigade, the academic research done on it tends to automatically adopt their language and methodology unquestioningly and unconditionally so starts from the perspective that all porn is used mainly by men to victimise and threaten women. Vast numbers of women hugely enjoy the thrills of using it or of cashing in on it secretly.

“There are no official statistics collected regarding the number of individuals accessing pornography in the UK or what proportion of pornography users are male and female. Recent surveys and studies suggest, however, that women’s use of pornography has been under-reported. Although research into
pornography’s impact on society is limited, numerous organisations and individuals are suggesting
negative links, including in relation to: attitudes towards women, low self-esteem, and addiction.” a library note in the House of Commons inform us.

Central to the radical feminist perspective is to make establishing just how many women watch porn incredibly difficult and how many women appear in it even more so. A quick Porn Hub browse on your mobile phone in a private place (preferably not while surrounded by the ever-vigilant sisterhood eager for scalps and while being recorded on international television) will establish that the bigger money is made mostly by younger, more attractive girls (possibly students seeking a safe and controlled way to pay their way through university) who have the largest, wealthiest following and that older males, for instance, are more likely to be paying and following than profiteering and appearing on these porn sites. In some senses, this works as an effective wealth redistribution system to move funds from those who no longer need them to poorer working girls who do.

Statista tell us that 28 per cent of visitors to Porn Hub in the UK are female, but how would they know if there are “no official statistics”?

And then we have this rather perplexing piece of academic research looking at gender, race and religion.


“These findings affirm our general theory that Americans who are already more likely to
view pornography than others (blacks compared to whites, men compared to women) would
show greater rates of pornography viewership over time as pornography has become more
accessible and acceptable.”

Wow! Who’d have thought it!

Isn’t a generous, un-threatening, sugar daddy of more use to poorer working girls than a bitter, twisted, rancorous mummy?


April 27, 2022

“You stand accused of being a white, older, male………To count one, how do you plead?”

“Guilty, Your Worship.”

“To count two, how do you plead?”

“Guilty, Your Worship.”

“To count three, how do you plead?”

“Guilty, Your Worship.”

“Mr Hoyle, you represent the defendant. Can you address us on his behalf before we consider sentencing options?”

“Thank you, Your Worship. My client has admitted these very serious offences at the earliest possible opportunity in order to save the court’s time and money and to dispense with the need for a trial by jury at crown court.

“He is aware of his natural culpability, Your Worship, and offers no excuses whatsoever. Indeed, he has been frank, clear and completely honest in his admirable acceptance that he is, regrettably, completely guilty of all these offences and is here today to beg leniency and to ask for mercy. A prison sentence, Your Worship, would add considerably to his not inconsiderable woes and distresses and is unlikely to lead him into a better future nor, sadly, would it in any way benefit him nor society at large, I would humbly argue. Let me be clear, he knows he is a sinner and is now obviously seeking to make amends and reconstruct his future by first fully embracing his shame, sense of complete and utter uselessness and redundancy and, of course, most of all, his offensive ageing penis and the unfortunate instincts and directions the possession of this grossly offensive symbol of all that is most degrading and damaging to polite society can, from time to time, lead him into exhibiting unacceptable entirely masculine traits.

“In mitigation, Your Worship, my client tells me that there have been no instances or episodes of predatory or scavenging behaviour nor misogyny in his recent past and he emphatically denies ever consorting with the Duke of York at any time either now or in the past and has never been in a pizza restaurant.

“He is now considering re-engineering and transforming and has told me that he likes the name Fenella, having enjoyed many films featuring the actress Fenella Fielding, particularly Carry On Screaming, which he tells me is a classic, so he may, at some future time, seek to formally adopt that name and re-purpose his life as a tribute to her. Indeed, he tells me that he has been working hard on developing a husky voice by increasing his tobacco and red wine use and has a suite of witty and diverting double entendres ready and waiting, Your Worship, and a rather fetching raven-haired wig and attractive black dress to complete the ensemble.

“He is addressing his colour issue as best he can by regularly attending tanning salons and he has invested in a consignment of pharmaceutical tanning solutions which he is able to purchase at cost. He tells me that he is quite willing, should it be your wish, to visit warmer foreign countries where he can lay in the sunshine to build up a tan, Your Worship.

“As to his age, Your Worship, he fully accepts that there is nothing he can do as he has run out of hair dye and organic, environmentally sustainable moisturiser.

“He is a man of previous good character and brings with him today references from a Mr Farage and a Mr Morgan. He knows the gravity of the offences and is ready to commit to any community order or any similar sentencing option requiring him to do voluntary work with other similar offenders to offer society some meaningful compensation.”

“Thank you, Mr Hoyle. I am grateful to your client for making a clean breast of it at the earliest opportunity and thank him for his commendable honesty. I am able to deal with this by way of sentencing him to 17 years of HARD LABOUR. Next case.”


April 26, 2022

The most significant statistic in the French election result was, of course, the high number of people who did not vote.

Turnout was at just 72 percent, with abstentions at their highest of any second-round vote in France since 1969.

In an alarming signal for Macron, 8.6 percent of those who made the effort to turn up at voting stations on Sunday cast a protest vote to send the message that neither candidate was acceptable. Some 6.35 percent of votes were “blank” on Sunday and another 2.25 percent were “null”, with a candidate’s name crossed out or a ballot otherwise invalidated. 

And this will be the case on May 5, 2022, when I – like many others – deliberately DO NOT vote in the Newport City Council elections because I live in a rotten borough where a permanent, unchallenged and unquestioned single dominant party processes back into power without bothering any more to even appear to engage with the electorate nor, crucially, to represent them.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Tony Bliar con trick 1997 devolution referendum was unfairly rigged with some underhand and highly questionable tactics so I have no reason to invest psychologically in even the mere concept of ethical and entirely fair and accurate democracy backed by a voting system which reflects that and offers a potential solution to everyone.

No, I am trapped in a country where the overton window has moved so far to the left that my only choice appears to be between one of two radical feminist, progressive, trans, eco, BLM neo-Marxists with no hope of escape because a hugely supportive electoral reform movement at Cardiff Bay seeks to keep lowering the voting age until eventually infant school pupils will scrawl Xs on ballot papers (or, more likely, their teachers will do it for them) even when they have not yet learnt to write and illegal immigrants fresh off their rubber dinghies will be frogmarched to polling stations.

I have had one visit appealing for my vote from one of the two Green Party candidates. Labour councillors now no longer even venture into these areas unless cocooned inside a self-loving, self-aggrandising and self-congratulatory protective posse of Drakeford acolytes spouting nonsense about economic equality wearing offensively odd neutral clothes while calling Councillor Jane Mudd “leader” like marching north Korean security guards afraid to say anything remotely meaningful or profound, their every utterance prepared by press and PR people surrounding them to give the impression of command and coherence.

I would vote for any candidate who could first remove the council’s link to the Newsquest media group, which publishes its “official newspaper” Newport Matters and offers permanent unconditional support to a failing institution, absolutely ensure that no lock-downs are ever ordered again with absurd ad-hoc and contradictory rules banning free movement, gets all officials back to work normally, prioritises face-to-face meetings with GPs at surgeries and advocates a results-based financial rewards system for all staff so we no longer have lifelong lingering losers promoted and rewarded with pay and pensions.

Like the absent millions in France, I am disgusted, disengaged, unrepresented and unhappy and now lie outside the system and not within it.

And, of course, it is these people on the outside looking in at a privileged elite expanding rapidly at our expense while the mess worsens that hold a potential which is growing.


April 22, 2022

HOLLYWOOD blockbuster Contagion was pro-vaccine protective big state big pharma anti-conspiracy theory-led unregulated online “disinformation and misinformation” propaganda (“blogging is not writing, it’s graffiti with punctuation”, a respected scientific specialist played by Elliot Gould in a business suit dismissively told Alan Krumwiede (sounds like Alien Untrustworthy), played by Jude Law, the maverick blogger in casual clothes) which prepared us for the COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus and the biotech cash bonanza it prompted.

Starting with Gwyneth Paltrow coughing in an Asian airport terminal after casual sex with a stranger on her way back to the US, all the deliberately disproportionately magnified threats about a virus which in the film originated with bats infecting pigs in China – “as many as 70 million could die”, said Dr Ellis Cheever (sounds like Doctor Achiever), played by Laurence Fishburne, but just over six million have in real life according to the latest World Health Organisation figures  were used on the big screen.

Contentious stuff including credit cards and touch screens being infected (that frighteningly ludicrously alarmist business of not touching your face which dominated health messaging early in 2020 when we thought twice about using the handrails on stairs needlessly, enforced cremation of the dead on health grounds with cemeteries closed to the public and the digital tracing of all contacts by the infected, the closing down of all international borders to make us the problem and scientists and a ruling elite the only solution legitimised in the psyche of individuals for some reason in this 2011 film.

And in that, just like in real life (spooky and uncanny, eh!) it was a vaccine which saved humankind from the spread of death and disease in a deliberately magnified predicted doomsday scenario (remember mad Dominic Cummings and his Independence Day ravings about Jeff Goldblum rescuing humanity?) and it emerged surprisingly quickly from pure and virtuous scientists backed unconditionally by big pharma and big government.

Yes, SARS-CoV-2 is novel and treacherous because it could affect kidneys, heart, liver as well circulatory and gastrointestinal systems with a unique ability to inhibit the virus fighting T and B cells with the potential for the body to attack it’s own cells but Contagion-style end of times?

Watching it again today brought home exactly how deviously, devilishly deliberate that movie really was in bringing about compliance and obedience in a frightened worldwide populace (“we need to make sure that nobody knows until everybody knows”) who might have put up more resistance (the filmed violence among hooded and masked people desperate to get the jabs and the riots outside shops cooked up to warn us of complete breakdown in society which never really materialised because people too lamely accepted whatever restrictions and medication they were given purely and simply out of irrational fear).

Considering it time to get serious about science after agreeing to be vaccinated by the state (twice summoned to a surgery with bizarre personal telephone calls from doctors to my mobile phone and once to a converted leisure centre staffed by strangers after being bombarded with text messages) under considerable pressure and without any proper qualitative or informed consent or knowledge of things like what is actually in the AstraZeneca and Pfizer BioNTech doses I received nor their possible side effects and how they were made so stunningly quickly, I decided to read a book which would hopefully tell me.

A Shot to Save the World (ironically, employing exactly the same Hollywood hyperbole in the title for commercial reasons as was used regularly in Contagion and relying on many of its assumptions about lethality rather too trustingly) by New York Times business and investment writer Gregory Zuckerman is mainly concerned with the potential for profit to boost the incomes of scientists and researchers by increasing sales to worldwide health authorities and injecting growth in stock exchange shares for anyone invested in, say, AstraZeneca or Pfizer BioNTech. Speculators in the know presumably switched all their funds into such stocks around 2018 and are now rolling in filthy lucre vaccinated against infection and poverty, raising the thorny issue of advance knowledge by select insiders, a persistent trope among conspiracy theorists.

The biological research community needs money to prosper and grow so will not turn down profit, which acts as THE greatest natural motivator for most. My poorly informed view had always been that university laboratory boffins were motivated purely by the greater good and increasing life expectancy for anyone threatened with death or serious infection from AIDS, cancer, and/or COVID-19 while shunning greed like trappist monks in monasteries in the Andes pursuing higher, more spiritual goals. Zuckerman explains how wrong that assumption is.

Injecting mRNA into the body has a potential to cure all ills by effectively giving us our own in-built vaccine factory which acts fast and effectively to fight or cure cancers and other diseases so the battle between competing laboratory researchers to be the first to publish findings then win drug company cash bringing massive profits has been ferociously bitter and bloody.

“If mRNA molecules were employed to create short-term proteins, they would have to be reapplied on a regular basis, potentially leading to repeated sales of any mRNA medication. In other words, the fact that it was more more fleeting could make it more profitable,” he writes.

Vaccines teach our cells how to make a protein that will trigger an immune response inside our bodies. Like all vaccines, mRNA jabs benefit people who get vaccinated by giving them protection against diseases like COVID-19 without risking the potentially serious consequences of getting sick, goes the theory.

My personal view about COVID-19 was firmly, for some reason, that I was not vulnerable but that the best possible protection I would have would be to catch it and fight it off naturally, thereby building immunity in the same way as I did fighting Chicken pox in my fifties.

It is a secular, fundamentally scientific evangelical proactive (before not after the possible event) medicinal intervention which seeks to alter the way your body naturally defends itself with anti-bodies to fight destructive cancerous or other malignant tumours and infections which act rather like devastation and destruction seeking devils intent on spreading and, ironically, also prospering and growing like stock exchange shares until they eventually bring about their desired end, death.

Controversy is based very firmly in the fact that some people may be allergic to the ingredients in the vaccines and cases of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and pericarditis (inflammation of the lining outside the heart) have been reported after vaccination with Comirnaty, a 30 microgram dose of which I received in December at Newport Leisure Centre. My understanding was that I had the freedom to decline but would be denied free movement and international travel and may have faced difficulties ever again engaging with the NHS and could be socially stigmatised and denied health insurance and other basic protections. This left me with no viable alternative but to roll up my sleeve.

The package leaflet for this Pfizer BIOnTech vaccine says this:

“Like all vaccines, Comirnaty can cause side effects, although not everybody gets them.

“Very common side effects (may affect more than one in ten people some slightly more frequent in 12 to 13 year olds than in adults) Injection site pain and swelling, tiredness, headache, muscle pain, chills, joint pain, diarrhoea and fever. Common side effects (one in ten) Injection site redness, nausea and vomiting. Uncommon side effects (one in 100) enlarged lymph nodes, feeling unwell, arm pain, insomnia, injection site itching, allergic reactions such as rash or itching, feeling weak or lack of energy/sleepy, decreased appetite, excessive sweating, night sweats. Rare side effects (one in 1,000) one-sided facial drooping, allergic reaction such as hives or swelling of the face. Not known (cannot be estimated from the available data) Severe allergic reaction, myocarditis and pericarditis, palpitations and chest pain, extensive swelling of the vaccinated limb, swelling of the face.

The vaccine sceptics and conspiracy theorists know people HAVE died as a result of taking these vaccines, Tory MP Chris Chope has met resistance to his efforts to protect people with legislation at Westminster and a very cunningly collusive and collaborative media and ruling elite has branded all independent truth seekers seeking to debate online as conspiracists spreading misinformation and lies, very seriously heightening the understandable suspicion.

I take a list of medication daily, some NHS prescribed some not, to treat other underlying conditions and all of these carry warnings of possible side effects, too, so I persistently debate internally the pros versus cons of prescribed medication (if only Elvis Presley and many others more locally had seriously contemplated this before killing themselves with Dr Feelgood’s pills) and often wonder if they are negatively causing or positively preventing some of these troubling new health conditions.

The move from face-to-face consultations with medics at surgeries to a cocktail of jabs and a remote, inaccessible NHS with fewer meetings with GPs and hospitals in “black alert” troubles me greatly, too, and I fear being mandated to accept all biotech interventions routinely proactively for problems I neither have nor may ever get, thereby becoming a passive pincushion rather than an active collaborator with a doctor who really knows me and can accurately measure risk.

Indeed, mRNA vaccine technology threatens conventional medicine and its practitioners, many traditionalists adamant that the common cold should run its course for instance, because it seeks to eliminate ills by injecting proteins into cells, harking a new age of injected health and safety and protection with little or no need for doctors at all. Herein lies its most potent and polarising power.

Members of the born-again evangelical charismatic Christian fraternity and many other religious faiths like the Mormons – locked in opposed fundamentals to science because they believe in scriptural absolutes such as the Allmighty’s Will being obeyed and undiluted in this and the next life, many relying on prayer and a Pastor’s spiritual healing for protection, are the most stubborn in their opposition to this spectacular scientific advance partly because it artificially interferes with their creator’s creation and normalises a reliance on science rather than belief to cure all ills while removing external locus of control over issues like birth and death again being in the hands of a creator.

They, of course, also oppose homosexuality so those stricken with AIDS – in their eyes God’s judgement for sin – in the 1980s would never have benefited from perhaps the most groundbreaking advances achieved after experimenting on insects, rats and then humans using laboratory petri dishes then administering real vaccines compared with a placebo to accurately and systematically gauge reliability and efficacy of the jabs. Life expectancy for AIDS victims was, consequently, radically altered and improved to the point where now it no longer kills. Other advances in mRNA technology have brought about massive changes to many other health outcomes.

Many of the often zany, brilliant and unconventional scientists who offered Zuckerman evidence and explanation of their work in laboratories all over the world to overcome very considerable opposition and hostility from mRNA sceptics in the scientific community who doubted their methods talk about “playing God” and “being evangelical” about their discoveries – adding greatly to the belief/faith versus science/reason dispute underpinning the current controversy around giving repeated COVID-19 jabs, particularly to children and young people with no symptoms.

In Contagion, the MEV-1 virus is successfully grown in a laboratory using monkeys by a scientist and their vaccination  is presented as our only hope of relief from mass extinction and Aussie blogger Law’s mocked and deranged natural drug Forsythia, which he presents as a wonder cure, is deliberately set against it as a crazy and typically irresponsible malign wild online misinformation hoax threatening scientific authority and human life.

Watson and Crick’s discovery of the structure of DNA, first published in 1953, gave rise to modern molecular biology, which is largely concerned with understanding how genes control the chemical processes within cells, yielding ground-breaking insights into the genetic code and protein synthesis and paving the way for exciting and groundbreaking work to make anti-viral drugs to treat AIDS and cancer and, now, COVID-19.

Zuckerman takes us chronologically through the scientific progress starting in 1979 with advances in treating pneumocystis pheumonia and other puzzling infections and tumours with a sideline on the 1774 southern England farmer’s smallpox treatment after scraping pus from one of his cows showing signs of cowpox which led scientists to adopt similar procedures and further science and life expectancy.

Bitter battles between US firm Moderna and the German one which became BioNTech and was helped by Pfizer dominate the 1990s and early 2000s with Oxford-based boffins then offering AstraZeneca their discoveries.

Biotech scientific pioneers in laboratories competing with each other are here described as frequently foul-mouthed, socially inadequate or isolated, manically driven egotists, sloppily dressed outsiders struggling to engage and get good rapport with ordinary people and, crucially, with the big pharma big bucks suits who have the power to make or break them by awarding contracts.

Zuckerman is clear on the Chinese government’s malign efforts in December 2019 to keep secret the emergence of a killer virus emanating out of a Wuhan wet market where bats were bought and eaten by locals and goes on to speculate about a Chinese lab leak.

On January 23, 2020, Chinese leaders locked down Wuhan and three other cities in the biggest quarantine in history. “They were going to push to make a vaccine before the end of the year, faster than any vaccine had ever been made. But BioNTech only had about $300 million on its balance sheet, even less cash than Moderna”.

Other scientists who had worked on AIDS also shifted to COVID-19, to genetically engineer antibodies in the lab in a worldwide race to save lives.

Oxford University collaborators Adrian Hill and Sarah Gilbert screened healthy volunteers in the Thames Valley who were under 55 and we’re confident their vaccine worked and they raced past everyone in the early stages certain they were safe so AstraZeneca, the Cambridge-based firm, distributed it.

Zuckerman too easily falls for the charm and romantic patter of hubris-infected bio-tech pioneers and their carefully curated claim to be lifesavers and the intense egotism and power this engendered in them, failing to properly assess critically the demerits of a proactive biotech intervention heralding a new jab and isolate system.

COVID-19 has turned our political public servants into our private rulers ordering altruistic behaviour in us they are incapable of themselves and it is now forcing us to protect a national health service which was designed to protect us by us agreeing to avoid using it so staff within it can cope.

It has removed face-to-face GP appointments and normalised distant and remote care, invasive surveillance and an insulting and psychologically devastating legitimised view that people are a danger unless they can prove otherwise so are forced to put the safety of others first and regularly now face suspicion.

Be thankful that you’re alive, especially if you have shares in Pfizer BioNTech and keep taking the jabs is well and good but only for so long.

When people start to realise what has really happened to us in the past two years and all the things we have lost and will never regain, however, many will wonder why we accepted tamely so much of it for such relatively low comparable risk to health and they will wonder why we had to be nudged so forcibly by corny confected claptrap like Contagion.




April 20, 2022

Free Speech Union to launch in Scotland

The forthcoming launch of the Free Speech Union in Scotland was the Times’s top Scotland story. The Times reported that SNP MP Joanna Cherry QC, education policy professor Lindsay Paterson, former Scottish Conservatives deputy leader Murdo Fraser MSP and award-winning poet Jenny Lindsay were joining the Advisory Board, along with journalist and former University of Edinburgh rector Iain Macwhirter, director of the Catholic Media Office Peter Kearney and former SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars. The Times quoted Jenny Lindsay on the toxic literary cancel culture in Scotland, saying: “I dearly hope for robust discussion about re-energising Scotland’s literary landscape so that writers and thinkers feel free to explore complex contemporary issues without fears of no-platforming, ostracisation, smearing and loss of livelihood.”

There was much enthusiasm for the FSU in Scotland below the line in the Times, with posters welcoming the move in the face of increasing censoriousness in Scottish life and asking where to sign up. If you’re based in Scotland or know people who could benefit from membership, please sign up and share.

As though to illustrate the need for intervention, Edinburgh University UCU president Grant Buttars described the University’s new branch of Academics for Academic Freedom as “sickening” and “a haven for racists, transphobes and other assorted bigots”. Scottish Greens minister Lorna Slater told the Herald that the BBC needs to stop platforming gender-critical views, saying that it “only recently stopped putting on climate deniers because they required balance. We wouldn’t put balance on the question of racism or anti-Semitism, but we allow this fictional notion of balance when it comes to anti-trans [views]. The whole thing is disgusting.” Elsewhere in the interview Slater had claimed, of the SNP-Greens coalition, “We don’t do shouty negative politics – we do ‘working together’… We believe in collaboration, cooperation and consensus.” In the Spectator, Debbie Hayton said that Slater “cited climate deniers as not worthy of a platform. I’d suggest biology deniers like Slater are another.” In the Times, Alex Massie said of Slater’s ‘no debate’ tactics: “The arrogance is breathtaking, and all the more so given that it is, at least in part, in thrall to pieties that are demonstrably untrue.” 

Edinburgh Event: Why Free Speech Matters

Please join us for a members’ event on 21 April in Edinburgh where internationally renowned free speech advocate and author Jacob Mchangama will be introducing his highly acclaimed new book, Free Speech: A Global History from Socrates to Social Media. The evening will be hosted by Toby Young, General Secretary of the Free Speech Union; Toby’s Spectator review of Jacob’s book can be found here. Toby and Jacob will be joined by a distinguished panel, including SNP MP and newly announced FSU Scotland Advisory Council member Joanna Cherry QC, to discuss the importance of free speech and how it can be defended today. Tickets can be booked here.

Nottingham holds out on Sewell degree, and Durham decolonises maths

Nottingham University is still resisting calls for it to reverse its decision to rescind the offer of an honorary degree to former Government race Tsar Dr Tony Sewell, with the rationale that Sewell’s presence would “overshadow” graduation ceremonies and upset students. We wrote to the EHRC asking them to investigate whether Nottingham’s decision to single Sewell out as a subject of controversy was motivated by racial prejudice; 50 Tory MPs also wrote to the University, highlighting the “absurdity” of granting honorary degrees to disgraced former Malaysian PM Najib Razak and Uighur re-education camp denying ex-Chinese ambassador Liu Xiaoming while refusing to do so for Sewell, “simply because he earned the ire of a few frustrated ideologues for his widely welcomed work” on the Government’s race report. In the Spectator, Tom Slater recalled the racist abuse aimed at Sewell on the day the report was released and said: “But rather than stand by one of their own, someone on the receiving end of abuse and character assassination, Nottingham has essentially joined the pile-on. An accomplished black Brit is lambasted for having an opinion, and the high-status move is to side with his critics. This is modern racial politics summed up.” In Spiked, Rakib Ehsan said: “This speaks to a deep problem in Britain’s higher-education sector. It seems nothing offends our universities more than someone challenging their grievance-fuelled, identitarian narrative on race.”

As nearly 50 universities signed a pledge not to use confidentiality clauses to silence campus misconduct, Oxford and Cambridge continued to hold out, with no colleges having signed up despite the recent incident at Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, where it emerged that the College had instructed a student not to speak to public media about an alleged rape. 

Durham University’s Mathematics Department has been given a guide to decolonising its curriculum, including considering the cultural origins of mathematical concepts and asking whether mathematicians cited are “mostly white or male”. In another Spectator piece, Tom Slater said the decolonisation drive demonstrated two things: “First, that identity politics in education is no longer confined to the arts and humanities – even maths and the hard sciences aren’t safe from such relativism. Second, for all their talk of ‘decolonisation’, it is woke activists who think of ethnic minorities as lesser beings, incapable of mastering ‘western’ subjects unless those subjects are completely rewired beforehand.”

Stonewall sulks on

After the government’s ‘Safe to Be Me’ conference was cancelled due to Stonewall leading a mass boycott over the decision not to ban “conversion therapy” dealing with gender dysphoria, a Times leader said that Stonewall’s intolerance of any but the most extreme viewpoints over trans issues had “alienated” other organisations along with the general public. The Times pointed out that, at a time when homosexuality continued to be criminalised in many countries, punished by some with the death penalty, an opportunity for Britain to lead change on a “genuinely existential issue” had been squandered by Stonewall’s intransigence. 

In the Telegraph, Zoe Strimpel compared recent British controversies over trans rights to the situation in the US, saying that Boris Johnson’s “balance between zest for LGBT rights and common sense” would be “unimaginable” from any US politician, where “the debate has become almost universally nasty, polarised and extreme.” Strimpel observed that “Britain has imported many of the horrors that gave rise to the American culture war, such as the doctrine of intersectionality, which pits people of varying degrees of ‘oppression’ against each other” but concluded: “Unlike America, however, we are still a country where our leaders can speak clearly and with sensitivity on matters as vexed and uncomfortable as gender identity and its relationship to sexual anatomy. In Britain, at least, there’s still cause for hope that the current mess can be resolved decently.”

And as Left Twitter erupted into outrage and sorrow over photos of JK Rowling enjoying a drunken lunch with other ‘Respect My Sex’ activists, Kathleen Stock shared her top five tips for managing fractious transactivists in a brilliant piece of Supernanny satire, including getting them off their screens and outdoors and setting boundaries: “This appears to be a particularly hard one for transactivists to accept, tending as they do to think that all boundaries are fascist – so start small. Begin by casually saying things like ‘apples can’t be oranges’ and ‘tables can’t be chairs’. (If they get cross and start calling you the ‘fruit police’ or the ‘furniture police’, calmly ignore).”

Guilty verdict for Amess’s killer – and the serial avoidance of talking about Islamism

Sir David Amess MP’s attacker, Ali Harbi Ali, was found guilty of murder, having told the court: “I wanted to kill David and every MP who voted for bombings in Syria. I wanted to die, be shot and be a hero.” Spiked’s Tom Slater said that, in the aftermath of Amess’s death, “the political and media classes seemed desperate to present this murder as something else entirely – as an act of senseless violence whipped up by the ‘coarseness’ of political debate.” In the Critic, Stephen Daisley described politicians’ and journalists’ avoidance of Harbi’s immediately apparent Islamist motives as “cowardice”, comparing the moral panic about abusive behaviour on social media and calls for new legislation to censor it, including speeding up the Second Reading of the Online Safety Bill, to “the mosques of Southend, which released a joint statement within 24 hours denouncing ‘an indefensible atrocity’ that was ‘committed in the name of blind hatred’ and urged that ‘the perpetrator be swiftly brought to justice’.” In the Spectator, Sam Ashworth-Hayes added, sardonically: “The twisted ideology that drove Ali to kill a decent man must have been free speech on social media, the idea that ‘legal but harmful’ content has a place in democratic debate. Our MPs, in their judgement, could see nothing in his words or actions that indicated otherwise. Or nothing they were willing to talk about, at any rate.” And Wasiq Wasiq said that the case of the Batley Grammar School teacher, who was still in hiding, indicated that illiberal Islamic blasphemy laws were creeping into liberal democracies like Britain, as in France with the Charlie Hebdo and Samuel Paty attacks.

Heather Mac Donald writing in City Journal made a similar point about the reaction to this week’s New York City subway shooting, with all the people commenting on it tip-toeing around the fact that the shooter was a black nationalist – or outright ignoring it:

Had a white male entered a New York subway car in a construction vest and gas mask, carrying a hatchet, a nine-millimeter handgun, extended ammo magazines, gasoline, fireworks, and two smoke grenades; had he then shot off at least 33 rounds, hitting ten people, the Biden administration and the media would have immediately raised an alarm about white nationalist violence. The shooter’s race would have led every story about such an attempted massacre; pundits would have immediately speculated about hate crime and domestic terrorism…

If that hypothetical white subway shooter had then been discovered to have posted tirades about black people, had he called for whites to get a gun and start shooting blacks, the global media would be in nuclear meltdown about white supremacy. Protests would be breaking out across the country and corporations would be emitting an avalanche of press releases about America’s racial injustice.

Instead, since the smoke-bomb detonating, race-ranting shooter on a New York City N train Tuesday morning was black, his race and apparent anti-white hatred are nearly taboo subjects.

Social media and the genealogy of culture war

In UnHerd, FSU Advisory Council member Andrew Doyle wrote about the hyperbolic accusations thrown around by activists and how these lead to defamation, saying: “Many activists are explicit about their refusal to debate their ideas – for the simple reason they would collapse under scrutiny – and one of the ways this can be achieved is to destabilise shared definitions of words. In their world, libel simply cannot exist, because the meaning of language has become a purely subjective matter.”

Another member of our Advisory Council, Eric Kaufman, argued in UnHerd that Francis Fukuyama, though correct in identifying that “Liberalism is in peril”, failed to understand the role of “Left-modernism” in undermining it: “Progressive illiberalism began with affirmative action in the 70s, cooked up political correctness and speech codes in the 90s, and metastasised into cancel culture and anti-whiteness in the 2010s.”

Kat Rosenfield, also in UnHerd, looked at how the hubris of MeToo led to its collapse: “At the height of the movement’s influence, a choice was made: to be relentless, to rejoice in punishing those who not only transgressed but questioned the orthodoxy, and to scoff at the idea that these excesses might ever come back to haunt us… It took a while to realise that we had created a toxic culture in which contrition was seen as pointless. And it was, ironically, the greatest gift the movement could give to its enemies: the courage that comes from having nothing to lose.”

Jonathan Haidt wrote in the Atlantic about how social media – and specifically the retweet and share tools that enabled information to go viral – “encouraged dishonesty and mob dynamics”, shredding social norms, trust and consensus. Haidt said: “The newly tweaked platforms were almost perfectly designed to bring out our most moralistic and least reflective selves… When our public square is governed by mob dynamics unrestrained by due process, we don’t get justice and inclusion; we get a society that ignores context, proportionality, mercy, and truth.” In Persuasion, Emma Camp, whose New York Times article about the chilling effects on campus free speech provoked widespread online ire from US progressives, wrote about how a culture of vindictiveness and bad-faith assertions create a climate of fear.

As Elon Musk elected not to take a seat on Twitter’s board, instead positioning himself to take over the company , the New York Post reported that Twitter workers described the atmosphere there as a “shit-show” and felt “super stressed”. Satirical news site the Babylon Bee wrote: “With Elon Musk becoming Twitter’s largest stakeholder… many within the company are worried he may turn their free speech platform into a platform that actually allows free speech.” As predicted, Musk has now launched a takeover bid, offering $41.4bn for all remaining shares and writing in a letter to Bret Taylor, Twitter’s Board Chair: “I invested in Twitter as I believe in its potential to be the platform for free speech around the globe, and I believe free speech is a societal imperative for a functioning democracy. However, since making my investment I now realise the company will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form.”

Event: Living Freedom Summer School

For free speech enthusiasts aged 18-30 the Living Freedom Summer School, organised by the BoI charity and supported by the Free Speech Champions project, provides a unique opportunity to be part of a stimulating forum for around 60 young advocates of freedom who will attend expert talks, hear from writers, critics and campaigners, and participate in debates, seminars and workshops. The three-day residential school takes place in central London between 30 June and 2 July. Applications must be submitted by Sunday 29 May. If you are over the age limit, please spread the word to younger folk.

Gillian Philip Fundraiser

We’ve launched a CrowdJustice fundraiser on behalf of our member Gillian Philip, a writer of young-adult fiction whose contract was terminated after she expressed the belief that biological sex is real. Her mortal sin was adding the hashtag #IStandwithJKRowling to her Twitter account, which immediately led to demands that her publisher dump her and, needless to say, it did just that. Gillian’s contract was ended, and her agent abandoned her, just one month after the death of her husband. The effect on her was shattering. Today she works as a courier and an HGV driver to make ends meet. Please help Gillian fight for her freedom of speech by giving what you can to the crowdfunder here.


April 19, 2022

BOFFINS must prove through stringent law and regulation that things like non-human driven robot cars and algorithm-driven health care are totally safe, AI experts told an online meeting to discuss breathtaking next generation technological advances this morning.

The UK is the third highest investor in the world after China and the United States of America, Matt Harvey, head of AI at Gowling, said and it can be used in all areas but he singled out finance, automotive transport and health care as the main areas to benefit.

“People should have the right to challenge a decision made by algorithm,” David Frank, government affairs manager at Microsoft, said and “explainability is key to trust.”

But Rocksana Fiaz, mayor of London borough of Newham – where “data ambassadors” are appointed and schoolchildren introduced to the benefits of innovation early in the Sparks programme – said there was a lack of clarity.

Safe and ethical AI is key to the government’s future plans to boost the “right sort” of economic growth by encouraging people to embrace new technology because it is good for them, Adrian Weller, director of the Alan Turing Institute, said.

There is a need to listen carefully to users, practitioners and stakeholders for what is needed then implement them and work closely together. Safe ethical trustworthy AI linked to ethical governments will foster the right kind of investment in the UK, he added.

“We are only at the beginning”, he said in answer to a question about “black boxes” within algorithms.

Key questions and fears around privacy, safety, reliability and ethical factors, particularly around DNA data used by security and police along with increasingly invasive overt and covert digital surveillance and movement monitoring, particularly during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, remain uppermost in the national psyche as we adapt to the lightning fast speed of social change overseen by tech innovators and politicians regulating them.

Progressing down the brave new world hi-tech super highway may also be hampered by an apparent historical reluctance among UK workers to “upskill” and work with and for new technology pioneers partly, I suspect, because it tends to reduce rather than increase human employment by replacing us with robots.

The Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation helps the public to better understand next generation technology and increasing access to private data while monitoring transparency, promoting higher ethics and public trust to help innovators, investors and political decision makers.

Westminster Forum’s Next steps for Artificial Intelligence in the UK – the National AI Strategy, market development, regulatory and ethical frameworks, and priorities for societal benefit was chaired by Lord Clement-Jones, Liberal Democrat spokesperson for digital and I attended as a retired member of the public with an interest in the subject but no stake or influence to learn then inform others.


April 18, 2022


April 18, 2022

WHAT in God’s name do the Royals and the Archbishop of Canterbury know about real life to equip them with knowledge to be able to pontificate on anything, least of all our immigration policies for dealing with illegal asylum seekers?

Seeing these symbols of English high church hypocrisy and patronisingly painful posh people privilege parading pompously at Easter Sunday services – a Prince of Wales who relied on Jimmy Savile and an archbishop who has been repeatedly protecting other kiddie-fiddlers in UK churches – talking down to us mortal sinners made me want to wretch over my Easter eggs.

These irritatingly pious pimped-up prancing ancient relics of a deferential bye-gone age are now way, way too far past their sell-by date so hopelessly out of touch with Brexit Britain and the lower working class communities most in need of real spiritual direction as they try to make sense of a new environment where strangers who arrive on boats trafficked by criminals without legal documents appear, to them, to get better treatment than local loyalists who have contributed for years and always obeyed the law.

People like sage and warning local barmaid Jackie McAlister in this BBC report from Dover which, untypically for the openly colluding Blatantly Biased Corporation, tries for once to get some real insight into the growing threat of civil disobedience and even rioting which will surely follow if we do not get to grips with this escalating issue.

Pack Welby, Charles, all the lords and ladies in their jewels and fine ermine and all the other spongers, pompous preaching paedophiles, gong-grabbing leeches and sickening neo-Marxist apologists off to Rwanda on a one way ticket, Pritti Patel, and I’d go along to wave them off.


April 17, 2022

BIG thumbs up to the COVID-19 conspiracy demonstrators angry that kids are being jabbed so waving placards at passing motorists on Newport’s bafflingly complex Tredegar Park roundabout this Easter Sunday.

Some pharmaceutical firms are coining it with mandatory jabs for children, presumably topped up as and when.

This is an outrage which we need people like the ones I just passed on a bus out in the sun to protest against. Jolly good jab, sorry job