Jeremy - Why you must reconsider singing the Royal Anthem, from a Politically Correct Perspective

Dear Jeremy Corbyn

Well done.

Now you have put some panties into a right pandemonium by not singing the Royal Anthem.

May I explain that term, instead of the usual "national anthem".   What we sing is a prayer for the sovereign, not about the nation, so let's deal with it from that angle?

The anthem's origins are not that clear : see here : but it is in use by 1744, and may have some of its roots in promoting George I in the context of the Stuart claim.

That has to be a very interesting point, a German immigrant family coming here to seek a new life, looking for work, speaking no English so to speak, and probably a lot of suspicion and antipathy, coming over here and stealing all our monarch jobs and, what's more, getting lavish state benefits, more than one home.

You see, by the time that George III (grandson, still in homes and on benefits) gets to learn English, he loses (or probably makes sure we lose) a load of troublesome colonists we all wanted to leave anyway - you know, the Ukippers of their age etc.   So the the rascally rebels create a NATIONAL Anthem using the very same tune, 'My Country 'tis to Thee I Vow" etc which they keep for a long time until the Star-Spangled wotsit.

And BTW, you may not be aware that it was redesigned and exported as anthem 2.1 by Joseph Haydn (who greatly admired the tune) and who wrote 'God Save The Kaiser' which then became the basis of one of his String Quartets, and then the tune was used in various versions of the German national anthem including Uber Alles and now sans words.

I'd also like to point out that we have shown further tolerance by adopting a Middle Eastern religion whose deity is the one we see implored in the words of the Royal Prayer.  Remember we have given up a whole raft of British gods who did a lot things around the place.  Well might the inhabitants have said "coming over here, taking over our prayers" etc.

Now I do understand it needs changing.  We can't have her ruling over us, can we?   That isn't on and it's also a direct challenge to the Supremacy of Parliament, for sure.  No one minds "reigns" it hasn't any meaning, but the class-bias of 'over' has to be addressed.  Hmmm, what about "for" or even 'long to have a happy life'  or something nice, eh.

And those Choicest Gifts in store.  I do hope Comrade McConnell will remind the Chancellor that this is a time of austerity no tax-free handouts thank you, and remember this family is on benefits, so what about that cap?   I know you are unhappy about it, but you can see one's point.    Also, under current regs, surely they have enough in the bank so they don't qualify and even if they do, I think you might well look at their efforts to get into employment.   I work with young people, and we are enjoined all the time to seek out the NEETs and get them weaving.  (Or some sort of apprenticeship at least, though traditional weaving could well be an option in rural Scotland, so do have a word with the lady in charge up there.)

I do hope this gives perspective.

Kincora Scandal - Why it must head the nations's agenda - and an Arun Man Knows Why

 The scandal about abuse of young boys at the Kincora Boys Home has been sitting at the heart of our national life, and gnawing an awful hole of untold stories, of decisions to cover up, of involvement of senior figures in national life, and by the security apparatus designed to keep us safe.

Instead, the allegations are to be believed, we have seen not only the gross exploitation of young people on both sides of the Irish Sea but also their being sacrificed to unaccountable agendas and plots by people sworn to serve the nation.

One man living in Arun, Colin Wallace, knows a good deal of the truth and it seems he was set up to be accused of murder to silence him.  The national inquiry into this awful chapter of institutional abuse has been told it may not call witnesses to the Kincora abuse in which UK security was involved - the reason given is that there is an inquiry related to Northern Ireland which must deal with it.  But that inquiry, unlike the mainland one, cannot summon witnesses.   

Wallace has said he will speak, and is saying that there is connection between the allegations re Kincora and mainland allegations regarding Elm House and Dolphin Square in London.

 Wallace had worked after leaving UK intel for Tory eminence gris Airey Neave MP. the man credited with master-minding Thatcher's rise to oust Heath as Tory Party leader, who died in a mysterious assassination explosion attributed to the Republican INLA group, renegades from the Provo IRA.  Eventually he ended up living in Arundel and working as an Information Officer for - Arun District Council and was much engaged in the organisation of the BBC  It's a Knock-Out competition in which Arun fielded a team.   It was in the wake of this that the hapless man, a Brighton antiques dealer, was found floating in the River Arun, and he was accused of having hit the man on the skull because of alleged infidelity with Wallace's wife.   An aptly-named programme, it would have seemed ....   It's odd at this stage to consider the adulation then accorded to now-convicted sex offender Stuart Hall whose fall from grace saddened so many who had not been much surprised by revelations about Savile.

Wallace's case raises many issues - why was he prosecuted for murder, of a man found in the Arun?   Why was this reduced to manslaughter?   What evidence did Sussex :Police have, where did it come from?    Why was Wallace represented as some obsessive military fantasist who liked to don military uniform and had no involvement with the UK military, yet the opposite was the truth - he was part of UK military intelligence in Northern Ireland, and, as today's revelations show, he tried to warn of the use of boys at Kincora in a sordid high-level abuse ring which was used by UK intel to pressure and blackmail senior NI and indeed UK officials and politicians.

 For this, he was set up, no more no less, and the UK government was complicit.   I recall speaking with local 'stringer' Jimmy Cleavit (a man who worked free-lance in the media) who lived in Littlehampton at the time.  He received a photo from an agency in London, purporting to show Wallace "dressed up", fantasist-style, it was used extensively in national and local papers.   Jimmy had not heard of the agency, he tried to trace it, without success.   THE PHOTO OF WALLACE WAS OFFICIAL ARMY STOCK.  He served several years in jail.  He has been awarded substantial compensation, by the UK Government.

So, if Wallace is innocent of the death of the man found in the Arun, how DID that man come to die?   HOW was the body obtained?   Was he who it was claimed he was?     We ask that question via our MP, he must seek an answer.   The truth of this cover-up involves our Sussex Police, UK intel.   Was he murdered to frame Wallace?  Or is the a Man Who Never Was?  Plucked from a mortuary perhaps?  

This is no James Bond Thriller, it goes to the heart of how we are being governed, there is no more important issue about our nation and who actually runs it - it dwarfs Europe, or Westminster.

  Not only is the record of our security system under the closest scrutiny, not only are high-ranking persons, alive and dead, in a sharp spotlight, but also there are the associated allegations of Wallace, alongside the gross exploitation of troubled children, that he was involved in Operation Clockwork Orange which targeted senior members of the UK establishment, which sought to undermine the UK political and constitutional system with a view to their removal or disgrace.   Mention three UK party political leaders of the 1970's, Edward Heath, Jeremy Thorpe and Harold Wilson - all of them CO targets, and Wallace knows this.

Is this merely some daft faction of MI5, allowed to rampage around, or is there something much more serious we need to learn?

  Incidentally, I have always found it odd, to say a little, that Wallace's defence was paid for from within the family of the Duke of Norfolk.   Not odd, that the family of the Premier Earl, the highest ranking family in UK nobility, chose to be involved for Wallace, presumably knowing and believing him to be what he claimed in his trial, denied by the prosecution (that is. by the State)?    This is no idle matter, it goes to the heart of our erstwhile rulers and masters.   So the Premier Earl's actions are not known and scrutinised by the Head of State, the Queen?  It would have had to have been known to her.

It is that local, the eye of the storm is here, in Arun.   And in case we lose sight of essentials, the issue is not simply and only about the sickening abuse of the vulnerable young, horrible though that is.   If we look back to 1970s Britain, we can see the context - in 1964, Labour won a General Election, Wilson was Prime Minister, and there was the illegal rebellion of the white supremacist Rhodesian regime - it's common enough knowledge that Wilson was told by UK generals they would not obey orders to end the rebellion using UK troops, a blatant disobeying of orders.    We also know the horror of that hidden establishment that an upstart grammar school oik (not Public School) was now Prime Minister with a Labour Government.    They had hoped Heath might sort that out but the latter's caving in to the miners in 1973 led to an ill-advised election where they hoped Heath would form a coalition with Thorpe's Liberals, but Wilson led a minority Labour Government for 6 months, and then later in 1974, won a majority.

It seems that the concern to see Wilson ditched reached fever pitch, and much Clockwork Orange activity originated here, especially after the abolition of Stormont and the imposition of direct rule over Northern Ireland by London.  It's a fascinating sideline but in an interview, the leader of the white Rhodesian rebellion, Ian Smith, said that if he had had the constitution we had allowed Storemont to operate under, he would not have needed to rebel - that is, the Protestant mini-state had sufficient powers under its constitution to be able to impose a police state denying rights to the Catholics in perpetuity.

  Did a plot exist to remove Wilson and his elected government to replace it with a military-led 'regime' headed by prominent persons?   Does that sound crazy?    Well, Wallace points that way, and names recurrently occur as being willing to lead that regime, one being Earl Mountbatten, assassinated on a yacht in Northern Ireland.   Also frequently named re the Kincora scandal.

Wilson was adamant a plot existed, as two senior UK journalists have attested - he spoke to them, in detail.

Were plans drawn up to detain British citizens seen to be likely to oppose a military coup?

All too fantastic.  Banana republic, cloak'n'dagger fantasy.    Yet ....  this writer was told by a lady with whom he was then involved that, at that time, her father, a senior and respected UK diplomat, was contacted by persons who asked if he would take part in a National Administration in the wake of the forced removal of Wilson and his Labour government - an elected government chosen by the popular mandate, invited by the Head of State to form Her Government.   He declined.   How many more were approached to be suborned, how many agreed to be involved?

Too far in the past to find out?   There are those alive who know things which need to come to light.  This is no mere escapade, it is Treason, the highest crime against State and People.

  If our most vulnerable young people suffered trauma, assault, rape, violence, possibly murder, if this is to be believed, and it was part-and-parcel of an obscene, deranged and unlawful enterprise conducted within the bowels of the UK state, in its underbelly even, then to do justice to them, the truth is more than a recital of sordid behaviour, it has to be a reckoning with those who wanted to destroy our democracy and who used and abused anyone and everyone to achieve their aims.

It has been observed already that this will define the lifetime of this government not its austerity-deception.   No one who cares about the parlous state of our democracy, such as it is, can afford to look away and ignore these questions.  If our state has been suborned and undermined, that has to be known and what damage may have been done remedied.   We cannot afford to ignore it, nor be distracted.

The media will do what it can to undermine Jeremy Corbyn, for example, but what if he does command the support of the electorate in 2020 and starts to create a range of changes seen by deeply invested interests to threaten them.   Can we be so sure that Clockwork Orange won't begin to tick again?

You've Got to be Joking - Proposing to climb a mountain, Madam? Today's Cartoon by Matt

You've Got to be Joking - A Budget Surplus - REALLY? - Today's Cartoon by Matt

You've Got to be Joking - Banking your goodbyes? Today's Cartoon by Matt

You've Got to be Joking - Sophistry? - Today's Cartoon by Matt

You've Got to be Joking - Childcare means business? Today's Cartoon by Matt