No More Nonce Sense

I posted this on 27th December:

It was splendid to see the Duke of York at Sandringham on Christmas Day. As Virginia Giuffre grows ever less credible, Prince Andrew should demand the late Queen's money back. People who did not happen to think that they were somehow advancing their republican principles by joining in the vilification of him would be fighting his corner just as tenaciously if he were anyone else.

Giuffre had to file a civil suit because she would have stood no chance of winning a criminal case in a jurisdiction that still had a proper burden of proof, unlike England and Wales, where, in my direct personal experience, the concept of conviction beyond reasonable doubt has been unilaterally abolished by the judiciary.

We are expected to believe that Ghislaine Maxwell trafficked all those women and girls to nobody. Even from his cell, Jeffrey Epstein was still making donations to "Petie" Mandelson. Hey ho, like Epstein before her, Maxwell is now on suicide watch.

Prince Andrew is an utterly unimportant person. Epstein's British connection that matters is to Mandelson, who pretty much ran the Labour Party when it was last in government, and who is back running it now, having solicited a large donation from Epstein's cell as a convicted and incarcerated paedophile.

In the meantime, Mandelson has been European Commissioner for Trade, President of the Board of Trade, Lord President of the Council, and First Secretary of State. In all but name, he was Deputy Prime Minister under Gordon Brown, and arguably under Tony Blair as well. Prince Andrew has never even run his own bath.

Mandelson, however, is now running Keir Starmer, who is the most inexperienced politician ever to have become the Leader of the Opposition. Starmer was the Director of Public Prosecutions when the decision was made not to prosecute Jimmy Savile. Due to Savile's fame and connections, of course it is inconceivable that that decision was made by anyone other than Starmer, just as of course he was sly enough not to have left a paper trail.

And there are the Royal Family and the political elite again. The rest of us live our entire lives without ever encountering a paedophile, yet our betters have the misfortune to trip over them every time that they go out. As with illegal drug use, they extrapolate from their own experience and present such behaviour as normal, not even so much because they want it to be, as because they sincerely believe that it is.

Although every specific allegation that Jeremy Corbyn was an anti-Semite has been easily refuted, the idea lingers in the air. It never made any electoral difference. Starmer's change to Labour's Brexit policy caused both the 2019 General Election and its outcome, or else an Election this spring would have delivered a hung Parliament with Labour as the largest party. But it was there, and it still is.

The lingering idea of Starmer and "oh, something to do with paedophilia" would, however, have a great deal of electoral cut-through if anyone were prepared to push and twist the knife hard enough. Between Savile and Mandelson, that ought not to be difficult to do.

Why did Starmer let Savile off? Why is Starmer so dependent on Epstein's closest associate in Britain, indeed one of Epstein's closest associates in the world? What sort of person therefore wants Starmer to become Prime Minister?

The age of consent in London was and is 16. In New York, it was and is 17. And how prepubescent does the then Virginia Roberts look in that photograph? In relation to Alan Dershowitz, she has effectively admitted her own incredibility. Prince Andrew should sue everyone who had called him a paedophile, a paedo, a nonce, or anything in that vein. And he should demand the late Queen's money back.

Since I am now being proved right about that before our very eyes, please note that I posted this on 30th December:

My life was quite complete without my ever having heard of Andrew Tate, but then it would have been quite complete if I had never heard of Greta Thunberg, either. And I do have a good record of rat-smelling where this sort of thing is concerned. I doubt that Ched Evans and I would find much to talk about, and I know that Freya Heath's victims and I would have more than enough for a very heated discussion indeed, but I was right from the start about both of those cases, as it is increasingly obvious that I have been about Prince Andrew. When is anyone to whom Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of pimping going to be arrested at all, never mind with the fanfare that has attended the arrest of Tate? When is Heath going to be prosecuted for the criminal offence that it is for a British citizen or resident to have sex with anyone under the age of 16 anywhere in the world?

It would not surprise me in the least if Tate turned out to be innocent. Or to have been running something in Romania with impunity by greasing the right palms, as would also happen here or anywhere else, until he had failed to show due deference to Thunberg. She has undeniably pulled class and racial rank by sending round the rozzers, as she personally would no doubt be able to do in any European country other than Russia or Belarus, as well as in any of the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, if not also elsewhere.

This intercontinental superpower is 19 years old, but it is apparently Tate's followers of the same generation who are too big for their boots. Nothing terrifies the ruling class of State-funded bourgeois women more than anyone with a young male following. There is no length to which that class will not go in order to destroy such a figure. Ask Ron Paul, or Bernie Sanders, or Jeremy Corbyn. Or Julian Assange, whom its branch in Thunberg's country treated in a manner that would have caused an international sanctions regime to have been imposed if it had been done to almost anyone else by almost any other state.

The Western elite tends not to like school refusers, but those do not tend to be upper-class white girls who bang on about anthropogenic global warming. As we have seen in recent days, that is supposed to be cause of any and every sort of weather, even when Hell freezes over. Nothing else justifies the predetermined policy prescriptions, which are indisputably anti-male in the extreme, all the way back to Margaret Thatcher's passionate addresses to the Royal Society and then to the United Nations General Assembly, the speeches that brought anti-industrial Malthusianism into the political mainstream.

Still, the late Dame Vivienne Westwood was also a staunch Green, but that did not stop her from being valiant in the cause of Assange, even to the extent of making the then Stella Morris's wedding dress. In what would otherwise be just another battle between the Azov Battalion and the Wagner Group, between the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and the People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran, then whichever of Tate and Thunberg came out to bat for Assange would be relatively more sympathetic. Both of them would still be awful, though.

All political parties of any size are abysmal on all of this, but we are heading for a hung Parliament. To strengthen families and communities by securing economic equality and international peace through the democratic political control of the means to those ends, including national and parliamentary sovereignty, we need to hold the balance of power. Owing nothing to either main party, we must be open to the better offer. There does, however, need to be a better offer. Not a lesser evil, which in any case the Labour Party is not.

See the comments on the second link for answers to the usual claims about the Heath case. The "paedophile" and "nonce" abuse is being thrown at Tate, as it has been at Prince Andrew, and as it was at Evans. "Girls," we keep being told of grown women in the Tate case, as the grown woman who accused Evans was a "girl", and as Roberts was above the age of consent. In that case, then what is Thunberg, and why? How did her ostentatious recent arrest in Germany fail to preclude her attendance at Davos? And how did she get there?

Notice that Blairite opinion wanted the Police to be able to lock up working-class and politically black men for 90 days without charge, and had no problem with their being based in schools for the purpose of strip-searching working-class and politically black boys (as it overwhelmingly is), until they turned out to have been crossing the line by raping and murdering middle-class white women. Even now, those who would protest at that are still in the same category as Thunberg's devotees, being permitted and even assisted by the Police to stage demonstrations such as have recently been made illegal. If you doubt that, then try holding one against the death in custody of a working-class, politically man, or against the strip-searching at school of a working-class, politically black boy.

Watch out for the word "incel". It is one of those unanswerable, catchall ways of shutting down debate. As used in British politics, "anti-Semitism" no longer has anything to do with hatred of, or prejudice against, Jews. It certainly does not preclude support for Nazis in Ukraine; quite the reverse, in fact. It is now barely even a way of silencing criticism of Israel. It is just a device for punishing preemptively and summarily any dissent from liberal-capitalist elite opinion. So, too, is "incel". Tate is not involuntarily celibate by any conceivable definition of the term. Yet even he is an "incel". Any man can be, and perhaps, in the way that the Labour Party was expelling huge numbers of Jews for "anti-Semitism", so too could any woman.

But we are heading for a hung Parliament. To strengthen families and communities by securing economic equality and international peace through the democratic political control of the means to those ends, including national and parliamentary sovereignty, we need to hold the balance of power. Owing nothing to either main party, we must be open to the better offer. There does, however, need to be a better offer. Not a lesser evil, which in any case the Labour Party is not.