On the Proposed Replacement of the Human Rights Act 1998 with a Modern Bill of Rights
“This is the story of a duel. It is a duel between two very unequal adversaries: an exceedingly powerful, formidable, and ruthless state and an insignificant, unknown private individual. The duel does not take place in what is commonly known as the sphere of politics; the individual is by no means a politician, still less a conspirator or an enemy of the state. Throughout, he finds himself very much on the defensive. He only wishes to preserve what he considers his integrity, his private life, and his personal honor. These are under constant attack by the government of the country he lives in, and by the most brutal, but often also clumsy, means.”
—Sebastian Haffner, Defying Hitler (paperback, Kindle, audiobook)
I am writing to express grave concerns regarding the Human Rights Act Reform: A Modern Bill of Rights – Consultation, which recommends extensive revisions to the Human Rights Act 1998.
I often contemplate how people who consider themselves virtuous can blithely commit acts, make decisions, and enact policies that infringe the rights; curtail the liberties; and inflict anguish and even death on incalculable individuals.
I’m not talking about the tyrants—who are nearly all psychopaths—but about the ordinary colluders, without whose cooperation the tyrants could not execute their tyranny.
Is it bribery? Blackmail? Threats? Hypnosis? Ideological capture? Social and political pressures? Lust for power? Envy? Fear? Pride? Likely miscellaneous mashups of the above depending on the participant—served with a philanthropic side of self-delusion.
Since you’ve made the effort to read this far, I’ll be charitable and assume it’s just self-delusion in your case. You probably believe these policy reforms are for the best. Unless you’re a blackguard, that’s the only way you could cope with the moral ramifications of green-lighting legal transubstantiations that unfurl the crimson carpet for totalitarianism.
So, before you read further, I have a simple request. Try to actively resist the temptation to rationalize, to justify, to abstract away the concrete consequences of your decisions. Resolve to cease lying to yourself, as Dostoyevsky’s Father Zossima admonishes:
“Above all, don’t lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to such a pass that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others.”
―The Brothers Karamazov (paperback, Kindle, audiobook)
Take a deep, belly-filling breath. Stand up and wiggle your whole body, from your toes to your knees to your elbows to your nose. Feel the physicality of your body and notice your sensations. Don’t be afraid to feel silly. Laugh at yourself. Shake out all the lies. Blow raspberries if you like.
Then let all the truths you’ve been hiding from your conscience rise to your consciousness. At this point, you may need a cathartic cry. That’s okay. It means you’re human and thus better-equipped to make decisions about human rights policies than a sociopathic bureaucrat.
Doesn’t that feel better? Don’t you feel lighter, more open, more welcoming of ideas that stretch your thinking?
With that frame of mind, let’s examine some of those proposed reforms, starting with:
“[O]ur system must strike the proper balance of rights and responsibilities, individual liberty and the public interest, rigorous judicial interpretation, and respect for the authority of elected law-makers.”
These sound like the gilded words all authoritarian regimes deploy to persuade people to accept degradations of their individual liberties and rights in the name of the notorious “greater good.”
Reading that statement as beneficent requires a cultivated amnesia about the totalitarianism that bloodied the bleakest decades of the last century.
In his May 1983 essay Totalitarianism & the Lie, Polish philosopher Leszek Kołakowski writes:
“In both forms of totalitarian socialism—nationalist and internationalist—social control of production for the common good was stressed as essential.”
He continues:
“The destructive action of totalitarian machinery is usually supported by a special kind of primitive social philosophy. It proclaims not only that the common good of ‘society’ has priority over the interest of individuals, but that the very existence of individuals, as persons, is reducible to the existence of the social ‘whole’; in other words, personal existence is, in a strange sense, unreal. This is a convenient foundation for any ideology of slavery.”
See if you recognize that foundation for the ideology of slavery in these items from the Executive Summary (emphasis mine):
- [#3] “We will overhaul the Human Rights Act passed by the then Labour government in 1998 and restore common sense to the application of human rights in the UK.… we will reverse the mission creep that has meant human rights law being used for more and more purposes, and often with little regard for the rights of wider society.”
- [#4] “Our reforms will be a check on the expansion and inflation of rights without democratic oversight and consent, and will provide greater legal certainty.”
- [#6] “The Bill of Rights will make sure a proper balance is struck between individuals’ rights, personal responsibility, and the wider public interest.”
- [#9] “provide greater clarity regarding the interpretation of certain rights, such as the right to respect for private and family life, by guiding the UK courts in interpreting the rights and balancing them with the interests of our society as a whole”
- [#9] “recognise that responsibilities exist alongside rights, and that these should be reflected in the approach to balancing qualified rights and the remedies available for human rights claims”
These statements unapologetically articulate the authors’ intention to roll back individual human rights for the sake of “wider society,” a sentiment repeatedly echoed throughout the document.1
You know who else championed putting “the common good before the individual good”? Hitler. And Stalin. And Mussolini. And Mao. And Ceauşescu. And Castro. And his son Trudeau. And every dictator ever—including present-day masochist-fascist Rodrigo Duterte, who stated:
“Love of country, subordination of personal interests to the common good, concern and care for the helpless and the impoverished—these are among the lost and faded values that we seek to recover and revitalize as we commence our journey towards a better Philippines.”
Psychotherapist Nathaniel Branden dissects the psychology of the aeons-old despotic demand for individuals to sacrifice for the “public good”:
“With such [collectivist] systems, the individual has always been a victim, twisted against him-or-her-self and commanded to be ‘unselfish’ in sacrificial service to some allegedly higher value called God or pharaoh or emperor or king or society or the state or the race or the proletariat—or the cosmos [or COVID]. It is a strange paradox of our history that this doctrine—which tells us that we are to regard ourselves, in effect, as sacrificial animals—has been generally accepted as a doctrine representing benevolence and love for humankind. From the first individual … who was sacrificed on an altar for the good of the tribe, to the heretics and dissenters burned at the stake for the good of the populace or the glory of God, to the millions exterminated in … slave-labor camps for the good of the race or of the proletariat, it is this [collectivist] morality that has served as justification for every dictatorship and every atrocity, past or present.”
—The Psychology of Romantic Love (paperback, Kindle)
Academy of Ideas explains How the “Greater Good” Is Used as a Tool of Social Control:
It appears we have arrived at the “stage of ultimate inversion” predicted by Ayn Rand:
“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”
Whether it comes in the guise of “wider society,” “wider public interest,” “society as a whole,” “the greater good,” or “public health,” “the common good” is always a euphemism for seizing individual rights to enhance tyrannical powers, as Albert Camus so incisively captured in his 1955 speech “Homage to an Exile”:
“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.”
—Resistance, Rebellion, and Death (paperback, hardcover, Kindle)
Subsuming the individual into the collective is the very definition of totalitarianism:
“Every private act—a telephone call, the use of an electric light, the service of a physician—becomes a public act. Every private right—to take a walk, to attend a meeting, to operate a printing press—becomes a public right. Every private institution—the hospital, the church, the club—becomes a public institution. Here, although we never think to call it by any name but pressure of necessity, we have the whole formula of totalitarianism.
“The individual surrenders his individuality without a murmur, without, indeed, a second thought—and not just his individual hobbies and tastes, but his individual occupation, his individual family concerns, his individual needs. The primordial community, the tribe, re-emerges, its preservation the first function of all its members. Every normal personality of the day before becomes an ‘authoritarian personality.’ A few recalcitrants have to be disciplined (vigorously, under the circumstances) for neglect or betrayal of their duty. A few groups have to be watched or, if necessary, taken in hand—the antisocial elements, the liberty-howlers, the agitators among the poor, and the known criminal gangs. For the rest of the citizens—95 per cent or so of the population—duty is now the central fact of life. They obey, at first awkwardly but, surprisingly soon, spontaneously.
“The community is suddenly an organism, a single body and a single soul, consuming its members for its own purposes. For the duration of the emergency the city does not exist for the citizen but the citizen for the city.”
—Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933–45 (paperback, Kindle, audiobook)
Kolakowski further underscores this equation:
“Total power and total ideology embrace each other. The ideology is much more comprehensive (at least in its claims) than any religious faith has ever been. Not only does it have all-embracing pretensions, not only is it supposed to be infallible and obligatory, but its aim (unattainable, fortunately) goes beyond dominating and regulating the personal life of every subject to the point where it actually replaces personal life altogether, making human beings into replicas of ideological slogans. In other words, it annihilates the personal form of life. This is much more than any religion has ever prescribed.”
In the proposed Modern Bill of Rights, the Chapter 3 summary contains several alarming examples of what the authors believe is “flawed” about the original Human Rights Act, such as:
- “the growth of a ‘rights culture’ that has displaced due focus on personal responsibility and the public interest”
- “public protection put at risk by the exponential expansion of rights”
Anyone alert to the threat of tyranny will read these lines with a cynical eye toward the underlying meaning. With COVID having been used as a pretext for imposing increasingly autocratic restrictions over the past two years, the intention of these statements could not be clearer.
Scare-quoting “rights culture” conveys a sneering condescension toward those “Deplorables” and “Brexiteers” who dared exercise their critical thinking skills to make decisions about their personal health—unlike the Covidians who hypnotically obeyed their designated gods and virtue-signaled their veneration by sacrificing up their faces and arms.
Funny thing is, we Deplorables were right—and the pedestaled “experts” (yes, I’m the one using contemptuous scare quotes this time) were deadly, fatally, lethally wrong.
The cumulative scientific evidence has now irrefutably demonstrated that:
- masks not only fail to prevent contagion but also pose serious health threats—especially to children;
- lockdowns caused irrevocable damage to individuals, society, and the economy, the repercussions of which we may never recover from;
- hospitals administering officially sanctioned treatments such as remdesivir and ventilation are knowingly liquidating patients for profit;
- the experimental cell and gene therapy transfections being deceptively marketed as “vaccines” have caused at least a twelve-sigma mass fatality rise as well as millions of crippling injuries—including those caused by the 1,291 side effects revealed in the latest court-ordered FDA release of Pfizer clinical trial data (it’s no surprise that health insurers and life insurance companies are starting to squeal given what a thrashing they’ve taken);
- the early treatment protocols mocked by BigPharma disinformationists have healed and saved the lives of those who were cognizant enough (and permitted to) access them, while countless others suffered and needlessly died due to the trammeling of these life-saving medications;
- propagandists intentionally stigmatized those who refused to unquestioningly obey the State, sowing destructive fear, divisiveness, hatred, and rage and building a climate in which family members could be prevented from visiting dying loved ones and quarantining dissenters in isolation camps was not only imaginable but implemented; and
- government agencies manipulated and obfuscated data, goal-shifted the guidelines, and committed scientific fraud while suppressing counterbalancing facts and silencing the most qualified voices to protect their pharmaceutical overlords from corruption-exposing “misinformation.”
The UK government is even facing litigation by a group of psychologists for the “grossly unethical” brainwashing tactics it used to whisk the populace into a psychologically traumatizing state of fear:
Even the opprobrious Sage Committee, whose factitious models were wielded to justify two years of COVID absolutism, is collapsing under the weight of its own Goebbelsian lies, as its chair, Professor Graham Medley, admits its “models had been at variance to reality.”
Individuals were coerced—without informed consent regarding the potential adverse effects—into submitting to hazardous experimental injections with a grisly safety profile to keep their jobs, access facilities, and even buy food. Many of those people either suddenly died or were so severely injured by the COVID vaccines that they can no longer work, thus negating their decision to comply with the illegal mandates to maintain their employment. In addition to losing their income, they are now saddled with spiraling medical bills with no legal recourse for compensation from the government-sheltered pharmaceutical corporations.
According to the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) data, the injections not only fail to prevent COVID—they actually have a negative efficacy of up to 226 percent. For example, 40–49-year-olds who were gullible enough to get boosted have more than tripled their chances of contracting COVID, and deaths among the boosted population are nearly six times higher than those among the unvaccinated.
Researchers are discovering “consistent pathophysiological alterations” post-injection, and “lab studies show that mRNA vaccine DOES integrate itself into human cellular DNA.” Who knows what else they’ll find by the time this Mengelesque experiment ends since these drugs are still in clinical trials. Perhaps the subjects will end up like the victim of DNA experimentation depicted in the oracular O Lucky Man:
Unless governments, corporations, and complicit agencies are intentionally trying to kill off massive swaths of the world population—which, frankly, looks to be the case as no degree of incompetence could account for the failure to alter course after the galactic spike in non-COVID mortality and injuries (especially cardiac ones in young, healthy, athletic individuals) coinciding with the global transfection rollout and the subsequent coordinated coverup of these fatalities—then it’s time to STOP all COVID injections now and hold the perpetrators of this murderous fraud accountable, even as they are attempting to sweep their crimes against humanity under the rug while redirecting attention to the next diversionary crisis.
What does this have to do with the UK’s proposed human rights reforms? Everything.
Imposed in the name of “public health,” the worldwide COVID strategy emphasized the “wider public interest” and “broader needs of society” over “individual rights.”
Two years into these authoritarian measures, it is no longer possible to ignore the mass casualties and harm they caused. Had the rest of the world possessed the dictatorial and surveillance powers of China so admired by WEF middle-finger puppets like Trudeau—which this Modern Bill of Rights helps legitimize—even more people would have been forcefully experimented upon than already have been.
The point is, policymakers can be “mistaken” (being generous here), and requiring citizens to submit to their lock step edicts can endanger their lives and health. People have the rights to conduct their own research, arrive at their own conclusions, and make decisions about their own bodies, and those rights must be defended at all costs because, as Rod Serling notes, “the State is not God”:
If anything, the protections for individual liberties, rights, bodily autonomy, freedom of expression, and privacy should be increased to defend against the tyrannical and life-threatening encroachment of the State, but the proposed human rights reforms accomplish the reverse:
- [#282] “The Convention recognises certain rights as ‘qualified’, which means they can be balanced with the rights of others and the needs of society in general. These rights include the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8); freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 9); freedom of expression (Article 10); and freedom of assembly and association (Article 11).”
- [#290] “There are other rights in the Convention, known as ‘limited’ rights, which can be subject to restrictions, such as the right to liberty and security (Article 5) and the right to a fair trial (Article 6).”
Saying “freedom of thought” should be “qualified” and “balanced with … the needs of society” is literally describing thoughtcrime. If that doesn’t send an electrifying shock down your spine, you’ve probably never read or watched 1984, which is the world such Orwellian alterations will help bring to fruition:
Eroding (“qualifying”) the rights listed in #282 also appears to contravene the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Amnesty International says:
“outlines 30 rights and freedoms that belong to all of us and that nobody can take away from us. The rights that were included continue to form the basis for international human rights law.”
Article 2 notes:
“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind.”
It looks to me like practically every one of these articles has been violated in the name of Almighty COVID—including Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30.
If you don’t think it was a malefaction against human rights to psychologically terrorize, deprive of employment, and threaten exclusion from society to coerce individuals into ignorantly accepting an untested, never-before-used technology whose long-term consequences are unknown, then it’s time for you to revisit the Nuremberg Code:
“[T]he person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.”
Meredith Miller further explores these transgressions in The Violation of Consent:
- “To oppose a person’s right to bodily autonomy is an attack on human rights.”
- “Remember the power of your choice when you hear the social and political pressure (ie: bribing, shaming, blaming and guilt-tripping) to do something to your body that you are not okay with.”
- “They aim to make you feel that you don’t have the right or the worthiness to make your own choice because your individuality is not valid when it comes to the greater good. You’re expected to sacrifice your own wellbeing for the collective.”
- “Millions of people in history have been killed as a result of ideologies using the euphemism of the greater good.”
So unless you want to be culpable for instituting verbiage changes that wind up macerating human rights, you will deep-six the Modern Bill of Rights and stick with the Human Rights Act 1998, International Bill of Human Rights, Nuremberg Code, and Declaration of Helsinki.
I know the tyrannical forces of global agencies, multinational corporations, and string-pulling Svengalis are bearing down upon you, fully expecting you to comply with their authoritarian machinations as they’re so accustomed to their marionettes doing.
You will need to reach into the deepest part of your soul and rediscover your inner medieval knight to slay the technocratic dragon endeavoring to reboot the world.
As is posed in O Lucky Man—a sibylline meditation on human rights in an age controlled by multinational conglomerates in connivance with the military-medical-governmental complex—“It’s a big challenge. You think you’re up to it?”
© Margaret Anna Alice, LLC
For those of you new to my blog, I have a series called Behind the Scenes that is a special perk for paid subscribers. These email-only newsletters are not archived at my blog, so you can’t access them at a later date if you miss signing up in time. This is not because I want to restrict the content but rather because these exchanges originally occurred on a private platform, and publishing the comments of others without their permission is a bit of a gray area. To be safe, I have changed the names of the participants and am only sharing these privately via email.
This Saturday, March 12, I will send the next Behind the Scenes issue, “Defining the Enemy,” featuring an exchange with a Covidian I’m calling Syme. He became rankled when I shared the the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’s section on Defining the Enemy: The Excluded and pointed out the parallels with the vilification of the unvaxxed. Fireworks ensued.
Subscribe now if you’d like to access this and future issues of Behind the Scenes as well as my other paid content:
If you feel the work I am doing is worthwhile and want to make it possible for me to spend more time writing and researching in my aim to unmask totalitarianism and awaken the sleeping before tyranny triumphs, please consider supporting me, whether it be by subscribing, donating, buying me a coffee, or sharing my posts. I thank you for reading, thinking, sharing, and supporting my work in whichever ways you choose.
England has been an aristocratic police State since at least 1900…It’s going to take a revolution to change that…
I agree, governments are by definition, unreasonable force. The only way to counter force, is with superior force. The uniting of the people is the one thing all governments fear. The problem is that it takes something very drastic to unite the people.
It is possible that if this war continues much longer, the loss of barley exports will cause a beer shortage, and that may be the thing that angers the Brits and Irish enough to go after the criminals in their governments….
You are dead right there Jdog – take our beer away and revolution will ensue – no question!
https://greatbritishmag.co.uk/uk-culture/why-is-alcohol-a-big-part-of-british-culture/
IMHO – it’s not far away. Wait until Sue Gray’s PartyGate report in full is released in a few weeks (unless scotched by you know who) – all hell will erupt within the upper class Establishment. Do you realise that this is the first time that they have been caught with their trousers down? Partying whilst the Queen is in mourning is unforgivable at any level of British society.
The plebs just unthinkingly carry on drinking their beer and working their arses off for peanuts but as long as they have their football at weekends and TV at night – they know little else. Bread & Circuses – works every time for the elite. Now, it could be different – perhaps – or not according to how much they have in their guts (in more ways than one):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVYA3oTG8fg
Uhh, linking to an Amazon kindle version of ‘The Brothers Karamazov’, when it’s public domain and can be downloaded for free?
For example from here:
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/28054
Tyranny, just say no!
Sorry Margaret – I wasn’t able to publish your lovely pictures on TBP (I must learn to do this). I wonder if I try on my own Substack? If you would email or leave here a URL I will do my best on my small email list which I will be expanding shortly to cover all the email contacts I have collected over the years estimated around 500 worldwide, but I need my Techies to make up the email files Worth a shot?
No worries, Peter, and thanks so much for posting this! I’ll follow up with you via email.
I put a link to the original in the comments so people can see the embedded images and videos for context.
Ok – look forward to your next email!
Lots of hugs 🙂
Hi Margaret, good stuff, as usual!
I did an “Open Letter” article last week … and thought of you while writing it. Really. Hope you had a chance to read it. (It was even translated into German!)
Hi Stucky! I’ve missed you! I apologize for not keeping you apprised lately, but it’s been impossible to keep up with everything.
Thank you for alerting me to your open letter! My husband usually reads me your pieces but must’ve missed that one, so I’ll have to look for it.
Meanwhile, I’ve published quite a few letters you may have missed if you want to peruse the archives.
Can you provide the link to your Open Letter, Stucky? I started going through the archives but realized it would be a lot quicker to get the link 🙂
Here it is, good looking ….
Haha, thanks, Stucky! My husband found it earlier and read it to me while I was making breakfast. Hysterical! 🤣🤣🤣
Plenty of laugh-out-loud parts, plus this was clever:
One grievous error, though—in the caption, you wrote “Kiev” instead of “Kyiv” *gasp* 😂
Special gratitude to Peter for posting this. He had trouble carrying over the embedded images and videos (some of which lend important context to the post), so I encourage everyone to visit the original article for the full experience:
https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/letter-to-the-uk-government
Warm hellos to everyone at TBP!
Have just returned from a whirlwind trip to Oklahoma and back again. Too much to talk about now, but have been reading your site not commenting much.
I was wondering where you were! Great to hear from you, Ghost, and no worries about the comments. I’m having trouble keeping up with them, myself!
A sublime article, Margaret, and a wonderful dissection of (as you say) “such Orwellian alterations”.
Furthermore, all of the embedded hyperlinks make this post a veritable smorgasbord to be devoured for days.
So I read the “letter” with gratitude and wanted to thank you for your eloquence, hard work, and courage.
You wrote:
and
Amen to that, Sister. This, indeed, goes to the very center, the black heart, if you will, of Covid totalitarianism.
Thank you again
What an exquisite comment, Doug, made all the more meaningful given how much I respect your writing. I’m especially looking forward to your latest entry (“Oceania Has Always Been At War With Russia”), which looks deliciously nuanced, just as I would expect from you.
I’m glad you appreciate the hyperlinks. If you haven’t already viewed the original post, I think you would enjoy the embedded videos, too, as a bit of the meaning is lost without the contextual references.
Thank you, Doug, for your continued vigilance and valiant efforts to defeat tyranny.
Ironic that both of our articles were posted on the very same day (March 7th) and with so many parallels (Orwell, 1984, and others).
Or given the times, and our shared ideological perspective, perhaps it isn’t so ironic after all
I have never heard of “Lucky Man” but will now see if I can’t pull it up from some online cinematic buffet as it appears to fit my warped sense of humor (for example, I thought “The Island of Dr. Moreau” was pretty funny in parts).
And, admittedly, after pursuing your original post with the videos, the Rod Serling reference resonated more – and I have actually seen that Twilight Zone episode
Looking forward to whatever you write next
Haha, good points—synchronicity rather than ironicity!
I think you will relish O Lucky Man. Watching the clips for this essay made me realize how harrowingly relevant it is to today—all the way down to DNA experimentation. It’s lengthy but quite the intellectual and comedic adventure.
Glad you enjoyed the Twilight Zone clip. It was the only one I could find with the excerpt I needed and coincidentally had appropriate overlays comparing it to the COVID tyranny.
You should join Substack, BTW 🙂 It wouldn’t take away from your special role at TBP but would introduce your writing to a whole new audience that would greatly appreciate your work. I’d be happy to give a shoutout to my readers if you do join. If you’re not already on my mailing list, you can sign up and reply to the Welcome message if you want to touch base via email.
Actually, I’m just an ex businessman here in Galt’s Gulch who found a late-in-life catharsis with blog posting; and maybe harboring some guilt for staying so career-minded all those years as my country swirled straight down the drain.
The gratification I get from writing articles is comparable to how some might enjoy putting puzzles together or playing crosswords in a newspaper.
Even so, my online life is but a mere fraction of my day.
My blog is simply a means to catalog, and timestamp, my thoughts – sort of like a diary that I can also use to prosecute future crimes. And, lately, I am down to writing only one post a month, mainly to keep my blog (somewhat) viable; of course, with the content of each piece usually assembled from the comment sections here.
Moreover, as a TBP contributor, I appreciate “The Man With No Name” who guards the platform-a-burning against DoS attacks – and, especially, in the days ahead or if my own site goes down or gets hacked.
With that in mind, I thanked you for your “hard work” in my above comment. Surely, you understand that appreciation comes from one who knows what it takes to put together an article like yours above: The researching, outlining, structuring, phrasing, cutting and pasting, rewriting, hyper-linking, choosing and inserting media, sizing, cropping, uploading, reading, revising, re-revising, tagging, posting – all of it, is tricky and time-consuming work indeed.
I honestly don’t know anything about Substack other than it seems to be a “thing” currently with many of the online truth-tellers whom I enjoy reading, yourself included.
If I ever do decide to explore the option, as you mentioned in your comment above, it would be “in addition”; or, rather, another gig over and above my regular routine.
In any event, I appreciate the “nudge”, your kind offer(s), and your encouragement, too.
Haha, Wallace Stevens was just an ex-businessman, too, but he won the Pulitzer Prize for Poetry 🙂 I for one am grateful you found this new calling as you clearly are well-suited to it.
Your comparison of the writing process to assembling a complex puzzle is bang on! I have collected thousands of references, documents, videos, and other happenstance findings over time and sort through the puzzle pieces to find just the right fits for each article.
I do appreciate that you appreciate how much hard work goes into each essay, and you captured the process well.
You clearly are a vital part of the community at TBP, and I, too, am grateful that this platform provides a refuge for truth-telling while curating some of the most compelling writing around.
As far as Substack goes, it is ridiculously easy to set up an account, and it would take minimal effort to incorporate into your posting routine by simply copying/pasting your posts over to Substack. It is sort of like the Parisian cafés where ex-pats like Hemingway and Fitzgerald congregated—brilliant writers, scientists, doctors, and thinkers of all stripes who have been banished from other platforms can speak freely and share their uncensored thoughts with fellow exiles. Being able to communicate directly with people I’ve come to admire deeply over the past couple of years as well as connecting with new kindreds around the world has enriched my own writing and research.
In any case, I encourage you to join my mailing list if you haven’t already, and perhaps I’ll see you in the Stacks 🙂
“Oceania Has Always Been At War With Russia” is phenomenal, BTW. My husband read it to me last night while I was making dinner, and I kept exclaiming how I had thought or said exactly the same thing or followed the same line of reasoning! Not that you didn’t surprise me with new ideas—I just was giddy at the number of points that coincided with my own conclusions after assessing the evidence.
Indeed, I will likely reference your piece in an upcoming article, so stay tuned 🙂
Doug was once a little jfish swimming in a pond near Mayberry, MAA.
He’s a good writer and a good human, too.
I’ve been on the road again. A grandson!
Indeed re: Doug, and wow, congratulations, Maggie!! 👶🎉🐣
Margaret Anna Alice, am so delighted to find you here and this is really funny, but I’ve been revising this comment so long I ran out of time to do so. Fortunately, I copied it before leaving the page… here is the edited comment that became a story of its own
Doug was once a little jfish swimming in a pond near Mayberry, MAA. We both miss EC, don’t we, jfish?
He’s a good writer and a good human, too.
I’ve been on the road again, Doug. I now have a grandson!
I’ve also been taking a close look at the puppetmaster’s organizational techniques and wonder if this is a somewhat modern version of Hitler’s
Mein Kampf
This was Obama’s introduction to the world stage, I suppose.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/21/remarks-president-obama-address-united-nations-general-assembly
“
”
Think about the current events and look through his UN signatories. Comparing the first one to this one (and subsequent ones) causes my spidey sense to tingle, but it could be the hydrocephalus acting up again.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/21/remarks-president-obama-address-united-nations-general-asSembly
https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/barack-obama#barack-obama-s-education
*Margaret Anna? If you are reading this, you will understand that one doesn’t mention Hitler or Mein Kampf around this place without attracting the usual fan club activists, who are equally as good at “community organizing”(censorship) as the puppetmaster appears to be. I’m going to go neutral here and say that I mention it only to suggest it offers a look at Hitler’s political philosophy and goals, just as a look at Obama’s early speeches and later ones offer a glimpse at his political philosophy and goals.
So, who is the puppetmaster? Well, it is the same as ever, the Master of all that is evil, but the person I believe most instrumental in implementing the larger plan was Obama. I believe Obama was chosen for the same reason the new SCOTUS member was chosen. Enough said.
He doesn’t seem to be one of those Young Global Chosen ones, yet he just slipped right in there, didn’t he? I believe he did so because he was in on the plan and realized he was much better at community organizing than Bill, who was a horndog, or Hillary, who is about as charming as a snake at her best. And the ones with the money and the influence at the WEF, which appears to be the League of Human Controllers now, decided Obama would be a quite useful tool, as long as he succumbed to the fringe benefits they could offer him and his family. (Since he’s wealthy beyond his fondest dreams in Kenya, I assume he benefited quite well financially, as they all do.)
So, he was propelled to the world stage with his own agenda, which seemed to go along nicely with Agenda 21 and then Agenda30 and here we are.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/21/remarks-president-obama-address-united-nations-general-asSembly
That is the rabbit hole I find myself in while my husband snores gently in bed and the dog less so downstairs. Snores of blessings.
Am still following the neurobiologist from Pittsburgh. His family cut ties with him after he lost his research position at University of Pittsburgh for calling the Covid Vax a type of gene therapy called “transfection.” Anyway, his most recent livestream included a speech-by-speech analysis (through a biologist’s viewpoint) of Wolensky to show she is, at best, an accomplished actress, and at worst, she is really a doctor and a scientist in name only because no one who’d completed a doctorate in medicine could believe some of the things she says.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1418779275?t=00h26m50s
Anyway, this is cued up to the point where he starts lambasting her and her cohorts. I’ve never had the time to transcribe one of his streams… Life just keeps on moving in spite of my plans.
Aww, thank you for sharing your midnight musings, Ghost—intriguing analysis, and the Obama puppeteering hypothesis is certainly well-supported! He admitted himself he would love to serve a third term if he could just have someone else in there whose puppet strings he could pull, which is obviously what is occurring.
It is surprising he isn’t a WEFer, but he certainly fits the profile and is fully on board with the globalist agenda.
No worries about the transcription! I honestly am too overwhelmed by the thousands of articles, videos, and other resources that have been piling up. FYI, the Twitch link you previously sent for your friend no longer works, tho, so I’m not sure if those time out?
Congratulations, Ghost.
Thanks, Leah. I’ll be Ghost MawMaw now! Haha…
My comment above got revised and grew all out of proportion.