Tip - If you are using a phone, set the "Desktop Site" option in your browser   

Featured

End of Fakery to be Faked? - Fulford Report 1 Dec 2025

Details
Category: Free Citizen
Hits: 54

2025-12-01

Given that everything that we read in the press or on social media is potentially corrupted, making sense of what we read is become a fool's errand.

The late great Robert David Steele used to say that nearly everything we need to know can be obtained through "open source" intelligence, and the only source that he thought worth his paying for was Benjamin Fulford. In that spirit we feature Benjamin's reports even though he appears now to be not so independent as before, since he now publishes under the branding of the White Dragon Society, and his various contacts in other organisations will tell him whatever they want him to tell us.

So we must bear in mind that he isn't necessarily as independent a journalist as he used to be, and his output should be judged in that light.

Take for example the "tale of two Trumps". It looks persuasive, but the abilities of even the most consummate administration to coordinate the activities of two competing Trumps seamlessly and simultaneously operating toward differing ends within one administration ... let's say I'd take some convincing.

Throw in that the "fake Trump" has apparently manoeuvred Zelensky into his downfall, and the two Trump theorem is looking dodgy to me. I prefer the idea that Trump is acting with extreme unpredictability because that's the only way to keep his true intentions hidden to friend and foe alike - until his ends are accomplished.

And he probably does have two avatars to play to the gallery ...

Your entertainment this week. (Modest subscription required for prompt access)

 

The Federal Communication Commission Continues Regardless

Details
Category: Free Citizen
Hits: 30

2025-12-01

What's the difference between a regulator and an enabler?

Quite a few regulators seem to have trouble differentiating, as Tom Wheeler so ably demonstrated in this pre-Covid video.

Has anything changed?

Well, the names in the frame may have changed but little else.

:" ... the FCC has never met a regulation it couldn’t sidestep or ignore, and that certainly won’t be changing anytime soon"

Ah, but the Yanks do things their way. So is the rest of the world different?

 

Courting Chaos

Details
Category: Legal
Hits: 31

2025-12-01

Martin Geddes has established (at least to his logic-based satisfaction) that some, maybe many of the "magistrates courts" currently "hearing cases" have defective foundation in law, and cannot therefore operate within the law. 

And, with a little help from one or two AI assistants, he has developed a procedure for validating such "courts", a procedure which (he asserts) anybody in receipt of a summons (or other legal demand from the State) may use to verify its authenticity.

"For the first time in British history, citizens can formally verify the legality of the State"

He lists the process by which he came to the "court name requirement specification", and then lays out that specification itself, as deduced by AI from the Magistrates Court Act 1980.

Worth reading.

As he remarks - 

"Now imagine this same method applied across the entire public sector"

Now it clearly would not be true to say that anybody could do this.

You would need a basic grounding in the Statute Book, you would need to identify the primary legislation involved and to recognise that some Acts permit ministers to rewrite them via ministerial orders (which Parliament may choose to let pass without debate} as they deem circumstances demand, you would need some proficiency in directing your favoured AI assistant(s), and you would also need a bucket-full of self-confidence to approach the bench with your results ...

... but nevertheless, the Statute Book is now potentially your oyster. 

Off you go!

See also Martin's follow-up article, introducing the idea of "Lexworthiness" for JPs and judges- is your court fit and safe to fly?

 

The Cultural Battleground Cometh

Details
Category: Free Citizen
Hits: 40

 2025-11-30

We have been here before, but never as deeply nor pervasively .

The British Isles as history will attest has never been immune from trouble and strife, most recently in Northern Ireland, and before that the previous matter was settled at Culloden - but not truly settled until the English Ordnance Survey mapped the territory of Scotland so that any further rebellions could be pursued through mapped and understood terrain. Our highly prized Ordnance Survey maps beloved of ramblers and campers alike were born of conflict.

Which is no reason to want another such conflict.

Yet governments around the western world seem hell-bent on creating circumstances likely to lead to conflict anew, by importing others of any culture but our own and any religion but our historic Church of England - and by historic I don't necessarily mean merely Henry VIII and his "split" from the Holy Roman Empire under the Vatican.

Our response has been essentially (a) to blame the government (correctly) and (b) to demand protection by law and order (at least partially misguidedly).

Why is it misguided to demand protection through the proper administration of law order and justice?

Simply put, because law order and justice is currently administered by the same governing powers that are busy creating the problem in the first place - it is beyond question now that importing "diversity" of all shades is a government priority which isn't going to change under a different political party.

The principle of demanding respect for law and order isn't wrong, but under the current system of governance the practice is essentially misguided and doomed to fail unless it is allied with additional measures that do not depend upon the current system of governance.

We may also remark in passing that current law and order appears no longer to be impartially administered without fear or favour and is therefore unreliable. Placing all our eggs into this basket is not likely a viable way forward for anybody.

Could we change the current system of governance?

Yes in theory, but in practice we would be fobbed off with cosmetic change that changes nothing significant (eg: "rejoin the EU", "proportional representation", "new political party":- already in train!). With a bit of encouragement it may yet fall apart under its own manifest contradictions, but given lack of an appropriate Act of God, the only way through the current electoral system is to spoil every ballot paper by writing "None of these candidates" across it, politely but unambiguously. 

If there are more of these rejection slips than votes for the leading candidate, then legally "None of these candidates" is elected. Note that simply not voting at all doesn't cut it, as there are no such votes to be counted.

Whilst I wouldn't discount such a sea-change in public opinion, it's unlikely at the next general election, but we should make a start.

If we don't like that idea, then we could vote for independent candidates only. But that still creates MPs, many of whom would still be open to control by corrupt parties behind the scenes, by fair means or foul - it would merely be marginally more difficult.

Could we appeal to the diversity already here?

Whilst there are a lot of them, they are still numerically in the minority overall, although within certain conurbations they are already in the majority.

They are however still human, and most humans want to live and raise their families in peace and prosperity. They don't want to fight and despoil their neighbours (even if some of our leadership may be less wise), because we are carefree safe and prosperous when we work together for mutual benefit, and unsafe worried and poor when we fight amongst ourselves. 

So we should foster amicable and productive relations with those already here who value peace and prosperity above strife and tension. We should talk with them, understand our strengths and weaknesses, and agree to work together rather than to fight over spoils.

That means that we should first identify where we are in agreement, and agree to work together on these matters, whilst setting aside cultural differences (such as religious dogma) in favour of non-interference. That may upset some people but is there any reasonable alternative?

Thereby we can build trust toward "live and let live". Trust that may ultimately allow further voluntary progress on our differences, in both directions, in due time.

 

Operation Five Year Anniversary!

Details
Category: Free Citizen
Hits: 31

2025-11-29

Lei reminds me that I missed a trick back in October, but I never set out to make this site about me, so it's just what comes naturally.

I am today very happy to feature Lei's five year anniversary video, she has made a huge contribution to the social media scene with her authentic in-depth analyses and independent self-directed investigations on all topics Chinese.

Watch and celebrate with Lei - and her unseen team, who provide her with the necessary unstinting support. Let us hope that they are a model for how our future world will be created.

(27 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

 

Page 3 of 322