REVIEW OF THE RT HON NADINE DORRIES’ BOOK ‘THE PLOT: THE POLITICAL ASSASSINATION OF BORIS JOHNSON’

 

 REVIEW OF THE RT HON NADINE DORRIES’ BOOK ‘THE PLOT: THE POLITICAL ASSASSINATION OF BORIS JOHNSON’

 

This book is one that the British Political Establishment does not want you to read.  It is damning, not only about the way in which the Conservative Party works, but also damning about the media collusion.  When you have read it you will have an insight just how far the corruption goes. 

 

Her book is called ‘The Plot:  The Political Assassination of Boris Johnson’.  I do seriously recommend it for anybody interested in British politics.  There are a huge number of revelations about just how appalling the internal politics of the “Conservative” Party at Westminster has become.  Here are just two quotations from her book which give you a flavour of what you see if you read her book:-

 

EXTRACT FROM ‘THE PLOT: THE POLITICAL ASSASSINATION OF BORIS JOHNSON’ BY THE RT HON MRS NADINE DORRIES

 

“It is extraordinary how much happened going right back to the days of Portillo.  How many people lived together, slept together, did business together.  The gay network has always been strong throughout the Party and as I was obviously a big supporter of gay marriage, I am not passing judgment in any way.  But because it was a network thrown together by the necessity for secrecy, away from the prying eyes of journalists and cameras, that network certainly functioned behind closed doors, and it was unhealthy and dominant.  The promiscuity was legendary and the sex parties, well you know about them.  Emma Sayle, who I think took them over from Dougie, said they were just orgies with lots of people just squirming on beds.  I can tell you every one of them was one of us, a Tory.  Decisions about the Conservative Party were not even taken at dinner parties, but in beds and in relationship networks.”

 

 

EXTRACT NADINE DORRIES TALKS TO ANONYMOUS CONSERVATIVE PARTY WHIP IN 2023

 

“The public think MPs just get drunk all night on cheap booze or in subsidised bars.  How easy the Whips’ job would be if that were all we had to deal with.  It is all broken.  Like all the parameters that kept things in place, respect, values, public service, it is all gone.  I feel like these guys are trying to rot the Party from within when you were talking in there it dawned on me this Party today isn’t what I signed up to.”

 

Nadine asked:-

 

“Is the sex on the billiard table as bad as it gets?”

 

“Sadly, no.  Look, the thing that disturbed me more than anything was a serious rape that was reported and no action was taken by the Party.  An MP gave a young female a date rape drug; the next thing she knew was she woke up in a country hotel the following morning.  He wanted her out of the room because, he told her, he had visitors coming for breakfast.  She staggered for miles before she could find a taxi and help.  She was a long way from home.  She was very young.  She was encouraged to go to the police, but she didn’t, I think because she was scared of him and scared of it coming out, embarrassed that she had found herself in that position.  She came to us.  No action was taken by the Party against the MP.  He wasn’t even reprimanded by anyone, his Whip removed or the complaint reported further up the line.  It never reached Boris’ ears.  That MP went on to repeatedly sexually assault and rape, even though the Party knew about him, he retained his Whip and remained undisciplined.  He was also quite a nasty piece of work in the Chamber and in Westminster generally…    If action had been taken when that first rape had been reported, those other women would have been saved from their life trauma.  You could say the men who get into fixes with prostitutes and rent boys and other behaviour, they do serve their own free will.  They have agency and choice.  But those poor women… and sadly, he isn’t the only one who preys on vulnerable women and has sex with them.  It does tend to be vulnerable women they target.  I have a list if you like, which includes one MP who took advantage of a young women on the night before his wife gave birth to their child.  The next day, he was showing people the delivery photographs on his phone.  …The thing is, it has never been good in Westminster, but it has never before been as bad as it is right now!”

 

Here is a link to the book >>> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Plot-Political-Assassination-Boris-Johnson/dp/0008623422

WHAT THE MEDIA BLACKOUT TELLS US ABOUT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA

WHAT THE MEDIA BLACKOUT TELLS US ABOUT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA

Donald Trump and his Campaign Team famously developed the expression “Fake News” to comment on the left-liberal, blatant bias of the US mainstream media. 

In this country I think the mainstream media are at least as biased as the US media. 

For the last three years or more we have had wall to wall and utterly shameless and blatant Remainer bias from the BBC and all the other main broadcast channels on any topic relating to Brexit. 

Charles Moore on last week’s Question Time brilliantly exposed the BBC’s and Question Time’s bias against Leavers, whilst the BBC’s Fiona Bruce desperately tried to shut him up!

The mainstream media’s bias however goes much further than disproportionate coverage to include outright censorship of any story which goes against their internationalist, left-liberal bias. 

I think few stories illustrate this better than the coverage of our case. 

The English Democrats are bringing a High Court case using the Judicial Review procedure to sue Theresa May and the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (Case No. CO/1322/2019).  We have a strong case that, according to law, the United Kingdom left the European Union on the 29^th March at the expiry of our two year notice period which was given under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. 

This case is therefore the only realistic chance that we have of getting any real Brexit.  The media are falling over themselves to report displacement activity that cannot make any difference.  For example, as I write this, they are falling over themselves to report about Nigel Farage and his new Party.  The safe fact for the Remain supporting media is that however many MEPs Farage’s Party wins it cannot make any difference whatsoever to whether we are in or out of the EU or on what terms!  Misdirecting Leave support into that cul-de-sac is therefore useful for Remain.

I and numerous others whom I know of have tried very hard to get the mainstream media to report about the case, but with very little success. 

This is of course also in stark contrast to the massive and persistent reporting of the much less important constitutional case brought by Gina Miller to require the Government to get an Act of Parliament to permit it to serve the Article 50 Notice.  That case, as I am sure anybody who listened to any of the “news” output of the mainstream media, received literally massive coverage because the Remainers in the media thought that it might derail Brexit.

By contrast our case which may actually get a Declaration that we are already Out of the European Union has only had the Mail On-line do two items about it, both of which were top trending political news stories on-line. 

I have been informed that those in charge of the Mail On-line were told by the Daily Mail’s new editor (who is a Remainer) that they were to let the story drop. 

The Express On-line also began to cover the story, but again I understand they were told to drop the story by their new owners from the Mirror Group. 

Apart from those two media outlets there has been, so far as I am aware, no other coverage at all. 

Given the significance of this case I think we can draw some important conclusions from this treatment. 

The first is that despite the claims of the mainstream media to report “News”, this claim is quite simply ‘fake news’.  The so-called “News” which they report is subordinate to their propaganda objective of furthering their internationalist, left-liberal bias. 

So, any of us that take our understanding of what is going on in the world from the mainstream media is therefore running a big risk that their awareness of news will be so tainted by this propaganda objective that their understanding may well be led into fundamental errors about what is going on. 

This of course has important implications for political policy and decision making because our politicians seem to take much of their agenda from what appears in the mainstream media.  No wonder they make such a mess of almost every decision that they are involved in!

Also no wonder so many people are misled into supporting displacement activity!

Another important point to consider is the effectiveness of social media.  Despite not receiving any proper coverage by the mainstream media, we have still been able raise over £80,000 toward the case.  That does enable us to carry on with the case with some confidence.  However against that we have to set what happened with the Gina Miller case where the fake news mainstream media furore led to the funding of a case which cost over £1.2 million!  Social Media therefore is helpful but does not fully compensate us for being completely cut out of the mainstream media reporting. 

Last but not least, it also does need to be noted that the Remainer cartel politicians like Yvette Cooper and Tom Watson have been campaigning for social media access to be cut-off for all those who oppose the current British Political Establishment cartel. 

Our window of potential opportunity on social media is therefore already being closed off, as the recent treatment of Tommy Robinson so vividly demonstrates!

This of course means that it is urgent to find ways to break through politically before the window of opportunity finally closes on us!

THE SCANDAL OF BBC WAGES – THE REAL STORY

THE SCANDAL OF BBC WAGES – THE REAL STORY IS NOT THE INEQUALITY BUT THE EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF REMUNERATION TAKEN FROM TAXPAYERS FUNDS

I have read with amazement the mainstream media’s coverage of the BBC’s pay scandal which in its obsession with politically correct equality seems to have missed the main common sense point.


It should be remembered that the BBC exists primarily on a so-called syndicated tax. This is the “Licence Fee” which forces us all to pay the BBC £147 for the right to use a television whether we watch the BBC or not.


Any of us that do not pay the “Licence Fee” can be prosecuted and potentially sent to prison.


It is also worth remembering that everyone of those whose taxpayer funded pay has just been revealed is being paid more than the Prime Minister (who is currently paid p.a. £150,402)!


So now we all know where so much of our money goes!


It seems that it is being paid to people whose contribution to any serious public interest benefit (which you might expect from a taxpayer funded entity) is often extremely questionable.


It is also interesting to consider what these now revealed salaries show about the BBC's bias. Almost all their top names are Leftist Remainers! In fact the only one who isn’t, that I have noticed so far, is Andrew Neil.


I ask you:-

1. Whether Chris Evans, with his declared pay of £2.2m (14,966 times the licence fee!), or Graham Norton, with his declared pay of £850,000 (5,783 times the licence fee), are doing anything socially useful that is worth such a huge amount of taxpayer money?


2. Also whether even the supposedly more serious “public interest” broadcasting personnel, such as Huw Edwards (£600,000), Eddie Mair (£425,000) are worth anything like the money they are being paid?


In the circumstances I wonder if I would be alone in suggesting that far from raising any of the BBC’s women’s salaries, what should be done is to reduce the salaries of all those relevant employees of the BBC so that none gets more than the Prime Minister?


Further I would say that as regards all positions that are taxpayer funded – that is right across the UK State – all their pay should be subject to a maximum figure of what the Prime Minister gets, unless there is a specific reason justifying the exception (such as the need to recruit a particular person whose salary has to exceed the Prime Minister for reasons of competition with other potential employers).

Given the general lack of talent amongst senior UK State employees, and the UK’s various quangos, I would doubt whether that condition would often be met!

Who would agree?

WHAT THE GRENFELL TOWER DISASTER REALLY SHOWS THAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS NOT REPORTING

WHAT THE GRENFELL TOWER DISASTER REALLY SHOWS THAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS NOT REPORTING

I have deferred commenting on the Grenfell Tower disaster for some weeks, partly in order to let all the understandable grief of the individuals, and the knee-jerk reactions by various commentators, time to subside. However we seem to be continuing to hear demands by those speaking for the residents that the Judge dealing with the inquiry should be somebody like them. It is therefore worth considering what somebody like “them” is like.


One of the most striking things that can be said about what we saw on our TV and computer screens and in the newspapers of the pictures of the missing, and of their naturally distraught relatives and friends, it is that hardly any were English. Furthermore it was abundantly obvious that a large proportion of them were Muslim and clearly dressed in such a way as to show they are the sort of Muslims who have no inclination to integrate with English society.


Given that this tower block was public housing, or as we used to call it, “council housing”, it is a remarkable and a sorry reflection of just how appallingly badly managed immigration has been by the British Political Establishment over the last 50 years that a public housing tower block in the middle of our capital city should have next to no English people in it! What a disgrace that is! The English Democrats have long said that only our citizens should be entitled to any welfare benefits, free medical care or council housing.


We then come to the cause of the fire. It has been strangely unclear from the reports what exactly caused the fire. Given the general dishonesty of our media in trying to prevent reporting of things that might give rise to suspicion and hostility towards politically correct causes; and that this fire was started about the time when many of the residents of the tower block were breaking their fast after sunset during Ramadan it seems to me not at all unlikely that the fire was caused by something like the barbequing of kebabs in an unsafe way within the tower block. Even if that is not the case there does seem to be many reasons for being suspicious about the origin of the fire.


So far as the reason why the fire got out of control, that seems to be partly a consequence of the so-called environmentalist lobby in seeking to put cladding on the outside of tower blocks in order to insulate them. There is also the EU, in overriding the British Building Standards, to insist upon EU compliant cladding which is less fire resistant.


Naturally the fire inspection process has been made radically less effective in protection against fires by the focus on compliance with EU directives rather than on the safety of the occupants.


This type of regulatory overload is not at all an unusual situation in the UK now where the original purpose of an activity is often lost sight of in a maze of inane legal rules and political correctness.


The one thing we can be sure of there will be many more problems caused by the general institutionalized uselessness of the UK’s public authorities!

Finally here is an interesting article which has been circulated to me:-


As the catastrophe at Grenfell Tower has been so" Politicised" you may be interested to see these facts - especially the last paragraph....

The following appear to be matters of public record:

1. The block of flats was run not by the Council but by Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO). This body is made up of 8 TENANTS, 4 councillors and 3 independent members.

2. Labour hold the seat that the block is situated in.

3. Labour run the London Council who manage the under-funded London Fire Service

4. Emma Coad the sitting Labour MP for that ward also sat on the KCTMO.

5. The advice to stay put which Sadiq Khan has been so vocal about was given by the London Fire Service.

6. The decision to change contractors during the refurb was made by KCTMO.

7. The decision not to spend an additional £138k on fitting sprinklers was again KCTMO.

8. The decision to create Arms Length Management Organisations (ALMO) such as the KCTMO was made under the Right To Manage legislation passed in 2002 as part of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act.

9. This was put in place to give leaseholders and tenants a greater say and the ability to self manage, which in some circumstances has clearly proven to be flawed.

10. Which Govt was in a charge when this law was passed? It was Labour.

11. Sadiq Khan as mayor of London Produced a report to say that the fire service did not need further funding.

12. Emma Coad elected Labour MP was on the board of the Tenant Management group who are being accused of not listening to tenants.

Further, according to Christopher Booker (a strong advocate for Remain) in the Telegraph, when the Grenfell Tower was built, the cladding materials were glass-based and inert. Fire could not pass through or behind the cladding.


Since then, authority for specification of construction materials has passed from individual governments to the EU. The EU has decreed, as part of climate change initiatives, that the main purpose of cladding is to provide insulation, thus reducing the need to burn fuel. When, three years ago, Kensington spent £10m on up-rating the Grenfell Tower it had no option but to use cladding permitted by the EU. Unfortunately, the cladding is not fireproof.
 
I have not (yet) heard anybody accuse the EU of responsibility for the fire - though that is where at least part of the blame lies.”