The Overton Window

Have you seen all those amazing shades of brown cars upon the UK's roads? There's deep golden tones, metallics reminiscent of sunsets one might have experienced whilst on romantic holidays, radiant variations that artists such as Andy Goldsworthy might have employed upon some of his 'living' artworks. I can well recall when a brown car would have been regarded as, quite possibly, the worst of all worlds... in terms of colour choice, that is. No longer is that the case.

Now, within the industry that is constantly having to rebrand itself, the options, for those who can afford it, might be made from a veritable explosion of, mostly, metallic shades of brown. Although, seldom is 'brown,' as a verb, employed within the description. Or, if it is, the term tends to feature almost as some sort of coy suffix. With descriptions such as 'coffee,' 'chestnut' or 'fawn,' we, likely, understand; likewise 'hickory,' 'cinnamon' or 'pecan,' or we might take a stab. But, what about 'everlasting silver,' 'meteorite grey,' ametrine,' 'smoked quartz,' selenite grey magno, Carpathian grey,' 'blue pearl,' 'Java' or 'compass yellow?' Isn't the last one just another shade of yellow?  'Blue pearl,' another variation upon blue? I possess two compasses and neither has even the minutest corner of yellowness upon it. And, isn't 'selenite grey magno' simply a less appealing brand of icecream, soon to be withdrawn or, at the least, rebranded as, perhaps, 'selenite cream magno?' Rebranded, I might even give it try but I'd expect some sort of magic upon the tongue. All the above descriptors are currently terms being used to describe what even the manufacturers may, collectively, lump under the wider appellation of 'brown.' 

Fair enough! It's a sales pitch. Just so long as they're not trying to sell us something, disguised as something it's not... just so long as it remains a car. 

What about tones of shirt? Or tones of political persuasion? Is a brown shirt still a brown shirt? Is fascism still fascism? I mean, presumably, that's still something the vast majority of the UK's population abhors? Fascism, right?  

So, when the stabbing to death of a white British male, by a British Sikh, finds, amongst other things, that the police officers in attendance, tragically and horribly, misjudged and failed the victim, what might we, reasonably, expect the reactions of a sane and healthy democracy to be? A point of information here: the coroner's report, upon the death of, victim, Henry Nowak, concluded that, even had the officers behaved swiftly and impeccably, poor Henry had already sustained such mortal wounds that he could not have been saved. But, Henry, whilst still able to communicate and comprehend so much of what was happening about his being, breathing his last, should, at that moment, and at the very least, have been able to understand that he was now in the hands of people who wished to do all that they possibly could to ease his pain and to be performing with his 'best' interests at heart. The murderer, Vickrum Digwa, a 23 year old Sikh. was sentenced to 'life' in prison, with a minimum term to be served of 21 years. 

The list of failings, potential failings and questionable criminality- not, necessarily or wholly, on the part of the police officers- remains considerable. The rulings and findings are likely to face questioning from certain quarters. I would imagine that there is more than a fair chance that Digwa's arguably lenient sentence will be challenged and extended. Prominent in the news, discussions up-and-down the country will rage on, at least until MSM finds something else with which to distract and/or redirect the national focus. Rioting and the stoking thereof has been, thoroughly, disrespectful to the murdered teenager and his family and, entirely, from the usual quarters. 

But, how did we get here and where are we headed?

 Remarkably, the citizens of the Hylton Castle ward, in Sunderland, recently elected a chappy by the name of Glenn Gibbins (Reform). 'Remarkably,' very much in the negative sense of the word, because, in 2024, that same chappy wrote on social media, that he, "Can’t believe the amount of Nigerians in town ... should melt them all down and fill in the potholes." Which is both shocking and far more commonplace than MSM would have the viewer/reader/listener believe. I've, certainly, heard similar comments made but such characters do not usually get elected in a functioning democratic country, where disagreements may be robustly aired, rigorously discussed and roundly challenged. Think: if he commits those words to social media he's almost certainly said similarly incriminating, or even more depraved, comments amongst his mates. How can Mr Gibbins, elected councillor, now be expected to represent any of those 'too-many' Nigerians? But, it's worse than that...

Because, when challenged upon the precise words of one of his Reform Party's councillors, and with the time and the space to properly reflect, Deputy Leader, Richard Tice, doubled down, multiple times, refusing to condemn the 'mere' sentence. Multiple times he did so, and would ,likely, do so again. “I’m going later to a campaign against the scourge of anti-semitism, which is the greatest threat facing us, particularly in London but elsewhere across the UK. That’s what people are really concerned about. If people have said daft things, of course it’ll be looked at,”  Mr Tice diverted, again and again. 'The scourge of anti-semitism... the greatest threat facing us'? Really? 

I'll take a punt and guess that none of these 'anti-semites' has ever implied similar uses for any of London's Jewish communities. Neck out, I'll go further and suggest that the vast majority of theses implied anti-semites may be far more anti-Zionist than actual anti-semite- ever considered it curious how the overwhelming majority of MSM inferred cases of anti-semitism remain just that... 'inferred,' frequently not 'specified,' almost never 'debated?' Whole news stories may be constructed around 'inferred anti-semitism,' without clarification. Don't dare to interrogate too deeply! It's the desired narrative... but 'the narrative' of whom? 

Nigel Farage- lovely countryside setting, with sheepy 'things' in the background- said that he watched the footage of police officers dismissing Henry Novak's pleas of having been stabbed and not being able to breath, and went on to strongly suggest that we should all react with, "pure, cold rage!" In true Farage 'style,' the man also referenced/exploited 'the murder of George Floyd' and railed against what he called 'two-tier policing.' He confected an instance of 'anti-white policing,' implied it to be but one amongst many, before retiring to some posher member's club and, likely, a more expensive glass of red. We can't be certain but we can, credibly, surmise that he rather knew the seeds that were being sowed. Into which atmosphere Tommy Robinson, bright-red face flanked at two throbbing temples, and his predictable variety of imported thugs, were more than happy to jump! 

Mr Farage, absolutely, was not heard to chuckle quietly to himself. Well practised at negotiating the increasingly-billionaire-owned MSM, the Reform leader delivered his recorded message straight to social media. As awful as the referenced/exploited murder was it was also, precisely, the type of tragic 'anecdote' Mr Farage could embrace. At no point did he wish to reference any of the commissioned studies into such things as two-tier policing, all of which, to a fault, have found that, where discrimination occurs, it, demonstrably, favours the white (male). In the rare instance, where the 'white, working-class, male' finds himself on the receiving end it is in relation to those (ostensibly white) of more affluent outlook. Otherwise, findings are, generally, unhelpful to those such as Mr Farage. No worries!

Of course, it's not just Nigel, is it Sir Keir? Sir Keir, himself a well-practised negotiator of the MSM landscape, would know, precisely, what and what-not to say, what and what-not to reference. Newly, and disingenuously, elected to the leadership of the Labour Party, Sir Keir, then, sought to back up his faux-raged accusations of anti-semitism in the Labour Party by commissioning the Forde Report. But, then opted to, initially, 2-year-'delay' publishing the findings. Then, simply and from that point onward, to refuse to even acknowledge a merest reference to the multi-million pound document. Hint: findings of the report did not deliver the raging infestation of anti-semites Sir Keir had been hoping for. Events surrounding the report may seem highly duplicitous but, consider, given the nature of the UK's compliant and lobby-infested MSM, coupled with Sir Keir's seeming inability to differentiate between fact and confected fiction, treatment of Martin Forde's report actually sits, 'comfortably,' amongst far too many likeminded documents. The report was eventually leaked and then, swiftly, kicked into the archives, whereupon and henceforth, treated as being non-existent by all the UK's lobby journalists.

Sir Keir- national statesman and former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, just in case you hadn't heard- union jacks propped about like so many nightclub bouncers at the start of an anticipated busy night, strode to the podium and decreed that Mr Farage cease with his weaponising of the tragic murder, to his own ends. At the former, thankfully non-fatal, incident, and true to type, Sir Keir had, yet again, trampled roughshod through the nation's abilities with the simple deployment of basic recall- BBC headline: 'Police declare terrorist incident, after two Jewish men stabbed in London.' Just those few short weeks past a thoroughly-flanked Sir Keir had, deftly, weaponised said incident in, very much, the same manner, and the BBC had slipped, seamlessly, into compliance. When the nation's national broadcasting service, both sides of the House (of Commons) and the capital's police force all line up as one, we really should sit up and take notice! But, precisely what should we be noticing?   

Well, for a start, that all three institutions were in agreement, rather as they were when israel plunged headlong into a whole series of nationally broadcast and celebrated Acts of Genocide (not then by name), upon the civilian populations of the Occupied Palestinians. Like rats fleeing a sinking ship, significant numbers of observers may have since hoped to slide, inauspiciously, from 'Genocide denial' (even so far as 'complicity'), over to 'denial of once having been in denial.' Once and once again, crediting the electorate, and a far-more compliant MSM, with neither memory, nor the means to formulate and/or to pose pertinent questions. Headlines such as 'Two Jewish men stabbed,' may have brought some of Keir's wavering fold back to heel. But... 

As Sir Keir well understands, as does Sir Mark Rowley, as do the upper echelons of the BBC, the 'incident' never was such a straight forward act of anti-semitism as was being implied. There exists considerable evidence to support the contention that the 45-year-old Somali perpetrator was in the midst of some sort of 'mental crisis,' whereupon he might well have lashed out at anyone within reach. Further, he did lash out at 'anyone;' the first of three (not two) victims was left off the casualty list, by virtue of not fitting so neatly with the desired narrative. Ishmail Hussein, a man the perpetrator had known for twenty years, was also attacked and stabbed. He was, and remains, a Muslim, which a) supports the contention of an ongoing 'mental crisis, and b) strongly contradicts Sir Keir's desired narrative of an 'anti-semitic attack.' Sir Keir, Sir Mark and the BBC, each fully-furnished with the facts, elected to omit this major detail. Government, police and the BBC! Right there, that's an additional detail that's highly worthy of MSM-interrogation and retention.  

Other pertinent facts: 1) the weapon used was a knife but was not, specifically, a Kirpan. 2) the number of UK incidents involving stabbing with a Kirpan currently stands at zero. Suggestion: observe the space, into which certain MPs and faux-journalists will most swiftly leap, demanding that the ceremonial Kirpan be banned. 

Imagine, if you can, the sort of climate in which the nation's PM may dance his way through all that inconvenient expectation of honesty, (quite frankly) with barely a murmur from the tiers of lobby journalists, picking and choosing which newsworthy events to address and those to treat as if they had not even happened? Imagine! Condone acts of Genocide one minute- yes, he did!- then roll out an entire cabinet of misinformants to deny the charge. Imagine whole news-outlets that might permit such words to 'slide' and, so swiftly, slip from scrutiny? That might permit such an expenses-clad 'statesman' to, then, address the nation, about 'those British values we hold so dear.' Imagine! 'One day everyone will have always been against this'- Omar El Akkad. We might, even as these words are being typed (by me), witness and listen to all manner of Labour MPs and client 'journalists' wondering quite whether they might have left it rather too late, worming their pathways from Genocide enabler and Genocide denial, over to faux-abhorrence for those same acts. Imagine!

It is with this 'cultivated' landscape that Home Secretary, Shabana Mamood, has been able to tear up and redefine what may constitute an act of 'terrorism,' in order to intimidate and to gag, first and outrageously, criticism of israel's Genocide upon the civilians of Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon, then to further shackle much criticism of Government complicity in said Genocide. It is within this climate that Foreign Secretary, Yvette Cooper, has been able to misrepresent direct actions against Elbit Systems UK's arming of the israeli Genocide, as acts of terrorism. A climate whereby, Human Rights Barrister, Rajiv Menon was, initially, shackled, then accused of contempt of court by trial judge, Justice Johnson, when he attempted to explain to the jury that they were at liberty to acquit the Filton Six on grounds of conscience- a ruling, happily, since overturned on appeal. Proceedings against Menon are believed to be the first, in living memory, brought against a barrister in respect of a jury speech. It is within this climate of confected fear that David Lammy is able to stand up and to speak all manner of tosh, in order for the UK's complicit arms industry and RAF to continue to arm and assist israel in its ongoing Genocide upon wider and ever wider swathes of the Middle East.      

When Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, Sir Mark Rowley, stood up and faced down TV crews and called for the curtailing of Anti-Genocide marches, on the grounds that organisers repeatedly requested march routes that sought to include synagogues, Sir Mark, pretty much, knew that he would not be robustly challenged by a compliant MSM, because this was the cultivated landscape into which his message was being delivered. Absolutely, he must have recognised that these claims were spurious, because the routes and the proposed routes remain up for inspection for any one who wishes to check. Mark Rowley, instead, wished to grant Central London to Tommy and Mates. Thus substituting a wholly peaceful Anti-Genocide March, with that of another march, of a different hue, thereby guaranteeing (almost for certain) the violence he claimed to want to avoid. Curiously, although I very much doubt Sir Mark will have brushed upon this at any later date, Tommy's guaranteed-violence march was, quite liberally, furnished by israeli flag-bearers, who were being more than welcomed, and with open arms, into his sullied ranks. 

When (not-really) independent peer and UK Government Advisor on Anti-semitism, Baron John Mann, decreed that the wearing of 'political' (but, really, Muslim or Palestinian) items within the NHS should be prohibited- also scrubs not to be worn at any protest- he was operating at the behest of, Zionist, Sir Keir, within the same confected political climate. But, seriously, who could possibly want to be spared pain or, otherwise, cared for by anyone wearing the minutest semblance of a keffiyeh- heaven forbid a badge or pin that might imply an abhorrence for Genocide? Human Bull-horn and Zionist, and Labour Friend of israel, Baron John Mann, has stated that some Jewish patients might (just might) have expressed a concern, when exposed to such outrageous compassion. Again, without being too specific, without citing any particular incident. Curiously, the Anti-semitism Finder General didn't (or chose not to) reference incidents of Muslims being intimidated by instances of israeli attire. Baron Mann, not one of life's fence-sitters, especially when there's an israeli Genocide to negotiate! Good citizens, I give you Baron John Mann, 'Independent' Advisor to this Government on Anti-semitism! At his bumptious and disingenuous 'best.'

None of the above culprits has, yet, to the best of my knowledge, sought to drape themselves within a brown shirt. Maybe, I haven't, yet, seen one, although the nazi salute appears, once again, to be raising its noxious hand. If the aforementioned attire did start to spread within certain ranks, I predict that one of the above-named, or a close associate, will be more than happy to declare the attire to be far more of a shade of, 'everlasting silver,' 'meteorite grey,' ametrine,' 'smoked quartz,' selenite grey magno, Carpathian grey,' 'blue pearl,' 'Java' or perhaps 'compass yellow?' Blame immigration, why not? Look! On the far horizon, a boat of 'illegal' immigrants!