I am the founder of the only Jewish group within the freedom movement here in the U.K., called Jews for Justice.
I started the group in November 2021, at a time of increasing prejudice against unvaccinated people. Other members of the freedom movement were already making a comparison between discrimination against the unvaccinated and the treatment of Jews in Germany in the 1930s. But they were being shouted down by prominent Jewish public figures who were effectively ‘weaponising’ anti-semitism and the Holocaust in order to silence any comparison with Nazi Germany. It occurred to me that if I got together a group of Jews, the majority of whom had a direct personal connection with the Holocaust, we could make the comparison with Nazi Germany without being shamed and silenced. Yes, Jewish gatekeepers for the regime could argue with us, but then we would be in a debate, and all that we want is to be able to debate these issues in public. So Jews for Justice was born.
In January 2022 I wrote a letter on behalf of Jews for Justice to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who had stated publicly that it was immoral not to get vaccinated against COVID-19. In the letter I listed several points of comparison between recent events and the history of Germany in the 1930s, including how the confinement of Jews within ghettos and their ‘evacuation’ to concentration camps had been justified by the Nazi regime on grounds of ‘public health’, specifically the need to combat an infectious disease (in this case typhus) – exactly the same justification as was currently being used to restrict the civil liberties of those who chose not to be vaccinated. I emphasised to the Archbishop that I was not seeking to make any comparison with the Holocaust itself, only with the events that led up to the Holocaust. I told the Archbishop that Jews for Justice saw it as our role to warn the public at large how history is in danger of repeating itself. The letter went ‘viral’ on social media.
In his article defending Andrew Bridgen against allegations of anti-semitism, Will Jones refers to the Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav, who has been a long-term campaigner for human rights and has spent the past three years warning of the lessons we should be learning from the Holocaust. In the short video of Sharav that Will added at the bottom of his article, she makes similar points to the ones I made in my letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury. But she has gone further.
This summer marked the 75th anniversary of the publication of the Nuremberg Code which, following the trial of Nazi doctors at Nuremberg in 1946-7, had established the inviolable principle of informed consent to all medical experiments. There was no official commemoration of this anniversary, for reasons that can easily be guessed at. But there was an unofficial commemoration in Nuremberg, featuring a speech by Sharav. Despite the existence of a German law against ‘relativising the Holocaust’, in other words prohibiting the comparison of the Holocaust to any other event, past or present, Sharav did not hold back. “The purpose of Holocaust memorials,” she said, “is to warn and inform future generations about how an enlightened, civilised society can be transformed into a genocidal universe, ruled by absolute moral depravity. If we are to avert another Holocaust, we must identify ominous current parallels before they poison the fabric of society. … Those who declare that Holocaust analogies are ‘off-limits’ are betraying the victims of the Holocaust by denying the relevance of the Holocaust.”
As a result of this speech, Sharav is being investigated by the Bavarian police for the crime of ‘Holocaust denial’. That’s right, a Holocaust survivor, who actually began her speech by describing her own experience of the Holocaust, is being investigated by the authorities in Bavaria – the heartland of Nazism – for ‘denying the Holocaust’. You couldn’t make it up.
There are Holocaust denial laws in many European countries, including some in which the Holocaust did not take place. There are not yet any such laws here in the U.K. But there is of course legislation against hate speech, and we are all well aware of current moves by the Government to extend such legislation further. Personally, I am concerned that the attack on Andrew Bridgen is part of an attempt by the Government to introduce de facto Holocaust denial legislation in the U.K. Anyone who dares to ‘relativise the Holocaust’ is already demonised, and in some cases people are already being prosecuted under existing hate-speech legislation.
It is patently ludicrous to accuse Bridgen of anti-semitism, as Matt Hancock did in Parliament. But the accusation was not accidental. It is part of a concerted campaign to ‘weaponise’ anti-semitism, to use the accusation of anti-semitism as a cudgel with which to beat anyone who speaks out against the Covid regime. Jews for Justice as a group is committed to shining a light upon the malicious practice of weaponising anti-semitism in order to silence any criticism of restrictions on civil liberties and of the vaccination programme.
I would strongly defend Bridgen’s position. He did not ‘relativise the Holocaust’. He did not say that the vaccine programme should be compared to the Holocaust. He said that it was the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust. Personally I am not convinced that there exists sufficient evidence to justify this statement. Not yet, anyway. But speaking as a Jew, and as the founder of a Jewish campaign group, I have no problem with his having made it.
In addition to founding Jews For Justice, Andrew Barr is the author of Wine Snobbery, Pinot Noir and Drink: An informal social history.
Jews For Justice doesn’t have a webpage, but it does have a Telegram group. If anyone is interested in joining, they should email Andrew at jewsforjustice@protonmail.com.
Stop Press: Andrew Bridgen has responded to his accusers. Read his statement in full here and watch it here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The response to Andrew Bridgens tweet by MPs (and others) was sadly typical of the knee-jerk responses we get from those who have given up on independant thinkingq in favour of simply signalling the right virtues in line with “the narrative”. I doubt that a single one of those MPs, including the dim-witted odious Hancock, actually stopped for a moment to think about what Bridgen had actually written.
In my view, the Holocaust was the lowest point in human depravity, that manifested itself in the most grotesque of evil behaviour. It is the stuff of nightmares. Over the past three years we have witnessed a callous indifference to the plight of humans which has taken us perilously close to a repeat of that nightmare. As an example, I’m reminded of the treatment of aborigines in NT, Australia, and their removal into camps for refusing the jabs. I could list moe, but readers of this site will be familiar with them already.
That fact we didn’t sink as low as 1930s Germany is maybe because many of us have thankfully learned from history. The battle is far from over, but at least we have a clearer view of who the tyrants are and how they oprate.
‘In my view, the Holocaust was the lowest point in human depravity,’
Don’t you think it has been knocked off the top spot, as the Covidcaust is a crime against all Human life, as is the climate change criminality, deliberately targeting babies, infants and the young with known fatal and injurious ‘vaccines’, and with respect to Net Zero to drive all into economic and social ruin and back to the Stone Age?
I certainly believe that crimes against humanity have been committed with regard to Covid and possibly with regard to other things including the manufacturing of food and energy shortages. I still think the Holocaust was exceptional in its brutality and its focused persecution of (mostly) one group of people. Will there ever be a Nuremburg-style trial of the current tyrants? I don’t know that, but I prefer to keep hoping for accountability and justice rather than give up on the idea.
JXB and Nicholas Britton
I sympathise with both your perspectives but my concern is this [click to go to the link]:
“Sadly, it is because of the ignorance of people like Karen Pollock Chief Executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust who perpetuate the idea that there was only the one Holocaust. Genocide repeats. We have even seen it repeated in Europe since 1945 in the Balkans. We have seen it in China, Cambodia, Russia, Rwanda, Syria and many other places.
These people are genocide denialists. They deny that anything as bad or worse than the Holocaust could ever happen and yet it has been repeatedly over decades.
They are responsible for making people think there was only ever the one Holocaust.”
I agree that it would be foolish to imagine it was only a bunch of goose-stepping national socialists who were capable of the atrocities seen in 1930s Germany. As you say, there have been plenty of other acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing since then, and before. I suspect there are any number of such sociopathic individuals in our midst at any time, including the political establishment. Moreover, they may not fit any stereotypical tyrant profile. The philosopher Hannah Arendt used the phrase “banality of evil” to describe the cold, perfunctory indifference of Adolph Eichmann during his war crimes trial. We should be vigilant. The events of the past three years have reinforced my view that things aren’t always what they seem to be.
If Arendt tried to publish “Eichmann in Jerusalem” now, in 2023, she’d be cancelled so quickly she wouldn’t know what hit her. She almost was back in 1963. It’s possible that the vile phrase “self-hating Jew” – which, of course, means anyone Jewish who doesn’t toe the line – was invented for her.
The “anti-semitism” card is just the last resort of the desperate. And for it to be Matt Hancock saying it. A wholly disinterested party, renowned for his honesty and probity… You couldn’t make it up.
Thank you for the succinct article. I think it is very sad that TPTB are using the antisemitism line as a shield to avoid facing up to the grist of bridgen’s argument.
It’s still not clear to me what he had the whip widthdrawn for. There are accusations of antisemitism but the statement by the chief whip made no mention of this, so are we to assume that AB was suspended for sharing the opinion of a respected academic who has concerns about the vaccine. If this is the case then we can assume that in the mother of parliaments no less, elected Conservative MP’s are no longer permitted to debate freely by the party hierarchy and supported by the party leader and PM no less. This is more akin to China than Great Britain and they have much to be ashamed of.
Lastly, why stifle debate if you have nothing to hide?
They aren’t ashamed they are feeding at the trough. You are still holding conservatives to a decent standard of behaviour, please accept the reality the last 3 years has presented. Parliament is a criminal enterprise that runs any number of Ponzi schemes because it has the legal means to do so.
With respect, I think your post, particularly your “mother of parliaments” and China references, suggests you don’t really understand the party whip system. MPs within a party are not, as a matter of party discipline (supporting a need for a coherent and united presentation), permitted to deviate significantly from the party hymn-sheet, and particularly not to undermine party policy or strategy.
As an independent MP following the removal of the party whip, Andrew Bridgen will be free to say what he wants. It is not Parliament that is silencing him.
I thought in our Parliamentary system MPs were responsible to their constituents and bound to representing their interests not the Party, its strategy or policies.
What you describe is a Republic not a Democracy… such as it is.
My understanding is that most parliamentary democracies are based on representatives organising themselves into parties and standing for election under manifesto commitments and values drawn up by the various parties. At the same time, in the UK and elsewhere (I guess), they represent their constituents in the parliament. By belonging to a party, an elected representative agrees to exercise discipline when speaking and voting in parliament, and only rarely are they given “free rein” to speak and vote as they wish, usually on “matters of conscience”. Clearly, we would all agree that Andrew Bridgen has concluded correctly that his constituents’ interests (taken as a whole) are not served by the party’s position on the injections and should, as a matter of conscience, effectively give up the party whip to speak out against them.
I thought that the distinction between a democracy and a republic was whether the voters (by electing representatives to the legislature) or a written constitution was the supreme source of law.
Excellent post.
Aren’t Conservative MPs in an small and endangered minority in Parliament?
If you ever wanted to make sure an atrocity like the holocaust could be repeated a good way to go about it would be to make it illegal for anyone to make any comparison to it.
It seems to be the benchmark for human malice. So take away the benchmark and you won’t know whether you’ve equalled it or surpassed it.
Yes where is the deluge of offended Jews then? All I’ve read is support from their community so far. Isn’t it strange that idiots can be offended on behalf of an entire community which isn’t actually offended? How does that work? Jeez… And to make it a punishable offence to make comparisons to the holocaust would be a massive insult to the memory of all those who suffered and lost their lives as a result of that horrific event. I think anyone with a functioning brain can see the tactics at play here.
It’s called identity politics, claim to represent ppl then fill yr own boots whilst ordinary ppl suffer horrendously. Nelson Mandela was the first person to perfect this, claimed to be for black Africans whilst presiding over a health/economic/crime disaster in the 1990s. Why do you think all the low life politicians were at his funeral shouting “Madeeba” and taking selfies, one group of criminals recognise the true god father.
That is interesting about Mandela. Are you saying he ran the presidency pretty much like Marlon Brando in The Godfather?
No I’m just pointing out what happened in SA after he became president was an unmitigated disaster, economically, health and law and order wise. This disaster has been airbrushed from history because of the personality cult around the man. He also filled his pockets in style. The ANC are even worse than the SNP, hard to believe I know.
Thanks, wokeman – interesting stuff.
Mogs – message in your DS inbox.
Messaged you back.
Excellent article and I’m absolutely chuffed that Andrew Bridgen is getting so much support from the Jewish community. It would seem, so far anyway, more support than from his fellow MPs, which is beyond shameful. His fellow dissident colleagues should be rallying around him now but all I hear is crickets!
I’m also confident that the government has scored one hell of an own goal with their outrageously unjust treatment of Mr Bridgen and what we’re seeing is just the beginning of a tsunami of support for him, likely internationally. Oh, and the fact the rat, Matt Hancock, has the audacity to take the moral high ground on this issue makes me want to regurgitate my breakfast in disdain. Vile, vile, vile little weasel! ( Too early for expletives )
Totally agree – Hancock trying to take the moral high ground is beyond satire. He should have been laughed out of court … but he wasn’t.
When I hear mention of Welby I think humbug. AB is late to the party but all converts must be welcomed with open arms. Except Hancock etc can never be welcomed.
“Except Hancock etc can never be welcomed.”
Only after he’s been paraded naked through the streets of Britain having had excrement thrown at him.
Bridgen was quoting a Consultant Cardiologist.
So MPs’ are, apparently, to be banned from quoting an expert source unless they are approved by the Government and their fellow MPs?
Andrew Barr is to be commended for standing up for Mr Bridgen, but since he is obviously a free thinker who won’t toe the Covid line, the Globalists/Establishment want him out of Parliament. Since they know his Constituents voting behaviour may not be “acceptable”, they are trying to ban him from standing again.
Let’s hope they don’t succeed. We need far more “free thinkers” in Parliament, not fewer.
That’s another important point: It wasn’t even his statement and was clearly marked as such. Nevertheless, refraining from publishing it had been a wise choice as the reaction was entirely predictable and there’s never anything to be gained from this particular reaction.
There is much to be gained from this kind of reaction.
It has outraged British people, motivated and activated them like never before.
I have never seen so many people become aware of the manipulation of British laws and democracy as has occurred since Fall 2019.
What we all lack is a political party capable of harnessing that rage.
We need a new powerfully democratic party of neither left nor right with pragmatic short and long term policies to manage and steer our country [countries?] safely through dangerous national and international times.
I’d start one if someone of the right calibre might be willing to assist with the funding.
Bridgen endorsed a comment that the Covid vaccination program was the worst crime against humanity since the holocaust. Thus, he was supporting the view that the vaccination program was a crime against humanity, that it was a lesser crime than the holocaust, and that it was a greater crime than any other since the holocaust.
I think the latter point is certainly contestable but nowhere in the statement is anything which could reasonably be construed as anti-semitusm. The charge of anti-semitism is being made cynically and opportunistically to take down a regime critic.
The regime will give no quarter but the people are awakening to what has been done. Hopefully, one day the likes of Hancock will get their richly deserved appointments with a hangman.
It plays into the far-right’s hands when individuals say the Holocaust cannot be compared to.
Something as important as the Holocaust should be able to hold water, have no fear from discussion and investigation.
Frankly the laws that make it illegal to dispute such things in continental Europe do it no favours and people may well resent it and see it as an insult to their intelligence.
I sympathise with your perspective. My concern is very similar but nuanced [click to go to the link]:
“Sadly, it is because of the ignorance of people like Karen Pollock Chief Executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust who perpetuate the idea that there was only the one Holocaust. Genocide repeats. We have even seen it repeated in Europe since 1945 in the Balkans. We have seen it in China, Cambodia, Russia, Rwanda, Syria and many other places.
These people are genocide denialists. They deny that anything as bad or worse than the Holocaust could ever happen and yet it has been repeatedly over decades.
They are responsible for making people think there was only ever the one Holocaust.”
And so people today believe what happened in 1939-45 could not happen again but it has been repeatedly and in the millions.
To isolate the Holocaust from comparable events in history tends to turn it into an ahistorical myth, instead of an object lesson and a warning. The same is true of the much longer-standing practice of making Hitler out to be such an inexplicable monster that we fail to see how his like might delude a nation again – and indeed, how that has repeatedly happened since World War 2.
The spontaneous war-games of children in the 50s and 60s – most of whose parents had been in one way or another traumatised by actual war against the Nazis – probably served an important social function in both memorialising and containing collective experience. We did not do Nazi salutes and say “Heil Hitler” and “Achtung Spitfire” out of any fascist sympathies – quite the reverse. And I suspect that was as true for the Jewish kids at school, most of whose families had direct experience of the Holocaust.
It seems significant that the kind of taboos and weaponised sensitivity Andrew Barr describes have arisen as most of the generation that actually experienced these things has passed on. Without actual witnesses, they can be manipulated for whatever current political purposes are desired. Trudeau can loudly condemn a (planted) swastika flag at a truckers’ rally, but get away with military training of the Azov regiment.
I agree, as an unvaccinated I thank you and your group for support. Ithink in addition to the point you make regarding laws against comparison with the Holocaust, there is another angle at play, tge attempted shutting down and censorship of anyone pointing out the building evidence of the damage the coerced injections are doing. When you mentioned Hancocks condemnation I knew this was the tactic, he is up there on the front line with the criminals who have caused death and injury to possibly millions, so it is no wonder he is trying to deflect and damage those that would bring the evidence of his wickedness to the attention of the country. Its a pity that the mass media have once again focused on the supposed slur against the Jewish community in order to deflect from the real crime, which lets face it those editors of the MSM have been a part too.
But God willing this year the truth will come out and by next Christmas these real monsters will be on trial.
The vaccines are largely ineffective and far from safe, so in the non-elderly, at least, they had little effect on COVID deaths. But the deliberate suppression of every effective alternative treatment, worldwide, undoubtedly caused COVID to kill many who could have been saved. And it was done deliberately to maximise vaccine profits and bypass emergency authorisation rules, even before those vaccines were available.
Worldwide excess deaths during the pandemic will therefore some give some rough numerical comparison to the Holocaust, the latest WHO estimate of COVID deaths being 6,684,756. As regards criminal motivation, which is worse? To see one whole race of human souls as a “problem” to be eliminated, or to see the whole race of human souls as an expendable source of wealth?
I,d just like to make it clear,as have a few others here, he quoted someone (a cardiologist I belive) who ended the quote with “SINCE THE HOLOCAUST ”
Since, not including!…Everything AFTER,.He did not say “as bad as the holocaust”
His statement clearly excludes the holocaust as a comparison!
People in gov and the media need to learn and understand English least they get caught in the same woke cross hairs themselves!
And when the furor as calmed down.. it does not take away from the point he was making about the vaccines, and it will not be swept under the carpet! we are with you Andrew!
Listening to Talk Radio this morning. AHB
It appears to me that there is more concern over the use of the word “holocaust” in Brigdens tweet than the intended principle that people are dying from either poor quality or intentionally poisoned mRNA covid vaccines.
“Dont use bad words on me” Im woke (but I dont care if people die)
Another thought.
If what a lot of us suspect is a malicious effort by (????) to intoxicate people with a harmful “medication” (and against many peoples wishes and non-informed “consent”) world-wide, then it is not inconceivable that a significantly greater number of the Jewish community could die from this? In Jewish terms, this has the potential to become another “holocaust”.
I do not believe the word “holocaust” is inappropriate or exaggerates the potential problem the majority face.
What the Israeli government did to the Israeli people during the lockdowns was evil IMHO.
No Nuremberg Code for Israelis. The entire country was turned into a Covid vaccine lab and the people forced to become lab rats.
Holocaust or no Holocaust – the history of Israel during the so-called Covid pandemic was pure evil IMHO.
Remember that Pf..er did an exclusive deal with the State of Is…l to be the first to benefit from the vaccine rollout and first to all the subsequent boosters – heart issues were pointed out by their military back in spring of 2021. – it absolutely has the potential to become another “h…t”.
Hancock will say anything to get his name in headlines and the usual suspects latch on. Glad to see some balance here, even if it is not widely reported.
It is very worrying that the only place there is a reasonable discussion not:
Squeeming
Squeeling
Squeeking
is on the Daily Sceptic
Parliament, to me, seems to be cut off and isolated from the country that surrounds it.
If you try to bring in concerns and problems from the outside world you’ll be chastised , cancelled and shot down in flames
“how dare you bring the common publics concerns in here? they have no idea whats good for them, we have an unwavering agenda to keep, so, tow the line in here or else!”
Parliament was set up to prevent the tyranny of the ruling royals, now, it’s become the tyranny!
“as Matt Hancock did in Parliament.” Matt Hancock, a preening, narcissistic, treacherous charlatan, whose every word should be ignored.
He lost the whip in the Department of Health …..
….. down the back of Mrs Gina Coladangelo’s filing cabinet.
Or so is claimed by some wags, but its surely not true – just a joke.
“It is patently ludicrous to accuse Bridgen of anti-semitism, as Matt Hancock did in Parliament.”
Of all the unfortunate events in history, can Matt Hancock not be involved in an ‘unexplained’ Caribbean diving accident soon? Or a tragic gas explosion? Or a high speed car brake failure? Or be found naked in a hotel room cupboard with a plastic bag over his head, a sports bag of cocaine and ITV cash and a stack of porn? For the sake of all humanity!
No need. Matt Hancock is a walking talking car-crash. A continuing accident from before birth.
What shows how low standards of journalism have fallen is they quote him despite him being a proven lying cheating philanderer.
Oh the joy of being able to write that without fear of being sued.
Oh, perhaps its wrong? After all he did an interview wearing a polo neck shirt insisting he “fell in love”. So that makes it all OK.
SINCE.
Meaning any comps are with subsequent events like Stalin’s, Mao’s, George W.’s atrocities.
That alone should end the discussion.
And make a defamation suit against Hancock and Sunak an easy and lucrative win for AB.
For those capable of grammar, the post is not just not anti-Semitic, it cements the Holocaust even further on its uniqueness pedestal!
Indeed.
Brilliant Bob.
Even rhymes with Marmite.
Ha ha! Except people are at least allowed to like it not like Marmite!
Great article; I feel like I should be a member of Jews for Justice as that’s exactly what I am!
Accusing Andrew Bridgen of antisemitism really reveals the pathetic weakness of those who are implicated by what he says. It would be comical if it weren’t so infuriating and insulting. I just hope that their ridiculous attempts to smear him backfire and get more people looking into and thinking about the tremendous and unjustified harms caused by so-called vaccines. I think his detractors want to be careful; it’s now patently obvious to all but the most brainwashed that the case for the Covid measures was vastly overstated. By drawing attention to his comments in this ridiculous way, they could find themselves in very hot water.
This is what Kathy Gyngell at TCW has to say today about the tories treatment of Andrew Bridgen and she absolutely nails it:
Editor’s comment:
Today was the day that Parliament showed itself to be a criminal conspiracy against the people of this country. It no longer represents the British people or their interests in any way at all and its main ambition appears to be no less than to enslave and impoverish us. This was a fuse lit in the 1945 General Election in the misguided belief that Marxist-Socialism would improve the lot of humanity. It has come to a head almost 80 years later in the strangling of free speech, the betrayal of medical autonomy, the imposition of state controls and the wanton destruction of the energy supply and economy. All of which, horrifyingly, has been rapidly progressed under the recent and current deceitful, in name only, Conservative administrations. The horrors we now face are worse than anything in 1984. Truly, lives will – as a result of government – become ‘nasty, brutish and short’. For too many, they already are.
Kathy Gyngell 19.10, 11th January 2023
Link to full article:
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-tories-gotcha-moment-as-they-knife-andrew-bridgen/
Well, we are only allowed to draw the official, approved lessons from the Holocaust as defined by our Governments (as with everything else) as otherwise we might notice the similarities between them and the ghastly regime which caused it.
Of course there is no restriction on relativising Hitler and the Nazis when it comes to labelling and demonising anyone who dare stand up to those in power and control and their acolytes.
There is only one source of truth and fact – the Government, just as in the days when the Catholic Church ruled Europe, and anyone who challenged, disobeyed, gave alternative explanations was declared anathema, heretic (spreader of misinformation, in league with the Devil), and excommunicated (cancelled)… even prosecuted, imprisoned, fined or executed.
We have not progressed, we have regressed.
Thank you Andrew Barr for writing and publishing this.
We are today under the thumb of another evil regime.
Well done to Andrew Bridgen for putting the issues firmly onto the political map.
If you want to cut the head off the serpent there is no doubt whatsoever that corruption in Whitehall enables all of this.
These kinds of people however attack Andrew Bridgen for expressing his political/philosophical beliefs and in doing so demonstrate their contempt for our laws, democracy and democratic rights.
Shutting people up was a feature of the Holocaust. Many were shut up permanently. And it was not just anti-semitism. Many people of different kinds were murdered – gypsies, gay people, the disabled, the mentally incapacitated and those like Andrew Bridgen who spoke their minds and lost their lives for it.
In the 1980s, Whitehall civil servants were first allowed to develop contacts to and ties with commerce and industry. It was predictable then that would lead to an increase in corruption and it has. It has had 40 years to develop to where it is now.
Direct experience of corrupt practices in Government agencies and some statutory bodies is that corruption can only take place at the grace and favour or direction of the most senior civil servants. Whilst I am sure they will all disagree with this view, to me it is the only consistent coherent and indeed inevitable explanation. Even our security services are tainted.
Sadly, it is because the ignorance of people like Karen Pollock Chief Executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust who perpetrate the idea that there was only the one Holocaust. Genocide repeats. We have even seen it repeated in Europe since 1945 in the Balkans. We have seen it in China, Cambodia, Russia, Rwanda, Syria and many other places.
These people are genocide denialists. They deny that anything as bad or worse than the Holocaust could ever happen and yet it has been repeatedly over decades.
They are responsible for making people think there was only ever the one Holocaust.
Thatcher’s favourite sitcom “Yes Minister” was in truth a comedy about Whitehall corruption in the proper sense of the word.
Most troubling is the silence about it from politicians – especially the majority of UK MPs – who never address it.
They keep a cowardly silence whilst death rains down from the Department of Health and MHRA.
And of course the Left are happy to have democracy undermined so keep silent to control us all when they get power.
Let us not forget that in the 1930s it was done in the name of German socialism. Soviet communism was considered inferior by the German preference of national socialism.
But back to today and to the UK and a public example of the web of Whitehall corruption: the recent Greensill scandal.
Greensill was reportedly first brought in by the cabinet secretary at the time. The government’s chief commercial officer began working as an adviser to Greensill Capital in 2015 – while still employed in the civil service. He was given official approval to do this. And then in 2016, after leaving office, David Cameron became an adviser to Greensill Capital. He was given share options reportedly worth tens of millions of pounds. Clearly, if it was not for the actions of the civil servants, Cameron would not have been exposed to a person and company which he presumably believed from his civil servants was beyond reproach. His subsequent actions were however still unwise.
There are many other examples the public never gets to learn about.
There is reason to believe manipulation from Whitehall is far more common than anyone realises and is across the board and includes at least several statutory bodies.
Former Whitehall civil servants appointed as executive day-to-day management to run some agencies and statutory bodies can oil the wheels of and ease the way for manipulation.
How is it the Statistics Authority is able to publish false statistics like the Covid death statistics? It is only possible if sanctioned at the highest levels in Whitehall in my view.
It is unlikely the UK is alone in this. A recent example is Dr Fauci of the USA, made public in Robert F Kennedy Jnr’s book The Real Anthony Fauci. It is now in a documentary film. The book had sold over 1.1 million copies by early last year and had 22,144 Amazon ratings [more now no doubt] giving it 4.8 out of 5 stars.
Why is the UK NHS costing 40% of GDP when historical scientific knowledge tells us our generations should be the healthiest to have trodden the earth?
And why are there so many chronic illnesses with only palliative treatments and not cures?
Thank you Whitehall.
Last night on GB News with Nigel Farage we learn from medical and scientific experts the details of how £449 billion was squandered on a treatable disease no one should have died from.
A rain of death from the reign of death in Whitehall.
POSTSCRIPT
Sadly I forgot to mention that the Holocaust was made possible not because of the national socialists but because of the millions of German civil servants who pursued and carried out their individual roles in the genocide with Germanic efficiency and enthusiasm to eradicate all the undesirables. This was aided by mechanical punched card computing machines manufactured by IBM.
When I explained to a young relative that the people who carried out the genocide in Germany were no different to many of those to be seen walking down the street he lives in today it sparked what has turned into an interest in history which looks to be lifelong.
Yes, the unvaccinated are the new undesirables and those people attacking Andrew Bridgen seem to me to be no different and perhaps worse than the German civil servants of the 1930s and 1940s.
The rain of death comes under the guise of healthcare and public health measures backed by a desire for profits from their puppeteers whose identities remain hidden and protected by the walls of Whitehall.
That’s exactly the kind of rubbish the people who started this debate by posing as offended wanted to have published: Loads of mentally incontinent Germany-bashing (This is not an indepedent country. It’s a somewhat autonomous US protectorate) and harping on about antisemitism (with barefully camouflaged yearning for German censorship laws), no other content. The usual boilerplate substitute for any kind of actual debate of a relevant topic.
This was supposed to be about the vaccine-injured, including those in Israel whose government invented the Keep on boosting! medical experiment. They actually said so at that time — Because of COVID we must innovate. Hence, we’re just going to do this and see what happens (paraphrase). That’s a definition of experiment. One should also note that the formal reason for Bridgen being beaten up by the powers who are – As a nation we should be very proud of what has been achieved through the vaccine programme –
looks suspiciously like a press release of the government of Israel which corona-vaxxed the people who couldn’t help it much more aggressively than this happened in the UK, where vaccination remained essentially voluntary for the majority of the population.
That’s a relevant topic which can perfectly well be discussed without constantly going into About 80 years ago … !!! mode. That’s just a rethorical trap for the unwary.
If you want to debate RW then be specific. I note below several passages which to me lack a coherent cohesive train of thought or argument.
I can just about discern that you think it is not legitimate to take note of history: of what happened before, that it has happened since and it looks it is happening again? So you want us to be doomed to repeat the mistakes of history.
I can see that here you want to stop people expressing their thoughts – just like the people who want Andrew Bridgen to shut up:
“That’s a relevant topic which can perfectly well be discussed without constantly going into About 80 years ago … !!! mode. That’s just a rethorical trap for the unwary.”
Let us cut out your strawmen.
“That’s exactly the kind of rubbish”
What specifically is “rubbish”? – please quote the offending rubbish.
“the people who started this debate”
What do you say is “this debate”? And who do you say started it? By what authority do you hold yourself out as the arbiter of what can and cannot be debated?
And why do you say they are “posing” as offended?
What are you trying to communicate here because I cannot discern any coherent cohesive argument:
“wanted to have published: Loads of mentally incontinent Germany-bashing (This is not an indepedent country. It’s a somewhat autonomous US protectorate) and harping on about antisemitism (with barefully camouflaged yearning for German censorship laws), no other content. The usual boilerplate substitute for any kind of actual debate of a relevant topic.”
What is the “this” in:
“This was supposed to be about …”
And who prescribed that what is discussed here is supposed to be about:
“the vaccine-injured, including those in Israel whose government invented the Keep on boosting! medical experiment.”
and not about basic freedoms, laws and democracies being under threat?
What are you trying to communicate here because again I cannot discern a coherent cohesive argument:
“They actually said so at that time — Because of COVID we must innovate. Hence, we’re just going to do this and see what happens (paraphrase). That’s a definition of experiment. One should also note that the formal reason for Bridgen being beaten up by the powers who are – As a nation we should be very proud of what has been achieved through the vaccine programme – looks suspiciously like a press release of the government of Israel which corona-vaxxed the people who couldn’t help it much more aggressively than this happened in the UK, where vaccination remained essentially voluntary for the majority of the population.”
I’m not going to be drawn into this smokescreen debate, no matter how abusive you chose to become.
Suit yourself. It is a free world for some things and that is one thing we remain free to do in this context [but not other things].
All I can find which comes close to abuse is this: “That’s exactly the kind of rubbish”, which I did not and would not write.
A nice article including several tweets in support of Andrew B.
https://www.infowars.com/posts/conservative-british-mp-punished-under-investigation-for-tweet-exposing-covid-vaccines/
https://youtu.be/LD2lhNnlDbQ
Statement from Bridgen. He’s sticking to his guns, and taking legal advice regarding accusations of anti-semitism.
Thanks for the heads up.
A great announcement by Mr Bridgen.
Thanks tof.
Important that is he not backing down.
As i posted elsewhere on here – when your back is against the wall you only have one option – Fight.
Good man.
Norman Fenton, the Jewish son of a Holocaust survivor, also denies Bridgen’s remarks were anti-semitic, and suggests the ban is to divert attention away from the vaccine problems. he is right, of course, but they are also intended to neutralise the one political voice in UK raising the issue.
If we could follow the money, we would find at the top of the chain not incompetent ex-ministers in Britain, but far more powerful people here and in the USA. Remember – LOCKSTEP.
Now that’s weird – the link I saved on Fenton’s short Odyssee post now takes me (and you, if you linked from my post) to some post about whether Jews can be antisemitic, complete with anti-semitic comments. Anybody got an explanation for that, or has Odysee been captured by someone?
What happens with this one?
To me Andrew Bridgen is a man of high principles and morals.
That he is being ostracised by the Con-servative party for speaking the truth is truly appalling.
There was nothing anti-semitic in his statement but, no doubt, TPTB are becoming nervous about the impending backlash against the jabs.
I live in Thailand where there has been much propaganda about the covid virus and the safety of the jabs. I was horrified that a young girl of nine years to whom I am teaching English had started her period. Extremely regrettably she is not the only girl in her class who has had this happen to her. She has been double-jabbed and I have no idea why. In essence these young girls have had their childhood stolen from them. I am unable to adequately express the anger I feel that this has happened. How many other girls are/will be affected in this way?
That’s awful Judy. The poor girl.
The sight of the philandering Hancock and un-elected Sunak pontificating in the Commons tells us all we need to know about Andrew Bridgens word’s. Words and views shared by millions.
Bridgen’s remarks might be offensive to Cambodians and other erhnic groups who have experienced genocide since 1945. However if the extent of a crime against humanity is measured simply in terms of deaths then the vaccination rollout may in due course come to be seen as ‘bigger’ than the Holocaust.
in one respect the vaccine rollout may be directly compared to the Holocaust, carrying out medical experiments without the subject’s consent, pace Dr Mengele.
Oh I think “holocaust plus’ between now and 2030 is definitely on the cards.
When the venal, ignorant, self-obsessed slob Wancock takes a dig at you you know you’re on the right side of the debate. Bravo Mr Bridgen.
Well said Andrew you are right. That is no more obvious than when you get A***holes like Hancock spouting rubbish against you.