Miri AF

Massive missives and more

FB Fulminations

Non-Crime and Punishment

Posted by Miri on October 13, 2020 at 5:45 AM Comments comments (0)

n the UK, as in most of Europe, we don't have the death penalty, which means the very worst punishment our society recognises is life in prison. That is the harshest retribution our culture and judicial system can conceive of.

But why is life imprisonment considered such a uniquely severe penalty? After all, prisoners are kept warm, fed, and entertained. They're not physically tortured or starved. They have access to books and games and TV.

Yet it's still considered the worst punishment many societies have to offer. Why?

It's because it deprives people of the single most important facet of life - liberty. That is the only answer there can be, because otherwise, what's so bad about life in prison? All your basic needs are met, you don't have to worry about rent or bills, and you have access to entertainment and education. But prison is still recognised as a profound punishment and effective deterrent, because it removes liberty and prohibits independence and self-determination - which all societies innately know are the most important parts of life, and therefore removing them, the worst punishment.

So: compare that to our "new normal", where we've lost our jobs and must depend on the state to subsidise us, we can't see family and friends, and we are severely restricted in our movements, restrictions which are enforced by the state.

"What are you complaining about?" Demand the muzzled masses. "Aren't you being kept warm? Aren't you well fed? Aren't your rent and bills being covered? Don't you have Netflix and Facebook and YouTube? Can't you do your studies online?"

Well - you could say the exact same thing to someone doing a life sentence for murder. If "lockdown" isn't so bad, then neither is life in prison, because there is no material difference between the two.

That is why these measures are so abhorrent and so unjustifiable, so completely and utterly obscene. We have delivered society's worst punishment - the forcible removal of liberty by the state - to millions of completely innocent people, who have been treated with more indignity and contempt than sadistic mass murderers, who uniformly get the right to a trial, a defence, and due process before their liberty is permanently stripped from them.

If I accuse someone of a crime and want them to be sent to prison, then there are processes and protocols that must be rigorously adhered to, such as the production of evidence and then a trial, where the accused has the right to a defence, and to appeal.

Yet, if I want to accuse someone of potentially being "Covid positive" (which, although you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise, is not actually a crime) and have them put under house arrest, again and again and again, I need produce no evidence. There is no due process, and they have no right to any objection, defence or appeal. I can strip all liberty from anyone I like, any time I like, and be fully backed up by the state, all on the basis of nothing. I can (we all can) condemn someone, anyone at all, to society's worst fate - the forcible removal of liberty by the state (£10,000 penalty if you breach "self-isolation" rules) - for absolutely nothing, and there's not a single thing they can do about it. That means, the current reality is, convicted mass murderers serving life sentences in prison have more human rights than you or me; because they went through due process before being stripped of their liberty and forcibly detained by the state. We have not.

Let's just repeat that: we are all being subjected to society's worst punishment, without even the rights we extend to society's most depraved criminals. It is utterly inconceivable that that could be true in a 21st century liberal democracy. But it is.

Arrested Development

Posted by Miri on September 14, 2020 at 6:55 AM Comments comments (2)

I had quite a few "heated debates"* last week (*got called stupid and evil a lot, because is there any other kind of "debate" on social media? No, so thankfully now we're here where I have a filter on certain words in comments... :D), in regards to my interpretation of the new "rule of six" being a law, not a guideline, and that breaking it could therefore put one at risk of arrest and all the undesirable consequences associated with that.

It has been confirmed today that it is a law, and that breaking it could therefore end up slapping one with a criminal record. I know there's a lot of bravado floating around the internet, both of the "yeah, I don't care if I'm arrested, bring it on!" and the "ah, but I have my magical cloak of invincibility, so it won't apply to me" varieties, and I just want to urge people to be very careful before you take this at face value and make your next move. We are in a war - the fight for our lives - and as all victorious armies know, in order to defeat the enemy, you need planning and strategy - not ill-informed bravado.


So first of all, please do your research about all these magical immunity-from-authority spells floating around Facebook (common law, Magna Carta, etc.) which people are hawking as protection from breaking the law and the consequences thereof. I have looked into all this in great detail, and I find no evidence whatsoever that this is true. It is possible you could use common law or similar to challenge an arrest thereafter, but not to avoid being arrested in the first place. If the police want to arrest you, they will, and I would be thinking very carefully before putting yourself in a situation where arrest is a serious possibility, believing you have total immunity from this situation by saying such-and-such, without having seen any direct evidence of this being put into practice and being successful. 

Many people, with no experience of being arrested or handling the police, have said something to the general effect of, "oh, so you're scared of getting arrested are you? Pfft, how pathetic, what's a little arrest given the current circumstances?"

Am I scared of being arrested? That is to say, am I scared of being detained by state operatives in state facilities at a time when the state has given itself unprecedented and frankly despotic powers? Er.... YES. And if you're not, I don't think you're thinking clearly. People have expressed rightfully grave concerns about being detained in quarantine camps - state facilities run by state operatives - but they're not worried about a police station? What meaningful difference is there?

Virtually nobody being so blithe and cavalier about the prospect of arrest has ever been arrested or knows what it entails. First of all, did you know even if you challenge the arrest afterwards as illegitimate and are successful (a complex and costly process with no guarantee you will win), the arrest remains on your record and can come up on an enhanced DBS check?

But far, far more sinister, did you know it is standard police procedure to take a DNA swab of everyone they arrest, and that they can do it by force if you don't consent?  (See link at footer.)

So, let's envisage this scenario: On the 19th September, there's a big "anti-lockdown" protest in London; when I checked on Friday, the situation appeared to be all protests with more than six people would be illegal. However, the situation now apparently is:

"Protests and political activities organised in compliance with COVID-19 secure guidance and subject to strict risk assessments can continue." (Source: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/coronavirus-rule-six-england-lockdown-18926782)

Well, what chances are there that a protest specifically designed to oppose all the "COVID-19 secure guidelines" is nevertheless going to adhere to them in order to make it legal - !? And if it did do that, it would invaidate the entire purpose of the event. 

Despite the lllegality, was there an immense turnout, as per the August 29th event, then, yes, the protest would be very difficult to police; but as the protest - initially scheduled for the 26th - has been split in two, there are now going to be dramatically less people attending, thereby making it much easier for the police to make arrests.

Certainly, they can't arrest everyone. But they have made it very clear they will be enforcing this law and criminalising people who break it, and what better opportunity to prove this to the populace and scare them into compliance than to make an example of "selfish Covidiots" protesting the new restrictions, in a "non-COVID secure" way?

The organisers will almost certainly be fined and arrested (please note Piers Corbyn, Kate Shemirani, and Mark Steele have already been arrested for arranging protests), and my strong suspicion is that members of the crowd will be, too. There was a small anti-lockdown protest in Melbourne at the weekend, and 74 members of the crowd were arrested.

Once you have been arrested and are in police custody, they can and will take your DNA and fingerprints; and I repeat, they will do this by force if you don't consent.

So now you, as a known state dissident, are a suspected criminal with your fingerprints and DNA on police record. 

Is this helpful strategy in winning the war, or is it actually playing right into the enemy's hands? The reason they take your DNA is to run it against past unsolved crimes. Would you put it past our completely corrupt and criminally insane state to frame you for something? I wouldn't. What a great way of dealing with dissenters who are getting too rowdy or visible - arrest them, take their DNA, and frame them for a crime; and of course, the masses would have NO trouble believing it: "crazy conspiracy theorist arrested at anti-lockdown protest found to be serial thief / rapist / murderer". It might sound far-fetched, but so would everything that's going on right now 12 months ago, and as I said, I put NOTHING past these psychopaths and you shouldn't either. 

So yes, I am afraid of getting arrested, and you are at risk of arrest if you very publicly flout the "rule of six" (they can't enforce it in private homes as they can't enter without a warrant - yet). In my view, mass arrests will be made at the protest on the 19th for the reasons I've just outlined above. 

Please think very carefully before you put yourself in that situation. Some "professional protestors" like Piers Corbyn are always getting arrested and know how to handle themselves with the police. You probably don't, and if you've never been arrested before, your DNA and fingerprints are currently not on police record. You may want to keep it that way. I certainly intend to. 

There are multiple ways of challenging the current circumstances which don't risk criminalising you and getting your DNA on police file. I would be very wary of anyone encouraging you to publicly flout these rules, because what benefit is there to you of getting arrested? Ok, you've "made a statement", but as I said, there are multiple ways of doing that that don't involve detainment by state officials in state facilities having your DNA taken by force.

I already decided not to go to the London event because I oppose the split, which seems at best ego-driven, and also because I don't see much of a purpose to standing around in the cold for four hours listening to speeches I can't hear properly telling me things I already know  - a day-trip that also entails a considerable investment of time and money, given I live four hours' drive away. 

But things are much more serious than personal preference now. The reality is, if you attend the event on the 19th and it hasn't passed a strict risk assessment deeming it "COVID secure", you are breaking the law, and you could get arrested. Are you genuinely prepared for that? Will it help? How will it help? Or could it make things unfathomably worse for you and for "the cause"?

As all military victors know, you must not be swayed by playing to the crowd or people-pleasing, but instead think very carefully before you make your next move. Don't be influenced by people calling you names (remember what happened to Marty McFly in Back to the Future because he got so wound up every time someone called him "chicken"; this has always been an effective ploy from malevolent forces of getting people to do things that aren't in their interests). Think about what's best for you, your family, your reputation - because you're the one who's going to have to live with the consequences of what you decide, and all the people goading you now for being scared or unprincipled if you don't risk arrest... Will be nowhere to be seen. 


Incarcerating Over-50s: All Part of the Agenda

Posted by Miri on August 2, 2020 at 6:30 AM Comments comments (0)

So, now Alexander Johnson (we should not use his stage-name "Boris"; none of his friends or family do) suggests all over-50s are put under house-arrest.


The utter lunatic monstrosity of this aside, how will the rest of the populace prove when out and about that they're not over 50? After all, plenty of 40-somethings look 50 and plenty of 50-year-olds look ten years younger.


This is how they'll begin to normalise showing your ID if you want to go anywhere or do anything. The excuse will be "proving your age", but the reality will be, "indoctrinating you to accept presenting your papers to state officials upon command".


This is in the lead up to showing your immunity passport and proof of vaccination if you want to go anywhere.


It's also about accelerating the depopulation agenda by making over-50s virtually unemployable. This age-group already faces discrimination when job-seeking, but once employers know - whilst facing the worst jobs crisis in history - that over-50s could be "locked down" any time there's a new "outbreak", then they're going to be completely put off hiring them altogether.


As a result, you then have another huge swathe of people (on top of all the former small business owners, hospitality and service industry staff, and all other people who've seen their livelihoods suddenly and irreparably decimated) who can't support themselves and will be forced to take government "assistance". Some form of UBI will be introduced to "help" these people, and the number one condition of receiving it will be mandatory annual vaccination. Quite possibly more frequently than annually.


The health of all those being repeatedly vaccinated will collapse and within five years, most will be dead. These mass deaths will be blamed on "the virus mutating" and "anti-vaxxers compromising herd immunity".


The diabolically evil Satanists orchestrating all this consider all of us to be "useless eaters", consuming "their" resources, so they want most of us gone, but they are most incentivised to get rid of those approaching pension age, because by far the biggest slice of welfare spending is on pensions. Therefore, the ruling classes intend to bump most over-50s off before they get a chance to get there.


And they've got the perfect cover, by inventing a virus that is claimed to be most deadly to those over 50, and that can legally be put on a death certificate without even conducting a test.

Enter: SMART Pods

Posted by Miri on August 1, 2020 at 8:10 AM Comments comments (0)

I'm sure all of us who've visited city centres in the last few years have noticed the dizzying number of new flat builds shooting up everywhere, as well as a lot of super-modern "student housing". What's it all for? Up to now, there hasn't been any mass exodus from the suburbs and countryside to the city, nor has the nation's student count suddenly shot up.


Now we see what it's all been for (see screenshots below). All these people about to be made homeless are going to be herded into the city-centre builds, all of which will have been fully kitted out with 5G and SMART-everything. Your fridge will literally be watching you, whilst you'll be bathed in constant high-frequency EMF exposure, leading to possible radiation poisoning. And what are the symptoms of radiation poisoning? Wouldn't you just know it, they just happen to be respiratory! They just happen to resemble almost exactly the symptoms being attributed to "coronavirus". So there'll be a lot of sick people, helping to further perpetuate the illusion of a "second wave", and we will then see all those extra "emergency hospitals" that have sat completely empty until now, getting some use.


Universities, meanwhile, are never going to return to the traditional model - everything will move online and students will "Zoom from their room" at home, which begs the question of what will be done with all this "student housing" that's gone up everywhere. Same answer. These have all been designed to be used as 5G-enabled SMART-pods; environments deftly designed to have complete surveillance over people's every move and to create sickness (to further the illusion of a "deadly pandemic") and premature death (to meet Agenda 2030 depopulation goals).


Crazy conspiracy theory? I sincerely hope so - but once the government has been called on to fix a problem caused by the government, we know there can only ever be catastrophic consequences.