Sep 9 2017
Spiv, The Press Gazette, Private Eye & The Chimp
PT Barnum is credited as being the author of the quote: “There is no such thing as bad publicity“… Which I have to say that I do not entirely agree with.
After all, I have certainly had more than my fair share. However, having discovered my inclusion in an article published in the latest edition of “Private Eye” magazine, I have to say that I have mixed feelings about the publicity in this instance.
I mean there is no doubt that “Private Eye” is not in support of me yet they were very restrained in what they wrote.
Mind you, the magazine is so satirical I am not sure if they were taking the piss by describing me as an “Essex body-builder” – not that I would be offended if they were.
After all, I have a nice body… Nice & fat.
Now the article that I get a mention in starts off by mentioning the £100,000 compensation payouts made to former army chief, Lord Bramall and Leon Brittan’s wife in regard to the “bungled” MET investigation into allegation of child abuse.
The article then goes on about how the former Prime Mincer, Deadwood Teeth is still being accused of being a Satanic nonce.
You can read the article in question further down, but basically my involvement is the fact that one of my articles was apparently used for “a conference paper delivered at the 24th European Congress of Psychiatry in Madrid by Dr Rainer Kurz, a chartered occupational psychologist” in a positive way, which Private Eye took exception to – especially so since the peer-reviewed European Psychiatry, the official journal of the EPA (European Psychiatric Association), used that conference paper along with my name in an article last year titled “The Satanist Cult of Ted Heath: Ethical Implications of Authority Compromise” .
And therein – I would imagine – lies the reason that Private Eye were so restrained when mentioning me… After all, given the arena that my article was being circulated, Private Eye could hardly brand me an “internet nutter banging away at my keyboard in the confines of my bedroom in my mother’s house“, could they now?
Course the fact is, Private Eye has a huge readership and indeed In February 2017, the ‘Press Gazette‘ said the following about the satirical magazine:
Private Eye hit its biggest ever print circulation in the second half of 2016 – up 9 per cent year on year, according to ABC.
The title has also revealed that the 2016 Christmas issue achieved the biggest sale in the title’s 55-year history, 287,334 copies.
The circulation period followed the UK vote in favour of Brexit and coincided with Trump’s inauguration as US president.
Ian Hislop, who has been editor of Private Eye for 30 years, said both issues were probably a factor in the title’s success.
He told Press Gazette: “This is our biggest sale ever, which is quite something given that print is meant to be dead.”
He added (possibly in light of the current vogue for ‘fake news’: “Our sales are real, we are not making these figures up. This is a record.”
Asked why he thinks Private Eye is doing so well, he said: “It’s obviously to do with Brexit and Trump and people thinking where can I find something that might be true and something that might be funny.
“People say you can’t do satire any more because of Trump. I think people are saying: ‘Can we have some?’”
He added: “We have put in more pages of journalism and there are more pages of cartoons in the paper [45 cartoons per edition] and it’s a great outlet for quite an old skill which is drawing and coming up with a joke.”
He said there has been no extra marketing. The circulation is 99.9 per cent actively purchased.
Asked whether Private Eye can offer any lessons to the embattled national newspaper industry, which is seeing across the board circulation decline, he said: “I know we are niche and we are fortnightly but it is about having confidence in the reading public. I do think if people will pay £2.50 for a cup of coffee then they will pay [£1.80] for a copy of the Eye.”
The Private Eye website provides tasters of the magazine’s content, but most is only available to print buyers.
Hislop said: “Lots of things you read in the Eye are better for being in print which offers that mix and combination of stuff. You can’t do that online. In print you can go from a joke to a serious story about historic sex abuse involving Ted Heath. What we present is the whole package so readers get it all.”
In a press release Private Eye quoted Hislop saying: “More people buy Private Eye than attended Trump’s inauguration. Fact. Possibly.” It said he added: “Can I have a knighthood please?”
Under notes to editors the release said: “Private Eye magazine is printed on White Paper, contains more than 50 Articles and was triggered in 1961.”
Other current affairs magazines also performed will in the second half 2016 according to ABC.
The Week and The Economist both grew their circulations year on year to 206,251 and 235,670 respectively.
The New Statesman grew 5.3 per cent year on year to 34,025 and The Spectator grew 15.2 per cent to 82,585. Source
However, anyone with half a brain should instantly realise that the huge, mainstream readership enjoyed by Private Eye and the fact that Ian Hislop is the editor points to one thing only, namely that the magazine is nothing more than controlled press.
And as such the purpose of the fortnightly magazine is to protect the Establishment, not expose it.
Therefore, there can be no surprise that the useful idiots are trying to make out that the accusations leveled at the Nonce Leon Brittan and Lord Edwin Bramall stemmed from nothing more than the ‘word‘ of ONE, now ‘discredited‘ CSA victim – named only as “Nick” in the national press… Which kinda makes a mockery of the magazines applauded “investigative journalism” and the shit-rag-mag’s reputation for reporting on things that the National Press dare not even touch upon.
Yet by repeating that one-claim-only mantra are we meant to take that as gospel? I mean what about the allegations against Brittan of rape made by the 12 year old boy back in the 1980’s? Or what about Bramall’s close relationshit with the nonce Lord Tenby.
Indeed, in the case of the many allegations made against Nonce Brittan, the Magazine’s “investigative Journalists” certainly wouldn’t have to investigate too hard.
And Likewise, where Dead Heath is concerned:
The police chief investigating claims that Sir Edward Heath was a paedophile is convinced the allegations are ‘120 per cent’ genuine, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
More than 30 people have come forward with claims of sexual abuse by the former Conservative Prime Minister, according to well-placed sources.
And they are said to have given ‘strikingly similar’ accounts of incidents to Wiltshire Police – even though the individuals are not known to each other.
The Mail on Sunday has been told that Wiltshire Chief Constable Mike Veale regards the allegations as ‘totally convincing’, and plans to publish a report in June.
Detectives have established that, contrary to claims that Sir Edward could not have committed the crimes as he ‘never drove a car’ and ‘always’ had a police driver with him, he did drive – and did have a car.
They have photographic evidence that shows he is a driver, and have established that he had a driving licence. He also bought a Rover 2000 after being deposed as Tory leader by Margaret Thatcher in 1975, when he was 58.
Astonishingly, Mr Veale is also understood to support claims that Sir Edward’s alleged crimes were reported to police years ago but covered up by the Establishment.
Some of those who said Sir Edward abused them are believed to have told police they went on to commit sexual abuse crimes themselves as a result.
The investigation into Sir Edward, called Operation Conifer, was set up in 2015 in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal.
Mr Veale came under pressure to abandon the inquiry last year after separate claims of a paedophile ring at Westminster involving former Home Secretary, the late Lord Brittan, and former Defence chief, Lord Bramall, were found to be groundless. Source
Challenging the Establishment indeed!
I mean if Hislop & his nonce protecting scummers were serious about exposing the Monster’s through satire they would first be questioning photos like the following:
And then progress by linking to other events:
Before hitting their readers with the big one:
Just a though.
That’s it, cept for the Private Eye article, but just so as you know, y’know; “A Bridge Too Far” is done my end, so just waiting for Gary now…
Old Nick Knackered
INSPECTOR Knacker has paid a reported £100,000 each to former army chief Lord Bramall and to Lady Brittan, widow of former home secretary Lord Brittan, to atone for the Met’s bungled £2.5m investigation into an alleged Westminster paedophile ring, based on the sole evidence of a complainant known as “Nick” – whom retired judge Sir Richard Henriques found to be a fantasist (see Eyes passim).
Meanwhile, however, former prime minister Sir Edward “Grocer” Heath still stands accused of being part of a Satanic cult which ritually sacrificed 16 babies and children, allegations being investigated by Wiltshire Police’s Operation Conifer. The notion of Grocer Heath as a murderous Satanic paedophile has been freely bandied around the Internet, not least by David Icke. But these ravings are now turning up in more apparently respectable forums.
‘Satanist Cult of Ted Heath’
The Eye has been alerted to an article that appeared last year in the peer-reviewed European Psychiatry, the official journal of the European Psychiatric Association, titled “The Satanist Cult of Ted Heath: Ethical Implications of Authority Compromise”. It was based on a conference paper delivered at the 24th European Congress of Psychiatry in Madrid by Dr Rainer Kurz, a chartered occupational psychologist.
Kurz states the Satanic Grocer scenario as fact to an audience of mainstream psychiatrists and in a peer-reviewed journal – which makes one wonder what respect his peers have for corroborative evidence.
The main source he cites is an Essex body-builder called Chris Spivey.
Of Spivey’s online post naming 235 supposed members of Heath’s satanic cult, Kurz writes: “No indications were found that would throw the veracity of the document into doubt.” Worthy of Inspector Knacker himself, who announced that “Nick’s” stories were “credible and true” – before they turned out to be, er, nothing of the sort.