VILLIERS VICEROYAL VOMITORIUM

Rule Britannia For Global Crimes

By Finian CunninghamMay 12, 2013 "Information Clearing House" - It’s an anthem that is usually sung with chest-thumping pride and misty eyes by British imperialists. “Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves”. This jingoistic celebration of Britain’s former global conquest may yet degenerate into “Rue Britannia, Britannia rues the waves”.

This is because, as The Guardian newspaper reports this week, the London government has at long last been forced into recognizing compensation payments for as many as 50,000 Kenyan nationals who were victims of torture and other crimes against humanity during that country’s independence struggle in the 1950s. The eventual bill for compensation could run up to tens of millions of pounds.

But the bad news for financially bankrupt Britain does not end there. With this precedent established of compensation for past British imperialist crimes, that now leaves the way open for a global flood of similar claims.

Jingoistic British imperialists may therefore soon rue their often-made reference to Britain ruling the waves and so many countries the world over - at the height of the British Empire some 20 percent of the globe’s land mass was under colonial domination. That’s a lot of people who can claim recompense for past British horrors and deprivation.

If the bill for Britain’s crimes against humanity in Kenya alone runs into tens of millions of pounds, then we can easily multiply that sum manifold if the millions of other victims from across the world who suffered under the British jackboot come forward to claim justice.

The Guardian listed just a handful of additional class-action cases for compensation against the British government. They included the former colonies of Cyprus, Yemen, Swaziland and British Guiana. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg when measuring Britain’s global legacy of crimes and human suffering. Many others would include Britain’s dirty wars and repressive colonial regimes in Bahrain, British Somaliland, Burma, Ghana, Nigeria, Northern Ireland, Oman and Zimbabwe. Even that list is far from complete.

Iran presents a challenging case too. After the British-assisted coup in 1953 that led to the 26-year reign of terror under Shah Pahlavi, tens of thousands of Iranians were subjected to torture by the Western-trained and armed Savak secret police. Iranians therefore have a case for compensation against the British government.

Previously, the British House of Lords decreed arbitrarily that no cases for compensation stemming from before 1954 can be brought to an English court. Fortunately for the British establishment, that ruling excludes millions of more potential litigants from former British India, which gained independence in 1947.

Given the appalling suffering inflicted by the British overlords in India - from starvation, massacres, mass imprisonment and destruction of farming and textile livelihoods to give British exporters a competitive advantage - the resulting claims if filed to the Exchequer would definitely spell good night for Britain’s sputtering economy. Far from ruling the waves, Britannia would sink to a watery grave.

But the real point perhaps is more about principle than money - important though material redress is to victims of injustice. What the case of the Kenyans against the British government is really achieving is to strip bare the truth about Britain’s imperial legacy. British national conceit and history books are replete with double standards and moral relativism. It is too widely and fatuously assumed that Britain’s Empire represented somehow a benevolent contribution to history. British people, and unfortunately English-language academia and media across the world, tend to perceive Britain’s “decolonization” - its retreat from imperial territories - as a magnanimous gesture of granting independence. This delusional notion is best summed up in the Orwellian term “the British Commonwealth of nations”.

With conceited moral duplicity, Britain insists that Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany must pay out compensation to victims of their conquests. But no such obligation pertains to Britain, according to the British rulers. Why not? Only imperial arrogance and a certain sense of victor’s justice stemming from the Second World War are invoked to subjectively justify that contradiction. In the world of objective facts and evidence, Britain is equally liable for redress to its global victims of crimes against humanity.

When Britain set out to destroy the Mau Mau struggle for Kenya’s political independence during the 1950s, the British were not interested in benign, passive “decolonization”. For the British rulers, it was a life-or-death challenge to the entire global system of British Empire and its exploitative excrescence on the world. The same British “siege mentality” manifested ruthlessly against the independence movements in all its colonies.

Up to 300,000 Kenyans were incarcerated in concentration camps during what the British euphemistically called “The Emergency”. That same quaint word - “Emergency” - was used by the British to dissemble their barbarism and brutality in Burma against pro-independence communist guerrilla. During Bahrain and Northern Ireland’s struggle for freedom from Britain’s unlawful dominance, the preferred euphemism for repression was “The Troubles”.

But these semantics aside, the nature of repression meted out by British rulers and their officers was systematically criminal and brutal and comparable to the worst genocidal regimes the world has known.

The Kenyan Mau Mau may have suffered the most, probably owing to a twist of racist depravity among the white British counterinsurgency practitioners. Kenyan prisoners were castrated and roasted over fires by British officers using methods of torture that even classified British records explicitly sanctioned as “Gestapo techniques”.

During the British suppression of the Cypriot insurgency during the 1950s, inmates were routinely tortured by water-boarding sessions in which Kerosene was added to the drowning water. Later, during the 1970s in Northern Ireland’s conflict, Irish prisoners were incarcerated without charge and tortured by hooding, prolonged wall-standing, sleep deprivation, white noise and intimidation with guard dogs, not to mention routine physical beatings.

If such torture and generally repressive regimens sound similar to what has since been uncovered in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo Bay it is because they are wholly consistent. These are the standard operating practices of British military doctrine and that of its close American ally.

The reason why such barbarity continues to be practiced is because of the moral duplicity and propagandized version of history that the Western media and academia instill. Barbarity is something that others perpetrate, not us.

The glacial pace of justice - as shown by the more than six decades’ delay for the Mau Mau victims of British crimes - is reflective of the massive public deception instilled by Western media on behalf of their criminal governments.

However, thanks to the courageous pursuit of justice by many people across the world, this edifice of deception will eventually be broken down. This is imperative as a matter of justice for the millions of victims of British crimes against humanity.

But, in addition, the exposure of British criminality is crucial to deleting the duplicity that serves to give contemporary British and other Western governments a veneer of legitimacy. Britain has no right to pontificate and brow beat Syria, Iran or any other nation about “international obligations”. With the full record of British criminality on display, this is a country that, far from lecturing others, should be made to hang its head in shame and remain silent.

Finian Cunningham, is a prominent expert in international affairs. The author and media commentator was expelled from Bahrain in June 2011 for his critical journalism in which he highlighted human rights violations by the Western-backed regime. He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in journalism. He is now based in East Africa where he is writing a book on Bahrain and the Arab Spring. He co-hosts a weekly current affairs programme, Sunday at 3pm GMT on Bandung Radio

Comments (9 DrS· 11 hours ago Many now will seek compensation from the colonial powers. It will bankrupt many and will ensure there is no recovery. Could things be any more bleak than that? It is understandable why many non-Westerners want justice. Can you blame them!? Reply Basic James Rabbit· 11 hours ago The anthem continues: "Britons never, never, never shall be slaves." But it is obviously untrue. "Anyone will tell you it's a prison island, hidden in a cloud for 10,000 years." Jigsaw· 11 hours ago Good article The British Empire was monstrous in it's disregard for the living conditions of most of it's unwilling 'subjects' throughout the world. It was not unique in that as far as empires go but because they controlled the fate of more people so the number of casualties was much greater. One thing perhaps nearly unique about the Brit empire was it's love of settler colonialism, they wanted to eventually transform entirely - new landmasses they claimed... through eradicating the natives and importing white people to create a new nation on the old... They were the most successful in history at doing this - the scarce, marginalised populations of native peoples in N America and Australia are a testament to this. Be thankful they do not 'rule the waves' today as they used to, bad as the yanks are at least there are still Vietnamese people abundant in Vietnam and plenty of Iraqis living a (mostly) unchanged Iraqi way of life today... Although you see in some actions like Starvation sanctions (so beloved of 'liberals') a whiff of the old British Imperial indifference to mass civilian suffering. Reply 1 reply · a Ipse_Dixit· 1 hour ago The Spanish and Portuguese did similar things in Latin America. And in fairness it was the United States that committed genocide rather than Britain. Reply Fitzhenrymac· 11 hours ago Don't forget the indigenous peoples such a Australian Aborigines and Canadian Indians and Inuits. Overall more than 90% of the earth felt the lash of the British Empire including Britain itself. Read more at http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32946.htm Reply voxpopbc· 10 hours ago The English ruling class today are the direct descendants of the Normans who conquered England in 1066. As Vikings (recently arrived in NW France from Scandinavia) they had no empathy with their newly defeated Germanic Anglo-Saxon peasants. Like other ethnic in-groups (Israel?) they emotionally distanced themselves from the majority of their fellows. This led them to readily extend this attitude to foreign lands when they created the British Empire. Sadly, some of their direct descendants also formed the US elite who have continued this imperial nightmare. Reply No JO Jo· 9 hours ago Nazi Germany must pay out --Wrong! England and gang brother France declared war on Germany 1938 and fire bombed several German cities. Why? Because Germany invaded Poland. Germany had a good right to do it--Polish Jews were being abused and Unlce USA Scam was funding the Nazi government to send Polish Jews into Palestine--record 175,000. And what was Eng's terror business to go after Germany? Same as USA--get control of all of Europe. It did work-NATO and millions more Jews to Palestine Reply ian· 9 hours ago then the people can after the french for their atrocities in northern africa and while they consider that go after the italians for their brutal treatment of the libyians but tell me how can you get anyone in the US to front any tribunal when they don't recognise any international laws Reply BP Storm· 8 hours ago The British have invaded all but 20 or so nations on Earth. That says something right there. Just ask a native Tasmainian what they think of Britain. That's a joke son, you can't ask a native Tasmainian what they think of Britain, because Britain killed them all. Marched women and children(not to mention the men) over cliffs into the Sea. The Brits will tell you that they are civilized though. Not really though, England is not Civilized. The English are just a bunch of Dandies. Like that Prime Minister they have now. The Irish called the Union Jack(and still do to this day) the Butcher's Apron. They have invaded Afghanistan at least 5 times since 1839. And they have gotten their butts kicked out everytime. They pulled out a few weeks ago leaving The Americans and NATO holding the bag, because they know what Afghanistan becomes when conquerers begin to loose power, as will happen as the US pulls out. Prince Harry in his brilliance called the Afghans a bunch of Towel Heads a few years ago, easy to see the racism involved. The only important thing to ever come out of Britain were some Rock'n'Roll bands. Everything else was crime laden.

Brutish Vomitorium of British Occupied Ireland

BBC A

 Point of View   The British Vomitorium

The British Empire was based on the preceding Roman Empire. Both were based on their respective brutality, couched as civilization, hence the name Brutish Empire. During the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, decadence coupled with orgies and vomitoriums of incessant eating, were some of their features, before their fall. Others were wanton sadistic violence, coupled with the systemic rape of children. The Brutish tradition of foxhunting, blooding young children and raping them, is a part of the heritage of the British Empire. Ireland its first colony should know, it has experienced all of their brutality first hand, where not just its wildlife but also its people were hunted down, sadistically stretched, ripped apart and the agony blood of the victim, rubbed on their British children to cultivate the blood lust of their parents and ruling class.

In the troubles of the last forty years in British Occupied Ireland, we have experienced the internment of our people without trial, to be replaced recently with secret kangaroo courts, by an SS type secret service, called MI5, with secret kangaroo evidence from paid informers, secret kangaroo prosecutors, secret knagaroo sentences, secret knagaroo charges, etc., resulting in secret kangaroo selective political internment. This has been coupled with the indiscriminate murder of peaceful civil rights demonstrators on Irish streets, coupled with torture, the murder of their human rights lawyers and  journalists who  dare cover the facts.

The Brutish Empire has bullied British Occupied Ireland for more than 800 years, with brutish, sadistic, experiments of political divide and conquer. Kitsonian  brutal, counter- insurgency and experiments with their experimented, evolved, industrial war complex hardware, then exported around the world, to their compliant common wealth states, carefully structured, to replace their colonies.This coupled with buyers from oil rich middle east regimes of brutal oppression, feeds the greed frenzy of its corrupt City of London bankers. The extent of the sadism and bloodletting in Ireland along with its legacy of brutal empire worldwide, has prompted many to conclude that Empire be it British, Roman, American or Brutish all have a satanic origin and purpose. The propaganda of civilizing savages, is cover for hundreds of years of war crimes in Ireland alone, including a holocaust that cost as many as the Jewish one, that makes the Nazi's look like a supporting cast. A recent article by the BBC world service, now known as the Brutish Bugger Children, world service, titled 

A Point of View: The British vomitorium 

prompted this presentation.

Dear Cecil:

Were vomitoriums really used in ancient Roman times so that people could throw up between courses in order to eat more?

— Christine

Let me ask you this, Christine. The last time you were doubled over the porcelain throne heaving your nachos, did you think: I want to permanently consecrate part of my home to this delicious experience?

Well, neither did the Romans. While there was something called a vomitorium (from the Latin vomitus, past participle of vomere, to vomit), it wasn't a room set aside to vomit in. Rather a vomitorium was a passageway in an amphitheater or theater that opened into a tier of seats from below or behind. The vomitoria of the Colosseum in Rome were so well designed that it's said the immense venue, which seated at least 50,000, could fill in 15 minutes. (There were 80 entrances at ground level, 76 for ordinary spectators and 4 for the imperial family.) The vomitoria deposited mobs of people into their seats and afterward disgorged them with equal abruptness into the streets--whence, presumably, the name.

That's not to say the Romans were unfamiliar with throwing up, or that they never did so on purpose. On the contrary, in ancient times vomiting seems to have been a standard part of the fine-dining experience. In his Moral Epistlesthe Roman philosopher Seneca writes, Cum ad cenandum discubuimus, alius sputa deterget, alius reliquias temulentorum [toro] subditus colligit, "When we recline at a banquet, one [slave] wipes up the spittle; another, situated beneath [the table], collects the leavings of the drunks." OK, it doesn't literally say puke, but come on. The orator Cicero, in Pro Rege Deiotaro, says matter-of-factly that Julius Caesar "expressed a desire to vomit after dinner"(vomere post cenam te velle dixisses), and elsewhere suggests that the dictator took emetics for this purpose. Caesar's hosts wanted to take him to the bathroom, since they supposedly had a squad of assassins waiting there (at the time of Cicero's speech, King Deiotarus was on trial for this alleged attempt on Caesar's life), but he decided to go to his bedroom instead. Nowhere does Cicero say anything about a "vomitorium."

You get the picture. The Romans weren't shy about vomiting, and they had vomitoria--but they didn't do the former in the latter. The conflation of the two appears to be a recent error. The Oxford English Dictionary cites Aldous Huxley using the term incorrectly in 1923, with the stern comment "erron." Urban historian Lewis Mumford makes a similar screwup in The City in History (1961), claiming that the vomitoria of the amphitheaters were named after the mythical dining room appurtenances. So you're in distinguished company, Christine, but still misinformed.

Probably I should leave it at that. But perhaps all this talk of vomiting has you feeling . . . strangely excited. Perhaps I also need to fill out the bottom couple inches of the column. Either way, I'm obliged to inform you about a condition known as emetophilia, which is sexual arousal in response to vomit or vomiting. I won't claim it's a major phenomenon at the moment. I could only find one pre-Internet article in a medical journal ("Erotic Vomiting,"Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1982), which calls it "a previously unreported aberration." A quick on-line search suggests emetophilia has a long way to go before it catches up with Japanese tentacle porn. But today's fringe practice is tomorrow's Newsweek cover. I say forewarned is forearmed.

— Cecil Adams

LIST OF BRITISH SATANISTS AND PEDOPHILES from David Icke

The Satanic movement known as Frankism.

Queen Elizabeth II of the UK: Satanist, child sacrificer, shape-shifting reptilian. Major Illuminati figure.

Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother: As above.

Prince Philip: As above.

Prince Charles: As above.

Prince Andrew: As above.

Princess Anne: As above. Not seen to shape-shift.

Lord Mountbatten of the British Royal Family and World War II "war hero". Rothschild bloodline, and therefore a shape-shifter. Satanist.

Winston Churchill, Britain's war-time Prime Minister, and bloodline of the Marlborough family, one of the elite aristocratic bloodlines of the British Isles. Satanist.

Tony Blair British Prime Minister. Satanist.

Edward Heath, Prime Minister of the UK from 1970-74 and the man who signed Britain into the European Community. Satanist, child torturer, paedophile, shapeshifting reptilian.

Willie Whitelaw, Deputy Prime Minister to Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. Satanist.

Lord McAlpine of the McAlpine Construction dynasty in the UK. Satanist, paedophile.

Jimmy Savile, Satanist, pedophile,

The Right Wing Left Hand Path

by Elisabeth Selwyn

The connection between Satanism and Fascism in Britain is well-known, though not well-explained. Nor has it been understood why this particular malaise has not, in general, crossed the Atlantic. Before attempting to examine the reasons why British Satanism has for so long been stained by this association, it may clarify matters to consider in some detail the major exponents of British Satanism and their political affiliations, past and present.

The name Dark Lily is alleged to have been originated by a Satanic group in the first decade of the present century. As far as can be ascertained, there is only hearsay evidence for this, but it seems irrelevant to the present study. The magazine Dark Lily first appeared in duplicated news-sheet format in 1977, allegedly the organ of the Anglian Satanic Church - not to be confused (though it often was) with the Anglo-Saxonic Church, which was Odinist and which will be refered to later.

The Anglican Satanic Church was run by Father Raoul Belphlegor (yes, that is how he spelled it), real name Thomas Victor Norris, and Mother Lilith, real name Magdalene Graham. It claimed vast resources, numbers and magickal powers which would be bestowed on members in return for money and/or (in the case of young female members) sex. Norris had earlier acquired a liking for brothel-keeping, involving his wife and daughters, aged eleven and thirteen. On his release from a six-year sentence resulting from this, he restored his fortunes with the aid of a rather naive eighteen-year-old (she was not concerned with his occult activities and has since now made a new life for herself, so her name will not be mentioned).

Norris' Occult involvement brought him into contact with Magdalene Graham, who was editing an Occult magazine on broadly LHP lines. Norris persuaded her to take over production of his magazines, both Occult and political (fascist), including the occasional news-sheet of his Odinist Anglo-Saxonic Church (another paper organisation). Despite holding similar political views, Ms. Graham was, at first, reluctant to be associated with the disreputable Norris, but was in the vunerable position of having just been diagnosed as suffering from a disabling illness and was desperately seeking a cure. That particular illness is subject to recession and Ms. Graham experienced an improvement (presumably psychologically induced), which, for a time convinced her.

She eventually became disillusioned and tried to leave. Impeded by her physical disability, she sought help from a Satanist who was not a fascist (possibly the only representative of that rare breed in Britain at the time) and he eventually re-started the magazine Dark Lily as the organ of non-political Satanism in Britain. Ms Graham remains typist, sometimes designated editor, although it is doubtful whether she has executive powers It appears that she is now convinced that Occultism cannot be associated with politics. Certainly Dark Lily, despite its history, has, since coming under new management, shown no sign of political allegiances and has, in fact, warned that to divide one's energies between politics and Occultism means that one will succeed at neither.

While Dark Lily may have purged itself, the same cannot, unfortunately, be said for a magazine called Fenrir (an Odinist word) produced by a Satanic group called the Order of the Nine Angles. They claim an ancient pedigree, but their writings appear to be an ill-digested mixture of Satanism (on the Black Mass level), fascism, ("Roman Salutes" as part of the ceremony!), sado-masochism (the inevitable scourge), alchemy, ritual magick and a paranoiac insistence that they are the only upholders of the Satanic tradition. Although referring to them in the plural, the effective long term membership of the Order of the Nine Angles remains at one: a gentleman who calls himself Anton (yes, really, Anton!) Long. His aliases include Stephen Brown, David Myatt and Algar Langton.

The Order of the Nine Angles first appeared in Leeds in 1975, but its founder was rather more preoccupied with his political attachments (the now-defunct National Socialist (Nazi) Movement and its successors), so the Occult aspect was not prominent.

The magazine Fenrir first appeared in 1988; it will be noted that it is dated in the Nazi tradition YF99 (Year of the Fuhrer). Mr Long's other writings have included pamphlets for Liberty Bell Publications (American readers will presumably not require further explanation of the nature of such literary efforts), a Black Mass to commemorate the one-hundredth anniversary of the birth of Adolph Hitler, and various rituals. Mr Long is at present experiencing difficulty with his publisher, who appears somewhat discouraged by the contents of the rituals.

We referred to the former National Socialist Movement and must now introduce another of the Occult luminaries of that organisation, Mr David Austin. Without digressing too far into the convoluted history of Fascism in Britain, the National Socialist Movement was founded by Mr John Colin Campbell Jordan (generally known as Colin Jordan). Following his release from a prison term imposed for sedition, he changed the name of his organisation to British Movement. Shortly thereafter, Mr Jordan was fined for shoplifting a pair of ladies' red knickers from a (Jewish-owned) supermarket, and deposed from leadership of the BM. The new "fuhrer," Michael McLaughlin, instituted his own little knight of the Long Knives to remove all whom he considered to be "perverts" from the BM (disregarding the fact that this would leave him with only twenty-eight members) and David Austin was one of those booted out.

Mr. Austin, whose previous history included several years as a Mormon "missionary," has since joined the U.S. based Temple of Set and was formally ordained to their priesthood in May of 1989.

There are (unfortunately) other Satanic organisations in Britain. I say unfortunately because none appear to have escaped the political adherence which bedevils (if one may use that word) British Satanism. However, they are too small and ineffectual to be included here (if they are getting ideas above their station, this may be considered to only a temporary reprieve).

Let us now turn to the question of WHY. Yes, the Satanic question. Why is a valid and highly potent way of life so often (on one side of the ocean, at least) soiled by association with an inadequate and life-denying political creed? To Occultists, Fascism may be defined as the new "English Disease," but the condition which has for centuries been so entitled is Masochism, and the two are closely related.

It has been said that those who hold anyone else to be worthless are really projecting the fact they believe themselves to be worthless; this is demonstrably true. Even a brief acquaintance with a Fascist will reveal that he/she suffers from a severe inferiority complex. The phrase "racial masochism" is well-known. Most right-wing bookshops used to sell (possibly they still stock it, we haven't checked lately) a volume purporting to explain in pseudo-medical jargon why circumcision is for the purpose of increasing virility. On the same theme, the only quotation that anyone can ever remember from The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is the contemptuous description of the Ayrian race as "hewers of wood and drawers of water."

One must also survey the poseurs. The High Priest in his dramatic robe or the Nazi in black uniform and jackboots. Where's the difference? The answer is that the Satanist understands the real reasons why he is "dressing up;" the Nazi does not. The Nazi is not intellectually capable of realizing that such trappings are a masquerade, utilized for the purpose of reinforcing an image when (in his case) no real authority exists. Dominance has no connection with threats or violence. One who is in control does not need them; in fact they negate potency. The power comes from within himself and it has no visible show; especially not a form of apparel which represents an external conferring of jurisdiction, or, in some cases, is the semblance of domination without any validity or competence. In such circumstances, a uniform is a pretence, in the manner of children playing games. It reveals the psychological deficiencies of those who resort to fancy dress to augment their macho appearance. Yet some people are able to direct others and order action without accoutrement. This is the phenomenon known as the ability to command. You want an example? Look at a genuine Satanist. To some of my readers, the direction may be re-phrased: look in a mirror.

Having briefly refered to Odinism, it must be said that followers of that path, in Britain, are, almost without exception, Fascist. This aspect of Occult political involvement is outside the scope of this article. However, the digression on Odinism is merely for the sake of completeness. The subject is Satanic Fascism and the question is why such a diversion should appeal to those who purport to be seeking Occult knowledge. To say that they are affected by masochism (which is an extraordinarily powerful sexual motivation) is certainly the explanation in many cases. Alternative answers which have been propounded are as follows: (A) that those who are politically-inspired are looking for something other than Occult power and knowledge and are attracted to the sinister image of Satanism; (B) since Fascists naturally expect to be hated, they gravitate to a theology which is hated; (C) the proponents of the politics of fear are subconsciously seeking persecution.

(To confuse the issue, it has been argued that Satanism has more in common with Judaism, especially in the matter of suffering persecution. Witch-burnings or gas chambers? How many million?)

As an afterthought, let us contrast the foregoing with Dr. LaVey's clear sighted understanding that the Nazi's were capable of Lesser Magic and mind manipulation but with obvious limitations. He had the courage not to avoid this thorny issue, as shown in the Satanic Bible and elsewhere, but makes it plain that the Church of Satan will never succumb to "the English disease."

---

Copyright 1995-2003 Elisabeth Selwyn