text:
Private Eye reconsidered after fifty years v. 2017-03-09
Establishment gadfly? Lively satire? Insider stories? . . .
. . . Controlled Pseudo-Opposition? 'Communist'/Jewish Front? Useful Idiocy? Non-articles?
Note on writers—here's a contemporary quotation from C N Parkinson (1960): '... modern governments go far beyond printing records of debates [.. it is reserved to H.M. Stationery Office to produce a daily list ... of official publications ... the experience of Britain in World War II goes to prove that it is everyone else who has to go without, the official printer redoubling his efforts... ] ... many civil servants began their lives with dreams of authorship. They saw themselves, first of all, as dramatists, novelists, essayists and poets, only reluctantly accepting the role of bureaucrat. The more readily, therefore, do they plunge into print at the public expense. It is true that their works must often remain anonymous but they hope perhaps that the secret of authorship will leak out... "Look!" they fancy hearing the whisper, "there is the author of Coccidiosis in chickens!" or "That man over there wrote Expanded Nitrile Ebonite for Sandwich Construction." ...
Note Parkinson's assumption that writing, preferably in modes established millennia ago, has primacy in government. Let's look at evidence that this leads to a type of ignorant arrogance, and that dim ex-public schoolboys became a positive menace.
Radio, TV, Film: The Power of Language to Broadcast Unreason
Younger people might be interested in this review of a book on John Reith, one of the very few BBC people to have made much impression. He was dull and dour, had a high opinion of his abilities, and shaped the BBC, as was required, into the pompous slippery deceptiveness needed to promote world war. At the time the Eye was founded, the BBC was in effect a government department, staffed largely by demobbed wartime types, and entirely undemocratic. TV changed this a bit: now its staffed by a mixture of Jewish-dominated propagandists with people who at least try to aim for both popular and higher-brow entertainment.
['Baron von Lotsov' in an Internet forum, in 2013, explains how attitudes to homosexuality, race, crime, education, life, are transmitted:–]
' ... It's all done as a sort of pecking order, indeed just as a typical communist state is set up. If you listen to [BBC] Radio 4 they often have the liberal elite giving out advice to their underlings. First of all they don't tend to communicate in a logical manner, rather they are into the arts, but the arts are the transmission medium for the ideology. It works on the psychological level. For example, you will often get a member of the liberal elite saying this or that work is absolutely fantastic and wonderful, as in novels or plays of one sort or another, and this stuff is essentially mind control. Instructions are not transmitted in a direct way. That would be too easy to bust. They kind of set the mood and general emphasis of different things. It's subliminal communication in other words. This psycho-woman doesn't know what she is doing, but she is doing it even so. ...'
NOTES on MARXISM - 1. USELESSNESS It's no accident that Marxism is tolerated and encouraged: it is completely useless, with its jargon, its emphasis on just one of many possible power struggles between groups, its absence of anything on militarism, its absence of science (and therefore the importance of raw materials etc), its absence of anything on propaganda and education, its absence of discussion of splits between workers in different industries. .. It was looked upon with worry at first, but later accepted in Darwinian fashion as its hopeless nothingness became clearer. Marx died in 1883, predating most of electricity, telephones, aeroplanes, motor cars, newspapers, radio, TV, bombing and fighting planes.Back to top
Even sociology which is not obviously Marxian is concerned with unimportant problems:Weber on suicide (one of the least important of any phenomena) and on bureaucracy (a footnote to modern industrialism) are just two examples.
NOTES on MARXISM - 2. AS POOR MAN'S P.P.E. (PHILOSOPHY, POLITICS AND ECONOMICS
PPE is relatively new (1920s Oxford; something like an updated version of 'Greats') and is an interesting study object for persons wanting to understand how important subjects are evaded: Oxford's present 'course information', about a century later, is online. Many British politicians studied this subject; and indeed their motive was to get into politics. Many other politicians studied law—the House of Commons has a large proportion of lawyers. The most important missing pieces of the world, as presented by PPE, in my view, are (1) Science and technology (including the difference between empiricism and science); (2) Some feeling for biology and ecology and different psychologies; (3) The influence of Jews, notably in paper money and in control of information—a subset of examination of legal systems; (4) Military and police matters, from wars down to small disturbances and assassinations.
All the public school types in Private Eye must have been aware of the influence of PPE as something like a supposed summit of the education system in Britain. Incredibly, many people supported this system. An example is Hugh Trevor-Roper (later Lord Dacre) who described the 19th century public school and university curriculum of Greek and Roman writings as perfectly adapted to the world they were to administer. (I'm unsure of the exact wording). The result was that many of them were slaughtered in the 'Great War' (Eton has wall memorials to dead Etonians 1914-1918 to this day), having no idea what to expect, or how it had been started. And thousands were brought 'up against the staggering secret they had never suspected—the compete control exercised over [metals] ... absolutely necessary to the nation's survival by half a dozen Jews. ...'
Granted that education systems tend to avoid unpleasant truths, we can see Marxism is ideal as an evasionist system, as described above. It has its own philosophy (mostly Hegel), its own politics (mostly the 'French Revolution'), and its own economics (mostly cotton mills in northern England, the 'labour theory of value'). The 'Communist Manifesto' was plagiarised. A lot was added later (Hobson on empire, for example). I think this combination of evasiveness with simpleness is the secret of its popularity with such people as Tony Benn, Paul Foot, and Claud Cockburn, who ran a predecessor publication to Private Eye, The Week. See below for Cockburn's life and work.
Private Eye writers Claud Cockburn 1904-1981
OVERVIEW:Claud Cockburn: Union Power (1976) Published when Cockburn was over 70, by William Kimber, a small publisher, this book was cheaply produced with no illustrations of any sort, not even graphs, and is unindexed—often evidence of money-saving. It even has a typo on the very first page. Internal evidence suggests it was mostly written much earlier, then dusted-off, maybe in the hope of profiting from the miners' strikes in Britain. Or perhaps it was a 'wee sweetie' cast to him as a reward for a lifetime's useful idiocy: Cockburn's life conforms exactly to the 'Frankfurt School' analysis.
Presumably, in primitive societies most people did what they had to; populations were presumably small, and mobility difficult. Modern technology allows large numbers of people to gather and work. As with cities, and armies, and tribes, groups can increase their power, with varying upper limits, usually not impressively high. Cockburn's version of Marxism is based on the idea, which he repeats very often, that the 'working class' has interests which are opposed to other classes. Cockburn was not intelligent enough to come up with anything abstract; his book looks at British history for three quarters of the 20th century, but he's hopeless at general laws. The General Strike (1926—when Cockburn was not much older than 21) must have impressed him. His insistence on inevitability of conflict, and the non-existence of normal times, perhaps came from this influence. And perhaps from his upbringing, where his family wondered which would come first—war, or revolution. However, another Marxist tradition—having no idea what to do to get 'socialism'—suited Cockburn. His book tries to suggest dark hints and forebodings, but is hopelessly vulnerable to ordinary common-sense criticisms.
[1] In a sense, anyone's interest is opposite to everyone else's, but the facts of child rearing, co-operation in constructing societies, the need for defences, divisions of labour and specialisations of work, make it obvious the situation is more complicated than that. Probably the emphasis on 'class war' was simply a Frankfurt style propagandist simplification.
[2] Cockburn never took professionalisation very seriously (though there's some material on running power stations, and he was aware of the possibilities of computer experts wielding power; air traffic controller strikes were in the future). This is all very well for Jews in Russia with paper money supplied externally; expertise was bought, probably very incompetently. And it's easy to over-estimate the numbers in industries; northern mill towns impressed their contemporaries, but huge numbers of people there dealt with food, clothing, coal, building, domestic work, education. And there may be bankruptcies.
[3] I remember two striking examples of party recruiters being brushed off: the first was a chap in a university: he said to an unwilling listener something like "First, the workers are exploited by the bosses. The whole class is exploited. That's true, isn't it?" "No." "Have you heard of the dialectic?" "No." The second was at a social meeting; person A was saying "The working class to this day have disadvantages. It's outrageous; they have to take what is theirs. It's about time. And think of Auschwitz." Person B evidently found A an irritant; he said "Society has to be organised. The workers are nothing without the middle classes. Nothing!"
Cockburn has interesting material, mostly quoted from other writers, mostly Jews, but all interpreted with dubious honesty. Corelli Barnett in quoted on the working conditions of men around 1914 resembling wartime conditions—rats, trenches, rain, poor food, explosions. Fair enough point, but they weren't expected to climb out of trenches and be shot. Cockburn regards war as promoting science (as did Arthur Keith, and Bertrand Russell); Cockburn's examples include penicillin, and a sea sickness preventative for Normandy landings, and probably nuclear weapons, now known to be a fake; he doesn't seem to realise this could just be a post-hoc justification by people who made money, i.e. just bullshit, in the same way that claims NASA led to useful inventions is doubtful. Cockburn quotes from The Strange Death of Liberal England on increasing numbers of strikes. But he adds many strikes were frivolous; at the present day, NHS managers' car parks empty early on Fridays, but this doesn't prove they want revolution. And millions of days lost is hard to get into perspective: there's lost time through late deliveries, machinery failures, learning. Supposed full employment may in fact hide waste: teaching probably wastes billions of days. Cockburn mentions folk memories as important things, instancing the Taff Vale judgment (1901) and clearly the situation changed from smaller-scale production.
It's quite saddening to see how little useful material Cockburn amassed after a lifetime's work.
• He noticed if there's full employment and high demand, unions get powerful; but in depressions, their membership drops. If there's a war, unions become more like partners and become important; women get employed; Cockburn does his best not to be jubilant about wars, but he's close. Wars provide booms, he thinks, pun intended; he regarded the Second World War as a 'battle for National Survival' in what now seems a naive manner. Cockburn says nothing about the debt accumulated, which of course Jews would want unmentioned, and he seemed uninterested in it. In the same way, Britain's coal industry was subsidised to a fantastic extent; but the media barely mentioned this.
• Cockburn discusses the situation, without suggesting anything useful, in e.g. Durham in the 1930s, and comments by observers: why don't they revolt? How can they tolerate it?
• Cockburn notices for example that more money could be made by investing overseas than in Britain (or at least that was the claim). Should machine tools be exported? Should expertise be sold to foreigners? But he has no theory as to what should be done.
Ultimately, his book says little: sometimes groups of men in some industries have power; sometimes they don't. He says nothing about individuals and freelancers. Significantly, he says nothing about bureaucracies, huge groups of ruling people, though their danger ought to have been obvious from the USSR. At the present time we have 'Common Purpose' which is a form of secret union, displacing Freemasons as planners and big finance schemes have displaced small local businesses. His book tails off, a disappointing minor effort and very red herring indeed.
Social histories of the time make a lot of the contraceptive pill (1961) married women only, and 1962 the year the Beatles became known; a second BBC channel was started in 1964. Maybe it's worth noticing the propaganda use of TV: Till Death Us Do Part (with 'Alf Garnett') started 1965, and the derivative American TV series All In The Family (with 'Archie Bunker') started in 1971. (I wondered if there was a connection between 'Johnny Speight' and J M Spaight of Bombing Vindicated of 1944, but I couldn't find any. However, a publishing company, W Speaight & Sons, which published Zionist books in London, strongly suggests 'Johnny Speight' was another Jewish writer). There was a vast expansion of education (including the Open University), town planning, health measures and so on. Unfortunately, this included a vast consolidation of war opportunities. By now, the shining hopes and new vistas have been pretty thoroughly stunted and deformed, as we see surveying just a small part of the darker side:–
• 1962 Cuba missile crisis supposedly involving nuclear missiles occurred; in retrospect probably a way to keep weapons sales and profits up, plus perhaps being an anti-white move, or perhaps to instil the idea of a world divided into the 'West' and 'Communism' as opposed to being run by 'Jews' or some other hypothesis.
• 1963 The Destruction of Dresden by David Irving.
• J F Kennedy, elected in November 1960, was murdered in November 1963; This must have been carefully planned, and any media likely to sniff around Johnson and subsequent legislation would have to have been Jewish-influenced or controlled. In fact it's possible Private Eye's editorship may have been influenced by this.
• 1965 Capital Punishment abolished. Largely a Jewish campaign. Quintin Hogg (=Lord Hailsham) commented on the Jewish hypocrisy here after killing German leaders.
• 1965 Bertrand Russell tore up his Labour party membership card and his Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal was announced for 1967. On Russell's death in 1970, the Eye printed a childishly insulting mock obituary.
• 1967 USS Liberty attacked by Israel, now known to have been L B Johnson's attempt to start USA war with Egypt.
• 1968 Reprint of F J P Veale Advance to Barbarism
• 1969 NASA's first fake moon landings of a series.
• Laws included 1967 Abortion Act; 1972 European Communities Act; and 'Race Relations' and Immigration Acts e.g. 1968, 1971, 1976, 1978
• 1974 First publication of Did Six Million Really Die? (attributed to Richard Verrall)
In this period, Private Eye invented and stuck to a number of stylistic devices:–Back to top
• 'Lord Gnome' as the condescending proprietor. The name presumably suggests Switzerland and Swiss money, rather than a more accurate Jewish suggestion. In the same way the Jewish media often portray crooks as Italian.
• Nicknames, sometimes effective, sometimes not, such as 'The Swinging Turds' (Peter Cook, apparently referring to the Beatles); 'Spiggy Topes' (apparently John Lennon); 'Okay Yoni' (Yoko Ono); 'Mafia Arrow' (Mia Farrow - who incidentally acted a young girl in some US nuclear scare films); Von-armed Bendit (Daniel Cohn-Bendit - note the suppression of 'Cohen'); Masturbami (Mastroianni); President 'Raygun'. The Grauniad newspaper was called that on account of the supposed high number of misprints (not for any serious reason).
• A crossword with obscene, impolite, vulgar etc clues and solutions. These are (or were) meticulously correct in composition, and so presumably the work of a crossword compiler at play
• Ads including the 'Thai wife' and begging letter types.
• Contributors signed by nickname, who may, or may not, be the same person throughout. For example, 'Piloti' wrote on buildings and architecture and disappearing heritage for example in London (though there's nothing on destruction elsewhere). Lunchtime O'Booze is another such nickname. I seem to recall Miles Kington of Let's Parler Franglais was a contributor, and Craig Brown is or was, but contributors' actual names are almost never given, as will be seen.
• There is apparently serious material on business, finance, medicine, and Europe, but which, on examination, yields little. Usually attacks are on members of public organisations—watchdogs, investigators, departments, inspectors, police or whatnot who haven't done their jobs. There is little attempt to identify causes. This of course deflects criticism away from the serious issues. For example, there is never anything on the control of paper money by Jews.
Very likely 'Dave Spart' and 'Deirdre Spart' mocked genuinely-concerned, but misinformed, types, not rent-a-thug and rent-a-chant mobs funded by Jews.
Here are examples: Greenham Common women etc,
Kate Hudson on CND,
Protestors Handbook.
The infinite tragedy of the Vietnam War started 'Dave Spart' (as far as I remember) on his career and of course was, and is, marked by Jewish media lies. Vietnam War with its massive crop of lies, rather ineffectual opposition, and fake opponents.
• The Prime Minister's 'diary', or notebook, or report, or wife's diary, is a permanent feature. Invariably it's based on gossip, trivia, famous people, and conventional views of what parties and their leaders do. An occasional variant looks at e.g. Princess Diana, rugby players... Amusing; not serious.
• Centre pages, mostly compiled by looking at the 'news' and writing short jokes in formats that suit the page size.
• From The Message Boards is relatively new, mimicking semi-literate computer comments with semi-literate nicknames. Interesting jubilation over deliberately dumbed-down British education. An earlier version was 'Dave Spart' (see box, right), poking fun at would-be left-wingers from downmarket areas of London who, it's clear now, hadn't grasped the Jewish connection of the modern world.
• There is of course a pitiful lack of reliable science—nothing they say on windfarms, nuclear matters, 9/11, OPs, drugs, farming, global warming, global cooling, or any such subject, can be assumed to be correct or even remotely competent.
• Dear to Eye hearts (cp Parkinson above) is a heavy emphasis (disguised somewhat by being separated) on books, and what they call bookmen—the editorial and other types in the publishing industry. It's amusing to read their envious reviews of big-selling hack books. There are TV reviews, but only as consumers. Many soft literary writers are very conscious of their precarious positions: advertising being their default/ failure position. (A John Cleese film had a line: '... too thick to go into advertising').
• Very important note: anonymous writers in newspapers and especially TV news and programmes are never identified, and never criticised.
Private Eye writers Christopher Booker 1937-
OVERVIEW: Booker is said to have edited the 'Eye' up to issue 40 i.e. less than 2 years from 1961, assuming no missing issues. This may be why Booker, in his book The Neophiliacs (published 1969) gives 1963 as a terminal year of frightfulness for Britain. Below is a review of his book, I hope not too long. His attitude to the changing world was, it seems, incomprehension; so his view of satirical news must have been different from most. And there's a significant point of interest, which is that Booker, very unusually, specifically mentioned Jewish property speculators and rent criminals. I suspect these may be what led to Ingrams taking over the editorship.Christopher Booker: The Neophiliacs
Internal evidence suggests that most of this book was written long before 1969, possibly in 1963 when he ceased editing Private Eye. He dates the 'satire boom' 1961-1963. He details a BBC TV thing of 1963, about Christine Keeler, who had sex with numerous high-up people, but the density of information after that plummets—for example, Enoch Powell's mid-1968 speech is barely mentioned, as is other 1968 material, and the 'moon landing' appears only only in endnotes.
His book is fitted around the idea, based on Jung, and/or Greek tragedy, that groups of people in times of turmoil go through a process schematised in 4 stages (pages 71 ff): [1] Anticipation [2] Dream when things temporarily go right, a collective fantasy [3] Frustration (Booker unconvincingly includes bad weather, traffic jams, car crashes, and power cuts as examples) [4] Nightmare. He gives examples: the film Jules et Jim, Macbeth, Lolita, and The Great Gatsby without seeming to understand that scriptwriters design their works that way. Booker claims this happens in reality: his example of course is Germans and Hitler (though he supplements this with teddy boys, and romanticism).
With incredible naivete, Booker thinks films and newspapers appear in response to public demand: thus for example decline in derring-do war films. He was too young to understand publishing as a process of planning and promotion. (Where are the films of Romanov deaths? Of the Ukraine famine? Of Dresden and people burning? Of the Anglo-Israel war?). Booker assumes headlines, critical reviews, and commentators mirror the public views, rather than form and shape them: he gives an incredible smorgasbord of headline bits, as though stuff in papers must represents important events.
The overall feeling of this book is that Booker is baffled by modern life, but has been told the correct way to behave is to be 'mature' and accept things. I infer this e.g. from his attitude to nuclear war: he clearly believes H-bombs exist; but demonstrations are silly. It's impossible to know if he was aware of US genocide in Vietnam, but he says concern causes 'neuroses'; of course, he doesn't say the Second World War caused neuroses. Booker takes refuge in Jung and Christianity. People like him became known as 'young fogeys'.
Booker notices a trend in writers to absurd claims, though he doesn't realise this is the result of Jewish media control. For example (page 27) Heath is described using these implausible adjectives: tough energetic ruthless energy abrasive young classless professional. Booker attributes this to Schlesinger on Kennedy. He notes the use of 'vibrant' to suggest vitality vs. order.
Booker regards Britain as public school (i.e. pay; for example Etonians) vs all others. This of course can hide Jews as part of an elite.
He know no science whatever: his description of the Festival of Britain as bright-coloured plastic and concrete etc shows he has no idea about polythene and other then-new materials. He has no idea about the technologies of television; he seems to have little idea of colour printing, regarding colour supplements as a weird oddity, a bit odd since the Eye itself had to be printed, as of course did their public school mag. He has no idea about special effects and colour film, essential to James Bond films. Heathrow was new but it's clear air travel was a mystery to him, as were reinforced concrete, float glass, steel tower blocks. He seems surprised that contraceptive pills changed things. He has little idea about sound processing, and stereo, vinyl discs, transistors, and electric instruments (which still to this day worrying composers). He seems puzzled by new styles in interiors, fed by new types of lighting.
Booker has little idea of economics: he doesn't know about paper money or the leverage it can give in the wrong hands. He seems surprised at Rachmanism. He describes his surprise at shipyards closing, but has no feeling for international organisation on unions.
Like many commentators at the time, he has no feeling for the push behind immigration; he has no idea it was planned, with (for example) assistance supposedly designed for British people deliberately extended to immigrants. He talks as though they just happened to come, and as though anyone—even billions—from the 'Commonwealth' could all fit into Britain's small islands.
RICHARD INGRAMS [b 1937] edited until 1986Ingrams edited the magazine along the lines explained above until he was aged about 50; his successor, Ian Hislop, was 26, in fact more or less the same age Ingrams had been at the start of his work. A lot was made of this supposedly sudden replacement in the establishment media—a sure sign it was accepted. (Other investigative/ satirical/ genuine news magazines arrived, then sank without trace: I seem to remember Scallywag (which ran child sex abuse allegations) and Mother Jones—but may be wrong). Obviously a replacement must have felt to be sound; and in any case Ingrams is stated to have remained chairman, so that decisions could be chewed over. However, this adds weight to the idea that the magazine was simply pursuing its agenda: experience and knowledge were very much secondary to their policy, which I'm assuming based on the evidence was more-or-less standard Frankfurt School anti-white pro-Jewish propaganda.
The Eye built up a reputation, at least in the controlled media, of identifying and pursing serious frauds: T Dan Smith is an early example; later examples include disastrous NHS computer systems, Europe commentators, medical commentators, someone called Richard Brooks, 'a former tax inspector, on tax havens', someone on BSE. If there were any competent media studies departments, there would be comparisons of fraud and incompetence tabulated by media outlet. It's difficult to be certain, but for example this look into British private hospitals has only a few attributions to Private Eye.
There's some material online by a lawyer, Geoffrey Bindman, on the 'Goldenballs' fund in the 1970s and 1980s, asking for money to fund a legal case brought by Goldsmith, a billionaire Jew. The thought occurred to me that the whole thing could easily have been rigged up: with say 250,000 readers donating an average of (say) a tenner, a tidy sum could be made. Why would a billionaire piddle about in such a way? Possible? Well, another thing the Eye did not do was list tricks played by the legal profession. As far as I can remember, for example, no detailed inside story was made of the way lawyers decide how to apportion legal aid between lawyers.
One of their lost cases, which suggests some carelessness, was tied up with 30 January 1984's BBC Panorama programme, "Maggie's Militant Tendency", which alleged that Neil Hamilton MP gave a Nazi salute in Berlin a parliamentary visit in August 1983. Neil Hamilton also said in Parliament, when Greville Janner (accused of child sex) said he had lost half of his family in the Holocaust, "Unfortunately, the wrong half." I think I'm right in saying Private Eye relied on Searchlight, a Jewish front, for their information, which may give some indication of the poor quality of their sources.Note added 2013-11-27 (i.e. 27 Oct 2013)
Ingrams is related to a British 'psyops' worker of the Second World War - who presumably helped tell lies about Hitler's intentions, lies about fire bombing of German cities, and lies about Stalin, the Red Army, Jews in the USSR, and the true costs of the Second World War.
[From a Daily Telegraph obituary:-]
Leonard Victor Ingrams was born on September 1 1941, the youngest of four sons of Leonard St Clair Ingrams, who served in the Secret Service in the Second World War. His mother, Victoria Susan Reid before marriage, was musical and a friend of Vaughan Williams, Benjamin Britten and Imogen Holst; and his brother is Richard, the former editor of Private Eye.
From Udo Walendy, The Methods of Reeducation, Verlag für Volkstum und Zeitgeschichtsforschung, Vlotho/Weser, 1979. This extract from Simon Shappard's heretical.com website. Added 24 July 2014
...Within an hour of Hitler having spoken I [this is 'Sefton Delmer', a Jew from Hungary] was on the air with my reply. And without a moment's hesitation I turned his peace offer down. My colleagues at the BBC had approved of what I meant to say. That was enough authority for me.
"Herr Hitler," I said in my smoothest and most deferential German, "you have on occasion in the past consulted me as to the mood of the British public. So permit me to render your excellency this little service once again tonight. Let me tell you what we here in Britain think of this appeal of yours to what you are pleased to call our reason and common sense. Herr Führer and Reichskanzler, we hurl it right back at you, right in your evil smelling teeth..."
[NB the Imperial War Museum has a yellowed copy of Hitler's plea for peace, after the defeat of France].
...Duff Cooper rallied to my support with all his suave authority. He assured the House that my talk had the Cabinet's full approval. And when the Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax replied to Hitler a couple of days after me the sense of what he said was the same, although he used rather more restrained language. (Black Boomerang, pp. 16-18.
Sefton Delmer finally was entrusted with the command of a "Research Unit," which, however, did not have anything to do with research—but was simply the cover-name for special radio stations giving the impression, "as if they were working at some place inside the Europe occupied by Hitler." His initial chief was Leonard Ingrams, a key employee in "the Cloak-and-Dagger Organisation S.O.2 later renamed S.O.E. (Special Operations Executive) which was responsible for the organisation of resistance, sabotage, assassination and kindred enterprises" (pp. 36-37). Delmer's remit: "There are no limits. No holds are barred" (p. 38).
Delmer's instructions included the following: "Accuracy first," I used to tell the writers. "We must never lie by accident, or through slovenliness, only deliberately!" And as we put out news bulletin after news bulletin and service programme after service programme an entire system of subversive campaigns developed. (p. 92) ...
Private Eye writers Paul Foot
Private Eye writers 3rd Feb 2013 Paul Foot 1937-2004 The Politics of Harold Wilson (1968)
Foot's book on Wilson was published as a red-backed 'Penguin Special', and written before Foot was 30. It's unindexed. Foot's sources are unclear, but probably were largely newspaper libraries on specific subjects, and letters from people who knew Wilson, and biographies. Possibly Foot kept his own press cuttings. And Foot credits Jewish front organisations, without the slightest sign that he regarded them as biased or suspect: the 'Institute of Race Relations', 'Anti-Apartheid', 'International Socialism' magazine, 'New Statesman'.
The book has two parts: the first half is a biography of Wilson's politics, including academics like G D H Cole, and, later, politicians such as Stafford Cripps, Gaitskell, Kennedy before his murder. The second half is on issues deemed important by Foot, all of them suggested by the ordinary media: European 'Economic Community' or Commonwealth or US links? 'Racialism' in southern Africa? Foreign aid to independent (sic) countries? Foot piles on detail, usually quotations from speeches and newspapers, interspersed with official media history, plus his own commentary. The actual minutes and other records would be secret at the time, of course, though Foot shows no sign of understanding systematic lies and biases. I'll try to present a deep revisionist view here, slipping through this book fairly rapidly and picking out topics:–
• Labour 'landslide' of 1945 was in fact just a modest victory.
• Balance of payments: there was a huge emphasis on exports. Why? WW2 had left Britain in huge debt to the USA (not repaid until about 2000) and they wanted their money. Also of course the US was in debt with huge phoney nuclear project and other military expenses. Foot of course doesn't know or mention this.
A related issue is devaluation of the pound, a big issue at the time. Foot has no analysis of who gains and loses - in fact usually Jews benefited.
• Immigration. Immigrants claimed benefits; these were designed for the British, i.e. whites, but were in effect extended to immigrants without debate. Foot of course doesn't mention this.
• Labour Party funding: Labour started with Jewish funding; in effect Jewish paper money and other scams funded 'Labour'. Naturally Foot doesn't mention this (his life was spent in organisations—school, university, family homes and assets, newspapers—where the funding was traditional and nearly invisible).
• Union trouble: there was a lot of discussion of 'communists' leading unions, and in fact the NUS, NUJ, and many unions had leaders funded covertly by Jewish interests. Ordinary honest workers were kept out of the educational and promotional aspects of union life. In this way trouble could be caused more or less anywhere in Britain. Foot of course says nothing of this.
• Slavery. Foot emphasised the Atlantic slave trade, probably following a few hack academics. He says and knows nothing of Muslim slaves, the African slave trade, or Jewish involvement in slavery.
Note that Foot really believed the 'Russian Revolution' was a spontaneous uprising; he seems to have had no idea Lenin had access to vast funds of money. All his life he was a theoretical revolutionary, and all his life he had no idea that Marxism was a Jewish construct.
• Arms: mostly these were under the control of Weinstock and advisors like Bondi, with techies scrabbling for money. Much of their equipment never worked. Foot says nothing about this.
• Labour only got in in 1964 because many conservatives switched to Liberal. Foot says nothing about proportional representation.
• Foot knows nothing of Lyndon Johnson's switch of the USA to fervent Zionist support. (Significantly, Foot on Suez makes no mention of Israeli intervention).
• Foot, like Booker, supported unlimited immigration as though it was self-evidently a 'left wing' policy. And of action against South Africa and Rhodesia. This seems to have been almost universal among such people. Foot, again characteristically, says nothing about the Boer War resulting in Jewish control of minerals.
1990 THE CASE FOR SOCIALISM published by the Socialist Workers Party.
You might expect this smallish book to explain the case for socialism. In fact, it doesn't, and Foot uses the pseudo-authority of Marx to explain why not (pages 15, 72): Marx never described what 'socialism' would be, which of course is useful to Foot. ('When people asked Marx for blueprints of a socialist society, he steadfastly refused to supply them.') In fact, this is a valuable part of Marxism for useful idiots, allowing them to dodge the issue. Probably it's a significant reason, along with absence of science, that the pretence was built up of Marx as a great thinker.
Foot still assumes there was a genuine revolution in Russia, starting in 1905; he thinks the USSR was efficient, since he doesn't understand that all the technology was imported, being paid for by Jewish money from the west, using Russians as slave labour—the ones who weren't murdered. Foot's book is a run-through of the history of the twentieth century, but with a new emphasis on the USSR not being socialist. It's state capitalist. Foot goes through Thatcher and Reagan, the 'fall' of communism, and so on, almost always looking at money; wars hardly appear despite the vast death and destruction.
Foot does not mention Jewish finance; nor does he discuss Jewish power in both the USA and USSR. And his technical knowledge is nil. Let's interpret these omissions:
• 'Economic power' is a key phrase here. It appeared in other writers, for example Bertrand Russell. The important issue here, which the phrase hides, is the difference between financial power and everyday economic power, such as might be seen in factories, docks, railways, airports, building sites, farms, power plants, and arrangements for competitive selling of products.
'Economic power' (and 'workers control of economic power', 'democratic control of economic power' etc) are phrases aimed at workers and voters. Finance is much less noticeable than everyday economic structures; whole industries can change ownership, but of course they look exactly the same as before. This of course is a pro-Jewish attitude, designed to suggest that horrible money-grabbing capitalist business owners represent 'economic power'. (Landowners have a similar relation to power: the Queen for example, and the Church, own vast tracts of land and buildings, but these institutions would rather not mention this. Probably the growth in connections between Jewish money and landowners is explained by the mutual low profile).
• 'State capitalism' (Foot's view of Jewish control in the USSR) manages to hide the financial connection. In the same way that 'Stalinism' hides the Jewish control of the USSR behind a front man.
• Jews straddling the USA, Europe and USSR: Foot illustrates the incompetence of the USSR by the much-publicised-at-the-time sales of wheat to Russia at knock-down prices. This was presented as a cunning Commie coup against the 'West'. In fact of course Jews decided what was wanted and got American wheat; with control over the media it was easy to present this in any way they desired.
Both Reaganism and Thatcherism were devices to get publicly-owned assets, notably large-scale infrastructure, into Jewish hands, under the pretext of efficiency.
• Another important example is union activity. There was quite a bit of discussion about 'communist union leaders', usually treated as though these were alliances with 'reds'. In fact of course union leaders could be groomed, funded, and inserted into position. Any industry targeted for destruction could be removed, perhaps under the pretext that it had become too difficult to manage. This applies also to propagandists: the NUJ's guidelines, which still exist, forcing journalists to misreport race incidents, were passed by a Polish Jew with a false name (MacShane). The NUS has probably always had groomed 'leaders' of this type; most students work too hard (or at least long) to lose time on such activities.
• Jewish power found a perfection of rottenness in fake think-tanks and propagandist university and college departments. Jewish paper money cost them nothing; in effect, inflation paid them a percentage of GNP, and of course they'd get fallout from Jewish scams. And the whole set-up suited their hectoring style of propagandist word-twisting, notably in fields relevant to chosen people fantasists, such as anti-white racism.
• Foot's scientific and technological ignorance: Nuclear weapons: it's now known that all this was a fake, though Foot was scientifically a complete ignoramus—another useful attribute in all useful idiots.
This is an extreme and controversial example; less difficult is the miners' strike in Britain. British coalfields were some of the longest-established in the world, and all the easily-won coal had long gone. Men had to journey underground, sometimes for miles. Contrast this with Pennsylvania, where there are 60-foot thick seams of very high-grade, low-contaminant coal, near the surface. And with eastern Europe, with lower grade 'brown coal' something like Irish peat. The TV 'news' coverage never mentioned any technical issues whatever; they were the same type as Foot: long on irresponsible oratory and uninformed preaching.
There doesn't seem any doubt Foot really thought revolutions were an imminent possibility. He lists France 1789 and Russia (1917-ish, but not 1905) and France 1968, Portugal 1974, Iran 1979, Poland 1981—but of course omits the far more numerous coups, invasions, military takeovers. Foot was an engaging speaker, and possibly saw himself as a Lenin or Rosa Luxemburg figure: certainly the ending of this book—'There has never been a time when socialism - real socialism, socialism from below, ... democracy, ... fighting against capitalism - is more relevant.'—is more of a rousing speech than anything analytical, as of course he never says what he means by 'socialism'.
Foot's book (1990) dates after the 'fall' of the USSR, which he thought was a magical event attributed to millions of oppressed Russians and east Europeans. Probably the truth is the Jews running it made such a mess of things that they decided to move, after of course legally tying up major assets as best they could.
Foot despaired of political parties; he noted that every Labour government left the country with more unemployment when they were voted out than when they started; and Conservative governments built more council housing than Labour. But he had no idea of the influence of finance on political parties. So all his comments on 20th-Century 'democracies' are more or less worthless.
Readers on the 'Frankfurt School' will appreciate that many of Foot's views are inexplicable without the Jewish hypothesis. For example, Penguin published Immigration and Race in British Politics for him in 1965, before Enoch Powell's famous but evasive 1967 speech. And yet what could Foot know of race, or immigration, or politics, aged about 25? Near the end of his book (page 87) he gives three examples of 'fighting minorities': the Vietnam Solidarity Campaign, 'the Anti Nazi league in the 1970s', and the anti-poll tax movement. The first of these 'went a long way to changing people's attitudes to the Vietnam War': in fact knowledge of the Vietnam genocide was and still is censored by the Jewish media, presumably because it would show up the likes of Kissinger as amongst the most evil people who have ever lived. The second of course was pure anti-free speech thuggery, another typical Jewish activity. Poll tax activity was pretty much an unimportant diversion. So we find that the 'Frankfurt School' hypothesis fits the real world far better than Foot's tendentious inaccuracies.
However the main point here may be that Foot, aged over 50, having spent his entire life on nothing but politics, and convinced that huge changes may soon happen, could give no description of 'socialism'. Paul Foot was a pure example of the hard-working 'useful idiot'.
Back to top
IAN HISLOP [b 1960] editor of Private Eye from 1986Hislop as far as I know was a backroom figure for a few years, presumably, if the provisional thesis of this piece is more or less right, being 'groomed' to present a pro-Jewish and anti-white front. He was under thirty and it's not credible to me that he could have built up an independent world view of his own.
On the Jewish issue, it appears to be the case that Hislop is exceptionally tiny; possibly this could be some genetic characteristic, though so far as I know not geneticist has commented. Of course, it may not be.
He appeared from 1990 on BBC television in Have I Got News For You, largely with Paul Merton as something like a double act. The news is always official pseudo-news, and the 'guests' generally comedians or actors; no serious people get invitations (unless Ken Livingstone and Boris Osman are regarded as serious). In view of this free advertising, it's remarkable that Private Eye sales stayed low.
(A reminder: I'd say anti-white racism (whites as deserving to be exterminated), and omission of mention of Jewish activities are the leading media news drivers. For example, promoting miscegenation, promoting illegal and any other immigration, and not reporting crimes against whites are priorities; as are refusing to mention facts about Jewish 'holy books', and such Jewish activities as use of paper money for Jewish purposes, promoting and profiting from wars, and using white women as prostitutes. Wider perspectives include concealment of the parts played by Jews in slavery, and the continuing lying about Germany and the Holohoax and other Jewish frauds. The reader may like to watch episodes of Have I Got News For You, perhaps on BBC's iPlayer, or perhaps Youtube, and judge whether the BBC are guided by something of that sort).
Private Eye writers Craig Brown - British 'alternative' media as a fake
Craig Brown: The Lost Diaries Amazon removed this review!
Satire and cowardice don't mix—disappointingly lightweight and superficial
Craig Brown writes parodies for Private Eye, a [British] magazine with an unjustified reputation for serious news exposure, and has written for years; his pieces typically occupying about half an Eye page. About 26 each year, therefore. I'm unsure if he has written 365 by now; quite possibly he's been at it for more than fifteen years. There may be some copyright issue with Private Eye; Hislop is listed as his 'editor' and the sources are not made clear. [NB for American readers, Hislop is on a 'current affairs' TV programme called 'Have I Got News for You'—mostly politically correct garbage]. However, I recognised some fragments originally in the Eye—our Queen explaining what a railway train is to Tony Blair, 'Ming' Campbell on Saddam Hussein being no friend of the Lib Dems, Michael Winner in a ridiculous anthropophagy story. Most of the 'diary entries' are too short to have been printed unchanged.
A cover blurb from the failing 'Sunday Times' says Brown's the 'greatest living satirist'. So what do we find here? This collection, or rewrite, is indexed, and as many names as possible are shoehorned in—thus a Shirley Williams reference proved only to be a mention in passing, not a joke diary entry. Many seem oddly dated, for example Edward Heath. There are such people as Clive Bell and Racine and Lord Lucan and George V; maybe some date coincidence justified their presence. But, given a quarter century or more, what a potential feast we have—ingredients spread on display perhaps including our Archbishop of Canterbury, a political appointee selected by a war criminal; Tony Benn, a consummate hypocrite; Ken Livingstone, Mandelson—well; whole clutches of official state media people—Yentob, Clive James, Dimblebeys, Barry Norman; Callaghan, Major, sundry shadows. I'd have liked some satire at the expense of Susan Greenfield. (And Brian Cox. Maybe Dawkins)—too much to hope for, though. Diane Abbott? What about various black appointees who embezzled? What about the Stephen Lawrence propaganda fest? Maybe Dizaei (I think) and 'black police officers' introducing their cultural traits to Britain? Perhaps a Rothschild advising the Queen—surely there's satirical scope for comments on the murder of the Romanovs by Jews in Russia, maybe with smart rejoinders about German royalty?
Sadly, there's little of any merit. Brown has a narrow range of techniques: one is cartoonish exaggeration as with Winner—another example is Roger Scruton mounting a horse backwards. This can work—there's Esther Rantzen complaining about tight belts, though I have to say that plump Daily Mail chap did it better. Another is language, obviously—there's a simple divide between chavs and soap 'stars'—his Madonna has an American accent, and Jonathan Woss says "gweat"—and more-or-less literary figures (such as Hitchens—nothing on Elie Weisel—Isaiah Berlin, A L Rowse, Anthony Burgess etc) who are mostly pastiched with long words, as their underlying outlooks and concepts seem out of Brown's range. (The Dalai Lama pieces... couldn't Brown have done a bit of background work? Harold Pinter and Antonia Fraser—ditto; not just a bit of foul-mouthed stuff touched with east end slang!) As a thought substitute there are walk-on parts for such as Murdoch and Kissinger, both handled with kid gloves.
Omitted names, in no particular order, as well as those listed above, include Andrew Neather, any Dimbleby, any BBC boss e.g. Dyke, J K Rowling, heads of any of the Civil Service, Intelligence, military, the Commission on Equality and Human Rights, the MacPherson Report, asylum barristers—surely there's food for the satirist there!!
An odd omission is Eye writers. Wheen, author of a very useless book on a serious topic, is missing. So is Booker. So is Hislop—a horrible prematurely aged pig-faced little clown, posing for his TV sound bites on Diane, 9/11, or whatever, obvious lies with obviously fake canned laughter. Nor his holiday novelist wife, who seems to thinks nice girls should forever get taxpayers' money for non-jobs..
Just as people of the defunct USSR must sometimes stumble across an old issue of Krokodil and gaze in wonder at its restricted little grubby porthole on the world, so must Craig Brown's books be viewed. Shallowness and parody don't mix; neither do satire and cowardice mix. Avoid this book.
The Best of 'Dear Bill' by Richard Ingrams and John Wells (published by Andre Deutsch .. guess what) has Private Eye pieces from 1980-1985 under the general rubric 'Dear Bill' - letters to 'Bill' from Denis Thatcher, husband of Margaret Thatcher, up to about half way through her nominal Prime Minister-ship.
It's really quite extraordinary what trash this book is. Denis Thatcher had oil interests, and probably some covert interests, combined with perhaps some awareness of the oil world. Nothing of this appears in these 'letters'; he's presented solely as a drunkard who dislikes every type of human being; I won't spell anything out, as the book certainly doesn't warrant it, but typically if Thatcher went to Japan, or the USA, or France, or Germany, or Switzerland, or Downing Street, or Arab countries, the two authors presumably amused themselves assembling contemptuous commentaries in slang they assumed Thatcher would use.
However the serious business—Thatcher's retinue and support of Jews, anxious to get their hands on Britain's public assets; Reagan's retinue of Jews, ditto, don't appear at all. Wars, the then-current damage by Jews to South Africa, white workers ... all are treated as nothing. And this is not satire; serious satire of course includes reference to actualities. So far as I know, Wells was just another public school nonentity, amiable and vacant, and with no intellectual interests at all. He was given some free TV publicity for his theatre show 'Anyone for Denis', I'd guess by the BBC.
Private Eye writers Francis Wheen
OVERVIEW:Francis Wheen: How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World
Very likely another Jewish liar ... 6th Feb 2013
I wrote a dismissive review of Wheen's book How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World in 2010, unaware at the time he was deputy editor of Private Eye magazine. In fact, he seems to have worked there something like a quarter of a century by now. A bit of burrowing reveals he wrote a book on Karl Marx; and also 'won an Isaac Deutscher prize', Deutscher being a pro-Stalin Jew, whose wife, amusingly, thought Trotsky would have been a better catch. His surname may be cognate with e.g. Vaughan, Whine. All this of course puts him right on the jadar screen. Tantalisingly, I found he'd had a fire: his extremely valuable collection of books and papers, stored in what looked like a garden shed, had gone up in flames, sufficiently intense to completely destroy the structure and evidence. I remember being told by a printer that books are rather difficult to burn; water is the enemy of books.
Anyway ... How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World is not about a legendary African monster. And it's not about 'how' absurdities are spread. Rather it's an account of topics in the same style as American skeptics groups, covering anything except what's important. Wheen starts his book with a preamble on the 'Enlightenment', I'd guess relying on university memories of official history, emphasising the USA (not Germany, apart from bits on Kant and Hegel!), then another starting-point: he dates the modern world of 'Mumbo-Jumbo' from 1979, with Ayatollah Khomeini and Iran, and Margaret Thatcher. It's difficult to know if any of this is intended seriously; journalists like to be thought clever, without having to think (Bertrand Russell's words). The endnotes reveal the way the book was constructed: about half the material taken from ordinary newspapers, about 1/4 taken from think-tanks—generally the Jewish race or money ones—and the remaining quarter quotes books. As a result the book is almost unendurable to plough through—it's one press-cutting after another, with little discernible thread of logic.
The entire book follows the Jewish agenda. One has to assume this is conscious and deliberate. For example (page 85) '... many post-modernists seemed to accept the demise of socialism and the success of capitalism as immutable facts of life. ...' In fact of course the Jewish-run USSR and its unfortunate satellites was never 'socialist'. And for that matter the successor regimes, also controlled by Jewish paper money, weren't capitalist either. As regards the USA, around page 30 is a discussion on junk bonds etc: '... Boesky ... bought stock in companies which ... were targeted for takeover shortly afterwards. ... Dennis Levine was tipping him off... Michael Milken['s] ... high-risk, high-yield 'junk bonds' [converted] ... equity into debt to finance the merger mania. ... T Boone Pickens and Sir James Goldsmith ... would acquire a menacingly large stake in a company and then terrify the firm's owners into buying it back... economic tsunami of 19 October 1987 ... What saved it was... the new chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Alan Greenspan, who flooded the market with cheap credit..' No doubt this is romanticised to hide the obviously fraudulence, but the point here is that the Jewish connections go unremarked, notably the two-tier system with Jews controlling the issue of paper money. Wheen says nothing about the more decorous, but perhaps just as disastrous, link between Thatcher and Keith Joseph, and getting British public assets into private (i.e. read Jewish) hands. There's more similar stuff on the dot com pseudo-boom. The Islamic material condemns Muslims from several viewpoints, including the fake attribution of 9/11, and their bases for anti-Americanism such as Palestine and numerous coups and wars are omitted; but Judaism is just as backward and in fact historically the two cults are inter-related. But there is no discussion of Jews as superstitious and vicious. There are accounts of anti-evolution American citizens and other absurdly simple people—Reagan and Diana Spencer as just two examples—but there's nothing on Jews promoting anti-white immigration, anti-white laws and what have you. Wheen discusses military budgets of the USA, but the beneficiaries, presumably Jews, are, I suppose I need hardly say, never discussed.
The only thing that struck me as interesting was the material in the chapter with the typically rather vague title 'The demolition merchants of reality'. (Vague titles permit material to be inserted or moved around later). This deals with 'deconstruction' and such people as the Jew Derrida. Eagleton, Barthes and others figure, but the introduction describes Colin MacCabe, in an English department, in 1981, in a tussle faintly resembling A J P Taylor vs Hugh Trevor-Roper a couple of decades earlier. In that previous case, Taylor, pro-Jewish and probably actually Jewish, lost—and Private Eye always used 'Hugh Very-Ropey' as their selected pseudonym for the winner. (I'm not suggesting he was anything other than very ropy, by the way). MacCabe lost his academic battle, in the short term, making up for it by accepting positions based on his new renown. But, again, there was a Jewish link. One of the ideas of 'deconstruction' is the idea that reality (or language, or texts, or something) is a 'construct' or 'social construct'. In the same way Boas pretended race didn't exist, many Jews like a fluctuating model of the world. Pragmatism had the same purpose: if Jews control propaganda, what they say is 'truth'. Anyway—before reading Wheen I'd missed this rather obvious fact. I suppose I should be grateful.
Fortieth anniversary issue (#1040) 15 Nov 2001[1] Cover design to the right. I think it's fair to say the joke is feeble.
[2] Note: this issue was fairly soon after Sept 11 2001 (more than six weeks), enough, presumably, for their sharp fearless teams of well-informed contacts to alert them to funny business. I counted 25 more-or-less definite references to 9/11, now known of course to have been a staged and documented 'Jewish lightning' style fraud, followed up with money-making by bombing hapless Muslims, and by imposition of controls on US and other citizens. Jewish media control allows more or less indefinite lies, including faking and making-up of mythical groups and people. The twenty-five items are:–
• Five bin Laden mentions. A faked interview of a supposed bin Laden's son in the Jewish Sunday Mirror/ 98+ callers urged on by Jewish-porn-owned Daily Sport to phone an MP who opposed bombing/ 'Our own [anonymous] correspondent' in Delhi on e.g. treacherous medieval Afghan Warlords, the CIA, and a Pakistani deputation to negotiate bin Laden's surrender/ spot the bin Laden style cartoon
• Two 'Taliban' mentions: someone called Abdul Haq, who they'd 'revealed' in the last issue planted a bomb (in 1984). And Blair, then Prime Minister, telling lies about a 'respected' BBC World Service reporter, who, presumably, told Private Eye herself.
• Ten 'War on Terror' mentions: two captioned photo jokes (e.g. 'We find Bin Laden, kill him, arrest him, try him and ... er ... if we don't find him we overthrow his friends or at least some of them and ... er.. everyone clear?')/ 'Warballs' quotations on the effect of 9/11 on opticians' sales, digital youth media, bridal retailers../ a joke using the Jewish-owned Sun logo with a confused piece on going into action, possibly a comment on 'British' muslims/ A joke mock-Hansard Prime Ministers Question Time interchange with vicious MPs/ newspaper joke about saturation bombardment of British people with 'articles on the war on terror'/ Joke with Bush getting the words 'tourism' and 'terrorism' mixed up/ A cartoon joke about Kate Adie, a token woman autocue reader/ Saatchi and Saatchi, a Jewish advertising agency given one million pounds to encourage young men to join the British army/ Metropolitan Police [i.e. London] Commander Stevens on recruitment of agents etc to murder etc
• Four Anthrax mentions: Joke Daily Mail mockup with headline: 'Anthrax Threat to House Prices/ two cartoon jokes/ gas mask joke
• One 9/11 insurance claim. Quite an interesting item, since Private Eye is not known for its informed comment on international insurance. It states 'some cynical sub-editor at the [Jewish-owned] F[inancial] T[imes]' placed an article on how obvious it is that the leaseholder should be paid for damage to both insured towers. (Readers may remember that Silverstein took legal action on this point, and was later duly rewarded).
• Three miscellaneous: 'Gnome' on 'terrible events'/ supposedly inconsistent quotations on asylum seekers—supposed refugees from supposed Taliban supposed to be entitled to come to Britain!/ and part of a letter including 'congratulations on your coverage of Armageddon'
Cynics will notice the complete adherence to the Jewish line, and support for war. There is absolutely no suggestion of investigation into the obviously absurd claims of building collapse, UN inquiry, military inquiry, or any other such civilised activity.
[3] Afghanistan bomb. Unusually, there's a technical-ish item on bombs being dropped by C-130 gunships, and BLU-82 bombs 'killing indiscriminately over a wide area.' The width of the area is not specified. Nor is the cost, or who profits from making these things.
[4] Note elsewhere in the issue: We have received a great many letters on the MMR vaccine, and this subject will be addressed in the next issue. Ed. I have no way to tell how many (if any) letters they actually received, but the collective knowledge of the Eye people on vaccination could be fitted in large font on a postage stamp. I wonder how many people were drawn into thinking Eye had either the expertise, or willingness to act?
[5] Note on English style: one of the odd things about the Eye is its curious literary style, usually of the 'dying fall' theatrical type. The traditional guides to English (Fowler, Gowers, Strunk etc) all of course advocate straightforward, direct, clear, etc etc wording. The Eye owes more (I think) to Rhetoric, which was a pre-modern subject, and in fact still exists as a subject in some Universities. Possibly their style was modelled on Alistair Cooke, whose BBC radio Letter from America, a programme that continued for years, managed by imply and suggest and hint with virtually no reliable factual bases. I think he started by deciding what he intended to imply, then wrote down a number of associations, and then again with more; and then orated them in the reverse order, editing down or up to fill the time-slot.
[6] Is Private Eye coached in evasiveness, or perhaps gives lessons in this subject? When several of us compiled a piece on medical negligence in private hospitals in Britain, and its concealment by lawyers, we wondered if the techniques are taught, or whether they emerged by default, as thorny topics were avoided. We never found out.
[7] Note on legal action. For all the pretensions of the Eye there's a depressing example here in the 2001 issue; an accountant accused of overcharging, the amounts by Eye standards being tiny. (Illustration, right)
Back to top
The Premiership [sic] ... (ITV)


text:
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
Badmovies.org Home
B-Movie Reviews
Reader Reviews
Capsule Reviews
TV Show Reviews
Rated PG-13
Copyright 1971 American International Pictures
Reviewed by
Andrew Borntreger
on 3 June 2001
The Characters:
Dr. Phibes - Vincent Price! A revenant intent on destroying the people who may or may not have been responsible for his wife's death. He is completely evil, but guess who you'll be cheering for during the whole film.
Victoria Phibes - Beautiful even in death, though her husband's penchant for talking to her silk screen image is creepy.
Vulnavia - Assists the abominable doctor and you might suspect she is his daughter (nope). Has her face burned off by acid.
Inspector Trout - One of Scotland Yard's finest officers and long suffering due to everyone mistaking him for another species of freshwater fish. Let me tell you, Englishmen are darn funny by default.
Dr. Vesalius - Surgeon who is frightfully adept at dissecting his own son. People are sure to talk after this movie is over.
The Victims - Man, I wouldn't want to be one of these individuals. Doomed! They're all doomed!
The Plot:
Readers may have noticed, usually I do not like "artsy" films. This is due to the fact that often they are little more than "grand and visionary images" repeated over and over. So, keeping that in mind, some friends are surprised I regard this title as a nearly perfect black comedy. Look at the cast though, everyone plays their roles with deadly serious poise and the hero is a
murderous genius!
Not so much that we are intended to love Phibes as a character (and we are), but he is far too charismatic and inventive not to like.
Trout is investigating the curious deaths of a few doctors around London when he comes to the conclusion that something is amiss. The first two really do not peak his interest, even though one man was stung to death by a swarm of bees (boils) in his room and another ripped to shreds by bats. Might I remind you, these deaths occurred in the middle of London. Not precisely the sort of locale that supports populations of killer bees or genetically engineered bats. Work with me here, Flying Foxes are really
too cute
for the bloodthirsty part they play, but something scratched that man to death. Anyway, Pike - I mean Trout, realizes that foul business is afoot when one man has his skull crushed by a mechanical frog mask.
Victoria Phibes died during an operation (exactly what is not explained) and her grieving husband was presumed dead after his car drove off a cliff and burned. Unfortunately for the doctors, the man either has the greatest immune system ever known or is an undead avenger (I'm partial to the latter explanation myself). Biding his time, he devised a fiendish plan to kill anyone involved with Victoria's death. Nothing simple like a knife or bullet either. Phibes will visit a deadly plague, derived from what Moses called down upon the Pharaoh, on each and every person.
We, the audience, are privy to the extraordinary lengths Dr. Phibes is going to for revenge. Whether he is intensely playing the pipe organ that dominates the grand ballroom of his hideout or gracefully dancing with Vulnavia, the man has style. Nobody else is there to see, save the incredible clockwork musicians playing music, so the performances solely gratify Phibes' strange tastes.
Probably the most chilling end is that of Dr. Longstreet. Lulled into a dreamy state by Vulnavia, he allows himself to be bound to a chair. Then Phibes walks in and fixes the old horny coot with a reproachful stare (I love the look he gives the victims) before inserting a large needle into the man's arm. Attached to the tube is a pint jar and the glass container begins to fill as Phibes slowly works the pump. He artfully drains every single drop of blood from the poor man, leaving him a gray husk and placing all eight pints on the mantel. I've watched hundreds of slasher flicks and few scenes have ever really deserved a second thought. Watching a man's blood being leisurely pumped from his body made my hair stand on end.
Gruesome as it may be, the last victim's end provides Trout with a much-needed clue. Phibes had a set of pendants specially made; each has a Hebrew symbol representing one of the plagues. He wears the respective pendant when executing each sentence and lost the one for blood during Longstreet's initial thrashing. Between visiting a jeweler and a Rabbi, the inspector is able to start piecing things together. Fat lot of good it will do.
Impressive powers of deduction (actually he or one of his servants spent hours sorting through folders) enable Vesalius to volunteer that all the deceased were involved in the failed surgery on Victoria Phibes. Despite knowing this, two more are killed before the authorities get the remainder under police protection. Still no good; Trout and another inspector actually open the door for number seven when a brass unicorn head (beasts) is catapulted across the street, skewering him. Then there's the problem of removing the victim from the wall, resulting in a scene that really cracks me up.
As the audience might notice, the protagonist is ingeniously cruel. He honestly believes these doctors and the nurse are responsible for his beloved's death. Phibes spends a great deal of time talking to her image and even wears latex facial features over his burned visage, thereby appearing more or less normal. Okay, so he must speak through a phonograph (attached to him by cable). What of it? He ingests food and drink via the back of his neck too! In fact, while brewing up a special batch of Brussels sprout syrup (egad, imagine that on pancakes), he tastes the concoction. Disgusting slurping sounds result, causing my imagination to speculate: what sort of orifice was located on the back of this man's neck? Considering the tongue's roll in that sense, how does he taste anything?
Now, about that mind-boggling health syrup; it is used to facilitate the nurse's murder. She is a little distraught and sent to bed with a sleeping pill. Unbeknownst to the officer standing guard outside her door, the villain has entered the room above and drilled a hole through the ceiling. He then applies a liberal coating of Brussels sprout syrup to the comatose woman before goading a number of famished locusts down the pipe. Hehehe! Someone who has been sedated might not wake up if a few wood chips fall, but having their nose and mouth filled with that disgusting molasses should rouse them. Let alone when the hungry hoppers start eating their face off!
The police are nearly beside themselves, but at least they have Dr. Vesalius where nobody can get to him and... ...oh no! The ninth plague was death of the firstborn and Vesalius Jr. is at home alone! Phibes has struck again, but this time he devised a way to torture the surgeon and test his mettle. Vesalius must remove a key lodged near his son's heart before a deadly shower of acid rains down from above. While the father rushes to split his child open the abominable organist descends into a crypt where his wife awaits. Fittingly, Dr. Phibes saved the last plague (darkness) for himself.
I'm at a loss to explain why the protagonist is such a charming character. Vincent Price being one of my favorite actors probably has a lot to do with it; add to that the dedication and imagination he displays and we have a winner. And this is a person visiting grisly ends upon nearly a dozen people who very likely do not deserve them. Victoria died on the operating table while an obviously experienced group was trying to save her life. Did one of the surgeons tug on something they shouldn't have? Since Phibes does appear to be a revenant (although I have a disturbing theory about Vulnavia that pops up in
the sequel
), this appears to prove her life was unfairly cut short. We cannot tell for certain.
Dr. Freex and myself are have a mini roundtable this weekened! Enjoy a double shot of Vincent Price on both sites and you will soon find yourself slavering for more. More. MORE!
The Bad Movie Report:
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
The Bad Movie Report:
Dr. Phibes Rises Again
Dr. Phibes Rises Again
Things I Learned From This Movie:
Women can change quickly when they want to.
Fruit bats are, strangely enough, carnivorous.
In the old days watching a porn film would get your arm tired; no matter what.
The Vulcan Nerve Pinch is common knowledge.
Never stand directly in front of a high velocity snow cone machine.
Most small plane crashes are caused by rat infestations.
Having to drink champagne though a hole in the back of your neck sort of ruins the debonair image.
At one point Egypt was beset by a plague of unicorns.
Locusts can eat fifty times their own body weight -
in human flesh!
Stuff To Watch For:
Opening Credits - What films did Samuel Z. Arkoff not produce?
13 mins - Every time I start playing an organ in the middle of the night my neighbors call the police on me...
26 mins - Oops!
30 mins - Would you give somebody, who is that freaky looking, a sharp instrument and tell them to circumcise your son?
48 mins - He burned to death so they just went ahead and cremated him? Is this practical or ironic?
58 mins - Hehehe! Look at those feet go around! A perfect example of rigor mortis instantaneous.
63 mins - Okay, obviously only a madman would carefully inspect Brussels sprouts for quality.
67 mins - I wonder who finally came up with the idea of filling those with air.
86 mins - RANDOM ACTS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST EVERYTHING IN THE ROOM!
Trout: "Oh, don't take him out like that! At least cover his face up...what's left of it."
Phibes: "Nine killed you, nine shall die! Nine eternities in doom!"
Audio clips in wav format
Starving actors speak out
Trout's Boss: "Anyway, medical men die every day."
Trout: "I'm aware of that sir."
Trout's Boss: "Good. They're composed of the same flesh and blood as you and I."
Trout: "I'm aware of that too sir. I happen to have seen rather a lot of their flesh and blood in the past few days."
Trout: "Somebody is using these ancient biblical curses to kill everyone associated with the Phibes' operation. But, I mean: the husband's dead, there's no children, it all happened ages ago - so who the hell are we looking for?"
Trout's Boss: "A brass unicorn has been catapulted across a London street and impaled an eminent surgeon. Words fail me, gentlemen."
Phibes taunting Dr. Vesalius.
Click for a larger image
Scenes from the movie
Watch a scene
MPEG video files
- 3.0m
Trout thought that this doctor would be safe once he was in protective custody. He didn't plan on Phibes chucking a brass unicorn head across the street.
Leave a comment
Buy the movie
Stumble This Review
Digg This Review
Buy it from Amazon.com
(United States)
Internet Movie Database
Write Comment
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
Reply #25.
Posted on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM by phibesfan
I don't believe I,ve seen a bad Vincent Price movie. He really get,s into character. Phibes rules!
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
Reply #26.
Posted on November 25, 2006, 04:09:03 PM by Rhatt
Only Vincent could do that name justice.
My all time favorite B-movie, altho at the time it was the scariest thing.
The House that Dripped Blood. Another of those icky-ooky movies. Christopher Lee I believe in that.
Now I gotta find these on DVD.....
Honey....popcorn run!!!!
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
Reply #27.
Posted on November 21, 2005, 12:27:08 PM by IT
My favorite of all Vincent Price movies.The scene with the man in the frog mask was my favorite death scene .Vulnavia was my favorite character she was more evil then the good doctor himself. I would marry her myself.I give it six stars.
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
Reply #28.
Posted on February 09, 2006, 02:06:07 PM by Ron Weiskopf
I also loved the movie, but one thing got me really puzzled. The Rabbi says nobody knows the order of the plagues, and the movie takes some liberties there (e.g. the death of the first born was the last plague, not the ninth). All anyone needs to do to find out the order is to read Exodus, where everything is spelled out in great detail.
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
Reply #29.
Posted on November 25, 2006, 04:10:12 PM by Terry Smith
The wave files were well chosen and brought back memories - but a decent "Viictoooooorriaa' is as canonical as a Moriaty [tm:goons]"AOooooooowwwww".
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
Reply #30.
Posted on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM by charles peterson
I love the Dr. Phibes shows so much and I have not been able to find the shows, is there a way to buy the dvd's without a credit card. I do not have one but I want the Dr. Phibes movies so bad. The scarey shows now just can not touch the Dr. Phibes at all. Let me know if I can sent a check or money order to get this movie. Thank You.
Re: The Abominable Dr. Phibes
Reply #31.
Posted on January 16, 2007, 02:23:19 AM by T. J. Davis
This is probably my favorite horror movie (along with its sequel). The dark humor of Mr. Price is at its best in this film, and its a really great movie to view if you've had a falling out with a doctor. This is one of the few movies (if not the only one) I've ever watched where you really hope the bad guy (?) gets away with it. I can not say enough good about this darkly humorous film masterpiece (yes, I said masterpiece).
I had the wonderful chance to see Vincent Price do a lecture back in the late 1970's regarding his horror film roles, a memory I cherish very much from that time. Near the end of his lecture, Mr. Price took questions from the audience, and one of the questions he was asked was; -What was your favorite horror film roll?
Mr. Price responded, that most people seem to best remember him as the crazed guy at the lever in "The Pit And The Pendulum", laughing maniacally as the blade swings over his helpless victim. But, as for himself, he would have to say his personal favorite horror roll was "The Abominable Doctor Phibes". He went on to explain that he had come into films well into the sound era, so he had completely missed out on the silent movie era where it was important to "emote", or exaggerate for the camera to make your character understood, an acting "style" that he had always longed to try on film. The character of Dr. Phibes aforded him this chance.
As you may recall from the film, Dr. Phibes must use a sort of speaking apparatus (the victrola thing he plugs into his neck) to enable him to speak due to his injuries, so his character never moves his lips. Only his throat moves a bit when lines are given. Mr. Price explained that in order to make the character of Phibes work, he had to use the same "emoting" techniques (eyes and posture) as were used by actors during the silent film era. He would "facially act" the lines of Phibes, and later the soundtrack of Phibe's stumbling speech (as spoken by Price) would be dubbed in, so he had to "think" his lines as he acted, or responded to the other actors, all the while making the small swallowing movements with his throat to show that something was happening in his throat to make the sound of his character's voice.... a subtle, but important little nuance to make Phibes all the more real.
And in perfect Price style, he ended his lecture by reading Edger Allen Poe's "The Raven"... with that, I am certain that he made a couple of hundred people's night, as no one else before, or even since, can deliver lines by Poe with that kind of flourish and style. This was the genius of Vincent Price... and like many fans of the late, late movies... he is very much missed.
Re: The Abominable Dr. Phibes
Reply #32.
Posted on January 23, 2007, 12:22:59 AM by
When you walk into my house, the first thing you see is the "Love means never having to say you're ugly" poster for
The Abominable Dr. Phibes.
No horror film ever captured my imagination in the way this one did. After growing up on a steady diet of lumbering monsters in the Universal horrors, Phibes was a revelation. Not only did Dr. Anton Phibes possess a Rube Goldbergian genius for dispatching his victims, he was actually the romantic hero of
and its sequel.
I remember running home from school in order to catch the yearly Halloween broadcast of
The Abominable Dr. Phibes
before it started, and I was a lazy kid. This was the only time I remember running.
Share on Facebook
Subscribe by RSS
Subscribe by Email
Recommended Articles
How To Find A Bad Movie
The Champions of Justice
Plan 9 from Outer Space
Manos, The Hands of Fate
Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk
Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!
The Human Tornado
The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed
Godzilla vs. Monster Zero
Do you have a zombie plan?
The Giant Claw
Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.
Lesson Learned:
Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.
Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:
B-Movie Reviews
Reader Reviews
TV Shows
Badmovies.org is owned and operated by
Andrew Borntreger
. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with
Fair Use
, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
B Collection Men's Knit Look Fleece Jacket - Blue - Size 3XL
Enter your postcode or suburb to display delivery options for this product
Product Features:
- Marled design
- Soft fleece lining
- Zip up front
- High neckline
- Front pockets
- Pocket with zipper closure
- Polyester make
- Machine washable
Care InstructionsWash before wear
Warm machine wash
Do not bleach
Do not tumble dry
Warm iron
Do not dryclean
Brand NameB Collection
Article Number1035731
FREE Same Day Pick up
Pick up allows you to buy online and Pick up in any BIG W store 7 days per week.
If your order is placed by 12 noon, it will be ready for Pick up from 4pm same day. If your order is placed after 12 noon, then it will be ready for collection from 10am the following day.
See here for more information on Pick up.
Home Delivery
Want to have your order delivered? See here for more information on our delivery options.
Warranty, Return & Refunds Policy
We understand that sometimes you may wish to return a product you have purchased. So we have set out here our Warranty, Return and Refund Policy for our products.
These stock levels are constantly changing and the information shown is accurate as at 2 hours ago.


text:
Get Started with Buffer for free. No credit card required! All prices are all-inclusive as opposed to a "per team member" cost.
3 Social Profiles
10 Scheduled Posts per Profile
8 Social Profiles
100 Scheduled Posts per Profile
25 Social Profiles
2,000 Scheduled Posts per Profile
5+ Additional Team Members
Want to see the full details for each plan?
Unisa Women's Balanabw Trainers Black Black Black cheap price factory outlet view sale online free shipping clearance UhFkGn18k
Get started with your 14-day free trial. No credit card required! All prices are all-inclusive as opposed to a "per team member" cost.
25 Social Accounts
5 Team Members
50 Social Accounts
10 Team Members
150 Social Accounts
25 Team Members
150+ Social Accounts
25+ Team Members
Don't quite need all the power of Buffer for Business? Check out our Free Pro Plans
Buffer manages your publishing and analytics. We do have a separate product,
Geox Mens U843FA Uomo Ravex Closed Black in China sale online footlocker finishline cheap price high quality cheap online eastbay cheap online nvUBZ82
, which allows you to engage with your audience on Twitter Facebook.
Yes! Buffer intergrates with a tool called Bulk Buffer , which allows you to bulk upload your posts and save even more time.
Buffer accepts all major credit cards and pre-paid cards. You can also pay through your iTunes account. Unfortunately we are not able to accept payments via PayPal nor are we able to issue invoices and receive checks as payment. We're really sorry for the limitations there. We'd love to explore more payment methods in the future!
Get all the latest hints and tips on improving your social media with the Buffer Social BlogRead the latest
Join us for a 60-minute webinar where we'll walk through the features of Buffer for BusinessJoin a free webinar
What to find out more?
Gabor Women's Fashion Ballet Flats Black buy cheap good selling oX3eB7vOA
Compartmentalization need-to-know-basis is a mind control strategy to contain and control the field of academics, scientists, military and government personnel who are complicit in carrying out the destructive and harmful behavior of the
cheap sale official pictures Pepe Jeans Men's Jayden Tech Trainers 999Black Grey Stone 836 where to buy buy cheap manchester great sale UC3gGqKp
and Native Apollo Moc Embroidered Jiffy Black Shell White Shell Rubber Black outlet for nice WWFrp
, and are rewarded monetarily and socially for going along with reinforcing the alien invasion of our planet and enslavement of humanity.
If a person or group operates in and environment on which your scientific funding or career is based on certain results and those results are focused in a very narrow area of research. If that person is just one of thousands of scientists, physicists and your focus is very detailed and minute, the person's psychology keep themselves compartmentalized so that they do not step outside of the box. Because people will ask that person, why are you asking questions like this, do you want to lose your job? The intimidation is used to blackball people that actually ask rational and intelligent questions. Most people are delusional from being deceived as a product of continual indoctrination and
Mind Control
, such as in the world of science and the military, by being a cog in the wheel of
Nike Good FDN Distress JDI Womens Shirt Grove Green/Blackgrove Green clearance sneakernews 2014 newest cheap online clearance best place supply cheap price iAjpnxKdAl
and the NAA .
Compartmentalization is the Mind Control method used to shut down and destroy open mindedness, critical thinking, independent thinking and creative thinking.
Compartmentalization is an unconscious psychological defense mechanism used to avoid cognitive dissonance, or the mental discomfort and anxiety caused by a person's having conflicting values, cognitions, emotions, beliefs, etc. within themselves. Compartmentalization allows these conflicting ideas to co-exist by inhibiting direct or explicit acknowledgement and interaction between separate compartmentalized self states. [1]
is a situation in which one member will not communicate directly with another member, but will communicate with a third member, which can lead to the third member becoming part of the triangle. The concept originated in the study of dysfunctional family systems, but can describe behaviors in other systems as well, including work. This is a common method to spin disinformation between multiple parties to increase compartmentalization within organizations or employ divide and conquer strategies. ( See
Les Tropéziennes par M Belarbi Women's Begonia Rear Flange Gold Or 642 outlet professional cheap get authentic clearance eastbay RZ4NBg
Splitting Behaviors
reinforce our sense of self as good and virtuous by effectively demonizing all those who do not share in our same opinions and values. Through the course of growing up from childhood into adulthood, we develop coping skills of labeling people, places or objects in the environment as acceptable or not acceptable, according to our belief systems. Ego defenses are similar to mental racketeering programs commonly used as coping mechanisms for reducing day-to-day anxiety, fears, and obsessions, which are related to thought addiction or the need to
shop sale online Vans Women's Old Skool Trainers Blackblack/Blanc De Blancmoto Leather how much cheap price 2014 cheap sale top quality sale online YhbZQO
. When we are addicted to our thoughts, we have lost balance with our feelings and sensory abilities. These allow us to be fully present in the moment and to be in receptive mode, in order to better discern the environment and its energies.
There is strong consensus that the diagnosis of CSS requires both the reproduction of spontaneous symptoms during CSM and clinical features of spontaneous syncope compatible with a reflex mechanism. The quality of evidence is moderate and is given by studies of ECG correlation between CSM and spontaneous events, and indirectly by studies of efficacy of cardiac pacing. Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimation of effect and may change the estimate.
Cardiac sinus massage
BP = blood pressure; CSM = carotid sinus massage; CSS = carotid sinus syndrome; TIA = transient ischaemic attack.
Cardiac sinus massage
BP = blood pressure; CSM = carotid sinus massage; CSS = carotid sinus syndrome; TIA = transient ischaemic attack.
Changing from the supine to the upright position produces a displacement of blood from the thorax to the lower limbs and abdominal cavity that leads to a decrease in venous return and cardiac output. In the absence of compensatory mechanisms, a fall in BP may lead to syncope. 20 , 103 , 104 The diagnostic criteria for OH have been defined by consensus. 6
Currently, there are three methods for assessing the response to change in posture from supine to erect 20 , 103 , 104 : active standing (see section 22.214.171.124), head-up tilt (see section 126.96.36.199), and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) (see section 184.108.40.206).
This test is used to diagnose different types of orthostatic intolerance (see Web Practical Instructions Web Table 1 ). A sphygmomanometer is adequate for routine clinical testing for classical OH and delayed OH because of its ubiquity and simplicity. Automatic arm-cuff devices, which are programmed to repeat and confirm measurements when discrepant values are recorded, are at a disadvantage due to the rapidly falling BP during OH. With a sphygmomanometer, more than four measurements per minute cannot be obtained without venous obstruction in the arm. When more frequent readings are required, as for initial OH, continuous beat-to-beat non-invasive BP measurement is needed. 20 , 103 , 104
Abnormal BP fall is defined as a progressive and sustained fall in systolic BP from baseline value ≥20 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥10 mmHg, or a decrease in systolic BP to <90 mmHg. This definition of OH differs from the 2011 consensus 6 in adding the 90 mmHg threshold. This Task Force believes that an absolute threshold of 90 mmHg of systolic BP is useful, especially in patients with a supine BP <110 mmHg. An isolated diastolic BP drop is very rare and its clinical relevance for OH diagnosis is limited. Orthostatic heart rate (HR) increase is blunted or absent [usually not >10 beats per minute (b.p.m.)] in patients with neurogenic OH, but increases or even exaggerates with anaemia or hypovolaemia. The probability that syncope and orthostatic complaints are due to OH can be assessed using the information given in Table 8 .
Psst. It's better sideways.
(Try me in landscape!)
How data science is woven into the fabric of Stitch Fix
At Stitch Fix, we're transforming the way people find what they love. Our clients want the perfect clothes for their individual preferences—yet without the burden of search or having to keep up with current trends. Our merchandise is curated from the market and augmented with our own designs to fill in the gaps. It's kept current and extremely vast and diverse—ensuring something for everyone. Rich data on both sides of this 'market' enables Stitch Fix to be a matchmaker, connecting clients with styles they love (and never would've found on their own).
Our business model enables unprecedented data science, not only in recommendation systems, but also in human computation, resource management, inventory management, algorithmic fashion design and many other areas. Experimentation and algorithm development is deeply engrained in everything that Stitch Fix does. We'll describe a few examples in detail as you scroll along.
So what does the data look like? In addition to the rich feedback data we get from our clients, we also receive a great deal of upfront data on both our clothing and our clients. Our buyers and designers capture dimension and style details, and our clients fill out a profile upon signup that's calibrated to get us the most useful data with the least client effort.
Let's first walk through the filling of a shipment request to see a few of the many algorithms that play a role in that process, before zooming out to view the bigger picture.
As noted, when a client first signs up, he or she fills out a Style Profile (it can be updated at any time). Then, scheduling a delivery is easy: an algorithm is used to populate a calendar from which she selects a delivery date.
Observational registries are another crucial way of elucidating real-life outcomes of newer drugs. Relevant studies in the management of patients with AF and the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) include global registries such as GLORIA-AF (GLObal RegIstry on long-term oral Antithrombotic treatment in patients with Atrial Fibrillation), 18 GARFIELD (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD) AF, 19 and GARFIELD VTE (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02155491); US registries such as ORBIT-AF (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation) 20 ; European registries such as PREFER in AF (PREvention oF thromboembolic events—European Registry in Atrial Fibrillation) 21 and PREFER in VTE 22 and regional registries such as Fushimi AF in Japan 23 and Dresden NOAC in Germany. 24 These and other studies will be described in further detail in later articles in this supplement.
Real-life data have an important role to play in the evaluation of short- and long-term drug safety in clinical practice; the effectiveness and safety of drugs in special populations; adherence; persistence; epidemiology and burden of disease; treatment patterns and health outcomes and cost. 25
Following the drug approval process, concerns remain regarding the safety of new drugs that are introduced into the marketplace. As mentioned, RCTs use strict inclusion and exclusion criteria to enrol a defined, homogenous patient population, which can limit the translatability of the results to clinical practice. 26 Real-life studies typically have limited exclusion criteria and involve a more heterogeneous population, including higher rates of non-compliant patients and more subjects with significant comorbidities. 26 In addition, RCTs usually last for a defined period of time, which may preclude the discovery of adverse events that result from long-term administration of a therapy. Therefore, it is important that safety signals are identified to ensure the best outcomes for the general population. Post-authorization safety studies are one example of how such real-life information may be elucidated.
Real-life studies can be used to assess the effectiveness of therapy in special populations, such as patients who have renal impairment, are overweight, or are elderly. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) constitutes a risk factor for thromboembolic events, stroke, and bleeding in patients with AF. 27 Real-life data have shown that VKA therapy is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of stroke and thromboembolism in those with CKD, but the risk of bleeding is also significantly increased. 27 According to the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) Practical Guide on the use of NOACs in patients with non-valvular AF, NOACs appear to be a reasonable choice for anticoagulant therapy in patients with mild-to-moderate CKD. 28 However, careful monitoring of renal function is required in patients with CKD who are receiving NOACs, since all undergo some form of renal clearance. 29–31 There are no outcome data for NOACs in patients with AF and severe CKD, and the current European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommend against their use in such patients. 32 Clinical experience with newer agents is limited, and more data from real-life studies in patients with CKD are warranted to optimize the potential benefits of treatment and minimize the potential harm in this high-risk and growing population.


text:
You are here
Corporate Partners
The medical industry is supportive of the mission and initiatives of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS). Corporations partner with SVS to advance the care of vascular patients through support of the Society's meetings, events and initiatives. Support of SVS programming and services provides a unique and valued opportunity to establish companies as an integral part of the vascular health community.
Partners are acknowledged through a recognition program that provides exposure, extends the corporate message and builds loyalty among vascular surgeons.
Thank you to SVS Corporate Partners
The Society for Vascular Surgery would like to thank the following companies for their support of the Vascular Annual Meeting and participation in the SVS Corporate Partners Program.
2016 SVS Corporate Contributors
The following are SVS corporate contributors for the April 1, 2015 - March 31, 2016 fiscal year:
- Abbott Vascular ($310,000)
- Argon Medical ($7,500)
- Bard Peripheral Vascular ($11,000)
- Boston Scientific ($150,000)
- Cook Medical, Inc. ($125,000)
- Cordis Corporation ($50,000)
- Covidien ($65,000)
- Endologix, Inc. ($30,000)
- Getinge Group ($5,000)
- Gore & Associates ($398,000)
- Medtronic ($20,000)
- Merk ($25,000)
- Sapheon Inc. ($15,000)
Twenty-five percent of SVS operating revenue for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016 was derived from industry support. Sixteen percent was from industry support for education, research, and the PSO; the remaining 9 percent was from industry exhibits and advertising at the Vascular Annual Meeting.
For more information see sponsorship opportunities and review the Guidelines for SVS Management of Relationships with Industry.


text:
The Tigers boys' golf team finishes third in a match in Lebanon, but their coach says he was pleased with the improvements he saw out of his young group
In a match on Monday that Waynesville's coach Rube Dowell said was more fitting for a polar golf match, the Tiger boys' golf team began it's season with a third place finish in a triangular match between WHS, Lebanon and School of the Osage.
With temperatures in the 30s and drizzling rain that turned into snow every so often, the three teams fought through it all to finish the meet.
Lebanon came out with the best team score, posting a 168. Osage finished second with a score of 196 and Waynesville came in with a total of 235.
While the scores won't exactly rouse excitement from anyone, Dowell said they do actually make him proud.
"Of our eight participants, only junior Wade Howser has more than one year of experience," Dowell said. "Howser completed his round in 47 strokes, just six behind meet medalist Aaron Shoemaker of Lebanon."
Dowell also said all of his golfers finished well below their season scoring average, which was a pleasant surprise for the first year head coach.
"I was anticipating only Howser to finish below double par, but all of them did," Dowell said. "That shows that their hard work in practice is paying off."
The Tigers have 14 golfers this season, with nine of them coming in as freshman.
Two of them took swings on the varsity squad on Monday — Fred Boone and Kevin Barrett— and both posted rounds of 62. Those marks are good for second lowest score on the team.
"Those two young men really played their hearts out and gained a lot of valuable knowledge for the futre," Dowell said. "I am looking forward to a great season with all of these young men. It is truly a treat to get an opportunity to coach so many new players and to be a part of their development."


text:
Illness and injuries don't always happen during normal office hours. That's why we have two urgent care options for our patients.
Our Urgent Care Center in Bellingham is for established Family Care Network patients (patients who have been seen previously by a Family Care Network doctor in one of our regular clinic locations).
Our North Cascade Urgent Care Clinic in Mount Vernon is open to all patients, even if you have not been seen by a Family Care Network doctor previously. Both locations can help you with urgent, non-emergency health issues that need immediate attention. Patients are seen on a first come, first serve basis (no appointments). Click on the photos at right for more information, including hours and directions.
Please check with your regular doctor before coming to urgent care, since some clinics have extended hours. Non-urgent appointments, such as sports physicals, CDL certification, and vaccinations, must be scheduled with your regular doctor.
Life-threatening emergencies should be seen at the hospital, or dial 911.