Sunday 16 June 2024

Chris Spivey is Back and Doing what he does Best...

A Bionic Man – Or Just Another Corrupt Little Man? raises suspicions about the circumstances surrounding the reported sepsis illness and quadruple amputation of British MP Craig Mackinlay. 

Renowned conspiracy writer Christopher D Spivey questions the timeline of events, the lack of media coverage until weeks after the alleged amputations, and perceived inconsistencies in the accounts provided by Mackinlay, his wife, and others, implying that the entire situation may have been fabricated or exaggerated, potentially as a government "psyop" (psychological operation). 

Spivey raises several suspicions and questions regarding the reported sepsis illness and quadruple amputation of British MP Craig Mackinlay:

  1. He questions the timeline of events, noting that there was a lack of media coverage about Mackinlay's condition until weeks after the alleged amputations occurred.

  2. He implies there are inconsistencies in the accounts provided by Mackinlay, his wife, and others regarding the circumstances surrounding his illness and treatment.

  3. Spivey suggests the entire situation may have been fabricated or exaggerated, potentially as part of a government "psyop" (psychological operation).

  4. He expresses scepticism towards the official narrative and implies there could be a coverup or deception involved.

The article by Christopher Spivey on his website presents a sceptical view of the circumstances surrounding British MP Craig Mackinlay's reported battle with sepsis that led to the amputation of both his hands and feet. Spivey expresses doubts about the official narrative and implies there could be a coverup or deception involved regarding Mackinlay's condition.

Timeline Inconsistencies

One of the main points raised by Spivey is the lack of media coverage about Mackinlay's illness and amputations until weeks after the alleged events occurred. He finds it suspicious that such a significant health crisis for a sitting MP did not receive immediate attention from the press. This perceived delay in reporting fuels Spivey's scepticism towards the official timeline provided.

Conflicting Accounts

Spivey also highlights what he views as inconsistencies in the accounts given by Mackinlay, his wife Kati, and others regarding the details of his illness, treatment, and recovery process. He implies that these differing narratives cast doubt on the veracity of the overall story being presented to the public.

Allegations of Fabrication or Exaggeration

Perhaps Spivey's most provocative claim is the suggestion that Mackinlay's entire medical situation may have been fabricated or grossly exaggerated, potentially as part of a government "psyop" (psychological operation). He does not provide concrete evidence for this allegation, but his tone conveys deep scepticism towards accepting the official version of events at face value.

Lack of Definitive Proof

It is important to note that while Spivey raises numerous questions and expresses suspicion, he does not offer definitive proof to substantiate claims of wrongdoing or deception by Mackinlay or others. The article relies heavily on speculation and a generally sceptical perspective towards the reported circumstances.

Mackinlay's Background and Career

To provide context, the other search results offer factual information about Mackinlay's background and political career. He was initially involved with the UK Independence Party (UKIP) before joining the Conservatives and being elected as an MP for South Thanet in 2015, defeating UKIP leader Nigel Farage. Mackinlay was later acquitted of charges related to allegedly falsifying election expenses during that campaign.

READ MORE - South Thanet Tory Craig Mackinlay charged over alleged 2015 election fraud

Before politics, Mackinlay had careers in chartered accountancy and as a magistrate, and also did volunteer work. These details shed light on his professional history and community involvement, though they do not directly address the controversies raised by Spivey.

Potential Conflicts of Interest

Some of the other search results highlight potential conflicts of interest involving Mackinlay and his staff's ties to organisations sceptical of climate change policies, such as the Global Warming Policy Forum and Net Zero Watch. While not directly related to the sepsis allegations, these findings raise broader questions about transparency and the influence of lobbying groups on MPs and their staff.

Lack of Corroboration

Crucially, none of the other search results directly corroborate or refute Spivey's specific claims about alleged controversies surrounding Mackinlay's reported illness and amputations. The information provided focuses more on his background, career, and potential conflicts of interest, but does not substantively address the central allegations made in Spivey's article.


In summary, Christopher Spivey's article raises numerous suspicions and questions about the circumstances of Craig Mackinlay's reported sepsis battle and quadruple amputation. However, Spivey does not provide definitive proof to back up his most serious allegations of fabrication or cover-up.

Ultimately, Spivey's article presents a sceptical perspective that casts doubt on the official narrative, but lacks concrete evidence to conclusively prove wrongdoing. Further investigation and transparency from official sources may be needed to fully address the concerns raised. As with any such allegations, it is important to maintain objectivity and rely on verifiable facts rather than unsubstantiated claims or speculation.

But to be fair! There is a Part Two coming…

As Spivey ends his article:

"Please Note:

Due to the huge size of this article in it’s entirety, I have now been forced to split it into two parts for fear that it will not load for many of you. Therefore, Part 2 – still quite not completed but coming very soon – and entitled: A Harsh Sense Of History (so as not to be confused with this first part), will continue on at the very same point as I have ended this one. And as such both parts should be treated as one, with the Mackinlay saga forming its conclusion... I will also tell you that the carry on will blow your mind."

Chris Spivey

Thursday 13 June 2024

James Hind and Project Night Watch: The Weapon of Mass Reporting…

In the ever-evolving landscape of social media, a new front has emerged in the war of ideas: the weaponization of platform reporting mechanisms. At the forefront of this battle is James Hind and his controversial group, Project Night Watch. Known for their aggressive tactics, Project Night Watch's greatest weapon in their propaganda war is not a reasoned debate or factual argument, but the systematic mass reporting of their critics' social media accounts.

The Strategy of Silence…

Project Night Watch has been described by many as an enigmatic and militant organisation that operates primarily online. Their stated mission is to safeguard certain ideologies and silence opposition. Unlike traditional advocacy groups that engage in open debate and discussion, Project Night Watch employs a different approach: mass reporting.

Mass reporting is a coordinated effort to report a social media account en masse, flagging it for violations of the platform's terms of service. The intent is to trigger automated systems or overburden human moderators, leading to the suspension or permanent deletion of the targeted account. For Project Night Watch, this tactic has become their primary tool in silencing dissent.

The Mechanics of Mass Reporting…

The process begins with identifying a target—usually a vocal critic of Project Night Watch or its ideologies. Once identified, members of the group mobilise. They flood the social media platform's reporting system with complaints, alleging various breaches of community guidelines. These could range from accusations of hate speech and harassment to the dissemination of false information.

Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram rely heavily on user reports to monitor and regulate content. While these platforms have systems in place to detect fraudulent reports, the sheer volume of reports generated by Project Night Watch can overwhelm these safeguards. As a result, the targeted account is often suspended or banned pending review.

The Ethics and Impact…

The ethics of mass reporting are hotly debated. Proponents argue that it is a legitimate tool for combating harmful content and protecting communities from abuse. Critics, however, see it as a form of digital vigilantism that stifles free speech and open discourse.

For the targets of Project Night Watch, the impact is profound. Accounts that are suspended or banned can lose years of content, connections, and influence. For independent journalists, activists, and ordinary users, this can be devastating both personally and professionally. The loss of a social media platform can mean the loss of a voice in the public square, effectively silencing dissent and opposition.

A Propaganda War…

The use of mass reporting by Project Night Watch is emblematic of a larger trend in modern propaganda warfare. Rather than engaging in dialogue or addressing criticisms directly, groups like Project Night Watch prefer to eliminate the platform for such discussions entirely. This strategy ensures that only one narrative prevails—uncontested and unchallenged.

James Hind, the figurehead of Project Night Watch, has often been criticised for his group's methods. Detractors argue that the reliance on mass reporting indicates a lack of confidence in the group's own arguments. If Project Night Watch truly believed in the strength of their positions, they argue, they would welcome open debate and the opportunity to prove their critics wrong.

The Future of Digital Discourse…

The rise of mass reporting as a weapon in ideological conflicts poses serious questions for the future of digital discourse. Social media platforms are caught in a delicate balance between protecting users from genuine abuse and preserving the principles of free speech. As tactics like those employed by Project Night Watch become more prevalent, platforms will need to develop more sophisticated methods to distinguish between legitimate and fraudulent reports.

In conclusion, James Hind and Project Night Watch have highlighted a critical vulnerability in the digital age: the ability to silence opposition through coordinated reporting. While this tactic may be effective in the short term, it raises significant ethical and practical concerns about the future of open dialogue and the health of our public discourse. As social media continues to play a central role in shaping public opinion, finding a way to address these challenges will be essential for preserving the integrity of online communication.

The Hidden War: James Hind's Project Night Watch vs. Matt Taylor…

In the shadowy corners of the internet, a covert battle rages between two enigmatic figures: James Hind, the leader of the notorious satanic group Project Night Watch, and Matt Taylor, an ex-Royal Military Policeman turned politician. This conflict, shrouded in secrecy and allegations, raises the question: who truly deserves public support?

Project Night Watch: A Cloaked Conspiracy…

James Hind's Project Night Watch is a leading organisation within the satanic community. Known for their stringent anonymity, members of this group operate under a veil of secrecy, hiding their faces and true identities. This elusive nature has only fuelled public curiosity and speculation about their intentions and activities.

Project Night Watch promotes a radical interpretation of satanism that often clashes with mainstream values. They are known for their provocative online presence, which includes disseminating content that challenges societal norms and religious conventions. This has placed them at odds with various public figures and groups, but none more so than Matt Taylor.

Matt Taylor: The Unyielding Opponent…

Matt Taylor, a former Royal Military Policeman, has transitioned into the political arena, where he continues to uphold his commitment to public service. Known for his tenacity and outspoken nature, Taylor has positioned himself as a staunch opponent of Project Night Watch. His military background and experience in law enforcement lend him a unique perspective on issues of security and public safety, making him a formidable adversary.

Taylor's opposition to Project Night Watch stems from a deep concern for what he perceives as their threat to societal values and safety. He has been vocal about his belief that the group's secretive operations and controversial rhetoric undermine public trust and destabilise community cohesion. As a result, he has become the group's primary target, a testament to his perceived threat to their agenda.

The Clash: Reputation and Safety at Stake…

The declaration by Project Night Watch that Matt Taylor is their number one target implies a significant threat to their reputation and safety. Taylor's relentless pursuit of transparency and accountability has evidently struck a nerve within the clandestine group. His efforts to expose and counteract their influence suggest that he poses a real danger to their operations.

Taylor's campaign against Project Night Watch is not just a personal vendetta but a public crusade. By challenging the group's secretive nature and controversial beliefs, he positions himself as a defender of societal values and public safety. His military and political careers have equipped him with the skills and platform to mobilise public opinion and action against what he sees as a pernicious influence.

Choosing Sides: Taylor or Hind?

In the context of this conflict, the question arises: who should the public support? On one side is James Hind and his Project Night Watch, a group cloaked in secrecy and controversy. Their commitment to anonymity and radical beliefs creates an aura of mystery and suspicion. On the other side is Matt Taylor, a public figure with a background in military and law enforcement, who champions transparency and societal values.

Supporting Matt Taylor seems to align with principles of openness, safety, and community cohesion. His proactive stance against what he perceives as a threat to public order and values demonstrates a commitment to safeguarding societal norms. Taylor's background suggests a disciplined, informed approach to tackling the challenges posed by Project Night Watch.

Conversely, supporting James Hind and Project Night Watch may appeal to those who value radical thought and secrecy. However, the lack of transparency and the group's controversial nature raise significant concerns about their impact on public trust and safety.

The ongoing conflict between James Hind's Project Night Watch and Matt Taylor underscores a broader societal debate about transparency, safety, and values. As Project Night Watch continues to operate under a veil of secrecy, Matt Taylor's unwavering opposition highlights the importance of accountability and public trust. In choosing whom to support, it becomes a question of whether one values the mysterious allure of radical thought or the steadfast commitment to societal norms and safety. For many, Matt Taylor represents the latter, making him a beacon of resistance against the shadowy figures of Project Night Watch.

The War of Allegations: Matt Taylor vs. James Hind…

In the world of shadowy conflicts and public accusations, the battle between James Hind's Project Night Watch and Matt Taylor, an ex-Royal Military Policeman turned politician, stands out as a particularly heated confrontation. At the heart of this dispute are allegations that cut deep, casting long shadows over the reputations of both men. However, a closer examination reveals stark differences in the credibility and nature of these accusations.

James Hind's Accusations: Baseless and Malicious…

James Hind, the leader of the secretive satanic group Project Night Watch, has accused Matt Taylor of being a predator and a stalker. These are serious charges that, if true, would undermine Taylor's standing and cast doubt on his integrity. However, these accusations crumble under scrutiny. Taylor's criminal record is clean of any offences related to sexual misconduct or stalking. Moreover, Taylor has been in a committed relationship with a mature woman for the past eight years, further disproving any notion that he is a danger to women, children, or men.

These accusations by Hind appear to be nothing more than unfounded attacks aimed at discrediting Taylor. By labelling Taylor as a predator and stalker, Hind attempts to shift the narrative and undermine Taylor's credibility without any factual basis. This tactic reflects a desperate attempt to tarnish the reputation of a vocal opponent rather than engage in a substantive debate.

Extract from James Hind's Satanic Views - November 2018

Matt Taylor's Campaign: A Call for Accountability…

In stark contrast, Matt Taylor's contention against James Hind focuses on Hind's conduct, which Taylor argues is unbecoming of a child protection advocate. Taylor's criticisms are grounded in Hind's actions and rhetoric, questioning whether Hind's behaviour aligns with the responsibilities and ethical standards expected of someone claiming to protect children.

Despite these serious allegations, Hind has yet to address Taylor's criticisms directly. This avoidance raises questions about Hind's transparency and accountability, especially given the gravity of the role he claims to fulfil. Taylor's focus on these issues underscores his commitment to holding public figures accountable, particularly those in positions of trust and influence.

Extract from James Hind's Satanic Views - November 2018

A Clear Divide: Facts vs. Fictions…

The contrast between Hind's baseless accusations and Taylor's fact-based criticisms highlights a fundamental divide in this conflict. Hind's strategy of character assassination lacks evidence and seems motivated by a desire to silence a persistent critic. On the other hand, Taylor's approach centres on accountability and ethical conduct, raising valid concerns about Hind's suitability as a child protection advocate.

Taylor's criminal record and stable personal life further reinforce the baseless nature of Hind's accusations. By focusing on factual evidence and advocating for transparency, Taylor presents himself as a credible and principled figure in this conflict. His military and political background adds weight to his arguments, suggesting a disciplined and responsible approach to public service and advocacy.

Choosing Sides: Integrity vs. Secrecy…

In deciding whom to support in this ongoing conflict, the choice becomes one of integrity versus secrecy. Matt Taylor's commitment to transparency, accountability, and ethical conduct stands in stark contrast to James Hind's reliance on unfounded accusations and avoidance of scrutiny. Taylor's dedication to exposing what he sees as Hind's misconduct aligns with broader societal values of openness and responsibility.

Supporting Matt Taylor means endorsing a campaign for truth and ethical behaviour, especially crucial in matters involving child protection and public trust. Taylor's background and clean record bolster his credibility, making him a trustworthy advocate for public safety and societal values.

Conversely, supporting James Hind and Project Night Watch means overlooking the lack of evidence behind his accusations and the serious questions raised about his conduct. The group's secretive nature and controversial stance further complicate their position, making it difficult to justify support without substantial evidence of their integrity and accountability.

In Conclusion…

The battle between James Hind and Matt Taylor is more than a personal feud; it is a clash of principles and credibility. Hind's baseless accusations against Taylor are a stark contrast to Taylor's well-founded criticisms of Hind's conduct. In this war of allegations, Matt Taylor's commitment to truth and accountability shines through, making him a figure worthy of public support and trust.

An example of the disturbing art Hames Hind publishes on his blog

Matthew Taylor Responds to James Hind’s Allegations: Dismisses Claims and Calls for Mental Health Support…

In recent days, James Hind has made claims on social media suggesting an ongoing conversation with Matthew Taylor regarding issues of stalking and harassment. Hind’s assertions include a need for changes in laws and processes to better support victims of such behaviours, referencing his experiences with Taylor. However, Matthew Taylor has issued a firm response, distancing himself entirely from these claims and expressing serious concerns about Hind’s mental well-being.

No Conversation Exists…

Matthew Taylor categorically denies having any conversation with James Hind about stalking, harassment, or any other matter. Taylor states, “I am totally uninterested in anything James Hind has to say. There has been no conversation, nor is one desired.” This clear statement aims to dispel any notion of dialogue or interaction between the two, refuting Hind's implications of an ongoing discussion.

Disinterest and Dismissal…

Taylor emphasises his complete disinterest in Hind and his claims. “I consider James Hind’s assertions to be baseless and without merit,” says Taylor. “I have no interest in engaging with him on any level.” This dismissal underscores Taylor’s position that Hind's statements are unfounded and do not warrant his attention or engagement.

Concerns About Mental Health…

More significantly, Matthew Taylor has raised concerns about James Hind’s mental health. Taylor comments, “Based on his actions and statements, I believe James Hind is extremely mentally ill and in urgent need of professional mental health assistance.” Taylor’s remarks suggest that he views Hind’s behaviour as symptomatic of deeper psychological issues, rather than a legitimate attempt to address or resolve matters of stalking and harassment.

The Need for Accurate Representation…

Taylor’s response highlights the importance of accurate representation and responsible communication, particularly on sensitive issues such as stalking and harassment. By denying any interaction with Hind and questioning his mental health, Taylor aims to clarify the narrative and prevent the spread of misinformation.

In Conclusion…

Matthew Taylor has made it unequivocally clear that he has not engaged in any conversation with James Hind and has no intention of doing so. Taylor’s disinterest in Hind’s claims and his concerns about Hind’s mental health mark a decisive rebuttal to the allegations made on social media. As this situation unfolds, it remains critical to distinguish verified facts from speculative assertions, ensuring that public discourse on such serious matters remains grounded in reality and truth.

Refuting James Hind's Claims on Stalking and Harassment: A Response from Matthew Taylor…

James Hind's blog post, titled "A Conversation on Stalking and Harassment," presents numerous claims about Matthew Taylor, accusing him of persistent stalking and harassment, particularly against an individual who cannot be named at this time. However, these assertions are baseless, exaggerated, and reflect a deep mistrust and misrepresentation of facts.

Lies and Exaggerations…

Hind's narrative portrays Taylor as a habitual stalker, citing past convictions and ongoing court cases. However, Taylor contends that these claims are grossly exaggerated. The references to multiple social media accounts and daily posts by Taylor are inflated to create a false image of obsession and compulsion.

Misrepresentation and Mistrust…

Hind's blog misrepresents interactions as stalking. The claim that Taylor has made threats and malicious communications, particularly around sensitive aspects of an individual's identity, lacks concrete evidence. These accusations appear to be based more on personal vendettas than on factual incidents. The blog's description of Taylor’s engagement in public debates as abusive ignores Taylor’s perspective that these are legitimate, if heated, exchanges of differing views.

Propaganda and Deflection…

The involvement of Project Night Watch (PNW) in an "internet conversation" with Taylor is presented as a means to understand and expose Taylor’s behaviour. However, Taylor argues that this so-called conversation is a one-sided propaganda effort aimed at demonising him while ignoring his rebuttals and context. The blog frames Taylor’s online activity as inherently malicious without acknowledging his claims of being a victim of harassment himself.

Mental Health and Personal Attacks…

The suggestion that Taylor needs major psychological intervention is not only unfounded but also a personal attack designed to undermine his credibility. Taylor asserts that this rhetoric is used to deflect attention from the inconsistencies and biases in Hind's narrative.

In Conclusion

James Hind's blog post is a mix of lies, exaggeration, mistrust, and propaganda. Matthew Taylor refutes these claims, emphasising that the portrayal of him as a stalker is a gross misrepresentation of the truth. Taylor calls for a more balanced and factual approach to addressing issues of stalking and harassment, one that does not rely on personal attacks and sensationalism.

Matthew Taylor Alleges James Hind's Projections Reveal Serious Offences…

In a controversial statement, Matthew Taylor, who claims to be a victim of stalking by James Hind, has voiced suspicions that Hind might be projecting his own serious child offences onto Taylor. Taylor suggests that Hind's repeated accusations against him could be a form of psychological projection, where Hind attributes his own criminal behaviours to others.

Taylor's allegations are grounded in the observation that Hind's detailed accusations and intense focus on Taylor could indicate underlying issues. This theory posits that Hind's vehement claims against Taylor might be a way to deflect attention from his own actions. While such assertions are highly speculative, Taylor believes they warrant further investigation.

This statement adds another layer to the already contentious and complex interactions between Taylor and Hind, highlighting the need for a thorough and unbiased examination of the facts surrounding their accusations against each other.

Extract from James Hind's Satanic Views blog November 2018

Wednesday 12 June 2024

James Hind's Stalking Behaviour Draw Comparisons to Netflix's Baby Reindeer Drama…

In a striking parallel to the intense drama depicted in Netflix's "Baby Reindeer," James Hind, referred to as a "satanic stalker," has garnered significant attention for his evident obsessive behaviour towards Matt Taylor. A recent YouTube video reveals that Hind has posted 100 tweets in the past month alone, with a staggering 719 posts overall, 90% of which target Taylor.

The volume and persistence of these posts have led to comparisons with the stalker character in "Baby Reindeer," a series that delves into the harrowing experience of a man pursued relentlessly by an obsessed individual. In the series, the protagonist's life becomes a nightmare as he tries to navigate the constant barrage of unwanted attention.

“OMG, now that is an obsession 719 posts. Baby Reindeer comes to mind.”

Similarly, Matt Taylor finds himself under relentless scrutiny from Hind, who has been accused of using his online platform to launch a continuous series of attacks. This situation raises significant concerns about the impact of sustained online harassment and the challenges faced by individuals targeted by such behaviour.

While the motives behind Hind's fixation on Taylor remain unclear, the intensity and frequency of his posts suggest a deep-seated obsession. This case highlights the darker side of online interactions and the potential for social media and blogging platforms to be used as tools for harassment.

As the story unfolds, it brings to light the need for effective measures to address and mitigate online stalking and harassment. The parallels with "Baby Reindeer" serve as a stark reminder of the psychological toll such experiences can take on victims, emphasising the importance of vigilance and support for those affected.

Online Feud Escalates as James Hind Vows to Target Matthew Taylor.

In a recent tweet, James Hind, a controversial figure known for his confrontational online presence, has declared his latest target: Matthew Taylor of Brighton. Hind's tweet reads, "Stalker Matthew Taylor of Brighton is flagged as a priority predator to watch and challenge by PNW. The posts PNW make about Taylor are reactive to the vast quantity of abusive output that Taylor is putting out against his victims on a daily basis."

This statement marks a significant escalation in the ongoing feud between Hind and Taylor. By branding Taylor as a "priority predator," Hind has signalled his intention to intensify his efforts to monitor, challenge, and publicly criticise Taylor's online activities. This move is consistent with Hind's history of taking a hardline stance against individuals he deems problematic.

Hind's tweet suggests that his actions are a response to what he describes as Taylor's "vast quantity of abusive output" directed at his victims. However, critics argue that Hind's approach often borders on harassment, raising ethical questions about the methods used in his self-appointed role as an online watchdog.

The Background of the Feud…

James Hind and Matthew Taylor's animosity is not new. The two have exchanged barbs on social media for some time, each accusing the other of various forms of misconduct. Hind has positioned himself as a crusader against what he sees as Taylor's abusive behaviour, while Taylor has often portrayed Hind as a relentless stalker.

Hind's recent tweet reinforces his commitment to this cause, indicating that he sees Taylor as a significant threat that requires ongoing attention. The use of the term "priority predator" is particularly striking, as it suggests that Hind views Taylor as a top target in his broader campaign against online abuse.

Ethical Implications…

The escalation of this feud raises important ethical questions. While Hind frames his actions as a necessary response to Taylor's behaviour, the aggressive nature of his tactics has led some to question whether he is simply perpetuating a cycle of harassment. The line between vigilantism and harassment can be thin, and Hind's methods often blur this boundary.

Online harassment is a serious issue that affects many people, and efforts to combat it are undoubtedly important. However, when individuals take it upon themselves to act as judge, jury, and executioner, the potential for abuse of power and the targeting of individuals without due process becomes a concern.

The Role of Project Night Watch (PNW)

Hind mentions PNW in his tweet, suggesting that the organisation supports his efforts. It is unclear what role PNW plays in this situation, but its involvement adds another layer to the complexity of the feud. If PNW is indeed backing Hind's campaign against Taylor, this could legitimise his actions in the eyes of some, while further polarise public opinion.

In Conclusion…

James Hind's recent declaration against Matthew Taylor marks a new chapter in their ongoing conflict. By doubling down on his intention to target Taylor, Hind continues to stir controversy and provoke debate about the ethics of online vigilantism. As this feud unfolds, it serves as a stark reminder of the challenges and dangers inherent in the digital age's battles over reputation and justice.

Read more at Laughing at Satanists...

Reluctant to contaminate Guerrilla Democracy News with the tripe of the satanic comings and goings of James Hind, and his imaginary team of Project Wet Wipes, I publish what needs to be published at

Check out the latest blogs including:


Please show your appreciation with a donation.