The Prosecution of Chris Spivey.

Christopher Spivey is about to learn the hard way that the evil ones hate when you call them unpleasant names.
Chris Spivey is learning the hard way that the evil ones hate their lies being exposed.

August 19th, 2015.

The Prosecution of Chris Spivey.

Who is Chris Spivey?
Chris Spivey is a British online journalist responsible for most of the writing on the popular Chris Spivey the World Put Right website. An irreverent and coarse blast of truth in the face of the wicked British Establishment that has gathered a dedicated following since inception in 2012 and broken many important stories.

What has happened?
Chris Spivey was recently convicted in a British court of the crime of Harassment in relation to his investigation into the alleged killing of British soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich, London in May 2013.

Essex man convicted of harassing family of murdered soldier Lee Rigby

I  have read all the mainstream media coverage on this case that I could find, and the Crown Prosecution Service media release yet in all honesty the specific nature of Spivey’s crime is completely unclear.
It is clear that part of the case against Chris Spivey relates to material posted on his website and the views he expressed about the Woolwich incident.

The CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) states that:

“The prosecution’s case was that the combination of the postings, containing a mixture of grossly offensive remarks about the Rigby family, upsetting assertions surrounding the murder, and the publication of details of two of the family’s homes, could not be justified under freedom of speech”

A Breach of Chris Spivey’s Human Rights?

Regardless of what happened in Woolwich there is no doubt that any prosecution that uses the fact that Spivey expressed contrary opinions as part of the evidence is appears to represent a breach Chris Spivey’s human rights as outlined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the EU Human Rights Charter as these unambiguously proclaim the right to freely express political views.

The EU Charter states in Article 10 that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.”

Article 11 is more explicit

“Article 11 Freedom of expression and information

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected.”

If Britain’s corrupt leadership do not support the central tenets of the EU Charter they should explain why this is the case and begin immediate steps to withdraw from the EU and the United Nations. The British legal system  appears to be operating in a manner that is inconsistent with the fundamental tenets of human rights as stated in both the EU Charter and the UN Declaration.

A Flawed Process?

It is also worth noting that the alleged victims did not appear before the court, all the evidence tendered was provided by the police who were the only witnesses.

Spivey was thus convicted without his counsel having the opportunity to question the witnesses against him in another clear breach of all legal norms and traditions, and a denial of natural justice.

If the alleged victim was so upset by Spivey’s claims why did the alleged victim take no action to curtail Spivey’s actions or simply ignore Spivey’s posts which had no material impact on her whatsoever and no realistic prospect of doing so?

The fact that Spivey is right, undoubtedly correct in the broad claim that Woolwich was a stage-managed and fabricated bit of psychological warfare against the people of Britain does not even matter. Even if Spivey was completely wrong, the prosecution would still be malicious, politically motivated and illegitimate.

The absurdity here is completely obvious. Do you think the woman with the shopping may have gone the other way home perhaps? Look at the
The absurdity here is completely obvious. Do you think the woman with the shopping may have gone the other way home perhaps? Also look at the “killers” right hand.

Woolwich.

There is in fact no possibility whatsoever that the Woolwich incident was an authentic terrorist attack or anything of the sort. Analysis of the Woolwich event, even crude preliminary analysis makes it absolutely clear that there is no way known that this is anything more than a Benny Hill standard piece of street theater constructed and executed extremely poorly in full public view.

Woolwich was a made for TV faux event, with multiple cameras filming multiple takes, terrible special effects and a C grade cast of players.

The way to prove Woolwich manufactured is very simple. Watch it.

Woolwich killers being shot charging police,extended footage

Note that there is no blood present and that all the blood we see on the “killer” at all times has been digitally inserted. Something that is hard to miss because it also all disappears at certain stages of the event.

There is no good part of the story, none.

This is from the mainstream coverage of the case. The digital job was clearly very rushed and terribly shoddy. The lack of paint on the clothing was a major blunder. It is absurd.
This is from the mainstream coverage of the case. The digital job was clearly very rushed and terribly shoddy. The lack of paint on the clothing was a major blunder. It is absurd.

The bad actor delivering the silly speech with the digitally inserted blood on his hands.

The terrorist killer who throws down his knife as he runs at the police and leaps through the air theatrically and positions himself halfway across the road where he moves his legs to cover the spot cues the handlers have left at the spot.

Oh dear! The chaps and chapettes of special effects had a short nap. These are the real hands of the man.
Oh dear! The chaps and chapettes of special effects had a short nap. These are the real hands of the man.

Commonsense and empathy.

Imagine yourself on a street where a man has just been butchered by jihadist nutters who are standing in the street armed with knives and firearms. You are out shopping in your local area, you eave the supermarket and you are  waking home and you notice a dead body lying in the street and two large men prancing about with weapons.

Do you walk down that street, past the dead body in the middle of the road, past the knife wielding “blood spattered” large men ranting in the street or do you think you might walk home down a different street?

That’s right, you walk home down a different street as you do not want to walk past a “blood spattered” maniac who just hacked someone to death.

Except in Woolwich, where numerous shoppers walk blithely past the “blood spattered” knife wielding man and the body in the road.

It is hokum. Pure hokum.

Another
Another “bystander” wanders past during the Woolwich farce.

The British Establishment Press.

There were a number of pieces in the corporate media regarding this case. Not one of them contained a single word of truth. It was both predictable and shocking. There was not a word about the possible implications for free speech in the conviction. Not a word.

All I would say to the members of the British Press is that your souls are in great danger and I hope it was worth it.

But I suspect that you may come to regret the way you have sold your soul to the forces of darkness and evil.

The choices you have made will resonate forever and one day you will reap what you have sown. I hope you understand what you have done.

Links to the genuinely nauseating, mainstream articles on this case are at the very bottom of the page.

A Pattern.

The legitimacy of a Government that has acted utterly cynically and made a further mockery of the rule of law in staging this event to frighten the people and cause them to hate and fear Muslims surely has to be questioned

Where does the public interest sit in staging these events?

What on earth gives the Government, or part of the Government the idea that they have the right to manipulate and deceive the people they are supposed to be serving.people and terrify them with lies?

This evil little stunt has genocidal implications when viewed in the light of Britain’s behavior over the preceding decade. This was an evil thing to do and it is truly so sad that we have been reduced to this pitiful state at any point in time let alone the present.For decades British Intelligence have been in the game of manufacturing terrorism in order to terrify and control the population. Whenever a villain has been required, they have obliged.

Staging this event was a very silly and wicked thing to do, but on the big scale of things, compared to some of the other things they have done, this is nothing. Quite literally.

Counter tactics.

The publication of addresses, while in no way or manner in my opinion constituting harassment, may be unwise in future. This appears to have been the element that enabled this dirty game of political prosecution to be played. It was the one fact that has been used to weave a grotesque lie around.

If this is the ploy that is being used to implement Cameron’s oft stated ambition of tyranny it might be counterproductive to publish personal details of alleged crisis actors and other perceived accomplices to the hoaxes and/or false flag events in future in order to prevent the corrupt Establishment from using this technique as a means to persecute and criminalise truth-tellers.

The Precedent is Clear.

If Spivey is imprisoned, as is at least possible (unthinkable but apparently possible) his case will become a very big cause very quickly and one consequence of that will be a major increase in public interest in alternate theories and a massive upsurge of interest in the Woolwich incident.

Do not think for a second that any of the things that have been done to Spivey cannot be done to you.
If Chris Spivey can be prosecuted for voicing a controversial opinion on the internet, anyone can be prosecuted for expressing any view on the internet or anywhere else.
Truth will clearly be no defense.

Therefore every possible political and legal effort must be made to overturn these convictions and to establish a precedent that ensures that such vindictive political prosecutions are never allowed to happen again.

I would encourage anyone with the ability to be in Essex on the morning of August 27th to attend the Essex District court and offer support to Chris Spivey. If not,  make a phone call, write a letter. Be polite and firm. Do not let these people destroy your hard won liberty. DO SOMETHING! Enough is enough.

This is a test. This is a moment that cannot be allowed limply to pass. People need to make their feelings known (in a civilised and dignified way) and more importantly, a whole series of legal actions need to be undertaken against the British Government in every possible jurisdiction, from Europe, to the UN, to the local British courts until justice and human rights have been restored.

The Crown of Thorns

Aangirfan: CHRIS SPIVEY AND LEE RIGBY

I Am I Said

I Am Said I.

Full Woolwich Terrorist Attack (Was Censored By British Government)

UK Woolwich eyewitness describes attack by Muslims on Help for Heroes TShirt wearing man

HUMANITY vs INSANITY – #48 : STFU … or we’ll take your kids! Ian R Crane Chris Spivey

The British Prime Minister has repeatedly stated the intent to criminalise the very mention of the Big lies that define our age. This should be viewed as no less than a proxy claim of responsibility. Cameron’s handlers are especially concerned about London 7/7 and 911. I wonder why?

DAVID CAMERON in UN Speech Says ANYONE QUESTIONING the 9/11 Official Story Is a TERROR EXTREMIST

Lee Rigby troll Chris Spivey is convicted of harassing murdered soldier’s family | Daily Mail Online

Chris Spivey who said Lee Rigby murder was a HOAX guilty of harassment | UK | News | Daily Express

Conspiracy theorist who claimed Lee Rigby murder was a hoax guilty of harassing soldier’s family | Essex Chronicle

19 thoughts on “The Prosecution of Chris Spivey.

  1. of course there is something wrong but most people really couldn’t give a damn, brains already turned into crap by too much rubbish TV really can’t work out what has happened, if they are told something it has to be true. You would be a fool to take anything at face value ..

    Like

    • Chris, you’re a jumbo jet encourager for us all to shout out. There’s much we want to commend you for and your journalism. Jim, CalamiTcat (? – not that I’ve spoken to her yet) and I, are aiming to write our piece on all things Spivey this week, we ain’t so much trying to find crits but obviously have some suggestions. Of course there’s one controversial, are you ‘really’ Chris Spivey or Dave, as in, Courtney?
      James – if it’s too long it may have to be an early piece on soon to be Plant a Seed.

      Mark

      Like

    • With all due respect to Richie Allen whose work is often useful, I am confused as to how Richie Allen is supposed to constitute the “big hitters” as he is only one person. Thanks for comment.

      Like

      • No Matt Taylor I was not and I apologise if you got that impression. If you think people should distance themselves from Chris Spivey please explain why you believe they should do that. I am genuinely interested in the reasons I do not mean this in an adversarial way. Thanks for comment.

        Like

      • Please don’t apologise James; I often get the wrong end of the stick! And I’m thankful for your question. It gives me the opportunity to express myself and get things of my chest, which I otherwise wouldn’t be able to.

        Having posted a number of promotional videos about Chris Spivey on Youtube, I’m privy to the many comments people have to say about him. Surprisingly, not all comments are positive. People ask me why I support him, when in return I get ridiculed by him and his team.

        I personally don’t think I get ridiculed by him; but his FB administrator Lisa Peabody is often the first to chastise me to asking questions.

        I’m particularly surprised by Richie Allen’s comments about Spivey and the many anti-Spivey blogs springing up, of which ‘Spivey is a Cunt’ is just one.

        I don’t think people should distance themselves from Spivey; Spivey has got a lot to offer. Mind you, I’m personally at the end of my tether with him and his team.

        I’ve become disillusioned with him over the Hampstead Kids case.

        Before discovering the work of Bill Maloney and Chris Spivey I knew nothing about the evil which rules the world. I knew nothing about Satanists holding high office and nothing about paedophiles infesting parliament.

        The likes of Bill Maloney and Chris Spivey became kind of guru’s to me. I haven’t got time to do all my own research and came to rely on Bill and Chris for their point of view and opinion. This is why I value the works of Richard D Hall and James Corbett so much.

        In return for the work I dipped into my pocket and donated what I could afford and invested my time and effort in promoting their work across my own blog platforms. I like to think I’ve brought Spivey’s work to people who otherwise wouldn’t have known about him.

        But and this is a big but; when the Hampstead case broke, I turned to Spivey for advice and guidance and he’s remained silent ever since.

        Maloney and Spivey tell us that Satanists rule the world and that children are being murdered on a daily basis; but when two kids come forward with a story which collaborates their own research, the AV community roundly throw scorn on it, call it a hoax and ridicule anyone who believes it.

        I’m personally walking away from Spivey because he has remained silent, one way of the other, as to what he believes.

        I’m annoyed that people can put themselves forward as experts on the subject but remain silent when a major case of satanism arises.

        As I mentioned in a recent youtube video; I believe his team are letting Spivey down more than himself. I cannot make contact with Spivey without hearing from Lisa Peabody. And all she has to contribute, is that I should shut up and be quiet.

        Having eventually made direct contact with Spivey; I’m simply put down by saying I should mind my own business, and that I’m not a true supporter because I never made the effort to go to Chelmsford to support him during his many court appearances. (Unlike Danielle La Verite; of whom he won’t hear a bad word said against her.)

        Yes, there is an element of ‘begrudge’ on my behalf. I begrudge my questions about the Hampstead case being dismissed so readily by himself and his team. I begrudge being chastised for not travelling to Chelmsford to support him and I begrudge being mentioned in his court case as the person responsible for posting the mockup Sun newspaper front page, of which he got into so much trouble. Above all else, I begrudge the way I’ve been spoken to by Lisa Peabody.

        If this is the way he and his team treat his supporters, God knows how he treats his enemies. (Of which I do know, having read what he had to say about Tom Cahill, Jimmy Jones and Sonia Poulton.)

        So that’s it James; thanks for the chance to get it of my chest. I appreciate its come across more as a moan, rather than a valid answer on why I think people are distancing himself from him.

        Either way, Spivey’s support is not as rock solid as he likes us to believe. I’m just your average Joe, trying to make sense of the things he says.

        Its hard, I tell you! It doesn’t help that when you need further clarification on what he says, his team calls you a trouble-maker and the man himself remains tight-lipped…

        Its for these reasons I’m withdrawing my support of the man. (Not that he needs my support; he’s evidently doing very well without it.)

        Thanks James; I love your work and really appreciate the research and work you put into your articles.

        Like

      • Many thanks for that Matt, although I would suggest that it may be best to evaluate the work that has been done rather than what you believe should have been the case. It is entirely possible that a sincere person could find the Hampstead allegations unbelievable and I would not hold that against anyone. It was disappointing for example to hear the James Corbett dismiss the Hampstead case at the end of an otherwise excellent broadcast about establishment pedophiles but this does not detract from the outright greatness of some of his work, like the Oklahoma City video he made “Who was Timothy McVeigh?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vgfi1QZILxk and the same is true of Chris Spivey in my opinion.
        Thanks for comment.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s