The UK Government HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) is proposing the digitisation of all original wills proved since the civil registration of wills was introduced in England and Wales in 1858, followed by their destruction except for the wills of the elite. The proposal is subject to a consultation paper published at HMCTS
 |
Above: the mining of the Four Courts and Public Record Office of Ireland in Dublin by the Pro-Treaty forces during the Irish Civil War, 1922. Michael Collins, leader of the pro-Treaty forces said “better a state with no archives than an archives with no state”. |
The definition and number of the elite whose wills they propose should be permanently preserved in their original paper form are not defined at this stage.
SQA has several points to make in response to the consultation. Benedict Crumplethorne, principal spokesman for SQA, asked Garth Bland, embattled County Archivist of Loamshire, to articulate these.
Firstly, I note the whopping omission of the most obvious solution to the stated storage problem, which is to find alternative storage. Such a situation once arose at the old Public Record Office in Chancery Lane which had proposed the destruction of a whole class of records. Their decision was reversedy after Philip H. Blake Esq., a herald and proprietor of Barham Court and Mystole House, both large houses in Kent, offered at a public meeting to store the records in question, rather putting the PRO on the spot and prompting them to reverse their decision.
While at this early stage no alternative storage has been identified, that is rather far from the point. The is the next stage. The consultation needs as a matter of course to consider that option, and perhaps then, and only then, consider destruction after digitisation.
Secondly, SQA has warned on previous occasions of the globalists’ insidious plan to physically destroy the UK’s archival heritage. We have explained the reasoning behind this, which is to say that our archival heritage constitutes the evidence as to how our common law, parliamentary democracy and freedoms developed, in contradistinction to the civil law systems of our European neighbours and in the face of threats from the European Union, New World Order and the Great Reset. Our archives are inconvenient to their plans and like all counter-revolutionary material have been identified as suitable for destruction. Make no mistake, this is the real reason for the proposed destruction. More such proposals will follow, and if this proposal is enacted, then they will flow thick and fast. Digital copies will be easier to control and then delete.
We recall the EU Malvine Project, the object of which was to selectively preserve and conserve only those cultural collections with potential for promoting European Union and the Ruskin College Oxford scandal of 2012
Thirdly, and this is a more specific subset of my second point, we are faced with the much more global threat of cultural genocide, of which the destruction of archives forms an essential part, especially in the UK, which has a far more important archival heritage than most nation states. The globalists intend to create a global slave worker race which cannot be formed unless and until national identity, religion, laws, customs, traditions, cultural assets, archives, books and architecture are swept away and replaced with a one world government, one world religion and a fascistic global government and financier pact. This proposal is merely the tip of the iceberg.
Note what UNESCO’s legal team has advised: States should take all appropriate measures to prevent, avoid, stop and suppress acts of intentional destruction of cultural heritage, wherever such heritage is located.
I can go further. This is not only cultural genocide, it is democide, in so far as the HMCTS’s openly stated objective is to destroy the heritage of a people in the form of their original wills, except for the brazen exception of wills of the social elite. UNESCO also states:
When conducting peacetime activities, States should take all appropriate measures to conduct them in such a manner as to protect cultural heritage and, in particular, in conformity with the principles and objectives of the 1972 Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, of the 1956 Recommendation on International Principles Applicable to Archaeological Excavations, the 1968 Recommendation concerning the Preservation of Cultural Property Endangered by Public or Private Works, the 1972 Recommendation concerning the Protection, at National Level, of the Cultural and Natural Heritage and the 1976 Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding and Contemporary Role of Historic Areas.
Fourthly, it isn’t clear by what means HMCTS will define the elite. In fact, comparing such a subjective approach to the National Archives’ operation of the Public Records Act, we immediately call to mind the latter’s supposedly scientific, technocratic and objective methods for appraising and selecting government files for permanent preservation or destruction. Will such a process be applied here? Or is the approach to be subjective in contrast to TNA’s methods?
Fifthly, following the gigantic Covid hoax and vaccine cull of the population, will the destruction of archivists and kindred specialists come next?
And finally, may I as always conclude by quoting George Orwell, author of 1984 published in 1949 in which he anticipates the digital memory hole:
The Party said that Oceania had never been in alliance with Eurasia. He, Winston Smith, knew that Oceania had been in alliance with Eurasia as short a time as four years ago. But where did that knowledge exist? Only in his own consciousness, which in any case must soon be annihilated. And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed -- if all records told the same tale -- then the lie passed into history and became truth. Who controls the past, ran the Party slogan, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past. And yet the past, though of its nature alterable, never had been altered. Whatever was true now was true from everlasting to everlasting. It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. Reality control, they called it: in Newspeak, doublethink.
Further reading
The user’s perspective, a YT video by GenealCymru: UK Government plans to destroy your family history
Preserving Our History: James Corbett (corbettreport.com) interviews Dr. Neil Oliver, 2023
“Archivists killed for political reasons”, article by Anton Baets, 2013
Archives and the State, SQA 2005
Cultural genocide and the protection of cultural heritage, Edward C. Luck, 2018
UNESCO declaration concerning the intentional destruction of cultural heritage 2003
Is there a place for handwriting in a digital age? A symposium hosted by The Stationers’ Company, Stationers’ Hall, London 2023 YT video recording
Comments
Post a Comment