Diane Abbot stated her hairstyle is linked to her political views

Diane Abbot stated her hairstyle is linked to her political views.

Speaking to Andrew Marrr on the BBC, Diane Abbot - Shadow Home Secretary for the Labour Party - stated that since her hairstyle changed her views on the IRA had changed - stating that there is a direct link between her hairstyle and her political ideas.

This was her hairstyle when she made racists comments against white people. Have her views changed since she had this hairstyle?

This is Diane Abbot speaking to Andrew Marr a few days ago.

When people stop believing in politics, violence get closer.

With every move to curtail Free Speech, civil war gets a step closer. LBC bosses are misguided. Katie Hopkins was a safety valve allowing people to express their views peacefully and on a democratic framework. Organisations like the Police Federation, the National Union of Journalists and others ban members of certain political parties, the mass media deny spaces that are fundamental for the sake of Free Speech.

What Nick Griffin, former British National Party Leader, is saying is all too obvious. Deprived of the opportunity of expressing their views within a Democratic framework, people will ultimately turn to violence.  If the government, the political classes, the mass media including the BBC, SKY News, LBC and others do not understand this, the price we will all pay will be extremely high in terms of human lives lost.

The repression exerted by the Political Correct Society has cost lives and there is more to come. When people stop believing that there is a political solution, they will certainly turn to violence. 

Like Jo Cox before her, Helen Goodman believes that repression is the answer. She couldn't be more mistaken. 

Senator John McCain asks Russians to contribute by supporting his re-election campaign

You couldn't make it up. One of the men that is most vocal in the anti-Russian stance asked Russians to help him finance his re-election campaign. Next, a photo of Senator Schumer with President Vladimir Putin. He couldn't be happier sharing a drink with the Russian President.

Later, both McCain and Schumer launch vitriolic attacks against President Donald Trump.You couldn't make it up. And the Clinton News Network writes the scripts of a political charade.

Germar Rudolf: Persecuting those who seek the truth

Germar Rudolf: Persecuting those who seek the truth

Germar Rudolf, a qualified chemist linked to the Max Planck Institute in Germany, has been persecuted by the German government that went as far as requesting his extradition to send him to jail in Germany.

Germar Rudolf was born in Limburg an der Lahn, Hesse in 1964. As a young German, and like many other Germans, he was indoctrinated, brainwashing, and made to accept guilty for something they had nothing to do with because they were born long after the end of World War Two.

Germany is still under the grip of Political Correctness leading to persecution of anybody who dares to challenge any official views about what really happened during World War Two.

After initially suport the CSU/CDU, political coalition now led by Angela Merkel, he distanced himself from the CSU/CDU.

In 1990, after doing his military service in the Luftwaffe, he joined the Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research at Stuttgart. In 1991, He started working on a paper entitled Report on the formation and verification of cyanide compounds in the Auschwitz "gas chambers" and he did so working on behalf of Hajo Herrmann, a former Luftwaffe pilot.

After the report was publicised by the media, he was banned from entering the Max Planck Institute ever again and political persecution started. He was told by the University of Stuttgart that to withdraw his application for a final PhD examination and threatened being told that should he maintain his application his application would be rejected.

German Rudolf's reports indicate that only minute amounts of cyanide compounds were found in samples taken from Auschwitz.

Legal consequences followed. Instead of being treated as a scientist, German authorities treated him as a criminal, merely because he presented evidence that questioned the revealed official truth.

In 1995, Germar Rudolf was sentenced to 14 months in prison accused of inciting racial hatred - trumped charges against a man whose sole crime was to use facts to challenge official myths. The District Court of Stuttgart sentenced him to 14 months in prison using what is called the Rudolf Report. In Germany, questioning the official version of the so called Holocaust is classified as a crime.

Germar Rudolf was forced to flee to Spain, to England and finally arrived in the United States where after many years of appeals in 2005 he was deported back to Germany. On March 15, 2007, the Manheim District Court sentenced him to two years and six months in prison accusing him of inciting hated disparaging the dead and libel. Copies of his "Lectures on the Holocaust" were confiscated and destroyed. He was released from prison on July 5 and now lives in the USA with his wife and his daughter.

A list of selected publications of Germar Rudolf include:

Auschwitz-Lies: Legends, Lies, and Prejudices on the Holocaust, with Carlo Mattogno (Theses & Dissertations Press, 2005), ISBN 1591480213

Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of Truth and Memory (Theses & Dissertations Press, 3rd edition, 2003), ISBN 0967985625

The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the Gas Chambers of Auschwitz (Theses & Dissertations Press, 3rd edition, 2003), ISBN 096798565X

German governments, one after another, have become what they say that they reject. There is Systematic Political Persecution against anybody who dares to investigate to find out what really happened under Das Dritte Reich. Those who dare to challenge the official version of events is criminalised and anybody who dares to publish facts about what actually happened is sent to jail.

Karl Hohenstauffen

How did former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith's research in London Soho's Red Light District go?

Jacqui Smith

How did Former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith's research in London Soho's Red Light district go?

When she was found in researching in Soho's, the former Labour Party Home Secretary indicated that she was working on a project involving female prostitutes.

This came after having to cease being Home Secretary when it was discovered that she had claimed as Parliamentary Expenses pornographic material acquired by her husband but the charges against Home Secretary Jacqui Smith didn't end with the acquisition of graphic material for sexual gratification.

False housing claims, acquisition of expensive equipment and claims for other expenses to cover private expenses like accountancy bills, et cetera, et cetera, were also part of the package of irregularities - some would say criminal activity - that pushed Jacqui Smith out of the Cabinet together with another list of MPs including Patricia Hewitt.

Despite such reputable political background she was employed by broadcaster LBC to interview the 2012 British National Party Mayoral Candidate at the London Assembly building during the 2012 London Mayoral Election.

But like I said at the beginning we still don't know the outcome of her research on prostitution in London Soho's Red Light District.

The Power of the word NO and Islam

The Power of the word NO and Islam

Ayann Hirsi Ali is one of the characters that the mass media not usually want to talk about because she breaks away from all their preconceived ideas.

The so called Religion of Peace forced her to live in hiding because she opposes much of what an murderous ideology called Islam stands for.

When it comes to real life, the cult promoted by mass media is a lot different from the sanctified image that is shown on our screens.

Ayann Hirsi Ali explicitly sayd that Muslims need to re-think sex, money and violence and the concept of time.

She wonders if depriving impressionable young men of entertainment and female companionship doesn't make them more susceptible to calls for self-annihilation. Well, events in the United Kingdom where gangs of Muslim men go on the rampage targeting vulnerable children for sexual gratification, plying them with drugs and alcohol very much supports her idea that sexual repression and a very abnormal way of life leads to violence and even to self-destruction.

The man who blew up himself in Manchester a few days ago was addicted to alcohol and drugs and he purposefully and willingly killed himself to destroy the lives of others. It was without saying that after leaving Islam and claiming back her human rights and the capacity of rejecting the ideology imposed on her, she lives in hiding somewhere in the United States of America after being a Member of Parliament in the Netherlands.

She laughs at those who talk about Islamophobia and says that if you are an ex-Muslim there are people who want to kill you on account of deserting Islam. It's reasonable to be a little concerned. That is not phobia. It is rational fear. The stupidity of Islam is such that on her supposed wedding day, she not even need to be present. The marriage was carried out without her consent and without her being present during the ceremony that was attended only by the groom. She calls Islam "bearded men preaching seventh-century laws".

  

Die Endlösung der Judenfrage: a capital moment in history

Die Endlösung der Judenfrage: a capital moment in history

Much has been said about what British and other countries where English is the predominant language called simply "Final Solution".

As a historical fact it must be stated that most of the buildings we can see today in what are presumed to be the installations of concentrations camps were built after World War Two when National Socialist Germany was no longer around.
The paradox is that the constant reminder about the camps serves to perpetuate the memories of what happened in concentration camps but at the same time perpetuate the memories of Adolf Hitler and of an ideology called National Socialism. In peoples minds, Jesus of Nazareth and Adolf Hitler are equally famous.

I have looked at the words Arbeit Macht Frei and there is a fundamental truth in those words. Work makes you free. This couldn't be truer in an world in which there is crippling unemployment. We are not masters of our own destiny unless we have control of our own finances. So this is yet again another paradox. We are told to hate an expression that carries such a powerful and positive message.

The NSDAP was in its origins a true Socialist Party German style. Its name - National Socialist German Workers' Party - represents the ideals of a Socialist society in which every member of the said society would play a useful role and in turn everybody's needs would be met.

In spite of all the rubbish we hear when this very important period in history is mentioned, the one fundamental aspect of what actually were the ideals of the NSDAP is completely forgotten. In the rise of National Socialism in Germany there was a very powerful element called Solidarity. People were told that they had to look after each other, care after each other, be a German of one another and share these ideals in the pursuit of a greater, healthier, stronger and wealthier Germany.

For the unemployed, and there were many people out of work and unable to make ends meet, the world Arbeit was a magic word and it was very much rooted in the work ethics of the German people. People were going to be free from hunger, free from the miseries of a life without future, masters of their own lives. This was the essence of "Arbeit Macht Frei" , essence that is very powerful today when in Britain, in USA in France, practically everywhere, politicians promise more jobs and the reduction of the queues of unemployment. There is an element of Arbeit Macht Frei in every political speech - whether we talk about the Conservative Party, the Labour Party, the Liberal Democratic Party, the Green Party, UKIP, BNP et cetera, et cetera. The NSDAP promised more jobs in ways that were identical to the promises made by today's political parties.

People wanted answers to deal with unemployment and deprivation and from 1933 onward the National Socialist Party led by Adolf Hitler as German Chancellor and German President produced a massive number of jobs. There was a psychological factor and a financial factor. Financially, the chaotic situation that existed before the rise of Adolf Hitler was dealt with. People had jobs, people had bread on their tables. The psychological element came from association: this is your country, you deserve everything your country can provide, it is a powerful country and you don't need to fear about external aggression. People were reassured in every way and this led to massive political support.

Here comes the concept of "if you have one political party - the National Socialist German Workers' Party - that looks after your every need, why do you need other political parties?" The process towards a one-party state had been voluntarily and willingly triggered by the mass of the Electorate. Who could possibly be opposed to such levels of happiness, togetherness and wealth? Liberals, Marxists and among them the Jews who were said to be looking after their own interests and didn't care about the German people who where predominantly Christian. This is why at one point, Jews were banned from getting involved in many professions. And the process continues and goes farther and farther.

There is an evolution. There is a series of steps along the way towards getting rid of the Jews but it is also a process to get rid of Liberals and Marxists. People were interned in concentration camps for all kinds of reasons but the persecution of the Jews had little to do with religion or race. It was a political decision and you can deal with people who are political opponents or perceived political opponents in various ways. You ban them from professions. You imprison them. You deport them. You kill them. And there are various examples of this to mention. The persecution of many people - Jews and non Jews - was purely political.



 


 

Manchester attack was a masterpiece

Manchester attack was a masterpiece

The terrorist attack in Manchester was carefully planned and a true masterpiece. To begin with the choice of venue, the occasion and the political background - during a General Election Campaign - everything was done for maximum effect, ensuring that there would be massive repercussions and international mass media coverage.

Whoever organised it is a true genius and we should give him, her, them credit for that. It was a despicable murderous attack but it was carried out with absolute efficiency. We shouldn't underestimate the people we are standing against. They have the brainpower to organise this kinds of attacks for maximum effect.

It was a low-cost operation, requiring not so much technical expertise and requiring limited manpower that minimised loss of human resources, therefore making it practicably undetectable. The Security Services due to lack of manpower usually focus on operations requiring big amounts of money, technical expertise and manpower because this is what usually allows early detection. They Security Services are not equipped to deal with operations like the Manchester operation.

Islamic State quickly make sure that it quickly capitalise on the political repercussions and it must have been a huge morale boost for its embattled troops in Iraq and in Syria.

These people are not cowards, they are not crazy and they are extremely intelligent. They know exactly what they are doing. The aftermath of the Manchester attack and the fact that alert levels have now been raised to Critical with the deployment of the army is certainly a huge success for Islamic State.

Muslim Kamikazes are not cowards and are not crazy

Muslim Kamikazes are not cowards and are not crazy

Because I had the life experience of confronting some of these people, I know that the political establishment, the Police and the mass media and people in general are making a serious mistake.

We are dealing with individuals who do not want to divide us. The couldn't care less if we are united or not.

They are not cowards. No one willing to lose his or her own life could possibly be called a coward.

They are not crazy. They truly believe that they are fighting for a right cause and they could be more rational and more logical than anybody else.

The constant speeches about 'we stand together and they will not divide us' is sheer rubbish. We are confronting an enemy who doesn't cares about our lives or our values. They purely and simply want to destroy us and in so doing wipe out everything we stand for.

Everybody talks about how awful it is that they target children. They target everybody regardless of sex, age and gender. In their minds, children will grow up to become what we are and therefore they just kill them to stop them from growing and becoming what we are.

We are at war with an enemy that is very much living around us, in our own environment and who will attack whenever they feel that they can achieve their objectives.

We could organise ten thousand Cobra meetings. It will not make a heck of a difference. We cannot use Nuclear weapons against them. We cannot used force against them. We cannot predict when they will attack. We are totally and utterly defenceless. They have total access to our technology. They have total access to every part of our social and defensive structures. They can strike anytime and they have the time to be selective in order to make the greatest impact.

The Police cannot protect us against them. MI5 and MI6 cannot protect us against them. The attack in Manchester could not be foreseen as the killing of Lee Rigby came out of the blue.

I know that the Prime Minister and various other politicians and broadcasters would like to be reassuring to soothe people who are suffering because of the atrocity Manchester suffered in the last few hours. They have good intentions but their good intentions will not help us avoid the next atrocity and there will be more atrocities.

Karl Hohenstauffen

Mass Murder in Manchester: 22 dead and more than 50 people injured

Mass Murder in Manchester: 22 dead and more than 50 people injured

Cobra meetings and political correctness will not stop killings that are now happening with terrifying regularity in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. Just a few ago, it was Westminster, in Central London. Today, now it is Manchester's turn.

Katie Hopkins was reported to Police for asking for a 'final solution' but a solution to put an end to the series of killings is exactly what we need. Our lives have been turned upside down by religiously motivated violence and all the politically correct mass media and the politically correct establishment do is to continue to appease the followers of a cult that is causing mayhem across Europe. Entire areas of European cities are being turned into no go areas where people live in fear of attack perpetrated by extremists.

The paradox is that those who raised the alarm about the danger posed by religious extremists are themselves attacked for raising the alert. People like Tommy Robinson (former leader of the English Defence League), Paul Golding (leader of Britain First) and Nick Griffin (former leader of the British National Party) have been constantly and systematically attacked the political establishment and the mass for talking about the threat posed by religious extremists.

There are bans being implement against people who have committed no crime and whose only guilt is to have belonged to organisations that speak about the dangers of religious extremism.

European Convention on Human Rights: What we know and what we don't know

European Convention on Human Rights: What we know and what we don't know

The levels of lack of awareness about fundamental pieces of legislation is a matter of great concern.

We hear politicians and the mass media mentioning the European Convention on Human rights on a regular basis but how much is known about it?

When it comes to the business of what is legal and what is illegal there is quite a lot of grey areas generated by legislation that is often used to circumvent the European Convention on Human Rights and this is why in certain political sectors there is growing interest in having a British Bill of Rights to deal with the said grey areas.

There is no point in having such important pieces of legislation when the number of loopholes makes it impossible to proceed to its full implementation. Conventions and Treaties end up being no more than the expression of aspirations that cannot be implement in the real world.

Maria Gatland: Former High Ranking IRA member and Conservative Councillor in Croydon

Maria Gatland: Former High Ranking IRA Member and Conservative Councillor in Croydon

Maria Gatland was born Maria McGuire in Dublin, Republic of Ireland in 1948, She became an IRA member in the early 1970s. In 1972 she arrived in London and wrote articles for The Observer and also wrote a book describing her experience as member of the IRA.

In 2002, she was elected as Maria Gatland as a member of the Conservative Party and entered Croydon Council representing Croham war. In 2006, she became a cabinet member for Education.
When the Conservative Party found out that she had been a member in early December 2008 she resigned as council cabinet member, was suspended by the party, but returned to the party later on. She was re-elected as Councillor in the 2010 and 2014 local elections.

What is astonishing is that people who have never been involved in any terrorist organisation and who have never committed any crimes are denied the opportunity of joining political parties in the United Kingdom. UKIP, for example, doesn't accept as members former members of various political organisations who, incidentally, never committed any crimes nor were involved with terrorist organisations.

This issue reminds us of the European Convention on Human Rights that explicitly rejects any kind of political discrimination - not that several organisations in the United Kingdom take any notice of the European Convention on Human Rights. In fact, organisations like the Police, the Association of Police Officers and others explicitly violate the European Convention of Human Rights and several members of Parliament including the now late Jo Cox MP actively promoted political discrimination.

What is even more astonishing is that the leadership of parties like the Labour Party that were actively involved with Provisional IRA also promote political discrimination. Ken Livingstone refused 'to share a platform with the BNP' when he comfortably shared a lot more than a platform with a terrorist organisation that killed British men, women and children, killed members of the Conservative Party including a serving MP and also killed Lord Mountbatten, Prince Phillip's uncle.

I have a very funny feeling when writing about this kind of issues. There is a huge amount of duplicity and double-standards, there prejudice, discrimination and harassment against people who never got involved in any crimes, duplicity and double-standards promoted by the political classes and the mass media.

Karl Hohenstauffen

Simon Hughes is openly bisexual but Tim Farron constantly struggles with sexual issues

Tim Farron constantly struggles when asked about issues regarding sexuality.

Once again the Liberal Democrats struggles to give a straight answer. He struggled before when asked about homosexuality. Now, he struggles when asked about abortion.

Simon Hughes publicly stated that he is bisexual. I would like to have Tim Farron and Simon Hughes together, in front of television cameras, and ask a whole range of questions about sexuality.

This man has serious issues to answer for. As Liberal Democrats Leader he should be able to give straight answers about sexuality as his inability to provide straight answers on this issues increasingly looks like a very serious personality flaw.

Other political leaders have been very clear about where they stand on the said issues and have prominent representatives that are openly homosexual or bisexual that had stood in the House of Commons. Tim Farron is letting himself down and is letting his political party down by not providing clear cut answers.

Marion Maréchal Le Pen: Un interval avant de rentrer

Marion Maréchal Le Pen: Un interval avant de s'engager de nouveau dans la vie politique de France.

Marion Maréchal Le Pen: An interval before becoming engaged once again in France's political life.

One can perfectly understand that a very young woman and mother (27 years-old) who has been a very active political campaigner with political responsibilities since she was 22 years of age, has to deal with fundamental priorities.

As a mother, she has decided that at this point in time, she must and she needs to devote more time to her daughter at a very crucial stage of her life. As a politician, she has decided that she needs to acquire more experience in the world outside professional politics so that one day she can return to politics.

I do remember where I was when I was her age and I totally understand the decision she made. I also remember my life as a little child and the regular absences of my parents who were very often away from the family home. Even at my age the memories of those days are extremely vivid as if it was happening right now. To be elected at the age of 22 is a remarkable achievement and especially taking into account the political realities of France. To have maintained such coherence, consistency and energetic approach when other much older and much more experienced politicians faltered shows the character and temperament of Marion Maréchal Le Pen. When the time comes, she will more than ready to face new and more difficult challenges.

Front National values family and family values and therefore family is for her a fundamental priority. Front National values experience and knowledge and therefore her mission is to acquire experience and knowledge that would render her capable of being an even more effective politician with knowledge of the world outside the world of professional politics.

Tactical Voting Liberal Democrats attack UKIP saying that UKIP is promoting Tactical Voting

Tactical Voting Liberal Democrats accuse UKIP of promoting Tactical Voting

You couldn't make it up. Tim Farron said that he's relaxed about the idea of tactical voting. Well, the Liberal Democrats printed a leaflet accused UKIP of promoting Tactical Voting.

A very hypocritical Liberal Democratic Party who constantly talks of support for Tactical Voting distributed a leaflet attacking UKIP of supporting Tactical Voting.

In 2005 General Election, the Liberal Democrats headed by Nick Clegg and with Tim Farron as member and candidate talking about abolishing University Tuition Fees. Something they forgot about it completely when the formed a government together with the Conservative Party. Now, they talk about Tactical Voting but criticise other political parties accusing them of promoting Tactical Voting. If Tim Farron himself doesn't see the error of his ways a few weeks before a General Election then somebody inside the Liberal Democratic Party should think very carefully about the content of the leaflets that they are printing and delivering, most probably a few of the only things they can deliver.

At the end of the 2015-2017, this was the distribution of seats per political party represented.

Liberal Democrats in fourth place: Conservatives 330, Labour 229, Scottish National Party 54 and Liberal Democrats 9. A miracle will have to occur for the Liberal Democrats to reach Third Place because when Parliament was disolved for the 2017 General Election, Liberal Democrats were in Fourth Place. Luckily they won one seat in a by-election because otherwise they would be in Fourth Place together with Democratic Unionists.

This was the state of the parties at the end of the 2015-2017 Parliament and they have a few mountains to climb to have the slightest chance of delivering anything more than an explanation of why they lost. If they lose, they cannot blame Brexit.

Alexander Litvinenko: the story is a bit different from the official version

Alexander Litvinenko

Alexander Litvinenko: The real version of events is a bit different from the official British version. At the time of his death, Alexander Litvinenko was working for British Intelligence. Despite constant requests made by his wife, the British establishment has repeatedly denied that he was working for them.

But Alexander Litvinenko was a bit of a problem given his sympathies with Muslim Chechen rebels linked to AlQaeda and Taliban when Britain and USA were actively engaged in the fight in Afghanistan. As a lieutenant of Boris Berezovsky that the Russian Federation wanted back on charges of embezzlement of public funds, Alexander Litvinenko was the weaker link, somebody who could become a major source of embarrassment for then Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Boris Berezovky has been a useful pawn working for the CIA and mobilising his network of contacts to facilitate easier military access to land locked Afghanistan. It was well-known that Alexander Litvinenko could be tempted with a clean-bill of health and a safe conduct that could allow him and members of his family to return to the Russian Federation in exchange for incriminating evidence against Boris Berezovky that could have force the British government to deport Boris Berezovsky back to the Russian Federation. Andrei Lugovoi was sent to London to negotiate with Alexander Litvinenko to persuade to make the exchange. 

Boris Berezovsky

It was no coincidence then that Mario Scaramella, with clear links with the CIA met Alexander Litvinenko, whom he had met before in Italy. Despite the fact that Boris Berezovsky's contacts and influence were fading away the revelation that he was and his lieutenant were linked to Muslim Checken rebels linked to AlQaeda and Taliban would have been too much of a scandal when British soldiers were involved in a military conflict in Afghanistan.

A short-term solution was to get rid of Alexander Litvinenko to protect Boris Berezovsky. When some time later, Boris Berezovsky ceased to be an asset he was himself dispatched to get rid of loose ends.

Mario Scaramella

Shortly before Boris Berezovky was 'dismissed', I was asked to travel to Latin America to gather evidence that could seriously undermine the British government's position in terms of refusing the extradition request made by the Russian Federation. Before I could fly to Latin America, the news came that "Boris Berezovsky committed suicide". 

Both the Alexander Litvinenko Affair and the Boris Berezovsky Affair were very sordid chapters in the history of British Intelligence and their partners in crime the CIA. An innocent man - Andrei Lugovoi - who came to negotiate with Alexander Litvinenko to try and get the extradition of Boris Berezovsky - was unfairly accused and everything became part of a major British cover-up.

Andrei Lugovoi was totally cleared of any involvement but the British mass media that easily prostitutes itself swallowed and spread a distorted version of events. Perfidious Albion did it again.

Karl Gerhardt Hohenstauffen

Julian Assange: Sweddish Authorities drop charges against Julian Assange

Julian Assange

Swedish Authorities dropped charges against Julian Assange

Many years have passed since Julian Assange was forced to seek asylum at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Faced with the possibility of being the victim of political persecution by the US State Department, he opted for political exile seeking refuge at a Latin American Embassy in the United Kingdom.

The United States of America trumped up charges against Julian Assange after the US State Department classified Mr Assange as a National Security Risk because the organisation led by Mr Assange was revealing information concerning US dirty business.

The fact the Swedish authorities have now dropped charges against Mr. Assange more than proves that the whole case about Mr. Assange was a complete fabrication with the intent of taking Mr. Assange to Sweden and for there to the United States.

Despite the fact that Swedish Authorities have dropped charges against Mr. Assange, British Police sources indicate that they would still arrest Mr. Assange if he tried to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Therefore, Mr. Assange plight continues since US State Department wants to use every means, including illegal means, to seek the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States.

With every news about the case, the motives behind false accusations against Mr. Assange become more and more clear. A country that justifies rendition flights, detention with trial and torture, political assassinations, illegal invasions, and attacks against countries that are not at war with the USA would stop at nothing to get its own way.

Daniel Hannan: Consumers are the ones who ultimately pay for tax rises

Daniel Hannan: Consumers are the ones who ultimately pay for tax rises

The logic of the argument is self-evident. A business has suppliers, staff, customers.

When you calculate the cost of services or goods that you offer you take into account the prices charged by your competitors, the cost of your supplies including infra-structure and tools of the business and the cost of having a certain number of staff. You look at the income of the business.

When taxes rise or the costs paid to your suppliers rise or the salaries paid to you staff rise or the taxes paid rise you have to make adjustments. If the equity of your business calculated by deducting your costs from your income starts to fall, you need to put up your prices. This can be done up to a certain point until you start losing customers to the competition that offers cheaper prices. So what next?

You can try and reduce operational costs and you have a look at the number of staff that you employ. Is the number of staff that you pay for justified by the equity of your business? You could lower salaries and this can be extremely unpopular and your workforce most probably will not want to get less pay. So what do you do? You start laying off staff. Now, you can continue laying off staff until the point when the business is no longer capable of being operational. The last move is to close down the business.

What happens when you close down your business? Your staff will lose their jobs and claim unemployment benefits. They are no longer going to be a direct burden for you. They are going to be paid with taxpayers money. Your suppliers for whom you are a customer are going to lose a source of income making them reconsider their pricing policies and the number of staff that they themselves have. So they too might decide to close down business if they lose a certain number of customers and their employees are going to become unemployed to get welfare payments paid by taxpayers.

When a big industry comes to an end, there is a network of associated industries that can fall with it and if enough industries disappear this ultimately leads to mass unemployment.

Therefore taxes are a very sensitive issue. You want to take the apples but if you also cut the trunk and the roots of the tree there are going to be no apples.

2017 General Election - Box of Surprises or Pandora's Box

2017 General Election

No sooner than the echoes of the French Presidential Election are dying down and France prepares itself for a Legislative Election, the focus is more than ever before on what happens in the United Kingdom.

In every election there are different factors in play. The Conservative Party without David Cameron is once again led by a female Prime Minister, the second female Prime Minister after Margaret Thatcher interrupting a very long series of male Prime Ministers in the history of British Democracy.

North of the border, in Scotland, another female leads a majority party, the SNP, with a very different agenda, and in Wales yet another female leads Plaid Cymru - equivalent of SNP but on a much lower scale.

So there are going to be several battles in this war called General Election. In Scotland, SNP needs to justify its predominance (56 out of 59 Scottish MPs are SNP) and the SNP struggle will take place on two fronts: its local politics within Scotland as political party in government and its politics within the United Kingdom and the relationship with the EU. If local politics happen to be the main focus, SNP could end up losing many of the House of Commons' seats that it won in the previous election.

We should never trust electoral forecasts. If forecasts are true then the Conservative Party is due for a revival in England, Scotland and Wales and even seats in the Greater London Region dominated by the Labour Party would be up for grabs.

Even in the middle of an electoral campaign prominent figures of the Labour Party (London Mayor Sadiq Khan and Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn) don't seem to be on the same wavelength. Just days ago, when the Labour Party Leader went north, the now newly elected Mayor of Greater Manchester didn't want to meet him.

North of the border, things don't seem to be going well for the Labour Party. The Scottish Labour Party Leader Kezya Dugdale suspended Labour councillor in Aberden because they wanted to form an electoral alliance with the Conservative Party. She secured an important majority in the contest for Leadership of the Scottish Labour Party. Would she be obtain to obtain a similar majority today after all that has been happening not just in Scotland but also south of the border? Recent council elections results - May 2017 - seem to indicate that Labour could have to withstand even more divisions.

Prime Minister Theresa May went to Parliament to seek an exception to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 because she said that she needs a strong mandate to engage in Brexit negotiations with the EU. What we witnessed during Parliamentary debates leading to the triggering of Article 50 more than justify the 2017 General Election.

The news that many Labour MPs would not stand as candidates in the coming General Election could signal the reappearance in Parliament of old faces, should they get enough support to win seats in the House of Commons. One of those faces is Simon Hughes, long standing London MP that lost his seat to Labour in 2015. In his particular case, the struggle is to have to stand against a Labour MP that shares his views about the EU. Would divisions in the Labour Party be strong enough an issue to temp Labour voters to support a Lib Dem candidate?

The 2015 General Election was a catastrophe for the Liberal Democrats. In 2010, they had 57 seats. In 2015, they were left with 8 seats. David Ward who was a Member of Parliament in 2010 and lost his seat in 2015 is not allowed to stand for the Liberal Democrats because of differences of opinion regarding Israel and Palestine.

Thanks to an organisation that opposes Brexit, the Conservative Party has the wind on its sails. Prominent Conservative Members of Parliament who were part of the campaign against Brexit changed direction when the said organisation suggested that it would campaign against the Conservative Party. Party allegiances prevailed and now they act as one in support of Prime Minister Theresa May.

So now is the time for party political manifestos with the Liberal Democrats trying to show that they can offer more than the Labour Party, a Labour Party who manifesto is focused on re-nationalisation and on tax changes that could have a major impact not just from a financial point of view but also from a political and social point of view. The Conservative Party chooses a more cautious approach and in times of great political and financial uncertainty vast sectors of the Electorate would choose to play safe.

The Labour Party has grandiose ideas but even within the ranks of the Labour Party there are voices of disagreement of those who don't support the Labour Party Manifesto thinking that it is too extreme or unrealistic in financial terms. This could be a Clause 4 moment for the Labour Party. Will the Labour Party continue under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership? Will the Labour Party split?

The Liberal Democrats dream about the split of the Labour Party, seeking to attract those who oppose Jeremy Corbyn to form another political party, a centre ground political party, a moderate force in British politics to oppose the Conservative Party.

The strain in British politics is at peak levels. 2017 could end up being even more eventful than 2016.  Alignments and re-alignments in a more fluid political environment could lead to quite a few surprising developments.

Away from the so called mainstream political parties, there are quite a few changes in the offing. Some have already discounted UKIP as political party. Others say that UKIP will adapt to a post-EU membership. Arron Banks, former UKIP supporter is now talking about the launch of a new political movement in the autumn - this is after the General Election.

As always the advice is 'don't try to cross the bridge until you reach the bridge' (or don't put the car before the horses). Despite the talk about a Conservative landslide, I am wise enough not to take anything for granted.

Like everybody else, we will go to the polling stations in the early hours of Election Day and we will wait patiently to hear the announcements about who has won and who has lost. Every election is a box of surprises. I do have my favourite to win. I have my own views about who should win for the sake of the country. We do need a strong government. A dithering government or a government with a very small majority could be a Pandora's Box.

 

Vladimir Putin: Qualifies the anti-Trump political climate in the US as political schizophrenia

President Vladimir Putin qualified the anti-Trump political climate in the USA as political schizophrenia and offered to release records of the conversation President Donald Trump had with Russian representatives. He even joked about it saying that he was about to tell off Sergei Lavrov and Sergey Kislyak because if they got some secrets they didn't report back to the Russian government.

It is pretty evident that the Russian Federation is ready to confront the warmongering lobby with the facts, not that people like Senator Schumer or Senator McCain of the Clinton News Network would take any notice of the truth when they Schumer, McCain and the Clinton News Network are not so much interested in the truth but on the fabrications and distortions that they produce to attack President Donald Trump.

Labour Manifesto: a lot to worry about and not just about economics

Labour Manifesto: a lot to worry about and not just about economics

For those of us who take the time to read party political Manifestos, the Labour Party Manifesto for the 2017 General Election contains some worrying inexactitudes. I say "contains some worrying inexactitudes" not to say 'incredible lies".

The Manifesto of more than a 100 pages with more than 24,000 words and divided in 12 chapters deals with a number of issues and some very frightening ideas.

We cannot deal with everything in one single article. Therefore I will focus on Chapter 2 - Negotiating Brexit.

On Chapter 2, the Manifesto says that Labour will scrap the Conservatives' Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union.

Now standing by what many high ranking EU representatives including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Jean Claude Junker, Martin Schultz and Wolfgang Schäuble, Brexit means no Single Market and no Customs Union. There could be trade agreements but Britain will not be part of the Single Market or of the Customs Union.

This leads us to the point that the Labour Party is in denial of the nature of Brexit and wants Britain to remain in the EU, going against the will of the British people expressed in a Referendum on June 23 2016 and supported by the House of Commons that acknowledge the will of the British people and gave Prime Minister Theresa May the authority to trigger Article 50.

What follows next is yet another lie. The Manifesto says "A Labour government will immediately guarantee existing rights for all EU nationals living in Britain and secure reciprocal rights for UK citizens who have chosen to make their lives in EU countries. Eu nationals do not just contribute to our society: they are part of our society. And they should not be used as bargaining chips."

"It is shameful that the Prime Minister rejected repeated attempts by Labour to resolve this issue before Article 50 was triggered. As a result three million EU nationals have suffered unnecessary uncertainty, as have 1.2 million UK citizens living in the EU."

Another two lies: One - Britain is not using EU nationals as bargaining chips and Two - Prime Minister Theresa May tried unsuccessfully to get Angela Merkel and other high ranking EU representatives to deal with the issue of EU and UK citizens' rights before Article 50 was triggered.

The EU response was that there would no negotiations whatsoever until after Article 50 was triggered and formal negotiations started. The Labour Party is lying to voters misrepresenting what has been Britain official position on this issue.

The Labour Party explicitly says that "We will drop the Conservatives' Great Repeat Bill, replacing with an EU Rights and Protections Bill". What this means is that the Labour Party will seek to maintain the status in which EU rules will take precedence over British rules.

On the one hand the Labour Party is portraying itself as respecting the will of the Electorate expressed on June 23 2016 and on the other the Labour Party is refusing to accept the will of the people by maintaining the status quo that the Electorate expressly rejected.

A concoction of false promises and lies are not a good start for a Manifesto that seeks to persuade the Electorate to support the Labour Party in a General Election.

Arms Lobby doesn't like peace between US and Russia

Arms Lobby doesn't like peace between US and Russia

Any signs of joviality and closeness between US and Russia is something that the Arms Lobby and those who benefit from rivalry and wars don't like.

But Senator Schumer, one of President Trump's staunchest critics doesn't practice what he preaches. He is angry because President Trump is being friendly with Russia and because his party lost a Presidential Election having chosen the wrong candidate - a woman with self-evident physical and mental problems that will go on blaming others but not so much herself for her own defeat. The Russians did this, the Russians did that. No mention whatsoever of cheating within the Democratic Party against another Democratic candidate - Bernie Sanders. Senator Sanders was robbed by the very same people who now ran around shouting about foul play.

Hillary Clinton didn't wipe out her emails for fear of being hacked. She wiped out her emails before they could fall into the hands of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. CNN (Clinton News Network) and other mass media and the war machine of Hollywood became a gigantic propaganda machine targeting Donald Trump as aspiring Presidential Candidate, as Presidential Candidate and now as President of the United States of America.

Does anybody want to push the Nuclear Button? If we don't want somebody to push the Nuclear Button we must choose dialogue instead of confrontation. Organised and premeditated hostility towards the Russian Federation will not bring Peace but War.

NATO forces massing along the borders of the Russian Federation are a reminder of what happened on June 22 1941 - Unternehmen Barbarossa. As Adolf Hitler said, armies are made for war. Massing troops along the borders of another country is not a sign of the will for peace but of the determination to go to war. On June 22, 1941, National Socialist Germany under the leadership of Adolf Hitler invaded the Soviet Union and the rest is history.

Some people in the higher echelons of power of the United States of America want Nuclear War and Senator Charles Schumer could be one of them and so could be Senator John McCain - two warmongers - one on the Democratic side and another on the Republican side.

Both Senator Schumer and Senator McCain are members of the pro-war campaign. They don't want friendship and cooperation between two key countries in the Security Council of the Organisation of the United Nations.

European Convention on Human Rights and Political Life in the United Kingdom

European Convention on Human Rights and Political Life in the United Kingdom

Article 14 - Prohibition of discrimination

The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.

Why then in the United Kingdom members of legal political parties or who have been associated with legal political parties are banned from certain professions? 

This is an extremely serious issue and too many people in the United Kingdom are willing to accept discrimination against those they don't agree with. When people are banned from joining the Police services, for example, and this is done on political grounds such ban is a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Those enforcing such bans like to portray themselves as supporters of Democracy and in fact they are not supporting Democracy because Democracy is based on deeds and not just empty words while many are being denied fundamental rights.

The Prison Service says it was the first public sector group to ban staff from belonging to racist groups, and specifically asks applicants if they belong to the BNP, the National Front or Combat 18.

The Association of Chief Police Officers also agreed a policy in 2004 that means police officers can be dismissed if they are members of the party.

Combat 18 is not a political party. Far from it, but both British National Party and National Front, whatever their ideological platforms, are legal political parties taking part in elections in the United Kingdom.

This shows very clearly that both the Prison Service, the Association of Chief Police Officers and other branches of the State are in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights that doesn't allow discrimination on political grounds.

What is even worse is that there are quite a few people ready and willing to violate the European Convention on Human Rights.

Moreover, I do believe that Jo Cox MP, the Labour Party MP that was killed a few months ago, was targeted because she was campaigning for additional violations of the European Convention on Human Rights.

When your political aim is to deprive others of their legitimate rights, you can expect that at a certain point in time life will catch up with you.

In the United Kingdom, anybody who dares to have an alternative point of view that doesn't coincide with the views of the so called mainstream political parties is usually called Nazi, Fascist, Xenophobe, Anti-Semite, Racist et cetera et cetera.

This is so much so that Universities that used to be at the forefront of new thinking and openness are now dominated by people that believe that they have the legitimate right of banning those that they don't like and this is why every time somebody who has the audacity to be a free-thinker is invited to talk there is a scandal and invitations are very often withdrawn for fear of offending a Political Correct Society that is destroying public freedoms.

Free Speech is no longer the rule. Free Speech is under attack. This is one of the fundamental reasons why Jo Cox MP was killed. The likes of the UAF and Hope Not Hate are not much different from the storm-troopers that they say that they criticise. Going around wearing balaclavas, shouting insults, threatening political opponents and attacking people that they don't like they are exactly what they say that they oppose.

In 2004, Nick Griffin then British National Party Leader, raised the alert about Muslim rape gangs abusing children in the United Kingdom. At the time, Nick Griffin was qualified as being Racist when all he did was to raise the alert about a crime that was becoming endemic. Rotherham was one of the British towns greatly affected but not the only one. The MP for Rotherham happened to be Denis MacShane from the Labour Party that blatantly chose not to do anything about it. The Police forces were instructed to deny the ethnicity of the attackers. The rest of the political establishment simply didn't want to talk about the issue when minors were being taken from public residences to be used in orgies of sex, alcohol and drugs carried out by grown up men.

The scandal went on and on and on, with politicians and Police forces whose duty was to protect vulnerable children from abuse simply choosing to cover up, to pretend that nothing was happening. Only in 2016, eight years after Nick Griffin first raised the alert, we started to see prosecutions with Muslim criminals involved in rape sent to jail.

Things changes but not that much. Instead of referring to Muslim criminals, the mass media, the Police and the political establishment chose to use the description "Asian rape gangs", apportioning blame to people of other ethnic groups that had nothing to do with the crimes being committed. The Sikh Community had nothing to do with it. The Chinese, the Japanese or other communities were not involved with the crimes being committed. They were afraid of using the terms Muslim Rape Gangs because the Politically Correct Discourse banned from doing so.

A few days ago, Katie Hopkins spoke about the issue on LBC Radio, and openly mentioned the curtain of secrecy and the organised attempt to deny that there were Muslim rape gangs. Therefore, I spoke with Nick Griffin and asked him if this wasn't a fundamental reason to be interviewed by LBC Radio given that he was the first one to raise the alert about crimes being committed. Nick Griffin stated that they wouldn't give him the opportunity to talk because there is a plain ban not to allow him to talk and this in a country that is supposed to be a Democracy.

There is political discrimination and people are being banned not just from speaking but also from legal professions. This is real Britain.

Tony Blair: Ban on prosecution goes back to court

A higher magistrate is going to study the existing ban on private prosecution cases brought against Tony Blair.

What transpires from an article published by The Guardian is that the British Justice System is hidden behind a veil of secrecy. Some things might never change.

This is one major characteristic of a weak Democracy that cannot face its demons head on because its citizens are denied access to information they should know for Democracy to be a real Democracy.

Secrecy leads to speculation that undermines Democracy because there is always the presumption that things are kept secret because they are dirty, illegal, fraudulent, criminal. This is the country that has Laws that prevent members of the public from knowing what their rulers are up to with archives that will never be made public or will be made public not less than a 100 years afterwards.

Theresa May is absolutely right in asking the country for a clear mandate

To be or not to Be: That is the question.

When Prime Minister Theresa May was elected by the Conservative Party, many of those criticising her for calling an early election said that 'she had not been elected in a General Election'.

As soon as Prime Minister Theresa May went to Parliament to amend the legislation about fixed 5-year Parliaments and won, she was criticised for asking the British people for a clear mandate.

I am not a member of the Conservative Party or of any other political party for that matter. I vote with my conscience regardless of any party political allegiance and I say that Prime Minister Theresa May is absolutely right to call a General Election when some of the most crucial negotiations modern Britain will be engaged in are due to take place.

I witnessed the mayhem and confusion in the House of Commons, the sniper-fire and the air of division and without a shadow of a doubt a House of Commons elected after the implementation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty was badly needed because the one we had did not represent the will of the Electorate expressed on June 23, 2016.

We need a Parliament that is fully behind the British Prime Minister showing a United Kingdom that is truly united supporting the will of the British people who, at the end of the day, is the true sovereign of the United Kingdom.

When the new House of Commons rises it will be a House of Commons that truly reflects the will of the Electorate and not a House of Commons that was embattled in the campaign for or against the implementation of Article 50 of the House of Commons.

We hope to see the real balance of forces in all home nations and undoubtedly there is a question mark about the level of support for the Scottish National Party that constantly threatens to break up the United Kingdom cajoling, blackmailing and concocting all kinds of schemes that threaten the political stability of the United Kingdom and weakens the United Kingdom when confronted with external powers.

I will stop short of qualifying Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP as traitors but the actions of the SNP and of its leader are controversial not to say treacherous and treasonable. There was a lawful Referendum on Scottish Independence, Referendum that the SNP has asked for and campaigned for and there was a clear majority of Scots that chose to be part of the United Kingdom. So where the United Kingdom goes, Scotland goes and there is no way out of it. That was the commitment made when people were asked if the wanted an independent Scotland.

All home nations will act as one, together, when decisions are made in the negotiations with the European Union because they share one destiny as the United Kingdom.

Those opposing the implementation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty even appealed to the maximum Court in the land and the maximum Court in the land said loudly and clearly that it was up to the national Parliament and its elected chamber the House of Commons to make a decision and that all other assemblies including the Scottish Parliament should have no say in the matter.

The Scottish government regardless of being or not being a majority in the Scottish Parliament and regardless of the number of MPs that represent the SNP in the House of Commons have to obey the will of the majority in the House of Commons.

The General Election is about having or not having a strong government to negotiate the future relationship with the European Union. Everything else comes second place. The priority is to show a united United Kingdom with an elected Primer Minister backed up by an unquestionable political mandate to do whatever is necessary.

Jo Cox: Right to the Point

Jo Cox: Right to the Point

• The then Labour MP Jo Cox was murdered. Fact. 
• The man who killed her had asked NHS for help because he was feeling mentally unstable and was told to come back another day. Fact

• Jo Cox was campaigning to deprive quite a lot of people of the right to have say in a Democratic Society. Fact.

• In the UK, there is legislation and regulations that bans members of legal political parties from certain professions. Fact.

These are the irrefutable facts and we know that this is the case and that for a very long time 1) the infra-structure to deal with cases of mental illness has been deficient and 2) there has been institutionalised political repression promoted by some political parties, the mass media and para-political organisations and the Trade Union movement to the point that one particular organisation called the National Union of Journalists actively encourages and promotes hostile attitudes against people who do not agree with its own ideological platform.

At this moment in time, I am not a member of any political party, I have no political affiliation whatsoever. Just a few days ago, I went to witness rallies that took part near the Houses of Parliament - one organised by Britain First and another organised by EDL.

I was accosted by a woman identified as a representative of the National Union of Journalists that in a very intimidating bully manner came to me and started a sort of interrogation followed by all kinds of accusations. I was there merely as an observer, filming and talking to people around me and this included talking to deployed Police officers both at Charing Cross BR and on the Embankment promenade. I didn't make any speeches. I didn't applaud or cheer anyone. I repeat: I was there merely as an external observer.

So called UAF and Hope Not Hate are bully organisations and we know the tactics some of their members use wearing balaclavas and physically attacking those that they don't like. It has got to the point when Conservative Party activists were attacked and politicians like Nigel Farage stated that at one point he was afraid of living his home for fear of being targeted by violent thugs.

The death of an individual is lamentable but how much of what is going on was promoted by Jo Cox herself? The present climate of intolerance and violence against political opponents has existed for quite a while and have said more than once that Police forces are deployed to protect people against United Against Fascism that I call United Against Freedom and Hope Not Hate that I call Hate Not Hope.

Banning members of legal political parties from certain professions is not only wrong. It should be illegal because it is not consistent with Democracy. The fact that such bans exist degrades Democracy and promotes discrimination and persecution.  

 

Why is Labour's Helen Goodman promoting the British National Party?

Helen Goodman - Labour Party

Why Labour's Helen Goodman promoting the British National Party?

After the lethal attack against Jo Cox carried out by a man who the day before had asked and been denied mental support by the National Health Service and despite the efforts of the BBC, Sky News and the Political Establishment to depict the attack as a political motivated attack, the truth is that the said attack was de facto the consequence of a campaign of persecution against people whose only crime is not to agree with the policies of the so called mainstream political parties including the Labour Party.

Britain might be the only country in the entire world in which members of a legal political party that lawfully participes in elections are banned from certain professions. This is an interesting aspect remembering that many criticise National Socialist Germany for banning Jews from certain professions. Here the similarities between what Britain is doing and what happened in the regime headed by Adolf Hitler.

The then so-called anti-racist Member of Parliament launched a racist against Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt on Twitter. Mr Hunt's wife happens to be Chinese and the then Labour MP Helen Goodman publicly insulted her for being Chinese.

When other politicians including members of her own party reacted, she was forced to delete the twit and apologise but what counts are first intentions. She publicly used the ethnicity of the wife of Mr Hunt to launch a politically motivated attack.

In a letter addressed to Helen Goodman, the British National Party Leader Adam Walker explains his reasons to stand in the Bishop Aukland Constituency.