Brexit: General Election and what afterwards?

Brexit: General Election and what afterwards?

December 13 is the day but what will be the political landscape then? There are all kinds of assumptions but what will be the real picture? After the events of the last three years, nothing is guaranteed.

Whether we are dealing with national politics or geopolitics, the outcome is uncertain.  Both main political parties have been fractured by a more than three-years-struggle and this is not just about internal politics. The whole country has been affected and this includes the Supreme Court. Disappointment has been replaced with cynical attitudes. 

The first question to ask is: what will be the turnout in this General Election? The weather is the least of all concerns. Electoral margins will be an issue and the political platforms of candidates standing will be another issue because of divided allegiances that could alter the outcome of the General Election.

What was the thinking behind the votes of Members of Parliament that perfectly knew that a General Election could mean the loss of their seats? What was the thinking behind the votes of Members of Parliament that not necessarily agree with the political agendas of their own political parties? What was the thinking behind the votes of Members of Parliament for whom the chances of returning to the House of Commons are remote? Yesterday, the last interventions of Members of Parliament like Anna Soubry and Michael Gapes show the level of dispair after the realization that their political futures could effectively be coming to and. At the last minute, 10 out of 21 Conservative MPs that lost the whip were returned to the fold.

This General Election is being fought inside and outside political parties.

 

    

Brexit: Isolated as the only political party not supporting a General Election, Labour will vote for General Election

Brexit: Isolated as the only political party not supporting a General Election, Labour will vote for General Election

Finally, today, the House of Commons will debate about a General Election and vote for a General Election, ending years of uncertainty and rising tensions inside the Houses of Parliament and on the streets of Britain.

No milkshakes this time. No verbal abuse nor threats. Just ballots and Democracy as it should have been for the very beginning.

We awair with expectation today's debates in the House of Commons. 

Brexit: Parliament is playing a very dangerous game, an expensive game

Brexit: Parliament is playing a very dangerous game, an expensive game

When Anna Soubry rose in the House of Commons the game was self-evident. Why not a General Election? For the same reasons that the Labour Party doesn't want a General Election. Plagued by internal conflicts and divisions, scandals, it remains to be seen if the Labour Party is not actually the big loser in the skirmishes linked to Brexit.

Jeremy Corbyn knows that this could well be the end of his political career. After all that is happening in the Labour Party, losing a General Election means goodbye to the Leadership of the Labour Party and a reshuffle that will be the end of the road for John McDonnell and others that will be blamed for the context in which many Labour MPs left to become Independents and even joined the Liberal Democrats. For some Labour MPs, all the threats will mean very little either because their majorities look unassailable or simply because after decades in politics they are heading for retirement. For other Labour MPs, the risk of their careers being ended by a General Election is very real and therefore they will drag their feet for as long as it is possible to do so. Other Labour MPs see the defeat of the Labour Party and in particular of Jeremy Corbyn as the best opportunity they have to rebuild the Labour Party. Losing an election would be for them a price worth paying 

For the Liberal Democrats, it is the kind of opportunity that they have been looking for for a vary long time. They jumped at the chance of being in government and this is why they were eager to join the Conservative Party in a coalition under the Leadership of David Cameron. In fact, some Labour MPs asked the Liberal Democrats today if they were willing to join the Conservatives in a coalition if the outcome of a General Election is once again a hung Parliament. There is the suspicion that this is exactly what the Leadership of the Liberal Democrats is looking for as several of them - including its present Leader - were in government with the Conservatives. The main difficulty is that the present Liberal Democratic Party was joined by Labour MPs and Conservative MPs and they would be in a very awkward situation.

For those like Chuka Umunna, former Labour MP for Streatham, to leave the Labour Party was a jump into the unknown. Then came the option of joining another political grouping with former Labour MPs and former Conservative MPs called Change UK. But after a dramatic failure in the European Parliament Elections, Chuka Umunna instinctively knew that the only alternative was to join the Liberal Democrats to stand a chance to try to save his political career. In a General Election, he wouldn't stand in Streatham and therefore he would be standing in the City. He secured his position as Liberal Democrat Speaker on Economic Affairs but, would he be willing to be part of a coalition with the Conservatives? For Conservatives who left the Conservative Party and joined the Liberal Democratic Party to see themselves as part of a coalition with the Conservatives would be a paradox and a very uncomfortable position to be in.

But before we can assume that Labour MPs and Conservative MPs who joined the Liberal Democrats would be re-elected but this time as Liberal Democrat MPs, we need to look at what is happening right now. The European Union suggested that they would agree to an extension - that they called a flexible extension - to allow the UK to finalize all legislative processses including the approval of the Withdrawal Agreement agreed with Prime Minister Boris Johnson but the agreement for a flexible extension comes with conditions attached and they are waiting for the House of Commons to make a decision that the House of Commons is not willing to make. The House of Commons hasn't approved the Deal, the House of Commons doesn't want a second Referendum and the House of Commons doesn't want a General Election. What would then be the point of granting an extension - or even a flexible extension? 

Will the EU deny the United Kingdom an extension at the last minute because the House of Commons cannot agree the way forward? It has been reported that tomorrow, a new motion will be put forward that would make possible to have a General Election despite the Fixed Term Parliament Act that requires a two-third majority of all 650 seats of the House of Commons including the seats that have not been occupied by Sinn Fein/IRA. The Speaker and other officials despite being MPs don't vote. For this reason, in order to have the required number of votes - according to the Fixed Term Parliament Act - a vast number of Labour MPs would have to support the motion. Tomorrow, would be decision time in the House of Commons. Would this be the end of the stalemate?

 

Now it is Chile's turn. Political Parties without leaders and political classes disconnected from the Chilean people

Now it is Chile's turn. Political Parties without leaders and political classes disconnected from the Chilean people

When the political classes are isolated from those they are supposed to represent, people die and this is exactly what is happening in Chile where the building of the Chilean Congress had to be evacuated as protests spread and the government struggles to contain a situation generated by economic hardship.

When the European Common Market was created generating protectionism and subsides, Latin America suffered as a mainly agricultural region and exporter of agricultural products. It can be said without a shadow of a doubt that the progression towards the creation of the European Community and later the European Union only made a bad situation worse. 

The dictatorships of the 1970s and 1980s were the direct consequence of European tariffs and subsidies. Latin America debt grew exponentially and this led to even greater indebtedness not just with private institutions but also with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank that imposed recessionary recipes that meant cuts of investments in infra-structure, health, education and many other fundamental areas.

Latin American economies never recovered. Drug production, drug trafficking and and political instability were the direct results of the degradation of national economies. Against all odds, economies like the Chilean economy managed to succeed and figure amongst the most prosperous economies of Latin America. But it didn't last.

Most Chileans earn between £437 and £592 a month, struggling to pay for basic needs and things have become intolerable leading to present demonstrations that have led to curfews and state of emergency in 12 of 16 major cities in Chile, with more than 19 deaths, more than 500 people injured and more than 2000 people arrested.

Getting Britain out of EU, would allow Britain to become involved in many markets around the world, many of which are part of the developing world, helping many democratic countries across the world and Chile is one of them.  

Anti-Terrorism or Dirty Political Games

Anti-Terrorism or Dirty Political Games

If in the United Kingdom Anti-Terror Legislation is used for political purposes, Britain will face a nightmare of major proportions. With the arrival of Tony Blair as British Prime Minister in 1997, things went from bad to worse. Anti-Terror Legislation was adopted primarily to go against Muslim communities in the United Kingdom.

With a bill introduced by the then Secretary Jacqui Smith, the door was open for detention without trial, suspension of Habeas Corpus and anonimity to cover up the activities of British Security Services in party political activities and criminal activities in the United Kingdom.

Many questions were raised about the actions of Russian oligarchs that left Russian Federation and former republics of the Soviet Union with vast amounts of money that they had stolen from Russia and republics of the former Soviet Union.

Britain welcome them and explanation was they were the good guys runnning away from bad fallen Soviet Union. They transfered money to the pockets of their British hosts and came with a network of contacts that could be useful for intelligence organizations including the CIA and British Security Services.

With money and contacs they brought more corruption to the United Kingdom as if existing corruption in the United Kingdom was not enough and wars between oligarchs started to be fought in the United Kingdom. 

One of those oligarchs was Boris Berezovsky that soon became a star. He had been second pair of hands of Boris Yeltsin and he had with him Alexander Litvinenko - a former KGB agent that had gone rogue. They were both up to their ears supporting Islamic terrorists in Chechnya and used their support for Islamic terrorists as revenge when they feel from grace and were forced to run away. 

Boris Berezovky was in his element in Britain. He had money, a network that included former Soviet republics, and was a useful pawn for the CIA and British intelligence services. He was very much a celebrity that relied on the support of a firm of lawyers that could get British visas for his friends that were on the run. Britain became a magnet for every crook that wanted to avoid the courts.

Because he was a key piece on the chessboard and due to his support to the enemies of the Russian Federation, Russian authorities asked Britain to send him back. Russia chosen legal means to trying and take him back to face the courts and Britain protected him because of his apparent usefulness. 

But his lieutenant Alexander Litvinenko was his Achilles Heel. He knew too much about the businesses of Boris Berezovky and in the end this led to his demise at the hands of British agents that in an effort to protect the major asset - Boris Berezovky - didn't hesitate in eliminating a loose end.

In 2001, Britain got involved in Afghanistan, a major opium producer. There were enormous amounts of money to be made. The public explanation was the fight against AlQaeda and Taliban. The true reason was the drugs trade coming from Afghanistan. American soldiers, British soldiers and soldiers of another nationalists were sent to die in Afghanistan and the world was told that they had conquered Afghanistan when in reality they barely controlled some areas including areas of Kabul. Most of the country remained in the hands of tribal leaders and Taliban. No surprise then that the conflict has lasted more than 18 years.

As long as there is money to be made in the opium trade, they will try and keep some kind of military presence in Afghanistan even if doing so means putting the lives of British soldiers in danger. The rising incidence of drug addiction affecting Western troops tells you the real story and USA has not escaped the realities of the drug trade linked to Afghanistan. The use of opioids in the USA has become widespread and endemic.

But going back to the story linked to maffia boss Boris Berezovky, the way to make the British position untenable was to denounce the businesses that Boris Berezovsky was involved in and part of his business activities included supporting Chechen rebels allied to AlQaeda and Taliban while British troops were fighting and dying in Afghanistan. 

Russian agents approached Alexander Litvinenko. The idea was to persuade Alexander Litvinenko to cooperate to be able to expose Boris Berezovsky and by extension expose British authorities that supported him. The quick to prevent a scandal and protect Boris Berezovsky was for British agents to kill Alexander Litvinenko. The method used by British authorities was radioactive substances that supposedly could only be produced in a military laboratory. Well, Britain has such kind of laboratory and stores the said radioactive substances. The British Establishment quickly blamed Russian agents for the demise of Alexander Litvinenko and convinced the mass media - that it takes very little to convince because of long standing anti-Russian prejudices - that it could ony have been done by Russian agents. Since the days of the Cold War, blaming Russia has been a British sport.

With Alexander Litvinenko out of the way, the British Establishment thought the problem had been satisfactorily solved. This wouldn't last. The business activities of Boris Berezovky were obviously not limited to the United Kingdom. He had links in Latin America were there were records of his "business activities". In time, in his wars with other Russian oligarchs, Boris Beresovky got embroiled in a legal battle with Roman Abramovich - a real celebrity and more so for his acquisition of Chelsea Football Club. Roman Abramovich defeated Boris Berezovsky in British courts and at this point in time Boris Berezovky had become much more of a liability than an asset. British agents conveniently "suicided" Boris Berezovsky conveniently get rid of loose ends. 

With Boris Berezovsky out of the way, the attention turned to Roman Abramovich and the next move of the British Establishment was obvious and foreseeable: they refused to renew Roman Abramovich's British visa. 

Going back to the main subject, the legislation introduced under a Labour government by the then Home Office Secretary Jacqui Smith has been steadily enhanced and now is being used not only to target Muslim communities in the United Kingdom but also as a political tool against those the British Establishment doesn't like. 

During the trials against Alison Chabloz and Jez Turner there were attempts by Prosecutors to use anti-Terrorism legislation in cases that had nothing to do with terrorism. They have tried to use anti-Terror Legislation against Tommy Robinson. Others, less fortunate, have got long sentences because of alleged terrorist offenses.

Police forces and especially S015 are now openly using anti-Terror Legislation for political persecution against individuas that have nothing to do with terrorism. In this particular situation, againts those who are see as too close to the Russian Federation.

As a fabricated dodgy dossier was used to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq, there are fabricated cases for political reasons. When governments use anti-Terrorism legislation to deal with political opponents they cross a red line and the courts become kangaroo courts very much like the courts of a totalitarian state and this is happening in Britain today.

 

Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn's only alternative to prevent the disintegration of the Labour Party is a Referendum

Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn's only alternative to prevent the disintegration of the Labour Party is a Referendum

Jeremy Corbyn has rejected a General Election three times while asking for a General Election more than 50 times. Why? It doesn't escape public attention the flow of Labour MPs leaving the Labour Party because of anti-Semitism, harassment and the risk of deselection. 

On the same day of the start of the Labour Party Conference in Brighton, there was an attempt to get rid of Labour's Deputy Leader Tom Watson. Later on, there were dramatic changes at Labour Central Office with Jeremy Corbyn's supporters being replaced with John McDonnell's supporters. Not only that. Just a few day, key members of the cabinet spoke for Remain while Jeremy Corbyn was nowhere to be seen.

He announced a three-line whip and 19 Labour MPs supported the Deal proposed by the Conservative government. Now, it is reported that faced with possibility of a motion for General Election on Monday, Jeremy Corbyn is asking Labour MPs not to support it. There deselection processes south of the border and north of the border. And the issue of anti-Semitism has not gone away. Some of his key MPs even joined the Liberal Democrats. 

Jeremy Corbyn and others like to talk about chaos in the Conservative Party but looking at what has been going on in the Labour Party I would say that they situation is a lot worse in the Labour Party.

The great benefitiaries are the Conservative Party as party for Leave and the Liberal Democrats as party for Remain. They are the only two parties that stand to be net winners in a General Election. The Labour Party performed badly in the European Elections and there is the danger that Labour could become the third party in a General Election.

Vince Cable spoke about the creation of a centrist political party. The fact that Conservative MPs and Labour MPs have joined the Liberal Democrats would be a step in what Vince Cable called a new alternative. The creation of a non-Marxist alternative in British politics could be the sign of things to come.

When you go down to local level, Labour grassroots have been turning against local authorities controlled by the Labour Party accussing them of being the drivers of gentrification and ethnic cleansing. The next stage would be a challenge to Labour hegemony at local authority level. If there is a General Election in December, what will happen in the London Election? Siobhan Benita - former independent Mayoral Candidate will be standing for the Liberal Democrats. Shaun Bailey will be standing for the Conservatives. Will Sadiq Khan survive? At constituency level, with processes of deselection of local MPs, the outcome for the Labour Party is less than certain.

  

Syria: Russia is building peace for all

Syria: Russia is building peace for all

While USA, Britain and others were bent on regime change in Syria, thus creating the mess that Syria became, Russia was involved - especially authorized by the Syrian government - to restore stability in Syria.

Even today, the British Parliament seems to be more worried about how close Russia and Turkey have become and there is even talk about raising the issue at the next NATO summit. They seem to forget that thanks to Russian mediation in Syria the feared massacres in Syria will not happen. Turkey will have the reassurances it needs that Kurds will not use Syria as a platform to attack Turkey. For the Syrian government, Russia provides the reassurances that Syria will recover control in areas that were occupied by foreign forces.

And what the mass media and many of the political establishments are worried about? They talk about loss of American influence. So what is more important: American influence with the loss of the lives of American soldiers who would be dying for nothing or the restoration of peace in Syria and by extension the potential to restore peace in the Middle East? If peace is restored in Syria, there won't be a platform for Islamic State to attack other countries and this means that everybody in Middle East and Asia Minor and outside the said areas will benefit. US withdrawal was a rational and benefitial measure for all, including those not involved in conflicts. The sooner political estability is restored, the sooner the fighting will stop for the benefit of all. 

Another factor that both some people in the USA and many in the Europe ignore is that Turkey has sufferent the brunt of instability in the Middle East and Asia Minor. Hundreds of thousands of refugees, running away from conflict, ended up in Turkey and this is causing serious problems in Turkey. So the sooner conflict ends, the sooner many if not all of those refugees will be able to return to Syria. What is more, when the conflict in Syria is over many of those who sought refuge in Europe and elsewhere will be able to return to Syria. This way, many difficult issues several European countries are struggling to deal with will be resolved.

So, once again, thanks to the Russian Federation, there is hope for peace in a very troubled part of the Middle East and there is hope of being able to deal with the problems of refugees and the problems massive flow of refugees can and do create.

But the positive influence of the Russian Federation doesn't end in Middle East, Asia Minor, Europe and the USA. The Russian Federation is building up cooperation with African countries and in turn will create a much better environment, an environment for peaceful and democratic developments.

  

Catalonia: A historical insight into what led to the present crisis

Catalonia: A historical insight into what led to the present crisis

Eduardo Mendoza provides a different angle - a pragmatic non partisan approach - to what has led to present events in Spain and in Catalonia. The author, born in Barcelona in 1943, states in the book "Qué está pasando en Cataluña?"(What is happening in Catalonia?) deals with cetain historical assumptions that tend to distort perceptions of what is actually happening. He also deals with cultural aspects of Catalonia, immigration and how immigration has shaped up today's Catalonia and in end comes to the issue of independence of Catalonia.

Eduardo Mendoza clearly explains why he wrote what he wrote refering to those who are in favour of independence and those who are against independence:

"No lo he escrito para posicionarme en un bando o en otro. Personalmente, no me gusta ninguno de los dos, pero eso se puede atribuir a mi temperamento, a mis ideas y a mi experiencia personal. Lo he escrito para tratar de comprender lo que está pasando." (I haven't written it to take sides. Personally, I don't like neither, but this can attributed to my temperament, to my ideas and to my personal experience. I have written it to try to understand what is happening." 

Although I don't completely agree with some of the statements made by Eduardo Mendoza, the book provides a valuable analysis to deal with the complexities of the subject. When you deal with the history of Spain and of Catalonia nothing is black or white and over-simplication can lead to fundamental errors. Eduardo Mendoza states that although the Spanish Civil has something to do with what is happening today there are other more relevant factors dating from Post-Franco Spain. 

"Francisco Franco fue un criminal de guerra, un dictador y un político astuto y mediocre, pero su importancia histórica y su influencia han sido magnificadas." (Francisco Franco was a war criminal, a dictator and an astute and mediocre politician, but his political importance and his influence have been exaggerated.) By saying this, the author indicates that thinking that everything that happens today was due to the Civil War and Franco's regime is in itself an exaggeration. 

During the Civil War and after the Civil War, Catalonia was not a monolithical unit. Some Catalans sided with Franco and some Catalans sided with the Republic. Catalonia itself was divided across socio-economic classes. In principle, Catalonia didn't want independence. Catalonia wanted to recover its lost freedoms, an amnesty for those who had been incarcerated and those who had been forced to leave the country and the restoration of its autonomous government.

The book plublished by Seix Barral in 2017 is a brief, but right to the point analysis for those seeking to comprehend present realities of Catalonia and of Spain. 

It must be remembered that the book was published long before recent political events in Catalonia and in Spain under a Socialist Prime Minister that seems to have lost control. Excessive use of force and long jail sentences for elected representatives of the Catalonian people are reminders of the fact that repression is neither exclusively left wing or exclusively right wing. It happens under any ideology. What is shocking is that today it is happening in what is considered to be democratic Spain.

Brexit: Labour at war trying to expel Labour MP in Scotland

Brexit: Labour at war trying to expel Labour MP in Scotland

While Jeremy Corbyn tries to block Brexit by voting against the deal negotiated with the European Union and also votes against the Programme Motion once the House of Commons voted in favour of the deal, a Labour MP who is against Brexit is about to be thrown out by the Labour Party, expulsion promoted by Unite.

It seems that there isn't enough with the profound distrust of the Leadership of the Labour Party. There isn't enough with hatred against Jews in the Labour Party. Now, they are talking about throwing out even those who in theory should be kept in the Labour Party because they share the views of the Leader of the Labour Party on the EU. 

The Labour Party Leader is as detached from the realities of Britain as he is detached from the views of his own political party. Despite threatening his MPs with a three-line whip, 19 of his MPs support the deal agreed with the European Union. And for individuals like Hillary Benn MP that is the author of what became the Benn Act, well.... the Prime Minister delivered a deal and the deal was approved by the House of Commons. Now, in despair, Jeremy Corbyn is trying to have a new Referendum. Why not a General Election? Because he knows that he doesn't command the views of his own political party and he is right in the middle, in a very unconfortable position.

The Conservative Party is the party of Brexit. The Liberal Democratic Party is the party of Remain. And under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership the Labour Party has become the party of nothing and the promoter of ideas that goes against everything Britain stands for. Banning private education? Supporting the enemies of Britain and risking to build barriers against the main ally of the United Kingdom namely the United States of America. Misguided on national politics. Misguided on geopolitcs. This basically sums up Jeremy Corbyn.

Brexit: When you change one part of a deal you create a different deal.

Brexit: When you change one part of a deal you create a different deal

John McDonnell can talk about Customs Union as much as he wants but the fact remains that when you change one part of a deal that has already been agreed you change the deal and therefore have to return to the negotiations table and this menas yet another delay. What does another delay mean for the European Union? It means a delay in the proceeding, blocking the European Commission, leaving the European Parliament in the dark about who is and who isn't a Member of the European Parliament. The amount of time spent by EU authorities in negotiation after negotiation is time that the EU has not spent in other more fundamental issues for the European Union. John McDonnell, as other Labour MPs, is doing this not because of Brexit but because he has a political agenda to throw a spanner in the works with the belief that this would put him and his party in a better position come a General Election.

The SNP has a very public agenda. For the SNP, Britain is not what matters. For the SNP what matters is Scottish Independence to be achieved regardless of whatever happens to the United Kingdom. What hasn't enter the SNP's minds is that should Scotland become independent Scots will be foreigners in what remains in the United Kingdom and therefore a border will have to be erected across the border with England that will prevent freedom of movement of Scottish citizens. They will. have to have Scottish passports and apply for a visa to enter England or any other part of the United Kingdom. They will have to have their own currency supported by their own Scottish bank. They will have to have their own Armed Forces and they will lose all contracts and benefits they have at the moment as an integral part of the United Kingdom.

For the Liberal. Democrats, everything is about winning and elusive General Election. They became the fourth political party after the SNP and they are now rejoicing because rogue members of other political parties decided to join them. The question is: how long will happiness last? When a General Election comes those who chose to joined the Liberal Democrats might find themselves out of Parliament.

For the DUP, there is a very clear threat. If there was a General Election today in Northern Ireland, there is no guarantees that they will keep or increase the number of DUP MP in Westminster. In the wilderness, the DUP will have little say in Westminster and no say at all in Northern Ireland because the Northern Ireland Assembly has been paralized for the last three years when Sinn Fein IRA in violation of the Good Friday Agreement decided to leave the Northern Ireland Assembly. Sinn Fein IRA doesn't want Northern Ireland to exist. They want to annex Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland. For the DUP, there is a double wammy effect. The DUP doesn't like Abortion and doesn't like Same Sex Marriages. Because there isn't a functioning Northern Ireland Assembly, the Westminster Parliament in what constitutes de-facto Direct Rule imposed in Northern Ireland Abortion and Same Sex Marriages because there is no Northern Ireland Assembly that could oppose Abortion and Same Sex Marriages.

Rebel Conservative MPs are just playing into the hands of the Labour Party, a Labour Party that is divided and of which many Labour MPs don't want Jeremy Corbyn as Leader because of the danger of him becoming Prime Minister.

The only deal that could be put to the vote in a Referendum is the original deal that has the approval of both EU and UK and, even so, the European Union Parliament will only consider the deal that has been agreed by both EU and UK. As stated at the beginning, if you change one part of a deal you change the entire deal and this would lead to a new process of negotiations. Further delays for the United Kingdom and further delays for the EU that in the meantime will have no budget and will be facing UK Veto in the European Commission. 

  

Whatever your views on Catalonian independence, widespread brutality is not the answer

Whatever your views on Catalonian independence, widespread brutality is not the answer

Fourteen year jail sentences for elected Catalonian representatives and widespread brutality is not something that should be happening in Spain and this is happening under a Socialist Spanish Prime Minister.

Condenas a 14 años de prisión para representantes electos Catalanes y brutalidad generalizada no es algo que debería estar ocurriendo en España y esto está pasando bajo un Primer Ministro socialista.

The scenes we see in Catalonia are the kind of scenes that we would usually see under the rule of totalitarian regime and not under democratic rule. The official position of the British government is "it is not our business". It is the business of the Spanish government'. This position is diametrically different when we talk about events happening in other countries where people are severely mistrated by the authorities.

Las escenas que vemos en Catalunia son el tipo de escenas que usualmente veriamos bajo el gobierno de un régimen totalitario y no bajo un gobierno democrático. La postura oficial del gobierno británico es 'no un tema que nos concierna'. Es un asunto que concierne el gobierno español. Esta postura es diametralmente diferente cuando hablamos sobre acontecimientos que ocurren en otros países en que la gente es severamente maltratada por las autoridades. 

Spain is an European Union member country and elected Catalonian MEPs are not allowed to sit in the newly elected European Parliament. One imagines that the European Union wants to build new understandings based on consensus but this is not consensus. This is purely and simply repression.

España es país miembro de la Unión Europea y a MEPs catalanes no se les permite integrarse al Parlamento Europeo recientemente electo. Uno imagina que la Unión Europea desea generar nuevos entendimientos basados en consenso pero esto no es consenso. Esto es lisa y llanamente represión.

Even for those who are highly criticial with regards to the actions of the pro-independence movement, the way fellow Spaniards are treated should be a reason to be extremely concerned. When looking for examples of brutality, ordinary Spaniards are usually told about the Guerra Civil (Spanish Civil War) and what happened soonafter the Guerra Civil but in this particular case this is happening under a Socialist government.

Inclusive para aquellos critican severamente las acciones del movimiento pro-independencia, la manera en que compatriotas españoles son tratados debería ser una razón para estar extremadamente preocupados. Cuando recordamos ejemplos de brutalidad, a los españoles se les habla sobre l.a Guerra Civil Española y lo que ocurrió después de la Guerra Civil Española pero en este caso particular esto está ocurriendo bajo un gobierno socialista.  

For Catalonian seeking to escape, there is no safety across national borders. In the days of General Franco, they could go to France like many did including a famous and celebrated poet idealized by Joan Manuel Serrat. With the existence of the so called European Arrest Warrant, for political reasons Catalonians are being arrested and sent back to Spain where they face an uncertain future.

Para los catalanes que quieren escapar, no hay sitios seguros al otro lado de las fronteras nacionales. En los días del General Franco, podían ir a Francia como muchos fueron incluído un famoso y celebrado poeta idealizado por Joan Manuel Serrat. Con la existencia del denominado European Arrest Warrant, por razones políticas los catalanes están siendo arrestados y enviados a España donde afrontan un futuro incierto. 

Much has been said about Huawei. What about the safety of ordinary communication links?

Much has been said about Huawei. What about the safety of ordinary communication links?

On a daily basis we learn about scams committed using ordinary communcation links in UK. It has gone beyond impersonation. Foreign gangs can now alter information registered by British servers operating links from overseas.

Using computers in India they can, for example, alter the information registered by British Telecom services. When you dial 1471, you are supposed to be told the number that actually called. Not anymore. The fraudsters can now alter at will the numbers registered by British Telecom servers and put in any number that they want as a way not to be tracked down.

We reported the matter to BT authorities, to Members of Parliament and to the Metropolitan Police as servers could be manipulated to extract vital information that could affect not just ordinary people and businesses but also public services including Police and Armed Forces.

How deep this goes is everybody's guess.Next time you receive a spam call think that it could well. be the tip of the iceberg, something involved not just your own personal security but also National Security.

Louise Ellman: Another Labour MP resigns because of anti-Semitism and disagreements on basic policies

Another Labour MP resigns because of anti-Semitism and disagreements on basic policies

Louise Ellman MP

The 75-year-old MP spent 55 years in the Labour Party and his relationship with the Labour Party came to an abrupt end when she resigned declaring that she was resigning because of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party and disagreements with Jeremy Corbyn that she judged unfit to be Prime Minister. If this is not a damning condemnation of the Labour Party, I don't know what is.

As this happens the process of forced deselection of MPs that represent the Labour Party goes on and despite assurances given by Jeremy Corbyn regarding what the Labour Party will do with Members of Parliament that do not foot the line. This is a defining moment for Labour Party MPs. Do you want to pushed around and forced to support policies that you don't want to support? Do you want to be threatened by the Leadership of the Labour Party?

I saw an exchange on Twitter between Anne Soubry MP and Jess Phillips MP. Jess Phillips was showing sadness and surprise asking why the matter of anti-Semitism had not been resolved. Anne Soubry MP asking Jess Phillips MP why they hadn't adopted a firmer stance on the issue and asking why they had not left the Labour Party to form a new centrists political party.

In the present political environment, Members of Parliament will have to decide what matters most. Their principles or their seats. I understand that many will be pressured and will succumb to pressure because their income as Members of Parliament is all they have got or because they want to keep their seats hoping that something will dramatically changed inside the Labour Party.

What becomes immediately apparent is that United Against Fascism, Searchlight, Hope Not Hate, Unite and others don't seem to be at all worried about Anti-Jewish sentiments in the Labour Party and don't seem to be at all worried about racism. The same individuals that usually go around calling other people Nazi, Fascist and Racist appear to be extremely quiet when the Labour Party is the one that stands accused. Are they actually against anti-Jewish sentiments? Are they actually against Racism? Or are they simply there to do the dirty political work for the Labour Party?

Only Russia can help stabilize Asia Minor and Middle East

Only Russia can help stabilize Asia Minor and Middle East

From Russia with love

British and American records in Asia Minor and the Middle East make them unfit to sort out what is going on in those regions because their actions have been usually aligned with Israel and Saudi Arabia and to a lesser extent with Turkey thas has been a minor partner because of its NATO membership.

Because of the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia was sidelined and this is why we had the incoming mess generated in the said regions. Both Russia and China tried to keep things under control but they failed to do so not because they were not willing to have a say but because Britain and the USA took for granted that since Russia was in the process of change and China had no military credibility nor the willingness to engage far away from China's borders they could move as they wanted without any opposition. Hans Blix, UN Inspector, said over and over again that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction - weapons of mass destruction fabricated by George Bush and Tony Blair to justify aggression against Iraq. In the background, Dick Cheney was rubbing his glands with glee thinking about the monies to be made in the reconstruction of Iraq when the war had not even started. The unbelievable and unjustiable destruction of Iraqi infrasture can only be explained by the belief that the more was destroyed the more companies would earn when the reconstruction started. 

The destruction led to chaos that actually prevented the reconstruction. Therefore, the amazing winnings never became a reality. What became a reality is that after desmantling of the Iraqi Armed Forces and of the Police, tribal leaders, religious leaders and gangs took over to fill up the power vacuum. In that kind of environment Iraq was de-facto partitioned and this led to the rise of Islamic State. Pandora's box had been opened. Without Iraq, other regional powers started to strive for power and this is why we have now so many conflicts with so many players including Turkey, the Kurds, Saudi Arabia, Iran and others including Israel who has carried out all kinds of incursions against its neighbours without any condemnation whatsoever.

President Trump's statement was loud and clear: "It is up to Turkey and Syria to sort out their problems. They have been fighting each other for a very long time." What was basically said is that USA doesn't have the will to waste any more time and resources in conflicts that don't affect USA's critical interests. USA has been getting flak for either doing too much or doing too little. If USA is no longer directly involved, there is no flak.

The EU is in no mood nor has the capability to commit troops on the ground and as a Turkish Ambassador clearly stated "Turkey is the second force in NATO in terms of military forces" and added that "This is a Turkish issue as Turkey is trying to deal with terrorism." "The Kurds are no saints." Well, the Kurds best card is to seek an agreement with the Syrian government thus allowing the Syrian government to take over control of disputed zones. Without British and American support the Syrian rebels have nowhere to go and sooner than later will have to put down their weapons. 

A key piece of any aggreement will be guarantees for Turkey that no one will use Syria as a platform to attack Turkey and that Syria will have full control of its territory. Once this is achieved, the conflict will come to an end. Peace in Syria will counter Israeli attempts to destabilize the region and the focus will go elsewhere namely Yemen and Palestine. 

British and American interference only made matters a lot worse than they could have been and helped to promote the kind of rhetoric that is not conducive to peace. Minor players believing that they had external support became increasingly confrontational and lost contact with reality. Once they realize that they will be on their own their confrontational attitudes will become a more moderate language and they will more interested in conflict solving that conflict making.

A Crucial week not just for the UK but also for EU

A Crucial week not just for the UK but also for EU

In an unusual manner, Parliament will be sitting on Saturday October 19 2019. On Saturday, in the House of Commons, the manner in which the United Kingdom will be leaving the European Union will be debated.

Whether the so called Benn Act will come into play or not will depend on what happened with the ongoing negotiation but it will also depend on the behaviour of the Labour Party now lead by John McDonnell who has effectively take the reins from the hands of Jeremy Corbyn by replacing key players close to Jeremy Corbyn.

Even Jess Phillips has spoken about throwing her hat in the ring should Jeremy Corbyn resign and the subject of such resignation has been mentioned far too often not to take into account. Should there be a General Election, will Jeremy Corbyn lead the Labour Party in such General Election? Is the Labour Party seeing Jeremy Corbyn as an electoral liability? 

Well, an Independent MP (former Labour Party) spoke loud and clear about the fact that Jeremy Corbyn would wreck long standing relationships like the US/Britain relationship  and the relationship with NATO. There was even the threat that Jeremy Corbyn would take Britain out of NATO that Emily Thornberry said had no foundation and explicitly said that Jeremy Corbyn had never spoken about taking Britain out of NATO. But whether Jeremy Corbyn wants or doesn't want to wreck the US/UK relationship or take Britain out of NATO is irrelevant. What is relevant is that given his stances in geopolitical terms he doesn't inspire much needed confidence.

This is a time when there are so many "what ifs" that all certainties have evaporated but I have no doubts that at this point in time those in charge of the European Union have come to see Britain's presence in the European Union as a threat since they were reminded of the fact that Britain could block things as critical as the European Union Budget. Allowing an orderly exit would be now a number one priority for the European Union. 

  

The Fall of the BNP and the rise of National Action

The Fall of the BNP and the rise of National Action

There is no coincidence that groups like National Action appeared in the United Kingdom. The demise of the British National Party under a disastrous leadership led directly to the rise of extremist groups and National Action is one of them but there are many more and their numbers are being fulled by a very myopic approach that enriches the rhetoric of the violent against the principles of democratic coexistence.

Liberalism and Marxism have become the new intolerance. Marxism has always being intolerant but now has joined forces with Liberalism in a struggle that is destroying the foundation of a democratic way of life.

The designs and ulterior motives of Liberals and Marxists matter more than the will of the Electorate. We have been here before. The Weimar Republic comes to mind for the Weimar Republic was described as a democracy without democrats.

By putting obstacles along the way, Liberals and Marxists and the drivers of political correctness are destroying our democratic way of life. When people are banned from organizing political parties to take part in lawful democratic activities, Liberals and Marxists are creating the recipe for the destruction of our democratic way of life. Whether you like or dislike what people stand for, all political views should be present on the ballot for the Electorate to decide.

The then Home Secretary Amber Rudd banned National Action. What did she achieve? If I said 'Absolutely nothing,' I would be generous. She achieved something. She managed to increase radicalisation because the ideas of National Action have spread under other names and the myopic actions of the Electoral Commission are now being used as a recruitment tool.

When political ideas cannot be expressed within a democratic framework, radicalisation grows and spreads. If political fights do not take place by using ballots, we end up in a situation in which ballots will be replaced with guns.

Liberals and Marxists like to talk about the Good Friday Agreement that put an end to the troubles in the Republic of Ireland and in Northern Ireland. What was the idea of the Good Friday Agreement? To allow both Unionists and Republicans to engage in a democratic process as a meas to put an end to violence.

Using the same logic then, the Electoral Commission shouldn't use its powers to prevent the participation of political groups in democratic elections because by using its powers in such a manner the Electoral Commission is going against the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement. Democratic participation is the way to prevent violence. If the Electoral Commision prevents democratic participation then the Electoral Commission is promoting violence and I don't think that the Electoral Commision should be promoting violence because this is not what the Electoral Commission shoul.d be about.

We need as much democratic participation as possible. We need everybody involved in the democratic process. 

 

.

Brexit: Politics is the history of what ifs

Brexit: Politics is the history of what ifs

The expression 'if somebody is not safe, nobody is safe' couldn't be truer at this point in time in British politics.

While many minds - perhaps too many minds - are focused on economics, let's not lose sight of the political implications.

For quite a few the issue is not how many billions will be won or how many millions will be lost. It is a much more emotional issue and it goes down to the definition of what Britain has been for centuries.

When things went badly wrong on the continent, Britain as an outsider played a fundamental role. A chained Britain will. not be able to play such a role. This means that if things go badly wrong again on the continent there would be nothing that could prevent a catastrophe.

Quite a few times in history idealism started something that led to a major development and in the end destroyed tens of millions of lives.

Messiah attitudes have replaced common sense. One currency, one government, and one army with critical decisions being made by a selected few.

Politicians and mass media have completely overlooked what is actually happening in the 28 EU countries.

I was asked what is my ultimate goal. My ultimate goal is to persuade people to put idealism aside and use rationality instead of idealism.Many ill fated endeavours started with smiling crowds, clapping hands and marching bands and when the music was over and the smiling crowds and clapping hands disappeared we were left with the stench of dead bodies and devastated cities. 

Many of the pilars of the present EU are not stable countries. In fact, political developments in those countries could dramatically alter the face of the continent in the very near future. If countries that are very much in control of the European Union are not stable then European Union will be a very powerful monster mentally deranged. Political. circumstances can change rapidly and dramatically.

Who is going to be powerful enough to challenge a deranged monster? Listening to Guy Verhofstadt talking about an EU army, about moving Eastwards and challenging the Russian Federation rings quite a few bells. If this ever happens, every single nation in the European continent will be driven head on towards a wall. Haven't we learnt anything from the politics of alliances in Europe and the catastrophic consequences of such politics of alliances? What was World War One about? I don't mention World War Two because in fact World War Two was the direct consequence of World War One or merely the continuation of World War One because of the unfinished business and injustices created by the Treaty of Versailles.

Independent nations with governments that are directly and duly accountable to their peoples have always been the answer. A big monster with remote governance in which responsibilities gets diluted is a recipe for disaster and especially when different languages separate the parts like in some gigantic Tower of Babel.

Brexit: A battle of wills that could lead to disastrous consequences

Brexit: A battle of wills that could lead to disastrous consequences

As many Members of Parliament have sided with the negotiators of the European Union to prevent Britain from coming out of the European Union, the battle of wills continues. The so called Benn's Act would in theory force the British Primer Boris Johnson to ask for an extension to keep Britain in beyond the 31st of October 2019. The Prime Minister has stated that Britain will be out on 31 October 2019 with or without a deal.

When many thought that the political crisis had been averted, the political crisis is very much ongoing. It wasn't even delayed. Parliament will be suspended days before the Queen's Speech. The clock is ticking. 

My belief is that the letter might be sent together with a threat: "Should you try to keep Britain in, Britain will use its veto to block the European Union." For the EU, it will very much like swallowing a poisonous frog that in the end will kill the animal that eats it.

What are the matters that Britain will block?

If Britain vetoes decisions on foreign affairs, taxation, justice and the EU budget, such decisions will. not be approved and this means paralisys. Does the EU want to be paralized? 

European Union without a budget because of British veto. Well... This could happen right at the beginning, transforming the European Union into a ship without engines and without rudder. 

Wife of US Diplomat in UK commits traffic offense that kills British teenager and rans away back to US using diplomatic immunity

Anne Sacoolas, wife of US Diplomat in UK, commits traffic offense that kills a British youngster and runs away using Diplomatic Immunity

This week it was reported that the wife of a US diplomat committed a traffic offense that killed a British youngster and ran away from UK back to US using diplomatic immunity. After promising Police authorities in Britain that would stay in UK during investigations, Anne Sacoolas did a runner and fled back to United States.

United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom.

The shameful episode is an embarrassment but more than an embarrasment for which the US Ambassador to the United Kingdom - Robert Wood Johnson IV - was forced to apologize - is dishourable behaviour for the United States of America. US reputation is at stake. The cowardly and criminal actions of the wife of an American diplomat in the United Kingdom are negatively affecting the image of an entire nation. 

Anne Sacoolas who ran away after commiting a criminal offense is embarrasing the American Ambassador Robert Wood Johnson IV who did his best in terms of damage limitation and is embarrasing the United States of America. The United States of America is being degraded by an ordinary criminal that used Diplomatic Immunity to ran away from her duties as the wife of an American Diplomat and from her responsibilities as a human being.

Jeremy Corbyn doesn't want any deal

Jeremy Corbyn doesn't want any deal

The strategy is pretty simple: he wants to use Brexit to created enough instability in the belief that should there be a future election he will be able to win such election by destroying the Conservative Party.

The statement indicates that the Labour Party cares about Britain is the real and biggest lie. They don't give a damn about Britain. All they are doing is to try and score party political points keeping Britain hostage.

Margaret Beckett was pretty clear: she will not vote for any deal. This is Opposition for Opposition sake. She will not vote for a deal that benefits Britain. She will create as many obstacles as possible for the sake of ideological struggle.

This is not about Parliamentary rights. This is about using Parliament to keep Britain hostage of a foreign power. Even the head of the Supreme Court has been found out and exposed for what she really is and for what she is really trying to do. And what about John Major, the former Prime Minister. He is supporting the interests of a foreign investment company that pays his salary. He is not standing for Britain either.

The present situation is absolutely shambolic. But if Parliament forces the Prime Minister's hand the big loser will be the European Union. Do you fancy Nigel Farage as British EU Commissioner and every single action of the European Union vetoed by Britain? If the EU wants war, then let's have war.