Brexit: January 31st 2020 11pm London

Brexit: January 31st 2020 11pm London

Tonight is the night. After years or wranggling, a Referendum and two General Elections, Britain has come a long way. What next? Next is decision time about the future relationship with both the EU and the USA plus dramatic geopolitical stances. Massive repositioning is on the way. This is about Iran, China, and the Russian Federation. From now on, the old status quo is on the way out.

Germany stood firm to protect its national interests linked to an pipeline that will bring oil and gas to Germany directly from the Russian Federation. The 5G revolution is very much part a key piece of geopolitical struggles. Every step of the way new issues will arise that will not lead to unity but to divisions. Old alliances are being tested to the limit.

The outome of the present struggles will define a new status quo in which there will be new political realities. Old allegiances will be no more. National interests will prevail. The creation of new defensive/offensive structures is already ongoing. The future of NATO is by no means guaranteed. Pesco is not just a new defensive/offensive project. It is much more than that. It is a geopolitical statement. Very much promoted by Germany and France, Pesco brings NATO into question.

And then, threre is the economics war. While USA applies sanctions against the Russian Federation, China and Iran, the tariffs and tax confrontations between USA and EU are the equivalent of sanctions. 

 

BBC: Another nail in the coffin after BBC World Service

BBC: Another nail in the coffin after BBC World Service

BBC authorities talk about saving 80 million Pound as part of the effort "to save the BBC". Any talk about cutting executives salaries? For decades the BBC has been paying huge amounts of money coming from the TV License to support luxury lifestyles while at the same getting periodically rid of those who actually do real work at the BBC.

For all the talk about the BBC being trusted across the world thanks to the BBC World Service, the knives came out and dismantled the BBC World Service. They got rid of the independent budget of the BBC World Service and they attached whatever was left to the main BBC. Now, the BBC as a whole is in trouble. 

Throughout the years, cost cutting involved moving many BBC operations out of London, but the BBC aristocracy and those favoured by the BBC aristocracy still got their six, seven and eight digits contracts while those at the lower end of the scale were expendable. When the announcement came about the Victoria Derbyshire Show's demise, BBC authorities not even bothered to tell the news to Victoria Derbyshire. She learnt about her demise by reading a newspaper article.  

Now, let's rewind and remember how the BBC World Service was dismantled. Bit by bit, language services were closed down. The famous headquarters were no more. Bush House as the magnetic centre of the BBC World Service was no more. Now, the same method is being applied. After a very expensive building project to redimension Broadcasting House in Central London, the wine bottle is being emptied. It could very well come the time when the BBC will follow the COI, London Radio Service and British Satellite News.

Brexit: Then and Now

Brexit: Then and Now

In ten days time, Britain will be on its way to be as it was before entering the Common Market. Will it be like it was before entering the Common Market?

So much has happened in more than 40 years. There has been a demographic revolution and London - its capital city - is completely unrecognizable. The Monarchy itself is unrecognizable. We have had Harry-exit. Diana's boy is now in Canada, without a Royal title. SNP seems to rule Scotland and is threatening to break up the United Kingdom. Let us remember another earthquake that happened in the United Kingdom in the 1920, the partition of Ireland and the creation of two separate entities - the Republic of Ireland in the south and the Province of Northern Ireland in the north. A hundred years later, we are witnessing events that have generated realities that we couldn't possibly have imagined thirty years ago.

But when it comes to surprising changes, Britain is not alone. The European Continent is on the move and significant political developments are taking place. 

Merkel, Medvedev, Schroeder

Germany is also unrecognizable. CDU/CSU is faltering and Alternative für Deutchland and Grünen are rising stars. In France, Emannuel Macron - the opportunity candidate that rose to power as to prevent National Front (Now National Rally) from winning the French Presidential Election is facing war as discontent rises. As the Socialists were on the way out, the French Centre Right faced the unthinkable and had to create a fantasy on the back of a massive propaganda effort.

Brexit is not the main issue, Europe is facing. Much more serious developments are on the way. Unfortunately, and perhaps in a premeditated manner, the mass media have their own agenda and they don't report about certain events to the point that when something dramatic happens it seems to have come from nowhere.

Politics: Pretending that conflict doesn't exist doesn't avoid conflict

Politics: Pretending that conflict doesn't exist doesn't avoid conflict

Some in the United Kingdom complain saying that one of the BBC flagship programmes - Question Time - has become too beligerant, that those taking part in it are not the happy chappies they used to be and that they are at each other's throats even after the cameras and microphones are switched off.

When issues matter people who care become beligerant. As Americans become beligerant when it comes to the right to bear arms. Do they become beligerant? Of course they do. Rights are fought for.

Isn't this something that marks the history of any nation across the world? The expression is: standing up for your rights. Did Britain award the colonies in America the right to vote, the decision power they were asking for because they were paying taxes to the British Crown without representation? Conflict is often unavoidable.

The upper lip, the time to endure without reacting, is on its way out. People become plainly open about their views. They say that in Britain people are learning to litigate, somehow following the example of the United States of America. Those accustomed to pretend that nothing is happening are alarmed when somebody stands up and airs his or her views openly. The time to bow is over.   

When Prince Harry Windsor says "I have had enough", the ground trembles. Those who strive to maintain the status quo are shocked. When reverence feels and sounds like subservience, the time for reverence is over and this happens over and over again and the fact that it happens is a healthy feature of social development.

But in Britain, at several levels, including Universitary education, many are not ready for plain talking. They are literally afraid of plain talking. British universities used to be a lighthouse of free thinking. Nowadays, they are bastions of political correctness and repression. The education system controlled by left-wing ideologues promotes a totalitarian approach. Having said that, when such approach goes not only against true democratic values but also against national interest there is no room for complaisancy. 

Now is the time for plain talking to cleanse Britain of negative structures and negative tendencies. The sooner we call apples apples and oranges oranges the better. Just across the pond, in the USA, the attempt by the Democrats to change the outcome of a Presidential Election will lead to a backlash as the attempt by a Remain Parliament led to a backlash in the United Kingdom and this is very much the consequence of democratic principles. When the Democrats as elected work against the electors, the electors rebel and get rid of the elected.

Regardless of who has the balance of power in the House of Representatives, ignoring the wishes of the American people the Democrats are digging up their own political graves. The Democrats are abusing power to try and change the outome of an election. The vote in the House of Representatives was in itself proof that the attempt to impeach President Trump is no more than a Democrat coup attempt. It was by no means a bypartisan vote.

Britain: Will Scotland declare independence unilaterally?

Britain: Will Scotland declare independence unilaterally?

The Brexit earthquake just happened but there are tremors in Scotland with QC stating that Scottish Parliament could call a Referendum without the authorization of the Westminster Parliament. 

Whether it is legal or illegal for Scotland to declare independence is irrelevant. What is relevant is the question of what could happen if Scotland were to unilaterally declare independence. In the years after the 2016 Referendum on EU Membership, the movement towards Scottish independence has been reinforced by a General Election in which SNP has reaffirmed its position as the party of Scotland going against what happened in other parts of the United Kingdom where the Conservative Party won in Labour Party heartlands.

The present crisis in the British Monarchy doesn't help. For many years, the Monarchy has been the glue that kept together the United Kingdom. A weaker Monarchy is a recipe for trouble. In geopolitical terms, Scotland is moving towards EU while the rest of Britain is in limbo. For the moment, at least some kind of balance has been in Northern Ireland with the restoration of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Trying to keep the United Kingdom in its present form by force could lead to civil war. But if the use of force is out of the question, how would people on both sides of the border react if the Scottish Parliament decides to call a Referendum or decides to declare independence unilaterally. In the 1920s, there was the partition of Ireland giving birth to the Republic of Ireland in the south of Ireland and the Province of Northern Ireland in the north of Ireland. A century later, could this be the time for Scotland?

 

President Trump's Impeachment: Democrats plot against democracy in the USA

President Trump's Impeachment: Democrats plot against democracy in the USA

Since the days when the Democratic Party got John Kennedy elected thanks to the Mafia, there hadn't been any attempt as shameful as the present attempt to undermine democracy in the USA. The House of Representatives with only the votes of Democrats approved sending two impeachment articles to the Senate. Those willing to vote in 2020 US Elections should remember the plotters and punish them as they very much deserve to be punished for trying to overturn the outcome of a Presidential Election.

There were no criminal charges whatsoever because no crime has been committed by the President of the United States of America and therefore there was no cross party support for what is nothing more than an attempted coup d'état in the Uunited States of America.

This is as shameful as it is dangerous for political stability. You might agree or disagree with the policies implemented by the American President, but there is legal justification whatsoever to try and overthrow an American President that has committed no crime.

Royal Family Crisis: the same mass media that poisoned the country against Diana, Princess of Wales, is after Prince Harry

Royal Family Crisis: the same mass media that poisoned the country against Diana, Princess of Wales, is after Prince Harry

Princess Diana was never forgiven for her association with the al-fayed family and she paid the ultimate price for her association with the al-fayed family in 1997.

The same mass media that hunted her then showed fake sorrow after her untimely demise. Now, they are up to their old games again.

Whatever Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II decides for everybody's sake, the hawks will continue the persecution wherever Prince Harry goes.

After decades of life and work in the United Kingdom, creating wealth and putting Britain on the map for excellence, Mohamed al-fayed was systematically denied a British passport.

For years, the boys were treated with silk gloves and subject of public adoration. But this was not meant to least. As soon as Meghan Markle came to public view, the hunt started all over.

This is not just about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. There is a political agenda.This a political struggle.

Royal Family Crisis: the same mass media that poisoned the country against Diana, Princess of Wales, is after Prince Harry

Royal Family Crisis: the same mass media that poisoned the country against Diana, Princess of Wales, is after Prince Harry

Mohamed al-fayed and Princess Diana

Princess Diana was never forgiven for her association with the al-fayed family and she paid the ultimate price for her association with the al-fayed family in 1997.

The same mass media that hunted her then showed fake sorrow after her untimely demise. Now, they are up to their old games again.

Whatever Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II decides for everybody's sake, the hawks will continue the persecution wherever Prince Harry goes.

After decades of life and work in the United Kingdom, creating wealth and putting Britain on the map for excellence, Mohamed al-fayed was systematically denied a British passport.

For years, the boys were treated with silk gloves and subject of public adoration. But this was not meant to least. As soon as Meghan Markle came to public view, the hunt started all over.

This is not just about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. There is a political agenda.This a political struggle.

Royal Family: The rift between William and Harry has now been made official

Royal Family: The rift between William and Harry has now been made official

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/12/prince-william-harry-and-i-are-now-separate-entities

Since the abdication of Prince Edward (later known as Duke of Windsor), this is the most crucial event in the life of the Royal Family. The glamour and romantic aura are over. Now comes reality.

Reality knocks when one Labour Party contender calls for the abolition of the Monarcy and another calls for the abolition of the House of Lords - two of the pillars of the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom has been kept as one thanks to the Monarchy. Without it, it will be England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland playing separate roles. The union can survive other kinds of political upheavals, but the union would not survive the fall of the Monarchy. Centuries of common history would come to an end.

Why is this happening? Because the Labour Party is in tatters and is in denial and SNP is using the present circumstances to achieve its lifelong mission of destroying the United Kingdom.

Royal Household: Harry and Meghan

Royal Household: Harry and Meghan

In the 1930, Prince Edward could not marry Wallis Simpson because she was a divorcee. After that, Princess Margaret was not allowed to marry the man she very much loved - an ace of the Royal Air Force who served with distinction because his wife had left him (he became a divorcee due to no fault of his own). 

These were the precedents, but year later Prince Charles who had been a lover of Camila Parker Bowles was allowed to marry Camila Parker Bowles and suddenly divorce was no longer an issue. 

There had not been an issue either when it came to public morality that the Lord Mountbatten was married and slept with young boys while his wife slept around with men including foreign dignataries. 

But somehow in the eyes of the mandarins of mass media Harry and Meghan have committed a mortal sin by wanting to live their own lives in their own way. They are poisoning the minds of members of the public in the same way that they killed Princess Diana - Harry's mother.  They are at it again. The prostitutes that like to call themselves Defenders of Free Speech are no better than an organised Mafia making an awful amount of money by means of fabricated scandals.

Ursula von der Leyen: Desperate trip to London.

Ursula von der Leyen: Desperate trip to London

Ursula von der Leyen (aka Angela Merkel) is very much against the wall. She barely managed to win the 2017 Federal Election. She desperately tried to form a coalition with FPD and Grünen. She failed. She ended up agreeing a coalition of last resort with SPD that didn't want a coalition with her after losing support.

By the same time, CDU/CSU lost in Brandenburg, Bavaria, Saxony and Hesse and it was revealed that CDU representatives were working together with AfD at local level.

As if this wasn't enough, she had to resign the leadership of CDU to persuade her how political party to allow her to continue. Although on the surface this is about the relationship between EU and UK, it is in fact about the political survival of Angela Merkel now that SPO's newly elected leaders are asking for more concessions at a time when Germany is being forced to increase contributions to EU.

Germany desperately needs a deal to try and soften the blow of Brexit on the German economy. Ursula von der Leyen was in fact appointed by Angela Merkel as she was the only candidate on the ballot for President of the EU Commission in a battle of wills between Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron. The outome of the British General Election only serve to confirm German fears. It must be noted that after the German Federal Election, AfD is represented in the Bundestag and in every single of the 16 state parliaments in Germany. This is a crucial moment for Germany.

Ursula von der Leyen is playing for Angela Merkel using the EU as a shield to delay Brexit.

2019 Iran/USA: Nothing new, but merely the historical consequence

2019 Iran/USA: Nothing new but the historical consequence

Qasem Soleimaini 

The conflict between Iran and the USA started a long time ago. In 1953 there was a coup d'état in Iran organized by the United States and the United Kingdom. Democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh was deposed and the USA and the UK supported Mohammad Reza Pahlavi as monarchical ruler of Iran.

USA and UK wanted a puppet that they could control to manage Iranian mineral resources. The Shah as Reza Pahlavi was known lasted until 1979 when an Islamic Revolution deposed the Western puppet and replaced him with a theocratical regime that has runned Iran until this day.

The Iranian Revolution happened during Jimmy Carter's Presidency and it was at that time that the revolutionaries took over the US Embassy in Teheran and kept hostages and this remarkably determined the outcome of the US Presidential Election of 1980. The Democrats led by Jimmy Carter were literally wiped out. Jimmy Carter got 49 electoral votes while his Republican counterpart Ronald Reagan got 489. It was a disaster for the Democratic Party and something they never forgot. Having lost control of Iran, the USA embarked in a series of foreign politicies that included supporting Saddam Hussein and the use of chemical warfare against Iran by Saddam Hussein.

But sooner than later, the US Establishment decided to get rid of Saddam Hussein after it became clear that they could no longer control Saddam Hussein. The invasion of Kuwait in 1990 was landmark. Under a mandate of the Organisation of the United Nations, a military operation was launched and ultimately served to contraint Iraq within its borders but also imposed restriction zones that Saddam Hussein and his regime couldn't possibly tolerate. As sooner as Iraqi forces were forced to withdraw from Kuwait the planning started to get rid of Saddam Hussein. This effectively happened in another military operation without an UN mandate. American and British forces dismantled the power structure in Iraq that spiralled out of control. The state of disarray led to the rise of Islamic State that was effectively created by the power vacuum that was the direct consequence of the invasion of 2003.

With the disappearance of Iraq as buffer zone, other regional powers strived to feel up the space that Iraq no longer commanded. Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran are now the new players and most of the conflicts in the region were the direct consequence of US and UK military actions. The state of imbalance affected Africa Middle East and Asia Minor.

With every additional US/UK intervention, the situation was made worse and when US and UK proved unable to take control then conflicts became the norm. To sum up, US belligerance against Iran started a long time ago when US and UK acting together destroyed a democratic opening in Iran and replaced it with a monarchical puppet that couldn't last long. Sunni and Shia are coming together and this has significant implications with regards to any controlling attempt by Western powers. We are not in the 1800s. We are not in the 1900s. The world has changed. The bipolarity of the 1950s has been replaced with a multipolarity. Former colonies are no longer willing to be treated as colonies or puppet states. The new cowboys haven't been able to understand that the new indians are not just more numerous but also better prepared and that in the present context the new cowboys could end like General Custer.

 

In politics, the issue is to have candidates that can perform

In politics, the issue is to have candidates that can perform

A politician is a salesman that sells ideas and strive to meet up expectations. Voters look at the salesman. Is he a credible salesman? They listen to what that the salesman says and ponder about how likely the salesman is to deliver what he promises to deliver. They might like or dislike what is on offer. If they dislike what is on offer, they might go against it and if they like what is on offer they might even disregard their first impression about the salesman (or salewoman).

The Liberal Democrats had been all over the place and in the spate of a few years have had more leaders that there were General Elections. Correct me if I forget all the names. After Paddy Ashdown came Charles Kennedy, Sir Menzies Campbell, Vince Cable, Nick Clegg, Tim Farron, Sir Vince Cable, Jo Swinson, Baroness Sal Brighton, Sir Ed Davey, and Mark Pack? For the duration of one Parliament they were in power in coalition with the Conservatives under David Cameron.

The Liberal Democrats - with a few exceptions - defined themselves as pro-EU. After the 2016 Referendum, the made themselves one of the stumbling blocks in the quest for Brexit. They desperately pursued the possibility of a Second Referendum with the hope of keeping Britain in the European Union. When that failed to cristalize, they went for a General Election that they strongly believed would give them what they wanted but from the start the struggle to reach an agreement with other political forces to overcome party political differences. They divided the Remain Camp because they couldn't possibly reach an agreement with Jeremy Corbyn. The fact that several Labour MPs and several Conservative MPs decided to join them was not an incentive to reach such agreement. She went as a far as saying that she would go against Article 50 and de-facto keep Britain in the European Union despite the outcome of the 2016 Referendum on EU Membership. This last act signalled the beginning of the end for Jo Swinson's leadership. The British Electorate could possibly stomach the idea of a Second Referendum. They couldn't possibly support somebody that talked about getting rid of the Article 50 straight away.

The issue for Scottish voters - Jo Swinson was at the time a Scottish MP - was to decide between an SNP that openly stood for Remain and also for Scottish Independence and a Liberal Democrat MP that stood for Remain but against Scottish Independence. The political fate of Jo Swinson was sealed. She lost her seat and as a direct consequence of losing her seat she could not continue as Lib Dem leader.

Voters didn't like the saleswoman, didn't believe that the saleswoman could deliver what she was offering and many even didn't like what she was offering. In the process, every single Labour MP and every single Conservative MP that defected to Lib Dems lost their seats. Even the possibility of a hang Parliament eluded them. 

The agony for both Lib Dems and Labour is self-evident. For Labour, as some Labour representatives have publicly stated, the aim is to restore public faith. The party is a divided as before. It is difficult to find a unity candidate. London set itself apart from the rest of the Labour movement when Labour voters outside London decided that the only possible choice was to support the Conservative Party.

To say that the Labour Party has a mountain to climb would be a historic understatement. As long as whoever replaces Jeremy Corbyn is seen as a representative of the Jeremy Corbyn lobby, the Labour Party will struggle to recover.

Now, all eyes look towards the 2020 May Elections and in particular towards the London Mayoral Election in which an opponent of Jeremy Corbyn - Sadiq Khan - is likely to win a second mandate. Given the absence of candidates visibly able to unseat Sadiq Khan, the London Mayoral Election could serve to unite a very divided Labour Party.

Do you see Sadiq Khan as potential Labour Party leader? Nobody mentions Andy Burnham - present Mayor of Greater Manchester. Former Member of Parliament and former Cabinet Minister and a likeable individual far detached from Jeremy Corbyn's leadership and one of the centre-left politicians born in Liverpool - a northerner. If the Labour Party has any hope of bringing back traditional labour voters into the fold, choosing a man from Liverpool with proven political record would not be a bad choice. Sadiq Kahn would appeal to London. Andy Burham would appeal to the country as a whole. 

Whoever is chosen now as leader could end up being the leader of a party forever in opposition but if the struggle ends up being a war between London and the rest of the country the Labour Party will have to decide between being a political party for London or being a political party for Britain. 

 

Sadiq Khan: London Mayoral Election 2020

Sadiq Khan: London Mayoral Election 2020

Despite what happened in the rest of the country and in the Labour Party in particular, I don't think there is a natural challenger that could unseat Sadiq Khan as London Mayor. 

Whoever aspires to defeat Sadiq Khan will have to have enough political weight to have any chance of winning against a London Mayor that built his own political profile regardless of the troubles of the Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn.

Regardless of his stances on Brexit and his statements on foreign affairs i.e. his war of words with President Donald Trump, I reckon Sadiq Khan could even benefit from his stances and statements because London is a completely different cup of tea when compared to the rest of the United Kingdom.
Who are the other contenders? Well, Shaun Bailey will be standing as Conservative Party Mayoral Candidate. The Liberal Democrats have Siobhan Benita who previously stood in 2012 as Independent. Siän Berry will stand for the Green Party. Sue Black will stand for the Women's Equality Party, Rosalind Readhead would be standing as Independent, and Rory Stewart, former Conservative MP would be standing as Independent Candidate.

Despite the fact that opinion polls indicate that Sadiq Kahn went from 62% down to 44%  (December 2018 until November 2019), none of the contenders seem to have the charisma and the experience Sadiq Khan has. So unless there is a last minute change with a bigger hat being thrown into the ring I reckon the Sadiq Khan's mandate will be extended for another four years. 

Greens and Labour will be fighting for predominance in the London Assembly. As it was stated in a husting in London before the 2019 General Election, the Green Party is a serious challenger and would do well on the London Wide List. The credibility of the Lib Dems was seriusly damaged with the loss of many MPs - including those who defected from the Labour Party and the Conservative Party and their leader Jo Swinson but they could do well enough to get Siobhan Benita elected as London Assembly Member if they play their cards right.

With regards to UKIP and Brexit Party and other political contenders, they were routed or not even stood in December 2019. Therefore, I believe that they wouldn't stand a chance. They would lose not just the election but also all their deposits.