Labour's 1997 historic majority led to Afghanistan and Iraq, but a war in Europe is a different cup of tea

 

Tony Blair / Prime Minister

Labour's historic majority in 1997 led straight to war in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Years later, we face the prospect of yet another war - although much more catastrophic if it ever happens.

In one of his initial appearances, Keir Starmer told the country and the world that he will allow the use of British weapons to attack the Russian Federation.

No interpretation needed. It is all too clear in which direction the wind is blowing.

And this is the same Labour Leader that opposed National Service. When conscription letters arrive telling young untrained men and women that they have to fight a war, I wonder what the public response will be.

Be assured that Keir Starmer will have no hesitation in terms of sending untrained British citizens to war, because reality tells that the British Armed Forces have been severely weaknened and do not have the manpower nor the equipment for any long term war.

It is not secret that Britain as well as other NATO countries expect that the USA will send young Americans to the slaughter house to defend European countries that have been entirely negligent when it comes to compliance of NATO Article 3 that demands that each member has to be able to defend itself.

Britain has done very little to beef up its Armed Forces. In fact, the now former Defense Secretary Grant Shapps could hardly explain why what he called an increase in defense expenditure was what actually a reduction in real terms. He couldn't because it was a reduction.

British morale is at an all time low affecting recruitment. Reports about more than 64% of those serving members of the Armed Forces living in substandard accommodation do not help. Let's see what Keir Starmer has to say about beefing up the Armed Forces because if he does not pay attention to the Armed Forces then we will know that all the rhetoric is based on thin air. 

Labour government: Public sector pay promises that cannot be delivered will be the beginning

 

Is the edifice already starting to fall apart? Rachel Reeves promises of public sector pay rises have already backfired with Unions told that what they were promised is not affordable.

Winning an election acting under false pretenses is not a sign of political stability.

The 2024 September Budget will be crucial to know if this is the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end for the new Labour Administration, and this without taking into account dangerous statements that could take Britain to war in Europe, a war that will transform the Britain mainland into a battlefield.

Labour Administrations have a tendency to get Britain involved in disastrous wars. In 1997, Tony Blair won a historic majority only to get Britain involded in two major military conflicts that spelled absolute disaster. If Keir Starmer follows suit, the consequences for Britain would be catastrophic.

On the nature of war: if somebody risks his or her life for the country you see as your country, he or she are duly entitled to be protected by you.

In 2001, Britain went into Afghanistan and stayed there 20 years. In order to fight in Afghanistan, British forces needed the cooperation of local populations, people that put themseves in mortal danger simply because they were helping Britain to fight a war. In Britain's hour of need, they were there to support Britain and therefore Britain has the moral obligation to protect them in their hour of need.

In 2003, Britain went into Iraq and needed the cooperation of Iraqis to be there. There same applies then to Iraqis that helped Britain and it must be remembered that many of them not just risked their lives. They lost their lives.

When the point was raised that Britain should honour those who fought for Britain during World Wars, including World War Two, some Conservative MPs showed that they opposed the plan not because of what happened in World War Two and other wars of a long gone past but because of present geopolitical considerations that have nothing to do with the risks people took 70 or so years ago. If we were to think in such a way, Britain would see the French Resistance as enemies because of the fight against Napoleon.

Sajid Javid and others are right to consider honouring Muslim fighters that fought for Britain during World War Two. 

 

Energy Crisis: Who is winning?

 

Covid did damage economies and completely changed lifestyles, but the single most  negative factor for Western Economies was the knee jerk reactions aimed at damaging the Russian Federation that ended up creating hardship, political and social instability in those countries seeking to undermine the Russian Federation.

For those living in the United Kingdom, sanctions against the Russian Federation meant the end of the Paradise of low prices and stable economics. Just when Britain was coming out of the nightmare created by Covid economics, the British government - once again - reacted by impulse instead of using their brains properly. Not enough with mistakes made in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. British politicians had once again to put a foot wrong by jumping on the American bandwagon of failed foreign policies and started to dig an even bigger hole for themselves.

British policies regarding events in Eastern Europe have led to catastrophic realities in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. Industrial economies rely on... energy. Something that British politicians completely forgot about it. Germany, thank to Merkel, got into a bigger hole. Why? Merkel's knee jerk reactions regarding nuclear power. What would be the chances of a tsunami hitting German nuclear reactors as it happened in Japan? Zero. Angela Merkel over-reacted and decided to leave Germany totally exposed to an energy crisis having to almost totally depend on fossil fuels. Even France with its nuclear capacity got hit because... France negleted its nuclear infra-structure.

The conflict has been raging for years now and might continue for the foreseeable future, although the USA and Germany are now applying pressure on Ukraine to force Ukraine to seek peace. At the end of the day, it all comes to money and another factor to consider is that today Europe is a lot less safe because of the stupidity of its leaders. As the Western side decided to get dirty by using weapons banned by most countries in the world, the Russian Federation decided that it had enough and passed legislation withdrawing from all nuclear weapons agreements. So now, all gloves are off. This is a situation created by Western warmongers that expected that they could whatever without a rection from the other side. They have used Ukraine in a war by proxy against the Russian Federation and now those who jumped on the warmongers' bandwagon are bound to pay the consequences.

General Winter is coming. The expectation is that all Ukrainian infra-structure will be wiped out, pushing Ukraine back to the Middle Ages.

1945/2023: different times, same justification

 After the bloody battles in the Pacific, President Truman took a momentous decision to prevent a huge number of American casualties during the assault on the Japanese mainland. Hiroshima and Nagasaki. President Truman took care of American interests. Today, Secretary Blinken says that the Russian Federation will use nuclear weapons to put an end to the conflict in Ukraine. Well, the Russian Federation will follow the American example do what is best for Russian interests.

After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan recovered and went on to become one of the great nations of the Developed World. The war in Afghanistan lasted twenty years. The longest war of the century until now. The conflict in Ukraine has lasted more than a year and the Russian Federation might decide that enough is enough and do what USA did in 1945.

This a real possibility and all those seeking to prolong the conflict by supporting one of the sides in the conflict must take this into consideration. If nuclear devices are detonated in Ukraine, bordering countries will the first to be affected. The power of modern nuclear devices is vastly superior and therefore the level of destruction will be much greater and, as the world revolves, air and water will be contaminated. Those who remember the effects of Chernobyl should think about what is coming their way.

At this point, all warmongering attitudes and provision of armament should come to a halt. The likes of Warsaw that suffered under the German assault of 1939 with conventional weapons should take into account the destruction caused by an invisible enemy called nuclear radiation. The consequences of destruction caused by conventional weapons can be dealt with in the short term. The consequences of radiation pollution will last for many years to come rendering entire areas totally uninhabitable. Although Japan ultimately recovered, the legacy was thousands of lives affected for many generations to come. Cancer, birth defects and the like.

If Secretary Blinken is really and trully concerned and if he believes that the use of nuclear weapons is a certain possibility, he should advice President Biden that a strategy change is needed. The more fuel is added to the fire the closer we get to a nuclear reality. 

The War in Afghanistan lasted about 20 years at an incalculable cost. Will the War in Ukraine go the same way?

 

The events in the USA on September 11th, 2001 were a long way from the date when the War in Afghanistan came to an end.

After the initial interest in the conflict, people simply forgot about it and continued living their lives as usual as if nothing was happening. 

At the end, public interest was renewed and it turned into a subject of national and international debates trying to discern what was actually achieved or not achieved. Soonafterwards, it ceased to be a fashinable subject to talk about. 

Now, we have the conflict in Ukraine, a conflict that actually started several years ago, before open hostilities. The question that arises is if the conflict in Ukraine will not go on very much like the War in Afghanistan. Is there a real interest to put an end to the conflict or is there an agenda to keep it going indefinitely? The USA has invested more than 64 billion US Dollars and like it happened in both Iraq and in Afghanistan, untraceable amounts of money went somewhere, but there is little accountability. The same happens with war materials that some say are already in the hands of international gangs. We must remember what happened to weaponry and war materials in Afghanistan and before that in Nicaragua. The Contras and drugtrafficking cartels were in business exchanging weapons for drugs that ended up being sold in the USA.

With the veil of secrecy that accompanies any war, money laundering, arms trafficking and illegal earnings are part of the deal because everything becomes an issue of National Security. 

We don't usually agree with Diane Abbott, but she is spot on on the causes of the crisis in Eastern Europe

Over and over again, the USA has been directly responsible for destabilization and migration crisis. The second campaign in Iraq was an unmitigated disaster that destabilized even more an already unstable Middle East and threatens to lead Europe towards chaos. The major defeat in Afghanistan was yet another disaster and one of the longest wars on recent records. 

American and British warmongering will generate one of the worst economical and political crisis in Europe and most probably turn back the clock towards the 1930 with well known consequences.

UK: Money is the cost of political decisions, but it can also be measured in lives lost

 

Money is the cost of political decisions, but it can also be measured in lives lost

The cost of dealing with the Covid pandemic has been enormous. Lives lost or damaged, job lost, the burden of anxiety and despair plus the economic and political cost.

But in essence, every political decisions has a cost attached. The cost of decision making when dealing with a crisis cannot be underestimated. When wrong decisions are made there is also a cost. Britain has been acting like a gambler, betting and hoping to win, but losing along the way. This gambling behaviour has been at the core of British geopolitical decisions. On the one hand there was the intent of saving money by cutting corners and on the other was the intent to remain relevant.

Afghanistan and Iraq have proven how wrong it was to cut corners while at the time attempting to remain relevant and and the consequences were shambolic. Politicians like to sound impressive and impressive it was the idea of investing hundreds of millions of Pound to build what were thought be state of the art aircraft carriers that have been beset by disasters. On top of delays came the realisation that structures were far from perfect and lead to leaks. As if this wasn't enough, it was understood that the carriers could be operational, but without the aircraft that should carry onboard. The latest chapter was HMS Prince of Wales when having left Porstmouth it had to return to port just when it was on its way for a long naval exercise and these was due to 'technical problems'. If Britain was at war, such kind of deficiences would be unforgivable.

What happens to the British Royal Navy in terms of mishaps does not end there, but other branches of the British Armed Forces are facing challenges. The recruitment crisis is not about lack of candidates to join the British Armed Forces. It is about suitability. Of those wanting to join in, there is a huge percentage in terms of those not judged fit to join in. This is why there was the idea of opening the gates allowing candidates from the Commonwealth to join. That did not go well. Now, recent decisions made in terms of recruitment have been criticized. Positive discrimination, not allowing white candidates to join in, has led to a new low. Trying to be politically correct, those in charge have made a difficult situation even worse. If those wanting to join in - if they trully wanted to join in - are ultimately judged not fit for purpose or if standards are lowered to allow them to join in then there will be serious questions to ask about fighting capabilities. The British Armed Forces do not have the necessary manpower and are also critically stretched in terms of material capabilities. Should Britain have to face a real threat involving a sustained long term effort, Britain would be facing mortal danger without the tools needed to get itself out of danger. Today's Britain is less capable than the Britain of 1940. 

Foreign Secretary Liz Truss spoke about her willingness of 'pressing the button' should it be necessary. Well, without the necessary conventional forces, 'pressing the button' might be the only one thing to do when everything else is missing. Just a few weeks ago, she stated that she was in favour of reducing manpower. It seems that all she has in mind is the nuclear deterrent and IT capabilities to deal with dangers linked to Internet. The formerly glorious Royal Navy had to be committed to the task of patrolling the Channel because Britain does not have enough patrol boats and this didn't go well either. Using warships to chase small ships and rubber boats is not ideal.

Building huge aircraft carriers was expensive and time consuming. One wonders how much could have been done instead of building such huge aircraft carriers. How long did the Bismark last? Were any lessons learnt? Titanic comes to mind. Given the way the British Armed Forces are managed, they could well become the new Titanic.

And when all this is happening, Britain faces a financial crisis of major proportions that threatens to unleash waves of social and political unrest. Will politicians be able to deliver all the promised budget increases? The months ahead come with the threat of blackouts, rationing, riots and defaults. Does internal upheaval make a country stronger? 

 

 

  

Democrats have two houses of Congress and Biden fails to push legislation through?

 

President Biden in the first two years of his presidential mandate fails to push legislation through Congress despite having majorities in both houses.

He travelled to Saudi Arabia to persuade Saudi Arabia to produce more oil to lower market prices, failed to persuade Saudi Arabia and managed to push up oil prices.

And what will happen in the mid-term elections? Will Democrats lose legislative control with President Biden turning himself into a lame duck President?

This is what America has to face at a very dangerous time in its history.

On the other side of the Atlantic, President Zelenskiy cannot trust his own intellgence officers and sacked none other than the chief intelligence official saying that Ukrainian intelligence services have been infiltrated and this is happening during an ongoing military conflict that Ukraine is losing despite the best propaganda efforts of the BBC, SKY, CNN and other Western media that want to maintain the 'Stalingrad ilusion of a winning Wehrmacht' but this time in Ukraine.

As temperatures soar we might be inclined to forget that temperatures will fall and that Europe will pay a very high price for the so called energy crisis and it is not going to be merely about economics, and issue that is already generating social unrest and will ultimately lead to political crisis and more.

If things don't change soon, this will be the Democrats' Vietnam. Jimmy Carter lost the opportunity of a second presidential mandate because of Iran and the failed rescue attempt of the hostages in Teheran. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was a clear indication that the present American government is not on top of its briefing. It was a popularity disaster as well as a military disaster. Could yet another crisis - this time a financial crisis - sink the Democrats' ship and open to the way to a return of the Republican Party?  

Military realities: Armies cannot be built overnight and speeches based on thin air are not helpful

 

This morning the Conservative Party looks smaller in Parliament having lost two by-elections created by sheer stupidity of two now former Conservative MPs who engaged in activities that led to the conviction of one of them for criminal sexual behaviour and another for impropriety having been forced to accept the fact that he had been watching pornographic videos inside the House of Commons. Not a very uplifting behaviour and nothing to be proud of.

But something else is looking pretty small and this is something to be a lot more concerned about. The size of the British Armed Forces is smaller than the Russian deployments in Ukraine while those in power are engaged in warmongering activities that increase the risk of a major incident triggering yet another European-wide war. As Chinese preparations continue apace, those in charge in the United Kingdom seems oblivious to the fact that there is an obvious issue concerning numbers. It is a bit like the case of a mouse trying to bite an elephant. If the plan is to go to war on Continental Europe or in Asia, Britain has lost the war before the war has even started. The Foreign Secretary seems to live in her own fantasy world and the Defense Secretary is pushing forward plans that will make British Forces even smaller. Britain will end up fighting using toothpicks.

With a total population of about 65 million people, British Armed Forces are remarkably small, so small that they could only play second fiddle in Afghanistan and in Iraq. The Defense Secretary Ben Wallace MP had some troubles trying to explain in the House of Commons what had actually happened in Afghanistan and the apalling details of the withdrawal from Afghanistan. As it was explained to me, the issue when it comes to recruitment is not lack of potential recruits. Unhealthy habits lead to lack of the minimal requirements in terms of physical and mental fitness required to join the forces. In an attempt to boost the number of recruits able to pass fitness test, the decision was taken to open the field and accept recruits coming from the Commonwealth. As this did not work either, my educated guess is that plans drawn by Ben Wallace MP that include smaller conventional numbers is simply a reflection of what is happening in terms of recruitment. Too many people in Britain are not fit for purpose.

But there is more. On top of the fact that research indicates that in Britain about one in ten teenagers go on to suffer mental health issues - many cases go undetected - new medical conditions appear. One of them is DLD (Development Language Disorder) and youngsters suffering from DLD have difficulties talking and/or understanding. This is a condition that affects initially children and persists into adulthood. The condition can be missed, misdiagnosed or misinterpreted as poor behaviour, poor listening or inattention. About 7.5 percent of children 4-5 years of age suffer from it. Children's ability to learn is impared. It affect reading or writing and is often linked with dislexia. All in all, this means that a vast number of individuals will never be fit for military service for physical reasons, for mental reasons and for both mental and physical reasons reducing the pool of resources in terms military manpower. We are talking about millions of individuals in the UK that face a very uncertain future and the real possibility of not being able to cope by themselves in civilian life let alone military life.

This should also be a reason for concen in terms of National Security when we talk about long term commitments in a theatre of war. 

Britain: Gun Ho mentality is making a bad situation worse

The crise in Eastern Europe is set to carry on and on and on, increasing the chances of an even worse conflict to occur. Those in charge of dealing with the situation are visibly acting out of their depth and without any real understanding of the consequences of what they are doing.

Mass media are blissfully ignorant in terms of what is involved and keep the propaganda machine alive with a series of headlines that apart from being absolutely pathetic and often misguiding tend to create hatred and animosity.

In the meantime, the range of issues that continue to erode the foundations of the European Union keeps growing. It is just a matter of time when issues related to refugees generate political upheaval in the host countries. Just days ago, Lech Walesa stated that Poland and Hungary should leave the European Union since both countries are losing out because of their membership of the European Union. There are obvious disparities and differences in terms of aims within the European Union. France and Germany have their own approach to the crisis in Eastern Europe with regards to the stances of other EU countries. Unity is in very short supply and the cracks are becoming ever more visible.

While USA and others use Ukraine in a proxy war against the Russian Federation, they know full well that given the cost of a direct confrontation they would not want such direct confrontation. In the meantime, they all agree that China is a much greater threat and China is closely following events in Europe while it prepares itself to recover Chinese territories in Asia. China is no longer the retiscent China of the past. China is more than willing to engage in military conflict and incursions close to Japan and to Australia are much more than posturing. After the shambolic end of military operations in Afghanistan, there is little appetite for what would be a massive military conflict that will involve both Europe and Asia.

In Britain, what is the state of British military capabilities? Britain struggled in Iraq and struggled in Afghanistan being limited now to skirmishes across the Middle East. Britain does not have the manpower it would need for an all-out war that would very likely include the British mainland. It would take 15 minutes for a nuclear missile launched from Kaliningrad to reach London. There has been some research about the impact of a nuclear strike in London, but we must assume that should there be an all-out war all the main British cities will be targetted as a well as military installations, communications, energy production and distribution and we could not discount that there will be acts of sabotage within the United Kingdom.

These are the two people who will send Americans to die in war

 

These are the two people who will send Americans to die in war

Why do more and more people dislike politicians? Well, politicians don't seem to have a very good track record when it comes to making decisions that will put lives in jeopardy. At least, in the past, some of those making decisions had had some involvement in military issues including real military conflicts. Nowadays, all is decided with money and popularity contests and this is why we end up with the mess that we end up with. Are you happy to have these people send your children to conflicts in foreign lands? We are not talking about American survival. We are talking about vested interests of a certain group of individuals who will use your children as cannon fodder.

War is a business for the said individuals. The conflict in Afghanistan meant that Britain spent 40 billion Pound that could have been spent elsewhere to make the lives of British peoples better. How much did American spend? You might have to spend a sizeable amount of your income to pay for health expenses. You might be late with your mortgage payments and at tisk of losing your home - it happened to many Americans in the so called Sub Prime scandal. Don't doubt for a minute that those promoting wars aboard don't give a damn about your well-being and the well-being of your children. They could not care less. They just have to stand and utter some warmongering soundbites and fill up their pockets with the taxes that you pay.

Joe Biden is white and Kamala Harris is mixed race - Black and Asian. Does race matter? Of course not. There are crooks of all races and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are just examples of what is going wrong in the USA.  

Those of us who were 'educated, educated, educated' by Tony Blair know that American has its own dose of Tony Blair, the ones who cry about non existing WMDs and then go on to kill civilians with drones. Oh, yes, and the Guantanamo Detention Centre is still there. President Obama who was President for two Consecutive periods promised to close down the detention centre in Guantanamo Bay and Joe Biden was his VicePresident. Did they close the detention centre in Guantanamo Bay? Of course they did not. Soundbites to get themselves elected soon to be forgotten to join the lot of unfulfilled promises.

John Kennedy: Being Human, being responsible and accountable are key elements of any democracy

 

Several decades have passed since Johnn F Kennedy invited people to think what they could do for their country instead of thinking what the country could for them.

In essence, what he was telling was 'stand up and do what needs to be done instead of constantly waiting for somebody to do it for you.

You don't have to be born in wealth to do what needs to be done. In fact, what I see is widespread apathy, a constant state of resentment, and the belief that whatever needs to be done is not within our means.

When you think about what is happening in Afghanistan after more than 36 billion Pounds were spent far away in a country that far too many need to consult a map to find out where it is, inhabited by people we could hardly come by even if we tried to, that speak a language that the vast majority of us does not understant, with social, economic, and political realities that most of us are completely unaware of, with customs and values that for what we have been told are radically different form our customs and values, you struggle to accept that most people show no interest in asking for accountability of those who made decisions and of those who are making decissions.

You come to the conclusion that most people don't care.You come to the conclusion that most people are happy to live in ignorance. You come to the conclusion that most people don't give a damn about how their monies are being used. They don't seem to join the dots to understand that while they are struggling with bad living conditions and unemployment, that while we have people most of whom are suffering from mental illness living on the streets, somebody is benefitting from the expenditure of more than 36 billion Pound in a foreign adventure.

We hear the world democracy and people congratulating themselves 'because we live in a democratic country'. Do we live in a democratic country? Do we take care of public business that affects all of us? 

The invitation that was very much a request to get involved in public business is us relevant today as it was when John Fitzgerald Kennedy ask people to take responsibility. Taking responsibility has a lot to do with accountability and this is what has been lacking all along. 

Nazanin: British outside Iran, but Iranian in her country of birth

The time to understand the way International Law works is long overdue. To hear a British minister talking about Iran using British citizens as hostages when in fact they are Iranian and hold British citizenship because of double nationality is appalling. 

Such kind of statements completely misrepresent what is actually going on. Iran is duly entitled to deal with its own citizens. While in Iran, British citizens born in Iran are de facto Iranian and not British. 

With regards to obligations Britain has regarding Iran, it is well known that Britain owes monies to Iran, monies that Britain is mandated to pay. This has been going on for ages and it is an issue that has poisoned British/Iranian relationships. Is it due to geopolitics? Is Britain failing to comply with international obligations contracted with Iran because of geopolitical considerations? 

It is thought that if Britain paid its debts Iranian attitudes would change, but what has happened for decades hasn't helped. Iran has been under siege and British history of interventions in Middle East and Asia Minor has made matters a lot worse. Since the fall of the Shah of Iran, USA and Britain have been involved in actions against Iran. They used Irak under Saddam Hussein to wage a chemical war against Iran because Iran dared to claim ownership of its oil resources. They never forgave Iran for daring to stand as an independent country.

When USA and Britain decided to get rid of Saddam Hussein, they created a vacuum that is now being filled up by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran with other countries being affected in the whole process. A mass exodus created by Britain and the USA led to neighbouring countries being flooded with refugees and this completely destabilized the entire region. The conflict in Syria very much started with the so called Arab Spring that both Britain and the USA promoted. The conflict in Yemen is perhaps and without perhaps the biggest tragedy that Britain and the USA actively contributed to create. What happened in Libya, what happened in Egypt, what is happening in Syria, what is happening in Yemen, what is happening in Lebanon and what is about to happen in Jordan could have been avoided. 

A knee-jerk reaction led to the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and this was followed by the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and what happened then is history leading to the mess we are in nowadays.

When we look for an explanation of why Iran could ever want to have nuclear weapons, the explanation is self-evident. Iran would look for nuclear weapons to deter any aggressor. Isn't this the explanation or justification for Britain to have its Nuclear Deterrent. Well, Iran is also entitled to have its Nuclear Deterrent to protect itself for external aggression.

In order to lower tensions, Britain will have to change its attitudes towards Iran. Paying debts could be a first step in the right direction. Britain will have to change its attitudes towards Saudi Arabia to reassure other players in the Middle East and Asia Minor that Britain will not support aggression against Iran and Britain will not be involved in wars by proxy like the ongoing conflict in Yemen. All regime-changing attempts must come to an end. All military interventions on foreign soil must come to an end. All demonizing campaigns by the political establishment and the mass media must come to an end. All economic warfare must come to an end. Normalization of relationships is the best way to prevent cases like the case of Nazanin from ever happening again.

 

Corona Virus and Immigration: Yet another reason to restrict immigration

Corona Virus and Immigration: Yet another reason to restrict immigration

The headline "Turkey allows 100,000 immigrants to cross into Greece" is not just about sheer politics. It is a health threat. Vulnerable people entering Europe could well be a bomb about to explode. Immigraiton has always been a health risk. Much of the native aborigine people of the American Continent were wipe out by illnesses brought in by Europeans.

People carry diseases wherever they go and the local populations might not be immune to viruses and bacteria brought in by newcomers. International Treaties and Convention on Assylym and Immigration fail to address health issues. What started in China is now spreading to the rest of the world.

Each country has to take measures to protect itself and if necessary treaties and conventions should be amended or rescinded on health grounds. Protecting local populations is top priority. This is about health and also about National Security.

IRAN: Yet another war?

IRAN: Yet another war?

The War in Afghanistan has been one of the longest conflicts having started in 2001 when the USA bombed Afghanistan and started a military campaign. In 2003, there was the illegal invasion of Iraq and several other conflicts across Africa, Middle East and Asia Minor followed. Now, another major conflict could be about to start and this time against Iran that shares a very long border with both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Some seem to be desperately trying to create more and more conflicts across the World. While this is happening the situation across Latin America is deteriorating. It would not be surprise if we see a return of military regimes across the board.

Europe itself is in political meltdown and political stability hangs in the balance as old uncertainties make a comeback. It seems that peace in Europe has lasted too long and that brushing contradictions under the carpet is not a long term solution. But things could be a lot worse if yet another major conflict erupts in Asia Minor. Major oil producing countries would be dramatically affected by such a conflict and we know that any conflict that affects vital energy supplies can cripple economies and political stability of neighbouring regions.

Conservative Party fails to explain why it is accepting money from criminals

Conservative Party fails to explay why it is accepting money from criminals

The anti-Russian hysteria came to a climax in Britain, in a country that produces chemical weapons in Porton Down close to populated areas.

In the process, the Prime Minister failed to explain why the Conservative Party is being funded by criminals who hate President Putinn and hate the Russian Federation.

A whole chapter of fabrications was once again mentioned. Alexander Litvinenko was killed by MI5 when Andrei Lugovoi came to offer Litvinenko safe passage in exchange for compromising evidence against Boris Berezovsky at a time when Berezovsky was supporting Chechen rebels allied to AlQaeda and Taliban when British soldiers were fighting in Afghanistan.

After Alexander Litvinenko's death, I was asked to gather evidence against Boris Berezovsky but Berezovsky was killed by MI5 to tie up loose ends and put an end to the whole saga that was deeply damaging for the British government.

What a shambolic government and what a shambolic Parliament. Jeremy Corbyn was absolutely right to ask Conservatives why they are accepting monies from Mafia but Conservatives refused to return monies from criminals.

Berezovsky/Litvinenko/Islamic Dreams

June 22, 1941 - Unternehmen Barbarossa

June 22, 1941, Unternehmen Barbarossa - Wehrmacht launches invasion of the Soviet Union, after massing forces along the borders. 2017- Nato masses forces along the borders of the Russian Federation. Mmmm......

Alexandr Litvinenko

Massively publicised death of Alexandr Litvinenko who was on the payroll of the British Security Services but played a double game supporting Chechen rebels linked to AlQaeda and Taliban at the time when Britain was involved in military offensive against AlQaeda and Taliban in Afghanistan. Alexandr Litvinenko was contacted by Russian Federation envoys offering him safe passage in exchange for documents that could compromise Boris Berezosvky who was working with the CIA facilitating exile in Britain of "businessmen and foreign politicians" involved in corruption scandals- also a double game since Berezovsky was dealing with the Italian Mafia to provide weapons and money for Chechen rebels. A meeting with a certain Italian journalist presumably investigating Mafia comes to mind. Alexandr Livtinenko eliminated by British Agents to protect both Tony Blair and Boris Berezovsky from a massive scandal. His wife tried to force British Services to acknowledge that her husband was officially working for them. The British Establishment used him used him as long as he was useful to them and then they killed him.

Boris Berezovsky

Soon afterwards, Boris Berezosvky himself was "suicided" by British agents once he ceased to be useful and became much more of a liability. I was asked to travel to a Latin America country to collect information that could have brought down Berezovsky and the British government. I didn't manage to get to the airport as the new broke out that Berezovsky had been found dead.

As always, the mass media fully cooperate to provide cover ups and brainwash the wider public with a mythology that they easily swallow, a mythology they have been fed since birth by mass media, politicians and the entertainment industry that funnily enough uses the same strategies to attack a President Elect in the USA. Today, a CIA high ranking official attack President Elect Donald Trump. Coincidences? There are no coincidences.

In the meantime, the build up of forces prone to attack the Russian Federation continues. If they attack the Russian Federation, will they say that the Russian Federation attacked herself?

A veteran who lost his legs fighting for Britain in Afghanistan had to apply three times for citizenship

Cayle Royce

A South African who joined British Forces in Afghanistan and lost his legs fighting against Taliban had to apply three times for British Citizenship despite the fact that he had been awarded an MBE.

One wonders how many times those who have done practically nothing for Britain and come to Britain to milk the Welfare State have to apply for British Citizenship before they actually get it.

The buck stops with the British Prime Minister David Cameron, the clown that walks around talking about how much he cares for the British Armed Forces.

If David Cameron and the cohort of those who support him really cared about those putting their lives on the line of fire for Britain, they would put legislation through the House of Commons to ensure that the shambolic system a British veteran had to face is no more. We will have to check the records of the House of Commons to see if the South African soldier's plight was ever mentioned. Since Cayle Royce was awarded an MBE I have to conclude that Cayle Royce was mentioned in the Houses of Parliament but those in charge of the Home Office seem to have been unaware of who they were dealing with.

When they bring back Litvinenko, you know that dirt is coming

Alexandr Litvinenko

Whenever the BBC brings back Alexandr Litvinenko, killed by British agents in London to protect CIA operator and former Russian powerful man Boris Berezovski, you know that dirt is coming.

Alexandr Litvinenko, former KGB agent, in his new re-incarnation was the right hand man of Boris Berezovski, a former Boris Yeltsin supporter, who having left Russia in a hurry had dealings with Muslim Chechen rebels carrying out terrorist attacks.

Boris Berezovski was also working for the CIA and bringing in to the West politicians that fell out of grace including sons of Presidents. The way things worked was that they would arrive in Britain and the same firm of lawyers working for Boris Berezovsky would get them visas to remain in Britain or perhaps travel to other parts of the so called Western World including the US.

Both Boris Berezovsky and Alexandr Litvinenko were seen as insiders who in theory possessed valuable information about the USSR that gave way to the Russian Federation. The US needed access to landlocked Afghanistan and who better to contact 'old friends' than Boris Berezovsky and his lieutenant Alexandr Litvinenko.

What wasn't so convenient was the fact that both Boris Berezovsky and Alexandr Litvinenko had links with Chechen rebels linked to AlQaeda and Taliban at a time when British Forces were fighting in Afghanistan under Prime Minister Tony Blair.

In every transaction you needed valuable friends and who better in terms of knowing about dirty dealings that the Italian Mafia and this is where Mario Scaramella, an Italian lawyer, that was supposedly investigating Italian Mafia links. When it came to money and weapons Chechen terrorists needed what better than the Italian Mafia.

Mario Scaramella

Alexandr Litvinenko was very small fish but you always need a good bait to catch a bigger fish and in this particular case the Russian Federation was after Boris Berezovsky and the best way of getting Boris Berezovky was to make Tony Blair's position unsustainable. Revealing details about Boris Berezovsky's operations in Chechnya, linked to what was happening in Afghanistan, would force the British Government to give up Boris Berezovsky. But given that Berezovsky was also helping the CIA and facilitated transit of US troops into Afghanistan, the British Establishment had to move quickly to avoid public embarrassment and protect a man that was considered an asset at the time.

When Andrei Lugovoi, former colleague of Alexandr Litvinenko, came to London to persuade Alexandr Litvinenko to cooperate with the Russian Federation in exchange for a free passage agreement this signalled big danger for the British Establishment killing Alexandr Litvinenko to protect Boris Berezovsky became a number one priority.

Even until this day Marina Litvinenko is trying, unsuccessfully, to get the British Establishment to acknowledge that Alexandr Litvinenko was in fact working for the British Establishment. The British Establishment wants none of it because they believe that such acknowledgement would create a snowballing effect leading to the truth about how and why Alexandr Litvinenko was killed by British agents.

Marina Litvinenko

With Alexandr Litvinenko, out of the picture by courtesy of the Security Services of Tony Blair, the Russian Federation still had an interest in exposing Boris Berezovky and this is why I was asked to travel to Brazil where Brazilian prosecutors had valuable information that would seriously incriminate Boris Berezovsky. Oh, surprise, hours before my trip to Brazil, Boris Berezovsky appeared dead in his bathroom. Conveniently enough, Boris Berezovsky had been left without bodyguard protection.
By that time, Boris Berezovsky had become a public embarrassment and was no longer useful and therefore he was more of a liability for the British Establishment. After losing a very public litigation in British courts when facing Roman Abramovich, it was said that 'Boris Berezovsky was feeling depressed'. Killing Boris Berezovsky, the British Establishment destroyed a very embarrassing link.

Roman Abramovich

A saga like the Litvinenko Affair is used over and over again by the British Establishment to try and cause some damage to the Russian Federation, when in fact War Criminal Tony Blair should be the one on the spot.

Well, it is business as usual for the British Security Services and poor Marina Litvinenko will have to wait more than 100 years to read de-classified papers when the matter is no longer remembered nor relevant.