Alternative für Deutschland Far Right or Far Correct?

Alternative für Deutschland means that Far Right is Far Correct

The mess created by so called mainstream political parties is such that only political parties like Alternative für Deutschland can turn things for the better. For decades, Europe has been absorbing the mess created in other continents and being flooded with both victims and opportunists who seek to take advantage of a Welfare System paid for by hard working peoples. Most migrants end up not working or working in subsidized jobs, taking over services, housing and welfare infrastructure while locals who have paid for those services, housing and welfare are made to work harder at the best of times or to be without essentials at the worst of times.

So local and regional authorities are running out of money or have run out of money. Why? Migration. They are crumbling under the weight of inflated budgets that are not affordable. The Labour Party aka Champagne Socialists could not care less. Taxes keep going up, borrowing keeps going up and services are cut. When things are going in the wrong way, so called mainstream politicians try whatever they can to maintain the status quo, regardless of the consequences.

It is now that the Far Right / Far Correct has a vital role to play to amend what has been going wrong. So called Diversity has undermined public services by adding unnecessary costs that have nothing to do with the declared aims of public services.

Sexuality has been politized to the point of pretending that political statements about a myriad of non existing genders can change reality. Gender disphoria is a reality but is a reality that does not change the fact that we are talking about men and women. This is many cases has had a negative economic impact and negative social impact. 

Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick: Conservative Party has demolished stereotypes

 

Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick

The British Conservative Party has demolished all stereotypes 

In a few years, the British Conservative Party has demolished all stereotypes and offered the country a wide range of choices, both in terms of ethnicity and of political beliefs, going much farther afield than any other political party, destroying every tool in the Labour Party's workshop. The traditional left used to dress itself as the representative of ethnic minorities and talked a lot about gender. The traditional left has been totally and utterly defeated and can no longer use the race card nor the gender card.

Kemi Badenoch, married, mother of three is an engineer that has held several high positions in government. Robert Jenrrick, also married, father of three, also University graduate and has held several high positions in government.

Both of them have been described as Far Right of Extremist. Really? I suppose that having family values, solid education and professional careers, caring more about the country in which they were born, it is easy to understand that those bent on destroying family values and British identity would certainly see them as something to be afraid of, especially when none other than Keir Starmer, the British Prime Minister, does not know what a woman is.

Political commentators who oppose them say that they might become leaders of the Conservative Party, but would have no political future in terms of leading the party and winning the next General Election.

One can never foresee what the future will bring. Suffice to say, that in recent by-elections, 14 Labour seats were already lost, after a disastrous beginning for a political party that had recently won a General Election with an outstanding majority. We haven't even reached the first national budget and there is already infighting within Labour ranks. 

We await the first national budget with trepidation.Already several MPs decided to become Independent and major figures of the Labour Party were literally pushed out of the Labour Party. It can be literally said that the present Labour Party won the General Election under false pretenses. Major policies that helped them win the election have already been thrown out. No more taxes? It seems that there was one Labour Party before the General Election and another, different, Labour Party after the General Election. A combination of lies, deceit, and miscalculation. 

Gary Lineker: Using the BBC for political agendas

 

For a long time, there has been criticism regarding BBC Superstars and the fact that they are overlypaid when the coorportation has been downsizing and cutting down services.

Not a year goes by without hearing announcements regarding services being cut off to save money and it is not any money. It is about money gathered because people most of whom do not watch the BBC are forced to pay under duress.

Despite the fact the he made a name because of football, Gary Lineker has very well known political views and political allegiances. If we want a BBC that is seen as impartial, Gary Lineker is not the best exponent of such impartiality and perhaps, and without perhaps, this led the BBC to make the decision not to allow the presenter to host a very public football programme. His twitter comments led to confrontation and even division between peoples that hold similar political views. Exponents of the Jewish Communities in the UK have shown that they are not happy - in some cases that they are deeply unhappy - to hear or see that the experiences of 70 or so years ago are being used for party political purposes in the United Kingdom. Is this a watershed moment? Are people tired enough of seeing words like Nazi, Fascist, Racist, Homophobe, Transphobe used to prevent any qualified debate about many of today's issues and ills?

Gary Lineker is not a Member of Parliament. Perhaps he should consider leaving the BBC, stopping being a sports presenter, and engage in politics full on. Then he could talk about politics using his own steam instead of using his presence as presenter of a public broadcaster to promote his views. It is become apparent that many communities in the United Kingdom are not happy when they are flooded with illegal immigrant centres and their local economies that were already in trouble before their hospitality industry was used for purposes that have nothing to do with the reasons why the hospitality industry was created. Calling disgruntled and desperate local communities Far Right or Racist is in itself a form of abuse. Local inhabitants become hostages of circumstances beyond their control. They become victims of decisions made by political groups that are not to have to cope with the repercusions of their decisions. 

What is happening in many local communities across the United Kingdom shows, once again, the disconnect between the well-off and the poorer segments of society. The said centres are not set up in well-off areas. The said centres are set up in the poorest areas of Britain. Rich Liberals and Champagne Socialists are condemning the poorest in Britain to live in conditions that Rich Liberals and Champagne Socialist would not want to live in.  

If somebody is to be blamed, politicians in Westminster are the ones to blame for lamentable events regarding migration

 

If somebody is to be blamed, politicians in Westminster are the ones to blame for lamentable events regarding migration

The Labour Party and others blamed 'Far Right Demonstrators'. Undoubtedly, peaceful demonstrations can be highjacked by violent individuals, but the fact remains that it was for starters a peaceful demonstration in which ordinary law abiding people tried to express their anger and their frustration when their local communities are flooded with total disregard for public views. Suddenly, local inhabitants see their towns and cities overrun and their economic prospects and peaceful coexistence ruined. They talk about it, but Westminster politicians don't seem interested. They hear that their local authorities are running out of money, cutting down services and having to increase taxes that come out of depleted pockets. They ask their local representatives and their national representatives to speak for them, to actually represent their views, and they are not just blatantly ignored. They are insulted. The vast majority of those taking part in the demonstrations were not Far Right Extremists. They were ordinary people who are suffering and have no voice because those they elect to represent them are not interested in representing their views.

Homelessness amongst the local inhabitants has not decreased. In fact, it has increased. Everywhere you see people sleeping rough. Many are struggling to keep a roof over their heads or living in accommodation that is not fit for purpose. On the other hand, they see thousands of illegal migrants crossing the Channel and being given what they - the ordinary people of Great Britain - are denied. Are there laws in Britain? Are there immigration policies in Britain? Those who have the obbligation of enforcing laws are willfully allowing violation of immigration laws.

National and local authorities have created a fertile environment for violence to occur.  

Ben Wallace: To be or not to be?

For British Secretary of State for Defense Ben Wallace MP the issue is pretty clear: to be or not to be? British politicians have been claiming that after the USA, Britain is the second most powerful country in the world and one wonders on what such claims are based.

Spending less than 2 per cent of the budget on Defense, Britain is below the 2 per cent required by NATO and with less than 80,000 troops the country is behind Germany in terms of capable combattants. Even Margaret Thatcher that is now in history as the one Prime Minister that was at the helm in 1982 when Britain faced Argentina in the South Atlantic was about to mothball the navy right up to the point when the country had to embark in a naval campaign for which NATO resources had to be moved south and private ships had to be used to transport troops. Lucky for Britain that the Harrier jump jets were available and were the key for success as Britain had completely underestimated the amount of resources it needed for such endeavour.

Today, reality tells us that Britain is not fit for war. Britain was not fit for war in Iraq and Britain was not fit for war in Afghanistan. Even when it acted as second fiddle to the US, its failings were immediately apparent. When you send troops to a theatre of war in vehicles that are not fully armoured and were only meant for riot control, you know that something is extremely wrong. As soon as they drove over landmines, British soldiers were turned into mincemeat. Britain's capacity to move troops around was very limited as there were no enough air transport resources and British commanders had to use American aircraft to move around in a theatre of war. 

Talking about the present conflict in Eastern Europe, if you give away British military resources and you don't invest to replace or increase British resources you know, once again, that things are extremely wrong. The country could run out of ammunition in a week. Britain build two very expensive sea mammouths at a huge cost only to realize that they were not fit for purpose. One of the biggest embarrassments were massive ships that were not sea worthy.

It was Ben Wallace that had to counter statements made by Rishi Sunak regarding the deploymenty of British jets in Ukraine stating that sending jets would undermine British security because it would trigger retaliation against the British homeland. But I am sure that it was Ben Wallace's awareness of the present state of the British Armed Forces that pushed him to act without delay to reject the promises made by Rishi Sunak as Prime Minister. Who could be the right Prime Minister if Britain faces the prospect of a protracted European War? I am sure that many Conservatives are asking such question. An opportunistic Boris Johnson? Bureaucracts like Lizz Truss or Rishi Sunak? Lizz Truss herself support a 10 per cent reduction of the British Armed Forces while at the same time trying to sound threatening on the world stage.

Eleven billion Pound might sound like an impressive amount of money, but it is just money. You need to train human resources, you need time. You don't build reliable Armed Forces on the hoof. Politicians and Church leaders seem more interested in promoting homosexuality and social decadence than in promoting a Britain that is fit for purpose and capable of performing in a theatre of war. In a country in which supporting illegal migrants is more important that supporting Britons, you know in which direction the wind is blowing. When local populations rebel against invasion and are labelled 'Far Right extremists', you know that the political system is rotten to the core.

Rotten to the core by militant homosexuality, social decadence and the destruction of British identity, Britain is not fit for purpose.

SO15: Myth and Reality

 

SO15: Myth and Reality

Every night, when we go to bed to gather our energies at the end of a hard day, we are confronted by the harsh reality of who we are. We are vulnerable individuals caught up in the net of our own uncertainties and weaknesses. The adrenaline that kept as going during the day seems to be gone and we are down to our individuality, away from the trials and tribulations, from the challenges that we face, from the doubts and hesitations.

Even the most frightful organisations are no more than a collection of vulnerable individuals very much like ourselves. SO15 has been designated as an anti-terrorism tool, but how much of an anti-terrorism tool any organisation can be without proper information and without the proper tools to analize and to arrive at the right conclusions that will allow it to achieve its aims is a fundamental question. I am no spring chicken. As a child, as a teenager, as a young man, I watched World War Two movies and I usually complained about being born too late to actually have been a protagonist in World War Two. I felt that after World War Two, whatever happened afterwards would have insignificant. Here we are living in times when much of the present day politics is described using as a reference World War Two. When we talk about politics, we used words like Nazi, Fascist, Stalinist, and so forth. It feels like whatever happened 70 or so years ago is still with us and is very much relevant to us.

I look at and listen to youngsters today who are frightfully oblivious to what happen in my young man's years in Latin America, for example. In the movie The Two Popes - Jonathan Pryce plays Pope Francis. Pope Francis tells Pope Benedict played by Anthony Hopkins about the death flights that took place in the River Plate Region. Most people, including SO15, MI5, MI6, would be totally unaware of the methods used in those days that rivalled what was done during World War Two. What were the death flights? Political detainees, after being tortured and drugged, were loaded onto airforce planes, flown over the sea and thrown while still alive into the sea. You can imagine that when their bodies touched the sea the water would have the consistency of concrete. Bones would be crashed and faces disfigured to the point of making them unrecognizable. This and other methods were used during the 1970 and 1980. 

I lived in the River Plate region at that time and I can tell you here and now that there was a lot more than that and, when it comes to terror, what has happened in Britain compared to what happened in Latin America is no more than peanuts. Talking about doing something is nothing. The real issue is doing it and much of what was done and is still being done in Latin America beggars belief because it surpasses in more ways than one what happened in World War Two in terms of levels of perfection of cruelty.

Politics and geopolitics have come together as one, but security services are failing to grasp the extent of the ongoing changes. Today, it is about movements more than political parties, movements that have links across national borders, share resources and for which ordinary political processes like elections are just a means to an end and getting elected representatives might not be the main purpose. Today's security services are about 'Far Right' at a national level and are totally oblivious to the dimensions of what they call Far Right. Anybody without a real political agenda ends up being called Far Right or Extremist or the like. The game has changed but politicians, mass media and commentators have failed to grasp the fact of how much things have changed. I confess that I now rarely read the pages of newspapers like The Independent. So called political commentators don't seem to have a clue of what is really going on. The likes of Tommy Robinson, Jack Renshaw, and others are classified as Far Right, something that they are not in any way, shape or form. Misguided? Perhaps. But the aforementioned could not be Far Right, not in a million years. Terrorists? Really? There has to be a long term ideology. There has to be a plan. There has to be a set of objectives depicting a new reality that they try to create.

If all Jack Renshaw thought about was about killing one Member of Parliament, where is the ideology? Where is the long term plan? Where are the long term objectives? A Member of Parliament can be replaced by another Member of Parliament who will have the same or similar views. Threatening somebody is a criminal act, but  what would then be achieved? What real change would then be achieved? Absolutely nothing. One individual is replaced by another individual and it is business as usual. People can lament Jo Cox's death or David Amess's death. What did the culprits actually achieve? Absolutely nothing. Did killing or maming people on July 7th 2005 achieve anything? Corpses everywhere. Lives of passers-by lost. What did killing an unarmed Police Officer right in front of the gates of the House of Commons actually achieve? And what about the incident in London Bridge or in Manchester? What about those killed Lee Rigby? Such actions are the actions of deranged individuals very much like the one who went along the high street street in Streatham in South London trying to stab pedestrians achieved nothing.

When politicians, security forces, mass media and members of the public continue to think about such acts as acts of terrorism, they are taking their eyes away from the ball. We have not had real acts of terrorism and if we continue to misuse anti-legislation using anti-terror legislation for political ends we are going to lose everything worth living for. The real danger is hidden and for such danger we are totally unprepared.

When a politician, that could be a Member of the Cabinet, threatens another country - even without knowing that he or she is threatening another country - the danger grows. When the present Foreign Secretary Liz Truss spoke about a 'no fly zone', she obviously was not aware of that imposing a 'no fly zone' was a declaration of war. When she promoted the idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine, she obviously was not aware of the fact that mercenaries are not protected by the Geneva Convention. Now, those captured in Ukraine face the death penalty.

When General Patrick Sanders speaks about British forces that should be prepared to fight on the continent, what he says goes against what the Defense Secretary Ben Wallace MP is promoting. You don't fight long wars with commando units. So General Patrick Sanders wants Britain to go in one direction and the Defense Secretary is moving Britain in another direction and the two things are totally incompatible. Fighting long wars means more manpower, not less manpower and you need to get used to the fact that there will be a huge number of casualties along the way and you need to accept there would be retaliation and that the British mainland would be targetted. No one cares to explain to the British public the true meaning of what is being talked about. War in Europe will not be like recents wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq.

Instead of compartmentalised actions in terms of national security, Britain will have to think about an integral approach based on the idea that national politics and geopolitics go hand in hand. There are clear examples of how disastrous such compartmentalised actions can be. For many years, the Royal Navy, the Army and the Air Force operated as separate entities. There are tragic examples to show how misguided such actions were. Two British ships sent to Asia to confront Japan were sunk by Japanese torpedo airplanes. The assault against Narvik was yet another example of how foolish such actions were. Without air cover, the Royal Navy was a sitting duck. Integration is the way forward because the next war will be fought both at home and abroad.  

They look the same, they think along the same lines, and they will be living next to you

Profile: Who are Ukraine's far-right Azov regiment

Azov is a far right infantry military group, ultra-nationalists with a white supremacist ideology. They have officially integrated into the National Guard of Ukraine. They carried out attacks against minority groups and its leader Andriy Biletsky said that he is leading the white races of the world against Semite-led Untermenschen (inferior races).

They wear symbols as Swastikas and SS regalia both as part of their uniforms and as tatoos. One of those symbols is the Wolfangel symbol which resembles a black Swastika on a yellow background. Groups carried out pogroms against the Roma community and attacked members of the LGBTQ community.

These are the people the so-called West is supporting. They are sworn anti-Semites.

These are the kind of people that will be coming to the EU and also to Britain. And they share the same ideology of other white supremacist groups that were very active in the United Kingdom.

Alison Chabloz: How monies are being spent in court cases that serve no purpose whatsoever

 Alison Chabloz: How monies are being spent in court cases that serve no purpose whatsoever

For several years now, the English legal system has been used as a money making machine for private individuals and as money spending machine for British taxpayers in meaningless court cases that are not going to make things better.

If anything the legal circus is creating more problems and giving ammunition to groups that have as a given agenda the extermination of Jews across Europe including in Britain.

Jews and those who continue this legal circus more than 70 years after the presumed end of World War Two have made Adolf Hitler and his ideas immortal. Just a few days ago in Norway, Anders Breivik during an appeal sessson made a National Socialist salute and people across the world enjoyed the scene.

Some say that we are three weeks away from the start of yet another World War. Nobody rational would believe that should the conflict start in Ukraine it will stop in Ukraine. We know that given the policy of alliances, the conflict in all probability will spread like wildfire across the entire continent and this without taking into account that it could also trigger war in China as China would use this as a golden opportunity to implement its own agenda in Asia.

There are more than enough Far Right groups and Muslim groups in Europe to use the fog of war to go hunting Jews across Europe when countries are engulfed in a World War. What have been the mortal crimes committed by Alison Chabloz? She has written songs and expressed her views on radio programmes. If everybody who does not believe in the Jewish mantra of the Holocaust were to be imprisoned, more than half of the world's population would be in jail and history and especially after the presumed end of World War Two has not been favourable to Jews given the record of Israel and of certain very prominent individuals who have been constantly on the news.

The more people mention the persecution of Jews, the stronger the anti-Jewish movements become. The Jewish rhetoric feeds the anti-Jewish rhetoric in the same manner that the Muslim rhetoric feeds the anti-Muslim rhetoric and this is happening on a daily basis. The rhetorics about Jews and Muslism is mixed with vested interests and geopolitical interests and this is a deadly mix and wars are not the way to maintain social, economic and political stability.

Die Judenfrage is already being talked about and certain groups are rubbing their hands with glee. Chasing artists for writing songs and taking part in radio programmes will not save the idiots who are behind such harassment and persecution schemes. 

British? Yes. Far Right? I doubt it

 

Paul Golding in Moscow during a visit to the Russian Parliament British? Yes. Far Right? Not really. 

Whatever the BBC, Sky News, the British Political Establishment  and other political operators want you to believe, reality is quite different from what they try to make you believe.

Because he has been working with Russian Nationalists, something that bothered very much the Political Establishment, a little known piece of legislation called Schedule 7 of the 2000 Anti-Terror Legislation was used to entrap and convict Paul Golding accusing him of terrorism.

Of course the usual media made a fuss about misused terrorism charges, charges that were used for purely political reasons.

Most of those journalists that campaign against the Far Right or what they call Far Right don't seem to have a clue about what is going on. They keep writing articles to suit the official narrative and getting things wrong.

  

Benjamin Netanyahu: The fate of millions of people lies in the hands of one man

 

Like it happens with all controversial politicians, there are two sides of Benjamin Netanyahu: one is the ideologically driven individual that wants the Bigger Israel no matter what and the other is the mortal individual that got into many dubious dealings that led the Israeli Judiciary to chase him.

The present Benjamin Netanyahu cannot get a Knesset majority and lives in borrowed time. He knows that the moment he steps down as Prime Minister of Israel the Judiciary will catch up with him and his reputation and his personal life will be dealt a deadly blow. Therefore, he will do whatever it takes to stick to power, even if this means all out war with Israel's neighbours. For Benjamin Netanyahu the ends justify the means and the lists of casualties and material losses will be his legacy. Long gone are the days of Yitzhak Rabin when lasting peace between Jews and Palestinian was mesmerizingly close.

Menachem Begin and  Anwar Sadat had achieved peace between Israel and Egypt leading to the restoration of territories that had been taken from Egypt in war. Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat held the keys to Paradise, but Paradise was not meant to be. A Far Right Jew killed Yitzhak Rabin and killed the peace process.

As far as Benjamin Netanyahu is concerned, peace is his greatest enemy. His support for Jewish thugs who call themselves Nationalists led to the incidents in a Mosque in Jerusalem during Ramadan and the Palestinian response followed. At the moment, a case is going through the legal process in Israel that is directly linked to the rights of Palestinians to live in Jerusalem. Jewish Far Right activists claim that Palestinian homes in Jerusalem belong to them. This is the core of what is happening right now. Jerusalem, like the rest of the occupied territories, has been subjected to ethnic cleansing with Israeli Arabs stating that in Israel itself they are being treated as second class citizens.

Benjamin Netanyahu does not represent Israel and does not represent what Israel stands for, but his actions are affecting the wellbeing of Jews inside and outside Israel. In this particular situation, Jews and Palestinian are being held hostage by Benjamin Netanyahu for reasons that have nothing to do with Israeli security, but more to do with an extremist agenda and his unwillingness to face the courts and be accountable. This is why Israelis and Palestinian are dying.

 

2021 - London Assembly Elections Start of official election period and nominations

A year after the London Assembly Elections had to be posponed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and measures put in place to prevent the spread of the virus, London is open for business again and preparations are in full swing for what is going to be a very exciting time for all Londoners. 

From 9:00 o'clock this morning and with 45 days to go until election day on May 6th, London Elect is calling on all voters across London to prepare themselves to vote. Nominations can now be submitted for those wishing to stand for Mayor and the London Assembly. The nomination period will end at 16:00 hours on March 30th 2021. It must be noted that campaign spending will be controlled.

To register to vote, you can visit: gov.uk/register-to-vote

How to vote

• In this election, there are three ballot papers and four votes.
• Two votes for the Assembly elections and a first and second choice for the Mayoral election.
• You must make a first choice, or your vote won’t be counted. Each vote must be for a different candidate.
• Your polling station will be open from 7am until 10pm on election day. 
• Before 6 May, you will receive your polling card through your door. This will include details of your named polling station.
• You can also vote by post. You must apply for a postal vote by 5pm on 20 April 2021. 
• Your ballot papers will be sent to you about a week before Election Day. Mark your votes and return them to arrive before 10pm on 6 May 2021.
• You can also vote by proxy. This is when a person you trust votes for your chosen candidates on your behalf if you are unable to make it to the polling station. If you want a proxy vote, your council must receive your application by 5pm on 27 April 2021. The deadline to apply for a proxy vote as a result of an emergency is 5pm, Thursday 6 May 2021.

 To find out more, visit londonelects.org.uk

 

1. This unique form of local government represents the interests of London and Londoners.

London has one Mayor and 25 Assembly Members. The Mayor of London is responsible for running the city, from policing and housing to environment and transport.

The Assembly keeps a check on the Mayor’s work and investigates issues that matter to Londoners.

2. To find out more, visit: londonelects.org.uk
3. Link to 2016 results

Now Labour wants to follow Britain First

After being routed in its homelands during the 2019 General Election, an election in wich the Conservative Party got a sizeable majority by becoming the party of the white working class (statistically more white working class people voted for the Conservative Party than they voted for the Labour Party), Labour Party Leader Keir Starmer wants his party to use national flags and put on a suit to try and regain the confidence of British voters.

According to him, a posher Labour Party might become a more attractive option, but if this an issue merely of flags and suits and not of real policies the chances are that his approach will not find favour amongst those whose support he needs to turn the tide that has gone against the Labour Party after a series of scandals involving anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and outright fraud. One example is the once popular Mayor of Liverpool Joe Anderson who fell from grace after being accussed of being involved in a conspiracyu to commit bribery and witnerss intimidation. 

Before Joe Anderson, members of the Labour Party Shadow Cabinet have shown worrying signs of incompetence when Diane Abbott discussed on live radio his options to improve Police services. Something about the amount of money needed to recruit new Police Officers. Emily Thornberry didn't do that well when she publicly acknowledge that she wasn't aware of the names of key political figures in the international arena, people she would have had to deal with if she had been Foreign Secretary.

If anything, the removal of Jeremty Corbyn also helped remove many members of his Shadow Cabinet, but it hasn't helped to improve the Labour Party's standing in terms of competence. 

Having the Labour Party taken  to the courts by its former Leader is not a show of unity. If the party whip is not returned to Jeremy Corbyn, Jeremy Corbynb would be facto not allowed to stand in a General Election for the seat he now represents. And what about Labour Party supporters? During his term in office as party Leader, Jeremy Corbyn managed to increase Labour Party membership. The irony was that Labour Party members liked Jeremy Corbyn as much as the Parliamentary Labour Party disliked Jeremy Corbyn. What happened in the northern seats that used to be represented by Labour MPs might very well have been retaliation by the Labour Party grassroots against the Parliamentary Labour Party that got rid of Jeremy Corbyn.

Using the tactics of the so called Far Right could be for Keir Starmer a fatal mistake. What would the likes of the UAF, Hope Not Hate, Searchlight and others say when they see the Labour Party dressed in Britain First's clothes? For decades the Labour Party tried to convince British voters that Natinonalism was poisonous and that whoever went around with national flags was racist, Fascist and xenophobe. Labour Party authorities literally replaced national flags with European Union flags. After Brexit, they cannot use European Union flags to hide symbols that they actually hate.

Will the Labour Party that actively campaigned against British Nationalism now turn around and say that they are British Nationalists and that they no longer believe what they used to preach by demonising anybody who dared to stand for British Nationalism?

 

Iran: Misreading signals and cultural misunderstandings

Iran: Misreading signals and cultural misunderstandings

The greatest defect of Western Diplomacy is the huge capacity to misread signals and the inability overcome cultural differences. The more the stakes are raised the more entrenched positions become. 

World War Two offers many examples of how bad things can be. One of the said examples involves cultural differences between Japan and Western nations. Japanese soldiers were cultural averse to any surrender. Surrender was seen as shameful, as an act of weakness. For those who shared British heritage, surrender was very much part of the game. If things were bad enough, then surrender was a way out. Those who surrendered to Japanese forces were seen as inferior and treated badly because they were seen as subhumans. When the wheels of war started moving in the opposite direction, many Japanese military and also civilians chose death. There are records of civilians who died jumping off from heights. 

The assumption is that increasing pressure on Iran, Iran will be brought to the negotiations table. Instead, it is fatally weakening moderate politicians that want an agreement and reinforcing hardliners that would choose open war instead of what they see as a surrender.

While some in Britain see a dual-national as somebody that needs rescuing, in Iran they see her as an Iranian national that has engaged in anti-Iran activities.

Geopolitical factors will make positions in Iran ever more entrenched. Increased military presence and sanctions are not fomenting generosity. 

Jeremy Corbyn's video: Infiltration within the British Armed Forces

Jeremy Corbyn's video: Infiltration within the British Armed Forces

We must always following the line of un-intended consequences. There is no coincidence that British soldiers appeared to be shooting at Jeremy Corbyn. The British Armed Forces know than when it counted Jeremy Corbyn was on the side of the Provisional IRA and those memories are deeply rooted Jeremy Corbyn is the ideological enemy and they know it and this is playing into the hands of groups that have long abandoned the political way and are bent on getting results the hard way. 

Funnily enough, the usual idiots are so dedicated to demonising what they call Far Right that when people from the so called Far Right try to raise the alert about impending doom their calls are purely and simply ignored.

Therefore, we can only watch developments knowing that those in charge will ignore the dangers and do nothing. In the meantime all we can do is to continue working with grassroots to be ready for the onslaught.

When the onslaught comes, Hope Not Hate, Searchlight and others will be sitting ducks. . 

Brexit: Trust in Democracy can only be restored when politicians deliver on what they promise

Brexit: Trust in Democracy can only be restored when politicians deliver on what they promise

Anna Soubry was called Nazi by a protester in front of the Houses of Parliament. That was a wrong thing to do because she isn't a Nazi. 

Having said that there is one claim that can be made. She has failed to deliver what she promised to her voters and to the Nation..The same has happened with other Members of Parliament. After the Expenses Scandal and several other shortcomings, Brexit would have been the golden opportunity for Parliament to redeem itself. Instead, trust in Parliament is at an all time low. But trust in Parliament is not the only one issue. There has been a loss of faith in Democracy.

Five days before a crucial deadline to leave the European Union, nobody knows with certainty what it is going to happen. There is a power struggle between the Executive namely the Prime Minister and the British government and Parliament. Parliament has been wrestling control away from the Executive and this poses questions about the foundations of Democracy that stands on Division of Powers - Executive, Legislative and Judiciary.

The authority of the British Government has been eroded but also the authority of the leaders of political parties has been eroded with renewed accusations of Anti-Semitism made against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party and of Islamophobia against the Conservative Party as a whole. This is happening when unity within the two main political parties should exist to ensure sustainable governance.

Since the General Election of 2017, there has been a hang Parliament in which the Conservative Party had to negotiate an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland. There have been so many conflicts that several key members of both the Conservative Party and of the Labour party decided to resign their membership of their political parties and even a Liberal Democrat MP resigned the whip of his party because of disagreement with regards to his political party's position concerning Brexit.

To the already complex political situation, where do the British Armed Forces stand? Apart from a scandal created by the revelation that active members of the Armed Forces have joined a now banned organisation called National Action, a video was published showing members of the Armed Forces doing shooting exercises using a poster with the image of Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the Opposition, as a target.

Fears regarding an European Parliament Election that Britain might have to take part in have encouraged political parties that the mass media have classified as Far Right to participate in the said European Parliament Election at a time when in Continental Europe there is a mood that would produce great political gains for political forces opposed to the European Union Project.

In France, where last time around Emmanuel Macron was offered as an alternative to the then Front National and now Rassemblement National, President Emmanuel Macron is not just the least popular President in the history of France. For the first time, the French people hate a French President. This puts Rassemblement National in pole position to obtain a vast number of seats in the European Parliament.

In Italy with a political alliance of Right and Left and in Germany there is the possibility of getting many anti-EU Members of the European Parliament Elected. In recent elections in Germany, Alternative für Deutschland entered every single one of the sixteen state Parliaments and is the official opposition in the Federal Parliament.

With this in mind, will the present authorities of the European Union agree to an extension that would allow a massive number of anti-EU Members of Parliament to be elected and make decisions regarding the European Commission and the long term budget of the European Union? 

The coming week promises to be even more crucial not just for Britain but also for the future of the European Union.

.

 

Roberta Woods: Speaking on the Judiciary and legal inconsistencies

Roberta Woods is a prominent and very coherent and consistent writer and presenter of what is usually known as Far Right, a segment of public opinion that is 
usually depicted as 'skin heads and street fighters constantly looking for trouble'.

Reality couldn't be more different. Roberta is no skin head or street fighter. She offers a different insight into what happens in British Courts and about how so called mainstream media and  what is known as the political establishment approach very public and very lamentable events. 

This happens at a time when the number of those injured or murdered on British streets is on the rise. Every human life counts. Every family, whatever their race, religion or nationality suffers the loss of a loved one to crime.  

Roberta Woods is not just a writer and presenter despite the fact that she introduces herself to the audience in a very humble way. She is politically active and has stood in elections both local and London-wide. 

Only Black Lives Matter

I have chosen this name for my talk as this definitely seems to be the case today in mixed-race murders.

You will all be aware of the glaring difference in the way the media report on white on black crime (default is, it’s a racist crime) and black on white (default it’s just a crime, race is kept out of it). Where a defendant is non-white, it is all too easy to deny murder with a claim of racism. The media rush to report at length any perceived racist murder, while more or less ignoring white victims of non-white violence. Then to compound the injustice, they will demonise any support offered to white victims by, what they call ‘right-wing’ groups, as ‘stirring up hatred’ , when all the while they continually stir up hatred themselves, with their non-stop references to the racist murder of Stephen Lawrence. The result of this is that the grieving white families are isolated from their only source of support. Our genuine wish to help is guaranteed to be made ‘toxic’ by the media. The legal fraternity will argue against deporting a foreign criminal back to his home country, in case he may not receive a fair trial, while we natives cannot get a fair trial in our own country despite our supposedly superior legal system.

 I would like to speak to you of just such a case and highlight what I see as serious flaws in the jury system, and also contrast the different outcomes for the two Greenwich families involved.

·        I am certain that all of you will have heard of one Greenwich mother, Doreen Lawrence whose son Stephen was murdered in 1993, in a supposed ‘racist’ killing. You cannot fail to forget this particular murder as you will have been reminded of it on a daily basis over the past 26 years, by a media obsessed by that ONE victim.

How many of you will have heard of another Greenwich mother, Sue Gregory whose two sons were murdered by non-natives, almost 2 years to the day apart. One perpetrator West Indian, the second Vietnamese? Sue was just getting her life back together following Terry’s murder, when a tragic quirk of fate, saw her elder son Billy, murdered almost 2 years to the day after Terry, in the Earl of Chatham pub in Woolwich on Dec 25^th 2005 aged 23, by a Vietnamese immigrant For this talk I will concentrate on the case of Terry Gregory as there was some measure of justice for Billy, with his murderer, Thu Nguyen being sentenced to 14 years imprisonment in October 2006, although he almost certainly will be out of prison now and free to commit more violent crime – he had attacked another drinker with a glass not long before murdering Billy.

·        Sue Gregory was always at pains to say that the family were not claiming a racist attack in the case of Terry, although all it requires for an attack to be deemed ‘racist’ is for someone to claim it was and Terry’s murder seems to have almost certainly had black aggressive elements of feeling disrespected, especially in front of 3 young black women. Billy’s murder may also have been racist, as Vietnamese, like blacks, have fragile egos and are also easily disrespected. Who can know what was in the mind of the murderer and whether he was having racist thoughts as he plunged the knife? Why the disparity of media and police attention? The CPS were not even prepared to seek a third trial in the Gregory case, although the evidence appears compelling, while the law of double-jeopardy was changed in order to pursue Lawrence’s murderers and that case goes on to this day.

Is Doreen Lawrence’s grief for her one son any more than Sue Gregory’s for her two sons, simply because one murder was deemed to be racist?.

·        On the night of Sat 27^th December 2003, Terry, his girlfriend Louise Reed and his friend Sam Nelson went to the Pullman pub in Woolwich for a night out. They were probably all quite merry by the time they left, catching the N1 bus to where they lived in Charlton – crucially there was no CCTV footage available although all buses have these cameras.

Terry felt sick and they got off the bus so he could get some air. There was an umbrella lying around which Terry started fooling around with – he was soon confronted by a black man who claimed it as belonging to one of his 3 female companions. A scuffle ensued in which Terry, being the younger, fitter man unfortunately seems to have got the better of his antagonist. Some Asian men stopped in a car and seemed to have been successful in defusing the situation as the black man and his companions got on a bus and disappeared. Terry and his friends continued walking home along Woolwich Church Street and as they approached The Albion pub, about half a mile from Terry’s home, the black man from the umbrella incident reappeared. In the following minutes, in a frenzied attack, Sam Nelson sustained a deep knife wound to his hand and Terry in attempting to protect his friend, was stabbed 9 times including twice in the back. Terry was rushed to hospital but did not survive.

·        A description of a man wanted for questioning was circulated and on 30^th December, 65 year-old George Edwin of Maryon Rd Charlton gave himself up at Shooters Hill police station. He was charged with Terry’s murder and GBH in relation to Sam Nelson.

·        CPS must have been confident in a murder charge as opposed to manslaughter, as the evidence showed clear premeditation (time lapse between original altercation and defendant reappearing armed with a knife)

·        The first trial was in August 2004, at the Inner London Crown Court, and not at the Old Bailey as the Gregory family expected. The defendant George Edwin, admitted Terry had wound him up during the umbrella incident and when he saw the three friends again later, he feared HE would be attacked. He claimed this second encounter was near Prospect Vale and not the Albion. In my opinion, this was done in order to give the impression that the other three had followed him, and not vice-versa, as this would be nearer his home in Maryon Rd, whereas The Albion was nearer to Terry’s. Not only did Edwin admit to being in possession of a knife – he went as far as admitting drawing the knife, but supposedly to frighten off HIS would-be assailants. He denied stabbing Terry. The murder weapon was never found but the pathologist estimated it as being at least 10cm long.

 Edwin had no criminal convictions and it was easy for the defence to portray this supposed law-abiding black pensioner as the victim rather than the aggressor. The jury was unable to reach a majority verdict on the murder charge and were dismissed and a new trial ordered.

Someone mentioned double-jeopardy, but this case was outside the remit of double-jeopardy, as there was no verdict or acquittal.

·        The second trial commenced on 21^st October 2004. On this occasion the jury visited the scene of the crime by the Albion pub. This pub as one would expect from its name, boasts a sign depicting Winston Churchill in the guise of John Bull, complete with Union Jack waistcoat. Lying nearby was a wreath , also in the style of a Union Jack, which had been placed there by a local lady who knew Terry had been a sports fanatic. This was not long after Britain’s Olympic winners victory tour in London and as we all know, sports merchandising is full of Union Jack images, but our national emblem is now used as a stick to beat us and is always seen by the establishment as evidence of that ubiquitous racism, when it comes to whites.

The NF had already laid a wreath at the scene of the crime in January 2004, and this, tragically, served only to strengthen the defence’s claim of Terry’s possible racist connections.

Needless to say, on returning to court, the seeds would have been well and truly sown in the minds of the jurors, that this was perhaps, a racist enclave. The mention by Edwin’s defence, of the proximity (same borough, not really close) to where Stephen Lawrence was killed, the inference being ‘this is an area where blacks are in fear of their lives’ – the character of the victim then being sullied when he cannot defend himself. It is almost OK for a black to kill a white if the victim is portrayed as a racist. If, God forbid, I was murdered by a non-native, regardless of motive, they would have a cast-iron ‘stay out of jail card’ as my BNP membership would be seen as mitigating. The assailant had to be the victim and the victim ‘had it coming’.

Why was the defence lawyer allowed to draw the jury’s attention to the fact that this was not far from where Stephen Lawrence was murdered as though to infer that it was acceptable to overlook white victims as all whites in this part of Greenwich must be racist and it’s ok to murder racists – Isn’t it? It was also easy for the defence to demolish unsophisticated witnesses like Sam Nelson and Terry’s 16 year-old girlfriend Louise Reed, and then attack their conflicting evidence. Louise had been so traumatised by the first trial that she chose to give evidence via video link in the second trial.

This time round Edwin claimed not to remember much of what happened that night, he responded:-

 ‘To my knowledge I never stabbed that boy. I am not a murderer. I am not a killer’

His performance and the underhand tactics of his defence seem to have been sufficient to convince the jury of his innocence, despite the damning evidence.

·        Is it not unbelievable that you can have a defendant who admits to both HAVING the knife and DRAWING it but whose memory then fails at this crucial moment? Did the jury believe that someone else intervened at this point and stabbed Terry 9 times? On this occasion, the jury found Edwin NOT GUILTY on the GBH charge relating to Sam Nelson but again could not reach a verdict in relation to the murder charge. After deliberation the CPS said they did not intend to seek a third trial. On 3^rd November 2004, the judge dismissed the murder charge, declaring George Edwin NOT GUILTY, adding ‘You leave this court without a stain upon your character’.

The Gregorys were devastated

·        It is possible that the jury was split over whether it was a case of murder OR manslaughter, NOT as to the defendant’s innocence of either. The second jury should have been directed by the judge to reach a majority verdict on either murder OR manslaughter, but it seems that in our antiquated judicial system, this is not permissible. It is quite possible that George Edwin walked free when both juries believed him guilty and were only split between those believing it was murder and those thinking it was manslaughter. Thus a man who admits to carrying a large bladed weapon and is not averse to drawing it when crossed, was allowed to walk free.

·        In January 2005 the NF planned another wreath-laying ceremony, preceded by a march. On the day, the usual suspects, UAF/Hate Not Hope, came out in force with ‘Stop the fascist BNP’ banners, press reports mentioned the NF having ‘very short haircuts’, some having their faces covered with scarves – Again, everyone here will know that it is the fascist UAF and their-like, who hide behind scarves and masks, not patriotic groups like the NF and BNP, who were there simply to remember white victims of non-white violence. A copy of the Fallen List was laid where Terry had fallen.

·        I would also like to highlight the difference in outcomes for the two mothers:-

Doreen Lawrence feted in the media, a whole pack of lawyers at her   disposal and then a seat in the House of Lords. Her son’s name constantly mentioned by the media and in parliament. Not content with the existing memorials, there is now to be an annual Stephen Lawrence Day and there is also a petition for a statue in Trafalgar Square.

Sue Gregory, ignored by the media, no lawyers coming forward to help her in her fight against a patent miscarriage of justice. Her son’s names forgotten save for on the patriots Fallen List. Greenwich Council dragging their heels dealing with her council house transfer, which meant she came face-to-face with her son’s killer on a regular basis. A lowly job with Greenwich Council from which she is now on sick-leave due to serious illness.

·        I believe Juries generally, and certainly for murder trials, are no longer fit for purpose. They worked when we were a homogenous people being tried by 12 of our countrymen, but now with multiculturalism all sorts of other allegiances and identities are involved race, religion, sexual orientation.

·        I recalled initially reading of the murder in the local paper in December 2003 and thinking killed because of an umbrella? I then came across the story of the trial and acquittal in November 2004, and the man who almost certainly murdered Terry walking from the court a free man. My own son was a teenager at the time, I felt for the family - it could just as easily have been me in this nightmare situation.

The whole case struck me as a grave miscarriage of justice, having seen on more than one occasion as a juror, the injustice of our legal system eventually walking out of a jury trial in August that same year.

·         Meeting with Sue Gregory in about December 2004, I was determined to do what I could to draw attention to the injustice suffered by her family. When I called at her house in Charlton, her son Billy recalled reading MY jury-walkout story in the local paper – Billy would himself be a murder victim within a year.

I did not have myself have power, or a platform, but I could write letters and send emails. I joined forces with Stewart Rigby, a friend of Terry’s from his time as a lifeguard at Eltham Baths. Stewart had sat through both trials and was shocked at the outcome, he wrote to his local MP and Baroness Scotland, Attorney General at the time (subsequently discredited),questioning a legal system which delivers such injustice. Ironically, at the foot of the Attorney General’s letters was the following line:- ‘Building a safe, just and tolerant society’.

I wrote to several journalists whom I thought were in a position to perhaps take up the case and give it wider exposure:- Simon Jenkins, Peter Hitchens, Melanie Phillips, Joshua Rozenberg –not one expressed an interest. Simon Jenkins had himself written a lengthy article in the Times calling for the abolition of the jury system. Having served as a juror on 3 occasions, Jenkins, like me, felt they were time-wasting, inefficient and expensive. He argued that jury justice is largely guesswork, as they are denied crucial pieces of evidence, like previous convictions of a similar nature. Juries will agonise over their decision on serious cases, expecting a guilty verdict to attract a prison sentence, which seems to very rarely follow – that seems to have been both Jenkins and my experience. Not only was I unsuccessful in my attempts to draw media attention to the Gregory case, but Stewart Rigby who I had been working with, refused to speak to me on hearing that I was a member of the BNP – thus, I have many unanswered questions and no one to ask.

Evidence of guilt in the Gregory case, seems to have been conclusive, however, this trial was conducted amid blatant appeals to emotion and prejudice, when the jury are expected to make a decision based solely on the evidence. The judge in both trials should have intervened to stop the defence resorting to smear tactics against the victim and inferences that perhaps Terry and his friend Sam were part of a white gang-culture. Juries are all too easily swayed, especially if race is involved and again, I know this from my own personal experience as a juror where one jury was convinced that perhaps the black gang involved suffered racism at the hands of the police who had been called to crime scene, some jurors were quite prepared to believe that the police had planted evidence on the blacks.

I believe that if George Edwin had appeared in front of a panel of judges he would have been found GUILTY.

                                               

·        I was recently reminded that 28^th Dec 2018, marked the fifteenth anniversary of Terry’s murder. We must not forget victims like Terry.

A first step would be to have the Terry Gregory case re-examined under the police’s increasingly successful cold case review process (New Tricks TV series).

 Is this asking too much when there is a police team still investigating the Stephen Lawrence case after 26 years?

In 2006, in the first trial under the amended double-jeopardy provisions of the Criminal Justice Act of 2003, William Dunlop was tried for the third time of the murder of Julie Hogg in 1989, this time Dunlop admitted to strangling the victim. Two previous trials in 1991 had broken down with both juries failing to reach a verdict, as in the Gregory case and an acquittal following the CPS not seeking a third trial.