Britain's impending depression: Mass media focus on witch-hunt instead

Britain impending depression: Mass media focus on witch-hunt instead

Emily Maitlis heading a witch-hunt

At the time when mass media and politicians should be focusing on what is going to happen when the Lockdown is finally lifted, the emphasis is on a witch-hunt.

When unemployment is bound to reach more than 10 million in the United Kingdom alone, time is awfully wasted in point scoring, the kind of exercise in which the whole country loses.

If Parliament is incapble of dealing with the real issues, why do we need a Parliament at all? The amount of borrowing continues to escalate and when the furlough scheme is finally over, Britain will be facing a crisis that will be an absolute catastrophe. But the so called Free Press that is neither Free nor real Press doesn't give a damn about millions of British families that will be literally left without a roof and without money to put food on the dining tables.

When you have no savings and no monies coming your way, you cannot afford to pay your mortage, your loans and credit cards and this means a default of gigantic proportions, much bigger than any financial crisis we have ever faced before. Neither of the financial insitutions will be able to survive such a crisis. We risk being swallowed by mountain of debt and defaulted loans and mortages.

Unfortunaly, we have got party political operators like Emily Maitlis using and abusing the BBC as a platform to promote her own agenda, whatever credibility the BBC has left after years of partiality and political meddling.

If because of a financial crisis without precedent in the United Kingdom the political scene becomes extremely polarized, the Weimar Republic will be seen as Paradise on Earth. The truth no longer matters. All that matters is innuendo, distortion, lies, deceit, demonization and gossip. I suggest that we rename so call Mass Media. From now on, they should be known as SGI (Scandals Gossiping Industry).  

The Fall of the BNP and the rise of National Action

The Fall of the BNP and the rise of National Action

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

.

Attacks against political parties and political party members have been blessed by the Political Establishment

Attacks against political parties and political party members have been blessed by the Political Establishment

Owen Jones (The Guardian) - Anna Soubry MP

Both Owen Jones and Anna Soubry MP promoted and celebrated attacks against political parties and political party members.

Owen Jones actively supports thugs that engage in political violence and his writings are not conducive to peaceful political coexistence but since the National Union of Journalist has an active agenda that leads to persecution discrimination, harassment and violence this doesn't come as a surprise. 

It remains to be seen if the aforementioned would remember what happened in 1930s Germany and perhaps learnt a few lessons from it because the kind of realities that they promote are certainly leading Britain to become 1930s Germany, especially when nowadays political violence in Germany is on the rise and Britain will soon become a reflection of it. They both lamented the death of Jo Cox MP but they don't seem to understand that their behaviour is putting people in danger.

If we don't respect each other and if we don't care for each other, regardless of our political differences, Britain will be the new Weimar Republic.  

Simon Darby offers his account of an event during which Owen Jones was filmed celebrating political violence.

"Since the College Green assault on the BNP’s newly elected MEPs in 2009 has come in to focus, I’ll share a few recollections of the event. I do so for the purpose of making people aware of the increasingly desperate manoeuvres by the power structure in this country, approaching March 29th, to officially reclassify some 17.4 million people as far-right extremists.

Tuesday 9th June 2009 just a couple of days after the BNP’s incredible breakthrough in the European elections and it was my job to sort out a press conference. Having myself obtained 122,000 votes (8.6%) across the West Midlands I was somewhat disappointed not to be on the podium, but the show had to go on.

It was my idea to host the event at College Green, right outside Parliament, since whilst working at the GLA I had done a number of interviews from that same location. I found it to be secure, most of the time crawling with police and easily accessible to the world’s press. More than this though, with Parliament in the background any images would tend to visually turbocharge our breakthrough and help cement the achievement in the public’s mind.

Both Nick and Andrew were happy with the idea, but BNP security were concerned about the complexities of operating in London. Far from “BNP Thugs” our security team was a highly disciplined, politically savvy synthesis of ex-military, martial arts experts and doormen from some of the roughest cities and towns across the UK.

Those initial concerns were alleviated by the use of special forces grade communications equipment allowing extraction vehicles to be in close orbit to the event at all times away from the prying eyes and ears of the boys in blue. That proved to be a very wise move with this particular choice of winners enclosure.

All progressed smoothly enough at first, I was pleased with the size of the snarling press pack I had conjured up knowing we would not be wasting our time. Then all of a sudden I heard chants and out of the corner of my eye I saw a hundred strong herd of far-left zombies was shuffling towards us.

I don’t need to say what happened next as the attack has been seen by most. There are however photos of myself at the event with a look of shock on my face almost as if I’m smiling. How on earth, in one of the tightest security zones in the country, do a mob of one hundred assailants at first assemble, then walk unhindered, right outside Westminster, to deliver a sustained uninterrupted ten minute assault on democratically elected MPs?

It goes without saying that the far left and the media, if there is a difference, co-operate to facilitate violent intimidation. BBC and Channel 4 get the money shot and the left alienate support amongst the middle classes and delegitimise our message. However, in the College Green case the only conclusion you could draw was that certain elements within the police were playing the game too. It was a pattern repeated often over the next few years.

As for the attack itself I remember the bizarre giant rugby scrum that ensued, moving with a momentum and shape akin to the Great Red Spot on Jupiter and the Andromeda Galaxy. Thanks to security nobody was hurt, although I did feel sorry for young Jay from Essex. Attached closely to Nick he continued to take blows whilst protecting him, resisting the obvious urge to retaliate which he was capable of doing most effectively.

As is nearly always the case with left wing violence against nationalists, nobody gets charged. My local police took it all very seriously, but the Met conveniently mislaid the file. In fact the only person they pursued with interest was one of our security team who extracted us with his expert defensive driving. Maybe they wanted to recruit him.

What “robust action” the police will take against people ”harassing” the likes of Anna Soubry and Owen Jones is unknown. However I can tell you for sure that ANTIFA and other violent leftist groups will not be classified as domestic terrorists. Their members will not be charged with belonging to an illegal organisation. Their organisers, journalists and serving police officers will not be arrested for conspiracy to incite violent disorder. Union backers will not have their funds seized under anti-terrorist legislation and The Electoral Commission will not be disbanded for allowing violence and intimidation to undermine our democratic system for decades. If they were merely football hooligans, well that would be a very different matter."

Project Fear: Fear as a Political Tool

Project Fear: Fear as a Political Tool

Since the beginning of time, fear has been a tool to be used to get what you want. You can pretend that you are bigger and stronger than you actually are. One example of such tactic is what Britain did soon after the evacuation operation in Dunkirk in 1940. The RAF was not at full strength. The Army was on its knees with soldiers that barely managed to escape carrying their rifles. The only significant tool at the time was the Royal Navy. But many felt that Britain was playing for time. Suddenly, out of nowhere, pretend weapons, pretend artillery, pretend aircraft started to appear so that enemy reconnaissance crews could see that Britain was not naked but ready to defend itself.

Debates that cannot be won with serious propositions based on factual evidence can be won with fear. You want to make people believe that a threat is very real and your proposed course of action should be adopted as a matter of urgency. You can make people feel that they are weaker than they actually are and that should they try to operate independently from others they will be doomed. The purpose of this is to keep people chained to a particular situation of dependency. Beware! We are facing the abyss! Suddenly, without any real justification and simply because mass media messages keep talking about the impending catastrophe, many are convinced that the threat is real and that something absolutely tragic is going to happen if they choose to go their own way.

The more credible the media that spread fear the more people will believe that a certain threat is real. Orson Welles knew it very well when a radio broadcast told American listeners that the USA was being invaded by extraterrestrials. The radio broadcast was followed by a panic wave.

To counter fear, we need facts and credible force to ensure that if there is a panic reaction the situation is going to be under control. Force does not merely exist to counter a threat if there is a real threat but also to reassure those who might panic and engage in actions that would be counterproductive for themselves and others.

Politics is increasingly dominated by all kinds of project-fear and fear has political consequences. Public Opinion is driven by a mix of facts, personal experiences, rumours, presumptions and half truths and this is why perception is so critically important. To alter perception, political operators, mass media and para-political organisations. There is a vast array of labels that can be used to distort political messages, to demonise those who hold different views and to basically prevent their views from becoming widespread. 

Labels like Nazi, Fascist, Racist, Homophobe, Anti-Semite, Islamophobe, et cetera are widely used with a given political purpose: to discredit political opponents. Those using such labels know perfectly well that audiences can be switched off by eliciting an emotional reaction to the said labels. Individuals not only have the capacity to think. They have emotions and if emotions can be manipulated everybody - even the most bright - can be influenced and made to more in a certain direction. Manipulated reactions can become stereotypical to the point that even the most rational of individuals stops thinking.

If I were to ask an individual in Britain if he/she believes that people should be banned from a certain profession or activity on political grounds, the said person would say: Absolutely not. The grounds for such response would be: in a democratic society no one should be discriminated against on political grounds.

When your enquire becomes specific to a particular group, suddenly the answer changes and all kinds of justifications arise that contradict the initial answer to support discrimination on political grounds. The rational process stops and decisions are made because of stereotypes.

There is little difference between the Nuremberg Laws of the 1930s and the attitudes of Liberals and Marxists of today. In the 1930s, laws were passed preventing Jews from getting involved in certain working activities/professions. Today, people that are loosely called Far Right are discriminated against and not allowed access to certain professions and occupations. The Far Right of today are the Jews of the 1930s.

The striking similarities between the Nuremberg Laws of the 1930s and today's restrictions imposed for political reasons are not mere coincidence. Modern Britain looks increasingly similar to the Weimar Republic. We have reached the point when Anti-Terror Legislation is being used for Political Persecution and the independence of the Crown Persecution Service has been compromised. Influential groups are exerting pressure on the legal system and have become the New Inquisition. Cases discarded by the Crown Prosecution Service and Police Authorities for lack of merit are being re-instated and Probation Services are being used to harass those persecuted and jailed for political reasons.

What is happening is not reassuring and sooner than later there will be dramatic consequences that society as a whole will regret. The reactions that we have already seen are merely the tip of the iceberg of what is to come.