Schedule 7 and SO15: Anti-Terror or Political Persecution

Schedule 7 and SO15: Anti-Terror or Political Persecution?

Next week on May 20th 2020, at the Westminster Magistrates Court, Paul Golding will be standing against charges of terrorism because when detained at Heather Airport on his way back from a visit to Moscow where he met political party representatives he didn't agree to reveal pin codes and passwords giving access to his phone and computers. Officers at the scene indicated that what they were doing had nothing to do with terrorism, but proceeded to interrogate Paul Golding and took away his electronic devices that were returned to Paul Golding after Paul Golding told the authorities that he would seek a Judicial review of the case.

Oddly enough, after almost six months, Paul Golding received a letter indicated that he had to go to court to face terrorism charges. It was self-evident that the case has nothing to do with terrorism and that it is a blatant case of political persecution during Lockdown measures aimed at preventing the spread of Corona Virus.

Also oddly enough, when Paul Golding asked for information about the organisation of a rally and a march to protest against the use of Anti-Terror Legislation for political persecution, the said rally and march will be allowed. So apparently, we live in two different dimensions. On the one hand, we are talking about limiting peoples' movement to prevent the spread of Corona Virus and on the other rallies and marches that will lead to mass gatherings in Central London will be taking place during the Lockdown. This reinforces suspicions about the real motives behind the implementation of Lockdown.

At a time when the Chancellor of the Exchequer will attend Parliament to talk about a possible reduction of furlough monies paid to keep peoples' jobs, we see Police organisations and the Judiciary wasting vast amounts of monies in political persecution. For quite a long time, people have been complaining that Police forces and the Judiciary have been used for spurious purposes that have nothing to do with the administration of Justice in the United Kingdom.

Of course, Paul Golding is being penalised for his friendly relations with the Russian Federation that he had visited in several occasions being officially invited to speak at the Duma, the Russian Parliament. Anybody who doesn't follow the trend of unfair demonisation and attacks against the Russian Federation and of its authorities and among them President Vladimir Putin is bound to be attacked by the British Establishment, the Police, the British mass media and the Judiciary that has become a tool for political persecution. 

In times of confusion, what is the Far Right?

In times of confusion, what is the Far Right?

In Britain, without a single organisation that could claim to represent a sizeable number of followers, what is the Far Right? What does the so called Far Right stand for?

In days of plenty, when organisations like the British National Party stood tall and was represented in the European Parliament, in the London Assembly and in quite a few other others places across the United Kingdom, with a very well known leader, you could say that you had an approximate idea of what at least one particular oganisation stood for. There were Manifestoes, Party Conferences, and very public statements. 

The waters have been muddled intentionally by the mass media and what we loosely know as the political establishment. Now, Tommy Robinson is defined as Far Right and so is Paul Golding of Britain First. Anne Marie Waters of For Britain is defined as Far Right. Jayda Fransen is classified as Far Right. Even non political individuals like Alison Chabloz and many others are classed as Far Right. Confused? You should be confused because many of those classed as Far Right seem to have very different platforms. So Far Right has become a one label that fits all kinds of different ideological stances.

Fragmentation has been superseded by individualities. Somebody writes comments on social media, class himself or herself as being this or that, without any real political substance nor structure, and says that he or she represents political organisations that in most cases only exist on paper or in their febrile minds.

Such is the state of what used to be known as British Nationalism that there isn't a single organisation with enough political clout to be able to justifiably claim that it trully represents British Nationalism.

  

Corona Virus: Realities and Consequences

Corona Virus: Realities and Consequences

2000 Anti-Terror Legislation being used in political persecution

2000 Anti-Terror Legislation being used in political persecution

Covid-19: good example as weapon

Covid-19: good example as weapon

Covid-19 shows the destructive potential of biological weapons. Biological weapons can cause mayhem socially, economically and politically. While a conventional weapon has relative effect, a biological weapon can completely destabilize an entire country. In just a few weeks, Covid-19 has become practically the one subject of conversation.

Since World War Two, nuclear weapons have been seen as the ultimate deterrent that could prevent major conflicts between countries. Who needs to use nuclear weapons when biological weapons can do a much better job. Even warships loaded with the most advanced technologies cannot operate if crews are infected with biological weapons. Wars can be fought if there is a viable economy to support the war effort. 

Major countries have been affected by Corona Virus and they happen to be members of the NATO alliance.

This is the progressions of numbers of deaths in the UK from the start until today.

Do you honestly believe that it is going to end up soon? Mortality as of today stands at 13.97%. This means that approximately 14 people out of a 100 who get infected are going to die.

But this is not the whole picture. This is long term. WHO itself has stated that there is no guaranteed immunity. Dramatic changes in terms of lifestyle are going to produce dramatic changes in terms of economics and dramatic changes in terms of economics produce political changes. The geopolitical map of the world will not be the same.

Lockdown: Blamed if you impose it and blamed if you lift it

Lockdown: Blamed if you impose it and blamed if you lift it

Imposed a lockdown was both about health and about politics because it had both health and political repercussions on top of having enormous financial consequences. Politicians are blamed for not imposing a lockdown and politicians are blamed for having imposed a lockdown. At the end of the day, we know that no economy in the world can survive almost total paralysis. If major economies collapse, other economies around the world will collapse because we are interdependent of one another.

This is worse than 1929 and we know what happened as a direct consequence of 1929. World War Two was one of the direct consequences of what happened in Wall Street, New York in 1929.   

According to the League of Nations, the world's population in 1929 was about 1,833 million. In 2020, the world's population is estimated to be 7,800 million. The pressure in terms of having to meet the needs of a population that is more than 3 times bigger than the population of 1929 is gigantic.

The challenge is clearly visible. Economic demobilization at this point time can have dramatic repercussions. We are talking about mass starvation and conflicts of unbelievable proportions.

Left-wing political repression in Uruguay: Senator Guido Manini Rios denounces prosecution carried out with fabricated evidence

Left-wing political repression in Uruguay: Senator Guido Manini Rios denounces prosecution carried out with fabricated evidence