Archive | June, 2017

An Organised System of Unethical Taxation, Poverty and Inequality

30 Jun

[Published 01 July, 2017] 

download.jpeg

If we wish to live in so-called ‘progressive societies’ – where we all have some form of access to health provision, welfare, public services, and good infrastructure – I doubt that anyone would disagree that most, if not all of us, should pay some form tax.

In the most basic terms, our governments have always needed to raise cash to pay for such services, whether it be to service past or current war efforts, build hospitals, new railways, or provide social housing.

The problems with paying tax is that the tax systems are arbitrary and unnecessary, meaning the amount of tax we pay varies; being unfairly distributed and enabling avoidance, due to lax rules and procedures in collecting it.

By arbitrary, I mean that our governments often impose tax just because they can, rather than out of any particular necessity, like on certain important purchases that we make.

For example, should we pay tax on medicines needed to keep us healthy, that our governments already tax? Should we pay tax on heating and lighting, or the water we drink, wash, or bath in?

Pharmaceuticals are taxed on their research, development, and manufacture – and then government collects more tax from the consumer purchasing them!

Taxing us after paying the purchase price for medicines, that we all need for our good health? And surely access to water is a universal right, is it not?

It works the same way with almost other forms of tax, like when we have general tax, which is deducted at source from our wages. For example, a percentage of general taxation goes toward paying for the construction of new roads. The government then collects more tax from us when some roads are converted to toll roads.

Take owning a car as another example; to get you to and from work etc. We are taxed for purchasing and owning the vehicle, on the fuel it consumes (on duty, then VAT!), on repairs, keeping it on the road, and insuring it!

In many countries, it is actually the poorest in society who pay disproportionately higher taxes than those on middle incomes and considerably more than the wealthiest. 

For example, if you smoke or drink alcohol – and no, this is not an inference that poorer people smoke or drink more – the tax levied on the purchase of these items is as high as 80%!

Consider the impact of this when you are on minimum wage; struggling to pay bills, travel costs or using a vehicle, heating and lighting, weekly food shop, and health and other insurances.

The more fortunate – who are able to pay into pensions and savings schemes for old age and emergencies; to purchase property, insurance, and investments – don’t get much of a better deal either!

For those able to save into a pension, additional tax is paid on the annuity and when income is drawn. In the case of women reliant on a spouses pensions, when the spouse dies, in the UK, women only receive a 60% entitlement but still pay tax on the pension, plus everything else.

When purchasing a property, there are a variety of fees and taxes levied even before we get to move in. Then we pay annual taxes on services to the property and for government and public authority services provided within the local community in which the property is located.

Alongside national and local taxes, there are also several forms of interest and tax on annual insurance and mortgage payments. When we come to sell the property, the tax paid on selling a property is determined on whether it has increased in value but is often capped regardless of household income, property size, or value.

In short, if you own a six bedroomed property, worth three million, with an annual household income of seven hundred thousand, you will pay no more tax on the property – either for national and local taxes, or on its sale – than say,owning and selling a four bedroomed property, worth four hundred thousand with an income of two hundred thousand!

The last global crash occurred due to the artificial inflation of housing prices, repackaged bad debts, and unaffordable mortgages, sold and created by banks, insurers, and speculators – all of which was enabled with our governments’ full knowledge and consent.

In countries where it has been provided, social housing stocks continue to be sold off to the private sector, who rent them out, or sell them on at inflated prices. For example, if a social housing property was sold ten years ago for one hundred and twenty thousand, today its value is likely to have been inflated to three hundred and fifty thousand.

If you are a private investor – from China or Russia, let’s say – you can purchase an off plan new build property for one hundred and fifty thousand and sell it on at double that when its constructed, or sit on it for several years until it increases in value even more.

Further more, a private investor can purchase such a property through an intermediary, such as a shell or holding company that is registered offshore, thus paying minimal tax, whereas an ordinary purchaser will pay the maximum amount of tax to be paid.

Our governments enable, permit, and even encourage private enterprise, banks, and investors to profit when the economy is buoyant and avoid paying tax, forcing middle and low income people to pick up the tab.

All the while, social housing stocks are decreasing and not being replaced, whilst private sector rents are increasing, and the purchase price of property is on the rise again.

Through Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, the UK government currently employs more than three thousand staff – on minimum wage – chasing fraudulent welfare and benefits payments, but fewer than four hundred staff on chasing those who avoid tax.

Do you see the problem?

Whether in the UK or in any other country, the tax system is organised theft and was created and is maintain in order to prey on the poorest, whilst favouring the wealthiest and actually works to create and prop up poverty and inequality.

In case you did not get the memo, the wealthiest only pay the tax they choose to and our governments allow them to do this.

Time to change the system, people!

Author: Jason Schumann

Advertisements

Colour Blind: Flags, Racism, PoC, and LGBTI Pride

28 Jun

[Published 28 June, 2017]

download
[Source: ZARI TARAZONA / BILLY PENN]

For those not aware, ‘PoC’ is an abbreviation of the phrase People of Colour.

It’s a term that is commonly used as an all-encompassing catchall phrase – mainly in the United States – to describe people of all cultures and ethnicities, who are non-White.

Whilst it’s still a label indicative of difference – and some may find it too politically correct or even contentious – its usage makes for a good start in the process of moving away from – and the divisions and inequalities of – and connotations associated with racial profiling.

Moreover, its use has been adopted as an attempt to partly cast off notions of race and racism – and, in some way – seeks to unite people [of colour] in a common cause against systemic and social injustices.

In 2017, as part of the official ceremony and opening celebrations for the Philadelphia annual Pride event, the organising committee unveiled a redesigned Pride flag, to include two new (black and brown) stripes, thus seeking to give greater recognition to People of Colour (PoC).

The addition of these two stripes was intended to make QPoC somehow feel more included – and to acknowledge the existence racism from within the community – as a result of the publication of a report of racial profiling in LGBTI bars and clubs in Philadelphia’s Gaybourhood.

Despite this key point, some within our LGBTI communities, were dismissive about the addition of the stripes… on ‘aesthetic grounds’ – yes, you read that right – as if the pretty colours are apparently more important than rights and inclusion! Then we have those expressing complete outrage and indignation at the ‘desecration of such an iconic symbol’, because it the flag already represents PoC. Others have blamed PoC and accused them of being divisive. Yes, this is mainly White people saying all these things.

And people say there is no racism with in the community? I mean, we only need to consider how many non-PoC still perpetuate racial stereotypes of Black men as ‘lions and beasts’, South East Asian men and and women in their smaller physiques, willingness to please, and perceived submissive manner, and Black women as ‘hard work’ or ‘difficult to handle.’

These statements are all stereotypes made and acted out by both Heterosexuals and members of the LGBTI communities, who them use to define PoC.

My partner, of 11 years – who is a White male – told me of an encounter whilst he was on the metro system, with a colleague when he lived in KL some years ago. On hearing two young women speak in Malay, his colleague heard them commenting on ‘how White men are supposed to have big cocks.’ As he was getting off the metro, my partner’s (White, male) colleague, who speaks or spoke fluent Malay, said: “Yes, it’s true! Wanna try?”

The fact is, many White men do travel to live, work, and holiday in South East Asia, purely to have sex with South East Asian men and women. For example, ‘Rice queens’ – as some LGBTI-ers are called, within the community – are mainly White men who prefer South East Asian men.

I know that many of my South East Asian friends, are now increasingly fed up with this narrative and insist on being dominant with White men. Similarly, many African-American and Black-British men, have refused to have any sexual and/ or social relations with White males, because of perceived racism. To give further weight to this view, many White males will put ‘no Black or Asians’ on their profiles on dating websites and apps.

Clearly, without wish to sexualise this any further, many PoC are still viewed as – exotic objects and ‘Other’; to be conquered, dominated, and to be subservient – which maintains and continues to prop up the tired, repetitious position that PoC are lower beings and should know their place.

At this years’ Pride event in Ohio, a group of PoC LGBTI-ers conducted a small protest by stopping the parade. They were asking onlookers to give several minutes silence, in remembrance of the murders of more than 14 Trans PoC in the United States in the first part 2017. It follows similar campaigns on social media, like ‘Black Lives Matters’ and ‘Say Her Name.’

However, before being moved on by police, with some of the protesters actually being arrested, the onlookers apparently booed and jeered at the protesters, claiming that the protesters were obstructing the parade and disrespecting their fellow LGBTI-ers and the celebrations.

The point is, that many PoC within the community still experience exclusion, injustice, and forms of racism both from within the community itself and externally in their lives outside the community – and are still disadvantaged because of how society views us, simply because of the colour of their skin. PoC still rightly believe that they continue to be marginalised; that their voices are not heard or being listened to, and that nothing has moved on for them since the Stonewall riots. This is particularly acute in the United States and in countries like France.

As I noted earlier, whilst some may argue that this change is unnecessary or even diminutive – what this step actually does – is give PoC within the community, greater visibility and enables non-PoC to reflect on their own personal views of PoC and racism from within. Clearly, it’s another step towards greater inclusivity for PoC who have been made to feel excluded and subjected to different forms of prejudice and discrimination by White LGBTI-ers.

The view that the flag has always colour blind and inclusive of all cultures and ethnicities, does not wash with anyone, except non-PoC. One might describe this ‘colour blind’ perspective of the flag, as a form of ‘exceptionalism’ and ‘cognitive dissonance.’ So if the addition of these two new stripes encourages and creates more debate, then this has done its job and is a positive and necessary step in realising what needs to change within the LGBTI community to address some of the above issues.

Card.jpg

As I explained to an old friend and colleague who runs a national organisation for PoC in the arts in the UK:

“Look at these additions [of the two [black and brown] stripes to the flag] as a mirror into which the largely White, privileged hegemony of [the LGBTI] community can [take a long, hard] look at itself, introspectively, and to reflect, on its own role, in perpetuating racial exclusion, and cultural stereotypes.”

We might also then take the time to look further at our views of people who are transgender and the participation and acceptance of members of the Jewish diaspora within our community without the politics of ‘us’ and ‘them.’

If you are a White person reading this blog article, may I suggest that you click on some the linked articles, reflect, and start a conversation with others. Hey, if you don’t socialise with PoC, perhaps even make the effort to.

Author: Jason Schumann

Twitter Censoring Criticism of Israel As Hate Speech

22 Jun

[Published 22 June, 2017]

Between 1948 – 54 and possibly over a longer period, Israel was responsible for the abuse and disappearance of 100’s if not several thousand Yemeni babies.

This heinous act has been reported by the BBC, Haaretz, the New York Times, the Financial Times, the Independent, and many other global news outlets.

According to various official and independent sources, parents of newborn Yemeni babies, were told by doctors and other officials, that their babies had died during or shortly after birth.

We now know this to be a lie and a coverup by hospitals, the medical profession, and the Israeli government.

In December 2016, the Jerusalem Post published news of 200,000 documents concerning what is believed to have happened to these innocent babies.

Originally, these files and documents were ordered sealed until 2071 and only released after much public pressure and outrage.

Many of these babies are now believed to have been given to Israeli families, whereas other babies may have been used as organ donors, and some underwent post-mortem surgical procedures.

Similarly, another injustice committed by Israeli doctors and officials, is the recent revelation that some Ethiopian Jewish mothers, were forcibly sterilised.

So what does this injustice and travesty have to do with the social media platform, Twitter, you may ask?

According to my own sources, it would appear from a number of reports received, that Twitter is accusing users of hate speech; for merely posting any comments or links to articles or references, of these missing and disappeared Yemeni babies.

Presumably, under pressure from members of the Jewish diaspora, Zionist supporters and organisations, and the Israeli government, that users who post such content are committing blood-libel and thus an expression of hatred or prejudice towards Jews.

On the contrary, posting something on social media which is in fact based on the truth and historical, documented facts, can never be a form of hate speech and should never be curtailed.

Users who link to these reports and/ or post any links, comments, or articles, are being threatened with having their accounts suspended by Twitter and advised to remove them, thus denying the truth of occurrence of these events.

If we go down this route, then we will all ultimately lose control of our individual sovereignty and universal human rights, including the freedom to speak out and criticise our own and other governments for what are crimes against humanity.

It would appear in this instance, that Twitter is bowing to official pressure to silence Israel’s critics.

Author: Jason Schumann

Note:

I haven’t posted the names or details of those whom I am aware have been threatened by Twitter. The reason I have not  is to respect their right to privacy and prevent any abuse they may receive for speaking out.

Stephen Silverman and the Sickness of Jewish Privilege – Grenfell Towers Fire

16 Jun

[Published 16 June, 2017] 

Stephen-Silverman

[Image source: HERE]

In recent months, I’ve posted several blogs concerning Zionism, Jewish privilege and victimhood, and the Israeli Lobby; so, the last I want to do – following the fire that engulfed Grenfell Towers, which has resulted in the needless loss of in excess of more than 100 lives – is write a blog about a Zionist and prominent member of the UK Jewry, who unwisely thought it wise to make light of the tragedy, by shamelessly seeking to point score against one of his perceived enemies.

Now, please don’t get me wrong on this. Like any human being, I am the first to admit, that I have occasionally taken a swipe at, and derived amusement and satisfaction, from seeing those whom I have reason to dislike, get their comeuppance, so-to-speak.

However, the last thing I would ever do, is seek to derive pleasure from their death, an injury, or suffering. Neither would I intentionally or otherwise, seek to trivialise and weaponise a tragedy such as the Grenfell Towers fire, and certainly never in order influence someone else’s opinion, belittle, or express a particular repulsion or dislike for someone.

In this case, Stephen Silverman, aka Mr. Slitherman, aka @bedlamjones, and the ‘enforcer’, who is the ‘Director of Prosecutions and Investigations’, for a so-called nefarious fake charity, Campaign Against AntiSemitism (CAA), sought to denigrate Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the UK Labour party, purely to further the Jewish cause of perpetual victimhood and the Jewish communities’ general dislike for him, because of his peaceful stance in the ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict.

For those that do not know, Slitherman is a known harasser of women on social media, which he was recently forced to admit in open court, at Westminster Magistrates, in December 2016, in what has turned out to be a failed and misconceived attempt by CAA, to criminalise valid criticism of Israel’s war crimes and human rights abuses. The case was sponsored by the Israeli government itself and has since been dropped.

In a now deleted post on Twitter, Slitherman’s cheap and – quite frankly, what can only be described as a despicable pot-shot – claimed that Corbyn’s proposals to support the Grenfell Towers survivors – who are now homeless and the families of victims of the fire – was “a grotesque, self-serving cynicism.”

IMG_pqo4qd.jpg

Slitherman posted this comment in the wake of the fire and Corbyn’s condemnation of Theresa May’s inaction and alleged coverup of the tragedy.

The condemnation, concerning May’s unwillingness to meet residents; that her government purposely sat on a fire safety report, that could have prevented this tragedy had the report’s recommendations been implemented; and the suspicion and concern that her government is micromanaging the aftermath of the tragedy, including withholding details on the total number of deaths.

What Slitherman was referring to, when posting what he did, were Corbyn’s subsequent comments in Parliament and, unlike May’s refusal to do so, his willingness to visit local residents, as if he was conducting a public relations exercise.

Anyone who knows Corbyn, knows that this is simply not so and utterly outrageous to even suggest it.

One individual, who commented on the post, also suggested that Slitherman was attempting to smear Corbyn with a wrongly attributed quote that was actually made by Winston Churchill. The quote concerned the requisitioning privately owned property, to rehouse people who were made homeless after WWII. It was the reviled Daily Mail that published Churchill’s quote as Corbyn’s. Slitherman, either knowingly or otherwise, was repeating the smear in order to compound it.

Screen Shot 2017-06-17 at 17.46.58.png

For absolute clarity, the quote in question – was, in fact – made by Churchill.

Before deleting his callous and mendacious smear of Corbyn, however – which was not his first, and which he only did… after it was pointed out him how despicable it was – Slitherman’s post had 16 retweets, 20 favourites, and various follow-up posts by those in apparent like-minded awareness and agreement with his intentions in posting what he did.

For the record, I, myself, have been on the receiving end of Slitherman’s bile, and it was not pleasant. Clearly, the only person guilty of being “grotesque” and of “self-serving cynicism” here, is Slitherman himself.

It truly despairs and pains me to say this – but Slitherman, like so many other Zionists and anti-Corbynites – are truly pernicious and resentful specimens, who will use any means at their disposal to discredit their self-created enemies.

As a closer to this blog, it is also worth noting, that 72 members of May’s government are landlords of private and/ or social housing – all of whom, voted against and filibustered a proposal by Corbyn – to recommend installation of sprinkler systems in all or most high-rise residential buildings.

A proposal that – had it  been passed – could have prevented the deaths of the victims in the Grenfell Towers fire.

Perhaps Slitherman should consider “whispering” more quietly next time!

Author: Jason Schumann

Whitesplaining Colonialism and Structural Racism: Human Zoo 

14 Jun

[Published 12 June, 2017]

Black people, people of colour, are exotic, aren’t they? I asked

What do you mean? He replied

Well, think about it. I said

The idea that people from Africa, and other natives, are exhibits and trophies. I exclaimed

To be paraded in front of crowds; to buy, and work them into the ground

Intellectually

To be inspected, studied, and marvelled at, like a specimen… in a jar

Cruelly

Shackled and chained, in service… to do the White man’s bidding… according to when and how he says

But that’s in the past. He said

To always know one’s place, never question, or speak out, and stay in line. I said

Whilst mugshot, gunned down, and framed behind bars, as a reminder of our place.

To be considered ‘upperty’, ‘difficult’, have a chip on one’s shoulders, or have ‘too much attitude’, lacking grace? I said

(Any you wonder why?) I said

To be limited in what you can, should be allowed to do freely, and forever typecast. 

Have you ever been called a nigger, sold as chattel, overlooked, stopped so many times you no longer care? I asked

Turned down for a job, because you don’t fit in or look the part? I asked

Interrogated because your family name doesn’t match your skin tone? I asked

Do you share my past, my suffering, or my ancestors’? I asked

His answer came back: No.

Then don’t ask me to be ok with an exhibition that reminds of me this.

To be looked at in curiosity and humorous or pitied spectacle

To remind us all of the wrongs of our past

If you want to look at me (without reflecting on your burden that you have put upon me) then do so for me and what I can bring, have achieved, or can do. 

Author: Jason Schumann 

EXPOSED: British General Election and Israeli Lobby

9 Jun

[Published 09 June 2017]

As the Russian media and Putin’s government have been exposed for interfering in the election of Donald Trump and efforts to subvert the outcome of the election of France’s President Macron, so have Israel’s efforts to alter the outcome of the UK General Election.

President Macon of France, whose private emails were leaked, noted in the Youtube clip shown above, that no foreign state power should use propaganda or seek to undermine and interfere with the democratic processes of any other state as a means to its own ends.

This is exactly why Donald Trump is now facing impeachment for his collusion with the Russian government in the hacking of the DNC and smearing Hillary Clinton’s failed presidential campaign. 

In the case of this blog, it can now be confirm that three British-based organisations have been exposed in actively attempting to subvert and influence the democracy of British politics, by specifically seeking to gerrymander the outcome of the election.

All of the organisations mentioned, have direct links to the Israeli government itself.

A search of social media posts confirms that one of these nefarious organisations, the Israel Britain Alliance, had its website set up anonymously by the World Zionist Federation.

In its campaign to muster up support in the UK General 2017, the Israel Britain Alliance, which was set up in February 2016 and renewed its web domain registration in February 2016, just six weeks before Theresa May announced the June election on the 18 April, 2017, states that its purpose is to persuade election candidates to sign up to its pledge to support Israel.

Its campaign appears to have had some success, in that more than 200 election candidates have pledged their support of the State of Israel.

Another of these lobbying organisations, is the ‘We Believe in Israel’ campaign website, which appears to have been set up by the British Israel Communications and Research Centre.

One of its directors, is listed as Richard Adam Cannon, who is also listed as a director of the London Jewish Forum and the London Press Club. The ‘We Believe in Israel’ website, lists several activities, including campaigning against UK foreign aid being given to charities supporting the education of Palestinian children.

Luke Akehurst, its director and an active Labour member, boasts the success of the pledge to lobby election candidates to support Israel and its efforts to criminalise the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement that opposes illegal settlements and human rights abuses of Palestinians.

In its general election ‘campaign toolkit’, the We Believe in Israel website, gives volunteers and supporters ‘How-to’ guides on ‘lobby[ing] MPs’, ‘influence[ing] people’, ‘dealing with anti-Israel arguments’, ‘joining a political or trade union party’, ‘sending campaign emails’, and provides a number of lesson plans, resources, and factsheets on preparedness and countering criticism of Israel.

A third organisation, the Anglo Israel Association, is run by one Ruth Saunders. Its president is the current UK Israeli Ambassador, Mark Regev, who has repeatedly dismissed the role of Shai Masot, the Israeli diplomat etc, who was sacked and ordered to return to Israel for actively subverting UK politics and democracy with threats to ‘bring down’ MPs considered to be anti-Israel.

No one is suggesting that the organisations listed in this blog article are or have been involved in leaking false, hacked, or misleading information to the media in the UK General Election, but not one of these organisations are registered as lobbying organisations, which is a legal requirement under UK law.

The purpose in their campaign is, and always has been, to influence UK foreign policy in regard to the Middle East peace process between Israel and Gaza and the wider Middle East conflict regarding Iran and Syria, which is part of a longerterm plan to remove Israel’s enemies.

Author: Jason Schumann

Leo Varadhar: Premiership, Parity, and Poverty

4 Jun

[Published 04 June, 2017] 

As a fellow friend of Dorothy and descendant of immigrants, I consider Leo Varadhkar’s likely election to be the next President of the Republic of Ireland an exceptional victory for the acceptance of the LGBT community and ethnic minorities and a clear recognition of the role in into Irish society.

I also agree that it represents another significant shift in social change in attitudes and thinking, in the context of the role of religion, politics, identity, and culture generally.

What troubles me, and several of my Irish friends, is that Varadkhar is just another establishment politician. In particular, my friends tell me that he holds the same views regarding immigration, the economy, and poverty, as his fellow establishment elitists.

Two of the most contentious issues in Irish politics today, are water charges, and the cost of living. The public blame the European Commission, a lacks and authoritarian Irish government, and increasing property prices.

In the past, Varadkhar has publicly stated that the poorest in society are to blame for Ireland’s economic woes; and not the financial crisis, which has in fact been worsened by levies imposed by the European Commission.

Many in Ireland actually blame the government for allowing corporations to avoid tax, failing to stand up to Brussels, and the implementation of water charges, despite the fact that access to free water is enshrined in the constitution.

In addition, homelessness in Ireland is at its highest level. Here too, Irish citizens blame the Government; and the Fine Gael party in particular, for encouraging high rents and a housing bubble, without any market controls or safety stops to help those in most need.

Varadkhar is also on the record for saying that immigrants should be repatriated and that immigrants look down on and do not respect Ireland’s culture, traditions, history, and values as a society.

So, despite the significance of the acceptance of Varadkhar’s sexual orientation and his ethnic background, it is actually his political views, fiscal approach, borne out by an apparent favouritism for business and severe cuts to public services, that are most present on people’s minds.

Varadhar is just another corporate puppet. 

Author: Jason Schumann

London Terror Attack: A False Flag or Gross Incompetence?

3 Jun

WATCH ALL CLIPS AND CLICK ALL LINKS!

[Published 04 June 2017]

Just as the Youtube clip below was a staged event of a fake terrorist attack in Syria, so yesterday’s terror attack in London was a false flag.

For those who do not know, a false flag is an incident that occurs, but was in fact a staged event. The specific intention of a false flag is for the purpose of spreading propaganda and/ or to instil fear in us.

To be absolutely clear: to say that an incident, such as an act or terrorism is a false flag should not detract from the panic and fear it instills and the harm or loss of life it causes to victims and their families.

It is no less tragic or abhorrent.

In the case of the Manchester attack the week before, the person who committed this atrocity, Salman Abedi, was known to the authorities for more than five years. Yet, despite warnings from the FBI and members of his local community, including, allegedly, his own mother, the security services and British authorities were apparently completely unaware of either his extremist views, his movements leading up to the attack, or his intentions to carry out the attack.

We already know from sources including the media, that Abedi planned to martyr himself, using what has been described as a sophisticated explosive device; for which he would have likely required technical expertise, as he did not possess the know-how or expertise himself.

Abedi’s attack just so happened to occur at the very same time as a general election in the UK; in which the Labour party opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn, was, and continues to be, harangued by the current government and the media in baseless smears and accusations regarding his non-existent support for the IRA and Hamas.

Immediately following the Manchester attack, Theresa May’s government announced that it was increasing the security threat of another imminent attack, from “severe” to “critical”.

The authorities also claimed, that Abedi was part of a terror cell and had made repeated trips to Syria and Libya.

IMG_20170604_121813.jpg

More than 30 terror related arrests were subsequently made in the Greater Manchester area, including reports of a woman being shot by armed police, whose name has not yet been released and neither have her family members spoken out or been interviewed.

The police, government, and the security service, have since confirmed that Abedi was a lone wolf — and not part of any terror cell.

The terror threat level was dropped back to severe less than a week later.

What has also come to light, is that Abedi, plus several members of his family, were also on the payroll to overthrow Qadafi in Libya and latterly Assad in Syria by British security services.

As noted by John Pilger, the British government maintained “assets”, who were cultivated by MI5 handlers.

Some have called Abedi’s act of terrorism blowback for British Foreign policy.

Remarkably, it was French authorities who informed the media of Abedi’s travels to Syria. When asked to confirm how they knew this, French Interior Minister, Gerard Collomb, said British authorities had made them aware.

It begs the very serious question: why would the British authorities ask the French to make an announcement to the press about something they were already aware.

Despite the multiple arrests of more than 20 suspected associates of Abedi, why has every single one been released without charge?

Now, on the very eve of the London attack, several pertinent things happened on social media, at the scene, and in the immediate aftermath of the attack.

First, we have footage taken at the scene on the eve of the attack of police officers and apparent ‘crisis actors’ – yes, you heard that correctly – stripping down to their underwear in the street and changing clothing in shop doorways.

In the footage below, some of the officers appear to be putting on riot gear, but pay attention to the officer on the far left who takes of his uniform and puts on a pair of camouflage trousers.

As is very clearly indicated and shown in the image below, the officer who puts on a pair of camouflage trousers is actually shown as one of the so-called terrorists, later reported and photographed as being shot dead by police.

He is wearing the same t-shirt and the same camouflage trousers with his right leg raised, despite being apparently shot dead.

In a further post on social media, we also have evidence posted by a Ryan Hooper, not less than an hour before the first media reports of a terrorist attack, that both London Bridge and Borough stations were closed.

Screen Shot 2017-06-04 at 22.57.52.png

Second, Amber Rudd, the current Home Secretary, appearing at hustings… to persuade voters to allow her retain her seat in the upcoming general election, was filmed censuring one of her rival candidates, Nicholas Wilson.

Wilson is standing as an independent and recently exposed Rudd’s connections and financial dealings in the Panama Papers. Nicholas Wilson has also been relentless in pursuing HSBC for defrauding its customers, tax avoidance, and financial crimes, for the last 10 years.

In the Youtube clip above, Rudd is clearly seen passing a note to the Chair of the hustings, asking for Wilson  to be silenced.

Why?

Because, as above, Wilson had previously exposed her links to organised financial crime, a series of bankrupt businesses, and links to individuals convicted of financial crimes.

Before being silenced at the hustings, Wilson was speaking of the UK government’s involvement in illegal arms sales and trade to fund and support terrorism and its efforts to destabilise Middle Eastern countries.

Wilson’s references to Rudd on the matter, related to her role as Home Secretary, in her visits to broker arms sales with the Kingdom of Saud, that in all likelihood contravene international law.

Less than an hour later, on news of the attack coming to light, the media and the police reported that there were three separate attacks in London.

Early reports listed the attacks as having taken place at London Bridge, Borough Market, and Vauxhall.

In the early hours, however, that the story had changed.

The socalled attack in Vauxhall was subsequently reported – both by the police and the media – as a non-terrorist incident.

Borough and London Bridge stations were closed, remember? So why not close Vauxhall station, even as a precautionary measure?

Reports were already coming in of three men in a white van, who were reported as being seen driving erratically at speed across London Bridge, who then exited the van and ran toward Borough Market, stabbing and slashing at people on the streets who were out socialising.

No one has captured any footage of this white van.

Yet, in December 2016 a ferrari mounted the pavement in Battersea, injuring seven.

Similar non-terrorist incidents have occurred in Islington and Brentwood in recent months.

One onlooker, Gerald, recounted to the media, that he saw the attackers stabbing people indiscriminately and considered throwing a stall from the market at them.

Really, Gerald?

Borough Market is closed at that time of night, so how and where would you have obtained a stall to throw at these attackers?

There is no camera, mobile phone, or street camera footage of the white van driving erratically across London Bridge or of the attackers stabbing people in Borough High Street or near the market.

In a further contradictory report, a photographer, Gabriele Sciotto, speaks with the media regarding his doubts that the attack involved explosives and that he was suspicious or doubtful that the images he took of two of the attackers wearing canisters that could be detonated, were in fact fake in his opinion.

Scroll back up to the Youtube clip filmed and uploaded of the police crisis actors.

When asked by a BBC journalist how many victims there were, a senior Metropolitan police officer on the scene, said that he had not been told.

This was some three hours after the attack and; at this point, no deaths (other than those of the attackers), had been reported or confirmed.

We now know that the explosive canisters shown in the photo taken by Sciotto, strapped to two of the dead attackers have been confirmed as fake.

Screen Shot 2017-06-04 at 22.01.50.png

The Independent newspaper has also reported that a member of the public was fleeing the scene with a glass of beer in hand.

The following morning, authorities reported a total of seven deaths, including the three attackers.

If indeed this latest attack was neither a hoax nor a false flag, then the authorities, including Theresa May’s government, have some big explaining to do to the public.

Afterall, Theresa May was Home Secretary prior to becoming Prime Minister and has had seven years to tighten and increase surveillance of terrorist suspects.

Since the attack, however, Theresa May has chosen this attack to call for a new plan to counter extremism and terrorism; including unprecedented and unwarranted access to all communications on everyone’s mobile phone apps, such as Whatsapp and internet browsing history.

Trump has joined her in this call.

This is the second of two attacks in the UK in twelve years, so why does Theresa may want complete control of the internet and access to all our data now?

Interestingly, Theresa May, until the eve of this attack, was three points behind in the election polls – and again, within hours of the attack – Jeremy Corbyn was being attacked by politicians and under fire from the media for simply supporting peace with the IRA.

On the BBC’s Question Time programme two nights before the London attack, two of the audience were later discovered to be Tory plants, whose purpose on the programme was to smear and humiliate Corbyn. One of whom, pretended to be a poor student, who was in fact extremely wealthy and wearing a Ralph Lauren jumper on the programme.

Whether this latest attack is just a timely opportunity, or it was indeed pre-planned and the government and security services were aware and party to it – always remember, there is no such thing as coincidence – as desperate times always call for desperate measures.

Did Theresa May allow the London attack to happen, or were the authorities completely clueless and incompetent in gathering or acting on intelligence about this attack?

The fact remains, that Theresa May told the press in an interview four days before the attack, that security services were aware of another imminent attack, which begs the question: why reduce the threat level from critical to severe and not arrest the suspects before the act?

Only this evening, the authorities have announced that they know the names of the now dead suspects, but refuse to release further details at this time.

The evidence is here before you, so seek it out, digest it, and make up your own decision or choose to believe what they tell you and want you to believe.

Stay woke, or be one of the sheep!

Author: Jason Schumann

Tommy Robinson, Alt-Right antiMuslim Propaganda, and the Portland Terror Attack

1 Jun

[Published 31 May 2017]

In recent days, Jeremy Christian has been charged with the murder of two individuals and the serious wounding of a third, who came to the aid of two young Muslim women on a train in Portland, Oregon, who were being subjected to “aggressive Islamophobic verbal abuse” by Christian. 

The three victims have been called heroes and Christian has rightly been labelled a terrorist by witnesses and the public in general.

Within eight hours of a campaign to raise money for the families of the three victims, Muslim communities had raised over 100,000 dollars, a figure that now stands in excess half a million.

At his arraignment, Christian, who is now known to be White supremacist, justified his attack on the two women and the strangers who came to their aid, by shouting in the courtroom that he was acting out his first amendment rights.

In defiance of the court and public outrage of his callous act of murder, Christian was heard calling out: “free speech or die”, “death to the enemies of America”, proclaiming what he did was an act of patriotism.

On learning of the incident, former leader of the far right group EDL and Pegida, alt-right mouthpiece and all-round antiMuslim thug, Tommy Robinson, aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was quick to blame Muslims for the Portland terrorist attack.

He tweeted the following remark on the 27 May 2017:

TRobPortland.jpg

Robinson deleted the tweet several hours later; but only after realising, or being informed that the terrorist in this instance, Jeremy Christian, is a White supremacist. Presumably, the narrative had changed beyond his control to milk it in the way in which he would have wished.

In another, either failure to grasp the facts of the matter or complete misinterpretation of a news event that did not quite fit his narrative to easily exploit and to further his rhetoric of the ‘Islamification of the West’, Robinson posted a link to a newsflash of a train in High Wycombe, UK, being evacuated by police.

Screen Shot 2017-06-01 at 14.29.51.png

As it turns out, Robinson was also wrong about this incident; and so, presumably again, wilfully or ignorantly, posted something about nothing in order to further stir up fear and resentment against Muslims by his followers and those gullible to believe in everything he posts as being fact.

This is in the same week as Robinson being convicted of contempt of court and given a suspended 3-month sentence, as well as claiming that we are at war and calling for the mass deportation and incarceration of Muslims, following the Manchester attack, carried out by Salman Abedi.

In a further effort to create divide and stir up hatred toward British Muslims, Robinson also posted an image of Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, Ian Hopkins, holding a copy of the Qur’an purportedly taken immediately after the Manchester attack. In fact, the image of CC Hopkins was taken almost a year ago. Robinson was corrected, but chose to throw insults instead of retract or apologise.

All the while, the likes of the counter-extremism think-tank, the Quilliam Foundation, who have previously sponsored Robinson and received government funding to work with and re-educate him, still hold the view that Robinson is neither a danger to Muslims nor an extremist.

Robinson also blamed the terrorist attack in Dortmund on fanatical Muslims, when, in fact, the attack was carried out by members of a far right group.

A journalist posting such inflammatory accuracies and propaganda – as Robinson clearly does quite regularly – would be challenged without question. Robinson, however, appears to lack any integrity and has neither retracted nor apologised for doing so. Neither has he condemned Jeremy Christian.

If Robinson wishes to wipe the slate clean and cast off the label of being an extremist himself; or at least an apologist for White supremacy, he needs to cease door-stepping individuals who call him out as such in order to intimidate them; stop posting false and inaccurate news to inflame; and start being pro-active by engaging in constructive debate and actions with those he views as enemies of Western, Liberal ideology.

Until then, Tommy, you will remain an extremist in many people’s eyes. That, or an apologist and a racist thug, at best.

Author: Jason Schumann

%d bloggers like this: