Archive | Politics RSS feed for this section

Zionist Lobby: Tim Farron, Liberal Democrats Party Leader, and the Sacking of David Ward, MP

27 Apr

 

On the 26 April, 2017, Tim Farron, leader of the UK Liberal Democrats, announced on Twitter that he had ‘sacked’ David Ward from the party.

Initially, Farron was reported as having stated that he was unable to intervene in local party politics or selection processes. Ward was to stand for election in the parliamentary seat of Bradford East on the 08 June, 2017.

However, after pressure from Sir Eric Pickles, the UK’s Special Envoy to Israel and Chair of Conservative Friends of Israel, and the ‘behind-the-scenes’ intervention of the nefarious and meddling Campaign Against AntiSemitism (CAA), Farron decided to do an extraordinary u-turn, calling Ward ‘unfit to stand and represent the Party.

Ward is known to be very critical of the apartheid state of Israel and his comments have been somewhat hard-hitting and possibly unpleasant to some sensitive ears. For example, the year before Israel’s Protective Edge slaughtered more than 2,400 Palestinian including 500 children with the illegal use of White Phosphorus, Ward said:

“Am I wrong or are am I right? At long last the Zionists are losing the battle – how long can the apartheid State of Israel last?”

 

Prior to Farron’s u-turn on the matter, Mark Wallace, editor of Conservative Home, called his decision not to sack Ward “bullshit”. Not content with attacking Farron, Wallace then went on a tirade of abuse aimed at Ward, saying: “maybe fuck-off now, you weapons-grade scumbag” and posting a link to his blog about him.

Sadly, Wallace is under some illusion (a spell or cognitive dissonance?) and claims Ward’s comments about the insidiousness of Zionism, the Lobby, and Israel’s persistent Human Rights abuses amount to racism.

Possibly knowing that he or a colleague would be attending a meeting with the Liberal Democrats to discuss Ward, Stephen “Slitherman” Silverman, director of prosecutions and investigations for CAA, and a known harasser of women, was on hand to comment on Wallace’s abuse, suggesting he already knew what would happen to Ward.

Screen Shot 2017-04-27 at 15.25.58.png

 

Slitherman and CAA also enlisted the assistance of Martin Greig, a Liberal Democrat councillor in Scotland, the day before the announcement of Ward’s sacking.

Greig offered to intervene and act as go-between between CAA and the Liberal Democrats in a separate matter. As you can see in the above screenshot, CAA asked Greig to contact them by email regarding the meeting to discuss Ward as well as others matters.

We can reasonably assume, therefore, that Ward’s sacking was as a direct consequence and outcome of CAA’s meeting with the Liberal Democrats, Pickles challenging Farron in Parliament; and perhaps to a lesser extent, Greig’s role as an intermediary.

CAA was set up as a fake charity in 2014 by Gideon Falter after Israel’s Operation Protective Edge assault on Gaza. As stated earlier, Protective Edge massacred 2,400 Palestinians to further Israel’s efforts to legitimise its suppression of the Palestinian peoples’ right to self-determination and illegal expansionism and occupation of Palestine.

By lobbying in this way, to sack a member of a political party and prevent him from standing as a member of parliament, CAA is in fact in breach of charity law, as charity law clearly prevents such lobbying.

In addition, as it would appear that CAA is very much involved in lobbying activities, there is also a legal requirement for it to be registered as a lobbying organisation.

Notably, the charity, Greenpeace, was recently fined £30,000 for refusing to register as a lobbying organisation.

Screen Shot 2017-04-27 at 16.12.32.png

 

There is currently no evidence to confirm that CAA is also registered as a lobbying organisation, so it is also in breach of its requirement to register under the Administration Act of 2014.

CAA is part of an offensive to shut down any form of debate, criticism, or challenge to Israel’s Human Rights abuses and illegal occupation and ongoing settlement expansion programme. It is directly linked to the World Zionist Organisation and has been tasked specifically with the purpose of shutting down free speech in Britain under the guise of false claims of antiSemitism.

It also actively seeks to impose a definition of antiSemitism which prohibits any criticism of Israel and comparison of Israel to the Nazis or an apartheid/ fascist state.

CAA also actively lobbied for the expulsion of Baroness Jenny Tonge from the Liberal Democrats Party.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unhinged @MLewisLawyer: Bile, Bullying, Slander, & Threats

16 Apr

Here, you can see (and judge for yourself) just how hate-filled, tendentious, skulking, and threatening the infamous Mark Lewis can actually be.

He has previously been reported to and investigated by @SRA_Solicitors, for misconduct and harassment. Not the first time he’s been reported to them, either.

He is known to conspire with others (Jasna Badzak, Ambrosine Shitrit, Marko Hoare) to target critics of Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians.

Hell, if he dislikes his target that much, he’ll pursue them by legal means, send threatening letters, or engage the police in fabrications.

  1. You are absolutely right, Jo, Mark is well and truly unhinged.

  2. Mark’s favourite insult is to SCREEAAM: antisemite, NAZI, RacIST!

  3. Can’t debate, lose your temper, don’t like criticism of Israel and the holocaust industry, SHOUT nazi! Pathetic!

  4. Mark, her grandfather is dead, and you wish her to join him in the afterlife? Mkay. Got that one!

  5. Here’s Mark admitting that he tried (and failed) to have the person he is now targeting, arrested, on trumped up charges of antischwemitism.

  6. And here’s proof of his admission.

  7. Mark doesn’t appear to care that his conduct is bringing his profession into disrepute.

  8. In the tweet before this one, Mark made reference to her ethnicity… simply because she questioned his behaviour. Why? Racism?

  9. No, Mark, she wasn’t fired, she was targeted by Zioturds, like you.

  10. Mark wishing the person he is targeting, dead, again.

  11. Here’s more proof Mark conspires with others to have antiZionists arrested on fake antischwemitism charges.

  12. In this next tweet, Suzanne is crying to @engrugger, aka Rabbi Jonty Blackman, another Zioturd, who is a known racist with links to the Jewish Defence League.

  13. Here’s more on the halfwit fail-troll and poor little victim, Suzanne Fernandes.

  14. Foulmouthed, threatening, abusive, bullying, not very civil, at all! Mark isn’t capable of being civil.

  15. Here’s stupid @_Andreaurbanfox, using her not so anonymous troll account to harass and smear. She is so STOOPID, she used her own email address to verify the account, when she first set it up. Andrea is also a Zioturd, hates Muslims and Palestinians, and finds their suffering humorous.

  16. Here he is shouting NAZI – again!

  17. The ‘nazis’ to whom he’s referring, are people oppose Israel’s war crimes and question the validity of aspects of history presented as fact.

  18. I think he might burst a blood vessel.

  19. Mark and I have history. I am the one who has reported him to the SRA. My current complaint is pending. Here Mark makes reference to the fact ISIS would throw me off a roof because of my sexual orientation. I’ll leave you to guess which team I bat for.

  20. If you think his behaviour is unacceptable, you can report him to the Law firm, Seddons (his employer) or the Solicitor’s Regulation Authority.

 

Yes, Mark, and friends! All of this has been sent to the SRA and the police. Read it and weep!

My offer stands, Mark! You want to come after me: bring it!

 

 

 

By Jason Schumann

 

 

Disclaimer:

  1. All tweets and information posted in the previous Storify and this post, are (or were, before being deleted/ suspended) in the public domain and believed to be a matter of public record and have been posted in good faith, in the belief that they are true and not in any way specious or false.
  2. The above posts were actual tweets posted by Mark Lewis himself and the others referred to herein. They were part of my Storify account, which has since been suspended due to me keeping a record of the abuse I and others have been subjected to by certain individuals who shall remain nameless until further notice.
  3. Where an image is missing or there is no apparent other information, this means that the original, linked tweet or post has been deleted or the user suspended.
  4. Mark Lewis has since deleted much of his vitriol directed toward myself, Jo and several others with whom he disagrees; but not one to be caught out, I decided to archive everything… in case I might need it one day!
  5. The original of this post was collated and posted on my now suspended Storify account, here! I have offline backups though 🙂

Hacking My WordPress Account 

14 Apr

[Updated Sunday, 16 April, 2017 at 16:03]

 

Here is one of my stalkers:

Screen Shot 2017-04-16 at 15.39.36.png

 

To explain the relevance of the above screenshot and the point of this blog post, I recently noticed that my viewer and visitor stats were considerably down on my WordPress.

When I say down, I mean absolutely no visits or views for almost a week.

Now, this is very unusual, because I have an average number of visitors per day, stretching back over a year.

Another reason it is very unusual, is because of the topics and subjects on which I blog about.

I also have a number of repeat (some obsessed) visitors, who view the same blog posts and click on the same links every time they visit.

So, to investigate further, I first checked my stats counter with a third party app, that logs the IP addresses and other data about my visitors.

I then checked the code I use for that app, which monitors who and where my blog visitors are.

Low and behold the code was missing from my WordPress settings.

I readded the code and, to be on the safe side, I also changed my security settings, including authentication and my linked email address. 

To my surprise, my linked email address had also been changed to one not too dissimilar, with an alteration to how I spell out my name.

Now, here’s the thing. Because of what I blog about and being quite outspoken and political in my views, I am aware that I have made some enemies, who take an overly obsessive interest in what I blog about and are religious in viewing and visiting my blog.

These same people have previously attempted to hack my social media accounts and go to the extraordinary lengths to set up troll accounts to abuse me online and have set up several email addresses in variations of my name to hide their tracks.

Another reason I know that my WordPress was hacked, is due to one of my repeat (nee, obsessed) viewers checking my blog within 20 minutes of me changing my linked email address back to what it was.

In the screenshot at the head of this blog post, you can see how obsessive and pernicious one of my stalkers and harassers actually is.

The individual in question, has visited my blog for the last three days, consecutively, on no less than 16 separate occasions. On each occasion, referring to, and clicking on the same blog posts and the same links.

It’s been several weeks, if not months now, but this particular individual, is now known to the police, as are the individual’s accomplices, and is currently under investigation.

I have collated evidence of all of the above, having documented the individual’s abuse and harassment of myself and others, over a considerable period of  time.

Since this person, or someone who is known or close to this person, has somehow managed to hack into my WordPress account, I have now had to alter my privacy and security settings on all my online accounts.

With any luck, I am hopeful that those responsible will soon be caught and dealt with appropriately.

Until then, try harder, you pathetic humorons!

 

 

 

Author: Jason Schumann

Mosul: How Do Terrorists Get Their Hands On Chemical Weapons and Why is No-one Concerned?

5 Mar
mg

A representation of the effects of Chlorine gas.

In February 2017, the Daily Star reported the suspected assassination of Abu Yaha al-Iraq, socalled “engineer” behind ISIS’s stash of horrifying Chlorine bombs.

It is since January however, that the UN and other sources have been reporting on the potential for ISIS/ Daesh to obtain and make use of chemical weapons – which, if it were to proven – would represent a clear breach of international law and thus a war crime.

Again, in February, it was reported that the Pentagon also alleges the manufacture of ‘improvised’ chemical weapons. Contradicting this, in 2015, it was reported – again, by the Pentagon – that ISIS was not and could not manufacture such weapons.

In the last few days however, we have had new reports from the International Red Cross of multiple hospital admissions of civilians, including several children, suffering from what appear to be symptoms indicating exposure to these kinds of chemical weapons.

If reports are true, then who is supplying ISIS with the necessary material and equipment to manufacture them and why?

How is ISIS obtaining the expertise to manufacture them?

If neither of these, and ISIS has simply ‘come by’ a stockpile of already manufactured chemical weapons, from who or where did they obtain them and what were they doing in Mosul anyway?

It’s pretty hard to believe that ISIS is capable of or has the expertise to manufacture these chemical weapons on its own; so, one must logically assume that someone or a foreign state is supplying them.

As Michael Springmann recently told Press TV, the manufacture of the elements needed to create a chemical weapon, like Chlorine gas, “is something that is not [what] you can make [it] in your bathtub at home.”

Could it by that the US or another Western government is supplying ISIS with the materials and equipment to create Chlorine gas, or the weapons themselves?

We already know from the Washington Post reported in September 2016, that the Saudi-led coalition have been using White Phosphorus in Yemen, which has been confirmed was supplied to it by the United States.

We also know that Western governments, including the United States, are, and have been, funding Islamist militants, including ISIS, since the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in the 80’s.

Why is no one asking these very pertinent questions; and why does no one seem at all concerned to want to to find out the answer and bring those responsible before the international criminal court?

 

 

Author: Jason Schumann

 

 

Obsessed and Pernicious Trolls 

1 Mar

[Posted 01 March 2017] 
I am reliably informed that my haters and trolls are obsessing and foaming at the mouth again. 

My blog (this blog) and in particular, two 6-month old blog posts, have had 66 separate visits and 133 views today. 

Not only that but my obsessive visitors are repeatedly clicking on the same hyperlinks. 

Could it be that they are plotting, or seek to provoke me into a response? 

Possible and very likely in view of their past efforts, pathetic obsession and from what I have been informed in recent days.  

Think it’s time to contact the police again and send a couple of cease and desist notices. 

You just won’t be told and leave me alone. Well, you will learn your lesson when the police come.
Tick tock! 
Xxx

Two Tier Justice: White Terrorist Versus Muslim Terrorist and Institutional Racism

21 Feb

unequal-justice-black-sq-1170x1170

In mid-2016, a 17-year-old male from the City of Bradford in the North of England was arrested on terrorism charges after being reported by a suspicious neighbour.

What ever we say about curtain-twitchers in our local communities, sometimes they can be lifesavers, hey?

The young male’s identity has been protected because he is considered a minor under British Law; and so, he is protected under various legal instruments including the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Yes, you may laugh at this; but this is one of the tenets that are supposed to make the British judicial system unique and to be envied as a beacon, is it not?

Many would disagree with this, and suggest that such protections; particularly in this instance, are ‘nannyish’ in the extreme, arguing that the seriousness of the matter (had an act of terrorism been carried out) would warrant removal of anonymity. 

Hold that thought for a moment! 

The police are quoted in the mainstream media; and subsequently by his prosecution, that he became ‘radicalised’ by social media and events happening in the UK and events portrayed in World news.

The 17-year-old had posted images of homemade incendiary devices and made comments on social media, praising the murder of the Labour MP, Jo Cox, who was shot dead in the street of her constituency by a member of the public with Far Right connections.

When West Yorkshire police raided the young male’s family home, they found various extremist paraphernalia and incriminating content on his personal computer, including messages and communications posted on chat forums, that he had shared with others with similar views to his own.

He was apparently planning an attack on a local mosque.

Incidentally, the young male in question, also had links to the same extremist group, National Action, as did Jo Cox’s murderer. Rightly so, National Action has since been proscribed as a terrorist organisation.

In January 2017, the male was found guilty of making ‘viable’ explosive devices, but acquitted of intent to carry out an act of terror. His defence team successfully argued that he was only ‘experimenting’, and had no intention of carrying out any kind of attack.

He was sentenced by Mr Justice Goss, rather leniently, to just a supervision and rehabilitation order.

But what if he had been a 17-year-old Muslim, ‘messing’ around with explosives and posting extremist content on social media, not intending to act out his desires to commit a terrorist act?

Let’s look, shall we?

In March 2015, a 15-year-old male from Lancashire was convicted on terrorism charges, after pleading guilty to inciting a person to commit an act of terrorism.

In May 2015, a teenager from Newham, London, was convicted of grooming a “vulnerable” young man, to kill UK soldiers, and sentenced to 8-years in a young offenders institution and placed on a 15-year prevention and supervision order.

In October 2016, in Paris, France, a teenager was charged with criminal association with a terrorist group. Again, in Paris, in 2017, a 16-year-old female was arrested on suspicion of planning a future attack.

Only within the last couple of days, five teenagers, between the ages of 17 – 19, have been arrested in London, on suspicion of planning a terrorist attack.

In 2014/ 5, two teenage males in the North East of England were arrested by Northumbria police, on suspicion of planning a terrorist attack. Again, the defence team argued that the two males involved were not serious and had no intention of carrying out an act of terror. They were also given anonymity and let off the supervision orders.

In the case of the 17-year-old from Bradford and the two teenagers from the North East of England, all three were young White males.

In all other cases referred to, the teenagers involved are Muslim and have all been sentenced to detention, or are waiting to be given detention orders.

In the case of the 15-year-old, from Bolton, in Lancashire, convicted of terrorism charges, for inciting a person to commit an act of terrorism in Australia, his rights as a minor and to anonymity were removed by the British courts.

Anonymity if you are a White teenage terrorist suspect but not if you a Muslim teenage terrorist suspect, you query? 

Does this mean that the British media and judicial system only say ‘terrorism’, when the person involved is Muslim? Can we say that the ‘system’ looks on White teenage terror suspects and treats them more favourably and with more leniencies?

In short, the answer is yes!

In comparing each of these circumstances, all those involved were/ considered minors under the British legal system; only those who are Muslim have received a custodial sentence. Only those who are White have been afforded the right to anonymity. 

Perhaps the British Judicial System is not an enviable beacon after-all?

Indeed, it’s the same outcome when we look at arrests and sentencing rates, of other minority groups. Only in the last week, the Guardian and Voice Newspaper journalist, Leah Sinclair, revealed that Black and other minority groups in the UK are 40% more likely to be tasered by the Metropolitan police.

As we know, it’s even worse in countries like France; and particularly, in draconian countries like the United States.

Whilst the term ‘racism’ is used as a blanket or catchall description; for all forms of prejudice and discrimination, it seems that wherever we are, our criminal and public institutions remain inherently and systemically racist and biased.

Until we remove this double standard of cultural bias and privilege and difference of ‘Other’; true equality under the law (and in society as whole) is, but an aspiration and an everyday reality of inequality to us non-White folk.

Don’t be surprised if we refuse to sit for it much longer!

 

 

Author: Jason Schumann

 

 

 

 

The Future of UK Labour: Why Jeremy Corbyn Must Go

14 Feb

labourFar from being a hypocrite, I have always stated that Corbyn is an interim party leader.

Despite protestations from anti Corbynista or Corbynite naysayers, I have never believed that he has either the gravitas or image to be a world leader.

He appeals to my values, but I consider him to be simply too bland and aloof and never quite on the ball or in the loop. If not also too harsh, Corbyn reminds me of the person who arrives at the party when it’s just finished and everyone is leaving.

I am certain, however, that he is thoroughly principled and humanitarian, in his values and politics, and that is what attracts me to him. But in the politics of today, being principled will never be enough to win hearts and minds, without presence and some charisma.

It is with sadness that his convictions and principles just aren’t enough to sate today’s often ill-informed, MSM-influenced, and style-over-substance electorate. I also do not believe he is capable of winning over new voters. He is viewed as too left-wing, which is why he is bête noire to many on the right.

Rather like an obese father, too lazy to fetch his own slippers, Corbyn must go; first, because he did very little or nothing to support the remain campaign in the Brexit vote. In fact, he was hardly anywhere to be seen.

It’s true that politics are also fickle; but also, that Corbyn genuinely seems to shy away from the public eye, and he most certainly does not like journalists, TV cameras and MSM.

But can we blame him when more than 70% of the coverage they print and report about him is all negative?

No, of course not!

In Corbyn’s favour on Brexit, there are some suggestions his own party supporters conspired against him to ensure he couldn’t campaign. If so, we can also blame the lack of positive media coverage by Murdoch’s imposed blackout on him and the factory of negative briefings churned out against him by the Number 10 press office, as they did with his predecessor, Ed Miliband.

Just as they did with Ed in 2015, Labour supporters turned their back on Corbyn and the remain campaign, largely due to orchestrated fears, played out by leave campaigners around ‘foreigners invading our country and taking our jobs’ and ‘an unelected EU taking our money, and making our laws.’

Corbyn failed to do a single thing to enlighten, inform, or change the minds of those even from within his own party wanting to leave the European Union.

Neither was he, or those close to him, it appears, aware of just how big the swell to vote leave would turn out to be.

Rightly, Corbyn recognised the benefits of EU membership (to protect trade, investment, the environment, farming, our freedoms and rights), but he failed to convey this to supporters, and seemed completely unconcerned about the potential outcomes of not doing so.

Importantly, it goes to show just how out of touch he is; with the values, and expectations, of young people, traditional Labour voters, & his own grass roots supporters. It was as if he was either purposely asleep at the wheel, or derelict in his duty. That, or his chauffeur drove him in the wrong direction.

It is also clear to me that his deliberate, almost conceited unwillingness to engage in public debate, has helped in his undoing. He also now appears to be proving himself to be an autocratic leader, who is dismissive of the valid criticisms of his failure to lead, rightly laid at his feet.

At the start of his leadership of the party, he had already removed several of his detractors from their shadow leadership roles, informing the press that he isn’t going anywhere. This is arrogant and dictatorial of him. Perhaps also a red rag to bull. You don’t remove someone just because you don’t get on with him or her, or they don’t like you, especially if they are good and effective at what they do.

Corbyn should have been more diplomatic, statesman-like, and proactively sought to galvanise and inspire his party and supporters. In sum, well below the expectations of an effective opposition leader and he has shown neither foresight nor strategy. All of these have served to harm Labour’s future and counter the destructive efforts to diminish rights and privatise everything, as is the current course of the incumbent party.

As Brexit unfolds and becomes more clear, right-wing supporters in the Tory party will slowly repeal the laws that were agreed by all EU member states and designed and enacted, primarily to protect citizens from exploitation and and greater inequality. Without a doubt, things will become worse for the majority, but minorities in particular. We can see the beginnings of this already being evident in the resurgence of the Far Right and increases racism.

Corbyn’s inaction has effectively given the likes of Gove, Hunt, May et al, carte blanche, to repeal the HRA, DPA, FoIA, worker’s rights, privatise the National Health Service & more.

Perhaps more worrying, is that Theresa May is worse. Well, of course she is, especially as it is her clear intention to carry on where Margaret Thatcher left off. But what she lacks in ability and confidence as a sheepish head of state, is masked by her image and taste for designer clothing. More importantly, her longer term aims to diminish what few rights we have remaining. 

As little thanks, we can take small comfort in the fact that the UK Independence Party that began much of this is now disintegrating from within. 

 

 

Author: Jason Schumann

 

 

 

A Prediction: Trump, the Muslim Ban and an Imminent Attack 

12 Feb

 

 
[Updated 07 April, 2017] 

When I blogged ‘Trump: A Walking Disaster’ after his election win, I made some pretty bold but clear comments about things that would happen during his presidency, including several catastrophic predictions in the likely fallout that may follow for the rest of us.

Already, we are less than a month into this ‘Mad Hatter’s tea-party’ state of affairs, and the signs are showing that my predictions are beginning to bear out in what may well become a global nightmare.

I ask you, 20 executive orders in his first 10-days in public office?

This man isn’t a world leader interested in diplomacy, peace, and global stability.

He’s a self-interested, narcissist, autocrat, and dictator. It is no exaggeration to state, that every single one of these 20 diktats signed by Trump, either benefits him personally – or is intended to undo peace, equity, and stability – whether domestically, or globally.

One of these orders was to place a blanket ban on the citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries travelling or emigrating to the United States. This was on the cards as one of his election promises, so it isn’t really a prediction, at all.

What is a prediction, however, is what may well come next; and I am not the only one saying or thinking it may actually happen!

And no, I am not talking about any diplomatic, tit-for-tat, spats or sanctions being imposed on US exports or markets, or condemnation by world leaders. This type of response was always a given in such circumstances — no matter who the president, or the country!

In response to his defeat; first, in the lower, district court and subsequent defeat in the federal circuit appeals court, Trump took it personally and let his own prediction be known (of the possible outcome) of the Court’s ‘defiance’ of his ‘authoriteh’, in its refusal to uphold and reinstate the ban.

In a rather prophetic and his usual manner of ill-concerned twattering, Trump tweeted, that the ruling is ‘bad’ and that ‘the United States security is at stake’.

He followed this up with another tweet, stating that if an event was to occur – by which he means a terrorist attack – it should be the Courts and the Judiciary that are held accountable for such a travesty.

Trump’s prediction here – if, indeed, there is one – is whether or not there will be an imminent attack on US soil.

Has an attack been pre-planned? Has it already been set in motion? Does Trump have any knowledge of such an attack? If it were to happen imminently, who planned it? What will be the repercussions?

Had the ban remained in place and there been an attack at some point in the immediate future, you could have blamed Trump, himself. Now you can’t, because he’s shifted the blame and responsibility if it does.

So, who benefits and who loses if his apparent prophecy occurs?

As the most unpopular president of all time, how timely (and how much of a coincidence) would it be, if there were an imminent major terrorist attack in the US?

The outcome (of such an act) would see sweeping and fundamental changes across the whole of America, including wholesale reform of the legal system and judiciary and a reintroduction of the ban.

As Trump, and his inner circle, have already sounded out and made mutterings regarding sanctions against Iran and Yemen, it would likely mean these two countries get the blame, which would give Trump the reason to justify another prolonged US-led, engineered invasion and murderous war.

Only time will tell if Trump’s and my predictions become a reality, but it’s food for thought!

You can bet if they do, that it will not be a coincidence.

As if by magic my predictions come true! Trump is bombing Syria after a chemical attack orchestrated by the White House. 

The article below has since been removed from the paper’s website. 

Trump is doing exactly what he once advised Obama specifically not to do. Who benefits? Yes, you guessed it! 

As I write this update, news has just come in that Russia has sent a war ship to confront two US destroyers in the Mediterranean. 

Author: Jason Schumann
Note:

I remove the word ‘attack’ from the headline. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Doh! UK Zionist Lobby Exposes The Zionist Lobby

24 Jan

 

Earlier today, on the 24 January 2017, the Times of Israel published an article penned by Justin Cohen, one of its News Editors.

The article concerns the recent 4-part undercover documentary conducted by Al-Jazeera; to expose – what can only be described, as the seriously seditious activities of Shai Masot at the behest of the Israeli government – to undermine British politics and democracy – including attempts at removing political opponents, like Sir Alan Duncan and Jeremy Corbyn – who are deemed to be obstacles and therefore incompatible with Israel’s aspirations and long-term goals.

Despite a public outcry and requests made by members of opposition parties – thus far, the PM, Theresa May, and the rest of her government – have categorically refused all calls for a public inquiry into the extent and scale of the role of Israeli government, its officials, actors, and diplomats, attempting to subvert and influence British democracy, favourably to Israel’s goals.

It is self-evident in Cohen’s article, that neither members of the UK Jewry, nor the Israeli government itself, are particularly happy about Al-Jazeera’s far-reaching expose of the tactics that the Israeli government is willing to employ and the lengths it is willing to go in order to push its expansionist agenda.

When Al-Jazeera’s expose was first aired – many (if not all) members of the Jewish diaspora, were unequivocally dismissive, and frankly insouciant – about the gravity of such nefarious interference of a foreign state (Israel) in another state’s (UK) sovereign powers – to independently and democratically, determine what its approach to and its foreign policy should entail. I dare say some were even apoplectic.

After Shai Masot was caught out in his candid admission of state-sanctioned and funded covert operations, to undermine British foreign and domestic policy, a prominent member of the UK Jewry, Jonathan Hoffman – who is a former Bank of England official – recently saw fit to use his own influence, to complain to members of the UK Parliament and House of Commons – seeking that Al-Jazeera be reprimanded for exposing something that is in all our interests to know and be aware of.

And guess what happened, folks?

Yes, you guessed it right!

The British government, like a compliant and pathetic lap dog rolling over on its back for its master, has happily kow-towed and will consider acting on Hoffman’s demands for it to reprimand Al-Jazeera.

(Now just for clarity, Theresa May, please remind us who your ‘Mamma’ is?)

 

Recently, Mr Hoffman, has let it be known, that anyone who speaks out against what many consider to be a rogue and terrorist state, its plans for expansion, or its human rights abuses, should automatically be considered an enemy of the Jewish diaspora and Israel itself.

Hoffman has made clear (in a recent Facebook post) that all dissenters should be discredited by “shining a light on the dissenter”, as opposed to “whispers to discredit them”.

(It appears that Mr Hoffman has since deleted or altered his Facebook account, attempting to disprove that he made these comments, but screenshots were obtained, prior to deletion).

You can also see Jonathan Hoffman in action here:

 

If, for some bizarre reason, you do not consider Mr Hoffman’s efforts to be a clear example and therefore somewhat of a confirmation of the existence of the Israeli/ Zionist lobby in action and its efforts to influence foreign democracies in its favour, one might wish to have a rethink about that.

Clearly, Mr Hoffman’s personal interventions, as a respected member of the Jewish establishment in the UK, to seek punitive measures against Al-Jazeera – for merely exposing the truth regarding Israel’s sedition – should be considered nothing short of an attempt at coercion or undue influence. In the very least, ‘crying foul’ or claiming ‘but that’s not fair’, when you have been caught out doing the deed.

In the last few days the Campaign Against AntiSemitism (CAA), a so-called UK-based charity, that is known to use legal means to silence Israel’s critics, has also decided to flex its muscles, by lodging a formal complaint against Al-Jazeera with the Broadcasting Regulator, OFCOM.

Amongst many other accusations, CAA’s complaint claims that Al-Jazeera’s expose is “mendacious”, “inaccurate”, amounting to “unfair treatment” (of Masot?), and even “promot(ing) incitement”. CAA is also seeking to force or impose upon OFCOM for it to use and adopt a definition of antiSemitism that is widely disputed, because it infringes on universal rights of free speech, expression, assembly and protest.

In making these complaints, the wider agenda of Hoffman and CAA here, is, once and for all, to finally criminalise any and all criticism of Israel’s persistent human rights abuses and illegal occupation of Palestinians and further expansion into settlements. All of which, not doubt, could not happen without the direction, influence, and input of Israel itself.

Talk about shooting yourself and your cause in the foot, by trying to silence critics and, in actuality only serving to prove the ‘conspiracy’ of the ‘Lobby’ to be true by your own actions and interventions, Mr Hoffman and CAA?

Now, if you are reading this and you are in any way concerned – as any vaguely intelligent person should be – regarding any foreign state unduly influencing your own government’s sovereignty, you should sign this petition.

It seems clear and simple: Zionism is racism and a truly subversive element in world politics, that may well be to the detriment of all humankind!

 

Regards,

Jason Schumann

Xxxxxxx

 

UK Foreign Policy: Lessons From Libya, Illegal Wars, Profit, and the Refugee Crisis

6 Jan
[Image: Migrants from Eritrea jump into the sea from a crowded wooden boat during a rescue operation last week. Photograph: Emilio Morenatti/AP]

Boat Refugees.jpg

I made the following comments on another platform, after reading ‘Libya: Examination of intervention and Collapse and the UK’s Future Policy Options’; a report published by the House of Commons FCO Committee on the 06 September, 2016.

My comments are based on snippets of text, taken directly from the report, as observed by the Committee, or evidence and opinion given, by experts and Members of Parliament to the Committee.

The report states that the UK government spent in excess of £320m on bombing Libya, but only £25m on reconstruction programmes… most of which, went to foreign companies in the plundering of its natural wealth and subsequent reconstruction.

Dr. Liam Fox, MP, and former Defence Secretary, by his omission to answer (before committee) point 3, of the ‘Failure Strategy’, admitted destabilising Libya was an ‘engineered’ outcome, by various Western governments, including the UK.

(Note: this is the very same Liam Fox, who has consistently voted against Human Rights; strongly supported the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as being forced to repay approximately £40,000 in wrongfully claimed parliamentary expenses of taxpayers money. He has previously stated, “Israel’s enemies are our enemies and this is a battle in which we all stand together or we will all fall divided”).

Before the UK and coalition invasion, Libya had some £30bn in unused weapons; which, after Western efforts to oust Gaddafi, ‘fell’ into hands of militias, including Boko Haram.

As a direct consequence of the invasion, the UK government and its international partners, created the possibility for increased migration of refugees from Libya and surrounding countries in Western-caused conflict, poverty and displacement.

This is documented as fact in both the report and many other reports by world governments and international NGOs.

Yes, it is entirely true; our governments created the migrant and refugee crisis in Europe.
Now we have Baroness Anelay, former Minister of State in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office – who, for the record, has a relatively untarnished record – told the committee, that the UK did not support sea rescue missions of migrants, because of ‘pull factor.’

Translation: They can drown, because if we let more of them come, they will keep coming!

(No mention or acknowledgement that we allowed our governments to create this situation).

 

Here’s what Baroness Anelay meant by not wishing to support sea rescues:

British warship sent to Libya to target people-smugglers: Deployment of HMS Diamond part of EU crackdown, as… http://bit.ly/2bMRww8

 

Here’s Dr. Liam Fox, MP, giving evidence (and telling outright LIES) to the Committee: http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/5c9e78c8-5c3f-4511-ab58-e9b068d6906a

 

And here’s Cameron congratulating the Libyan people (and himself) in the overthrow of the government: https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/777780997987393536/pu/vid/1280×720/QuLVu-9z6esf3EFY.mp4

 

Hold on!

Now we have Cameron suggesting the UK’s involvement would ‘stabilise’ Libya: https://archive.fo/bC3DR

 

For the record, and so that you are in no doubt, in 2014, the UK Parliament voted against Syria. Cameron ignored the vote and misused the royal prerogative, without any consultation of parliament to send UK troops to provide what he later described – but only after he was found out, that is – ‘logistical support’ for the Americans.

Cameron was found out in early 2015 and wriggled out of it by saying that there were no boots on the ground, so, technically, he hadn’t broken parliamentary rules.

Yeah, right!

In come his cronies, to grease the wheels of and start the propaganda machine to work in order to engineer ‘boots on the ground’ via a second vote.

Yes, it worked… Cameron spun it and got the second vote to invade Syria!

Only recently I read in the Guardian, that a Syrian activist has had her passport withdrawn (by UK authorities) at the request of Assad’s government; and yet, we (the UK) are supposed to be at war with Assad.

As with Syria, the UK and other Western governments, including France and the US, wanted regime change in Libya, just like Afghanistan and Iraq.

The result?

Engineered turmoil, people displacement, sectarianism, poverty, inequality, destruction of infrastructure, mass murder, and the EU’s current migrant crisis!

Why, you may ask?

The answer is always the same: power, profit, and control!

Syria and Libya are your legacy, David Cameron.

Like Blair in Iraq and Afghanistan; you should be sent to the international criminal courts, for war crimes and crimes against humanity!

And now, the same Western governments, are playing the blame game with Russia and Assad, whilst people are bombed out of their homes, to death, or to flood European borders.

The struggle for world peace and the security of the Middle East is far from over; it is part of a wider plan!

 Open your eyes!

 

 

By Jason Schumann

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: