Theresa May’s war on the internet

NOVANEWS
Image result for Theresa May CARTOON
By Dan Glazebrook 

Last night, Theresa May was in France for a joint press conference with new French President Emmanuel Macron. As far as I could tell, it was only Al Jazeera that broadcast it live in Britain.

The only time it was mentioned during BBC radio 4’s flagship news show, the Today program, was during the five-minute religious slot Thought for the Day. It was not covered in the news section at all.

But this should be major, major news. This was Theresa May’s first policy announcement since last week’s election. And it wasn’t on Brexit, the reason she supposedly called the election. It wasn’t on austerity, which she apparently told her own MPs was over in a private session two days ago. No, her first major public policy announcement was – the end of internet freedom.

Specifically, what was announced was that both countries would be introducing heavy fines for internet companies that failed to remove what they, very loosely, defined as “extremist content.”

Now, taken at face value, this might seem to be referring to ISIS [Islamic State, formerly ISIL] recruitment videos or online suicide bombing training videos, or whatever. But the direct encouragement of violence is already illegal. So, what exactly is being proposed? Who exactly will be targeted?

It was former PM David Cameron who originally came up with the idea that “nonviolent extremism” should be criminalized alongside violent extremism. Intriguingly, as an example of what he meant, he included the idea that the “West is bad,” as well as elsewhere arguing that the promotion of “wild conspiracy theories” would also qualify.

Well, the collusion between, for example, British intelligence and Al-Qaeda might sound like a wild conspiracy theory. But, in the context of Britain and Al-Qaeda’s shared enemies in the form of Gaddafi and Assad, this collusion actually did take place. MI5 was facilitating the passage of fighters between Britain, Syria, and Libya, the SAS were training them, and MI6 was equipping them. Indeed, this collusion is not even secret: as late as 2016 the British government openly pledged to send more British troops to Syria to train rebel groups that even the BBC admitted were likely to be allied with Al-Qaeda.

So, is the publication of this information going to be barred now as extremist? Will YouTube and Facebook and Google and Twitter pull these revelations in fear of getting fined for promoting the “wild conspiracy theories” that, according to Cameron, qualify as extremism?

It is clear why the British state is so keen to clampdown on the internet once this kind of information starts going viral. But the election just gone has raised the stakes even further, demonstrating that, if the government does not reassert its authority over the internet, it may well have lost control of the political narrative for good. Let’s review what’s just happened:

A month ago, almost everybody was predicting a wipeout for the Labour party, a repeat of the disastrous 1983 election in which Margaret Thatcher really did win the landslide Theresa May had been predicting. Oh, how times have changed.

Back in 1983, pretty much everyone got their political information from either the newspapers or the BBC. In other words, between them, the big press barons – about 4 or 5 of them – and the British state had total monopoly control of political information.

This meant that when they portrayed Labour leader Michael Foot as a bumbling Oaf, that became the abiding image of him. A tiny handful of millionaire Tories effectively had total control over the public image of every politician in the land.

This time around, it’s a different story. The newspapers and the TV threw everything they could at Corbyn – ‘he’s a terror-supporting, magic money tree-mongering, Brexit-frustrating Remainiac’ – but people weren’t buying. And why weren’t they buying? Because they’re not reading the newspapers, and they’re not watching terrestrial TV. This time around, people, young people in particular, were increasingly getting their political information from social media – and on social media, the conservatives did not control the narrative.

For example, an RT interview I did about British collusion with terrorism shortly before the election got over one and half million views on Facebook – higher than the daily readership of the Daily Mail. Jonathan Pie’s fantastic piece tearing apart the Tory’s ‘strong and stable’ nonsense, got 11 million views. That is two and half million more than the combined circulation of the Daily Mail, Daily Express, Guardian, Sun, Daily Star, Times, Telegraph, Evening Standard, and the Mirror and Metro – the country’s ten leading newspapers.  And hilariously, when I had just watched one of Theresa May’s speeches on YouTube during the campaign, immediately afterwards, YouTube automatically played Liar Liar, the anti-May anthem that reached number four in the UK pop charts last week. And I suspect YouTube auto played that video after anyone watched anything about Theresa May due to the algorithms that they employ.

So, you can see why the Tories are furious about the internet. They, and the British state more generally, have totally lost control of the narrative. And that’s what cost them this election.

So that’s what this new crackdown on the internet is really about; it’s about regaining control of that narrative. It’s about turning the CEOs of YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Google into the Rupert Murdochs of the 21st century – the political allies and mouthpieces of the British state and the capitalist class, and doing this by forging a new relationship that explicitly punishes them if they refuse to play ball.

Even the government’s own ‘reviewer of terrorism laws’, Max Hill, has come out against the move, explaining that “my view is that… we do have the appropriate laws in place, and that essentially the police and security services, and those whose job it is to keep us safe, do have the powers at their disposal.”

He noted that, in his experience, the police unit responsible for identifying online extremist material receive full co-operation from the tech companies already.

Similarly, The Open Rights Group has warned that “to push on with these extreme proposals for internet clampdowns would appear to be a distraction from the current political situation and from effective measures against terror.”

“The government already has extensive surveillance powers. Conservative proposals for automated censorship of the internet would see decisions about what British citizens can see online being placed in the hands of computer algorithms, with judgments ultimately made by private companies rather than courts. Home Office plans to force companies to weaken the security of their communications products could put all of us at a greater risk of crime.”

Those who are worried about extremism should be calling for an end to the British intelligence services’ collaboration and facilitation of terrorism and the extradition of those who have carried out or facilitated attacks abroad, as well as an international investigation and prosecutions of all those involved.

Theresa May’s new proposals do nothing to end the impunity of her own government in the grooming and facilitation of terrorism. Rather, they serve to extend this impunity. They must be resisted.

Posted in UK0 Comments

Britain’s Real Terror Apologists

NOVANEWS
Image result for Jeremy Corbyn CARTOON
By Finian Cunningham | Sputnik 

Despite a vicious smear campaign to denigrate Britain’s Labour leader as a “terrorist sympathizer,” Jeremy Corbyn still pulled off an amazing achievement in the general election.

Hardly has a politician in any Western state been so vilified with character assassination, and yet he has proven to be most popular Labour leader in Britain since the Second World War.

After weeks of trailing his Conservative rival Theresa May in the polls, Corbyn’s socialist manifesto appealed to a record number of voters – closing the gap between the parties to only two percentage points behind the Tories.

This was in spite of a concerted media campaign to destroy Corbyn in the eyes of the British public as a “terrorist stooge.” The irony here is that the Conservative party is forming a governing coalition with a little-known Northern Ireland party whose history is steeped in British state terrorism. (More on that in a moment.)

For Corbyn, the election outcome was a stunning moral victory. For Prime Minister May it was a humiliating defeat. The Conservatives lost their overall majority in the British parliament and now they have to rely on this reactionary fringe party from Northern Ireland to form a government.

May called the snap election because she thought her party would increase its majority and also because she calculated that Corbyn’s socialist direction of Labour would be wiped out. Many Blairite naysayers in his own party thought so too.

The opposite happened. The British public largely rejected May and her neoliberal capitalist, pro-austerity, pro-NATO policies. They instead rallied behind Corbyn. Granted, the Tories still won the election – only narrowly – but the surge in support for Labour under Corbyn means that he has galvanized a party that stands a strong chance of winning if another election is called. And that could be soon, perhaps in the coming months owing May’s shaky ad hoc government collapsing.

Another riveting factor in all this is that Corbyn’s success came amid a torrential Tory and right-wing media campaign to denigrate him as a terrorist sympathizer. The propaganda onslaught was conducted for months since May called the election back in April. And it grew to a frenzy as election day approached last Thursday, especially when the opinion polls showed Labour steadily whittling away the earlier Conservative support.

The day before the public went to the polling booths, the Daily Mail ran the front page headline: “Apologist for terror,” with Jeremy Corbyn’s photo below. It looked like a “wanted poster” from the Wild West. The only thing missing was the subhead with the words: “Wanted dead or alive.”

The scurrilous allegation pounded over and over by the largely pro-Conservative British media that Corbyn is “soft on terrorism” stems from his otherwise principled history of campaigning on international justice and peace.

Over his 35 years as an MP, he has voiced consistent support for Palestinian rights under illegal Zionist occupation; he has supported Hezbollah resistance against Israeli and American aggression; and during the conflict in Northern Ireland, Corbyn gave a voice to Irish Republicans who were being assailed by British military violence.

Many other international causes could be mentioned, such as Corbyn opposing British government weapons dealing with the despotic Saudi regime which is propagating terrorism in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

He has also campaigned to abandon nuclear weapons and is critical of NATO’s reckless expansion in Europe, which have earned him the jingoistic pillorying by the British establishment of “being soft on Russia.”

Corbyn has never condoned terrorism. Rather he has always sought to properly put it in a wider context of other parties also, unaccountably, using terrorism and thus fueling conflict.

This brings us to so-called Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) from Northern Ireland whose 10 MPs Theresa May’s Tories are now relying on to form a government. This party was formed in the early 1970s by the firebrand Protestant preacher Ian Paisley. While Paisley mellowed in later years before his death in 2014, he spent most of his career preaching vile hatred against Catholics and Irish Republicans, whom he saw as a threat to the political union between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain. In British-run Northern Ireland, it wasn’t acceptable to have a democratic aspiration for an independent Ireland. You were either a pro-British unionist or a “threat.” So much for British democracy.

Senior members of Paisley’s pro-British party played a crucial role in smuggling massive caches of weapons into Northern Ireland during the 1980s to illegally arm unionist paramilitaries. These paramilitaries went on to murder hundreds of innocent people simply because they were Catholics, who tended to be Republican. A favored tactic of these paramilitaries was to storm into pubs and homes and indiscriminately mow people down with assault rifles.

One notorious pro-British killer was Gusty Spence who belonged to the Ulster Volunteer Force paramilitary. He later expressed remorse and deplored Ian Paisley, the DUP founder, as the person who incited him to murder innocent Catholics due to his sectarian hate speech.

The paramilitary murder gangs were not just supported covertly by members of the DUP. The British government of Margaret Thatcher – Theresa May’s predecessor and political heroine – orchestrated these same death squads in a covert policy of “dirty war.”

British military intelligence colluded with the pro-unionist militants to assassinate Republican politicians and ordinary Catholics alike in a covert policy of state-sponsored terrorism. The objective was to terrorize people in submitting to British rule over Northern Ireland, rather than allowing the island country to become united and independent.

The British government provided intelligence and cover for the death squads and the unionist politicians had helped supply the AK-47 assault rifles and Browning handguns smuggled from Apartheid South Africa.

This secret dirty war policy of the British government and their unionist proxies in Northern Ireland has been uncovered by investigative journalists such as Paul Larkin (see his groundbreaking book “A Very British Jihad: Collusion, Conspiracy and Cover-up in Northern Ireland”); as well as human rights campaign groups like Belfast-based Relatives for Justice and Pat Finucane Centre.

Not even the present government of Theresa May can deny this murderous legacy in Ireland, although there is a determined silence now as she fights for her political survival in the wake of the British election disaster.

It is a proven fact that May’s Conservative party and the unionist politicians whom she is now partnering with to govern Britain were complicit in terrorism.

Northern Ireland has since gained a peace settlement in which unionist and republican politicians have been able to work together to form a local governing administration. The Irish peace process was possible partly because of the courageous and principled intervention by British politicians like Jeremy Corbyn.

Corbyn has never apologized for terrorism. He has sought to overcome it by making politics work. The same cannot be said for Theresa May’s Conservative party. It was an accomplice and an apologist for a covert policy of state-sponsored terrorism during Northern Ireland’s recent 30-year conflict.

The very party whom she is now allied with for governing Britain – the DUP – were also apologists for paramilitaries who routinely smashed their way into family homes and slaughtered victims in cold blood in front of their loved ones.

The ongoing muted policy of May’s government and her unionist proxies about their murderous legacy in Ireland is a testimony to who the real apologists for terror are.

Posted in UK0 Comments

The Loyalist Zionists Who are Keeping Theresa May on Life Support

NOVANEWS
 
a marriage made in hell – Loyalism and Conservatism

The links between Ulster Unionism and Zionism have always been close.  The British Mandate in Palestine began in 1920 and it was ratified by the League of Nations in 1922.  The Partition of Ireland began in 1921 and Southern Ireland became independent in 1922.

Both Ulster and Palestine involved British imperialism using a settler population in order to maintain its presence in another peoples’ land.  Ulster had been the subject of the Plantation of Protestant settlers in the 17th century.  Palestine was the subject of Jewish settlement in the 20thcentury.  As the first Military Governor of Jerusalem, Sir Ronald Storrs(1920-1926), wrote in his autobiography Orientations:

 
Jackie McDonald – S Belfast UDA Brigade Commander – Arlene Foster met him a few days after a UDA killing

“Enough [Jews] could return, if not to form a Jewish state … at least to prove that the enterprise was one which blessed him that gave as well as him that took, by forming for England ‘a little loyal Jewish Ulster’ in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.”

The agreement by the British to support the Zionist colonisation of Palestine was symbolised in the Balfour Declaration whereby the Foreign Secretary, Arthur James Balour wrote a letter of November 2nd 1917 to Lord Rothschild in which Britain promised the land of the Palestinians to the Zionists.  Promises made in the Declaration that ‘nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine’ was honoured in the breach.

Zionist settlers in Palestine based their claim on the Biblical ‘return’ of the Jews to Palestine just as the Protestant settlers of Ulster believed that in settling the north of Ireland they too were fulfilling god’s mission.

 
Arlene Foster – DUP leader, blamed for loss of hundreds of millions on energy scheme

It is no accident that when an Israeli propaganda group, Stand by Israel, sent out a Pledge for Israel to candidates in the general election, 5 of the DUP’s candidates – Jeffrey Donaldson, Paul Girvan, Gary Middleton, Ian Paisley, Jim Shannon – signed.  Although the founder of the DUP, Ian Paisley was in habit of making anti-Semitic jokes, he was nonetheless fully signed up to the idea that Israel represented the ‘return’ of the Jews as a precursor of the second coming of Christ.

 
Theresa May addresses journalists after she returned from the Palace – she managed not to mention the election outcome

Both Israel and Ulster were set up as settler colonial states and both indulged in ethnic cleansing – in Israel’s case of Palestinians and in Ulster it was Catholics who were forced to flee from pogroms in 1921.

Just as Israel is a Jewish supremacist state, Ulster was set up as a Protestant Supremacist state.  In the words of James Craig, the Viscount Craigavon, Ulster’s first Prime Minister, ‘we are a Protestant Parliament and a Protestant State’ which became popularly known as a Protestant Parliament for a Protestant people.’

The Democratic Unionist Party was formed by Ian Paisley in 1971.  Paisley was the founder of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ireland and an anti-Catholic agitator.  From the very start the party was linked with loyalist terror gangs such as the Ulster Defence Association.  This tradition has continued to the present.  Arlene Foster, the present leader of the DUP, met with the leader of the UDA, Jackie MacDonald, just three days after their Southern Antrim brigade murdered a fellow paramilitary.

It is no surprise that Theresa May, whose party has vigorously attacked Jeremy Corbyn for his links with Sinn Fein and the IRA, has no problem with forming an electoral alliance with a party with close links to Protestant death squads.  People forget that whereas the IRA attacked the British army and the Royal Ulster Constabulary (renamed PSNI), all of them armed, the Loyalist death squads of the UDA and the Ulster Volunteer Force attacked Catholic civilians at random.

As was proven by the 1990’s Stevens Inquiries, intelligence information was supplied to these Loyalist death squads by British agents inside these groups.  The army’s Force  Research Unit, a military intelligence unit, ran an agent Brian Nelson inside the UDA and the FRU helped the UDA kill hundreds of innocent Catholics.  Indeed they agreed restriction orders with the RUC in order that these killers wouldn’t be apprehended by the Police.  One particularly notorious murder was that of the Belfast solicitor Patrick Finucane, whose crime in their eyes was defending Republican soldiers.

Former Tory Prime Minister John Major has spoken out against any alliance with the DUP, following on from Ruth Davidson.  Given the present impasse in Belfast between the DUP and Sinn Fein, which has meant that Stormont, the local Assembly hasn’t met for months, the British government going into an effective coalition with the DUP removes any pretence that it is an honest broker.

It is a measure of the desperation of the Witch of Westminster that she should ally with these creatures.  Not only are they anti-gay and anti-abortion but they are also sectarian racists.  Fitting allies for a discredited Prime Minister  May.  May has demonstrated that in order to hold onto  power she will literally ally with the devil.  However I suspect that this alliance, made as it is in hell, will have a rather short lifespan.

Tony Greenstein

A Joke in Very Poor Taste

London Review of Books

Daniel Finn 12 June 2017

As Britain woke on Friday morning to discover that Theresa May had flushed her Commons majority down the drain, people found themselves having to learn about an unfamiliar party on which May (or her successor) would be relying to get anything done. The titles of the hastily commissioned primers – ‘So, Who Are The DUP?’; ‘Who are the Democratic Unionists and what do they want?’ – told their own story. The Democratic Unionist Party is Northern Ireland’s largest political force and was until recently the principal coalition partner in one of the UK’s devolved governments. But most of the time, what happens in Belfast or Derry is deemed irrelevant to political life on the other side of the Irish Sea.

Superficially, this year’s election campaign was an exception, with events in Northern Ireland discussed more widely than at any time since the Good Friday Agreement. But that was because the Conservatives thought they could damage Jeremy Corbyn by highlighting his relationship with Sinn Féin in the 1980s. The fact that Northern Ireland’s government had collapsed just a few months earlier, however, was barely mentioned; neither Corbyn nor May was asked to spell out in detail what they planned to do about it.

The Westminster arithmetic makes any speedy resolution of the Stormont crisis unlikely. Problems had been accumulating from the first day of the power-sharing arrangement back in 2007, as Ian Paisley, the DUP’s leader since its founding in 1971, had done little to prepare his supporters for a deal with their republican enemies. Paisley’s apparent bonhomie with Sinn Féin’s Martin McGuinness infuriated many DUP activists, and it wasn’t long before Paisley’s deputy Peter Robinson had eased him into early retirement. Robinson was more intransigent than Paisley in his dealings with Sinn Féin, and Robinson’s successor Arlene Foster more intransigent still; the DUP used the requirement for cross-community consent in the Northern Ireland Assembly to block reforms that had already been agreed on in peace talks.

Brexit added another fault line: the DUP campaigned to leave the EU, while the other main parties all plumped for Remain, as did 56 per cent of voters in the region. The referendum exposed a light-minded attitude towards the Good Friday Agreement among Leave-supporting politicians in both London and Belfast: mixed messages about the likelihood of a ‘hard border’ in Ireland betrayed the fact that most Brexiteers hadn’t thought about the question at all before taking the plunge.

The text of the Good Friday Agreement explicitly referred to the Irish and British states as ‘partners in the European Union’, and tacitly assumed that questions of sovereignty would get hazier as European integration progressed; anyone born in Northern Ireland is entitled to an Irish passport, and the only sign of the border in recent years has been the text message from your mobile phone company when the train goes past Dundalk. The prospect of a harder-edged approach to national identity after Brexit seemed to delight the DUP leadership. The party is adamantly opposed to any special status for Northern Ireland when its departure from the EU is finalised – although with an eye to farming interests, it also wants to keep trade flowing across the border. Squaring that circle will be a key issue in the negotiations to come.

The Stormont government collapsed when Arlene Foster refused to take responsibility for mismanaging a renewable heating scheme that may end up costing Northern Ireland half a billion pounds, and Sinn Féin pulled the plug. A snap regional election at the start of this year saw the DUP come perilously close to being overtaken by Sinn Féin, but its performance in the Westminster poll last week was much more assured, adding two seats for a total of 10; Sinn Féin and an independent unionist accounted for the rest of Northern Ireland’s 18 constituencies.

The idea that Theresa May – or any Tory politician – can serve as an impartial mediator while relying on DUP votes at Westminster is a joke in very poor taste. A parliamentary alliance between the Tories and the DUP will reinforce an ideological convergence between the parties. ‘The immense contribution of the security forces during the Troubles,’ the Conservative manifesto said, ‘should never be forgotten. We will reject any attempts to rewrite history which seek to justify or legitimise terrorism.’

Official inquiries have exposed a long record of collusion between state forces and the loyalist paramilitaries who waged a ruthless war on nationalist civilians. The DUP wants to shut down all investigations that bring its fictitious narrative of the ‘Troubles’ into question. DUP leaders always saw the loyalist paramilitaries as allies in the struggle against Irish nationalism, refusing to take responsibility for their actions in public, but privately urging them to keep on killing when the IRA called a ceasefire. Now the party wants the IRA to be held exclusively responsible for the conflict, the state forces exalted, and the loyalists forgotten: anything else would be ‘legitimising terrorism’. The Tories agree (there was hysteria when Corbyn insisted on condemning loyalist bombings as well as IRA ones). And Michael Gove, now back in May’s cabinet, in 2000 denounced the Good Friday Agreement as a ‘moral stain’, a ‘capitulation to violence’ and a ‘denial of our national integrity’. He defended the comments last year.

The DUP may be out of step with Britain’s political mainstream in many respects, but as far as security policy is concerned, it marches in tight formation with some very powerful interests. For those who value civil liberties in both Britain and Northern Ireland, that will pose a grave problem, however long the current arrangement at Westminster lasts.

Theresa May to be propped up by Christian Zionists

In a stunning upset, the British electorate moved sharply to the left in Thursday’s general election. The Labour Party, led by Jeremy Corbyn, gained dozens of seats, while Theresa May’s governing Conservatives lost their majority.

When the prime minister called the snap election seven weeks ago, polls suggested she’d win a massive majority.

Even such Labour stalwarts as Guardian pundit Owen Jones predicted that under Corbyn the party would be crushed.

But Corbyn’s ebullient grassroots campaign, built on policies of free university tuition, social justice and more investment in public services, generated enthusiasm that defied virtually all expectations.

May moves right

Diminished and humiliated, May will hang on as prime minister for now. But unable to command a majority in the House of Commons on their own, the Conservatives will rely for support on the 10 lawmakers from the Democratic Unionist Party, a Christian Zionist group in Northern Ireland which pushes extreme pro-Israel policies.

It also staunchly opposes same-sex marriage, a position that might make it more at home in America’s Bible Belt.

This means that while the British electorate embraces more progressive policies, May is likely to hunker down and move even further to the right in defiance of public opinion, including the growing support for Palestinian rights.

Who are the DUP

The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) was founded in the early 1970s by the late Ian Paisley, a Protestant cleric notorious for his anti-Catholic bigotry.

Paisley’s DUP opposed any change in the status quo of Northern Ireland, an entity created by the British in 1921. As Ireland struggled for its independence, the British imposed partition in order to give Protestants, largely descended from Scottish and English settlers, an artificial majority.

This “Protestant state for a Protestant people” ruled over Irish Catholics with bigotry and an iron fist.

Unionists’ violent rejection of Irish nationalist demands for equality in the late 1960s inaugurated the three-decade low-level civil war known as “The Troubles” in which more than 3,500 people were killed and 50,000 injured – nearly two percent of the Northern Ireland population.

Paisley’s demagoguery and incitement has been blamed for at least some of the deaths in the conflict.

But after almost a lifetime spent opposing accommodation, in 2007 Paisley led the DUP into a power-sharing government with the leaders of Sinn Féin – the party he had just a few years earlier denounced as a “filthy nest of murderous Irish nationalism.”

Islamophobia

Although Paisley underwent some form of transformation, many in his party have not and the DUP leadership is accused of maintaining ties with violent pro-British extremist groups, called loyalists, that carried out hundreds of sectarian murders of Catholics.

Loyalist paramilitaries endorsed DUP candidates in Thursday’s election.

After Ireland’s 1998 peace deal, the Good Friday Agreement, politicians can no longer utter open expressions of anti-Catholic bigotry of the kind in which Paisley routinely indulged.

But some of that bigotry appears to have morphed into Islamophobia. In 2014, an evangelical pastor attacked Muslims as “satanic.” The DUP’s Peter Robinson, first minister of Northern Ireland at the time, defended the comments, before eventually apologizing amid public outrage.

Friends of Israel

The DUP is a staunchly pro-Israel party – Ian Paisley himself launched the group Northern Ireland Friends of Israel in 2009.

Before this election, members of the DUP joined dozens of candidates from other parties signing a so-called Pledge for Israel.

The party also has its own DUP Friends of Israel lobby group in the Northern Ireland legislature.

Northern Ireland Friends of Israel co-chair Steven Jaffe explained that the party’s strong support for Israel stems in part from religious beliefs.

“Many DUP [members of Parliament] come from a Bible-believing Protestant background,” he told The Times of Israel in 2014. “They have a very sincere and positive attitude to the biblical roots of the Jewish people’s connection to the land.”

These Christian Zionist beliefs are what motivate many extreme supporters of Israel, such as the powerful US lobby group Christians United for Israel.

Since 2015, CUFI also has a UK branch. The group had been due to celebrate in London 50 years of violent Israeli occupation in the West Bank at a “Night to Honor Israel,” before it was canceled amid what it claimed were security threats.

The “Pledge for Israel” was also emailed by CUFI UK to its supporters just before the election.

Settler-colonialism

The identification also stems from the shared history that Northern Ireland was created through imposed partition, for the benefit of a settler-colonial group, against the wishes and rights of the indigenous population, just like Israel’s 1948 creation in Palestine.

The DUP “identify with Israel fighting for its survival, and they feel the international media is unfairly hostile to Israel just as they believe it was hostile to their own cause,” Jaffe explained.

Veteran Irish journalist Patrick Cockburn shed light on this sense of a common cause between Zionists and pro-British unionists in Northern Ireland, during Israel’s December 2008 to January 2009 invasion of the Gaza Strip, which killed more than 1,400 Palestinians.

Israeli society “reminds me more than ever of the unionists in Northern Ireland in the late 1960s,” he observed. Like Israelis, unionists were a community “with a highly developed siege mentality which led them always to see themselves as victims even when they were killing other people. There were no regrets or even knowledge of what they inflicted on others and therefore any retaliation by the other side appeared as unprovoked aggression inspired by unreasoning hate.”

As The Electronic Intifada’s David Cronin has observed, “the racist discourse of the Protestant establishment in the north of Ireland” is “almost identical to what Israeli politicians say about Arabs.”

Israel’s justice minister Ayelet Shaked, for instance, called Palestinian babies “little snakes.” Paisley once claimed that Catholics “multiply like vermin.”

Exporting repression to Palestine

The overall responsibility for the violence lay with the British state, which propped up the bigoted Northern Ireland regime for decades.

But while the peace process ended the most violent manifestations of British repression, that apparatus of state violence has been rebranded for export to Palestine.

Several veterans of the now disbanded Royal Ulster Constabulary have been employed by the European Union to train Palestinian Authority security forces that work closely with Israel’s military occupation.

This is the same Royal Ulster Constabulary that colluded with loyalist militias on a vast scale in the murder of Catholics, and whose members are now honored by DUP leader Arlene Foster as heroes.

The morning after the vote, it is no wonder that many are describing May’s desperate deal with the DUP to stay in power as the “Bad Friday Agreement.”

In a stunning upset, the British electorate moved sharply to the left in Thursday’s general election. The Labour Party, led by Jeremy Corbyn, gained dozens of seats, while Theresa May’s governing Conservatives lost their majority.

When the prime minister called the snap election seven weeks ago, polls suggested she’d win a massive majority.

Even such Labour stalwarts as Guardian pundit Owen Jones predicted that under Corbyn the party would be crushed.

But Corbyn’s ebullient grassroots campaign, built on policies of free university tuition, social justice and more investment in public services, generated enthusiasm that defied virtually all expectations.

May moves right

Diminished and humiliated, May will hang on as prime minister for now. But unable to command a majority in the House of Commons on their own, the Conservatives will rely for support on the 10 lawmakers from the Democratic Unionist Party, a Christian Zionist group in Northern Ireland which pushes extreme pro-Israel policies.

It also staunchly opposes same-sex marriage, a position that might make it more at home in America’s Bible Belt.

This means that while the British electorate embraces more progressive policies, May is likely to hunker down and move even further to the right in defiance of public opinion, including the growing support for Palestinian rights.

Who are the DUP

The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) was founded in the early 1970s by the late Ian Paisley, a Protestant cleric notorious for his anti-Catholic bigotry.

Paisley’s DUP opposed any change in the status quo of Northern Ireland, an entity created by the British in 1921. As Ireland struggled for its independence, the British imposed partition in order to give Protestants, largely descended from Scottish and English settlers, an artificial majority.

This “Protestant state for a Protestant people” ruled over Irish Catholics with bigotry and an iron fist.

Unionists’ violent rejection of Irish nationalist demands for equality in the late 1960s inaugurated the three-decade low-level civil war known as “The Troubles” in which more than 3,500 people were killed and 50,000 injured – nearly two percent of the Northern Ireland population.

Paisley’s demagoguery and incitement has been blamed for at least some of the deaths in the conflict.

But after almost a lifetime spent opposing accommodation, in 2007 Paisley led the DUP into a power-sharing government with the leaders of Sinn Féin – the party he had just a few years earlier denounced as a “filthy nest of murderous Irish nationalism.”

Islamophobia

Although Paisley underwent some form of transformation, many in his party have not and the DUP leadership is accused of maintaining ties with violent pro-British extremist groups, called loyalists, that carried out hundreds of sectarian murders of Catholics.

Loyalist paramilitaries endorsed DUP candidates in Thursday’s election.

After Ireland’s 1998 peace deal, the Good Friday Agreement, politicians can no longer utter open expressions of anti-Catholic bigotry of the kind in which Paisley routinely indulged.

But some of that bigotry appears to have morphed into Islamophobia. In 2014, an evangelical pastor attacked Muslims as “satanic.” The DUP’s Peter Robinson, first minister of Northern Ireland at the time, defended the comments, before eventually apologizing amid public outrage.

Friends of Israel

The DUP is a staunchly pro-Israel party – Ian Paisley himself launched the group Northern Ireland Friends of Israel in 2009.

Before this election, members of the DUP joined dozens of candidates from other parties signing a so-called “Pledge for Israel.”

The party also has its own DUP Friends of Israel lobby group in the Northern Ireland legislature.

Northern Ireland Friends of Israel co-chair Steven Jaffe explained that the party’s strong support for Israel stems in part from religious beliefs.

“Many DUP [members of Parliament] come from a Bible-believing Protestant background,” he told The Times of Israel in 2014. “They have a very sincere and positive attitude to the biblical roots of the Jewish people’s connection to the land.”

These Christian Zionist beliefs are what motivate many extreme supporters of Israel, such as the powerful US lobby group Christians United for Israel.

Since 2015, CUFI also has a UK branch. The group had been due to celebrate in London 50 years of violent Israeli occupation in the West Bank at a “Night to Honor Israel,” before it was canceled amid what it claimed were security threats.

The “Pledge for Israel” was also emailed by CUFI UK to its supporters just before the election.

Settler-colonialism

The identification also stems from the shared history that Northern Ireland was created through imposed partition, for the benefit of a settler-colonial group, against the wishes and rights of the indigenous population, just like Israel’s 1948 creation in Palestine.

The DUP “identify with Israel fighting for its survival, and they feel the international media is unfairly hostile to Israel just as they believe it was hostile to their own cause,” Jaffe explained.

Veteran Irish journalist Patrick Cockburn shed light on this sense of a common cause between Zionists and pro-British unionists in Northern Ireland, during Israel’s December 2008 to January 2009 invasion of the Gaza Strip, which killed more than 1,400 Palestinians.

Israeli society “reminds me more than ever of the unionists in Northern Ireland in the late 1960s,” he observed. Like Israelis, unionists were a community “with a highly developed siege mentality which led them always to see themselves as victims even when they were killing other people. There were no regrets or even knowledge of what they inflicted on others and therefore any retaliation by the other side appeared as unprovoked aggression inspired by unreasoning hate.”

As The Electronic Intifada’s David Cronin has observed, “the racist discourse of the Protestant establishment in the north of Ireland” is “almost identical to what Israeli politicians say about Arabs.”

Israel’s justice minister Ayelet Shaked, for instance, called Palestinian babies “little snakes.” Paisley once claimed that Catholics “multiply like vermin.”

Exporting repression to Palestine

The overall responsibility for the violence lay with the British state, which propped up the bigoted Northern Ireland regime for decades.

But while the peace process ended the most violent manifestations of British repression, that apparatus of state violence has been rebranded for export to Palestine.

Several veterans of the now disbanded Royal Ulster Constabulary have been employed by the European Union to train Palestinian Authority security forces that work closely with Israel’s military occupation.

This is the same Royal Ulster Constabulary that colluded with loyalist militias on a vast scale in the murder of Catholics, and whose members are now honored by DUP leader Arlene Foster as heroes.

The morning after the vote, it is no wonder that many are describing May’s desperate deal with the DUP to stay in power as the “Bad Friday Agreement.”

Posted by Tony Greenstein at 02:23

Posted in UK0 Comments

Corbyn’s victory is greater than the keys to Number 10

NOVANEWS
Image result for Corbyn CARTOON
By Nasim Ahmed | MEMO

Britain underwent the most important general election of this century. For the second time in a row, Conservative leaders scored the most spectacular own goal ever to be seen. Twice within the period of two years, British prime ministers gambled with the lives of the British people and lost; on both occasions Conservative leaders put their self-interest above the national interest and the electorates punished them for it.

It has now become resoundingly clear that the electorate does not like being taken for granted. Former Prime Minister David Cameron and current Prime Minster Therese May have learnt this the hard way. Cameron paid the highest political price in gambling to hold an EU referendum for no reason other than to please his own backbenchers. May too will most likely pay the same price for her humiliating defeat in calling a snap general election for no reason other than to inflict a crushing defeat on the Labour party.

But it is the Conservatives that have suffered a great defeat, even though they have won the election and are still in power. Hubris and opportunism assured their humiliation. They imagined they would have a landslide victory and increase their control of the Commons. With more Conservative MPs May was confident – to the point of carelessness – in being able to ease through a hard Brexit. She underestimated the opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn. Believing him to be weak and unpopular, a caricature from bygone years, she was certain of attaining absolute power.

That we are now talking about the triumph of Corbyn over May is one of the more remarkable stories in British politics. Rarely has another leader had to take on so many enemies. He wrestled against the Tory war machine while fending off foes within his own party. The vast majority despised everything he represented culminating in172 Labour MPs voting against him in a no confidence motion. Labour MPs at one point were talking about going through an ongoing cycle of leadership contests until they forced him out. With such a desire to sabotage his campaign it would be naïve to assume that some Labour MPs were not secretly collaborating with the Tory party to see his downfall.

While the major parties in Westminster were gunning for him, the mainstream media stooped to levels unseen in British politics. For long periods, the entire mainstream media undermined him, mocked him, ridiculed him and constructed a narrative that would have totally damaged any other candidate. The traditional so called left wing media were nowhere to be seen, in fact they cheered for his public execution. Even his so called friends defected saying “I’d find it hard to vote for Corbyn”.

The inability of the Labour MP’s and the mainstream media to see what was happening was further proof that the entire establishment was really out of touch. They lived in their own little bubble inside an enormous echo chamber, thoroughly convinced of the lies and propaganda they propagated.

Faced against such challenges the achievement of Jeremy Corbyn in the last two years has been nothing short of remarkable. What this has shown more than anything else is the growing appetite for social justice; even socialism shall we say. He has turned Labour into a socialist party with the largest membership in Europe. Public ownership, and civic and community pride have all been returned to the political agenda. Corbyn has also succeeded where many before him have failed; to empower large sections of the population that were living in self-imposed political alienation. There’s a younger generation who have spoken for the first time and they have turned their back on austerity and having to settle for the crumbs left behind from the Chancellor’s budget.

The triumph of Corbyn is likely to see a push back against decades of unhindered neo-liberal economic policy which has been responsible for unprecedented levels of inequality not just here in the UK but also around the globe. This victory, as many believe, is substantial.

Corbyn has not won the election but his triumph has been to bring back into public ownership, not-for-profit utility companies, and investment in the health service, the police and public services back on the agenda. Privatisation, free market fundamentalism, and bankers’ greed at everyone else’s expense is now blown out of the water.

The Labour leader achieved wide popularity because of his ethical foreign policy. His years in the back benches have been spent defending human rights across the world and fighting against imperialism and political domination of all kind. In his manifesto he promised to block the sale of weapons to repressive regimes and pushed for a more ethical exports policy. The rights of the Palestinian people are very close to his heart. It was, telling that despite the mudslinging against him over his track record in the Middle East he has come through unscathed if not stronger.

No coming election can ignore the issues raised by Corbyn over the past few years. He may not have won the election but the victory he has achieved is more than just the keys to number ten. Equality, social justice and ethical foreign policy are back on the agenda and the mainstream media can go on mulling over them by eating some humble pie.

Posted in UK0 Comments

“For the Many, Not the Few:” Labour Party Gains in Britain Highlight Political Viability of Socialism

NOVANEWS

British Prime Minister Theresa May recently called for snap elections to take place on June 8th an in effort to win a more powerful mandate for her Conservative Party ahead of Brexit negotiations.

However, May’s plan backfired as the Conservatives lost their majority of seats in the vote. Now no party holds an outright majority in Parliament.

While the Conservative Party lost seats, the Labour Party led by socialist Jeremy Corbyn won an additional 24 percent of seats and its largest share of votes since 2005.

These gains by the Labour Party underscore the political viability of a socialist platform during a period of right-wing and neoliberal resurgence.

The results of the election were “incredible” for the Labour Party, Corbyn told the BBC after the vote.

“The party that has lost in this election is the Conservative Party,” he said. “The arguments the Conservative Party put forward in this election have lost. I think we need a change.”

He affirmed that Labour did not lose. “We gained seats in every region of the country, we won three million more votes on a much higher turnout. I think that is a pretty good result.”

The election results position Labour as a formidable opposition party and point toward the popularity of their anti-austerity and socialist platform, spearheaded by Corbyn.

“What’s happened is people have said they’ve had quite enough of austerity politics,” Corbyn said in a speech after the vote, “they’ve had quite enough of cuts to public expenditure, under-funding our health service, under-funding our schools and our education service, and not giving our young people the chance they deserve in our society.”

Corbyn was first elected as a Member of Parliament in 1983 in Islington, a leftist area of London. He is a long-time union leader and peace and human rights activist who railed against his party’s support for the Iraq War under Tony Blair.

In the recent election, many voters were drawn to the Labour Party’s socialist platform, outlined in its new manifesto, titled “For the Many, Not the Few.”

The manifesto is a radical document that directly takes on the politics of austerity, privatization, and neoliberalism.

It calls for broad access to education, universal healthcare coverage, nationalization of critical utilities, free college tuition, economic security for workers, massive expansion in public housing, and major taxation efforts to redistribute wealth from corporations and the richest 5% of the population to working people.

The party’s plans would reverse welfare cuts, raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, prohibit unpaid internships, empower unions’ ability to organize, provide free pre-school childcare and free lunches to all primary school students, and lower the voting age to 16.

“Let’s build a Britain that works for the many, not the few,” Corbyn wrote in the manifesto. “We will measure our economic success not by the number of billionaires, but by the ability of our people to live richer lives.”

The manifesto called for an overhaul of British foreign policy.

“We will put conflict resolution and human rights at the heart of foreign policy,” the document states, “commit to working through the UN, end support for unilateral aggressive wars of intervention and back effective action to alleviate the refugee crisis.”

In the wake of the recent Manchester terrorist attacks, Corbyn boldly made the connections between terrorist violence in Britain and the country’s foreign policy.

“We will also change what we do abroad,” he said, speaking of his party’s new platforms. “Many experts, including professionals in our intelligence and security services have pointed to the connections between wars our government has supported or fought in other countries, such as Libya, and terrorism here at home.”

He promised to ensure “our foreign policy reduces rather than increases the threat to this country.”

The rise of Corbyn and the success of the Labour Party has been watched with excitement by leftists around the world.

In 2015, Senator Bernie Sanders applauded the election of Corbyn as the head of the Labour Party.

“At a time of mass income and wealth inequality throughout the world, I am delighted to see that the British Labour party has elected Jeremy Corbyn as its new leader,” Sanders said. “We need leadership in every country in the world which tells the billionaire class that they cannot have it all.”

Posted in UK0 Comments

Sometimes Our Nightmares Don’t Come True: the Tories Lose Their Majority

NOVANEWS

Photo by Afshin Darian | CC BY 2.0

When Theresa May called a snap election a few weeks ago, she enjoyed a 20-point lead in the opinion polls. Translated into votes, this lead would create a huge Tory margin of victory of around 100 seats in parliament.  The Tory working majority after winning the 2015 election was 12 seats.

At the same time, Labour’s prospects looked dire.  The unceasing sprays of venom directed at him by the billionaire tax-dodgers who own the right-wing media, and by the supposedly neutral BBC and the supposedly “liberal” Guardian, were compounded by the Blairite backstabbers in his own party, who made desperate attempts to unseat him as party leader.  Corbyn has long said that Blair should stand trial at The Hague for war crimes, so it is just as well that Labour did not beat the Tories, even if it prevented them from having an absolute majority.

Blair would be adding experts in the laws of war to his legal team had Corbyn prevailed.

The factors which caused May to lose her majority just before Brexit negotiations are due to begin on June 19 (apart from the gamble she took in calling an election well before the Conservative term in office expired in 2020), will become clearer in time, but already the contrasts between the two main parties responsible for the outcome of the 2017 election are discernible in the very different party campaigns and the leaders who fought them.

The Tory campaign was pathetically inept.  Confident of victory and with their base seemingly secure, the Tories went after “patriotic” Labour voters (“patriotic” taken by the Tories to mean “wanting a hard Brexit”). The Tories were heedless of the fact that many Labour voters in the UK’s rustbelt were the prime victims of the austerity policy implemented by the Tories since 2010, and simply could not countenance another 5 years of the Tory boot on their collective necks, even if they were inclined towards Brexit.

The Tories in their carelessness and indifference had simply lost count of the victims of austerity–  not just those who are unemployed and underemployed, but also the working poor, as well as the disabled and homeless, those in increasingly unaffordable rented accommodation, those having to rely on the burgeoning number of food banks, students crippled by debt, poor children who would lose free school lunches, nurses whose wages have been stagnant since 2010, the police and firefighters who have lost their jobs in the tens of thousands since 2010, the growing number of homeless veterans, even the civil servants who have seen their numbers cut by one-third (even as they are being asked to deal with the repercussions of Brexit, the UK’s greatest postwar administrative challenge), and so on.

All this was taking place while the National Health Service and education were undergoing a stealth privatization (even the national blood transfusion service was flogged-off to Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital), local councils were having their budgets slashed, funds for emergency disaster relief were drained, legal assistance for those unable to afford it was cut to the bone, and so forth.

These were the people very much at the heart of Ken Loach’s award-winning film I, Daniel Blake.

At the same time, the stock-portfolio class was benefitting from tax cuts, as well as a “light-touch regulation” of the tax-dodging wheezes used by many of this class, and an elimination of taxes on their mansions and inheritances.

“Austerity” is a shameless hoax attempting to magic the banking-induced crisis of 2007-2009 into a crisis of the welfare system.

The Tories said there were no “magic money trees” when it came to dealing with the deficit, though Dodgy Dave Cameron and his finance minister George Osborne deliberately chose policies that increased it (e.g. by reducing taxes on the rich).  The deficit has risen steadily since 2010.

The Tories and their banker pals were determined to make ordinary UK citizens pay for the bankers’ mistakes by sacrificing their wages and pensions, health care, education, prospects of decent employment, and adequate social services.

In the end, the victims of austerity resorted to May’s robotic slogan “enough is enough”, and shoved it into her face.  May never seemed able to move beyond such vapid soundbites, “Brexit means Brexit” was another, and “strong and stable” repeated ad nauseam became an object of fun for the television comedians.

Labour’s campaign pitch was simple but effective– this is what the Tories have been doing to anyone who is not wealthy, and we undertake to reverse what they have done.

The party manifestos reflected this state of affairs—while the Labour manifesto pledged to undo what the Tories had done, the Tory manifesto only promised more of the same, though this time with “compassion”, accompanied by a plethora of lies.

Oh, and the Tories were the only party which could deliver on Brexit.

Sufficient numbers of the electorate saw through the Tory ruse.  May and her handlers were stealing the clothes of the far-right pro-Brexit UKIP, which had the effect of wiping-out UKIP in this election, but also turning-off voters repelled by the idea of having to vote for what was in effect two UKIPs– the official UKIP and May’s “UKIP lite”.  Judging by the results, many voters called a plague on both these houses.

The discrepant campaigns were reflected in the glaringly different performances of May and Corbyn in the hustings.

May was known to be a “details” person, able to master reports and briefings, but whose preference was for the cabinet room and not the rough and tumble of the campaign trail.

Her exposure to the public was a disaster for the Tories and May herself.  Her handlers made the crucial mistake of thinking that a 20-point Tory lead when she called the election could somehow be conjured into a manifestation of her popularity with the electorate.  It took a few days of campaigning to shred this notion.

May is unable to think on her feet, so she refused to take part in televised debates with the other party leaders.  A substitute was sent in her place, which made May’s absence even more obvious.

Her one-on-one TV interviews with Andrew Marr and Andrew Neil were car crashes, so that was the end of that.

Her public walkabouts were just as disastrous.  Unable to deal with jeers when she visited a social housing estate, and flummoxed by a distressed person with learning disabilities who asked May why her benefits had been cut by the Tories, May’s “appearances” were soon limited to carefully staged settings with bused-in Tory activists.

In the meantime, Corbyn was relishing the public campaign.  UK electoral law mandates equal television coverage for the main parties, so he could engage with voters who were now seeing a Corbyn not filtered by the rancid portrayals pumped out by the right-wing media.

Corbyn made a few gaffes, but his ease when meeting voters, and engaging with them, was evident.  Moreover, he was very much on message— the Tories couldn’t campaign on their cruel and irresponsible record of austerity (in fact they had to avoid mentioning it), but Jeremy could!

In a way, the media depiction of Corbyn as a cultish figure of the “looney left”, allegedly out of touch with the commonsensical electorate, did him a favour.  It overlooked his 40 years of campaigning experience as a politician, mostly on behalf of causes not obviously popular, which gave him a resiliency, and an adaptability to situations, which May clearly lacked.

Corbyn (in the main) kept his principles intact and adapted to the campaign’s circumstances, while May adapted her principles to the campaign while being unable to deal with its circumstances.

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves– Labour lost this election, and Corbyn and his supporters conducted, at best, a successful holding operation.  They arrested Labour’s slide into oblivion by reverting to social democracy after the “Thatcherism lite” of Blair and his successors, but deeper and more lasting transformations are still to be awaited.

The Tories, to put it mildly, are in a mess.  May’s government survives courtesy of the Ulster Unionists, an even nastier lot than the avowedly nasty Tories.  The Unionists are against abortion and gay marriage, as well as providing a home for climate-change deniers.  Their leader, Arlene Foster, is implicated in a corruption scandal.  Any “understanding” with them is bound to be brittle.

Meanwhile, the knives are out for May within her own party.  Widely derided for her “own goal” performance in this election, she can hardly afford to take a false step from now on.

The election was meant to strengthen May’s hand in Brexit negotiations, but the opposite has happened– she will now go to Brussels absolutely bereft of bargaining chips when she deals with the vulpine Eurocrats.  They took Tsipras and Varoufakis to the cleaners when Greece wanted to renegotiate the terms of its eurozone membership, and May can expect a repeat performance.

There is a two-year timeframe for the completion of Brexit negotiations, and it may be safe to assume May won’t be prime minister by the time these are completed.

Posted in UK0 Comments

In the Wake of Britain’s Elections: Yet Again Voters Dismissed as May Submits to Tory Grandees

The politicians are leading Britain into a void. Rapidly declining in influence in both Europe and America, having made enemies of Russia and distrusted by everyone east of the Ukraine and south of Tunisia, Britain is now the global laughing stock, the butt of jokes and political cartoonists the world over.

Our world and the world around is a mess due to the personal ambitions of so-called ‘world leaders.’ We only have to look at the self defeating prophesy of our own, whose track record of success is woeful at best, and frankly, at any other time in history, would have been treated as not much less than treasonous.

Robert Harris in the Sunday Times writes:

“how did a stable parliamentary democracy, granted a unique set of favourable opt-outs with the largest trading bloc in the world, including on the single currency and travel, throw it all up in the air on the basis of 52-48 yes/no vote in a referendum – a margin not normally wide enough to change the constitution of the average golf club”.

Cameron told us that the ‘big society’ would solve our ‘Broken Britain’. The idea proposed the integration of the free market with a theory of social solidarity based on hierarchy and voluntarism.

Cameron said he was going to reform the EU.

Both were vacuous to an electorate who saw through his shallow deception.

Osborne told us of his economic miracle – driven by austerity – as if the two don’t cancel themselves out, which is exactly what happened.

Mind you, Trump was going to drain the swamp and clean up the Wall Street casino – they now own him.

It’s telling isn’t it that the three biggest democratic votes in the history of the United Kingdom are:

No.1 2016 – LEAVE the European Union with 17.4 million votes
No.2 ‘1975 – YES” to remaining in the EEC with 17.3 million votes
No.3 2016 – ‘REMAIN’ a member of the European Union with 16.1 million votes.

All three have massively out-gunned votes for a single politician including Attlee, Churchill, Thatcher and Blair. All three of these momentous events were defined by the lies of government officials.

Theresa May’s snap election was designed to increase her authority and kill the opposition, especially Jeremy Corbyn and his vision of the rise of traditional socialism. Instead there are now 262 Labour MP’s rather than the 170 or so widely touted by the mainstream broadcast media along with a howling mainstream press, who are now eating their deceitful and misleading words in front of a defiant citizenry. As if to enrage them further, May jumps into bed with a bunch of anti choice, religious bigots and climate change deniers who have called for the return of the death penalty – a party of extremists living in the olde world.

Strong and stable is now weak and wobbly and feckless too.

Europe’s Euractiv news cartoon entitled “Britain’s top minds are on the case” (Source: TruePublica)

Theresa May got more votes in this election than David Cameron did in both 2010 and 2015. She won with 13.7 million followers, a full 2.5 million more than Cameron at his best – and yet she lost.

Having won, but lost, Theresa then tears up her manifesto, making it obsolete within two days, abandoning nearly 14 million voters who thought her manifesto would be their country’s salvation, whilst she acquiesces to the Tory grandees demands. These are the very same establishment dinosaurs who are systematically destroying Britain with their infantile world view of old empire.

According to the newspapers today, May has axed key manifesto pledges as she pays the price for Cabinet support before facing a showdown with backbenchers. But they are not the electorate are they?

This is so typical of Britain’s democracy today. It’s all about politics, nothing to do with the voters you see.

Top politician’s inside the corridors of power used to wait at least a few years until they exacted revenge on former cabinet colleague enemies. They became columnists or wrote a memoir. George Osborne went straight for May’s jugular just weeks after leaving his post calling her a ‘dead woman walking.’ Osborne can’t see he is supposed to have the best interests of the country at heart. Which he doesn’t – and never did.

‘It’s just how long she’s going to remain on death row. We could easily get to the middle of next week and it all collapses for her’ – clearly aiming for gloat Bafta of the decade.

We see something from history coming to bite us with something in common with King John back in 1215AD. A lecherous traitor, a depraved tyrant and a hopeless leader in war – it’s no wonder his subjects rose up and forced Magna Carta on him.

Theresa May, an authoritarian but hopeless tactician, gambled our future, like her predecessor did, for greater personal glory – and lost.  If Thatcher’s raison d’être was implementing extreme neoliberal capitalism with the consequent aim of  destroying socialism, Mays achievement was resurrecting socialism and is destroying capitalism because her subjects rose up and forced Jeremy Corbyn on us.

It’s simple, the country cannot afford Corbyn’s socialism, but it clearly cannot afford Thatcher’s capitalism either – both are failed systems but the vacuum has not been filled. That vacuum happens to be the centre.

Let there be no illusion here. Britain’s fortunes are being squandered after this extraordinary general election outcome. The supreme political strategists and tactician’s can’t even work out the most basic outcomes of their own domestic electorate, let alone negotiate with the three biggest economic powers humanity has ever seen – America, China and The European Union. Britain is now considered a spent force – the last residues of the empire finally dimming with the incoherent murmurings of the establishment – who are despised by a people so ruthlessly exploited in the past four decades due to the ideology of neoliberalism that created a society so unequal as to equal that of the times of Dickens.

Posted in UK0 Comments

UK Prime Minister Theresa May’s pact with the devil

NOVANEWS
Theresa May and Arlene Foster

By Stuart Littlewood

Former Conservative Chancellor George Osborne, now editor of the London Evening Standard, calls Theresa May “dead woman walking”. Another former minister, Anna Soubry, says: “She is in a desperate position. It is untenable…”, while, according to former Education Secretary Nicky Morgan, she cannot lead us into another election and a leadership challenge is possible during the summer.

While stunned Conservatives try to recover their composure, the rest of us can amuse ourselves speculating on whether it’ll be messed-up May or her nemesis, the charismatic lefty Jeremy Corbyn, who’ll be leading the UK to the sunny uplands of post-Brexit opportunity in three months’ time.

Dodgy friends

For now, though, May seems to have soothed her furious Conservative backbenchers enough to gain breathing space. She told those who survived her reckless general election performance: “I got us into this mess, and I’m going to get us out.”

How?

With the help of some new-found but very dodgy friends.

When you consider that the DUP are a deeply unpleasant gang of Protestant fundamentalists supported by the bothersome Orange Order and with links to paramilitary groups, you can be sure that this is a pact with the devil

A deal apparently struck between May and the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party in Northern Ireland) has stoked widespread anger. With their 10 seats they might prop her up for the time being. But this will not be a formal coalition like the one agreed between David Cameron and the Liberal Democrats after the 2010 election. Instead, May has in mind a “confidence and supply” arrangement in which the DUP guarantees to protect her from a “no confidence” vote and to back her budget, but anything else will have to be thrashed out on a case by case basis.

What we’re not told is the DUP’s price for coming to her rescue. When you consider that the DUP are a deeply unpleasant gang of Protestant fundamentalists supported by the bothersome Orange Order and with links to paramilitary groups, you can be sure that this is a pact with the devil. Their views on climate change and LGBT are unpalatable and they vehemently oppose abortion (in Northern Ireland it is still an offence for women to procure a termination, the penalty being life imprisonment). They also don’t want the sort of “hard” border with the Irish Republic that a “hard” Brexit would bring.

As if that wasn’t bad news enough, they oppose power-sharing with Irish nationalists. May’s willingness to romp with them is therefore seen as a breach of the Good Friday accord which requires the UK government to show rigorous impartiality towards the different political factions in Northern Ireland. Favours to the DUP would be viewed as a grave threat to the hard-won peace.

So, May’s selfish ambition could have fatal consequences. In any case, could a flimsy “confidence and supply” deal ever provide the stability and certainty the UK needs for its Brexit negotiations and re-emergence into the wider world?

Foreign affairs nightmare

We saw earlier May’s poor judgement when as Home Secretary she presided over soaring immigration and cuts to police and other agencies which undermined national security. We can now add her lack of common sense in anything to do with foreign affairs.

The media endlessly pump pout images of May and her husband entering and leaving their local church. She’s the daughter of an Anglican priest after all. But do her high principles extend to concern for her Christian brothers and sisters in the Holy Land, abused and oppressed for decades by the illegal Israeli occupation? Hell no, she praises Israel for being “a thriving democracy, a beacon of tolerance” when it clearly is neither. Then there’s her truly offensive belief that we share “common values” with Israel, which was recently branded an apartheid state by the UN.

And who hurriedly declared the Shai Masot affair “closed” after Masot, employed by the Israeli embassy and probably a Mossad asset, plotted with gullible British MPs and political hangers-on to “take down” senior government figures?

She even attacked the successful BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions] campaign, calling it unacceptable and warning that her government would “have no truck with those who subscribe to it”. Two hundred legal scholars and practising lawyers from 15 European countries promptly put her in her place by pointing out that BDS is a lawful exercise of freedom of expression and outlawing it undermines a basic human right protected by international convention. Furthermore, BDS is civil society’s response to the international community’s irresponsible failure to act. Her efforts to repress it amounted to support for Israel’s violations of international law and a failure to honour the solemn pledge by states to “strictly respect the aims and principles of the Charter of the United Nations”.

In a speech to Conservative Friends of Israel she said the British government will be marking the centenary of the Balfour Declaration later this year “with pride”. The declaration was the infamous letter by the British foreign secretary to Lord Rothschild in 1917 that betrayed the Arabs and started a running sore in the Middle East lasting a hundred years. Britain’s failure to make amends continues to endanger the whole region and cause grief for millions. By coincidence, this year also marks 50 years of brutal Israeli occupation of Palestine. To add insult to injury, May has invited Israel’s chief criminal, Binyamin Netanyahu, to join her government in whooping it up at the Balfour celebrations.

Eager to fuel old hostilities, Theresa May accuses Iran of working with Hezbollah, interfering in Iraq, sending fighters to Syria to help Assad, and supporting the Houthis in the conflict in Yemen. At the same time Britain expects to meddle in the Middle East anytime it pleases and with whoever it wants. And despite growing opposition at home, the British government recently concluded another huge arms deal with the Saudis which, according to May, is for the sake of long-term security in the Gulf. She argues that the same extremists who plot terror in the Gulf states are also targeting the streets of Europe: “Gulf security is our security.”

And who can forget how she left the British public cringing in embarrassment after inviting Trump on a state visit to the UK when he’d been in office only five minutes and clearly ought to have been on probation? Let’s not even mention the photo of the pair holding hands.

So what price should we pay – if any – to the DUP for keeping Theresa May in her job?

As for Brexit, am I alone in wondering why we need to get bogged down for two years negotiating our freedom? What is wrong with stating our terms (which should be as near as dammit the same as existing arrangements and safeguards, minus the free movement of people) to Europe’s principal industrial, commercial, financial, research and security interests, and leaving them to argue with their bureaucrats? I doubt if VW, Audi, Mercedes, Bosch, Renault, Fiat, AEG, Peugeot-Citroen and so on wish to say goodbye to lucrative business or see the UK importing all it needs from the Far East and America.

Posted in UK0 Comments

Nostalgia and British Politics

NOVANEWS

Labour is gaining power by marketing nostalgia

So, seventy-five per cent of Brits realize that it is those immoral interventionist wars in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Libya that have contributed to the terror that now haunts their country.

But ‘interventionist wars’ is just a politically correct term for Israeli-driven global conflicts promoted by the worldwide Zionist lobby: AIPAC in the USA, CRIF in France and the LFI/CFI in Britain. So the next question is unavoidable. How many of these Brits, who obviously know the truth about Britain’s ‘interventionist wars’, also grasp who it is who triggers these genocidal conflicts?

Today’s British election results provides us with a clear answer.

Theresa May has been made a fool by the British voter while Jeremy Corbyn, who was subject to constant smearing by the same lobby that pushed us into Iraq, Libya, Syria and even Iran, came out as the big winner.

The conclusion is inevitable: the more the Jewish and Zionist  institutions (BOD, JC, Jewish Labour Movement, LFI etc.)  rubbished Corbyn, the more the Brits loved him. The more the Daily Telegraph pointed at Corbyn’s ties with so-called ‘Holocaust deniers’ the more the Brits saw him as a genuine human being and an entirely suitable Prime Ministerial candidate.

This should not surprise us. Exactly the same dynamic led to the election of Donald Trump in the USA last November. The more the Jewish institutions and media castigated Trump as an ‘anti-Semite,’ the more Americans saw him as a their liberator.

The truth of the matter is that Trump is far from being an anti-semite. On the contrary, he is, as some Jewish journalists pointed out, probably the ‘first Jewish president.’ The same applies to Corbyn. He is certainly no ‘racist’ nor an ‘anti-semite.’ No, his crime is all-too-obvious: He thinks  Jews are ordinary, people like all other people. He refuses to buy into the ‘chosen people’ mantra.

I have been anticipating Corbyn’s imminent success for more than two weeks now, but how did I know? Simple, the Jewish Chronicle and the Guardian of Judea changed their tone. They began to accept the possibility that Corbyn may well take up residence in 10 Downing Street for a while.  Pretty much, out of the blue, somehow, they decided to make friends.

Corbyn performed very well in this election. But he could have won it just by pointing at the lobby and the people behind the institutional smear campaign against him. He could have done what Trump did and performed what the Jewish press refer to asdog whistling.

He could have chastised the Israeli Sayanim within his party – after all, the evidence was fully documented.  He could  have taken a stand and stood for his party comrades who were victims of the Jewish Labour purge. But he didn’t. Corbyn isn’t Trump.  Being an overwhelmingly nice person, he turned the other cheek – something I myself find frustrating, probably due to my own Jerusalemite origin.

In my new book Being in Time – a Post Political Manifesto I point out that for working people, utopia is but nostalgia. It was Trump’s promise to ‘make America great again’ that secured his election.  Similarly, the surge in popularity of Jeremy Corbyn, an old-style Lefty who speaks about a unity that goes beyond sectarianism and identity politics is due to the nostalgic impact of his message, that yes, once upon a time, we were united by the Left.

Is it really a coincidence that, in Britain, it is Labour that is gaining power by marketing nostalgia while Theresa ‘conservative’ May is punished for her attempt to frog-march Britain ‘forward’ into the brutal and merciless hands of murky City mammonites and New World Order merchants?

Posted in UK0 Comments

False flags backfire in Britain – voters repudiate lying establishment

NOVANEWS

Will Corbyn gain power in UK and become an even more serious thorn in Establishment’s side?

Watch False Flag Weekly News above – click HERE for story links

By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

Have false flags been so thoroughly exposed that they no longer work? That is the lesson of yesterday’s British elections, which delivered a stinging rebuke to incumbent PM Theresa May, and a high-octane boost to 9/11-truth-supporting anti-Zionist challenger Jeremy Corbyn.

For the second year in a row, Britain held critically-important elections in June. For the second year in a row, those elections were preceded by one or more false flags designed to terrorize voters and stampede them into the Establishment camp. And for the second year in a row, the voters rebelled.

Last year it was Brexit, preceded by the Jo Cox false flag “murder by a crazy pro-Brexit fanatic.” This year it was general elections, preceded by a series of false flags attributed to “ISIS-inspired Muslim fanatics.”

The question of whether last year’s  Jo Cox murder was a false flag was hotly debated before the Brexit vote, with the right wing (generally more pro-Brexit) voters leaning in favor of that thesis. This year’s Manchester and London attacks also inspired heated debate across Britain concerning the false flag thesis, with left-wing Corbyn supporters leaning toward the false flag interpretation.

So the whole British political spectrum, from left to right, now features so many people who are cognizant of the Elite’s bloody manipulative spectacles that the bad guys can’t seem to get away with it any longer. For the second year in a row, the false-flagging establishment lost.

My VT colleague Ian Greenhalgh notes:

We have only four degrees of separation between Israel and the London attackers

  1. IDC Herliza (Mossad training centre)
  2. ICSR in London (main centre for ‘expertise’ on combatting Islamic terrorism, IDC is one of four financiers of the ICSR)
  3. Ahmad Musa Jibril (Muslim hate preacher in Dearborn, MI, whose entire mythos/legend is based on ICSR reports)
  4. London attackers were ‘radicalised’ by Jibril via his online preachings bingo, there, in a nutshell is the Israeli ‘Islamic Terror’ operation from top to bottom

In this week’s False Flag Weekly News (scroll all the way up to watch) we covered a slew of stories analyzing the British “false flag fail” including:

Is False Flag Weekly News becoming a serious thorn in the side of the Establishment? I would like to think so. Maybe that’s why we’re getting so much pushback:

  • Prof. Hall suspended from his university
  • My GoFundMe database nuked
  • Censored at the Left Forum

And so on…

Will Jeremy Corbyn eventually gain power in the UK and become an even more serious thorn in the Establishment’s side? I hope so, and am praying for his success…and his safety.

Posted in UK0 Comments

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING

June 2017
M T W T F S S
« May    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930