Wednesday, 19 April 2017

June 8, 2017 - UK General Election

UK General Election - June 8, 2017

Every election is a box of surprises and this election couldn't happen at a more dramatic time in the political life of the United Kingdom.

This is an election that will be played at different levels and undoubtedly the outcome could be life changing for the mass media including the BBC and Sky and also for the printed media who have absolutely against the idea of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union. But it also going to have a dramatic effect in the political balance in the country as a whole and in each of the component parts of the United Kingdom.

There are some fundamental questions. Will Caroline Lucas manage to survive a General Election? The only Member of Parliament representing Brighton could be on the way out. What could happen to the SNP majority in Scotland? Will local issues play a crucial role meaning the loss of seats in the House of Commons. Will they repeat the feat of 2015 when they got 56 out of 59 seats? Will SNP be able to keep its momentum in Scotland? What will happen in Northern Ireland where at the moment there is local government?

In England, a divided Labour Party that has effectively several leaders (the Official Leader - Jeremy Corbyn) and several unofficial leaders and plotters wishing to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn).

The Liberal Democrats hope that disaffected Labour voters will turn out to support them and allow them to overcome the dismal results of 2015 that left them with less than 10 Members of Parliament.

UKIP needs to find its way. The Conservative Party de-facto represents many of the views of UKIP and in fact called for the implementation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. What can UKIP offer that is not already on offer by the Conservative Party?

The vote today in the House of Commons was remarkable in many ways. It was remarkable because of an overwhelming number of MPs that supported the government's call for a General Election. It was also remarkable because 13 Labour MPs voted against but it must be said that tens of MPs abstained.

Soon after, there was a series of announcements of present Members of Parliament that said that they would not be standing for re-election and it would be fair to say that they don't want to stand because they feel that they have no chance of being re-elected and they want to avoid the embarrassment of not being re-elected.

In any case, this promises to be a very interesting time in the political life of the United Kingdom. 



Monday, 17 April 2017

The Independent classifies Britain First as an example of British voters going against foreign sounding names

I almost fell off my chair with laughter when I saw an article published by The Independent regarding peoples' rejection of candidates with foreign names.

The picture was taken during a recent rally in Central London and clearly shows Britain First's banners and its leader Paul Golding.

I contacted the news desk of The Independent to ask them about their choice of graphics to illustrate the said article posted on The Independent's main website.

Are we saying that British voters choose candidates who have English sounding names because of some hidden xenophobic connotations? Or do they choose candidates who have English sounding names because they do want to vote for people that they see as their own people?

Whatever was the general idea of using a picture of a Britain First rally to head and article about people's electoral preferences, I can say that the choice of picture is a bit of a joke.

Thursday, 13 April 2017

Britain First website and twitter accounts hacked by undesirables

Britain First's website and twitter accounts hacked by undesirables. The matter is being investigated by Police.

The hackers posted threats to human life. I hope that they are caught and punished. What the said hackers couldn't possibly foresee is that their attacks can only increase support for movements like Britain First.


Friday, 7 April 2017

Unwarranted attacks against countries we are not at war with are acts of war

On September 1st, 1939, Adolf Hitler ordered the invasion of Poland. Two days later, Britain and France declared war against Germany.

On December 7, 1942, Japan attacked Pearl Harbour and US was at war with Japan.

Now lets look at the rationale. The United States of America has been invading and attacking countries that are not at war with the United States of America and, morever, countries like the United Kingdom have supported such attacks and invasions. We cannot possibly criticise others when we are doing exactly the same. Bombing the Syrian Army is an act of war very much like the invasion of Poland and the attack against Pearl Harbour were acts of war.

Now, Syria has the upper hand and should the Russian Federation start a Nuclear War in retaliation such retaliation will be totally justified. We cannot go on supporting or justifying acts of war like the invasion of Iraq or Libya.

The Organisation of the United Nations created in 1945, by the end of World War Two, was supposed to be the channel to deal with crisis after crisis but the Organisation of the United Nations has not been fit for purpose.

Unilateral actions like the bombing of Syrian military bases are acts of war. Whatever happens in Syria, no country has the right to attack Syria merely because somebody doesn't like what is happening in Syria.

Syria is a sovereign country. Syria is suffering from a civil war aggravated by the actions of Islamic Extremists that have spread across Asia Minor and the Middle East. When the United States via unilateral action destroyed the Iraqi government and generated a state of lawlessness in Iraq, the United States promoted the rise of Islamic Extremists that could act at will since both the Iraqi Army and the Iraqi Police that kept extremists at bay were no longer around.

It is lamentable that the governments of two supposed democratic countries can possibly engage or justify or promote the kind of attack perpetrated by the United States.

Such action was wrong and will be followed by repercussions. When we talk about Islamic State and about the actions that there carrying out not just in the Middle East and Asia Minor but also in Africa, Europe and the USA, undoubtedly their source of inspiration is not the Quran but US Foreign Policy.