Rupert Murdoch’s Hitmen - a book by Bobby Cummines OBE, Ian Cutler and Jack Cox

Rupert Murdoch's Hitmen

How the Media, Police, Politicians and Big Business
conspire to snare and enslave us
in their web of lies.

a book by Bobby Cummines OBE, Ian Cutler & Jack Cox

(c) 2016 Bobby Cummines OBE, Ian Cutler & Jack Cox

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted or reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, mechanical, electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except for brief extracts for the purpose of review, without prior permission in writing from the authurs. Each authur takes full personal (not joint) resposibility for the truth of what they have written in this book.

Introduction by Jack Cox

Chapter One - Its a Dirty Old World Out There by Bobby Cummines OBE

Chapter Two - Don't Believe Everything You Read In The Papers by Ian Cutler

Chapter Three - United We Stand by Jack Cox

Chapter Four - The Leveson Enquiry and The Demise of the News of the World by Ian Cutler

Chapter Five - Who Are The Real Gangsters? by Bobby Cummines OBE

Chapter Six - What's Really Happening in the Middle East? by Jack Cox

Chapter Seven - Rupert Murdoch's Hitmen by Ian Cutler

Chapter Eight - It Ain't Necessarily So by Jack Cox

Chapter Nine - Beliefs and Resposibility by Jack Cox

by Jack Cox
"I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only make them think" - Socrates

POST-TRUTH is the latest new term to be added to the Oxford English Dictionary. It was named 2016 Word of the Year. It refers to the way that emotive arguments often carry more weight than facts in media coverage, elections and debates. The term came to prominence during the EU referendum in the UK and the 2016 presidential election in the USA.

In both the UK and USA campaigns, both sides were accused of spreading disinformation and lies. All the candidates were accused of telling lies and half truths and so were the news sources that supported them.

Another recent example of POST-TRUTH or POST-FACT was when Labour MP and former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone claimed that Hitler supported Zionism because the Nazi government signed the Haavara Agreement, which facilitated the relocation of Jews to Palestine in 1933 before the Third Reich turned to mass murder and extermination. The agreement allowed a portion of Jewish emigrants' possessions, which they were forced to hand over before they left Germany, to be re-claimed through transfers to Palestine as German export goods.

Livingston probably got the details of the Haavara Agreement wrong, and the conclusions he drew from it were controversial and unsound, but nobody seems interested in looking into that. I am no fan of Ken Livingston but nevertheless, I find it strange that the Labour Party and the media keep bleating on about all the people he 'offended' without once asking wherever or not he was telling the truth . Indeed, at the time of writing, he is still suspended from the Labour Party. Guess that's just par for the course in post-truth Britain. The Labour Party couldn't give a monkey's whether he told the truth or not. All they cared about was whether is was likely to loose them votes. And the media just did what the media always do, report any old bollocks in order to sell papers.

We live in a crazy world where we expect our politicians to lie to us. We have become so accustomed to it that we now accept it as normal. And of course, the press are lying to us as well. With very few exceptions, even when they tell us the truth they only tell part of the story, the part that supports their own political bias.

In his book, Camera Assassin , my good friend Ian Cutler, tells of how he used to fake stories for the News of the World.

A more recent example of POST-TRUTH was the BBC announcement this very story. In their report they blamed only the LEAVE and the TRUMP sides of telling lies when clearly REMAIN and CLINTON were equally guilty.

Websites such as The National Resource in the USA and several East European sites, supported by advertising, have been making money by telling sensational lies to lure in visitors and thus revenue. Over the past year, the Macedonian town of Veles (with a population of just 45,000 souls) has been the epicentre of the fake news explosion. Locals, mostly young people, have launched at least 140 new websites with American-sounding domain names such as,,,, and They make their money by enticing internet surfers in with sensational and blatantly untrue headlines.

Lies, so many lies, and even lies about lying. Ever since the 2016 EU referendum, Remoaners have been falsely accusing Leavers of lying on the side of their campaign bus. The Vote Leave campaigners toured the country in a red bus bearing the slogan 'Let's give our NHS the £350m the EU takes every week'. Remoaners keep banging on about broken promises but what part of the word 'let's' do they not understand? The wording clearly said 'Let's' not 'We will'. It was a suggestion not a promise. Indeed Cameron was still Prime Minister and he supported the Leave side. So clearly none of the Vote Leave people had the authority to make such a promise. It was clearly just a suggestion. Of course many things were said that should not have been and the figure of 350 million pounds was probably an exaggeration.

The term 'POST-TRUTH' seems to be making a value judgement. It seems to be saying that people should react more with their heads than their hearts. But how?

In a world were we are all drowning in a sea of lies and half truths, how can we ever know what is really true? How can we ever know who to trust?

Only if every single one of us makes a firm commitment can we move towards a more truthful world. Only if we all stop telling lies, even little white ones. Only if we determine never to buy a newspaper that is caught lying. Only if we determine never to vote for any political candidate who is caught lying. One strike and they are out. Only that way can we build a better, more truthful world.

In this book we hope to make you more sceptical about the things you read, watch and hear through the media, including social media. It ain't necessarily true.

There are things that people do not know and they don't even know that they do not know.

I have been researching this subject of many years. What really is going on? Who really is pulling the strings? How much of what we read in the newspapers or view on our television sets can we really believe? How much of our fictional entertainment is deliberately geared to moulding our beliefs, attitudes and opinions? And who is doing the moulding?

My eyes were opened a few years back when I met a former News of the World photojournalist, Ian Cutler, who confessed to me all the fake stories he had made up in the pub. Even more shocking was the revelation that his boss, Rupert Murdoch, had published the stories knowing full well that they were a pack of lies. Murdoch even said to Cutler "Its is only fucking entertainment anyway".

More recently I have met another very interesting man who has opened my eyes still further. Bobby Cummines OBE is an ex-gangster and a life long associate of Cutler. Bobby Cummines was a London crook back in 60s and 70s. He started running with a street gang while he was still at school and ended up as one of the most violent men in London, one of the most notorious killers. He spent time in prison and when he came out he started a charity working with ex-offenders for which he was awarded the OBE. His insights into our thoroughly corrupt society are fascinating.

This book looks into the often sordid relationship between politicians, the media, organised crime and big multinational companies. It asks many questions. You may not accept or agree with everything presented here but it will most certainly set you thinking. You have a choice about what to believe, and the responsibility to choose wisely, in the knowledge that your choice will have consequences. In a world so full of lies and liars, how can any of us know the truth, or who, if anyone, is telling it? Certainly not me or my co-authors. We are not here to tell you all the answers, merely to prompt you to ask the questions.

"There is an elite in politics, in the police, in the legal system, in the media too, that colludes together to exercise power over ordinary people. .... you have to fundamentally rebalance the system .... to give ordinary people the ability to get truth and justice when they need it."
- Andy Burnham MP talking about the Hillsborough cover-up on BBC TV, April 2016.

The horrific disaster at Hillsborough football stadium in Sheffield, back in 1989, where 96 fans lost their lives and a further 766 were injured, was a day of shame for both police and press alike. The match was the semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest. The match was sold out, meaning more than 53,000 supporters of the two teams headed for the Hillsborough stadium.

Football at that time had acquired a reputation for hooliganism so the strict segregation of fans was enforced everywhere. Despite being a far larger club, Liverpool supporters were allocated the smaller end of the stadium, Leppings Lane, so that their route would not bring them into contact with Forest fans arriving from the south.

Fans began arriving at Leppings Lane at about midday. The entrance had a limited number of turnstiles, of which just seven were allocated to the 10,100 fans with tickets for the standing terraces. Once through the turnstiles, these supporters were faced by a wide tunnel leading down to the terrace.

For security reasons, the terrace was divided into pens with high fences that corralled fans into blocks and separated them from the pitch and from opposing supporters. There was no system on the day to ensure fans were evenly distributed across the pens and no way of counting how many were in each pen.

The police match commander was Ch. Supt. David Duckenfield. He was new to the post and had limited experience of policing football matches.

Police expected supporters to find their own level by spreading out across the pens in search of space, but this was difficult to do as the only possible movement between the pens was by narrow gates at the rear.

By 14.15 pm a crowd had started to build outside the Leppings Lane turnstiles and was swelling rapidly. Progress through the seven turnstiles was slow and by 14.30 just 4,383 people had entered, leaving a further 5,700 ticketed fans who were set to enter the ground in the half hour right before kick-off.

This was cutting it fine to say the least so Ch. Supt. Duckenfield and Supt. Bernard Murray discussed delaying the kick off to give fans time to enter. They decided against it, a decision they would regret for the rest of their lives.

The funnel-shaped nature of the area meant that the congestion was hard to escape for those at the front. The turnstiles became difficult to operate and people were starting to be crushed. The police officer in charge of the area, Supt. Roger Marshall, made several requests and at 14.52, Duckenfield at last gave the order to to open the gates. Some 2,000 fans swarmed into the ground.

Most of those entering through Gate C headed straight for the tunnel leading directly to pens 3 and 4. This caused severe crushing in the pens. Fans began climbing over fences into the relatively less packed adjoining pens in an effort to escape.

At 14.59, the game kicked off. Fans in the two central pens were pressed up against the fences and crush barriers. One barrier in pen 3 gave way, causing people to fall on top of each other. Those who survived told of seeing people lose consciousness in front of their eyes. Supporters continued to climb perimeter fences to escape, while others were dragged to safety by fans in the upper tiers.

At 15.06 Supt. Roger Greenwood ran on to the pitch and told the referee to stop the game. 96 people lay dead or dying.

It had been a tragedy but then the police made things far worse by lying. South Yorkshire Police, as police so often do when things go wrong, closed ranks. Even West Midlands Police, who had been drafted in to run an 'impartial' investigation, conspired to continue the cover up.

They tried to cover up their incompetence by accusing the fans of being drunk and disorderly. The police chiefs were desperate to find evidence of drunkenness. In the police interviews which followed even children were asked if they had been drinking. When they couldn't find enough evidence, they fabricated it.

The longest inquests in British legal history began at Sheffield Town Hall in April 1990 but was adjourned until November pending an investigation by the Director of Public Prosecutions who eventually decided not to bring any criminal charges against the police.

The coroner was Dr. Stefan Popper. On Thursday March 28, 1991, after sitting through more than 600 hours of evidence, the jury returned verdicts of accidental death on the 95 victims of the disaster (a 96th victim died later of his wounds).

Grieving families refused to accept this verdict. Their loved ones had been killed due to a massive police cock up and they knew it. They were determined to fight on. It was a hard fight and I don't have space here to go into all the details.

Suffice it to say that, two decades of pain later, a fresh hearing began on Monday 31 March 2014 in Warrington, Cheshire, this time heard by retired Court of Appeal judge Sir John Goldring. The jury delivered its verdict of unlawful killing in April 2016, 27 years after the event.

27 years! 27 years of heartbreak for the families involved. The jurors at the inquest found that match commander, Ch. Supt. David Duckenfield, had had a duty of care to fans in the stadium that day. They found he was in breach of that duty of care, that this amounted to gross negligence and that the 96 victims were unlawfully killed.

The jury also concluded that police errors caused a dangerous situation at the turnstiles, that failures by commanding officers caused a crush on the terraces, that there had been mistakes in the police control box over the order to open the Leppings Lane end exit gates, that defects at the stadium contributed the disaster, that there was an error in the safety certification of the Hillsborough stadium, that police delayed declaring a major incident and that the emergency response, including the ambulance service, was delayed.

Duckenfield, who froze in his decision making and then lied about the conduct of Liverpool fans, is part of a group of senior officials under suspicion and facing criminal prosecution for gross negligence and manslaughter.

Families grieving for loved ones had endured 27 years of police and media cover ups, lies and abuse. The Murdoch press, the News of the World, The Sun and The Times were part of the cover up. They took the official police line right up until the end. The News of the World is no longer with us, thank goodness. The Sun refused to run the story of the new inquest findings and The Times omitted the story from its first edition, reluctantly running it later in the day in response to protests. Now we know the victims were unlawfully killed, will justice be done at last?

In 1989 the editor of The Sun was Kelvin MacKenzie. On the Wednesday after the disaster he pondered two possible headlines. He rejected "You Scum" and decided to run with "The Truth" instead. As we know now, the article couldn't have been further from the truth.

A team of 18 journalists and photographers had been sent to cover the story. One reporter, Harry Arnold, cautioned MacKenzie against reporting allegations as truth, but Mackenzie would not listen. Having decided to lay the blame on the fans' doorsteps, there was no stopping him.

The story went like this: "Drunken Liverpool fans viciously attacked rescue workers as they tried to revive victims of the Hillsborough soccer disaster, it was revealed last night.

"Police officers, firemen and ambulance crew were punched, kicked and urinated upon by a hooligan element in the crowd.

"Some thugs rifled the pockets of injured fans as they were stretched out unconscious on the pitch.

"Sheffield MP Irvine Patnick revealed that in one shameful episode a gang of Liverpool fans noticed that the blouse of a girl trampled to death had risen above her breasts.

"As a policeman struggled in vain to revive her, the mob jeered: 'Throw her up here and we will **** her.'"

Many Liverpool families have not bought The Sun since and some Liverpool newsagents still refuse to stock it.

28 long ears after the disaster, in June 2017, the Crown Prosecution Service finally got around to pressing chargers against six people.

Duckenfield was charged with the manslaughter by gross negligence of 95 of the 96 Liverpool FC fans who died.

Sir Norman Bettison, former Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, has been charged with four counts of misconduct in public office.

Former South Yorkshire Police officers Donald Denton and Alan Foster, as well as force solicitor Peter Metcalf, are charged with acting with intent to pervert the course of justice.

And former Sheffield Wednesday secretary Graham Mackrell was charged with three offences relating to health and safety at sports grounds.

Rupert Murdoch's UK papers always tend towards their support of the Conservative Party, which was still in power at the time. The Sun is aimed at working class Tory voters. However Thatcher was loosing her iron grip on the country which was still reeling from her introduction of the Community Charge many called the Poll Tax, her most unpopular policy ever and the one that, the following year, was to bring down her government. What she needed that year, more than anything, was a gigantic diversion and Murdoch and MacKenzie gave it to her.

Please don't go away with the notion that all reporters, editors, police officers and politicians are corrupt. Many genuine, well meaning men and women enter these profession with the best of intentions and the highest ideals. Some even manage to hold on to their integrity throughout their careers. Others however are only interested in feathering their own nests or in wielding power over others. This book seeks to expose some of the many crooked going-ons.

People ask whether I am a conspiracy theorist. Rather than give them a yes or no answer I just ask them to define what they mean by that term.

Clearly there are conspiracies going on, everywhere. Whenever two or more people, politicians, media people, business people, put their heads together to think up some plan of action you could say they are involved in a conspiracy. You may well be conspiring with your mates at work over who will get the next promotion the same way that Tony Blair and George Brown conspired over who would be the next prime minister and chancellor of the exchequer. So yes, conspiracy theories are real, some of them anyway, and you are probably involved in one. How far you want to take all this is another question alltogether.

Writers such as David Icke will tell you there is a secret society, the Illuminati, the Rothschild family, or the Bilderberg Group, quietly running everything behind the scenes, plotting to bring about a New World Order.

Now I have a lot of respect for David Ike, some of his insights are revolutionary, but I certainly do not believe everything he says.

There is an American writer and college lecturer,  Jim Fetzer PhD, who goes even further. He believes the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in America never happened. According to him it was all faked to support Obama's proposed gun control laws. He is also a holocaust denier. He claims the term 'conspiracy theory' was coined by the CIA to discredit anyone who doubts the establishment. Very few people believe in conspiracy theories to the extent that Fetzer does.

Do the Illuminati, or the Rothschild family, appoint Prime Ministers and Presidents?

Britain is a parliamentary democracy. Our system for appointing Prime Ministers is transparent. Anyone can track the rise of Theresa May, David Cameron, Jeremy Corbyn or Tony Blair, first through their local party, then put up for election by their local party and voted for by the citizens of their local constituency. Anyone can track their rise through their respective parties, their time on the back benches, their cabinet positions, their accession to the post of Party Leader. And under the British system, when their party formed a government they automatically became Prime Minister. Jeremy Corbyn will automatically become PM if Labour should be voted in while he leads that party.

The American system is similar but different in many respects but seems to be equally transparent.

So where is the role of the Illuminati in that process? Party donors, MI5, MI6 and the CIA perhaps?

What is clear is that something fishy is going on when an ignorant, stupid person such as George W. Bush becomes President of the U.S.A. What the heck was that all about?

Tony Blair was much more intelligent yet still he got drawn into attacking Iraq and deposing Sadam Husain. It was that illegal war which was responsible, more than any other single factor in modern times, for the creation of ISIS / Daesh and for destabilising the Middle East. I go into this in more detail in a later chapter.

One single chain of events, from the election of two despotic world leaders (Blair and Bush) to the creation of Daesh, to the flood of Muslim immigrants now hitting Europe. Could that all be part of a plot to bring about the New World Order? I can't see how but maybe time will tell.

How could the Illuminati, or whoever is working behind the scene, possibly undermine the democratic process like this? In America, the T.V. series Game of Thrones showed up some of the dirty, underhanded tactics, including murder, that could be potentially used to undermine the democratic process. Similar things could quite possibly occur in Whitehall.

One tactic of control, used by the USA and possibly other leading nations such as our own, is the use of what John Perkins calls 'Economic Hit Men'. In his autobiography, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, Perkins reveals how he was approached by the American National Intelligence Agency (NSA).

Perkins defines economic hit men (EHMs) as "highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign aid organisations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet’s natural resources. "

Is this the real reason that politicians such as Theresa May and Boris Johnson are so committed to maintaining foreign aid while our own veterans are sleeping on the streets and our senior citizens shiver in their homes? I wonder.

Perkins claims "The tools of the economic hit men include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalisation."

Perkins didn't work directly for the NSA but rather through an international consulting firm, Chas. T. Main, Inc. (MAIN). Having a direct association with a government body could have caused too much embarrassment were it found out. Intelligence agencies the world over like their operations to be deniable.

He was told in confidential meetings that his job was to write overly optimistic economic forecasts for poorer countries in order to justify huge loans. The money would pay for major engineering and construction projects, which were to be carried out by MAIN and other U.S. companies such as Bechtel, Halliburton, Stone & Webster and Brown & Root. The idea was to help bankrupt those countries after the U.S. companies involved had been paid. This would make sure that these countries would remain in debt to their creditors and would then be easy targets when the U.S. needed favours such as military bases, UN votes and access to natural resources like oil.

In his book Perkins tells of how he was involved in bankrupting Indonesia and how he was instrumental in helping Panama reclaim the Panama Canal, which lead the country to financial ruin.

He then goes on to describe a rather different operation in Saudi Arabia which led to two Gulf Wars and the birth of Al Qaeda and Daesh. I highly recommend his book if you want to read up on this.

Another mechanism for control is the Media. Rupert Murdoch wields a huge amount of power in the world today due to his enormous press and media holdings. He got his start with a chain of Australian papers and now controls newspapers, satellite T.V. stations, film makers and book publishers around the world.

Rupert Murdoch and his son James own 21st Century Fox and News Corporation. These two companies include the following:

News UK, The Sun, The Times, Fox News, Fox News Sunday, Fox News Edge, Fox News Radio Network, Fox Business Network, Fox Sports Net Inc. (FSN), National Sports Programming, Yankees Entertainment, Fox Sports Go, Fox Sports 1, Fox Sports 2, SPEED, Fox College Sports, Fox Soccer Plus, Big Ten Network, FX, FXX, FXM, National Geographic, Nat Geo, Nat Geo Wild, Nat Geo Music, Adventure Channel, Fox International Channels (FIC), Fox Channel, Fox Life, Fox Crime, Fox Traveller, Voyage Channel, STAR World, STAR Movies, NGC Network International, Elite Sports Limited, Baby TV, Fox Sports Latin America, MundoFox Broadcasting, Eredivisie Media and Marketing, Channel V Thailand, CJ E&M Korea, Fox Sports Japan, STAR India, International Cricket Council matches, Asianet Communications, Vijay Television Private Limited, Balaji Telefilms Limited, Rotana (Middle East), Moby Group Holdings, Fox Sports Asia, Phoenix Satellite Television Holdings (China), PT Visi Media Asia (Indonesia), Fox Television stations (WNYW, WWOR, KTTV, KCOP, WFLD, WPWR, WTXF, KDFW, KDFI, WFXT, WTTG, WDCA, WAGA, KRIV, KTXH, WJBK, KSAZ, KUTP, WTVT, KMSP, WFTC, WOFL, WRBW, WJZY, WMYT, KTBC, WHBQ, WOGX), FOX Broadcasting Company, MyNetworkTV distribution service, Twentieth Century Fox Film, Fox 2000, Fox Searchlight Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox Animation, Fox International Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment, Twentieth Century Fox Television productions, Fox 21 Inc., Twentieth Television,  Fox Television Studios (FtvS), Shine Limited, Sky Italia, Sky Deutchland, BSkyB (U.K.), Hulu (30% stake), Tata Sky, Bona Film Group, CMC-News AsiaVice Holding, Vice News, Dow Jones, Wall Street Journal, CIO Journal, CFO Journal, CMO Journal and international WSJ editions, Wall Street Journal Digital Network, Factiva, DJ Risk & Compliance, Dow Jones Newswires, Barrons, MarketWatch, Dow Jones Private Market, DJX, The Australian, The Daily Telegraph, Herald Sun, The Courier Mail, The Advertiser,,, Busienss Spectator, Eureka Reports,, FOX SPORTS PULSE, (and vatious local dailies too numerous to list), New York Post, News America Marketing, SmartSource, Storyful, Fox Sports Australia, Digital Real Estate Services, REA Group (digital advertising, international versions of,,,,, HarperCollins, Amplify Insight, Amplify Learning and Amplify Access.

He also holds directorships in several non-media companies including the Genie Energy Corporation. Is that enough influence for you?

Hot on Murdoch's tail, at least in the U.K., is Lord Rothermere who owns The Mail, The Mail on Sunday and Metro.

Next comes David Grigson and Simon Fox who own the Mirror group (Trinity Mirror PLC).

The Scott Trust Ltd. is controlled by Alex Graham and publishes The Guardian and The Observer. He is also CEO of Wall to Wall Media.

David and Frederick Barclay control The Telegraph and the Sunday Telegraph.

Alexander and Evgeny Lebedev own The Independent, the Independent on Sunday and the London Evening Standard. Alexander is an ex-KGB agent who lives in Russia. One cannot help but wonder how independent he really is. He may be independent from the British establishment but that's about all.

Richard Desmond controls the Daily Star and the Daily Star Sunday.

Glen Moreno and John Fallon control Pearson PLC which publishes the Financial Times.

If you read their papers, these powerful individuals wield a huge influence over what you think and what you believe.

In the following chapters, written by Ian Cutler, Bobby Cummines and myself, Jack Cox, you will learn about the seedy world of London gangland killings and fake newspaper stories, of corrupt politicians and of big business. The contents of this book are the personal opinions of its authors. We are not here to tell you what to think or what to believe but mearly to remind you that you do have a choice in the matter.

In 1931 Aldous Huxley wrote a novel called Brave New World. In it he predicted a dystopian future where human embryos were genetically engineered to suit the work predetermined for them by the elite. He foretold of children being born in-vitro and systematically brainwashed through the education system to accept without question, and indeed, be ecstatically happy with, their predetermined rolls in life. Only the Alpha Class had any chance of ever thinking an original thought in their entire lives. Everybody was kept happy and compliant with an addictive drug he called soma. Anyone who did ever exhibit deviant behaviours was sent for more training / brainwashing. Unbridled consumerism was the norm. All food was synthetic and everyone could have as much as they wanted, without ever getting fat. There was no democracy, the elite were in charge and that was that.

If Huxley saw that possibility looming up in the 1930s, how much closer are we to it now? We don't have genetically modified humans, yet, but it can't be long now. We already have GM crops and GM fish and even GM mosquitos are being developed to tackle the spread of malaria and other insect borne viruses.

Our children's education already contains a huge amount of brainwashing, not necessarily by the government, yet, but rather by the left wing / feminist bias prevalent in the teaching profession. We have long had single faith schools dedicated to introdcing children to this or that religion. I would like to see a world where it was illegal to indoctrinate children into any religion, including my own. Let them decided for themselves what they will believe when they are old enough to do so.

We already have happy pills and whole populations are being systematically dumbed down by adding fluoride, a known carcinogen, to the drinking water. Its not put there to help fight tooth decay, its put there to keep us compliant. Add to that all the pollution in the atmosphere, dangerous hormone disrupters in our clothing, cleaning produces, shampoos, shower gels and plastic bottles. And who knows what's in our food these days?

And that brings me neatly on to the next point, food. Much of our food is already synthetic. In fact for much of the time we are not eating food at all, we are eating food like products. Real food comes from your local farm or your own garden. It does not have a brand or a TV advert. Nearly all the rubbish we buy from the supermarket contains a cocktail of chemicals designed to dumb us down and make us fat.

We are also being dumbed down by the crap we read in our newspapers and watch on television, especially the mind numbingly stupid commercials. Our masters clearly don't want us thinking for ourselves.

Then in 1948 George Orwell gave is Nineteen Eighty-Four, an ever darker dystopia where the people were under constant state surveillance and were encouraged to grass each other up. Does that sound familiar already? We have cameras snooping on us from every building, motorway bridge and road junction.

On the 1st March 2015 the British government introduced the Investigatory Powers Bill. The second reading took place on 27th June 2016 and the queen signified her royal assent to the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 on 29th November 2016. The draconian piece of legislation, nicknamed the Snoopers' Charter, will give unprecedented powers to the UK Intelligence Community.

In the government's own words the legislation is intended to "make provision about the interception of communications, equipment interference and the acquisition and retention of communications data, bulk personal datasets and other information; to make provision about the treatment of material held as a result of such interception, equipment interference or acquisition or retention; to establish the Investigatory Powers Commissioner and other Judicial Commissioners and make provision about them and other oversight arrangements; to make further provision about investigatory powers and national security; to amend sections 3 and 5 of the Intelligence Services Act 1994; and for connected purposes".

In other words it is very much a Snoopers' Charter. The media and the government have conspired to scare us enough to permit them to take away more of our freedoms in order to protect our freedoms. And we have been sufficiently dumbed down to let them get away with it. OR HAVE WE?

Recently we narrowly escaped the prospect of ever closer political union with the heavy handed, authoritarian, undemocratic, European Union. On the 23rd June 2016 Britain held a referendum on our continued EU membership. Thankfully we voted OUT with an overwhelming 52% majority. The pan-European fascist megastate will, over time, strip away the last vestiges of democracy in Europe. We in Britain are now on our way back to freedom and independence. After much delay, our new Prime Minister, Theresa May, finally triggered Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty on the 30th March 2017, thus beginning the formal process of leaving.

Many of the 48% who lost have been kicking up a fuss, earning themselves the label of 'Remoaners'. They have shown themselves to be extremely poor losers, throwing their rattles out of their prams like a bunch of spoilt children. The Liberal Democratic Party even swore to overturn the democratic decision of the people and stop Brexit, is ever they should get elected in a general election. Perhaps they should be renamed the 'Liberal Undemocratic Party'.

Nicola Sturgeon of the Scottish National Party has been just as bad. This crazy woman can't see the contradiction between on one hand, trying to leave the UK and have more independence and on the other hand, staying in the EU and having less independence. She doesn't want to take orders from Westminster but she doesn't mind taking them from Brussels. Incredible ! Does she want an independent Scotland or not? That has to be a very special kind of stupid indeed.

Brexit became a clash of generations with young people claiming that Brexit had stolen their globalist futures. All this just goes to show how powerful and how dangerous the Globalist movement has become. They have clearly infiltrated our schools and universities brainwashing our young people to accept their agenda. We must realise that globalism is about both trade and politics. The two are inseparable. Already we have multinational corporations that are more powerful than any national government. We can beat these corporations by buying locally grown food and locally produced goods. Left to their own devices, globalists won't stop until they have created a New World Order under a totalitarian world government. We will never be able to control such a world government. The only way for ordinary people to influence the decision makers is to keep counties small and independent. Lots of small, independent nations cooperating together as equals.

So yes, of course we want to cooperate with other countries and of course we want to trade freely with other countries but we don't have to let them tell us what to do in order to achieve that. I can trade freely with you and you can trade freely with me, without either of us telling the other what to do. I have a dream of a post-EU world where free, independent, sovereign countries trade freely together without any attempt to tell each other what to do. We can even have free movement of people between a small number of countries with compatible economies and compatible cultures, if we so wish. We do not need to meddle in each other's internal affairs in order to achieve that.

But all rulers want more people to rule over. All bankers want more people to make money out of. And media barons want more people reading their papers and watching their TV programmes, getting brainwashed into believing whatever crap the media barons want them to believe. But in the words of the George Gershwin song, it ain't necessarily so. None of it is necessarily so.

Read on and watch the plot unfold. You will be amased by just how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Meet Bobby Cummines OBE, FRSA, MUniv

Bobby Cummines grew up on the mean streets of war-scared North London in the 1950s and 60s. He and his friends played in the bomb craters and burnt out buildings. His first crime was while he was still at school. He stole a bundle of newspapers from outside a newsagent's shop early one morning. He tried to sell them on to the local chippie for wrapping the fish and chips but the chippie noticed the date on them and refused to pay. He still kept the papers. Cummines got his own back by throwing a dead cat into the chip fryer.

I Am Not A Gangsterbr
by Bobby Cummines OBE

Cummines soon became recognised as the gang leader because he was more daring than the others. They were always armed. First with sticks, then knives and axes and eventually guns. Cummines committed his first armed robbery in 1967 when he was just 16.

He had just left school, with no qualifications. Nevertheless he still managed to land a good job as a shipping clerk. He was set for a promising career in customs and excise. That was until two bent coppers fitted him up for possession of a cut-throat razor. "I'll admit to everything II've done in my life, but not that," says Bobby.

His mother was very upset by the whole thing. She would have been devastated had he gone to prison at such a young age. So Cummines accepted a plea bargain and got away with a fine, for a crime he had not committed. As soon as his boss got wind of it he was sacked. Unable to find alternatice employment due to his new criminal record, Cummines began his career in serious, violent crime.

Cummines became one of Britain's most dangerous men. So dangerous that the Old Bill sent a SWAT team out to arrest him. They didn’t send the normal police, they sent the SWAT team . That was in the 1975.

He was sent to prison for various serious offences including manslaughter and bank robbery. He served a total of thirteen out of the twenty years of his sentence. He was involved in several prison riots and was moved around various maximum security prisons.

Cummines met the Krays in Parkhurst Prison. He got on well with them. It was Cummines who negotiated the peace treaty between the Krays and Charlie Richardson of the notorious South London ’Torture Gang’.

It was about to kick off, a Parkhurst blood-bath. They were all on maximum security. People get killed in there. It was a different world. People say prison is like a holiday camp. What holiday camp did they go to?

Cummines loves poetry, it helped him get through the tough years behind bars, seeing people beaten up and killed. People went mad, some commited suicide. Criminals don't suddenly stop commiting crimes because they are banged up and some of the screws were worse than the prisoners. He wrote this touching poem while in solitary confinement at Bristol:


I have seen dark souls within these walls
Each man’s sins made the cross he bore
Yet no darker soul did I ever see
Than the one that locked my door

I have seen men’s souls cry out in pain
I have seen men beaten to the floor
I have seen men stripped and abused
By the one who locked my door

I have been to the place they put us men
Who refuse to bow and crawl
Our honour is written in the red of blood
Written on those four walls

There is no level they will not stoop
They torture men night and day
I have watched them abuse the food we eat
And beat men whilst they pray

I have seen the chaplain give sacrament
To men beaten beyond repair
Kneel down and pray to our Lord
And pretend the blood was not there

But our dear Lord was one of us
And he will keep the score
And he will judge those blackest souls
The ones who locked my door.

Cummines told me 'It was Charlie Richardson who set me straight. He told me I had a good brain but if I carried on I would end up dead or on a life sentence. He told me to get into education, that it would enable me to earn money without hurting anyone. I had to think about my daughter and my son, I had to think about them and how it was going to affect them.

My wife, Ami, a charity worker, is Japanese. I think of her son, Kai, as my own. He went to school in Japan and later to a Japanese school in London. I had to think about them.' Cummines also has a daughter, Sophie, from his first marriage, which broke down after his second daughter Abigail was stillborn. 'I carried her little coffin and it just brought me to my knees. I walked through that hospital in the night and the priest said do you want to kneel down and pray and I said "Fuck off, I've just lost my baby".

I was raging with God. I lost my baby. Why me?

"I went to go back into the maternity ward where they were. I believed in fate. I went through the intensive care baby unit. Why not me? I wouldn’t have wished this on anyone else. It didn’t make sense but it did give me a bit of humanity. I felt for these people and that’s when I thought "right, I am going to do something with my life".

'Years later I am sitting here, talking to you now about writing this book, telling the truth about what really happened, because I believe that the truth sets you free. We must write this book. I think people should be prepared, that’s why this book must be written, because whatever is written, a hundred years from now, it will be our history.

When in 1988 Cummines came out at last. He tried to get a job. He was married and had a baby. He tried but couldn’t get much of a job so, determined to go straight, he went stacking shelves in Tesco.

He had already done an Open University Sociology and Psychology degree while in prison. Now he took a Housing, Architecture and Housing Law degree and really turned his life around. He became a volunteer helper for fellow ex-offenders. He also became a trained negotiator and suicide counsellor for a housing association working with ex-offenders and those with mental health problems.

Mark Leech was an old friend of Cummines. They had served time in Maidstone together. In 1998 Cummines heard that Leech was planing to set up a charity to help ex-offenders. Cummines gave his old pal a ring and together they founded   'Unlock - for people with convictions'. They were soon joined by other reformed offenders who were successfully rebuilding their lives after serving prison sentences. They all wanted to use their experience of the great difficulties faced by those coming out of prison, to assist others who genuinely wanted to "go straight". As well as Leech and Cummines, the group also included Stephen Fry and Bob Turney.

Their first president was Sir Stephen Tumim, a former judge and Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons. Unlock was granted charitable status in 2000.

They advised governments, not only the British government but others as well. He was working in partnership with statutory and voluntary agencies within the criminal justice system along with the private sector, to overcome the social exclusion and discrimination being faced by ex-offenders. He was helping them to break the cycle of re-offending, so often exasperated by a cycle of escalating resentment. The more people are punished the more they resent the society that is punishing them causing them to rebel. The more they rebel, the more society resents them and punishes them. And on and on and on. Cummines worked with both sides to try and brake that cycle.

Representing ex-offenders, he has addressed numerous conferences, statutory agencies, non-statutory bodies, charities, prison inmates, community groups and employers as well as debating in the public forum of television, radio and newspaper articles concerning issues of social injustice received by ex-offenders, to inform and challenge popular misconceptions and prejudice.

At first the establishment was worried about Cummines corrupting politicians. That made him laugh. He was more worried about them corrupting him. They soon realised he wasn't just a cauliflower eared, thick thug.

He went over to Dublin and met the taoiseach. The European parliament, he went there as well. As Cummines explained to me "I just wanted, still want, a fair and inclusive society where people with convictions can move on positively in their lives".

He went to South Africa looking at their prison service and was advising on what we do and what they do better and what we do better than them and then they brought over a delegation from China and he talked to them. Later Cummines went to China himself.

He was appointed specialist advisor to Justice Keith at the Zahid Mubarek murder enquiry in 2006. Mubarek had been murdered whilst in custody at the Feltham Young Offenders Institute, West London. The family of the Asian teenager, who had been battered to death by his cellmate, tried to accuse the Home Office and the Prison Service of "institutional murder". They claimed his death was the direct result of chronic incompetence, which it was.

When it kicked off, Cummines was there for 13 months, investigating the Prison Service. He found it funny because he had done 13 years out of 20 in the slammer and now he was sitting up there investigating them. It was really quite bizarre.

Cummines appeared on BBC Radio 4 once in a live discussion with Jack Straw,   Home Secretary from 1997 to 2001 and Foreign Secretary from 2001 to 2006 under Tony Blair. He gave Straw a real going over. People took him very seriously after that. That’s when he was made Master of the Open University and a Life Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts and Commerce. There are only 32,000 FRSAs in the entire world and only 8,000 of them are life fellows.

He was one of the judges for the Royal Society of Arts and Commerce and they wrote articles in the The London Evening Standard named Cummines one of the thousand most influential people in Britain and one of the top 100 people who made Britain a better place to live.

It’s been a very bizarre existence really, surreal. Cummines told me 'if I had said to the governor of Parkhurst I would have an OBE and I'll meet the queen and all that, he would have sent me to the hospital and I would have been on the wally juice. You never know where life is going to take you'.

Cummines humbly added "This little charity Mark and I started in my garage had turned into a national charity. Its lost its direction a bit now, gone by the wayside. We used to be right there on the street helping people. Now its more political, more academic. Not helping the actual people any more. It’s all done by the internet now. I like meeting people. So in March 2012 I stepped down as Chief Executive to pursue my private business interests."

In 2011 Cummines was granted an honourary master’s degree from the Open University. Later, in June that same year, he was awarded the OBE by Queen Elizabeth II  in recognition of his services to reformed offenders.

Cummines told me 'I felt quite humble, it’s a really weird feeling when you meet the Queen because you go in there, it’s all top hat and tails and all that sort of thing. When the letter came through I thought someone’s doing a wind up here but I phoned them up they said 'no, would you accept the OBE?'

I said 'certainly'. I am an out and out royalist so of course I was going to accept the OBE. I remember when I was a kid. My Dad used to take us to Buckingham Palace to see the changing of the guard and all sort of thing. I would see people going in, they call it the walk of honour. They were going in with top hats and tails and the ladies all in their finery. My dad said to me ’see them, they are the tops, when you get there that’s when you know You’ve made it'.

When I walked through I thought about that. I thought 'I wish he was here now to see this'. There was my Japanese wife. She was dressed in her kimono. We went in there and there was all the other people being honoured. There was this big woman who did the paintings. There were people receiving different honours, some for flower shows, some policeman getting the George Cross and some soldiers.'

Then in 2014 Cummines wrote his first book, 'I Am Not A Gangster'. Its been an incredible journey because of his criminal past and how he turned it around and got an OBE. It's never been done before as far as we know.

Meet Ian Cutler
Camera Assassin
by Ian Cutler
and Jack Cox

Ian Cutler, now in his 70s has little remaining of his career. He now lives to share his explosive inside knowledge of the newspaper industry and the many famous names exposed by it.

In his other book, Camera Assassin, he reveals all about the sleazy, dirt digging and dishonest goings on within the media business. It make for an interesting read.

The general public would not believe how many news stories are fake, and how many sex and sleaze activities exposed by the press were regularly indulged in by the very same journalists who blew the lid on them. Is it any wonder that journalists are now rated by the general public on the same low footing as lawyers, the police, politicians and pornographers?

In Camera Assassin and through the pages of this present book, Cutler names and shames many of the sleazy journalists and photographers involved, of which he, of course, was one.

This is no mere speculation or hearsay. Cutler was there. He was right there in the middle of it all. Read Cutler’s first hand account of the despicable activities at the News of the World, Daily Mirror, The Sun and other publications for which he worked for many years. Cutler just needs to get this off his chest while he still can.

He was born Ian Garnett Cutler in November 1944, in Caledonian Road, London N7. His cousin was Sir Horace Walter Cutler OBE (28 July 1912 - 2 March 1997), one time Leader of the Greater London Council. He married a former prostitute a quarter of his age, lucky bugger.

Ian Cutler has always alleged that Sir Horace conned his father out of a substantial legacy due from his grandfather. As a result, Ian’s family was poor and he was brought up on a council housing estate. Sir Horace lived in luxury for the whole of his life, until he died in 1997. His illegitimate son (mother was fucking the chauffeur) inherited the family fortune, some 150,000 quid (a lot of money in those days), which Ian has always alleged was, in part at least, due to his family.

Cutler first became interested in photography at the age of nine, when a lorry overturned outside his family home. He photographed the incident on his Brownie box camera and sold the pictures (pics or pix in the jargon) to the Islington Gazette for what was a very large sum of money for a kid.

He left school at 15 and became a beach photographer in Bognor Regis, working for two lesbians, where he met a man called Liam who showed him the ropes and later got him a job as a photographer at the Dorchester Hotel, Park Lane, London. It wasn't for him and he only stayed a few weeks. That was in 1965, the year Winston Churchill died. While everybody was outside the hotel watching the fueral prosession, semeone nipped back in and stole 10,000 quid from the safe. Some people claimed it was Cutler but we will never know.

Later that year Cutler took up wedding photography. He took to the profession like a duck to water and pretty soon was making a good living as a freelance press photographer during the weekdays and a wedding photographer at weekends. Both careers combined when the bridegroom at the wedding he was photographing was shot dead by local gangsters. A news agency circulated the pictures to 30 newspapers worldwide and he became a teenage press photographer star, with assignments flowing in on a regular basis.

Cutler’s career was rudely interrupted by a five year custodial sentence, which he served in Maidstone, Albany, Pentonville, Wormwood Scrubs and Wandsworth prisons.

The incident which initiated the prison sentence resembled a Laurel and Hardy movie. A waiter in one of London’s many Chinese restaurants spilled a plate of soup on Cutler’s lap, ruining his suit. He got up to walk out and the Chinese owner stopped him, insisting that he pay for the meal he never ate. Cutler did offer to pay for the soup, provided the owner paid for his ruined suit. He was then karate chopped to the ground. He again attempted to leave but was kung-fu'd to the floor on a number of occasions. When he eventually managed to get out he vowed that the restaurant would have to go. So he hired someone to burn it down during the early hours of the following morning. As Cutler had threatened to burn it down during the hot soup incident, the police managed to convict him of arson and Cutler was sentenced at the Old Bailey to three years inside. He was not a model prisoner, imagine our surprise, so served two extra years.

During his long spell inside, Cutler used the prison libraries to further his education. Upon release, he resumed his career as a star press photographer, spending much of the next eighteen years specialising in photographic exposes for the News of the World, where he earned the nickname 'The Camera Assassin'.

Cutler left the News of the Screws as the paper was often affectionately known, with a golden handshake and started his own publications -Scallywag, Private Spy and Action News - specialising in exposing dirty deeds and the sexual indiscretions of the rich, famous and influential.

Despite the most revealing and intimate exposés, no one ever sued him for defamation. But then "truth" is the ultimate defence against libel. During this period Cutler discovered that a senior police officer was a drug addict and was also involved with the underworld in drug dealing. His knowledge ensured that he became a target of both the police and of the underworld.

The law was used against him and he soon found himself under arrest. No charge was ever laid against him. Nevertheless, during his time in the cells, he was badly beaten up by the police. Cutler suffered a stroke which greatly reduced the use of his right arm and leg, effectively ending his career as a photojournalist. Cutler sued the Metropolitan Police and won and was awarded a substantial amount in damages.

He then bought a London pub, the Cap’t Cutler, near Fleet Street where the newspaper business was located. Many of his journalist buddies used it and business was great.

In 2000 Cutler agreed to sell the pub for a million pounds, but the underworld stepped in and demanded 50,000 of it or they would burn the building down. He told them to "fuck off". Within 24 hours the pub was burnt down with him inside. Cutler managed to make a miraculous escape. He sold what was now vacant land for a miserly sum and went to Thailand.

Read Camera Assassin to discover what was really happening in Fleet Street and the truth behind many of the sensational (faked) stories. I promise it will open your eyes.

Meet Jack Cox

Jack Cox is a freelance writer and photographer, he took his first photography post while still at school, just a holiday job in a photographic retailer and darkroom. That was the summer of 1966.

On leaving school in 1967 he worked as a photographic assistant in a portrait and wedding studio before moving on to a commercial studio specialising in images for packaging. These posts gave him a through training in what has been a life-long passion.

However he took a six year break from professional photography, joining the Royal Signals in 1971. Later, at the age of 30, he spent 4 years at Greenwich University gaining a BSc in Environmental Science with a view to entering the field of environmental journalism. But first some practical experience working for the Royal Society For The Protection of Birds (RSPB) on a reserve in Norfolk and for a private nature reserve in Somerset.

In 1995, following the death of his girlfriend from thyroid cancer, he decided he needed a change of scenery and moved to Spain for a fresh start. While there he wrote a number of walking and travel guides, including one on the mountain range in the north of the country called the Picos de Europa.

Cox also ran a bar in Spain, Jack’s Tavern, which is how he met Ian Cutler and collaborated on the writing of the third edition of his book, Camera Assassin. It was Cutler who introduced Cox to Bobby Cummines and the three of them got together to write this present book.

Jack is the founder of the Towards Utopia movement.

Chapter One - Its a Dirty Old World Out There
by Bobby Cummines OBE

Who rules the world? In an ideal world it would be the people, you and me, ruling through our elected representatives, the politicians. But of course we don't live in an ideal world and we are unlikely to do so any time soon.

So who really rules the roost here on planet Earth? Politicians? Rich banking families? Multinational corporations? The police and security services? Or perhaps it’s the media barons such as Rupert Murdoch? Well I suppose they all do, to a greater or lesser extent. Each echelon of power certainly exercises a high degree of influence over all the others, as you will see in this book.

The thing that always amuses me is how each of these groups think they have the right to police themselves. It would be like asking Al Capone to investigate the Mafia. You know, its exactly the same. Ok the Mafia are accused of this or that and we are bringing in this specialist gangster, Al Capone, to investigate them.

'All right Al, how are you getting on?'

'We didn't do it. '

’sweet. Alright, so what we are doing now, what we do, we're going to retire you, rather than go to jail we are going to retire you on mental health grounds. you’ve had a breakdown. When you shot all those people on Saint Valentine’s Day, you had a nervous breakdown.'

It’s laughable, it is.

Who is investigating the politicians? Other politicians. And the police, who politicians control anyway, who’s controlling who? It’s the old thing, who will guard the guardians?

Its like Kipling said. I used to have it on my wall. If? 'If you can bear to hear the truth You’ve spoken, twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools ...' .

Well honest men stand up to challenge these people, right? But politicians twist the truth. The knaves, the fools, are the public. And that’s how it works, of course. But we vote for them because we think they will stand up for us.

And the spin doctors, who are the spin doctors? Professional fucking liars, that’s who.

Tell you what, you give a professional liar a political title and you make him a spin doctor. I've got this guy who tells fantastic lies that will make one gasp and stretch one’s eyes.

Like Matilda by Hilaire Belloc (1870-1953). If you read the poem, that’s what a spin doctor is. Matilda, tells such fantastic lies that will make one gasp and stretch one’s eyes, and the public believe it. Here you are, I've really fouled up. Now what I said there, I meant it. Like Brown in the car, when he said that woman’s a nutter and all that. He fouled up, spin doctors moved in straight away, let’s make out he didn't really mean that.

When you write to a politician, when you get too near the bone like he’s written to a politician, the Home Secretary or gawd knows who else, they think he’s a bit too close to the mark they put him down as a nutter, don't answer the letter.

Tony Benn didn't like the fact that when Blair came he stopped anybody from talking to the press freely. They had to go through him first.

Not only that but when Peter Mandalson, and his old woman, got involved is some iffy mortgage deal. we never heard another thing about that. Never heard another word about that. It just got buried in the long grass.

The thing is, the other thing is, look at it both ways. you’ve got the other thing now that because they want to play everything correct, they put, like Bloody Sunday, they put a paratrooper on trial and yet they've got the IRA pumped up, and they give them the Good Friday Agreement and let them all out of jail. How disgusting is that on Poppy Day?

You’ve got young troops out there and one of my friend’s sons is there, in Afghanistan. We are asking them to loose limbs, blow themselves up for a poxy couple of quid a week. And when they come back, with post traumatic stress disorder, they haven't even got a decent place to live. How many of them have got their own home? And who sent them to war? Blair!

And what was it about? It wasn't about caring about the Iraqis. Who put Sadam Husain in power? The CIA. As soon as he doesn't do what they say, well they top him and get some other megalomaniac in there.

Same with Gaddafi. Gaddafi started looking after his people. I was in prison with a Gaddafi general who shot and killed a dissident outside the Regents Park mosque. According to him it was an execution, not a murder. and Gaddafi had signed the death warrant. He gave his gun to the copper, the arresting officer, and had a cushy time in prison. He had velvet curtains in his cell, his very own butler, members of his family were flown in to visit him. Then one day he vanished. A few days later Charlie Richardson received a card from Libya. They had swapped him for a prisoner over there. Politics is a dirty business. Talk about the Mafia. Politicians are the real Mafia.

You can control people’s minds through the media, telling them what to think. And you can control people’s minds through finance by saying if you don’t do as we say we can stop you getting a lone or a mortgage, or even a job, There are many ways to assassinate someone. The media, the police, the politicians, they are all in it together because of what they all have on each other or because they are on the take.

Leverson set out with good intent. He got close. They probably told him that if he pushed it any further he would not be in favour. They probably have some dirt on him that he did didn't want dug up. What would do if they offered you two choices? If they said we will pay you off or we can bury you, financially and politically. What would you do? These are very powerful people. Knowledge, in the form of dirt, is very powerful and the media barons, such as Murdoch, know how to wield that power. Are you going to fuck with those people, if you have kids? No you're not.

Not unless you are a lunatic like me who says 'fuck you. You’ve done it to me now I’m going to do it back on you. I’m going to show the people who you really are'.

It takes brave men to do that because you’re under so much pressure not to do that. Even if you are clean, with no skeletons in your cupboard, you can be fitted up. They could go in my house tonight and plant explosives in there, say its a terrorist cell.

I could walk out of here tonight, they could have me whacked and claim it was an underworld killing. They could say, 'well he was a gangster, other gangsters got the hump with him so they shot him' . But it weren’t gangsters, it was the police. How would anyone ever know?

Back when I got nicked, in North London, in the 70's, they told people they weren't going to nick me, they were going to shoot me.

They said that to Dicky Smith. The Serious Crime Squad went into the Aardvark Restaurant and said to Dicky "Have you seen that flash bastard?"

He went "No."

Dicky was going out with my sister so he's not going to shop me is he!

So they said to Dicky "Tell him we're not going to arrest him, we're going to shoot him."

That's why I was going to pick up a machine gun that day. So the SWAT team came to do me. They're not like proper Old Bill, they wear berets and stuff. They done me on the street near The Anchor on Holloway Road. They were waiting for me. Smokey was with me. He nearly shat himself.

I told Smokey "Don't touch your pockets 'cause they will whack you, this is a proper SWAT team."

They went "Come out and lay in the middle of the road."

They shouted it with megaphones and all that. They'd been hiding in an ice-cream van. This geezer is out there with a rifle in an ice-cream van!

They went "Come out and lay in the middle of the road."

I went "Go fuck yourself. I am wearing an 800 quid suit. I am not going to lay in the middle of the road."

He went "Well alright, there is a volvo there, put your hands on the bonnet."

So I put my hands on the bonnet. Barber come up, he was head of the mob, he just laughed. He went "We've got a supergrass so you're gone but to tell my SWAT team to go fuck themselves, I've never heard that before, they should have shot you."

"Go fuck them" I said.

"If they shot me no problem but I paid a lot of money for the suit, I ain't fucking laying in the middle of the road, I ain't a dog."

Then they done me. Barber went "I am not even going to take a statement, we have a supergrass, you're gone for a 30."

"You said that when I done Barclays Bank in Swiss Cottage. I walked out off that one."

"Well you won't walk away from this one."

When they brought all the stuff in knew I was gone, I knew I was gone. But it was fun in a way. It was the greatest thing in the world because they done me for everything. They were talking about bodies, said I had wiped out five people. So I went "Well where's the bodies? And that one over Hampstead when you say your frog team jumped in the lake to find a body. All you found was a rolled up carpet."

They wanted to nick me for another murder then they could have put me away. They jumped in there and all they found is an old fucking carpet.

Anyway as it was a public place they couldn't shoot me. They were shouting and people were looking so they couldn't do it, they had to arrest me. That's the only reason I'm here today.

You look at Jermaine Baker, the squads just went in and shot him. He was only 28. Its cheaper than a trial and it stops embarrassing truths coming out. Its easier to whack you. That’s how they operate.  Now murder charges may be brought against a police firearms officer who killed him in north London in December 2015.  Police claimed he was in a gang called 'Bloodline' and was preparing to spring two Turkish gangsters from a prison van. Now he is dead we will never know.

Murdoch had an agenda about everything, even Iraq. It was all about building himself a bigger empire. Think of any tyrant you want, what they want to do is expand and take their competitors out of the game. Its like when I was running a gang, I wanted to take other firms out because if I took them out I could take over their business. It was purely down to money and power.

If I went weak then another firm would come in and do me. The 'P' in 'power' also stands for 'paranoia'. Murdoch has power but he’s scared that if he doesn’t stay on top, someone else will come along and swallow him up. At that level it really is all about survival. You can't trust anybody. I used to sleep with a gun under my pillow and a gun in every room in my house. When I went to the pub or the club I was always looking around. I used to drink bitter lemon in those days because I never knew if someone was going to whack me, or someone with a loose mouth was going to pick up the phone and put me away for thirty years.

You didn't know if your best friend had ambitions about taking over your business. He could just pick up the phone and set you up to get whacked. You can't trust anybody. The 'P' in 'prison' stands for 'paranoia' too. Even in there you get whacked.

Look at Rupert Murdoch’s track record with fake stories. Look at the stories Ian Cutler faked for him, the one about the dole scroungers, the one about British Leyland workers sleeping on the night shift. Lies, all lies but Murdoch published them knowing they were lies. Why? Because those fake stories reinforced the propaganda Maggie Thatcher was putting out to attack and weaken the unions. Maggie and Murdoch were thick as thieves together.

That was back in the 70s and 80s but look at today. Tony Blair wanted to invade Iraq. There were reserves of oil and minerals there. Murdoch was running fake stories about weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Why? What was his connection with Blair, a Labour Prime Minister? Thatcher had been a Conservative Prime Minister so surely it wasn't an ideological motivation. Of course Bush wanted the same things and he was a Republican President.

Not only that but Murdoch was most likely cutting deals with MI6 and the CIA. They wanted Saddam Hussein out of power because he had been their puppet but now he was starting to think for himself. We will never know what conversations took place behind closed doors or what bribes or threats may have been made. But we do know that Murdoch ran these fake stories about WMDs.

A picture paints a thousand words. That’s where photography comes in. If you find lots of dossers on the river or down to subway and you give them a few drinks and get them to pose for some photos, now you can write a story. You can write any old bollocks you want, about benefit scroungers, people working while claiming the dole, whatever you like. Doesn’t' have to be true. You have the pictures and people will believe you.

If someone took a photo of you today, sitting here, talking to me, with my reputation, they could say we were planning a hit together. They could say any old bollocks they wanted and dishonest media barons like Murdoch would probably run it. You try and prove it wrong. They could say we were plotting to assassinate the queen. That wouldn't work because I am an out and out royalist but you get the idea.

I have known Ian Cutler since I was a lad. He was always good to me since I was a kid. I was a bit of a naughty kid in them days but he always kept an eye out for me. When I went to prison he always made sure I got my newspapers. Then he had his stroke but he still made sure I got my newspapers. 

He is a good lad. He’s an absolute diamond. He is family to me, he is family, I love him with all my heart because he was there for me and now I’m there for him

When I got older and I started running North London and he was working for the News of the World before he had his stroke, and they was getting up to their mischief with my brother.

My brother Smokey used to supply them with the people for the fake stories. I found out about it and was worried about him because he had been a fireman and he got burnt badly. He became an alcoholic. He was just getting drunk and then Ian took him under his wing to make sure he was OK.

When I heard they was doing these fake stories I got a bit worried about it and so I went to see him and said 'what the fuck is this all about? Can he get nicked?

Ian said 'no, now come and meet the people'.

So I met Rod Tyler, it was Rod Tyler I met then, I said to him 'listen ,my brother is involved in this'.

Tyler was the Features Editor of the News of the World. I said 'my brother is involved in this and these fucking stories are dodgy, if anything happens to him I will be coming to visit you, and you wouldn’t want that'.

He knew I was running North London at the time and I had shot a few people, and been shot myself. I got done for murder and then I got done for numerous bank robberies, discharging fire arms and endangering life. It’s all in my first book. if you read my book it’s all in there.

I said to Tyler 'if he gets nicked I will be visiting you and the only thing you will be writing in your newspaper is your obituary'.

So that’s what I said to him. He went 'We can protect him, I promise you'.

I said 'but what happens when Murdoch finds out it’s all fake?'

So he says to me 'who do you think is running the show? He tells us he wants this story, if we can’t get it for real then make the story up'.

Murdoch knew all about it. I said 'what about the Old Bill? This is basically a fucking fraud. What you are doing?'

Tyler told me that Murdoch owns the police, and the politicians. That is what Rod Tyler said. 'Rupert owns the police. Everyone thinks the politicians run this country but they don’t, Rupert does, the media runs this country because the public only get what the media wants to give them.'

That is power. He’s like the Mafia.

So anyway I said to Ian 'you know my brother was getting the bodies and you are taking photographs'.

I didn’t like Tyler at all and I didn’t want to know about none of that. All I knew was my brother was involved in faking the stories and I got to make sure that none of these people  get hurt in faking these stories. I used to go round and see the people and persuade them. He would only give us £ 50 and it’s all front page in the News of the World. I would go round to them and I would say to them 'have a drink and there is another 50 quid in it for you if you forget all about  it'.

They understood,  they would forget it because I had to protect Ian and my brother. Ian was taking the pictures but Chapman was writing stories and so was Gerry Brown and the rest of them. Ray Chapman and Gerry Brown would write the stories and Ian Cutler would take the pictures. My brother was involved in faking the stories.

I was in some of them too. I dressed up in a crash helmet and a false moustache for a silly story Ian was doing about the YMCA and I done another one too, dressed up as a wedding photographer, I had a camera and a little hat on for that.

Another story, Fiddler On the Roof, that was my brother Smokey who posed for that story and recruited the other guys, just lumps really. I just stood there guarding my brother. We had to gets lumps up on the roof so Ian could snap them there.

Chapman gave them fifty quid each, took them to a pub. He and Smokey recruited these people who were down on their luck. Fifty quid to them in them days was quite a lot of money. Smokey was wearing a T-shirt with 'Britain is Great' on it. Chapman told Smokey 'Just chat to them, like a normal chat'.

So it looked like they were doing an actual exposè. They were reading off a script, I saw that with my own eyes, saw them sitting in the pub with the script and that’s what they used to do. Then the next weekend there it was in the paper.

Chapman had a tape machine in a briefcase, gave them the scripts, told them to read the scripts and he would give them another fifty quid. Simple, Ian took the pictures, Chapman recorded the statements and the story ran in the News of the World that Sunday.

One of the lumps saw the story and went crazy, said he was going to rip Smokey’s fucking head off. I had to go round and see the guy, gave him another fifty quid 'have a drink, behave yourself.'

That guy could have got my brother really hurt cause he didn’t know what Chapman was going to write, as far as they were concerned they were having a laugh with Ian, just posing for photos. Fifty quid to pose for photos, the would have posed as fucking Donald Duck, it wouldn’t matter to them. They would have said they had had sex with Prince Phillip or whatever, you know, it was fifty quid.

But when he realised what Chapman wrote, different ball game. It destroyed their lives, stopped their housing benefit, their dole money. The Dole Office read the paper and thought they were working. But they weren’t, they just posed for a few photos but they lost their benefit anyway. They were really pissed off. Chapman didn’t give a shit. Three weeks later there is a disclaimer in the paper, just a couple of lines, but the damage has been done.

I thought it as just a bit of a lark at the time. I didn’t realise what these fake stories were for. if they said to me pose with a sawn off shotgun I would have posed with a sawn off shotgun but I could have done that for real anyway but you know I said to him it’s a joke but I realised when I got more educated with the open university cause I did a degree in sociology and psychology and then I went and did another degree in Housing architecture and law.

Brown, Chatman and Ian were doing stories about prostitutes and that sort of thing too. Later we found out that Chapman was having sex with the prostitutes and even had sex with under aged girls. Lucky for him they kept him well away from me.

Chatman was a terrible pervert, I didn’t like the man at all.

Being mates with Ian, helping him fake stories, I learnt a lot about how things work. I soon figured it out. I mean, even the Idi Amin thing. Amin was the President of Uganda between 1971 and 1979. That heads in the fridge story was a load of bollocks but the people loved it. He was no cannibal. That was just spin. So many fake stories, now if you sold a fake Rembrandt you would be in the nick but he’s telling fake stories as the truth, untouchable, Rupert is like Teflon, nothing sticks to him. I said that to Blair once, much later when I was running Unlock, told him to his face, Teflon Tone, he was in Rupert’s pocket.

That’s about the time when it sort of started going down a bit. I got nicked for all my villainy and Ian had his stroke. I went in Ian’s house once to see how he was getting on and it was all the News of the World team there. It was like a Roman orgy. I come from a staunch Catholic family so we didn’t do bad manners or that sort of stuff .

People called it the News of the Screws. They were screwing each other, writing about themselves. I was quite shooked by it all.

When I thought about it all, about Rupert Murdoch, he was the real gangster, these people pointing the finger at everybody else. I think we have got to expose what they do, because people believe what they read. When Maggie Thatcher was in power she wanted to remove all the so-called "spongers" from society and she wanted to give people on the dole queue a battering. So she spoke to Rupert and my brother went out and recruited a few drunks and made these stories up. It was front page stuff and it which helped Maggie Thatcher enormously. They lied about the most vunerable people in society. Of course some people realised that the News of the World was a comic, you might as well be reading the Bino, or Parade or Playboy magazine, but others were taken in.

Rupert didn’t give a fuck. Do Murdoch’s people believe what they read? Of course not. We need to tell the people.

These things they were writing destroyed people. One guy committed suicide over this, his name was Arnold Lewis, a maths teacher. A NoW reporter phoned him one Saturday afternoon in 1978 , says "I’m just ringing to say we'll be naming you in tomorrow’s paper, story about wife-swappers". He had been advertising in the contact magazines, nothing more. Named and shamed by one of Murdoch’s hitmen and dead by the morning. His sad suicide note was read out at the inquest.

Rupert Murdoch controls the media all over the world. Not just him of course. He is just the main one in the news himself recently. There are lots of media barons just like him and they wield tremendous power. They are all in the same swindle and they are all vying against each other.

Media barons like Murdoch work with politicians for a whole range of different reasons. The bribes and the threats can work either way. If a politician has some dirt on a media baron or a media baron has some dirt on a politician, that’s power. And organised crime has their fingers in the pie too, believe me, they are players on the same game.

Who are the Mafia anyway? There just a bunch of immigrants who came over here, couldn't get a job, so started fiddling. Its no different to what we were doing. And it goes all the way to the top, it always has.

Drug dealers are nothing new. This country and other counties like France, look at the opium dens in China. We turned the Chinese into a race of dope addicts. Same with rubber. If the kids didn't work the rubber trees they cut their hands off. The first concentration camps. You talk about the Nazis. The first concentration camp was by the British in South Africa during the Boer War. We invented this stuff and we've been doing it for hundreds of years. Next to them I might have well have been picking pockets or nicking sweets out of Woolworth s.

This country, same as other countries, is run by organised criminals who have been doing it for generations. That’s why they have have their own schools such as Eaton. That is where they cultivate the future godfathers. Oxford and Cambridge. Where are spies recruited? They don’t come from the local technical collage up the road. Its all very incestuous. Same with the big crime families. When you get to the top gangs, we were very incestuous. We would think that because we had known a family for three or five generations we knew we could work with them.

The people in power do the same, we learnt it off them. Its an alternative system. they've got the big cake. They can make the laws to suit themselves. They can make it so the way we steal from them is illegal but the ways they steel from us are legal. By working with the media barons they can make sure the propaganda suites their own agendas. And they can make out its all for our own good. No! They are doing it for their good.

Even when people realise they've been had over, are they going to admit it, even to themselves? Are they going to admit that they've been had over all their lives?

GB doesn't stand for Great Britain any more. Now it stands for Gullible Britain.

When we were kids we believed in the Tooth Fairy. We have come to a point in history where the truth has become so blurred, you look at it and ask 'what is truth?' When You’ve been getting so much detritus for so many years you no longer want to face up to the truth. Its easier to go on believing in the tooth fairy. The lies are easier to live with. You can feel comfortable. You can go to sleep at night thinking the government will protect us.

The truth is, of course, that they don’t really want to protect us against Isis / Daesh. Back in WW2 they dropped two big bombs on two Japanese cities and they capitulated instantly. If we could beat the Germans and the Japanese then, we can beat Daesh today. But our leaders don't really want to war in Syria or international terrorism to end because they are making too much money from it, selling arms to the terrorists, selling arms to the military of NATO, Russia AND the Syrian government. The top echelon of society are getting richer by the day. Why should they kill the goose that’s laying their golden eggs?

Talk about gangsters like me. Well sorry, there are no bigger gangsters than the politicians . Political Parties are really just firms of gangsters. doing deals behind closed doors and getting rich. Sometimes they just do deals with other parties and sometimes with other countries. Say Russia is getting a bit naughty, getting away with something, and people are asking questions. Other countries will agree to split it with them and then create an unstable situation as a diversion, such as Daesh for instance, to divert the peoples' attention. That’s the job of MI6 and the CIA, to manipulate world events on the quiet. Then its up to the media bosses to make the people see what the politicians want them to see. Its a dirty business.

Who profits from all the wars? Our boys are getting whacked but who profits? Who is the next firm of gangsters? Arms dealers. They are happy to have wars 24/7. And who is the biggest arms producing country? America, the USA. The European Union is a very close second (stats here please).

What they are all worried about these days are the Chinese. The Chinese own everything now.
They are investing so much money into western counties as to be in a position to destabilise our economies any time they choose. They own half of Africa’s minerals. They will own our next nuclear power-station.

Why do you think we have started teaching Mandarin in our schools? And Urdu as well. What do you think That’s really about?

If you want to know whose at it just follow the money trail. How did they nick Al Capone? They followed the money trail. Who’s got all the wealth? It aint you and it sure as hell aint me. The more money there is, the more corruption there is and the more gangsterism there is. And when the people get too close to it they have accidents.

When Diana got killed, who did the post-mortem at Fulham mortuary in 1997? Their own pathologist. The establishment made sure they did it just in case there was something dodgy. Or maybe they expected something dodgy. We will never know, although there was certainly motivation. She had become a serious embarrassment.

In his book, ' How They Murdered Princess Diana: The Shocking Truth', author John Morgan claims to have discovered the truth of what actually happened during the 24 hours following the deaths of the Princess and Dodi Al Fayed in a Paris.

"There is a lot of evidence which points to the toxicology testing being carried out on samples that did not come from the body of Princess Diana." he said.

Morgan believes the samples were switched as part of an establishment cover-up.

And what about John F. Kennedy? It certainly wasn't that little Oswald guy. He couldn't win a teddy-bear at the fair with that little shooter. Clearly Kennedy had upset some very powerful people, there had to be a huge cover-up. For a start the arms industry was worried he was going to take America out of Vietnam. He was also threatening the autonomy of America’s Central Bank. Lots of powerful people wanted him dead.

A study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research at United Nations University reports that the richest 1% of adults owned 40% of global assets in the year 2000, and that the richest 10% of adults accounted for 85% of the world total.

Another study found that the richest 2% own more than half of global household assets.

That’s a lot of wealth and power concentrated at the top. They are so powerful they control governments, they control the banks, they control the media. They even control Murdoch. And they have been running things for hundreds of years, the same super-rich families have been running things for hundreds of years.

The Bilderberg Group has long been suspected of running the world. They have been the subject of much speculation for years. But what do we really know about the secretive international meetings between top politicians and bosses of multi-national corporations?

The location of their meetings is now public. In 2014 the Danish capital, Cophenhagen, was the venue of choice. In 2015 it was Tyrol in the Austrian Alps where George Osborne and Ed Balls attended, as did José Barroso, the former EU Commission President, and executives from firms including Google, BP, Shell, and Deutsche Bank.

Topics such as Artificial Intelligence, Cybersecurity, Chemical Weapons Threats, Current Economic Issues, European Strategy, Globalisation, Greece, Iran, the Middle East, NATO, Russia, Terrorism, the United Kingdom, the USA and the US Elections were up for discussion.

The area around the venue is completely locked down and the host government always provides security and police protection.

There are no minutes taken of the meetings, and no reports are made of any conclusions reached. No votes are taken. Journalists attempting to interview attendees have been arrested in the past. What on earth is that all about?

All US presidents are believed to have belonged to the Bilderberg Group, as have all British prime ministers. Some people even think the Queen is a member All those with money belong to it.

They are poisoning our water with fluoride, a know carcinogen. What’s that all about? They are poisoning our shampoos and household products with hormone disrupters that reduce our fertility What’s that all about? They are poisoning our food with artificial colours, preservatives and flavour enhancers, not to mention agricultural chemicals, more know carcinogens. What’s that all about? And then there are GMOs.

Mention your very legitimate concerns are you get written off as a 'conspiracy theorist'. The media bosses are in on it of course so don’t expect the papers or television to take you seriously. If they run such stories at all its along the lines of poking fun at the daft conspiracy theorists.

Same with UFOs yet the Germans in the second world war were working on flying saucers and maybe the Americans or the Russians still are. Maybe that’s what people are seeing and maybe that’s why its all so hush hush.

And the Nazis were also working on ways to kill people without leaving a trace. During World War II, several of German doctors conducted painful and often fatal experiments on thousands of concentration camp prisoners without their consent.

That’s part of what Josef Mengele was doing with his hideous experiments at Auschwitz. He was working on lots of different ideas including genetic modification. Now Monsanto has taken up the work. Its not about feeding the world. It was never about feeding the world. Its about controlling the food supply. What better way to control the people than to control their food supply.

Do you remember when GMO research first got media attention. It was portrayed as a way to breed pest and disease resistant crops you could grow without chemicals.. What did Monsanto do instead? They produced Roundup resistant crops. And who makes Roundup? Monsanto of course, who else?

Once again the people are being conned and its all about money and power. People commit crimes for three different reasons, need, greed or power. Not just people like me. Rich politicians, international arms dealers and media barons have no need. They are just motivated by greed and power.

Ordinary crooks like I was, committing crimes, most of them are victims of crime because they have had no proper upbringing. They come from broken homes, they come from drug addicts and they become drug addicts themselves. The worst thing that happened to this country was drugs because when we was doing villainy we had a code of ethics what you could do and what you couldn’t do, you couldn’t hurt someone in front of the wife and the kids, if you did you would get hurt yourself, if you were going to whack a guy you couldn’t do that in a public place you take them away and do it when they done me in the streets just drove by in a car and bang. Rival gangs tried to assonate me three times and I’m still here to tell about it.

I am still here. I thought I wouldn’t make thirty because, when you are in that life, you don’t expect to live that long. Life expectancy rates drops down and the bigger you get, the quicker it drops. I’m still here today and II've got a sweet life, it’s a nice life.

It’s funny when we talk about the House of Lords and the House of Commons, my kids call them the House of Conmen and the House of Frauds. They are not far wrong 'cause if you look at them they are all fiddling their expenses. The public has got to wake up. We have Rupert Murdoch destroying lives, controlling so much power that he’s above the police and above everything else. He’s been done for corruption. Has he gone to gaol? NO! If I done what Rupert has done I would be doing a thirty stretch.

Him and his little firm of gangsters, all those paedophiles and blaggers, all basically fraudsters, they all stay safe. Has Rebekah Brooks gone to prison? NO! None of them got bird. Andy Coulson? NO!!! None of them has got bird. You know why, because Rupert has the dirt on every politician and every top cop, Special Branch, all the lot. Even Commander Bert Wickstead (a.k.a 'The Old Grey Fox' or 'The Gangbuster' of Scotland Yard) was working for Murdoch. Rupert goes 'you turn on one of mine this pops up in the newspaper. I don’t have to print it here. Put a 'D Notice' on and I'll just have it published in Germany or in France or in Australia and your careers are over.'

They all eating Rupert’s meal, he’s throwing them a few scraps. 'Behave yourselves and you will be alright, you want to be in power I'll back you, you go against me you won’t get into No.10.'

That’s how powerful that man is, he’s a godfather more than the Mafia, he’s got his own Mafia, the House of Commons and the House of Lords is another Mafia, but he’s got the biggest 'cause he’s got the dirt on all of them. Rupert knows who’s selling them drugs, cocaine for their parties, whose having the rent boys. He don’t always print them stories. What he does, he puts them in the safe for later so if you come up against him he has it on you. Are you going to go against Murdoch? No! You are not. That’s why no one else will print a book like this. They are all frightened that Rupert will end their careers or their newspaper if they go against him. We three me, Ian and Jack, we are old now, our careers are over anyway and we don't give a fuck anymore.

Chapter Two - Don't Believe Everything You Read In The Papers
by Ian Cutler
"Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play."
- Joseph Goebbels - WW11 Nazi propagandist

The most commonly discussed forms of media propaganda bias occur when a paper or news channel supports or attacks a particular political party, candidate or ideology. The Murdoch press are generally right wing while papers such as The Guardian lean heavily towards the left.

Media bias can take other forms too, such as advertising bias, when stories are selected or slanted to please advertisers. Papers depend for their livelihoods on advertising revenue so are unlikely to want to upset their best paying clients.

There is also corporate bias, when stories are selected or slanted to please corporate owners of media. Murdoch has always been a very hands-on type of owner and his editors knew they had to please him if they wanted to keep their jobs.

Then there is mainstream bias, a tendency to report what everyone else is reporting, and to avoid stories that will offend anyone. It takes a brave editor to stick his or her head out and tread the road less travelled. More recently, editors have been running scared of Muslim intolerance. Look what happened to those poor Charlie Hebdo cartoonists in Parris in January 2015. They were murdered just for drawing satirical cartoons. When cowardly religious fundamentalists react so violently to a little harmless humour, journalists and editors become frightened to report the real truth.

Sensationalism is another form of media bias where the exceptional is favoured over the ordinary. This gives people the false impression that rare events, such as plane crashes and terrorist attacks, are more common than they really are.

Concision bias is a tendency to summarise events succinctly, rather than devote space and time to an in-depth analysis.

Other forms of bias include reports that favour or attack a particular race, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation, ethnic group, or individual.

Lastly there is gate keeping bias, deciding whether to release a story or keep it under wraps.

Of course politicians have long employed spin doctors to twit and distort the truth about their disastrous actions and policies. Arguably the most famous of these professional liars was probably Alastair Campbell, 'Director of Communications and Strategy' for Tony Blair between 1997 and 2003.

The term spin doctor was probably first used in print in October 1984 in the New York Times and derives from the phrase 'to spin a yarn', although the practice is much older. If you are interested in Hebrew mythology, the first spin doctor may well have been the serpent in the Garden of Eden.

During my time at the News of the World, the paper was definitely used as a spin doctor for Margaret Thatcher and her government.

The general public would not believe how many news stories are fake, and how many sex and sleaze activities exposed by the press were regularly indulged in by the very same two-faced journalists who had blown the lid off them. Is it any wonder that journalists are now rated by the general public on the same low footing as lawyers, the police, politicians and pornographers? The newspaper stories I mention below were all bent in some way, yet they were put out by the editors of each respective newspaper.

In this chapter I give the real, inside story on on many tall tales published as the truth. The press cuttings of these stories can be viewed online at

Take Piers Morgan for example. He was fired recently after printing 60 pages of rubbish about our forces torturing Iraqui prisoners. It was all lies and faked pictures. (Stuart Kuttner who remained in his job, printed even more rubbish, until the News of the World's demise in 2011).

God knows how many coalition troops were killed or wounded as a result of Morgan’s cynical and opportunist photos. During his most recent TV appearance you would have thought it never happened. He didn’t refer to it once! Nor was he asked a question about it by his pals on the chat show!

Pure Fiction: The time span was the seventies and eighties when I teamed up with reporter Ray Chapman on at least 20 major series ordered by Murdoch. These included a long-running saga on so-called 'Welfare Scroungers', then exposing 'leftwing revolutionaries' and finally many so-called sex scandals, mainly exposing wife swappers, one of whom committed suicide after a dubious story appeared.

Chapman was one of the longest serving reporters on the paper until his retirement in 2007. Almost every single story I was associated with was pure fiction. If the facts didn’t fit the brief, we made them up. I paid actors to pose in so-called 'snatch' pictures. A snatch or candid picture is one where the subject is not aware of being photographed or is unwilling to be photographed.

When Rupert Murdoch first bought the News of the World in one of the city’s most controversial take-overs, he was determined to be a hands on proprietor. At first the staff, including the editor Stafford Summerfield, treated him as an Aussie sheep farmer. But he fired anyone who got in his way, including Summerfield, and soon made radical changes to the paper.

A little while later he added the Sun to his Bouverie Street stable.

Murdoch had an obsession to expose welfare scroungers and left-wing militants and continually put his executive into fast forward for exposure stories. Everyone from the news editor to the top brass would accept almost anything if it pleased Murdoch, with scant regard for truth.

Rupert said, "The subjects were tailor made for a journalistic scam".

Dole Dodgers: One of the things which first appalled Murdoch about London was what he saw a blatant abuse of the social services by welfare scroungers. He declared war on them and let his executives know that he wanted a full and long running exposure. Every budding, hungry, or down and out freelance quickly realised that the paper would buy almost any story which exposed dole fiddlers.

Me and my sidekick Ray Chapman retained several freelancers who spotted an immediate and lucrative money-spinner and got to work. We often used two down and outs, one called Smokey and the other Michael, to manufacture stories and both were immediately recruited to hunt out the dole dodgers. Smokey was Bobby Cummines' brother, an ex-fireman who was down on his luck folowing a bad accident at work.

The whole campaign went on for a decade but was kicked off by a two part series to which veteran reporter Ron Mount put his name. Mount was a suspect ex-policeman who, when in the force, had been useful to the News of the World as an informer. When he was found out and fired, the paper gave him a job.

He was also a chronic alcoholic who had two girl friends and a wife and family at home. His favourite watering hole was the Wine Press, a trendy place actually in Fleet Street at the top of Bouverie Street.

We faked too many stories to list. Here are just a few of them:

Spaghetti Scroungers (News of the World - August 1979) - A story ran on the front page of the News of the World about numerous Italian immigrants. The story was another fabrication. Me and Ray Chapman faked the photographs to support it. It led to an investigation by Lynda Chalker who was Under Secretary of the Health and Social Security department at the time.

Not all these men were claiming social security but it was another winner for Rupert.

Me and Chapman ferreted out some good tales but, to tell the truth, every last one of them was a setup. We'd go out, set up a picture, then Chapman would invent the story to go with it and we'd deliver it to Ron Mount (the ex flying squad copper).

Throughout the whole series, Mount never left the wine bar and never came on a single story.

On one occasion, knowing that we had a free hand, me and Chapman bought six bottles of wine and went to a dole office in Bishops Gate where welfare could be obtained instantly in cash because it specialised in helping homeless people.

The faithful Smokey, always pocketing his 50 quid daily fee, went up to the queue (which was spilling out onto the street) and gave the claimants the six bottles of wine. I duly photographed this merry band downing the wine with glee. A certain piquancy was added to the story because I had bought Smokey a T-shirt which said plainly on the back "Britain is Great".

Chapman then wrote a wholly inaccurate piece alleging that these same people went to a different dole queue each day and spent all their money having street parties at the taxpayer’s expence. We delivered it to Mount in the wine bar where he was incoherent and he in turn gave it to his news editor, Bob Warren. The story went straight up to Murdoch who was elated. The News of the World duly thundered about the dole dodgers and Mount bathed for weeks in the series' success.

Fiddler On the Roof (News of the World - August 1978) was one of our most important faked stories, published on Sunday 6th August 1978, It took over the whole of the front page. It was one of many of our made up "Scroungers" stories ordereddirectly by Murdoch. This story was about a fictitious building and roofing contractor Stan Clarke, who was supposed to have employed men off the dole and turned a blind eye to them claiming benefits whilst working for him.

Stan Clarke didn't exist of course, the story was totally fabricated by Ray Chapman and myself. Rupert laughed at the idea. Smokey Cummines was dressed up in my hat and coat for this faked picture. As before Smokey recruited claimants direct from the DHSS offices to pose for pictures. They were each paid ten pound cash to pose as roofing workers.

Cummines was actually a former firreman, badly burnt while on duty. He pretended to be Stan Clarke and I lent him my hat and overcoat to disguise him as a bare-faced 'fiddler on the roof'. We paid him his usual fee of 50 quid for this scam. He only did it for the beer money.

The Good Night Shift (News of the World - November 1979).  This was another good one. Me and Gerry Brown were sent up to Birmingham to catch the British Leyland night shift workers at the Longbridge plant sleeping on the job. When we got there we found both production lines working at full pelt. The whole thing had been a hoax.

Nevertheless we had been sent to get the pictures so that’s what we did. There was a room where the workers went during rest breaks so we set up some fake shots there.

To our utter amassment the nation fell hook line and sinker for this garbage. But it was the time when Mrs. Thatcher’s spin doctors had been bombarding us all with their propaganda about workers and unions. Other right wing papers eagerly picked up on the story and the Sun’s cartoonist, Franklin, had a field day.

Rupert would print any old lies as long as they sold papers and pleased Margrate Thacher. I can't prove that she was paying him to spread her propaganda against workers, uniuons and imagrants. Maybe he really believed that the cause was worth supporting, and lieing for. I will leave you to draw your own conclusions.

Gay YMCA (News of the World - March 18th 1980 ) G.A.Y.M.C.A.: Out of all the manufactured stories in which I took part as a willing accomplice (and often engineering them myself) the story on the frontpage of the News of the Worldtakes the biscuit. It was headlined, We expose the shocking truth about the GAYMCA with a strap line - Showpiece Hotel is pick-up paradise for these weirdos.

Remember that attitudes to homosexuality were very different back then.

The story went into great detail about the 15 million pound showpiece of the Young Men’s Christian Association - Plush Hotel Y - which had supposedly become a gathering place for rent boys. The by-lines were: Special Investigation by Martin Turner and Michael Parker. Pictures by Ian Cutler.

Following a tip-off, the three of us tried to penetrate Hotel Y, which for a while we did. But the tip-off just didn’t stand up. We couldn’t find a genuine rent boy, even after touting ourselves and offering fairly serious money. So we decided to provide our own evidence.

I cannot now recall whether Turner was fully involved with the subterfuge, but Michael Parker most certainly was, Parker knew full well that I, through my underground contacts in the sex trade which I often exploited, had hired a rent boy for the day and paid him 50 quid over and above the going rate.

The story we concocted ’exposed’ three youths purporting to be rent boys, using the hotel to ply their trade. Making them look like snatch shots (journalistic jargon for snapping a victim when they are unawares) Parker and I dressed up the hired boy in widely different garbs. Three of the pictures taken and submitted actually depict the same youth. In one shot he is wearing a false moustache and a crash helmet, presumably entering the premises, the next, without a moustache is the same boy hiding behind a book smoking a joint, and the third is an innocuous picture of a young man, which did not get published but seemed genuine enough to warrant three separate statements which were entirely fabricated by Cyril, Paul and Alan.

The unholy alliance of Parker and myself then triumphantly took the pictures and story back to the News of the World. We made sure it was put into the hands of Craig McKenzie (brother of the notorious Kelvin) who was then one of the chief sub editors. McKenzie himself then became fully and knowingly involved with this wretched subterfuge.

Cheeky Confessions of the Wedding Photographer (News of the World - March 1980). Another fake story appeared in the News of the World in March 1980. This one was a complete fabrication about the invented character Robert Croft, who was allegedly a wedding photographer Casanova. The man didn’t exist but the story sold papers. Rupert was happy again.

The character of Robert Croft was roughly based on my own life. In my teens, as a young wedding photographer, before joining the News of the World, I would do eight or nine weddings every Saturday in Finsbury Town Hall. It would often happen that the bridegroom would get pissed and I would take the opportunity to screw his new bride. Failing that I would usually get to fuck a bridesmaid or two. I
have always enjoyed my work.

Bobby Cummines OBE FRSA, Smokey’s brother, became the CEO of the pressure group Unlock, The National Association of Reformed Offenders. He often used to pose for me in fake stories. This time we slung a camera around his neck and used him to help us 'expose' a fictitious wedding photographer who supposedly seduced brides. I held a drinks party in my garden and posed all the pictures, but there never was a bride or a marriage.

Newspaper stories like these can be used to divert public attention away from the more controversial activities of Parliament. Was it just a coincidence that while these stories were running, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was pushing through one of her most unpopular pieces of legislation? The Housing Act (1980) gave five million council house tenants in England and Wales the right to buy their house and flats, on the cheep, from their local authority. The Act came into force on the 3rd October 1980 and is seen as a defining policy of Thatcherism. It was great news for the long term renters suddenly able to own their own homes for the first time in their lives. Nevertheless it was a huge disaster in the long term because the Act totally failed to require councils to spend the money on replenishing their housing stock. As a result, waiting lists lengthened and homeless people ended up in temporary accommodation which ended up costing the public purse far, far more. This compounded a housing shortage for people on low incomes.

In the first four years of the scheme 380,912 homes were sold off (an average of 95,228 a year) while only 145,270 new ones were built to replace them (an average of 36,317 a year). That means that over half of our council homes were lost in those four years.

Throughout this period and up to the present day, the building of new council homes never increased. (Source: AND

This is just one example.

Dramatic Thames Rescue (Evening Standard). Another major story, for the Evening Standard this time, showed a photograph of Douglas Smith being rescued by Patrick O'Connor. The story told how Smith had fallen overboard from a pleasure boat on the Thames, and O'Connor, a bystander had gallantly dived in to save him. However, the two knew each other and planned the stunt together to get some positive publicity for O'Connor who was shortly due in court. This illustrates just one way that the media can be used to pervert the course of justice.

Hitler Diaries (News of the World - April 1983). We had to laugh at Rupert over the Hitler Diaries story. On 22nd April 1983, German magazine Stern announced that it had discovered the Hitler Diaries. Journalist Gerd Heidemann claimed to have received the diaries from East Germany, smuggled out by a "Dr. Fischer". The diaries were supposed to be part of a consignment of documents recovered from an aircraft crash in Bornersdorf near Dresden in April 1945.

Two historians, Hugh Trevor-Roper of Times Newspapers and Gerhard Weinberg of Newsweek, authenticated the diaries. Serialisation rights were sold for huge sums. Murdoch was one of the top bidders and the Times ran a front page scoop on The Hitler Diaries.

When they were exposed as fakes Rupert said IT’s ONLY FUCKING ENTERTAINMENT ANYWAY!

Stern editors Peter Koch and Felix Schmidt resigned from the magazine; Frank Giles stood down as editor of The Sunday Times; and William Broyles resigned from Newsweek.

The episode was much ridiculed in the UK media (particularly by the Sunday Times' rival newspapers, and Trevor-Roper’s reputation was seriously damaged. But did Murdoch suffer? What do you think?

Council Workers Moonlighting In Council Time (News of the World - 1984). Ted Knight (born 13 June 1933) controlled Lambeth council. When the Conservative Government passed the Rates Act 1984 to limit the budgets of local councils, several left-wing Labour councils organised a rebellion in which they refused to set a budget.

All the councils eventually backed down except Liverpool City Council and Lambeth. The district auditor found that the council had lost interest on tax payments as a result, which was held to be due to the "wilful misconduct" of Knight and 31 other councillors. Each was required to repay the amount of lost interest in a surcharge and banned from holding office for five years.

Neil Kinnock, the Labour Party leader, blamed leaders like "Red Ted" Knight and Linda Bellos from Lambeth, for bringing the party into disrepute. In our attempt to embarrass him further, Chapman and I paid for black models to pose as council workers moonlighting in council time with council equipment. Another policaly motivated fake story.

When trying to expose illegal immigrants claiming dole at Kings Cross we couldn't find any. So me and Chapman dived into an Italian restaurant called Luigi’s and paid all the waiters and kitchen staff £ 10 each to pose outside the dole office making rude gestures to the welfare state.

Scandal of the Sardine Hostels (News of the World - July 1984). Me and Gerry Brown went on a story about overcrowded student accommodation. We found a few privately run dormitories but nothing that came anywhere close to the squalor we were looking for so I faked the pictures. We even claimed that some tourists to London were being treated like this. Ridiculous !!!

Fury of the Evil Escort Boss (News of the World - July 1984)  made for another good headline. In July 1984 Trevor Kempson and me went to London’s West End to expose an escort agency offering 'extras'. During the interview the owner of the agency, a pimp known locally ad 'The Beast', hit Trevor.

In the article Trevor claimed he had been kicked and hit with a gas cylinder. Before photographing his injuries I applied make up to Trevor’s face to make the damage look much worse than it was. One of the girls photographed wasn't even involved. She was my girlfriend, we just needed an extra face. Of course the News of the World hierarchy were well aware that we had fabricated part of this story.

So what were Parliament up to in 1984? What did the wish to divert attention away from? Could it have been the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984? PACE was extremely controversial as the Act gave considerable extra powers to the police.

Posh Beckham Kidnapping (News of the World - November 2002). It wasn't all politiccaly motivated. Sometime we just faked stories for the fun of it, and for profit too of course. The Posh Spice (famous singer and David Beckham's wife) kidnapping was one such fun story.

It was hashed up by reporters Mazher Mahmoud and GerryBrown (known to colleagues as 'Gerry-can' or 'Brown Gerry', brown as in toilet).

In 2002 Detective Chief Superintendent John Coles, the head of SO7, said: "As a result of information from the News of the World, SO7 Kidnap Unit conducted an operation to arrest a group of individuals who are suspected of having been involved in theft and a conspiracy to commit kidnap".

Stuart Kuttner, managing editor of the News of the World, told Sky News: "About six weeks ago we were alerted that a gang of Romanian and Albanian criminals, or people of that persuasion, had a plan to try and kidnap Victoria Beckham".

Although I wasn't personally involved in this story (I had retired by then) I knew the journalists who were and I had no doubt what was going on. I contacted Gavin Hodges and Joseph Reams, solicitors of 70 Marylebone Lane, London W14 2TT. They were the defence team for the Bosnian defendants accused of kidnapping David Beckham’s wife Victoria (formerly known as Posh Spice of the pop group the Spice Girls).

The Spice / Beckham kidnap story was all Bollocks!! Rupert loved this idea.

I posed the question as to how a bunch of immigrants who didn't know London from the Suez Canal could find out where David and Victoria Beckham lived when most Londoner’s born and bred had no idea.

Knowing the gutter press well, having worked for the News of the World for so long, and how they often set up stories or simply make them up, my instinct was that the down on their luck immigrants had been given the address where David and Victoria Beckham lived.

I had little doubt who had put the kidnap idea into their heads. A financial inducement from the press in order to create a story that would engender massive income worldwide would be par for the course. The story was all bollocks, just six pages of rubbish approved by Rupert.

Solicitors for the defence used my information and put it to the judge. Armed with this knowledge and the iffy nature of the police allegations, which by then had created massive worldwide media coverage, the Judge threw the case out.

Could the press have set up a fake kidnapping? I think so. Whatever, Rupert Murdoch’s News of the Screws did all right out of it. If the press had actually set up the story and bribed desperate immigrants to attempt to carry out the kidnap, they got their money’s worth.

The year was 2002. A lot was going on in Parliament that year, the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act, the Land Registration Act, the Enterprise Act, the Tax Credits Act, the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act, the Proceeds of Crime Act, the Finance Act, the Education Act, the Enterprise Act, the Homelessness Act, the Police Reform Act, the State Pension Credit Act, the Local Government Act, the Adoption and Children Act and the Homeland Security Act was passed in America n 2002. That’s a lot of controversy to want to divert people’s attention from.

At the time I was setting up all these fake stories I was not aware of any political adgenda, beyond pleasing Murdoch so he could sell papers as well as please whoever was pulling his strings. I have given it a lot of thought since though.

While The News of the Screws was supporting Thatcher, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) was being accused of left-wing bias. Norman Tebbit, Thatcher’s Secretary of State for Employment, called the BBC the "Stateless Person’s Broadcasting Corporation" in his autobioraphy because of the way it covered the Falklands War.

Conservative M.P. Peter Bruinvels ran a campaign calling it the "Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation."

Stuart Young, the accountant and brother of one of Thatcher's staunchest cabinet allies, David Young, was appointed as BBC chairman in 1983. A plainly political appointment, Thatcher hoped that Young, as a Conservative, would challenge the more left-leaning Director-General of the BBC, Alasdair Milne. When first appointed, Young argued that the BBC should be funded by advertising. However, he later changed his mind and argued for the continuation of the television. This disappointed Mrs. Thatcher who accused him of 'going native'.

In 1985 the left wing biased Daily Star ran a virulent campaign against the BBC calling it "Beaten, Boring and Costly"

Young was replaced in 1986 by Marmaduke Hussey, another Tory party insider. The Tory party chairman at the time, Norman Tebbit, said that Hussey had been appointed 'to get in there and sort the place out'.

The controversies continued with several BBC television programmes. The Nationwide general election special with Thatcher in 1983, a Panorama documentary called Maggie’s Militant Tendency, the Real Lives interview with Martin McGuinness, the BBC’s coverage of the United States' 1986 Bombing of Libya and the Zircon affair all leaned towards the left.

Milne was forced to resign in 1987. Thatcher later said: "I have fought three elections against the BBC and don't want to fight another against it."

Much later, in 2006 Tebbit said: "The BBC was always against Lady Thatcher."

In 2010 Mark Thompson, Director General of the BBC was reported as saying "In the BBC I joined 30 years ago there was, in much of current affairs, in terms of people’s personal politics, which were quite vocal, a massive bias to the left. The organisation did struggle then with impartiality."

Of course every Prime Minister becomes paranoid about the BBC at some time. Margaret Thatcher was not the first. Harold Wilson had no love for the organisation. He was so convinced they were sympathising with the Conservatives and trying to rubbish his government that he refused to allow the BBC to interview him on his victory train following the 1966 general election.

You don't need to tell lies to be biased, just tell selective bits of the truth. On February 27th 2016 the Guardian reported that tens of thousands of protesters gathered in central London for Britain’s 'biggest anti-nuclear weapons rally in a generation'. Campaigners came from across the world. Some even came all the way Australia to protest against the renewal of Trident. Others had come from the west coast of Scotland, where Britain’s nuclear deterrent submarines are based. Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, addressed the crowd and Leanne Wood, Nicola Sturgeon and Caroline Lucas joined the protesters. However Angus Crawford of the BBC dismissed the gathering as being far fewer than the 300,000 strong peace protest of 1983 and his camera operator selected a small section of stragglers to film, giving a totally false impression of the huge numbers present.

So who was telling the truth The Guardian or the BBC? They both were. Tens of thousands were less than 300,000 AND it was the 'biggest anti-nuclear weapons rally in a generation'. Both statements were true although the gave widely different impressions of the march. It is so important that we read our newspapers and watch television news bulletins with awareness and through the pages of this book we are trying to give you this awareness.

I was probably the first press whistleblower with my Camera Assassin book but I was not the last. Recently ex-BBC reporter, John Darvall, has exposed simmilar goings-on at the Beeb. "Trust nothing you read or watch" he warned.

Darvall was moved to speak out following the insensitive reporting of the tragic death of his daughter, Polly, by the BBC and other outlets. The BBC itself misreported specific information about his family, which added even further to their grief. "This poor piece of journalism made Tuesday probably the worst day of this whole episode so far" he bitterly remarked.

"This week TV and newspapers have proven to me why they are not the future of news. ... The internet allows us to come to our own conclusions by checking our own facts. We really can’t trust the traditional outlets to do it right or properly. ... If they can’t even get their facts right, be trusted with clear information and then report it accurately, is it any wonder that we are all turning to Facebook, Twitter and other internet sources for our news and information? ... I am ashamed to be a journalist. Trust nothing you read or watch."

Research by Cardiff University has shown the BBC to be pro-business and conservative. An analysis of BBC News at Six revealed that, in 2007, business representatives outnumbered trade union representatives by a ratio of more than 5-to-1 , and of in By 2012 that figure had risen to a staggering 19-to-1!

Research into the BBC coverage of the 2008 financial crisis revealed similar pro-business sentiment. Opinion was almost completely dominated by investment bankers, stockbrokers and other city voices.

So it wasn't just me, Chapman and Brown, in the pay of Rupert Murdoch, who were presenting a highly skewed version of reality. Read the whole sordid story in my book Camera Assassin.

Chapter Three - United We Stand
by Jack Cox

Why can't folks just get along? If you want to start a company to make widgets you will need certain things. Your will need a factory building, raw materials, machinery, design engineers, skilled workers (who are also qualified engineers) to operate the machines, accountants, administrators and managers, sales reps, cleaners and other unskilled workers. You will need all of these. If you leave out any of these people you will not be able to make and market your widgets. Its that simple. All these people are contributing, in their different ways, to the success of the company. Without them, you will be out of a job yourself. They are all essential, so why not treat them all with respect and pay them well?

Of course the people who put their life savings into starting a company, and may well work many long hours for little reward for the fist few years of operation, deserve to be rewarded for their enterprise and for the gamble they took with their money. Unless there are financial incentives to start a company nobody would ever start one.

But there is a big difference between incentive and greed. Karl Marx (1818 - 1883) realised that the greatest power would inevitably be wielded by the owners of the means of production, the factory owners. Prior to the industrial revolution, the owners of the means of production had been the farm owners.

In medieval times, poor people controlled small strips of land where they grew their own food, a bit like allotment holders today. But the rich, greedy, land owners had a different vision and as they also were the politicians of the day they were in a position to abuse their power.

The Enclosure Acts were a series of Acts of Parliament which enclosed open strip farmed fields and common land, creating legal property rights to rich land owners who were effectively steeling the land from the poor.

Between 1604 and 1914, over 5,200 individual enclosure acts were put into place, enclosing 2,800,000 hectares of land. The people depended on this land in order to eat. Loosing it forced them to become paid labourers. And with so many people flooding the labour market its not hard to see that individually they didn't have a lot of bargaining power. Indeed their wages were so low that they spent their entire lives close to starvation while the rich land owners grew ever fatter. Indeed this had been the plan all along.

At the beginning of this period people had been forced into near-slave labour on the big farming estates. But with the coming of the industrial revolution they ended up leaving the land altogether and sought employment in the new factories, mills and mines. As the rich land owners were the ones with all the money, they were the ones to open the factories and they brought their bad attitudes with them. They weren't all bad of course but most of them just wanted to make as much money for themselves as possible and to hell with everybody else. That meant keeping production costs as low as possible and wages were considered to be just another production cost. It never occurred to them that their workers were an essential part of the business and deserved a fair proportion of the profit they were helping to create.

Indeed it would be better not to look upon wages as a production cost at all but rather, one of the ways that profit is distributed to the people who create the wealth, on an equal footing with shareholder dividends.

As it turned out, ownership of the means of production was not the only source of power. Another was collective action and so the trade unions were born. As mentioned earlier, the rich landowners held the political power so were able to pass laws to suite themselves. As a result, collective bargaining had been outlawed as far back as the 14th century with The Ordinance of Labourers (1349).  Some 400 years later the Combination Act (1799) banned trade unions and collective bargaining by British workers.

Arguably the first modern union was the The General Union of Trades (also known as the Philanthropic Society) which was founded in 1818 in Manchester. The factory owners / politicians were not happy about this so they passed the Combinations of Workmen Act (1825) to further prohibited trade unions from attempting to collectively bargain for better terms and conditions at work, and suppressed the right to strike.

There is no doubt that the unions were needed and did a good job in protecting worker rights. However, as is so often the nature of things, they themselves grew very powerful, some would argue too powerful.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is also what had happened with Russian communism. Originally set up to empower the people, 'the people' soon became a term euphemistically used to mean 'the government'. The Russian Revolution had merely replaced one oppressor with another and that is not freedom.

In Britain, trade unions had begun to oppress, as well as empower their members. Closed Shops had been introduced forcing workers to join a union as a condition of gaining employment and strike ballots were far from fair or democratic. Votes were usually decided on a show of hands rather than a secret ballot. Even worse, workers who did not agree with a strike or with the aims of the union were branded ’scabs' and were subject to much persecution, often violent persecution. Workers who did not vote in accordance with the wishes of the union were often beaten up.

The right way to release the iron grip of the unions would have been to render them obsolete by enshrining worker rights in law, guaranteeing fair wages and safe working conditions. Instead the goernment tried to break them. Battle lines were drawn. Government intentions may have been good, to begin with, but ther methods most certainly were not and they went far too far.

Why can't people just get along? Why can't they share profits fairly, without being forced to, just because its the decent thing to do? I am sick of hearing captains of industry bleating on that they can't pay their workers more because it would make the business unprofitable. It never occurs to their blinkered minds that they can indeed pay their people more, without increasing their overall wage bill one penny, just by paying themselves proportionally less. Such a solution would not make the business unprofitable so why is it never mentioned? But successive Conservative governments didn't want a fair and equitable solution for all, they just wanted to hammer the unions.

Flying pickets or secondary pickets are groups of strikers who move from one workplace to another to picket there. Usually flying pickets are illegal - you can only join a picket line at your own workplace although trade union representatives can be on picket lines at different workplaces if they're responsible for organising workers in those workplaces. The practice of secondary picketing was banned in the 1970s while Ted Heath was Prime Minister.

The first ever national building industry strike was held in 1972. Working conditions on building sites were second only to coal mines for fatalities and serious injuries. Basic facilities which people took for granted in factories, offices and shops were scarce or non-existent. There were hardly any (or no) toilets, washbasins, or lockers, let alone canteens.

Ricky Tomlinson (born1939, former building worker, now an actor, comedian and activist), remarked 'McAlpines looked after their horses better than the workers on their sites'.

Fatal accidents were hardly a rarity.

Number of fatal accidents in construction
reported to Health & Safety Commission (HSC),
enforcement and other authorities 1971-75:

1971                201
1972                190
1973                231
1974                166
1975                182

Tomlinson was one of the shrewsbury 24, a group of 24 flying pickets who were arrested during the Builders Strike in September of 1972, while Ted Heath was still Prime Minster.

Five coach loads of pickets visited Shropshire to protest against poor working conditions in the building industry. Five months later on 14th February 1973, 24 of the pickets, including Ricky Tomlinson, were arrested and charged with over 200 offences. The charges related to picketing in the Shrewsbury area on 6th September 1972. They included charges of unlawful assembly, intimidation and affray. Six of the pickets were also charged with conspiracy to intimidate. None of the pickets had been cautioned or arrested during the strike.

There had been around 70 police officers shadowing the pickets at all times. No complaints were made to the unions or laid against the pickets at the time.

Several separate trials further and after several different convictions, the pickets always denied they were guilty of any of the charges which were levelled against them. For 40 years they have maintained that there was government interference in the prosecutions. The government just wanted to make examples of them.

Since its inception in 2006, the Shrewsbury 24 Campaign has subsequently sought for the complete release of all papers relating to the case and the arrests.

Successive governments have used Section 23 of the Freedom of Information Act (2000) to prevent the release of the papers that might shed light on any role the government of the day played in the prosecutions.

A pressure group, The Shrewsbury 24 Campaign, was formed to try to overturn the unjust prosecution of the 24 building workers.

Their main focus is an application to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) to have these cases referred to the Court of Appeal and for these miscarriages of justice to be overturned. It was submitted on the 3rd April 2012.

The Paper Petition demanding that the Government release documents relating to the conviction of the men was served at Number 10 Downing Street on Monday 16th December 2013. The petition lead to a parliamentary debate which was held on 23rd January 2014. It was was won by 120 to 3.

Have you ever noticed the media bias in the way industrial deputes are reported? Even the left wing papers like The Mirror and The Guardian unconsciously follow this trend but Murdoch’s The Sun and The Times (and The New of the World in its day) are quite blatant. They write about the Steel Workers' Strike or the Miners' Strike, like its all one sided and the workers are to blame for bringing the country to a standstill.

Strikes do not happen in a vacume. They are not caused by the workers or by seniour management alone. Rather they are caused the the faliure of both sides to agree on certain matters. It would be fairer to refer to the Steel Industry Dispute or the Mining Industry Dispute.

Ok, they may often just be dissagreeing on what constitutes decent wages but they are just as likily to dissagree on vital matters of saftey. Since the earlist times, manual workers have been considered to be expendable. Working class lives don't matter.

We could reduce the income gap between business owners and their employees, without reducing incentives to start businesses or to rise within them, if we replaced Income Tax with a Differentials Tax.

Income Tax rates 2016

The Standard Personal Allowance
(the amount of income you don’t pay any tax on) is £ 10,600

Basic rate:           20%     on £ 0 to £ 31,785 above your Personal Allowance
Higher rate:          40%     on earnings between £ 31,786 to £ 150,000 above your Personal Allowance
Additional rate:     45%     on earnings over £ 150,000 above your Personal Allowance

Proposed Differential Tax rates

The Standard Personal Allowance is £ 10,600
above the earnings of the lowest paid worker in the company.

Basic rate:           20%     on £ 0 to £ 31,785 above your Personal Allowance
Higher rate:          40%     on earnings between £ 31,786 to £ 150,000 above your Personal Allowance
Additional rate:     45%     on earnings over £ 150,000 above your Personal Allowance

I absolutely do not want to give the impression that politicians and the media are always working against the interests of ordinary people. Far from it. Many politicians, business people, journalists and editors, of all political persuasions, have a strong social conscience.  Indeed working conditions have been steadily improving, year after year, for a long time. The Labour Party and the trade unions have been working tirelessly for a fairer society. So have the other parties.

Margaret Hilda Thatcher LG, OM, PC, FRS (1925 - 2013) was a British stateswoman and politician who was the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990 and the leader of the Conservative Party from 1975 to 1990. Politicians do like to have their scapegoats. For Margaret Thatcher, that meant the unions. She was the nemesis of the trade union movement. Indeed she managed to destroy the power of the trade unions for almost a generation. However she did bring in Enterprise Zones and an Enterprise Allowance which helped thousands of unemployed and redundant people to set up small businesses. In fact all the parties have done some good and done some harm.

The whole left, right and centre model of politics is flawed anyway. The right want a world in which ordinary people are powerless and dependant on the owners of the means of production. The left want a world where ordinary people are powerless and dependant on the government and the unions. The common denominator is people being powerless and dependant. Maybe its time for a complete rethink.

The left, right and centre model is further complicated by immigration. You would think the right wound support immigration because increased competition for jobs pushes down wages, You would think the left would oppose immigration for the exact same reason. However the opposite is often the case. Makes you think what really does motivate these people.

The usual argument put forward in support of immigration is that immigrants work hard and pay taxes. Statistics are produced to show that, on balance, immigrates pay more in taxes than they take in benefits. What this argument conveniently fails to mention is that if the immigrants weren't there, British people would be doing those self same jobs and paying that self same tax, and what is more, they would be off the dole so saving the country having to keep them in their idleness.

Short sighted leaders in industry, and in the private sector, often find it easier to import foreign workers than to train British people. This has been especially true in the National Health Service (NHS). That’s why we have far too many foreign doctors and nurses and why Brexit is causing a panic within the NHS. We will just have to stop pirating workers from other countries and start training more of our own people, and we will have to do it quickly.

But Theresa May's new government is doing the exact opposite. In July 2016, just before clearing off for their extended summer holidays, the government announced their intention to scrap NHS bursaries for university students by 2017.

The plan to scrap bursaries and replace them with loans would result in trainee nurses leaving university with over £ 50,000 worth of debt yet the starting salary for a newly trained NHS nurse is just £ 21,692 per year. Just when we should be encouraging more British people into the nursing profession, Theresa May is making it even harder for them. What on earth is she thinking?!?!

The whole idea of student loans in a nonsense. I was lucky. Back in my day we got free tuition, a maintenance grant and travelling expenses. My classmates and I left university with zero debt. The country is in a pickle. The only way out of a pickle is to think our way out. The only way to do that is to help our people become better educated, not make it harder for them.

In this book we draw attention to much that is wrong in the world and ways improvements could be made but its not all doom and gloom. Very far from it. So many things are better now than when I was growing up. Some things are worse but lots of things are better. Our standard of living is better for a start.

By way of illustration of how much worse conditions were in the past, and how far we have come, let me quote from a report that appeared in the New Statesman in October 2014. It was written by Harry Leslie Smith, an RAF veteran, now in his 90s, who was born into an impoverished mining family in the 1920s.

You can read the full article here -

Over 90 years ago, I was born in Barnsley, Yorkshire, to a working-class family. Poverty was as natural to us as great wealth and power were to the aristocracy of that age. Like his father and grandfather before him, my dad, Albert, eked out a meagre existence as a miner, working hundreds of feet below the surface, smashing the rock face with a pickaxe, searching for coal.

Hard work and poor wages didn’t turn my dad into a radical. They did, however, make him an idealist, because he believed that a fair wage, education, trade unions and universal suffrage were the means to a prosperous democracy. He endured brutal working conditions but they never hardened his spirit against his family or his comrades in the pits. Instead, the harsh grind of work made his soul as gentle as a beast of burden that toiled in desolate fields for the profit of others.

My mother, Lillian, however, was made of sterner stuff. She understood that brass, not love, made the world go round. So when a midwife with a love of gin and carbolic soap delivered me safely on a cold winter’s night in February 1923 into my mum’s exhausted arms, I was swaddled in her rough-and-ready love, which toughened my skin with a harsh affection. I was the first son but I had two elder sisters who had already skinned their knees and elbows in the mad fight to stay alive in the days before the social safety network.

By the time I was weaned from my mother’s breast, I had begun to learn the cruel lessons that the world inflicted on its poor. At the age of seven, my eldest sister, Marion, contracted tuberculosis, which was a common and deadly disease for those who lived hand to mouth in early-20th-century Britain. Her illness was directly spawned from our poverty, which forced us to live in a series of fetid slums.

Despite being a full-time worker, my dad was always one pay packet away from destitution. Several times, my family did midnight flits and moved from one run down single-bedroom tenement to the next. Yet we never seemed to move far from the town’s tip, a giant wasteland stacked with rotting rubbish, which became a playground for preschool children.

At the beginning of my life, affordable health care was out of reach for much of the population. A doctor’s visit could cost the equivalent of half a week’s wages, so most people relied on good fortune rather than medical advice to see them safely through an illness. But luck and guile went only so far and many lives were snatched away before they had a chance to start. The wages of the ordinary worker were at a mere subsistence level and therefore medicine or simple rest was out of the question for many people.

Unfortunately for my sister, luck was also in short supply in our household. Because my parents could neither afford to see a consultant nor send my sister to a sanatorium, Marion’s TB spread and infected her spine, leaving her an invalid.

The 1926 General Strike, which began just as my sister started her slow and painful journey from life to death, was about more than wages to my dad and many others. It was called by the TUC in protest against mine owners who were using strong-arm tactics to force their workers to accept longer working hours for less take-home pay. At its start, it involved 1.7 million industrialised workers.

In essence, the strike was about the right of all people, regardless of their economic station, to live a dignified and meaningful life. My father joined it with enthusiasm, because he believed that all workers, from tram drivers to those who dug ore, deserved a living wage. But for my father the strike was also about the belief that he might be able to right the wrongs done to him and his family; if only he had more money in his pay packet, he might have been able to afford decent health care for all of us.

Unfortunately, the General Strike was crushed by the government, which first bullied TUC members to return to their work stations. Eight months later, it did the same to the miners whose communities had been beggared by being on the pickets for so long. My dad and his workmates had to accept wage cuts.

I remember my sister's pain and anguish during her finalweeks of life in October 1926. I’d play beside her in our parlour, which was as squalid as an animal pen, while she lay on a wicker landau, tied down by ropes to prevent her from falling to the ground while unattended. When Marion’s care became too much for my mother to endure, she was sent to our neighbourhood workhouse, which had been imprisoning the indigent since the days of Charles Dickens.

The workhouse where Marion died was a large, brick building less than a mile from our living quarters. Since it had been designed as a prison for the poor, it had few windows and had a high wall surrounding it. When my sister left our house and was transported there on a cart pulled by an old horse, my mum and dad told my other sister and me to wave goodbye, because Marion was going to a better place than here.

The workhouse was not used only as a prison for those who had been ruined by poverty; it also had a primitive infirmary attached to it, where the poor could receive limited medical attention. Perhaps the only compassion the place allowed my parents was permission to visit their daughter to calm her fears of death.

My sister died behind the thick, limestone walls at the age of ten and we didn’t even have the money to give her a proper burial. Marion was thrown into a communal grave for those too poor to matter. Since then, the pauper’s pit has been replaced by a dual carriageway.

Some historians have called the decade of my birth the Roaring Twenties but for most it was a long death rattle. Wages were low, rents were high and there was little or no job protection as a result of a postwar recession that had gutted Britain’s industrial heartland. When the Great Depression struck Britain in the 1930s, it turned our cities and towns into a charnel house for the working class, because they had no economic reserves left to withstand prolonged joblessness and the ruling class believed that benefits led to fecklessness.

Even now, when I look back to those gaslight days of my boyhood and youth, all I can recollect is hunger, filth, fear and death. My mother called those terrible years for our family, our friends and our nation a time when hard rain ate cold Yorkshire stone for its tea.

I will never forget seeing as a teenager the faces of former soldiers who had been broken physically and mentally during the Great War and were living rough in the back alleys of Bradford. Their faces were haunted not by the brutality of the war but by the savagery of the peace. Nor will I forget as long as I shall live the screams that fell out of dosshouse windows from the dying and mentally ill, who were denied medicine and solace because they didn’t have the money to pay for medical services.

Like today, those tragedies were perpetuated by a coalition government preaching that the only cure for our economic troubles was a harsh austerity, which promised to right Britain’s finances through the sacrifice of its lowest-paid workers. When my dad got injured, the dole he received was ten shillings a week. My family, like millions of others, were reduced to beggary. In the 1930s, the government believed that private charities were more suitable for providing alms for those who had been ruined in the Great Depression.

Austerity in the 1930s was like a pogrom against Britain’s working class. It blighted so many lives through preventable ailments caused by malnutrition, as well as thwarting ordinary people’s aspirations for a decent life by denying them housing, full- time employment or a proper education.

As Britain’s and my family’s economic situation worsened in the 1930s, we upped sticks from Barnsley to Bradford in the hope that my father might find work. But there were too many adults out of work and jobs were scarce, so he never found full-time employment again. We lived in dosshouses. They were cheap, sad places filled with people broken financially and emotionally. Since we had no food, my mum had me indentured to a seedy off-licence located near our rooming house. At the age of seven, I became a barrow boy and delivered bottles of beer to the down-and-outs who populated our neighbourhood.

My family were nomads. We flitted from one dosshouse to the next, trying to keep ahead of the rent collector. We moved around the slums of Bradford and when we had outstayed our welcome there, we moved on to Sowerby Bridge, before ending up in Halifax. As I grew up, my schooling suffered; I had to work to keep my sister, my mum and half-brothers fed. At the age of ten, I was helping to deliver coal and by my teens, I started work as a grocer’s assistant. At 17, I had been promoted to store manager. However, at the age of 18, the Second World War intervened in whatever else I had planned for the rest of my life. I volunteered to join the RAF.

My experiences of growing up in Britain before the NHS, when one’s health was determined by one’s wealth, and after 1948, when free health care was seen as a cornerstone for a healthy economy and democracy, convinced me that it was my duty to share my family experiences at this year’s Labour party conference. I agreed to speak about the NHS because I know there are few people left who can remember that brutal time before the welfare state, when life for many was short and cruel. I felt that I owed it to my sister Marion, whose life was cut short by extreme poverty and poor health care, along with all of those other victims of a society that protected the rich and condemned the poor to miserable lives. In many ways, making that speech freed me from the suffering of my youth.

Harry Leslie Smith is the author of a memoir: Harry's Last Stand: How the World My Generation Built is Falling Down and What We Can Do to Save it

Chapter Four - The Leveson Enquiry
and The Demise of the News of the World
by Ian Cutler

On 13th July 2011 then Prime Minister David Cameron appointed Lord Justice Leveson as Chairman of a public inquiry with a remit to look into the specific claims about phone hacking at the News of the World. The initial police inquiry and allegations of illicit payments to police by the press, and a second inquiry to review the general culture and ethics of the British media.

The News of the World had long been a dirty newspaper, especially since Murdoch took it over. Lies, double standards, sleaze and dirty tricks had been its stock in trade.

Then, starting in 2006, allegations of phone hacking began to engulf the paper. These culminated in the revelation on 4th July 2011 that, nearly a decade earlier, a private investigator hired by the newspaper had intercepted and deleted the voicemail of missing British teenager Milly Dowler, who was later found murdered. However, a Scotland Yard spokesperson admitted at the Leveson Inquiry that it had not been a private investigator who had deleted Dowler’s voicemail.

Due to the public backlash, the withdrawal of advertising and maybe my own revelations too, News International announced the closure of the News of the World on 7th July 2011.

The scandal deepened when the paper was alleged to have hacked into the phones of families of British service personnel killed in action. Senior figures on the newspaper were questioned by police. Former editor Andy Coulson and former News of the World royal editor Clive Goodman were arrested on 8th July 2011.

The former executive editor Neil Wallis was arrested on 15th July and former editor Rebekah Brooks was arrested on 17th July.

In October 2016, former News of the World reporter Mazher Mahmood was imprisoned for 15 months after being found guilty of tampering with evidence in the collapsed drug trial of singer Tulisa Contostavlos. After a two-week Old Bailey trial the so-called 'Fake Sheik' and his driver Alan Smith, were found guilty of conspiring to pervert the course of justice by changing a police statement. News UK was left facing more than 45 civil claims relating to Mahmood's stings.

Leveson made broad and complex recommendations relating to how the press should be regulated in future: He said that newspapers should continue to be self-regulated and the government should have no power over what they publish.

BUT there had to be a new press standards body created by the industry itself, with a new code of conduct. That body should be backed by legislation, which would create a means to ensure the regulation was independent and effective.

Leveson hoped that the arrangement would provide the public with a greater degree of confidence that their complaints would be seriously dealt with as well as ensuring the press are protected from interference.

Lord Justice Leveson said the new regulatory body should be independent but "underpinned" by law, to prevent more people from being hurt by "press behaviour that, at times, can only be described as outrageous".

He rejected a proposal from the press itself to police papers who signed up to a new regulator through legally-enforceable membership contracts.

However the initial reaction of the press, on the whole, was not overly supportive.

This is what they said:

Daily Mirror Editor-in-chief, Lloyd Embley, tweeted: "There is a firm belief that papers can deliver Leveson principles far more quickly without legislation - better for public and free speech.

"We need the right solution and fast .. but also need bit of time needed to check it is fit for purpose.

"Legislation can be changed - that's why statute is threat to free speech. Surprised some left of centre politicians are pushing for it."

The paper commented on the Leveson report that it had exposed "20 years of dirty washing" of the press "including the shocking treatment of the Dowlers, McCanns and others - but it is important to restate that laws already exist to deal with such cases.

"Nobody in their right mind would defend the status quo... Yet we firmly believe that a free press is a principle worth fighting for."

The Independent Editor Chris Blackhurst has said there is "movement" across the industry towards an agreement on making the new body fully independent of serving editors. Previously, he had said the independence of the new regulatory body was a "sticking point".

He said there was unanimity that the regulator would need the teeth proposed by Leveson, he said, such as the power to levy million pound fines, to launch investigations and direct the size and prominence of apologies.

The industry recognised the need to return the "favour" done by Mr..... Cameron in resisting statutory regulation, he told Sky News.

After the report was published, the Independent praised Lord Justice Leveson for "rejecting statutory regulation as such".

But it said: His central proposal, that the establishment and working of a new and fully independent regulatory body should be underpinned by legislation, we believe to be not only unnecessary, but undesirable." Daily Telegraph Editor, Tony Gallagher, has said Monday's meeting "felt like the summoning of the Five Families in The Godfather."

Of the Leveson report: the Telegraph said :"It would be wrong to use bad behaviour by the minority as an excuse to introduce the first press statute since censorship laws were abolished in 1695. "Whatever the judge hopes, this would be a slippery slope to state meddling."

Daily Mail expressed "the gravest reservations" about Lord Justice Leveson's recommendations.

"Repeatedly, he has said he is not proposing statutory regulation, but merely a body 'underpinned' by statute. This is just playing with words."

The Sun reported that Lord Justice Leveson "has sought to be fair and objective. But we are deeply alarmed by his main proposal for new legislation that could bring in state control of newspapers.

"How 'independent' would a regulatory body be if it had to answer to MPs? Such a law could allow state officials to walk into papers like the Sun and censor stories."

The Guardian commented "There are many good things about Leveson's ideas.

"Newspapers - which have complained for years about the iniquities and cost of the law - ought to welcome a more flexible, quicker and cheaper alternative.

"As we have argued consistently, this is a real prize worth having, even if it needs statute to achieve it and to make it stick.

"The processes of appointment and governance he outlines are fairer, more open and more transparent than the old PCC club. Publishers - including digital players - would have compelling reasons to want to be inside the tent. Anyone outside the tent could be regulated by Ofcom.

"But a 2,000-page report is bound to provoke questions. Is Ofcom really the right body to be involved in all, or any, of these roles? Can any system be both voluntary and still have compulsion?"

The Daily Express said that David Cameron has admitted "to pass a press law making newspapers ultimately accountable to Parliament for what they print would be to cross a Rubicon.

"His challenge to the newspaper industry to devise its own regulatory system that complies fully with the tough principles set out by Lord Leveson, delivers fair play and yet does not require legislation is therefore one we are happy to take up. The task is an urgent one.

"No properly run newspaper should fear or resist genuinely independent checks and balances,"

The Times said Mr..... Cameron's resistance to statutory regulation "showed courage and principle".

The Leveson proposal for legislation to back up press regulation was "politically hard to resist" and Lord Justice Leveson has called it "essential", it noted.

Then added "The independent regulation that the report advances does not require statutory underpinning. Statute can be spurned while the scheme is embraced."

Financial Times said it was "worried about Lord Justice Leveson's proposals for a 'backstop regulator' that would step in if news organisations did not join the new body.

"It is a press law by the back door and one that pays scant attention to the revolutionary changes in the m edia landscape. This is increasingly dominated by digital innovators and social media," it claimed.

The Independent Press Standards Organisation ( IPSO ) was established on Monday 8 September 2014. It replaced the old Press Complaints Commission (PCC), which had been the main industry regulator of the press in the United Kingdom since 1990.

Now it will be impossible, or at least a lot harder, for unscrupulous journalists and press photographers to get away with what I got away with when I worked for Rupert Murdoch.

No longer will mavericks like Gerry Brown, who was behind many a fake story including Sardine Hostels, the Beckham kidnapping and the Bullets Wizzing Past My Ears rubbish he concocted with Mazher Mahmoud, the 'Fake Sheik' who was sent to prison for 15 months for tampering with Tulisa trial evidence, or Clive Cooke who committed an act of paedophilia with a 13 year old boy while following up a lead about a gang of paedophiles in Holborn be able to operate unchecked.

That era is over. Let's hope the future of journalism will be cleaner and more noble that the world I inhabited.

It would be nice to think that now media barons like Rupert Murdoch will find it harder to encourage bad journalism but will it stop them from accepting money from corrupt polititians or from arms companies? Until we find a way to stop that we will not stop the proliferation of fake news.

You can ind out more about the dirty antics that went on at the News of the World by reading my book -

Chapter Five - Who Are The Real Gangsters?
by Bobby Cummines OBE

I was a gangster, sure. I was one of the most dangerous men in England, but I turned my life around. I committed terrible crimes and I served my time. What gets me mad are all the villains who never get caught because their sins are not actually illegal. I am talking about the rich MPs and bankers whose atrocities are not illegal for the simple fact they they make the laws to suit themselves. Even when they do break the law they always seem to get away with it because they have connections.

That’s why I used to call Tony Blair 'Teflon Tone', nothing sticks to him. I told him that to his face once.

I am working on my second book and that’s about the prison service, what goes on in there, that’s my next book and it’s all about maximum security prisons, what really went on in there on, how people got murdered that sort of stuff. They used to cover it up, they wouldn’t even record it. People were vanishing from the prisons. Going away to psychiatric institutions like Broadmoor, coming back fried. If they couldn’t control them they sent them away. They come back as sick young guys, fit young guys come back fit guys who used the gym, slamming dominoes on the table. Oh he’s a subversive, they would vanish under the mental health act.

They don’t do it with electrodes now, they did me with electrodes, they electrocuted me because I was supposed to be a very violent offender.

I them days it was called aversion therapy. They electrocuted me but nowadays they don’t use that, because that was classed as torture. They had to close down the control unit. I was 19 when they done that to me and then what happened after that. They started using drugs like Largactil Tuinal and Nembutal so they ply you with that now instead of electrodes.

The prison officer who sat with me when they brought me back. cause they doped me up twice, they give me too much dope, when they done it you have a strobe light put in front of your face. They put wires on you then they give you it.

Anyway, they was worried I wasn’t going to make it. I will never forget he was a good prison officer, you get good and bad on both sides of the fence. He was a good prison officer and he sat with me all fucking night and I woke up about 3 o'clock the next night, 3am, thumping headache if you can imagine the worse migraine You’ve ever had and he went 'are you alright Bob?'

I went 'I don’t feel well'.

I was still drugged up and I had pounding headaches and that guy sat with me and I tell you what. He didn’t like what had been done, I think between you and me, he was a little bit of a whistle blower. I think he let the journalists know what was going on, because all of a sudden MPs started coming in and they shut down all the control units under the Torture Act.

The best friend I had, ever, who stood by me all the way through my bird, was my Buddhist monk. He used to visit me everywhere I went and Tony Benn, used to write to me regular. When I used to sit in parliament and Hilary was there, he used to go "I know Bobby you know my Dad."

Hilary Benn, Tony Benn was his Dad. Tony Benn was Lord Wedgewood Benn who gave up the lordship to be a Labour MP. He was the main one who stuck up for the miners in the miners' strike, so me and him used to write to each other regularly. That’s why it was iffy. Once I had him and I had the Duke of Devonshire writing to me. The screws got worried then because I had powerful people on my side. They couldn’t do what they used to do any more Those two gentlemen really saved my life. The screws could have topped me me and made it look like suicide, any time they liked.

I had a lot of respect for Tony Benn over the way he helped during the miners' strike. He always stood up for ordinary people. Tony heard what I had been through and he took a little bit of a shine to me.

One of the miners, a guy called Terry French , told Tony about me. Of course he is dead now, so is Tony. Somehow me and Tony just clicked. Tony said to me 'you know you’re really bright, why are you in prison?'

Tony never came to the prison but we used to write to each other regularly, like once a week, we would write to each other and then someone mentioned something to the Duke of Devonshire and they said you had better write to him Bobby he’s really interesting.

So I wrote to the Duke of Devonshire cause he knew Tony Benn, and I used to get letters from the Duke of Devonshire. That freaked out the prison authorities. Me getting letters from Tony Benn and the Duke of Devonshire .

David Mellor and Lord Belsted had labelled me one of the most dangerous men in British jails. There is David Mellor, the Minister of Justice at the time, and he got caught sucking Koo Stark’s toes. She was an high class playgirl. I doubt if she was a prostitute but she was moving round in high class circles having fun and games with all the pervies.

It embarrassed him when it all came out but then, all these people banging on about cracking down on crime, sanctimonious twats, just a bunch of perverts the lot of them.

Much later, when I was on the radio, I remember saying to an MP 'I think you are in the wrong business, you should be in garden centres instead of politics, you would make a fortune.'

He said 'how do you work that out?'

I said 'With what comes out of your mouth, you could grow beautiful roses'.

The people loved that and so they knew I could do the one shot when I was meeting politicians, cause the thing was when you are not telling lies and they are telling lies, they tell one lie they have to tell a thousand to cover that one, you stick to the truth they are done. The truth really does set you free.

Another time, on Radio 4, I done Jack straw over prison overcrowding. I knew Jack well in fact I quite liked Jack He said he was going to provide 10,000 more prison spaces. So I said to him 'Jack, let’s get this right, your stats not my stats, we know that every person in prison has committed at least three other offences. Is that correct? So let’s get this straight, what you are telling the British public is you’re quite willing to let 30,000 victims of crime suffer to fill your 10,000 places. One victim of crime is too much for me but 10,000 is all right for you',

That slaughtered him, done him, even the presenter of the show started laughing. When I walked out Jack went 'that was well below the belt Bobby'.

I went 'your stats not mine Jack, there’s this thing called honesty, you were trying do the politician shuffle, I don’t do that.'

When Murdoch had to testify to the House of Commons, how many of those MPs did he own? If he owns you and he gets the word to you through nefarious sources not to ask him certain questions, then you are not going to ask him those questions. How much power has that man got? Is he a godfather? I think he’s the biggest godfather you could ever meet, on both sides of the Atlantic,  but that’s just my opinion. If he can bring down governments he can do it here, he can do it in America, he can do it in Australia,  he can do it everywhere.
Murdoch doesn't own all the press of course. There are other people that run newspapers. They are like little mandarins. They are  like little gods themselves between them but put them together they make the American mafia, the Russian mafia, the Triads and all that look like mere gas meter bandits.
I'll tell you something, You’ve got to be careful cause  if you go against Rupert he’s got the dirt on MI5, MI6, C.I.A., he’s got the dirt on all of them. In other countries they put trouble makers in cells, as political prisoners, and that sort of thing. In this country they do it quite differently. They make sure you don’t get a job, or you don’t get credit, or you don’t get a mortgage. There are many ways to kill people. You can kill them with a bullet or you can kill with a phone call.
They control the media, they can make you look like a nutcase, they can make you look like whatever they want. When you have the police in your pocket and you have the politicians in your pocket and you own the media what the fuck have you got to worry about?
I fear no one, don’t worry about that, if he wants it I'll have it with him. He has fucked up people’s lives. I might not get my knighthood or my lordship out of it but I've already got an OBE. What else do I need?
I went to Charlie Richardson’s funeral. I read the eulogy. He was my best friend. I had certain MPs say to me 'Bobby if I was you I wouldn’t do that because he led a notorious South London torture gang. Going to his funeral could mess you up for your knighthood. You are going places'.

I replied that if I turned my back on a friend for a knighthood what sort of man would I be. 'Go and fuck yourself, I am doing it anyway'.

And I did. You've got to stand up for what's right in this world.
I look at it this way, II've got children, there’s people got children, these people have so much control. They control your children’s education, they control the laws and polices your children will be living with. No one should have that sort power, no one man should have that power. Murdoch is like a god.
Tony Benn had integrity, he had he was a brilliant guy.
B: That’s what they say right when Tony Benn give up the House of Lords over the miners' strike they shut him down. Everyone turned against him  cause they were all worried about having their noses in the trough. They were climbing up the political ladder. That’s why Rupert was able to control them.  They knew that if Murdoch brought out a scandal their careers would be finished.
They don’t give a shit about the working classes but they gave a shit about their own careers. We proved it, politicians' duck houses being installed at public expense. Sir Peter Viggers claimed £ 1,645 for a floating duck house, and Kitty Ussher was forced to resign as a Treasury minister after avoiding a £ 17,000 tax bill on the sale of her home. Fiddling bastards.
If a mother on a housing estate fiddled her housing benefits to buy her kid a pair of shoes, she would do six months in Holloway.
Politicians fiddled  thousands and its still going on. How many of them went to gaol? Three, Lord Taylor went to gaol and Jeffery Archer and Jonathan Aitken .

Aitken, a former cabinet minister, was jailed for 18 months after admitting perjury and perverting the course of justice.

Mr. Justice Scott Baker told him: "For nearly four years you wove a web of deceit in which you entangled yourself and from which there was no way out unless you were prepared to come clean and tell the truth. Unfortunately you were not."
He was so blatant. They are all same.  Aitken even tried to get his daughter to take the wrap for him.

These so-called honourable gentlemen are not that honourable. We looked after our own, they will throw their own kids to the wall to look after their political careers. Not the sort of people I'd like to have a drink with. I am particular about who I drink with.

There are gangsters everywhere, in politics, in the police, in the security services in terrorist organisation and among freedom fighters.

When the IRA were blowing up England we never said Catholic terrorists, we never labelled them by religion. They called themselves the Irish Republican Army, the IRA, not the Catholic Republican Army. But now Islamic terrorists want to be called the Islamic State so we talk about Islamic terrorists.

The Troubles in Ireland weren't really about religion. You had Protestants who were loyal to Britain and Catholics, the IRA, who wanted independence from Britain. You had the orange and the green. Is was about politics, not religion.

You had the loyalist lot out there, the Shankhill Road lot, cutting each other up, cutting the Catholics up with razors and killing them. The Shankill Butchers they called them. Then you had the IRA going and shooting people in front of their wives and kids.

All those people were let out of jail on the Good Friday Agreement and there was even Secret Service reports saying don't nick this guy, don't nick that guy, even though they knew they were terrorists or gangsters. There were gangsters for the government as well.

The British government and the American government have created the Islamic terrorist situation because we're going for the oil fields. We need an excuse to go into the Arab countries. We are not going in to liberate them, we are going in to conquer them and the only way we can justify that is by pretending it's a war on terror.

Now we have got a religious thing, you had it since day one. In the 12th century it was Saladin verses Richard the Lion Heart but that wouldn't have got any support so they sold it to the people as a holy crusade. Before that, Alfred the Great rallied his troops by saying they were fighting pagans. Had he admitted he wanted to rule over them and take their taxes instead of letting the Vikings do the same thing, they would have told him to piss off. Religion is a very good motivator.

Always ask yourself, who was involved? what are the politicians going to gain from this? What are the bankers going to gain from this? what are the arms manufacturers going to gain from this? Think to yourself what political story is unfolding that they want to divert your attention away from? And ask yourself which back bencher got promoted to the cabinet because of this?

What about bribery and corruption? The days of the brown envelopes may be over but there are still deals being done behind the scenes. How come G4S keep getting all these government contracts? Couldn't possibly be because Theresa May's husband is a major shareholder, could it? G4S crashed the Olympic Games and have been taken out of 140 Dutch jails. Even in South Africa they are getting rid of them. Yet Theresa May keeps giving them more contracts.

How do corporations bung a politician? I will tell you how. They find out all his relatives. "We can't give you a bung but we will give your relatives a share of our company."

That's how you do a kick back.

Chapter Six - What's Really Happening in the Middle East?
by Jack Cox

Some conspiracy theorists will tell you that we have nothing to fear from Muslim extremists, that its just a storm in a teacup whipped up by the media and the politicians to scare us into giving them more power. In this chapter I intend to demonstrate that that point of view is only half correct.

Yes it has been whipped up by the media and the politicians. Yes they are trying to scare us. Yes they do want us to surrender more of our precious freedoms. However ISIS / Daesh, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram and other terrorist groups really do present a very real and present danger.

It is my contention that these very dangerous groups are the puppets of western arms traders and the politicians and media barons who are in bed with them.

In November 2015 former Lib Dem leader, Lord 'Paddy' Ashdown, told the BBC that British Conservative  politicians are  linked to the rich Arabs who fund the jihadists. He claimed that closeness was the reason ministers are reluctant to tackle the Gulf States. Lord Ashdown said 'rich businessmen' in Gulf countries are funding terror and nations like Saudi Arabia haven't been fighting hard against ISIS. Lord Ashdown went on to say that David Cameron (the then Prime Minister) must pressure Gulf states to play their part. Of course Downing Street refused to accept Ashdown’s suggestion and praised their strong relationships with the east.

Lord Ashdown said it was essential that any strategy for tackling Daesh in Syria addressed the role of the states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Although the two countries are nominally part of the military coalition against Daesh, Lord Ashdown said neither had been involved in military action for months although  funds were continuing to flow from the two countries to the extremists. He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: "I don’t say the governments have been doing it, but their rich businessmen certainly have."

He said that the Prime Minister’s strategy on Syria needed to include international pressure on the Gulf states to ensure they "play their part" in the coalition.

"One element of this which is pressure on the Gulf states to stop funding Sunni jihadism, and pressure on the Gulf states if we are going to send our aircraft in to make sure that theirs are present too, is a crucial part of this strategy," he said.

I am not, yet, in a position to name names but its becoming increasingly apparent that there is a deadly game being played that is making a few rich business people, media barons and politicians an awful lot richer and a lot of poor solders an awful lot deader.

Paddy Ashdown, as an ex SAS officer, feels for the brave soldiers sent to die and to kill, fired up by lies. I too took the queen’s shilling back in 1971 and was sent off to Northern Ireland to take pot shots at the IRA. I was armed with a 7.62mm high velocity rifle, a pouch full of ammunition and a head full of lies. I was told by my C.O. that the Catholics and the Protestants in Northern Ireland were squabbling, and killing innocent civilians, over whether the eucharist symbolically represented the blood and body of Christ or whether it literally, magically became the blood and body of Christ. Surely, I was told, such stupid fanatics needed to be stopped and it was our duty to stop them.

Many of the lads I served with actually believed that crap. Of course the conflict was a lot more complicated than that. It was about the Catholic descendants of the native population trying to claw back political and financial power from the Protestant descendants of the English invaders.

Religious wars are always far more complicated than they apper on the surface. People, especially uneducated poor people,  get very emotional about their religions. The ruling elete know this and play on it. 1200 years ago King Alfred of Wessex rallied the support of his people against the invading, viking Danes, not by saying 'we must fight the invaders to protect my crown' but rather 'we Christians must resist the advance of the Pagans'. He never mentioned the uncomfortable fact that just a hundred years previously, the Saxons had followed a very similar Pagan religion to that of the Danes. Indeed their chief god, Wodin, was just another name for the Danish chief god, Odin.

Alfred and his priests told so many lies about the Pagans that, evan after all this time, the word 'Pagan' induces fear and revution in the hearts of many brainwashed Christians. Of those who claim to stand for religious freedom, few want to extend that freedom to modern-day Pagans.

I know what lies I was told, and what lies the Saxons were told, but I can only guess at what our brave boys are being told now to make them kill and die in Afghanistan and in Syria. And I can only guess what lies the terrorists are being told. Must be huge great whopping lies to make them strap on suicide vests and blow their daft brains out. Yes they are extremely dangerous. Our boys are extremely dangerous too. Both sides are misguided because they have been lied to by wicked and greedy men and women. The ordinary fighters on both sides, the cannon fodder, victims, all victims of greedy, wicked liars.

And not just lies to give them reasons to kill but also lies to soften the tradgedy of their own deaths.

The newly Christanised Saxons were promised they would live on in a paradice called Heaven, the Danes were told they would feast in the halls of Valhala, and the Islamists are being told they will be given the use of 72 virgins (houris) when they get to their Heaven. What god would give other human beings as a reward is hard to imagine but these poor, uneducated, brainwashed people seem to believe it.

The whole process of radicalisation in a con trick. Take Anjem Choudary for instance. He preaches that Muslims are God’s chosen people and that 'infidels' (non-Muslims) owe Muslims a living. He preaches that its good for Muslims to move to Britain, refuse to work and claim Job Seekers' Allowance (JSA). Indeed, Choudary calls JSA 'Jihad Seekers Allowance'. He says we infidels work hard to pay the taxes that pay their benefits. So, according to Choudary, by living off the state, Muslims are treating infidels as slaves, which is the right and proper order of things.

How can any rational person possibly be taken in by such outrageous nonsense? Choudary is an educated man. Does he really believe the lunacy that comes out of his mouth or is he deliberately stoking the fires of unrest for some darker purpose?

How can we tell whether the liars believe their lies, whether the radicalisers really have been radicalised themselves? Or are they deliberately misleading their followers for some sinister reason? Clearly if you go far enough up the chain of command you come to the deliberate liars, the spreaders of misinformation, the warmongers and the arms dealers.

Of course Muslims have genuine grievances. Just take a look at their history. The West had taken a very cavalier approach to Middle East affairs during the colonial years and it was the West that caused the very creation of Daesh.

Even before Islam was invented, East and West had often clashed swords. The Persians invaded Europe in an attempt to conquer the Greeks in the fifth century B.C.E. The Greek, Alexander the Great, attempted to conquer all of Asia, as far as India, in the fourth century B.C.E. Both the Persians and the Greeks set up colonial empires in their occupied territories. The Romans established colonies in Mesopotamia, north-western Arabia, and Assyria in the second century C.E. Much blood was spilt and there was much suffering on both sides. Thus started a festering resentment of the West that still exists today.

The Avars from northern China and Mongolia besieged Constantinople in 626 C.E. Mohammed was working as a merchant in Arabia at the time. Indeed, the Avars, by this siege, were one of the many different forces that weakened the Byzantines to the extent that the Byzantine empire fell, relatively easily, to the Muslims.

In 624 Mohammed led a raid against a Meccan caravan, killing 70 Meccans, for mere material gain. Between 630 and the death of Mohammed in 632 C.E., Muslims, led personally by Mohammed, conquered the bulk of western Arabia and southern Palestine.

After Mohammed’s death the new Muslim caliph, Abu Bakr, launched Islam into almost 1,500 years of continual imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest and subjugation of others through invasion and war, a role Islam continues to this very day.

Muslim imperial wars were waged against hundreds of nations, over millions of square miles. At the height of their power they controlled more land than British Empire ever did. They ranged from what is now southern France and Spain, to the Philippines, Austria, Nigeria, and New Guinea. This is the classic definition of imperialism -- "the policy and practice of seeking to dominate the economic and political affairs of weaker countries."

The Muslim Moors invaded the Iberia peninsular in 722.

The Muslim subjugation of Palestine began with the Battle of Yarmk in August 636. With the help of the local Jews, who welcomed the Muslims as liberators, the Muslims took all of Palestine but had not been able to capture Jerusalem.

In July 637, Muslims began a bloody siege of Jerusalem which lasted for five months. Jerusalem fell in February 638. Arabs did not sack the city, indeed no destruction was permitted.

For the next 100 years or so Jerusalem prospered under Muslim rule. Then, under the succeeding Abbasids, the city began to decline. By the first quarter of the 8th century the Arabian Empire was starting to break up and warlike revolutionary groups and extremist Muslim sects were taking advantage of the situation.

A new policy was introduced whereby all non-Muslims were obliged to convert to Islam and the language of the government became Arabic. As you can imagine, that did not go down too well with the Christians, Jews, Pagans and followers of other religions. Around 750 the Caliph destroyed the walls of Jerusalem, leaving it defenceless.

By the 11th century Christians and Jews, who were the majority in Jerusalem, were suffering greatly. The Muslims were ransacking the countryside and destroying Christian churches, building mosques on the top of Christian churches and attacking and robbing Christian pilgrims from Europe.

The Crusades were a series of military campaigns to try to expel the Muslims from Jerusalem. It is said that history is written by the victors but in reality, two opposing versions of events often arise. At school I was taught the version of history stated above. Muslim children are probably taught that The Crusades were an attempt by Europeans to invade their lands. The truth was probably somewhere in the middle.

The Fall of Constantinople occurred in 1453. The battle ended the Byzantine-Ottoman Wars (1265-1453).

The Byzantine Empire, sometimes referred to as the Eastern Roman Empire, was the continuation of the Roman Empire in the East during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. The Roman state continued and Roman traditions were maintained. However modern historians distinguish Byzantium from ancient Rome insofar as it was centred on Constantinople, oriented towards Greek rather than Latin culture, and characterised by Greek Orthodox Christianity.

The Ottoman Empire, also known as the Turkish Empire, was founded in 1299 by Oghuz Turks under Osman I in north-western Anatolia. It was the one of the largest and longest lasting Empires in history. It was an empire inspired and sustained by Islam, and Islamic institutions.

Following the fall of Constantinople, The Ottoman Empire replaced the Byzantine Empire as the major power in the Eastern Mediterranean. But the Muslims were not getting it all their own way. Europe was fighting back. The 'reconquest of Spain' began with The Battle of Covadonga (in what is now northern Spain) in 711. This was the first victory by a Christian military force in Iberia against the Moors. It ended in 1462 when the Moors were finally ousted from Gibraltar. The Spanish then ruled Gibraltar for 242 years until 1704 when it became British. At the time of writing, Gibraltar has been British for 312 years, 70 years longer than it was Spanish. Still the Spanish moan that they want it 'back', but I digress.

The Ottoman Empire held on in the Eastern Mediterranean until after the First World War. The Ottomans had sided with the Germans. The Ottoman Army had engaged in the Italo-Turkish War (1911), the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), and the continuous unrest caused by the Counter coup, which preceded the 1912 Ottoman coup d'etat (Saviours) and the 1913 Ottoman coup d'etat).

The Treaty of Sevres in 1920 gave them a nominal land holding and permitted them to use the title Ottoman Caliphate, provided they presented no further threat. However the terms of the treaty brewed hostility and nationalistic feeling amongst Turks.

The signatories of the treaty were stripped of their citizenship by the Grand National Assembly led by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, and the treaty ultimately led to the Turkish War of Independence, following which Ataturk and Turkish nationalists accepted a new treaty, the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, which effectively brought into being the modern-day Republic of Turkey.

But the land borders were all messed up. They were no longer drawn along religious or ethnic lines. For instance, the Kurdish people no longer had their own state but were divided between Turkey and Syria.

Lawrence of Arabia found fame in the First World War. He gained an almost mythical status amongst the Arabs who called him Al Auruns. Thomas Edward Lawrence was born at Tremadoc in Wales in 1888. At Oxford University, Lawrence read History and gained a first class honours pass. While a student at Oxford, he travelled to the Levant where he visited Crusader castles. After gaining his degree, he joined an expedition by D. G. Hogarth to excavate Carchemish. He found that he had a natural affinity with the Arab people who he met. He learned their language and customs and spent time reading about their history. When war was declared, Lawrence joined the intelligence branch of the general staff. His knowledge of Arabic led to a posting to Egypt where he served in the Arab Bureau.

The British military campaign in the Middle East had got off to a shaky start. The British had easily repulsed a Turkish attack on the Suez Canal but their pursuit of the Turks across Sinai ground to a halt near Gaza.

In other areas in the region, the Turks had been more successful, especially in Aden. The Ottoman Empire, controlled by the Turks, had swallowed a great deal of the Middle East and led to much anti-Turk feeling among the Arab tribes.

In 1915 there was much unrest amongst the Arabs. There was talk of a uprising. The revolt, which was to begin the following year, was to be led by a Sunni Muslim, Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca. It was the aspiration of a disparate grope of tradespeople to throw off Turkish shackles and build a nation state for themselves.

The Turks had recently built a railway track east - west, from Constantinople to Bagdad. Lawrence had been working under Colonel Ronald Storrs (later to become Governor of Northern Rhodesia), gathering intelligence about the possible uprising.

In October of that year, the British sent Storrs and Lawrence to talk to Hussein bin Ali and his son, Amir Feisal. Lawrence believed in the revolt. He understood what it would mean to the Arabs as well as to British imperial interests. The Arabs knew that their only hope of independence was to wage war against the Turks while they were weakened fighting for Germany. They also knew only too well how ill equipped and supplied they were. They would need an ally to support an arm them. Britain was the obvious candidate but could we be trusted?

So he asked for a pledge that if they fought for Britain, we would guarantee their independence after the war. In 1915 opinion in the British government was that the revolt would be just a splash in the pan but could prove useful for a while. On that tongue in cheek basis they gave Hussein bin Ali their pledge. Lord Kitchener even arranged to drop leaflets on Arab territory pledging Arab independence if they helped us win the war against the Turks.

On the strength of that promise Sharif Hussein called his people to war and on June 5th, 1916, the Arab Uprising began. I think its fair to say that at this point Lawrence believed his government’s pledge. At that point, but not for long.

Feisal and Lawrence developed an immediate rapport Feisal’s men were keen fighters but lacked discipline. Lawrence realised they had little chance of winning while the Turks controlled the railway. He believed their best option lay in guerrilla warfare against the railway line.

They fought well capturing Mecca but the Arabs failed to take the main railway line. The Turks quickly sent trainloads of reinforcements as well as German planes and the revolt lost its impetus for a while. They needed modern weapons as well as tactical advice. Britain, on Laurence’s advice, sent, ammunition, food and cigarettes.

Lawrence, who had received training in explosives, helped them blow up the track. Soon afterwards they captured Medina.

In 1917 Lawrence and Feisal captured Aqaba after defeating a whole Turkish battalion. Feisal moved his headquarters to Aqaba and placed himself and his men under the command of General Allenby, British commander in Palestine. Allenby planned to use the growing Arab revolt against the Turks to his advantage. He provided the Arabs with guns, ammunition and gold. Small numbers of British, French and Indian troops were sent to Aqaba to support Feisal’s men. The Turkish Army contained a number of conscripted Arab units and Allenby hoped they would change sides in a demonstration of Arab unity. Many of them did.

The Turks were now in serious trouble. On December 9th, 1917, Allenby’s forces entered Jerusalem. Lawrence was with him. Both men got on with one another despite their different ranks. Allenby was quite happy for Lawrence to wear Arab dress which other British officers hated.

During January 1918, Lawrence led an attack on the Turks at Tafila in which a whole battalion was destroyed. By this time word had reached Laurence of the planned British double-cross although he said nothing to his Arab friends. In fairness let’s just say he had 'divided loyalties'.

The Arabs had entered the war on the British side, on the back of a British promise Lawrence knew in his heart would never be honoured. The word of the British was greatly respected at that time (note the past tense) and the Arabs believed they were told but Lawrence already knew the promise had been broken. The Sykes-Picot Agreement (1916) between Britain and France had already been concluded in order to to carve up the Middle East after the war. The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916 and the agreement was signed on 16 May 1916 but was kept secret until November 1917. It was a huge betrayal in which Britain lost all honour.

Lawrence and the Arabs continued to push north. British troops also pushed north making for a two pronged attack on Jerusalem, and then Damascus.

The Turks fled Jerusalem in December 1917 in the face of the advancing British an allied armies led by British Commander-in-Chief Sir Edmund Allenb. Laurence hurried to join the victory celebrations.

We often think of the creation of Israel to be a World War 11 phenomenon but as far back as 1917 Jewish Zionists were lobbying the British parliament to help them regain their long lost homeland. On the 2nd November 1917, Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour wrote to Walter Rothschild, one of the Jewish leaders, saying "His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

This declaration, although a right and proper reinstatement of Jewish rights, flew in the face of their pre-existing promise to the Arabs.

The Arabs believed they were fighting for their independence. Feisal believed that if the Arabs could successfully take Damascus they could claim their independence. Lawrence knew it would not be so straightforward but said nothing to disillusion him. The British government continued their pretence, even designing a flag for the new Arab nation. Whatever it took to keep them fighting on the British side.

It is generally agreed that the betrayal did not sit well with Lawrence, especially as he help bury his Arab friends and comrades, thousands of Arabs had fallen in battle, but his loyalty to his country came first.

In his book, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, Lawrence confesses the conflict of interests that tore him apart towards the end of the war. He loved the Arabs dearly but he loved his country too. "They had joined the war to win freedom, therefore for every reason, strategical, tactical, moral, we are going on" he wrote.

Having taken Jerusalem, the two armies now advanced north on Damascus, the Allies taking the western flank and Lawrence and the Arabs on the eastern flank. Lawrence knew that if the Allies arrived first the deception would be exposed but if the Arabs arrived first, took he city and were firmly entranced by the time the British arrived, that might have some negotiating power. It was a desperate strategy but it just could have worked.

The Turks fled as the liberating Arab army poured into the city. There was rejoicing and dancing in the streets. The people truly believed they had been liberated and that they were now free. The Arab flag, given to them by the British government, was hoisted over the City Hall. Emir Feisal was driven into the city as a conqueror. He had become a hero to his people. He had no idea he had been double-crossed by the British.

When the other allied leaders arrived in Damascus, talks were held. This was the first time Feisal heard about the Sykes-Picot Agreement and the double cross. Of course he lodged strong objections which led to the British using Lawrence as a scapegoat, blaming him for misrepresenting the British position. Feisal walked out in disgust and Lawrence was posted back to an England celebrating the end of the war.

Lawrence was summoned to address War Cabinet's Eastern Committee where he presented his plan for the Arab region. He also launched a lobbying campaign in support of an Arab state in partnership with the Britain and France. He most probably believed that he himself had acted in good faith in helping to deceive the Arabs, even though he had known about the Sykes-Picot Agreement but had kept the knowledge to himself. He needed to save face and he did genuinely care about the plight of his Arab friends.

His letters, which were published in The Times, made waves in the government but not enough. He knew he was loosing the argument. He was to receive the Distinguished Service Order and the Companion in the Order of the Bath from King George. However, in order to make his point about the Arab double cross he refused the honours. This snub backfired on him and The Time began editing out the more controversial parts of his letters. British society was closing ranks against him.

Lawrence's next move was to invite Feisal to London and introduce him to Chaim Weizmann (later to become President of the World Zionist Organization). The meeting was friendly and showed considerable promise of an agreement but the British showed little interest.

In 1919 Lawrence accompanied the Arab delegation to the Versailles Peace Conference in France where Weizmann and Feisal signed the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement. It was a short-lived agreement for Arab-Jewish cooperation on the development of a Jewish homeland in Palestine and an Arab nation in a large part of the Middle East but the French and British insisted upon an international administration.

Britain and France shamefully carved up the Middle East between themselves and a new map was drawn up. The Arabs were pushed south out of Syria which became French territory and the French even sent troops to eject Feisal from Damascus.

The Arabs were pushed west out of Mesopotamia and Persia which was taken by the British and the Jews were given Jerusalem and Palestine for their homeland.

After Versailles, Lawrence resigned from the army in protest. Basically we treated the Arabs in the same way our U.S. cousins treated the Native Americans, lies and broken promises. A what's an Indian / Arab anyway? attitude. Is it any wonder that so many Muslims consider Europeans to be without honour?

Is it any wonder that they hate us so much?

The Treaty of Versailles paved the way for a century or more of resentment which is still causing much bloodshed today.

Now this is all very true, as far as it goes. But let's remember that Sharif Hussein and Feisal were Sunni Muslims. Daesh are Sunni Muslims. If his revolt had succeeded, would it really have been a unified Arab nations for Sunnis and Shias alike, not to mention the Kurds and the non-Muslims living in the region? And what about provision for a Jewish homeland? I don't think so. Yes we Brits acted deplorably, no excuses, but did our government know something perhaps? Something about the way Sunni Muslims tend be with people of other faiths Maybe they weren't like that then, before we pissed them off? I don't know, I'm just asking the question.

Modern Zionism emerged in the late-19th century as Jews began buying up lands formaly controled by their ancestors. 

In November 1917, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration, announcing its intention to facilitate the "establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."

Following the British capture of Ottoman territories during World War I, Jewish immigration to Israel increased, as did Arab-Jewish tensions.

In 1922, the League of Nations granted Britain a mandate over Palestine which included, among other things, provisions calling for the establishment of a Jewish homeland, facilitating Jewish immigration and encouraging Jewish settlement on the land.

Palestinians and Israel were granted independence from Britain in 1948. This was marked by a further massive migration of Jews from both Europe and the Muslim countries to Israel. It also sparked a mass exodus of Arabs from Israel. About 42% of the world’s Jews live in Israel today, the largest Jewish community in the world.

Palestinians have never accepted the State of Israel or the return of the Jews to their ancestral homeland.

Just imagine how different Palestine-Israeli relations would be today had Britain and France not scuppered the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement. Just imagine how different relations would be between the Muslim world and the West had Laurence not conspired with the British and French governments to mislead Feisal. But we live in a world of lies and deceit, of corruption and double dealing, by governments, the media and multinational corporations. How can we ever know anything for certain when we live each day in a web of lies. If forced to choose an adjective to describe the human species it would be deceitful.

The Bible talks of the The Lord visits the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children's children, to the third and the fourth generation or something like that.

Those who view the Bible as a religious text probably think that means some unfair God punishing people for what their ancestors did but think about mistakes and their consequences and it becomes a philosophical text. In Western-Middle Eastern affairs the mistakes made in the first two decades of the last century are still causing pain and bloodshed today. And when we stop making the same mistakes, when we stop lying to each other, cheating each other, trying to profit at each other’s expense, the suffering will still take generations to run out of steam. So the sooner we make a start the better.

There were a couple of very silly American teenage movies made in the 80s, Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure. Bill (Alex Winter) and Ted (Keanu Reeves) are a couple of school friends starting a band. However, they are about to fail their history class. Silly the films may have been, in many ways, but they carried a revolutionary catch phrase, BE EXCELLENT TO EACH OTHER Well maybe that's the only way we will ever get ourselves out of this mess, by ceasing to lie and cheat each other and by being excellent to each other instead. Shall we give it a try?

Now I am absolutely not saying that we Brits must forever bow our heads in shame for what our ancestors did before we were even born. That attitude disgusts me. We are a proud nation and the way to rebuild our reputation is to act honourably today.

I am saying we have already done enough damage in the Middle East and we should now keep our runny noses out of Muslim affairs in their own lands. We had no business invading Iran, we had no business interfering in Afghanistan and in Libya and we have no business now messing around in Syria. We must leave them to sort out their own affairs because whenever we get involved we end up making things worse.

It is not our place to tell Muslims how to behave in their own countries just as it is not their place to tell us what to do, or not do, here. We don't like them spreading their sharia law in the West and they don't like us spreading our democracy and human rights over there. We must both learn to respect each other's ways. We are all different and its our differences that make us special.

We talk more about tolerance today than we have ever done but its Orwellian New Speak. The way we are taught to be tolerant is to not offend Muslims but that’s backward. Tolerant people are not easily offended. Tolerance is all of us doing our own different things and tolerating each other doing our own different things NOT walking around on eggshells trying not to offend each other. That’s just nonsense. Nobody should be expected to live like that, scared to express an opinion.

In a book this size I can't go into all the details of how the West have pissed off the Muslim world over the years. I have mentioned the crusades, I have mentioned the Treaty of Versailles (1919), then there was the Suez War fiasco (1956), the first Gulf War (August 1990 to February 1991 following Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.), the Russian invasion of Afghanistan (December 1979 to February 1989), the Allied campaign in Afghanistan (2001 - 2014) , the second Gulf War (Shock and Awe 2003 _ 2011). Ok, lets pause there for a minute.

On the 20th March 2003 Iraq was invaded by a multi-national coalition force including troops from the US, the United Kingdom, Australia, Poland, South Korea, Italy, Georgia, Ukraine, the Netherlands, Spain, El Salvador, Romania, Estonia, Bulgaria, Moldova, Slovakia, Lithuania, Portugal, Thailand, New Zealand, the Philippines, Norway, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Honduras, Japan, Iceland, Nicaragua, Mongolia, and several more. After the overthrow of the legitimate Iraqi government, the multi-national coalition force was joined by Iraqi army and troops of the so-called 'Awakening Council'.

Initially the coalition force attacked the Republic of Iraq’s army. Once the government was overthrown, Ba'ath Party loyalist troops; Sunni insurgent groups such as Ansar al-Sunnah and the Islamic Army of Iraq; and Shia insurgent groups like the Asaib Ahl al-Haq and the Mahdi Army took over the defence. The cost in lives of this totally unnecessary and illegal war were huge, 24,219 Coalition troops killed and 117,961 wounded, an estimated 28,821 to 37,405 Iraqi combatants killed, and approximately 600,000 civilian deaths.

Why? Some commentators say this was the final campaign of the First Gulf War, and George W. Bush finishing what his father had started. Let’s also bear in mind that in 2001, the World Trade Center in America had been hit by aeroplanes in a massive terrorist attack generally blamed on Al-Qaeda and Bush wanted revenge.

The Bush Administration in America focused special attention on alleged ties between Saddam Hussein and Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who U.S. Secretary of State Powell called a "collaborator of Osama bin Laden." However, soon after the start of the war, evidence of the ties was discredited by multiple U.S. intelligence agencies including the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the Defense Department’s Inspector General’s Office. A CIA report in early October 2004 "found no clear evidence of Iraq harbouring Abu Musab al-Zarqawi,"

The coalition claimed that the intent was to remove "a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harboured and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world." Additional reasons have been suggested such as "to change the Middle East so as to deny support for militant Islam by pressuring or transforming the nations and transnational systems that support it."

Al-Qaeda probably had stronger ties with Saudi Arabia and with Pakistan than they ever had with Iraq anyway and it was eventually proved that Iraq never did have any weapons of mass destruction. It was all lies.

George W. Bush had it in for Saddam Hussein for a different reason. George W believed, rightly or wrongly, that Hussein had ordered an assassination attempt on his father. There may have been other motivations too. Back then public opinion was that the coalition of nations were going to Iraq for its oil. Indeed, securing oil supplies into the future may well have had a lot to with it. Additionally there was talk of increasing the West’s sphere of influence or "sphere of democracy" as it was euphemisticaly called. You don't promote democracy by invading people.

There is evidence that American intelligence operatives had been using Hussein as their instrument for more than 40 years but he was becoming a lose cannon.

The Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), originally known as the Baghdad Pact or the Middle East Treaty Organization (METO) was formed in 1955 by Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, and the United Kingdom to oppose soviet Cold War interests in the region.

In July 1958, General Abd al-Karim Qasim led a coup which overthrew the Iraqi monarchy. The following yar he annoused his intention to withdraw Iraq from CENTO. Qasim began to buy arms from the Soviet Union. It has been alleged that Saddam Hussein may have been part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad sent to assassinate Qasim. According to this source, Saddam Hussein was installed in an flat in al-Rashid Street, Baghdad, directly opposite Qasim’s office to observe his movements.

Adel Darwish, a Middle East expert and author of "Unholy Babylon" said the move was done with the full knowledge of CIA and that Hussein’s handler was an Iraqi dentist working for the CIA and Egyptian intelligence.

The assassination was set for 7th October 1959, but failed misserably. One former CIA official said the 22-year-old Hussein lost his nerve and fired too soon. Apperently he killed Qasim’s driver and only wounding Qasim in the arm and shoulder.

Saddam Hussein escaped to Beirut where the CIA put him through a brief training course.

In February 1963 Qasim was killed in a Ba'ath Party coup. Roger Morris, a former National Security Council staffer, claimed that the CIA was behind the coup which had been sanctioned by President John Kennedy.

The Ba'ath Party was hunting down Iraqi communists, a fact which interested the CIA greatly and Saddam Hussein was helped to become head of the Ba'ath Party’s intelligence service. Miles Copeland, a veteran CIA operative, said the CIA enjoyed close ties with the Ba'ath Party at this time.

During the Iran-Iraq war in 1980, the CIA regularly sent Saddam Hussein battlefield intelligence.

Saddam Hussein fell out with American intelligence in 1990 Iraq invaded Kuwait. Their ally had become a bitter enemy. In August of that year George Bush senior launched the first Gulf War and in 2003 the family feud continued with the second Gulf War.

Saddam Hussein was executed on Saturday 30th December 2006. He had been sentenced to death for crimes against humanity and for the murder of 148 Iraqi Shi'ites in the town of Dujail in 1982 AND in reality, for pissing off the Americans.

Hussein was gone but the resentment against the West was stronger than ever. The Jordanian Salafi jihadist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his militant group Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, founded in 1999, achieved notoriety in the early stages of the Iraqi insurgency for their suicide attacks on Shia Islamic mosques, civilians, Iraqi government institutions and Italian soldiers of the invading multinational coalition who they thought of as "crusaders". Talk about being stuck in the past.

Al-Zarqawi’s group officially pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda in October 2004, changing its name to Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn. In January 2006 they joined forces with several smaller Iraqi insurgent groups under an umbrella organisation called the Mujahideen Shura Council (MSC) and on 12th October 2006, the MSC united with three smaller groups and six Sunni Islamic tribes to form the "Mutayibeen Coalition". The State of Iraq (ISI) was declaired in 2006  claiming Baqubah as their capital city.

In late 2009, the commander of the American forces in Iraq, General Ray Odierno, stated that ISI "has transformed significantly in the last two years. What once was dominated by foreign individuals has now become more and more dominated by Iraqi citizens".

On 18th April 2010, the ISI’s two top leaders, Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, were killed in a joint US-Iraqi raid near Tikrit.

In a press conference General Odierno reported that 80% of the ISI’s top 42 leaders, including recruiters and financiers, had been killed or captured, with only eight remaining at large and hat they had been cut off from al-Qaeda’s leadership in Pakistan.

On 16th May that year Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was appointed the new leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and several former Ba'athist military and intelligence officers, who had served during Saddam Hussein, were appointed to top positions.

In March 2011 protests began in Syria against the cruel government of Bashar al-Assad. Over the next few months, violence escalated on both sides. In August, al-Baghdadi saw an opportunity for expansion and began sending Syrian and Iraqi ISI members into Syria to establish a branch of ISI there.

The following month al-Baghdadi announced that the al-Nusra Front had been established, financed, and supported by the Islamic State of Iraq and that the two groups were merging under the name "Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham". In 2013 they started calling themselves Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and on 29th June 2014, they grandly proclaimed themselves to be a worldwide caliphate.

Obviously they are only a ’state' or a 'caliphate' within the privacy of their own deluded minds. Many prefer to call them 'Daesh'. This is an acronym of their Arabic name - Dawlat al-Islamiyah f'al-Iraq w Belaad al-Sham. It is similar to another Arabic word - 'das' - which means 'to trample down' or 'crush'.

'The Crushers' hate the name so much that they have threatened to cut out the tongues of anyone who uses it in public.

So now we know where these idiots came from, what do they want?

As  I have claimed before, the majority of world leaders, in ploitics, the media and big business, all want the  same thing. They want more money and power over other people. What they tell their followers is another matter however.

So what is the official line? What does Daesh claim to want? The first thing is obvious, they want to overthrow Bashar al-Assad and to rule Syria in his place. But their ambitions, driven by their hatred of the West, go much further than that.

In August 2014 The brutal Sunni Muslim terrorist group, Daesh, announced its new five year plan to overrun several countries in the Middle East, Africa and even Europe.

In a map widely-shared by Daesh supporters on social networks, the Islamist group outlined a five-year plan for how they would like to expand their boundaries beyond the present Muslim world.

As well as the Middle East, North Africa and large areas of Asia, Daesh plans to extend its Muslim State or 'Caliphate' into Europe.

Spain, which was ruled by Muslims for 700 years until 1492, is marked out as a territory the caliphate plans to have under its control by 2020.

The Balkan states including Greece, Romania and Bulgaria and eastern Europe up to and including Austria will become part of their evil empire.

Muslim extremists have long dreamed of recreating the Islamic state that existed in the Middle East, North Africa and Southern Europe in various forms at different times over the course of Islam’s 1,400-year history.

Now Daesh wants to set the world back culturally too by abolishing the human rights, gender equality and other freedoms we have fought so hard to establish and replace them with a totalitarian state.

This is the most ambitious bid for world domination since Hitler’s Nazis in the last century. Charles Lister, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution, said the announcement was the "most significant development in international jihadism since 9/11".

Daesh have demanded allegiance from Muslims around the world.

Abu Mohammed al-Adnani claimed that "The legality of all emirates, groups, states and organisations becomes null by the expansion of the caliph's authority and the arrival of its troops to their areas".

He then went on to say "Listen to your caliph and obey him. Support your state, which grows every day".

What are Fifth Columnists? Emilio Mola, a Nationalist General during the Spanish Civil War, told a journalist in 1936 that as his four columns of troops approached Madrid, a 'fifth column' of supporters already embedded inside the city would support him and undermine the Republican government from within. The term was popularised by Ernest Hemingway.

Well now Muslim fifth columnists, migrants and refugees, are already embedded in every European country including Britain and the crazy thing is that our misguided politicians actually invited them in. I am not saying that every Muslim in the world will support The Islamic State and the imposition of Sharia Law, of cours not, but millions of them will. There are already some 200 sheria courts oporating in Britain and many more in the rest of Europe.

When ISIS fighters reach Spain expect the Spanish Muslim population to rise up agaist their hosts.

But don't expect it to end there. You can be sure that Daesh will continue to push north. They will invade Britain within the next ten years when our own fifth columnists will rise up and attack us.

They will rape our women and girls and behead our men and boys, just as they are doing in Iraq and Syria right now. Then they will raise their black flag of evil over our Houses of Parliament and declare their Sharia Law of hate.

Unless we wake up and take decisive action now, before it is too late, democracy in Britain, and in the rest of Europe, will soon be consigned to the pages of history.

The Muslim Moors invaded the Iberian Peninsula (now Spain, Portugal and Gibraltar) in 711. They relentlessly pushed north taking just a decade of brutality to reach the Principality of Asturias in the far north of the peninsula. There they encountered the fearsome warrior, Don Pelayo, who defeated them at the Battle of Covadonga in 722. The Muslim fighters fled into the high mountains where most of them perished.

So began what history now calls the 'Reconquest of Spain' (even though Spain  had not exiasted as a country in 722). Slowly pushing the Moors further back, further south, until 1492 when the Muslim leader Boabdil surrendered Granada to the Spanish forces.

Now Daesh wants to invade all over again. Spain is a member of NATO so Daesh will be taking us on too. Will we learn anything from history? Will a 21st century Don Pelayo appear to save the Spanish? Will a 21st century King Arthur arise to save the British? Or will our politicians get their heads out of the sand and act decisively against the Muslim fifth columnists before Daesh gets here? We have to act and we have to act quickly. The clock is ticking!

Are Muslims more of a threat than people from other religions and cultures? I don't know and it would be wrong to generalise. Clearly many Muslims are good, peaceful, tolerant, broad-minded, law abiding people. Many come to the West to escape the clutches of sharia law and controlling imams. But then there are the others, the haters, the trouble makers. Many countries have suffered. Some are taking decisive action.

Japan is now refusing Muslims permission to live permanently in the country and banning them from owning property or running businesses. Japan has also banned the worship of Islam. Any Muslim caught evangelising Islam is deported, including all family members. Cuba has rejected plans to build their first mosque. Angola has officially banned Islam. Some 2,000 Muslims have been deported from Norway in an attempt to fight crime. Since the deportations crime has dropped by a staggering 72%. Prison Officials are reporting that nearly half of their cells are now vacant. Police are now free to attend to other matters, such as traffic offences.

I do not advocate hatred towards all Muslims or anyone else. I do not advocate hatred towards anyone. I do advocate a total crackdown on sharia law and sharia courts everywhere in Europe, America, Australia and New Zeeland. I do advocate making the renouncing of sharia law a condition of entry into our countries. No other group would be allowed to come here and bring their own laws with them. What an idea!

Am I being racist? Absolutely not! Its not racist to criticise people who are doing wrong. What is racist is to refuse to criticise wrong doers because they are from a particular race, religion or ethnic group while criticising people from different groups. That’s what went wrong in Rotherham.

Everybody should obey the same laws regardless of race, religion or gender. What is racist is to allow slaughter houses not to pre-stun but only slaughter houses run by Muslims and Jews. What is racist is to give benefits to second wives but only the second wives of Muslims. What is racist is to allow Welsh and Scottish people to fly their national flags but not to allow English people to do the same. What is racist is making people remove their crash helmets in a garage or bank but not making people remove burkas and hijabs. Need I go on?

Everybody should obey the same laws regardless of race, religion or gender. Making racist exemptions to our laws causes resentment which sooner or later will spill over into violence. Enoch Powel saw this coming a long time ago. He was no racist either although he was accused of being one by the politicians who preferred to keep their heads firmly buried in the sand. He would have made a good chess player because he could see more moves ahead than other politicians either could see or chose to see.

I am not advocating anything racist or xenophobic. The same rules must apply to everybody regardless of race, religion or gender. So that means no racist exemptions to our laws. To hell with offending immigrants. They choose to come here so its up to them to adapt to our ways and to obey our laws. We have always had an open-minded, tolerant society and open-minded, tolerant people don't easily become offended.

Sure our ancestors acted despicably towards the Muslim world. Even in our own times, Bush and Blair acted despicably towards the Muslim world.

Should we mend our ways? Yes we should, urgently. Muslims have good reason to hate us, of course they do. But if they hate us, why do they come here? To make a peaceful new life for themselves amidst their hated enemy? Or to take revenge? I will leave you to ponder that question and reach your own conclusions.

Yes we have given them much cause to hate us but why would they want to live amongst people they hate and despise unless its to take revenge. They call us the enemy yet they flock here in their droves. We never went to live in Nazi Germany during WW2. What's going on?

I have hurt people in the past, never intentionally but I know I have hurt people. I'm sorry, very sorry indeed, but it was a long time ago and there is no way I can make amends now, I don't even remember who they were.

And even if I did remember I'm certainly not about to invite them into my home to take revenge by rearranging my face. It would not be useful. Indeed I rather hope they they never catch up with me. I wish I could put things right but I can't, its too late. What happened happened and can't be undone. The only way I would ever invite them in is if they said to me it was a long time ago Jack and we forgive you. Let's just let bygones be bygones.

So why do we, as a nation, invite people to come and live here who hate us and want to take their revenge against us? The only Muslim immigrants or refugees we allow in should have to sign a declaration saying it was a long time ago and we forgive you. Let's just let bygones be bygones.

They should also be required to renounce sharia law while they are here.

Not all Muslims support Daesh of course, but I digress, we were talking about the Middle East and about Daesh, so let’s continue.

Daesh is a death cult. They believe Armageddon is coming and that it is their duty, their mission from their god, to bring it on.

Acording to William McCants in his new book "The ISIS Apocalypse: The History, Strategy, and Doomsday Vision of the Islamic State How did the Islamic State attract so many followers and conquer so much land? By being more ruthless, more apocalyptic and more devoted to state-building than its competitors.

Of course the leaders of Daesh don't believe all this nonsence about an apocalypse but their followers do, and that makes them easy to control. McCants states that soundbights such as "on-state building now" and "don't put off the caliphate" because "we are waging the final battles of the apocalyptic" are very attractive to young Islamic men and women across the world. ISIS advocates the idea that the apocalypse is imminent and that Islamic State fighters will battle the 'infidels' of the West in Dabiq, a Syrian town now under ISIS control.

However there is one prophecy that Daesh choses to ignore. McCants points out that Daesh ignores the part about the Antichrist of the Islamic State that is stated in a collection of prophecies they accept. The prophecy states that, "the Antichrist will appear in the empty area between Sham [Syria] and Iraq. " which is the very area now under ISIS control.

McCants continues "The shrewd leaders of the Islamic State combined two of the most powerful yet contradictory ideas in Islam -- the return of the Islamic Empire and the end of the world -- into a mission and a message that shapes its strategy and inspires its army of zealous fighters ....  They have defied conventional thinking about how to wage wars and win recruits. Even if the Islamic State is defeated, jihadist terrorism will never be the same."

Another Islamic prophecy that Daesh keeps banging on about says "the armies of Rome will come to Northern Syria to fight Islamic soldiers." l wonder what they mean by 'Rome'. McCants seems to think we should consider 'Rome', in this context, as the Republic of Turkey. He explains it like this, "The fact that Turkish Muslims, not infidel Romans, control Constantinople, or Istanbul, today and are working with the infidel West against the Islamic State makes the Dabiq prophecy a poor fit for contemporary events but in the apocalyptic imagination, inconvenient facts rarely impede the glorious march to the end of the world."

How can we defend ourselves against brainwashed fools who believe their wicked actions are the will of their god, that their god wants to wipe non-Muslims of the face of the world and establish the Kingdom of Heaven right here, and that all the Muslim martyrs will be raised from the dead to live on in paradise with their 72 virgins?

We must fight Daesh because they have clearly stated their intention to destroy the West, but we really should not meddle on purely Muslim affairs. Nevertheless our brave soldiers have fought in Iraq and in Afghanistan, often only interfering, making things worse, but always with the best on intentions, misled and misinformed by the media, politicians and arms dealers who are making fortunes by their suffering and death.

And the press were there stirring the shit as usual. Take Piers Morgan for example. He was fired from The Mirror after printing 60 pages of rubbish! God knows how many coalition troops were killed or wounded as a result of Morgan’s cynical and opportunist photos. During a recent TV appearance you would have thought it never happened. He didn’t refer to it once! Nor was he asked a question about it, by his pals on the chat show!

Piers Morgan (born Piers Stefan O'Meara; 30 March 1965), is a journalist and television presenter. He was editorial director of First News, a national newspaper for children. Morgan branched into television mainly as a presenter, but has become best known as a judge or contestant in reality television programmes. He was a judge on Britain’s Got Talent. Morgan has also worked in the United States where he was a judge on America’s Got Talent, and as the winner of The Celebrity Apprentice.

On 14th May 2004 Morgan was fired from the Mirror after authorising the newspaper’s publication of photographs allegedly showing Iraqi prisoners being abused by British Army soldiers from the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment. Within days the photographs were shown to be crude fakes. Under the headline "SORRY.. WE WERE HOAXED", the Mirror responded that it had fallen victim to a "calculated and malicious hoax" and apologised for the publication of the photographs. Nevertheless Morgan had caused huge embarrassment to the Lancashire Regiment and endangered soldiers lives. His supercilious attitude typifies the kind of unprofessionalism which is part of the current media. Was his only motivation to sell more newspapers or did he have a darker agenda?

In December 2015 Newsweek reported

U.K. arms sales to Saudi Arabia are fuelling the ongoing conflict in Yemen, according to legal opinion obtained by humanitarian agencies.

Amnesty and Saferworld, which are both members of the Control Arms Coalition, said that the U.K.’s continued dealings with Saudi Arabia, in context of the latter’s intervention in Yemen, is in violation of national, European-Union and international law. Saudi Arabia is leading an airstrikes campaign in Yemen, the latest round of which killed at least 15 people on Monday.

The two humanitarian agencies sought the legal opinion of several international-law experts on the U.K.’s arms dealings with Saudi Arabia. The U.K. has issued more than 100 arms export licenses to Saudi Arabia since the airstrike campaign began in March, and licenses for exports to Saudi Arabia were worth more than £ 1.75 billion ($2.61 billion) between January and June, according to Amnesty.

Conflict has raged in Yemen since March, when an advance by the Iranian-backed Houthis forced Yemeni president Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi to flee the country, prompting Saudi Arabia to begin airstrikes. Following United Nations-sponsored peace talks in Switzerland in December, a seven-day ceasefire between the warring parties began on Monday. At least 5,800 people - almost half of them civilians - have been killed since the Saudi-led airstrikes began in March, according to the U.N.

Legal experts working on behalf of Amnesty and Saferworld claimed that, since at least May, the U.K. government can be deemed to have "actual knowledge...of the use by Saudi Arabia of weapons, including U.K.-supplied weapons, in attacks directed against civilians and civilians objects, in violation of international law"

Amnesty alleged in November that a British-made missile was used by the Saudi Arabia-led coalition to destroy a civilian target - a Yemeni ceramics factory -in Sana'a, resulting in the death of one person, an apparent violation of international law.

”This legal opinion confirms our long-held view that the continued sale of arms from the UK to Saudi Arabia is illegal, immoral and indefensible,” said Kate Allen, Amnesty International U.K. Director.

The U.K. has previously denied participating in the conflict in Yemen and said that it assesses the possibility of human-rights abuses when considering arms deals. In a November statement reported by the Guardian, a U.K. government spokesman said that the U.K. ”takes its arms export responsibilities very seriously and operates one of the most robust arms export-control regimes in the world.”

Later that same month The Independant reported that:

The British Government signed a secret security pact with Saudi Arabia and is now attempting to prevent details of the deal from being made public.

The Home Secretary Theresa May agreed to the so-called 'memorandum of understanding' with her Saudi counter-part Crown Prince Muhammad bin Nayef during a visit to the Kingdom last year.

The Home Office released no details of her trip at the time or announced that the deal had been signed. The only public acknowledgement was a year later in a Foreign Office report which obliquely referenced an agreement to "modernise the Ministry of the Interior".

But now following a Freedom of Information request from the Liberal Democrats, who were in Government at the time, it has emerged that the agreement is far wider than has been acknowledged.

In its grounds for refusing to publish details of the memorandum, the Home Office has admitted it "contains information relating to the UK’s security co-operation with Saudi Arabia".

Releasing the document it says "would damage the UK's bilateral relationship" with the Kingdom and potentially damage Britain's national security.

Human rights groups have expressed alarm at the secretive nature of the deal with a regime which has been condemned for its human rights record.

In February the Kingdom adopted a new anti-terrorism law that defines terrorism as words or actions deemed by the authorities to be directly or indirectly "disturbing” to public order or "destabilising the security of society.

In March, a series of decrees promulgated by the Interior Ministry extended Saudi Arabia's extended the definition of further to include "calling for atheist thought" and "contacting any groups or individuals opposed to the Kingdom", as well as "seeking to disrupt national unity" by calling for protests.

The Ministry of the Interior is also responsible for carrying out executions such as the threatened beheading of Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr for taking part in anti-government protests and allegedly attacking security forces when he was 17. Mr Ali al-Nimr supporters claim he was tortured while detention.

Both Liberal Democrats and Labour have called for Mrs. May to provide details of the deal to Parliament and expressed concern that such an agreement should be done behind closed doors without any public scrutiny.

"Deals with nations like Saudi Arabia should not be done in secret," said the then Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron.

"Parliament should be able to hold ministers to account. It is time to shine a light onto the shady corners of our relationship with Saudi Arabia."

"It is time we stood up for civil liberties, human rights and not turn a blind eye because the House of Saud are our allies".

The emergence of the agreement comes after the Justice Secretary Michael Gove announced he was cancelling a £ 5.9 million contract to provide a training programme for prisons in the Saudi Arabia.

The contract had attracted widespread criticism but when the cancellation was announced it led to a diplomatic row with the Saudi leadership who threatened to withdraw Saudi ambassador in London pending a review of relations with the UK.

In an attempt to placate the Saudi’s David Cameron sent a personal message to King Salman bin Abdul Aziz bin Saud, while the Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond was dispatched to Riyadh to rebuild bridges.

Labour’s Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn said that while Saudi Arabia had undoubtedly provided assistance to Britain in dealing with threats in recent years it had also clamped down on fundamental freedoms, such as free speech.

"Any assistance to their interior ministry needs to be in line with our commitment to human rights worldwide," he said.

"Given the UK Government's recent decision to pull out of a deal with the Saudi Ministry of Justice on prisons, it is imperative that the FCO and the Home Office provide details on what this MOU with the Saudis involves so Parliament and the public can be assured that it is compliant with our treaty obligations and British values.

"Ministers should not hide behind the cloak of national security and should instead be open about the nature of this arrangement".

Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen described the memorandum as a murky deal.

"We'd like to know what efforts are being made by UK officials to challenge and prevent abuses in Saudi Arabia's highly abusive justice system?" she said.

"This murky MoU deal was set up shortly after the Saudi Interior Ministry was granted draconian new powers to hold and interrogate terrorism suspects without a lawyer for 90 days. Have Theresa May's officials ever asked their counterparts to scale back on these excessive powers?

"The UK already has a track record of selling vast quantities of arms to Saudi Arabia while remaining markedly reluctant to publicly criticise Riyadh for its atrocious human rights record.

"With people like the blogger Raif Badawi still languishing in jail and the teenage protester Ali al-Nimr still facing a possible execution, secret deals between the UK and Saudi leave a very bad taste."

A Home Office spokesman said they could not comment on the memorandum.

So why do our leaders really want to pick a fight in Syria? Why is Rupert Murdoch using his news machine for the sabre rattling?

"It's libel to say I use my newspapers to support other business interests. The fact is, I haven't got any other business interests" - Rupert Murdoch

Oh yeah! One organisation you won't read about in Murdoch’s papers is the Genie Energy Corporation, headquartered in Newark, New Jersey, U.S.A. Genie’s directors include former U.S. vice-president Dick Cheney, James Woolsey (former director of the C.I.A.), Larry Summers (former director of the U.S. Treasury), Lord Jacob Rothschild, and guess who, Rupert Murdoch.

The company was founded in 2004 by Howard Jonas, a Harvard graduate with Jewish connections. Although not raised an Orthodox Jew, he funds a range of Orthodox as well as other Jewish causes across the ideological spectrum, and has made major investments in Israel as well.

Genie Oil and Gas (GOGAS) is an oil and gas exploration company. GOGAS holds Genie’s interests in a conventional oil and gas exploration project in Northern Israel and an early stage unconventional oil shale development project in Colorado, U.S.A.

The truth is that Murdoch is a part-owner of an Israeli-American company which has landed a shale oil exploration and production license covering 238 square miles in the Judean Hills and on occupied Syrian land, even though this is plainly illegal under international law?

Nathaniel Charles Jacob Rothschild, 4th Baron Rothschild, Bt, OM, GBE, FBA (born 29 April 1936) is a British investment banker and a member of the prominent Rothschild banking family. He is also Honorary President of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research.

Lord Rothschild has said "Rupert Murdoch's extraordinary achievements speak for themselves and we are very pleased he has agreed to be our partner. Genie Energy is making good technological progress to tap the world’s substantial oil shale deposits which could transform the future prospects of Israel, the Middle East and our allies around the world".

Of course he is pleased to have Murdoch as a partner, Murdoch controls the press and the press controls what peole believe and what they think.

Now Genie wants to build an gas pipeline through Syria and President Assad has refused them permission. And Murdoch’s press empire is keeping very quiet about it. 

In November 2015, Israeli and American oilmen discovered a bonanza in the Golan Heights. After three test-drillings, Yuval Bartov, the chief geologist of Genie Oil & Gas says his company thinks it has found an oil reservoir "with the potential of billions of barrels".

Later that month Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used a private meeting with the then U.S. president Barack Obama, to raise the question of dismembering Syria. Netanyahu claimed that Washington should give its blessing to Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights.

Formaly Syrian territory, the Golan Heights has been occupied and administered by Israel since 1967.It was captured during the 1967 Six-Day War.  Egypt, Jordan, and Syria attacked Israel and lost, so they lost the territory fair and square, but have been bleeting on about it ever since.

Because of that, thousands of British, European and American solders will be coming home in body bags; thousands more civilians will die and a million more refugees will flood into Europe.

Of course, Daesh will take full advantage of the instability for their own evil agenda. So who are Daesh and what do they really want? In part they want to revere the territorial losses sustained during the Six Day War and even World War 1, but there is a lot more to it than that.

Their ideology arose out of the Salafi or Salafist movement, an ultra-conservative, extreemly bigoted reform movement within Sunni Islam. The Salafism doctrine can be summed up as taking "a fundamentalist approach to Islam, emulating the Prophet Muhammad and his earliest followers, al-salaf al-salih, the 'pious forefathers'. They reject religious innovation, or 'bida', and support the implementation of sharia law.

The movement is often divided into three categories: the largest group are the purists who avoid politics; the second largest group are the activists, who get involved in politics; the smallest group are the jihadists, who enforce their beliefs on others through murder, mutilation and rape.

The Salafi movement is often described as being synonymous with Wahhabism, but Salafists consider the term "Wahhabi" derogatory.

Salafi violence is on the rise across the Arab world and is also gaining a dangerous foothold here in Europe. Germany’s intelligence chief, Hans-George Maassen, is reported as saying that the number of active Salafists in his country has grown from 3,800 to 6,300 in three years. That was before Angela Merkel opened the floodgates to a million more migrants. Of course only a small percentage of them will be Salafis or Daesh sympathisers, but inevitably some will be.

Reporting in the New York Daily News, Soren Kern described Salafism as "the fastest-growing Islamic movement in Europe" and he accused European leaders of failing to confront the rise of a dangerous ideology on their own turf.

He goes on to say:

'The jihadist attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a French magazine known for lampooning Islam, has cast a glaring light on the growing problem of Muslim radicalisation in Europe.

'While there are millions of European Muslims who worship in peace and pose no threat whatsoever to others, increasing numbers of Muslims on the continent are embracing a radical form of Islam and its call to wage violent jihad against all nonbelievers for the sake of Allah.

'The trend can be seen in the increasing appeal of Salafism, the fastest-growing Islamic movement in Europe'.

I am not trying to start a witch hunt here, that was evil enough the first time around. Its so important to  point out that while all the Daesh leaders are Salafis, not all Salafis support Daesh. There have been enough atrocities carried out over the centries in the name of so-called 'religions of peace' without stoking up more intolerance here.

Indeed it would go a long way towards world peace if we could all all just learn to be excellent to each other. Imagine if you can, a world where everyone respected the fact that everybody has the right to choose a religion that works for them, or no religion at all if that is their choice. Let's start teaching our children there there is no such thing as the 'one true religion' and that all tolerant paths lead to the centre. Let's teach them the following prayer:

May the God that is above all human religions save us from religious intolerance and bigotry.

We need to teach this, we need to teach this here, we need to teach this everywhere. If Christians were taught this in Sunday school they would, in time, stop looking down on other religions. If Muslims were to teach this in their madrassas they could, in time, become the religion of peace they claim to be.

In a world full of lies it’s hard to discover the truth of anything. All we can realistically hope for is a balance of probability.

In December 2015 Russia accused Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s son-in-law, of being 'linked to ISIS oil trade'. President Erdogan claimed this was slander yet we know he is sympathetic to the cause of Islamic Fundamentalism as he is on record as saying "There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it".

Berat Albayrak is a businessman and politician. He is the former CEO of Calik Holding and Turkish Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. He is the son-in-law of the President of Turkey.

Eren Erdem is a member of the Turkish Republican People’s Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi or CHP for short). He threatened that, like Moscow, he would soon provide proof of Erdogan’s role in the smuggling of Islamic State oil. "I have been able to establish that there is a very high probability that Berat Albayrak is linked to the supply of oil by the Daesh terrorists" Erdem said at a press conference in December 2015. He accused Erdogan and  Albayrak of running a ”family business” linked to the smuggling of Isis oil.

Erdem has been investigating an oil company, which he believes Mr. Albayrak is linked to.

That isn't the first time Erdem has accused the Erdogan government of engaging in nefarious activities. In October 2015, Erdem together with CHP deputy Ali Seker, claimed an investigation into Turkey’s role in a 2013 sarin gas attack that killed more than a thousand civilians in Syria was being obstructed.

He went on to say that "over 1,300 people were killed in the sarin gas attack in Ghouta and several other neighbourhoods near the Syrian capital of Damascus, with the West quickly blaming the regime of Bashar al-Assad and Russia claiming it was a false flag operation aimed at making U.S. military intervention in Syria possible".

All this may or may not be true. You can draw your own conclusions but its certainly food for thought.

The Kurdish people are an ethnic group in the Middle East, mostly inhabiting an area spanning adjacent parts of eastern and south-eastern Turkey (Northern Kurdistan), western Iran (Eastern or Iranian Kurdistan), northern Iraq (Southern or Iraqi Kurdistan), and northern Syria (Western Kurdistan or Rojava). They have a strong separatist movement which fights for the freedom of Kurds to govern themselves. They also fight, very hard, against the threat from Isis. Indeed they are the West’s strongest allies in the fight against Isis terrorism.

Erdogan considers them to be terrorist and the enemy of Turkey. According to the adage that 'My enemy’s enemy is my friend' this would appear to be a very short-sighted policy if he really does want to oppose IS expansion. But does he? Or would he rather go on buying their cheep oil?

In February 2016 there was a bomb attack on the military convoy in Ankara. A car laden with explosives blew up next to military buses as they waited at traffic lights near Turkey’s armed forces' headquarters, parliament and government buildings. At least 28 people were killed in the heart of the Turkish capital. Erdogan was quick to lay the blame on Kurdish separatist group, People’s Protection Units (Yekineyen Parastina Gel or YPG for short), based in on the Syrian side of the border and supported by the U.S.A. He further claimed that they had been supported by the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK).

At the time of writing 14 Kurds have been arrested despite both groups strongly denying any involvement.

Have you ever know a terrorist group to deny involvement? I haven't. Terrorist groups are usually keen to admit their actions and to threaten more. So why is Erdogan so keen to blame the Kurds. Could it be because they are a danger to his friends in Isis? Could this indeed have been another false flag attack aimed as discrediting the Kurds? You must draw your own conclusions.

Within hours of the bombing, Turkish warplanes struck PKK bases in northern Iraq and Syria.

Just a few months previously, Turkish Kurds had hope for a political solution to their ongoing disagreements with the government. They had won seats in parliament and the pro-Kurdish party, the HDP, was to meet with Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu just days after the bombing. That meeting was then cancelled. What did the Turkish seperatists have to gain from such an attack at this time? Absolutly nothing!

The ongoing operations against Kurdish fighters leaves no sign of a likely return to the peace process. The political engagement has been turned into a military one. So why the about-face? And will the Turkish government and the Kurds ever find a way to interact without violence?

Only if that’s what Erdogan wants. But the Kurds are arguably the most moderate of all the Muslim groups in the Middle East, the ones Erdogan believes do not exist. And that’s a big problem.

John Lennon was wrong when he asked us to imagine a world with no countries and no religion. People need countries and religion.

We need countries to give us a sense of belonging, something to be proud of. You are proud of your own achievements aren't you? And you are proud of the achievements of your children. So you are proud of your family. That’s healthy.

On the next level up you may be proud of your town or your county. You may even cheer your town’s football team or your county’s cricket team on a Saturday afternoon. That’s healthy.

Up one more level and you are proud of your country and support your national football team in the World Cup. Or you may relate better to the Eurovision Song Contest. Whatever, its all healthy.

The problem arises when people get violent, football hooliganism and wars and stuff. But we don't try to control football hooliganism by banning football do we? Of course not. We combat the real problem of hooliganism, we don't use football as a scapegoat. And we shouldn't use nationalism, or religion, as a scapegoat either.

We also need our countries to ensure accountable democracy. We need national governments for the same reason we been borough councils and other levels of local government. They enable decisions to be made locally, by the people who will be affected by them, rather than people being dictated to by over-centralised levels of government.

That is why the European Union is falling apart. If it had stuck to its original mandate of being a free trade zone it would have been fine, but instead it became dictatorial, interfering in the right of member countries to make their own laws. People just won't stand for that.

Most of the wars since World War 2 have been caused by ethnic or religious groups sick and tired of being forcefully enfolded into countries run by different ethnic or religious groups. Instead of being content to live in a relatively big country with people who have an incompatible culture of different political needs, they rebel and try to form their own smaller, self governing country. In Northern Island the Catholics tried to break away from the United Kingdom. The Warsaw Pact countries split apart. Yugoslavia split into several smaller, self regulating countries. In the Middle East, Israel has become a nation once again and its Muslim neighbours are also splitting apart along ethnic and religious lines. The same thing happened in India with the splitting away of Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The inevitable trend is towards a greater number of small countries.

And we need religion. Science explains a lot but it leaves many questions unanswered. People still seek these answers and when science lets them down they turn to more intuitive methods of inquiry.

There is a Hindu proverb that says "There are hundreds of paths up the mountain, all leading to the same place, so it doesn't matter which path you take. The only person wasting time is the one who runs around the mountain, telling everyone that his or her path is wrong".

Modern Pagans put it more succinctly when they say "All paths lead to the centre". Actually I prefer "All tolerant paths lead to the centre" because it seems to me that bigoted religions that preach hatred and intolerance are leading their followers away from the centre, back down the mountain.

We certainly do have a huge problem, here in the West, with some Muslims. The prudish way extreemist Muslim women dress, covering every strand of hair and sometime even their entire faces, upsets many Westerners. What on earth is that all about?

Many Muslims are taught from early childhood to hate, and even to kill, those whose religious beliefs are different or non-existent. What on earth is that all about?

Many Muslims, even those living in the West, support Sharia law. What on earth is that all about?

Many Muslims hate pork, dogs, alcohol, normal Western dress, freedom and gender equality yet they choose to settle in countries where these things are the norm. What on earth is that all about?

Many Muslims feel excluded from Western society yet they insist on dressing and behaving in ways that exclude them from Western society. What on earth is that all about?

There absolutely is a Muslim problem in Britain, Europe, America, Australia and New Zeeland yet we will never solve that problem by sweeping it under the carpet, burying our heads in the sand, and pretending there is nothing wrong.

However, for some crazy reason, we are scared to talk about the problem. We have been brainwashed by all the 'political correctness' nonsense and we are scared of being called 'racist', if we even acknowledge the fact that there is a problem. What on earth is that all about?

I am not even sure where this 'political correctness' bullshit came from. How on earth did we allow our hard won freedom of speech to be stripped away from us like this?

But we have to talk about it, we have to be free to speak our minds frankly, if we are ever going to find a solution. If we fail to do so, more of our innocents will be murdered by the cowardly, misguided jihadists. Terror attacks by Islamist extremists to further their twisted Islamic religious / political cause have been occurring globally.

(You may want to fast-forward through the next few pages, its a long list of atrocities, but after this rather one-sided list you will see that I am, in fact, being very even-handed).

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 63 innocent Embacy workers and visitors in Beirut on the 18th April 1983.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 307 prople in the Beirut baracks on the 23rd October 1983.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 people in Kuwait on the 12th December 1983.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 24 people in Beirut on the 20th September 1984.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 18 people in Spain on the 21st January1985.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 18 people in Spain on the 12th April1985.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent passenger in Greece during the TWA Flight 847 hijacking on the 14th June 1985.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 22 innocent Jew in the Neve Shalom Synagogue attack in Turkey on the 6th September 1986.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 16 innocent passengers in the Tel Aviv bus attack on the 7th July 1989.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent tourists in Egypt on the 4th February 1990.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in China on the 2nd February 1992.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 29 innocent people in the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires on the 17th March 1992.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in the CIA Headquarters in Langley, America on the 25th January 1993,

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in first World Trade Center bombing in America on 26th February 1993.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 257 innocent people in Mumbai, India on the 12th March 1993.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 35 innocent people in the Sivas Massacre in Turkey on the 2nd July 1993.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 8 innocent people in Afula bus bombing in Isreal on the 6th April 1994.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in the Hadera bus station bombing in Isreal on the 13th April 1994.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 85 innocent people in Buenos Aires Jewish Center bombing on the 18th July 1994.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 22 innocent people in the Tel Aviv bus attack on the 19th October 1994.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Netzarim Junction bicycle bombing in Isreal on the 11th November 1994.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent passenger in the Philippine Airlines Flight 434 bombing on the 11th December 1994.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent passengers in the Air France Flight 8969 bombing on the 24th December 1994.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in the Beit Lid suicide bombing in Isreal on the 22nd January 1995.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 42 innocent people in a police station car bonbing in Isreal on the 30th January 1995.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people in the Jammu scooter bombing in Isreal on the 20th July 1995.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in the Ramat Gan bus bombing in Isreal on the 24th July 1995.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 8 innocent people in  a series of attacks by the Armed Islamic Group of Algeria in France, betwwen 25th July and the 17th October 1995.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in the Rijeka police station bombing in Croatia on the 20th October 1995.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 45 innocent people in the Jaffa Road bus bombing in Isreal on the 25th February 1996.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 13 innocent people in the Dizengoff Centre  bombing in Isreal on the 4th March 1996.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 18 innocent people in the Europa hotel, Cairo bombing on the 18th April 1996.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia on the 25th June 1996.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in the Xinjiang bus attacks in China on the 25th February 1997.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 16 innocent people in the Mahane Yehuda Market bombings in Isreal on the 21st March 1997.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Café Apropo bombing in Isreal on the 30th July 1997.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 62 innocent people in the Luxor massacre in Egypt on the 17th November 1997.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 58 innocent people in 12 bomb attacks in 11 different parts of the city of Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India on the 14th February 1998.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 224 innocent people in the American embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya on the 7th August 1998.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people in the attack on ship, USS Cole, in the Yemeni port of Aden on the 12th October 2000.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the attack on Red Fort, Delhi, India on the 22nd December 2000.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 18 innocent people in the Christmas Eve church bombings in eight cities in Indonesia on the 24 th December 2000.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Netanya bombing in Israel on the 4th March 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 innocent people in the Ramna Batamul bombing in Bangladesh on the 14th April 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in the HaSharon Mall suicide bombing in Netanya, Israel on the 18th May 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 40 innocent people in the Dos Palmas kidnappings in the Philippines on the 27th May 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 21 innocent people in the Dolphinarium discotheque suicide bombing in Israel on the 1st June 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people in the Sbarro Restaurant suicide bombing in Jerusalem on the 9th August 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the the Nahariya railway station suicide bombing in Israel on the 9th September 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2,996 innocent office workers in the World Trade Centre in America on 11th September 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 38 innocent people in an attack on the Jammu and Kashmir legislative assembly in India on the 1st October 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Pardes Hanna bus bombing in Israel on the 29th November 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people in the Haifa bus suicide bombing in  Israel on the 2nd December 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in a suicide attack on the Indian parliament in New Delhi on the 13th December 2001.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in an attack on an American cultural centre in Kolkata, India, on the 22nd January 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in the Jaffa Street bombing in Israel on the 27th January 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists beheaded 1 innocent American journalist, Daniel Pearl, in Pakistan on the 1st February 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent people during the Yeshivat Beit Yisrael massacre in Jerusalem on the 2nd March 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent people at Cafe Moment in Jerusalem on the 9th March 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 8 innocent people in the Umm al-Fahm bus bombing  in Israel on the 20th March 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in the King George Street bombing in Israel  on the 21st March 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 31 innocent people in the Passover Massacre at the Park Hotel in Netanya, Israel, on the 27th March 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Kiryat HaYovel supermarket bombing in  Israel on the 29th March 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent people during an attack on the Raghunath temple in India on the 30th March 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people in the Matza Restaurant suicide bombing near the Grand Canyon shopping centre in Haifa, Israel on the 31st March 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in the Yagur Junction bombing in Israel on the 10th April 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in the El Ghriba synagogue bombing on the Tunisian island of Djerba on the 11th April 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in the Mahane Yehuda Market bombing in  Israel on the 12th April 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 16 innocent people in the Rishon LeZion bombing Rishon in Israel on the 7th May 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people, mostly French engineers, in the Karachi bus bombing,  Pakistan, on the 8th May 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 31 innocent people when they attacked a tourist bus near the town of Kaluchak in the Indian state Jammu and Kashmir, on the 14th May 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in the Netanya Market bombing, Israel,  on the 19th May 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in the Megiddo Junction bus bombing, Israel, on the 5th June 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Los Angeles International Airport shooting, U.S.A., on the 4th July 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in the Herzliya Shawarma restaurant bombing, Israel, on the 11th June 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent people in the first of several attacks targeting the U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, on the 14th June 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 19 innocent people in another  Patt Junction Bus bombing in Israel on the 18th June 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in the French Hill suicide bombing in Israel on the 19th June 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 27 innocent Hindu labourers in Qasim Nagar on the outskirts of Jammu, India, on the 13th July 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in the Immanuel bus attack in Israel on the 16th July 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in the Neve Shaanan Street bombing in Israel on the 17h July 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people at the Hebrew University, Israel, on the 31st July 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in the Meron Junction Bus 361 attack in Israel on the 4th August 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in the Allenby Street bus bombing in  Israel, on the 19th September 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 32 innocent people Akshardham Temple attack in India on the 24th September 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people, including one U.S. serviceman in Zamboanga City, the Phillippines, on the 2nd October 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 United States Marine in the Faylaka Island attack, Kuwait on the 8th October 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 202 innocent people in the Bali bombings, Indonesia on the 12th October 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in another bomb blast which targeted Zamboanga City, Philippines, this time a shopping centre, on the 17th October 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in the third of three bomb blasts targeting Zamboanga City, Philippines, this time Fort Pilar, a Catholic shrine on the 21st October 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in the Karkur junction suicide bombing in Israel on the 21st October 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 170 innocent people during the Dubrovka Theater, Moscow, hostage crisis in Russia, on the 23rd October 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Sonol petrol station bombing in Israel on the 27th October 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent people the Kiryat Menachem bus bombing in Israel on the 21st November 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in an attack on the Raghunath temple in India on the 24th November 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 13 innocent people in Mombasa, Kenya on the 28th November 2002.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 23 innocent people in the Tel Aviv central bus station massacre, in Israel, on the 5th January 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people when a gunman opened fire on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan on the 28th February 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people in the Haifa bus 37 suicide bombing in Israel on the 5th March 5 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Mike’s Place suicide bombing in  Israel on the 30th April 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person when a man dressed in a Royal Saudi Navy uniform penetrated an American base  in Saudi Arabia, killing one American, on the 1st May 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 39 innocent people when several heavily-armed gunmen opened fire and detonated vehicle bombs outside three housing compounds in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, occupied by Westerners on the 12th May 2003. And they expect Westeners to welcome their people with open arms.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 59 innocent people in the Znamenskoye suicide bombing in Russia on the 12th May 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 45 innocent people in a series of suicide bombings in Casablanca, Morocco on the 16th May 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in the French Hill suicide bombings in Israel on the 18th May 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Afula shopping centre bombing in Israel on the 19th May 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people in the Davidka Square bus bombing in Israel on the 11th June 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent people in the Marriott Hotel car bombing in Indonesia on the 5th August 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 24 innocent people in the Shmuel HaNavi bus bombing in Israel on the 19th August 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 54 innocent people in twin car bombings in India on the 25th August 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in the Tzrifin bus stop attack in Israel on the 9th September 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in the Cafe Hillel bombing in Israel on the 9th September 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 21 innocent people in the the Maxim Restaurant suicide bombing in Haifa, Israel on the 4th October 2003. Among the victims were two families and four children, including a two-month-old baby.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people when a suicide truck bomb detonated outside a housing compound in Laban Valley, Saudi Arabia on the 8th November 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 57 innocent people in the Istanbul bombings in Turkey between the 15th and 20th November 2003.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Indonesia on the 10th January 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Israel on the 14th January 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent people in Israel on the 29th January 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 41 innocent people in the Moscow Metro bombing on the 6th February 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 8 innocent people in Israel on the 2nd February 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 116 innocent people during the sinking of SuperFerry in the Philippines on the 27th February 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person  in Turkey on the 9th March 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 192 innocent train passengers in Madrid on the 11th March 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in Saudi Arabia on the 21st April 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 22 innocent people in Saudi Arabia on the 29th and 30th May 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent BBC journalist, Simon Cumbers, in Saudi Arabia on the 6th June 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent American worker in Saudi Arabia on the 8th June 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent American, Paul Marshall Johnson,  in Saudi Arabia on the 18th June 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 68 innocent people in Iraq on the 28th July 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent churchgoers in Iraq on the 1st August 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Saudi Arabia on the 3rd August 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 24 innocent people in Bangladesh on the 21st August 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 innocent people in Russia on the 31st August 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 386 innocent people, mostly children, during the Beslan school hostage in  Russia between the 1st and the 3rd September 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in Indonesia on the 9th September 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent British worker in Saudi Arabia on the 15th September 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 34 innocent people in Egypt on the 7th October 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in the Netherlands on the 2nd November 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in Indonesia on the 13th November 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in Saudi Arabia on the 6th December 2004.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in Israel on the 13th January 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 22 innocent people in Lebanon on the 14th February 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in Israel on the 25th February 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 22 innocent people in Indonesia on the 28th May 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people at  Hindu temple in India on the 5th July 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 53 innocent commuters in London on 7th July 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in Israel on 12th July 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 64 innocent people in Egypt on 23rd July 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Bangladesh on 17th August 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Indonesia  on the 1st October 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in Israel  on the 26th October 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 60 innocent people in India  on the 29th October 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in Indonesia on the 30th October 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 60 innocent people in Jordan on the 9th November 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in Israel on the 5th December 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 8 innocent people in Indonesia  on the 31st December 2005.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Pakistan on the 2nd March 2006.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 28 innocent people in India on the 7th March 2006.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent people in Israel on the 17th April 2006.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 23 innocent people in Egypt on the 24th April 2006.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 35 innocent people in India on the 30th April 2006.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Israel on the 30th May 2006.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 209 innocent people in India on the 11th July 2006.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in Yemen on the 15th September 2006.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in Israel on the 29th January 2007.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in Turkey on the 18th April 2007.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 80 innocent people in India on the 13th May 2007.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 guilty person, one of the attackers, druring the Glasgow International Airport car bombing in Scotland on the 30th June 2007.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in the Philippines on the 11th July 2007.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered around 500 innocent people in Iraq on the 14th August 2007.

A fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadist managed to blow himself up killing nobody else in Israel on the 4th February 2008. What a looser.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 56 innocent people in India on the 26th July 2008.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 30 innocent people in India on the 13th September 2008.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 54 innocent people in Pakistan on the 20th September 2008.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in India on the 27th September 2008.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered around 40 innocent people in Iraq during a series of attacks between October 2008 and January 2009.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 166 innocent people in India on the 26th November 2008.

A fanatical brainwashed Muslim convert, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad (born Carlos Leon Bledsoe) murdered 1 innocent person, Private William Long and wounded Private Quinton Ezeagwula, when he opened fire with a rifle in a drive-by shooting on soldiers in front of a United States military recruiting office in Little Rock, Arkansas, U.S.A. on the 1st June 2009.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 35 innocent people in Somalia on the 18th June 2009.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in Indonesia on the 17th July 2009.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 13 innocent people in the Fort Hood Shooting, Texas, U.S.A. on the 5th November 2009.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent Coptic Christians  in Egypt on the 7th January 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 8 innocent people in Pakistan on the 3rd February 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people in India on the 13th February 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 33 innocent people in Iraq on the 3rd March 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 40 innocent people in Russia on the 29th March 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered over 100 innocent people in Iraq on the 10th May 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 86 innocent people in Pakistan on the 28th May 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 42 innocent people in Pakistan on the 1st July 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 74 innocent people in Uganda on the 11th July 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 27 innocent people in Iran on the 15th July 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 60 innocent people in Iraq on the 17th August 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 53 innocent people in Iraq on the 25th August 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in Pakistan on the 6th October 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 51 innocent people in Iraq on the 31st October 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 66 innocent people in Pakistan on the 5th November 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in India on the 7th December 2010.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 23 innocent people in Egypt on the 1st January 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 137 innocent people in Iraq on the 18th to 20th January 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 37 innocent people in Russia on the 24th January 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 48 innocent people in Iraq on the 27th January 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Germany on the 2nd March 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 25 innocent people in Pakistan on the 8th March 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 65 innocent people in Iraq on the 29th March 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 24 innocent people in Iraq on the 5th May 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people in Egypt on the 7th May 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in China on the 18th July 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people in China on the 30th and 31st July 2011. (These two atrocities in China were all because the Chinese authorities wouldn't let them walk around masked in public. As if any self-respecting civilised country is ever going to allow that. Just think of the security risk for a start. )

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people in India on the 7th September 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 100 innocent people in Somalia on the 4th October 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 64 innocent people in Iraq on the 7th October 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 60 innocent people in Iraq on the 22nd December 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 41 innocent people in Nigeria on the 25th December 2011. Christians were attacked in their churches on Christmas Day.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 8 innocent people in China on the 28th December 2011.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 73 innocent people in Iraq on the 5th January 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 83 innocent people in Iraq on the 23rd February 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 52 innocent people in Iraq on the 20th March 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in France on the 20th March 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in Russia on the 3rd May 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 101 innocent people in Yemen on the 21st May 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 93 innocent people in Iraq on the 13th June 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in China on the 29th June 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in Bulgaria on the 18th July 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 116 innocent people in Iraq on the 23rd July 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 128 innocent people in Iraq on the 16th August 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 108 innocent people in Iraq on the 9th September 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Libya on the 11th September 2012.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 130 innocent people in Pakistan on the 10th January 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 67 innocent people in Algeria on the 16th January 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 110 innocent people in Pakistan on the 16th February 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 16 innocent people in India on the 21st February 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in the Boston Marathon bombings, U.S.A. on the 15th April 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 52 innocent people in Turkey on the 11th May 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered Fusilier Lee Rigby of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, in London, England on the 22nd May 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 26 innocent people in Niger on the 23rd May 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 71 innocent people in Iraq on the 27th May 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 26 innocent people in Pakistan on the 15th June 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent tourists in Pakistan on the 22nd June 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 13th September 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 67 innocent people in the Westgate shopping centre, Kenya on the 21st September 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 82 innocent people in Pakistan on the 22nd September 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 44 innocent people in Nigeria on the 29th September 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in China on the 28th October 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 56 innocent people in Yemen on the 5th December 2013.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 26 innocent people in Pakistan on the 19th January 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered over 200 innocent people in Nigeria on the 14th February 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 28 innocent people in China on the 1st March 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 88 innocent people in Nigeria on the 14th April 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in China on the 30th April 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 118 innocent people in Nigeria on the 20th May 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 39 innocent people in China on the 22nd May 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in the Jewish Museum in Brussels, Belgium on the 24th May 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 37 innocent people in China on the 28th July 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered over 700 innocent people in Syria in mid August 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent people in Pakistan on the 15th August 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in Russia on the 5th October 2014.

A Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadist murdered 1 innocent Candian soldier, Warrant officer Patrice Vincent, on the 20th October 2014.

A Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadist murdered 1 innocent Candian soldier at a war memorial on the 22nd October 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Israel on the 22nd October 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Israel on the 5th November 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 innocent people in Israel on the 18th November 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 120 innocent people in Nigeria on the 28th November 2014.

A Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadist, a burqa-clad woman, murdered an American teacher in a shopping centre lavatory in the United Arab Emirates on the 1st December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 26 innocent people in Russia on the 4th December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent people in the Philippines on the 9th December 2014.

A fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadist murdered 3 innocent people in Australia on the 15 & 16th December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 140 innocent people in Pakistan on the 16th December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 26 innocent people in Yemen on the 16th December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists working for Boko Haram insurgents murdered 32 men and kidnapped at least 185 women and children in Nigeria on the 18th December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 230 innocent people in Syria on the 18th December 2014.

A fFanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadist murdered 1 innocent police officer in France on the 20th December 2014.

A fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadist1 ran over and killed 11 innocent people in France on the 21st December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Nigeria on the 22nd December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists working for Daesh murdered 150 innocent women in Iraq for refusing to marry their fighters, during December 2014.

A fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadist murdered 33 innocent people in Iraq in December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists working for Al-Shabaab murdered 9 innocent people in Somalia on the 25th December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 30 innocent people in Cameroon on the 28th December 2014.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Afghanistan on the 5th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 soldiers in Iraq on the 6th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Afghanistan on the 5th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people during the Paris attacks betweem the 7th to the 9th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered at least 200 people innocent people (another 2000 are still unaccounted for) in Nigeria on the 8th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Afghanistan on the 5th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people during the Porte de Vincennes hostage crisis in France on 9th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in Lebanon on the 10th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 44 innocent people in Egypt on the 29th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 55 innocent people in Pakistan on the 30th January 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 19 innocent people in Pakistan on the 13th February 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Denmark on the 14th and 15th February 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 58 innocent people in Nigeria on the 7th March 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people in Pakistan on the 15th March 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 21 innocent people in Tunisia on the 18th March 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 135 innocent people in Yemen on the 20th March 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent people in Libya on the 25th March 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Somalia on the 27th March 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 148 innocent people in Kenya on the 2nd April 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 innocent people in Somalia on the 14th April 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 40 innocent people in Iraq on the 17th April 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 33 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 18th April 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 9 innocent people in Somalia on the 20th April 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 police officer in Bosnia on the 27th April 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 19 innocent people in Iraq on the 3rd May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 17 policemen in Afghanistan on the 3rd May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Afghanistan on the 4th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in Iraq on the 10th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 10th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 45 innocent people in Pakistan on the 13th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 14th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 17th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 19th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Libya on the 21st May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 21 innocent people in Saudi Arabia on the 22nd May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 19 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 25th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 innocent people in Iraq on the 28th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Saudi Arabia on the 29th May 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in Iraq on the 1st June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Turkey on the 5th June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent people in Iraq on the 13th June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in France on the 26th June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 27 innocent people in Kuwait on the 26th June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 28 innocent people in Tunisia on the 26th June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 30 innocent people in Somalia on the 26th June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 200 innocent people in Nigeria on the 26th to 30th June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Israel on the 29th June 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people in Nigeria on the 5th July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Nigeria on the 7th July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 13 innocent people in Cameroon on the 13th July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 5 military personnel in Chattanooga, USA on the 16th July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 62 innocent people in Nigeria on the 17th July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 33 innocent people in Turkey on the 20th July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 40 innocent people in Nigeria on the 22nd July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in Cameroon on the 26th July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 22 innocent people in India on the 27th July 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 47 innocent people in Nigeria on the 11th August 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 70 innocent people in Iraq on the 13th August 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 79 innocent people in Nigeria betwwen 28th and 30th August 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Nigeria on the 10th September 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 innocent people in Iraq on the 17th September 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 54 innocent people in Nigeria on the 21st September 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 25 innocent people in Yemen on the 24th September 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 21 innocent people in Nigeria on the 2nd October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Israel on the 1st October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 21 innocent people in Nigeria on the 2nd October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Australia on the 2nd October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent Japanese man in Bangladesh on the 3rd October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 18 innocent people in Iraq on the 3rd October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Somalia on the 7th October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 102 innocent people in Turkey on the 10th October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 35 innocent people in Chad on the 10th October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Nigeria on the 22nd October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 42 innocent people in Nigeria on the 23rd October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 13 innocent people in Nigeria on the 28th October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 224 innocent people with a bomb on board a Russian jet flying over Egypt on the 31st October 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 42 innocent people in Lebanon on the 12th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 137 innocent people in Paris on the 13th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 21 innocent people in Iraq on the 13th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Philippines on the 17th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 30 innocent people in Nigeria on the 17th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Bosnia on the 18th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people in Nigeria on the 18th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 19 innocent people in Mali on the 20th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 innocent people in Iraq on the 20th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 innocent people in Cameroon on the 21st November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 8 innocent people in Nigeria on the 22nd November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent people in Tunisia on the 24th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in Egypt on the 24th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 18 innocent people in Niger on the 25th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 21 innocent people in Nigeria on the 27th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Egypt on the 28th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 3 innocent people in Mali on the 28th November 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in San Bernardino, USA on the 2nd December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 15 innocent people in Chad on the 5th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Yemen on the 6th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 70 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 8th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 4 innocent people in Egypt on the 8th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 11 innocent people in Iraq on the 9th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in the Spanish Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan on the 11th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 60 innocent people in Syria on the 11th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 16 innocent people in Syria on the 12th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in Iraq on the 12th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 30 innocent people in Nigeria on the 13th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 21st December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 14 innocent people in Nigeria on the 26th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Afghanistan on the 28th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 26 innocent people in Nigeria on the 28th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 26 innocent people in Pakistan on the 29th December 2015.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person in Russia on the 29th December 2015.

Fanatical a brainwashed Muslim jihadist murdered 1 innocent person and himself in Afghanistan on the 1st January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in India on the 2nd January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 innocent people in Iraq on the 3rd January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 50 innocent people in Libya on the 7th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 7 innocent people in Libya on the 7th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Iraq on the 11th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 10 innocent people in Turkey on the 12th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in Indonesia on the 14th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 63 innocent people in Somalia on the 15th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Burkina Faso on the 15th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 22 innocent people in Pakistan on the 21st January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Somalia on the 22nd January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 25 innocent people in Cameroon on the 25th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 65 innocent people in Nigeria on the 30th January 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 18 innocent people in Ivory Coast on the 13th March 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 24 innocent people in Iraq on the 20th March 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 35 innocent people in Belgium on the 22nd March 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 26 innocent people in Yemen on the 25th March 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 30 innocent people in Iraq on the 25th March 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 70 innocent Christians who had gathered on Easter in Gulshan-e-Iqbal Park in Pakistan on the 27th March 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 64 innocent people in Afghanistan on the 19th April 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent university professor in Bangladesh on the 23rd April 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent gay rights activists in Bangladesh on the 25th April 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 40 innocent people in Iraq on the 11th May 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 49 innocent people in a nightclub in Orlando, U.S.A. on the 12th June 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 2 innocent people in France on the 14th June 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 6 innocent people in Jordan on the 21st June 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent person, Amjad Sabri, who they accused as blasphemy (as if that was a valid excuse) in Pakistan on the 22nd June 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 20 innocent people in Bangladesh on the 1st July 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered over 300 innocent people in Iraq on the 3rd July 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 56 innocent people in Iraq on the 7th July 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 1 innocent priest in France on the 26th July 2016.

A fanatical Muslim jihadist murdered 1 innocent American tourist on the streets of London on the 7th August 2016. This time the police, scared to admit that they have no way of protecting civiallians, claimed the murder has mental health problems. Of course he has mental health problems. All terrioists have mental health problems or else they wouldn't be terrorists. No sane person goes around murdering innocent civillians on the street. That's no excuse.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 77 innocent people in Pakistan on the 8th August 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 18 innocent people in India on the 18th September 2016.

Fanatical brainwashed Muslim jihadists murdered 12 innocent people with a truck at a Christmas market in Berlin, Germany on the 19th December 2016.


Its a long list but had I given all the names they would have needed a whole book all to themselves. Not a bad body count for the religion of peace err. So much blind hatred, so much ignorant prejudice.

Of course, terrible as this list of atrocities most certainly is, its just one side of the story. I could just as easily have compiled a similar list of all the horrors committed by the West in our illegal and unjustifiable wars on Middle Eastern countries.

At the same time as Islamist terrorists were carrying out these atrocities, British, French, American and other allied troops were invading Iraq and Afghanistan murdering thousands of innocent Muslims.

Both sides are as bad as each other. The only way to stop the killing is to stop killing people, stop invaded other peoples' countries (with or without weapons) and start respecting each others' countries, cultures and religions. Can we please all stop killing each other and start talking and listening.

Violence is never the answer. Violence creates victims and victims and their loved ones will crave revenge, not dialogue.

Invasion is when you enter a country with the intention of changing it. Migration is when you enter a country, legally, with the intention of being changed by it.

You can't invade peoples' countries, kill millions of them, and not expect them to retaliate. The West has no right to even attempt regime change in other peoples' countries. The invasion of Iraq and the removal of Sadam Husain left a political vacuum that could not be filled. That region has strong rulers for a reason and we have no right to believe that we know what's best for them better than they do themselves. That disastrous war created Daesh and the dissolution of the Iraqi army left thousands of professional soldiers unemployed with no way to keep their dignity and support their families. Its hardly surprising that they sought employment with Daesh. The West then went on to repeat the same mistakes throughout the Middle East. We did not go to bring peace, we went to control their natural recourses and their central banks.

You may be forgiven for thinking that Western governments have little incentive to try to calm things down. Every violent jihadi attack gives Western governments another excuse to introduce ever more draconian security measures, the real purpose of which is to weaken the autonomy and independence their own citizens.

Indeed whenever the jihadi lion seems to be going quiet, governments tweak its tail with another drone attack.

But not all Islamic aggression is a response to Western aggression. There are many different individuals and many different groups, all with their own agendas. Each jihadi has his or her own reason for being there. A lot of them have been brainwashed with intolerance and bigotry. How many more innocents have to die before we stop pretending the violence has nothing to do with Islam? Of course it is 'to do with' Islam. It may well be argued that these attacks are due to a misreading or a misunderstanding of the teaching of Islam. It may well be argued that these attacks are carried out by people who have been deliberately misinformed, radicalised and brainwashed into wrongly believing that they are fighting for Islam. But they are still 'to do with' Islam.

Do they really think that killing us will make us love them and make their immigrants more welcome? Do they really think all these deaths will advance their cause in any way whatsoever?

Yes of course they have grievances and of course some will feel that violence is the only way for them to get heard. So long as we in the West persevere with all this failed 'political correctness' nonsense that stops us from debating these issues openly and honestly in search of a solution, our guns and bombs and drones will get us nowhere. Free dialogue is the only way out of this mess. But if jihadists and their sympathisers in the West want to talk, they must be prepared to listen too, as must our governments.

Our soldiers are just as brainwashed, and lied to, as are the jihadis. I know because I was lied to and conned as a young soldier in Northern Ireland back in the 70s.

We don't fight to bring freedom to the Muslim world, we fight to secure oil supplies, to impose Rothschild run central banks upon them, to bring about regime change and appoint our puppet kings on their political thrones, to sell them arms and to put them into our debt by lending them the money to buy those arms. Maybe the so-called 9/11 attack was perpetrated by Al Qaeda or perhaps it was a false flag attack as many believe. Either way it played right into the hands of George W. Bush who was just itching to attack the Middle East. His war on terror was just one big con to start a series of wars to make profit.

Of course the Rothschilds were in on it too. They were at the heart of it.

The Rothschilds are the richest family on the planet. They are estimated to be worth nearly 300 billion pounds. They own nearly every central bank in the world. The only countries without Rothschild central banks are North Korea, Iran and Cuba.

Until the turn of the century Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan and Libya were independent too. Not any more. The Rothschilds, through the misuse of their great wealth, were able to exert enough influence of word affairs to ensure the invasion and occupation of those countries. They bought the media barons like Rupert Murdoch and they bought pro-globalisation politicians like George W. Bush and Tony Blair. They also influenced the arms manufactures such as BEA that stood to make huge fortunes from the so-called war on terror.

Many people believe that the Rothschilds were behind the 9/11 attacks in America. Whether this is true or not, they certainly exploited the tragedy for their own ends. America, Britain and their allies invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. By the end of 2003 both countries' central banks were under Rothschild control.

That still left Sudan, Libya, Iran, North Korea and Cuba. It was time to enlist the help of the United Nations (UN), time to buy some UN officials. The UN dutifully intervened in the affairs of Sudan and Libya and by 2011 the Rothschild family controlled both these central banks.

North Korea, Iran and Cuba are the last remaining targets. Time for Barack Obama to dip his dirty noes in the trough. This time a softer approach maybe. Before he left office he had already negotiated more cordial diplomatic relations with Cuba and made overtures towards the leaders in Iran.

However a softly softly approach is unlikely to work with North Korea. Instead a very dangerous game is afoot. Kim Jong-un is emotionally and psychologically unstable. Leading the last country to resist the Rothschilds he is also feeling very insecure, he has nuclear weapons. Probably best not to upset him, but no. Barack Obama, eager to please his Rothschild masters, has been yanking on the tiger's tail. It stared in 2014 with Obama blaming North Korea for a cyber attack on Sony Pictures. It will be interesting to see how Donald Trump hols out against Rothschild corruption. Time will tell.

Yet Russia seems to be pushing back. In June 2016 there were unconfirmed reports that Vladimir Putin had banned Jacob Rothschild and his New World Order banking cartel family from entering Russian territory under any circumstances. The report claimed Putin had reminded his cabinet that he paid off the Rothschild's debt and grabbed them by the scruff of the neck and kicked them out Russia's back door.

Is this why the Obama admiration has been so antagonistic towards Russia? It seems so logical that they would want to work with Putin to get Daesh out of Syria but no, they have been portraying Russia as the enemy while supplying Daesh with money and weapons. Hillary Clinton was at the forefront of this treachery. Maybe that's why she lost he election. Let's see what Trump will do. He certainly seems to have a more adult approach to East / West relations.

We will never bring about peace by killing people. The only way is to foster understanding and tolerance. Many notable people, including the late, great John Lennon, think that we can solve the world’s problems by doing away with all religions and national borders, but they have it all backwards. We need religion because science leaves so much unanswered. What we know is just the tiniest fraction of all the knowledge we are yet to discover. Among all that uncertainty there is ample room for all of our religions to find a niche. And we need nations because one size most certainly does not fit all. People need to be able to make laws locally that affect just the people they are intended for and people in other countries must have the right to make different laws.

There are nearly 200 countries in the world, each with their own unique set of laws and customs. People need to be free to settle wherever they wish, provided they go there because they love it there, the way it is, and do not intend to start making changes.

So rather than doing away with religions and countries, we need to respect each other’s religions and countries. If we don’t like the way other countries treat their people (women’s rights and gay rights come readily to mind) we just have to accept the fact that what they do in their own country is none of our business. We make a huge fuss, and rightly so, when Muslims come here and try to bring their barbaric Sharia Law with them. Well if we want the right to veto Sharia Law here, then we also have to agree not to try and impose our democracy on their countries.

And we must guarantee everyone living in the West absolute freedom of religion. That does not mean the right to ram their religion down other people' throats. Everyone has the right, if they choose, to go about their day and never even think about religion. This means no knocking on doors asking if people want to talk about God. It means no wearing of religious uniforms in public places, not just Muslim women covering their hair and faces but Christian nuns too.

When Muslims, in particular, moan about being persecuted for their religion, I wonder how anyone knows what religion they follow. Indeed nobody would know if they dressed normally and tried to fit it. But if they insist on dressing differently, making a loud, obnoxious statement about their religion, they must expect to be treated differently, treated as if they were loud and obnoxious people. There is nothing racist about saying this, the same principle applies to people of all religions and none. It applies equally to boys with their trousers sagging down showing their underpants, for example. If you dress differently, expect to be treated differently. Its not rocket science.

Here in the West people have the right to dress as they please, with certain limits, but choices have consequences and everyone must take full personal responsibility for the consequences of their choices.

If we want peace the first thing we must agree on is for everyone to stop invading other people's countries, with or without weapons. Invasion is when you enter a country with the intention of changing it. Migration is when you enter a country, legally, with the intention of being changed by it.

e must agree on the sanctity of national borders and the right of every country to govern itself according to its own laws and customs. We are not the world's policemen.

Of course the West only pretends to be the world's policemen as an excuse to wage war. the real reason for war is to get rich selling arms to both sides and lending both sides the money to buy those weapons. The West couldn't care less about human rights abuses or why would we trade and sell arms to the country with the worst human rights record of them all - Saudi Arabia?

There are good Muslims as well as bad ones of course, many good ones. There will inevitably be those who will twist my words to try and make me out to be against all Muslims. I most certainly am no such thing. Many come to Britain and Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zeeland to escape the fundamentalist Muslims. Many try to give up Islam altogether but find themselves labelled as apostates and threatened with violence and death. So they put the burkas and hijabs back on and tow the line.

Others actually believe the extremist narratives but only because they have been brainwashed from birth by parents and teachers who were also brainwashed from birth. We must see these people as victims and try to provide them with a safe space where they have freedom of religion, the freedom to wear western clothes and the freedom to think for themselves. We can do this, not by passing new laws, we have too many laws already, but by strictly enforcing the laws we already have. Muslims and ex-Muslims are entitled to the same human rights and freedoms as everybody else. We must stop hiding behind so-called 'political correctness' as an excuse not to crack down hard on those who would try to restrict those freedoms through intimidation and sharia courts. The same laws must apply to everybody regardless of race, religion or gander.

Political correctness is just another term for censorship and censorship is a tool of fascist oppression that inevitably leads to totalitarianism. And we don't want that here do we?

And we must tackle the rising resentment amongst our on people caused by the very real discrimination often shown in favour of Muslims and refugees. Our people are being sent to prison just for speaking out despite the fact that freedom of speech is guaranteed under the Human Rights Act (1998), while Muslims are allowed to insult us, burn our flags and our poppies without sanction.

The same laws must apply to everybody regardless of race, religion or gander. Rules brought in as knee jerk reactions intended to calm unrest are having the opposite effect. They are fuelling unrest as our people see Muslims and refugees given priority housing, higher levels of state benefits including being able to claim for multiple wives, and a soft touch approach from the police. The only way to restore calm, and to avoid a civil war, is to create a level playing field where everyone is treated equally regardless of race, religion or gender.

How many more innocents have to die before we ditch so-called 'political correctness' and start talking about this problem openly and frankly?

We remember Tony Blair as the wicked Prime Minister who caused so much trouble in Iraq, leaving thousands dead but lets try to remember that before that he did something quite remarkable. Blair and his Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mo Mowlam, opened a dialogue with the IRA, thus starting the Northern Ireland peace process.

Margaret Thatcher took the opposite approach, an approach akin to political correctness. She refused to negotiate with terrorists. She wouldn't even let Gerry Adams speck on television, insisting his words, if reported at all, were voiced by an actor.

What happens when you deny anyone the right to voice their concerns and fears? You leave them just one outlet, violence. The analogy here is not just with the IRA and the Muslim extremists although tat argument can also be made. I am more concerned here with the similarity between the dilemma faced by the IRA under Thatcher and that faced by people genuinely concerned over creeping Islamification but oppressed and silenced by political correctness.

Sooner or later their frustration will erupt into civil war. This is, of course, exactly what our corrupt leaders want. They will be able to make fortunes selling guns to both sides and the bankers can make fortunes lending both sides the money to buy the guns. They also get to impose draconian security measures which make them stronger and us weaker. Its a no brainer for them.

In the words of Maajid Nawaz, a former Hizb ut-Tahrir (H.T.) Islamic terrorist who how runs The Quilliam Foundation , "Like so many nice people who seek power, I wanted to force everyone else to be nice. It's called totalitarianism."

"Poking fun at other people's beliefs, while it may seem frivolous and offensive, is a non-negotiable right. It is a principle that underpins free speech, the basis for progress."

Nawaz is himself a former Islamist terrorist, who has seen the light, a modicum of it at least, so he should know what he is talking about.

Louis Smith MBE is a British artistic gymnast. who received a bronze medal at the 2008 Beijing Olympics and and a silver medal the 2012 London Olympics. He was suspended for two months on 1st November 2016 by British Gymnastics after exercising his right to free speech in an Instagram video mocking Islam.

The following day, Conservative MP Charles Walker put a question to Theresa May during Prime Minister's Questions:

"When people make fun of Christianity in this country, it rightly turns the other cheek. When a young gymnast, Louis Smith, makes fun of another religion, which is widely practised in this country, he is hounded on Twitter, by the media and is suspended by his association. For goodness sake Mr. Speaker, this man received death threats and we have all looked the other way.

"So my question is to the Prime Minister is this - What is going on in this country because I no longer understand the rules".

In her rather woolly reply, the Prime Minister totality failed to grasp the nettle and affirm our right to free speech.

The journalist Melanie Phillips said on BBC Radio 4 "We are trying to stifle ideas that should not be suppressed while at the same time, we are reluctant to act against ideas that do pose a danger to individuals or the state.

"I think giving offence or hurting someone's feelings or making them feel alarmed, should never be prohibited. We should surely all be robust enough to deal with such things, not least by combating such opinions with other ideas.

"I also think that there are ideas which pose a real threat, which a responsible society has a duty to thwart. For example, ideas behind movements intent on capturing by stealth, the structures of society and transforming it into something else. I'm talking about subversion.

"This kind of threat manifests itself in different ways and at different times. In the last century it was fascism then it was communism. This century I believe its Islamism.

"I want to find out how we dealt with subversive groups in the past and whether, as a country, we are still capable of taking the action I think is required, to meet the threats that face us today".

She gives the example of Anjem Choudary who has been living here in Britain for many years and has been perching hatred and radicalising young Muslims a number of whom turned to terrorism for two decades. Choudary was finally convicted and imprisoned in September 2016 but not for subversion. He walked free until he was caught raising funds for Daesh.

David Anderson, who revues the government's terrorism legislation had this to say ”We do have laws, not just directed at terro9rism but directed at inciting racial hatred, inciting religious hatred. We don’t, its true, have laws making it a criminal offence to speak against democracy. or its a criminal offence to wish for a caliphate or even express support for the idea of a caliphate. ”I think most people would be very reluctant to convict people for offences such as that”

What do you think? I have always supported free speech but the same rules must apply to everybody. Yes Muslim hate preachers must have the right to speak freely but so must their opponents. We cannot allow the current situation to continue when Islamists are free to plot the overthrow of our whole democratic way of life but their opponents are accused of racial or religiously motivated hate speech and silenced.

We must all be free to practice any religion we choose but when people agitate for a caliphate or for the end of democracy or for sharia law, they are not practising religion, they are practising politics.

The definition of racism is treating one ethnic group differently from another.

The cornerstone of our democracy is our absolute right to criticise political ideas we disagree with, regardless of who is postulating those ideas. Making it a so-called 'hate crime' to challenge the political ideas of ethnic minorities but not others is, of itself, a racist policy.

Melanie Phillips again "Terrorism is an obvious threat to society but we also have non-violent extremism. I don't mean by this phrase fundamentalist religious ideas I mean an idealogical religious programme to infiltrate, subvert and overthrow the state".

You may remember the Trojan Horse plot in 2014 where hard line Islamists plotted to take over some of Birmingham's schools.

Peter Clark , former head of Police Counter-terrorism, was the government investigator who concluded there was "a coordinated, deliberate and sustained action to introduce an intolerant and aggressive Islamic ethos into some schools".

Michael Gove reported to Parliament "Keeping our children safe and ensuring our schools prepare them for life in modern Britain could not be more important. Its my department's central mission. Allegations made in what has come to be known as the Trojan Horse letter suggested that children were not being kept safe in Birmingham schools."

Many people think there is a broad Islamist agenda to infiltrate and islamise western society. Maajid Nawaz again "The Islamist ideology, in its organised nature, and with the main groups representing it, have a clear and stated official policy of affecting the culture of our societies. I would suggest that because Islamists are highly organised, because they are entirely dedicated and committed to bring about this purpose, I would suggest this should be taken incredibly seriously."

In 2015 the government looked into whether, or to what extent, Islamists have already infiltrated the NHS, local councils, the Civil Service and the education system. There was a time, not so long ago, when Britain was well organised at combating subversion. After WW2 our spooks kept a keen eye on those who had been working with or sympathisers of the Nazis. We understood then that fascists were trying to silence free speech and that we must not allow that to happen. How things have changed. Now our own government is clamping down on free speech, imprisoning goof people for not being 'politically correct' and criticising the islamofascists.

Everything we understood in the 1940s and 50s has been turned on its head. We are living in a world of Orwellian newspeak, where everything means the opposite of what it seams. Our government is now protecting the fascists and locking up the patriots. Could it have anything to do with the fact that the countries the islamofascist come from have all the oil? Forget the superficial left / right / centre model of politics. That doesn't work anymore.

Today the political spectrum is highly polarised. On the one hand we have those who want more freedom and independence, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, true universal equality (rather than just more rights for this or that specific faction) free and open debates on all subjects. We want devolved parliaments making laws for relatively small numbers of free, independent local people. We want short supply lines and independent, self-sufficient communities. We want free movement of the people who will respect the cultures and laws of the countries they move to. This group values independence and free and willing cooperation.

On the other hand we have the fascist oppressors of free speech, those who will censor you with their insidious political correctness, those who want totalitarianism and globalisation, one world government, one set of laws for everyone in the world irrespective of local cultural values. They want to do away with all borders so immigrants can run roughshod over local established communities. This group hates independence and promotes competition rather than cooperation.

One particularly extreme faction within this second group wants everyone to follow the state religion and often kill people who try to leave the Islamic religion, calling them apostates.

In between these two extremes we have billions of ordinary people who just want to get on with their lives, largely unaware of the dangers and even unaware that they are unaware. Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing. The cuddly, easy going liberals may well be the ones imposing political correctness and concealing their totalitarian agenda while the ones falsely labeled as fascists and neo-nazis may be the very people who are fighting for your equality, your freedom and your civil rights. Beware of newspeak. Don't take my word for it, I could be wrong but please do do your own research and your own thinking.

Totalitarianism is looming large on the horizon and unless we stand up for our civil rights, our freedoms and our diverse cultures we will soon be consumed into Huxley's Brave New World or Orwell's 1984.

My father knew the Nazis. He got his leg shot to pieces fighting the bastards.

Unfortunately there is a modern trend to call true patriots who defend freedom and democracy 'neo-nazis'. This really is quite slanderous and utterly deplorable.

Australian journalist, John Pilger wisely said "ISIS is a monster created by the West. The United States, UK and France aren't fighting with ISIS, they created and armed them".

They are all in it together.

The real Nazis wanted to censor criticism and shut down opposition groups and they wanted to impose a totalitarian world government. Where do we see that today? We see it in ISIS and we see it in the EU, in Saudi Arabia and in many other governments.

Angela Merkel, Jean-Claude Juncker, Theresa May, Barak Obama, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the Saud family are the real Nazis, all working towards a new, totalitarian world government under sharia law.

Why do you think Angela Merkel invited a million Muslim refugees to flood Germany in a single year? Why do you think Theresa May refused to stop selling arms to Saudi Arabia despite human rights abuses at home and the atrocities they are committing in Yemen? Why are all the refugees coming to Europe, Australia and the USA and not to Saudi Arabia? Why is Saudi Arabia financing all the new mosques across Europe? Can't you see where this is going?

They are all in it together, Angela Merkel, Jean-Claude Juncker, Theresa May, Barak Obama, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the Saud family, all working towards a new, totalitarian world government under sharia law.

If we want to preserve our way of life, our freedoms, our human rights, our animal rights, our gender equality, our gay rights, we must oppose the EU and the spread of Islam.

We will never fix our problems by pretending they don't exist. Young British born Muslims are being taken in by the lies of the extremists. They are going to Syria to fight for Daesh. Why?

We know there are many Muslims who hate us in the West. They have good reason to hate us as I have outlined in this chapter. The question is, why do they choose to live here amongst us if they hate us so much?

The only way to stop the hate is for everybody to stop invading other people's countries and to stop medalling in their internal affairs. Of course its not always that simple, especially in places such as Ireland and Israel that were invaded hundreds of years ago and where the descendants of the invaders have grown up believing its their own country. In such circumstances only some sort of compromise can ever bring peace.

But back to the U.K.. Not all Muslims hate us. There are many good, tolerant, broad-minded Muslims too. They come here to escape the clutches of the extremist, intolerant terrorists and imams.

We must provide a safe space for forward thinking Muslims to reject fundamentalism. Many Muslims come here to escape the clutches of Muslim Fundamentalism and the extremist imams only to find a nest seething with extremists here, lying in wait for them. They find themselves bullied, intimidated, violently attacked or even killed if they try to modernise. We must provide a safe environment for these people. We must pass and strictly enforce laws protecting absolute freedom of religion. Acts of violence and incitement to violence must result in lengthy prison sentences EVERY TIME.

Those who commit violence in the name of Islam often think of themselves as Soldiers of Islam. These misguided fools think they are taking part in some holy war.

As I said before, religious wars are seldom about what they appear to be about. Only the foot solders believe that. The politicians and generals are just after power and world leaders may allegedly be in the pay of the international arms dealers. And the media barons, such as Rupert Murdoch, need to be on side to brainwash the populace into supporting the war. I wonder what inducements they got for paying along in this deadliest of games.

Its not all carrots of course. There are also sticks for those who refuse to co-operate. Just look at what happened to Dr. David Kelly. He was a distinguished government scientist who hunted down weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Blair and Bush depended on the lie of Iraq possessing WMDs in order to justify their illegal war. The problem was the Saddam Hussein regime did not have any and Kelly spilt the beans to the BBC 'Today' programme. He was called to testify before a parliamentary committee where he was aggressively questioned about his role in the scandal. He was found dead two days later.

On 18th July 2003 his body was found dead on Harrowdown Hill, near his home in Longworth, Oxfordshire. His death was ruled a suicide by the judicial inquiry chaired by Lord Hutton, but was it just too convenient? He had no reason to take his own life and the British government had every reason to want him dead. So was Dr. Kelly murdered on the orders of Her Majesty’s Government? We will never know for sure.

What we do know is his death was not the fault of the existence of countries although it could have been caused by greed, power lust and corruption at the highest level.

How much better it would have been had Lennon encouraged us to imagine a world where different countries and different religions co-operate with each other in a spirit of love and tolerance. But I suppose it wouldn't have made such a catchy song.

Why did Tony Blair and George W. Bush invade Iraq? Why did they want us all to believe that Sadam Husain had weapons of mass destruction? I don't have all the answers but I know a man who does. His name is Tom Bower and he has just written a fascinating book called Broken Vows: Tony Blair The Tragedy of Power. In it he claims that Blair personifies everything that is wrong with modern politics.

Bower has intervied dozens of insiders, ministers and civil servants who were close to Blair during his time as British Prime Minister. He details how Blair manipulated public opinion with his false claims about WMDs in order to create unjustified levels of fear. The book talks about how a similar tactic was used to justify the invasion of Afganistan and it tells how Blair synically engeneered mass imigration in order to permanatly change the face of Britain, turning it into a truly multicultural society for his own political ends.

The Chilcot Inquiry into the 2003 invasion of Iraq was finally published on 6th July 2016. Sir John opened his lengthy report with the following words :-

"We were appointed to consider the UK’s policy on Iraq from 2001 to 2009, and to identify lessons for the future....... In 2003, for the first time since the Second World War, the United Kingdom took part in an invasion and full-scale occupation of a sovereign State. That was a decision of the utmost gravity.

"Saddam Hussein was undoubtedly a brutal dictator who had attacked Iraq’s neighbours, repressed and killed many of his own people, and was in violation of obligations imposed by the UN Security Council. But the questions for the Inquiry were:

•whether it was right and necessary to invade Iraq in March 2003;

•whether the UK could - and should - have been better prepared for what followed.

•The judgements about the severity of the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction ( WMD ) were presented with a certainty that was not justified.

•Despite explicit warnings, the consequences of the invasion were underestimated. The planning and preparations for Iraq after Saddam Hussein were wholly inadequate.

•The Government failed to achieve its stated objectives.

"We have concluded that the UK chose to join the invasion of Iraq before the peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted. Military action at that time was not a last resort."

Sir John Chilcot made no judgement as to whether or not the war was legal, or whether or not Tony Blair acted legally. His is not a lawyer and that was not his brief.

You can read his full statement here :
or the full report here:

In the House of Commons on 18th March 2003, Mr. Blair stated that he judged the possibility of terrorist groups in possession of WMD was "a real and present danger to Britain and its national security"

He added that the threat from Saddam Hussein’s supposed arsenal could not be contained and posed a clear danger to British citizens. Like heck it did! He just wanted an excuse to go to war and make himself and his palsrich.

Blair had been warned that military action would increase the threat from Al Qaida to the UK and to UK interests. He had also been warned that an invasion might lead to Iraq’s weapons and capabilities being transferred into the hands of terrorists. Nevertheless he ploughed ahead.

In Chilcot's words "As late as 17th March, Mr. Blair was being advised by the Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons, the means to deliver them and the capacity to produce them. He was also told that the evidence pointed to Saddam Hussein’s view that the capability was militarily significant and to his determination - left to his own devices - to build it up further. It is now clear that policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. They were not challenged, and they should have been.

"The findings on Iraq’s WMD capabilities set out in the report of the Iraq Survey Group in October 2004 were significant. But they did not support pre-invasion statements by the UK Government, which had focused on Iraq’s current capabilities, which Mr. Blair and Mr. Straw had described as 'vast stocks' and an urgent and growing threat. In response to those findings, Mr. Blair told the House of Commons that, although Iraq might not have had ’stockpiles of actually deployable weapons', Saddam Hussein 'retained the intent and the capability ... and was in breach of United Nations resolutions'. That was not, however, the explanation for military action he had given before the conflict."

Tony Blair told the Chilcot Inquiry that "the difficulties encountered in Iraq after the invasion could not have been known in advance. "

Sir John disagreed "We do not agree that hindsight is required. The risks of internal strife in Iraq, active Iranian pursuit of its interests, regional instability, and Al Qaida activity in Iraq, were each explicitly identified before the invasion. Ministers were aware of the inadequacy of US plans, and concerned about the inability to exert significant influence on US planning. Mr. Blair eventually succeeded only in the narrow goal of securing President Bush’s agreement that there should be UN authorisation of the post-conflict role".

Although Chilcot obviously has a pretty lo opinion of Tony Blair he had only praise for our brave service men and women "The Armed Forces fought a successful military campaign, which took Basra and helped to achieve the departure of Saddam Hussein and the fall of Baghdad in less than a month.

Service personnel, civilians who deployed to Iraq and Iraqis who worked for the UK, showed great courage in the face of considerable risks. They deserve our gratitude and respect. More than 200 British citizens died as a result of the conflict in Iraq. Many more were injured. This has meant deep anguish for many families, including those who are here today.

"The invasion and subsequent instability in Iraq had, by July 2009, also resulted in the deaths of at least one hundred and fifty thousand Iraqis - and probably many more - most of them civilians. More than a million people were displaced. The people of Iraq have suffered greatly."

Sir John was far from happy about the post-war situation too "The vision for Iraq and its people - issued by the US, the UK, Spain and Portugal, at the Azores Summit on 16 March 2003 - included a solemn obligation to help the Iraqi people build a new Iraq at peace with itself and its neighbours. It looked forward to a united Iraq in which its people should enjoy security, freedom, prosperity and equality with a government that would uphold human rights and the rule of law as cornerstones of democracy. We have considered the post-conflict period in Iraq in great detail, including efforts to reconstruct the country and rebuild its security services. In this short statement I can only address a few key points. After the invasion, the UK and the US became joint Occupying Powers. For the year that followed, Iraq was governed by the Coalition Provisional Authority. The UK was fully implicated in the Authority’s decisions, but struggled to have a decisive effect on its policies. "

In other words Blair was still under Bush’s thumb.

The report concluded that: "Military action in Iraq might have been necessary at some point. But in March 2003:

There was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein.

The strategy of containment could have been adapted and continued for some time.

The majority of the Security Council supported continuing UN inspections and monitoring.

"There are many lessons set out in the Report. Some are about the management of relations with allies, especially the US. Mr. Blair overestimated his ability to influence US decisions on Iraq. The UK’s relationship with the US has proved strong enough over time to bear the weight of honest disagreement. It does not require unconditional support where our interests or judgements differ. The lessons also include:

•The importance of collective Ministerial discussion which encourages frank and informed debate and challenge.

•The need to assess risks, weigh options and set an achievable and realistic strategy.

•The vital role of Ministerial leadership and co-ordination of action across Government, supported by senior officials.

•The need to ensure that both the civilian and military arms of Government are properly equipped for their tasks.

Above all, the lesson is that all aspects of any intervention need to be calculated, debated and challenged with the utmost rigour. And, when decisions have been made, they need to be implemented fully. Sadly, neither was the case in relation to the UK Government’s actions in Iraq."

If we learn nothing else from this tragedy, let's at least remember that politicians are our servants, not our masters, and we need to keep them on very much tighter reins. They ride on our backs. We allow them to rule us by our compliance. If we all stand up we can change things.

The bottom line is we can never have peace until we stop invading other people's countries and interfering in other countries' internal affairs. The sheer arrogance of even attempting to bring about regime change in a foreign nation is mind blowing. We must all stand together and tell our politicians "NO MORE WAR IN OUR NAME!"

Chapter Seven - Rupert Murdoch's Hitmen
by Ian Cutler

I thought you might like to meet some of the dubious characters I have rubbed shoulders with during my shady career as a press photographer working for Rupert Murdoch.

Let me begin with biggest villan of the lot, Rupert Murdoch. (Keith Rupert Murdoch, AC, KSG) was born on the 11th March 1931 in Victoria, Australia. He is the founder, Chairman and CEO of News Corporation, the world's second-largest media conglomerate. Murdoch became managing director of News Limited, inherited from his father, in 1952. In the 1950s and '60s, he acquired various newspapers in Australia and New Zealand, before expanding into the United Kingdom in 1969, taking over the News of the World followed closely by The Sun. He moved to New York in 1974 to expand into the US market and became a naturalised US citizen in 1985. In 1981, he bought The Times, his first British broadsheet.

In 1986, keen to adopt newer electronic publishing technologies, he consolidated his UK printing operations in Wapping, causing bitter industrial disputes. His News Corporation acquired Twentieth Century Fox (1985), HarperCollins (1989) and The Wall Street Journal (2007). He formed BSkyB in 1990 and during the 1990s expanded into Asian networks and South American television. By 2000 Murdoch's News Corporation owned over 800 companies in more than 50 countries with a net worth of over $5 billion.

In July 2011 Murdoch faced allegations that his papers, including the News of the World, had been regularly hacking the phones of celebrities, royalty and public citizens. He faced police and government investigations into bribery and corruption in the UK and FBI investigations in the US.

Barry Askew (13 December 1936 - 16 April 2012) was appointed as editor of the the News of the World In April 1981. In early December he came into conflict with the Queen after claiming that if Princess Diana felt harassed by press photographers she should send a servant out to shop for her. At the end of the month he left the newspaper and spent the rest of his career in various short-term provincial posts.

Sir Nicholas Lloyd (born 9th June 1942) editor of the Sunday People 1982-1983, editor of the News of the World 1984-1985, and editor of the Daily Express 1986-1995. He was known for his sexual indiscretions in Murdoch's 'Animal's Room'.

Derek Jameson (born 29th November 1929 in London). His career began in Fleet Street, as a messenger boy, before becoming managing editor of the Daily Mirror newspaper, editor of The Daily Express March 1977 - 1980, editor of The Daily Express March 1977 - 1980 and Editor of the News of the World 1981-1984.

Trevor Kempson. Former chief Features Writer for News of the World. In the December of 1990 he tragically died of AIDS, contracted from a prostitute in a brothel he was exposing in a press story!

Ray Chapman was a journalist who joined the News of the World in 1981. He was a well known cocaine addict and convicted felon. He married a former prostitute and was an aficionado of anal sex with prostitutes. Chapman retired from the paper in September 2007 and died on New Year's Eve that same year at the age of 71.

Gerry Brown was born in the Gorbals, the son of a gunner in the Royal Scots Fusiliers. As a teenager he joined the Air Training Corps. A motorbike accident put paid to an RAF flying career. He then became a copy boy on Glasgow's Daily Record and then landed a job at the East London News Agency. He later became a journalist at the News of the World and America's National Enquirer. He was a two bottles of scotch a day man, a self-styled super stud and lover of fellow journalist Tina Dalgleish. He regularly 'created' fake stories such as 'Idi Amin Eating His Subjects Brains for Breakfast'. He was banned from the USA for Credit Card Fraud. He used to milk Chris Robinson, a well known psychic and former brothel owner, for stories. Gerry died at the age of 60.

Clive Cook. Well known cocaine addict and former Journalist at the News of the World. He faked stories like there was no tomorrow.

Phil Wrack was deputy Editor of the News of the World until 1998. He loved nothing more than to get pissed during lunch time and expose himself to 'News of the Screws' secretaries. He died aged 71.

Wendy Henry. In the 1970s she was given a six month trial with the Daily Mail but was not given a permanent position. Instead she worked as a freelance and later joined the features department of the News of the World where she committed regular sexual indiscretions with Sir Nicholas Lloyd and Phil Wrack. Wendy later became features editor of Woman and later, series editor of The Sun, followed by a stint as woman's editor, then assistant editor (features). During the Falklands War, when she heard that the General Belgrano had been sunk, she joked "Gotcha!", which was used by editor Kelvin MacKenzie as a famous Sun headline. In 1983, she was suspended for two weeks after fabricating an interview with Falklands veteran Simon Weston. She was the first journalist to report that Princess Margaret was having a relationship with Roddy Llewellyn.

Wendy Henry was then promoted to editor of the News of the World's Sunday magazine, before being appointed editor of the newspaper in 1987. In 1988, Wendy was appointed editor of the Sunday People where she was able to have more input into the leading articles. While there, she became known for publishing controversial pictures, including victims of the Sioux City air crash, an ailing Sammy Davis Jr and a seven-year-old Prince William urinating in public. Following the publication of the last two photographs (especially the Prince William one), she was fired. In 1990 she moved to the United States to become editor of The Globe.

Tina Dalgleish. Former Journalist at the News of the World and Blow Job Specialist in the 'Animal's Room'. She was also the girlfriend of Trevor Kempson who later tragically died of AIDS.

Kelvin MacKenzie (born 22nd October 1946 in South London) Kelvin McKenzie is best known for being editor of The Sun newspaper between 1981 and 1994. He left school with one O-level in English literature. He joined the South East London Mercury at 17, and worked on local and then national newspapers, such as the Daily Express for the next ten years.

MacKenzie stated that he discovered early on in his career that he had little writing ability and that his talents lay in making up headlines and laying out pages. By 1978, at the age of 32, he was Managing Editor of the New York Post, two years after it was purchased by Rupert Murdoch, who already owned The Sun. Murdoch appointed him Sun editor in 1981 and is said to have described MacKenzie as his all-time "favourite editor".

Craig McKenzie. Former journalist with the News of the World and a senior editorial executive at the Daily Express under Sir Nicholas Lloyd. The brother of Kelvin, we all knew Craig as a herpes sufferer and frequenter of brothels.

Rod Tyler. Former Features Editor of the News of the World. Rod wrote some of Margaret Thatcher's speeches, including the famous "Me? The Iron Lady?". He was also brought in by her PR adviser, Tim Bell, now Lord Bell, to help with strategy sessions. Tyler was the one time lover of Margaret Thatcher's daughter, Carol. He became deputy features editor of the Mail but fell out of favour with the editor, David English, who sacked him in 1976. Rod is quoted as saying "David English, who was the greatest journalist I have ever worked with, used to sack one executive a year to keep the rest on their toes. That year it just happened to be my turn." After freelancing for a while, he landed a job as assistant editor at the News of the World where, among other duties, he took charge of the 'Grope Squad', as the paper's investigation team was appropriately known. His greatest coup, however, was to sign up Joan Collins for the serialisation of the sensational autobiography Past Imperfect that did so much to resurrect her career, as well as boosting circulation with its kiss and tell revelations. in 1982 a change of editor at the News of the World prompted Rod to resign and to go back on the road as a freelance. Tyler died in October 2003 aged just 60.

Stuart Kuttner (born 1939) was managing Editor of the News of the World for 22 years before stepping down from his post in 2009 and retiring to Woodford Green. He was arrested on 2nd August 2011, in connection with the News International phone hacking scandal and later bailed. He was 71 at the time of his arrest, which was a clear statement that the Operation Weeting team, led by the deputy assistant commissioner Sue Akers, intend to be thorough. Kuttner helped Gerry Brown and Ray Chapman falsify stories; in particular the 'Social Security Scam' and visits to Poland with me which never happened!!

Piers Morgan (born 30 March 1965 in Guildford, Surrey) once served as de facto editor of The Sun's show business column, Bizarre, under the editorship of Kelvin MacKenzie. In 1994, aged 28, Rupert Murdoch appointed him editor of News of the World. He quickly gained notoriety for his invasive style and lack of concern regarding the right to privacy of celebrities and royals. Morgan insisted that they could not manipulate the media to further their own ends without accepting the consequences of a two way deal. Morgan's autobiography The Insider states that he left the News of the World of his own choice and somewhat against owner Rupert Murdoch's wishes when he was offered the job of Editor at the Daily Mirror.

As editor of the Mirror, in 1996 Morgan was widely criticised and forced to apologise for the headline "Achtung! Surrender" a day before England met Germany in a semi-final of the Euro '96 football championships. In May 2004 he was sacked for his involvement in the Lancashire Regiment scam !!

Ron Mount. Former Flying Squad officer, taken on by News of the World because of the stories he had to tell which were all lies. In the words of Andrew Drummond "The newsroom was a bit like public school with our token East Londoner, Ron Mount (ex flying squad) holding the candle of the masses and meeting up with his doll in the Printers Pie after work."

Mazher Mahmood was an undercover reporter with The Sunday Times newspaper. He previously spent 20 years working for the News of the World. He has been dubbed as "Britain's most notorious undercover reporter." News of the World claimed he has brought over 250 criminals to justice. Mahmood is also known as the fake sheikh because he often poses and disguises himself as a sheikh in order to gain his target's trust. In September 2008, he wrote a book entitled Confessions of a Fake Sheik - The King Of The Sting Reveals All published by Harper Collins. He was banned from The Times for false stories. He fabricated the Posh & Becks kidnap scam !!

In October 2016 Mahmood was jailed for 15 months after being found guilty of tampering with evidence in the collapsed drug trial of singer Tulisa Contostavlos.

Chapter Eight - It Ain't Necessarily So
by Jack Cox

When I read a newspaper article or watch a TV news report I often think you those haunting lines written by George Gerswin for the hit musical, Porgy and Bess, 'It Ain't Necessarily So'.

You must of heard the expression 'Order Out Of Chaos'. It is used in Freemasonry an elsewhere. Sounds inviting doesn't it? Its what most of want. If I offered to bring order out of all the chaos in the world you would be queuing up to follow me. Right? But what if, unbeknown to you, I had created the chaos in the first place? What then?

Another word we often associate with 'chaos' is 'fear'. Get people scared enough and they will act irrationally. Tell them there is a huge danger of terrorist attacks and they will let you put them under more surveillance. Teresa May worked this out years ago. Tell them they will starve in the wilderness if Britain leaves the European Union and they will act out of fear and vote to continue giving their sovereignty away. As I write these words a referendum is looming up as to whether Britain will leave or remain in the E.U.. By the time you read this, that referendum will be history. You will know which way it went. Look back over the arguments put forward by both sides and you will see they were mostly aimed at promoting fear.

Its a simple enough technique. Create a problem or at least make a real problem worse or seem to be worse, tell the public about the problem in the way you wish them to believe it, wait for them to react with fear then put forward your agenda for fixing the problem. Its a guaranteed way to get support for your agenda. Politicians and big business leaders create the problem, get the media to spread the word, then offer a product or political policy to fix the problem. It works every time.

The news is full of frightning stories about war, eccnomic collapse, terrorism, mass migration and health scares. Its mostly true but who started the war? Why are the terrorists fighting? Who is funding them? Who is suppling them with arms? Who will benifit from mass migration? Who will get rich from combating the dissease? Just follow the money trail if you really want to know wha’s going on. Failing that look to see whose political careers wll get a boost.

In May 2014 Andrew Smith reported in the Huffington Post:

On Wednesday 7th May, Sir Roger Carr, the new Chair of British Aerospace (BAe Systems), hosted his first annual general meeting.

There are few companies with as much to be ashamed of as BAE Systems. The company, which is the biggest arms dealer in Europe, has a long history of corruption, white-washing and arms sales to tyrants. It is unquestionably one of the worst corporate citizens in the world.

As you can imagine, its AGM, hosted in a sterile and remote airbase outside Farnborough, was a surreal experience. We knew it would be bad, but what we got was a long and often nauseating lesson in evasion, denial and downright fabrication.

Proceedings began with a barrage of corporate videos, followed by an unusual and almost Orwellian speech from Carr, in which he claimed that, despite all of the evidence on the contrary, BAE works 'for peace at home and abroad.' His claim was rightfully met with a mixture of shock, disbelief and derision from the floor.

You could be forgiven for thinking that perhaps he had misspoke, but it was a point he returned to throughout the subsequent questions from activists and shareholders.

Questions focused on BAE’s relationships with authoritarian regimes, including those in Bahrain, Libya and Saudi Arabia. There was particular focus on Saudi Arabia, the largest customer for UK weaponry, where BAE has sold fighter jets, including the Eurofighter Typhoon, Tactica armoured personnel vehicles and missiles. BAE manufactured the armoured vehicle that were used by Saudi Arabia to support repression of peaceful protest in Bahrain.

Sir Roger said that he had thought a lot about the company’s relationship with the brutal Saudi regime before accepting his new role. One questioner said that she was shocked that he could have thought about the relationship and still taken the job. She pointed out that Saudi Arabia has been condemned by Freedom House, Human Rights Watch and the Economist Intelligence Unit, which listed it as the fifth most authoritarian regime in the world.

Carr justified arms sales to the regime on the basis that he believes Saudi Arabia to be a "country in transition" and a "critical ally in defence terms, critical to world peace from our perspective". While it may be true that there has been some limited degree of progress in some areas of Saudi society, there has also been an escalation of the crackdown against political opponents. Only last month the government passed a new 'terrorism' law that treats all atheists and political dissidents as enemies of the state.

One point that Carr kept returning to is the fact that he is not a politician and that it is not his job to make judgments about what countries are allies. Even if we ignore the fact that the BAE puts considerable time, money and resources into lobbying politicians at home and abroad, it is very hard to see it as a dispassionate bystander in global conflict rather than a company that actively fuels and profits from it.

Time and again Carr stressed that BAE’s allies are the UK government’s allies and that BAE only sells weapons to countries approved by the UK under the existing arms export legislation. This may be the case, but that doesn't mean that arms companies can simply absolve themselves of any responsibility for the consequences when they arm human rights abusers. By choosing to sell weapons to oppressive regimes BAE is strengthening and endorsing them.

Where Carr is right is that BAE is only able to arm and bolster these regimes due to a combination of support from the government and a lack of any meaningful arms controls. On that point, Carr said he was supportive of the Arms Trade Treaty, which should make its supporters question how strong it really is. If an arms trade treaty has the support of the biggest arms exporting nations in the world, and some of the biggest arms companies, then surely that is a sign of its weakness. If the UK is serious about ending the arms trade, with its dire consequences for peace and human rights, then it should immediately stop promoting arms exports and allowing companies like BAE to profit from repression and violence.

Upon leaving the meeting and re-entering the real world we were treated to a sub-standard packed lunch and a shuttle bus back to the train station. What is clear is that Carr and the rest of the board has bought into their own propaganda and a dystopian world-view in which strengthening tyrants is a way to bring peace and stability, and where the human consequences of war have nothing whatsoever to do with those who provide the weapons.

Sir Roger Carr became Chairman of energy giant Centrica in 2004 and Deputy Chairman of the Bank of England in 2007, as well as President of the CBI in 2011. He joined BAE Systems as Chairman in 2013.  Sir Roger became BBC Trust vice-chairman in March 2015. Are you starting to join up the dots yet? The Deputy Chairman of the Bank of England, the President of the CBI, and the BBC Trust vice-chairman IS THE BIGEST ARMS DEALER IN THE COUNTRY !!!

The BBC Trust is the governing body of the BBC. It is responsible for ensuring that the corporation delivers on its mission 'to inform, educate and entertain.'

The Trust, established through the 2006 BBC Royal Charter, describes itself as 'the guardian of license fee revenue'. It strives to make the corporation ’simpler, more efficient and more open.' It sets editorial standards, appoints the Director-General and serves as the final arbiter on complaints.

So with his appointment, the government deeply associated our public broadcaster with the arms trade. Why aren’t we talking about this?

But the rabbit hole goes even deeper. Carr is also a senior advisor to Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (KKR), the American multinational private equity firm. Indeed KKR is currently the world’s largest private equity company. He is also a member of the Prime Minister’s Business Advisory Group. So he has huge influence, not just staggering amounts of money but also the British Prime Minister.

No wonder there have been so many wars! The West have been systematically attacking the Middle East for decades and BAE Systems have been supplying much of the weaponry. And where has it got us? What have we gained from all the killing and dying?

The West has achieved the Muslim world getting the hump. We have achieved the growth of terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and Daesh. Western actions have resulted in the murder of the strong leaders who were holding their countries together, leaders such as Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi. These were hard men, ruthless men but very necessary men in the context of the situation in their nations at the time.

When you read or watch about the reasons why these wars were supposed to be necessary just think to yourself It Ain't Necessarily So. Arms dealers such as Carr (and his predecessors) made a fortune from these wars. And you may well believe that the politicians and media barons who helped were not left out of pocket either.

The other huge consequence of these disastrous wars has been the mass influx of migrants and refugees. And embedded in their ranks are inevitably many terrorists heading for Europe.

Of course its heart-breaking to see these desperate people, including many women and children, taking such huge risks, on flimsy open boats, trying to get here. Of course it is. Yet its important to try and see he bigger picture.

Its not a black and white situation. Of course there are many genuine, desperate people in those boats. The are fleeing wars and tyranny in their home countries. But why are they fleeing to the West, the very countries who have destabilised the Middle East in the first place? Why do they never try to get to African or Asian countries? Most of them are Muslims who would be far happier living in a Muslim country. Many of them have ideas about how to treat women and how to behave in a foreign country that are totally incompatible with Western culture. At the very least we should insist that they renounce sharia law and vow to obey the laws of their host country before we let them in.

My work has taken me to all corners of the globe. I have had friends from every continent except Antarctica. I do not care where people were born, the colour of their skin or the names they call God by. All that matters is what is in their hearts and how they behave.

Sometime I describe myself as English, sometimes as British but really I consider myself to be a citizen of the world. Travel has taught me many things. It has made me broad minded and tolerant. We are all different and it is our differences that make us special.

I had a Polish wife. I have lived abroad, three years in Holland and seventeen years in Spain. The Dutch people and the Spanish people where great hosts and I always tried to be a good, respectful guest in their countries.

Yes I may be a citizen of the world, and so may you, but I have always accepted that the ones to make laws and policy are the people who have been in the place longer than me. It is their country and I a mere visitor. Even though I may be a long term visitor, their families may go back generations. That gives them more say than me.

If refugees come here with that attitude, willing to adapt themselves and fit in, we should make them welcome. However the ones who come here intent on making trouble, expecting us to adapt our ways for them, give up on flying our flags and celebrating Christmas, stop serving our own children pork at school, these arseholes are most certainly not welcome here. They can just fuck off!

Of course we should let in the genuine refugees who are in genuine need of help because of our wars and who are genuinely willing and eager to adapt themselves to our ways. Of course we should. But we have to be very selective.

The eurocrats in Brussels have a plan for ever closer union which will eventually do away with all nation states and create on huge pan-European county. That is their plan. Cameron claims to have negotiated Britain exemption from ever closer union but its not worth the paper it is written on. The European Parliament will not even vote on it until after we have our referendum. The British people are being asked to sign a blank cheque.

There will obviously be a huge grassroots resistance form patriots in all European countries who value their independence, their culture and their identity.

One might well speculate that a multicultural country would, after some time, have a weaker national identity and its people might well be less resistant to that country being swallowed up by a pan-European megastate. Is that the purpose of multiculturalism? Is that why this mass migration of people with cultural needs widely different from ours has been engineered? I wonder.

Listen to what they tell you its all about then remember it ain't necessarily so.

Why else would German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in September 2015, have invited a million immigrants into her country unchecked? Compassion? Basic human decency? Give me a break. Unless there was a secret agenda it was total madness. She, and the German people, had no idea who was going to come, what countries they would come from or what their intensions were. No idea whatsoever. Of course some of them, maybe even most of them, were genuine refugees. And it is equally certain that some were not, some were economic migrants and some were terrorists. Utter madness, unless there was a secret agenda.

Her reckless generosity came hot on the heels of the world media being flooded with pictures of a dead Syrian boy washed up on a beach. His whole family dad drowned, except hi father. A sad tragedy, no doubt about it and the media made a meal out of the story of this Syrian family that died fleeing the war in Syria. It was told how they had fled Syria in fear of their lives. Big story.

However hardly any of those newspapers or news channels carried the follow up story of the father, who was supposed to be fleeing for his live, taking the corpses back to his Syrian home town for burial. Wow! Why did only a handful of independent publications run that story?

Had Merkel been planning this all along? Did she engineer he news stories to support her plans?

Come the 2016 New Year celebrations in Germany and other European nations, organised Muslim gangs sexually abused European women. Some were Merkel’s new migrants, some had been here longer. The result was more fear and chaos for the elite to use to manipulate the people.

If its true that the EU leaders want to create a pan-European megastate, especially a police state, if they want to con us into believing they need to restrict our freedoms to protect our freedoms, then they would want to stir up as much fear and chaos as possible.

Of course everybody is responsible for their own actions but I am not saying that migrants are to blame for migration. I believe that both the newcomers and the established European population are being manipulated to bring about this pan-European fascist megastate I keep talking about. Some people are calling it the Fourth Reich. I known some German friends of mine refer to the E.U. as the 'United States of Germany' and I don't think they are just trying to wind me up.

Chapter Nine - Beliefs and Resposibility
by Jack Cox

"Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed." - Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)

In this book we have tried not to tell you what to think or what to believe but merely to raise your awareness of the fact that some of what you read in the papers or watch on your screens may not be wholly true.

As I said at the beginning of this book, you have a choice about what to believe, and the responsibility to choose wisely, in the knowledge that your choice will have consequences. We are not here to tell you the answers, merely to prompt you to ask the questions. 

Truth is not a black and white thing. Psychologists will tell you that the human mind always tries to justify its beliefs by making the thing you believe seem true, or even come true for you. They call it 'Confirmation Bias'. This is how it works. Beliefs are the things we hold to be true, whether they really are true or not. What we believe has a powerful effect on how our lives unfold.

To try and explain this phenomenon I am going to delve into some of the cutting edge material available in the self-help community. The teachers I quote are talking about attracting money, love and success but the same principals apply to how our beliefs affect all aspects of our lives.

Let me quote, word for word, from Gill Edwards' excellent book Living Magically:

Let’s imagine two people, Joy and Gloom, who visit London one weekend. The first visitor, Joy, experiences a wonderland of historical sites, museums, parks, theatres, shops and entertainment. A city full of friendly, smiling and colourful people.

Gloom, on the other hand, sees a noisy, grimy city with crowded underground stations, overpriced restaurants, jostling strangers and mournful faces. They visited the same city, perhaps the same places, and spent the same amount of money but Joy had a marvellous time while Gloom was thoroughly miserable from start to finish. Why? The secret lies in their belief systems.

Joy holds the following beliefs:  'Cities are exciting places to be. People are generally friendly and helpful. Life is to be enjoyed to the full.'

Gloom, in contrast, believes: 'Cities are horrible places to be. People are usually unpleasant. Life is a burden but we all have to struggle on.'

No wonder they experienced a different London. While standing in the same street, Joy would notice the creative window displays and smiling faces, hear the laughter and smell the roasting chestnuts on the street corner; while Gloom would see the traffic, litter and inflated prices, hear the honking horns and smell the exhaust fumes. They live in different worlds!

Of course all those things were really there, the sound of laughter AND the sound of traffic. The smell of roasted chestnuts AND the exhaust fumes. What affected the happiness of the trip for each of them was which version of reality they chose to focus their attention on, and that was determined by their Internal Map of Reality and especially, their beliefs which govern their expectations. Of course for most people it is not a choice because it is unconscious. That is why its so important to bring it all out into the open and direct these things consciously, with awareness. Gill Edwards goes on to explain:

However it isn't just their perceptions and responses that are affected by their beliefs. Creating our own reality goes much deeper than that. We create every experience we have. We attract certain people and events because of our belief system. Joy would have been drawn towards the shops and restaurants which had friendly, helpful staff, while Gloom would bump into those that were stern and morose. Joy would happen across the unexpected delight of street theatre or a parade, while Gloom might attract muggers and crooked salespeople or even witness a street fight.

Both would return home believing they were right. London really is a wonderful / terrible place! Our beliefs are not based on our experiences but vice versa. Our experiences are created by our beliefs.

So now you see why its so vital that we take control of our own beliefs and use them to create what we want in life. In order to do so we must first become aware of them and what external influences are shaping them, which is exactly what this book has been about.

Regardless of what we believe, we will always find a way to create consistency between our life experiences and our beliefs. Our beliefs create or attract all the experiences of our lives. The mind is a very powerful goal seeking mechanism. It will either find a way to make what we believe come true, or it will make it seem to be true to us.

Physiologically we have a powerful need for consistency between the things we believe and the things we experience. The drive to create this consistency is so strong that people will do almost anything to be right about their beliefs, even when doing so creates failure, suffering, or unhappiness for themselves. Of course nobody consciously decides to do this, it isn't voluntary, its just our nature. 

I had an operation recently under local anaesthetic. I was fully conscious and talking to the doctors and nurses throughout the procedure. Although the area was completely numb the doctors went to some trouble to stop me looking at what was happening. Their explanation was that it is a fact with human beings (and they had seen this in the past) that we create consistency between what we expect and believe and what we experience. Patients in the past who observed a big gaping wound in their body, created the pain to go with it, while those that did not look felt nothing. Even when pain was physiologically impossible due to the anaesthetic, those who believed they should be in pain felt pain. Let me quote again from Gill Edwards:.

"The task of the subconscious is to confirm that we are right. It does not care whether we programme it to create laughter and joy, or misery and failure. That is not its job. It simply ensures that our beliefs and expectations are fulfilled, that they are consistent with what we experience, that the outer world mirrors our inner world. If we have contradictory beliefs, it will reflect that in the reality it creates."

We make the mistake of assuming that beliefs follow experience when in reality it is the other way around. Our beliefs about ourselves and the world attract experiences to confirm those beliefs.

There are three main ways that we make what we believe either come true or seem to be true. 

1)We attract or are attracted to people or situations that make our beliefs come true.

2) We interpret whatever happens in such a way that our belief seems to be true, even if it isn't.

3) We act in such a way as to make it actually come true.

We all behave this way until we become aware of what we are doing. Once we become aware that our beliefs may not be our own, that some of them have been imposed upon us by very powerful people telling us lies, we can choose to stop behaving the way they want us to behave.

Of all the possible interpretations in any situation, we always pick those that conform with what we already believe. With all these three methods, we get to be right about what we believe, sooner or later. As success coach, Bill Harris, says "If you'd rather be right than happy, this is a great strategy, but if you'd like to be happy, peaceful and prosperous, it’s a losing proposition".

Whatever you believe, feel and think about is your choice. You don't have to believe your daily paper. You can read lots of different papers, get lots of different opinions, realise they just could all be a pack of lies and decide to think for yourself.

Everything is true in the mind of the person who believes it. When people argue over a belief it is only because the maps of reality they  hold in their heads are different. Neither map is more valid than the other, they are just different.

Imagine a group of friends watching a television programme together. All of them will perceive it differently, not because they have watched different versions of the same programme but because their differing mental maps influence their perceptions of the programme. We create, attract or imagine whatever evidence we need to be right. So evaluating beliefs based on whether they're true or false isn't really very helpful. Evaluating our beliefs in this way is just indulging in circular, flawed logic. 

If asked why they believe something most people will say claim to have plenty of evidence. Yet the person next door might believe the opposite, and he, too, has plenty of evidence. Who is right? They both are, because each will use the three methods discussed above to make whatever they believe either BE true or SEEM TO BE true to them.

Some people seem able to convince themselves that the earth is flat or that they are following the only true religion. Have aliens really infiltrated 10 Downing Street or the White House. Even though the behaviour of the occupants lend lots of credibility to the story, I don't really buy into it. Do you? But some people are absolutely convinced about it.

In order to be right about what they believe, people are quit able to find ways to make whatever they believe either come true or seem to be true to them. So how can a belief ever be false?

If we believe it we will find a way to make it seem true to us. Only other people’s beliefs can ever be false, our beliefs will always turn out to be true. For this reason, conscious, happy, aware people evaluate beliefs based on whether or not they are resourceful, whether they lead to good results and good experiences.

Please don’t email me to tell me that ice is cold and fire is hot, whatever we believe. I am not talking about those kinds of beliefs. I’m talking about more subtle beliefs and our ability to make what we believe come true, or to make it appear to be true to us. In terms of our experience of life, this amounts to the same thing. As Henry Ford said, ”Whether you believe you can or you believe you can’t, either way you are right". 

Since whatever you deeply believe will end up being true for you, why not believe what will give you the best results?

If you doubt the contents of this final chapter, if you doubt that beliefs really do affect the outcomes we create, if you think this is all mumbo jumbo or pseudo-psychology; considered this: If the top echelons of society did not truly understand that our beliefs affect our behaviour and our outcomes why do they go to so much trouble, spend so much money and create new industries, for the sole purpose of manipulating our beliefs? They understand this stuff and it’s important that we understand it too.

Quoting from Gill Edwards again:

" 'Scarcity belief', otherwise known as 'Poverty consciousness' is a widespread belief system in our culture.... For centuries material wealth and abundance has been seen as incompatible with spiritual growth..... We have believed that God wants us to struggle along, barely able to pay our way, and certainly doesn't want us to have any fun with our money. Money is the root of all evil, dictated the puritanical thought of the Old Age. However New Consciousness suggests otherwise. It conjectures that God (whatever we perceive that to be) just might prefer us to enjoy life to the full, to open ourselves to the joy and abundance of the universe."

What is money? Are we being told the truth about it by the economists, bankers and the politicians? This is what Gill Edwards has to say on the subject:

"Money is just a set of vibrations, an illusion we create, and we can have as much as we like of an illusion. This doesn't mean seeing wealth as our main goal in life or as a guarantee of security and happiness, nor does it mean being wasteful and extravagant. It means learning how to create money easily and effortlessly, trusting that we will always have enough. It also means enjoying it, using it, perhaps to create a pleasant environment in which to live, or to purchase experiences, whether travel, books, workshops, creative hobbies, social life, leisure or cultural pursuits which will help us grow. If we hoard money it soon learns that it is not needed and we no longer attract it. We become a stagnant pond. By learning to be an open channel, spending money, giving it away, passing on old clothes, furniture and bric-a-brac we no longer use, we encourage more to flow into our lives. As we learn to take it more lightly, seeing it as a mere illusion, money begins to flow through us like a stream".

What wonderful words. Money is energy and energy needs to flow. This is extremely important as I write this chapter, in December 2015. The government is trying to convince us, once again, that there isn't enough money to go around, that we have to accept more austerity and make do with less. They have been bleating on in the same old way since the banks collapsed back in 2008. The media has been brainwashing us with the same old story. Seven years of austerity and nothing has changed.

It wasn't a lack of money that got us into this mess but corrupt banking practices. Banks make their money by borrowing our money from us at a low interest rate then lending it back to us at a much higher rate. Its a huge big con trick.

In order to pull it off they need the cooperation of economists, the media and politicians telling us that this is normal. Well it is most certainly not normal.

The 2008 collapse was the direct result of too many people and businesses relying on way too much easy to get credit. What should have happened was that interest rates should have gone up considerably, thus rewarding investors and reducing borrowing. But what happened instead? Interest rates were slashed thus penalising, and in may cases bankrupting, the investors, who could have led the economy to recovery, and rewarding the borrowers who had caused the problem in the first place.

I was one of those people. I had just sold my interests in one company and was looking for a new opportunity to put my capital into. My plan was to leave the cash in the bank for a few months while I researched the market. I was in no hurry. I was living quite comfortably on the interest. Then suddenly everything changed. The interest rate on my money fell to way less than one percent, overnight. I ended up living off my capital and very nearly went bankrupt. I was certainly no longer in a position to invest in the country’s recovery.

Follow the money trail. Who benefits from you believing in scarcity? The bankers of course. They can sell you cheap loans. And the politicians too, they always find ways to profit by spreading fear.

Always read everything with awareness and with scepticism. Read books by people who can see through the chaos caused by all the lies, books like this one. There are lots of books about positive thinking, about making money, about creating good relationships, about having peace of mind, about being healthy, and anything else you want in life. Find them and read them. Be on the lookout for other people who believe what you want to believe. Going to seminars about what you want is one way to meet such people. Its your mind and you have the right to decide what goes into it. Don't give your power away to the liars and the mind manipulators. Taking back control is not just your right but also your responsibility.

Responsibilty has nothing to do with blame. Its not your fault that you have bought into all the lies and propaganda all your  life. But now you know what’s really going on behind those sensational headlines you do have a responsibilty to read more critically from now on. Responsibliity is the ability to respond. By taking 100% responsibility for what you read and what you choose to believe, you empower yourself to respond wisely and thus take back contol over your own life.

So you now know how your beliefs can affect the way you live and the world you create day by day. Now you understand more about how Murdoch and his hitmen have been manipulating your beliefs, how Murdoch, and the other manipulators of truth we have mentioned in this book, have been using you to build the future they want. Now, with this knowledge, you can set yourself free to create the future you want, for yourself, your family and for all humanity. May you, may we, build a world full of happiness, tolerance and love. 

We stand at a fork in the road. The left had road leads to dystopia. The right hand road leads to utopia.

The left hand road is paved with hate, censorship and so called 'political correctness', greed, envy, intolerance, war, the invasion of other people’s countries (with or without weapons), and people believing that their religion is the only true religion.

The right hand road is paved with love, free speech, sharing, tolerance of other people’s ways, peace, respect for the sovereignty of other nations and their right to govern themselves as they please, the recognition that we are not the world’s policemen, and absolute freedom of religion and respect for those who believe differently than we do. In short it is paved with all of us being excellent to each other.

Which path will we take? May we choose wisely and may the media report stories fairly and in a way that will support us to hold resourceful beliefs and to make wise choices.

We the people are not powerless. By coming to an understanding of what is wrong in society, of how politics, multi-national companies and the media barons control our lives, we can choose to fight back by simply refusing to comply with their wishes.

Acts as simple as growing our own food, fitting solar panels to the roof of our homes, collecting and filtering rainwater and cycling to work are significant acts of defiance. Please don’t dwell on how rotten and corrupt the system actually is. We have mentioned these things in this book to open your eyes, not to spread doom and gloom. What we feed energy to will expand, what we deny energy to will contract. Thought is energy. We want you to be aware of what is happening but we also want you to focus your attention on the utopia that we can build together, if we so wish.

Imagine a world where everyone is free, tolerant and respectful of each other’s differences, a world in which we no longer look up to the people who take the most out of society for themselves, who own the biggest houses and the most expensive cars but rather we admire those who put more into society by helping others and showing kindness. Imagine a world were employees are partners and directors strive to maximise shareholder dividends and employee wages, in the realisation that both are ways that the profit is distributed to those who create it. Imagine a world where our politicians really are the unselfish servants of the people and where the media report the facts in a positive, upbeat way. We can bring about such a world by refusing to see it any other way and by non-compliance with the old system. If enough of us embrace this vision we can make it our reality.

Let's give the last word in this book to Bruce Lee:

"Absorb what is useful.
Discard what is useless,
and add what is specifically your own."

Everything in this book could be wrong.

(c) 2016 Bobby Cummines OBE, Ian Cutler & Jack Cox