News Corporation go straight after Jeremy Corbyn again..

Sky news reports….

Jeremy Corbyn is making a controversial return to election campaigning after the Manchester bomb attack with a speech blaming UK foreign policy for terrorism at home.

The Labour leader claims the so-called “war on terror” is not working and is promising a government led by him would change foreign policy so it fights rather than fuels terrorism.

But by choosing to talk about terrorism and linking it to UK support for wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria he is certain to be accused by opponents of exploiting the Manchester atrocity.

Mr Corbyn has taken a calculated decision to resume Labour’s campaign not by returning to Theresa May’s social care u-turn or other domestic policies, but by speaking out on the sensitive issue of the Manchester Arena suicide bomb.

His opposition to UK involvement in overseas conflicts goes back decades and has put him at odds not just with Conservatives, but also many in his own party.

He was one of the leading opponents of the Iraq war and since becoming Labour leader has attacked UK intervention in Syria and suggested during this election campaign that he would refuse a NATO request for more troops. Read more

“A calculated decision?” This is News Corporation talking, owners of the Sun who hours after the attack printed a story that claim Jeremy Corbyn has blood on his hands due to his relations with the IRA, in fact they could him “IRA fan boys” at one stage and demanded Facebook do more to silence voters.

Sky news also reported

PM to urge action over online extremist content after Manchester attack

The Tory leader argues tech firms like Facebook, Google and Twitter are not doing enough to remove harmful material from the web.

Theresa May is to call on world leaders to step up pressure on internet companies to rid the web of extremist material in the wake of the Manchester terrorist attack.

The Prime Minister will tell the G7 group of leading industrial nations that the threat from Islamic State is evolving from the battlefield to the internet, as she accuses tech companies of not doing enough to remove harmful online material.

Mrs May will say that internet giants – the likes of Facebook, Google, Twitter – have a social responsibility to do more to remove harmful content from their websites, including videos promoting hate, violence and terrorist activity. Read more here

Sky news do not accuse Theresa May of a calculated decision to use this terror attack to take our civil liberties, why does Theresa May have such a problem with Social media? Who is the material harmful to? Me? You? Or her and her rich puppet masters?

These people are simply exercising their right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression. To have a Prime Minister that so openly and passionately hates freedom should be a scary thought to anybody.

Lucky for us Theresa May is not very likable, in fact shes horrible, she looks ill, stressed and baffled and everything she does seems to go completely wrong.

How predictable…Donald Trump has turned out to be a liar, hypocrite and a puppet.

I did not support anybody for the American election until I witnessed the huge backlash and bad press Donald Trump was receiving from the mainstream media. I have a understanding with the mainstream media, I listen to what they say and what they want me to do than I do the opposite. This understanding meant by the run up to the end of the American election I wanted Trump to win. I wanted to see and understand why the media hated him so much and I liked his relations with Russia. Also I could not stand Hillary Clinton I feel the same way about Hillary Clinton as she feels about freedom.

Before he became president, Donald Trump accused a Saudi prince of wanting to “control U.S. politicians with daddy’s money.” He claimed Saudi Arabia “blew up the World Trade Center” and also claimed that the kingdom “wouldn’t exist” without American assistance. Back in 2012, Donald Trump criticized his predecessor Barack Obama for bowing to foreign leaders, including then-Saudi King Abdullah. Donald Trump performed a curtsy to Saudi King Salman instead.

He also agreed a huge weapons deal with them. I’m not stupid I know Hillary Clinton would be doing the same thing so its not like I’m pissed because Clinton would have been any better, I just expected better from Trump.

I never really liked Trump’s politics and I always thought he was a racist, sexist, easy to make look stupid idiot if I’m honest. But at the same time I believed he might just be independent, not as easy to buy and not such a puppet as other presidents have been but credit to Trump he made his voters look stupid and supporters look stupid including me though I did always have doubts about him if I was in America I would have probably voted him. Its not like Americans were spoiled for choice.

Despite his apparent “good relations” with Russia, too good according to some, there still seems to be high tensions between Russia and the US and rumours of another potential cold war are still regularly brought up.

And his support for Israel seems strong, not only does Donald Trump appear to be a Zionist he appears to be a super Zionist. Donald Trump used the “alternative media” to get him where he is but still he pushes for Internet censorship.

Whats worse is his supporters don’t seem to want to admit it, I’m not for one second suggesting that Hillary Clinton would have been any better because I’m pretty sure she would have been worse but what does seem blatantly obvious now is that Donald Trump does not represent the American people or particularly care what they think of him, he represents the establishment. He can correctly expose CNN, BBC and mainstream news in general as “fake news” but as long as he pushes for Interent censorship he is killing the real news.



The British government and their incompetence is being exposed by these Manchester attacks many are claiming false flags but even if you do not believe that these attacks are false flags the blame still has to be aimed at the British government and their war on terror. Would these people have died if the British government tried a more sensible approach to tackling terrorism? Instead of their plan to fight terrorism using terrorism. We may never know the answer to questions like this but we do know that there have been much more casualties and death caused by the policies of the British government than casualties and death caused by Islamic terrorism.

Our government have reacted with shock and outrage concerning these attacks and they would have a right to react like this because the attack was unbelievably cowardly, shocking and wrong. But the British government have also conducted, supported and even funded unbelievably cowardly, shocking and wrong attacks themselves. Terrorism has not stopped they’re support for Israel and Saudi Arabia both nations have taken part in attacks on civilians of other nations (Yemen and Palestine) the British government have choose to overlook these acts of terrorism.

When I was walking through town today at 11 o’clock the whole town stood silent for one minute in order to show respect for the people that died in the Manchester attacks. I stood silent with them but I couldn’t help but think we never stand silent for Palestinians, Libyans, Syrians or for the people of Yemen, we simply carry on our lives and ignore them and the terror these people face on a regular basis. Why not? They’re still people, women and children are massacred in the name of peace but somehow we ignore these injustices.

Now the government have deployed up to 5000 armed troops to the streets of the UK, they say this is due to the Tory cuts after they cut the British police numbers by 20000 people. Its a bit of a joke with many on Facebook about how these cuts have backfired and led to the Conservative party actuallt depending on armed forces to do the job of the police. Maybe the incompetence of the British government is to blame for this but that does not change the fact we have armed troops patrolling our streets. Has any Prime Minister since World War 2 ever deployed armed troops to the streets of Britain? Not to my knowledge (other than Tony Blair in 2003 to intercept an airline but that was not to this scale.)

If the British public are willing to give up freedom in the name of security we are going to end up disappointed because we are most likely going to lose both. In my opinion the British troops should be sent back to their homes, if the shortsighted beyond belief British government need more police they should employ more police, as long as we have armed troops in our street we are at risk.


False flag are the new F words in Britain. Since the Manchester bombing many people including politicians and celebrities have come forward and suggested that the attack could be a false flag or at least questioned the timing of it. The media has ridiculed these people and dismissed these claims as conspiracy theories made up by fantasist’s. But even the most skeptical minded must acknowledge the timing of these attacks were convenient for the Conservative Party but not just the Conservative Party!

The Conservative party have been selling arms to Saudi Arabia and these weapons have been used in an equally sick, disgusting and cowardice manner on innocent people in Yemen because not all terrorism offends the Conservative Party, some of it they see as a necessity.

Jeremy Corbyn like Donald Trump (before he was elected) has been very critical of Saudi Arabia. The Independent on the 29th of April reported that “Labour will block the sale of weapons to repressive regimes if it wins the election”. This means Conservatives winning this election is not just important to the Conservative party (who support terror when it suits) but also to the Saudi Arabian government.

Its true that finding real evidence of a false flag is hard but finding evidence that rules out a false flag equally as hard. To rule something out without any consideration to the possibility seems foolish and to simply suggest the British government would not commit or advocate such crimes is ridiculous.

We’re talking about a government that has killed thousands of women and children in the Middle east over the last 15 years, a government that profits from and gains strength from war and fear, a government that has aided Saudi Arabia’s killing of civilians in Yemen, for me the question is not are they evil enough to kill innocent people to get what they want because they have proved they are, the question should be did know or play any part in this attack themselves?

To suggest that mentioning the words “false flag” is unhelpful and even stupid is unhelpful and stupid.

If somebody you know was found murdered and you financially benefited from that murder you would automatically be a suspect and investigated. Should the same rules apply when it comes to terrorism and terrorist attacks? Of course it should and anybody that says it isn’t is either deluded or even worse they have something to hide.