NICOSIA, Cyprus (AP) — A Cyprus criminal court on Monday sentenced an army captain to seven life terms in prison after he pleaded guilty to the premeditated murder and kidnapping of seven foreign women and girls.
In handing down the sentence, the three-judge panel said that Nicholas Metaxas appeared to have mounted a “campaign of murder” in choosing defenseless women, most of whom came to Cyprus looking for work.
The judges said Metaxas “didn’t even hesitate to kill children” over a 2½-year period during which prosecutors said he sought out many of his adult victims on online social networks using the handle “Orestes35″ and had sex with them. Five life terms will run consecutively, while two will run concurrently. The judges said there could be no mitigating circumstances in such a case.
Earlier, Metaxas pleaded guilty and tearfully apologised to the families of his victims for the “unjust pain” he has caused them. Reading from a prepared statement, Metaxas said he doesn’t “have any clear answers” why he committed the killings and that he has “struggled” to figure out the “why and how.”
The 35-year-old officer said his cooperation with police investigators was the least he could do to ease the pain he caused to the families of the victims and his own family. Metaxas killed four Filipino women and the daughter of one of them, as well as a Nepalese woman and a Romanian mother and her daughter.
He asked authorities for a scientific panel to interview him in order to delve into his psyche and find the reasons for his actions in what’s believed to be the east Mediterranean island nation’s first serial killer case. He did speak of unspecified events in his past “decades ago” that he tried to forget.
He looked down throughout his court appearance as a state prosecutor said six of the victims died of strangulation and the seventh of a massive head injury. The case came to light on April 14 when the decomposing body of Mary Rose Tiburcio, 38, from the Philippines, was found by chance down a flooded mineshaft that was part of an abandoned copper mine.
Four days later, the body of 28-year-old Arian Palanas Lozano, also from the Philippines, was pulled out of the same mineshaft. Investigators homed in on Metaxas after scrutinizing the online communications of both women. Metaxas, a divorced father of two children aged 6 and 9, initially refused to cooperate with investigators. But as the evidence increased, he buckled and confessed in a 10-page handwritten note to the seven killings.
His victims included Romanian Livia Florentina Bunea, 36, and her 8-year-old daughter Elena Natalia; Maricar Valtez Arquiola, 31, from the Philippines; Ashita Khadka Bista, from Nepal; and Tiburcio’s daughter, Sierra Grace.
Metaxas led police to where he disposed of his victims’ bodies; the bound remains of Bunea, her daughter and Arquiola were placed in suitcases and thrown into a toxic lake that was part of the same abandoned mine. Bista’s skeletal remains were found down a dry well inside an army firing range. Tiburcio’s daughter was found in another lake, wrapped in a sheet and weighed down by a rock.
Metaxas had told investigators under questioning that what prompted him to strangle Tiburcio and Bunea was his “hatred” of them and desire for “vengeance” over his suspicions that they prostituted their daughters. He said he choked the children to death as they slept “so that they would no longer have to suffer.”
Prosecutors said investigations found that both mothers were very loving and cared for their children.
Metaxas also told investigators that he strangled Maricar and Lozano as he climaxed during sex with them. He said he killed Bista, who died of a head injury, in anger after she spat at him for videoing their sexual encounter.
All Metaxas’ victims except Bista had been reported missing to police shortly after their disappearanceThe disappearance of Bunea and her daughter in October 2016 was the subject of an investigative report by a local TV reporter, who said police claimed they had good reason to believe that the mother and daughter had crossed into the breakaway north of the ethnically split island.
Police failures to probe those missing persons cases resulted in the resignation of the justice minister and the firing of the police chief. Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades said lives could have been spared had police acted swiftly in investigating those initial reports.
I have grave concerns about this conviction, as this is the first time they have dealt with a case so serious and a psychopath, so evil here in Cyprus. Has this man lead them down his chosen path? His first solicitor resigned, in the interim period, he confessed, they found whatever evidence they had found. He continued to refuse a solicitor, but hard as it may seem to believe, confessions and DNA do not always result in a ‘safe conviction’
THIS MONSTER KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT HE IS DOING
He was in court on Monday morning 24th June 2019 and was found guilty and sentenced all in one day. Anyone familiar with the workings of the ECHR will have grave concerns, because it would be a tragedy if there are grounds for an appeal at a later date.
I have always maintained that for crimes this serious, he should have been assigned the best representation, not so he can be free to walk, but ensure that his conviction is so safe, that he WILL NOT!
My deepest sympathies to the families of the victims. There is no possibility of comprehending the mind of a monster.
Mass immigration has turned London into a city that is ‘no longer English’, John Cleese claims.
The comic was asked what he thought about British culture and the recent London riots during an interview on 7.30, a television show in Australia, where he is currently on a stand-up tour. He replied: ‘I’m not sure what’s going on in Britain. Or, let me say this – I don’t know what’s going on in London, because London is no longer an English city.
‘That’s how we got the Olympics.
‘They said we were the most cosmopolitan city on Earth. But it doesn’t feel English. ‘I had a Californian friend come over two months ago, walk down the King’s Road and say, “Where are all the English people?”
‘I mean, I love having different cultures around. But when the parent culture kind of dissipates, you’re left thinking, “Well, what’s going on?”‘
The comedian was praised by UKIP leader Nigel Farage for articulating ‘what an increasing number of people in London are thinking’. He added: ‘For him to make these remarks shows a tremendous strength of feeling on this matter. ‘Of course other cultures are welcome, but Mr Cleese is right to point out that it should not be at the expense of the parent culture.’
Of the eight million people who currently live in Greater London, 2.7 million residents were born outside the UK, and more than 300 languages are spoken in the city.
While Mr Cleese has received a lot of criticism for his comment, which was to be expected given the culture of ‘treading on Eggshells’ that we live in, he was absolutely right. The influx of so many different cultures in sch a short time has been breathtaking, to say the least, however, this has not been without cost.
Successive governments have allowed London property to be used a car park for overseas investment, which has had the effect of pricing out people who were born and bred in London. Whilst people draw comparisons with New York, London has had a population and a culture that goes back for centuries, New York was founded in a different way to London. It is not that one is better than the other, but we must understand that the entire identity of London has changed in little more than a generation.
More interestingly, was the way that this was seized up by a race activist on GNB, who instantly made the comment about race and branded John Cleese a racist. If you watch the video, we have the Race activist Dr. Shola Mos-Shogbamimu, a Russian immigrant who was actually agreeing with John Cleese, Konstantin Kisin, and Monty Panesar.
Look out for the way the Russian actually makes an example using the Scottish that could not be clearer, watch how the presenter responds with “wait a minute, let me get my head around that” because he did not like the argument and the race activist is getting agitated when the Russian actually discredits her usual racial rhetoric,
Primas Law is urging landlords and property developers to seek legal advice about potential stamp duty rebates on ‘uninhabitable’ second properties after a landmark tribunal case. A recent ground-breaking case, between P N Bewley Ltd and HMRC, held that properties that are not immediately habitable at the time of completion do not constitute as a “dwelling” for the purpose of the Finance Act 2003.
This finding could have major implications for the UK housing market, according to Primas Law, as the decision meant that P N Bewley was not liable to pay the additional 3% stamp duty surcharge applicable to second homes. It could mean that those who have paid stamp duty on similar uninhabitable properties – including potentially thousands of landlords and developers – may have paid an inappropriate level of tax and could seek to reclaim them.
Consequently, Primas Law is being instructed to act for a large and growing number of landlords and developers seeking to recover stamp duty paid for properties that, potentially, should not have attracted the additional tax.
Daniel Thomas, Head of Litigation at Primas Law, said: “To provide more context to this particular case, the property that P N Bewley purchased was a bungalow and a plot of land in Western-super-Mare.
“The company’s intention was to demolish the bungalow and build a new dwelling on the land with planning permission already being granted. The bungalow was essentially a derelict building that had been unoccupied for around three years.
“The tribunal was provided with photographs of the derelict building and these demonstrated the heating system, radiators, floorboards and pipework had been removed, and that the property – both internally and externally – was in a very poor condition.
“It was also provided with reports from surveyors that concluded asbestos was present in the property and urgently needed removing.”
If you are a developer and are buying property unfit for habitation, then this law could definitely apply, but you may need to use a solicitor who is up to date with property law, as most who simply deal with run of the mill conveyancing may not be aware of this law, or not familiar with the process of appeal, meaning that you could potentially pay out many thousands that you need not pay.
Germany’s rent controls place strong restrictions on in-tenancy rent increases, while the ‘rent brake’ introduced a couple of year ago makes it harder for landlords to charge higher rents when re-letting a property. But would a similar system work as far as the UK’s rent control system is concerned?
Last week the German finance minister Olaf Scholz voiced his support of a controversial five-year rent freeze to tackle the increasing cost of living in the city.
The aim, according to Scholz, is to ensure that Berlin does not ‘end up like London’.
In the last five years, London rents have increased from an average of £1,530 a month to £1,679 – an increase of 2.44% annually.Should this growth trend persist for a further five years, it would push the average rent in the capital to £1,894 a month.
However, the implementation of a five-year rental rate freeze would see London tenants save a total of £7,620 in rental costs, according to the research. Tenants in Newham stand to save the most, with rents increasing by 6.95% on average in the borough over the last five years, an increase of £329 in the monthly rent. If this continues, the average rental price could hit £1,977 a month in five years, but a freeze would see tenants save a notable £19,413 as a result.
A five-year rental rate freeze would also see a five-figure saving for tenants in Barking and Dagenham, Hackney, Waltham Forest, Tower Hamlets, Redbridge, Kensington and Chelsea, the City of London, Havering, Lewisham, Southwark, Enfield and Ealing.
Oxford tenants would benefit with a rental freeze saving totalling £17,746 over the next five-years. The average rent in Oxford over the last five years has increased at an average of 7.3% a month, second only to Manchester at 8%, which could see Oxford’s rental costs hit £1,741 a month.
Bristol has also seen a sharp increase in rental prices, up 6.75% annually over the last five years. A similar growth trend would see the average monthly rent hit £1,489 however, a five-year rental freeze would save tenants a total of £14,294. Tenants in Manchester, Oxford, and Newcastle would also enjoy a five-figure saving.
Tom Gatzen, co-founder of ideal flatmate, said: “The figures suggest that should such a rental rate freeze be introduced in London and the wider country, the saving for tenants could be considerable. This saving could go some way towards a mortgage deposit and a foot on the ladder, while at the same time helping to alleviate some of the pressure on the rental sector.
“Any pro-tenant initiative can, of course, be viewed as a positive, but the mere suggestion of a rental rate freeze in Berlin seems to have sent the property market into meltdown. There is every chance that the same could happen here as a recent string of government changes to the buy-to-let sector have already diminished landlord confidence levels.
“This further dent on profitability could see more opt to invest elsewhere, however, the meteoric rise of the build-to-rent sector is providing a viable alternative to traditional stock supply and could therefore be the answer, stomaching a static rate of rental growth far better without any detriment to the tenant.”
The massive increase in the build to rent sector is beginning to filter through, but there needs to be more money made available for this. As it stands, there is not enough private funding of build to rent, but with amendments to tax rules, this could change rapidly. If legislation were introduces to allow people to plough their pension funds in to build to rent, but under strict return guidelines, to ensure affordability, this could not only give our ageing population a source of income, but it would also help to create more housing stock, thereby distributing demand and curbing spiralling rents. As build costs on a large scale are less than property on the open market, this would give the investors a fair return, without the need for excessive rent costs.
The holiday rental market in this country looks set for another busy summer as the weak pound persuades millions to opt for a staycation.
The fall in the UK pound since the Brexit vote three years also means Britons get less for their money abroad.
Meanwhile, more tourists than ever before are visiting the UK. VisitBritain figures show that 2018 was a good year for inbound tourism to the UK, with spending by overseas visitors to the UK reaching almost £27bn.
The strength of the UK tourist industry is paying dividends for holiday property owners, according to Bournemouth-based holiday letting agency, Bournecoast Holiday Agents, which reports that holiday lets are on the rise.
It has been known for a long time that owning a holiday let can be very advantageous in the holiday letting industry. Not only can it provide a potentially lucrative additional income for buy-to-let landlords, but it also offers certain tax advantages to holiday let owners.
There are specific requirements a property needs to meet in order to be classed as a furnished holiday let, such as its availability, actual bookings and level of furnishings.
Capital allowances can be claimed on a furnished holiday let property. This means the cost of kitting out a holiday property to a luxury standard (and in return, increasing the potential rental income) can be deducted from pre-tax profits. This is not an option available for long-term rental properties.
Income generated from a furnished holiday let property is classed as ‘relevant earnings’ which means a landlord can also make tax-advantaged pension contributions.
If the landlord should come to sell the furnished holiday let property, they may be able to claim certain Capital Gains Tax reliefs. These are unavailable to long-term rental properties and include Entrepreneur’s Relief, Roll-over Relief and Hold-over relief.
With long-term rental properties, profits would be distributed according to the official ownership split (e.g. if they owned 50% of the property, they would share 50% of the profits). With a FHL property, they can portion the profit however they decide.
A self-catering property which is available for short-term lettings for more than 140 days in any given year, is subject to Business Rate property tax. Since all furnished holiday let properties must be available to let for a minimum of 210 days, they fall into this category. However, this isn’t necessarily bad news as the landlord can claim Small Business Rate Relief, which can be up to 100%, dependent on what area you are in.
Des Simmons, Bournecoast’s managing director, said: “The holiday let market has gained considerable momentum over the past year, as evidenced by the growing number of lenders now offering mortgages suitable for this type of investment.”
Phil Wadham, director of Elite Financial, added that “the range of products for holiday letting is improving and more borrowers are thinking it’s a market to look at.”
Personally speaking as a small private Landlord, after the difficulties I have faced with the last possession, which is still not finalised as I write this, I can say that the days of my letting out on AST are over…..at least under the current anti-landlord legislation. It appears that I am not alone, many landlords have sold up, are planning to sell up, or have decided to switch to other options, either rooms on a licence or short term holiday lets.
I am sure it is only a matter of time before they try to pull the rug from beneath the short term letting market, but it will be very difficult to enforce. I for one, believe that the measures taken over recent years to punish landlords is having a detrimental effect. In the first instance, those at the bottom end are now very unlikely to find a property to rent, certainly in the South East, where there is demand, because there is increased likelihood that they may have problems, the local authorities advise them to ignore notice to leave, because they will consider them to have made themselves homeless, this means that the landlord has no other option but to go through the courts, which is expensive, the tenant finds themselves with a CCJ against their name as well as the likelihood of them finding another property will then be zero, and then, the landlords may well decide not to re-rent on AST, as I have.
Earlier this month the Tenant Fee Ban was introduced, after much fanfare from the Government. However, it is not the only piece of regulation and policy change set to affect the landlord market this year. It joins what can only be described as a slew of restrictive government policies – including tax changes, tougher HMO requirements and the recent announcement / threat to ban ‘no fault’ evictions– which many would agree amount to an unfair and sustained attack on the landlord market.
It is clear the government seems to have forgotten landlords are often just ordinary, hardworking people and savvy investors,who have saved to buy an additional property as a nest egg or source of income. A report from the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) recently criticised the government’s approach, concluding landlords are unfairly being discriminated against and scapegoated for the rental housing crisis.
By squeezing profit margins and pushing landlords to exit the market, there is a very real danger that the recent government policies will start to undermine the UK rental sector altogether. The fact of the matter is, the rental market is growing, and landlords fulfil an incredibly important role in providing essential property stock. Instead of increasing red tape and making it harder for landlords to turn a profit, the government should be supporting and encouraging the sector.
Appropriate planning is now incredibly important to ensure you avoid any financial, practical or legal ramifications of new and upcoming legislation. So, as a landlord, what should you be doing to navigate this new regulatory landscape and make sure your assets are protected?
As most will know, the Tenant Fee Ban means the only payments that can now be levied at tenants by landlords or agents are rent, dilapidation deposits and default fees, with the deposit limit reduced from 6 weeks to 5.However, the biggest danger for landlords is the removal of an agent’s ability to charge for tasks like reference checks. Nightmare tenants can wipe out profit through property damage or failure to pay rent. It is therefore vital to commit to paying for reference checks and a rent guarantee to ensure all parties are fully protected. Alternatively, make sure you are using a reputable agent who will continue to carry out these tasks properly, potentially by using deposit replacement schemes that include these as standard.
Another significant change has been to HMO licenses, traditionally required in any property where five or more people live over three floors but are not part of the same family. Non-compliance can result in unlimited fines, a criminal record and a ban from acting as a landlord in the future. What many don’t realise is that HMO rules can be different for each borough, and numerous councils are getting much stricter about enforcement (encouraged by the fact they now profit from any fines!). For example, in Camden, London, HMOs are now required for any property with three unrelated persons, and also within properties on a single floor. Tenants are also being invited to report non-compliance, encouraged by the fact that landlords can be forced to repay all rent to tenants for the length of their contract. In just one of the London boroughs, there have been 1,200 prosecutions of landlords and agents for HMO breaches in the last five years, so ensuring you are HMO compliant by checking your borough’s specific rules is an absolute must.
On 20th March this year, the Homes Act 2018, or ‘Fitness for Human Habitation Act’, also came into effect. While not entirely new, rather a clarification and bringing into line of previous legislation, it is harsher in a number of ways. There are now 29 hazards that landlords are responsible for monitoring – including damp, mould, cold, asbestos, heat, and radiation to name a few. Tenants can take landlords to court and sue if it is found they have failed to maintain standards in one of these areas. The problem here is that it can be incredibly difficult, as an independent landlord, to both have the necessary knowledge on these matters and make sure you are compliant. This is where a knowledgeable and reliable agent or adviser is key.
Finally, the government have also announced that they intend to end ‘no fault evictions’, by removing the Section 21 notice. Although their proposals presently lack any real detail, this will make it even harder for landlords to get rid of disruptive tenants. Their current suggestion that Section 8 notices should be used instead, by which grounds such as failure to pay rent must be provided for eviction, are little comfort thanks to a backlogged court system thatwith three-to four-month delay in hearings can make this an incredibly lengthy and costly option. Given the lack of detail, there might still be opportunity to adjust this law, and so lobbying MP’s and Parliament members on this could provide some relief.
Rental yields are improving and buy-to-let can still prove to be a good investment for many, so you should not necessarily be put off. However, it is vital to remember the onus is now on you to put the necessary precautions in place to protect both your property and rental income.
Increased costs, devastating changes to Tax allowances, ridiculous legislation designed to create many ways for landlords to trip up and be unable to evict tenants. The end of the S21, it is time for Landlords to fight back. I am in favour of AST properties to be removed from the market EN MASS. It is not difficult to cover a long term rent with short term yields and it will finally turn the table on this spitefully draconian attitude towards Landlords.
The Labour Party recently commissioned a proposal paper entitled: ‘Land For The Many: changing the way our fundamental asset is used, owned and governed’ which can be downloaded here (pdf).
Within this, a number of recommendations for reform are set out for possible inclusion in the next Labour party manifesto.
While much of the paper focuses on land ownership in England, the paper also includes a number of recommendations regarding inheritance tax and amendments to the current rates of capital gains tax.
In this note we provide a brief summary of these proposals.
1. Increasing Capital Gains Tax rates
The paper sets out a number of proposed changes to the current system of taxation. One significant proposal is to increase capital gains tax rates for certain transactions. The proposal is that the rate of capital gains tax for second homes and investment properties be increased so that it is in line with current income tax rates.
Currently this would mean a rate of 20% for basic rate payers (as compared to the current rate of 18%) and 40% for higher rate taxpayers (as compared to the current rate of 28%). The policy behind this is a desire to combat what is described as the intuitively unfair policy of taxing “income” derived from asset appreciation, which they state requires no work, at a lower rate than income derived from labour.
The possibility of removing principal private residence relief (which can often exempt property sales from tax) is also raised. While this is given consideration, the paper does acknowledge that it could create difficulties when people look to move house. As such, the paper favours reforming inheritance tax as a means of redistributing wealth.
2. Replacing Inheritance Tax with Lifetime Gifts Tax
The second proposed change to the tax system lies in the abolition of inheritance tax and its replacement with a lifetime gifts tax. Such a system would be intended to tax all gifts during life, with death acting as a final gift (this is similar to the regime of “capital transfer tax” that was in place prior to 1986).
The proposal finds its basis in the work of the Resolution Foundation and the Institute of Public Policy Research and has received public support from the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell.
Under the proposed system, each individual would receive a lifetime allowance of £125,000 for gifts that they receive. Once this limit was reached the recipient of a gift would be taxed. The rates of tax that would apply are not fully set out.
The Labour proposal paper refers to gifts being taxed at the rate of tax on “income from labour” (which could be as high as 45%, or more if national insurance was also charged).
As a comparison, under the modelling set out by the Resolution Foundation (on which the proposals are based) the rate of tax is initially set at 20% with a top rate of 30% for lifetime gifts exceeding £500,000. They predict that such a change, if implemented, would see the system bring in £11 billion in the period 2020-21 compared to the £6 billion predicted to be brought in by the current inheritance tax system.
It is also suggested that because each recipient would have their own allowance (as compared to the current, “nil rate band regime”) such a system would encourage the distribution of wealth to those who have not received large lifetime gifts previously, and as such would encourage a wider spreading of wealth. It is expected that a full spouse exemption would also operate.
The proposal paper recognises that such a system would take time to implement, but again highlights the Labour plan to reverse the Conservative government’s introduction of the inheritance tax residence nil rate band.
Finally, the paper also calls on a new tax be introduced to tax “equity withdrawals”. No further details are provided.
3. Reform to Business and Agricultural Property Exemptions
The final arm to the proposals concerning the reform and potential replacement of inheritance tax is that consideration should be given to the reform of both business and agricultural property relief.
While the paper does acknowledge the importance of such reliefs, it raises the possibility of recasting both reliefs so that they act as a form of tax deferral rather than a full relief.
Under the proposals, the revised reliefs would defer a tax charge until the eventual sale of an asset, or on a business ceasing to trade. This would be similar to “woodlands” relief, which can currently operate to defer tax on woodlands until the timber is cut.
Finally, the paper also addresses what it takes to be abuse of the tax system by people who seek to mitigate inheritance tax liabilities by investing in farmland and forestry assets. It suggests that this area be given a further review in future with a view to removing the opportunities to use such assets as a tax shelter.
The changes, if implemented, could have a very significant impact on succession plans currently in place or under consideration, and at a time of significant political change.
It should be remembered that at this stage, it is only a proposal document but clearly there are major implications should even some of this be brought in to our tax code in the future.
Has anyone stopped to think what would happen to our wonderful country if this MORON were able to sneak in to Number 10? Here is a man with an inherent contempt of the free market, a free economy, fair competition and most importantly free thinking. We have seen Marxism in its worst form over the last century, we are all aware what the Stasi did to all those who’s line of thinking did not fit in with the narrative. People were punished for free thought, for objecting to the mind control, this ranged from anything from arrest and persecution to torture in a Mental asylum.
WE MUST NEVER ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN AGAIN
This man wants to destroy prosperity, he wants to take away everything you have worked for and give it to those who refuse to work for it, when they run out, he intends to import more and more, until you are little more than mention in the history books.
This is not a change in taxation, this is state theft on a grand scale, Mr Corbyn should be seen for exactly what he is and NEVER allowed in to power!
A total of 3,060 migrants have crossed from the occupied areas into the republic so far this year asking for political asylum, Interior Minister Constantinos Petrides said on Friday. Talking to the Cyprus News Agency, he said the situation has accelerated since 2018 and the problem is extremely serious.
“In only one month, from May 2 until June 2,744 have crossed. In 2017 there were 138, during the whole of 2018 there were 2,625 and this year, by June 2, 3,060,” he said.
Most of them are men and they come in large groups “so it is definitely organised. There are groups from several different countries, so we are definitely talking about networks. There are Syrians as well as people from other nationalities which did not exist in the past, from African countries such as Cameroon and Nigeria, reportedly arriving by air at Tymbou airport.”
It is possible that even the authorities in the north act as traffickers, he added. The refugees themselves talk about the existence of networks, Petrides added, but the Republic of Cyprus cannot do anything about the situation because these are territories not under control of the republic.
According to the interior minister, the EU has been informed by the President and it will be addressed directly to the UN.
“We are also examining the practical application of the Green Line Regulation and what this implies.”
Asked what he means by this, he replied “Let’s just leave it at that.”
There is some help from the EU, but the reception centre where the migrants are registered is overflowing and with the growing numbers it is “extremely difficult if not impossible to deal with the problem.”
Since most of the asylum seekers come from war-torn countries such as Syria, their application for political asylum is usually granted, but the country cannot deal with housing and supplying workplaces for so many people. The big problem and the difference between Cyprus and other EU member states is that the refugees come from the uncontrolled areas, Petrides reiterated.
“This is why we ask for practical support from the EU. Turkey and the pseudo-state should not have the right to use migrants for political purposes in this way.”
We are constantly told that these are Syrian refugees, yet most of the immigrants who are here are NOT from Syria. Turkey is waving them through and that is not without agenda. During WW11, Hitler airdropped currency over the UK to destroy the British economy, it was called Operation Bernhard. I feel that these people are being dumped in Cyprus ‘en mass’ to wreak destruction. Hundreds of residential blocks have already been turned in to ghettos and this is just the beginning.
This is not giving safe haven, this is not the first safe country they have reached (as required by international law) they are people who have been shopped here WITH INTENT. Cyprus cannot cope with these numbers, Europe cannot cope with these numbers, we are constantly lied to about the numbers who arrive, they use every possible means to deceive us, anything from only counting the head of the family, to holding them in one country, (Cyprus for example) until they are granted Citizenship, they can them migrate AS EUROPEANS thereby distorting the figures.
EUROPE IS UNDER ATTACK, WE ARE UNDER ATTACK, THIS IS POPULATION REPLACEMENT ON A GRAND SCALE!
The former Prime Minister accused his successor as party leader of suggesting that Conservative and Labour governments had been “all the same” over the past thirty years, as he declared: “Enough is enough.”
The intervention comes after Mr Corbyn told an education conference last week: “For decades we’ve been told that inequality doesn’t matter because the education system will allow talented and hard-working people to succeed whatever their background.”
Mr Blair – a frequent critic of Jeremy Corbyn’s record as Labour leader – reeled off a string of achievements by governments he led, saying that 1997 to 2010 had seen “the most dramatic improvements in our public services with the largest ever peacetime investment in them”.
He talked up the Government’s work to cut pensioner and child poverty, provide compensation for miners hit by breathing problems – and defended Labour’s changes to the tax and benefit system while in office.
“The poorest 10% of households gained by something like 13% in their incomes, whilst the richest 10% lost by almost 9%,” he said.
Mr Blair added: “We made the UK more equal, more fair and more socially mobile. And we never, ever said inequality didn’t matter or that tackling it was not a priority of the Government.
“And by the way, what we did at home, we also did abroad, trebling help to the poorest countries, mobilising the international community in support of action against global poverty and becoming the first major developed nation to hit the 0.7% of GDP aid target.
“Of course, like any government we had faults, failures and did things people disagreed with.
“But don’t tell me or those who worked with me or those who were part of the Labour Party at the time, that we did nothing for the poorest in our country or the world. We did and we’re proud of it.”
This is just another example of the psychopath that is Blair, interfering in the workings of government. He had obviously sold his soul to the Devil a long time ago and everything he did was about appeasing the political classes, appeasing Europe and doing his part of the Globalisation agenda.
He led this country in to a war that was based on lies, DAMNED LIES, he instigated the opening of the floodgates allowing an invasion of immigrants never seen before in history!
The conversation reports:
It didn’t matter where they were: in front of a café, a tobacconist, or the train station. It didn’t seem to matter who they were: men or women, Italian citizens, “regular” immigrants or asylum seekers. So long as they were black. A shooting rampage against African migrants in the town of Macerata, in central Italy on February 2, unveiled the extent to which the debate about migration in Italy is shaped by fascist forces and racist ideas.
By the end of the rampage, six people had been shot, one woman and five men. One is in a regional hospital with a chest injury, the others suffered lesser injuries and are in stable conditions. A 28-year-old man called Luca Traini, arrested at the scene draped in an Italian flag, was charged with an attempted racially-aggravated massacre. A copy of Mein Kampf and books on fascism in Italy were reportedly found at his flat. In 2017, Traini stood as a candidate for the far right Lega Nord at a local election, albeit scoring zero votes.
The attack came soon after the macabre death of Pamela Mastropietro, whose dismembered body was found in two suitcases in late January, dumped along the road near Macerata. A Nigerian man called Innocent Oseghale residing in Italy with an expired permesso di soggiorno (or permit of stay) was arrested the day after, accused of killing her.
I never met Gideon Atzeke, Jennifer Otioto or any of the other victims of the attack, and hardly anyone has mentioned who they were. But I did meet many asylum seekers in Macerata in summer 2017 during my research on the Italian government’s reception system for asylum seekers. And even then, the everyday and institutional racism confronting them seemed to be their main preoccupation.
Talking to them on the phone in the days since the attack I’ve been struck by the fatalist nature with which they processed the events. A sign, perhaps, of their extraordinary lives, and of their ordinary fears, aspirations, and claims for a secure and decent life, all of which which are constantly devalued and obscured by the migration debate.
Some Nigerians blamed the accusations against Oshigale for putting “all Nigerians in a bad light”. Others evoked the violent and racist abuse they faced in Libya, drawing explicit parallels between their treatments in the two countries. Unfortunately, all seemed to agree that it was best for them to stay put in the hotels and houses where they are hosted, as they wait for their asylum claim to be processed.
I strongly encouraged them not to do so, and to join the various protests and marches that have already taken place or that are planned.
The attempted massacre appears to epitomise how fascist groups and ideas have been mainstreamed and glamorised in Italy, particularly in the run-up to elections on March 4.
After his arrest, Traini was heralded as a patriot by some on social media. Forza Nuova, the party founded by the far right politician Roberto Fiore, expressed full support for Traini and offered to pay his legal expenses.
Other political parties distanced themselves from his alleged actions. Yet they still managed to shift attention away from the political context of the rampage.
Casapound, a far right group, condemned the attack, and denied reports of Traini’s affiliation with them. Roberto Salvini, leader of the Lega Nord, tried to minimise Traini’s past candidature for his party, and linked the event to the “social confrontation” that is brought about by “uncontrolled migration”.
Silvio Berlusconi, the former prime minister and leader of Forza Italia, defined immigration as a “social bomb about to explode” and pledged to deport up to 600,000 irregular migrants. Other right wing parties, such as Fratelli d’Italia, used the events to emphasise their belief that Italy faces a security emergency caused by migration, which needs a strong response from the state.
Marco Minniti, Italy’s minister of the interior, a member of the Partito Democratico, appealed for unity. He tried to placate the situation by insisting that the shootings were unorganised and carried out by a loose cannon. The Five Star Movement, the largest party in Italy according to polls, insisted that it was the responsibility of political parties to maintain “silence” about the attack.
As the migrant support group Coordinamento Migranti asserted, underlying these responses lies a growing racism which pervades Italian politics and which frames migration as a threat to Italians, and seeks to legitimise military and security solutions.
I believe this was an act of terrorism and that it wasn’t an isolated event, but the latest episode of a series of fascist aggressions aimed at intimidating immigrants and those who support them. A strong mobilisation is required against this drift.
There is no doubt that most of Europe has moved to the right at an alarming rate. It is not possible to subjegate so many people and make them second class citizens in their own homeland. The indigenous people of Europe have been wrapped up in knots by political correctness, which is designed to gag them and prevent objection to the never ending torrent of migrants that are not just threatening the very identity of Europe, but is increasingly a threat to the Europeans as a whole.
This will not end well, as Europe moves further to the right, this serves as a barometer that the people of Europe are themselves becoming increasing drawn to resisting the narrative of the political classes. There is a great risk that the resistance will come from within, as Europe hurtles towards a political implosion not seen since the 1930s. On that note, why does it feel that we are fast approaching a re-run of 1933?