Chapter XV: China and then Turkey

1 My experience in China

1 Introduction

I eventually decided to settle on China. Whilst I was there, I had to wait to set up a business in order that I might proceed with my project.

I did end up leaving China but the time I spent there was not wasted given the fact that I

  1. Received confirmation of the fact that Doctor Oliver worked for Russia from the Kremlin.
  2. Managed to outline an incomplete account of why Salisbury occurred. At that stage I was unaware of the fact that members of the college (Johnathon Allen as UK deputy representative to the UN in New York, Julian Braithwaite as UK ambassador to the UN and international organizations in Geneva and specifically Simon Shercliff as director of national security) were employed at the foreign office with two in particular having been responsible for directing the harassment (Mr Allen and Mr Shercliff). It is perhaps the case that the foreign office decided to embark upon the false accusations against the GRU because they were somehow afraid of my presence in China and what I might reveal. This is a reasonable consideration given the fact that
    1. They had embarked upon the initial attack in Salisbury due to my writing of the dossier which I was intending to send to the French government .
    2. I went to America to claim asylum as a consequence of which it might have been thought that I would talk about infiltration. It is debatable whether it is coincidental that Russiagate and allegations of Russian collusion began at this time.
    3. When I was in Jordan, Dr Oliver became anxious and made a confession

I eventually left China a few months later due to the

  1. Need to secure pre-seed capital for my project which had by that stage evolved a great deal. It was apparently not possible to secure such funding in China at that time
  2. Interference which I was experiencing online as a result of the actions of the FCO. A notable instance of this was hacking and disruption to financial transactions.
  3. Curiosity about what might appear to be an invite from Moscow because they were aware that I was aware about Doctor Oliver. I was however certain that this was a ruse but felt that the information was worth gathering.

The time in China was not a waste of time given that I was able to examine the case as fully as was possible at the time. The police there did offer their help but I made the right move in leaving given the above and the fact  that

  1. My mother announced, when I arrived in İstanbul, that she had terminal cancer and establishing myself might have been rather difficult in China.
  2. I need to sort out a solution to my residence. Turkey seemed appropriate in light of
    1. The absence of a backbone on the part of the European Union.
    2. My parents were Turkish and I am entitled to Turkish citizenship.
    3. The fact that China does not tend to offer citizenship.

 

2 An example of interference

I attempted to correct some details in relation to a Western Union transfer on the 28th of September 2018. This had gone from a Swiss prepaid debit card to my bank account in China.

It had gone through fine the day before and a screenshot of the email showing the successful transfer is available here. (I could supply copies with the dates but that would alter the time at which they were sent given that I am no longer in China).

Screenshot from 2018-09-28 23-03-34 I had forgotten however that there is a requirement in China to put my middle names. As such, I altered the details the next day. I had to wait however for it to be reviewed for some reason.

Screenshot from 2018-09-28 23-13-03.png Around an hour later, I checked whether the transaction had been approved and discovered the following,

  1. I had not (and would not) receive an email which indicated that there was a problem or that it had gone through.
  2. There was throttling on the connection between the western union site and the computer so I could not check
  3. I received the following spam email telling me that there are some nice travel deals. In other words, given what occurred, it was a hint that I should buy a ticket away from China. For reference spam emails tend to occur on the hour and at regular intervals and the fact that this did not occur with expedia is an indication that it was directed to send a message Screenshot from 2018-09-28 21-51-14.png

Because of the throttling, I tried another device and managed to log in. Normally when one sends a transfer, one is notified of a rejection but the transfer was cancelled without any notification. This had also been the case when my parents had attempted to make a transfer from Lloyds and one can thus deduce that this was the same form of interference Screenshot from 2018-09-28 22-17-53.png It is silly to suggest that there should have been any problem with the transaction given that the transfer had gone through the previous day and adding a name should not present any problem.

Indeed the fact that there was interference was evident through the

  1. Denial of service attack
  2. Previous instances whereby
    1. My Lloyds bank card had been cancelled when I was in France under a spurious pretext
    2. My Swirl card had been cancelled when I visited London in 2015 and then uncancelled when I returned to France

I tried the transfer again and it said my transaction could not be completed.

Screenshot from 2018-09-28 22-20-27.png

I would continue to attempt to transfer the money to no avail until the early hours of the morning

GCHQ indicated that this was them because of

  1. The DDos attack and the fact that during the attack, there were blockage of transfers of money at this time (as I had previously experienced in Ireland France and the United Kingdom).
  2. Whilst this was occurring an individual the article which pertained to “St Catharines college and recruitment” numerous times within a very short period of time. The fact that this consisted of an attempt to communicate a message that I should return to Cambridge and work for GCHQ as is indicated by
    1. The fact that that article was accessed repeatedly within a short space of time from the same location which would have meant that they were not reading the article.
    2. An opening of a link to that article stating that they look to recruit autistic people as you can see in the last screenshot and no opening of other links.
    3. The fact that no other links within the article were opened.
    4. The fact that the access originates from the UK.
    5. Subsequent accesses from an area of China where the British have a record of interference.

Screenshot from 2018-09-29 04-47-54.png

Screenshot from 2018-09-29 04-56-46.pngScreenshot from 2018-09-29 12-09-31.png

3 The accesses from the Kremlin

The following contain screenshots which are large in scale and rather numerous. Whilst this may be deemed inconvenient to readers, I have done so because of the need to show that they have not been tampered with.

They pertained to “a diary” which I wrote and where I commented upon various things, mostly in relation to the intelligence services as part of which I included logs which showed accesses to my blog by certain organizations and people. I state “diary” because what I outline is not properly expressed and consists of scribbles.

I start with a discussion about the possibility of writing a film about the circumstances which pertained to the development of some software rather than publishing some software and then writing a film about it. One would of course as part of such a film, have to utilize material in relation to the asylum claim and what is outlined here which would include material in relation to Science, Cambridge, Russiagate and Dr Oliver.

My manner is ever so melodramatic and perhaps somewhat tasteless and consists in this instance of a bluff based upon previous instances where the British state has reacted by providing information when they feel under pressure.

The choice of SS Montgomery is a reference to a sunken ship from the second world war which is at risk of exploding due to it containing tons of TNT. As such, because of various forms of interference which are electronic, I give notice that should there be any attempt to force me into a situation where I had to go on hunger strike, there would have to be some sort of inquest, whereupon

  1. Lots of people have access to information in relation to what occurred,
  2. The British government would not have control of my work
  3. They would end up which more egg on their faces than they already have.

The diary was as follows and I shall note at what point hacking which emanates from the Kremlin starts:

The hacking from the Kremlin starts from this point

At 1:48PM, as can be seen from the screenshots of the log below, Russian bots start attempting to login to my site because of what I have written. These accesses cease at 3:01PM. Here is a copy of a selection of logs of the period which are in reverse order.

One can tell that it comes from the Kremlin because of

  1. The IP address which attempts to log into my site is 95.165.165.56 and the Hostname is 95.165.165.56.static-spd.mgts.ru.
  2. The fact that the geolocation indicates that the location is the Kremlin
  3. The browser and activity fingerprint was very distinctive and not from any western country and involves
    1. The usage of out of date software
    2. A regular pattern of attempts to access
    3. Most of the attempted logins from then on takes plac from Russia and former soviet republics which are within the sphere of influence of Russia but never outside of that area
    4. Not very credible attempts to hack which are best interpreted as a request.
  4. It occurs when I start talking about my intent to release a film about the circumstances pertaining to my situation and what effect my software would have.
  5. As such they Russian government is signalling that it would like to become either involved in this or for me not to publish a film

I later on write about what the software does and receive lots of accesses from the college and the next day I write about this. I state that it is doctor Oliver which it may be given that it emanates from the college but it is more likely to be the director of national security, Simon Shercliff. Whilst I am writing about this, at 3:43PM some attempted “hacking” from the Kremlin occurs

The hacking starts at this point

Here are the “hacks” from the Kremlin which again are in reverse order. I have only included a few selections because it occurred on over one hundred occasions.

It carried on for some time.

One can tell that it comes from the Kremlin because of

  1. One of the IP addresses which attempts to log into my site is 77.243.102.35.
  2. The fact that the geolocation indicates that the location is the Kremlin
  3. The browser and activity fingerprint was very distinctive and not from any western country and involves
    1. The usage of out of date software
    2. A regular pattern of attempts to access
    3. Most of the attempted logins from then on takes place from Russia and former soviet republics but never outside of that area
    4. Not very credible attempts to hack but consists of a request.
  4. It occurs when I start talking about Dr Oliver and they are unhappy that this would obviously form part of a film.

The fact that it did come from Russia would be confirmed by what occurred when I went to Moscow in transit. It constitutes an invite which ı was certain was a lure.

 

4 My transit via Moscow

I would attempt to go to the American consulate in Shanghai where I was located in order to discuss this matter and in particular the issues surrounding Salisbury but it was very much like walking into a version of Terry Gilliam’s Brazil in that the arrangement of the consulate is such that it is very difficult to actually talk to anyone there.

On Christmas day of 2018 therefore, due to the harassment and the need to secure finance and the harassment and out of curiosity at what was the intent of the accesses, I decided to transit via Moscow Sheremetyevo airport and then to go to Turkey via transit to Iran where I could perhaps claim asylum.

I was right to be suspicious at those accesses and regarded them as a lure. I had already made another speculative asylum offer at their embassy to see what the reaction would be and as they had said no, it seemed entirely unlikely that this would be forthcoming should I visit.

Nonetheless, it was the only option given my circumstances which they would have known about and given the lack of an offer in this respect, the only reason for such accesses was because they wanted to lure me there and leave me trapped so they could do as they had did earlier that year.

Moreover I had spoken with a member of TASS who seemed a little put out by what I had already discovered in relation to Salisbury

When I arrived there they tried to pull a fast one

  1. I was called to the information counter in the airport and was told that I could not go to Iran because I did not have a visa. They were pretty insistent, very insistent in fact. I pointed out that I had checked the various databases with Aeroflot and that they had said this was permissible. They refused however to listen.
  2. Whilst I was doing this, there was an individual with a Cambridge university pullover who was standing next to me at the counter who was of an undergraduate age. This was much the same as when I was in terminal E/F when I inquired as to the possibility of asylum at the information desk and where there was someone with a bag with Cambridge university press logo on it.

In other words, the accesses from the Kremlin which were an attempt to lure , the nonsensical claim that I could not transit via Iran as well as the presence of someone from Cambridge were indicative of the fact that Russia and the UK had done a deal whereby I would be deported to the UK, as had been attempted previously that year.

The thing is this was all on CCTV and let’s just say that the CCTV in places like aeroports is traditionally insecure, so I’m sure this will have been noticed and it will certainly have been noticed by various intelligence agencies given the fact that those agencies track people through their computers most notably my own which was connected to the internet at the time.

They only acquiesced when I told them I could pay for another ticket but still nonetheless tried to persuade me to go to Turkey. In other words, they were hoping that I would be stranded and would not have enough more to go anywhere and that as a consequence they could send me back to my “country of origin” which is the UK. They did not like the prospect of Iran because they were aware that I might claim asylum there which would be problematic given

  1. Their intentions
  2. The fact that it might leave them in a weaker position with one of their allies
  3. Turkey is not as sovereign as Iran given that it is part of NATO and wishes to be friends with the UK.

As such, one must conclude that the accesses did come from Moscow and consisted of a lure whereby

  1. I would arrive in Moscow,
  2. I would be trapped (as they had attempted when I was last in Moscow)
  3. They would do a deal with the United Kingdom which occurred because they knew I knew about Doctor Oliver as indicated by the accesses.

It was interesting in terms of information gathering about Cambridge and British intelligence and I do find it extraordinary that that should be attempted twice in one year and that it should be possible to escape such a situation.

Iran refused to consider asylum as I expected and I ended up in Turkey which I had previously avoided due to my parents feelings about the matter and decided to claim citizenship.

 

2 Turkey

1 Introduction

I might expand upon this section at a later date but at the outset I should state that the most notable thing which happened was the death of my mother and father.

My mother died on the Saturday July the 13th as result of the fact that the foreign office and other governmental bodies had been causing a great deal of upset within my family.

I said a prayer which in the past had worked when I was in Fulbourn and indeed before my entrance to Russia.

It also worked here because I had been blocked from accessing the St Catharines college twitter feed but I was strangely granted access to the private versions of the St Catharines college magazines a few days later.

I came across the name Shercliff in the 2005 college magazine and some details of the fact that he worked for the foreign office, did some further research and discovered to my amazement that he was director for national security. Whereupon over the course of a few weeks and indeed months, I did further research into other members of the college who were at the time and who had been employed at the foreign office and discovered many other names such as Johnathan Allen and all those who are noted in Chapter 6 and things began to fall into place not with respect to just myself but with respect to other matters.

It was only at this point that I was able to understand what had occurred, why it had occurred and who was responsible.

So you could state that prayer works.

Later on my father would be misdiagnosed with Alzheimer’s and indeed done away with as a result of the actions of the civil service. They did so because they wished to

  1. Cut off a source of support on the presumption that I would have to go back to the United Kingdom
  2. State that Alzheimers runs in the family and that I was somehow in the early stages either upon my return or at a date in the near future so that they could discredit me because of what I knew.

Obviously this is a presumption on their part given that there is no reason for me to accede to such pressure but it would concern me if they attempted this with other members of the family. It is not possible for them to do this as long as I stay out of their jurisdiction and range of influence and as such I cannot return to the United Kingdom or indeed one of their mewling colonies in Europe.

Other notable things that have happened include the fact that

  1. They would also would also ensure that members of the British government became ill during the coronavirus crisis in order to hamper their efforts to ensure that the transition period ended on December the 31st.
  2. Someone who worked for British intelligence, a Mr Le Mesurier would be killed by western intelligence. They did this partly in order to send a message that British citizens are not safe in Turkey but also partly because he knew too much.
  3. Another person who worked for the foreign office would be killed in order to conceal infiltration.
  4. I should have a rather interesting discussion where the UK proves that attitudes towards innovation and indeed abuse have not changed. It should be of particular interest to note the way in which they defend pedophiles

I should like in the first instance however to show how one can prove that God exists

 

2 How one can prove that God exists

This is somewhat complicated and philosophical but it might help with regards to my mother and father and why one conclude that this is a mere break and we will see them in due course.
Like many atheists, Richard Dawkins states that there is no creator since one cannot prove his or her existence and that as a consequence, there is also no “afterlife”.
This is however incorrect in that it is possible however to “prove” the existence of a creator according to scientific principles. He is however correct in so far as he disparages the concept of “faith”.
If one were to look at matters according to his own scientific principles and the need to prove the existence of a creator, it would be wrong to ask at the outset whether there is a creator. Instead, one would have to start from first principles and rather like the Eleatics, one would have to ask  whether it would be possible to prove that this reality exists as opposed to whether the creator exists.
It is only possible to prove the existence of this reality through pointing to the existence of or using things which exist within this reality (touch, sight or a scientific method or tool) and this cannot therefore in itself constitute proof that we exist.
As such, given the fact that there is no scientific proof that this reality exists, atheists have to accept, according to their own principles and those of the Eleatics (and in particular Parmenides) that it does not. This is even if this is difficult to imagine (except if you are “lucky” enough to experience a certain level of dissociation).
Since we experience the reality however, the default presumption has to be that this “unreality” is created and that there is a creator. If you will one could approximate this reality to a dream which seems like many dreams to be real.
Richard Dawkins also makes another presumption that “someone must have created the creator” and that that creator cannot thus be all powerful. This too is based upon the presumption that the things which exist in this reality (time and space) exist outside of it.
There is however no proof of that this is the case however and the default presumption therefore has to be that neither time or space exist outside of this reality. As a consequence, one must conclude that the creator has existed forever and is all powerful.
There is evidence within this reality that time is an illusion if one accepts the theory that white holes exist and that they can spew forth time which will not have existed. This is illustrated in the following clip from the fourth series of red dwarf
It would also be a presumption to state that there would be more than one creator given that whilst one must accept the existence of one creator, one would have to prove the existence of multiple “creators” which is not possible.
One might ask the obvious “If God exists and is good, why does he allow bad things to happen” but
  1. This is based upon the presumption that the things which do happen actually do happen something which according to scientific principles they do not.
  2. Since the creator can create things he can uncreate them so they never occurred.
As such one can argue that when bad things appear to happen, they never happen.
One might ask what the purpose of this reality might be and the most plausible explanation is as a test to see whether we obey the laws of the creator. These are written in the bible and other texts which might have some things which are considered incorrect from a scientific point of view.
The most plausible explanation as to why such texts exist is because at the time when they arose, humanity was not at the stage where there could be any understanding of science nor indeed the creator and his rules as a consequence of which such things had to be written in an allegorical fashion.
If we obey the laws then when we “die”, because the creator is perfect, we get to stay in nice place called heaven where in my case I will see my parents
Some might ask “why doesn’t my prayer work” and there are various logical explanations for this. One argument is as follows;
  1. Given that the default presumption is that this reality is an illusion, it can be argued that the person praying does not exist and that neither does their prayer.
  2. The illusion is given that “prayer does not work” is to maintain the illusion of reality or indeed the prayer might be answered at a later point.
It has however occurred instantly in my case in Fulbourn, just before my arrival in Russia and indeed just after the death of my mother.

3 My father’s misdiagnosis of alzheimers

It is demonstrably the case that my father’s diagnosis of Alzheimers dementia is invalid and his symptoms were due to a Traumatic brain injury, one of several in fact. There are five sources of information which prove that he had Tbi

  1. Statements from my father himself.
  2. My own recollection
  3. His French healthcare notes
  4. Statements from someone of which I have copies which for reasons of confidentiality shall for the moment at least be kept anonymous. That person whom I shall call Richard was in charge of his care. I asked on April the fourth of this year at 5:04PM whether my father would have an examination for his traumatic brain injury. In response the other person responded on April the sixth at 4:13PM that I had to understand that “all non-essential examinations had been postponed indefinitely“. In other words, there had been no examination as part of his diagnosis of alzheimers whether his cognitive state was in fact due to a Traumatic brain injury.
  5. The eulogy from the priest during his funeral saying that he had had a traumatic brain injury. This information had it not been true would not have been accepted as part of the eulogy by the person responsible for his care, by the person who arranged the funeral nor indeed the Catholic priest. If someone had stated that he suffered from something when he hadn’t, such as cancer, it would obviously not have been accepted.


As such, it is demonstrably the case that he had a Tbi (one of several) and the diagnosis of alzheimers is invalid because there was no such examination as to whether he had had a Traumatic brain injury as part of the diagnosis.

The DSM diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s are as follows

A. The diagnostic criteria for major or minor neurocognitive disorder is fulfilled,
B. Insidious onset and gradual decline of cognitive function in one or more areas for mild neurocognitive disorder, or two or more areas for major neurocognitive disorder, and
C. The diagnostic criteria for either possible or probable Alzheimer’s Dementia are fulfilled, as defined by the following:

Presence of causal Alzheimer’s Dementia genetic mutation based on family history or genetic testing.

The following three indicators are present:

1 Decline in memory or learning, and one other cognitive area, based on history or trials of neuropsychological testing

2 Steady cognitive decline, without periods of stability, and

3 No indicators of other psychological, neurological, or medical problems responsible for cognitive decline.

The last indication given his traumatic brain injury and the lack of any examination in this respect by the doctors in the United Kingdom invalidates the diagnosis of alzheimers. It is also invalidated by the fact that he had periods of stability.

To add to this, one should also state that

  1. Many of his symptoms such as seeing my mother when she is not there and thinking he is somewhere else can be explained by psychosis after traumatic brain injury.
  2. The DSM V indicates that Tbi is a risk factor for alzheimers. Head injury is one of the most common causes of Alzheimer’s.Old age can be excluded because his cognitive difficulties only began after he experienced a fall and a Traumatic brain injury.
  3. It is claimed that his “alzheimers” is due to grief given that it became apparent around that time but
    1. As you can see here grief is not the only factor in rapid onset dementia
    2. The other precipitating factor will have been Tbi
  4. He was not “frail” which can be related to Alzheimers. He did a lot of gardening, used a pickaxe and a saw and so on. In fact my mother told him off at various points for not listening and working too hard in the midday sun at the age of 92. The cause of his fall will have been his usage of beta blockers which causes people to fall.
  5. It is also worth bearing in mind that my father has stated that he considers himself to be on the spectrum which is plausible given that it runs in families. Dementia is far less common amongst those on the spectrum.
  6. Genetic material would disprove the possibility that it is genetic given that compared to other races the Circassians (of which my father was one) have a remarkably diminished incidence of hereditary diseases. My particular clan of the Circassians to which we belong is in the A column
  7. Indeed the genetic variant e4 of the APOE gene, something which is principally associated with alzheimers means that an individual has lower FSIQ from childhood. Moreover individuals with that variant have better working memory and executive function whereas those who are neurodiverse, such as myself and my family tend not to have it.
  8. The fact that they chose to overlook such things means that there is a motive not to diagnose correctly and indeed the diagnosis is incorrect because they did not do it correctly. And indeed it is consistent with the fact that
    1. They attempted to as much with me
    2. The fact that as I shall related he was killed
  9. He is now dead so it is not possible to carry out an examination of his Tbi, so the diagnose is false.
  10. Given the fact that they attempted to misdiagnose me and went to greater lengths with my father, any diagnosis in relation to the rest of my family from either the UK or countries which are allied to the UK will be seen as objectively unreliable.
  11. It’s quite a message the intelligence agencies of the United Kingdom are sending. If you defect, assist or/and provide significant information, it is probable that you will end up like Sergei Skripal. In fact, it is indeed odd that so many murders/suicides of Russian “dissidents” taken place in London as opposed to Paris or elsewhere.

What is the reason for the misdiagnosis. In order to state that it runs in families and at a later date claim that I or another member of the family has dementia, due to what I know.

This doesn’t work because of point four and five most notably and they demonstrably did not do the proper tests and did not take into account his TBi and because of the fact that they murdered him.

 

4 The murder of my father

There were two things which “precipitated” my fathers illness and which were said in my private diary. Given previous attempts involving poisoning and attempted the murder of myself, those statements, the nature of them and the fact that my father suddenly became ill, his “illness” can be said to be in reaction to what I said albeit using my statements as a pretext.

It is not the only thing which proves this as I shall outline. I made a set of statements which were in private.

The first set of statements pertains to the fact that I found the actions of British intelligence in harassing and hacking my computer in Turkey, when they had no authority or jurisdiction to do so, infuriating. It also pertained to the actions against the democratically elected government of the United Kingdom.

I said that someone in authority should punish the members of the foreign office publicly.

These statements are justified within the context of

  1. The criminal actions of the foreign office and the fact that it is infiltrated and the criminal lengths they go to to cover this up.
  2. Their actions against the democratically elected government.
  3. The fact that they are private

My statements do not pertain to anyone else and to be frank, I would rather the MoD or someone in authority did as I suggest. They are a mafia state within a state which, for the sake of the people and the government of the UK, needs to extirpated.

Moreover what I said is used as a pretext for what they intended given that

  1. They attempted this with me anyway, threatened to do as much and had done it with others and I have only recently on odd occasions expressed these views in a private diary.
  2. I had warned “Richard” who was the person charged with his care that this is what would occur.
  3. They had already medically mistreated him by
    1. Not diagnosing him correctly and not providing the correct treatment
    2. Stating that there was a long waiting list for hearing aids when this was not the case
  4. It is a very poor defense to murder someone because their son had said in private that those members of the government who were involved in criminal activity against myself and the government and who promoted criminality and terrorism (the foreign office) should be treated as criminals and terrorists. Objectively there is no difference between an organization which encourages terrorism and criminality and which is involved in the later and someone who commits the act. Even James Bond will tell you that.
  5. I talk about hostages but then my father was being used as a hostage and being mistreated in the hope of luring me back to England. Personally and this is just me, I find it worse for criminal elements within the state to harm someone’s brain and then kill them in a sly and underhand manner than to chop their hands off in response and to do so publicly and state why.

To add to this one must make the following important points.

  1. Every day, it is the same thing, hacking of one form or another and if they could get away with more they would. The only trouble is that I am not in Cambridge and will not be returning to the UK. They did so partly in the hope that they could justify their actions through eliciting a reaction and indeed they did but I only expressed my views in my private diary and in relation to an organisation within the state which betrays that state. Without meaning to go for the obvious comparison, this was known in 1930s Germany with respect to the antisemitism which was prevalent then, as “Jew baiting. The fact is they harass on a daily basis by government diktat in the hope getting a reaction. They then get a reaction in private using that as a pretext to kill my father and to find some justification in the eyes of the world for their criminal actions with particular reference to entities and nations which would search for any pretext to side with the United Kingdom (I make reference in particular to those non-entities who run the European Union).
  2. They say there is “no justification for terrorism” well it’s a silly thing to say if you have a deliberate policy to promote it. If you do not have the rule of law and the British intelligence agencies most certainly do not have the rule of law in any demonstrable respect, you cannot then complain when others might chose to  follow your example.
  3. One must view this in its broader context. It is certainly the case that there is a policy to attempt this not only with other people in this country but also countries as well. It is reasonable to state given my experience, given statements by former heads of intelligence that the invasion of Iraq would lead to an increase in extremism (but against civilians), given that they saw the effect of this but continued to invade other countries with much the same effect, that such a policy is deliberate.
  4. If the government of a country behaves in another country or indeed in its own without respect for the law, for morality and without boundaries and every other form of recourse is blocked, then it is reasonable and accepted that people or indeed the affected country will take issue with that government and take up arms against that government (but not I might add anyone else). If that wasn’t the case, then one could dispense with the need for armed forces and colonial liberation movements would have been in the wrong which clearly isn’t the case given that to give one example, the British government after they stole Hong Kong through aggression only returned it to China under the threat of force.
  5. My statements however only pertain to the foreign office which as I shall outline committed an act of treason against the democratically elected government. If one wants to talk about threats to the state, you need only look at the civil service’s actions against the British government which I outline in the next section and which occurred before my statements and their actions with respect to my father. A rational analysis would show that the intelligence services and the broader deep state are very much the enemy within.
  6. One does not respond to such statements by killing someone who worked for you/passed on information in the past! In particular, it adds further proof of the fact that they attacked someone else who worked for them, a Mr Sergei Skripal.

It is crystal clear who the criminal is and it isn’t me. It would be astonishingly hypocritical to blame me and then, as is always the case with western intelligence, find innocent/turn a blind eye to those who actually did harass to get a reaction and who are involved in what amounts to acts against the democratically elected government.

For reference these are copies of things I said in my private diary which I am outlining in public for the purpose of demonstrating my feelings about the criminal nature of the FCO.

1 My statements

My second set of statements concerned the fact that people in authority should use the lockdown to get rid of those who deal drugs because of the harm they cause. It just so happens that as one can see from my experiences in Cambridge with Michael and others and indeed non-recorded statements from Julia that the foreign office and other intelligence agencies like drugs and dealers because, rather as Hogarth depicted, it means certain sections of the public enslave themselves and become pacified. It’s a form of social control and it is a choice not to deal with the drug issue.

2 What happened next
  1. On Good Friday of this year, at 8:10PM, less than two hours after these statements and on the same day as the other statements, I receive news from Richard that my father has a high fever which apparently turns out to be coronavirus. Again, I have copies of these statements which, for reasons of confidentiality, shall for the moment be kept anonymous.
  2. Two days later, he reports that according to the doctors he has coughing and shortness of breath
  3. On Orthodox Easter Sunday, it is reported that he has died.
3 Why it was murder

The reason why it was murder is proven by the following

  1. The timing of my statements about how one should deal with the FCO and the fact that he falls ill two hours later. It is not the first instance where they have attempted to murder a member of the family, nor indeed the first time where such things have occurredas one can see from Gareth Williams and indeed others. One must also consider the fact that as the Salisbury affair occurred because of me, it would not imaginable that such things would occur to members of the family.
  2. The dates: the fact that he falls ill on good Friday and goes to heaven within less than ten days on Easter Sunday is a not very good attempt at at plausible deniability on the part of British intelligence. This is for the following reasons.
    1. It is an attempt to cover the fact of his murder by making it appear that it concurs with an opinion which I had expressed online and which I have reiterated above that there is a creator who intervenes in our life based upon, amongst other things, what had happened after my mother’s death
    2. Jesus was crucified by people who worked on behalf of the state.
    3. The fact that he should fall ill on Catholic Good Friday and die on Orthodox Easter Sunday is a reference to things which pertain to infiltration and the need to cover for them.
  3. The claim by the doctor that he had coughing and shortness of breath is a lie and they wish to state that he is more ill than is the case. Richard was categorical that that is what the doctors said. When I spoke to two members of the care home who were looking after him on two separate occasions, they reported that there had been no such issue. I recorded those conversation.
    1. Here is the conversation which took place on the 14th. I ring her at 8:57 and
      1. The person who was looking after him reported that
        1. On previous days he did not have a cough which is completely contrary to what my brother has been told.
        2. Previously in the day he did not have a cough
        3. She has suddenly noticed that my father has a slight cough which given that it does not occur over the next few days might be pepper.
      2. It is odd therefore that
        1. Richard should state that he is coughing and that there has been no change over the past few days
        2. On previous days he did not have a cough which is completely contrary to what my brother has been told by the doctor.
        3. The carer should state in one phone call that he was definitely not coughing and had not been coughing over the past few days
    2. Here is the conversation which took place on the 15th at 9:00PM.
      1. Richard had reported that
        1. He didn’t look good for this world.
        2. The GP has diagnosed him with coronavirus.
        3. He required ventilation.
        4. He had a cough.
        5. He was prescribed antibiotics.
      2. The person who looks after him reported that
        1. He was “not himself” and was sleeping a lot
        2. The GP had not diagnosed him with coronavirus and that where they did diagnose such people they have to be isolated and they had done so with others.
        3. He did not require ventilation
        4. He did not have a cough
        5. He has a temperature of 36 which is not consistent with a fever
  4. I am apparently not able to speak to him in person at any stage.
  5. They chose not to admit him to hospital but did with other residents.
  6. The probability of him falling ill with the virus and dying is less than one percent. There are 411,000 people in care homes in England and Wales. Given the fact that, according to the official ONS statistics, 42% proportionately of people who died of the coronavirus did so out of the hospital, and given that 42% of that 42% die in care homes, one can calculate that 2832 out of the the 22805 people who had died up until the 19th of April of the coronavirus did so in care-homes in England and wales. As a result the probability of my father having died died of the coronavirus is 0.689. It is made even more improbable and would be seen as a deliberate act given the fact that
    1. Stories by care homes about how there is supposedly a “big problem” do not tally with the evidence from the ONS which can be regarded as accurate given that it concerns an official record of excess deaths. As such given the fact that the care home where my father is resident will be cooperating with his mistreatment and given the fact that there will be other cases similar to mine will, they will with the collaboration of the cabinet office, put out exaggerated figures through IOPS to conceal such mistreatment. After all it cannot be said that there can in this instance be independent verification given the lockdown.
    2. The studies from care homes are samples and estimates based on a small sample size as opposed to actual published results by the ONS and indeed proper authoritative estimates by the WHO. The later estimates that 40,000 will die from the virus and if one accepts that a quarter of those are from care homes, this will still only be 2.5% which again will be a total from some time in the future. Care homes associations and care homes will inevitably suffer from a certain degree of bias with respect to such figures in that
      1. It is a useful way of concealing abuse
      2. Many of the people who manage such places will with the help of the cabinet office publish exaggerated statistics to conceal instances such as what they intended to do to my father.

The Coronavirus was used as a cover for the decision to kill my father and there can be no question that this is a case. They thought this would be easy to get away with given the fact that it could occur out of sight in that one was not allowed to be in contact with care home residents nor apparently to speak to people.

The trouble is that the decision by people in the care home or in authority to render him ill and murder him also proves the fact that his misdiagnosis was deliberate and indeed further corroborates the fact that there were such attempts in my case.