Posted originally on Sep 28, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
The entire English Legal System has abandoned everything that once made Britain the beacon of human rights and liberty in the world. There is absolutely nothing left for Britain even to hold its head upright. This man, pretending to be a judge, ASSUMES what he said is racist, without acknowledging that the immigrants are NOT all of a particular race. Then he PRESUMES that those words instigated someone else to violence with ZERO evidence of that being the case at all. This is NOT the rule of law, and when that crumbles, the ONLY solution becomes revolution and violence, for there is no court of law that can ensure that society remains civilized.
Perhaps this “judge” who is obviously violating the English Bill of Rights should turn to Confusus. His legal doctrines are far better than this nonsense. Even Jesus Christ addressed a gathering of Jews and told them: “And you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” Not in Britain. The truth will get you tax-free living in prison for 7 years.
The most famous trial where a jury stood up refusing to find the defendant guilty in the face of a corrupt government was that of William Penn (1644-1718), the founder of Pennsylvania. Penn was the leader of the Quakers in London, and you can see why people fled to America. The sect was not recognized by the government and was forbidden to meet in any building for the purpose of worship. In 1670, William Penn held a worship service on a quiet street, which a peaceful group of fellow Quakers attended. Penn and another Quaker, William Mead, were arrested for disturbing the king’s peace and summoned to stand trial.
As the two men entered the courtroom, a bailiff ordered them to put their hats, which they had removed, back on their heads. When they complied, they were called forward and held in contempt of court for being in the courtroom with their hats on. Penn discovered that contempt of court is a personal prerogative of the judge and an infliction of punishment by a judge who becomes the legislator, jury, and sentencing judge.
Penn demanded to know what crime he was being charged with preaching – the cornerstone of Due Process. The judge refused to supply any information as to his crime and instead referred vaguely to common law. When Penn protested that he was entitled to a specific indictment (NOTICE), he was removed from the presence of the judge and jury and confined in an enclosed corner of the room known as the bale dock.
Penn could neither confront the witnesses who accused him of preaching to the Quakers nor ask them questions about their charges against him. Several witnesses testified that Penn had preached to a gathering, which included Mead, but one showed some hesitancy as to whether Mead had been present. The judge turned to Mead and questioned him directly. In effect, the judge became the prosecutor, as he asked Mead if he was guilty. Mead invoked the common-law privilege against self-incrimination, which provoked hostile comments from the judge. The court then sent Mead to join Penn in the bale dock out of the sight of the jury and witnesses.
Finally, after the testimony, the court concluded that the judge had instructed the jury to find the defendants guilty as charged, dictating what verdict he had expected. Penn tried to protest but was silenced and again sent out of the courtroom. The jury, for its part, proved sympathetic to the two defendants and refused the judge’s command to find the defendants guilty.
At this point, the judge became so enraged, as I would expect from Judge Juan Merchan, and sent the jury back to reconsider their verdict. When they returned with the same verdict, the court criticized the jury’s leader, Bushnell, and demanded “a verdict that the court will accept, and you shall be locked up without meat, drink, fire, and tobacco…We will have a verdict by the help of God or you will starve for it.”
After that, the jury was sent back three more times but returned with the same verdict. Finally, the jury refused to reconsider. The judge then fined each jury member forty marks and ordered them imprisoned until the fine was paid. Penn and Mead went to prison anyway, held in contempt for obeying the bailiff’s order that they put on their hats.
Later, the jury members won a writ of habeas corpus and were released from prison. Penn and Mead left England after their release from prison, having a taste of English justice, and sailed to America. (Earl Warren, “A Republic, If You Can Keep It”, p. 113-115). Thus, Pennsylvania was founded. This was the Bushel’s Case(1670) 124 E.R. 1006, a famous English decision on the role of juries and that they possessed the independence to decide the validity of the law being prosecuted.
Where is the Magna Carta Right to a Trial by Jury of Your Peers?
This guy is forced to plead guilty to a non-crime because if he dares go to trial and the Judge refuses to allow the jury to nullify this insane Starmmer law, then he will be given the maximum time of 7 years+ for demanding a fair trial.
Posted originally on Sep 23, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Thailand has become a case study for the use of biometric data in every facet of life. Every banking transaction is monitored and scrutinized. Any perceived discrepancy is flagged as fraud and punished without due process. Regulations have overwhelmed the system, resulting in a full-fledged banking crisis. Over three million Thai bank accounts were frozen instantaneously without warning as a result of government overreach.
Transaction denied. You contact your bank to see why the payment failed only to learn that your account has been frozen–all of your accounts, for that matter. The bank is investigating you for suspicious activity and potential money laundering or fraud. There was no warning call or letter and there is no clarification as to what transaction was flagged. You’re completely locked out of your accounts and have lost the ability to purchase. You cannot fill your gas tank, you cannot purchase groceries, you’ve been completely removed from the financial system, and do not know when or if you’ll regain access to your funds.
This is the reality for millions of people banking in Thailand. The Bank of Thailand (BoT), with the Cyber Crime Investigation Bureau and the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, began an excessive crackdown on perceived fraud and streamlined the process under the premise of safeguarding the banking sector. Thousands of accounts are frozen each week. Panic has ensued. Retailers are no longer accepting cards, demanding payment in cash as they, too, are worried that they will be removed from the banking system.
Assistant Governor of the BoT, Darunee Saeju, publicly stated that the central bank is working to “immediately unlock wrongly affected accounts.” Saeju insists that new measures will enable the banks to verify accounts in under 48 hours. Confidence in the government and the entire banking system evaporated. People rationally fear that their account will be targeted next, without warning. Government overreach has backfired, and the people are removing themselves from the banking system entirely.
This phenomenon is not limited to Thailand. Vietnam recently erased 86 million unverified bank accounts. Governments are demanding banks track every transaction, tracing each account back to individual citizens using biometric data. The government believes these provisions will prevent capital from leaving the radar and, therefore, taxation. Instead, governments are propelling the cycle amid this private wave, as the people cannot possibly trust the current financial system.
Posted originally on Sep 22, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is actively destroying a once-growing economy. Lula told the BBC he refuses to maintain diplomatic ties with the United States under Donald Trump, and Brazil is losing the title of Latin America’s top exporter to the US. “The American people will pay for the mistakes President Trump is incurring in his relationship with Brazil,” Lula warned.
“I don’t have a relationship with Trump because when Trump was elected the first time, I wasn’t president. His relationship is with Bolsonaro, not Brazil,” Lula responded when asked why he has not spoken to Trump directly. This is not the quality of a leader. Diplomatic ties are essential for cooperation and world trade. Trump may have placed a 50% tariff on Brazil, but Lula is refusing to negotiate or speak with him directly to make a deal.
Lula is willing to maintain diplomatic ties with Russia and China. In fact, Lula has actually broken step with the globalists by continuing to purchase Russian crude. “Brazil doesn’t finance Russia, we buy oil from Russia because we need to buy oil just like China, India, the UK or the US needs to buy oil,” he stated. Lula has directly engaged with Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping under the BRICS alliance. Yet, since Lula personally dislikes Trump, he refuses to have any open dialogue.
Brazil will not permit an anti-establishment president. Bolsonaro was once considered the Donald Trump of Latin America and the men maintained close ties despite countless disagreements. As mentioned, Lula was losing in the polls and that is why the establishment silenced Bolsonaro permanently with political lawfare.
Lula’s war on Bolsonaro is not over. He believes the US is harboring Bolsonaro’s family and would like to lure them back to prosecution. “But I am a compassionate man, a family man. I would love dearly to have his son Eduardo to come meet his beloved father back in his country of birth. I will even grant an executive dispensation to make sure they are together and close in Brasil – perhaps even in the cell right beside or opposite the father’s. As a personal favor,” Lula mocked.
Brazil is risking losing access to its second-largest export market, potentially resulting in a $20 billion annual loss, all because the current president will not engage with his opponent’s supporters. Total goods traded with the US reached $92 billion in 2024—this is a strategic alliance. Donald Trump is a businessman first and foremost. He is willing to talk with anyone. The 50% tariff is excessive, but it was intended to encourage Lula to initiate dialogue.
Posted originally on Sep 18, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Jair Bolsonaro will spend the rest of his life in a Brazilian prison for inciting a coup that never happened. Bolsonaro’s public humiliation ritual is far from over as the establishment is using him as an example for anyone who dares to voice a dissenting opinion. The latest ruling determined that the former president must pay R$1m ($188,435.55 USD) for insulting a hairstyle, which the courts deemed racist.
The federal court of the southern state of Rio Grande do Sul examined a statement Bolsonaro made in 2021 when he insulted a black man by calling his afro a “breeding ground for cockroaches.” Insulting? Certainly. Racist? It seems to be a far stretch. The man with the afro told the courts that he did not believe it was a racist remark, and in fact, he had voted for Bolsonaro. He believed that it was a joke. I recall hearing similar sentiments about white men with long hair back in the day. People have been insulting long, “dirty” hairstyles on men for ages.
“Racial offence disguised as jocular remarks or mere jokes, linking Black power hair to insects associated with disgust and dirt, harms the honour and dignity of Black people and reinforces the stigma of inferiority of this population,” said Judge Roger Raupp Rios. The man he allegedly insulted did not feel offended. The establishment wants the people to view the remark as an insult to an entire race of people to further political division and to stifle free speech.
Again, the man did not file charges against Bolsonaro for the poorly worded joke. Public prosecutors and the public defender’s office took it upon themselves to persecute Bolsonaro for that statement and two separate remarks made during a 2021 live stream with supporters in front of the presidential palace. Prosecutors were initially seeking a R$10m fine for perceived “recreational racism.”
The Brazilian government was also ordered by the court to pay R$1m since Bolsonaro was in office at the time. The attack on free speech is global. The establishment is warning the public that they may not speak freely without severe punishment. Something said years ago could be used against you in courts today. Bolsonaro is a 70-year-old man and will likely die in prison for a crime he did not commit. The establishment behind big government is stronger than most could imagine.
Posted originally on Sep 15, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has been sentenced to 27 years in prison for allegedly plotting a coup to overturn the presidential election. Politicians who defy the new world order are silenced through assassination or imprisonment. This has become a worldwide phenomenon, from Germany to Brazil, as politicians who rebuke the globalist agenda are receiving massive support from the people, and eliminating opposition is the only way for current regimes to remain in power.
The Brazilian people independently denied the results of the 2022 election and stormed government buildings on January 8, 2022, a week after Lula was inaugurated. The Federal Police uncovered a draft of a coup announcement at the home of former Justice Minister Anderson Torres. After months of detainment, Torres maintained that the document, which he received from a private citizen, was taken out of context and held no legal validity. The plans outlined in the document never occurred, but the establishment maintains that Bolsonaro is a threat to Brazilian democracy.
As our computer warned, there would be intense, politically motivated civil unrest worldwide in November 2022. Ahead of the election, Brazil’s leftist opposition Workers’ Party (PT) Marcelo Arruda was enjoying his birthday celebration in the city of Foz de Iguacu, Parana, when he was shot dead. The vote of 49.1%-50.9% was the closest Brazilian presidential election in history since 1985 and marked Bolsonaro’s first political defeat. Bolsonaro supporters held mass protests across the nation to protest Lula’s victory and blocked hundreds of major roadways. Bolsonaro first sided with the protestors, saying they felt “indignation and a sense of injustice.”
The intense backlash from across the globe caused Bolsonaro to change course. “I know you are upset… Me too. But we have to keep our heads straight,” Bolsonaro said in a video posted online. “I will make an appeal to you: clear the highways.” Bolsonaro confirmed with Brazil’s Supreme Court that he would willingly hand over power to Lula. “I have always played within the four lines of the constitution,” he said, without declaring defeat. Bolsonaro is already barred from running for office until 2030. The establishment wants to ensure that he is never up for reelection.
The Brazilian Supreme Court rules in a 4-5 vote to convict Bolsonaro on all five charges, carrying a sentence of 27 years and 3 months in prison. There is no concrete evidence against Bolsonaro. There was no coup. No election was overturned and Bolsonaro did not attempt to take power after his defeat. Bolsonaro has evaded assassination in the past. Lula was desperate to find a reason to prevent Bolsonaro from running for office before the probationary period ended, and the Brazilian courts acted as weapons of the state.
The Brazilian government did not deter unrest; rather, they ensured it.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 