Encountering Muslim Brothers in Croydon (30.4.2016)


Walking through Croydon High Street today, I came upon a gazebo staffed by very devout and pure minded Muslim Brothers talking to passers by and giving-out free literature.  The website that prints this educational material is:

Islamic Dawah Centre International – http://www.idci.co.uk

As an ‘Internationalist’ whose flag is Red – I am of the opinion that ‘education’ about other people’s beliefs is essential.  I was not broughtup as a Muslim – but in my life I have encountered the decency, wisdom and compassion of Muslims.  I am only vaguely aware of the politics of Islam existing between different Islamic countries and tribal affiliations, etc, and tend not to take sides – although I definitely support Palestine.  Islamo-fascism is an invention of cruel Western powers that has cost the lives of not only innocent Westerners (in despicable circumstances), but also of many hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslim men, women and children.  Whether you believe in god or not – this is not right.  I am sympathetic to Islam because I have experienced only tolerance, peace and love from ‘true’ Muslims who have been accepting of my Buddhist and Marxist thinking – neither condemning nor condoning my beliefs – and in return have gently taught me about their beliefs.  It is irrelevant whether I agree or disagree with this or that teaching – the point is that we do not have to fight one another simply for thinking differently.  Criminals are terrorists – Muslims are not terrorists.  What Buddhism and Marxism has taught me is that it is important for human evolution to be ‘open’ to other people’s ideas and beliefs.

May Day – Croydon – 30.4.2016



Myself and Mr Ben Stevenson of the CPB

Around a hundred people gathered together at the bottom of Croydon High Street to celebrate May Day – which is in essence an International Working Class celebration of ‘Labour’ as a means to preserve and transform the world.  The Communist Party of Britain (CPB) was joined by a number of Trade Unionists, Socialists, Social Activists, Concerned Citizens, and other Leftwing Sympathisers.  It was particularly pleasing to see Disability Against the Cuts (DPAC) who marched next to the Red Flag.  The March was led by tartan-clad men and women – who played the bagpipes and drums – through the centre of Croydon and to Ruskin House – the Trade Union and Communist Party of Britain Headquarters.  There was food and drink for those attending – with a strong showing from the ‘Keep Our St Helier Hospital’ (KOSHH).  An excellent speech was made by Dr Philip Howard – an important Member of the British Medical Association (BMA) and an NHS Consultant within the NHS – who explained how the Tory (and LibDems) had ‘privatised’ the NHS in 2012, and how this had become ‘Law’ in 2013.  He stated that was in fact an ‘honour’ and a ‘privilege’ to treat people for free at the point of use, simply because it is ‘right’ to do so.  He also mention how around four million ‘Carers’ live in the UK carrying-out full-time care for sick or disabled relatives – for ‘free’ – and that these good people save the British government around four billion pounds per years in medical costs.  I would like to thank our Comrades – Dr Martin Graham and Mr Ben Stevenson of the CPB for their warm welcome and erudite conversation.  I would also like to thank the ‘random’ Southern Irish gentleman who approached me in the street – claiming to be ‘English’ and stating that I was 40 years too late (as he was labouring under the misapprehension that the Soviet Union had collapsed in in 1976!)  As part of my family are from Southern Ireland I know the accent when I hear it.  This gentleman was very disconcerted when I asked what part of ‘Southern Ireland’ he was from, and what he thought of the brave Irish men and women who took part in the 1916 Easter Uprising  under the Socialist Red Flag (that essentially led to Eire’s freedom).  He mumbled something about ‘Stalin’, and ‘North Korea’ before wondering off into the crowds!


























When Zionism was Officially Racist (1975-1991)


Theodor Herzl (1860-1904) – Founder of Zionism

‘…increasingly in the years after the Russian May Laws and the pogroms of 1881, Jews, too, embraced race as a basis for unity.  This was particularly true among some Zionists and freethinkers for whom religion had ceased meaningfully to explain their ties to the “folk.”  The “Jewish Question” as it was posed during the period of pogroms in the East and the Dreyfus Affair in the West generated new secular and political notions of Jewish peoplehood in response.  It was in this period, for instance, that Joseph Jacobs began his forays into Jewish race science in Europe.  And, as John Elton has amply documented, the racial individuality of the Jews as a people was of particular interest within the budding Zionist movement.  Aron Sandler’s Anthropologie und Zionismus (1904), for instance, mobilised the scientific language of a distinct racial genius in order to press the necessity of a Jewish territory where that genius could properly take root and develop.  Indeed, a much longer tradition entwined Jewish nationalism with Jewish racialism.  The proto-Zionist Moses Hess, in Rome and Jerusalem (1862), had flatly announced that “Jewish noses cannot be reformed, nor black, curly, Jewish hair be turned through baptism or combing into smooth hair.  The Jewish race is a primal one, which had reproduced itself in its integrity despite climatic influences…  The Jewish type is indestructible.”[1]

Zionism is a secular ideology premised upon science, political thought, sociology, nationalism and various notions of ‘belonging’ and ‘group identity’.  Zionism is not Judaic theology and should not be mistaken with it.  During its inception, Zionism was not always racial in emphasis, but was in many ways a legitimate response to the presence (and intensification) of anti-Semitic racism across Europe and elsewhere.  However, despite these facts, there were certain contributors to the development of Zionist thinking that definitely embraced ‘racism’, and replaced a theological definition of ‘Jewishness’ with that of a ‘racialised’ identity.  Since the UN ruling that granted Southern Palestine to Zionist Jews in 1947, it has become ever clearer to the International Community that the Zionism as practised by the modern State of Israel is ‘racially’ biased and ‘racist’ in nature. The victims of this racist Zionism are undoubtedly the Palestinian Arabs.  This fact, was for a time, recognised by the United Nation (UN).  Today, with the unquestioned support of the USA, Zionist ideologues across the world counter any accusations of ‘racism’ with the counter-allegation of ‘racism’ (in the form of anti-Semitism).  However, despite this incessant Zionist propaganda offensive, many followers of Orthodox Judaism deny the legitimacy of Zionism and work to educate both Jews and non-Jews against its racist ideology.  The True Torah Jews website states:

‘1. Zionism, by advocating a political and military end to the Jewish exile, denies the very essence of our Diaspora existence. We are in exile by Divine Decree and may emerge from exile solely via Divine Redemption. All human efforts to alter a metaphysical reality are doomed to end in failure and bloodshed. History has clearly borne out this teaching.

2. Zionism has not only denied our fundamental belief in Heavenly Redemption it has also created a pseudo-Judaism which views the essence of our identity to be a secular nationalism. Accordingly, Zionism and the Israeli state have consistently endeavored, via persuasion and coercion, to replace a Divine and Torah-centered understanding of our peoplehood with an armed materialism.’[2]

Theodor Herzl is the acknowledged founder of the secular, political ideology of ‘Zionism’ which although is directly associated with the religion of Judaism, should in fact be interpreted as separate and distinct from the teachings of Judaic theology.  The term ‘Zion’ refers to a mythical castle or fortress positioned on a hill.  In the Bible (2 Samuel 5:7) it was originally a stronghold captured by King David (the 2nd king of the Israelites).  On that hill was eventually built a Jewish temple – whilst later the same term was extended to refer to the hill, and later a synonym for the entire city of Jerusalem.  The ancient Israelites destroyed their enemies and colonised the area.  This is the self-asserting, military basis of Zionism, which has served as the basis of Israeli policy in Palestine (since 1947) against the Palestinians (who are a priori interpreted as the ‘enemy’ of Israel and treated accordingly).  This aggressive and destructive policy has no justifying basis within Judaic theology, despite the fact that ‘Zionist’ supporters continuously pursue a propaganda policy of associating ‘Zionism’ with ‘Judaic theology’, and habitually conflates the criticism of ‘Zionism’ with the criticism of ‘Judaic theology’ (falsely assuming that the former reflects the latter) – with the motivation deriving from ‘anti-Semitism’.  Of course, anti-Semitism can be motivated by irrational anti-Jewish criticism, but this is a clear manifestation of ‘racism’ against all Jews, Judaic theology, and Jewish culture, and is not necessarily the motivation behind a logical and rational criticism of ‘Zionism’.  Theodor Herzl (and many other Jewish intellectuals who contributed toward the development of secular Zionism) in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, were of the opinion that Judaic theology was no longer suitable to hold Jewish people together, or defend the Jewish communities scattered around the world.  For Zionists, the emphasis transitioned from a Biblical definition of what it was to be a ‘Jew’, into that of a non-Biblical ‘political’ definition of what it might be to be a Jew premised upon a very strong sense of ‘race’ and ‘nationality’.  In a sense, Judaic theology was by-passed by the generally ‘atheistic’ Zionists, who replaced theology with what they believed to be ‘science’.

Although not all atheistic Zionists adhered to racial models of Jewish identity, it is true to observe that the notion of a ‘racial’ identity for Jews became an ever stronger influence in the Zionist Movement.  This led to Jewish terrorist organisations being formed in Arab Palestine decades before 1947, which attacked and murdered British people, Arab people who wanted independence, Arab people who disagreed with Zionism, and Arab people who favoured the British over the Zionists.  After 1947, the modern Israeli State – heavily armed by the USA and British, immediately began an aggressive war against the Palestinian people who did not possess an Army, an Airforce or a Navy.  The Zionist Israeli military continuously attacked, killed, murdered and maimed either unarmed or lightly armed Palestinian men, women and children, whilst destroying their homes and taking their land (beyond the 1947 agreement).  All this military action is justified by the Zionists as being ‘acts of self-defence’ regardless of the obvious contradictory circumstances surrounding these operations.  In fact so appalling has been Israel’s behaviour toward the Palestinians that in 1975 there was a world-wide movement to officially do something to control the destruction.  This was achieved through the United Nations (UN).  The United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 3379, which was adopted on November 10, 1975 by a vote of 72 to 35 (with 32 abstentions), that “determine[d] that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination”.  The USSR withdrew diplomatic relations with Israel in 1952 (following an Israeli plot to kill Joseph Stalin) because the behaviour of the Israeli diplomatic staff were deliberately encouraging secular, Communist Jews in the USSR to regress to a state of religiosity and defy Soviet Law.  However, following the death of Stalin in 1953, diplomatic relations between Israel and the USSR were re-established.  However, following the murderous Israeli assault on Palestinians in 1967 (the so-called Six Day War), again falsely presented to the world as an act of ‘self-defence’, the USSR broke-off all diplomatic relations with Israel (a state of affairs that persisted until the dissolution of the USSR in 1991).  In 1991, as the USSR was falling apart, and its leftwing, Socialistic influence in the world was diminishing, Israel linked its participation in the Madrid Peace Conference with the revocation of the 1975 UN ruling.   This was achieved through the pro-Zionist lobby in the USA (at a time when the USA was leading the world in a war against Iraq) pressuring US President George W Bush to persuade the UN to annul its previous 1975 ruling.  This was done with the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/86, adopted on 16 December 1991, which revoked the determination in Resolution 3379, which had called Zionism a form of racism.  Many who voted in 1975 that ‘Zionism’ was a racist ideology changed their opinion in 1991 with no new evidence to the contrary being supplied (or considered) voted to repeal the 1975 resolution.  However, this 1991 ‘repealing’ was not a reversal of the original ruling (as it could not be proven that Zionist ideology was in fact not ‘racist’) but simply the artificial ‘removal’ of the official recognition that Zionism was racist.  Resolution 46/86 simply stated that ‘The General Assembly decides to revoke the determination contained in its resolution 3379 of 10 November 1975.”

The True Torah Jews website advises all supporters of Judaism in the following manner:

We seek to disassociate Jews and traditional Judaism from the Zionist ideology by:

‘1. Providing historical and supporting documentation that Zionism is totally contrary to the teachings of traditional Judaism through the words of our Rabbis, Sages, and Holy Scriptures which oppose the creation of a state called Israel.

 2. Providing historical documentation on the ideology and creation of Zionism, the supporters of Zionism and the negative impact of their actions on the Jewish people in the past hundred years, including their involvement in the Holocaust and their activities up to the present day.

3. Publicizing the efforts of traditional Jews to demonstrate their opposition to Zionism, efforts which are often ignored by the mainstream media.

4. Convincing the news media, politicians and the public to cease referring to the State of Israel as the “Jewish State” but to call it what it is: the “Zionist State”.

We also aim to reach out to our Jewish brethren who have never studied the subject of Zionism from a Torah perspective, and have only been taught the Zionist side of the story. It is our hope that all of our fellow Jews will soon open their eyes, return to Torah and reject this ideology that replaces the Jew’s age-old hope for G-d’s redemption with a false redemption and a human-initiated state.’[3]

[1] Back, Les & Solomos, John – Editors – Theories of Race and Racism – A Reader, Routledge, (2000), Page 246.

[2] True Torah Jews http://www.truetorahjews.org/mission – Our Mission – Accessed 29.4.2016.

[3] True Torah Jews http://www.truetorahjews.org/mission – Our Mission – Accessed 29.4.2016.


Blond Hakka?

download (5)

(This is a speculative research email to WL dated 29.4.2016 – about the possible origins, and cultural traits of the Hakka-Chinese people.  This deals with possible ‘European’ and/or ‘Caucasian’ DNA influences or cultural links.  This is part of a general investigation into Hakka origins that will also be developed to consider possible African influences in early China.  Of course, I fully acknowledge that those mummies in Takla Makan that look Western might well be ‘Middle Eastern’ in origin.)  ACW 28.4.2016

When I was in Turkey (in the late 1990’s) – I met Chinese Uighar people.  My Hakka friend (from Hong Kong) immediately said that they did not look ‘Chinese’ (at this point I was also a little confused, as we had been told that there was a ‘Chinese restaurant’ in the area), The Uighar people explained that they were ‘Chinese’, but from a different area (Xinjiang) and that their Chinese restaurant served ‘Uighar’ food.  These Uighar people (if memory serves me right) had dark complexions (that reminded me of many of my ‘Tamil’ friends in the UK), and had features that looked ‘East Indian’.  It is interesting to consider that many East Indians share a common Y-DNA with many Europeans (R1A1) – despite the rather obvious historical, cultural, linguistic, and religious differences.  This association did not arise with the Western colonial presence in India (although there was most definitely ‘mixing’ and ‘off-spring’ despite the official Western policy of ‘racism’, and control through division), but is a common Y-DNA connection dating much further back in evolutionary history.  In other words, Western Y-DNA in India does not imply that Europeans founded Indian culture, or were responsible for its development – despite the distant Y-DNA connection.  In fact, as you already know, Western civilisation, when compared to the Sumerian, Egyptian, Indian and Chinese, developed quite late, if its origins are taken from Ancient and Classical Greece.  The Buddha ‘reformed’ Brahmanism in India (introducing ‘logic’ and ‘reason’ to the world) BEFORE Socrates was born!  If anything, I suspect ‘Indian’ culture and thinking more than likely was the creative ‘spark’ that led to the great achievements of the Greek philosophers that we so much admire!

With regard to the Takla Makan mummies – the pictures look stunningly ‘European’.  However, China has never released any DNA studies about them (as far as I know), but I once saw a Western documentary that suggested a group of Northern Europeans arrived in China around 2000 years ago.  This narrative suggested that they mixed with local Chinese, and that their DNA and physical shape altered over-time, until their descendants looked completely ‘Chinese’ (probably over a 500 year period).  This documentary then revealed that certain Western academics took (stole?) small hair samples from some of the mummies – and that consequently DNA tests were carried-out in Italy.  The documentary was expecting a Northern European result – but this was not the case.  It turned-out that the DNA (probably both ‘male’ and ‘female’) was from Central Asia and had no ‘Northern European’ connection.  I think that the mummification process may well have ‘lightened’ the complexion of people (through desiccation) who probably looked more ‘Indian’ when alive.  However, although there was no ‘direct’ connection with Europe, many of the Takla Makan mummies do possess what I would call ‘Caucasian’ features (as do many Indians). I would qualify this by stating that this casual observation has no suggestion of ‘Europeans’ or ‘European culture’ in early China – but only a phenotypal connection.  These non-Chinese people did exist in China, and did ‘integrate’ into Chinese culture.  It is not beyond the realms of possibility that these people may have been an ingredient in early Hakka cultural development.

A point I must clarify at this juncture, is that Europe had cultures before the rise of the Greco-Roman monolith (as you know) that now defines ‘Europe’.  These indigenous entities (that constructed the many ancient stone circles and other structures throughout Europe) were collectively (and derogatorily) termed ‘Keltos’ (i.e. ‘non-Greek’) by the Greeks (and ‘Gaelic’ by the later Romans).  This blanket term does not convey the apparent diversity, or ingenuity of these European peoples who probably existed as distinct but related ‘tribes’.  I think that given the right circumstances, any group of human-beings can migrate anywhere if they need or have to do it.  After-all, a small group of homo sapiens left Africa around 140,000 years ago, and eventually populated the entire planet!  I mention this because there are three issues of Hakka identity that are curious to me, 1) recurrence of blond hair throughout Hakka-Chinese populations, 2) Hakka women are equal to Hakka men, 3) Hakka women never had ‘bound’ feet.  Of course, all of this might have developed through purely local conditions within China – and I once read an old Western book that speculated (for reasons not entirely defined) that thousands of years ago, Chinese people may have possessed blond hair!  Obviously, from a strictly ‘evolutionary’ perspective, all current physical characteristics have evolved from ‘different’ characteristics in the past, and that there is no reason to think that current manifestations will be the same in a thousand or ten thousand years’ time.  As it stands, blond hair exists in Northern Europe and is believed to be an adaptation to a cold climate.  There are cold areas in Northern China, and in the past (thousands of years ago) the climate was very different to today.  The last ice-age did not end until around 10,000 years ago – and perhaps many people around the globe developed the adaptation of blond hair, or at least ‘light’ coloured hair.  The question is how many non-Hakka people in China possess ‘gold’ hair?  I would say that most of my Hakka-Chinese relatives possess blond hair to varying degrees – with one man whose hair has been ‘grey’ since young.  If this adaptation did not develop in China, then where did it come from? If it did develop in China, then that is a ‘local’ explanation that excludes ‘blond’ foreigners coming into China.  A point to consider is that most Europeans are not ‘blond’ and the nearer to China the European populations are, generally speaking the darker the hair.  I have also found it interesting that within Celtic culture men and women were considered equal.  It is interesting how it is that the Hakka retained this tradition (from whatever source) within a strictly patriarchal society.  Of cause, Viking explorers possessed the blond hair (I think) but not the cultural traits of equality between men and women.  Having said all this, I did read a very good book that stated that thousands of years ago (probably during the Shang Dynasty period) women may well have been dominant within Chinese society and that this changed to its exact opposite over-time.  Again, this might mean that the Hakka are not ‘foreign’ at all, but simply retain a very old Chinese culture that they refused to change.  Another issue that might need exploring is that many Chinese and African people share very similar phenotypal traits.  As the statues of the Olmec culture are ‘African’ in nature, and considering some think these to be Shang Chinese in origin, has there been an early Africa-China connection?  Did Ancient Africans sail around the globe?

Fighting ISIS: Internationalist Ivana Hoffmann Dies in Syria


Original Chinese Language Article By:  http://www.hereinuk.com

(Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

Last Saturday saw the deaths of the first two Western fighters voluntarily combatting ISIS forces in Syria – namely the ex-British soldier Konstandinos Erik Scurfield and the Australian fighter Ashley Johnston.  However, a third Westerner also died in battle on that (terrible) day fighting ISIS – and she was 19 year-old German Communist volunteer – Ivana Hoffmann.

Ivana Hoffmann was a Member of Turkey’s Marxist-Leninist Communist Party (MLKP).  The MLKP confirmed the death of Ivana Hoffmann in an official communication which stated that:

‘Comrade Asashin (Ivana Hoffmann) and her fellow Kurdish Comrades, bravely took-up defensive positions around an Assyrian village (to protect the people) and held-off of a determined ISIS attack for several days.  They did not retreat.  Ivana Hoffmann and her fellow Comrades fought to the last round and the last moment (before being brutally killed).’

On her Facebook page, Ivana Hoffmann left this message:

‘I have come here to fight for Humanity and the Rights of the People.  The Communist Party is premised upon the principle of Internationalism, and because I believe in this – here I am.’

Regardless of her brave death, we remember her as a Great Soldier (for Humanity) and thank her for confronting the (fascist) forces of ISIS on behalf of the People.


©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2016.

Original Chinese Language Source Article:



上周六,继英国人Konstandinos Erik Scurfield和澳大利亚人Ashley Johnston之后,第三名西方人,也是第一位女性,牺牲在了对抗ISIS的战斗中。

她的名字叫Ivana Hoffmann,今年19岁,来自德国,祖籍南非,六个月前加入对抗ISIS的库尔德武装并且一直战斗在前线。

她是土耳其“马克思列宁主义共产党(MLKP)”的成员,该党在官方通讯中证实了Ivana Hoffmann阵亡的消息:Asashin同志在对抗ISIS的猛攻,保卫一个亚述村落的战斗中坚持了数日,她与其他同志们一直战斗到了最后一刻。



Hakka DNA – Part I

images (8)

(The following is a research email I wrote to a very dear friend – and fellow Hakka researcher – WL- on the 28.4.2016.  One lineage of Hakka women now living in the UK – but who are originally from Sai Kung in the New Territories area of Hong Kong, share what Oxford Ancestors define as ‘Chie’ maternal [mitochondrial) DNA that is found in Siberia amongst the Evenki people toda.).  ACW 28.4.2016

Email Extract 1.

When I get time, I intend to examine the academic definition of ‘Han’ DNA in both its ‘Southern’ and ‘Northern’ designations, as I suspect that both are geographically derived, and do not, in and of themselves, represent ‘singular’ DNA-types.  I know that Southern Han is an admixture of a number of DNA lines – some deriving from South-east Asia – as well as ‘Han’ (Tang?), and I suspect that considering the genetic diversity associated with the Euro-Asian Steppe, I suspect that the Northern Han is also diverse.  However, in all this ‘difference’, there must be some type of genetic ‘commonality’ that Chinese science uses to ‘define’ Chinese-ness – although of course, this is the over-lay of science upon the practice of culture.  In the UK, for instance, there is a common European designation (amongst others) but this is common throughout the many cultures of Europe – and in and of itself, tells us nothing about the culture of the different European peoples.  Although genetic designations routinely change in emphasis and refinement (due to improved scientific understanding), from what I remember the European DNA-marker is R1A1 – but around 70% of Indian men also share this exact marker (so in and of itself, it tells us nothing about culture, language and religion)!  Again, culture cannot necessarily be derived from DNA – but I notice that assessment of teeth gives clues of geographical origination.  Many early Christian monastics in the UK, for instance, came from France, (I think traces of ‘lead’ can be discerned in the teeth enamel).  What seems to be the case in China, is that the Chinese culture has become associated with certain genetic-markers – as if ‘genes’ define ‘culture’ – rather than the peculiarities and necessities of the outer environment (i.e. that which drives adaptation and evolution through natural selection).  Just pondering from the hip, so to speak, it would seem that ‘Han’ is a cultural definition used within Chinese science to denote otherwise diverse genetic-markers, giving the (unintended) impression (to those ‘looking in’ at progressive Chinese science) that Chinese DNA is of a single type, and is ‘pure’, etc.  Of course, I am hesitant to state this fully, just in case there is information I do not yet know or understand – but it certainly looks this way to me at the moment.  If correct, this would mean that there is not actually a ‘Han’ DNA (just as there is not an ‘English’ DNA), but rather two, broad Chinese cultural designations (North and South) that are in-effect ‘catch-alls’ for two extensive (and diverse) geo-cultural-DNA areas.  This would logically mean that ‘Northern Han’ and ‘Southern Han’ (both associated with Hakka DNA identity) could mean virtually anything!  I suspect (but cannot yet prove) that there ‘IS’ European (i.e. ‘Caucasian’) DNA within the ‘Northern Han’ designation, but that it is a small and probably insignificant amount when compared to all the other DNA lineages present.  However, again I am of the (as of yet unverified) opinion that a ‘high’ percentage of this small amount of European DNA probably occurs in an unusually ‘high’ amount amongst Hakka populations.  This is all speculation on my part, and more research is required.

(This edited extract is from a research email regarding Hakka Chinese DNA research in the UK to ‘DS’ – written on the 8.3.2009).  ACW 28.4.2016

Email Extract 2.

My daughters, (their mother) and about 30 female relatives from China, have the mDNA of Haplogroup C. This is rare in China, about 2%, so is not the norm for Chinese women. Both the Chan and Yin clan females have this marker.  Interestingly, a direct match for these women has been found amongst the Evenki nomads of Siberia, who look very Chinese, but speak a Siberian, Russian like language. This does fit with the Hakka stories of northern origination, and subsequent migration southward. My daughters have exactly the same mDNA as certain lineages of Evenki women living today.

Interestingly, Haplogroup C is also one of the main groupings of Native American women – across tribes, but mainly in the Sioux, Apache and Blackfoot tribes. As there has always been a link between the East, and the Native Americans.  My male line is E3B – which is around 4% of the UK, and bout 2% around the world, with a large percentage in East Africa. My haplogroup corresponds to Japan, and the Qiang of China, particularly the Pume subgroup.  This is the Wyles side. Brian Sykes of Oxford University (who did the analysis), thinks this group arrived about 4000 years ago in Britain, but research is ongoing.



Russian Communists Commemorate the 146th Birthday of Vladimir Lenin (2016)


Original Chinese Language Article By:  http://news.twoeggz.com

(Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

On April 22nd, 2016, (local time) in Moscow, Russian Communists respectfully gathered at the Lenin’s Mausoleum, and laid flowers in memory of the 146th birthday of Vladimir Lenin – the Founder of the Soviet Communist State.






UN Report – Japan has Serious Racial Discrimination Problem


Japanese People Demonstrate Against Racism

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination:

Original Chinese Language Article By:  http://news.sina.com.cn

(Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

Translator’s Note:  There are many historical issues that define the international relationship between Japan and China.  From around 1931 to 1945, the Japanese Imperial Army invaded and attacked China – killing millions of Chinese men, women, and children in the process.  Following the defeat of Japan in China (through Chinese resistance and the intervention of the Red Army of the Soviet Union) in 1945, and the subsequent occupation of Japan by US Armed Forces (following the dropping on Japan of two US Atomic Bombs), the Japanese government has consistently refused to admit their responsibility for the numerous atrocities their military forces committed in China (and other places in Asia).  In part this has been due to the foreign policy of the USA, which during its instigation of the Cold War against the USSR, radically and suddenly changed its policy toward defeated Japan, reviving Japanese racist militarism and nationalism – using this fascist rhetoric to create an ‘anti-China’ policy.  The climate of ‘immunity’ for its war crimes was established in Japan by the USA – and continues today in the form of ‘racism’ and ‘discrimination’ toward non-Japanese peoples – which is particularly aimed at China.  However, it must also be established that there do exist decent-minded Japanese people who take-on and decry this rightwing racist policy, and who selflessly work for the rights of others.  ACW 26.4.2016

Xinhua: GENEVA – 21.8.2014 (Correspondent: Mei Chen Wang Zhao).  During the meeting of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in Geneva, it was concluded by the Committee (after consideration of regular reports from Japan) that there are serious grounds for concern about racial discrimination existing within Japanese society.

In two days of deliberations, the Members of the Committee stated that Japan has a ‘serious’ problem regarding racial discrimination within its society.  This, in part, has been due to the rise of extreme Japanese nationalism, and corresponding right-wing groups (and individuals) that through the deliberate generation of hate-speech in newspapers, through the Internet, the television and other forms of media, that are designed to promote racism and racial superiority (by declaring all non-Japanese to be culturally and racially inferior).  This has been achieved through pursuing the revival of (WWII-type) nationalism and militarism, which belittles and demeans all non-Japanese people, through the provocation and harassment of foreigners.  This rhetoric has also led to acts of racially motivated violence against foreigners by the Japanese far-rightwing – violence that the Japanese authorities have refused to punish or condemn.

Committee Members noted that in 2013 there were 360 reports in Japan involving racial discrimination, and this raised the valid question as to whether the Japanese government had taken the necessary measures to combat racial discrimination and hate speech. It was also noted that Senior Officials in the Cabinet of the Japanese government, continuously misled the Japanese people by issuing statements that deliberately distort history through racist rhetoric and false commentary, and the spreading of the so-called myth of the ‘China Threat’ theory.  The Committee was of the opinion that the problems lay with Japan having no anti-racism law, and no nation-wide instigation of the concept of Human Rights (as the Japanese government does not perceive non-Japanese as being ‘protected’ by human rights).

The Committee Members drew attention to the fact that Japan as a nation has consistently failed to accept responsibility for its institution of ‘Comfort Women’ during WWII.  Japan as a nation, refuses to recognise or agree that ‘Comfort Women’ were in fact ‘sexual slaves’, and that this failure to accept responsibility for this past violation (of Human Rights against women) adds insult to injury for the many victims, which increases their suffering.

During its closing remarks, the Committee made the recommendation that the Japanese government should develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination law, which does not prejudice freedom of expression, under the premise of combating racially motivated hate-speech, and immediately establish a national Human Rights institution.

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination monitors Treaty Signatories, and ensures that the policy of the ‘International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination’ (which was established in 1970) is both properly instigated and correctly applied.  This ensures that countries who have signed the convention, fulfil their Treaty obligations and are held to account if they do not.  The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is comprised of 18 experts who are specially trained in the definition and correct application of UN regulations.

From the 11th to the 29th of March, 2013, saw the 85th Conference of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which was held in Palais Wilson in Geneva.  This Conference considered the situation regarding Anti-Racism Discrimination in El Salvador, the United States, Peru, Cameroon, Iraq, Japan, Estonia and other countries.

©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2016.

Original Chinese Language Source Article:



新华网日内瓦8月21日电(记者刘美辰 王昭) 联合国消除种族歧视委员会21日在日内瓦结束对日本消除种族歧视定期报告的审议,该委员会成员对日本社会中存在的种族歧视现象提出关切。








How the EU Killed the British NHS


It is ironic that the rhetoric and propaganda associated with capitalist economics espouses the unqualified concept of ‘freedom’, whilst the majority of people living within the capitalist system, possess in real terms little or no ‘freedom’ whatsoever.  This is because ‘freedom’ in the capitalist sense is premised upon the possession of extensive financial resources, political power and social influence.  The concentration of wealth and power lies in the hands of the middle class, and their upper class supporters.  This relatively small group of people have access to power and wealth, and have manipulated the system in their favour over hundreds of years.  In the UK, this state of affairs probably stems from the mid-1600’s and the English Civil War, which saw a developing middle class literally take political (and social) power from the upper class.  Although this transition was bloody and often said to be in the name of ‘the people’, the reality was that the ‘the people’ were subjugated as ‘underlings’ in this New World Order, and used as ‘fuel’ to keep the system going.  Nothing has fundamentally changed in the UK to this day.  The working class are educated just enough to make them appear reasonably ‘exploitable’ in the employment market, but not enough to ‘see through’ the system that enslaves them.

In 1948, a leftwing Labour Party in the UK re-distributed wealth through the instigation of the Welfare State and the National Health Service (NHS).  This was justified on the grounds that the British working class had been called-on twice in the first half of the 20th century, to fight and die for the British ruling classes in two world wars.  After the 1914-18 War, many returning serviceman were treated terribly within British society, and toward the end of the 1939-45 War, the Labour Party campaigned on a Socialist ticket that sought to reproduce the type of reforms in the UK seen in Soviet Russia after the 1917 Revolution.  This involved ‘free medical treatment’ at the point of use (paid for through taxation) across the nation, and a comprehensive system of benefits (also funded through taxation) paid to those in need.  Originally these kinds of payments signified the ‘benefit’ of being a British Citizen – hence the name.  However, with the defeat of the Labour Party in 1951, Winston Churchill’s Conservative government set about the task of dismantling the Welfare State and privatising the NHS – this is a task that all Conservative governments have pursued in one way or another, from that day to this (assisted by the Liberal Democrats).  In 2011, the Tory-LibDem Coalition government formally ‘privatised’ the NHS and voted to lay-out the legal framework for this process.  This is why the NHS ceased to exist in 2011, but continues to function under that misnomer, as the practicalities of privatising a previously ‘Socialised’ system are rolled-out.  The immediate result felt at the point of use, is that appointments to see doctors are rationed and discouraged, with only those who persist being granted access, but even then such people may find themselves seeing a nurse with limited medical knowledge.  Doctors also resort to telephone consultations and the issuing of prescriptions without seeing the patient.  As doctors are now accountants controlling the financial income of their surgeries, the level of knowledge deployed through the NHS GP system is severely constricted.  This reality evolves around Margaret Thatcher’s reforms in the 1980’s that changed the emphasis of NHS treatment from ‘need’ to that of ‘cost’.  This rightwing agenda simply states that what people ‘need’ costs too much – despite the fact that everyone pays for the NHS through taxation.  The next obvious change experienced by patients is that the number of treatments available on the shrinking NHS has been restricted to the most basic, with some areas using more or different treatments than others (the so-called ‘post code’ lottery).  These changes of access and choice have been compounded by the reduction in the quality of drugs issued through the NHS.  The NHS now has a policy of only issuing ‘generic’ drugs of lesser quality and effectiveness.  NHS doctors are now reluctant to ‘refer’ patients to consultants because of the ‘cost’, and many NHS surgeons and other staff, routinely make use of NHS premises and medical equipment to treat ‘private’ patients.  These changes are moving inevitably toward all patients being issued with a medical bill after each consultation and treatment, and are legally justified by the fact that in 2011, the legal requirement for the NHS to suitably ‘treat’ a patient in need was removed because it was a hurdle to privatisation.  As a result, it is no longer ‘illegal’ to die from ‘neglect’ in the NHS.  Today, as the NHS draws to a close, patients are treated by convention rather than legal necessity.  This is in the cynical hope that NHS patients will willingly ‘pay’ again for medical treatment that they have already ‘purchased’ through taxation.

In 1986, the rightwing Thatcher government voted for a single Europe.  This was the basis of the modern European Union (EU).  Margaret Thatcher was opposed to any form of Socialism and under her government the comprehensive Welfare State and NHS suffered its biggest attack.  Thatcher, acting in concert with the equally right American President Ronald Reagan, worked together with a rightwing West German government, to forge an anti-Socialist – pro-capitalist European Union that legally required the dismantling and privatisation of ALL socialistic entities throughout Europe – which were extensive at that time.  Unlike the US, Europe had thoroughly ‘unionised’ and the leftwing political agenda was its defining policy direction.  All this changed after 1986.  EU Law places the rights of big business over that of the rights of the workers.  Socialism is outlawed because it is defined as a hindrance for big businesses to make money.  All EU member nations must work towards ‘privatising’ their Socialistic or nationalised entities to continue to be part of the EU monetary system.  This is why the British Welfare State and NHS has been privatised, reformed or abolished.  The EU Law is in effect US free market economics that does not care about the well-being or welfare of the individual workers, or the majority of ordinary EU citizens.  Under EU Law – no Socialistic entity that has been ‘privatised’ can be ‘re-Socialised’.  Therefore, as things stand, once the NHS has gone, it is gone forever as long as the EU defines the manner in which we live in the UK.  The EU-wide pursuance of ‘Austerity’ is merely an excuse to bail-out the greedy bankers who caused the recession in the first-place, whilst dismantling any and all Socialistic entities across Europe.  The EU anti-Socialist policy is exactly why the Socialised countries of Scandinavia refuse to join the EU.

How the EU Uses Racism to Further Capitalism


The EU debate in the mainstream media is laughable in the UK! Ignorance, fear, greed and racism will decide the outcome of the Referendum because that is exactly the ground upon which the debate is held and limited. Cameroon has to console and persuade the British rightwing that migration into the UK will be ‘curtailed’ whilst the UK remains a part of the EU. This is a contradiction as EU Law places ‘Business’ above ‘Workers’ and Capitalism above Socialism. This requires an unbridled ‘free-market economic system’ that allows the free travel of ‘Labour’, or in other words, the unbridled movement of migrants across State-borders.  The free movement of migrant-workers across the EU is representative of the free movement of capital across the EU.  The problem the EU has, is how it should pursue its rightwing, discriminatory and racist agenda, whilst encouraging migration across borders.  The constituent EU governments try to appease their own racist, rightwing political movements, by passing ever-more draconian laws that target Black and Asian populations ‘outside’ of the EU – that do not, and have never had the right for ‘free’ travel into Europe.  This type of institutional racism can be seen in TV programmes such as UK Borderforce and the equivalent ‘anti-migrant’ documentaries around Europe, Australia, the USA and Canada, etc.  The policy is to ‘demonise’ and ‘criminalise’ all Black and Asian peoples both within the EU, and outside the EU.  This is, of course, a very dangerous and life-threatening ‘false’ scenario.  It is a slight of hand that the EU fully encourages and perpetuates.  Why does the EU follow this racist policy toward Black and Asian peoples?  The answer is simple.  The Thatcher government in 1986 signed into law the concept of a ‘Single ‘Europe’ as part of a broader rightwing policy to de-Socialise the UK and Europe, and instigated US-style free market capitalism.  With the collapse of the USSR in 1991, this policy was extended to include all the previous Soviet Eastern European countries, and took on the added policy of depriving Russia of allies against the West.  Today, racism and xenophobia in the UK is still aimed at Black and Asian people (despite the draconian immigration ‘limits’ placed upon the movement of such people into the EU from the outside), but is now also aimed at the non-British ‘white’ European migrants who travel quite lawfully into the UK for work.  Millions come to the UK every year because it is part of EU policy.  However, the constituent governments of the EU collectively pursue a high-profile policy of anti-Black and Asian racism in the media, as a means to divert the attention of the rightwing away from unbridled ‘foreign’ but predominantly ‘white’ migration across the EU.  The EU is so entangled and committed to ‘racism’ as a policy, that it cannot now ‘back’ away from it.  As the EU is a capitalist entity – racism is viewed as a price well worth paying for the support of big businesses and international banks.  As a consequence of this brutal policy of greed, the EU pursues both the free movement of capital and labour, whilst encouraging the perpetuation of anti-Black and anti-Asian racism – when in fact the real concern for the far-right is the mass immigration of ‘white’ foreigners.  Nothing will be done about this, because it is the basis of EU capitalism.

%d bloggers like this: