OP063, Ziggo Operation: Censorship via Vanished Content from Research Paper PD10 about Free Trade Agreement and the Problematic of Brexit - The Missing Content Vanished from Website and from Submissions to Academic Journals - 'Smoking Gun' points on Boris Johnson Administration that the Political Prisoner Operation has started in England under its Administration
https://www.rozen-bakher.com/iccg/op063
ICCG Announcement: 03 May 2023. Latest Update: 18 November 2023
OP063, Ziggo Operation: Censorship via Vanished Content from Research Paper PD10 about Free Trade Agreement and the Problematic of Brexit - The Missing Content Vanished from Website and from Submissions to Academic Journals - 'Smoking Gun' points on Boris Johnson Administration that the Political Prisoner Operation has started in England under its Administration, https://www.rozen-bakher.com/iccg/op063,Residence Location, Netherlands, Main Entity, E048, Ziggo (Internet, Mailbox-Outlook, Fax, Landline), Netherlands
Research Paper PD10
Rozen-Bakher, Z. The Chess Game of Forming International Trade Agreements: Shaping Global Economic and Political Power. Research Paper, PD10. https://www.rozen-bakher.com/research-papers/pd10
Highlights
Mr Boris Johnson, PM of UK, Assumed office: 23 July 2019 – 6 September 2022
ICCG Vanished the Whole Section during the period 12/2021-04/2022, yet it was revealed on 22 April 2022
On 22 April 2022 at 17:30, Dr. Rozen-Bakher found out that ICCG vanished the whole section below from the research paper PD10, a section that deals with the principles of Free Trade Agreement including giving examples about the Problematic of Brexit. Amid the vanished section, submissions during the period of 12/2021-04/2022 did not include the missing section. To clarify, ICCG vanished the whole section from submissions to academic journals, which led to withdraw of the submission when Dr. Rozen-Bakher found out about this sabotage. Importantly, based on the vanished content, likely that Boris Johnson Administration involved somehow in this sabotage because of the criticism about the Brexit in that section. Note, amid the Political Prisoner Operation that has started in England under Boris Johnson Administration, then Boris Johnson and its Administration were mentioned in the complaints to UK Police and Portuguese Police (Please see CM63 and CM60, but you could see also the relevant part from the complaints below).
The Section from Research Paper PD10 that was vanished from the website and from submissions to Academic Journals
The Rules of Chess Game ─ Principles of FTA: Checkmate via ‘Rules of Origin’
FTA is an international trade agreement between two or more countries. Under an FTA, import tariffs, export duties, quotas and other restrictions and barriers are lifted by the countries, either partially or fully, immediately or gradually, nonetheless, each country maintains an independent trade policy towards other countries that are not parties to the agreement (Gantz, 2003; Krueger, 1997; Lawrence, 2006; O'Sullivan et al., 2008; Plummer et al., 2011; Schott, 2004; Song & Yuan, 2012; Weerakoon, 2001).
Forming any FTA is based on several important principles, yet any FTA is different from other ones because each FTA has a different combination of how the principles of FTA are implemented. In other words, the combination of how the principles are implemented in the FTA determines the unique characteristics of each FTA. Given that, any political declaration by leaders about achieving FTA with other countries has no significant meaning but how exactly the FTA creates competitive advantages to the country. In other words, it may be wrong to assume that any FTA leads to a Win-Win for all sides. Some FTAs indeed lead to Win-Win, while other FTAs lead to Win-Lose namely, one side has significant benefits from the trade agreement, while other sides have fewer competitive advantages, and in some FTAs, it even may lead to competitive disadvantages that may backfire the national economy. Therefore, how the principles of FTA are implemented from the viewpoint of each side determines if the FTA is Win-Win or Win-Lose.
Considering the outlined above, FTA is based on several principles, which their combination and implementation determine the specific conditions of each FTA, as follow (Büthe & Milner, 2008; Kepaptsoglou et al., 2009; Gantz, 2003; Krueger, 2012; Mukunoki, 2017; O'Sullivan et al., 2008; Plummer et al., 2011; Song & Yuan, 2012; WTO, 2019):
· Removal of Direct and Indirect Restrictions. FTA is supposed to lead to the lifting of direct restrictions and barriers, such as import tariffs and export quotas. FTA is also supposed to lead to the removal of indirect restrictions and barriers related to international trade and FDI, such as technical standards, government subsidies, industry regulation, and indirect taxation.
· Exemptions. Many FTAs include partially or fully exemptions from tariffs and duties on goods between the countries who signed the agreement. That particularly applies in cases of FTAs between developed countries and developing countries or between powerful countries and their allies (Jacobs et al., 2018). Nevertheless, when a country imposes high tariffs, still, it may give exemptions from high tariffs for some products that are required to the local market, such as the exemptions that Trump administration gave to hundreds of types of Chinese products (Cheng, 2019).
· Non-restrictions on Forming Other FTAs. FTA is based on the important principle that each country has the right to keep an independent trade policy. That's reflected on the right to sign additional FTAs with other countries that are based either on the same or different tariffs and duties. Hence, a country can sign on different FTAs with multiple countries simultaneously, regardless of if those countries have or not FTAs between of them. Nevertheless, this principle does not apply to EU countries because the EU bloc acts as a single country in relation to international trade. Moreover, a specific FTA of a home country can give an advantage to a certain host country over another one due to superior terms of one FTA compared to inferior terms of another FTA. For example, Israel has several FTAs, such as with the USA, Canada and Jordan, but each of these FTAs has different terms of trade compared to other FTAs (Aminoff, 1991; Azmeh, 2015; Hofley & Gudofsky, 1997; Israeli Ministry of Economy, 2018; Nugent & Abdel-Latif, 2010; Saif, 2006; Tovias & Al-Khouri, 2004). In other words, any trade agreement may have different tariff rates for all products or certain products, as well as for all sectors or certain sectors.
· ‘Origin Product’ and ‘Rules of Origin’. One of the fundamental principles of FTA is the specific 'rules of origin' of a certain product, which can be different in each trade agreement. In general, a product is considered as an 'origin product' in FTA when the product is fully produced in the country includes raw materials used in its production. In other words, an imported product, or a product that its production is based on import raw materials cannot be considered as an 'origin product' in FTAs. For example, the different status of North Ireland from other parts of the UK in Boris Johnson's new Brexit deal has become a problematic issue for North Ireland because of the principle of 'rules of origin' that is led to a situation that the 'origin product' of North Ireland is not the same 'origin product' in the rest parts of the UK (Sampson, 2019).
· ‘Partially Origin Product', Some FTAs also include ‘partially origin product', depends on the specific 'rules of origin' of a product in each FTA. ‘Partially origin product' refers to a product that is fully produced in the country that signed the FTA, but with the ability to use raw materials that imported from a third country. Given that, the same product can be considered as an 'origin product' in one FTA, while in another FTA, it won't be considered as an 'origin product'. For example, the Qualified Industrial Zones (QIZ) trade agreement between Israel and Jordan allows Israel to manufacture products in Jordan and then to export these products to the USA as part of the trade agreement between Israel and the USA, despite that the production does not carry out in Israel but in Jordan (Aminoff, 1991; Azmeh, 2015; Israeli Ministry of Economy, 2018; Nugent & Abdel-Latif, 2010; Saif, 2006; Tovias & Al-Khouri, 2004).
· ‘Cumulative Rules of Origin Product’. ‘Cumulative rules of origin product’ refers to a product that is considered as an 'origin product', despite that the production is based on raw materials from other countries that have FTAs with the home country. In other words, in ‘Partially origin product', some of the raw materials can be imported from other countries, regardless if the home country has FTAs with these countries. However, in ‘Cumulative rules of origin product’, the raw materials can be imported from other countries that have FTAs with the home country. Thus, the main difference between them if exist or not FTAs with the countries that the raw materials imported from. Importantly, each FTA has different 'cumulative rules of origin'. Given that, in one FTA, a home country may be able to use raw materials from a specific third country, while in another FTA, the same home country will not be able to use the raw materials from the same third country.
· Direct Shipping. Direct shipping refers to the principle that an 'origin product' should be sent directly between the countries that signed the FTA. In other words, a home country cannot send products directly from a third country to the destination country unless if the 'cumulative rules of origin' allow sending the product from a third country who has also FTA with the home country. Direct shipping tries to prevent manipulation in the implementation of FTAs because of the concern that a home country will produce a product in a low-cost third country, but still will declare on the product as an 'origin product'.
An Example of Submissions without the whole section that vanished by ICCG
On 24 March 2022, the paper submitted to Scottish Journal of Political Economy. On 22 April 2022, when Dr. Rozen-Bakher revealed about the vanished section, she sent an email to the Editor in Chief of Scottish Journal of Political Economy about the missing section, but she NEVER got any response from the editor or from the journal, so eventually, she informed about withdraw the paper, and even following the withdraw, she NEVER got any response from the journal. During the attempts to inform the journal, ICCG blocked some communication.
For full details, please see OP124, Research Paper-PD10, Sabotage Publications-68: Wiley, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, https://www.rozen-bakher.com/iccg-announcements/op124,Residence Location, Netherlands, Main Entity, E080, Wiley, USA, Sub-Entity I, E048, Ziggo (Internet, Mailbox-Outlook, Fax, Landline), Netherlands, Sub-Entity II, E050, Mailfence (Mailbox), Belgium
Boris Johnson Administration was mentioned in section 2.4 in complaints to UK Police and Portuguese Police.
CM063, Complaint to UK Police-West Midlands Police Station, England, UK, 2 February 2020, https://www.rozen-bakher.com/iccg/cm063, E105, West Midlands Police, UK
CM060, Complaint II to Portuguese Police (Polícia Judiciária) and PM of Portugal, 09 January 2020, https://www.rozen-bakher.com/iccg/cm060, E101, Portuguese Police (Polícia Judiciária), Portugal
Please See the relevant part from the complaints below, yet for ICCG Operations in England, please see the whole section 2.4 in the complaints
Mr Boris Johnson, PM of UK, Assumed office: 23 July 2019 – 6 September 2022
Mr Boris Johnson, PM of UK, Assumed office: 23 July 2019 - Current. On the evening of 23 July 2019, the Twitter account of Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher has Blocked via cyber-warfare, and since then, the hostile cover-up operations against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher have worsened in England to the point that Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher have become de-facto Political Prisoners in England via cyber-warfare and via UK local cooperators of the ‘Israeli cover-up group’. These hostile cover-up operations have violated in a harsh way the human rights of Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher to the point that at beginning of 12/2019, they owed to flee from their home in Birmingham, England to their home country, Portugal in order to give an urgent complaint to the Polícia Judiciária (Portuguese police) and an urgent appeal to European Court of Human Rights against the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ and its local cooperators in EU with an urgent request to arrest immediately the ‘Israeli Cover-up Group' and its Local Cooperators in EU for the investigation to stop urgently their hostile cover-up operations in EU against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher. Hence, the investigation authorities should investigate if Mr Boris Johnson, the PM of the UK has known about the operations of the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son in England and other EU countries, or even if he has allowed it formally via an active UK operation that has carried out by the UK authorities like MI5. More importantly, Daniel Bakher is a student in England, and his mother, Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher is acted as an independent researcher in England while she is looking for an academic position in England. Thereby, UK should preserve their human rights to allow them to live their life as free EU citizens in England without any forms of political persecution against them, formally and informally, that has conducted against them in England by the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ and its UK local cooperators while England functions as a HUB for conducting the operations in other EU Countries.
Mrs Priti Patel, Home Secretary of UK, Assumed office: 23 July 2019 - Current. The Home Secretary of the UK is directly responsible for the activities of MI5, the UK intelligence authority, that is responsible for the internal intelligence matters of the UK. When Mrs Priti Patel has become the Home Secretary of the UK, then the activities of the 'Israeli Cover-up Group' have worsened extremely against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher. It looks like that all the 'human rights limitations' have been removed, and from that point, the 'Israeli Cover-up Group' can conduct any operation against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son without the fear of punishment. Worse than that, from that point, Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son have become de-facto Political Prisoners in England under the open eyes of the UK authorities. More importantly, it’s become clear that UK formal channels are involved in carrying out the cover-up operations, still, with an option that it has been carried out informally in order to help ‘the 'Israeli Cover-up Group'. Mrs Priti Patel is known for her secret and warm relationship with Israeli authorities, which even led to that she was sacked from Theresa May' cabinet after she misleading Theresa May over secret meetings with Israeli authorities (AG80). Hence, it’s very difficult to see how Mrs Priti Patel, the Home Secretary of the UK didn’t know about the operations of the 'Israeli Cover-up Group' and its local cooperators in England, especially due to her warm and secret relations with high-rank Israeli figures. More importantly, based on the whole occurrences, highly likely that Mrs Priti Patel, the Home Secretary of the UK approved, formally or informally, the worsening operations against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher in order to help high-rank friends in Israel that have involved in this case. In light of that, the investigation authorities should investigate if Mrs Priti Patel, the Home Secretary has known about the operations of ‘Israeli cover-up group’ against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son, Daniel Bakher in England and other EU countries, or even has approved, formally or informally, the escalation of the hostile operations in England and in other EU countries while England is served as the main base for these operations. More importantly, the investigation authorities should investigate if Mrs Priti Patel, the Home Secretary of UK ordered MI5, formally or informally, to cooperate with the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ against EU Portuguese citizens that reside in the UK following any secret arrangements with high-rank Israeli figures/authorities that are involved in the case of Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher.
Sir Andrew Parker, General Director of MI5, United Kingdom's internal Security Service MI5, Assumed office: April 2013 – Current. From the viewpoint of Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher, Sir Andrew Parker, the General Director of MI5, is responsible for preserving the ability of the UK’s residents to live their life without cyber-warfare or hostile operation that carry out against them by a foreign group and its local cooperators in the UK. Therefore, obviously, MI5 shouldn’t corporate with a foreign group that violet the human rights of UK residents to cover-up crimes. Hence, Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher sees Sir Andrew Parker, the General Director of MI5 as the prominent responsible for the violation of the human rights of Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher in England, regardless if MI5 was involved in the operations or not. However, since 05/2018, when Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher arrived in England, then thousands of people in England have been exposed to the hostile cover-up operations that carried out against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher in England and other EU countries. Hence, Sir Andrew Parker, the General Director of MI5 that assumed office since 2013, can’t argue that he didn’t know about the operations of the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher. On the contrary, highly likely that in any given week, he heard something about the ‘incidents of the week’. Nevertheless, too many proofs show that formal UK channels have involved in the cover-up hostile operations that have conducted by the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ and its UK local cooperators in England and in other EU countries. When we speak about local cooperators in England, then it’s hard to see how the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ get access to ATM machines, Blocking posts by Royal Mail, manipulations with internet local providers, fabricated letters, manipulations with local banks, manipulations with UK delivery providers, manipulations with orders and more without getting actively assistance from MI5, formally or informally. Nonetheless, if all that is done without the knowledge of Sir Andrew Parker, the General Director of MI5, then he risks the safeness of UK’s residents due to the inability to identify hostile operations of a foreign group in his backyard. Notwithstanding, Sir Andrew Parker has a long-serving in MI5 since 1983, so we can assume that the option that foreign group will operate in England like in their home territory without that MI5 will know about it, is not a real option, especially when it is been carried out over a long time at a very intensified mode. Hence, the investigation authorities should investigate not if Sir Andrew Parker, the General Director of MI5 know about the operation of the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher in England and in other EU countries because it’s obvious that he knew about it, but HOW Sir Andrew Parker, the General Director of MI5 has violated the human rights of Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher by providing help to the ‘Israeli cover-up group’ to conduct their hostile cover-up operations in England and other EU countries. The community spy works jointly on many projects, still, any attempt to help 'spy friends' to cover-up crimes against innocent civilians should be denounced by the law system to prevent exploitation of the BIG POWER that the spy community holds in their hands. No one is above the law. Therefore, the European Court of Human Rights should investigate if the mega-power of the Israeli spy community among their spy friends in EU has led to the creation of ‘networking spy’ in EU, informally or formally, at the mode of ‘quid pro quo’, and as a result, the help that is given to the Israeli spy friends to conduct their cover-up operations against Dr Ziva Rozen-Bakher and her son Daniel Bakher in England and in other EU countries.