U.S Afghan leak

It is ridiculously rich of the U.S today, to call the release of the Afghan files via Wikileaks, a “criminal act” given the nature of the documents. I wonder what other little gems of terrorism the U.S is hiding. Latin America must have it’s very own building, filled with reports of U.S backed terror operations. Despite the scale of the atrocities in Afghanistan, committed by U.S forces, I guarantee, the “international community” will not condemn the U.S, but will condemn the leak. The “international community“, usually means those who support the U.S. To call the leaks a “criminal act“, from a bunch of malicious criminals, is a little bit rich.

The leak is the biggest in U.S history, and is a political storm waiting to happen. The extent to which the U.S has mislead the public (the documents are from the Bush era, unsurprisingly) should surely result in prosecutions at the very top level of the old regime in Washington? At the very least, it has to be the start of a far more transparent era for U.S foreign policy, which for too long has smashed it’s clenched fist across the World, and condemned anyone who stood in their way.

The log shows:

Coalition forces have killed at least 195 Afghani civilians, and injured 174 more, between 2005 and 2009. Many are the result of Coalition troops shooting unarmed and innocent people, simply because they looked a bit dodgy. And yet Republicans will still insist that this ridiculously pointless war is not in anyway adding to the problem of extremism.

French troops machine gunned a bus full of children, wounding eight.

An operation to kill a Libyan extremist named Al-libi resulted in the deaths of seven children.

U.S troops fired on a bus full of innocent people, killing 15.

Civilian amputations as a result of Coalition troops bombing or shooting the wrong people, so far is huge in number.

The U.S believes that Pakistan is funding and training extremists. Pakistan strongly denies it.

That a secret unit of American forces, is hunting down and killing suspects, without a trial.

That the Taliban have not only acquired surface to air missiles, but have escalated their roadside bomb campaign, and have killed almost 2000 people so far as a result. All covered up by the U.S, who are pretty much failing entirely, much like they did with Vietnam.

One man, called Shum Khan was a deaf and dumb man, living in Malekshay. Out of nowhere, a heavily armed U.S truck rolled into his town, at which point he ran away scared. The War Logs reveal:

”ran at the sight of the approaching coalition forces … out of fear and confusion”

The U.S CIA paramilitaries on board the truck, shouted at him to stop. He couldn’t hear them because he was deaf. He was running away from them, so posed no threat. So to deal with the problem, the paramilitaries shot him. He was wounded but survived. Villagers explained the problem to the troops, who then said they were entitled to shoot him under ”escalation of force” provisions of the US rules of engagement, which i’m pretty sure the shot and injured deaf man did not agree to. The log ends with the U.S not treating the man for gunshot wounds, but paying compensation (known as solatia). The log says:

‘Solatia was made in the form of supplies and the Element mission progressed.”

Such nonchalance. Not a care in the World. Shoot a disabled man, give him a bit of food and clothing, and then move on to the next town.

On March 4th 2007, U.S Marines narrowly escaped a road side bomb, just outside of Jalalabad. The Marines ran away, and shot anyone in their path. This included young girls playing in a nearby field, and a few old men walking along the street, hundreds of metres away from the explosion. Nineteen innocent people were killed, and fifty wounded. The Marines in their reported omitted all of the details, other than the bomb attack and the sound of gunfire. An hour later, an investigative team of U.S soldiers came back to the area, to inspect. They tore cameras away from Journalists and photographers, demanding they delete any photos. A reporter for Tolo TV said that an American soldier had told him, of the photos and film he’d taken of the site: “Delete them, or we’ll delete you.” The soldiers lied, the Marines lied, a subsequent investigation that found no wrong doing lied, and only now, three years later, has it emerged that they lied. The Afghan Human Rights Commission then held its own investigation into the shootings and concluded that a 16 year old newlywed carrying grass had been repeatedly shot and killed, followed by a 75 year old man, who was just walking. The findings prompted a US army colonel to say that the shootings were a “terrible, terrible mistake“, and give the families of the victims just $2000 in compensation. The Marines were unhappy with the Colonel for insulting there competence, and so held their own investigation which cleared them of all wrong doing and said that they acted “appropriately”. No charges were brought, and so killing innocent people including young girls and old men, is apparently perfectly fine. Apparently the deaths of innocent Arabs is less important than the careers of a few trigger happy Marines.

The U.S didn’t apologise for the dead children, or the innocent people they have mutilated over the past five years, or the disabled people they’d shot for no reason. Instead, they chose to go on the defensive, and do what America does best; blame someone else:

We strongly condemn the disclosure of classified information by individuals and organisations, which puts the lives of the US and partner service members at risk and threatens our national security

What this actually means is:

We strongly condemn anyone who tries to stand in our way of establishing ourselves as the moral authority of the World, regardless of how evil the means are to achieving that end. We blame Castro.

Senate Intelligence Committee chair Dianne Feinstein, instead of apologising and begging for forgiveness for the atrocities committed by her pathetic excuse for a Country, simply said:

I ask the Secretary of Defence to launch a major investigation and bring the individual or individuals responsible for this to account.

Even in the midst of evidence that their Country is a vile terrorist Nation, the US officials cannot bring themselves around to admitting just how fucking awful they actually are. She is suggesting, indirectly, that leaking important information surrounding cover ups and murders is punishable by criminal charges, yet overseeing, directing and participating in the deaths of hundreds of innocents and the mutilation of hundreds more, is perfectly okay. America never fails to amaze me.

It isn’t surprising. The details are nothing surprising. It is simply a matter of “we told you so”. Those of us who are a little skeptical of everything the U.S tells us, know that the massacre in Fallujah“in 2003 was not going to be an isolated incident. We know that the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have very little to do with protecting the American or British people, and very much to do with securing oil supplies and enriching Arms Companies and Defence contractors. War is a private business now. We know that. So in that respect, the leak does not show us anything we didn’t already know. What it does do however, is show conclusively that the U.S is not the special force for good it attempts to paint itself as, by highlighting individual cases of abuses. These are important documents. Documents that governments like to cover up and claim that releasing them would be a matter of National Security, rather than the fact that they don’t want to embarrass themselves, and maybe face criminal charges. What it shows is that the U.S and Coalition forces have embarked on another Vietnam; an unwinnable war that threatens to get worse, after almost a decade of destruction. Thousands dead. Thousands more mutilated and without homes. An increase of a threat from extremists who now justifiably hate the U.S and allies beyond recognition. And no date for handover or withdrawal. A complete failure. And as the Guardian’s editorial puts it, the war effort and the U.S showed”:

A casual disregard for the lives of innocents. A bus that fails to slow for a foot patrol is raked with gunfire, killing four passengers and wounding 11 others. The documents tell how, in going after a foreign fighter, a special forces unit ended up with seven dead children. The infants were not their immediate priority. A report marked ‘Noforn’ (not for foreign elements of the coalition) suggests their main concern was to conceal the mobile rocket system that had just been used.

Wikileaks is not the enemy in this. Wikileaks has simply done what the Pentagon refuses to do, because it is hugely embarrassing to itself, and its delusions of grandeur. Wikileaks, and whomever leaked the information, should be knighted.

Hopefully, this will get the peace activists out and applying as much pressure as possible on the U.S and coalition forces, to withdraw as soon as possible. Maybe right winged Americans will accept that spending their taxes on a decent healthcare system is a far more justifiable way of using it, than on a war that has left thousands dead for absolutely no reason. Perhaps paying Lockheed Martin, the weapons manufacturer $65mn a day, every day of the year, from the US Treasury isn’t the right way to go about obtaining peace. Maybe accepting that the U.S military machine, and the private defence contractors that benefit from war, are the root of the problem. Hopefully the term “war crimes” will be used, because I’m pretty certain that if an Afghani man shot a deaf American in the middle of New York City, after scaring him and then yelling stop, before shooting him; he wouldn’t get away so lightly.

The Lie Machine

When I started researching this story, I had a short blog planned. But the more I researched, the deeper the story goes, it’s a story of huge proportions, with back stories, and secrecy, lies and propaganda that drives the veins, right to the heart of the war in Iraq, acting more like the plot of a Ludlum novel, than the core of realty. It’s a ridiculously deep story. Usually I do not give conspiracy theories much of a second thought, but when it is brought to my attention by a Pulitzer Prize winning Journalist with a Columbia University Masters, my curiosity is demanding to be fed.

In December 2003, six months after the Invasion of Iraq, and with the World coming to terms with the notion that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, and had no ties to Al Qaeda; a document was released, dated July 2001, apparently showing a connection between the head of Saddam’s Iraqi Intelligence, General Tahir Jalil Habbush and one of the terrorists behind 9/11 (Mohammed Atta). The document was supposedly found by the coalition Government in Iraq, and verified as authentic by interim Iraqi President (and long time CIA asset) Ayad Allawi shortly after the invasion. It suggests that Atta was trained as a terrorist by Abu Nidal, known at that time as the most dangerous terrorist on the planet, and who was based in Iraq. Despite the fact that Nidal was a long time critic of Saddam and was supposedly killed by the Hussain regime, after the Iraqi’s became convinced Nidal was spying for Egyptian and Kuwaiti intelligence, with the knowledge of the Americans. Nidal then, was not able to defend himself from these claims suggested in the uncovered documents.

The document, Addressed to: “To the President of the Ba’ath Revolution Party and President of the Republic, may God protect you.”
reads:
“Mohammed Atta, an Egyptian national, came with Abu Ammer [the real name behind this Arabic alias remains a mystery] and we hosted him in Abu Nidal’s house at al-Dora under our direct supervision.
We arranged a work program for him for three days with a team dedicated to working with him…He displayed extraordinary effort and showed a firm commitment to lead the team which will be responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy.”

Pulitzer Prize winning Journalist and Author Ron Suskind, has suggested that the Bush White House along with the CIA had forged the document to suggest a pre-war link between Iraq and Al Qaeda to back up their authority for war. He suggests that the biggest threat facing the America, and the World is a nuclear weapon falling into the hands of terrorists, and so with America losing it’s moral leadership in the World, the rise of Anti-Americanism becomes an ever increasing threat, which America fights with it’s own brand of semi truths, secrecy, and terrorism.

Suskind suggests that Habbush was an informer for the Bush Administration on Iraq. He started sending reports to both the White House and Downing Street in 2003, and confirmed that there were no WMDs in Iraq. The reports were kept secret, and during the invasion, Habbush was paid $5,000,000 in hush money and relocated to Jordan, by American intelligence. Later that year, the White House ordered the CIA to forge a document back dated to 2001, from Habbush, to Saddam, stating that Mohammed Atta had trained in Iraq, and so weaving a direct link between 9/11 and Iraq, simply because the WMD claim had failed miserably. The document was thus released to the media whom took it at face value, unquestioning, severely lacking in the journalistic qualities that earned Suskind the Pulitzer. Ayad Allawi, the interim President of Iraqi in 2003, and long time CIA associate, was of course quick to verify that the document was indeed genuine, refusing to answer the question of why Nidal would be colluding with Hussain, given weapons, a training camp, and a band of terrorists given that Nidal and Saddam were not exactly the best of friends, and that Nidal was more of a hired gun, than a trusted friend of Iraq.

Suskind goes on to suggest that CIA officers Robert Richer and John Maguire supervised to creation of the document, the order coming through from the Office of Dick Cheney. Richer and Maguire have categorically denied the claims, and so it is of course possible that the CIA did not produce the document. The CIA are under 1991 guidelines that prevent them from feeding false information in the U.S. Not that they can’t get round that. They do however know that their testament, could lead to the President being impeached. It’s quite the pressure. But, if Suskind is wrong about the source of the document, then who’s the likely culprit? Who would Cheney turn to? He was afterall, manic about finding a link, regardless of how the link was found and how credible the information was, between Al Qaeda and Iraq, despite intelligence suggesting absolutely no link between the two.

My guess, and of course this is just speculation, is the Pentagon’s top policy official at the time, Douglas Feith. Feith was the head of the Officeof Strategic Influence, which until it became public was a secretive arm of the defence in the United States. It existed for a very short period and was uncovered in 2002. The Office was set up to produce false documents and propaganda to mislead the enemy. The media started to ask questions about the Office, and it’s secretive operations. Defence Secretary Rumsfeld shut it down in February 2002. However, all he did in essence, was change it’s name. Rumsfeld stated in 2002, in regard to the closing of the Office ” You can have the name, but I’m going to keep doing every single thing that needs to be done.” Whether or not Rumsfeld would have closed it down, had it not been uncovered, is something one must think about when assessing this case. In any event, the newly created Information Operations Task Force (IOTF) took up much of the work where the Office of Strategic Influence left off. The IOTF has dealings with John Rendon of the Rendon Group. A PR group dedicated to supporting U.S military interventions all over the Globe, through propaganda aimed at the population of the victim nation. The field of work is known as “perception management,“, they have been accused of feeding foreign media fabricated articles in order to bring the citizens round to their clients way of thinking. Rendon’s work includes anti-Saddam covert PR campaigns in 1991, aimed at attempting to over throw the Hussain regime. Rendon has been involved in covert pro-American propaganda in Iraq, Kuwait, Kosovo, and Zimbabwe amongst others. Rendon is even supposedly the father of the Iraqi National Congress, a group of anti-Saddam Militants and Oil tycoons put together to oppose the Saddam regime and gain support for his eventual removal. Lead by Ahmed Abdel Hadi Chalabi, and funded by the Americans, the INC was responsible for passing on false information regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction to the Bush Administration. The evidence they provided was flimsy at best, but lead to the invasion of Iraq. Chalabi had his eyes set on power after the toppling of Saddam. Any official claim that his information was flimsy, would not have been taken lightly, and was a threat to Chalabi, Blair, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld or Rendon itself. The apparent suicide of David Kelly, comes to mind.

Rendon had been awarded a $6,400,000 contract to create pro-war, and pro-American propaganda and target Iraqi civilians with it.
This information, and much like it (search Google for Rendon Group, it’s all there) leads me to conclude that if Cheney was indeed adamant that he needed a link, regardless of it’s credibility, between Al Qaeda and Iraq, then the most likely source of the forged Habbush document, was not the CIA, it would have been the Office dedicated to creating this type of propaganda, and given the nature of the document, and it’s obvious importance to the Administration, it must have been the responsibility of the most senior members of the IOTF and the Rendon Group. I’d put all of this at the door of Cheney, and the Rendon Group.

Like I said, this story goes so very deep. It proves much more efficiently than any other story that I’ve come across connected to the Iraq war, that the indelibly secretive Bush Administration worked tirelessly to prove a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq, in order to justify a War that seems more and more likely to have been based on profit from defence and oil contracts, and that didn’t stand up to scrutiny the moment the Weapons of Mass Destruction Argument failed. All the time, hammering the American public into a sense of false Patriotism, you’re either pro-war, or you’re against us. It’s why they forged the Habbush document. It’s why they tortured. It had very little to do with Cheney’s dire need to protect America, and much much more to do with Cheney’s need to cover up the fact that his war, the death toll, the families lives destroyed, was based on such an ugly lie.
Why did we invade Iraq?

I wonder what Doctor David Kelly knew.

The Fall of the American Economic Empire

Please excuse the over simplification of the money markets that i’m about to talk about, i’m not an economist.

In June 2003, Iraq, under U.S guidance started trading Oil in U.S Dollars again. Which certainly gives credit to the idea that The Bush Administration, with it’s ties to the Oil business and it’s incessant need to expand it’s supply; invaded Iraq for two reasons Firstly, because they needed to increase supply. And secondly, to revert back to trading in U.S Dollars, something Sadam Hussain put a stop to back in 2000. And although I despise the Bush Administration, and it’s horribly reclusive policies, i’m a little sceptical when my fellow lefties try to find even the slightest shred of evidence that could be used by the Bush Administration as a pretext for war for oil. I just don’t buy it.

As far as i’m aware Iran doesn’t trade Oil in dollars. Hasn’t for a couple of years. And surely if America were so committed to being the dominant force in Global finance, economists must have noticed that promoting Democracy and Capitalism across the Globe, would not help that cause, and in fact, would lead to the growth of foreign currencies that inevitably challenge the dominance of the Dollar?
The Oil Bourse in Iran opened in 2007, trading oil in Euros and not Dollars, with no interference to try to prevent it from the U.S. Surely if they cared that much, something would have been done? And since then, transactions in Euros (among others) on the IOB have been worth well over $1.5bn. Surely the U.S would have intervened if it were THAT concerned? Obviously not militarily, given that the public wouldn’t support it after the debacle surrounding Iraq, and troops are already preoccupied with Iraq and Afghanistan, but even covertly, nothing has been done. Which to me suggests that although the Johnson/Nixon Administrations with the help of Kissinger may have needed the trade deals between the U.S and Persian Gulf States to boost America’s economic standing in the World during the late 60s and 70s, it’s not as important now as it was back then, because no matter how much the US now tries to sustain it’s economic dominance, inevitably it isn’t going to last all that much longer. Especially given that the the Dollar isn’t considered as “risk free” as it has been for decades.

The Euro was created to almost counter the dominance of the Dollar. So why hasn’t the EU been the target of U.S aggression? Given that most countries (Russia has decreased it’s Dollar reserves recently) now have a split reserve, between Dollar and Euro, that isn’t a good sign for the almighty Dollar, and in the long run, is hugely damaging, much more so than Iran’s IOB. And much more so than Sadam and his decision to stop trading in Dollars.

Also, Russia, Saudi Arabia (after refusing to cut interest rates in line with the U.S back in 2007), South Korea (who shifted investment from US currency to other currency in 2005 and fears that it may sell $1bn US Bonds in the not too distant future), China, Sudan (who suggested dumping the Dollar as far back as 1997) and Venezuela are considering doing the same as Iran at the moment.

Surely the more aggressive the U.S is with the World, the less likely other Nations are to feel happy about trading in Dollars? Aggression caused by the U.S need to prevent any challenge to it’s economic Empire is only going to isolate the U.S further.

I can understand the point on Iraq, given that Iraq mysteriously started trying Oil in Dollars again after the invasion, so yes, that was definitely a motive perhaps because the Republicans at the time thought ruling the World through fear was the only way to stay on top of the World. But Iran’s move to open the IOB was a far greater kick in the teeth to America, than Sadam was, and Iran haven’t been the target of such a mass invasion or even threat of invasion. Certainly the Bush Administration had harsh words for Tehran But no more so than Tehran has for Tel Aviv and their allies.

I think Iraq went a lot deeper. Crap intelligence (the U.S is good at that) and personal vendetta. If America were committed to sustaining it’s dominance economically across the Globe, invading one nation because they stopped trading oil in dollars, is pretty insignificant given that there’s half a World willing to do the same in the not too distant future. Iraq wasn’t just about oil.

If devalue of the Dollar were considered enough reason to go to war, then in the next twenty – thirty years, the U.S is going to have to commit to taking on pretty much the entire World, (either that, or creating a brand new common currency with Russia and China) because as the Euro will inevitably start to pick up pace, and nations start to shrink their Dollar reserves even more, and corporations then start to sell their dollar short for financial gain; Iran selling it’s oil in another currency will seem like nothing in comparison.

The problem I foresee for President Obama and President Bush, is that Republicans and Democrats will start to find reasons to blame them both respectively, when America starts losing it’s economic dominance, even though, it’s merely a case of Economic Evolution.

Guantanamo deepens

The whole issue surrounding the closure of Guantanamo bay detention centre has gained World Wide attention. Those on the Liberal side of the fence suggest that Guantanamo is merely a place of torture against those who haven’t actually been charged with any crime, which in turn leads to growing antipathy across the World toward America.
Conservatives meanwhile argue that Guantanamo is an essential deterrent to any would be terrorist, that if you mess with America, you’re going to be sorry.
Both the Liberal and the Conservative stance on the issue have good points worth paying attention to. Both want the same ending, but both go about it a different way. This is the nature of Democracy.

I put myself slightly more in the liberal camp when it comes to Guantanamo, purely because although there are doubtless terrorists rightly locked up in that detention centre, whose human rights I have very little time for; there are also those who are not guilty or haven’t been charged or are there simply for resisting American aggression. These people, have largely been ignored in the debate. Suddenly, the debate should become not whether Guantanamo is needed for the protection of America, but should be whether Guantanamo is actually Constitutional. An intelligent American cannot substantially claim to be against Gun regulations because it’s unconstitutional, yet be in favour of a camp that for some, holds their right to detention without trial as inconsequential. Of course, the placing of Guantanamo puts it out of reach of the law of the Constitution, which is convenient to say the least.

I do not however succumb to the ultra-Liberal belief, despite my Liberalism, that the World will be better without detention centres like this, or that terrorists will suddenly decide to stop their string of hatred toward the West. Nor do I accept that ultra-Conservative view that with the closure of Guantanamo, suspected Terrorists will be freed, and allowed to live next door to us, in the same way that I don’t accept our British Countryside Alliance, who seem to think that banning fox hunting will means the Country is over run by a mass Fox offensive stealing our jobs and raping our women.

Over the past eight-teen months since the ‘abdication’ of Tony Blair and the arrival of the guy at the Treasury, who had been waiting for the top job for fifteen years; Gordon Brown, we have seen exactly how disastrous this man really is. Mismanaged the economy before taking over as Prime Minister by claiming to do away with boom and bust, and yet not saving money when the Country was doing brilliantly well economically; abolishing the 10p tax band, hitting Labour’s core support base the hardest and alienating them some more; Using the phrase “British Jobs for British Workers” which has subsequently come back and attacked him viciously through the slogan being attached to placards used by the strikers recently.
Brown has, in affect, had a terrible eight-teen months. However, none of that comes close to the revelation this week that a British detainee at Guantanamo had been tortured, and that the British Government were complicit in it. The story is that the U.S had absolutely no evidence against Mr Mohamed when they charged him with conspiracy to build dirty bombs whilst in Kabul, and then later dropped the charges. Mr Mohamad was then charged again, this time by the new Office of Military Commissions, and then the charges were dropped.

Whilst being held at Guantanamo, Mr Mohamed claimed to have been tortured, humiliated, and injected with heroin to get him addicted. He claimed that those who tortured him had information about his life that only the UK Government could have provided. In July 2008, the British Government sent a letter according to The New York Times, to Benyam’s Lawyer ‘Clive Stafford Smith’ confirming that it knew and had detailed information about Mr Mohammed’s apparent abuse at Guantanamo. In July 2008, Smith and a team of lawyers filed a petition to make the Foreign Office hand over the evidence, so it could help Benyam’s trial hopes. However, the evidence was never made public because the High Court said that if the Foreign Office thought that making the documents public would affect the special intelligence relationship with the U.S, it should be kept away from the public domain.

Partially released rulings from the hearing to release the documents by the High Court who are fighting to release them fully, stated that the Bush Administration threatened to stop intelligence sharing with the UK if the documents citing the alleged torture of an innocent man was made public, because it threatens the National Defence of the U.S. According to inthenews.co.uk “Forty-two separate British intelligence services reportedly demonstrate awareness of Mr Mohamed’s torture.” Which is just incredible. The level of secrecy is unimaginable.
Clive Stafford Smith is quoted as saying: “For the foreign secretary to give in to these illegal demands by the Bush administration is capitulation to blackmail, pure and simple. It is hardly Britain’s finest hour.“

If this in fact true, if Benyam Mohamed is innocent, and if he was tortured. It does not in any way threaten National Security other than revealing to the World that the Bush Administration condoned the torture of those who had not been found guilty or even charged with any crime. It is merely a way for them to cover their tracks. For me, this is a scandal of the greatest proportions. If the Bush Administration knew about this and did try to surpress it, they need to be bought to justice. If I were to torture someone I suspected of threatening me, i’d be locked up for years.

If the U.K Government were complicit in the torture and the covering up of information that would prove Benyam Mohamed is innocent and that he was tortured for no reason, then every problem Gordon Brown has had up until now, will be nothing in comparison to what is to come.

Cori Crider, a lawyer, speaks for me and every other Liberal and Conservative who feels somewhat disgusted by these allegations, when she said recently : “Secretive and lawless to the last, one of the final acts of the Bush administration was to try to bully its closest ally into sweeping Binyam Mohamed’s torture under the rug. This is repugnant to the principles of open justice on which both our societies were founded. “

Both the Attorney General and the Intelligence Services Committee are investigating any legal wrong doing. However, as we’ve seen with the Hutton Enquiry into the 2003 death of Dr David Kelly, these Committees and these investigations will do nothing of worth, and always clear the Government.

The Foreign Secretary, recently back from a trip to Washington in which he smiled joyfully along side his American counterpart, Hillary Clinton, is under increasing pressure to explain himself. According to the Beeb, “The Tories say he needs to explain why he had not asked the new US government to allow intelligence material about the man’s treatment to be published.” The Tories in this case, are right. However, Miliband has said he feels no obligation to lobby the Obama government on this issue. Which suggests, further covering up. They want this issue ending without having to admit they acted completely unlawfully. Therefore, they are no better than the Bush Administration. Similarly, if the rumours that Obama has also already asked that the documents be withheld, then the Obama government i’m afraid to say, is also complicit and in the same realms of immorality as the Bush administration.

Unfortunately, I do believe this wont go any further. No charges will be bought. No deep independent investigation will take place and justice will never be served. That’s the way of the modern World and modern Politics.

Two political rants in one.

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. – US Federal Bureau of Investigation

“Have I Got News For You” this week showed the clip of George W Bush having that now infamous shoe threw at him in Iraq last week. The BBC Audience cheered and clapped in admiration for the man who did it. It goes to show the deep tide of hatred toward the most powerful terrorist in the World.

Rightwingbob.com, a dreadfully ignorant Republican blogger writes “if, as is being suggested in the media, this shoeless journalist is being “hailed a hero in the Arab world,” then it just highlights some serious problems in that culture.”
- I wonder, could right wing Bob be so seriously out of touch with not only the Arab World, but the rest of the Civilised World. Should the Journalist have shook Bush’s hand? Bowed to him? “Thank you oh great one, our children are dying in a shower of American bombs and my wife is in ten different pieces across our destroyed house…. but hey, we’re a Democracy now, so it’s all worth it!” Get a fucking grip.

It worried me when it happened, that i’d be the only one who thought “good!! If only it’d have hit him” given that all the Conservative papers (The Mail in particular) called it “inconsiderate”. The Mail went on to explain that the Journalist who threw the shoe had an opportunity to ask important questions about what we used to call American Foreign Policy and what has become known, throughout the Republican reign of terror as “American Imperialism” and that he blew it, in a mindless act of violence. I’m sorry, but when editor of the Mail’s family have been needlessly blown to pieces, invaded, destroyed, for no real reason, i’d like to see him face the Terrorist who did it and ask him an important Political question. It’s pathetic. If the past eight years has taught me anything, it’s that the word “Terrorist” is disasterously intriguing. If in it’s most definable terms, it means “one who causes terror”, then I struggle to find a reason why the Bush administration are not the most horrific terrorists to ever grace the Planet. “Terrorist” seems to apply only to those who want revenge for Western aggression. Bush, ingeniously refers to these people as “those who hate our freedoms”….. They don’t hate our freedoms. They couldn’t care lesss if I start up my own business or not. They hate being abused. They hate being seen as an American resource. I think humanity, particularly Western Humanity, for all it’s benefits, has lost touch with human decency, and become way too interested in the material side of life.

Anyone who causes needless deaths on a grand scale, be them Muslim Extremists, or American imperialists, are terrorists. Let’s quit pretending otherwise. A 2006 Washington Post study, estimated that 655,000 innocent Iraqi civilians had died since the War began in 2003. You have to start asking yourself, as a human being, have too many people died? Can anything be worth such a high number of deaths? How do you justify so many deaths? How many will need to die before the Bush Administration is investigated for crimes against humanity? Is it ok that over half a million innocent Iraqi civilians have died, because we’re Western, and somehow above those laws that come down on anyone who isn’t? By their own standards, by the FBIs standards, by anyone who has a heart’s standards, the Bush Administration are the most dangerous group of Terrorists on the planet. There comes a time when people living in civilised societies have to be thinking that no one else needs to die.

—————————————————————————–

Something somewhere within the system has gone terribly wrong when TV adverts exclaim with vengeance “Benefit thieves, we’re closing in on you”, and yet the World’s top financiers can get away with the most despicable display of greed imaginable leading to one huge global financial mess. Of course, it’s just another wondrous product of the Thatcher/Regan “What’s in it for me?” years. A Conservative legacy of greed that considers single mums who “cheat” the benefit system in order to help feed their children – criminals, and considers those earning upwards of £1million, who also swindle the system in order to be able to afford a new yaht – “successful”. Morally, there is something drastically wrong with a system like that. It masks itself manipulatively under the phrase “rewarding hard work”.

This whole business with Madoff for example, I cannot imagine that Santander and other such groups who invested with Madoff, didn’t know what was happening. It stinks of corporate greed across the board. Not just Madoff. The Securities and Exchange Commission, the US Financial Regulatory body were warned about this, ten years ago. They seem to have ignored it.
It is being referred to as “the world’s biggest pyramid scheme”. I cannot imagine that Santander, HSBC, Nomura RBOS and all the other huge financial centres who invested with Madoff didn’t know what was going on. It seems they were benefitting, so it was ok. The moment there’s a bit of trouble, they all seem to plead ignorance. I do not believe they are the innocent victims in this.

As you can tell, i’m becoming increasingly alarmed with the state of the Western World. With the ideal that the free markets work magic, that greed is human nature (it isn’t by the way), and that Bush may very well live the rest of his life, in a tranquill surrounding, with his family, whilst the 655,000+ deaths he ordered, continue to pain the families of the victims.
It comforts me, albeit in the worst possible way, to know that i’m not like these money hungry, fear mongering “people” to know that if I had the power, he’d be in Guantanamo right now. The one thing that a Right Winged, War loving, profit masturbating, selfish Government can be thanked for, is that they provoke so much hatred, so much anger, that groups of Humanitarians, Liberals, and Free Thinkers pop up across the planet, in protest, to show the decent side of Humanity. We get blessed with the Bob Dylan’s and the John Lennon’s inspiring a generation to say “enough is enough”. Is 655,000 deaths and the entire Capitalist economic system who’s innocent workers trying to pay off their mortgage and feed their kids, worth it though?

No.
One death wouldn’t be worth it.