In the US certain quarters are threatening cooling of relations of the relations and also trade problems should the UK government go ahead with it proposed pull out of troops from Iraq.
It would appear that the relationship that is supposed to be two-way between the US and the UK is still the same as ever, or maybe even worse. The US plays the bully boy who says “if you don't do as we say that will have consequences”. It is about time Britain showed the mettle it once had. Do we really need the USA? No more than we needs Europe. Let us look after ourselves first. Let's get our boys home and get out of that ill conceived conflict. The people of Iraq do not want either the USA not the UK troops in their country. Let them get on with it themselves. If it leads to a break-up of Iraq into three separate entities then so be it as well. But, oh no, the problem is the oi, despite what we are being told and led to believe and the control of the oil is currently in the hands of the coalition; or shall we put a name to it, in the hands of Haliburton and other US companies. There is not even the slightest control over how much oil is going through the pipeline shipping the oil out of the country. Apparently, so this writer has been told by some sources, the measuring gear has been disconnected. No one knows how much oil is being exported and it is more than likely that only a very small proportion of the money gets back to the Iraqis.
On the other hand, there is more and more private military in Iraq now that the British troops are hardly needed anyway. But, with the British pulling out the US no longer would have the chance to say that it is not a US led and organized war.
How dare the American government and especially the establishment threaten a sovereign nation, such as the United Kingdom in such a way; a country that has stood by its side in more than one of those conflicts conceived by the USA in order to secure oil supplies. It never had anything to do with freedom and democracy, like when a senator in the House asked during the first Gulf War when the then president of the USA, Bush Snr. stated that we were fighting for freedom and democracy since when Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were democracies and the next day or so was then told by the president that, in fact, it was about the oil.
It is obvious that it is all about oil and – maybe, just maybe – also about getting a base, yet again, not too far away from Russian territory. It can be seen well enough that oil is the factor here for why, otherwise, is nothing been done about human rights abuses in the former Rhodesia, now called Zimbabwe, with the so-called president of theirs, the title of dictator would be more appropriate, Mugabe, destroying the once richest country on the African continent, next to South Africa. Or why is nothing done in other regions of conflict and human rights abuses and wholesale murder and ethnic cleansing on the African continent. The truth is that none of those countries have any exploitable oil reserves. That is the very reason.
Let's get our boys home and stop following the lead of the USA into every idiotic conflict. The same is true for Afghanistan. The lessons from the past should have given some idea that Afghanistan cannot be won either. It did not work in the time of the British Raj, nor did Czarist Russia succeed at that time. No one has ever been able to conquer Afghanistan. What does make them think that they could do it now? Both of those conflicts are futile and will also do nothing to stop so-called Islamist terrorists and terrorism. The truth is that it will create more terrorists.
Is it not high time that the UK told the US where to get off; a running jump off Beachy Head would be a nice idea.
© M V Smith, August 2007
Showing posts with label general politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label general politics. Show all posts
Police call for return of Internment
One of Britain's most senior police officers has, so it is reported, demanded a return to a form of internment; with a power for police to lock up suspected terrorist indefinitely without charge while investigations are going on.
Police officers on the ground, so are we told, are asking for this, to enable them to investigate everything properly and without a rush. Right, sure they are. And on an airfield nearby a squadron of pigs is preparing for take off.
It is NOT the police services, I am sure, that are asking for this per se but it is the leaders of those police services being stooges for the powers that be who want a means of detaining anyone who they deem to be a danger to society – for that read also a danger to them and their agenda – without charge, trial and evidence.
Most British MPs would never go along with this if the demand would come from government directly whether from the Home Secretary or the Secretary responsible for Homeland Security. However, if they can be made to believe that the police, and especially the investigating officers, are asking for this then it will be much easier for the MPs to be swayed towards such a move.
Once those powers are granted to police (and other agencies) to detain suspected terrorists indefinitely in interment what is to say that those are not applied also to anyone else the powers that be deem to be a danger; a danger more to them and their shenanigans than to any member of the public. Who after all decides who is a terrorist and who not? What is the determination of a terrorist? They say that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Internment could also, I am sure, in the end be applied to all those that simply speak out against the doings of the government and its agencies. Free speech, we have been told only some months back by a minister of the Home Office is NOT an unalienable right but just a privilege granted to the British subjects and that it could be suspended or withdrawn at any time. We must remember that the UK does not have a written constitution where such rights are enshrined and that the often cited Magna Carta and the Bill of Right does not, actually, have any bearing on the rights of the ordinary subjects of Her Britannic Majesty; none whatsoever. Those rights were and still are, in truth, for the aristocracy and the King's and Queen's liege lords only.
Things are afoot in the European Union and the UK here especially that can only be seen as worrying and when viewed through the eyes of a Rom, a Gypsy, like myself then all those things are very reminiscent of the times of the Nazis and National-Socialism and the era of Stalinism. Both were and are but opposite sides of the same coin. The West is heading currently very much down the slippery slope of fascism yet again, fuelled by the fear of Muslim terrorists and also, for some reason the Gypsy is in the firing line.
All I am seeing is that the EU and not just the EU alone in headed down into dangerous waters that will entirely undermine all personal freedoms to the extent of turning all of its “citizens” into numbers.
I assume the reason they now are therefore also going after the Gypsy is because the Gypsy lives still outside the control of the state to some degree.
We, those of the Rom, and others that may be concerned, must keep a watchful eye on all those developments, especially those that are not paraded that openly. The freedom of all of us is under threat and it is not threatened by a handful of militants and such like but by our very governments.
© M V Smith, July 2007
Police officers on the ground, so are we told, are asking for this, to enable them to investigate everything properly and without a rush. Right, sure they are. And on an airfield nearby a squadron of pigs is preparing for take off.
It is NOT the police services, I am sure, that are asking for this per se but it is the leaders of those police services being stooges for the powers that be who want a means of detaining anyone who they deem to be a danger to society – for that read also a danger to them and their agenda – without charge, trial and evidence.
Most British MPs would never go along with this if the demand would come from government directly whether from the Home Secretary or the Secretary responsible for Homeland Security. However, if they can be made to believe that the police, and especially the investigating officers, are asking for this then it will be much easier for the MPs to be swayed towards such a move.
Once those powers are granted to police (and other agencies) to detain suspected terrorists indefinitely in interment what is to say that those are not applied also to anyone else the powers that be deem to be a danger; a danger more to them and their shenanigans than to any member of the public. Who after all decides who is a terrorist and who not? What is the determination of a terrorist? They say that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Internment could also, I am sure, in the end be applied to all those that simply speak out against the doings of the government and its agencies. Free speech, we have been told only some months back by a minister of the Home Office is NOT an unalienable right but just a privilege granted to the British subjects and that it could be suspended or withdrawn at any time. We must remember that the UK does not have a written constitution where such rights are enshrined and that the often cited Magna Carta and the Bill of Right does not, actually, have any bearing on the rights of the ordinary subjects of Her Britannic Majesty; none whatsoever. Those rights were and still are, in truth, for the aristocracy and the King's and Queen's liege lords only.
Things are afoot in the European Union and the UK here especially that can only be seen as worrying and when viewed through the eyes of a Rom, a Gypsy, like myself then all those things are very reminiscent of the times of the Nazis and National-Socialism and the era of Stalinism. Both were and are but opposite sides of the same coin. The West is heading currently very much down the slippery slope of fascism yet again, fuelled by the fear of Muslim terrorists and also, for some reason the Gypsy is in the firing line.
All I am seeing is that the EU and not just the EU alone in headed down into dangerous waters that will entirely undermine all personal freedoms to the extent of turning all of its “citizens” into numbers.
I assume the reason they now are therefore also going after the Gypsy is because the Gypsy lives still outside the control of the state to some degree.
We, those of the Rom, and others that may be concerned, must keep a watchful eye on all those developments, especially those that are not paraded that openly. The freedom of all of us is under threat and it is not threatened by a handful of militants and such like but by our very governments.
© M V Smith, July 2007
Rushdie Knighthood enough reason for suicide bombers - Pakistani minister
A Pakistani minister stated on Monday, June 18, 2007 that the British government’s decision to confer a knighthood on Salman Rushdie, the author of “Satanic Verses” is good enough reason and justification for suicide bombers to attack targets in Britain.
The Satanic Verses, published in 1988, provoked the ire of many Muslims and led to the issuing of a fatwa in 1989 by the then Iranian leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini.
However, this is neither here nor there, We do have, at least we still had, last time I checked, freedom of speech in the UK and the USA and no one can therefore, though they will try, Muslims and Jews alike, silence a writer. To, however, state that Rushdie's knighthood could justify suicide bombings is tantamount to a declaration of war. If that is so then maybe the British forces need to leave Iraq and have a little word in the ear of the Pakistani forces.
It beats me again and again that the so-called Muslims who espouse such violence and venom and who dare to call for a fatwa on a citizen of a free country and to state that the knighthood given to that author mentioned could be justification get away with such statements and, more often than not, the governments of the free world cave in to their demands.
Are we, as a people of a free country, willing to allow ourselves to be told who can and cannot receive an honor and decoration by other countries that have no freedom in their countries, threatening us with terrorist attacks if we do not take away the honor given to a person those governments disagree with?
I have nothing against Muslims nor any other faith and religion per se as long as they do not wish to impose their rule on others that are not of their beliefs. I have the same problem with the (fundamental) Christians who claim that they must covert everyone to their brand of religion, like those that destroy the Culture of the Romani People and Romani families by their actions. This, however, is another subject.
© M V Smith, June 2007
The Satanic Verses, published in 1988, provoked the ire of many Muslims and led to the issuing of a fatwa in 1989 by the then Iranian leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini.
However, this is neither here nor there, We do have, at least we still had, last time I checked, freedom of speech in the UK and the USA and no one can therefore, though they will try, Muslims and Jews alike, silence a writer. To, however, state that Rushdie's knighthood could justify suicide bombings is tantamount to a declaration of war. If that is so then maybe the British forces need to leave Iraq and have a little word in the ear of the Pakistani forces.
It beats me again and again that the so-called Muslims who espouse such violence and venom and who dare to call for a fatwa on a citizen of a free country and to state that the knighthood given to that author mentioned could be justification get away with such statements and, more often than not, the governments of the free world cave in to their demands.
Are we, as a people of a free country, willing to allow ourselves to be told who can and cannot receive an honor and decoration by other countries that have no freedom in their countries, threatening us with terrorist attacks if we do not take away the honor given to a person those governments disagree with?
I have nothing against Muslims nor any other faith and religion per se as long as they do not wish to impose their rule on others that are not of their beliefs. I have the same problem with the (fundamental) Christians who claim that they must covert everyone to their brand of religion, like those that destroy the Culture of the Romani People and Romani families by their actions. This, however, is another subject.
© M V Smith, June 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
