The Nether-World

Abject Failures

2008-06-21T13:57:00.001+01:00

Thanks to Justin for pointing me in the direction of the hilarious Fail Blog.

see more pwn and owned pictures

More On That Bush Protest

2008-06-17T00:51:00.011+01:00

This was a very different demonstration to others I've attended over the last five years. It was considerably smaller than the kind of protests unusually associated with the Stop The War Coalition. There are several obvious reasons for this: Firstly, Bush is a lame duck and the spectacle of him limping and quacking into the sunset was never going to attract the huge crowds which assembled earlier in his reign of terror when he first put a torch to the Middle East and when Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib were fresh issues. Secondly, people are weary; after years of protests which have been largely ignored by those in power and with numbers always revised down by the media, the large bulk of of the more genteel protesters have fallen away leaving just a core of people angry enough to continue the effort. More prosaically, it was a Sunday afternoon, not a good day to hold a demonstration. The planned march down Whitehall had been banned by our democracy meaning the protesters were limited to hanging around in Parliament Square with an inadequate sound system for speeches and no platform for the speakers.

Nevertheless, according to media reports there were about 2,500 people (I actually think it was a bit less than that). Confined as we were to the Square, the atmosphere was very relaxed at this time in the afternoon. The speeches were, on the whole, very good. The crowd was addressed by Tony Benn, Walter Wolfgang, George Galloway, Moazzam Begg, Brian Haw, Bianca Jagger and Brian Eno among others. It was during Brian Eno's speech that the sound system gave up the ghost leaving about 2,000 people with less to focus on and attention was inevitably diverted towards the fleet of police vans and barricaded blocking Whitehall. We made the token march from Parliament Square to the barricades and that is when the atmosphere changed from something akin to a village fate to something a little more menacing.

Now, if the authorities had allowed us to march down Whitehall, we would have made a lot of noise shouting our displeasure at the warmonger in Downing Street and the cowardly Prime Minister entertaining him. Then it would have been over, the crowd would have dispersed and everyone would have gone home happy. The decision to ban the march merely to spare the world's top terrorist a bit of embarrassment was idiotic in the extreme and a recipe for a confrontation which is, of course what happened. It wasn't a riot by any means, just a lot of angry and frustrated protestors lined up against against the police barrier trading insults with those charged with sparing the two lame ducks the humiliation of seeing the true state of their popularity. There were tussles and, in the centre of the crush; some metal barriers were moved, some banners were thrown, some arrests were made and a few police officers suffered some very minor injuries.

While all this was going on, the fleet of parked police vans manoeuvred to span the width of Whitehall. Mounted police appeared and a short wall hastily constructed. The sea of yellow florescent-clad police men was joined then replaced by the riot squad in dark blue armour and crash helmets. It could have gotten very ugly and for a while I really thought it would. After about an hour of this stand off I thought my energies would be better spent in the pub with Tim, Sim-O, and Gareth so I made myself scarce safe in the knowledge that an event which was unlikely to be reported was now going to get full media coverage. Well done Gordon, you moron! It is a shame however, that all the focus was on these minor scuffles and not on the message being given by the speakers who were preaching to the converted, but alas, that's always the way with these events. By the way, if anyone reading this did record the speeches and put them on on-line, I'll be happy to link to them.

I've got a few more images left to add which I'll do later.

More from Tim and Sim-O

All Images protected by Creative Commons License

Tags: Bush, Protest

That Bush Protest

2008-06-16T01:07:00.005+01:00

I'll write more on the protest later after work and after processing about 80 photos. Anyway the warmonger is is still in town and will meet his favourite poodle tomorrow. So this is a sort of holding post. For now you can read a MSM report here (with video) and see some more pictures from Lenin's Tomb and Indymedia (via).

Tags: Bush, Protest

Top Terrorist Leader To Visit London

2008-06-14T22:01:00.008+01:00

Well, the Nether-World is resembling a bus service today, no posts for ages then several at once (a couple anyway). While I am managing to do a little blogging, I thought I'd mention this (The following is a message from the Stop The War Coalition):

Protest at Bush visit - 5pm, Parliament Square, 15 June

War criminal George Bush will visit London during his European tour this month. He is expected on 15 June.

Stop the War is planning a protest in London on that day against Bush and his war policies, and against the British government's continuing support for his wars. Watch this space for more details.

Anti-Bush demonstration banned from Whitehall.

The Stop the War Coalition has been informed by the Metropolitan Police that a proposed march, co-organised with CND and the British Muslim Initiative, to protest George Bush's visit will not be allowed. The Coalition has organised scores of marches on this route, including during Bush's last visit in 2003.

It seems that when George W Bush visits this country traditional rights of assembly are to be removed from the people. This would be unacceptable for the visit of any foreign leader, but for George Bush, a man many regard as a war criminal, it is particularly deplorable.

We are calling on those who care for our democratic rights to come to Parliament Square at 5.0 pm on Sunday 15 June. Some of those who signed statements accusing Bush of war crimes will be leading this protest, and delivering them to no.10 Downing Street as the march progresses up Whitehall"

George Bush has been dictating British foreign policy for many years. Now it appears his security services are determining our rights of protest. This is a disgrace and we will challenge the ban" Lindsey German, Convenor Stop the War Coalition.

"The ban on the Stop The War Coalition march in protest at the visit of President Bush to this country is a totalitarian act. In what is supposed to be a free country the Coalition has every right to express its views peacefully and openly. This ban is outrageous and makes the term 'democracy' laughable".
HAROLD PINTER

Windsor Protest!

George Bush has been invited to tea with the Queen. This war criminal should not be feted by royalty, he should be explaining his actions to an international criminal court. Protest his visit at 1.30pm at Windsor and Eton Riverside Rail station for a march to Windsor Castle.

End of Message

-----------------------

The bastard has a nerve showing either of his two faces here after the reception he got last time.

Reuters

But Dubya is on a mission. Not content with the chaos he's already caused, he wants to leave his successor with another intractable mess. He's in Europe trying to drum up support for an attack on Iran and is pretending that it's all about diplomacy. He's unlikely to succeed but he should be given the message that he and his neocon cabal are as welcome here as a turd in a swimming pool.

Restrictions on demonstrating are already in place but thankfully his plan to prevent mobile phone 's from being used seems to have failed. Last time the Toxic Texan was here much fun and games were had chasing him around London as he tried to avoid demonstrators. It seems something similar might be on the cards this time round too.

I'm hoping I'm not too late to join Operation Manticore. If I am then I shall try to demonstrate at Parliament Square. If you're at a loose end this Sunday, why not join me?

Tags: Bush, Protest

Sorry For The Long Break

2008-06-14T20:16:00.004+01:00

Phew, has it really been over five months since I've written anything here? Well I'm sorry about the long break. I've missed blogging but a change in my employment circumstances has made it very difficult for me to write regularly. Basically, my current job involves me writing for eight hours a day about news and current events so when I get home the last thing I want to do is more of the same. I was over stretching myself in several directions and something had to give. I'd like to be able to say that normal service has now resumed but it hasn't so blogging will continue to be light to non-existent for a while longer.

I did however, need a break from blogging. Apart from work commitments I was getting very disillusioned with politics and I was in danger of starting every post with "Told Ya So!". Blog posts just seemed to be continually stating the obvious. Gordon Brown has turned out to be every bit the arsehole I predicted him to be (and then some); New Labour is just as cowardly, corrupt, immoral and incompetent as it was under Blair and in some cases more so. I could go on but I suspect any remaining readers will be all too familiar with this.

Over the last few months I've spent what little free time I've had re-engaging with other long-held but neglected interests like photography and trying not get obsessed with the unhealthy political climate we have. It has helped a bit but there seems to have been an acceleration in the decline of decent standards in the political sphere and once again it's getting harder to remain silent. I'm not going to give a recap of what has been going on, we all know and many other bloggers have covered the subjects excellently. There are some positive things on the horizon, America might well elect a president with more than one brain cell and something resembling a moral compass, which will change a lot of what has been going on. We can only dare to hope and envy the Americans for at least being given a clear choice.

For now I just thought I'd explain my absence and dust off the cobwebs on this site with a view to posting a little more regularly. There will be some changes. I'm not going to comment on every news article that annoys me or trawl through pages of different media as as I used to, I just don't have the time at the moment. But I will try to introduce some more varied content and I'll continue to post on topics I feel strongly about when I can. Hopefully I'll be able to find the time to post regularly enough to re-engage in politics to something approaching previous levels. At some point this site may well move to another platform if I can post enough to make the move worth while. In the meantime, here is something to do if you are at a loose end tomorrow.

July 7th 2005 London Bombings: The Government's Response To The Petition For An Inquiry

2008-01-03T21:21:00.000Z

The Government has finally responded to the petition which I set up on the Downing Street website calling for an full inquiry into the London bombings of July 7 2005.

Thank you for signing the e-petition about 7 July bombings.
The Government understands the feelings of the survivors and relatives of those killed in the 7 July bombings. Our aim is to ensure that other families do not suffer the hurt, loss and pain caused by such attacks and that is why the protection of our people against future attack remains our top priority.
The Government remains of the opinion that a public inquiry is not required into the events of the 7 July 2005. There are processes currently underway which will address many aspects of the 7 July attacks:

Criminal proceedings in connection to the bombings have been brought and pursued. Three people have recently been charged with conspiracy to cause explosions and are currently awaiting trial. The police investigation into the 7 July 2005 bombings continues.

The inquests into the deaths of all those who died have yet to take place. Proceedings stand adjourned because of the criminal proceedings outlined above.

At the end of the Crevice trial in April 2007, the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) were asked by the Prime Minister to re-appraise themselves of the information at their disposal - in particular, in relation to new information that emerged during the Crevice trial.
It remains the case that there was no prior intelligence that an attack was to be carried out on 7 July 2005. I can reassure you that the Police and Security Service would have done everything possible to prevent such an attack had any such intelligence been available. As highlighted by the Crevice investigation, the threat we face is complex. The presence of Shehzad Tanweer and Mohammad Siddique Khan in the periphery of the investigation of 2004 shows the scale and complex nature of the real and serious threat we face.

The original petition which I set up in November 2006 said:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to hold a full public inquiry into the London bombings of July 7 2005."
"More than a year after that terrible atrocity that killed at least 52 people and maimed many more, there still hasn't been a full public inquiry into that event. The "Narrative" and the ISC report we were given are insufficient. We've had public inquiries into far less serious events, why not this? We now know that the attacks did not come "out of the blue" as was asserted by the Home Secretary at the time."

So let's examine this response bit by bit. The first two sentences just don't make sense.

The Government understands the feelings of the survivors and relatives of those killed in the 7 July bombings. Our aim is to ensure that other families do not suffer the hurt, loss and pain caused by such attacks and that is why the protection of our people against future attack remains our top priority.

If the Government really understood the feelings of the survivors and the relatives of the deceased in that atrocity then it would have opened an inquiry according to their wishes. As it is, they are now having to take the Government to court in order to get the inquiry they want. The whole point in having a full inquiry into the awful events of July 7 2005 is to learn the lessons from that atrocity in order to ensure that other families do not suffer the hurt, loss and pain caused by such attacks. If protection against future attacks is a top priority, then surely learning everything possible from the attack that did happen is essential, no?

The Government remains of the opinion that a public inquiry is not required into the events of the 7 July 2005. There are processes currently underway which will address many aspects of the 7 July attacks:

Well, many of the people whom the Government is supposed to represent do feel that a public inquiry is required into the deadliest terrorist attack on the British mainland since the Lockerbie bombing in 1988, and the first suicide bombings in Western Europe, particularly after all the inconsistencies coming from the Government such as the completely untrue "out of the blue" statement from then Home Secretary Charles Clarke.

"This was a vicious and cynical attack out of the blue in a way that there was no knowledge of beforehand in any respect whatsoever."

Shadow Home Secretary David Davis has concluded that:

"It is becoming more and more clear that the story presented to the public and parliament is at odds with the facts."

Well, quite!!

Criminal proceedings in connection to the bombings have been brought and pursued. Three people have recently been charged with conspiracy to cause explosions and are currently awaiting trial. The police investigation into the 7 July 2005 bombings continues.

The fact that there is still an on-going police investigation into 7/7 needn't hinder an inquiry into the attack. There is not even a commitment from the Government to hold an inquiry after the conclusion of the police investigation and criminal proceedings. I'm sure such a commitment would be acceptable to many who want a full inquiry.

The inquests into the deaths of all those who died have yet to take place. Proceedings stand adjourned because of the criminal proceedings outlined above.

It is true that the inquests into the deaths of all those who died have yet to take place. The inquests have been postponed indefinitely causing even more anguish for the relatives of the deceased. Does anyone else get the feeling that the lame excuse of an on-going police investigation is merely a desperate effort to prevent any sort of proper inquiry from taking place? Is protecting the reputations of officials, who may very well be found to have been incompetent, so important that the people they represent are to be prevented from learning as much as possible about what happened? The Government's excuse would be more believable if it was an isolated case but there is a similar reluctance to hold an inquiry into the Iraq war where incompetence is all too apparent. I can't help feeling that the police investigation will conveniently go on for ever. Still, I concede that this is a better excuse than this...

In the Commons yesterday, Tony Blair said an independent inquiry would "undermine support" for the security service.

...which just goes to show how desperately the Government is trying to wriggle out of holding an independent inquiry.

At the end of the Crevice trial in April 2007, the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) were asked by the Prime Minister to re-appraise themselves of the information at their disposal - in particular, in relation to new information that emerged during the Crevice trial.

In other words this is an admission that the original ISC report (.pdf) is a complete pile of crap. The same report that said:

there were no culpable failures by the security and intelligence Agencies.

And let's not forget just how thorough the ISC was in assembling its report:

A committee member, who asked not to be named, admitted that it had not seen transcripts of MI5’s recordings of Khan. Instead, it had taken evidence from senior security officials and accepted their judgment that there was no reason to regard Khan as a serious threat.

And where is this re-appraised report? Did it take testimonies from survivors of the bombings? No, I thought not.

It remains the case that there was no prior intelligence that an attack was to be carried out on 7 July 2005. I can reassure you that the Police and Security Service would have done everything possible to prevent such an attack had any such intelligence been available. As highlighted by the Crevice investigation, the threat we face is complex. The presence of Shehzad Tanweer and Mohammad Siddique Khan in the periphery of the investigation of 2004 shows the scale and complex nature of the real and serious threat we face.

So, there was no prior intelligence that an attack was to be carried out on 7 July 2005 was there? Well perhaps the specific date was unknown, but there were plenty of warnings of an impending attack which the security and intelligence Agencies failed to act upon. The fact that Mohammad Siddique Khan was known to the security services and was under observation is well documented. The Government now admits as much, as it does the knowledge of Shehzad Tanweer "in the periphery". There were other warnings too. It seems likely that Khan was known to both American, French and Pakistani security services and an attack was expected. We were also told recently that Saudi Arabia alerted Britain of the danger of an impending attack and the warning was ignored. Another warning which was ignored came from an IT expert who alerted the police about the activities of Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer while he was working for their Islamic bookshop.

There is enough evidence to suggest that some degree of incompetence from the security services contributed to the events of July 7 2005. A full public, or at least independent inquiry, would help ensure that the oversights which failed to stop the bombers don't happen again. Unfortunately, as we all know, New Labour doesn't do accountability. The party is far more concerned with covering its own arse and sucking up to big business than protecting the people it was elected to represent. I don't know which Government wonk was press ganged into writing this idiotic response to my petition but I doubt that it'll fool anyone and the campaign for a proper inquiry into 7/7 continues.

The Government Tries To Wriggle Out Of Its Promise To Help Iraqi Employees

2007-12-12T07:36:00.000Z

This is a quick update on the on-going campaign to persuade the Government to grant asylum in the UK to former Iraqi employees. Back in August, Gordon Brown responded to pressure for the Government to do the right thing and grant asylum to Iraqi employees who had worked for the British armed forces and diplomatic mission in Iraq. He said that the Government would fulfill its “duty of care” to those who had served with British troops and announced a review of the Government’s assistance to locally engaged staff in Iraq. In October David Miliband announced in a Ministerial statement the elements of a scheme based on that review. It was (and still is) woefully inadequate and helps only a few of the Iraqi employees who are in very real danger of being murdered by death squads.

The scheme only grants asylum to those former employees who could prove that they had worked for the British after 1st January 2005 and for 12 months or more. This excluded many of the Iraqi employees who had worked for the British before that date or who worked for less than that period, often leaving their jobs at the end of a British battalion’s six-month tour. As Richard Beeston, Diplomatic Editor of The Times, said, it was "too little, too late, too slow, too complicated" and "unfair".

Now it seems that the Government is trying to wriggle out of even that very small concession:

More than half the Iraqi interpreters who applied to come to live in Britain have had their applications rejected, drawing accusations that the Government is “wriggling out” of its promise to help former Iraqi employees.
The Times has learnt that 125 of the 200 interpreters who took up the offer to resettle in Britain have failed to meet the strict criteria laid down for eligibility.
The revelation challenges Gordon Brown’s pledge in August that the Government would fulfil its “duty of care” to those who had served with British troops.
In three cases seen by The Times, former Iraqi employees were told that they were ineligible because of “absenteeism”.
The interpreters claim that they risked their lives to serve the British and are living in constant danger of reprisal from Shia militias. If they did not show up for work, it was because they were fleeing for their lives. They said that they now felt betrayed by the Government.
Read on

Well I can't say I'm that surprised. The Government has been dragging its feet over this issue since it was first raised and only public pressure has forced it to make the tiny steps it has so far taken. I am however disgusted that after the rhetoric from Miliband - let's just remind ourselves...

Locally engaged Iraqi staff working for our armed forces and civilian missions in Iraq have made an invaluable contribution, in uniquely difficult circumstances, to the UK’s efforts to support security, stability and development in the new Iraq. We are hugely grateful to them for their contribution, which continues to be essential to the delivery of our mission in Iraq.

... and Gordon Brown's talk of the Government's "duty of care", that the same Government would stoop so low as to throw up obstacles to the few Iraqi employees who are entitled to asylum in the UK under Miliband's inadequate scheme. In short it's a bloody disgrace that not only shows the Government in a bad light, it reflects badly on the country too.

It was pressure from the campaign spearheaded by Dan Hardie and helped by the Times that forced the Government to do the barest minimum with what looks like great reluctance. Now we need to apply more pressure to persuade the Government to go all the way and do the decent thing for once without ineffective half-measures.

Please write a polite letter to your MP about this. Dan has more details on how best to do this and gives helpful talking points. You can also use the very handy WriteToThem.com service to find and contact your MP. Lib Dem MP Lynne Featherstone has retabled her Early Day Motion (EDM 401) which calls on the British Government to move further and faster on this issue. If you get a reply from your MP, be sure to send it to Dan Hardie at danhardie.blog@gmail.com so we can find out which MPs are supportive and which ones aren't. Please also take a moment to sign the petition which asks the Government to honour its pledge.

*UPDATE*

More bloggage from Dan Hardie, Bloggerheads, Mr Eugenides, Beau Bo D'Or...

Tags: Middle East, We Can't Turn Them Away, Iraq, UK Armed Forces, Asylum, Refugees, Iraqi Interpreters,UK Politics

The Truth About the 'Special Relationship' With The Empire

2007-12-03T05:28:00.000Z

Image courtesy of Beau Bo D'Or

A couple of years ago when I was new to blogging I wrote a post entitled "At what point does America become an empire?" Although the post raised some good points about the United States having troops in 70 percent of the world’s countries and about the subservience of so many states including Britain to the whims of US presidents, the title was naive. It's pretty obvious to anyone now that the United States is indeed an empire and has been for over a century. The Sunday Times provides us with the latest confirmation about the true status of the "Special Relationship".

US says it has right to kidnap British citizens
AMERICA has told Britain that it can “kidnap” British citizens if they are wanted for crimes in the United States.
A senior lawyer for the American government has told the Court of Appeal in London that kidnapping foreign citizens is permissible under American law because the US Supreme Court has sanctioned it.
The admission will alarm the British business community after the case of the so-called NatWest Three, bankers who were extradited to America on fraud charges. More than a dozen other British executives, including senior managers at British Airways and BAE Systems, are under investigation by the US authorities and could face criminal charges in America.
Until now it was commonly assumed that US law permitted kidnapping only in the “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects.
The American government has for the first time made it clear in a British court that the law applies to anyone, British or otherwise, suspected of a crime by Washington. [My emphasis]
Legal experts confirmed this weekend that America viewed extradition as just one way of getting foreign suspects back to face trial. Rendition, or kidnapping, dates back to 19th-century bounty hunting and Washington believes it is still legitimate.

What is surprising about this isn't so much the arrogant assumption by America that it can do whatever the fuck it likes to anyone anywhere, it's the casual announcement that this is indeed the case after years of pretending that rules applied to everyone and sovereignty was, well, sovereignty. And not so much as a whimper from our oh so compliant government, a government, we may as well remind ourselves, that allows America to sack British ministers or rewrite the speeches for visiting Prime Ministers, command our armed forces, and use the country as convenient location to extend its power in Europe and beyond. In a way I'm grateful for the belated honesty. Now we know that Britain isn't even regarded any longer by the American regime as a client state - we have now graduated from what historians refer to as 'informal empire' when discussing the British Empire (the sphere of influence beyond the frontiers of the formal empire) to part of America's formal empire.

Another thing I find interesting is that there is a (very small) political party in Britain called UKIP which stands for UK Independence Party that bangs on and on ad nauseam about how Europe robs this country of its sovereignty (with some justification at times) and never has anything to say about the far more serious erosion of British sovereignty by the United States. After all, France, for example, doesn't have 10,000 troops stationed here and doesn't dictate who can or cannot be a minister. As part of the EU, Britain does at least have some sort of input on EU policy. This isn't the case with America where we just do as we are told and make no contribution to US policy. Our extradition treaties within the EU are reciprocal, unlike the one-sided arrangement we have with the USA. If UKIP really believes in UK independence and wishes to be taken seriously, it should look beyond the EU as well.

American power comes largely from our obedience to it. Without that the USA would have a much more difficult task in ruling us. I suggest that it's time we started disentangling ourselves from the USA, both militarily and economically (especially seeing as our economy suffers every time America mismanages its economy and its currency is going down the pan). It is after all a foreign country even if it does use the same language. We could start by asking the USA what right it has to kidnap British citizens because the last time I looked, the US supreme court had no jurisdiction here in the UK. We might then ask the USA if they would remove their troops and bases from Britain. Why are they here? Nazi Germany was defeated in 1945 and the Cold War ended nearly 20 years ago. Finally we should tell the USA that we are quite able to formulate our own economic and foreign policy and strike alliances with whoever we wish. And if America does insist on kidnapping British citizens, then the next time an American citizen is wanted for a crime over here we could consider kidnapping that person and just announce that we've decided it's legal to do so. Somehow I don't think the USA would regard that as legitimate or fair.

Tags: American Empire, US Politics, Extraordinary Rendition

Now We Are Two

2007-12-03T05:25:00.000Z

Today is the second anniversary of The Nether-World. Yup, I've been doing this blogging malarkey for two full years now and I have to admit to being surprised that I've stuck at it for so long. This year other commitments have prevented me from posting as much as I would have liked to, in fact posts for 2007 looks pretty scarce when compared with 2006. However, one thing I've learned from all this is not to become a slave to stat counts. I'm hoping to be able to post more often both here and elsewhere in the coming year but blogging will have to be balanced out with other things.

Despite the relative scarcity of posts here, it has been quite an eventful year. 2007 saw the long-overdue departure of Tony Blair from Downing Street. This followed a police investigation into dodgy donations to the Labour Party for which no one was charged (which took many of us by surprise). We now have a new Prime Minister and a new police investigation into dodgy donations to the Labour Party - so much for Gordon Brown's "New kind of politics". New Labour under Brown has continued with Tony Blair's themes of incompetence, unaccountability, autocracy, corruption and sleaze and will no doubt continue to do so until this discredited party is forced from office (not that I expect anything different from the Tories). The international scene has been dominated by speculation of an impending war with Iran which I still see as a distinct possibility if not a certainty. We've also had the on-going nightmare in Iraq and the intractable Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

This year has also been a year of campaigning. There is the on going campaign to get a proper inquiry into the London bombings of 2005, the campaign to persuade the government to do the decent thing for once and grant asylum in the UK to Iraqi employees who worked for British forces, and the campaign to stop the bloody crackdown on peaceful protesters in Burma. Closer to home, bloggers from across the political spectrum joined forces to bring a cyber-stalker to justice and to make a stand for freedom of speech when an Uzbek gangster tried to silence bloggers for daring to report the allegations against him using his team of shysters.

As well as unity there was division in 2007, numerous blog wars broke out which, for the most part, I stayed out of. I did however get into a scrap with a genuine card-carrying Nazi and Hitler apologist from across the pond which I'm happy to say I won when she was curtailed from spewing out her racial hatred and incitements to violence (clear abuses of free speech) by having her numerous blogs shut down on at least two platforms.

I intend to carry on blogging in 2008 and onwards when hopefully we'll see some more positive developments in Britain and abroad. Bush's time in office is nearly at an end and we can look forward to seeing the last of him in early 2009 (we can only pray that he doesn't do too much more damage before then). Around the same time (a little later probably) the people of Britain will pronounce their verdict on Gordon Brown. Whatever happens I want to be around to comment on it so many thanks to all the people who keep reading this blog.

Tags: Blogging

Letting The Iraqi Employees Die

2007-11-29T04:35:00.000Z

Since the woefully inadequate non-solution to the problem of granting asylum in the UK to Iraqi employees of the British armed forces and diplomatic services proposed by David Miliband (explained here), things have seemed pretty quiet on the issue. However, the problem has not gone away as the Government has no doubt hoped it would. Dan Hardie has continued to work tirelessly to get a fair deal for these people who have risked their lives and those of their families to help improve things in their country. Whatever our views on the invasion and occupation of Iraq may be (and I've always been completely against it) we have a clear duty to protect those who have helped us, to abandon them is dishonourable and an unacceptable betrayal which will undoubtedly affect future missions where we rely on the local population to help.

The situation for the Iraqi employees has become so desperate that some of these people are contacting Dan directly begging him for help. Dan has been told by some Labour MPs that David Miliband doesn't regard the matter as urgent. Miliband is dead wrong on this, the situation is very urgent indeed, so once again it is up to us to help him to realise this. I'll let Dan explain (I'm reproducing his post in full):

Letting them die
I've had emails from three people who claim to be - and who almost certainly are- Iraqi former employees of the British Government. All three say that they and their former colleagues are still at risk of death for their 'collaboration'.
We'll call the first man Employee One. He worked for the British for three years: 'I started in the beginning of the war with Commandos (in 30 of March 2003) then continued with 23 Pioneer Regt, and in 08 / 07 / 2003 I have joined the Labour Support Unit (LSU)'. His British friends knew him as Chris. The British Government has announced that he can apply for help if he can transport himself to the British base outside Basra, or to the Embassies in Syria or Jordan. It doesn't seem to occur to anyone that there might be problems with this. I can email and telephone this man: so can any Foreign Office official. It should not be impossible to verify his story and then send him the funds he needs to get to a less unsafe Arab country. But that is not happening.
Here's an email exchange we had the other day. My questions are in italics.
Are you still in Iraq?

'Yes, I'm still hidden in somewhere in the hell of Basra.'
Is there any reason you cannot travel to the British Army base at Basra Airbase to ask for asylum?
'Of course, we cannot travel to BIA (Basra International Airbase) due to the militia keep watched all the ways to BIA and they got their own fake check points there although, we claimed for asylum through the internet (we sent our application to the claim office at BIA). But we afraid that the British are going to take a long time to process our claims also we are very worried if they will offer just some money instead of asylum, please sir inform all the British people that we looking for asylum and just the asylum will save our lives, also we can't travel to Syria anymore to claim for asylum there as the Syrian government issued new conditions for Iraqis who want to travel to their country.'
Can you tell me how and when the militias threatened you?
'In 2006 I have threatened by militia that hated me because I work and help coalition forces in Iraq, I told my bosses about that but they said we can't do anything for you because we have nothing to do with civilian and we don't have any army rules or orders to help you, then I continued my daily work with British army, few days later the militia attacked my house trying to catch me but I was at the work at that time, they beaten my family and told them: we want your son or we will kill all of you!!!!
'Since that day I decided to leave my job and change my home place but until this moment the militia trying to find and kill me, I'm always changing my place trying to hidden from them, they know that I left my job but they don't care, they just want to kill me they called me collaborator and traitor and they asked everybody know me about my place, they told them: anyone know anything about (name) he should tell us immediately and also they said: we will never give up until we catch (name). They work for ministry of interior so they controlled most of government departments and they work under that cover.'
Do you have any family members who are also threatened by militias or who depend on you? If so, how many of them are there and how old are they?
'Of course, my family depends on me especially in the finance side as I'm the older son between seven sons and daughters they got, on other hand my parents cannot working as they are very old.'
Employee Two is in Syria, and is applying for aid from the British Embassy in Damascus. He can prove that he has worked for the British for over 12 months, after the magic date of 1st January 2005. But he still isn't safe.
He is staying illegally in Syria, having considerably over-run the 15-day visa on which he entered the country. He's been obliged to get forms for asylum or resettlement aid from the Syrian Government security men who guard the British Embassy. He tells me 'If I see any Syrian officer i really get fear , because of my expired visa.' The British Government, which asked us to accept that it was invading Iraq in part because of its horror at the brutality of the Ba'athist dictatorship, is now perfectly happy to leave its own former employees to the mercies of Syrian Ba'athists.
Colleagues of this man are also hiding in Damascus and are even worse off than he is, because they don't meet the perverse and arbitrary time stipulations. He writes: 'I know 4 former interpreters worked less than a year (for the British: DH), but they went to the embassy and they filled the paper with out telling the guards we had worked for less than a year. The Syrian guards have got instructions from the embassy (British Embassy in Damascus: DH), that (they) do not give that form to any interpreter who worked for British less than a year or any former interpreter who worked in 2003 and fled to Syria before 2005.'
Employee Three sent me copies of his Army ID card and photos of him with smiling Scottish soldiers. He worked for the Army in 2003, who then recommended that he work for Erinys- a private security firm which the British Government hired to form an Oil Protection Force. Both when working for the Army and when working for the British Government's proxies, he was identified as a target by the militias. The British Government made him a death squad target.
That same British Government will not be giving him any kind of assistance; not even a small cash handout to help him live elsewhere in the Middle East. It has announced that it will not help any Iraqi whose direct employment ended before the 1st January 2005: that Johnson Beharry was awarded the Victoria Cross for acts of courage in May and June 2004, when the Mahdi Army attacked the British and were fought off with many hundreds of casualties.
You've heard this before, but it's now more important than ever. The last lot of letters and emails got the Government to announce a change in policy: an inadequate change,badly implemented. The next lot of letters and emails will force the Government to announce another change in policy, one that will be properly implemented and will not be based on leaving people to die.
Your MP's address is The House of Commons, Westminster, London, SW1A 0AA.
His or her email address is probably SURNAMEINITIAL@parliament.uk
(e.g. BROWNG@parliament.uk). Please use the talking points below to send an email and a print letter to your MP, and chase them for an answer. And be courteous: an insulted MP will not raise this matter with Ministers, and that will lead to more avoidable deaths. When you get an answer, email me at danhardie.blog@gmail.com and let me know what they said.
I agree that it seems egocentric for me to ask you to put your MP in touch with me: but what alternatives do we have? I am in direct contact with Iraqi employees pleading with me to do something to help them. I cannot help them. Members of Parliament- including David Miliband- need to read what these Iraqis are saying.
Talking points:
On October 9th David Miliband announced that the British Government would assist former employees in Iraq, so long as they had worked for it after 1st January 2005 and for 12 months or more. That abandons several hundred Iraqis who have been targeted for murder because they worked for the British before that date- and in 2004 fighting between the Mahdi Army and the British was at its peak- or because they worked for less than that period, often leaving their jobs at the end of a British battalion's six-month tour. The British Government must help Iraqi employees on the basis of the risk they face, not according to an arbitrary time stipulation. This only affects a few hundred Iraqis, whom we are well able to shelter, and for whom we have a direct moral responsibility.

Even those Iraqi employees who qualify for assistance are not being properly assisted. Iraqis in Basra are not able to apply via the British Army in Basra International Airbase, since it is ringed with militia checkpoints. Iraqi ex-employees in Damascus are being screened by Syrian policemen guarding the British Embassy and delayed by lengthy bureaucratic procedures when they apply for asylum, although many of them are illegally overstaying their Syrian visas and face deportation back to Iraq.
A blogger called Dan Hardie is directly in touch with a number of Iraqi employees via email and phone. He is willing to brief MPs- as concisely as possible- either over the phone or via email. He can be reached at danhardie.blog@gmail.com
Footnote re authenticity: The ISPs confirm that one email was definitely sent from Damascus, the others from satellite networks serving the Middle East including Iraq. I have spoken to two of them on the phone, using Iraqi telephone numbers. (Many thanks to Alex Harrowell and Surreptitious Evil for their work on this.) A Times journalist in the region tells me that 'Employee Two' and 'Employee Three' are certainly authentic: she has been in contact with them herself. The other has sent me scanned copies of his British Army IDs, and photographs of him with smiling soldiers, as well as a lengthy reference from Erinys. He either is who he says he is, or has stolen the documents of the man he is claiming to be: and given that he names soldiers who know him, and will have to turn up in person and be photographed to claim asylum at a British Embassy, he would have no chance of perpetrating a successful fraud.
Footnote re the wider refugee crisis: Conceivably the Sunni-Shi'ite violence in the American-occupied areas of Iraq is diminishing: this story, quoting Iraqi Government sources, argues that it is, though the Iraqi Government has a vested interest in claiming an improvement. In response, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees argues that there has been no improvement. But even if the UNHCR is wrong, the Iraqi Government is right and things have got better for refugees from Baghdad and neighbouring areas that is, sadly, irrelevant to Britain's employees in the South of the country. What's still the case is that Basra is now effectively under the control of various Shi'ite groups who have varying amounts of loathing for the British and their Iraqi employees, and that one of the most powerful is the Mahdi Army, who fought several outright battles against British troops and have a long track record of killing 'Locally Employed Civilians'.

I wrote to my MP over this affair during the summer and received a prompt reply with the promise of a response from David Miliband when it came. It never came. I will be writing again to my MP shortly using the information contained here. I urge any British citizen reading this to do the same. When things get so bad that those in desperate need feel they have to contact powerless bloggers instead of the relevant branches of Government begging for help, then the Government needs to be forced into taking effective action.

Tags: Middle East, We Can't Turn Them Away, Iraq, UK Armed Forces, Asylum, Refugees, Iraqi Interpreters,UK Politics

Last Chance To Sign The Petition For An Inquiry Into 7/7

2007-11-19T06:28:00.000Z

On Tuesday November 20th, the petition that I created on the Downing Street website which calls for a full inquiry into the London bombings of July 7th 2005 will expire. The petition has been up for a year and has only attracted 521 signatures so far. I believe that this is because I have failed to publicise it properly rather than there being little desire among people for a proper investigation into that atrocity. Over the last year there have been numerous developments in the campaign for an independent inquiry into 7/7; the most notable being the legal challenge to the Government's refusal to hold an inquiry by survivors of the bombings and relatives of the deceased. Eventually the Government will have to bow to public pressure for an inquiry, but for the moment it's delaying as much as possible, presumably to protect its members - even the inquest is being held up.

We now know that contrary to what we were told by our leaders, at least one of the bombers were was being tracked by the security services and that there had been several warnings from foreign governments of an imminent attack, warnings that were apparently ignored (as was the warning from an IT expert who worked with the bombers). In order to prevent any possible future atrocity (God forbid) or at least be better prepared for one, a full inquiry into the events of July 7 2005 is essential. Unfortunately the concept of accountability in public office has seriously diminished under New Labour, whether in the Government or, as we have recently seen, in the police force. But asking for an inquiry into 7/7 was never about finding scapegoats, it was about learning the lessons from that event. The petition will shortly expire and I expect there will be some disingenuous message from Number Ten explaining how the fifth largest economy in the world cannot afford the resources to prevent terrorism and investigate its own failings at the same time. Or we will be told yet again that the 'Narrative' (.pdf), ISC report (.pdf) and London Assembly investigation (.pdf) are somehow sufficient substitutes for an impartial investigation. However, the campaign for an inquiry will continue. In the meantime please take a moment to add your name to the petition.

Tags: 7/7, London Bombings, July 7, Terrorism

The Launch of Liberal Conspiracy

2007-11-05T07:01:00.000Z

Do you keep hearing that there is a vast liberal conspiracy running Britain? Well there isn't much evidence of one is there? In fact these days there is more evidence to support the contrary with right-of-centre sites like ConservativeHome, 18 Doughty Street, Stand Up Speak Up, Platform 10 and CampaignTogether.com.

As New Labour lurches ever more to the right using the Conservative 'opposition' as a repository of 'new' ideas, the British liberal-left is increasingly disenfranchised. Although there are plenty of left-wing bloggers, they rarely join forces. Most organs of the British liberal-left only have traditionally static websites or blogs attached to existing websites. So perhaps it's time to create a genuine Liberal Conspiracy. This is an idea who's time has come. In fact it's long overdue. Liberal Conspiracy is a new on-line project. It's more than a blog with a collection of bloggers, its aim is to foster an intellectual revival of the liberal-left and be better organised when campaigning. Its long-term aim is to help build national and local grass-roots organisations in order to re-connect with people. Along with bloggers, there will be input from think-tanks, media organisations, websites, analysts, academics and journalists.

Liberal Conspiracy is the brainchild of Sunny Hundal of Pickled Politics. Over to him:

As times change, so does the nature of politics. New generations grow up, global conflicts come and go, the world keeps evolving and technology turns everything topsy-turvy. But if there’s one thing remarkable about our generation in Britain, it’s how badly Politics has become a dirty word.
People are less interested in political parties than they have ever been. As old loyalties start to fray, people are becoming more passionate about issues rather than being on the left or the right. And as the world gets smaller and more accessible, they demand more from their politicians. And even if party affiliations don’t matter as much - values, ideas and beliefs continue to be popular.
And so a new Liberal Conspiracy for a new era is born today. We plan to do things slightly differently here.
We want to discuss and promote traditional liberal-left ideas and values than political parties. We want to challenge the old order, discuss where Britain needs to go from here and make it happen. We want to campaign and push for our values: more equality, a better democracy, better standards of living, social justice, eradicating poverty, promoting non-violence etc, to be higher up the political agenda.
And this is where the internet comes in - we want you to get involved in this Conspiracy. We want to pioneer a new de-centralised approach to discussion and campaigning for these liberal-left ideals. We want to take advantage of everything from blogs, Facebook and YouTube to grass-roots mobilisation and campaigning to change Britain for the better.
The title of the site is obviously a mischievous take on the constantly promoted idea that there is a vast liberal conspiracy running Britain. Of course there isn’t. But while we’re here, we might as well create one.

Liberal Conspiracy will have contributions from some well-known left-of-centre bloggers and writers including:
Aaron Heath, Alan T, Chris Dillow, Daniel Davies, Dave Hill, Dave Osler, David T, Donald Strachan, Garry Smith, Henry Midgley, Jamie K, Jess McCabe, Justin McKeating, Kate Belgrave, Natalie Bennett, Olivia Skinner, Padraig Reidy, Paul Linford, Robert Sharp, Unity and Sunny Hundal, Oh, and me.

Also contributing will be:
Cath Elliott, aid worker Conor Foley, online campaigner Paul Hilder, aspiring politician Kerron Cross and policy officer Zohra Moosa.

Media organisations taking part include:
The Guardian, New Statesman magazine and openDemocracy.

And there will be input from think-tanks including:
Demos, Fabian Society, Runnymede Trust, New Jewish Thought and New Generation Network.

Sunny Hundal will be on BBC Radio 4’s PM programme this afternoon discussing the project and there will be an article in the Guardian about it later in the week.

Liberal Conspiracy aims to be the network hub where other organisations sharing its ideals are promoted and their campaigns highlighted. Curious? If so, do check out the new site, link to it and spread the word.

Tags: Liberal Conspiracy, UK Politics, Democracy, Blogging

Warning: Armed, Dangerous Lunatics On The Loose In London

2007-11-01T23:38:00.000Z

Following the verdict at the Old Bailey in which the Metropolitan Police was found guilty of "a catastrophic series of errors" in the events leading to the public execution of Jean Charles de Menezes, we hear that the killers who shot the Brazilian electrician seven times in the head with dum-dum bullets at point blank range while he was being held down (and still managed to miss several times) are back on active duty and have been for some time.

Despite their notoriety, the pair's identity has never been revealed, and their names are a closely guarded secret within the elite Met firearms unit, now known as CO19.
Retired superintendent Phil Manns, a former commander of the firearms unit, has described the pair as "incredibly mature, well-adjusted, competent, professional officers" [my emphasis].

So, the assassins who actually pulled the trigger(s) have been found to be in no way culpable. What a surprise! Perhaps the officer in charge of the botched operation is in some way responsible. You'd think so wouldn't you? But no, apparently not:

In a highly unusual move, the judge, Mr Justice Henriques, allowed the jury to insert a rider, or caveat, into the verdict stating that Cressida Dick, the commander in charge of the operation on the day, should not be held personally culpable for the events.

Well then, if neither the assassins or their commander are in any way responsible for the tragedy then surely the blame must fall on the The Metropolitan Police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair. Wrong again:

The Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said after the verdict that he would not be resigning and would go back to New Scotland Yard to "get on with my job". The prime minister, Gordon Brown, and the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, said Sir Ian retained their "full confidence".

In other words absolutely no one is to be held accountable for the cold-blooded murder if an innocent man. Why is this?

The judge called the case a "corporate failure, not an individual failure". He said it was hard to decide the appropriate fine because "any costs to the police is a cost against a police officer on the streets".

Well how bloody convenient! In the end the fine that was decided was a pathetic £175,000 with £385,000 costs. And this after the Met had tried to cover its tracks with a tissue of lies and had done its best to smear Jean Charles de Menezes. There are so many lies, smears and episodes of incompetence that it's hard to know where to start, so in no particular order:

The Met dishonestly manipulated a photo of Jean Charles de Menezes in an attempt to make him look more like Hussain Osman, one of the men who tried to bomb London's transport network on July 21 2005.

We were told by the Met that Jean Charles de Menezes was killed because he acted in an "aggressive and threatening manner" when challenged and was "up for it"

The facts that Jean Charles de Menezes had apparently taken cocaine and had a fake stamp in his passport* was used as a smear to somehow justify the execution.

After the shooting, we were told that Jean Charles de Menezes was an illegal alien. He wasn't

We were told that he was wearing bulky coat, refused to stop when challenged and then vaulted the ticket barriers. Not true

We were told that there was no CCTV footage at the Stockwell tube station. There was (at least in the ticket area, no footage was recorded on the train or on the platform as far as we know).

The spotter who was supposed to verify Osman's identity had gone to the toilet and was absent from his post when de Menezes left his home.

A suspected bomber was allowed to make two bus journeys, but were told to hold back and wait for the firearms team to handle the arrest.

And yet, Cressida Dick told the court that she never gave an order to shoot. The Operation Kratos "shoot-to-kill" procedures were never invoked, and no Kratos codeword was issued. Somebody must have.

Add to all this the chaos and confusion in the control room and the fact that we now allow Israel, of all countries, to train Met Police firearms officers, we can see that this was an disaster just waiting to happen. This still leaves us with the question as to why with all these catalogued errors and lies, no one is being prosecuted or asked to resign? The "corporate failure, not an individual failure" line just doesn't wash. After a fuck-up this big there should be a whole bunch of resignations if not prosecutions. When corporations fail, resignations follow.

The only answer is that the Police are never held responsible when they kill innocent people and those responsible are often promoted so as to rub our noses in it. The only time accountability came close was when the police gunned down Harry Stanley in 1999 and five years later when the officers responsible were suspended from duty, over 100 armed officers returned their weapons in protest leading to the reinstatement of the culprits. In the case of the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes a clue was given by defence counsel Ronald Thwaites QC as to what would happen:

A successful prosecution of the Metropolitan police over the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes would be like putting handcuffs on detectives and would damage the fight against serious crime in the UK, a jury was told yesterday.
A trial at the Old Bailey heard that the attempt to prosecute police over the death of the 27-year-old Brazilian, who was shot dead by police marksman at the height of the anti-terrorist operation in July 2005, was based on ignorance and hindsight.
"The prosecution in this case are attempting to dictate to the police how they should do their job from a position of near ignorance," defence counsel Ronald Thwaites QC told the jury.
He added that a conviction would "inhibit their effectiveness in combating serious crime" and said the trial should be viewed as a test case. "The prosecution do not appear to understand how the police organise themselves, how they conduct major operations, or how they work."

There you have it. Thankfully a jury was able to provide the correct verdict despite the lies given by the Met, but no prosecutions will come of it. And this was known before the trial ever started. The only way the incompetence could be highlighted at all was by charging the Met with "health and safety" violations. What a damning indictment of British justice!

* Clarification from John Lettice in the comments:
The Home Office never categorically stated that his leave to remain stamp was forged. It suggested that it was in a statement issued after an extensive record search, but didn't go as far as saying so. Covered in this article in The Register towards the end (another good piece by The Reg here).

More bloggage on this from Ten Percent, Mask of Anarchy, Obsolete, Paul Linford, Iain Dale, Pickled Politics, Bloggerheads, Chicken Yoghurt, Beau Bo D'Or, The Yorkshire Ranter, Blood & Treasure...

Tags: Jean Charles de Menezes, Stockwell Police Shooting, UK Police, British Justice, Ian Blair

Improve Your Vocabulary And Feed The Needy

2007-10-28T06:46:00.000Z

A friend sent me this link and I think it's a good idea so I thought I'd pass it on. FreeRice.com is a game in which you are given a word and you have to click on one of a selection of answers that best defines that word. It's that simple. If you get it right, you get a harder word. If you get it wrong, you get an easier word. For every correct answer, they donate 10 grains of rice to the United Nations World Food Program. This is made possible by the sponsors who advertise on the site. Ten Grains of rice obviously isn't very much but it's quite an addictive game and before long you can find that you've donated thousands of grains of rice. The more people who play, the more rice gets given to people who need it. This website started on 7 October and so far 293,172,530 grains of rice have been donated.

FreeRice is a sister site of the world poverty site, Poverty.com and has two stated goals:

To provide English vocabulary to everyone for free.
To help end world hunger by providing free rice to hungry people.

Two very laudable goals, I'm sure you'll agree. Will it end world hunger? Well I doubt it but it can certainly help alleviate some hunger and malnutrition. As for the goal of improving vocabulary, I've learned a few new words and my vocabulary isn't that bad (stop laughing at the back). Anyway, this is a fun way to pass a few idle minutes and do some good at the same time. The site has a FAQ for further information. Please give it a go and pass it on to others so more people can play.

Tags: FreeRice, Hunger, Poverty, Education

The Burmese Junta's Accomplices

2007-10-27T07:37:00.000+01:00

There's a new article in the Guardian by John Pilger that I've just read. It's about Burma and it's called 'The politics of hypocrisy'. It seems to be an edited version of an address he gave to a London meeting, 'Freedom Writ Large', organized by PEN and the Writers Network of Burma, on October 25. It's an interesting piece and I urge you to read it in full. Here are some highlights.

In Britain, the official PR line has changed; Burma is a favourite New Labour "cause"; Gordon Brown has written a platitudinous chapter in a book about his admiration of Suu Kyi. On Thursday, he wrote a letter to Pen, waffling about prisoners of conscience, no doubt part of his current empty theme of "returning liberty" when none can be returned without a fight. As for Burma, the essence of Britain's compliance and collusion has not changed. British tour firms - such as Orient Express and Asean Explorer - are able to make a handsome profit on the suffering of the Burmese people. Aquatic, a sort of mini-Halliburton, has its snout in the same trough, together with Rolls-Royce and others that use Burmese teak.
When did Brown or Blair ever use their platforms at the CBI and in the City of London to name and shame those British companies that make money on the back of the Burmese people? When did a British prime minister call for the EU to plug the loopholes of arms supply to Burma. The reason ought to be obvious. The British government is itself one of the world's leading arms suppliers. Next week, the dictator of Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah, whose tyranny gorges itself on British arms, will receive a state visit. On Thursday the Brown government approved Washington's latest fabricated prelude to a criminal attack on Iran - as if the horrors of Iraq and Afghanistan were not enough for the "liberal" lionhearts in Downing Street and Whitehall.
And when did a British prime minister call on its ally and client, Israel, to end its long and sinister relationship with the Burmese junta? Or does Israel's immunity and impunity also cover its supply of weapons technology to Burma and its reported training of the junta's most feared internal security thugs? Of course, that is not unusual. The Australian government - so vocal lately in its condemnation of the junta - has not stopped the Australian Federal Police training Burma's internal security forces.
Read the whole article.

Other crises have shunted Burma further down the news agenda but the problems are obviously still there. We knew that despite protestations from the Government that British companies are supporting the regime, as are French and American companies. So it's no surprise that Chevron and Total are part of a consortium with the junta and that Halliburton was involved in the construction of the gas pipline which was built with forced labour. Thanks to the Burma Campaign UK we can easily find out which companies are still propping up the vile regime in Burma and learn of the lamentable lack of meaningful action from the EU. And blogs like Ten Percent have done an excellent job in helping to keep the issue alive with active campaigning. What isn't being as widely reported on is the arming of the regime and the countries which are involved. It seems that the EU arms embargo on Burma has been compromised by India by their selling of European made military helicopters to the junta. Russia, China and Ukraine have also been arming the regime supplying it with everything from small arms to surface-to-air missiles. Israel too is playing a role in keeping the junta armed so that it can slaughter defenceless monks. Israel and Burma have developed a military pact. And when it comes to supporting despotic regimes, Israel has plenty of previous.

It could be that the Myanmar troops who've been shooting demonstrators to death were using Uzi submachine guns that Israeli arms dealers sold to the country's military dictatorship. According to Jane's Intelligence Weekly, Israeli "security companies" are believed to have sold Uzis and parts from Galil assault rifles to the junta. Israeli mercenaries are also said to have trained Myanmar's infamously repressive police force.
"Given its sensitive nature, it is difficult to see how this assistance could be given to Myanmar without the active involvement, or at least the full knowledge and support, of the Israeli government," reported Jane's in 2000. Myanmar, formerly Burma, has been one of the world's worst police states since 1988.
[...]
To the list of military clients Israel never liked advertising, you can add the dictatorships that once ruled Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Nicaragua and other Latin American countries, as well as past and/or present military dictatorships in Congo, Angola, Sierra Leone and other African nations.
The sadistic Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega owed his life, and his power, to Mike Harari, the ex-Mossad agent who led the team of mercenaries that was Noriega's palace guard. The Israeli arch-mercenary Yair Klein and his boys trained Colombia's right-wing death squads, drug cartels and whoever else would meet his price. When the apartheid regime of South Africa was having problems with black demonstrators, Israeli "security companies" sold the white rulers electrified fences and gravel-spraying trucks.

Back in March questions were asked in Parliament about Israel's help to Robert Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe which took the form of advice on demonstration control and supplies of tear gas. Isolating and starving the Burmese junta of revenue is obviously the best way to get it to stop its crackdown on protesters and take steps leading to democratic reform, but as long as so many countries are arming the junta to the teeth then there is little incentive for it to co-operate.

Tags: Freedom, Burma, Myanmar, Protest, Democracy, Israel, Arms Trade, John Pilger

Leader of Banana Republic Criticises Cuba

2007-10-25T04:02:00.000+01:00

I realise no one is going to fall off their chair at the news that George Bush is a hypocrite, but it is worth noting every instance of his hypocrisy. The latest episode took the form of his ramblings over Cuba.

George Bush, the US president, has urged Cubans to push for democratic change, insisting Fidel Castro’s government was a "disgraced and dying order".

Well, look who's talking! Time to bring out the old 'Pots & Kettles' cliché again. He goes on...

"America will have no part in giving oxygen to a criminal regime victimising its own people,"

Really? Does this mean that America is withdrawing its support for Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Israel and Colombia? No, of course it doesn't. The difference is that Cuba has an oppressive government that has a different ideology to the oppressive governments America likes to support. And worse still, Cuba has had the audacity to survive despite America's 45 year embargo on the country and numerous botched attempts to destabilise it.

Bush also described Cuba as "a tropical gulag". Well, here is is at least partially correct. There's an area of Cuba called Guantanamo Bay 'leased' by America. That can certainly be called a gulag.

Bush's rhetoric could also be used to describe his own country. Take a look at this list:

Spying without court warrants on Americans in violation of both the US Constitution and the FISA statute.

The denial of habeas corpus, attorney-client privilege, due process, and Geneva Conventions protections to those, American or foreign, designated without evidence as terrorists or enemy combatants.

The justification and use of torture to coerce confessions and the kidnapping of foreign nationals who are sent to be tortured in foreign prisons.

The initiation of military aggression against states based on intentional deception by the Bush administration of the US public and the United Nations, and the intentional fabrication of "evidence" to justify unprovoked aggression against sovereign states, which is a war crime under the Nuremberg standard established by the US.

Violation of the oath of office to defend the US Constitution by practically every member of the Bush administration and Congress.

Bush has assaulted the separation of powers and the rule of law with "signing statements" and "executive orders" that President Nixon’s White House Counsel John Dean says are commands that treat the co-equal branches of government and the electorate as subservient to executive authority. In April 2006, Boston Globe reporter Charlie Savage listed 750 laws "challenged" by the Bush administration. Not even the demonized president of Iran claims to be above the law.

Genocide against the people of Iraq where one million Iraqis have died as a result of Bush’s invasion and several million Iraqis are displaced persons.

Massive civilian casualties in Afghanistan, which is a form of genocide in which military force is routinely applied to unarmed noncombatants.

Massive corruption in which no-bid contracts are issued to Republican corporations in exchange for kickbacks to political campaigns.

The theft of two national elections as documented in books by Mark Crispin Miller and Greg Palast.

And this is without going into any great detail about America's international atrocities before Bush came to power. There is a lot wrong with the Cuban regime. It certainly can't be called a democracy and it's no bastion of liberty, but when Cuba's failings are compared with the crimes committed by the good old US of A, we get a sense of perspective. And Bush's hypocrisy isn't lost on those Cubans who are wondering why America is harbouring a known terrorist, Luis Posada Carriles, who is allowed to roam free in the USA despite all of Dubya's anti-terrorist rhetoric. You don't suppose it's because he's an ex CIA operative who has consistently targeted Cubans and even tried to assassinate Castro? No, surely not. It is apparently because America is concerned that his extradition might lead to him being tortured. You couldn't make this up could you?

*UPDATE*

More on this topic from Mask of Anarchy.

Tags: Cuba, Castro, George Bush, Guantanamo, Democracy, Torture, US Politics

Iraqi Employees: Another Letter To Your MP

2007-10-12T03:13:00.000+01:00

The campaign to persuade the Government to do the decent thing and grant asylum in the UK to those Iraqis who have risked their lives and those of their families by working in non-combat capacities for the armed forces and diplomatic services is growing and showing signs of progress. The Government has belatedly recognised that there is a problem but has done the barest minimum to solve the crisis. Its offer of a few quid to employees or asylum only if employees can prove they have worked for the British for 12 months is woefully inadequate and will mean that many Iraqi employees will fall through the cracks and be left in dire peril of the death squads. Richard Beeston, Diplomatic Editor of The Times explains the inadequacies succinctly:

Too little: The average compensation package envisaged for Iraqis would amount to a few thousand pounds. This will not cover the cost of moving a family from Iraq and resettling in a neighbouring country such as Jordan or Syria.
Too late: in the two months it has taken the Government to make its decision Iraqi staff have been killed, kidnapped and forced to flee the country. Final details of the package have still not been completed.
Too slow: The asylum process could take months or years to complete for Iraqi employees. Under the current arrangement only 300 can be processed a year by the Home Office.
Too complicated: The Government’s proposal is complicated and bureaucratic. The Danes airlifted all their locally engaged staff and their families from Iraq in one decisive move.
Unfair: Iraqi interpreters often worked for six-month periods, the normal tour of duty of a British army battalion in Iraq. Many have no written records of their service. Under the present arrangements many Iraqis who deserve help and are at risk will receive nothing.

Obviously much more needs to be done and the best way to get results is for as many of us as possible to write to our MPs and politely show them the seriousness of the problem and the shortcomings in the current Government position. From the recent meeting that was held at Portcullis House, it was apparent that there is cross-party support for a more extensive solution and some MPs are willing to help and eager to learn more. The first letter-writing campaign was very successful in getting the Government to change its policy (albeit not nearly far enough). Dan Hardie has put together a very helpful set of bullet points that can be included in a letter to your MP and also a useful template that can be adapted to make a more persuasive letter. Do please adapt this template to make your letter more personal as this will be much more effective than many identical letters. As always, please be courteous.

If you don't know who your MP is, you can find out here. Post is usually the best way to contact your MP but you can also use the excellent writetothem.com service. When you get a reply, please inform Dan via the comments on his blog post, or by email at danhardie.blog@gmail.com so that we can see which MPs we can work with, and which need persuading. Over to Dan:

Bullet points:

David Miliband’s Statement on ‘Iraq: Locally Recruited Civilians’ of 9th October stated that Britain will help to resettle- in the wider Middle East, or in the United Kingdom- Iraqis who can prove that they have worked for this country’s soldiers or diplomats for a continuous period of twelve months.

Hundreds of Iraqis have been targeted for assassination for having worked for this country. Some have worked for a period of twelve months exclusively for the British and can prove this. Some have not but have been pinpointed for murder anyway. We have a responsibility to save these people from being murdered for the ‘crime’ of working for the British.

There are a lot of local employees who fled their jobs before 12 months precisely because they had been targeted, or who did a 6-month tour for one British battalion and were then told to go and work for the Americans, or who did 12 months or more with interruptions, or who the Army didn't give proper documentation too.

Iraqi staff members must be given shelter not because of their provable length of service but according to whether they have been identified for murder by local death squads. This can be investigated on the spot by Army officers and referred rapidly to London: the process needs to start now.

Mr Miliband’s statement did not mention the families of Iraqi employees. As Iraqi militias also murder the families of their ‘enemies’, we must resettle our employees’ families as well. Mark Brockway, an ex-soldier who hired many Iraqis, estimates that we are talking about a maximum of 700 Iraqis to resettle: this country admits 190,000 immigrants net every year.

Iraqis have already been targeted for murder for having worked for this country. We will be shamed if we allow more to be killed for the same reason. Our soldiers, who are angry at this betrayal, and our diplomats, will be placed at risk if they gain a reputation for abandoning their local helpers.
Form letter:
(MP’s Name)
The House Of Commons
Westminster
London. SW1A 0AA.

Your full name and address.

Dear (MP’s Name)
As you will have read in the Times, Iraqis who have worked for British soldiers or diplomats are being targeted for murder by local militia. An unknown number have already been killed and more have been forced into hiding.
On October 9th, David Miliband’s statement on ‘Locally Recruited Civilians’ in Iraq said that Britain would offer assistance with resettlement for Iraqis who had worked with British forces, but only if they could prove that they had worked for us for 12 months or more. This is effectively leaving hundreds of Iraqis, who have risked their lives for this country’s forces, to the mercy of the death squads.
Mark Brockway, a former soldier who employed many Iraqis, told Channel Four News on 9th October that local staff often worked for six months for British units, during which time they were frequently identified as ‘enemies’ by the local militias. I believe that the Government has a direct responsibility for the safety of these people.
I feel that it is morally unacceptable that this country is following such a policy. I also believe it will endanger our soldiers and diplomats in Iraq and Afghanistan. Can I please ask you to write to the Foreign Office, and also to the Home Office which has charge of asylum policy, to ask why the Government is prepared to ignore the plight of hundreds of people who were placed at risk serving this country’s soldiers.
Yours sincerely

It might also be a good idea to ask your MP to sign the recently created Early Day Motion (EDM) tabled by Lynne Featherstone MP. It reads:

EDM 2057
IRAQI EMPLOYEES
09.10.2007
Tabled by: Featherstone, Lynne

That this House recognises the courage of Iraqis who have worked alongside British troops and diplomats in Southern Iraq, often saving British lives; notes that many such Iraqis have been targeted for murder by Iraqi militias in Basra, and that an unknown number have already been killed, whilst many others are in hiding; further recognises that many Iraqis who have worked for fewer than 12 months for the UK are threatened by death squads; and therefore calls upon the Prime Minister to meet the UK's moral obligations by offering resettlement to all Iraqis who are threatened with death for the `crime' of helping British troops and diplomats.

Thanks once again.

For those unfamiliar with this campaign, here are some pointers.

Tags: Middle East, We Can't Turn Them Away, Iraq, UK Armed Forces, Asylum, Refugees, Iraqi Interpreters,UK Politics

A Quick Write-up of Last Night's Meeting About Iraqi Employees

2007-10-10T16:56:00.000+01:00

This was a very interesting meeting and I'm glad I was able to attend. My only regret was that I didn't take any notes so this is largely from memory. First of all, much kudos to Dan Hardie for working so hard to make this meeting happen and for chairing it so well. The speakers at the meeting were:

Richard Beeston, senior Foreign Correspondent for ‘The Times’ newspaper

Mark Brockway, a former Warrant Officer in the Territorial Royal Engineers, who ran the British Army’s Quick Impact Reconstruction Projects in 2003 and who hired a great many Iraqi staff in 2003.

Ed Vaizey MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

Chris Bryant, Labour MP for the Rhondda

Lynne Featherstone MP, Liberal Democrat spokesperson for International Development

Andrew Alderson, banker responsible for reconstruction projects in Basra

Richard Beeston spoke about the important work Iraqi interpreters do for the military and also for journalists and diplomats. The Times has provided the best media coverage by far on the plight of Iraqi employees and the moral obligation Britain has to protect them. From Richard Beeston's speech it was evident that the plight of Iraqi employees is an issue close to his heart. He has reported on last night's meeting in today's edition of The Times with an excellent article that highlights the problems with David Miliband's offer in a concise way.

Serious shortcomings have been exposed in the Government’s plan to offer compensation or resettlement to hundreds of serving and former staff in Iraq.
During a discussion at the House of Commons last night, MPs and campaigners argued that the assistance package, announced by David Miliband in a written statement, was too little and too late.
The Government ordered a review two months ago, after The Times highlighted the plight of Iraqi interpreters working for the British who face persecution by insurgents for being “collaborators”.
The compensation package would offer existing or former staff who worked for the British for more than 12 months either a cash payment to help them to resettle in Iraq or the region, or the chance to move to Britain.
Read on

Mark Brockway spoke at some length on his experiences in Basra working with Iraqi interpreters. He was passionate about the problem and showed a Power Point presentation which outlined various aspects of the issue in great detail. He stressed the urgency of solving this issue now as former employees are in hiding while death squads tour the Basra region looking for them and threatening their families. Mark also relayed the close relationship military personnel have with their interpreters and recounted some incidences where they actually saved British lives. From his presentation and speech, Mark showed just how inadequate David Miliband's announcement is. It is impossible for many of the Iraqi employees to prove that they have been working for the British for 12 months because of the chaotic record keeping of the British. Added to this problem is the fact that many interpreters move to different employers. For instance, an interpreter may work for six months with a British regiment then move to work in a diplomatic capacity or translate for the Americans - and nearly always under a false name. Mr Brockway also highlighted the extreme difficulties of moving to Syria or Jordan in order to get asylum.

Conservative MP, Ed Vaizey stressed the cross-party support for the plight of Iraqi employees and how this is a moral issue rather than a political one. This sentiment was echoed by Labour MP,Chris Bryant and Lib Dem MP Lynne Featherstone. All three MPs acknowledged the important points about the danger of the '12 month' stipulation but that as frontbenchers they aren't free to criticise this without checking with their bosses, as it's an implicit commitment to a new policy. However, they all showed a keen interest to learn more and continue to campaign. Chris Bryant invited campaigners to email him with important points which ought to be raised and Lynne Featherstone drafted an Early Day Motion (EDM) for MPs to sign.

Andrew Alderson is a banker who was responsible for the allocation of funds for reconstruction projects in the Basra region. He has written a book on his experiences called Bankrolling Basra which has just shot up to the top of my list of books I want to read. Mr Alderson spoke of the problems he had in protecting the Iraqis he employed, particularly his personal assistant who was shot three times and left for dead while people close to her were murdered. She has now found asylum in Australia. She was further endangered by being visited by military personnel while recovering in a Basra hospital. This story outlined another part of the problem. If someone is wounded or killed while out on patrol with the British army, for instance, it is reported as such. However if an Iraqi employee is murdered on his or her way home, away from military or diplomatic installations, it is merely chalked up as just another murder in a lawless area.

There is a new website which has information about the campaign to grant asylum to Iraqi employees. It's called We Owe It To Them and it has details of the dangers faced by these people and their families. It is well worth viewing and supporting.

Among the people in the audience was an Iraqi exile, Mazin, who had worked for a Kuwaiti construction firm which constructed US bases. He gave a passionate speech on the difficulties in finding asylum and the horrors experienced by his friends and family. It was very moving and did much to ram home the message of the urgent need to solve this problem.

More bloggage on this from David Cole, Sunny Hundal in CiF, Yorkshire Ranter (I'll add the reports of other bloggers as I find them).

*UPDATE*

Here is a Radio Five clip with Dan Hardie explaining the inadequacies of the Government's current position on asylum for Iraqi employees of the British armed forces (courtesy of Ministry Of Truth).

For those unfamiliar with this campaign, here are some pointers.

Tags: Middle East, We Can't Turn Them Away, Iraq, UK Armed Forces, Asylum, Refugees, Iraqi Interpreters,UK Politics

Iraqi Employees - An Important Update

2007-10-09T04:53:00.000+01:00

There have been a few developments recently in the campaign to persuade our government to do the decent thing and grant asylum in the UK Iraqi employees of the British armed forces who are in danger of being tortured and killed. Let's start with the news that the Government seems to be responding to the pressure being put on it.

Iraqi interpreters and other key support staff who have risked their lives to work for Britain are to be allowed to settle in the United Kingdom, The Times has learnt.
Hundreds of interpreters and their families are to be given assistance to leave Iraq, where they live under fear of death squads because they collaborated with British forces. Those wishing to remain in Iraq or relocate to neighbouring countries will be helped to resettle.

Sounds good doesn't it? Except that it doesn't go anywhere near far enough and looks like being a classic case of New Labour smoke and mirrors trickery (remember the troop withdrawal announcement that wasn't what it seemed?). The timing was interesting to say the least, coming as it did just days after the US Senate approved an amendment by Senator Kennedy to a defence bill that will make it easier for America’s Iraqi friends to be allowed into the USA as refugees. The news also came before a meeting at Portcullis House where the plight of Iraqi employees will be discussed. Gordon Brown made a statement to Parliament in which he appeared to be heading in the right direction on this issue but provided few details.

Inadequate though it is, Brown's statement has at least brought the plight of Iraqi employees back onto the news agenda and today's meeting at Portcullis House will be interesting and I urge people to go if possible (I'm trying to juggle some other commitments so I can attend). Dan Hardie has done a sterling job of getting the campaign to this stage:

Meeting now in Portcullis House
And another announcement: the meeting on Iraqi Employees will take place on the same day (Tuesday 9th October) at the same time (7-9pm) with the same speakers in a changed venue very close to the original one: the Attlee Suite in Portcullis House (MPs’ own office block, opposite Parliament). The long-suffering and highly efficient Mette Kahlin will be standing outside the door of the old venue (Committee Room 14 in Parliament) pointing the way to the new venue, which is the Attlee Suite in Portcullis House. How do you get there? Walk to Parliament and it’s the very ugly building at the corner of Bridge Street and Victoria Embankment, facing Big Ben (or St. Stephen’s Tower, if you really must). If you get lost, which you won’t, ask one of the police officers, who are actually very helpful, or just look round for the biggest eyesore. It is unmissably hideous.
Poor Mette had the job, a couple of hours ago, of telling me that - despite the fact that she booked the room back in the first week of September, despite the fact that not double-booking rooms is a task open to the simplest person capable of using something like Outlook, despite the fact that a struggling provincial hotel could manage to avoid doing something like this- a Cabinet Minister claimed that she had previously booked the room and so we were bounced out. Oh, imagine my joy. It quite took the pleasure out of learning that I was a qualified physician [link added].
Salt in the wound: the Cabinet Minister in question is Hazel Blears. Silver lining: we can get TV crews in to film in the Attlee Suite, which we couldn’t in Committee Room 14. That’s Committee Room 14, our old venue. And of course our new venue is the Attlee Suite in Portcullis House.

With a little more pressure on the Government, it should be possible to get a more satisfactory solution for those Iraqis (all of them - and their families) who have risked their lives by working for the British army in non-combat capacities. For those unfamiliar with this campaign, here are some pointers.

Tags: Middle East, We Can't Turn Them Away, Iraq, UK Armed Forces, Asylum, Refugees, Iraqi Interpreters,UK Politics

Free Burma

2007-10-04T03:32:00.000+01:00

Click on the banner to learn more. Oh, and there is this (via Justin):

MARCH FOR BURMA
GLOBAL DAY OF ACTION

SATURDAY 6th OCTOBER 2007

Join us for a march and rally in solidarity with the monks and peaceful demonstrators in Burma and demand international action.

Assemble at Tate Britain, SW1P 4RG at 11.00am
Nearest tube Pimlico

March to Trafalgar Square for a rally at 12.45pm

For more information visit www.burmacampaign.org.uk, call 020 7324 4710 or email demo@burmacampaign.org.uk or call Crisis Action on 020 7324 4752/4758

Organisations supporting this march include: Amnesty International, Avaaz, British Muslim Forum, Burma Campaign UK, BDMA UK, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, Crescent Network UK, Federation of Student Islamic Societies, GMB,GNNSJ UK, Hindu Council UK, Human Rights Watch, Muslim Council of Britain, NUS, Prospect, Sikh Aid, Sufi Muslim Council, ‘Support the Monks in Burma’ (Facebook), TUC, United Nations Association of the UK, Unison, Unite the Union, Waging Peace.

For the latest news on the situation in Burma I urge you to read the excellent series of posts by Ten Percent.

Tags: Freedom, Burma, Myanmar, Protest, Democracy

Alisher 'Capone' Usmanov And The Continuing Campaign

2007-09-28T13:40:00.000+01:00

Let's start by linking once again to the post which started this story and remind ourselves that there has been no legal procedure, so Craig Murray's allegations are nothing more than that (just as Alisher Usmanov's allegations that he's been libeled are simply allegations). I don't have much in the way of new information on the Alisher Usmanov affair at the moment. For the latest news the best place to go is Tim Ireland's interim blog which is dedicated to the matter.

Tim and Clive have been trying to get hold of the correspondence between Fasthosts and Schillings which led to the plug being pulled on their stable of websites. Both companies have ignored the requests. Tim is now looking for summaries of this story so if you can reduce this saga to about 200 words, do let him know. The campaign by bloggers to protect freedom of speech from the likes of Usmanov and his shysters has now reached as far as Japan (via Postman Patel). Anyway, while we await further developments, I thought I'd play with Photoshop some more.

Click to enlarge

The resemblance between Alisher Usmanov and Al Capone is striking don't ya think?

My previous posts on this issue can be found here. More and more people are posting and re-posting on this story and the cross-spectrum support really is unprecedented. Let's keep the momentum going. Justin has done an excellent job of collecting the links to the Usmanov affair but now the updated list of supporters has moved over to Bloggerheads so if you do post something on it, let Tim or Aaron Heath (tyger AT tygerland DOT net) know and be added to the list which is now over 300 strong. Don't worry about arriving late for the party, this thing is far from over and the more the merrier.

Tags: Freedom of Speech, Islom Karimov, Alisher Usmanov, Blogging, Arsenal

The Crisis In Burma

2007-09-27T08:58:00.000+01:00

I was going to write a long link-laden piece about the situation in Burma but I don't think it's really necessary. You'd have to be from another planet to not know what's going on over there and I doubt I could add much more to the excellent series of posts by Ten Percent and Mask of Anarchy who have covered this crisis comprehensively. I urge you to read them and also the information in the useful set of links compiled by Mr Eugenides.

I've been watching the events unfolding in Burma with a growing sense of alarm. It was apparently too much to hope for that the peaceful protests led by the monks would not be put down with the brutality we've come to expect from the thuggish Junta running that country. The people of Burma (Myanmar is the name given to the country by the Junta) have been crying out for democracy for years (silently because of the awful repression) and have largely been ignored. All they ask is that the West stops investing in the corrupt regime and applies strong diplomatic pressure to secure change, something that so far hasn't really happened. The pathetic hand wringing and rhetoric we've heard from the UN and the EU is just that. We can be grateful, however, that the media is reporting reasonably well on the crisis and Burma is now getting the attention it deserves. But the momentum has to be kept up otherwise some other crisis will push Burma down the news agenda and an opportunity to achieve a relatively peaceful regime change will have been lost.

Of course there isn't that much we can do other than to pressure our leaders to isolate the regime and to force the companies investing in Burma to stop. Another (admittedly very small) thing we can do is to sign this petition to Chinese President Hu Jintao and the UN Security Council and get others to do so.

To Chinese President Hu Jintao and the UN Security Council: We stand alongside the citizens of Burma in their peaceful protests. We urge you to oppose a violent crackdown on the demonstrators, and to support genuine reconciliation and democracy in Burma. We pledge to hold you accountable for any further bloodshed.

China is an ally of Burma and both countries have atrocious human rights records. China, however is in a difficult position. Because of the Olympic Games soon to be hosted in Beijing, the country is trying to buff up its international image and supporting a violent crack down on peaceful protesters isn't going to help. China is also keen to be seen as a major player on the world stage and is even sending peace-keepers to Darfur. India too has a role to play in resolving this crisis as does Russia. Both China and Russia are, at the moment opposing meaningful sanctions.

Even president Bush now seems to be belatedly taking the matter a bit more seriously (though he needs to go much further) and Gordon Brown is also calling for tougher sanctions but we've heard Gordon wax lyrical about Burma before without any noticeable effect.

There has been some debate recently about the amount of investment British companies have in Burma. The Foreign Office denies that Britain is the second biggest investor in the country.

Contrary to some reports, the UK is not the second largest investor in Burma. The State Peace and Development Council’s investment records are far from transparent, but we believe the figure they quote for the UK is cumulative, and includes investments by companies such as Premier Oil and British American Tobacco who have since withdrawn. It also includes investments that were agreed but never occurred. The DTI figures for current active UK investment are very low. For example in 2003, the DTI recorded UK foreign direct investment flows into Burma as negligible (i.e. between £0 and £500,000).

This statement is however, misleading as there are British companies abroad trading with Burma. From the Burma Campaign UK (a good source for the latest news) there is a long list of companies (some British) which support the military regime. Among them are:

Abercrombie & Kent
Chevron
Rolls-Royce
Siemens
Suzuki
Total Oil

One thing we can do is to write to some of these companies and pressure them to stop supporting such a vile regime.

The protesters in Burma are showing incredible bravery by continuing with their peaceful protests despite the worsening violence inflicted on them by the authorities who are now launching raids on monasteries. They deserve whatever support we are able to give. This situation is urgent and could turn into a bloodbath very quickly.

*UPDATE*

Much of the news coming out of Burma has been because of bloggers or reporters using the internet. Now the Burmese junta is trying to cut off communications with the outside world by closing off internet access and telephone links. This is bad news and an ominous sign of things to come. So is this.

*UPDATE 2*

One of the monks holed up in a monastery surrounded by soldiers stated what the protesters are asking for. They want three steps to be taken:

The first step is to reduce all commodity prices, fuel prices, rice and cooking oil prices immediately.
The second step – release all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and all detainees arrested during ongoing demonstrations over the fuel price hike.
The third step – enter a dialogue with pro-democracy forces for national reconciliation immediately, to resolve the crisis and difficulties facing and suffered by the people.

Not too unreasonable under the circumstances.

Tags: Freedom, Burma, Myanmar, Protest, Democracy

Face inating

2007-09-27T06:18:00.000+01:00

This is such a bizarre story, I just had to blog it.

Face off
What do an executed prisoner from Texas, a former UN official and an eccentric Cornish aristocrat have in common? They've all had their death masks made by sculptor and Alabama 3 member Nick Reynolds. By Duncan Campbell
This is a story about a lethal injection, a body in the back of a hired car, a cabin in the wilds of Texas, a gallery of death masks, the theme song of the TV series The Sopranos, the son of the mastermind of the great train robbery and an artist baroness from Chiswick who wears a bra made out of latex pigs' heads.
Read on, it's fascinating

Incidentally, Alabama 3 are playing at the Astoria in London on October 7. This is a gig I'm really looking forward to.

Tags: Alabama 3

That Tom Wise Speech on Usmanov

2007-09-27T05:29:00.000+01:00

UKIP MEP Tom Wise did what other politicians should have done and didn't. I'm certainly no fan of UKIP but you have to give credit where it's due. By speaking out about the unsavoury Alisher Usmanov and his nefarious past during the Saryusz-Wolski report “Towards a common European foreign policy on energy”, Mr Wise managed to blow yet another gaping hole in the tactics used by Usmanov and his lawyers. This is what Shillings' intentions were:

Laura Tyler, of Schillings, said they did not intend to sue Murray directly because they did not want to give him a platform to express his views.

In other words they didn't want to go to court and risk Craig Murray's allegations being found to be correct so they managed to (temporarily) silence him without any legal process, merely by sending threatening letters to his web hosting company who duly pulled the plug (and in the process, took out numerous other websites, all except one of which had made no mention whatsoever of Usmanov). As we have seen, that tactic (predictably) exploded in their faces.

Tom Wise's short speech means that the allegations he made in the European Parliament can now be reported on (provided the MSM finds the courage to do so) as they are published under Parliamentary privilege. You can hear an MP3 of the speech by clicking on the button below (via Swiss Metablog).

Click To Play

And, courtesy of England Expects (via), we have a transcript:

When the EU talks of a 'Common Foreign Policy' on energy, you need to be aware of exactly who you propose to do business with.
President Putin is on record as saying "The Commission should be under no illusions, if it wants to buy Russian gas; it has to deal with the Russian state".
Gazprom is not a private company; it is a state controlled tool of Russian foreign policy.
It is, moreover, in the hands of Putin's political henchmen, and allegedly organised crime.
Take for example Alisher Usmanov. This gentleman, the son of a Communist apparatchik, is chairman of Gazprom Invest Holdings, the group that handles Gazprom's business activities outside Russia. He is the man you will be dealing with. He is the man who cuts off gas supplies if client states dare to question Gazprom's demands.
Allegedly a gangster and racketeer, he served a 6 year jail sentence in the Soviet Union in the 1980s, his eventual pardon coming at the behest of Uzbek mafia chief and heroin overlord Gafur Rakimov, described as Usmanov's "mentor".
Usmanov bought the newspaper 'Kommersant'. 3 months later, the journalist Ivan Safronov, a critic of the Putin regime who just weeks earlier had been "vigorously interrogated" by the FSB, as the KGB is now called, mysteriously fell to his death from his apartment window still clutching a bag of shopping.
According to Craig Murray, former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, it was Usmanov who ordered the cutting off of supplies to Georgia earlier this year. Please take note, Mr President, that the Kremlin has now refused to sanction the construction of a pipeline to the EU over Georgian territory.
These are the people you want to do business with. These are the people you are moulding your 'foreign policy on energy' around.
Mr Commissioner, good luck: You'll need it.

Marvellous stuff! Now what was that again about not wanting to give Craig Murray a platform to express his views Schillings?

More information about this story continues to emerge. Tim Ireland, now back on-line, has published a detailed timeline of the events leading up to, and following on from the closure of the websites which is well worth reading.

Tags: Freedom of Speech, Islom Karimov, Alisher Usmanov, Blogging, Arsenal

The Usmanov Affair: A Quick Update

2007-09-25T15:57:00.000+01:00

I'm still updating my original post but I thought this piece of information should have have its own post.

Tim Ireland is back blogging - not yet on his Bloggerheads site but on an interim site (hopefully Schillings-proof) set up to deal with this issue while the technical difficulties of getting Bloggerheads back on-line are resolved. This will obviously be a good source of information on the issue. Please spread the word and add this site to your blogroll: Bloggerheads: The Alisher Usmanov Affair. Thanks.

In other developments, the list of supporters is still growing fast. Among the latest links is a very good piece from Dan Hardie and another from Chris Applegate. Also The Committee To Protect Bloggers has an article. The mainstream media are still very slow on this story but The Register has covered it and Associated Press have too which might speed things up a bit.

I've just noticed that Bob Piper and Boris Johnson's sites have fallen off the net again. I hope this is just a temporary glitch. If anyone has any further information as to what happened or sees these blogs on-line again, please let me know in the comments.

*UPDATE*

I've just heard from Tim that the disappearance of Bob Piper and Boris Johnson's blogs is due to server demand...Phew!

Tags: Freedom of Speech, Islom Karimov, Alisher Usmanov, Blogging, Arsenal