The biggest threat to world peace today?
Say what you will about the continuing catastrophe in Iraq, or indeed, the desires of Pyongyang for Nuclear weapons, but to my mind, the biggest threat to the stability of the world is Iran.
A year ago I was hopeful for improvement. The previous President, Rafsanjani, was a ‘reformist’, a moderate in Iran’s radical Islamist theocracy. After eight years as President some laws were being relaxed. Women could walk around outside holding their boyfriends hands, though admittedly, homosexuals were still stoned to death or forced to have sex changes. This was a vile regime, though it was moving, albeit slowly, in the right direction.
Last August the bubble of Iranian reform burst. The hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected to office. We are not talking about a hardliner in the British sense of the word; he is not a Michael Howard, or even David Davis; Ahmadinejad is closer to Hitler. This is epitomised by his rabid anti-Semitism, ultra-conservative policies and his desires for the reassertion of Iranian military might.
The West was hopeful he would warm to the international community. The Europeans used the carrot of economic aid, in an effort to coax Iran off their nuclear ambitions. This has failed woefully. Indeed, Ahmadinejad has continually stated that Iran has every right to Nuclear weapons. Some members of the left and the anti-war movement even support him, arguing “Israel has them, why not Iran?”
I was once sympathetic to these views. Now I realise the crucial difference between the Israelis and the Iranians; the Iranians, to quote their new President, want Israel “wiped off the map” while the Israelis want to live in peaceful co-existence. The criticisms of Israel’s human rights abuses in Palestine are compelling, but Ahmadinejad’s desire for Israel’s destruction is tantamount to the Holocaust. In short, the Iranian regime is evil and must be stopped.
In light of Ahmadinejad’s comments, it is imperative Iran never acquires Nuclear weapons. If they do they will be able to hold the West hostage and may even provide nuclear capabilities to the network of terrorist organisations working within the Middle East. In the coming months I would not be surprised to hear of Israeli strikes at Iran’s Bushehr reactor.
“Will Iran dare risk a confrontation with Israel?” I hear you ask. This is a valid point. However, when we take a look inside the psyche of the Iranian regime we see this may not be an issue. Ahmadinejad is a staunch supporter of the Islamic revolution in Iran, a revolution which, during the Iraq-Iran war, used children as human mine clearing devices, promising them Paradise in the name of Allah.
Can the representatives of a regime that sent children as young as nine to die as human minefield clearers be trusted with nuclear weapons? The unequivocal answer to this is no. Will the regime care about the innocents residing in Jerusalem? In all likelihood, I think not.
In the 1980’s Israel averted its destruction at the hands of Iraq by attacking the Osirak reactor. Today they are attempting to go through diplomatic means first, calling for Iran’s expulsion from the UN. This will not work; the UN is a crumbling Cold War institution that could not prevent genocide in Darfur or Yugoslavia, or hold the US and Britain accountable for the invasion of Iraq.
During the 1980’s a confrontation with Saddam was becoming unavoidable. He was a tyrannical dictator hell-bent on creating an Arab super state like his hero Nebuchadnezzar. The state of Israel did not fit into this design. The bombing of Osirak only postponed the inevitable, i.e., a war with Israel or the West. The first Gulf War signalled that this prophecy had come to fruition. Likewise, Ahmadinejad wants the destruction of Israel, and likewise, wants a worldwide Islamic revolution, saying in June this year, “the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world”. The parallels are unnerving.
I fear, with Ahmadinejad and the Imams in charge of Iran, war is not just likely, but almost a certainty. Indeed, we have been seeing the beginning stages of this conflict with Iran’s alleged involvement in southern Iraq.
Our only hope is that the UN or other Middle Eastern leaders will somehow persuade Ahmadinejad to back down his pressure on Israel. If this fails, as I fear it will, Israeli war planes will be flying over Bushehr in the coming months. Many will criticise this as pre-emptive aggression, but in the face of a modern day Hitler, what other option is there?
A wonderful day for Iraq!!
- the former dictator continues his trail
- the Iraqi constitution is backed by 78% to 21%
- oh, and George Galloway is fucked up the ass by the US senaters he proffessed to have destroyed early last summer. mwahahahahahah
Ex Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq Tariq Aziz has grassed on George Galloway to the US Senate Subcommittee investigating the oil for favours scandal.
Aziz states:
Mr Galloway asked him for political funding in allocations in the name of Mr Zureikat. The Senate report shows that Mr Zureikat received $740,000 from Taurus Petroleum on July 27, 2000, as commission for its purchase of 2,645,068 barrels of oil.
Galloway denied he had reveived a single cent of the money before the Senate back in May:
The report then reproduces money-transfer documents from Citibank showing that Mr Zureikat sent Mr Galloway’s wife $150,000 on August 3, 2000. They conclude that the amount was “largely” Oil-for-Food money because Mr Zureikat’s account contained $848,683 at the time, only $38,000 of which did not come from the programme.
Galloway denies the latest evidence:
“I’ve already comprehensively dealt with these allegations — under oath in the High Court and the US Senate — to the Charity Commission and in innumerable media inquiries.”
That might have been a mistake:
Senator Coleman said. “We take very seriously the importance of testifying honestly before this committee . . .” he said. “We will forward matters relating to Galloway’s false and misleading statements to the proper authorities here and in Great Britain.”
A Senate aide said that Mr Galloway would be referred to the Justice Department for investigation of possible perjury, false statement and obstruction of a congressional proceeding — all “Class A” felonies carrying a sentence of up to five years and a $250,000 fine.
LATEST CHARGES
Since the May hearing, the Subcommittee has obtained further evidence establishing that the Hussein regime granted oil allocations to Galloway and his political organization, the “Mariam Appeal.” The Subcommittee report reveals that British MP George Galloway made false or misleading statements before the Subcommittee on May 17, 2005. Specifically, evidence gathered by the Subcommittee reveals:
* Galloway personally solicited and was granted eight oil allocations totaling 23 million barrels from the Hussein government from 1999 through 2003;
* Galloway’s wife, Dr. Amineh Abu-Zayyad, received approximately $150,000 in connection with one allocation of oil;
* Galloway’s political campaign, the Mariam Appeal, received at least $446,000 in connection with several allocations granted under the Oil-for-Food Program;
* Illegal “surcharge” payments in excess of $1.6 million were paid to the Hussein regime in connection with the oil allocations granted to Galloway and the Mariam Appeal; and
* Galloway knowingly made false or misleading statements under oath before the Subcommittee at its hearing on May 17, 2005.
The findings revealed in the Subcommittee’s report have been substantiated by personal interviews with high-level members of the Hussein regime, oil traders with personal knowledge of Galloway’s involvement, and extensive bank records that provide a conclusive paper trail and corroborate Galloway’s personal knowledge and involvement in the Oil-for-Food scandal.
Come on! everybody sing!...... Oh Happy days!
Bastards
i will have to check my dates, but some important events that should be noted.
Nick Griffin will be appearing at Leeds Crown Court on what i think is the 2nd of November. he should be roundly booed for being a racist cunt!
On the 8th, somewhere in Bradford, Mr Galloway will be making an appearence. He too should be hounded and roundly booed for being an appeaser of fascism.
Hopefully i can make it to both events.
'blogging-lite'
I must apologise for ‘blogging-lite’ at the moment. I’m currently trying to commit myself to writing some deliciously worked prose (Greek essay) whilst also experiencing the full fruits of Manchester. Spare time is not readily forthcoming, a synthesis of socialising and work is obviously required; unfortunately this leaves less time for blogging than one would hope. For this I must apologise.
Hopefully, normal service will be resumed soon.
Fraternally comrades,
Alexander
for Jenny
I hope to get something written in the Student Newspaper here in Manc; my first attempt is this diatribe against George Galloway and RESPECT.
ive had to leave a fair bit out - which is a frustration - and it probably needs more ammendments.
here it is anyway.
The amoral paradox of the anti-war movement
-
One of the things I expected from University was political discourse; especially politics with leftist principles. It would appear that some of the most active ‘leftist’ political organisations on campus are significantly lacking in principles.
Firstly, I must emphasise, this is not an attack on the anti-war movement as a whole. I was passionately anti-war, I wear my ‘George Bush is a Stupid Monkey’ t-shirt with pride and have even class myself as a Socialist. However, I have become increasingly disillusioned with what I once thought was my political foundation. This is a condemnation of those who lead the anti-war organisations and whose politics are riddled with contradictions and the stench of quasi-totalitarian fancies. It does not take long, when you pick at its surface, to reveal the true allegiances of some, if not many, of the anti-war movements leaders.
Let us begin with the most rabid of anti-war vocalists; George Galloway.
In 1994; Galloway, who admits he knew of the genocidal tendencies of Saddam, saluted the dictator with the words, “Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability." Galloway now claims this was a “salute to the Iraqi people”. Utter bullshit. The words following these were; “I want you to know that we are with you, hatta al-nasr, hatta al-nasr, hatta al-Quds [until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem]."
This cock-sucking of Saddam shouldn’t surprise; he has a history of supporting tyrannical dictatorships, once describing the collapse of the Soviet Union (50 million dead) as “the biggest catastrophe of my life”. The Ba'thist President of Syria, Bashar al-Assad is, according to Galloway, “the last castle of Arab dignity”. He appears to have forgotten the occupation of Lebanon and the recent assassination of Rafik Hariri.
Galloway was against getting rid of Milosevic, thus aligning himself with Serbian ethnic cleansers; implementers of the genocide against Bosnian Muslims. On the subject of genocide, he also claims in his autobiography that the post-Gulf war massacres of Kurds and Shia were part of “a civil war that involved massive violence on both sides.” This is plainly ridiculous, and yet another example of Galloway siding with Saddam and his vile kleptocracy.
The list goes on, and as Christopher Hitchens said in their recent debate, “the man’s hunt for a tyrannical fatherland never ends”.
I’m not talking about a few badly chosen words, this is just the tip of the sewage pile. Tariq Aziz, the de facto head of Government under Saddam is considerd a “dear friend”, with whom he spent the Christmas holiday of 1999 and even admits to have been “disco dancing” with. Galloway also organised a petition to try and gain his release from American custody.
As well as having a close personal friendship with one of the chief cabinet ministers of a tyrannical dictator, Mr Galloway also cohorts with known exacerbates of terrorism, for instance, Dr Muhammad al-Massari.
Galloway ran the 'Massari Must Stay Campaign' against his deportation in the early 1990's. The good doctor runs a lovely pro-terrorist website featuring advice on how to slit throats. The BBC has also previously reported that al-Massari helped Osama Bin Laden open a UK office in the mid-Nineties and now claims it is legitimate for Muslims to assassinate the Prime Minister.
Opposition to the Afghan invasion is another marked aspect of RESPECT’s agenda. It is one thing to be against the war in Iraq, but to suggest Afghans were better off under the rule of the Islamo-facsist Taliban is another altogether. One of the leaders of Manchester RESPECT gave her game away in a tirade against Bush (which I, on the whole, agreed with). She let slip that “Bush and Blair are trampling on Afghan democracy”. I questioned her on this point, citing the fact that 25% of the new Afghan parliament is reserved for women. In a country where five years ago women were oppressed second-class citizens they are now represented with women’s rights enshrined in the constitution. Despite the obvious problems in Afghanistan, this is undoubtedly a great step towards a better society. I have never seen a member of the Stop The War Coalition or RESPECT holding up signs calling for ‘women’s rights in Afghanistan’. They are obsessed with anti-Americanism in the face of real progress in a former hermit state.
Likewise, just as RESPCT appeases fascism in the form of the Taliban; the coalition manages to accommodate extreme homophobia within its ranks. According to the Electoral Commission, the largest donor to the Respect Party’s war-chest was a Dr Naseem. He gave 30% of their total budget of ₤53,486 and, three times what Galloway contributed. He was also the Respect candidate for Birmingham Perry Barr and a member of the party’s executive committee and an active campaigner.
Dr Naseem sports the usual right-wing religious fundamentalist hallmarks, the linking of homosexuality to paedophilia and saying both are “a danger to society”. But how, pray tell, does Naseem suggest we deal with public displays of homosexuality or “lewdness witnessed by several people”. The penalty for that is death.
The Muslim Association of Britain is also part of the RESPECT coalition. Its extreme homophobia and sexism make the Christian Coalition look tolerant and reasonable by comparison. It is also the British wing of the Muslim Brotherhood – which claims Hamas as its militant group in the Palestinian Territories and has as part of its motto “To die for Allah is our highest expectation”.
Some may criticise these examples as guilt by association; it is fair to say that in politics you cannot choose who supports your views or votes for you. But Dr Rahman provided 30% of the funding for the RESPECT campaign. Any decent person would reject money coming from someone who would gladly stone all homosexuals to death. This obviously isn’t the case for the morally repugnant RESPECT.
I could go further with examples of abhorrence among members of the RESPECT coalition; including the Socialist Workers Party and the MAB, but I must close this diatribe.
If I leave you with anything from this polemic, let me pose this to you: is it not true that just as Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo raise serious questions about the Americans commitment to Justice, Liberty and the Rule of Law, do the contradictions and moral paradoxes associated with members of the anti-war movement not bring into question, firstly their credibility, but most importantly whether, Galloway specifically, is anti-war at all? Certainly in my viewing of the evidence, and in the fight against fascism, it would appear that rather than being anti-war; Galloway is pro-war, just on the other side.
Bush and Blair backtrack on Saudi reform
President Bush has decided not to enforce any financial sanctions on Saudi Arabia, Washington's closest Arab ally in the war on terrorism, for failing to do enough to stop the modern-day slave trade in prostitutes, child sex workers and forced labourers.
The State Department accused Saudi Arabia and
13 other countries of failing to take even minimal actions to control
human trafficking. They include Cuba and Venezuela; those brave stalwarts of socialism; wildly revered by the idiots in the anti-American and quasi-totalitarian camps (ie the SWP and even certain members of the Guardianista).
The Associated Press has reported that two other countries - Ecuador and Kuwait - were given a complete pass on sanctions. Myanmar, Cuba and North Korea were the only countries "barred completely from receiving certain kinds of foreign aid."
Meanwhile, Tony Blair and John Reid, the defence secretary, have been holding secret talks with Saudi Arabia in pursuit of a huge arms deal worth up to £40bn, according to diplomatic sources.
The Guardian reports
here.
