A small revision of history
This is John Humphreys on the Today programme on Radio 4 earlier this week:
(Today, BBC Radio 4, 18 November 2015)
.
And there’s only one small thing wrong with that.
As the alert listeners at the OffGuardian blog spotted, the problem is that Humphreys’ statement is not only false, it’s the exact opposite of the truth.
“Well it’s more than two years since the Government, our Government, asked the House of Commons to approve military action against Islamic State in Syria and MPs said no – it was a devastating defeat.
It seemed to prove the end of David Cameron’s plans for British warplanes to join other Western forces in attacking them in Syria as well as in Iraq.”
The thing is, the 2013 vote was on attacking President Assad, not ISIS.
And who is it that Assad was, and is, fighting? Why, it’s ISIS, of course.
Had the vote been passed, as the Conservatives and most of the right-wing media now screaming for full-blown military action against the terrorists wanted, UK forces would now be on the same side as ISIS.
That’s quite an important detail to get wrong.
In a fascinating article published today, acclaimed BBC correspondent John Simpson bemoans “the British media’s ‘grotesquely selective’ reporting of deaths from terror attacks around the world”, and the standard of reporting on foreign affairs generally.
Simpson notes in the piece that he’s “really very kind of depressed about the way that newspapers and television has developed”.
It’s difficult not to agree with him.
Going by what John Simpson says, I’m wondering if he’s ever read Wings?
Its ok, it will sink into the public consciousness like a rohypnol induced brain bump. It ‘was’ Assad .. he was bad, now its .. umm … someone is bad. Soon it will be Scotland is bad.
Actually – with the BBC so tight with Spud’n’Co and the 1% .. we might even have Assad in the coach with Maj this time round.
[…] This is John Humphreys on the Today programme on Radio 4 earlier this week: (Today, BBC Radio 4, 18 November 2015) . And there's only one small thing wrong with that. As the alert listeners at the … […]
BBC proving yet again it has all the inside information at its fingertips … to rearrange at Her Majesty’s pleasure.
I hope my essay helps regain some good old balance: link to wp.me
The BBC own UK media and its run by hard line tories. John Humphreys new boss is just one of many blatant tory media liars but don’t say anything back at them, or else
link to dailymail.co.uk
The most grotesque aspect of this revison of history is not just that it happened but that it was perpitrated by someone within a group of seasoned real journalists, perhaps the last of their Tribe in the BBC..
DAMMIT, 1984 was supposed to be a warning not a blueprint.
All shame on the BBC.
An astonishing statement by John Humphreys. Begs the same old question about so called journalism – was it ignorance, arrogance, stupidity, or pushing someone’s agenda. Although here it sounds like a non interference agenda. Who knows!?
If the UK had bombed Assad’s forces, then perhaps ISIS would have progressed even further against a weakened opponent.
There’s a pattern to all this. Snap short term thinking leads to military action. The longer term consequences are never considered.
Clearly the consequences of action in Iraq by Bush/Blair must have been given no consideration whatsoever at the outset!
The Middle East is an incredibly complex area with local powers (Iran, Israel, Saudi, Turkey) manoeuvring for influence, tensions between Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, Jews, Seculars, and others, plus the ethnic mistakes of post-colonial borders. Interference by ‘outsiders’ like the US, UK, France, and Russia would be good, and possibly welcomed … if they were peace brokers!
“We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.”
The BBC in full Ministry of Truth mode.
I find it difficult to keep track of who we are supposed to hate from week to week,luckily,I found a handy guide.
link to en.wikipedia.org
Newly promoted hammer of the Scots and their vile democracy cheers on her newly promoted hammer of the Scots and their vile democracy boss
sarah smith ?@BBCsarahsmith Nov 16
Great to hear @bbcNickRobinson making such an impressive debut on @r4today. Well done. Even got live interview with PM on very first day
1 retweet 4 likes
Reply Retweet 1
Like 4
To be fair, they’re all so ridiculously tory Britnat tubthumper biased, the above is probably a parody twitter account. Even so…
It’s a good catch.
Hard to know how things would have been different if the Commons had approved of Cameron’s war plans but my guess is that the Middle East would still be a war zone.
[…] A small revision of history […]
so now we are going to bomb the mob who we armed and trained to fight against the bloke in secret who we wanted to bomb but couldnt.
So its a case of we asked you if we could bomb them you said no, so it must be okay to bomb the others then right.
bangs head on desk and we have the yanks already saying he will need to go to fit their new roadmap for elections and a stable government,have they seen Syria,oh lets put a new government in place one we like and leave them to fail in whats left of their wrecked country how could that possibly lead to more young Arab martyrs.
Yea you have to agree with J Simpson on that
Could the BBCbe challenged openly on this. It is a perfect example of how they are spreading misinformation to the gullible public.
Thanks again WoS for bringing this to our attention.
It may just be my own perception but I get the distinct impression hardly a day passes without some more people, particularly in Scotland, becoming aware they have been misled by all branches of the establishment throughout their lives.
It is indeed a rude awakening. I had my awakening way back around 1957 but had been rather suspicious since around 1952. My then best pal had got himself a, (behind the scenes), job with the BBC.
I used to go with him to the studio on Saturdays so as to remain in touch due to him needing to be in the Glasgow studio on Saturdays. (for the News insert to network news, Saturday football results and then The White Heather Club). We would never have seen each other otherwise.
I soon realised that not only were all the BBC, Hecht Heid ains, imported from London but London also directed everything BBC Scotland TV thought and did. I found it was then not possible for me to NOT then question everything the BBC broadcast in Scotland on both radio and TV.
As many wingers have observed, such knowledge, once realised, cannot be unlearned. The problem has always been to first catch a member of the public’s attention to the bias, and it is much more open and blatant now. Once their attention is drawn to it their views change almost instantly.
The pal? Oh! Him! I dropped him when he obviously moved over to the dark side. If each of us ca just draw a NO voter’s attention to an obvious BBC scam we have every chance of recruiting the vital percentage of voters needed to gain our independence.
Bombing one group of Syrians or killing a different group of Syrians, does it matter to the politicians in London.
Whatever the political reasons for UK action its not
like its part of a coherent policy that hopes to bring peace, stability, human rights, and freedom to anyone.
The sad truth is that any path to a peace will eventually involve talking to Bashar and to people like ISIL (Daesh)
and the voting Daily Mail readership wont want to hear that. And there are few if any politicians that will say it.
Anyway its been a whole year since we ended the £37bn and 13 year long tour of Afghanistan (Oct 2014).
link to medialens.org
UN “approval” or not I hope the SG stands firm against further escalation of war.
Without UK involvement in the post-Paris front against IS, Cameron will calculate he has little chance of concessions from the EU, which he needs to get a ‘stay-in-the-EU’ vote.
When Cameron meets Hollande on Monday, our Dave won’t be offering unconditional support and undying love to France. Instead he will offer Hollande a deal : You help us with EU concessions, we’ll help you defeat IS.
Alas, the BBC history re-writers at it again. You really have to watch em closely. Sneaky barstewards.
It’s only a matter of time before they will be saying that the vow was honoured, following an overwhelming NO vote……
Oh, wait a minute. 🙂
Also, the Radio Scotland coverage this morning failed to nail the question that, if there is no UN resolution, is it illegal? Amazing that that is not clarified.
I linked to “The Mayfair Set” by Adam Curtis a couple of threads ago. Covers how UK privatised overseas military action in the Middle East. In case you missed it:
link to youtube.com
@Capella 3:17pm
Pretty sure Cameron has already stated in the HoC that uk bombing will be “legal” whether UN sanctions it or not. Don’t know if his statement is based on anything other than what the old-boy network has told him. Okay yah.
OT Scotland Bill again
link to news.stv.tv
Rev, what you’ve possibly inadvertently stumbled upon is more important than it seems.
You see, it doesn’t really matter who they bomb in geopolitical terms. At the end of the day, who cares about Syria and its people?
To be clear, deposing Assad holds some appeal — his country has healthy oil reserves and would serve as a nice place to pester Iran from — and if you are going to drop bombs you might as well drop them in a way that furthers some vague notional objective. But there wasn’t any real pressing need to do it and we know that now.
No. The point in dropping bombs, regardless of who they fall on, is that it’s highly profitable. How many people reading this, for example, knew that it cost 1.5 million dollars to deploy one single cruise missile? We can only guess at the profit margins but, since it’s all tax-payers’ money, nobody is in much of a rush to tell us what they are.
Looking at it like that, they might as well bomb the empty desert, right? No. It’s hard to sell the idea of bombing an empty desert and even if you did it wouldn’t work in the long term.
You see, if you bomb people it pisses them off. The history books support this and are replete with examples. Pissed off people turn to terrorism, they destabilise, agitate, and generally cause trouble. This is all good for future sales.
In context, the arms industry is a key facet of the UK economy and the UK economy is on its knees. But even here the UK is losing its position — France is now 4th behind Russia, China, and the US. For decades throughout the post-war period, the UK was in the top 3.
Nobody should be fooled by the jobs argument though. Jobs always means profits in newspeak. If these people had any real concern for jobs they wouldn’t be beating down doors all around the world to make sure they could export our jobs overseas.
It’s business as usual.
@ Dan Huil yes that was Tony Blair’s assertion over Iraq. But it wasn’t legal. Looks like history is repeating itself aided by the failure of journalists to challenge and scrutinise.
BTW John Simpson isn’t above a bit of rewriting of history himself. Here is Putin giving a very full answer to his very leading questions and innueundo at a press conference in 2014:
link to youtube.com
Sometimes British and Western foreign policy is truly frightening, only a few weeks ago we were being urged not to appease Putin and quite a few Britnats were urging a Barbarossa mark 2. Now he is an ally. Looks like Assad will stay too.
Excellent analysis on geo-politics by Nafeez Ahmed
link to medium.com
In 1936 Hitler sent German aircraft to support Franco’s regime, the real reason was to gain battle experience for his plans to conquer Europe,
A little bit of history repeating itself?
I have absolutely no expertise in the area of international arms sales!
However, I am fairly sure in it easier to sell armaments if you can show that they actually perform as you claim! Real world carnage must help sales.
link to youtube.com
The Rt Hon Iain MacLeod, Colonial Secretary 1959-61, quoting Herbert Asquith, a former PM, who said that self-government was better than good government.
MacLeod was referring to African countries which, in England, were deemed to be better ruled by Europeans.
A century later and the old Colonial mentality clings on in England’s private schools and in the Conservative Party. How quaint.
(Herbert Henry Asquith, 1st Earl of Oxford and Asquith KG PC KC, served as the Liberal Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1908 to 1916)
That’ll be the BBC “Memory Hole” in operation, again.
It was aboutsix years ago that I first started noticing “mistakes ” like this at the BBC.
I thought it was shoddy journalism or perhaps incompetence. I no longer think so. As far as I am concerned it is a deliberate attempt to manipulate public opinion.
Rewriting history or pants journalism?
Either way, the current narrative running through our media has more than a hint of deja vu.
Can a suicide or bombing attack in the middle east actually be news in the same sense of the word? That’s the status quo. Things that happen in perpetuity surely don’t constitute the same level of interest.
We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.
Robert Knight says:
“Can a suicide or bombing attack in the middle east actually be news in the same sense of the word? That’s the status quo”
If there was an attack like the Paris one twice a week in Western cities (God forbid), it would reported ever time as news.
There are such attacks twice a week outside the ‘first world’, they are not reported in anything like the same way.
If the Mali hotel attack had involved no Westerners, would it have been headlines? Probably not.
It is not the frequency, but direct Western involvement, which makes such violence newsworthy.
John Simpson is spot on.
Dan Huil says
‘Pretty sure Cameron has already stated in the HoC that uk bombing will be “legal” whether UN sanctions it or not.’
France is relying on Article 5 on of UN Charter which says that a country can strike back if an attack is launched on that state by another state. This was why Syria was being blamed from the outset of Paris attack. The argument has since fallen apart because all attackers identified so far were French citizens.
How can it be that apparently normal people do not have it in them to even begin to understand the trauma that is being experienced by children in Syria? How can it be that British parents can support adding to that trauma without unequivocal evidence that British bombs will lessen rather than increase the number of child casualties.
I despair of the immorality of these Brits and anyone who supports their perspective.
As I understand it Assad was blocking the building of the oil pipeline (feeding Israel)through Syria. He wanted no part of it.
God forbid, I agree with Wings on this! That is a disgraceful.error.
arthur thomson says:
21 November, 2015 at 5:13 pm
How can it be that apparently normal people do not have it in them to even begin to understand the trauma that is being experienced by children in Syria?
Ruby replies
That is a very interesting question perhaps people are not in control of their own emotions perhaps they have to wait until the MSM tell them what to feel.
Perspective is easy to define in UKOK hackdom. So extreme far right Horatio Nelson says, Osborne’s a economic genius vote Tory
link to telegraph.co.uk
“On tax credit cuts: “The typical family will be better off, not just a bit, but over £2,000 better off. If you include the lower taxes, the free childcare, that family is supported. That family lives in a country that has economic security. If we have a welfare system we can’t afford, it will be that family on a low income that finds itself out of work”
or
link to theguardian.com
“With the government still running deficits each month, the UK’s total debt pile is still increasing, according to the ONS. In total, the UK now owes more than £1.5tn, equivalent to 80.5% of GDP. That compares with 69% in 2010/11, Osborne’s first year as chancellor under the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government.”
BBC Vote SLab Scotland says BetterTogether under red and blue toryboy rule, so shut up or we’ll ProjectFear you all over again.
@ bobajock:
“Its ok, it will sink into the public consciousness like a rohypnol induced brain bump. It ‘was’ Assad .. he was bad, now its .. umm … someone is bad. Soon it will be Scotland is bad.”
I thought it was ‘SNP bad…’
What? The propagandist BBC misleading people again? Surely not. As regards Syria, it is a mess, a very, very complicated mess, and when anybody offers short phrase responses to the problem, we can be sure of one thing, they are talking sh*te.
Too many people on multiple sides of the Syrian conflict like to imply it is really easy, as in ‘it is all the american’s fault’, or ‘it is all ISIS fault’, and so on. The reality is much more complex, and as a consequence, their is no easy solution.
Quite depressingly, in a truncated media world of soundbites and tweets, it would seem everybody has a ‘solution’ to everything.
Everyone in Scotland should shut up about the imminent war and stop complaining, and drink their Victory gin and be happy. UK ok!
Israel has illegally occupied the Golan Heights, which belong to Syria, since 1967, in defiance of UN resolution 242. Israel want water and oil. Syria has both. Syria is also an ally of Iran, which has a great deal of oil. I think that (oil and gas and pipelines) explains the warmongering going on now, and the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
link to en.wikipedia.org
Of course, we too have oil and gas.
tx for this stu
the msm have been avoiding the fact that the uk is now changing sides by only referring to Syria
they hope that people will forget or not notice, thanks for highlighting this
So,does this make Mr Cameron a turncoat?
Bottom line = boots on the ground.
While they are there the electorate have no idea who the military will be attacking. They will tell us it is Daesh but it could be Assad. We won’t know the difference.
That could escalate into NATO v Russia and potentially WW3.
I am cynical. Maybe they have realised the Middle East destabilisation project, or the Quatar/Saudi pipeline project is not worth the destruction of Europe. The corporate paychpathic power elite don’t give a shit about people only the structures.
Every news bulletin will contain stories of Daesh atrocities until we are brainwashed and support UK intervention.
Somebody please tell me i am wrong and paranoid. Somebody? please!
Lord Lawson on Any Questions.
We should be able to use our jets to bomb IS in Syria because we bomb them in Afghanistan.
Now let’s take that shallow, self sieving logic a stage further.
Since we know there are IS cells in Brussels, London, Madrid and London should our jets also bomb them there.
Don”t forget your £1 to £5 link to wingsoverscotland.com
Damn! So many people have beaten me to the “we have always been at war with Eurasia” lines.
Next up…
“The proles, normally apathetic about the war, were being lashed into one of their periodical frenzies of patriotism. As though to harmonize with the general mood, the rocket bombs had been killing larger numbers of people than usual. One fell on a crowded film theatre in Stepney, burying several hundred victims among the ruins. The whole population of the neighbourhood turned out for a long, trailing funeral which went on for hours and was in effect an indignation meeting. Another bomb fell on a piece of waste ground which was used as a playground and several dozen children were blown to pieces. There were further angry demonstrations, [Salmond] was burned in effigy… then a rumour flew round that spies were directing the rocket bombs by means of wireless waves, and an old couple who were suspected of being of foreign extraction had their house set on fire and perished of suffocation.”
Looks like tomorrow it’s going to be Tory “pants down” day.
Play spot the dropper.
Enjoy
In my view the fact of the matter is that the majority of political leaders, elected or unelected are in the pockets of other interests. Often known as lobbyists.
Be that big business, arms dealers, bankers or any interest other than the majority of the people they make decisions for. We are at the mercy of those with the power and it is not us, the voter. It will take a very brave and intelligent person to attempt to change this against such forces.
Their has always been an elite and history has shown that it is in their interests that governments make policy with few exceptions. The major players in the world are pretty much setting the rules. That is why propaganda by the state is so important (to them) it helps keep them in power.
As far as current leaders go, no matter the type. Ignorance is Bliss.
Well, I’ve just put in an official complaint to the BBC.
An effort in futility no doubt—after all (by definition) the BBC CANNOT be biased, but it gets it off my chest.
Mark
galamcennalath at 2.24
There is also a very large Christian population in the Middle East which is always forgotten about
@ Manandboy
On Asquith’s gravestone it states he was Prime Minister of England.
In the build up to war in Iraq 2003, Humphries had Swedish diplomat UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix live on BBC r4 news, on the phone, from Iraq virtually every morning explaining clearly that the UN weapons inspection units under his command had found no WMD’s, were very unlikely to find any WMD’s and they had the full cooperation of Iraq military.
Its just a total creepout to think that the exact same Labour crew that went to war against Iraq alongside far right USA, then ProjectFeared the living shit out of Scotland ten years or so later. And the fact that a warmonger like Crash Gordon was even allowed to take part in Scotland’s independence referendum with all the his historic vote NO for devo-max, federal UK fraud, speaks hideous volumes about the Labour party, the BBC and UKOK establishment.
This is how low end of era red toryboys are prepared to go 2015, in the Hootsman headline desperately pushing that Rattle blog’s extreme monstering of everything Scottish democracy-
“Brian Wilson: The ‘dodgy dossier’ of independence”
Blix lets Blair off the hook a bit but Bomber Blair, Labour UK.gov, their actual dodgy dossier and their wars that look endless and world wide, all of it still to be published by Chilcott.
link to berkeley.edu
“Blix accused U.S. President George W. Bush and U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair of acting not in bad faith, but with a severe lack of “critical thinking.” The United States and Britain failed to examine the sources of their primary intelligence – Iraqi defectors with their own agendas for encouraging regime change – with a skeptical eye, he alleged.”
heedtracker says:
Blix lets Blair off the hook a bit but Bomber Blair,
Blix is a diplomat – they are always kind in their language.
Fundraiser just clicked over £3k.
As far as the racists at the BBC think. ‘all Arabs look the same’. Complain to the Equal Race Relation Board. A crowd-funded to have Humphrey’s up in court, charged with inciting racism.
Blix is a diplomat – they are always kind in their language.
He says it was momentum and war build up, with vengeance for 9/11. Far right UKOK say
link to dailymail.co.uk
“And it also has continuing consequences for Mr Blair. He is treated like a pariah in his own country rather than with the respect, however grudging, normally due to one who served for a decade as Prime Minister.
He is said to live in dread of people trying to perform a citizen’s arrest on him for his alleged war crimes, as at least two Britons have thus far, in London and Hong Kong.
However, our constitution does provide a remedy, and for the sake of all parties to this argument it should not be dismissed as either obsolete or too extreme.”
Why just Blair though, why is Gordon Brown not also said to be living in dread?
Why is that whole Labour cabinet given a free UKOK pass? Far right types like Heffer focus entirely on Blair but Brown was his No.2 right in there, costing their war, although clearly no strategic planning. Maybe they did, we’ll probably never know. No one asks Crash Gordon anything. Just get Blair. Chilcott might have but why is not being published til after next May elections in Scotland?
When’s the last time Humphries had that nice Gordon Brown on his show?
‘Hans Brix?! Aw nawww!’
Team America clip –
link to youtube.com
‘In a fascinating article published today, acclaimed BBC correspondent John Simpson bemoans “the British media’s ‘grotesquely selective’ reporting of deaths from terror attacks around the world”, and the standard of reporting on foreign affairs generally. Simpson notes in the piece that he’s “really very kind of depressed about the way that newspapers and television has developed”.
The British Media has a GREAT deal to answer for: Covering up and twisting facts. Individuals like John Pilger have highlighted the part that journalists played in the IRAQ WAR. ……… “What if the free-est media in the world had seriously challenged George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and investigated their claims, instead of channelling what turned out to be crude propaganda?” He (Charles Lewis) replied that if we journalists had done our job “there is a very, very good chance we would have not gone to war in Iraq.” …………………………. It’s this kind of silence we journalists need to break. We need to look in the mirror. We need to call to account an unaccountable media that services power and a psychosis that threatens World War.’’
link to johnpilger.com
They are determined to carry out a regime change in Syria one way or another. Focusing on (blaming) Assad hasn’t worked, Russia has joined the fray now (jiggering it up for them), so refocus on Daesh. Getting into Syria one way or another is the name of the game here.
@ Lollysmum says at 5:20 pm ”As I understand it Assad was blocking the building of the oil pipeline (feeding Israel) through Syria. He wanted no part of it.”
Yeah Lollysmum this video CLEARLY explains exactly what is going on ….. with pipelines … note New American Century being mentioned at the end.
link to youtube.com
‘PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY’. Is this what it’s all about?
link to youtube.com
There are numerous youtube videos re. The ‘Project for the New American Century’, such as ‘The New American Century (1/10) PNAC Exposed’. Ten videos … too many to post on here. They cover ‘the untold history of The Project for the New American Century with tons of archival footage and connects it right into the present. The videos expose how every major war in US history was based on a complete fraud with video of insiders themselves admitting it.’
The New American Century (10/10) PNAC Exposed. Last video of the series.
link to youtube.com
Don’t let the name ‘David Icke’ put you off. This video is a ‘must watch’. Note ‘New American Century’ being mentioned … again.
David Icke:The Rothschild Zionist Agenda, New World Order and Third World War
link to youtube.com
This is what we are dealing with … one of MANY psychopaths determined to rule the World.
link to youtube.com
Alastair, 6.21
Lawson also that the cuts to Eng & Wal police budget would not be a problem if they stopped wasting money investigating historical cases of child abuse!
If pig dicking Cameron takes us into another illegal Syrian/Middle east War so him and his chums can profit billions we should put a citizens arrest target on him for war criminal.
This madness has got to end.
No dissent allowed across the whole Corpmedia about this or Osbourne’s criminal economics austerity scam?
Seriously?
Needs to end right here right now.
So we can get on with the rest of our lives unfettered.
Its hard to stay mad at BBC hacks like Suzy here. Thank fcuk they don’t do this kind of thing for the radio stars but no doubt neo fascist UKOK masterbaits really hard to endless close ups of Jim Naughty too.
link to dailymail.co.uk
Re the Beeb,
I was having a look at their website re the BBC Trust and saw their proposed guidelines for next years elections…
The BBC explains that the amount of coverage given to political parties and independent candidates in each electoral area (for instance, across a nation or within an individual constituency) relative to each other should reflect levels of past and/or current electoral support in that electoral area.
Although performance at the last equivalent election in terms of representation and share of the vote is taken as the starting point, it says the following factors must also be given due weight:
One effect of the proposed guidance in the Appendices would be that, broadly, the BBC would be quicker to increase coverage in recognition of recent increases in electoral support than it would be to take decreasing electoral support as an indication that a party should receive less coverage, although this may not always be appropriate.
The relationship between increased electoral support and any more coverage should not be one of simple mathematics,
because it would not be appropriate, where one party begins to enjoy very high levels of support, for it necessarily then to receive significantly greater coverage than the main opposition party. In other words, larger parties should be grouped together in terms of levels of coverage, at least until any disparity is sufficiently long term and established for a change to be considered.
Sort of looks like they’re getting their excuses in early.
@CamB –
Aye, the auld PNAC. They just don’t know when to give up, eh?
Kinda like this dude here:
Treeman, trying to learn ‘Magic Man’ –
link to youtube.com
Oops!
That wasn’t it – this is:
link to youtube.com
Neil Findlay getting really desperate on twitter.Posted a list allegedly showing the SNP support for Trident. Seriously!!!
Think it is a typo error in the wording of the document.
The war will go on, kids will die, innocent men, women, will join the ranks of unknown dead. The m.s.m will maintain its silence. But no matter armament shares will go up, what’s to loose the UK will be stronger. Vote better together.
How can we expect the BBC in Scotland to be impartial regarding independence when their employees were told that they would lose their jobs? I’d love that question to be put to those that run the creep show!
Dave McEwan Hill says:
21 November, 2015 at 6:50 pm
galamcennalath at 2.24
There is also a very large Christian population in the Middle East which is always forgotten about
—-
It used to be a significant minority. It has declined rapidly, especially in the last 10 years. Lebanon is the only place left they are relatively safe. The dictators we deposed used to protect religious minorities. Now it is just chaos.
link to nytimes.com
They get away with this day in and day out because most of the general population is extremely gullible, ignorant and bribeable.
They make sure the population remains that way.
More than 50% in Scotland are still controlled by them.
Because of the SNP’s success in government and the Rev. Stuart Campbell’s brilliant journalism, nearly half the population of Scotland has now seen through them.
@Rock
A number of years ago the BBC admitted that only 46% of Scots trusted them then and it certainly hasn’t gone up since then.
Im guessing that Assad had more control over the oil two years ago
David McEwan Hill@ 6.50
You are right. There is a large and very ancient Christian population in the Middle East.
Unfortunately they have mostly been driven out of their homelands by fanatical assorted Islamists. Most have fled to Jordan, Kurdistan or Turkey.
The irony is that the worst dictators – Assad and Saddam Hussein – were murderous bastards, but secular bastards, and did not care a toss about religion. By destroying their brutal power, the West lifted the dictator’s lid off the seething cauldron of medieval hatreds and the poor Christians, Sufis, and such groups were left undefended.
It would appear that the populations of the Middle East are better served by their traditional “Strongman” than Western attempts at imposing democracy.
I don’t say that the “strongmen” are the solution, but things were better for minorities when they were in power. What a mess!
Just a wee peek into gun violence in the US in the last 72hours. 60 people have been killed and given typical annual figures, that seems to be a ‘quiet’ period ….
link to gunviolencearchive.org
… and they worry about Moslem extremism inside America?
With Sir Roger Carr, Chair of BAE Systems also Vice Chair of the BBC Trust there probably isn’t much conflict of interest in governance.
link to baesystems.com
BBC vote NO Scotland is run by tories like this #SNPouter genius, currently using terrorist atrocities in France to scare everyone UKOK British
Effie Deans ?@Effiedeans 4m4 minutes ago
The UK needs a common identity to fight an evil that threatens all of us equally. Put aside childish squabbles now
Where’s Ken Livingston sarf of the the river psycho analyses of NOT mad people, when you need it?
my £1 to £5 contribution did not go through the first time. Does that mean
1. The system is under strain? Or. 2. There is a bug?
link to wingsoverscotland.com
I don’t seem to b the only one
Fireproofjim says
“There is a large and very ancient Christian population in the Middle East.”
… perhaps because that was where it began. Also, I understand most Moslems were Christians before Islam came along … though I stand to be corrected on that one.
” Assad and Saddam Hussein – were … secular bastards, and did not care a toss about religion. …. I don’t say that the “strongmen” are the solution”
Certainly in the case of Sadam, the West did believe having a murderous bastard like him in charge 30 odd years ago, was a solution at a time of Cold War and tensions with Iran. He was very much the West’s man.
BBC using inverted commas in reporting Russian attacks on ‘terrorists’ on their fib-site
I.E. They are not terrorists
Clearly Cameron must have forgotten to mention to Nick Robinson at their last tête-à-tête over afternoon tea in Downing Street that we are now on the same side as the Russians
Until it’s time to support ‘democratic’ government and the forced extension of NATO in Ukraine again
I note latest N.Ireland peace settlement this week foundered on the insistence by Westmonster government that it could veto the release of any documents to 100’s of innocent civilian murder investigations where Ithe State was involved in killing its own people purely on account of their religion to stir up a sectarian war in places like North Belfast.
They also continue to stymie dozens of inquests from being completed after many decades of waiting.
Call me a cynic, but the inverted commas would be be better used by the BBC in relation to ‘state terrorism’ in relation to it’s sole shareholder.
But that’s hardly going to happen either
Sunday Herald front page;
link to twitter.com
The BBC has posted a correction here: link to bbc.co.uk
19 November 2015: Correction – Today, BBC Radio 4 (broadcast 18 November 2015)
In the introduction to an interview with Sir David Richards , former Chief of the Defence Staff , John Humphrys said : “It’s more than two years since the Government asked the House of Commons to approve military action against Islamic State in Syria and MPs said No.” In fact the motion before Members of Parliament on 29th August 2013 was in support of ‘military action that is legal, proportionate and focused on saving lives by preventing and deterring further use of Syria’s chemical weapons’
Interesting how beeb spivs apology leaves out their own report and above all “MPs have rejected possible UK military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad”
Tory gits.
Fireproofjim
As far as I can ascertain the number of Iraqi refugees on Syria before the recent exodus was around 1.2 million, and Iraqi Christians make up around 10% of that figure around 120,000.
One of the first things the U.S. Did when they took control of Iraq was to implement a divide and conquer policy by setting Shia and Sunni even further against each other. I remember reading in an Observer I picked up on a train back around 2004/5 that Syrian Intelligence was reporting that several Iraqi’s who were on U.S payroll (cia ? ) had claimed asylum in Syria, they had been instructed to drive a car to a popular spot like a market and sit in there car and observe what was going down. Once on location they were to phone a number from the supplied mobile. The operatives which were now in Syria could not get a mobile signal so went to the nearest public phone box, dialled the number and boom. If it was a Sunni area it would be blamed on the Shia and vice versa.
It’s higly likely that this divide and conquer had two aims, firstly to make it easier to retain control of Iraq and to stir up trouble between Sunni and Shia in neighbouring countries, after all it’s no secret that the ultimate aim of the U.S. Is to control the supply of Middle Eastern Oil. That means taking Iran and the only way to do that is through Syria and Iraq. It’s a grand plan in which 9 11 was only the beginning. collateral damage in Western Europe means nothing to the people running the show.
…it doesn’t matter who…we just need to Bomb somebody and prove we are big boys with planes and stuff – including great big nukes!!!
The West did little to support Democracy in the Middle East. In fact they did the exact opposite. They promised the Arabs the vote for supporting the Allies in WW1. They reneged. Lawrence of Arabia was fighting in the Commons to try and get the commitment honoured. (Lloyd George) Lawrence was killed in a motor bike accident. The first Oil company in the Middle East was the American Sun Oil company.
Once the threat at the Dardanelles subsided ie Germany submarines or boats, Lloyd George consented to the Balfour Declaration 1917. A secret agreement which that gave Jews (US and Russia etc) the right to a Jewish State on Palestinian land, supported by Lord Balfour and Lord Rothschild a wealthy Jew. The idea was the Jews would be 20% of the population and the Palestinian’s 80%. It is now the opposite. The Palestinians’ have been pushed off their lands. In one of the most grotesque events in history. Many Jews emigrated from Europe to Anerica in the
Early 20th century seeking a better life. Migrants when to America from all over Europe. Jewish migrants then migrated to Palestine/Israel from America supported by the US Gov. One is six Americans are of Jewish descent.
After WW2 even more Jews flooded into Israel. It was a British Protectorate (Colonial). It was under Britush rule, as a result of France and Britain carving up the Middle East. The every increasing number of Jews invading in on boats etc were becoming more aggressive as their number increased. The British Army stationed there tried to restrict the flow and protect the local population. The Jews organised and they were classed as terrorists. They fought with the British Army and blew up the St David Hotel? The British headquarters. Eventually the British withdrew.
Events have continued to deteriorate since then. The new Jewish settlers terrorised the Palestinians and drove them off their land and villages. It has been described as genocide. Eventually there was a Israeli -Arab war with surrounding countries in 1967. Israel was out numbered but ‘won’ the conflict. They were armed and supported by the US had superior weaponry etc. Some of the political leaders today were the ‘terrorists’ of yesterday. Events escalated and ended up in Palestinian bombings and attacks in the 1970’s. Kidnaps and atrocities from both sides. Planes blown up.by terrorists.
The Palestinians now occupy less and less lands. Live in camps occupied with nowhere to go. Egypt and other counties in the region are unwilling to accept refugees because they have economic problems. Palestians live under occupation without full rights of other citizens. Israel is an Apartheid State which is funded by the US. Without US/UK French support Israel would not exist.
There was a suggestion of two separate States but the Israeli Gov just procrastinate. The latest trouble was about Pakestinians have restricted rights to a place of worship.
In the 1950’s Churchill took all Iran’s Oil. When the PM protested CiA/M15 caused unrest. The PM was discredited (rumours where spread he was a homosexual). He was put in prison and the unpopular Shah was reinstated. The West encouraged Saddam to invade Iran. Supplied weaponry and funds. The Iraq/Iran War. Assad was once considered an ally of the West and studied in London. The Suez Crisis. Egypt took control of the Suez Canel. Antony Eden? McMillian was thought to have mental health issues. The US supported Egypt but Westminster put the parachuters in and invaded. Egypt has returned to army rule because of unrest and lack of resolve over a democratic vote. Now the people don’t bother to vote.despite embracing Democrscy.
The West supports absolute despot monarchy in Saudi and Qatar. The people have no right to vote. Supported by Western weaponry. If people were treated like that in US/UK or France there would outrage, but it is support it in other countries, by their government. Imagine Obama not getting to vote or having second class citizenship. It’s still all about Oil. Trade for it and give Aid. Do not invade,
The SNP must remain strong and tell Cameron he is on his own, regards bombing Syria.
The last thing a skint UK needs is another Middle East campaign.
Tell Dave to take a hike.
Not in my name Nicola!
But in spite of the Parliament vote against military action, RAF drones pursue British jihadis on a kill list.
link to rt.com
To be quite honest, it doesn’t matter if the UK was fighting with the Americans, the Russians, the Arab Rebels, ISIS, Iraqi’s, Iranians or even old Bashar Assad himself. We have been involved with every nation there in the last 60 odd years …and made a complete dogs dinner of each one.
The whole scenario in the Levant; from the borders of Turkey, down through the Arabian Peninsula …all the way to the borders of India is a complete and unholy mess …and the UK has had its fingers in every single f***-up!
We brought down a democratic government in Iran in 1956 and implemented a puppet regime that the Iranian people despised; armed Saudi Arabia with every technological weapon going while the Saudi’s promoted the ultraconservative version of Islam known as Wahhabism; we helped build up the state of Israel and turned a blind eye to their expansionism into Palestinian territory; we refused to recognise a Palestinian state and then allowed the Palestinian people to become refugees in their millions all over the Levant; backed dictators in Egypt and other gulf states; we helped the US arm Iraq so that Saddam could gas and kill not only Iranians, but also his own people; we invaded Iraq twice …and left it in a mess twice; we have backed Pakistan even though they have been a bedrock for Al-Qaeda; we an economic war of attrition with Libya and Gaddafi …only to have Blair snuggle up with the odious dictator …before helping the rebels kill him and turn the nation into a basket case; we invaded Afghanistan …and achieved nothing; we helped to destabilise the nations of Egypt, Libya and Syria with airstrikes and thus allow Islamic fundamentalism to rise …and then finally, stood back from all this mess while Syrian refugees poured into Europe thanks to our airstrikes …and did squat to help them, while condemning other nations who did at least try.
I could go on but won’t. The list above condemns the UK enough.
For yep! Let it not be denied, for we are told time and again by our state media, that the United Kingdom, that glorious and wondrous nation, is not only a guiding hand in the world …it is a beacon of light to everyone…
@ JLT
I’m reading a book about all that at the moment – Secret Affairs by Mark Curtis. None of it surprises me (I’ve read other stuff before) but it’s very depressing. UK Establishment meddling – cynical and short-term – leading to long-term problems for the whole world.
(And of course having repercussions here.)
@JLT –
I wish you had ‘gone on’.
Okay, you’re a student of history, and that’s obvious, but you also have a real talent for summing stuff up and making it readable. (Like oor ain Robert Peffers, but with a different style.)
The comment you’ve posted above is, IMO, the basis of a solid chunk of provocative polemic. Don’t know about anyone else, but I enjoy seeing occasional pieces of that kind right here on WOS. It probably wouldn’t raise a lot of dissent, as most of ‘us’ would be in agreement with you, but it’d be the type of concise, fact-packed material which comes in very handy when doing street-work, or getting one right-up annoying in-laws.
In any event, more power to ye mister. 😉
JLT@11.57
An excellent summary of years of Western folly and duplicity in the Middle East.
For a more detailed description of Blair and Bush’s shameless lying and fabrication of the “weapons of mass destruction” evidence you must read “The War on Truth” by Neil Mackay.
It is devastating exposure of the criminal lead up to the Iraq invasion.
You can get it on Amazon for one penny plus post.
Don’t miss it you will not regret it. (No. I am not Neil Mackay. Just an admirer.)
JLT @ 11.57
I appreciate your post, as well as posts from Mr Peffers. I realise my history,gained in Scottish schools during the 70s is quite woeful.
I have never quite got to grips with the various factions in the Middle East, only that US/UK were leading some charge there for oil.
In the last 2 years, I’ve woken up, and try to sort the various players out, to try and understand the global picture better.
Much appreciated, and as Mr Brotherhood has commented, nice style.????
@ ‘The Confessions of an Economic Hitman’ John Perkins.
Middle Eastern History was restricted to Uni study. Many books are not available elsewhere. Censorship?
Another round of rancid the Graun attack propaganda farted out
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/22/scots-must-face-up–to-slave-trading-past
Scots think they’re dogs bollocks now and don’t know about Scottish involvement in the slavery 200 years ago.
What about the middle east today, bombed back to the middle ages by UKOK red and blue tory war mongers, on the basis of a lie and no exit strategy.
link to bbc.co.uk
The stench from rule britannia UKOK hackdom is definitely getting worse.
@ Capella at 10:10 re: Sir Roger Carr link between BAE (UKs main Arms Dealer) and the BBC.
Capella thanks for pointing this out. I highlighted this connection on here a few months ago and to my mind is extremely worrying and profoundly significant. Someone set up a petition to have him removed from holding his position with the BBC, to no avail.
More and more we see that a group of people, call them what you will, are making a concerted effort to take control of one Country after another on this planet with the ensuing HELL and threat now of WW3. Politicians, bankers, arms dealers and oil companies, to name but a few, are key players in this takeover for all the obvious, lucrative reasons.
The ‘Group’ use their knowledge of current divisions (religious, ethnic and so on) within each country to further their agenda, they arm and train individuals who are supported and encouraged (paid well) to oppose the sitting Governments and when their leaders are removed (usually murdered) and the people are brought to their knees they take over … put their ‘local puppets’ in place. Puppets who agree to hand over the countries wealth to the ‘Group’ and in the process line their own pockets.
Now THEY couldn’t get away with this AT ALL if it wasn’t for the totally controlled and corrupt MEDIA. And we all know who controls the Media Worldwide.
It’s clear that the Media, Worldwide, is TOTALLY complicit, in the main, in supporting the ‘group’. This is an essential cog in the wheel; the need to brainwash people en masse to ensure that there is little opposition to the ‘groups’ key aim and the subsequent actions (mass slaughter) they undertake to achieve it. They’ll tell you, for example, that bombing is being done for a humanitarian cause .. bomb, bomb Assad … he killed his own people with chemical weapons. Now it’s bomb, bomb Daesh … beheadings. In reality it’s just bomb Syria into a state of total submission and use any old excuse to do so. Syria just being one example of many countries now. Let’s face it what have the ‘Group’ done in relation to other oil free Countries that were being totally decimated, millions being slaughtered, tortured and raped such as in Rwanda? Nought! Humanitarianism and oil loot don’t go hand in hand at all it would seem.
We can’t (easily) rid ourselves of the warmongering ‘Group’ but we can do our utmost to cut off their life-line. Cut off the head of the snake. And it’s imperative for all of mankind that we do so.
Now WE are all involved in a battle to free Scotland from the totally debased Westminster Government’s shackles but along the way we have to continue to fight to make changes in relation to the UK Media propaganda overall. Wings, Stu, you and I are all playing our part. However we can’t possibly deal with every journalist or newspaper on the planet …… but we could start with the BBC.
It’s high time that we ascertained who the BBC actually employ (we want to see a list of employees / names / roles) and have knowledge of their ‘vested interests’. It’s our right as WE are paying their wages and forking out for their bonuses and MANY perks. I for one don’t want to hand over ONE penny to Sir Roger Carr, Arms Dealer, and have no faith whatsoever in a Corporation that employs him. Let’s not permit his length of service with the BBC (or any others with nefarious interests) to drag on as long as another ‘Sir’. Sir Jimmy Saville …. serial Paedophile. Time for this service provider to actually start serving the people who are servicing them.
Re: heedtracker
Indeed the graun loves to attack Scotland, wonder how many articles they put out about the clearances or any other ukok crime against the Scottish people. I used to know nothing about the history of ukok and their treatment of their neighbour but when you do a bit of delving it’s really disturbing. Pot, kettle black by the graun me thinks, that rag really annoys me because of their pretendy lefty reputation and I know some who follow it, believing the tosh they print.
Ian Brotherhood
A wee revision to history, perhaps? It was Petra who brought up PNAC.
As you’re talking
Fascistsneocons.Sorry Rev. but this one contains Zionists and is v. long.
link to voltairenet.org
Reminds me of the early Fabian’s and English Socialism. Very “BLOOD AND SOIL”. Remember though, Isreali nationalism GOOD, Scottish nationalism BAD!
At this point in time, the UK Government can no longer be understood to be on the side of Law and Order, despite the majority of the population continuing, blindly, to believe so.
The electorate has wandered into a bar, so to speak, in which every drink served is spiked by the Government.
Exposing it all is an essential part of the solution.
Then, Cameron must be jailed, with a few others.
heedtracker
That’s strange, I posted this only the other week. Yes, private Scottish ‘merchants’ were involved in the exploitation of slaves but only after the creation of Britain through the Union of Scottish and English parliments. It’s the Malthusian trait of the English Establishment that has added that special “blood and soil” flavour to British politics ever since, IMO. Presbyterianism and Anglicism are polar opposites, really.
link to nrscotland.gov.uk
That’s probably why you are directed to London, in order to conduct further research.
heedtracker
P.S. Of course, slavery was ‘abolished’ long before the common man AND woman got an apparently equal say in things. That didn’t happen until 1948, I believe, ergo the Scottish nation has never been in the position to prevent such exploitation of slavery. That’s the very essence of UKOKness.
Tags: wanker
JLT @12.09AM
That is what everyone (who thinks) thinks, put into words,
you analysis is exactly the reason I gave a person I was giving a lift home from work when she asked me if we should go into Syria, I asked (after telling her no) to go home and look a map of the world and consider north Africa and the middle east and tell me what she saw,
She didn’t understand the point so I asked her why do you think those countries were so well organised that their borders are almost all straight lines? then pointed out that they were almost all run by the UK and we created those artificial borders,
She came back the next day and said she had gone home and looked at the map and said she had never thought of that before but now she is challenging what she thought the UK stand for.
#young lady on a journey
link to nls.uk
So how the feck has Joe Soap been able to live up to the shameful past of his ancestor’s employer (probably)?
Apparently Scots are not only to be treated like the ‘New Children of Ham’, were supposed to feel guilty for the exploitation of the Children of Ham of the Enlightenment era?
Perhaps my additional commentary triggered something on the first attempt. 🙂
link to nls.uk
Universal suffrage 1928 when every person who qualified got the vote in the UK. People in Scotland have been fighting for Independence ever since.
Go on a guilt trip about slavery. The slave trade workers were slaves. Hit on the head and conscripted to work. Many were forced to work in the slave trade because of economic conditions.
Many Scots had to leave Scotland to find work. The ‘Clearances’ etc. 1800’s. People were forced off their land and the land was given over to sheep and deer estates, which led to a 40Million Scottish diaspora in the world. People were forced to leave Scotland because of Westminster rule/ policies.
Many Scots were forced to fight with the British army at Culloden etc. They were captive slaves who were forced to fight or be killed by the British Authorities. Their land and possessions were confiscated and they were often killed anyway or imprisoned in England. Butcher Wade. Created road system in Scotland which made it easier to get around. ‘Outlander’.
Jacobite Rebellion 1715 – 45. Scottish enlightenment 1750. French Revolution 1798. Scottish Enlightenment was taking place after the Jacobite Rebellion. The French King did not give ships and arms as promised for the 1745 Jacobite Uprising. French King Louis was dead by 1798. Absolute monarch – ‘the Divine right of Kings’, believed God had annointed them. Believed they were God’s representative on earth.
The population in France was increasing. The people were starving. The people lived off the land and the harvest was failing. The weather changed. The wind blew off the sea. Hail stones fell the seize of golf balls. There were freak weather condition. The mob stormed the Bastille.
Scotland flourished during ‘the Scottish Enlightenment’ A result of Scotland (church) free education system? Glasgow and Edinburgh flourished. Scotland was the first country in the world to have a ‘free’ universal tertiary education system. Scottish invention changed the world. Invented many of the good things in the world today. Telephone, TV, telecommunication leading on to the Internet and the world wide web. Shipbuilding and engineering specialists and now there is Oil, Gas and Renewables techniques and technology. Medical matters and care. Scotland led the way.
Ahem, cough, cough.
link to ucl.ac.uk
Make sure and check out legacies. 😉
link to ucl.ac.uk
@ Russian Revolution 1917. Czar Nicholas 11. Believed in the ‘Divine right to rule’. The Peopke had few rights. The population had expanded and their was a shortage of food. The Peopkevwere starving,
The Czar invaded Germany. That started WW1 1914 because of Interdependent Treaties. (Look it up) The Russia Revolution 1917. Rusdia came out of the War. 1917 The Balfour Declaration 1917.
Europe was ruled by intermarried Royal Families. They were inbred cousins. Their parents were cousins and they married their cousins. The Kaiser Willem, Czar Nicholas 11 and George 5th? all cousins fell out because of independant Treaty Alliances. The Czar decide to invade Germany. The Kaiser and George tried to talk him out of it but he refused and invaded. Nicholas believed in the Divine right of Kings. Germany was beating Russia. The Russian Navy/Army mutinied which led to the Russian Revolution, the Czar was killed. The Kaiser was forced to stand down after
WW1.
Cameron and the Queen are cousins. Boris Johnston is a descendent of King George of Europe.
Boris Johnston’s grandfather was murdered by Turkish Nationalists. His grandfather did not support
the Turkish Independence movement. His grandfather was a journalist who was close to the
Turkish administration.
The fall in Oli price is damaging the Russian economy. Russia would like the price to go up. Russia has Oil interests. Putin is destroying the Oilfields in Syria, which could lead to a relevant shortage of Oil, increasing the price.
Russian Oil interests produces Syria’s Oil but are losing out to Daresh. Russia will be able to return to production in Syria once Daresh is destabilised. Russia also supplies Syria with arms which will be offset by Oil payments. Increasing Russian (State) Oil Company assets.
@ predicted text
Typos! Ahh
@JLT 11.57
Pretty much in a nutshell. The middle east is a hopelessly convoluted mess and the ‘great’ powers, including our own, both historically and currently are up to their oxters in its creation and the ongoing catastrophe.
I doubt they could tell you themselves where they’re at now they’ve jumped sides so many times, cut so many ‘deals in the desert’, in pursuit of their own agendas. Its safer to say those powers have only ever had one side and one set of interests, their own. In pursuit of those interests they’ve signed our names up to so much human suffering.
For a mad flight of fancy, imagine if every power that had its hands in this mess upped sticks and handed over full responsibility to the UN to effect a solution tomorrow. In all likelihood it would still take decades to come to any peaceful resolution, if at all possible, and a fair few administrations would find their arses before the Hague.
Geopolitics they call it. Not the name that springs to my mind right enough, but what’s in a name? THIS is why politicians keep your focus on what’s in your wallet, on your table, in your back yard. It makes it so much easier to justify their actions on the world stage in our name.
When folk are in that polling station, how many honestly consider what the state does in their name? Maybe come indyref2 they’ll put a bit more thought into that one.
The UN is dominated/owned by US/UK France. US finances it. NATO it’s military arm is financed by US/UK, France and (Germany) 2% of GDP military funding. They break the Laws that they make.
The lunatics are running the asylum.
Robert Burns once thought he would have to emigrste to the plantations to find work. But he wrote The Slave’s Lament and didn’t go. Dougie Maclean has a version on Youtube
link to youtube.com
Persons of Interest
– James Evan Baillie of Dochfour
link to ucl.ac.uk
I think this may be characteristic of Scotland’s involvement with slavery.
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to en.wikipedia.org
link to dochfour.co.uk
Hardly representative of ordinary Scots, then or now.
Damn, damn, damn. I thought I got those links sorted before posting.
Wasn’t David Cameron’s ancestors one of the Scottish landowning families compensated for loss of their slaves? Recall reading that on Wings some time ago.
Odd the sort of things the memory retains isn’t it?
John I de Balliol.
link to en.wikipedia.org
What the spokespersons for the Establishment are saying is:
” You Scots are just like us. You’re greedy, dishonest, and you hate foreigners. So vote UK and let’s get on with the bombing.”
It’s a meme.
Cameron family had an estate in Huntly. There is a statue to his Uncle who died in the 1WW? It could have been sold off? His father in Law Sam’s stepfather Lord Astor owns Jura.
Westminster members- HoL own estates in Scotland. Bankers, Industrialists shareholders. They evade tax inScotland through the City of London. That is why they are against FFA/Home Rule/Federism/Independence. If Scotland had FFA and a fair and equal ax system. They would have to pay their tax. Westminster condones tax evasion so Westminster members and their associates (wealthist/making vast profits) can tax evade.
UK Tax evading Non Doms use Scottish land and businesses (Whisky etc) to evade tax and inheritance tax.
It has very little to do with religion. It is about poverty, deprivation power and greed.
Global Research, Canada based, has a different perspective from the fair and balanced BBC.
link to globalresearch.ca
Ken500
Of course poverty, deprivation power and greed are central components.
However, I would say Presbyterianism is characterised by far greater congregational control than the top-down Anglican tradition. Thomas Robert Malthus was an Anglican cleric and scholar, and still influences the Establishment view of political economy, IMO.
link to en.wikipedia.org
@crazycat / Fireproofjim
Thanks guys. I’ll keep an eye out for those books. You woulndn’t believe the pile of books that are lying in my study at the moment just waiting to be read. At present time, my OU course this year is pretty much focussed on this history of England from the late medieval era to 1900 (finally do Scottish next year (yeaaaah!)). But I’ll tell you what …English history is pretty damned fascinating (strange to say that on a Scottish indy site LOL). Certainly gives greater understanding into the politics of the land, and believe me, just as we see today, England has never been a unified nation; it’s as divided today as it was in previous centuries.
@Ian Brotherhood
Alright Ian. Hope you’re studies are going well. As to canvassing, I really do need to get back out with Kininvie and the West Lothian crew again. Time just doesn’t exist these days with all the studying. However, this is pretty much the phoney war period. Don’t think the real canvassing will begin until January. Folk are too focussed on Christmas coming up. But …I’ll see if I can get out today for an hour or so.
@Valerie
Valerie …believe me, when I first did history in high school in the 80’s, it was absolutely dreadful. I hated it! Scottish history revolved around the Scottish farming system of ‘runrigs’ …and we got taught it for weeks!!! Though things picked up once we did Edinburgh’s golden age and the Russian Revolution, but still …I do believe there was ana agenda there in sickening kids into NOT doing history. I wonder why LOL
@John King
I agree mate. At times, I can’t understand why people just don’t look that bit deeper at the Middle East. Once you do, you realise that the whole place is just a complete disaster. When Scotland finally gains independence, I would be steering well clear of the Middle East. As I tell folk, when 9/11 happened, the West on the 9/12 should have walked away from the place. Literally 15 years later …and we’ve made it a hundred times worse. Anyway John …hopefully, I’ll see you one day again when I cross over the Forth. Being kept in Livi all the time the now.
@Macart
I agree with everything that you said there mate. The Levant has been a warzone for 5,000 years, and they are basically fighting over a rock that is housed in the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem (within it is the sacred rock that is not only the ‘beginning and centre of the world’ created by God, but it is also believed to be the rock where Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac). If you ever fancy a greater understanding of Jerusalem, and why the Middle East is unsolvable, then have a butchers at ‘Jerusalem’ by Simon Sebag Montefiore. 5,000 years of occupation by around 40 odd nations …and for what???
Just a thought. Imagine a scenario where the SNP does well in May and the 2017 council elections.
At that point does the SNP and pro-Indy Yes become the Establishment in Scotland?
And, does it follow that pro-dependency Unionists and BritNats become the outsiders, the rebels on the fringes?
Seriously though, if things continue on the present course a point will be reached where we are the mainstream and the norm. I would propose this will happen well before Indy. Actually, I believe Indy won’t happen until the two fundamental groups roles reverse.
‘Royals’ intermarried all over Europe in medieval times. It was a way of consolidating power. Wealthy people still do. Consolidating wealth. People usually marry others within their own social circle. Children often follow their parents in employment.
Edward 1 Hammer of the Scots, (a legalist) was invited into Scotland to decide the successor after the death of Alexander 111 when he fell off his horse at Kinghorn in Fife, in a storm. He was galloping back to his second (French) wife. The Maid of Norway died in a storm at Orkney. Her Scottish mother had married Norwegian King.
Edward decided on John Bailliol as rightful heir. Robert Bruce (grandfather?) another contender wanted to divide up Scottish land between the 3 or 4 contenders. Robert Bruce had vast lands in Derby?, Stirling and Aberdeenshire. Aberdeen has a Common Fund from Robert Bruce’s land.
Edward held influence over Bailliol and made Bailliol swear Alligance to him. Taking him as hostage to London. Edward held vast estates in France (Normandy) and constantly fought French wars. Edward tried to introduce taxes and conscription in Scotland for his French wars. He drew up a list of ratepayers on whom to impose taxes. Raggyman Rolls. The Scots revolted and William Wallace came to the fore and took up arms against Edward 1. After several battles. Edward became ill and died at Alnwick. The ‘Royals’ in England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, France, Denmark Norway, Europe intermarried.
What about “Plantation Quay”, sorry ‘Pacific Quay’?
link to en.wikipedia.org
You can stick yer “place marketing” where the sun don’t shine.
If the people in the Middle East got universal suffrage and better off, religion would fall away. It has happened in the West.
A judge in Spain has issued a arrest warrant for Netanyahu for the attack on the Aid Ship to Palestine. Israel attacked it and killed Aid workers.
There was no universal suffrage in Glasgow. It was run by unelected Lords and Ladies often based in London. I.e. people of property/Corporations. The majority of the populous did not do very well. Poverty and deprivation. The rich got richer the poor got poorer. Slums and ill health.
Ken500
Even before Scotland became predominantly Protestant, I think the Catholic church in Scotland has traditionally been Presbyterian in nature. Was Scotland not excommunicated because the Bishop of St. Andrews wanted to appoint his own staff?
#wayoutofmydepth
the elephant in the room is Saudi Arabia, and wahhabism….
by the spring of this year, it was becoming more and more evident that uk and us foreign policy in the middle east was in tatters. they have been supporting the wrong sides. changing sides, mid war, is making the west look weak and leaderless, which they are, Putin saw this and took decisive action. Russia press releases always say, they are bombing isis “and other rebel groups”. no condemnation from the msm for putin bombing these rebel groups who were our allies until recently.
Indeed, it isn’t just the bbc who are trying to re-write history, the entire msm here is in lock down with no mention of these other rebel groups. we have polls today with people supporting the bombing of Syria with no clarification about who it is they want to bomb!!. putins press release highlighting who had been funding isis was also ignored
it is likely that there will be a UN agreement and Putin will be seen, in Russia and elsewhere, to be the strong leader, not Obama and certainly not Cameron, who are now merely followers of Putins policy.
that is why today, the number of refugees from the rebel controlled areas are increasing. they know what’s coming.
Osbourne is lying through his teeth again, about the Middle East.
The Tories good-old signature policy of war at any cost is now in full spate.
“It’s always easy to count the cost of getting involved in war”, adds Osborne, “What we need to count is the cost of not getting involved”.
link to wp.me
‘This country’ – what country?
Now lyng about the economy. Government ministers are not supposed to lie. They take an oath.
No one should be bombing in the Middle East causing the worst migrant crisis since the 11WW. Thry should be talking to find a diplomatic solution. Bombing will not work, it will just escalate the crisis as it has done. Keeping making the same mistake, over and over again.
What a Conman. Slick oil snake spokesman. Osbourne.
Obama press release today
the US and its allies will not “relent” in its fight against IS… the US would “continue to lead” a global movement against the extremists
the sunday times
Cameron wants
Britain to start behaving like Churchill and not chamberlain
JLT 11.57
A great post amongst many JLT. Your list sounds like the basis of an as yet unmade high production value, big budget documentary on UK involvement in the Middle East. The kind that will not be coming to our screens anytime soon.
During the referendum and now during the EU debate, “Punching above our weight” is the phrase used time and time again, particularly by David Cameron – we have a seat at the top table and influence that belies the UK’s modest size.
I think the phrase is interesting as the use implies a positive meaning ie being able to compete at a higher level than your size (weight) would suggest. But this is a twisting of the actual meaning- to punch above your weight in boxing is to compete against a competitor whom you are no match for.
So maybe the phrase has meaning after all. Had the UK pursued the elimination of poverty and the raising of living standards for its population with the same zeal it has indulged in disasterous colonial and post-colonial adventures down the years we would be a very different country. As it is 50% of us (and rising) want to start punching at our own level rather than trying and failing to be a super-power.
@schrodingers cat
the elephant in the room is Saudi Arabia, and wahhabism….
Bang on the money.
Oil has been Arabia’s primary weapon against the West. The Saudi’s keep the oil flowing while buying armaments from the West, but their strategy is twofold; first, they need weapons to counter their ever nemesis of Iran, while secondly, being the power in that region, they can promote their ultraconservative orthodoxy of Islam.
As to the Russians …beware. They are also playing a game, and it has nothing to do with defeating ISIS. Russia’s great aim for the last 600 years is to expand its borders and control over a vast area that most folk in the West don’t realise. The Russians succeeded at one point (and then lost their grip on it) when they controlled Eastern Europe right up to the rivers of the Oder–Neisse line (basically, the current borders of East Germany). Russia has always believed that Poland should not exist, and that their lands should be incorporated into the greater Russian sphere …all the way up to East Germany. Can you imagine the state of Russia encompassing all of Northern Central Europe right up to Germany?
Secondly, Russia being the ‘third Rome’ and now home (Moscow) to the Eastern Orthodoxy religion after the fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453, has always believed that that ancient Greek-Roman city should also fall into the Russian sphere of influence. Their desire to control the Balkans, Istanbul as well the region of today’s Turkish Anatolia is paramount in Russia’s greater aims. This is the equivalent in todays terms of Queen Elizabeth and Westminster admitting that England still desires control over the French throne and the whole of France (and that nonsense only stopped around 100 years ago!)
Simply put, the EU very recently as we all saw, bent over backwards to keep Greece in the EU. For had Greece left, the rumour was that Russia was going to bail the Greeks out, and chances are in exchange, the Greeks would hand over their ports to Russian warships. And with Cyprus, Israel, as well as Russia’s ally of Syria and the Suez canal all in this vicinity, can you imagine to the US and UK’s horror that the greatest power in the East Med …would have been the Russians. Russia also has a massive interest in Jerusalem as the Orthodoxy religion at one time was very big there. Russia at one time had major churches built in the city.
In fact …there is nothing to say that this whole scenario of the East Med won’t play out altogether yet in the years to come.
I have taken pains over on the Groan to point out several times now that if we had listened to Cameron the first time round Daesh would be in charge of Syria by now. They can fudge it all they like but the original strategy was a disaster in the making and Cameron is no world statesman.
Iraq is still a mess and if it wasn’t for the Kurds Daesh would have run riot there too. We have our hands full supporting the Kurds and could do a lot more. Unless Cameron is proposing to commit significant additional forces to the region any transfer for of focus to Syria would be at the expense of support to the Kurds. That should not happen. It need not happen as there are so many planes available to bomb Daesh in Syria from the US, Russia, Jordan, Kuwait and France that this role, straight forward bombing, is already covered. Indeed, one wonders if there is much above ground left to bomb. Daesh rules with a Koran in one hand and a gun in the other. They don’t have big installations and command structures.
It is worth a look at what countries actually spend on their military.
link to en.m.wikipedia.org
The US now spends about eight times as much as Russia.
China is undoubtedly the number two super power.
Russia spends not much more that the UK or France now.
Saudi is THE Middle Eastern top dog militarily.
Churchill supported Zionism. Just saying.
link to archive.is
However, I think Mr. Rosenfelder may be talking mince when he identifies Churchill as a life-long Zionist.
link to yalepress.yale.edu (Page 1, line 1)
P.S Semitic Jews are a tiny and dwindling minority in Israel. Most of the world’s Jews are descended from converts to the religion. On the other hand, the Arab Palestinians are of predominantly Semitic decent.
The Zionist lobby has managed to paint black as white, turning anti-Zionism in to Antisemitism and have successfully misidentified predominantly European and Russian immigrants as the true owners of the Palestine.
link to en.wikipedia.org
To be entirely accurate, it mostly wasn’t Da’esh Assad was fighting against at the time, although around 2013 they were starting to make inroads into Syria – it was the Syrian rebels and the Free Syrian Army. I know this, because I wrote a whole bunch of articles on it at the time, not that anyone seemed to give a shit.
After all, to begin with it was only Syrian civilians protesting in Homs, and being mortared, machine gunned and shelled with tank rounds, and who cares about them? – and then, later, when it became Syrian fighters against the Assad regime, well then it was “others” versus “others”, and, again, who gives a shit about them – just more brown people killing other brown people.
Of course, when Da’esh got involved it was all “how could this happen, look at the terrible situation, we have to do something, even if it will now be completely ineffective, and probably kill the very people we should have been assisting to begin with”.
The problem with this situation, of course, is that the non extremist Syrians have all been killed or fought to a standstill while they battled against Assad, unsupported by the West, and Da’esh have invaded, flush with cash, weapons and fighters, many of them from the morass the West left festering in Iraq, and with no shortage of extremists happy to die. So, now if we get involved, there are no good sides left – only Assad and Da’esh. There are still FSA and Syrian rebels left, but not very many, and they have no power.
To be honest, bombing is not going to cut it anyway. You can’t kill a ground army with planes alone. You may be able to contain them to a certain extent, but that’s it – and the problem is that containing Da’esh is not going to make them go away, nor is it going to stop them. Really, bombing them is not going to be a solution to the problem anyway, even if you kill every last one of them. The history of the region, and Western involvement in it, must surely make people understand why not?
The following is an extract from a piece I wrote near the end of 2013:
With regard to action against Assad, as I’ve said previously, the time for that was two years ago, when ordinary Syrian citizens were being shot, bombed and mortared in the streets for peacefully protesting. Because that support never materialised the Syrians feel abandoned. In fact, the most effective support against Assad they’ve had has come from imported Islamist extremists, who are hardly likely to be an improvement over Assad should they manage to remove him.
Regarding the OP though, even in 2013 attacking Assad would likely have been too late to do anything constructive in helping the Syrian Free Army or the people in Homs. Typical politicians, propose too little action far too late, do nothing, and then twist it years later to try and make it look like something it never was.
Jews can marry non Jews.
link to en.wikipedia.org
Have really enjoyed the informative posts this morning especially about the Slave Trade based in Glasgow,my home city.
The Treaty of Union 1707 gave access to the slave trade to Scotland. At least that was the situation until 1769,when a slave called Joseph Knight took his case before a Scottish court seeking his freedom from his “master”,an English trader.
Although it took two appeals,the Scottish courts ruled that under Scots Law slavery was unacceptable. As the judge said ” Not in this Kingdom”. This effectively ended the owning of slaves in this country,though no doubt they were still owned abroad ,and indeed in England till late in the 1860’s.
We were well ahead in recognising the rights of others in this wonderful country.
Daesh was funded and armed by UK/US. Now they are bombing them. They send in people to cause unrest and when it gets out of hand they bomb them. Or illegally invade, The West has been doing it for over 100 years and lyng. They are part of the problem.
Assad has indicated he is willing to relinquish some powers. Russia tried to broker a deal for talks with the West but the West refused. They would rather blow people to bits and support absolute despot monarchies, and spread Nuclear.
Cod
Who fired the first shots in Syria?
link to premshankarjha.com
@Tam Jardine
Hi mate. Absolutely. Personally, this is the perception that the UK has always tried to push since the end of WW2; that the UK is still a major voice in the world, and has substantial influence within it.
On both points …they are correct. For a small island nation to exert the influences that it does, I would say yes that the ‘UK definitely punches above its weight in this world’.
The only problem with that theory, is that it raises the counter-argument of ‘with the UK punching above its weight, does it act for the greater good; not only for itself, but also of the world around it?‘
And in that, it is found seriously wanting. The UK’s foreign policy is no longer one of trying to democratise the world by instilling the values of better education and the implementation of greater social benefits through health and governmental infrastructure, but rather, it ‘interferes’ should any country governs in counter to British interests. Should a nation ‘continue’ to act against Britain, then out come the guns.
Our promotion of British economic and banking knowledge is almost laughable once you actually realise that at points, it is all ‘smoke and mirrors’; banking fraud, manipulation of the markets, obscene bonuses, £1.6 trillion debt, heavy investment in countries that have poor human rights records or are just totally unstable in governance is at times, highly disturbing, as well as frightening.
What the UK has done is follow an ideology of making sure that the UK most definitely does ‘punch above its weight’, but in doing so, it has surrendered its ‘morals and ethics’ and therefore, a good portion of the nations soul. It can talk as much as it wants about ‘being a beacon of light within this world’ …but its record in a lot of fields, begs to differ…
billions of Saudi petro dollars have gone into building Wahhabi schools and universities and supplying imams throughout the muslim world
the power of wahhabism has grown in the last 30 years and what we see as jihadist organisations, Taliban, al Qaeda, isis etc, are nothing more than the foot soldiers of wahhabism where all roads lead back to Riyadh.
Saudi has released this genie and cannot put it back in the bottle, any attempt by them now to do so and the house of Saud would fall.
mecca would then be under the complete control of wahhabists and only other Wahhabis would be allowed to make the hadj.
result, holy war.
wahhabi’s on one side (muslims) versus sunni, shia, alawites (apostates)
as far as the russia moving into the med,and helping Greece. good. putin isn’t just seen to be a leader, he is a leader. it is the us and uk who are the bad guys
Cod
P.S. Apparently those civilian demonstrations were largely in response to austerity measures Assad had imposed following western economic sanctions.
@CameronB Brodie:
“The Syrian government’s version of what had happened was entirely different.”
How surprising. Who are you going to believe?
There is actual video of a peaceful crowd of civilians in Homs, singing a protest against the Syrian regime, being shelled with mortars. I remember posting it to accompany an article back in 2011.
Or, you can believe the words of a regime headed by a man who has used barrel bombs and chemical weapons indiscriminately, and who is following in the steps of his father in trying to eradicate Homs, and the people who do not fall in line with his authoritarian regime.
The measures Assad imposed on the people of Homs in 2010 – 2011 had nothing to do with the West, and everything to do with attempting to crush a growing resurgence of anti-Assad sentiment in Homs.
‘Zionism : The Real Enemy Of The Jews’ (Vol.1-111)
– Alan Hart
Who killed JFK?
There are still FSA and Syrian rebels left, but not very many, and they have no power.
many FSA defected to isis and other Islamic rebel groups, along with the arms and munitions that the US gave them.
the other rebel groups in the region do have power, except that the only other rebel groups left in the region are….Wahhabi islamists. eg. al nusra, jaysh al islam etc. it is through these organisations that Saudi (the government and/or rich individuals in Saudi)indirectly fund isis.
the un resolution will have the Russians calling for these other “rebel groups” also to be bombed and will bring Saudi into direct opposition to the 5 permanent members.
the house of saud is shitting itself
Cod
How sure are you?
link to premshankarjha.com
Thanks for bring up the Homms massace.
link to archive.is
Cod: “The measures Assad imposed on the people of Homs in 2010 – 2011 had nothing to do with the West, and everything to do with attempting to crush a growing resurgence of anti-Assad sentiment in Homs.”
A factually ridiculous statement which I will gladly dismember, if you insist — get back to me on that — but you seem to be making a case for intervention with this sort of point. Or, at least, points like this are typically used as a moral case for intervention.
There’s a fly in the ointment though. That fly is British history and more specifically the history of British intervention in the Middle East. If there is a country out there with more Middle Eastern blood on its hands than Britain, please point to it.
Here’s a question for students of British involvement in the Near or Middle East: name one example of British military intervention there over the last 200 years that actually promoted peace? To my knowledge there isn’t even an example that is debatable.
What’s remarkable is that nearly every intervention was cloaked in the sort of morality you conjure up here, Cod, with many explicitly aimed at maintaining or promoting peace.
Funnily enough, the one example that arguably comes close concerns the creation of the Suez Canal when the British armed and supplied a proxy army aimed at disrupting the progress of building work; no laughing at the back, the British argued that they disagreed with the use of slave labour on the canal.
Anyway, answers on a postcard, Cod.
PS. Incidentally, Syria was a French colony from 1920 until independence in 1946. It’s worth bearing that in mind. From the Syrian perspective, the same countries that are bombing them today are countries that have been meddling in their affairs for about 100 years.
@DerekM says: 21 November, 2015 at 2:49 pm:
” … so now we are going to bomb the mob who we armed and trained to fight against the bloke in secret who we wanted to bomb but couldnt.”
Nothing new about this sort of thing, DerekM. The Yanks trained and armed Sadam as an (Ahem!), “freedom fighter”, Until they decided he was an enemy which, of course, made him a terrorist with WMDs.
This whole thing in the Middle East dates back before WWI when the UK, (as usual posing as, “The British”, decided to take over what was then, Mesopotamia and was ruled by the Turkish Ottoman Empire. After a humiliating defeat the, “Brits”, eventually took over the area and renamed it Iraq. This ended up in chaos as there was no regard paid to what the residents wanted as their country and the several Kurdish and Sheiite factions have been at each other’s throats ever since and they all blame the UK, (a.k.a. “The Brits”.
The first big result of this whole idiotic mess was that the former Ottoman Empire sided with the Germans in WWI and there has been constant conflict in the Middle East since before WWI all due to the UK.
All made much worse by the Yank/UK instigation of Israel post WWII by the Allies. There is absolutely no doubt that between The UK and US there has been two World wars and an never ending set of conflicts throughout the Middle East.
As said, already, the Yanks and Brits have been training and selling arms to the factions in the middle East since before WWI and they often then change their arms and trained allies to terrorists and back again. Probably to continue the warfare in the Middle East for the sake of oil and weapons sales.
Myself, earlier.
Of course there were more ‘ordinary’ Scots acting as slave masters and drivers would, in an economic paradigm driven by colonial exploitation. That was the Enlightenment, when things were cool if you were rich and WHITE.
Lord Astor doesn’t own Jura, he has an estate in Jura. Scots themselves were slaves, not only those deported to the West Indies following the Wars of the Covenant & the Jacobite Rebellions, but 18th century colliers & salters were the property of their employer, their sons also ente became slaves afer payment of a small sum.
There were Scottish born slaves who survived into the 19th century.
Great posts to ‘wade’ through on a Sunday morning. A particular thanks to Capella (9:06am) and CameronB Brodie (11:30am) for posting the most enlightening articles.
I mentioned John Pilger earlier and his view of the crucial part that the Media play in blinding us all to what’s actually going on and the reasons behind such behaviour. Worse still that their ‘input’ led to, at the very least, the invasions and decimation of Iraq.
The BBC is no doubt the main ‘blinding’ player in the UK. One example highlighted by Cameron at 12:09pm …. BBC ‘accidently used Iraq picture’. Accidently my a*s.
We should investigate who exactly is behind controlling BBC International News and have all nefarious employees routed out (after all WE are paying their wages).
First in line BBC Trust Vice Chair Sir Roger Carr …. Chair of BAE Systems (UK top Arms Dealer). It would also be interesting to ascertain who offered him this post in the first place and why.
Oops meant to end my last post by saying ‘before they contribute greatly to dragging us all into WWIII’.
Here’s what’s happened in Iraq in the past week – anyone happen to catch any of this being mentioned in our MSM?
I haven’t even bothered adding up the numbers…
Iraq Body Count:
link to iraqbodycount.org
“International analysts as well as Syrian sources have since 2011 maintained, that the eruption of violence was systematically created from abroad.”
“Top British Officials Confessed to Syria War Plans Two Years before Arab Spring”
“I am going to tell you something. I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met with top British officials, who confessed to me, that they were preparing something in Syria”. (former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas
link to nsnbc.me
@ Angra Mainyu at 2:24pm
So Dumas says that it was the UK not the US that first plotted to ‘disrupt’ Syria. Interesting. No wonder Cameron is cracking up about being prevented, so far, from setting foot in Syria. Overtly that is. Looks as though Putin will beat them to it in controlling the oil fields on behalf of Assad (maybe).
Hi Petra, the record is naturally obscured. But it’s hard to believe anything would go on in that region without U.S. knowledge, acquiescence, or involvement. The same applies to UK foreign policy in general: the UK is basically a branch office of the State Dept., on all aspects of foreign policy.
The known record reveals Turkish and Israeli involvement aimed at destabilising Syria going back decades. Again, though, both of these countries are firmly under the influence of the U.S. and indeed they are both top recipients of US Military Aid going back decades (throughout the 90s they took turns at being the top recipients). Egypt has been the third largest recipient of US military aid since the late 70s, if I remember right.
My point in regards to Cod is that it’s time we kept our noses out of this region. Our involvement has never, ever done anything to help promote peace or served the interests of the people there.
The SNP should oppose bombing Syria, a sovereign country that does not want to be bombed. There is no moral case for bombing Syria. We (the UK) are the last country that should be involved given our history of involvement there and elsewhere; in truth, we don’t even have a right to discuss or comment, except in terms of establishing how much reparations we ought to fork up for the damage we have done.
Additionally, it’s looking like the Paris terrorists probably did not derive from Syria. The second they showed pictures of passports, I knew there was something sinister going on; if you try and imagine being a terrorist for a moment on that day, would you really make a point of grabbing your passport as you left for “work”?
So where is the case for escalating attacks on Syria? Assad is bad? If that’s the argument, I’d struggle to think of a country we shouldn’t bomb.
Angra Mainyu
link to americanthinker.com
Strange that Bernard Lewis became silent on the ‘Islamic problem’ once the US and the UK decided to support ‘Islamic nationalism’ through the Islamic Brotherhood. Perhaps not.
link to nybooks.com
link to washingtontimes.com
Muslim Brotherhood, obvs.
Bob Mack @ 11:15am
I meant to thank you earlier for the correction re. Scotland’s early prohibition of slave ownership.
Not sure what the relevance is of the Lewis reference is, CameronB, maybe you’d care to explain?
I vaguely remember Edward Said talking about him but can’t remember what was said.
The question you quote as well as the answer both exhibit the same underlying tendency of western commentators to assume some sort of role or responsibility in the affairs of the Middle East.
Frankly, the starting point should be that it’s none of our business.
The way Arab oil is diminishing in importance thanks to shale and new technologies such as the electric car is possibly the only cause I see for any real optimism going forward.
Angra Mainyu
Perhaps I’m jumping to conclusions? Lewis was the the key US middle-east go-to-man, from Carter until after the destruction of Iraq (I think). Apparently he’s the author of the “Arch of Crisis” strategy which lead to Carter launching Operation Cyclone.
link to en.wikipedia.org
I do not support what’s going on, in the slightest. The middle-east is a post-colonial nightmare that I think we have a duty to pay reparations for. I don’t think they can print that fast though.
link to andrewbostom.org
Sorry, I forgot the first link.
link to en.wikipedia.org
ITV News just tried to pull the same crap, with only their correspondent making a tiny mention of it at the end of their piece.
link to twitter.com
I see, CameronB, you think Lewis had a negative impact on US policy. It’s possible,I suppose, but there’s no shortage of scholars in the US and elsewhere who have tried to throw a veil of respectability over policy. Samuel Huntington and his “clash of civilisations” provide the current favoured paradigm.
My understanding is that the execution of policy comes first and is driven by less complex values — power, greed, oil, markets, control, etc. That stuff is going to happen whether they have an academic who thinks he can excuse it or not.
The US as you know was quite late to the party in the Middle and Near East. Once they got established there, they pretty much embarked on the exact same strategy as their European counterparts; sponsoring coups, proxy wars, assassinations, feeding arms to favoured dictators, and of course securing oil concessions.
I don’t think Lewis’s influence adequately explains this sameness of US policies and practices there and I think standard theories of predatory capitalism do. America maybe had a preference for indirect control where Europeans tended towards direct colonial rule, but that distinction isn’t as simple as some would have us believe.
I just think Andrew Bostom makes a strong argument which does appear to fit with US middle-east policy since the end of WW2, as I understand it.
I’m sitting in a flat in Edinburgh though.
link to amazon.com
Maybe I am missing something, but I still don’t know what side the UK would bomb.
And even if they said they were attacking ISIS, I still wouldn’t believe them
@Angra Mainyu
A factually ridiculous statement which I will gladly dismember, if you insist — get back to me on that — but you seem to be making a case for intervention with this sort of point.
The first protests in the path of events which led to the current civil war in Syria occurred in 2011, in a protest against Assad in Damascus. The sanctions imposed by the West hit two months later, after outrageous actions by the Assad government against protesting civilians, and were aimed at oil, luxury goods, dual use technology, and bank accounts of the government and Assad supporters.
The reasons for the uprising are, as is common in the region, complex, but two of the main factors – which people constantly seem to dismiss without thinking about it – are a really bad drought and the failure of crops (the same failure which led to the increase in bread prices which also contributed to the uprising in Egypt as well), which together led to an increase in the price of basic goods – something which was extremely difficult for the already poor residents of areas outside Damascus, and in particular in Homs, which was already subject to shortages imposed by Assad after the failure of the Damascus Revolution in the early 2000s. Now, unless you are of a conspiracy minded bent, I’m sure you will agree that the drought and crop failure, which played a larger part in the situation than all other factors combined, were not the doing of the West. These circumstances inevitably led to a current of anti-Assad feeling. Not that such feeling was ever far from the surface, particularly in Homs, which had already suffered badly under the previous Assad.
As to intervention – I was making a case for intervention in early 2011. Not necessarily of a military bent either at that point, unless it was of the peacekeeper ilk, as in Bosnia previously (which you will also recall was a humanitarian clusterfuck as the rest of Europe did nothing to curb ethnic cleansing and genocide). Intervention now – well, perhaps you missed where I said the following:
Really, bombing them is not going to be a solution to the problem anyway, even if you kill every last one of them. The history of the region, and Western involvement in it, must surely make people understand why not?
The inference of that particular statement was that military intervention will solve nothing now. It’s pretty much impossible to sort out who is who in Syria, even if you’re Syrian, so the chances of the West, or any other nation or bloc, being able to is pretty much a zero. You shouldn’t make assumptions without all the facts, my friend.
Sure, in regard to your contention that the West has historically had a part to play in the region and the resulting mess, I’d certainly agree that the West, in particular the UK and France, and latterly the US, have had a large hand in the region and the conditions which allowed such instability to occur. But then again, so have Iran and Saudi Arabia, and even Iraq to an extent. And none of them control the weather.
The USA started funding the Syrian opposition under George W. Bush in 2005. The ‘Syrian National Council’ has received $20.4 million from Libya, $15 million from Qatar and $5 million from the UAE, since its founding in October 2011.
The CIA has for years been arming and funding anti-Assad forces from the Turkish side of the Turkey-Syria border, using long-standing connections with the Muslim Brotherhood to do so. Russia and Syria both describe the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organisation.
The US government and Saudi Arabia are pumping money for covert operations into Lebanon, Syria and Iran, in an effort to strengthen Saudi-supported Sunni Islam groups linked to al-Qaeda.
In December 2009 in a US Embassy cable, the then US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton wrote: “it has been an ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist financing emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority. … donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide …”
From 2006 to 2010, the US spent $12 million on backing and instigating demonstrations, secret operations and propaganda against the Syrian government.
In June 2013 the former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas stated that the war on Syria was being planned in 2009: “I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met with top British officials, who confessed to me, that they were preparing something in Syria.”
President Bashar al-Assad must remain in power to allow his army to take the lead in defeating Islamic State forces in Syria, former chief of the defence staff General David Richards has said. In an interview on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on 18 November, he said: “At the moment we’ve got contradictory war aims. We want to deal with Isis but we also want to get rid of Assad at the same time. I personally don’t think that’s plausible. Any general will tell you you need to have unity of purpose and clear aims in a war. That muddies those aims.”