Britain: A country ethically ripe for insurgency!

Deliberately play with fire at someone else's expense and ultimately you will also get burnt. It's call BLOWBACK!

By Stanley Collymore

 

My country Britain needs to be dismantled and if having to use the insurgency methods it constantly and with impunity utilizes in its colonialist, imperialist and hegemonic zeal to destabilize, create chaos in, brutally assassinate leaders of, bring about regime change in, fragment and ruthlessly loot of their natural resources and mineral wealth countries of the global south, several of them ex-colonies of its former empire, is the only way to achieve this then the sooner this dismemberment begins the better I say; as it’s the only pragmatic solution I can foresee for permanently killing off the thoroughly fixated and delusionary conviction obsessively held by most Britons that somehow Britain is indispensible to the world and therefore what its rulers think, say and do are the only things that really matter. To me it’s an attitude that totally stinks, and one in my opinion that must unconditionally and completely be destroyed.

 

As you read this article Britain, never mind what the Con-Dem regime of David Cameron and Nick Clegg lyingly and dishonestly says, is actively and murderously involved in the logistical planning - MI6 had operational centres in the city of Homs before claiming to have tactically retreated, in other words these bullying cowards ran for their lives when the Syrian army launched a determined and concerted attack on their illegal strongholds - and actual implementation of terrorist acts that are premeditatedly targeting and killing innocent Syrian civilians, military personnel as well as wilfully destroying Syria’s public infrastructure with the aim of creating chaos in the country, generating instability and fear in the minds of the general public, engender crippling destabilization and significantly act as a powerful catalyst for widespread dissension across Syria that Britain hopes the vast majority of those forced into this uncompromising and unpleasant situation that they find themselves in will out of a natural desire for their personal safety, in other words simply managing to stay alive, and regardless of whatever genuine feelings of empathy with and support for the Bashar al-Assad government that they may have will nevertheless turn on it and bring it down.

 

It’s the very same artifice that Britain deviously used in Libya after its ostentatious public rapprochement with and much vaunted welcoming of Colonel Gaddafi back into the so-called international fold only to treacherously destroy his country, topple his government and give its approval to his cold-blooded assassination, this despite boy Hague - and I’m referring here to the British Foreign Secretary William Hague who is a pathological liar of the same sort as Tony Blair and that I’m quite happy to let it be generally known I’ve had a passionate loathing for ever since I first clapped eyes on him as a pretty revolting precocious schoolboy and nauseatingly rightwing burk with a most irritating accent and manner of speech, which haven’t deserted him I notice, giving a rabble-rousing rant at a Conservative Party conference  when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister �" openly and barefacedly lying to both the British public and the House of Commons that there were definitely no British boots on Libyan soil when in point of fact the SAS, MI6 and the CIA for instance were already clandestinely functioning in Libya for years and long before the so-called Arab Spring was ever ostensibly conceptualized and implemented, manipulated by the west is how I prefer to see it, by the west’s own agent provocateurs, naïve dupes and basically well-meaning mugs in the countries involved that for internal consumption, necessary international perception but most crucially for their own iniquitous advantages the involved governments of the west, including that of Britain, have cynically and quite disingenuously publicly given the impression that they too have bought into the generally perceived narrative that the so-called Arab Spring has been all about unprompted Citizens demonstrations and protests and it’s those that were out on the streets in their hundreds of thousands who should be given the credit for it. Nothing could be further from the truth where these Machiavellian purveyors of the black arts are concerned.

 

What the world is currently observing in the Middle East and more specifically at this moment in Syria is the partial realization of a detailed and concerted plan by the United States, Britain, the EU, Israel and the North Atlantic Terrorist Organization, NATO that has long been in the making to effectively destroy what they perceive and fear as an Axis of Resistance jointly led by Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas against their colonialist, imperialist and hegemonic ambitions in the Middle East and North Africa and continued theft of these regions natural resources, and if not checked will certainly grow in strength, numbers and purpose as progressively more people both at home but importantly in the affected and neighbouring countries come to realize, resent and resist what they’re doing.

 

To this end therefore of putting into operation damage limitation while proceeding apace with their plans to accomplish their goals, such as the destabilizing of multiple countries, generating chaos in them, leadership assassinations, regime change and the assiduous but invidious employment of the well-established principle of divide and rule, are all relevant components of these government and military terrorists aspirations and special agendas to destroy those whom they see as actual or prospective enemies and having got them out of the way to then swiftly militarize the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia as a sort of medieval type fort, and in tandem with what the United States and NATO are already up to in eastern Europe and Turkey that the US is aggressively pursuing in several Pacific Ocean and far east countries and of course Australia, encircle and severely circumscribe it hopes the growing military and financial power as well as the influence of China and Russia not forgetting that Russia is abundantly rich in natural resources, notably oil and gas, that an energy hungry, resources depleted west would dearly love to get their greedy hands on.

 

To gratuitously and worse still knowingly support a position that is morally indefensible, criminal and utterly reprehensible and to do so because those responsible for and who are carrying out these criminal and inhuman activities are either our friends, family members, colleagues, bosses, those we look up to or for personal reasons we’re well disposed to yet were these selfsame deeds the actions of those we’re wary of, dislike, hate or are envious of we would instantly be up in arms against quite frankly as an attitude just sickens me as it’s diametrically opposed to my upbringing as well as my entire value system; because as far as I’m concerned wrongdoing is simply that regardless of who the perpetrator is, and that individual or the persons involved should in my opinion be subjected to the complete rigours of the law, given a full, ample and unrestricted opportunity to defend themselves and let the law take its course. That’s what I call justice anything else is dead wrong!

 

It’s a tenet that I unashamedly think should and must be applied as well to our politicians, civic leaders, the military, law enforcement officers, corporation bosses, the unseemly but even so powerful rich and those that many in our society despite the year being 2012 and not 1812 still instinctively kneel in reverence to and obsequiously revere as the privileged elite. That no one should ever be above the law oughtn’t to be just an academic theory but should instead be a practical and indefatigable reality.

 

Tony Blair took Britain to war against Iraq on a lie knowing it to be so but at least he tried to cover his back by having the matter debated in parliament and getting the assent for his criminal escapade from the bunch of obsequious blockheads, Colonel Blimps and armchair patriotic generals who are always willing and ready to defend Britain’s foreign interests, never the country’s genuine needs like the safeguard of the NHS and the proper education of our children, to the last drop of somebody else’s blood but never their own or that of their families and who like the verminous and repulsive cockroaches that they are infest that far from august chamber they carouse in. UN Resolution 1973 decreed that there should be a no-fly zone over Libya, nothing said about or any authorization specific or implied ever given by it to gratuitously attack Libya and bring about regime change there but it didn’t stop the North Atlantic Terrorist Organization from doing these things. That’s because this was what Britain and its allies wanted all along and Libya’s massive oil and gas reserves were too temping for David Cameron and Nick Clegg to pass up the opportunity handed to them on a plate to further ingratiate themselves with BP and the other multinational oil corporations and with an eye to their own future financial security. What personal deals “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” they’ve concocted with BP  and the other oil thieves as Tony Blair did prior to the Iraq war we’ll just have to wait until they leave office to see; but you can bet your very last Pound that these avaricious b******s  along with the rest of their Con-Dem cabinet with more than a few venal spivs at the Ministry of Defence stand to gain  immensely, Bae Systems readily come to mind, from their treachery to this country. Watch this space!

 

No one with a working brain cell in his or her head thinks that UN Security Council is either democratic or is run that way especially with the pusillanimous buffoon Rickshaw Charlie, aka Ban ki Moon, allegedly in charge, which he isn’t as he’s nothing more than a willing toady to carry out the US’s wishes. Nevertheless the UNSC does have rules and among them are those that stipulate there are to be five permanent members of that body: China, Russia, replacing the former Soviet Union, the United States of America, Britain and France and that each of these permanent members have the right of veto to block any resolution that it doesn’t agree with regardless of what the other veto wielding permanent or temporary members of the UNSC or for that matter the UN General Assembly think of that decision. Throughout the UNSC’s existence the US has exercise more vetoes than the rest of the P5 combined, most of them extremely selectively and disproportionately as it happens in favour of Israel; and Britain and France are also pretty handy when it comes to either using their veto powers self-interestedly or in sycophantically following the US lead and using it to defend this Zionist apartheid and imperialist entity ensconced in the Middle East, and what’s more routinely expect and would most certainly demand if there were any inclination not to do so that whatever disposed recalcitrant country be it Russia China or anyone else play by the rules, maturely accept and abide by their veto decisions, which they always do.

 

Russia and China rarely use their veto powers in the UNSC but they recently did so to block a grossly one-sided regime change resolution against Syria brought to the chamber by the western UNSC P 3 members and their barbaric, undemocratic, wholly totalitarian Arab Bantustan puppets in the Persian Gulf, particularly Bantu-Saudi and Qatar: a petrol filling station masquerading as a country. Russia and China acted this way because they saw what happened in Libya after their foolish abstentions on the 1973 UN Resolution; how Britain and the rest of them in the North Atlantic Terrorist Organization shamelessly abused both the spirit and the letter of the law of that resolution and were determined not to permit that to ever happen again.. But like the arrogant but when push really comes to shove craven bullies that the UNSC western P3 are they just couldn’t abide what Russia and China did. How dare they, they openly queried as they furiously threw their dummies out of their prams; this after all is meant to be our UNSC not yours!

 

Filled with self-righteous indignation and with Russia and China sticking to their guns on this matter Britain, France and the United States along with NATO members like psycho-schizophrenic Turkey that can’t make up its mind whether it’s European or central Asian, Persian Gulf Bantustan puppet entities comprising Qatar, Bantu-Saudi and of course the principal mad dog of the Middle East Israel have decided to resort to the same terrorism that that they sanctimoniously and ad infinitum denounce whether anyone really wants to listen to them or not to have their way in Syria. Frankly, these countries are actively and knowingly violating every internationally agreed convention and UN regulation that there is to clandestinely wage war on a country that hasn’t threatened or attacked any of them and in doing so are deliberately killing innocent civilians, mostly women and children, to create chaos, destabilize the country and finally they hope bring about the regime change that they wanted all along. How utter disgusting that these people can expect and demand that UNSC P3 vetoes should be sacrosanct, respected and adhered to but that they don’t need to pay any attention to or follow the same rules when a properly taken decision goes against their selfish, premeditated and pernicious agendas. Just imagine what the reaction would have been if Russia, China or any group of states had decided to sponsor terrorism, insurgency or had provided the logistical support for death squads to infiltrate and work in Israel to create the same havoc that Britain, France, the United States of America, EU, Turkey and their Bantustan chums are doing in Syria. We wouldn’t hear the last of it and more likely than not such activities would have provoked a war by the west in the same way as if these terrorist activities were let loose on major US or EU cities. But once again we come face to face with the blatant double standards and hypocrisies of these criminal morons.

 

David Cameron, Nick Clegg and their cabinet on the legal principle of joint enterprise are now war criminals as they have neither the authorization of the UNSC, the British people nor our parliament let alone the permission of the global south to wage a war on Syria or anyone else, even if in Syria’s case it isn’t an all out military campaign but rather a nasty, vicious, covert insurgency and terrorist campaign against another sovereign, independent state that is also a fully-fledged member of the United Nations. I don’t expect the British legal authorities to arrest these war criminals since they haven’t done so with Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and their ilk; and it’s an absolutely sure bet that with David Cameron and Nick Clegg’s political parties, at the unconstrained insistence of Israel in order to protect its own war criminal who wished to visit Britain, having changed the UK’s laws whereby any British citizen in possession of a magistrate’s warrant to do so �" now only the British Attorney General a government political figure and cabinet minister can selectively make that judgement on who or which foreigner is a war criminal and can or cannot be arrested on British soil �" could have summarily executed that issued warrant against the accused war criminal  with a legal obligation on the part of the police to arrest that individual and the Crown Prosecution Service, CPS, to follow up the merits of the case now no longer in force or possible to affect, that it’s a safe bet the police and CPS or our Zionist House of Commons  won’t do anything to rectify this matter, and expecting David Cameron, Nick Clegg, boy Hague, Theresa May et al to freely fall on their swords or indict themselves as war criminals would let’s face it be a bit far-fetched.

 

Similarly there won’t be any relief I can assure you from the ICC which has an aberrant and obsessive fixation with the colour black, and that ever since its creation has only and exclusively selectively indicted, prosecuted and incarcerated Blacks as war criminals and perpetrators of crimes against humanity. Undoubted white war criminals however don’t have that problem to contend with since untroubled by such trivial concerns as both they and the ICC perceive them as they’re allowed to make millions from their crimes, publish memoirs and back-slapping go on global tours to laud and promote their heinous actions. Just look at Tony Blair; more than eight luxurious residences now for him and his family to live in, while he makes substantial millions from the major oil corporations and those of the military industrial complex on whose behalf he really went to war with Iraq not all that dishonest crap about its weapons of mass destruction which as he knew all along and every Briton who hasn’t been in a coma for the past decade knows all too well now didn’t exist. Yet not a hair on his head has been touched for his multiple war crimes and crimes against humanity. So on precedent alone David Cameron, Nick Clegg and their cabinet of associate war criminals can feel quite confident that neither the British police nor the ICC will ever bother them; which leave you the British public.

 

Now you can either redeem yourselves by collectively coming together as a nation, speak with one voice and absolutely ensure that all these criminals who blight our country and give it an awfully bad name while feathering their own nests in the process are arraigned and get their just desserts, or else you can slap yourselves on the back, smugly feel proud you’re white and delude yourselves that you and your country are forever immune from these kinds of atrocities which are routinely happening to people thousands of miles away from your European backyard; people that don’t look at all like you, that you don’t know, want to or care about as you ask yourselves in dismissive terms why should you? Never mind that it’s your country ostensibly acting in your name that is causing their misery and death. And anyway you self-congratulatorily persuade yourself Britain is a nuclear power and you’re well protected by this.

 

True, Britain does have nuclear weapons but it can’t use them in London, Birmingham, Bristol, Sheffield, Brighton, Stafford, Liverpool, Manchester, York, Leicester, Bradford, Wolverhampton, Coventry, Oxford, Milton Keynes, Cambridge or Newcastle-upon Tyne for example or to fight an urban guerrilla type insurgency campaign since that would be synonymous to a man holding a hand grenade and threatening those in the room with him with it, make no sense at all unless he’s also prepared to die himself. Neither can Britain use cruise missiles nor utilize RAF saturation bombing strategies, I know as I served with the Royal Air Force, as it did in Libya against insurgency embedded and targeted British cities as no British government could aspire to do that and survive, and the carnage would be so enormous and horrendous that no section of British society other than that involved in the insurgency would have the stomach for it. In marked contrast however there would be no such limitations or moral probity by the insurgents in respect of their use of IUDs car bombs, sticky bombs, improvised explosives, infrastructure and media broadcasting destruction and the like in concert with scrupulously targeted campaigns against shopping malls, schools, churches, recreational facilities, banks, constituency political offices and a host of residential and other so-called soft targets as well as law enforcement and military ones by internal clean skins and a consortium of externally funded and trained insurgents; all the associated criminal and heinous terrorist activities that Britain is practised at and is currently carrying out in Syria as it did in Libya; is also implicated with in Iran by means of its funding and arming of the MKO - no wonder that Catherine Ashton is so concerned about the physical welfare of this globally recognised terrorist group that was a close ally of Saddam Hussein and along with Britain, the EU and the US want it to be unbanned by the UN as a terrorist group and have collectively put pressure on Iraq not to expel it from its territory - and other similar anti-Iranian terrorist groups and is up to its neck in in the suppression of the genuinely peaceful protestors of Bahrain, Yemen and yes Bantu-Saudi in the massive weaponry, logistical support and other help it gives to the dictators in these Gulf Bantustans to kill their people, apart from exporting Ian Henderson and John Yates to assist in this process as well.

 

No one, individual or country, can expect to flout the law morally or in the criminal sense and expect to continuously and with impunity get away with it; which is what Britain is doing and thinks it can. I’m well aware that it isn’t only Britain that is conducting itself in this way; France, Germany, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Italy and others are also deeply complicit in these crimes, as are the US and Canada and it’s to be hoped that they too get their comeuppance. But I am British and it’s my country which I want to see put in order or else be destroyed as a useless entity as the case maybe, just as one would a family pet that has fatally contracted rabies and unhappily must be put down for the good and safety of everyone in that family home, the neighbours and anyone else that that dog might consciously or even by chance come in contact with, and therefore I can only hope that the citizens of the US, Canada and others that comprise the North Atlantic Terrorist Organization do the same in respect of their own countries.

 

The alternative is bleak; for to do nothing as you stand by and watch innocent people in the global south insensitively and cold-bloodedly murdered in their own countries by the military forces of your own marauding countries and especially when they pose no threat to you or ever did you any harm is complicity to murder, and if you or the British people can’t get that notion into your skulls then you’re all accessories after the fact and deserve everything that insurgents, whether they are home-grown, sponsored by countries abroad or simply an alliance these, with the specific remit to target your country and population can physically and psychologically wreak on you. And even though in the case of Britain I may unwittingly be a victim of such insurgency attacks - car bombs don’t discriminate against individuals or know what their political views are �" I shan’t lose any sleep over it as I think it’ll be a price worth paying. As Charles I said to his children shortly before he was executed, death isn’t such a terrible thing. And I should know.

 

On three separate occasions and in totally distinct surroundings and circumstances, one of them in an RAF fighter jet as it happens, I was seconds away from death but providence intervened; even so these incidents as my life flashed by before my mind’s consciousness weren’t frightening at all and honestly were very much to the contrary. So I’m absolutely philosophical about when or how my life ends, as my conscience is clear and has always been in relation to those things that truly matter in my life and which I feel passionately about. But other than natural causes or an unforeseeable accident that I have no control over I haven’t the slightest intention of ever surrendering my life cheaply, and especially with respect to causes I’m committed to, to those who for their nefarious purposes might want to subjugate it or even wish to deprive me of it. Not for me the Christian platitude of turning the other cheek since from personal observations and even the odd past encounter myself I’ve learnt it’s a mug’s game that can and will be horribly abused by those who’re most keen to advocate and what’s more want for me and others to adopt that dogma.

 

It’s internationally accepted that the South Atlantic is voluntarily a non-militarized and non-nuclear zone, something that the countries of the region firmly adhere to. Britain in 1982 and subsequently in its antiquated imperialistic and outdated colonialist aspirations has blatantly chosen to ignore this.

 

Its dubious sovereignty of the Malvinas aside what the Colonel Blimps of Britain are saying is that if one has a permanent seat on the unrepresentative and unaccountable UNSC and a nuclear capability as well that country along with its friends can do whatever they like, get away with it, and accounts for why they’re so obsessively keen to stop other countries they dislike or disapprove of from acquiring their own nuclear weapons, which they themselves are in possession of and have no intention whatsoever of ever giving up, as a counterbalance to them, whether these countries want nuclear weapons or not. The answer therefore is quite simple; ignore these bullies and go for the nuclear option if practicable.

 

As for David Cameron’s risible and fallacious claim that Britain stands squarely behind the right of all people to democratically choose their way of life, who governs them, what sovereignty they hold or aspire to, who they might wish to pledge their allegiance to and that these precepts apply rigidly to the settlers on the Malvinas/Falklands islands and from his perspective are non-negotiable, I would like to ask Mr Cameron if these same precepts so clearly demarcated by him also apply to the indigenous people of the Chagos Islands.

 

For those of you who are ignorant of what I’m talking about or even where the Chagos Islands are, let me explain myself. The Chagos Islands are an archipelago of islands in the Indian Ocean whose indigenous population is black. Like many territories around the world that during the rampant onslaught of British colonialism were arbitrarily invaded, occupied, had their inhabitants thoroughly subjugated and who were told that henceforth, whether or not they wanted to be, they were henceforth subjects of the British Empire, the people of the Chagos Islands suffered the same fate. A nation of indigenous people as distinct from the Falklanders who are categorically settlers and the remnant descendants of British whalers that plied their trade in the South Atlantic when whaling was a major seafaring industry there the Chaggossians remained involuntarily under British colonial rule until the early 1960s.

 

That’s when the United States government unilaterally approached its British counterpart and demanded that the main island of the group, Diego Garcia, be physically handed over, though mercifully as it turned out not sovereignty-wise, to the Americans for the purpose of a military base there, and furthermore to ensure that the United States would de facto have full jurisdiction over the entire archipelago of islands additionally stipulated in its demands to the British government that every living soul on these islands had to be ethnically cleansed from their indigenous homeland along with the absolute prerequisite and clear-cut guarantee backed up by any means that the Americans thought necessary as long as the base existed to ensure that neither the then current population of Chaggossians nor their descendants could ever set foot again on their native and ancestral homeland.

 

A secret deal concocted between the British and US governments there was evidently no transparency or revelation of what was agreed between these two entities, all that would clandestinely come out much later, nor was there any public or parliamentary scrutiny of or endorsement for this pact as it was never publicly discussed within the UK and most definitely not on the Chagos Islands where the islanders were permanently, disdainfully and dismissively kept in the dark about what was going on, clearly never consulted on anything but simply presented with a fait accompli when the shameless stitch up and dreadful betrayal of themselves by the British and the Americans was completed.

 

Sycophantically as it has always been towards the US since 1945 and still continues to be to this very day the British government readily acceded to every demand that the United States made of it in respect of the Chagos Islands; in turn the US unsurprisingly got the greenlight to build its base on Diego Garcia, however but before that was embarked on and not wanting to sully its hands when it could happily get its British quisling cat’s-paw to do its dirty work for it the US administration ordered Britain to commence the process of ethnically cleansing the Chaggossians from their homeland.

 

And so began a vicious and brutal process with routine beatings of the local inhabitants, torture, physical threats to murder babes in arms, toddlers and older children in front of their mothers that were themselves forcibly separated from their husbands who were then threatened with physical mutilations including leg amputations and castration, a common practice on the British colonial plantations in the West Indies and North America during slavery, if they resisted their forcible ouster from the land of their birth.

 

Pregnant women traumatized into labour by the undue pressure of persistent intimidation that took on many forms including verbal and physical harassment exerted on them by these British ethnic cleansers were callously prevented from receiving medical assistance resulting in the deaths of some mothers and their babies, and many elderly people on prescription medication cruelly had these taken from them with the same deadly result. In fact everything that could be conjured up to make life intolerable for these people was ruthlessly seized on to exert the maximum pressure on the Chaggossians to relinquish their homes, their lands and their islands.

 

Houses were set ablaze and their occupants forced to watch as they burnt to the ground with their prized personal possessions inside them; crops were wantonly destroyed; water sources contaminated; farm and other domesticated animals and even household pets were either mercilessly slaughtered, chemically poisoned or having been liberally doused with petrol in their pens were cold-bloodily burnt alive as part of what was essentially a scorched earth policy by the British with total ethnic cleansing as its sole objective; sadly but unsurprisingly it worked.

 

Shortly afterwards in the wake of the last Chaggossian being forcibly removed from the archipelago by its British lackeys the United States government began the construction of its military base on Diego Garcia the principal island of the Chagos archipelago; a base that 52 years on still exists and which has featured quite prominently in the unlawful US rendition programme and many other ghastly atrocities that the United States of America has been sadistically involved in, in Central Asia, the Middle East and the Horn of Africa.

 

Turfed off protestingly from their ancestral islands but physically unable to do anything to stop this from happening the Chaggossians were humiliatingly dumped by the British government on the island of Mauritius , another British colony at the time, with no provisions for their welfare put in place either locally or by the regime in London; and with the hapless Chaggossians left very much to fend for themselves in the face of simmering and at times open hostility to their presence on the island from local Mauritians the situation for them was indeed a very grim one.

 

Deeply traumatized by these new developments on top of what had already happened to them back home the Chaggossian community was in a deep quandary as to what best to do to protect itself and just as significantly survive in the process. Some members of it working on the principle that during the colonization of their islands they were deemed to be British subjects by their colonialist interlopers whether or not they wanted to be such, and furthermore since it was Britain that had ethnically cleansed them from their homeland putting them in the precarious position they now found themselves to be in, they would exercise their rights as British subjects and seek to emigrate to the UK.

 

This idea though was forcibly stamped on by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office which made it abundantly clear that such a move wouldn’t be tolerated let alone accepted by Her Majesty’s government since the Chaggossians weren’t British born nationals, had never lived in Britain, had no familial or other relevant links to the country, did not satisfy the UK’s strict immigration policies, and whatever claims they thought they had as British subjects were residual ones, restricted and notionally applicable in an overseas context only. In other words you don’t belong here and importantly we Brits don’t want you coming into our country, never mind that we’ve just brutally kicked your asses penniless off your own homeland that you never wanted to leave in the first place, viciously seized it from you in the process, are physically and psychologically preventing you from returning there, and in the most fawning manner imaginable to any sensible and fair-minded person have handed what’s rightfully, morally and legally your undisputed home over to our American masters and controllers to arrogantly do with it as they God-dammed well felt inclined to and eventually did.

 

Carte blanche provisions then to pursue a perversely indoctrinated and very tenaciously adhered to arrogance which explicitly stipulated then, and unchecked still holds sway to this day, February 15, 2012, that no one other than those who the United States government deems appropriate and accords permission to can approach the territorial waters or airspace of the Chagos Islands let alone presume they can set foot on that archipelago. A strictly enforceable ban that incredibly also applies to British government ministers, parliamentarians, our military, British law enforcement officers, our judiciary, the media, ordinary members of the British public, the Chaggossians themselves of course and even Her Majesty the Queen, notwithstanding, and I’m being particularly sarcastic here, the seemingly little from the perspective of the US administration’s and that of their Westminster quisling clowns but nevertheless by no means an insignificant matter in the eyes of everyone else with any sense of fair play or justice inside them that constitutionally these islands ever since their colonization by Britain have not ceased being and at this particular moment in time are still legally a British crown colony that’s internationally recognized as such, and furthermore their sovereign and globally acknowledged head of state is none other than HM Queen Elizabeth II the incumbent monarch of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland.

 

Now just imagine a similar scenario unfolding if you will where le’s say it was seriously demanded by Britain for example that the inhabitants of Puerto Rico or the US Virgin Islands should likewise be brutally and ignominiously turfed out of their respective islands by the United States which has a moral and legal obligation of care for these people as well as legal jurisdiction over them and their islands, and this was explicitly being done at the flimsy demand and selfish behest of Britain or even some other foreign state that coveted these islands and wanted to use them for their military adventurism or geopolitical and imperialist escapades.

 

Wishful thinking at best is how such an overture, immediately slapped down with dismissive opprobrium and disdain, would be viewed by the United States as regards any country stupid enough to make such a suggestion, and that would definitively be the end of that, as there’s no way that the United States would so blatantly and pusillanimously as Britain willingly and freely did vis-à-vis the Chagos Islands have compromised its independence and sovereign integrity to a foreign power while at the same time treacherously betraying the legal, personal and constitutional rights of people who were its lawful citizens, and furthermore that it had a moral duty of care to protect. All this notwithstanding the fact that the US Constitution specifically proscribes the military of all foreign countries being stationed on US soil, something that the British government, Britain after all was the former colonial ruler of what subsequently became the United States of America, well knows, and taking full cognisance of this would the US ever in a month of Sundays abrogate this hallowed rule, since its national pride and instinctive chauvinism would never countenance let alone accept such a move; which emphatically puts into its proper perspective and firmly reinforces this the truly obsequious and pitying character of contemporary Britain.

 

Unjustly and racially debarred from Britain and with all other likely practical options just as frustratingly leading nowhere the Chaggossians finding themselves marooned on the island of Mauritius were literally up the proverbial creek without a paddle, nevertheless their spirits remained unbowed and they were even more resolutely determined than before not to give up in their quest to regain their islands and return home to the peace and tranquillity which were so much an integral part of their everyday lives before their brutal ethnic cleansing from their own personal as well as ancestral homeland by the British government acting obsequiously at the behest of the United States administration and the Pentagon.

 

To this effect an organisational strategy following the dismissive snub to their expectant aspirations by the authorities in London was now scrupulously put in place with very specific long term goals a constituent priority of this manoeuvre, since the Chaggossians were under no illusions whatsoever that their struggle would be an uphill one just as their fight for justice would be a protracted battle with many likely setbacks along the way; but they were mentally prepared for these disappointments fully cognisant of the fact that the loss of any one particular battle doesn’t necessarily mean that the war that is being fought is itself unwinnable, and for these incredibly self-sufficient and remarkably courageous people winning this particular war of attrition against them and recovering in full what was rightfully, morally and legitimately theirs was undeniably their end game and would be pursued by them no matter how long it took.

 

And it did take a very long time during which successive British governments callously ignored the plight of the Chaggossian people and even pretended to themselves that no such people existed; that the Chagos Islands were terra nullius, contemptibly resorting to using the same lying, shamefully dishonest and discredited arguments their antecedents had previously and consistently employed in Australia, South Africa and Zimbabwe for example to justify white Caucasian hegemony in these places, and that the people there were in essence either temporary residents or migrant workers from elsewhere who’d sensibly come to realize that the way of life they’d led on the Chagos Islands, seemingly idyllic as it might appear to others looking on from the outside, was no longer sustainable and that’s why of their own accord and with no pressure from anyone  they’d sought the help of the British government to find them somewhere else more suitable to live, and quite happy to help Britain had obligingly done just that through negotiating a deal with the Mauritian authorities for them to relocate and take up residence on Mauritius.

 

This lying but official version of events was the one however that the British government nevertheless chose to promulgate and doggedly stick to, even though it was patently obvious to everyone in the know that what was coming out of London wasn’t by any means the truth and was as far from it as one could possibly get, but it evidently suited Britain’s purposes all the same to maintain this devious lie which beneficially enabled it to get some much desired Brownie points from its American masters and controllers, and to quisling Britain that essentially was all that mattered; for like an ill-favoured and intermittently thought of child, but crucially in the case of the latter situation only when pressing circumstances dictated such a move, desperately keen to please  at all time as well as find favour with a largely indifferent but none the less dominant and influential parent or guardian this was the role that Britain pusillanimously chose to adopt for itself vis-à-vis the United States of America and its selfish, imperialistic interests.

 

What a pathetic come down; the previously almighty Britain on whose empire, including the territories of the former American colonies, it was hubristically said and passionately believed the sun both literally and figuratively would never set now humiliatingly taking its orders from and quite obsequiously allowing itself to be superciliously dictated to by a bunch of trans-Atlantic, redneck hillbillies, analogous were it to happen to Tiger Woods’ former golfing caddie employing and then patronizingly using him in that role. What a crushing abasement that would be for Tiger Woods and one which I can’t ever imagine and honestly don’t think he would ever give in to; however in the case of contemporary Britain it’s an enervating indignity which the ruling elite as well as a significant section of the British population having ludicrously convinced themselves that Britain is still a very important and even an indisputably major global player seemingly welcome, while at the same time in their bizarrely transfixed state of self-denial continue to pretend, aided and abetted by the United States’ cynical indulgence of them and a concealed revenge for its colonial experiences at the hands of the British Empire, that Britain is still very much a world power and as such worthy of special recognition.

 

Some optimists think that the wheels of justice grind slowly but nevertheless thoroughly; sceptics however believe that in the general climate of perverted notions as to what constitutes right or wrong and where previously acknowledged value systems are now rather bizarrely and quite inexplicably turned completely upside down justice has become a commodity that those in search of it must seek out and determine for themselves; while there’s another school of thought which says it’s all to do with the vagaries of fate and as such we’re all just pawns in a process that we absolutely have no control over. Whatever your take on this matter it’s rather important to note that the ethnically cleansed and Mauritius dumped Chaggossians who subsequent to this disgrace had been in political limbo for many years after that were suddenly, unexpectedly and quite unintentionally on their part pushed into a state of affairs whose final outcome would have dramatic consequences as well as long-lasting beneficial effects on their collective lives.

 

This scenario which would be played out in the waters of the South Atlantic began in 1982 when the Argentinean dictator Leopoldo Galtieri beset with economic, social and political problems at home that threatened to topple him and his autocratic government cynically and self-servingly decided to resurrect the Argentinean claim over the Islas Malvinas that nominally were under British jurisdiction as the Falkland Islands. Never having relinquished its claim to sovereignty over the Islas Malvinas that were an indisputable part of Argentinean territory until the British kicked the Argentineans off their own islands and allowed a group of itinerant British South Atlantic whalers to settle there instead, arbitrarily renaming this South Atlantic archipelago they’d forcibly seized the Falkland Islands and for good measure, from a strictly British perspective that is, laid claim to the islands as a new part of the British Empire, Leopoldo Galtieri determined to remain in power at any cost manufactured a scenario which he felt confident would take the collective minds of the Argentinean people off their numerous domestic problems that his dictatorship had caused them and focus their undivided attention instead on an issue they all nationalistically felt very passionate about, the Islas Malvinas and the imminent repossession of them by Argentina. To this end, but chiefly for his own political survival, Leopoldo Galtieri made the bold but fateful decision to invade the Falkland Islands in his pompous attempt to reassert Argentinean sovereignty over them once more.

 

Meanwhile over 8000 miles away in the icy cold, choppy waters of the North Sea on a rather nondescript island called Britain located just off the edge of continental Europe a similarly incompetent, odious, rightwing Conservative regime led by Margaret Thatcher: an ideological soul mate of Leopoldo Galtieri and a particularly close buddy and political ally of his who personally authorized the British armed forces to train their Argentinean counterparts and equip them with state of the art technology; provided the opportunity for Argentinean officers to be routinely educated at Sandhurst, Britain’s prestigious military academy; permitted Argentinean special forces to regularly hold joint military exercises with their British equivalent in the UK �" in fact several of these Argentinean units were themselves in Britain when the two countries conveniently went to war and to Margaret Thatcher’s deep embarrassment her Argentinean guests had to be hurriedly smuggled out of the UK - was itself deeply embroiled in a series of politically damaging and explosive domestic problems that the prime minister, her cabinet and their parliamentary party were desperately trying to either find or else engineer ways to extricate themselves from while doing their utmost like their soul mate Leopoldo Galtieri in Argentina to stay in power.

 

Convinced that his close friendship with Margaret Thatcher and her firsthand knowledge of the political problems he was having at home coupled with her sisterly understanding of his prevalent difficulties there would cause her to turn a blind eye to his invasion plan of the Islas Malvinas, essentially being implemented to gain plaudits from the Argentinean people and remove most if not all of the political pressure he was remorselessly being subjected to and which threatened to remove him from power with all its foreseeable consequences for himself, Leopoldo Galtieri had actually persuaded himself that his military escapade would be a proverbial walk in the park, and it was in this frame of mind that he embarked on it; but unfortunately for him fate was being less than kind and his fixated aspirations of a quick and unchallenged success in his personal crusade of ostensible rehabilitation and being able to portray himself as a national hero and the patriotic leader who had successfully retaken the Islas Malvinas from foreign colonialist control and placed them once more under the valid and legitimate ownership and jurisdiction of Argentina were about to become horribly unstuck.

 

Germane to the problems experienced by Leopoldo Galtieri himself were Margaret Thatcher’s own political difficulties at home and which in many ways were indistinguishable from those of her Argentinean pal. Like Leopoldo Galtieri Thatcher also ran an autocratic government which was hopelessly out of touch with ordinary members of the British public and furthermore had dogmatically and quite insensitively bloody-mindedly introduced a series of political, social and economic policies that were diametrically opposed and significantly damaging to the general interests of ordinary Britons and as such were vehemently condemned and vociferously opposed by most of the British electorate. In other words like her Argentinean soul mate, Leopoldo Galtieri, Margaret Thatcher was a much hated political figure that most Britons couldn’t wait to see the back of and of whom it was realistically predicted by every opinion poll conducted would be humiliatingly thrown out of office at the upcoming parliamentary general elections.

 

Fully aware of this and with her numerous think tanks and well-heeled strategists unable to conjure up anything remotely feasible that could readily rejuvenate her political fortunes and simultaneously save her neck, as losing the general elections would certainly have seen her ignominiously dumped as the leader of the Conservative Party as well, Margaret Thatcher couldn’t believe her luck when Leopoldo Galtieri who from the outset she’d known would do something like this but didn’t care at the time because her political situation wasn’t as perilous then as it evidently was now actually went ahead, providing her with the political life line she now desperately clung on to with both hands, and dispatched his military forces to the Islas Malvinas.

 

Calculatingly no strategists or think tanks were required to inform or persuade the wily and self-centred Margaret Thatcher what she should do, and no friendship regardless of how conveniently invaluable she’d perceived it to be previously would she allow to stand in the way of her political survival and future ambitions as prime minister of Britain. To this end a rapid and self-serving abrogation of her friendship with Leopoldo Galtieri had to be instantly instigated in addition to her immediate disassociation and that of Britain from all things Argentinean, while in their place a concerted government and media assisted demonization of Leopoldo Galtieri together with the most spurious and arrant vilification of the Argentinean people, insultingly referring to them as Argies, was carefully crafted and viciously promulgated though more for the benefit of the British voters in the upcoming parliamentary, general elections than anyone else, but all the same as a logical and hopeful justification for what Margaret Thatcher intended to do next; since morally and even constitutionally in terms of sovereignty over what she and most of the British people call the Falkland Islands, Britain was really skating on very thin ice and Margaret Thatcher was well aware of this. Even so political survival for herself trumped all else and this unstintingly would be her single-minded course of action.

 

There’s nothing that appeals more to the mentality of the British establishment and a huge section of Britain’s population than colonialist ventures, particularly when such escapades are interlaced with the real prospect of military triumphs and imperialist glory in far flung overseas countries; and regrettably my country has more of its fair share of knuckle-dragging buffoons, armchair generals and those ardently prepared to fight and defend Britain’s dubious honour and prestige in the world to the last drop of somebody else’s blood to always persuade lawmakers from right across the various political spectra and more specifically political leaders and their governments finding themselves the butt of public derision and even hostility that war is always a good thing as well as a clever artifice to patriotically unite the country under a common purpose and bring cohesion once more to something they’re very much a part of and ostensibly love.

 

Disingenuously armed with these premises; the war drums of British colonialism beating at fever pitch; a severely retrenched Royal Navy somewhat embarrassingly supplemented by commandeered civilian cruise ships hurriedly assembled in Southampton’s docks; and as ardent cheerleaders an avalanche of boisterous, jingoistic, Union Jack waving and inveterate diehard, knuckle-dragging scaramouches, accompanied in many instances by their like-minded brats, all lining the perimeters of Southampton’s traditional naval docks in a frenzied and hubristic send off of “our boys”, Margaret Thatcher had successfully managed initially to rally a significant section of the British public behind her, and with her country’s appetite for war seemingly insatiable, its firm resolve to redress Britain’s bruised dignity caused by the actions of the Argentineans through their invasion of the Falkland Islands, and Britain’s domestic woes largely caused by the demagoguery of the Conservative Party, wholeheartedly subscribed to, implemented by and consequently the principal responsibility of Margaret Thatcher and her government now in these changed circumstances relegated to a distant memory, Margaret Thatcher was well and truly on her way to incredibly accomplishing what just a short while previously even those closest to her would have considered to be mission impossible; now all that she had to do was defeat the Argentineans, retake the Falkland Islands, sit back and rejoicingly bask in the effusive approbation of a fickle and largely ill-informed British public as its 20^th Century Boadicean heroine.

 

The general consensus among most objective observers of this unfolding but wholly unnecessary fiasco between Britain and Argentina, bearing in mind that ever since 1979 the two countries were involved in a dialogue that had led to serious negotiations between them concerning the long-term future of the Islas Malvinas or Falkland Islands, was that the enlisted, British armed forces members more committed  and professional, because of being a voluntary force, and significantly stronger militarily than their Argentinean counterparts and fully aware as well of the latter’s strengths and weaknesses because of their close military association with each other, would in any skirmishes between them have the upper hand, a situation that the British government and the Ministry of Defence were both fully cognisant of. Nevertheless this recognition of the state of play didn’t stop Margaret Thatcher though from dispatching Royal Navy nuclear submarines armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons to the conflict zone; a totally unwarranted, scandalous and pernicious development since neither Argentina nor any other country for that matter on the South American continent possessed or aspired to having nuclear weapons which Britain as an openly declared nuclear state obviously had and still does in abundance, and furthermore had arrogantly as well as unilaterally decided to trample all over a consensually agreed and globally acknowledged protocol by the world’s nations which declared the entire South Atlantic region militarily to be a nuclear free zone.

 

Such niceties though and even their legal obligations found no accord with and therefore didn’t matter a single jot to a very belligerent and obsessively, politically self-serving Margaret Thatcher; and with the bit of gritty self-confidence in the undoubted rightness of what she was doing clasped firmly between her teeth and hubristic defiance against her critics gushing from every pore of her body she carried on regardless fully comforted by the realization that the Ronald Reagan administration to which she was particularly close, notwithstanding the lofty principles of the Monroe Doctrine itself firmly underpinned by the fact that successive United States administrations ever since then had perceived and even physically saw the entire Latin American region as being in their backyard, was secretly giving Margaret Thatcher every logistical support she needed to guarantee her defeat of Argentina, which to put it mildly was rather ironic bearing in mind that at that time Argentina was itself even more of a client state of the United States of America than Britain was.

 

Against the solid backdrop of a complete news embargo by Margaret Thatcher on all live reporting by any broadcaster or journalist of real time events on and around the Falkland Islands forcing the British public like irresponsible children to have to exclusively rely on a rather one-sided and truncated account of what was taking place in the South Atlantic from a single public official specifically appointed by Margaret Thatcher herself to do the job he was entrusted with precisely in the manner in which he was carrying it out: namely to give prosaic reports of selected events while at the same time expressly forbidden from taking questions in response to observations he’d made or giving answers to impromptu queries that might be thrown at him, Margaret Thatcher kept and steadfastly maintained throughout this episodic period of her absurd skirmish with Leopoldo Galtieri that would grandiosely be later and constantly thereafter similarly referred to as the Falkland’s War a secure grip on every aspect that related, whether directly or indirectly, to the coverage of the conflict which she was now deeply and committedly embroiled in.

 

So much so in fact that she didn’t mind in the least carrying out a number of human rights volitions and crimes against humanity along the way, like the unwarranted attack on and the accompanied sinking of the Argentinean warship the Belgrano, which most ironically had previously been a decommissioned Royal Navy destroyer that had recently been sold by the British government to the Argentinean regime, sending to their untimely deaths at the bottom of the South Atlantic Ocean the entire Belgrano crew, which was in excess of 650 conscripts; by any stretch of the imagination or any standard that one might care to use a pretty despicable act.

 

However what made this heinous action a war crime as well, and a very contemptible one too, was the incontrovertible fact which Margaret Thatcher was subsequently after many blatant exploits of prevarications, dishonest claims and outright lies on her part forced to admit to, was that at the time of its premeditated sinking by the Royal Navy the Belgrano was well outside the unilaterally imposed and inflexibly policed exclusion zone that the British authorities had placed around the Falkland Islands, was actually sailing back to its home port in Argentina not many kilometres away and consequently posed no existential threat to anyone and least of all the British armed forces that were amassed on or around the Falkland Islands, when acting on the explicit instructions of the British prime minister the Ministry of Defence in London signalled the order to the South Atlantic for one of the Royal Navy’s nuclear submarines that was patrolling the coastal and territorial waters of Argentina, how much more ironic or contumelious could the Thatcher government have acted in the circumstances, to sink the Belgrano, with the added proviso that having do so if there were any survivors from among its crew their rescue wasn’t to be undertaken. In short every individual on board that doomed Argentinean ship had to die, and regrettably they did, as a distinctive and convincing chutzpah on the part of Margaret Thatcher and her gang that Britain meant business.

 

Grotesque as that might seem to ordinary decent folk, and it most certainly was, that was nevertheless par for the course where Britain’s colonialist and imperialist ventures are concerned; so nothing new there. However from a personal perspective it would be very remiss of me not to draw a parallel between the hypocrisies and double standards of the United Kingdom vis-à-vis the Islas Malvinas and what in contemporary terms it’s up to right now in relation to Libya and Syria.

 

Everyone who’s compos mentis and chooses to live in the real world already knows of the hands on approach as well as the prominent role that Britain pro-actively but highly clandestinely played from the very outset in the western-inspired, UN Secretary General complicit, and the North Atlantic Terrorist Organisation’s, aka NATO, executed terrorist insurgency campaign against Colonel Gaddafi’s Libya and is even now likewise involved in doing, despite foreign secretary boy Hague’s unconvincing and evidently lying public denials to the contrary, in Syria where illegal regime change there is being openly mooted and ardently encouraged as was the case with Libya and as then fomented also in cahoots with al-Qaida , most ironically so as this shadowy outfit is supposedly meant to be the implacable enemy of these same western countries like the United States and Britain that never miss an opportunity to intentionally scare their constituent citizenry, and sadly are quite adept at and successful in doing so, that al-Qaida, which conspiratorially is their functional and convenient bogeyman employed in the same way that a white Caucasian mother and similar control freak will threaten her impressionable kids that the n****r man will come and get them if they don’t do what she demands of them, is the embodiment of everything that’s evil and which these western states must individually and collectively eradicate at all costs in their interminable war on terror.

 

A reality check though on your part and a careful look at themselves in the mirror by the leaders of these western states sitting atop their sanctimonious hobbyhorse and preaching moral values they’ve never practised, obviously wouldn’t know what these are, and most certainly don’t have to others they hate will swiftly show who the genuine terrorists are, but it’s my guess that they already know this, and who’s intentionally hoodwinking who. Supporting despots that don’t have a single democratic institution in the countries they ruthlessly control and whose citizenry are brutally repressed and routinely denied even their most fundamental human rights as in the case of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and the so-called UAE for example, then to ludicrously showcase them as the champions of democracy elsewhere in the Arab or Muslim world where the perceived and established western narrative of global hegemony fully endorsed and incorporated by the autocratic, absolutist and Danegeld rulers of these quisling Arab Bantustans is summarily discarded by those Arab states like Syria, and as Libya did under Colonel Gaddafi, that wish quite properly to chart their own independent and sovereign course in the world isn’t to put it mildly simply bizarre but also unqualified lunacy on the part of these arrogant western countries  that are embroiled in all of this.

 

And not least so because it’s not the democratic and human rights of people in the global south that exercise the minds of the rulers of western countries like the United States of America, Britain, Canada, Australia, the EU member states, NATO participants or their obsequious allies like Turkey, South Korea, the Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, Singapore and ironically even Vietnam or what they want for the inhabitants there but a structured system of chaos where the citizenry of the affected countries are incited to be constantly at each other’s throats, the principle of divide and rule is kept securely in place, and the corrupt and bankrupt west can that more easily plunder for its own self ends the natural resources of these targeted people.

 

And just as hypocritical on the part of governments in the west and particularly that of the United Kingdom are their incessant blathering on from their vested interests perspective that the international media are excluded from Syria, relaying to a principally gullible and intellectually lazy public too bone idle to think for itself or to search out information that will positively enlighten it that what’s being done in Syria, accordingly to these western media liars, is intentional on the part of the Syrian government because it has something to hide, oblivious to or more appropriately a convenient forgetfulness by these critics of Syria that what Syria is said to be doing relative to barring the western media , which is clandestinely in the country anyway, from its territory is child’s play to what Margaret Thatcher did in the Falklands and the western occupiers of Afghanistan and Iraq with their selective lickspittle and embedded reporters have done in these two countries from the outset of the conflicts there and still largely continue to do in Afghanistan following the United States reluctant ouster from Iraq coupled with that country’s earnest attempt to regain its sovereignty; but even more scandalously we see no such condemnations from the purported sponsors and defenders of a free press and unfettered electronic media in respect of the despotically ruled, gulf region Arab Bantustans where the media in all its manifestations is completely muzzled.

 

And in all honesty if the government of Syria is somewhat cautious or even suspicious of having western reporters tramping all over its territory and therefore refuses to let them in who can blame it, when it’s quite obvious that the coverage of events there by these lying fifth columnists will be as far removed from the truth as one can possibly get let alone lend itself to any kind of balanced reporting as this principle is generally recognized by any fair-minded or objective person; and if someone is allowed to come into your home but privately, although unknowingly to you, does so with malice aforethought and what’s more is discovered to be deliberately and maliciously engaged in doing everything that’s possible in their power to dishonestly badmouth and traduce you, why allow them to stay or even worse consent to others of their sort to replacing them? Far better don’t you think to have them do whatever harm they always intended to anyway from the distance of the outside where you’re not obliged to contend with them and therefore don’t find yourself rather disadvantageously in the invidious situation of being a reluctant host to people who clearly and unjustly have nothing at all but significant ill-will towards you.

 

And when this untenable state of affairs is exacerbated by Rickshaw Charlie, aka the UN Secretary General, and the half-breed Asian, fawning house n****r and South African so-called human rights emissary and rapporteur one-sidedly and conveniently seeing human rights violations and crimes against humanity allegedly committed by the Syrian regime everywhere and quite remarkably in a country, lets not forget, that these enemies of Syria and their colluders complain bitterly when it suits their purpose they’re not permitted to enter and therefore realistically by any logical or objective analysis can’t say for sure or confirm with any certainty  what is really happening there but none the less not only think they do but categorically assert to the world that their biased and unsubstantiated version of events is the correct one, yet with a Nelsonian eye blindly and calculatingly overlook the self-same but all too real transgressions that they readily and subjectively denounce Syria for but are decidedly unmoved by in genuinely despotic entities like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen and the other gulf region Arab Bantustans that, like their North African counterparts doing the same to the African continent, infest the Middle East; countries that are on excellent terms with the major western countries so logically there shouldn’t be any unfamiliarity with what is actually happening in these places, if one is trustworthy that is as regards the work they claim to be supposedly doing.

 

That though is not the case or will it ever be, either with Ban-Ki-Moon or his subordinate human rights envoy both of whom are classic jobsworths without a scrap of integrity or professionalism about them to speak of, and whose principal interest apart from kissing suitable asses and being a good NATO puppet as Ban-Ki-Moon has demonstrably shown himself to be, is to keep a hold of the jobs, UN Secretary General and UN Human Rights Envoy respectively, that they’re both unfit for and should never have been given in the first place.

 

I’m not the only one it would seem who is of the point of view I’m about to espouse here. Only recently, late February 2012 to be more precise, Brazil obviously frustratingly at its wits end at what it regularly saw undertaken in the name of the United Nations but knows to be wrong openly lambasted Ban-Ki-Moon, aka Rickshaw Charlie, for pusillanimously permitting without any interference from or condemnation whatsoever by him of a series of ongoing, morally indefensible, and undoubtedly criminal activities which are routinely carried out on his watch by a number of key western countries and forcefully demanded that he stop being the west’s amenable lackey, independently step up to the plate as the United Nations Secretary General, which he officially is, and start behaving if he really knows how in a manner befitting that office. Unfortunately I must say that I hold no such redemptive predictions either for Rickshaw Charlie or his current posse of international civil servants at the UN, as in my jungle such leopards don’t change their spots.

 

Eventually, and some would say unsurprisingly, Margaret Thatcher won her personal and much touted battle with her convenient adversary but still ideological soul mate Leopoldo Galtieri and pointedly hammering home to the British voters with the upcoming general elections foremost in her mind that she was still the best person to lead Britain, acting as though the Malvinas settlers had always been an integral part of British society instead of them being the somewhat far flung community of mostly forgotten, eccentric, in-breeding rustics partially squatting on a tiny archipelago of South Atlantic islands off the southeast continental shelf of the South American continent that they were, and that few Britons including most of our MPs who before this risible brouhaha started and developed into the fiasco that it had become key the Falkland Islands existed and would have been very hard pressed to state precisely where they were, and their continued association with the UK it was further argued was most crucial to the maintaining and reinforcing that link when in actual fact reality was very much different and that supposed link was both an imaginary and fallacious one.

 

That the islanders’ interaction with Britain was equally non-existent and what connection they had to a country located over 8000 miles away from them was merely psychological and based on folklore didn’t factor into Margaret Thatcher’s somewhat vested equations either as she sweepingly went ahead all the same and speedily legislated that these people would from then onwards on be deemed and treated as indispensible British subjects with all the rights and privileges conferred upon them that being British subjects entitled them to, and in the bargain now had the inalterable permission to come and go as they pleased, something that generations of them in excess of a hundred years had never before taken any interest in or previously sought to do, where Britain was concerned, in addition to the permanent and inalienable right of abode to live and work in the United Kingdom.

 

Which poses the obvious and quite logical questions as to why these people needed to be declared British subjects in the first place if stating the obvious they were already British; and if they were British then and still are then surely their legal homeland as district from their place of residence, regardless of how long they were on the Islas Malvinas, has to be Britain not the Islas Malvinas, since to claim these islands as their lawful homeland with everything that entails automatically negates their rather contradictory but nevertheless firmly held assertion that they are British subjects, and realistically they simply can’t be both these diametrically opposed things at the same time.

 

Many Brits for example reside in the United States of America and have happily done so for many years, but unless they relinquish their entitlement to British citizenship and in turn legally become US citizens it would be utterly preposterous for them to assert that while holding on to their British passports and citizenship the areas of the United States where they live or congregate in any substantial number should from their unenlightened perspective and that of London’s, particularly as the country we now know as the United States of America was once colonies that were controlled by Britain during its period of empire, be arbitrarily deemed by these British Colonel Blimp types as British territories and whatever legitimate jurisdiction the United States had over them would now be null and void. Now if that sounds crazy to you which it most certainly is to me try to imagine what the furore would be in the UK, despite all the talk with some credence to it that the United Kingdom is de facto already the 51^st state of the United States of America, if US citizens living here did the same thing in reverse. Both these countries, the United States and Britain, would in both these incredible scenarios justifiably be entitled to feel rather incensed at what was contemplated or even done by their respective nurds; so why should the Argentineans be any different in this regard over the Islas Malvinas?

 

White Caucasian Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians aren’t indigenous we know to the countries they now control, but there’s undeniably a marked difference in attitude between them and the settlers on the Islas Malvinas. Unquestionably of British stock the vast majority of Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders although they recognize this and even value and celebrate their historical and familial links to Britain, and in the case of all three countries still voluntarily retain the British monarch as they head of state too, where they categorically part company from and depart from the antics of the settlers of the Islas Malvinas as well is that they distinctly see themselves as Australians, Canadians or New Zealanders not as British subjects; a state of affairs that is definitely reinforced by the fact that statistically their numbers are such that they can and do justifiably constitute a country as well as a nation, and not least so because that’s exactly what each of them is.

 

There’s no such realistic analogy however in the case of those living on what they call the Falkland Islands, and apart from the fact that their paltry number of some 2,300 souls at the very most, themselves supplemented by the entourage garrisoned in the military base located on the principal island and whose personnel aren’t there in the capacity of nation building, that aggregate is farcically derisory when one pragmatically thinks of the term nation. Furthermore, to use a football metaphor, these settlers habitually continue to score own goals and in doing so additionally destroy their already risible claim to sovereignty over the islands they’re living on, as every time they open their mouths they aggressively declare that they’re British, and while the Isle of Wight is geographically a component of the United Kingdom the Islas Malvinas situated over 8000 miles away, positioned deep in the global south and nowhere near Europe, let alone Britain aren’t physically, logically or morally a part of Britain.

 

Anymore so I’d like to add as a comparison than Bradford or Leicester, for example, with significantly more people of Asian extraction living individually in these two cities than the Falkland Islands right the way through their entire existence have ever had Britons of any description or hue residing on them can have their inhabitants realistically assert that these two English cities because of their contemporary racial composition are no longer territorially British and moreover these said inhabitants have the unilateral as well as the arbitrary right to declare these two English entities part of the Indian sub-continent; India or Pakistan, take your pick! Now that, he says with a mischievous glint in his eyes, would really set the cat amongst the pigeons wouldn’t it? But crucially it would also emphasize just how weak Britain’s claims to the Islas Malvinas fundamentally are as well as expose the completely bizarre and utterly dishonest propaganda of the Colonel Blimp, colonialist and imperialist type figures that are ardently espousing and publicly defending this rather egotistical and outmoded tripe.

 

With her South Atlantic campaign out of the way Margaret Thatcher was once again able to accomplish what she was most adept at doing, ruining other people’s lives while at the same time run rings around a feckless Labour Party opposition that evidently begrudged her her good fortune, envied her for what she was doing and the quite masterly way that she was executing it but didn’t itself have the courage to publicly come out and say so let alone bring itself to emulate her despite secretly wishing that it could; a confused state of affairs that would markedly shift into sync with the unanticipated but political emergence of and his attainment of the leadership of the British Labour Party which was swiftly and self-servingly repackaged as new Labour by one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair. Even so the madness of Margaret Thatcher’s methods did have one major if unintentional benefit for the people of the Chagos Islands, presenting them with a glimmering light at the end of a very long and dark tunnel.

 

In its imperial haughtiness the emerging English and then its successor the British Empire trying to model itself on the Roman Empire had arbitrarily and with no consultation at all with those individually involved unilaterally made the decision that everyone unfortunate enough to live within the boundaries of the colonies created and exclusively controlled by this particular offshore western European entity called Britain, whether they wanted to be so or not would in the future be regarded as British subjects; however unlike the authentic Roman model where the recognition of a common dignity existed itself visibly reinforced by a unanimous acknowledgement on the part of those governing and the governed alike that all Romans regardless of the skin colour, place of origin, social status or their ethnic backgrounds were all equal before the law and were to be treated accordingly �" how else could one possibly have had a situation where for most of the almost 500 years of Roman occupation of Britain those responsible for the comprehensive administration and defence of this northern European colony of what was then a massive influential, unassailable and militarily powerful Roman Empire were Blacks from the prominent African kingdom of Nubia, which from the status accorded to it by Rome was evidently an integral partner of the Roman Empire? This principle though was never adopted by the British or any of the other white Caucasian European colonialists for that matter and whose embedded concept of racial superiority based largely on skin colour due solely to a metamorphosis provoked by climatic conditions that affected their ancient ancestors was troublesomely endemic.

 

To this end we saw that while in theory although not substantiated so much so in practice, non-white and particularly black British subjects - always subjects never citizens �" from the global south could actually settle in Britain and against the odds and constant hostility that were customarily pitted against them become successful and even famous, in spite of the harshly imposed handicaps they were subjected to, as did Gustava Vasa (Gentleman’s Magna, vol.72, p384, 1792) and the prosperous black community that existed in London causing the town council there, fearful that the success of these Blacks would affect the labour situation, to pass a law in 1731 forbidding trades to be taught to black people, true emigration as far as Britain was concerned was essentially a one-sided affair with whites heading off in quite substantial numbers to the colonies where with the active support and comprehensive collaboration militarily, politically and morally from London they did as they damned well pleased, uncaring of the concerns or general interests of the locals that they delighted themselves in subordinating.

 

A commonplace situation whether it was carried out in the far flung Antipodes, Canada, the American colonies, Africa, the Indian sub-continent, Afghanistan, the Far East, China and Hong Kong, South and Central America or the Caribbean; quite a track record for a small, offshore western European country bereft of any significant natural resources and what were there were scandalously squandered, and that territorially was dwarfed in size by several of the countries it haughtily controlled only able to achieve this, but doing so most effectively, through the formula of militaristic barbarism, the iniquitous process of divide and conquer, and which were themselves aided and abetted unfortunately by no shortage of local colluders.

 

However Europe’s then latest internecine war, what its inhabitants and global white kith and kin like to grandiloquently describe as World War II when like the earlier misnomer World War I this was basically a case of white Caucasians transiently but barbarically all the same reverting to murdering each other rather than their usual victims in the global south, unfortunately for these arrogant colonialist bestriding their overseas colonies did cause a bit of a hiccup in the customary system of imperialist rule forcing them instead to concentrate on matters more expressly European tan global south.

 

A Nazi Germany on rampage across Europe had it was felt by some influential elements within the British establishment, although there were many others diametrically opposed to this view, to be forcibly reined in, but with Britain knowingly unable to do this on its own not least because most of continental Europe was sympathetic to the Nazis anyway, while British and European cousins across the Atlantic were much too busily involved in making loads of money from selling state of the art weaponry to their excellent customer Germany as well as the deadly toxic Zyklon B gas used extensively all over the network of Europe wide Nazi death and concentration camps to eradicate Germany and Europe’s perceived “Die Untermenschen” additionally serving as the Nazi Party’s global bankers with more than a little help from both of ex US president George W. Bush’s biological grandfathers that made for themselves and their familial descendants to this day a huge killing from their lucrative commercial dealings with the Third Reich, a very much and seriously encumbered Britain fully cognisant of what was threatened in relation to itself were Nazi Germany to secure and furthermore retain the upper hand in Europe and even seriously compromise its world standing, fretful at the real possibility of losing its prized empire rather self-servingly and quite cynically turned to the inhabitants of its colonies and dishonestly using human rights values which at no time previously it had itself ever practised or even promoted in these territories as its moral pitch, implored their help in fighting and defeating  what Britain alarmingly depicted as the Hum menace.

 

Hundred of thousands of British Empire residents including almost two million recruits from the Indian sub-continent: the largest volunteer military force then or since in the history of mankind to organize in this way, rallied to the defence of Britain motivated then as much by the prospect of fighting an ethically defensible war as they saw it as the promises pledged by Britain, which it callously and cold-bloodedly reneged on after the war was won, that those colonies desirous of and that through the publicly expressed and transparently democratic will of the people chose to have self-determination and opted to for independence from Britain could freely and unencumbered in any way do so with the explicit recognition and full support of the United Kingdom.

 

Reality though as I intimated earlier was a different tale entirely as the bloody massacres, chilling acts of genocide, routine torture, systematic displacement of entire communities and the brutal suppression by the British and their dependable colonial agents of the local people in these colonies of the global south that were requesting their basic human rights, pledged post-war entitlements and the concomitant guarantees which are indivisible from the fundamental rights of self-governance, independence and total sovereignty over their own and their ancestral homelands were viciously and quite often sadistically assailed in countries as far apart as Kenya, here under the tutelage of Ian Henderson who was then dispatched to Bahrain where he still is to this day by the British government when Kenya won its independence; Malaya, British Guiana now independent Guyana; both Rhodesias, now correspondingly Zambia and Zimbabwe, but particularly Southern Rhodesia among other colonies, with similarly enthusiastic and unconditional military, economic, political, logistical and diplomatic support given to the then despotic Portuguese regime in its own crackdown of independence aspirations by the indigenous population in Mozambique and Angola; and of course the apartheid regime of South Africa in its brutal subjugation of its own black majority population that it also carried out against the equally indigenous and black majority population of South West Africa that it illegally, with the explicit support of all the western countries and the tacit encouragement of the UN Security Council and successive UN secretary generals, occupied for decades but which has since emerged as an independent and sovereign Namibia.

 

Against this backdrop Britain strove tenaciously to hold on to and reinforce its grip which was looking increasingly wobbly with the passing years on its restive empire even though what dwindling prestige it conceitedly assumed that it still had globally had everything to do with it obsequiously clinging on as tightly as it could to the coattails of the new boy on the block, aka the United States of America. Nevertheless that didn’t diminish the British zeal for farcical posturing or their overbearing and incredibly, in view of the massive and quite voluntary assistance which their country had received from empire forces, sickening haughtiness as evidenced in the highly insensitive and appallingly insulting remarks from Winston Churchill who when discussing the proposed creation of the United Nations with the then presidents of the Soviet Union and the United States of America in relation as to how this projected new body should be run veering off course bluntly let it be known that in his opinion “the United Nations shouldn’t be a place for subject peoples.”

 

In other words it ought principally to be a special interest body and privileged exclusive club for majority white-ruled Caucasian states or those where whites irrespective of their numerical composition dominated, as was the case with minority white-ruled, apartheid South Africa; other than that the well established pre-war status quo should according to Winston Churchill remain in tact. Unfortunately this is a depraved and deeply embedded mindset that still prevails in the thinking of UN envoys and governments of all political persuasions within these white Caucasian countries that have now noticeably increased their tally from the two original culprits of the UK and the USA to include all of the EU member states and the rest of Europe on top of the traditional and not so well established colonial outposts of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel.

 

With their fabricated survival, supposedly just in the nick of time from the unwelcomed clutched of Leopoldo Galtieri’s fascist dictatorship, absurdly hailed as a major and even an epic triumph of steely British grit and military prowess over enforced adversities, the British media not tired of lauding the exploits of “our boys” under what it exaggeratedly called the courageous leadership of Margaret Thatcher now similarly turned the focus of their frenzied attention and stomach-churning propensity for hyperbole onto the Falkland Islanders wildly portraying them in poster pinup fashion while at the same time taking to eulogizing them as the true embodiment of everything that’s best and comforting about being British. The fact though that practically all of these purportedly deeply concerned pundits had previously not given a toss about the Falkland Islanders principally because they knew absolutely nothing about them since they hadn’t a clue what and where these islands were mattered not a jot it seemed to any of them, or for that matter their likewise ill-informed viewership that they were sanctimoniously preaching to. And why should they? As it stood looking at it from their perspective Britannia ostensibly still ruled the waves, a traditional imperialist prime minister was firmly ensconced in No.10 Downing Street with an explicitly rightwing media her ebullient cheerleaders and from a British standpoint things couldn’t be better. How very wrong they were!

 

The poll tax aside the evil machinations of this woman were in a master class of their own, and whatever notions that the British public previously had or ever identified with in terms of its understanding of the concept of society, society’s impact on their daily lives and the value systems inherent within the local and national communities of which they were obviously a part were rudely shattered then ruthlessly destroyed by Margaret Thatcher who publicly and bizarrely declared “there’s no such thing as society”, claiming we were all individuals with different aspirations which didn’t necessarily mesh or were compatible with each other, and therefore to think or act otherwise was foolish in the extreme. Thus at one fell swoop the cohesion of British community life was not only seriously undermined but also put under savage attack by this evil woman who sought and regrettably successfully managed to achieve her goal of dismantling the community ideas that we held of “we and us” forcefully replacing them with the selfish and insular ones of “I, me, my and myself.”

 

That however was really small fry compared to the massive corporate corruption and governmental fraud that Margaret Thatcher was principally responsible for instigating, personally overseered, and which came infamously to be known as the Al Yamahmah Bae project affair. Basically it revolved around Bae that was literally up to its proverbial neck in a plethora of criminal activities ranging from the payment of bribes, kickbacks and all manner of other equally nefarious financial practices that the prime minister was fully informed about and secretly endorsed. Several of these dodgy deals involved large scale armaments deals with Saudi Arabia arguably the most odiously despotic regime on planet Earth in addition to those that were already embarked on with some of the world’s premier autocratic states that realistically were capable of vying with Saudi Arabia for that top spot. But whether or not it was with Middle Eastern, despotic Arab Bantustans that were masquerading as real countries Bae and its tightly knit global network of spivs were deeply mired in corruption, fraud and public malfeasance of such a colossal scale that their brazen and corruptive high jinks always ran the risk of being exposed, and so they were.

 

When it happened it came in a report that was commissioned on the Bae Al Yamahmah project and which reached its conclusions in 1992 but unfortunately whose findings for obvious reasons were kept secret. However from well engineered leaks by well meaning souls disgusted at the banning of the report’s findings it emerged that was uncovered was a huge indictment of Margaret Thatcher and her government and the enormous and active collusion that took place between them and Bae, so given these circumstances there was no way that the government was going to permit its publication, and on that basis alone it would be banned. And that’s precisely what happened to it.

 

Meanwhile a criminal investigation of Bae by the Serious Fraud Office that was already underway was forced to close down by the government and charges against Bea were dropped by diktat of Margaret Thatcher’s successor as Prime Minister, Tony Blair who wholeheartedly adopted the same attitudes towards the widespread fraud and corruption at Bae as Margaret Thatcher did, concomitant with a similar approach in relation to the Civil Service departments that had worked and liaised closely with Bae and the outgoing government as well, dishonestly in administering the death knell to any open and publicly transparent revelations of what had taken place cited the Official Secrets Act and national security, neither of which honestly applied in this case, as valid reasons for the report on and the Serious Fraud Office’s investigation of Bae being dropped.

 

But a measure of the brass neck of these people is that several senior civil servants who were deeply involved in this comprehensive and unholy corruption scandal would later leave their key civil service jobs and governmental office posts with totally unblemished records to their name and quite unashamedly go off to work for Bae Systems where many of them still are to this very day.

 

Arrogance invariably breeds more arrogance and already convinced that she could walk on water there was no stopping Margaret Thatcher in this regard. Completely obsessed with reintroducing into British political life an antiquated medieval tax called the poll tax which was highly divisive even then into the political and administrative framework of what was presumably a contemporary Britain very much ensconced in the 20^th Century, Margaret Thatcher was repeatedly warned by her advisors in the Tory Party as well as in the civil service not to go ahead with her plans to legislate this particular tax into law as it would cause considerable political difficulties for her that would themselves be seriously compounded by a great deal of social unrest in the country as the British public nationally was very much opposed and even hostile to this tax perceiving it as unfair, discriminatory in its application and totally undemocratic in its provisions, views that every opinion poll conducted in the UK showed were very strong indeed, firmly adhered to, weren’t likely to dissipate anytime soon, let alone disappear in the face of Margaret’s Thatcher’s blind intransigence.

 

All this however fell impassively on deaf ears where Margaret Thatcher was concerned and who evidently taking a leaf out of the book of past imperialist British missionaries to the colonies assumed the attitude and therefore acted as though she knew what was best for the natives, concluding that no consultation with them whatsoever was needed and that instead of complaining they should instead be most grateful to her for what she was so selflessly trying to do and which was intended with their best interests in mind.

 

But with rising protests and demonstrations now violently rocking the country and civil disobedience and disturbances projected to escalate and even get worse the custodians of the Conservative Party deeply concerned by these developments and anxiously looking over their shoulders to the survival of their party staying in government and what was best to sustain this, decided that it was time to have a discreet but unambiguous word in the shell-like of Margaret Thatcher and inform her that however much she felt she was invincible politically or indispensable to the good fortunes of the Conservative Party things had dramatically changed and not for the better, and therefore in view of this it was time for her to step down from the office of prime minister.

 

Foot-dragging and rather reluctantly Margaret Thatcher did do so, but only after realizing that the Tory big guns were determinedly trained on her and several of her erstwhile and ardent backbench supporters somewhat fearful of losing their parliamentary seats because of the drop in popularity for their party due to her gross and arrogant mishandling of the poll tax affair had also deserted her, leaving a pretty despondent Margaret Thatcher with no other choice but to bend to the will of her parliamentary Conservative Party colleagues and go, and in so doing become the inevitable casualty of what was incontestably a very effectively orchestrated palace coup.

 

With the political and right across huge swathes of the UK, predominantly so in Scotland and the north-western regions of England, the absolutely unlamented demise of Margaret Thatcher the Tory Party’s hierarchy hurriedly looked for and fortunately found what was consensually agreed was a safe pair of hands in their selection of John Major as the milk snatcher’s, an acutely hated and recurring reference to Margaret Thatcher who when she was the Minister of Education in Edward Heath’s government quite unconcernedly took away from all primary school children right across the length and breadth of Britain their traditional and prized entitlement to free milk at school, successor as leader of their party and Britain’s new prime minister. But a deeply caring and capable prime minister though he was who additionally was able to win the next general elections for the Conservative Party John Major was nevertheless an honourable man seriously handicapped by the very corrupted legacy of Margaret Thatcher, and therefore it was a generally accepted premise that that he and his Tory Party were living on borrowed time and it wouldn’t be that long before the party was kicked out of office by the British voters; which ultimately occurred with New Labour, under the leadership of Tony Blair, assuming the reins of power and the governance of the United Kingdom from a discredited and, despite the exceptional efforts of John Major at rehabilitating it, much distrusted and intensely despised Tory Party.

 

Ever since the 1970s there’s been a marked shift in the consciousness and general belief of a sizeable number of those that comprise the British public that perception rather than substance is all that matters, and attendant with that notion is the added conviction that presentation of the communication involved together with the photogenic nature of the individual delivering that particular message constituted a key element to one’s personal success rather than what was actually being said; and for that reason if none other every politician or aspiring one that was worth his or her salt along with many that manifestly didn’t and consequently failed miserably along the way, studiously sought to emulate as well as assiduously employ the tactics of this particular practice for the express purpose of enhancing their professional career, and in this regard Tony Blair was no different. In fact Tony Blair made a speciality out of it, totally transforming the political landscape of Britain irreversibly in the process from one of orthodox explanation and informed debate to that of a somewhat absurd and rather cheerless situation where the sound bite trumped everything and thus unchallenged reigned supreme.

 

It’s a bizarre phenomenon and quite unfathomable in terms of any logical explanation why it is that political leaders who get elected with massive majorities invariably and all so frustratingly disappointingly finish up literally squandering the tremendous goodwill, trust, respect and genuine expectations that an optimistic electorate that trustingly gave them their mandate placed in them than using the confidence and faith bestowed upon themselves for the general welfare and inclusive good of those whose trust and affection they’d successfully tapped into and profitably secured. And once more rather than being a trendsetter Tony Blair embarrassingly turned out to be just another pedestrian follower of fashion more swayed by class and money perceptions than ethical principles, of which he had absolutely none then and still inconceivably doesn’t to this very day, March 2012, or even basic commonsense.

 

Whatever her faults, and these were legion, Margaret Thatcher did have a moral compass of sorts of her own although this was characteristically charged and driven by dogmatic propensities and was usually pointed in the wrong direction; that said however what she generally advocated tended in the main to be what she genuinely felt and believed, and like her or loathe her one couldn’t really hate her for that. In Tony Blair’s case though a principle was something to be sordidly haggled with the highest bidder or else summarily discarded as and when necessary in order to meet or rather more appropriately fit in with the exigency or expedience of the moment regardless of how unethical or even unlawful the ensuing consequences were; and during Tony Blair’s tenure of office as PM most of the decisions he made, and lets be perfectly honest and open about this and not beat about the bush here since there was nothing accidental, coincidental or spontaneous about any of his actions which were all calculatedly and premeditatedly embarked upon, clearly fell into these two specific categories.

 

The British trade unions collectively the largest financial donors to the Labour Party and with their well integrated links to it, unsurprisingly so since it was from the ranks of the British trade union movement that the Labour Party was created to be an authentic voice for the previously ignored working people of Britain and also as a counterbalance to the established political duopoly at the time of the Liberal and Tory parties respectively, was immediately sidelined and increasingly marginalized by Tony Blair and his New Labour lieutenants, even his undertaking to reinvent the Labour Party in his image was a pretty odious attempt to distance it from its working class roots, who jointly and cooperatively turned their ardent attention towards cultivating the friendship and backing of the City of London bankers, Rupert Murdoch and his News Corporation empire, together with other prospective well-heeled sponsors; and fortunately for these New Labour carpetbaggers they were quite successful in achieving their objectives.

 

Significantly all of these people with well entrenched colonialist and imperialist attitudes that gelled perfectly with those of Tony Blair and his cronies were very much in favour of the existing status quo in southern Africa, especially South Africa under the nefarious and repressive apartheid regime there that commercially and financially was acutely lucrative for them; even so there was one major fly in their particular ointment that they were very ill at ease with and that was South Africa’s neighbour Zimbabwe. And this was largely so because they very much wanted to have it revert to the status quo ante that prevailed for so long in that country and thus be able as a result to dispense with the social, political, economic and educational achievements, or as the stumbling blocks they saw them to be, that were realized under the Zanu-PF government of Robert Mugabe that in a hard fought liberation struggle for independence had replaced Ian Smith’s overtly racist, white-settler, minority-rule regime with an indigenous black majority controlled government of all the people in an independent and sovereign Zimbabwe.

 

The global south and particularly the continent of Africa abounds in mineral wealth and natural resources which the global north, with the exception of the Russian Federation that is, is largely bereft of and what it did have has been irresponsibly and completely squandered, but rather than acknowledge this, come to terms with it and do something positive about the dilemma they’re in the countries of the global north that are commonly considered as the most important western states, having covetously and avariciously cast their beady eyes on the wealth of the south have taken to banditry, theft and subterfuge as their principal means to physically in collusion with the corrupt, pusillanimous, unelected totalitarian autocrats and absolute, self-styled monarchs of the global south dispossess the local people in these countries of what’s rightfully theirs.

 

On the other hand when rarely they do come across the odd democratically elected leader or government that actually have the interests of their people at heart then the process of insufferable lobbying, political, financial, economic and diplomatic pressures established internationally in for a like the United Nations and ICC, threats of international isolation and even unwarranted sanctions and orchestrated media vilification for made-up charges of undemocratic practices nationally and regionally, the suppression of the rights of their people in a miscellany of ways mixed with lyingly and accusatively levelling purportedly perpetrated crimes of a heinous nature and even against humanity in relation to elements of their own population are quite ferociously and sustainably employed by these northern barbarian reprobates to ruthlessly exercise gratuitous pressure on those tempted to or who actually resist them, while sections of the local populace are either barefacedly bought off or conned by this persistent and adverse publicity they’re relentlessly subjected to, to fall in line with western demands; or else in the case of the more sentient constituents of that society wishing for nothing other than a quiet existence very reluctantly but submissively all the same do likewise.

 

Strange isn’t it how that while the global north rigidly insists on exclusively owning and controlling all aspects of the intellectual creation, manufacture and distribution of what’s rightfully and lawfully theirs, expect others to unfailingly tow the line in regard to these particular matters and therefore aren’t above using whatever sanctions or other means at their disposal that they deem appropriate to ensure this specific regime of theirs, no such consideration or reciprocal respect though is ever accorded by these rather people to their global south counterparts, is strictly maintained, they nevertheless see and firmly believe that what they do relative to the global south falls into the spurious category of a free for all scenario to be shamelessly exploited for their own self-centred ends, never mind what the local people think or how inimical what is being done actually is to their personal or national interests.

 

In fact rather than behave responsibly like average shoppers going to their supermarket, shopping mall or departmental store espying a particular item or items they fancy or had gone there with the specific purpose of purchasing, then on making their choice pay for the items selected and hopefully satisfied with their purchases leave the store westerners don’t see transactions with the global south in this light and have never done so; rather they see their dealings with the people who live and belong there in an identical manner to how a gang of bank robbers perceive their local high street bank.

 

Mercedes Benz, Volkswagen, Rolls Royce, Bae Systems, Nokio, Saab, Renault, Citroen, to mention just a few examples, are all household names in Europe and the global south. Importantly they’re also indigenous major European corporate enterprises that have been set up in Europe, are principally owned by corporations and shareholders there, have their headquarters and strategically planning departments located in Europe, and it’s from the continent of Europe that everything remotely associated with them and their products are determined and executed, and consequently the global south as customers are in the very same position as your average shopper going into British Home Stores, Tesco or Asda to purchase one or even several items there, but who I’m pretty certain you’re aware can not or wouldn’t be allowed to prescribe to the checkout lady let alone the store manager what they should pay for the goods they’ve selected. This is precisely how the global north has always self-interestedly dealt with the global south and to be perfectly blunt with you has no intention whatsoever of willingly changing its ways.

 

Significantly too the global north though they may advantageously set up subsidiaries of their principal industries in some euphemistically categorized developing countries of the global south where such action is evidently beneficial to them raising their corporate and sales profiles and attendant bank balances there’s no way for example that Rolls Royce or Mercedes Benz, national prestige apart or more fittingly a perceived loss of it, would ever move lock, stock and barrel from England or Germany respectively to lets say Brazil or India and in doing so effectively turn their prized assets into Brazilian or Indian corporate enterprises with the British and the Germans alike now forced to buy what initially were home-based products from abroad  and furthermore having to do so at prices dictated to them solely by the Brazilians or Indians. In fact not only the British and Germans by no other European state would do any of this stuff; for a number of reasons too numerous to explain here their national pride combined with European arrogance and an exaggerated self-importance wouldn’t allow it. Yet we see a most stupid situation of this in reverse in relation to South Africa and which for centuries has been endemic right across the length and breadth of Africa.

 

Israel a pretty odious apartheid, colonialist and settler state implanted in the Middle East has no diamond mines or likely diamond resources of its own yet it’s here that the global north’s cartel that dominates the international diamond industry and world markets in all their guises, legal and not so legal, are located. South Africa in marked contrast is one of the world’s principal diamond producers with arguably the largest deposits of diamonds anywhere in the world. Under the apartheid system that plagued and seriously blighted the lives and legitimate aspirations of South Africa’s indigenous black population Jews, who it’s alleged have a natural propensity for dabbling in money and dealing with gold and diamonds, cunningly gained, exercised and systematically reinforced at every turn the monopoly they held in relation to South Africa’s extensive and extremely lucrative gold and diamond industries, notwithstanding the incredibly brutal and political control that the boorish Boers who had introduced and ruthlessly administered it along with the country in the name of their racist, white supremacist ideas, and accordingly prospered significantly.

 

With the official collapse however of apartheid in 1994 and the inauguration after South Africa’s first ever conducted democratic elections of a demographically, majority black government in that country, many Jews who’d opulently and contentedly lived off the fat as it were of the gold and diamond mines of South Africa and the attendant exploitation and repression of black people in a land where as white Caucasian Europeans they had a privileged status under the segregated apartheid system that was cruelly, criminally and legislatively denied to Blacks in their ancestral homeland, obviously unable to stomach genuine democracy especially when it was judiciously, forgivingly and magnanimously dispensed by a black leadership headed by the iconic Nelson Mandela, promptly packed their bags, departed South Africa, and headed for what they felt most comfortable with, the apartheid reality of Israel.

 

Under colonialism Caribbean and African countries were forced to turn their economies into a cash crop one where for instance sugar couldn’t be refined in the Caribbean even though the locals possessed the expertise to do this and instead at the colonialist powers insistence had to have this done in Europe, most particularly so in Britain. Similarly the pricing of this commodity, its distribution, creation of markets and all the rest of it were exclusively determined in London with the extraordinarily bizarre situation of Caribbean locals having to buy their own locally produced sugar at UK determined prices. That said Africa fared no better. With a sweet tooth trend sweeping Europe and all things sweet the rage there chocolate became as much a European infatuation as Caribbean sugar already was, but like sugar the crucial ingredient from which chocolate was made could only be grown in the tropics, and West Africa became the focus for this European passion.

 

As a result cocoa trees were planted there in abundance and their plantations sprawled the local landscape with literally millions of tons of precious cocoa beans harvested annually and shipped to Europe, principally although not exclusively so to Britain, as the finished product from all this labour intensive and highly profitable commercial activity, the much sought after chocolate merchandise in all of its multiple manifestations, had to be made in Europe in factories owned and run by the likes of Cadbury and Rowntree, which became household names and still are to this day, and dealt with commercially in the exactly the same way as sugar was. But while the Caribbean states led energetically and successfully by Barbados eventually and irrevocably severed their previous links with this outwardly inflicted economic slavery Africa regrettably, and for purely sycophantic reasons, hasn’t managed to realize this; and to the present day, March 2012, you still won’t find a single chocolate manufacturing factory in any of these major African cocoa producing states or any others come to that which still permit involved European countries to arbitrarily and patronizingly dictate to them their morally bankrupt and self-interested terms that they’re expected to comply with, and mindbogglingly uncomplainingly do.

 

With the rulers and local establishment of these African countries, an intransigent attitude that predictably negatively impacts on the psyche of the run of the mill residents of these communities, it’s as though the status quo ante of slavery and colonialism have somehow uninterruptedly managed to permeate their lives and consequently must remain for them and unchangingly stay an integral part of their existence. A most frightening prospect to say the least; and to have South Africa routinely touted as one of the main players on the African continent yet sloppily on the threshold of the 21^st Century and a decade plus into it take its eyes off the ball and allow a coterie of racist Jews that once subjugated genuine South African citizens and who’re now living in Zionist apartheid Israel, to hijack, export to a foreign country and control from there an industry that justly belongs to South Africa and consequently should legitimately be based there, and as things stand don’t in any way materially benefit the average South African, but even worse still continue to obtain their supply of diamonds predominantly from South African diamond mines, which as was the case during the apartheid era and to day still is under white corporate control, just beggars belief. And eighteen years after a most daunting and traumatic journey to independence if ever a president who knows full well what went on yet does absolutely nothing to remedy this miserable state of affairs and should therefore be impeached, convicted and jailed for life Jacob Zuma is he!

 

There’s an old and wise saying exhorting the unsuspecting to be wary of Greeks bearing gifts and that observation is as valid now I believe as when it was first made, so I put no faith in the false promises or the spurious blandishments of western countries particularly previous colonial entities still harbouring imperialist notions and aspirations like Britain, France, the Netherlands and Germany, or those like Spain, Portugal and Italy that are no different in their outlook but are far too weak politically and economically to do anything about it on their own and therefore readily throw their lot in with those that they persuade themselves can pull these ludicrous stunts of theirs off and attempt to turn the clock back to what they kid themselves were halcyon days when white dinosaurs of the human kind ruled our planet from the Antipodes to Alaska, Tierra del Fuego to Indo-China, the Cape of Good Hope to the cold arctic wastes of Sweden and virtually everything else that was in between. Well the original dinosaurs aren’t here any more and hopefully a similar fate will befall the Homo sapiens variety.

 

However wishful thinking alone or even good intentions combined with it won’t on their own undo a millennium of injustices that particularly in relation to the events of the past 500 years of white Caucasian European excesses, still prevalent to this day, have never been publicly acknowledged either by those directly involved or their descendants that have benefitted enormously from the crimes of their ancestors let alone been apologized or financially compensated for. And if these subjugated peoples who aren’t restricted to just isolated countries or regions but encompass huge continents like Africa and South America genuinely need and more importantly expect to see any marked improvements in their current status  as human beings as well as similar trends in their overall personal, political, educational, social, aspirational and economic development they must first be willing to and actually get off their knees and stop crawling to the white man or woman, who bluntly have been the main and very often the sole source of most of their problems.

 

Then having accomplished this preliminary task they must seriously embark on finding common ground and solidarity with each other and not foolishly or suspiciously look for imagined differences implanted in their heads, hearts and minds by those who in the past and still are now quite adept at the insidious, manipulative and debilitating psychological process of divide and rule; and with this innovative, committed assertiveness juxtaposed with the ethical self-confidence and rightness of what they’re doing and itself reinforced with a positive and enduring belief in themselves the prospect of their long sought after  rehabilitation to the ranks of being commendable and creative human beings rather than to be patronizingly and forever seen as charity cases to be pitied or despised will be well and truly underway.

 

Why are all these measures not simply a first step scenario but also absolutely necessary? The straightforward answer is justice and self-determination. A people who for centuries have been trampled under the foot of another and unremittingly shorn in the process of all human dignity until so battered psychologically they essentially come to believe and even accept their enemy’s pernicious propaganda regarding themselves that they’re completely irredeemable and utterly worthless for anything but the convenient and disposable chattel they’re treated as to uncomplainingly do whatever their sadistic abusers see fit and insist upon, which is generally manual and demeaning work, and be at their every beck and call no matter how trivial that demand might be and usually is, surely with no foreseeable end to their intolerable humiliation have the right as well as the entitlement to stand up as one and say enough is enough, we won’t be your slaves anymore; and for those reasons alone insist on our inalienable right as the human beings you claim to be to likewise determine our future, as well as choose on our own how we conduct our lives.

 

Isn’t this what all whites intuitively expect, would categorically insist on for themselves and be most infuriated with those responsible if they were refused the same human rights entitlement which they seemingly have no problem in denying to others? So why should other races settle for less then and equally insultingly permit themselves to be conned by white liberals whose personal agenda basically is no different from that of their rightwing counterparts, it’s just a matter of emphasis with them that’s all, into believing and even to be told by these people that they should be patient. Patient; for what? More of the same? And anyway, how come that black and other non-white patience seemingly has no statute of limitation on it and none is deemed necessary but whites aren’t corralled into that same space and would be most offended if they were?

 

Ever since 1492 it has been all about white interests, their wants and sensitivities and the ongoing defence at all costs of these somewhat narrow but even so specific determinants but without any similar appreciation, thought given to, or any attention paid by these self-absorbed Europeans that apart from themselves there might very well be others who also have legitimately interrelated or even identical requirements or concerns in their lives that need to be acknowledged, viewed just as sympathetically and addressed accordingly. But this was never going to happen, as the widely propagated narrative by an elite colonialist and imperialist-minded establishment that didn’t then and still doesn’t now much care for or have any real affection for the common man or woman in its own society but ironically still saw fit, as it consistently continues to, to indelibly and successfully indoctrinate them with its own prejudices to have them willingly serve as the obedient racist dupes in a well orchestrated endeavour of imperialist occupation, collaborative, colonialist expansionism and global hegemony, wasn’t ever going to give a damn about the feelings of other races seen by them at best as vastly inferior to themselves and at worst as a sub-human species on par with the brute beast.

 

In terms of size Britain was considerably smaller than most of the countries of the global south that it then had under the jackboot of its colonialist and imperialist dominance; and in fact even in a European context was and still is significantly dwarfed by several of its continental counterparts, and a recurrent nightmare that haunts the British establishment and why they’re so keen and even desperate to coerce Scotland into staying in the UK, is that having lost an empire with the attendant global power and prestige that were such an integral and indivisible part of that wider mosaic of international influence and unchallengeable hegemony juxtaposed with that particularly comforting, intensely sought after and much relished status symbol of being a privileged people which counted for so much; but that notwithstanding however compelled alas by adverse circumstances as they saw it which in a concerted effort to maintain the existing status quo they urgently sought to rein in but sadly were unable to do so and as a result embarrassingly found themselves thrust unwillingly into a situation where still widely held aspirations had to be severely circumscribed as they still are to a considerable degree, were obliged out of necessity to seek a novel and unconventional role for themselves on the global stage and particularly in world politics.

 

Essentially Britain had two options that were open to it post World War II both of them in their own manner presenting somewhat austere choices for it in terms of the country’s respective adjustment to the new set of circumstances it found itself in and how it would deal with these. On the one hand it could realistically face up to the unpalatable and very disconcerting reality of being the ex ruler of an empire, adjust to its new and true position in the global hierarchy of nations and from there try to carve out a constructive niche or role that benefitted not only itself but also a considerable section if not exactly all of the international community. On the other hand it could have done what it has actually ended up doing and what has rather embarrassingly and quite shamefully become in the eyes of a sizeable section of the British public as well as many international observers who over the past decades have watched with mounting apprehension the accelerated moral decline of British politics right across the board and especially in foreign affairs, and undoubtedly unedifying trend; as with hardened obstinacy the once unassailable Britain reprehensibly sold its soul to and also recklessly compromised what few remaining principles it had left in an unbidden and totally obsequious capitulation to the utterly brash but rising power of the United States of America.

 

Pusillanimously this modus operandi of successive British governments with one notable exception, that of Harold Wilson which gallantly sought and largely managed to conduct independent domestic and foreign affairs policies that were fundamentally tailored to the needs of Britain and not those of the United States, carried on apace and still does to this very day. One clear-cut example of bucking this trend was Harold Wilson’s blunt refusal of the US’s demand that Britain militarily participate in its false flag created, perniciously manufactured and unquestionably illegal war in Vietnam, and how right he was not to get involved; for which the American establishment, including the Pentagon and the military industrial complex, led by its political administration never forgave him.

 

A Yorkshire man who was immeasurably proud of his roots and genuinely determined as well as dedicated to the difficult task of improving the lot of Britain’s neglected and often despised working class Harold Wilson after daringly standing up to the evidently bullying tactics of the United States soon became the focus of a fabricated and spiteful whispering campaign orchestrated by the CIA and rogue elements of the British secret services MI5 and MI6 that never really fancied anyone but the Conservatives to be in power in the UK anyway, that he was an ardent communist, a word that in the exceedingly paranoid and mindbogglingly stupid and obsessive American establishment’s psyche would equate in modern-day condemnatory and vilifying terms to that of being labelled a paedophile, had joined the Communist Party when he was a student at Oxford University, that suspected hotbed and stronghold of socialist radicalism, and was even a KGB agent in the mould of Guy Burgess and Donald Maclean.

 

In this paranoid frenzy of theirs it wasn’t a surprise to any intelligent person with even the barest modicum of political savvyness that attempts would be made by these people to literally get rid of Harold Wilson. And one such nefarious plot that was hatched by the CIA and its rogue British equivalents was to organize a coup which would have included senior element s of the First Division of the Civil Service in company with their military counterparts in the Ministry of Defence and with the eminent, well respected and retired Field Marshall Lord Mountbatten, the uncle of Prince Philip, as the putative head of this putsch. What these clearly failed to acquaint them with is that revolution and particularly of this odious nature is quite alien to the British character, and it must have been a pretty rude shock for them to be contemptuously and in no uncertain terms told by those whom they had so diligently sought to court, to literally go and screw themselves as they had no intention whatever of getting embroiled in their treasonable and nefarious, conspiratorial plan. Therefore as a result of their wretched failure to garner any support outside of their restricted ranks the planned coup d’état never materialized.

 

Harold Wilson would later resign as Prime Minister and step down from parliament to be succeeded by James Callaghan an affirmed right winger whose natural constituency as it happened was on the far right of the Labour Party; interestingly too he was also an agent of the CIA. However there was no parliamentary party election carried out enabling him to be Prime Minister in what was clearly a behind the scenes coronation of him by a very select few, with the mass of Labour MPs, Labour had an overall majority in the House of Commons and so didn’t need to get the approval of any other parliamentary party for this move, and all the Labour constituency party members around the entire country excluded from the process in an exercise evocative of the infamous gangster politics of Chicago’s Mayor Daley.

 

Conspiracy theories abounded at the time for why Harold Wilson quit when he did, over his manner in doing so , and his not giving any explanation for his decision to step down from office; but leaked reports several years later would point to serious health problems that he unfortunately suffered from. The same conspiracy theorists were likewise hard at work when Lord Mountbatten was assassinated in the Irish republic claiming that it was revenge for his having resolutely put the CIA and its equally lunatic British counterparts in their place over their proposed coup d’état against the Harold Wilson government and specifically the man himself. The republican IRA’s close links with the United States and naturally the CIA were extensively used as spurious arguments to bolster and substantiate their claims when in reality it was nothing more than the fact that Lord Mountbatten was in essence a cherished member of the British Royal Family, itself a hated symbol of Irish republicanism, and by killing a high profile figure like Lord Mountbatten the IRA in one fell swoop was able to get the global media coverage it was after and desperately craved for its cause of a united Ireland free of British control and the north of the island was.

 

Harold Wilson’s refusal to have UK troops involved in the Vietnam War notwithstanding the United States had nevertheless been able on a number of previous occasions to get the British government of the day to do just what it wanted it to and even at times demanded. Clement Attlee’s post Second World War government for instance at the insistence of the United States administration then readily agreed to and allowed some 100 thousand well-known and scrupulously documented by their German collaborators Ukrainian and Baltic States Waffen SS, Nazi death camp killers and their close family members to settle in the Britain, the asinine reason given by the US for this ludicrous and insulting imposition on the British people, considering we’d been fighting scumbags like these people since 1939 when the United States was nowhere in sight or in the least disposed to help us, was that to a man and woman all of these odious mass murderers were fanatically anti-communist and would be useful cats paws in bolstering the cherished ideas of the United States, with its implacable fixation with and intense hatred of communism, were that country to wage a war against the Soviet Union, which ironically and a point clearly lost on those idiots in the United States was an invaluable ally of ours in defeating Nazism and fascism. And if you love these people so much, the Attlee government never asked or suggested, why not have them all in the United States instead? Of course since this question was never asked there was no answer freely forthcoming from the United States, but it’s not rocket science to guess why. All the same the Clement Attlee government slavishly did as it was ordered to and we’ve discerned how over the post-war years the DNA of this inveterate scum has morphed into the so-called English Defence League (EDL) that now plagues our society.

 

So why does Britain sickeningly and so obsequiously suck up to the United States in the manner that it does, which is so highly embarrassing and painful to watch?  There are a variety of reasons for this and crucial among them is the glaring state of denial that huge numbers of Britons continue to live in, either unable or unwilling to grasp and therefore obdurately refusing to acknowledge that Britain is no longer the head of an empire that rules and dictates to the rest of the world, in particular the global south, how the people there should live their lives. This isn’t the case however with the privileged elites or the political and military establishments of the country who are very aware of the true state of Britain in the world but would rather that things had stayed as they were, and like an impecunious former multi-millionaire unexpectedly finding himself on hard times none the less still attempts to keep up appearances while at the same time convincing himself things will eventually turn around for the better and financial order but most importantly social status and influence will be permanently restored.

 

World War II having witnessed the official downfall of Nazism and fascism on mainland Europe as well as the predictable collapse of the British Empire also threw up in its wake two competing but ideologically diametrically opposed political powers vying with each other to fill the vacuum created, and while communism might have had its attractions for some social elements within British society its regimented, Animal Farm�"like and quite unappealing authoritarian nature as exemplified by the Soviet Union was a major put off for many people and most definitely didn’t appeal to the ruling classes of Britain leaving just the one alternative which was to find a shared accommodation with the United States of America even if that was massively skewed in the latter’s favour.

 

To unexpectedly find one’s self in the position of having to depend in hugely significant terms on a group of former colonies even if they were now integrated under the umbrella of the United States of America would privately have been hugely humiliating for many in the British elite that had long been indoctrinated with the cultural philosophy of social superiority and therefore firmly believed that it was indispensably everything not only to its subjects at home but to the broader world as well, quite synonymous in many ways to an utterly unfeeling and totally detached authoritarian father or mother, lets not be sexist here, suddenly through unforeseen circumstances finding themselves completely obliged to rely exclusively on that mistreated child, now a fully grown and independent adult, for restoring some if not all of the similitude of their former economic and social dignity; but as the saying goes beggars can’t be choosers and unhappily for Britain that was the tricky position it was now in.

 

However, determined at all costs to securely establish itself as the new bully on the block the United like any self-confident and ambitious gangster genuinely worth his salt knew perfectly well and readily acknowledged it that to successfully accomplish this goal with the minimum amount of fuss and in the speediest manner possible that it really needed to have a number of willing and cooperative accomplices to adequately assist it in its work; while Britain for its part realizing this to be the case and looking at matters strictly from the self-preservational perspective of its untenable and even precarious position as an ex world power considerably reduced in social standing, seeing a key opportunity it believed to pragmatically reinstate some of the global prestige and influence that it once benefited from and which losing an empire had caused it made the conscious decision which it then embarked on in the full knowledge of what it was doing to totally ingratiate itself with the United States, foster with that country what it exaggeratedly revealed, to those who cared to take any notice that is, was a special relationship which paradoxically the US has never regarded in those specific terms and has continually shown no inclination of ever desiring to do so notwithstanding that it has never been coy in brazenly and expediently exploiting for its own disreputable purposes that selfsame, so-called special relationship whenever it suited its needs, and zealously did its level best to maintain at any cost its presence on the international scene.

 

What the obsequious dupes, idiotic nations and even a country like Britain purportedly with a special relationship with the United States fail miserably to grasp and manifestly don’t really understand is that the United States doesn’t have friends nor does it seek to cultivate any, anymore than Count Dracula would have had an interest in establishing a private system of blood donors whose personal or collective wellbeing he considered as paramount; what interested him and was therefore pre-eminent in terms of his foremost priority was getting a regular supply of blood as and when he needed it, and to that end his intentions and eventual actions were purely predatory.

 

It’s an attitude that accords intimately with that of the United States of America whose longstanding track record in relation to predatory pursuits demonstrably shows that for that country people, communities, nations or even other countries only count when they are of some essential value to it, and when that ceases to be the case or the United States with its endemically puerile and unbelievably dysfunctional short attention span tires of them then it ruthlessly, cold-bloodedly and unemotively does what it has always done in such circumstances and alas for the rest of the world is most adept at doing, it clinically disposes of them.

 

The key to this particular American absurdity lies entirely with the country’s lawmakers, the infamous US Congress, that wouldn’t recognize a moral principle if it landed on their Zionist faces and whose only purpose in running for office thus further contaminating an already venal and dreadfully corrupt US political system by the way is to pusillanimously do the bidding of their AIPAC paymasters while at the same time avariciously using their lawful positions as elected, public office holders to extravagantly feather their own sleazy But economically indebted as they clearly are to AIPAC such is the turpitude, dishonesty and innate treachery among these people that were AIPAC, all of a sudden, to be entirely eclipsed by an alternative group of criminal mafia dons with bigger and deeper financial pockets and even a different political agenda to that of advocated by AIPAC but willing and quite prepared nevertheless to buy the loyalty of these lawmakers in return for their legislative support as AIPAC has religiously done over all these several decades, there’s no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the US Congress’ current and ostensibly inflexible pledge of perpetual commitment to the continued preservation of Zionist apartheid Israel would vanish as expeditiously and totally unconcernedly by these same serial bought and paid for congressmen and women as a snowflake would in the stifling heat of the Saharan sun.

 

So whichever way one might care to look at it United States foreign policy for what it’s worth, and that has as much credibility attached to it as Greek solvency does, is a clearly a permanent hostage to the domestic and overwhelmingly corrupt practices of the odious lawmakers of that country and barring a phenomenal miracle that situation isn’t going to change any time soon, so don’t hold your breath on it.

 

Notwithstanding everything that’s been said however it would be terribly wrong of me to suggest and have you think that the big bad wolf of the North American continent was or is solely responsible for all the problems in the world and that its sycophants like Britain that were and still are individually and directly to blame for many heinous crimes as well are simply following orders dictated to them by the United States. To think this would be just simply wrongheaded as nothing could be further from the truth, and here’s why. Way back and long before the American colonies morphed into becoming the United States of America, having had to fight their colonial ruler Britain in a fiercely fought liberation war to win their independence, Britain was a country already well versed in the procedures of executing a diversity of the most horrendous criminal activities possible, several of which would effortlessly outstrip the understanding of all but the most deviant or utterly sadistic minds but which in today’s phraseology would undoubtedly have effortlessly qualified as major war crimes and crimes against humanity, but for which no apologies or reparations have ever been contemplated or allowed.

 

This means that for the victims who were individually involved as well as their children and direct descendants who are every bit as much in the firing line of the rather barbaric treatment gratuitously handed out by this ex-colonial power, what Britain did coupled with the unseemly and indifferent manner of its conduct in relation to those that it saw fit to systematically abuse and to this day still periodically mistreat is very much a festering sore  whose chances of properly healing, if ever at all, relies enormously on Britain being brought to book and made to profoundly pay for its numerous and diverse crimes against humanity; since thinking that the passage of time and the evidently hoped for on Britain’s part of the dulling or even a sizeable effacing of past but still for the victims very painful memories should be permitted to encourage the current crop of British rulers to think that any such developments, very unlikely I must say, ought now realistically to be employed as instruments in themselves to extricate them and their country’s barbarous actions from the barbed hook of external rebuke as a country which will forever be indicted by history, and rightly so, as a serial predatory abuser of other people would be simply adding insult to injury.

 

I’m fully aware however that amongst my fellow countrymen and women there are those who’ll forcefully and even angrily reject the idea of British culpability lamely suggesting in response that what Britain did occurred a long time ago, that things have changed since then, and we should therefore all move on with our lives and not hark back revengefully to those shadowy days of the past. That’s all well and good on the surface of it if you’re the unconscionable criminal selfishly looking at things purely from your own perspective and the easiest way out of your immoral past, which incidentally you haven’t abandoned, and additionally the unctuous platitudinous noises you’re cynically making are simply for public consumption and cosmetic purposes.

 

However, if you’re the perpetual victim that your wrongdoer with a detestable and most unenviable track record of criminal behaviour sees and unsympathetically treats as such why on earth should you listen to let alone give any credence to what that person or the entity they represent has to say? No sensible person would, and whites as a race are very notorious for having an exceedingly short fuse when it comes to them implementing the very patience that they routinely insist of others, particularly when the matter in question is apt to or actually and substantially impacts negatively on them personally or their way of life. So no gratuitous or self-righteous Caucasian lectures on how others should regard their adversities or respond to them, please!

 

Few people worldwide, and ironically this includes the overwhelming majority of the US public, are aware that in its 236 years of existence as a country the United States has been involved in more than 183 wars, that’s on average one war every 15 months or s, and just as importantly the vast majority of these wars that ended up as cold-blooded, barbaric and absolutely vicious affairs were started, usually under a false flag pretext, by the US itself; but far more damning and established than the reprehensible conduct of the United States of America has been that of England and Wales, which with the formation of their union with Scotland would come to be known as the United Kingdom.

 

The constriction of time and space could not possibly permit one to give a comprehensive account, even though the information is very well documented, of the barbaric atrocities that Britain worldwide and particularly in the global south for in excess of 400 years has perniciously carried out to the cruel and long-lasting detriment of communities, countries and their people for its own haughty and self-centred aggrandisement, and listening to the likes of Zionist David Cameron, his neo-con, Con-Dem coalition cabinet colleagues, their ill-informed often inebriated on ludicrously cheap, taxpayer funded booze, largely obtuse but unbelievably venal parliamentary associates in the House of Commons and the Lords, and a profoundly obsequious, overtly lying and utterly dim-witted  so-called mainstream media comprised of a preponderance of manifestly limp-wristed, gender muddled and for all we know hermaphroditical males juxtaposed with a miscellaneous assortment of hard-boiled lesbians and fresh faced Barbie doll lookalike floozies who look like they’ve only just been weaned off their mothers milk telling the country and even believing their racist crap as well that there are too many immigrants in the UK, I now and again in response to their arrant nonsense ask myself what would they and most importantly Britain have done without these collectively detested immigrants most of whom were born in Britain by the way, a country that’s grounded on centuries of uninterrupted immigration, and according to my Oxford dictionary the expression immigrant can’t logically be applied to them; but we know what these nerds are driving at.

 

Whose wealth and resources, human as well as natural, was it that Britain mercilessly and avariciously pilfered to enrich and empower itself enabling it in the process to be changed from a comparatively obscure, backwater and offshore European country into the colonial world power and global empire it became? One glaring illustration of this white stupidity is that were British museums, just to hint at one example, compelled to hand back to their rightful owners in the global south all the objet d’art in them that they currently have and quite pompously put on display as if they were theirs and carry this off with no reference to their true ownership, the famous and priceless Nubian Diamond that forms an essential component of the British Crown Jewels and is located in the Tower of London is a classic case of this sort of chronic theft, there would be precious little left in their possession for them to put on show; and that would be the identical story across the length and breadth of former colonialist Europe.

 

But the dishonest excuse given by these crooked institutions for not returning these items to their lawful owners or countries is that having them in Europe a wider audience would get the chance to see and appreciate them, expediently omitting to mention of course that it’s a predominantly white audience they have in mind, since the prospective audiences of black or brown individuals from the countries that legally and ethically are entitled to the ownership of these precious artefacts that they’ve lost all control over find themselves as a consequence of Britain and the rest of Europe’s draconian and racist immigration laws severely restricted and even expressly prohibited from setting foot in Britain or anywhere for that matter on mainland Europe, and were they to ingeniously devise ways in which to circumvent these restrictions if caught would swiftly and ignominiously be expelled from the country concerned; so fat chance of them ever getting the opportunity to see or in the words of the museums appreciate what’s culturally theirs.

 

Looked at honestly the whole thing is a monumental travesty, for the immigrants that are being so studiously kept out as well as those living in the UK and who are remorselessly being vilified for purely racist reasons are in essence the real owners of Britain and come to that most of former colonialist, mainland Europe. How so? Allow me draw an analogy with something that most Brits aspire to being personally involved in and most vitally in the circumstances fix lots of importance to. I’m referring of course to the great obsession of home ownership that plagues the minds of most British people.

 

Now I don’t have to remind you that unless you own your house completely having fully paid for it any house ownership that you’re personally involved with, barring of course a rental situation, must by all logical deduction be one that’s derived through a negotiated mortgage agreement with a bank or other financial lending institution with the provision that they lend you the money to buy the house you want and you in return will repay the sanctioned mortgage as agreed between the two of you. All the same that house although purportedly in your name is actually the legal property of the bank or lending institution that loaned you the money to purchase the house which doesn’t become yours until you have fully discharged all your financial obligations to your lender and paid of in full the mortgage that was owing. However, if at anytime you unfortunately happen to default in your mortgage payments your mortgagor can quite lawfully foreclose on the property for which the mortgage is outstanding and should that happen force you, to put it bluntly, up S**t Street and without a roof over your head.

 

Britain position and that of its bellicose anti-immigrant Caucasian residents is identical to that of the putative house owner referred to earlier and who is lumbered with a mortgage they obviously can’t pay; and not least so because Britain never paid those whom it made slaves or the other colonials, which it financially and in many other ways materialistically exploited, a single penny for the wealth they were involuntarily forced to create for it and continuously did so over an unbroken period of 400 years; nor has any reparations to any of these people or their descendants ever been made. So essentially Britain is a house that is unpaid for and these unfortunate and much belittled immigrants, whether they’re really migrants or as much British as you pretentiously like to think you are, are your legitimate mortgagors; and let’s earnestly keep our fingers crossed for your sake, and since globally they outnumber your numerically, that collectively they don’t decide to foreclose on you; for if they were to do so the multitrillion Pounds Sterling in today’s terms which the UK would be indebted to these people you and your financially bankrupt country just simply couldn’t afford to pay. And with that in mind why don’t you just take my advice, toddle off somewhere quiet and have a good think but consider yourself lucky as you do so that you still have a country, even though it’s still mortgaged to the hilt, to live in and bluntly just shut up!

 

Most of the major and seemingly intractable problems that affect the world today either directly or by virtue of the dangerous consequences that result from them can and in my honest opinion should unquestionably be laid firmly and indisputably at the doorstep of Britain and its incessantly infernal penchant for wilful mischief, purblind sadism, and a fixated obsession for arrogantly meddling in the private affairs of other people and their countries even when Britain’s personal knowledge, accurate geographical location and cultural understanding of those whom it had chosen to focus its unwelcomed attentions on were scant at best and blissfully unenlightened at the worst. I mentioned previously that it would take a possible life time to catalogue fully Britain’s many global atrocities and crimes against humanity but here’s a flavour of what I’m referring to.

 

The 1884 Berlin Conference. Britain was the instigator of this colonialist European high level meeting that without any consultation with the people of Africa unilaterally carved up that continent, much of which was geographically unfamiliar to those doing so hence the clear-cut and unmistakable presence of the slide rule in subjectively fashioning what were essentially fictional territorial boundaries of made up countries, for the sole benefit of these European colonialists. And many of Africa’s social and political problems today stem from this period as traditional African nations and peoples were capriciously ripped apart by these absurd and incomprehensible actions that weren’t helped any when prior to gaining their independence all these artificially created African states were expressly told by their departing colonialist overseers that they would have to retain their colonialist era and European imposed borders. So all of northern Kenya for example consists principally of the Somali people who to this day see themselves as Somalis not Kenyans and Somalia as their real homeland and sovereign country not Kenya, because pre the colonial period the entire region was an integral part of Somalia but after the Berlin Conference of 1884 was with the unenlightened stroke of a cartographer’s pen geographically made a part of what would subsequently become Kenya and today, as it was in the past, is very much a fractious element of that cobbled together country.

 

On the 16 May 1916 Briton Sir Mark Sykes and the French diplomat François Georges-Picot with the assent of imperial Russia enacted a secret agreement between Britain and France to bantustanize on completely bogus nationalistic lines the Arab territories of the former Ottoman Empire that Turkey a World War I ally of Germany had forfeited after Germany’s defeat in that war. Previously to get the Arabs backing during that same war Britain had faithfully promised them to do all it could to secure their independence from the Ottoman Empire if they in return helped it to defeat Germany and its Turkish partner. Trustingly the Arabs did all that was asked of them and admirably assisted Britain in its military campaign only to find themselves deceitfully betrayed by Britain when the war ended and forced to watch helplessly as their lands were covetously carved up under the Sykes-Picot accord into a number of grotesquely fragmented Bantustan entities that bore no resemblance at all to genuine sovereign states as that terminology is generally known or acknowledged. In truth it was nothing more on the part of Britain and France than the unconcealed expansion, envisaged by both of them from the very start, of their respective existing empire attendant with the exercise of their own hegemony in the region now that Turks had been got rid of. However, the continuous and worrying source of friction in the Middle East that the Sykes-Picot accord disastrously gave rise to and still cultivates there has sadly with the emergence of the region as a principal producer of the world’s oil and gas requirements added a new and dangerous dimension to it making it as well a hotspot of growing instability and possible global conflict.

 

1917, the Balfour Declaration. One of the most perfidious acts in history and carried out by the United Kingdom, and lets face it when it comes to treachery Britain is virtually in a class of its own, is the Balfour Declaration; a mechanism entirely created by Britain and behind which it then deliberately and deceitfully hid as it shamelessly stood by, callously watched and vigorously encouraged, as it still continues to do, the systematic dislocation, comprehensive displacement and the utterly barbaric and ongoing ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian nation while concerted attempts were and still are being collaboratively made with the intruders of these Palestinian lands to expunge the country Palestine and even its name inexorably from the face of the map and the consciousness of the world.

 

A people desperately striving for survival while Britain which created the problem in the first place together with its equally sadistic Zionist collaborators not only unconcernedly overlook their plight but also go out of their way to put enormous pressure on those that might be tempted to assist the Palestinians, and if that fails dishonestly proceed to shun, place sanctions on, denigrate and even condemn them as terrorist sympathizers or actual terrorists themselves. And all this under the very noses of a pusillanimous UN Secretary General, Human Rights Commissioner and an ICC completely embedded in the pockets of these western prescriptive bullies hell-bent on always getting their way and seemingly oblivious to or else totally uncaring of the fact that their criminal and utterly deleterious activities in Palestine are undeniably creating a powder keg situation there with possible unforeseen and unintended consequences that could really blow us all to kingdom come.

 

Administrative Detention. This is an illegal device without any pretence of exercising due process of law to randomly arrest without charge or any obligation to inform the detainee why they’ve been arrested, and to detain, imprison, capriciously release then re-arrest and further imprison the victim again for multiple indefinite periods of time without access at any time during these periods of confinement to a lawyer or any sort of judicial oversight or protection. It’s principally state kidnapping where those ordering the abductions don’t feel compelled to give any reasons at all for their actions and if they vouchsafe any it’s to dishonestly seek, by cynically employing the lamest and most obtuse of excuses they can possibly come up with, to convince those gullible or dim-witted enough to swallow such garbage that what’s being done is for obvious security reasons as well as to safeguard the personal identities of security operatives, paid informants and their questionable sources.

 

Well that’s okay I guess now we know, even if these informers are a bunch of complete nurds, downright liars and fantasy fabricators. This as you might have conjectured is the recurrent modus operandi of the Zionist apartheid regime of Israel vis-à-vis the people of Palestine and is evidently carried out with the full tacit approval of the United States its western allies and their joint Muslim puppets in the Middle East, particularly in the Gulf region and North Africa, together with similar backing from those so-called international organizations that the empire of the United States of America coercively and undaunted by what others might think of its reprehensible behaviour  routinely exerts its corrosive and considerable influence over. That said if you’re carefully following the tenor of this article then it will almost certainly come as no surprise to you to learn that administrative detention is another vice that Britain inflicted on the world community and which rather ironically was used extensively by it, as the Israelis clearly are now happily doing, during its administration of Palestine prior to the establishment of the state of Israel.

 

Apartheid South Africa. Britain’s atrocities and crimes against humanity in Africa were and still are legion and extend the entire length and breadth of that unfortunate continent. It was in South Africa that the world’s first ever concentration camps and the systematic and wholesale practice of internment that collectively would become the self-confessed blueprint for Nazi Germany’s own sadistic answer to dealing with its own undesirables, oder seine sogenannten Untermenschen, were conceptualized and widely established by Britain with one Winston Churchill a highly instrumental figure in all of this. Therefore the Boer concept of apartheid which fully mirrors Britain’s own white supremacist and profoundly contemptuous attitude toward Africa’s indigenous population and its global Diaspora promptly found favour with and cheerfully received practical and enthusiastic financial, cultural, political, diplomatic and crucially military support from every London government regardless of its political colour.

 

The ANC which for years because of its non-violent stance and the length of time it was in operation was remorselessly mocked and lampooned by its white supremacist critics as ineffectual, ineffective and a bloody joke. However when it was ultimately compelled by utterly barbaric events like the Sharpeville, Soweto and other premeditated massacres of black South Africans to alter its stance rather than look on this change of approach it now undertook in light of the Nuremberg, Geneva, UN and other international recognized and universally acknowledged conventions that guarantee and support an oppressed people’s indisputable right to resist their oppressors, as would automatically have been the case if the victims were white, the ANC was instead judged and branded by the government and lawmakers in London and every other western capital as a terrorist organization with the British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher disrespectfully and pompously declaring to the world that “anyone who thinks that the ANC will ever become the government of South Africa is living in cloud cuckoo land.”

 

But in spite of her bombastic words and explicit support for racist apartheid South Africa, which was hardly surprising taking into consideration the huge financial investments she and her late unlamented husband Denis had in that country and the vast economic returns they made from these, the ANC’s freedom struggle not only led to South Africa attaining universal adult suffrage for all of its people but also witnessed its political wing lawfully and in a national, landslide victory assume the reins of power as South Africa’s first ever democratically elected government. And extraordinarily from a white perspective but not that of Blacks saw the black citizenry of a brand new South Africa and its democratically elected government demonstrate and astounding magnanimity toward their white abusers, literally extending the hand of friendship and reconciliation to them, which in light of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s distressing unearthing and public revelation that UK, German, French, other EU, United States, Canadian and other western scientists had actively and cooperatively worked with the apartheid regime to create a race vaccine that would effectively have annihilated on it being administered to them most of South Africa and Rhodesia’s black population, apart from those that is who were deemed indispensible to attend to and satisfy the white man’s domestic needs, in order to artificially devise and permanently establish a white demographic majority in these two countries not dissimilar from what already pertains in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Argentina and the United States for example in relation to their own indigenous populations,  frankly in my opinion was totally undeserved, since as we all know from bitter experience no such magnanimity or Christian forgiveness would ever have been forthcoming from any of these white-ruled countries or for that matter the vast majority of their Caucasian population if the boot was on the other foot, the perpetrators of these horrendous atrocities were black or brown and their victims were exclusively white. In those circumstances revenge and war would have been the order of the day from the leadership and ranks of the Master Race!

 

Not satisfied simply with propping up South Africa’s loathsome apartheid system Britain, several key EU states, the United States and Israel mutually went a major step further and enthusiastically invited that country to join their nuclear club, physically providing it with a number of nuclear weapons and the pertinent delivery systems it required to make these operative. The ANC however through its sources got wind of this and in response openly declared that a democratic South Africa under its leadership would have no place for any nuclear weapons in it; in other words they voluntary and categorically gave a solemn and binding undertaking to scrap South Africa’s nuclear capabilities and get rid of its nuclear arsenals if the people of South Africa elected them as their legitimate representatives. But with the writing on the wall heralding the official end of apartheid in South Africa these very same contemptible western barbarians with their reprehensible double standards and gut wrenching hypocrisy were suddenly and impatiently banging on the door of the ANC pressurizing and persuading in equal measure the prospective new rulers of South Africa to expeditiously do what they’d already voluntarily promised they would do.

 

True to its word the ANC on becoming the authenticated government of South Africa did honour its pledge and promptly eliminated all nuclear weapons from its country, the only country to ever do so. Even so I was immensely angered by this and still am although not with the ANC for nobly honouring the commitment it had made, which in itself is highly commendable and should be lauded, but with the leaders of all those western states, and that includes Britain, whose white-supremacist mindset seemingly dictates that while it’s perfectly in order for a profoundly barbaric, racist and reprehensible apartheid entity that brutally repressed and forcefully disenfranchised its indigenous majority population to be fully entrusted with the possession of powerful nuclear weapons and furthermore be able to do so in a world where the overwhelming majority of its countries are at the same time effectively prohibited through coercion and physical threats by this very same privileged club of nuclear weapons states proprietors from having them, as they conceitedly retain, upgrade and worryingly parade theirs; while in marked contrast a democratically elected government of the people, by the people and for the people in South Africa but which as it happened was black wasn’t in the minds of these western morons trustworthy enough to host such weapons.

 

Anymore than a banned Nelson Mandela, a well respected and international iconic figure, it seemed was freely allowed into the United States even after he became President of the Republic of South Africa without the explicit permission of the US State Department that had to be sought well in advance to allow it to perform its vetting of this astonishing man, as if there wasn’t enough information available on him both in their secret files and in the public domain already. The ban remained in force almost to the end of George W. Bush’s second term of office when quite surprisingly it was lifted. However by that time Nelson Mandela who even as a young man had showed no particular penchant to visit the land of the free and the brave had become a very frail gentleman who didn’t travel much anyway and when he did it was almost exclusively within his native South Africa, so the lifting of this insulting and highly disrespectful US interdict on him was little more than a pointless and cosmetic exercise anyway.

 

The Second Iraq War. It wasn’t all that long after Tony Blair became the Prime Minister of Britain that anyone with an ounce of grey matter twix their ears didn’t come to realize that he’s a liar; just how huge and pathological that state of affairs was though on his part didn’t really come to the fore until the run up to the second Iraq war when he sought and successfully managed to convince the British parliament - all his cabinet colleagues were of a similar mind as he was so he didn’t have to work on them - and crucially most of the British public that Iraq: a country considerably devastated by the first Gulf War, basically constricted by no-fly zones over its own territory and racked by debilitating sanctions that were specifically targeted at the Iraqi civilian populace with the overt intention of turning it against Saddam Hussein and whose dire consequences were to kill over a million Iraqi children, with Madeleine Albright the United States Secretary of State publicly declaring that the deaths of these innocent kids was a price worth paying, had the capability with its massive stockpile of weapons of mass destruction to launch Armageddon on the west and particularly on British bases overseas, as well as Britain itself in less than 45 minutes and as consequence posed a serious existential threat not only to British interests globally but also to the UK itself and therefore had to be confronted and obliterated. This Tony Blair heartrendingly emphasized to the House of Commons wasn’t just idle speculation on his part but an actual fact.

 

Of course it was all a bloody pack of lies from start to finish and as ensuing events post Saddam Hussein would categorically but tragically for the Iraqis confirm, and a series of them that Tony Blair was totally aware of when poker-faced he deliberately lied both to a supportively baying, gung ho, imperialistically-minded lets get the impudent b*****d and show him what mettle we Brits are made of House of Commons MPs pissing themselves with rapture at his affected inspirational words of reassurance that everything was safe in his hands and a British public likewise and rather easily swayed as it usually is in matters involving colonialist enterprises by their prime minister’s dishonest, self-centred and self-serving rhetoric, as secret pacts entered into between Tony Blair and those pushing most vigorously for war with Iraq, notably BP, the other multinational oil and gas corporations and, of course, Bae Systems and the other components of the infamous military industrial complex had all assured him that he would be very well taken care of when he left office; and the multimillion Pound kickbacks which Tony Blair, wife Cherie and their family are ongoingly profiting handsomely from is ample proof of this. No wonder then that equally avaricious David Cameron, Nick Clegg and their select club of multi-millionaire cabinet ministers would very much love and are trying their level best to emulate Tony Blair with their own colonialist ventures.

 

The terrible repercussions of the Iraq and Afghan wars are still being felt by those who’re directly involved. Over one million Iraqi civilians have unnecessarily been killed and like their Afghani counterparts that are correspondingly dying in their droves are dismissively shrugged off by those who’re murdering them as collateral damage. Meanwhile there are five million internally displaced Iraqis imposed on their country as a result of the conflict with a significantly higher number of these displaced people obliged for their own safety to flee their country and are currently living as poverty stricken refugees in neighbouring states, and together with the above transgressions must be factored in the enormous graft, theft and sadistic abuses carried out at will and for which they’re never held accountable for their actions by the so-called contractors, mercenaries to you and me, like Blackwater plus the incalculable damage that has, and is persistently being done to the infrastructure, social fabric and national cohesion of both Iraq and Afghanistan as a direct consequence of intentional western but in particular British and US instigated, instructed and covertly ordered Al-Qaida and GCC states death squad sectarian killings alongside deliberate and enormously destabilizing insurgency forays of targeted countries very much the order of the day, and whose specifically designed and effected purposes are to bring about regime change strengthened by the deep-rooted and nefarious western imperialist and colonialist practice of divide and rule, all the better to exert and preserve the west’s perception of its unquestionable right to absolute hegemony over these affected countries, their people and their region while wasting neither time nor effort to deviously loot their natural resources for its own selfish benefit.

 

Leon Panetta the United States Defence Secretary who narrowly escaped an assassination attempt on his life at the British manned Camp Bastion in Afghanistan on Wednesday 14 March 2012 is reported to have remarked earlier in the week that he was disquieted about the Sunni Iraqi Vice President, ironically considering Sunni Saddam Hussein’s appalling treatment of the Kurds presently holding up as a renegade from justice in the autonomous region of Kurdistan after he fled there, going on trial as a properly indicted suspect by the Iraqi government and law enforcement agencies in Iraq, for being the chief facilitator of a string of well publicized, protracted, widespread and devastatingly fatal bomb attacks that caused massive loss of life to innocent Iraqi civilians in combination with other terrorist activities that he’s also being blamed for.

 

Apparently Leon Panetta doesn’t want this trial to happen, which apart from raising a few eyebrows in Iraq and elsewhere prompts the obvious question why not? Iraq is ostensibly a sovereign independent state that the United States would have us all believe is totally in charge of its own legal affairs; the indicted suspect is clearly an Iraqi national and citizen not an American one, and irrespective of his social or political position in Iraqi society no Iraqi citizen or resident living in Iraq who is suspected of and charged with a crime there ought to be above the law, even if they have powerful or influential American friends on their side. Moreover Leon Panetta’s words, actions and overall conduct in this affair are a blatant breach of international protocol and law that constitutes an unwarranted intrusion into Iraqi domestic affairs that Leon Panetta himself or any other American public figure let alone someone holding a prominent position in the United States administration as he undoubtedly is most certainly wouldn’t put up with if the boot was on the other foot; and he knows that!

 

But dependable sources tell me and there’s also considerable speculation going around as well that Leon Panetta’s personal and indeed the United States’ overall trepidation of this Iraqi traitor going on public trial has more to do with the fact that revelations of the US’s own individualistic in addition to collaborative involvement with the accused and several others in multiple terrorist atrocities throughout Iraq through the coordinated auspices of agencies and groups like the CIA, Blackwater mercenaries - or as these nefarious murder for hire organizations like to call themselves contractors �" coupled with the wholehearted and sadistic services of the mentally unhinged salafist and wahhabi death squads from the GCC and especially the generously contributing Danegeld Bantustans of Qatar and Saudi Arabia will embarrassingly emerge to show the extent of US involvement and the lengths that that country was prepared and actually went to in intentionally killing innocent Iraqi civilians to engender religious sectarianism  and political and social destabilization inside Iraq in order to fabricate a pretext that would pressurize and hopefully persuade the Iraqi government to rescind its opposition to and allow the United States to stay in Iraq beyond the 2011 deadline that it had to leave that country. Obviously the manufactured deception didn’t work primarily because the central Iraqi government didn’t fall for it, so for this to be publicly revealed as well in a trial massively covered by the international media would be seen by the United States as doubly humiliating for it and is clearly something it wants to spare itself from at all costs.

 

Human rights ethically should begin at home and any country that forfeits in any way the rights of its citizens and other residents living inside its territory to such entitlements and freedoms has no moral right to assume let alone bestow on itself the one-sided authority to go charging around the world like a demented bull in a China shop lecturing and even dictating to others that it has no legal or moral responsibility for how they must live their lives. The Patriot Act is one of several mechanisms through which the US does just that, subjectively abrogating significant sections of its constitution, Bill of Rights and even the prescript of the Magna Carta with its illustrious and longstanding pedigree.

 

Britain though unlike the United States and many other so-called developed countries has no written constitution, shows no genuine eagerness for one and consequently enables its government and parliamentarians to make up, enact laws and set their own precedents on the hoof as it were without any constitutional supervision whatever; influential but highly unaccountable power in other words  This state of affairs evidently suits the purposes and serves the ends of the country’s privileged ruling elite which is embedded and obviously prefers to remain completely ensconced in an entrenched, invidious socially divisive and offensively antediluvian class system that freely lends itself to all sorts of civic and other discriminatory and at the same time enables this elite to adopt the haughty stance of being deeply suspicious and even furtively unwelcoming of the concept of true democracy. And it’s only the reality of demographics coalesced with this elite’s perception and thoughtful pragmatism of this that effectively precludes them from rolling back completely the hard fought for and democratic advantages that the masses have achieved in the second half of the 20^th Century by those who were bravely prepared to put their heads above the parapet and say forcefully and determinedly “we belong to this country every bit as much as you think you do and we demand a say in how it’s run!”

 

That said the task of keeping this up in the face of all the many obstacles wilfully placed in the way of those who take this route is an onerous one and quite analogous to cleaning out the proverbial Aegean Stables given that those who rule us don’t pass up a trick to try and claw back the disproportionate privileges and power they previously wielded and still feel they’re absolutely entitled to. So for them therefore to even put up with the notion let alone freely consent to the implementation of a lawfully binding and written constitution guaranteeing the rights of everyone and protected with a Bill of Rights setting out in clear and unequivocal terms how Britain should be run together with the rights and duties of all its citizens, not subjects, in conjunction with those that freely opt to come and live among us transparently arrived at and permanently on public display, would be acknowledged by our ruling elite as tantamount to political suicide, and so with reactionary zeal they baulk at the idea of such a move and as a consequence the entire country not unnaturally suffers enormously from not enjoying the full benefits of democracy, stability, prosperity and of course political accountability.

 

Therefore with such recalcitrant and reactionary ideas felt towards their own population it’s hardly surprising given the circumstances that countries in the west, particularly the UK, the United States and France, avidly entertain and periodically put into effect their even harsher attitudes towards the people and countries of the global south. It’s an open secret that the United States, Britain, France, Germany and other key western countries simply cannot abide countries in the global south that exercise an independence of their own outside the patronizing aegis of western influence and hegemonic control, and that every time this happens the west with mindboggling paranoia feels threatened by it and ludicrously concludes that it must replace the governments of these perceptually upstart countries by any means possible and install in their place malleable, compliant, puppet regimes of their own which are supportive of the west and that the latter can control at will.

 

To affect this numerous but invariably the same old predictable methods are employed by the west to realize its goals: CIA or MI6 coups; leadership assassinations; clandestine and deafeningly deniable insurgency operations as we’re currently observing in Syria and was the case in Libya; regime change under the pretext of humanitarian reasons or concerns �" what a joke and a pretty sick one too bearing in mind their own track record of repression at home �" as we saw in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya for example; or when all else fails the customary dishonest and lying excuse for war on the beleaguered country: Iraq’s WMDs, Afghanistan’s responsibility for and participation in 9/11, or Colonel Gaddafi killing his people just to cite three examples. A whole pack of concerted lies that with the pro-active involvement of an equally fraudulent and dishonest media soften up their public, which is either too badly informed to know any better, too lazy to think for itself and check out the facts or simply too spaced out or apathetic to care, for war which often and unfortunately is the general outcome, while powerless to do anything, or so they conveniently convince themselves, the rest of the world indifferently looks the other way.

 

The head of the United States Navy at the time when the fate of the Chaggossian people and in particular that of the inhabitants of Diego Garcia was being decided for them by the British and the Americans said publicly that he wanted the islands in his words to be “sanitized”. I don’t know if this prized, racist moron is still alive or preferably dead but I’m assuming here that he’s dead; anyway it’s not at all complicated to imagine what his reactions would have been if someone from another country with the power and obvious capability of doing so had similarly suggested and meant it that the district, area, state or region of the United States he most closely identified with, or any part of the US for that matter, should be treated in an identical way to how Diego Garcia was. He naturally, like all likeminded cretins, and indeed all Americans everywhere would be up in arms about this; but as we constantly observe with such people they have rights and sensitivities that must at all times be reverently observed and punctiliously respected; however perceived sub-humans, as they deem others unlike themselves to be, don’t qualify for such rights or considerations. And it still happens, this kind of condescending attitude, to this very day wherever US and imperialist Caucasian hegemony spread their wings.

 

Shamefacedly after many years of wilfully ignoring their plight, having totally expunged them from their indigenous homeland, the British government reluctantly bequeathed to the Chaggossians the same fundamental right to live and work in the United Kingdom as had previously been enthusiastically given to the Falkland Islanders and the residents of Gibraltar, but it came with an enormous price for those who decided to take up the offer, The automatic right to housing for those who had nowhere at all to live, and all the other back up social services plus essential financial help that was readily available for anyone from the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar or who was a white Rhodesian or South African ex-pat that set foot on British soil was immediately denied to the Chaggossians who had to make do with charitable help given to them by local sympathizers. During this time and through forced circumstances many Chaggossians, young and old alike, were obliged to bed down at nighttimes in city parks, whatever the weather was like, or in the lounges of airports like Gatwick, where I met, spoke at length with and interviewed several of them, so they would be able to use public facilities in these places like showers and toilets to at least maintain a sanitary lifestyle. All the same despite these horrendously imposed and inhuman privations on them the Chaggossians collectively never allowed their resolve to be diminished or broken and were instead even more determined not to give up.

 

Despite these overwhelming odds and having largely integrated themselves into British society the Chaggossians nevertheless have never forgotten nor do they have any intent of ever forgetting their mother country. Involuntary residents of Britain they may be but home will always for them be where the heart is and that’s Diego Garcia and the Chagos archipelago where to a man, woman and child they most emphatically want to return. So much then for the widely and offensively held white perception that all non-white people are prospective immigrants, and illegal scrounging ones in the bargain, who all “want to come here!”

 

In a progression of major British court battles against successive UK governments for the illegal ethnic cleansing of themselves from their country the Chaggossians have on every occasion won their case and in the unambiguous judgements that the courts have handed down consecutive UK governments have been ordered to honour the Chaggossians desire to return home, told to comprehensively recompense them for their numerous losses and degradation and entirely at the British government’s expense repatriate them in an orderly and respectful way back to their home country. However each court judgement delivered in favour of the Chaggossians and which every UK government at the time has appealed against but consistently lost has been stubbornly ignored by these governments that have no problems whatsoever in self-righteously preaching to others about respect for the rule of law.

 

And the crux of the problem? The United States of course and Britain’s slavish adherence to its wishes. Actually the US has no desire to give up its illegitimate occupancy of Diego Garcia, anymore than it wishes to voluntarily abandon Guantanamo Bay whose return the Cubans have been demanding for generations now, which is one of its main global bases, Diego Garcia that is, and has been frequently used in its so-called extraordinary rendition operations. Furthermore, even though the other islands of the archipelago have remained vacant ever since they were “sanitized” by the British on behalf of the Americans and no use, proper or otherwise, has been made of them consecutive US administrations and the Pentagon have recalcitrantly in manifest defiance of the several British court judgements which have been handed down, including those of our highest court, refused to allow the Chaggossians to resettle even these unused outlying islands citing the convenient pretext of national security for having done so. Which prompts the obvious question: since when does US security allegedly, thousands of miles away from the internationally recognized borders, airspace and territorial waters of the United States of America trump the definite and unqualified rights of an ethnically cleansed people to legally and justifiably return to their “sanitized” homeland? And who accords the US this right anyway; or has it simply and conceitedly presumed that because it’s a major military power bristling with nuclear weapons and a mindless proclivity for bullying as well it can just do whatever the hell it likes no matter the consequences are for those affected.

 

Ever the biddable sycophant Britain submissively conceded to the demands of the United States and employing a medieval device called the Royal Prerogative, which goes back to the days of the absolute monarch and the extensively believed and unquestioning tenet of the divine rights of kings and queens and whose residual powers have over the years with the transition of Britain into a constitutional monarchy passed on to the prime minister of the day and de facto his or her government, brazenly exercised this artifice to circumvent the High Court’s clear ruling that the Chaggossians must be allowed to go home while in the process keeping their American masters happy. Even so the Chaggossians who are an amazingly charming but nevertheless tenacious nation of people that work assiduously at preserving their language and culture while forced to live in exile in Britain have made it quite clear that they have no intention whatsoever of ever giving up their fight for justice and the restitution of what’s lawfully and morally theirs until they’re safely back in their homeland, no matter how long it takes.

 

In my opinion it’s no longer a question of if but when the American Empire will fall and predictably be destroyed; and that’s not simply idle conjecture on my part but an absolute certainty based on facts. And like its Soviet counterpart even though external factors and influences will unquestionably play a part in this and possibly help to shape the eventual outcome, when that destruction ultimately comes, as it most certainly will, it will be from within. What will replace this antediluvian dinosaur we know as the United States is any one’s guess but my own is that the larger states such as California will become countries in their own right while the smaller ones will disintegrate into the kind of Bantustans we see in the Middle East and the world has observed there since the Sykes-Picot accord of 1916. History repeating itself as it were and how ironically so considering the enormous treasure, political weight and military support the United States expends in its shameless propping up of these dictatorial, middle eastern Bantustans. That said there’s no doubt at all in my mind that the posturing, grandstanding, bullying tactics and mad dog behaviour of the United States of America are very reminiscent of the frenzied conduct of a lethally injured scorpion that knows it’s about to die but in its death throes is still potentially very dangerous.

 

Britain as it stands is a lost cause, a country quite unfit for purpose and which without the capricious coattails of the United States to cling on to would be even more so. Laughably but pretentiously grandstanding as a world power, which it most definitely is not and that without its variable association with the United States of America couldn’t possibly have imagined, even with its proclivity for overstatement and self-aggrandisement, that it was, Britain is not particularly liked or trusted by its European neighbours who at best tolerate and cruelly humour its pretentiousness as part of their overblown grand plan of European domination that they think they must rope Britain into, while in the global south Britain is intensely mistrusted and even hated with many there aggressively nurturing centuries-old feelings and deep-seated emotions of hatred and a lust for vengeance for the innumerable but never apologized let alone compensated for wrongs and the incalculable harm done to them, their communities and ancestors by this offshore European entity, and would dearly love nothing better in this world than to get even by taking whatever chances that present themselves to round on Britain, kick it where it hurts the most and at the same time inflict on it the optimum humiliation and damage that’s humanly possible.

 

Having presumed in the past though that this wasn’t really possible with the United States lurking in the background and which many of these latent adversaries have long and quite mistakenly regarded as the natural and trustworthy protector of Britain, because that’s the consistently adhered to national narrative and public point of view that Britain has always somewhat self-servingly, while additionally seeing it as a suitable defence mechanism for itself, projected to them, the rest of the world and has even ludicrously deluded itself with but which the United States for its part has never confirmed or refuted is the case because it has always considered Britain as a convenient cat’s paw to use at will particularly when it finds itself in a tight spot and saw no reason or necessity therefore for it either to give it the cold shoulder or else curb it of its delusions, now in accelerated decline itself, are now excitedly, quite understandably and in the vast majority of cases expectantly rubbing their hands in glee for those payback moments which they can foresee aren’t very far away.

 

At home things aren’t much better either with an ever increasing number of Scots uneasy about their country’s ongoing entanglement with the United Kingdom and as such clearly wanting to break free from the enfeebling social stranglehold and manic political control of the Chipping Norton, English county squire, privileged public school and financial multi-millionaire, tax evasion sect that runs Britain for its exclusive benefit, looking as a result with buoyed hopes to the eventual break up of the United Kingdom and the long overdue reclamation of their illustrious country Scotland to its proper and rightful place as a fully independent and sovereign state catering indefatigably as well as impartially for the legitimate needs of both its citizens and the residents alike while at the same time also signifying in an open and completely transparent manner its consummate capability and the undoubted resourcefulness and comprehensive expertise of its democratic leadership, skills that presently go begging because they’re either not understood, appreciated by or else are totally alien to the English blockheads or their Scottish cats paws that generally run Britain Plc, to outline a national course as well as institute effective, far-reaching and comprehensive global strategies that will at all times put Scotland’s interests first just as they’ll be optimally beneficial to all those fortunate enough to live in Scotland.

 

Northern Ireland is also intensely restive with a latent but highly pervasive undercurrent of generations-old acrimony directed towards the repressively destructive, colonialist and dirty sectarian roles that England has traditionally played in Ireland, and despite the Band Aid application of the Good Friday Agreement no one but diehard unionist intransigents believes that Northern Ireland, or more fitting the six counties that constitute the province of Ulster, will forever stay part of a union with England especially with Scotland having resumed its legitimate position as an independent and sovereign state.

 

And it’s not just the intolerable injustice Britain inflicted on Ireland in the first half of the 20^th Century when in a free, fair and transparent referendum the Irish overwhelmingly for complete severance from Britain and opted instead for the creation of a free, neutral and independent Irish republic only to have their democratic wishes dismissively ignored and their aspirations callously thwarted with the forced retention, in the face of minority Irish protestant recalcitrance  backed by unionist sentiments and support in London, of Ulster as a part of the United Kingdom that remains a recurrent problem because it still rankles with the vast majority of the Irish people who still long to see a united Ireland completely and permanently liberated from the meddlesome clutches of Britain; but significantly too it’s also a matter of demographics since Northern Ireland’s Catholic population is well set in the near future to surpass that of its protestant counterpart and when that time arrives it’ll be the power of the ballot box that will ensure the inevitable, which even a dishonest England won’t be able to gerrymander this time.

 

Wales for its part has for such a long time been enmeshed with England that the two are seen as inseparable and quite often spoken of in the same breath as one entity, and while lingering nationalist sensitivities on the part of the Welsh might very well take exception to this remark my own gut feeling is that any such response will stem more from a sense of hurt pride of living in a perpetual state of denial for so long than any inaccuracy which might be attached to my remark.

 

True there’s a welsh nationalist movement and party that avidly supported by a hardcore of Welshmen and women, principally welsh speaking, who in their vivid imaginations do dream of and even yearn for an independent Wales; but in a country where the majority of the population is Anglophone, speak little or no Welsh at all and outside the fanatical tribalism associated with its passion for Rugby, which is an English public school game by the way, see London rather than Cardiff as their cultural capital, and where the welsh nationalist political party, Plaid Cymru despite its gallant and noble endeavours dismally and regularly fails to attract any sizeable let alone majority support in its own fiefdom, or politically correct principality, it’s hard to imagine given the circumstances it finds itself in to see Wales realistically breaking out of its Anglophone straight jacketed position of being persistently the junior associate but never regarded as and therefore unlikely ever to become an equal partner with England in any union they share, a relationship reminiscent of that that existed between President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky that will always be weighted on the side of the person who calls the shots. However with an independent Scotland and United Ireland both immutable realities maybe the Celtic tiger of Wales will summon up the pizzazz not only to roar a somewhat belated defiance of London but also to resolutely and forever chase England well away from its hallowed jungle.

 

The English regions that by no stretch of the imagination constitute a homogenous entity come replete with their own challenges, problems and even contradictions that defy logic and even commonsense and realistically the only common thread that runs through these diverse communities is that they share a common island called Britain, otherwise they’re as disparate from each other as sharks, dolphins, sea turtles and flying fish that share the same waters of the Caribbean Sea. And therefore no one in their right mind would think for example that Liverpudlians have much, if anything at all, in common with those who cavort around the leafy shires of deepest southeast England or for that matter that there’s any reciprocity extant at all between the immensely privileged and ultra well heeled elites contentedly living luxurious lifestyles in their gated and 24/7 security enhanced exclusive London multi-millionaire row enclaves and those compelled to and who are consequently confined to the deliberately destroyed, left to rot, significant and seemingly irredeemably blighted, courtesy of successive British governments, regions of the Black Country where employment once plentiful has long been non-existent; once affordable homes are now as predictably rare an event for those who’re seeking and more importantly needing them as the appearance of Halley’s Comet; money is very hard to come by and what little there is doesn’t make ends meet with poverty very much the only growth industry in these areas; and what residual hopes of redemption for those desperately clinging on to ethical ideas of never give up, strive harder and ultimately something will turn up to provide that much needed light at the end of the tunnel is cruelly dashed by thoughtless, insensitive remarks by utterly out-of-touch, uncaring and comfortably well off MPs and others that sneeringly discount their efforts, see and even publicly condemn and vilify these people as workshy scroungers then heartlessly proceed to gratuitously label them as a burden on the state.

 

London multi-millionaires and their ilk ensconced across opulent areas of Britain don’t have time for and certainly won’t be seen alive or dead in the company or the same social milieu as the impoverished or societally disadvantaged co-residents of their respective cities, so why would they suddenly deviate from their normal practices and physically as well as morally decide to empathize with the inhabitants of places like the Black Country of the English Midlands? It just won’t happen, not in a month of Sundays and if you can prove otherwise feel free to tell me so, although I think you’ll be very hard-pressed to fill even the back of a postage stamp with any kind of erudite response.

 

Let’s face facts, Britain as it’s currently constituted and run displays all the hallmarks of a failed state existing perilously on borrowed time. Therefore as a country that prides itself on being a nation of animal lovers - how very ironic when so many of you don’t show or wouldn’t dream of doing so the self same concerns for your fellow human beings because you’re so eaten up with your self-centredness, self-gratification, envy and greed to give a moment’s consideration for anyone else apart from yourself, unless that is you know with absolute certainty you’re going to benefit materially from assisting them �" I know you’ll readily put that seriously wounded or terminally ill animal to sleep so as to preclude any more suffering on its part.

 

Britain too has been suffering for a very long time even though it has to be said that most of its angst stems directly from its centuries-old, still ongoing and unseemly conduct, like a chain smoker having been diagnosed with terminal lung cancer still refusing to give up the habit. Nevertheless it’s been a torment that for many sentient Britons, and particularly with the establishment of the Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and now the Tweedledum and Tweedledee David Cameron and Nick Clegg governments, have proved internally as well as in the international context to be hugely embarrassing, excruciatingly humiliating and terribly painful to watch, experience and bear; a state of affairs that must definitely end. That’s why it’s high time we disconnect the life support systems of what essentially is a brain dead entity, bid a permanent and even nostalgic farewell to whatever lovely memories among the far more numerous atrocities that we can recall and bury our dead without any regrets.

 

Footnote:

Self-explanatory! Not least because of Britain's own terrorist interference in and support for terrorist organizations and savage, dictatorial and feudal/Medieval regimes abroad, notably in the Arab world.