The US, Britain and Iraq: beyond satire

imgres

Sometimes international politics defies satire. Over the last few days there was talk Britain and the US coming to the assistance of thousands of civilians stranded on a mountain in Iraq. This, while at the same time the US and Britain assist Israel in killing thousands of civilians in Gaza.  Not just that, but the big enemy in Iraq is now ISIS, the fundamentalist Islamic organisation. Many of the ISIS fighters are people who were held in detention for years by the US, tortured by the US, an experience that truly radicalised them. In short, the Americans cut the rod which is now being applied to their own back. 

But the US and the British have still got plenty of chutzpah. Col Tim Collins (no relative, thank God) who made the half-baked Henry V speech on the eve of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, urging British troops to liberate Iraq, is now calling for more military intervention. Could you make it up?

The core of the whole problem is, of course, a three-letter word:oil. The US – and Israel – are allied with Iraqui Kurdistan and its capital Erbil. The US is busy supplying arms to Kurdish forces – in other words, aiding the disintegration of Iraq. I think it was Tony Blair who warned that if Britain didn’t get ready for air strikes now, it would pay the price in increased terrorism in Britain. It’s the other way round in fact. British military intervention will increase the chances of terrorist attacks in Britain by radicalised Muslims.

If there is a need for the supply of humanitarian aid – and the US this morning announces that there aren’t as many people stranded and they’re not in as bad a way as previously thought – then the UN should be doing the job. As Labour MP Diane Abbott says, that’s what the UN is for. The US isn’t and shouldn’t be the world’s policeman.

But ultimately, the US isn’t concerned to fix the ISIS problem; after all, in Syria ISIS is effectively the US’s ally.  The US has one goal only: to repel an invasion of Kurdistan. It’s the oil, stupid.

25 Responses to The US, Britain and Iraq: beyond satire

  1. Patrick J Dorrian August 14, 2014 at 11:03 am #

    I listened to yourself and Donaldson on the radio this am on Nolan. Everytime I hear JD I want to punch the radio, poor innocent radio, His sanctimony drips like acid into my ears. That psuedo Daniel voice, which says he is oh so holy. And yet he fails to see the argument, which thought you were presenting manfully until the news cut you off. So, in his mind one set of Muslims are good, because another set wants to convert them by sword or book and yet another set of Muslims deserve killing because the ‘chosen’ people think they have the right to do it. Then as if not bad enough, on comes Ian og. He was so patronising looking down from his mount olympus. I don’t think there is a more ignorant man on the planet. As you can see the DUP MPs put me in bad form. How long is it till Christmas?

  2. Norma wilson August 14, 2014 at 11:23 am #

    Ah Jude,

    It is a long time from I have congratulated you on such a good piece of reporting/ journalism call it what you will!

    America, America, did you ever watch Charlie Browns War, marvelous film, the USA arms the Taliban to fight USSR, only for them to turn their own weapons on them.
    Americas own SAM’s shooting at them, by those little Afghan men, who look so…. Half mounted?

    Most ordinary middle class Americans have not got a clue on world affairs, they are quite ignorant of what is going on in the world, I remember CNN or NBC once asking in Dublin, “when are you going to get the British Army out of Dublin”?

    The Irish used the Yanks well, spun them an auld yarn or two, and they fell for it, but the Clintons needed the Irish vote, and walla, trade off?

    I realise I have argued, and opposed you all bar a few, but I still hold firm to my beliefs regarding Israel! In 15 or 20 years from now Islam will be in the majority, whites will be in the minority. Our way of life will be unrecognisable. Our grandchildren, and great grandchildren, will ask, “why did we let this happen on our watch”!

    America, Canada, Europe, Sharia law will be practised, we won’t need alarm clocks, calling to prayer will start our day nicely?

    Like we yearn, for an old black and white film set in the fifties, only it will be our heritage, our way of life, we will yearn for?

    I do not recall ever being threatened by Israel, what a horrible world it would be without those strange looking Jews in it, life is like a box of chocolates, it takes all sorts, all flavours. Some you don’t like and leave for some one else.

    It very much looks like the people in Gaza have been telling porkies, and some German reporters who seen some things they should not have, have been run out.

    I hope in the not to distant future, the truth comes out, and you are all made to eat your words?
    Mazaltov NORMA(n)

    • Mick Early August 14, 2014 at 2:12 pm #

      Norma, I live on the States and really you sound like some fanatical right wing lunatic, or a fundamentalist crazy! In 20 or even 100 years time we will all still be fine, still struggling and there will be no sharia law, believe me!

      • Norma wilson August 14, 2014 at 5:29 pm #

        God Mick
        Believe me, I sure hope you are right, cause although I am 60, I do want my grandchildren to live, like the free and the brave, oh yes and a little bit of Liberty threw in for good measure!

  3. Perkin Warbeck August 14, 2014 at 11:35 am #

    When the relief convoys, consisting of the pink and cream vans of Mr. Whippy first hit the stricken suburb of drought-devastated Drimnagh, Dublin in the early Sixties, their arrival was invariably announced by an optimistic rendition of ‘She’ll be coming round the mountain when she comes’.

    Which inevitably brought hordes of parched gurriers and their pre-pubescent mots charging out of their humble hovels on to all the highest roads in the city, from Galtymore to Benmadigan to Errigal,, looking for their Ices ! Ices !

    In the course of time, other tunes also got to announce the arrival of the relief convoy, like ‘Greensleeves’ and ‘The Deadwood Stage’. But one which never did was, oddly enough, ‘Making Whoopee’.

    Happily, this neglect has been (almost) rectified by none other than the former Chief Whippy of the Buttondown Blueshirted Party and now (deep breath) Foreign Minister of the Free Southern Stateen. When asked about the defensive straffing by the IDF of Gaza, Charles Flanagan, T. D. (for it is he) replied in those measured, marshy Mountmellick tones of his:

    -Out of proportion, indiscriminate.

    Geddit? Oopi.

    Yes, our Charlie (he becomes Charlie when donning his old Flanagan and Alan routine hat) has been making oopi. Not quite, whoopee – but, one must aver, getting there.

    Note, his studious, statesmanlike avoidance of the mouth-muscle-flexing lexicon of the Free Southern Stateen during the Thirty Years Trouble when Dublin became Snarlsville Central with its well-oiled round the clock condemnatory engines ticking briskly over. At all times.

    Well-oiled, on account of the leprechaun for Ulster, Uladh, having the same pronunciation as the l. for oil, ola. (It also has the same pronunciation as the l. for wool, olla, but that, of course, only applies to black sheep).

    In this, Charlie ‘Charles’ Flanagan, TD is following faithfully in the distinguished footsteps of a former Foreign Minister of the Free Southern Stateen, Garret FitzGerald. Who is not to be confused with Ella Fitzgerald who had a hit with ‘Making Whoopee’. That was a Fitzgerald eile altogether.

    Oopi, indeed, bids fair to take its hackneyed place beside another iconic acronym of the Thirty Years Trouble: gubu.

    That was, of course, the coinage of the celebrated cobalt-blood, Conor Cruise O’Brien. And indeed, was later rendered into sparkling leprechaun, posthumously be it said, by the delightfully mischievous poetess, Maura Granna Mhac an Bhealfeisire. Which she unveiled at a particularly memorable Merriman School, founded to honour the eponymous butler of O.Wilde’s ‘The Importance of Being Earnest’ and who gets to utter but one line, but what a line, ‘the dog cart is at the door, sir’.

    -Ni faide gubu an ghandail, na gubu na ge./ What’s HP for the goose, is sauce for the gander.

    That impish translation had the TUT and RTE staff in attendance fairly rolling in the aisles, their annual opportunity to taste the O’Wilde side of life.

    Having started with Mr. Whippy it is perhaps only meet and just that one concludes by affording Mr. W. another crack of the w. Dominic Facchino, the Anglo-Italian entrepreneur who founded Mr Whippy, was prompted to do so after a visit Stateside where he observed the thirst-quenching humanitarianism of Mr. Softee in operation. That was in the late Fifties.

    Further back, in the Forties, a young, strikingly strident female research chemist in England was employed by a UK food company whose American partner was a certain Mr. Softee. There are those amongst us, more knowledgeable than the sheltered PW in these matters, who claim that the same Mrs. Thatcher – for it was she ! – could have made it to the very top as a leather-clad dominatrix, with a whip in one hand and a Juarez donkey’s scrotum in the other..

    ‘She had’, they add, ,’the necessary chemistry for the job in hand’.

    Oh, yes, please, I’ll have two of those delicious raspberry ripple ices……, Mister W.

    • Jude Collins August 14, 2014 at 1:19 pm #

      We do not deserve you, Perkin – we are not worthy….

    • paddykool August 14, 2014 at 2:00 pm #

      Ah Perkin… you are the donkey’s cojones alright……!

      • Norma wilson August 14, 2014 at 6:55 pm #

        Paddy Kool
        Sat down to reply to you, lost the lot, no saved button, no retrieve button, no history button?
        Have gone to get a G&T, am exhausted.
        God only knows where it has gone, maybe it’s just as well, for I let a few cats out of the bag, so to speak, to all those doubters, still Norma, with out the N still female. Still supporting Israel.
        Peace and love to you all Norma (N)

  4. Anthony Leisegang August 14, 2014 at 11:47 am #

    Oil and the creed of the Muslim Brotherhood backed by Russia.

  5. Norma wilson August 14, 2014 at 12:20 pm #

    A Reckless and Irresponsible ‘Superpower’

    The consequence of Washington’s reckless and irresponsible political and military interventions in Iraq, Libya, and Syria has been to unleash evil. The various sects that lived in peace under the rule of Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, and Assad are butchering one another, and a new group, ISIS, is in the process of creating a new state out of parts of Iraq and Syria.

    The turmoil brought into the Middle East by the Bush and Obama regimes has meant death and displacement for millions and untold future deaths. As I write 40,000 Iraqis are stranded on a mountain top without water awaiting death at the hands of ISIS, a creation of US meddling.

    The reality in the Middle East stands in vast contradiction to the stage managed landing of George W. Bush on the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln where Bush declared “Mission Accomplished” on May 1, 2003. The mission that Washington accomplished was to wreck the Middle East and the lives of millions of people and to destroy America’s reputation in the process. Thanks to the demonic neoconservative Bush regime, today America is regarded by the rest of the world as the greatest threat to world peace.

    The Clinton regime’s attack on Serbia set the pattern. Bush upped the ante with Washington’s naked aggression against Afghanistan, which Washington clothed in Orwellian language–”Operation Enduring Freedom.”

    Washington brought ruin, not freedom, to Afghanistan. After 13 years of blowing up the country, Washington is now withdrawing, the “superpower” having been defeated by a few thousand lightly armed Taliban, but leaving a wasteland behind for which Washington will accept no responsibility.

    Another source of endless Middle East turmoil is Israel whose theft of Palestine is
    Washington-enabled. In the middle of Israel’s latest attack on civilians in Gaza, the US Congress passed resolutions in support of Israel’s war crimes and voted hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for Israel’s ammunition. Here we witness Great Moral America 100 percent in support of unambiguous war crimes against essentially defenseless people.

    When Israel murders women and children, Washington calls it “Israel’s right to defend their own country”–a country that Israel stole from Palestinians–but when Palestinians retaliate Washington calls it “terrorism.” By supporting Israel, declared to be a terrorist state by a few moral governments that still exist, and accused of war crimes by the UN General Secretary, Washington is in violation of its own laws against supporting terrorist states.

    Of course, Washington itself is the leading terrorist state. Therefore, it is illegal under US law for Washington to support itself. Washington, however, does not accept law, neither domestic nor international, as a constraint on its actions. Washington is “exceptional, indispensable.” No one else counts. No law, no Constitution, and no humane consideration has authority to constrain Washington’s will. In its claims Washington surpasses those of the Third Reich itself.

    As horrific as is Washington’s recklessness toward the Middle East, Washington’s recklessness toward Russia is many orders of magnitude greater. Washington has
    convinced nuclear armed Russia that Washington is planning a nuclear first strike.

    It is difficult to imagine a more irresponsible act than to convince Russia that Washington intends to hit Russia with a preemptive first strike. One of Putin’s advisers has explained to the Russian media Washington’s first strike intentions, and a member of the Russian Duma has made a documented presentation of Washington’s first strike intentions. By marshaling the evidence, I have pointed out in my own columns that it is impossible for Russia to avoid this conclusion.

    China is aware that China faces the same threat from Washington. China’s response to Washington’s war plans against China was to demonstrate how China’s nuclear forces would be used in response to Washington’s attack on China to destroy the US. China made this public, hoping to create opposition among Americans to Washington’s war plans against China. Like Russia, China is a rising country that does not need war in order to succeed.

    The only country on earth that needs war is Washington, and that is because Washington’s goal is the neoconservative one of exercising hegemony over the world.

    Prior to the Bush and Obama regimes, every previous US president went to great efforts to avoid telegraphing any nuclear threat. US war doctrine was careful to keep
    nuclear weapons limited to retaliation in the event the US suffered a nuclear attack.
    The purpose of nuclear forces was to prevent the use of such weapons. The reckless George W. Bush regime elevated nuclear weapons to preemptive first use, thus destroying the constraint placed on the use of nuclear weapons.

    The overriding purpose of the Reagan administration was to end the cold war and, thereby, the threat of nuclear war. The George W. Bush regime, together with the Obama regime’s demonization of Russia, has overturned President Reagan’s unique achievement and made nuclear war likely.

    When the incompetent Obama regime decided to overthrow the democratically elected government in Ukraine and install a puppet government of Washington’s choosing, the incompetent Obama State Department, run by neoconservative ideologues, forgot that the eastern and southern portions of Ukraine consist of former Russian provinces that were attached to the Ukraine Soviet Socialist Republic by Communist Party leaders when Ukraine and Russia were part of the same country–the Soviet Union. When the Russophobic stooges that Washington installed in Kiev demonstrated in word and deed their hostility to the Russian population, the former Russian provinces declared their desire to return to mother Russia. This is not surprising, nor is it something that can be blamed on Russia.

    Crimea succeeded in returning to Russia, where Crimea resided since the 1700s, but Putin, hoping to defuse the propaganda war that Washington was mounting against him did not accept the pleas from the other former Russian provinces. Consequently, Washington’s stooges in Kiev felt free to attack the protesting provinces and have been following the Israeli policy of attacking civilian populations, civilian residences, and civilian infrastructure.

    The presstitute Western media ignored the facts and accused Russia of invading and annexing parts of Ukraine. This lie is comparable to the lies that US Secretary of State Colin Powell told the UN about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in behalf of the criminal Bush regime, lies that Colin Powell later apologized for to no avail as Iraq had been destroyed by his lies.

    When the Malaysian airliner was destroyed, before any facts were known Russia was blamed. The British media was especially primed to blame Russia almost the instant it was known the airliner was downed. I heard the BBC’s gross misrepresentation and blatant lies on American National Public Radio, and only the Daily Mail’s propagandistic account was worse. The entire “news” event has the appearance of orchestration prior to the event, which, of course, suggests that Washington was behind it.

    The airliner deaths became all important for Washington’s propaganda war. The 290 casualties are unfortunate, but they are a small fraction of the deaths that Israel was inflicting on Palestinians at the same moment without provoking any protests from Western governments, as distinct from Western peoples in the streets, people whose protests were conveniently suppressed for Israel by Western security forces.

    Washington used the downing of the airliner, which probably was Washington’s responsibility, as an excuse for another round of sanctions and to pressure its European puppets to join the sanctions with sanctions of their own, which Washington’s EU puppets did.

    Washington relies on accusations and insinuations and refuses to release the evidence from the satellite photos, because the photos do not support Washington’s lies. Facts
    are not permitted to interfere with Washington’s demonization of Russia any more than facts interfered with Washington’s demonization of Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Iran.

    Twenty-two reckless and irresponsible US senators have introduced the “Russian Aggression Prevention Act of 2014,” US Senate bill 2277 sponsored by Senator Bob Corker, who well represents in his ignorance and stupidity the majority of the American population. Corker’s bill is a mindless piece of legislation designed to start a war that would be likely to leave no survivors. Idiotic Americans will elect any fool to power.

    The belief that Russia is responsible for the downed Malaysian airliner has become fact in Western capitals despite the total absence of even a tiny scrap of evidence in behalf of the claim. Moreover, even it the accusation were true, is one airliner worth a World War?

    The UK Defense Committee has concluded that a broke and militarily impotent UK must “focus on the defense of Europe against Russia.” The military spending drums, if not the war drums, are beating and the entire West has joined in. A militarily impotent Britain is going to defend Europe from a non-existent, although much provoked, attack from the Russian bear.

    Russia can dispose of Great Britain with 2 or 3 ICMBs. What kind of insane government other than a dispensable American puppet state would get out front advocating “toughness” to Russia, a country that has announced no threat to the UK or Europe?

    US and NATO military dignitaries and the Pentagon chief are issuing Russia Threat Warnings based on alleged but non-existent Russian troop-buildups on Ukraine’s border. It has been established in the corrupt Western Ministry of Propaganda that it is proof that Russia is the villain if Russia defends the Russian populations in Ukraine from military attack from Washington’s stooge government in Kiev.

    Washington’s propaganda campaign has succeeded. Polls show that 69 percent of Americans now regard Russia as a threat, and that the confidence of Russians in American leadership has vanished.

    Russians and their government observe precisely the identical demonization of their country and their leader as they observed of Iraq and Saddam Hussein, of Libya and Gaddafi, of Syria and Assad, and of Afghanistan and the Taliban just prior to military assaults on these countries by the West. For a Russian, the safest conclusion from the evidence is that Washington intends war on Russia.

    It is my opinion that the irresponsibility and recklessness of the Obama regime is without precedent. Never before has the United States government or the government of any nuclear power gone to such great efforts to convince another nuclear power that that power was being set up for attack. It is difficult to imagine a more provocative act that more endangers life on earth.

    Republicans want to sue or to impeach Obama over relatively inconsequential issues, such as ObamaCare. Why don’t Republicans want to impeach Obama over such a critical issue as threatening the world with nuclear armageddon?

    The answer is that the Republicans are as crazed as the Democrats. Their leaders, such as John McCain and Lindsay Graham, are determined that “we stand up to the Russians!” Wherever one looks in American politics one sees crazed people, psychopaths and sociopaths who should not be in political office.

    Washington long ago gave up diplomacy. Washington relies on force and intimidation. The US government is utterly devoid of judgment. This is why polls show that the rest of the world regards the US government as the greatest threat to world peace.

    Washington’s puppet states–all of Europe, Japan, Canada, and Australia–enable Washington’s unrivaled danger to the world by their support of Washington’s agenda of exercising hegemony over the entire world.

    Any survivors of the armageddon toward which Washington is rushing the world will know who to blame.

    The 100th anniversary of World War I is upon us. And we are repeating its folly. WWI
    destroyed a civilized Western world, and it was the work of a mere handful of people.
    The result was Lenin, the Soviet Union, Hitler, the rise of American Imperialism, Korea, Vietnam, and resurrected conflict between Washington and Russia that President Reagan had ended.

    As Stephen Starr has pointed out on my website, if merely 10% of the nuclear weapons in the US and Russian arsenals are used, life on earth terminates.

    Dear readers, ask yourselves, when has Washington told you anything that was not a lie?

    Do you believe that Washington’s lies and propaganda about the Malaysian airliner and Ukraine are worth risking life on earth? Are you so stupid or gullible that you cannot recognize another Washington lie like Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Iranian nukes, Assad’s use of chemical weapons? Do you stupidly accept the latest Washington lie.

    I can answer for my readers. No, they don’t believe one word of it.

    Tags: Middle East

    • Jude Collins August 14, 2014 at 1:14 pm #

      All your own work, Norma?

      • Iolar August 14, 2014 at 1:29 pm #

        “I have pointed out in my own colums” (?) Source, please.

  6. Norma wilson August 14, 2014 at 12:30 pm #

    Jude,
    This was copied and pasted, I wish I could write like that, but a most interesting piece?
    Norma

    • Jude Collins August 14, 2014 at 1:15 pm #

      Maybe remember to give source next time, Norma – means people can verify if they choose…

  7. Iolar August 14, 2014 at 1:19 pm #

    It certainly is beyond satire and belief when one considers the death and destruction that took place in order to deal with “weapons of mass destruction”, initiate “regime change” and to make the world a safer place? Cooler heads did try to prevail, for example, I quote part of a briefing made by Hans Blix to the Security Council – 14 February 2003:

    “Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming…
    How much, if any, is left of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and related proscribed items and programmes? So far, UNMOVIC has not found any such weapons, only a small number of empty chemical munitions, which should have been declared and destroyed. Another matter – and one of great significance – is that many proscribed weapons and items are not accounted for. To take an example, a document, which Iraq provided, suggested to us that some 1,000 tonnes of chemical agent were “unaccounted for”. One must not jump to the conclusion that they exist. However, that possibility is also not excluded. If they exist, they should be presented for destruction. If they do not exist, credible evidence to that effect should be presented.”

    Without waiting for credible evidence, well the rest is history. In recent days, however, it was some of our local representatives who were calling for parliament to be recalled while advocating bombing raids in northern Iraq. The arms manufacturers, the mercenaries and the swelling ranks of “security consultants” cannot get enough of this. More money from America and the exchange rate is the icing on the cake. Is the world a safer place today? Are there less weapons of mass destruction in the world? I leave you with part of the speech made by Tim Collins as reported by Sarah Oliver, a journalist on 19 March 2003.

    “We go to Iraq to liberate not to conquer. We will not fly our flags in their country. We are entering Iraq to free a people and the only flag which will be flown in that ancient land is their own. Show respect for them.
    There are some who are alive at this moment who will not be alive shortly. Those who do not wish to go on that journey, we will not send. As for the others I expect you to rock their world. Wipe them out if that is what they choose. But if you are ferocious in battle remember to be magnanimous in victory…
    Regarding the use by Saddam of chemical or biological weapons, it is not a question of if,it’s a question of when. We know he has already devolved the decision to lower commanders, and that means he has already taken the decision himself. If we survive the first strike we will survive the attack.
    As for ourselves, let’s bring everyone home and leave Iraq a better place for us having been there.”

  8. paddykool August 14, 2014 at 1:41 pm #

    Yes Jude. It is so very transparent. Charity now means …what’s in it for me ?Of course , you could say that’s what politics is always about.The making of choices. The cutting of deals…right?
    Our morality can go out the window if our comfort is threatened too. At the moment America has no intention of getting its troops involved in any more complicated unwinnable conflicts. A nice neat black and white war is one thing…a chess game. The days of neat little set-pieces really ended with the Vietnam conflict when the Americans finally realised that these modern conflicts are essentially exercises in chasing water with a colander as a scoop. This isn’t World War Two and welcoming the heroes home any more.These conflicts are not popular at home because no one wants to see sons arriving back in the middle of the night in body bags . There is never any “prize” at the end either . Iraq turned into a nightmare too and only encouraged more conflict for the future. It took the likes Tony Blair’s mad crusading Christianity and Bush’s adventurism to get us all into that one .
    The Israel slaughter is a case in point. there is too much American investment to mess up there even though the humanitarian thing to do is to sanction Israel for its wholesale slaughter. That’s going to be hard to do when America is the one benefitting. Obama doesn’t want to do anything there, so a little humanitarian adventure up some mountain is designed to make America look as though they’re not really sitting on their hands .The preference is to retreat back into isolationism.I suppose if you lived in a wee town in the Mid West, you might agree.What’s all that got to do with me, anyway? A lot of Americans never ,ever leave their homeland in their lifetimes except maybe to get killed or maimed in the army.. Much was expected from Obama but it’s easy to understand that America will essentially not do itself any long -term favours by being seen as the world’s big policeman . Those days are gone too. .now ..if the oil is threatened in any way , that might make a difference alright . Germany’s reliance on gas has tended to colour their relationship with Russia, for example and that’s given Putin plenty of wriggle room.
    In Gaza, those beleaguered Palestinians have no such “prizes” to give out other than their lives and the lives of their children.As long as the world is divided by these types of Peace Walls each will see tha ones at the other side of the wall as a natural enemy .A threat..

  9. paddykool August 14, 2014 at 2:30 pm #

    Norma , that piece you found out there in the ether is a bit of a tin-hat paranoid rant that any of our mad conspiracy theorists and UFO gazers would be proud to own . It’s a way of weaving a story with bits of truth and large dollops of fear and paranoia… I’m not sure whether or not you pasted it up in an ironic way or not but it does contain the following which i’m sure you have found remiss in your past postings..

    “.Another source of endless Middle East turmoil is Israel whose theft of Palestine is
    Washington-enabled. In the middle of Israel’s latest attack on civilians in Gaza, the US Congress passed resolutions in support of Israel’s war crimes and voted hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for Israel’s ammunition. Here we witness Great Moral America 100 percent in support of unambiguous war crimes against essentially defenseless people.

    When Israel murders women and children, Washington calls it “Israel’s right to defend their own country”–a country that Israel stole from Palestinians–but when Palestinians retaliate Washington calls it “terrorism.” By supporting Israel, declared to be a terrorist state by a few moral governments that still exist, and accused of war crimes by the UN General Secretary, Washington is in violation of its own laws against supporting terrorist states.”..
    .
    Now you have implied with some gusto that you support the Israeli action whole-heartedly when many of us have argued against it and your defence is that basically you do this because the Palestinians are …muslims…and possibly because they are not white…?.. That seems to be the gist of it…I may have misinterpreted your meaning, of course.. Now if your next door neighbour was a Jew, or a Jain , a Muslim or a Buddhist and was any colour you might choose…., why do you think that it follows that you would have to put up with Sharia Law? Why should you want his religion or his lifestyle?

    You know already that many people we already live with in Ireland have problems enough putting up with our present civic laws anyway , but we rub along generally and occasionally have to lock up the odd one that breaks those laws or fine them. You don’t have to drive recklessly because your neighbour does …or fiddle your tax because he does….
    Why do you think that we’d have to abide by another set of laws or even take on a religion we didn’t want? Do you really think we are going to let a bunch of stone -age uneducated thinkers steal away our liberties? We are already fighting back a tide of mad Creationism .do you think we’re going to sit back and have someone or some group tell us that the moon is made of cream cheese? i really don’t think there’ll be much traction in that scenario….It would be like trying to get me to listen to Daniel O’Donnell….Don’t even think about it ….

  10. Norma wilson August 14, 2014 at 3:49 pm #

    DW Focus

    Entire Family of Dead Palestinians Found to be Alive
    Featured Media Critiques5 hours ago

    The New Statesman‘s almost 4,000 word report from Gaza by Donald Macintyre graphically illustrates the unreliability of Palestinian casualty reports. The report includes this paragraph:

    At least Yasser did not suffer the fate of another single survivor brought into al-Shifa Hospital, ten-year-old Mohammed Badran. He was blinded in an Israeli air strike but at the hospital he seemed unaware that his entire family had been killed when a missile destroyed their home at the Nuseirat refugee camp. Not understanding the nature of his injury, he repeatedly asked staff, “Why have you switched the lights off?”
    However, at the very end of Macintyre’s piece is an update which tells us that Badran’s “entire family” were not, in fact, killed in that air strike:

    Update, 12 August: Mohammed Badran’s family turned out not to have been killed in the strike on his home, as had been reported here. In the confusion of a packed Shifa Hospital, the doctors treating him in the burns unit thought he had lost his parents and all his siblings. In fact, although seven of the Badrans’ nine children were also injured in the attack, including their 17-year-old daughter Eman, who is now also in Shifa with serious leg injuries, Mohammed’s parents Tagorid and Nidal Badran both survived to take care of him. That is until Nidal, 44, a policeman, was killed in another air strike, this time on the Qassam mosque in Nusseirat refugee camp, in the early hours of Saturday, 9 August, as he prepared to attend dawn prayers. On 12 August, I was told that Mohammed was being referred to a Spanish hospital for treatment.
    Between the fog of war and Hamas’s deliberate distortion of casualty figures, can any of these reports on the alleged deaths of alleged Palestinian civilians be trusted?

    Like what you just read? Sign up to get more:

    Image: CC BY-NC-SA HonestReporting, Jared Rodriguez/Truthout (flickr)

  11. Norma wilson August 14, 2014 at 3:53 pm #

    DW Focus

    Rudoren: FPA Statement on Hamas is “Dangerous”
    Featured Media Critiques7 hours ago

    A bold statement from the Foreign Press Association harshly condemning Hamas for abusing journalists in Gaza has fallen flat in some quarters of the press corps.

    New York Times Bureau Chief Jodi Rudoren not only questioned the statement’s validity but also claimed it could be “dangerous” to the credibility of some of the reporting in the region.

    In a tweet to reporter Josh Mitnick, Rudoren claimed, “Every reporter I’ve met who was in Gaza during war says this Israeli/now FPA narrative of Hamas harassment is nonsense.”

    According to Haaretz reporter Matthew Kalman, Rudoren called it dangerous in an e-mail exchange with the FPA following the tweet. She elaborated to Haaretz on why it was dangerous:

    I found the wording of the statement overly broad, and, especially given the narrative playing out in some social media circles regarding foreign correspondents being taken in by the Hamas narrative and not reporting on the war fully or fairly, I was concerned that it undermined what I consider to have been brave and excellent work by very talented people,” she said.
    So according to Rudoren’s tweet, it’s simply the “Israeli narrative” that reporters were being harassed by Hamas. And the FPA had adopted the Israeli position.

    For Rudoren, what’s really dangerous about the FPA statement is that it proves Israel was right. And that, apparently, makes it “nonsense.”

    However, the Haaretz article also made clear that reporters who covered Gaza during the war were themselves divided over the issue of Hamas intimidation:

    Reporters who spoke to Haaretz on condition of anonymity insist that they did not experience or hear of the kind of Hamas actions described in the FPA statement. Anecdotal evidence suggests they may well be in the majority.

    But other reporters did experience threats and intimidation from Hamas – enough to convince the FPA that they were not isolated incidents.
    Alan Johnson, a research fellow at BICOM, compiled a long list of these incidents. Any of these cases could have a chilling effect on other reporters covering the war. And how many more took place that weren’t documented?

    And since Gaza has no provisions for free speech, any reporter who ventures into the area must take personal safety into consideration whenever he or she writes anything that goes against the Hamas propaganda line.

    Even if no direct threat is made, Hamas still maintains enough control of the area to bring any reporting originating there into question, whether Rudoren wants to believe it or not.

    Reporter Michael J. Totten, who experienced a similar situation with Hezbollah in Lebanon, said reporting from areas like Gaza, where a form of censorship exists, constitutes a form of journalistic malpractice.

    I understand why these reporters didn’t write about this while they were in Gaza. They could have been kidnapped or killed. Perhaps their editors back home kept quiet for the same reason, to protect their employees and freelancers.

    There is a solution to this conundrum, however. Don’t send reporters to places where they are intimidated into lying by omission or commission.
    And that brings us back the question of what’s really dangerous when it comes to the FPA’s statement. It’s not that people will come to question the reporting that’s coming out of Gaza, as Rudoren suggests.

    What’s really dangerous is that prominent members of the media, most notably Rudoren herself, are more concerned with “the narrative playing out in some social media circles” than with the integrity shown by the FPA.

    What’s really nonsense – the fact that Hamas intimidates journalists or Rudoren’s dismissal of the claim?

  12. Ceannaire August 14, 2014 at 4:42 pm #

    Norma, with respect, your sources are biased. You are copying and pasting from a pro Israel site.

    Imagine if I quoted from Republican News to defend Sinn Féin to you.

    You are merely reading what you want to read – essentially you are confirming your own bias. I’m afraid you really must try harder.

    On a number of times on here you have said you would destroy us all, if it came to it. I’m more afraid of you, a professed Christian, than Islam.

  13. bf_bhoy August 14, 2014 at 5:09 pm #

    found that original article posted here

    http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/08/08/washington-threatens-world-paul-craig-roberts/

  14. ANOTHER JUDE August 15, 2014 at 12:12 am #

    America is a wonderful country, a fantastic idea, every man a king, every man equal, yet it has a deplorable record as far as foreign policy goes. Sticking it`s big nose in where it is not wanted, bullying Cuba for decades, stirring up a hornets nest in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, even in Ukraine they filled the people`s heads with white mice then blamed the big bad Ruskies. Locking people up without trial then wondering why they are so hated. As for Britain, their levels of political cant are well known to the Paddies, saying one thing whilst doing the opposite. Praising their brave troops as they kick in people`s front doors and drag their sons away. Always in overseas lands of course, Afghanistan, Iraq, Ireland. Hypocrites.

  15. Virginia August 15, 2014 at 1:53 am #

    With respect, Jude, Colonel Collins speech was epic. Brilliant actually, even Americans read the speech which is a feat of genius. Sadly, the replies to this column not so much.

    • Jude Collins August 15, 2014 at 1:58 pm #

      Actually Virginia, I have rarely heard or read a more half-baked Henry V/Shakespeare pile of absolute nonsense posing as gallantry. I think whoever wrote it – probably not him – should be shot at dawn

      • Virginia August 16, 2014 at 3:47 am #

        True Henry the V was a bit much.