At the Nuremberg trials, it was deliberately decided that those selected for the visible judgement on aggressive war would represent a cross section of the Nazi leadership, including each branch of the Armed services. It was thought very important to include a representative of the journalists who had whipped up the hatred.
I think that was wise. I do not suspect we will ever see a war crimes trial, despite Polanski’s best efforts. But there are so many arch propagandists for the war in Iraq that it would be hard to know who to pick. Aaronovitch, Cohen, Phillips?
But I think possibly the worst offender is our old friend Frank “Goebbels” Gardner. Yet again his grave but reassuring features have been delivering smooth propaganda, this time from the comic opera re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reinvasion of parts of Helmand – an operation which is costing the UK taxpayer £2 billion this month, and the US taxpayer very much more.
I rather like the comic opera Afghan General they have fronting the operation, to restore the “Legitimate authority” of electoral fraudster Karzai. The “Taliban” have of course sensibly melted away. There are however plenty of civilians still around for the Americans to blow up. Twelve at once is unusual, but they are being killed all the time.
One of Gardner’s favourite tricks is to call ordinary Afghan courtyard houses “Taliban compounds”. It is not a compound, it is a house. Perhaps Afghans don’t live in things we would recognise in Acacia Drive – but they are their homes.
Anyway, let’s all get out the bunting and celebrate a great national victory over some empty houses and cowering civilians. Let today be known forever as Frank Gardner day. Gentlemen of England now abed are really missing out on this one.
Meanwhile the Afghan resistance will avoid pitched battles and pick off our poor troops slowly and patiently, until the day we can’t afford it any more and leave. Karzai will leave too, to live in Geneva and count his cash. Alistair Campbell will tell us how much better life has become for the people of Afghanistan.
Sir Jock Stirrup (a real comic opera name) has just told us that the missile killing twelve civilians was a setback, be we would get over it.
The twelve won’t get over it, of course.
Probably some social misfit of unstable mind somewhere in England has been nudged towards a violent response. All for the good – that will help keep the whole ultra profitable security behemoth rumbling on.
The sorrow and grief, these black evenings,
Eyes full of tears and times full of sadness,
These burnt hearts, the killing of youths,
These unfulfilled expectations and unmet hopes of brides,
With a hatred for war, I call time and again,
I wait for peace for the grief-stricken Pashtuns
Zarlasht Hafeez
“Feminists don’t like girlie magazines. Yes they think it’s degrading for women to be controlled by patriarchal religious laws, but they’re quite happy to degrade themselves as much as they want and more.”
Well, at least it’s themselves who make the choices, about what degrades them and whether they’ll do it; that seems preferrable to having somebody else doing it for them ? (insert here the argument about how economic forces falsify this statement).
Anno, I don’t agree with your comments on the nature of “feminists”, but I do think you have a point about the way some of their arguments have been taken up by the effort to persuade people here in favour of the western military’s presence & actions in other peoples’ countries.
All _sorts_ of justifications are offered, after all. “Bloodlust”, you say ? Not in “the people”, generally, I really don’t think. I think a lot of people are fairly inert, right enough – people do seem to have discomfort about things like criticising the government in time of war ? – but I don’t think very many people actively wanted anything like what was done in their name, or take any joy in it. Most of the evidence to the contrary seems to be opinions provided by the media people. Or perhaps someone could argue that the people I meet aren’t representative, I don’t know.
“The status of women in Afghanistan is immensely higher than the status of women in the UK, who frequently go out, get drunk, get raped, take the morning after pill, spread HIV, and go back to work on Monday morning thinking of themselves nearly equivalent to the Virgin Mary.
Stick to designing bikes Mr Moulton, you seem to know more about them than Afghan women.”
I wonder which piece of illiberal mediaeval excrement came up with that comment. You must be so proud of your readership, Craig. Sharia for an Independent Scotland campaign next?
Hark, what’s that, anno? Another response that refuses to answer these several questions. I think I am moving you from my “religionist” to my “wilful troublemaker” column.
Of course the government and war supporters appeal to women’s rights to justify the war. But that is not at all the same thing as genuine feminists supporting the war independently. Your quarrel should be with the liars in government, and not feminists per se. I’d say most feminists are on the left, and so would generally be against the war in Afghanistan, although I appreciate that won’t always hold true.
I think your mistake is that you equate feminism with liberalism, and all the other things you think are opposed to your faith, and you roll them up into a single “non-Islamic” bloc and make them responsible for everything you are against.
You repeat your central believe that the British people have “bloodlust” – a strong charge to make – but you won’t justify it. Feminism in itself is not pro-war, however much you disapprove of (Western) feminism.
Finally, given that you won’t distance yourself from your earlier comments – the strong implication that rape victims must bear some responsibility because they chose their permissive lifestyles – I can’t help reach the same conclusion as others on this thread. You appear to be seriously misogynist in your views, which will not stand you in good stead here.
“Can’t help it if you can’t connect with my point of view, but, did you know that before the British Raj 80% of India as was, was literate. AFTER THEY LEFT, LESS THAN 20%” – “Anno”
Could you prove that, you inbred twat?
“Can’t help it if you can’t connect with my point of view, but, did you know that before the British Raj 80% of India as was, was literate. AFTER THEY LEFT, LESS THAN 20%” – “Anno”
By the way, I take it you’re in the 20%?
Ah, not long after Eddie decides that the whole of the blog’s readership is supportive of Anno’s position on rape, our newer troublemaker decides that Anno is also representative of Craig’s views.
Logical errors abound in some of the trolls here, sadly!
I bet a fair portion of the readership here do agree with him/her. All those slags in the Ministry of Sound? Deserve to be killed, don’t they?
Jon: of course feminists (who are really also humanists) would be against dropping bombs on people.
Who is ‘alan campbell’ (jon, I don’t think he’s eddie) and why is he getting away with such repulsive statements as ‘inbred twat’?
I may not agree with anno, but I defend etc etc. He sometimes engages, I hope he will feel cheered by this, not driven into a corner.
drat, I am sounding like Clark (icon blowing loving kisses at Clark). For the record, I have quite a great (perhaps Irish) temper and am nowhere near as nice as I sound.
Because I zecretly believe in a perpetual war between people of different melatonin levels. Mwahaa!
If that Brute Anderson is advocating the use of torture, is he not committing an offence?
Shouldn’t the police be having a word with him about his behaviour?
Perhaps someone needs to make a complaint?
It has been alleged in a number of highly reliable media loci that Mister Francis Gardner is deep enmeshed in the SIS, so deeply enmeshed that it is hard to begin to differentiate between a salaried Albert Embankment Officer and Mister Francis Gardner.
Discuss.
I’ve never been in any doubt that He was a spook. It’s kinda obvious.
He’a another with one of those curious career trajectories.
In many ways it looks as if spooks and spook recruits are taking over the country, there’s so many of them in media and politics.
The worrying things about many sppoks is that they’re seriously deranged individuals.
Explains why we’re in the mess we’re in.
Sorry, “technicolour”, but “Anno’s” comments about Western women are far more “repulsive” than my childish insults. The fact that you don’t see that says quite a lot about you.
That was me.
Jon
I am heartened by your responses to anno. I thought the fact that he had gone unchallenged at first reflected badly on Craig’s regulars, but I was wrong, so well done for attacking his repulsive views. I am not Mr Campbell, only myself, albeit pseudonymous like most here.
I always have this sneaky feeling that if,say, a dirty bomb were to be set off in downtown Manhattan, a big chunk of the readership on this site would let out an almighty cheer of happiness. Just a feeling. And that community of extremists, I’m afraid, is who Craig, in his bitterness at mistreatment by the FCO, has ended up communing with. A similar path of nutterdom as Shayler, Tomlinson, Icke etc.
@ alan campbell
Craig’s case against the FCO was their complicity in torture.
The judges agreed with Craig.
So how is he a nutter?
Why aren’t you a nutter for disagreeing with what’s now pretty obvious?
People tend not to have a lot of sympathy for bullies who get their comeuppance.
That’s a natural human response.
What I find strange is the inordinate amount of sympathy extended to 911 compared to the relatively little sympathy to the victims of US terrorism over the years.
That’s an astounding level of hypocrisy, enaged in by media too.
So even those well-spoken nicely dressed people who smile at you from the telly are complicit in the evil and responsible for it too.
There’s plenty of Lord Haw Haws doing the rounds on British telly, and every one of them is as gulit as the American terrorists themselves, so they’d need to watch themselves too.
We won’t always live under the rule of these evil people who govern us today.
Thanks Eddie. I tend to try to extend a hand of understanding to people who I completely disagree with, and anno seemed to be prevaricating on the rape issue. I think that a non-confrontational tone can sometimes win people around.
It’s similar to my meeting with a representive from a group advocating Sharia law for the UK. Some members of the public just fell out with them, and some threats were issued; such responses just harden already entrenched views. However pointing out the logical contradictions – as with anno’s concern for women conflicting with his distaste for Western female empowerment – can product results in the long term.
Incidentally I didn’t intend to imply that you and Alan are the same person – just that it is a mistake to assume that the readers here, or Craig, are in step with anno’s misogyny.
Jon
I did distance myself from your concoctions about rape. So given nothing. I compared Islamic societies which protect women with Western societies which expose women.Nothing there puts any blame on the women themselves however hard you labour the point. It’s a bit thick of you to keep trying to put words in my mouth all day, if you don’t mind my saying.
The fact remains that there was a very strong feminist element in the original invasion of Afghanistan that wanted to give stick to Afghan male chauvinism.
That motive was flawed, in my opinion, but it continues to be used as a justification for escalating the war. I repeat, if they can’t change the Afghan people, they will carry on killing them until there are no more Afghans left. Feminism = don’t mess with us = ethnic cleansing of those who disagree with us = nice.
How are the Afghans going to be ethnically cleansed? Not by our nice army boys and their nice New Labour political allies in the war against Islam, the feminists, but by a Hitler-style rounding up of Taliban supporter- suspects who can be handed over to Dostum and slaughtered as previously in detention camps. Nice. Nice Nice.
What’s the technical term for that? miso-murder of Muslims? Prat!
Perhaps things might become clearer if Anno would like to name some names, say who he thinks some of these ‘feminists’ are ?
@Anno, you’re dodging the questions here. I am not at all putting works in your mouth, nor concocting views you do not have. You said:
“The status of women in Afghanistan is immensely higher than the status of women in the UK, who … get raped”.
I am glad that you now say “nothing there [i.e. that you’ve said] puts any blame on the women themselves”, which is a start, though I am now left wondering why you mentioned rape in the first place. It is not unreasonable for me to point this out, especially since several other people are taking you to task for it!
My position on conflating disingenuous feminist positions (i.e the “liberation” of Afghan women) with genuine feminism still stands. I maintain therefore that you should have no qualms with feminists in general, especially since most of them will agree with you about the war anyway.
You’ve not responded to the point about your holding all Britons responsible for the invasion. White British people do not greet you enthusiastically as a code to support the war. If they greet you it is to say hello, first and foremost; as a white Briton myself, when I say hello to my Jamaican, Indian and Pakistani neighbours, I am (a) saying hello, and (b) encouraging an atmosphere of multicultural trust. The idea that I might be gleefully enjoying the violence of my own government is ridiculous, and I reject the accusation completely.
I reject your rejection completely.
the people of this country do not like the cleanness of real Islam. they don’t mind the ground down versions you find in some Muslims countries which have been battered by colonialism before.
They really resent the burka, badly, and it makes them happy when the people of the burkha suffer, badly.
The people of Lot complained about clean people who did not engage in sodomy like themselves. their city and their land was turned upside down at the site of the dead sea. My prophet and his army , peace be upon him, covered their heads and faces and shame to be so close to destruction of the people of Lot.
Homosexuality and feminism are two sides of the same coin. While the men are engaging with each other,the ladies indulge themselves free from the commands of Allah. What they want to do, do. Give me a hard time, please. I am a miso-feminist, unashamedly. I condemn the sexual perfidy and destruction of the family of UK society, utterly.
The British public wring their hands and cry crocodile tears about genocide. but they know full well, whether it is Karadic in Bosnia, the Lords Resistance Army in Sudan, or criminal warlords in Afghanistan, ethnic cleansing of Muslims is being perpetrated time and time again by the superpowers through these mercenaries.
The whole world knows it, even if you don’t know.
“the people of this country … They really resent the burka, badly, and it makes them happy when the people of the burkha suffer, badly.”
Not all of them. Some of them _wear_ it, FFS. The “people of the country” are more varied than you’re saying.
anno,
Most people become aware of their sexuality at puberty. The vast majority are heterosexual. Something like around 5% at a guess are obviously homosexual and they always will be. Its not something they can do anything about. Its not a learnt experience. Its genetic.
There’s probably another 5% who are unclear of their sexuality – or bisexual.
Whilst I am a strong believer in the advantages of being brought up in a family, if a gay man or woman attempts to live a lie, by suppressing their sexuality and marrying it is usually disastrous for everyone.
The Muslim approach to homosexuality is blatantly wrong. There is nothing wrong with being a homosexual, and religions that condemn it are condemning 5-10% of their congregation through no fault of their own.
Tony
I don’t believe that the causes of homosexuality are genetic, rather, social and psychological. Just as real and unavoidable, for many people, in the sick environment we find ourselves in. Islam fosters trust between the sexes and sorts out the brain.
Feminism by contrast defines empowerment of women in terms of gender conflict instead of gender cohesion. I would love women to be empowered in all spheres of life, including the spiritual, but all they can think of doing is destroying stability. The logic of their thinking leads them to destroying Islam. They are the major perpetrators of the wars of our time because they believe that Muslims’ following of God’s laws is an obstacle to their empowerment. 100000000000000000000000000000% wrong.
it does not surprise me at all to find that Craig has found stability and happiness with a Muslim sister. The perfidy of western woman is enough to drive any man insane.
@tony_opmoc – thanks for your post on the natural incidence of homosexuality. I wonder if it is somewhat environmental in nature, as opposed to completely genetic, but I think we’re agreed that being gay “just happens” and as such, we should accept it, however it is caused.