The Respectability of Torture
St Mary’s University College, Thurs 1st August, 7.30pm
Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, was a whistleblower who was removed from his ambassadorial post by Tony Blair for exposing the Tashkent regime‟s use of rape and systematic torture, including the boiling to death of political opponents. He has also spoken out against Central Asia‟s appalling dictatorships, regimes which are allies of the West, involved in torture and rendition, and was accused of threatening MI6‟s relationship with the CIA. Now a human rights activist, author and broadcaster, he outlines the dynamics of torture and the hypocrisy of incriminated Western governments.
My first public appearance for a while will be in Belfast on 1 August where I shall be giving a talk. Long term readers of this blog will recall that, while my focus is largely on international affairs, the domestic political achievements I most hope to see are a united Ireland and an independent Scotland.
@Fred “Your devolved parliaments would actually give you more self determination than the English rather than less though wouldn’t it?”
Yes that is very true – although devolution is not the same as self determination and the robber barrons of the Crown will hold on to dear life to their economic and energy levers. But I would fuly support an English parliament if the people of England want it.
I very much agree that many parts of Enland and elsewhere are suffering too because of the draining of wealth to London and the South east of England. Areas of west Wales and the Valleys region for example have a GDP figure which is 70% of the EU average while Inner London is a staggering 328%, poorer than than parts of Bulgaria, Romania and Poland, and poorer than the whole of the Czech Republic (80), Slovenia (84) and Slovakia (84) – all countries that were part of the East European Communist bloc that collapsed more than 20 years ago.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/welsh-valleys-bulgaria-romania-comparisons-2525215
@Herbie – America is not a democracy,it’s a Republic. There’s a massive difference
Chris Jones 18 Aug, 2013 – 6:33 pm
“is not a democracy,it’s a Republic. There’s a massive difference”
Massive? The behaviour of a society these days, in matters of most importance around trade/foreign policy etc, will not be determined by that difference. I suggest the difference is minimal and technical.
Well, Phil.
I wouldn’t expect any system to last forever. That’s not a very useful test.
I’m merely saying that even nutters can produce acceptable outcomes. You work with what you have. You can’t dream up systems. They’re a product of your material.
We went through all this shit in NI, a place crawling with nutters, and the outcome is much better in terms of civil liberties and representation than anything in England.
Yeah. OK, Chris.
It’s a republic, produced by nutters.
@fedup
“why would koreans give transparently korean propaganda to some foreign blogger to release?”
Sorry I realised the stupidity of my questions moments after posting it.
“I very much agree that many parts of Enland and elsewhere are suffering too because of the draining of wealth to London and the South east of England. Areas of west Wales and the Valleys region for example have a GDP figure which is 70% of the EU average while Inner London is a staggering 328%, poorer than than parts of Bulgaria, Romania and Poland, and poorer than the whole of the Czech Republic (80), Slovenia (84) and Slovakia (84) – all countries that were part of the East European Communist bloc that collapsed more than 20 years ago.”
Seems quite a difference in the standard of living between Wales and the South East of England too.
http://www.wales.com/en/content/cms/english/live/cost_of_living/cost_of_living.aspx
@Herbie – Far from being nutters they produced one of the best constitutions in the world in my opinion.
Maybe ‘two mole’ Prince Charles would tickle your fancy a bit more..
@Phil – I would argue that the difference is of course technical but that technical difference has been crucial..not sure how long it will last at current rates but it is important
Chris Jones 18 Aug, 2013 – 7:13 pm
“Far from being nutters they [US] produced one of the best constitutions in the world.”
What are you basing that on? Cause it certainly isn’t a results and outcomes driven analysis.
@Fred – I’m not sure what is the point you’re making. You’ve quoted pan Wales figures from a Visit Wales site (Welsh toursit board) – they are paid to market Wales…
Have you a direct link to what the average gross weekly earnings for the south east of England are in comparison? I’d be genuinely interested to know
Chris Jones 18 Aug, 2013 – 7:13 pm
“Far from being nutters they [US] produced one of the best constitutions in the world.”
Sorry my last response was even more rubbish than this one:
It might be one of the best but it is still useless at taming the worse excesses of empire. So nothing to cling to.
@Phil – Oh you know – the notion of inalianable rights, life ,liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And of course the deterrence to mob rule and the corruption of the democratic system
Herbie, you have hit the nail on the head and perspicaciously summed up the debate. As we debate, the mid east is in the grips of further deaths, and more destruction to ensure the longevity of the constructs of oppression for the perceived benefits of the Western corporates.
The people caught up in this mess in the mid east lack any kind of organisations that can constitute an effective opposition, to their tyrannical modes of governance that mistreats them and has blighted their lives. This leaving the only effective organisation for any opposition to be found in the religious domain that effectively means Islamic institutions set up in the countries in the mid east.
However, it should be noted that concurrently some of these religious organisations have also been co opted into the arrangements of power in certain other countries in the mid east, notable among these; Saudi, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait. Therefore any potential unrest caused by the other competing religious organisations in neighbouring countries (Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, ….) is an alarming development that cannot be allowed to come to fruition and change the current dynamics of the near feudal structures in that area.
As you have rightly pointed out; “you work with what you have”. These poor bastards have only their god and his word to rely on, and get through their daily drudgery and misery they have come to call life. Alas this is not to the liking of the so called liberal intelligentsia in our neck of the woods either. These so called liberals have replaced the atavistic imperial attitudes of “civilising the savages”, and replaced it with a convoluted interpretations of “democracy”, none being so apparent then the following;
Utter nonsensical bollocks filled with labels and sound bites, reflecting the worst of the propaganda shite spewed by the relevant organs; 24/7/52, deliberately ignoring the actualities and bloodshed in Egypt.
Herbie, Phil, Chris this is the very first time on this board in my experience there has been a suggestion of an explorations of an Islamic system of governance without the usual “epithets” getting thrown around to dismiss any alternative other than the flag waving apple pie loving genuflecting “democracy” models. I thank you for your contributions.
Chris Jones 18 Aug, 2013 – 7:26 pm
” the notion of inalianable rights, life ,liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And of course the deterrence to mob rule and the corruption of the democratic system”
Yes but those are words. Do you really consider the us constitution has detered the corruption of democracy?
@Phil – there is that granted – corruption has crawled in in the last 60 or so years especially but at least the constitution can hold those these things to account if there are enough good people ready to stand up for it
The BBC in the 6pm news were smearing the Muslim Brotherhood by saying they had Al Qaeda connections. Not mentioned in their latest website report though.
Egypt army chief al-Sisi: Room for all in Egypt
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23744435
The US stooge al Sisi was shown very much in charge.
Chris Jones 18 Aug, 2013 – 7:32 pm
“there is that granted – corruption has crawled in in the last 60 or so years especially but at least the constitution can hold those these things to account if there are enough good people ready to stand up for it”
There is a convincing argument that the senate was devised as a house to empower the wealthy classes thus subverting democracy from the go. Maybe ben or someelse more knowledgable than me will chime in on this.
But that is besides my point. What I don’t understand is the argument that ignores outcomes. Look at what we have. It is a disaster that behaves no differently from an empire without a constitution. To say “it’s just not quite going right but it should work” is not enough.
“I’m not sure what is the point you’re making. You’ve quoted pan Wales figures from a Visit Wales site (Welsh toursit board) – they are paid to market Wales… ”
Typical Nationalist, anyone giving inconvenient facts must be biassed.
“Have you a direct link to what the average gross weekly earnings for the south east of England are in comparison? I’d be genuinely interested to know”
Nope, try google.
@Chris – further to my above:
Of course the us constitution built upon the magna carter. So we have the uk and then the us empires boasting about their wondefrul legal foundations whilst raping the world. It is a nonsense. The proof is in the pudding not revered documents.
“There is a convincing argument that the senate was devised as a house to empower the wealthy classes thus subverting democracy from the go. Maybe ben or someelse more knowledgable than me will chime in on this.”
I didn’t want to interrupt. Phil the theory behind the two— House of Representatives/Senate–Is that the House, with many more members less seasoned in the process is a hotbed of emotion)hot cup of tea) and Senate is the cooling saucer. Idea being; making laws should be a slow, methodical process to avoid social disorganization enacted in the heat of present emotions, and then rescinded when it doesn’t prove workable, or even Constitutional.
Of course they are giving the Legislators credit for being honest brokers.
Villager
17 Aug, 2013 – 3:37 pm
To Jon:
“I am no diplomat so not mincing my words. The truth is sometimes hard to swallow, but you should let people express themselves freely, in your words, “regardless of whether the hearer finds them objectionable.”
Your tactic Villager is to demand freedom of speech regardless of what is said so that you and others here can attack certain posters with impunity; the purpose being to upset those certain posters to a point where they are intimidated into keeping quiet or reducing their contributions on subjects you don’t like.
That is an attack on freedom of speech in itself.
You, and other clowns posting on this blog, need to engage more in legitimate discussions of controversial subjects instead of using diversion; distraction; obfuscation and personal attacks simply because you have no argument to put forward.
Póló
17 Aug, 2013 – 5:37 pm
“Craig”
“Give us another post, like a good man.”
“Even “Hello World” will do to make a break in the comments.”
Póló, why don’t you engage in a topic that interests you?
Why don’t you put forward a point of view that could lead to a new discussion?
ben
“Senate is the cooling saucer”
Sure but I recall that the senate was set up with the specific aim to retain the final say in the hands of the wealthy. This was a stated aim spoken by some founders. The senate use to meet in secret for chrissakes. I will need to relook this up for more detail but a simple question will make my point.
Has there ever been a poor senater?
What % of sentaors have not been stinking rich?
Somewhere between zero and zero. It was set up by the rich and has always been exclusively populated by the rich.
That is not a democracy with a strong constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_sessions_of_the_United_States_Senate
They still meet in the dark of night, like when they vote themselves a raise in pay.
Being rich already puts a candidate in the catbird-seat; greater circle of powered acquaintances with money of their own for campaign donations. It’s not fair that the rich can afford bizness class on long flights with plenty of legroom/space to avoid blood-clots. The poor just have to live with the blockage.
We vote for these people because they want the job, and that should probably be a disqualifying feature.
Averages are virtually meaningless, but not all are rich.
[hide]Top 10 Senators in 2011
Senator Average Net Worth
John Kerry $235,976,804
Mark Warner $228,129,609
Herb Kohl $171,257,008
Jay Rockefeller $102,706,012
Richard Blumenthal $100,190,174
Frank R. Lautenberg $87,557,109
Dianne Feinstein $70,725,124
Ron Wyden $38,370,525
Claire McCaskill $21,837,606
Kay R. Hagan $17,833,270
[hide]Bottom 10 Senators in 2011
Senator Average Net Worth
Saxby Chambliss $402,006
John Thune $345,008
Deb Fischer $323,501
Roger Wicker $299,508
Susan Collins $205,002
Mike Lee $111,002
Jeff Flake $32,500
Mark Kirk $17,501
Jim DeMint $16,001
Marco Rubio -$45,494
@Fred “Typical Nationalist, anyone giving inconvenient facts must be biassed”
– Oh Fred, you dissapoint me. I have no problem with any facts. I merely asked for a link to back up your statement so that I could take a genuinely interested look. It rather makes me think you just made it up.I don’t see what your touchiness is based on – England’s poverty bothers me as much as my own country’s.Trying to whittle it down to ‘nationalist’ name calling is very lazy. Aren’t you yourself a nationalist albeit a British one? (and rather a non tolerant one by the sounds of it) A shame that you feel the need for such grumpiness but there we are.
Yes you need money to become any politician in the US these days. What I am suggesting is far more seditious because it shatters the illusion that all we need to do is correct perversions of an otherwise fine system.
I am suggesting the senate was expressly created to retain power in the hands of the wealthy. It was set up by the wealthy and has only ever been populated by the wealthy. Such simple observations marry with the governments behaviour and shatter all the verbosity that talks of democracy.
“I am suggesting the senate was expressly created to retain power in the hands of the wealthy.”
Phil; I am not arguing that you are incorrect, but do you have something to replace? Maybe a Benevolent Dictatorship because the ambitiously wealthy have always held all the cards?
Compare and contrast Parliament.