Thursday, 30 April 2009

Colonial Conquest of Iraq

Well as we all know, Britain is famous for its Colonial conquests, across the world. Apart from the Colonies it has yet to give up, such as Ireland, on all occassions the results followed the same basic rule.

Britain entered a land, used force to take control of that land, despite being an invading minority, divided its peoples, pulled out of the country and left it to tear itself apart. Countries in Africa, Asia, The Americas and even Australiasia were invaded by Britain and left in tatters. Some countries still bear the mark; Examples such as Australia's flag, Hawaii's Flag, the Queens face on Canadian coinage etc etc. Other countries are still "controlled" by the British crown, such as Ireland, Scotland and Wales and also the Falkland Islands etc.

Anyway today we were greeted with the News, that after six years of occupation, combat operations in Iraq will cease. 234 Brits were killed, and at least 7,269 Iraqis murdered. We saw Sadam Hussein face the hangmans noose, and where as I don't think his Regime was fair or just, his murder was immoral. Tyrants hanging Tyrants. And what was it all for? Weapons of Mass destruction, that the governments had irrifutable evidence off? Yet they found none.

What will they leave behind? You guessed it. Divided people, that will most likely tear themselves apart. "Iraqi insurgents" have not been wiped out, or defeated, and they will now fight back. Histroys habit of repeat is striking sometimes.

God Bless

Friday, 24 April 2009

"Speaking for You" Maybe... Not for Me

My University, as well as Queens I assume, provide free copies of the "Belfast Telegraph AM" everyday, and so it has become the paper I read. However I have noticed it doesn't usually agree with me politically. Anyway its that time of year again where Political campaigns start, and leaflets are distributed while Politicians try to convince votes out of the very few non hardened voters, who do not know yet where their loyalty lies, or have become disheartened with their usual party of choice. Today in the Telegraph was a campaign leaflet from Jim Allister, who is running for the European elections. I'm assuming I won't open the telegraph anytime soon and find a campaign leaflet for Mr Colin Duffy.

I thought I would address what I read, and give my opinions.

On the main page, where he addresses the Economic Crisis, I would have to say I agree with his big words. It’s hard to argue against the fact that "restoring economic stability and prosperity must be the priority of all". He rightly says there is "no quick fixes, but there are certainly pitfalls to be avoided". However as said these are big words, but he does not yet address how he plans to rebuild the economy. However this section of these leaflets is to grab attention of readers and press them to read further, not to detail in-depth what they wish to do.

However upon opening the leaflet you get an immediate sense of what kind of Politics this man administers. The first section inside the leaflet is entitled “Consistently Resisting Sinn Féin". This displays the same dead-end politics that this part of country can no longer accept. It uses the same dead language of Unionist politics from the 70's and 80's relating Sinn Féin to terrorists, claiming they hold "affinity, not just with ETA and FARC, but closer to home with relentless pursuits of
issues such as the Northern Bank Robbery...". It further talks about IRA/Sinn Féin. Jim Allister refuses to move into the 21st Century, where the IRA have not only ceased fire, decommissioned but also disbanded. He refuses to recognise that Sinn Féin, on numerous occasions since 2009 started, have condemned violence within the current Republican movement, and even went as far as to call armed Republicans traitors. Furthermore he accuses Sinn Féin of a crime; A crime for which they
were not charged, found guilty or in anyway proven to be connected too.

Within this section Mr Allister talks of the "failed Marxist agenda to which Sinn Féin is aligned". Sinn Féin are a socialist party, that believe in workers rights, and that the people come first. Socialism, in the way Sinn Féin talk about, has not yet been tried on our capitalist island, and so how can Mr Allister claim it is a failed agenda. He accuses Sinn Féin of belonging to "the communist block". Sinn Féin are not a communist party.

Jim Allistar is stuck in a dead era, where he chooses to ignore the people with whom he has differences, and thus stops any advancement in the Peace he claims he wants, but discriminating against 50% of the population with the occupied territory. Jim Allister for example, would definitely not represent my views in Europe, because I am both Irish, and Republican.

Lets move on to section two; "Opposing Foolish Legislation".

Jim attacks the EU for the Working Time Directive. It seems reasonable at first glance, as who would disagree that when "Families are struggling to make ends meet" that workers are no longer allowed to work more than 48 hours per week. I guess if we listen to Jim Allister, I would agree that this is a ridiculous ruling. However through reading the regulations you will see that there is an opt out clause.

"If you are 18 or over and wish to work more than 48 hours a week, you can choose to opt out of the 48 hour limit. This must be voluntary and in writing." - Now to me this seems reasonable. It means that workers can not be forced to work overtime, which would be unfair treatment of staff. Now I will not make my mind up now, but I do not see this as foolish. It seems that it allows you to work overtime if YOU, the worker, choose too. One can cancel the opt out agreement at anytime the wish, by giving "one week's to Three months notice". This seems reasonable. As I said not 100% sure, but seems reasonable to me. Sorry Jim.

Section Three; "Peace-Funding A Wasted Opportunity".

In this short section, Mr Allister complains that "money has been wasted". If further says "No one has been more critical of the waste and direction of much of the Peace Funding than Jim Allister". Now I don't think that Jim Allister really means money should not be put into Peace, thought it sounds that way. However he does not explain how he believes this money should be sent.

Section Four; "Holding the Line against the Lisbon Treaty".

Finally something we can agree upon. Within this section Mr Allister claims he is opposed to "the haemorrhaging of national powers to Brussels". I was very much against the Lisbon treaty as one would read in my Blogs before. I was utterly disgusted that I had no say in the referendum, as an Irish citizen living in Ireland; I was denied the right to vote due to British Occupation. The British government promised the people the chance to have their say, however they did not actually follow this promise through, and denied the people, thus denying Irish men and women a say also. How and ever I had very different reasons for not supporting Lisbon that can be found in my blog on the topic, so I won't discuss them again here.

The back of Jim Allister's leaflet contains short extracts from his speeches made in Europe, entitled "Speak for You in Europe". For the most part Mr Allister you most certainly do NOT speak for me.

1. "The Antrim Murders"

Once again in the extract, Jim Allister uses this as an excuse to attack Sinn Féin as terrorists, due to connections in their past, to the Irish Republican Army. He complains about having "three convicted IRA terrorists as Government ministers" and makes reference to how Martin McGuinness was once referred to as "The Bogside Butcher". He is ignoring completely the real situation in which the "Antrim Murders" have brought the Peace process. Jim is very quick to attribute the term Terrorist to Sinn Féin, but I'm curious would he be as quick to say the same of the PUP, UPRG and the DUP, all of whom have had connections to armed Loyalists. I would say he would hold his tongue a little tighter at least.

2. Climate change and Political Correctness

"...the proposed climate change package, we have emission-reduction demands which, if met, would reduce food production when we need it most. Faced with the choice of feeding the world or ticking climate change correction boxes, I am afraid I am on the side of common sense".

How can you be on the side of common sense if you show little signs of having any? Climate change is a debatable topic. Some believe in it and some do not. What no one can deny is that we are mistreating our planet, and it is being left in a terrible state in some places. No one can deny that the planet is heating up, thought some believe it is a natural occurrence that has happened throughout global history. My theory is, even if that is true, there is no sense us helping it along its way, and thus we must protect our environment, which means "ticking climate change correction boxes.

The fact is simple, that due to global warming, many farm lands within the developing/third world have already been irradiated. This means two things. That food production that Jim Allister is talking about is going to suffer either way. What use is it to pick food over climate change, if you can no longer grow the food in the current environment?

However it alot means that many third world countries are going to suffer. We in the "developed" or rich capitalist countries, for want of a better word, create most of the problems, as we produce a lot more pollution; however it is the developing world that bears the brunt of the suffering. Like most things that affect the third world, our nations cause them. So to ignore climate change is to ignore the world’s poor. That’s a nice attitude to take Jim.

3. Same Sex Marriage

At this stage I am already pretty sure that Jim Allister will not be getting a vote from me, and this brings me one step closer to concreting that decision. I want to address two things here. The first is his opening quote, and the second is the topic of same sex marriage.

So the quote he chose to begin this extract from states that "A society consumed by rights is a give me give me society, which has lost its balance". It is clear that Jim Allister does not believe in rights, as he completely disregards any Republican idealism as terrorism. However this statement is ridiculous. If someone was to remove a single right from Mr Allister, I have no doubt in my mind he would shout foul about it, and so he should. Every single person deserves their rights, as all people are supposed to be seen as equal. So maybe society will "lose its balance" as Mr Allister puts it, but in the defence of Human rights then so be it.

Now to address the topic of same sex marriage, many would think is a predictable one coming from me. I am a Roman Catholic and I would be quite conservative about it for a young person. However, I have my beliefs and I have to disagree with taking rights away from anyone. Jim Allister says "The natural order is Man and Woman. We pervert it when we demand equality for its very antithesis". So basically what we have here is Jim Allister saying once again, that because he doesn’t agree with this particular group of people, they deserve no rights.

When I read the bible I am told two things. For me, it would be wrong to be Homosexual. However the bible tells me I can not judge anyone, and I am a firm believer in this. I have no problems with homosexual people, and in fact have friends who are homosexual. I don't even give it a second thought. If two people of the same gender wish to go to the registry office, and have a civil partnership or marriage, I don't mind. It is not costing tax payer’s money. It is not destroying the economy, or causing wars. I do not see why it is even considered a topic of importance to Politicians, in a time where the world is at war, the economies are failing and people in general are suffering.

4. On Israel and Hamas

This is another sticky topic. In this troubled part of the world, the two divided communities tend to disagree on things, even things that have little or no connection to our conflict. As many Nationalist and Republican people began to show growing support for the Palestinian people, we seen saw the Israeli flag popping up around Unionist and loyalist estates. We see people on both sides complain about the others view on the situation when they have no understanding at all about the Middle East conflict.

I am sure if you read my blog I have no need to reassure you of my opinions on Palestine. So all I can say is me and Jim disagrees again. He supports Israel yet states "I abhor terrorism". Obviously not.

5. The Irish Referendum result

Hold the press folks. Jim says something here that makes sense to me. I disagree with his use of the term country but to hear that he publically said " The disrespect for the lawfully expressed opinion of a small country [It’s a partionist state Jim] on the treaty of Lisbon is Palpable" is admirable. I would agree that it shows more "politics of the bully boy" than that of a democracy.

6. The Maze Shrine

Now frankly my opinion on Long Kesh isn't really in agreement with anyone. I would keep it as is, for museum and tourism purposes, like Kilmainham or Crumlin Road Gaol. However once again the word of Mr Allister, make me lose even more respect for his ability as a Politician. He refers to Long Kesh as a place where "the most vile and vicious terrorists were properly incarcerated". Does he even have the first clue what he is talking about here? The treatment of Prisoners in Long Kesh Concentration Camp was regrettable in a modern "civilised" society. This is not only republican sentiment; William Smith, the first Loyalist prisoner stated “Long Kesh was a dreadful experience for anyone who was there”. In reference to the guards in the Kesh he said “They would come in and for no apparent reason smash up things, destroy your property. That was just part and parcel of prison life.”

I would like to hope that in his sweeping statements about terrorists, that he was at least recognising Loyalist paramilitaries under the same title. However he goes on to say that "Irish Republicans - who love to wallow in self pity" would turn it into a shrine to "Some of the most evil terrorists known to this generation". Firsly, who does he think he is? What right has this Racist anti Irish man got to speak of 50% of the population of the occupied state like that? If I was to say "Loyalists - who love to wallow in hatred", he would publically shout foul once again. This man is not fit to be a Politician. How can a man that talks like this also complain about "Bully Boy Politics". Furthermore, although I do not see the IRA/INLA prisoners as terrorists, if he is going to paint them as "the most evil" he must also acknowledge that the Kesh held some evil loyalist terrorists also. After all William Smith also said “When the republicans went on hunger strike and the dirty protest, they were fighting for the same rights as we were”.


I could write a lot more, but I have shown here, that I can agree with Jim Allister on a few points, but that my disagreements out weigh them points completely. I can guarantee that Jim Allister will not be receiving my vote. He is a bigot and is clearly stuck in 1980's politics, where he still does not accept that Irish Republicans have rights. He claims to represent "Ulster" and yet ostracises 50% of the population that he will be "representing".

Tuesday, 21 April 2009

In Defence of Smaller Nations... Western White Nations

The World vowed never again, after the horriffic events of WWII. However yesterday the nations of the world turned their back on that very promise, allowing the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine to continue, cause sometimes the truth is just to financially damaging.

The United States, Australia, The Netherlands, Italy, Canada, New Zealand, Germany, Poland and Israel amoung others boycotted a United Nations conference on Racism, in South Africa. The basis of their boycott, was that Zionism was a topic that was to be addressed. I personally am completely for this Conference.

Navi Pallay, a UN Human Rights Chief, say she is disappointed at the boycott. The Pope spoke out in favour of the conference, saying it was an opportunity to fight discrimination and intolerance.

"A handful of states have permitted one or two issues to dominate their approach to this issue, allowing them to outweigh the concerns of numerous groups of people that suffer racism and similar forms of intolerance to a pernicious and life-damaging degree on a daily basis all across the world..." - Navi Pallay

"We ask for firm and consistent action, at national and international level, to prevent and eliminate any form of discrimination and of intolerance," - Pope
Benidict XVI

Many of the Western Nations that did not boycott the conference, including France, Spain and Britain, walked out once the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad began to speak. These Nations chose to walk out on the many in the world suffering under Racial oppression. They walked out on the Palestinian people, the Tibetian People, the Burmese people and the Sri Lankan People. I have no shame in saying I agreed with alot of what Ahmadinejad said. The following, are quotes from the speech, that I agreed with.

"Peace be upon them all who are the harbingers of monotheism, fraternity, love, human dignity and justice...Over the last centuries, humanity has gone through tremendous suffering and pain. In the middle ages, thinkers and scientists were sentenced to death. It was then followed by a period of slavery and slave trade, when innocent people in millions were captivated and separated from their families and loved ones, to be taken to Europe and America under worse conditions; the dark period that also experienced occupations, lootings, and massacres of innocent people... It did not take long that the coercive powers imposed two wars in Europe which also plagued a part of Asia and Africa. Those horrific wars claimed about 100 million lives and left behind massive devastation. Had lessons been learned from the occupations, horrors, and crimes of those wars, there would have been a ray of hope for the future...The victorious powers [of the world wars] call themselves the conquerors of the world, while ignoring or down-treading the rights of other nations by the imposition of oppressive laws and international arrangements... Following World War Two, they resorted to making an entire nation homeless on the pretext of Jewish suffering. They sent migrants from Europe, the United States and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in the occupied Palestine. In compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe, they helped bring to power the most cruel and repressive, racist regime in Palestine... It is all the more regrettable that a number of Western governments and the United States have committed themselves to defending those racist perpetrators of genocide, whilst the awakened consciences and free-minded people of the world condemn aggression, brutality and the bombardment of civilians of Gaza... the word Zionism personifies racism, that falsely resorts to religion and abuses religious sentiments to hide hatred... It should be recognised that boycotting such a session is a true indication of supporting the blatant example of racism." - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

The nations of the world, too afraid to lose out financially, walked out on the truth and chose to ignore the suffering of small nations. "In defence of small nations" seems to mean nothing when that small nation is both eastern and Arab. The fact that many chose to Boycott the conference, just because Ahmadinejad was addressing, shows racism against small Arab Nations.

Ahmadinejad had the courage to stand up and say, what the general people of the west said, and have been saying, since Operation Cast Lead and even before. However the Governments of the western
world are too afraid to make such statements, cause they are afraid of being called anti semitic. Being pro Palestinian and anti Zionist is not the same as being anti semetic, as many Jews throughout the world will agree. It is not Jewish to remove Arabs from their land and replace them in their homes with foreign settlers. It is not Jewish to Build a wall through Palestinain territory, housing them all in, and stopping their travel with illegal checkpoints and putting them under military occupation. It is not anti semetic to support Palestinian rights.

At least some of the nations leaders returned after Ahmadinejad's speech, however, the Czechs refused to return as a result. His presence there was too much, for this White Western nation, and they refused to share the rest of the day with him. The response of many of the worlds nations should be addressed. The Czech Foriegn Ministry, and current President of the EU, refused to return and said;

"We cannot allow, through our presence, the legitimisation of absolutely unacceptable anti-Israeli attacks. The Czech delegation will not return to the conference at all, as a consequence to Ahmadinejad's speech." - Czech Foriegn Ministry

To this I say, why can you not allow your presence to legitimise the "attacks". Infact I believe that your presence should and Must legitimise these "verbal attacks". Your walking out Legitimised 1,300 dead, 400 of whom where Children and women, and 86% were confirmed to be civilians. It legitimises the recent confessions that innocent civilians were shot intentionally. That the homes of Civilians where vandalised and their faith insulted by crude sexual diagrams. It legitimises the tshirts worn by Israeli soldiers that showed Arab women in the crosshairs. Your walking out legitimised Phosphuros attacks on Schools, Hospitals, mosques and homes. Your walking out legitimised Racism.

To David Miliband, the British Foriegn secretary, after claiming "President Ahmadinejad's remarks... were offensive, inflammatory and utterly unacceptable", I say this. Yes they where offensive, cause sometimes the truth hurts, and you are offended because you refuse to stand up and be held to account, and to stand for what you know is true and right.

As for Jonas Gahr S
toere, Norwegian Foreign Minister, you were completely naive when you claimed "Norway will not accept that the odd-man-out hijacks the collective efforts of the many". Odd Man Out?? Tell that to the thousands of civilians who took to the streets across Europe, America and the rest of the world. Tell that to the thousands of people, that you and your collective Nation leaders chose to Ignore. Tell that to the Jews For Justice, Anarchists against the Wall, the Anti War Movement and the Ireland Palestinian Solidarity Campaign. Just because you chose to ignore the calls for justice from the civilians across the world, does not mean they do not exsist, and this man is no odd man out.

Ban Ki Moon has disappointed me before and makes no exception here. "I deplore the use of this platform by the Iranian president to accuse, divide and even incite. This is the opposite of what this conference seeks to achieve." This conference seeked to achieve what then exactly? Was it not to fight Racism?? So if a Racist regime gets shaken in the process is this not part of what you set out to do. Or is it now Racist to disagree with Racists??

Furthermore, not only do I agree with the statement during the conference, but the attempt to justify himself afterwards.

"The main issue of the conference was racism. Are they supporting racism?... So why shouldn't they participate in a conference which is aimed at discussing and eleminating racism. The second point is, that the United Nations should be Civil Manifestation of Democracy and freedom of expression. Everybody should enjoy the right to freely express his or her own opinions. In turn we should not be intolerant to listening." - Ahamdinejad

The United Nations may as well join the League of Nations in the grave as it died of a lack of exercise, and the United Nations seems fit to follow.

I do not claim to know enough about Iran to fully support Ahmadinejad's rule, but I agree with what he said at Durban II, and I think the nations that Boycotted the Racism conference in Durban, are the ones that need to do the Soul Searching. They need to step back and take alook at themselves.

The United States is a Nation that is built on Slaughter and Slavery. A nation of people, that when they arrived on the shores, attempted to genocide, to rid the land of its indigenous people. A nation that while writing "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...", enslaved the African people based purely on skin colour. Are still a nation that spend more on War and weaponry than Education, and provide more aid to Israel than they do to the rest of the world combined. Now they Boycott a Racism conference, cause they don't like one of the sub-issues.

The British Empire, built off the spoils of poorer nations, when they plundered and pilaged and colonised Africa, India, Asia and America. A nation that has ravaged the history of Ireland with Bloodshed, opression and left it a divided nation amoung a divided people.

Let us take a look at this world we live in. Ravaged with Inequality, Opression, Occupation and Poverty. United Nations?? Our Nations are far from United. Very Very Far.

God Bless