[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Editorial See other Editorial Articles Title: Why ... When ... How ... Why ... When ... How ... Why? I have this evening listened to the Foreign Minister of Finland, which at present holds the presidency of our European Union, during which broadcast he stated quite clearly that the Union should open contacts with Hamas, the group which is behind the present governing party in the Palestinian Territories. However, he added, rather lamely, that Hamas would still have to recognise the present "state of Israel". The question which immediately comes to my mind is Why? We considered the late South African régime to be illegal because of its hideous policy of apartheid. Why does any country in the European Union act differently when it is dealing with a "state" with even stronger discriminatory policies, which policies are even more severely vicious than those of the previous South African régime. I merely ask "why?" In other words, how does such a nasty attitude, which we condemned in Nazi and former South African policies, now become acceptable. How would any of the European politicians react if they were indigenous inhabitants of Palestine having to suffer the persecution aimed at ethnically cleansing them from their ancestral homes? I merely ask the question, but do not expect an answer from persons who are so hypocritical in condemning anti-Jewish anti-Semitism while trying to impose anti-Arab anti-Semitism on all of us. I am happy to be a Christian, thus an heir to the glories of a faith brought to us through Semitic languages, and I reject all forms of anti-Semitism, just as I respect my Jewish and Muslim brothers and sisters in the great spiritual family of Abraham. The European Union should condemn all ethnic discrimination and refuse to deal with the modern equivalent of the Nazis unless and until they treat all human beings as equal, and, after putting an end to their Zionist state, give back the homes and lands stolen from the local people. The Zionists need to learn that there are no Untermenschen in a civilised world. When ? Living so close to the shores of England, just across the Channel from here, it is always interesting to follow what goes on in the United Kingdom, and all the political buzz at present seems to concern the date at which Mr Anthony (call me "Tony") Blair will finally leave office. He vaguely announced some time ago that he would leave office during the current parliament (i.e. probably within the next year or two), thus giving his successor as the leader of the Labour Party sufficient time to prepare for the next General Election. It appears that his advisers have suggested that he should "go out on a wave of euphoria" and make public appearances in "iconic locations" as well as on broadly popular television programmes, such as "Blue Peter" (for children) and "Songs of Praise" (a highly-rated Sunday programme of hymn singing, usually in a beautiful place of worship). As Mr Bush's most faithful lackey, Mr Blair and his apparently designated heir and fellow Scot, Mr James Gordon Brown, have a place in history which is hardly enviable. Mr Blair (with the unquestioning support of Mr Brown in such matters, however much they may disagree over others) has presided over a government which is guilty of so many serious crimes against humanity (as defined in the Nuremberg Principles and the Fourth Geneva Convention) that it is hard to bring them all to mind. We can put it briefly that they are both unworthy of the trust of any informed voter who is not a believer in the neo-fascist creed of Mr George W. Bush and the terrorist forces behind him, whereby they wish to impose the absolute rule of USA corporate power on the whole world. In other words, Mr Blair has worked, and continues to work, against the freedom of every single one of us and he and his like wish to prevent us all from enjoying justice and democracy. He has also done all that he can to please his Fuehrer by betraying the other countries of the European Union whenever they have tried to act to bring some calming good sense to world problems. He can be described as an abject and despicable traitor to his own country, Scotland, to the whole United Kingdom in which he holds his high office as Prime Minister, to the European Union and to the whole world. In my view, his only hope of glory (or even of salvation) would be if he were to acknowledge his crimes, apologise fully for them and do atonement by trying to put right as much as possible of the damage and harm which he has done to so many. He could start by an immediate withdrawal of all British troops from Iraq and a fulsome condemnation of all the terrorists who are currently killing (or have recently killed) on behalf of the Bush régime and its "closest allies" in Palestine and in the Lebanon. For a simple old man such as myself, reinforced by my years of practical experience of international law at the highest level and of criminal law at all levels, the only proper place for Mr Blair to go, when eventually he does go, is to a well-guarded cell before being tried for his own personal part in these many fully-admitted international crimes, of a number of which he has even boasted vain-gloriously. In the circumstances of a criminal such as Mr Blair and the proposal by his advisers for high visibility promotion of the "glory of Blair", the first expression which comes to my mind is "grossly indecent". Perhaps someone with a cruder vocabulary and imagination can think of a more appropriate description. The question remains however of when the long-heralded, and long-overdue, departure of this smooth but vicious criminal from the British political scene is finally going to happen - no decent person can see any reason to wait any longer. How ? How can the world save itself from the iron grip of the rule of the ruthless corporations behind Mr George W. Bush? This is probably the greatest problem facing the modern world, since it includes the fight against the damage being done to the world's ecological balance by the senseless greed which animates these inhuman bodies. We have to realise that we are faced with combating absolute evil, and we have to understand that our, and all humanity's, enemies are totally lacking in scruples. We have seen this just recently in the complete ruination of the Lebanon, in a vain attempt to crush any form of resistance to our common enemies. Mr Bush merely told his minions to get on with finishing the job of destroying a small unassuming country, which had happened not to do exactly what he and his backers wanted. I am definitely not in favour of a bloody revolution, but the sheer obstinacy of our enemies my make such a sad event the only way to save the world from them. They scream "terrorist" or "anti-semitic" as soon as anyone dares to speak out against their desire to rule and control everyone and everything, without for an instant thinking what either of these words really means. Personally, I consider it almost an honour that they should use such words of me, since it means that they are at least taking notice. Nevertheless, I do have to worry that the ignorant might easily believe that I, as a Christian, could ever either be in favour of the use of terror or have any kind of hostility towards either of the semitic languages which we know were used by Jesus. The problem remains as to how the world can peaceably free itself from the rule of the Bushists. An obvious start would be if someone in the USA could start the long overdue process of impeachment of Mr Bush and Mr Cheney for all the crimes which they have committed while in office. However, this requires political will (and perhaps some courage) on the part of other politicians in the USA, many of whom may feel that their own past is not sufficiently clean to stand up to close public examination. It would be in the general interest of the USA if all politicians had to declare all sums received and all other bribes or inducements of whatever sort, but the rules appear to be so lax that almost every politician is tarred with the same brush of corruption. Looking from Europe, both big political parties in the USA are what would here be considered to be extreme right-wing, whose equivalents here normally only receive comparatively small numbers of votes in elections, with the highest peak being when Mr Le Pen managed to get some 17% against Mr Chirac in our last presidential election. Happily, his party only managed about 4% of the popular vote in the ensuing parliamentary elections. Even this degree of success of an extremist over here has made us more vigilant, but we see that in the USA the extremists, due to widespread corruption and seemingly total lack of control over election expenses, manage to rule both of these large political parties, and we do not know which would be worse than the other. Human nature having also its good side, we have to assume that there are good folk who honestly support the supposed, or advertised, policies of both, but we have to admit that they have been fooled by those who manage to rule both. Perhaps someone can tell me of an honest person who will come to rescue the world by getting rid of all these criminals, but it most sadly appears that there is little immediate hope of success. We look at the Democrats, who had a reasonably decent looking candidate a few years ago in Mr Albert Gore, but he was cheated by a combination of crooked schemes, including notoriously "inaccurate" machines, supplied by dubious corporations, whose results even an inexperienced hacker could "modify" at will. The question therefore remains: how can these criminals be removed from office and detained where they should be? Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||