Not sure that it fits exactly what you are asking for given your reference to foreign policy and dictators. But how about Diego Garcia?

The British government is, after all, directly responsible in this case.

I can’t imagine the long-term support of both Saudi Arabia and Israel can be ignored.

Paul,

yep, Saudi Arabia and Diego Garcia are top of my list. Probably not Israel too because I don’t want two middle eastern.

Definitely Diego Garcia, though of course my own nation, the U.S., is at the root of the destruction of that beleaguered island and its people. But Britain has been so very, very helpful. It’s so nice to have a special relationship.

Don’t know about the dictator part. Does it matter what the executive is called if he/she and his/her ruling bodies permit such monstrous actions?

Northern Ireland. An Occupation.

The Maze/Internment/Torture in support of rule by the Protestant Orange Order.

Bloody Sunday. A cover up on an atrocity that happened 38 years ago washed away by an apology from the state by Cameron in the style of Brown.

Instigating the Americans to overthrow Mossadegh in Iran in the 1950s?

Israel has to be at the top.

Israel is the line the UK will never cross.

Israel has done many bad things, and each and every bad thing is always given full support.

Chagos Islands should be a definite – doesn’t the US’ lease of Diego Garcia come to an end in a few years. Would be great to help to build public consciousness about this and to help put pressure on the government to not renew it. Probably pie in the sky stuff but can you imagine if it worked.

Somebody – You can’t seriously reduce all that happened in Northern Ireland to “support for the Protestant Orange Order”. A lot of horrible things happened here and you do a disservice to the truth to look at it so simplistically.

Craig did say “current”.

Our silence on Burma is deafening!

Yeah, Paul, but the UK and USA are covertly working to destabilise the Burmese regime, which is a brutal regime, but that’s not why they’re working to destabilise it.

I once listened to Ruth Padel, she of the Oxford Poetry Professor controversy, read out poems about Burma, where she’d been shortly before. It was a lacklustre session, very elegant and Oxbridge-Metropolitan, no real passion, no heart. Compared to poetry readings I’ve been to in Scotland, it was anaemic, both artistically and politically.

And it struck me that, oh yes this is all very worthy and all, but isn’t she simply backing UK state foreign policy here, a sure way to get ahead? Yeah, cynical of me, right. But that was a couple of years before the Oxford debacle. So, maybe I wasn’t so far off the mark.

Iraq. Afghanistan. Iraq. Afghanistan. Iraq. Afghanistan.

Ed, you’re right, I should have read it more carefully.

Well currently, I think we’re doing just fine.

Probably the single most striking example of british foreign policy double-standards, is the difference between how a country like Iran is treated and presented, compared to a regime/dictatorship like Saudi Arabia; which in relation to human rights, freedom, women’s rights, the rule of law, fundamental democratic rights, attitude to dissent, is arguably far less ‘democratic’ than the demonized Iranian regime. So what behind the radically different approaches to Iran and Saudi?

Simply put, Saudi is weak, client regime, that couldn’t exist without US/Western protection and support. Saudi Arabia is clearly within the boundaries of the US/NATO/Israel imperial alliance; whereas Iran is not, and is therefore defined as a barbarous enemy and threat, a threat to the interests of the empire. If it was inside the sphere of the empire Iran would be almost treated as a model state, on a par with that other ‘moderate’ state, Egypt.

Saudi arabia, Diego Garcia, afghanistan, uzbekistan (possibly those two together). Current not historic. Oil companies in Nigeria, specific african arms deals, debunking sierraeone triumph. South america?

S. America: What connection did that Jane’s Defence Weekly journalist who was murdered in a cupboard in S. America in the 1990s while investigating stuff have with the UK arms industry, Gerald Bull, Matrix Churchill? Is there something in there that’s still going on?

Crown Agents…

I suppose it’s the countries that are the most powerful – economically or militarily or both – who can get away with the most. Therefore, in no particular order: USA, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Given that the state’s fundamental moral responsibility is to its own citizens, surely the most immoral aspect of our government’s foreign policy is the spineless and subservient relation to the USA. Our security and economy are repeatedly put at risk in the name of maintaining the “special relationship”, which quite clearly the yanks don’t give a crap about. Blair was even willing to commit an act of treason, promising UK military support for illegal wars without parliament’s consent, in order to suck up to Bush.

What about the failure to prosecute BAE for crimes under the legal provisions against bribery?

It is Israel, because even the anti-government left are scared witless about mentioing Israel.

Iran – Iran – Iran

In November 1977 about 1,100 British subjects were engaged in defence contract work in Iran.

Britain owes Iran over £400M from a military contract signed in 1978 by International Military Services Ltd. IMS ceased trading on 31st July 1991.

I am investigating the financial records of this company.

The then Labour government department had a 100% interest in the non-preferential shares of IMS Limited, a company registered in England.

Outstanding contracts do not seemed to have been settled before the company was liquidated. The Labour government department had written down the value of its investment to nil.

About £900M of Iran’s money is frozen and held in Britain due to the EU sanctions.

Reading this, Diego Garcia was the first thing that came to my mind.

Peter Hain called Viktor Bout, the Merchant of Death. But did Bout really run such a sophisticated network of arms supply? I very much doubt it. It’s far more likely that he fronted a covert arms operation run by the UK intelligence services. Excise duty covertly removed from the UK to buy weapons, weapons in exchange for diamonds etc., diamonds sold and the money laundered and legitimatised.

Suhayl

The Jane’s Defence Weekly journalist who was ‘unlawfully killed’ in March 1990 in Chile (according to the inquest held 8 years later)was Jonathan Moyle.

A few days earlier Gerald Bull was murdered in Brussels. Bull worked on the Iraqi ‘Supergun’ project, and Moyle, according to his family, was working on an Iraq related arms deal story when he was killed.

No convictions in any jurisdiction have been made in the wake of both of these untimely deaths.

And as Sir Larry of St Louis would have us believe, any person who suggests either or both of these deaths could be western intelligence agency ‘wet jobs’ is a ‘conspiraloon’, ‘nutjob’ etc. etc.

Interesting Ruth – thank-you

You might have seen these but still good for a chuckle:

youtube.com/watch?v=oK3dKyeB29Q

http://www.victorbout.com/Documents/Colombia_MFA_Eng.pdf

911 7/7 bali inside job

Chechnya. Utter silence. Total destruction.

Laysa ba’da al-kufri thanb.

There is no sin greater than disbelief.

The UK’s greatest state immorality is its opposition to Islam. Islam is the embodiment of humanity and natural justice. All the other dirty tricks flow from the persistent UK state disbelief. There are many ways to skin a cat. If there are two fishes arguing in the deepest ocean, the originator of the disagreement was UK foreign policy. If you want proof that we are the worst country in the world, look no further that Iraq and Afghanistan. None of the rest of the world’s non-superpowers dared to sully their reputation by immediately volunteering their services to the US invasions. Britain is the bottom of the pile of immorality, lying and callous violence.

Craig,

Examples of current immoral foreign policy by the UK have to include our dealings with dictatorships (that goes without saying) but our unquestioning support for Israel is the most diabolical. Israel is supposed to be (and portrayed as) a modern, vibrant democracy: it is not. The Foreign Office plays down or hides its support for Middle East dictatorships like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait and the UAE, but publicly proclaims unending support for Israel which, on close inspection, would reveal it to be a brutal, racist regime, with a bit of democracy (for Jews)thrown in. If you only want one example from the Middle East, choose Israel; don’t go for the easy targets.

Doug

Despite British intelligence backing Mousavi failed to deliver the goods and the Western media were left looking fraudulent.

From literally the morning after the Iramian Presidential election, the vast majority of Western journalists and U.S.-based Iran “experts” rushed to judgment that the outcome had to have been the result of fraud.

These journalists and commentators largely succeeded in turning the notion of a fraudulent election in Iran into a “social fact” in the United States — just as journalists like Judith Miller, formerly of the New York Times, and “experts” like Kenneth Pollack, an analyst at the Brookings Institution, helped turn myths about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction into “social facts” before the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

But there has never been a shred of hard evidence offered to back up the assertion of electoral fraud. For many, a “preliminary analysis” of the official results by University of St. Andrews Iranian studies professor Ali Ansari and two collaborators, published by Chatham House nine days after the election, was taken as scholarly ratification for an already dominant Western narrative about what had happened. But the extent of the evidentiary and analytic flaws in the Chatham House report is breathtaking. Don’t just take our word for it. We refer anyone who is interested to two impressively meticulous and thorough reviews of the 2009 election process and results. One, by two Iranian scholars living outside the Islamic Republic, systematically goes through all the points adduced by Ansari and his collaborators — alleged irregularities and anomalies in voter turnout, the sourcing of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s votes, the alleged underperformance of opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi (an ethnic Azeri) in Azeri-majority provinces and his fellow disappointed presidential hopeful Mehdi Karroubi in his home province, perceptions of statistical anomalies in the official results, etc. — and offers devastatingly persuasive rejoinders on every point.

Extracted from a report by Flynt Leverett – http://www.raceforiran.com/

Mark Golding – Children of Iraq: Iran may not be the next target, keep an eye on Venezuela.

You cannot ignore the false flag attacks designed to start the “War on Terror” to justify the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, to wage war against Moslem peoples, and attack human rights everywhere:

London 77; Bali; 9th of September.

All inside jobs by the Mafia that controles this world today.

Yeah, Diego Garcia certainly.

But, of course now we have a lot of bollocks such as this:

“Chechnya. Utter silence. Total destruction.”

No. NATO condemned Russia’s attack on Chechnya.

“There is no sin greater than disbelief.”

I don’t believe you. Paedophilia and genocide are worse than believing in fairies.

“The UK’s greatest state immorality is its opposition to Islam.”

This is where the circular firing squad ends up shooting itself. The UK belatedly assisted in ending a genocide against Bosnian Muslims. The assistance was, of course, opposed by those who thought NATO involvement was itself a travesty.

Mark Golding says, “Iran – Iran – Iran”.

“About £900M of Iran’s money is frozen and held in Britain due to the EU sanctions.”

Well, as you are the special envoy to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad maybe you should tell him that Iran needs to come clean on its nuclear weapons programme.

Paul Johnston: “Our silence on Burma is deafening!”

But Paul, criticising Burma is like a terrible intrusion in their internal affairs. Remember Mark Golding’s not at all fatuous or callous dictum that you don’t tell other people how to raise their kids and if Iran wants to hang its dissidents then who are we to say otherwise. Oh, and if you end up on the same side as British foreign policy you are, by definition, evil.

“But there has never been a shred of hard evidence offered to back up the assertion of electoral fraud….”

Blah blah blah, blather, blather, blather, bullshit, bullshit, bullshit…

Iran’s elections were fraudulent from the start. It is constitutionally forbidden from holding free elections as only those who are approved by a bunch of guys who believe in fairies are allowed to stand and they can only stand if their belief in fairies – and the right sort of fairies – is strong enough.

Let’s also not forget the way it ended with mass arrests, tortures and executions but that is of no interest to anyone who can’t find a way of linking it to British, American or Israeli malevolence.

“Paedophilia and genocide are worse than believing in fairies.”

And, of course, worse than NOT believing in fairies.

PAKISTAN:

Musharraf era and his unprecedented second marshal law against judiciary. Successful placement of corrupt Zardari regime by assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

Bedbugs in New York hotels.

And what angrysoba said.

We don’t seem too fussed about Thailand:

May 25, 2010

Subject: Political crisis in Thailand that has led to my arrest warrant

Dear Generous Supporters and friends,

First of all, I would like to apologize for bringing up a troublesome subject to communicate to you. I would like to ask for a few minutes of your time to consider factual evidence and circumstances that have occurred in Thailand. In addition, I would like to explain my involvement in the recent situations to you as well.

The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) began its gathering in the middle of March. UDD had only one request ?” that the Prime Minister dissolve the parliament. During the one-year and a half in the office, the government has failed in many ways. A large part of the population feels that their economic hardship has not improved. Many social issues, such as the problems in the deep South of the country, drug usage among Thai youth, and environmental issues like the one at Maab Taa Put Industrial Complex, worsened. There are also many grand-scale corruption cases relating to various government projects. Asking for a parliamentary dissolution, which would lead to a nationwide election, is a right of the population in a democratic society.

On 10 April 2010, the government used force to break up one group of the protestors on Rachadumneon Boulevard. Twenty-five people lost their lives and over eight hundred injured. After the incident, the government still continued to use force. As of 19 May 2010, the total death toll increased to 86 individuals, while more than 2000 people were injured.

As a peace-loving citizen, I wanted to help the people and their families who were affected by the government’s violent crackdown. Since 11 April, I visited the injured in many hospitals around Bangkok and met the families of those who lost their lives. Many of the deceased had young children or dependence. Many of the injured will become disabled for the rest of their lives. I am very saddened to see this. For all my life that I have been helping people in difficult circumstances, I understand full well the hardship they will have to endure as a result of the government’s brutal actions.

During and after the failed negotiation between the UDD and the government, the government continued to press ahead with measures that undoubtedly violated the international practices of crowd control. Many more people were sent to the hospital, or died, especially in Bon Kai area, which is near Klong Toey. Many of those victims did not participate in the UDD movement. They got injured while carrying on their normal lives. Some were going to work; some were simply out to buy food, etc. Nevertheless, they became victims of the government’s unrestraint and reckless use of force. Meanwhile, the highly respected and powerful individuals in the country chose not to come out to stop the government from killing innocent civilians.

Some of the leaders in Klong Toey community and myself decided to express our sincere wish for peace. We no longer wanted to see Thais kill Thais. We set up a small stage at Klong Toey intersection, with signs such as “Stop the Violence!” or “Stop killing civilian!”

In addition to our efforts, there were many groups in Thai society who urged the government to negotiate. Most notable was the group of 65 senators, led by the Head of the Senate, who agreed to be the middle person in the negotiation to resolve the conflict. However, the government declined the peace talk and rolled on tanks to the main protesting area in Ratchaprasong in the morning of 19 May.

Even after the UDD leaders already announced they would stop the demonstration and surrender to the police, the use of force by the government continued. The saddest episode happened at a temple called Wat Pathum Wanaram, in which many people, mostly women and children sought refuge. There were reports of soldiers firing into the temple, including at the First Aid tent, where a few medical volunteers lost their lives.

The government has an arrest warrant on me and has frozen my bank accounts, along with others whom it deemed to be on the opposite side politically. There were never evidence or investigation into whether these people on the list had any involvement in the “terrorist” activities that the government has claimed. I have asked myself if I was guilty of petitioning for the end of violence and killing.

When ignorance and selfishness obscured wisdom and goodness of the powerful in the society, disaster inevitably arrived. O… what a sad state Thailand has become!

I can only hope that this tragedy has provided many factions in Thai society with an invaluable lesson ?” that the government, which has the power in its hands, uses wisdom and conscience in solving the problems of the society with sincerity. Problems need real peaceful solutions, not the play with words nor the tainting of evidences as this government has done. One of the core grievances of the UDD that even non-UDD people understand is the existence of double standards in the society during the past few years. This must be addressed in order to bring about peace in Thai society.

I would like to thank you for your impartial and careful judgment of the circumstances, and for your continuous support of the Duang Prateep Foundation. I truly hope that my participation in the peaceful petition to the government will not affect your generous support of my humanitarian work.

Best Regards,

Ms. Prateep Ungsongtham Hata

A victim of the violence act by the Thai government

Firstly I would say here, in its own country. Culpable in so many cases against its own people, starting with the lack of finacial regulations, silently falling by the wayside and with the choiceless electoral reform con.

I agree with others on Diego Garcia, a wholly dehumanising ethnic cleansing of an island, now under false pretences, i.e. enviornmental protection. As if the US forces are known for their environmental record.

Another flashpoint where britain is closely involved is Columbia and its abstruction of oil in an environmentallly very sensitive area.

BP of all companies.

Operations there are marked by extrajudiciary killings of union labour by rebells and/or rightwing forces in with the Government.

Venezuela will be a future flashpoint for the simple reason that the US is establishing bases on the Columbian border and South America in general. They want the oil Chavez is sitting on and I expect some border dispute to kick it off.

The US established bases all over the world, from Mildenhall,Frankfurt, Diego Garcia, mostly to project its military might, this alone will make for marked differences in approach, less diplomacy and more military pushing of their global strategic interests.

Question to you all, which major US bases have not been permament, ie. recinded after the job was done so to speak? you won’t findmany, where they have afoot in the door, they have settled, no pushing will get them out.

Thailand is stricken by the silence of its king as much as by corrupt politicians, a peculiar thing in so called democratic politics. Centralised leaders are easily nobbled and corrupted by vested interests who never take blame or are contrite, a lasting feature of democracy and centralised Governments in general, hence my penchant for decentralising Governments.

Eastern European relations will not change until Russia reforms its ‘Oligarchski’s take all’attitudes, which run its secret service, stops pandering to people like Derepaska and Karimove alike, Russias oligarchs are only developing industries they have control over, everthing else is standing still.

British involvement in middle east is abysmal, Israels this self appointed belligerant sea dog should not be allowed to flai its way through neigbouring borders at will, it needs sorting once and for all, by the UN and the world community, Israel is incapable or unwilling in managing its relations with its neigbours.

‘Question to you all, which major US bases have not been permament, ie. recinded after the job was done so to speak? you won’t findmany, where they have afoot in the door, they have settled, no pushing will get them out.’

As of July 1, 2007, there are more now.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5564

Italy and Singapore both have dictators in all but name, and Sweden is owned by one man who keeps out of the limelight.

But what counts isn’t politics. Politics is always lies, a trap for any would-be critic to concentrate on. It’s like watching the telly. Hell, it is watching the telly.

Two of the nastiest sovereign-state brands that Britain associates with are Israel and the United States.

People mentioned Diego Garcia. Let’s not concentrate only on the removal of the inhabitants. Diego Garcia is the site of an American military torture-camp, more secret than Guantanamo.

Until 2008, the British authorities lyingly claimed the Americans weren’t keeping any “detainees” (i.e. POWs denied their Geneva Convention rights) on the island.

After that, the strategy was to queer the issue by talking about numbers of “rendition flights”, and about “refuelling”.

This strategy involves getting minor opinion formers (those who comment publicly on issues that have been put into their heads by major opinion formers) to focus on jargon-mediated nitty-gritty.

Well the hell with that.

Here’s the central issue: the UK government is allowing the US to run an illegal torture camp on British soil.

I’m surprised no one has mentioned CHINA.

UK Gov Plc has been more than happy to kowtow to the fascist aristocrats in Zhongnanhai.

I’m surprised no one else has mentioned Crown Agents – facilitating and funding the most egregious acts of “foreign policy” since 1833.

http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg17354.html

“Well the hell with that.”

I agree with your comment George.

“Here’s the central issue: the UK government is allowing the US to run an illegal torture camp on British soil.”

Now there is the rub, will the islanders ever be allowed to return? Does international jurisdiction apply to BIOT? Last time the High court order to return was overtunred by the Lords and is now on its way to the Hague if I’m right.

Diego Garcia is a secret prison, but jack Straw has assured us that there is no torture going on, honest….

When Diego Garcia was turned into a military base, deliberately and with a view of making it a global base, this was a 50 year contract so I believe. Theoretically this should end in 2021, but will it?

UZBEKISTAN.UZBEKISTAN.UZBEKISTAN.

UZBEKISTAN.UZBEKISTAN

I’m not sure how strong the British connection (or how current) but since no one else has mentioned it, what about Western Sahara?

My knowledge of this is a bit sketchy, but I believe it is correct that Britain has exported arms to Morocco that have been used in the occupation of Western Sahara, including artillery for the Berm (Moroccan Wall).

Also, I believe the EU has negotiated mineral and fishing concessions within the occupied territory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moroccan_Wall

http://www.wsrw.org/ – Western Sahara Resource Watch

Re EU fishing in the waters of Western Sahara:

http://www.fishelsewhere.eu/

If we’re not talking about our more distant past, I’d say the worst thing we’ve done post WW-II is to act as the supporter and enabler of America’s imperialism. Being “America’s loyal attack dog”, in the words of Chomsky. By proxy, we’ve participated in the deaths of many millions, and the financial enslavement of vast numbers worldwide (including in our own countries), the overthrow of democratically elected governments, installation of dictators, and the ruthless suppression of entire populations. Instead of enabling a united European alternative, we have acted as the US ambassador to Europe, undermining any counter-balance.

For example, even Diego Garcia was done entirely for the benefit of the US. Our continuing war against Iraq which started in 1990 and never ended was at the behest of the US.

Remember that the head of the CIA Station in London attends the weekly meetings of the UK’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

There are also more than 30 US military bases in Britain. That’s not counting US spy bases such as Menwith Hill.

Most of the films on UK TV are American, and the average person in the UK watches a depiction of an American firing a gun … I don’t know how many times per day, but a lot.

The country caved in to the US in the early 1940s, when Britain’s physicists were taken over by America, just as many German physicists were taken over by America a decade before.

UK TV routinely refers to the US president as “the president”. They don’t mean the president of France or Russia or Germany.

Britain is utterly dominated by the United States, is the truth of the matter.

Craig – here’s something you might try to find out, for those of us who don’t have your connections! Does the UK government receive any payment from the US government for allowing them to have military bases here?

They certainly used to. I remember in the early 1980s such payments were one of the two biggest components of British “invisible exports”. (The other one was accounted for by Lloyds insurance market).

Now, even those who campaign against US bases in the UK don’t know whether the UK receives any payment for having them here.

Either the information has been made secret. Or, more likely, the US simply told the UK at some point in the last 30 years that the payments would stop.

I’d be interested to hear your take on this, Craig!

The most disgraceful stance is supporting the zionist entity without question.

And here is a shameful example of this.

Gordon Brown was on the plane in his way to the Mideast Just after the Gaza massacre, where he pledged to donate a Navy ship to tighten the siege on Gaza. and he said the following:

“We are yet to discover the full scale of the appalling suffering, but what is already clear is that too many innocent civilians, including hundreds of children, have been killed during the military offensive.”

Here you have it, the UK is helping israel without knowing what happened.

http://tinyurl.com/9zondh

No crime is big enough for britain to change stance when the criminal is Israel!!!! that is why Britain has sent the Royal navy to help tightening the grip of occupation on palestine without waiting to know how the 1400 innocent civilians have been slaughtered

Britain is guilty everywhere.

The reason why God gave Britain an empire where the sun never sets is because God doesn’t trust the British in the dark.

“The reason why God gave Britain an empire where the sun never sets is because God doesn’t trust the British in the dark.”

*laughter*

Trouble is, the world’s round. Didn’t God notice that by doing that, he also gave us places where we can always be doing things in the dark ?

Richard, that’s an amazing joke! Really funny. It’s the way you tell ‘em, man!

Britain supports the American Empire in its drive to achieve global hegemony. From that most evils listed here derive, including Britain’s complicity in rendition and torture, support for Israel right or wrong, and the ongoing slaughter and displacement of Afghans and Pakistanis.

The question, then, is do you believe the American Empire is a good thing or not. If not, then all the evils of empire are unnecessary and should be opposed.

However, if one believes that it is better to live under the umbrella of American power rather than for Britain to look out for itself as a nuclear-deterrent-possessing Swiss style neutral (as advocated by the BNP), then perhaps some or even all of these evils must be accepted as the price of security, if not freedom.

It may be said that it is possible for a great empire to persist and grow without reliance on evil means, including false flag terrorism, torture, and the mass killing and displacement of innocents. However, no empire that has ever existed rejected whatever means were available to maintain and extend its power. Therefore, I do not believe that you can pick and chose. Either take the evils of empire as they are, or opt for something quite different and face the possibility of humiliating and possibly devastating subjugation by the spurned imperial overlord.

I meant, Arsalan, for the original joke!

I have no idea how much familiar you are about the situation in African countries. However, there are disturbing developments that have brought regimes to use the war on terror as a means to brutalize their subjects and yet remain unaccountable because they get support and backing from the US and UK governments. The typical and distubing case in point is the minority regime of Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia where the West gave a blind eye to the brutality of the regime and kept supporting the regime. In all accounts here is a regime that has no regard to human rights and respect of the law and its corrupt and criminal officials enjoy the support of western donors. Well if a regime, whatever criminal, has the support and material backing of a western donor, then it will have the means to institute a regime of fear and hopelessness. What makes the issue most frustrating is that even if the west knows the facts, they donot seem to care a bit and as a silenced majority one has little option but live a life of suppression and brute.

Of course not. Capitalist elites are not interested in how people are treated, how their lives are. They simply use the human rights narrative as yet another tool to further their own interests (eg. Tibet, Burma, Iran, etc.) and ignore or suppress it when it doesn’t. Craig’s experiencevis a vis Uzbekistan is a case in point, as, Hana, is your powerful depiction of the rehime’s actions in Ethiopia.

Human rights is just like international law and evidence.

It is just slogans used to justify policies that the west would have done anyway.

Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded using these slogans, the native peoples of North America and Australia were exterminated using these slogans and Africans were enslaved and transported to the Americas using these slogans.

There is just one law that matters, and the is the law of might.

Powerful nations have always done what they are able to do. The only way to stop them is to have enough might to act as a deterrent.

The colonised need to unite to deter the colonisers.

If we don’t want repeated invasions, we need to reestablish the khilafah.

For anyone interested, the Prateep Ungsongtham Hata article reposted above by ‘Suspicious’, about government violence in Thailand, also appears on Indymedia.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/05/452309.html

Prateep Ungsongtham Hata also has a wikipedia page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prateep_Ungsongtham_Hata

Thanks Paul, t’was I who posted it on Indymedia from my own correspondance,hence not referencing it.

I was in Bangkok at the end of March. My impression is of a very complex cultural situation.

Egypt has to be worth considering. Don’t forget that Blair went there on holiday while PM — and while British citizens were imprisoned (and tortured) there on charges amounting to belonging to an opposition party: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3337323.stm

And the holiday was paid for by the Egyptian government:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-447421-row-over-blair-holiday-funded-by-egypt.do

@Craig – if you want a good account of British history, to weed out our most flagrant abuses of HR, read Mark Curtis – one of our few historians not to revel in our bloodthirsty past. We tacitly supported, for example, the worst atrocities the US committed against Vietnam, and the use of napalm – as demonstrated by official FCO documents.

I’m sure Mr Murray and many of you posting will know about Mark Curtis’ books on Britain’s dubious diplomatic relations. But if not they are highly recommended – he has done a ton of original research using the declassified government files in the National Archive. He deals with crooked deals past and present.

@Jon

Great minds think alike, and almost at the same time by the looks of it…

Add Indonesia to the list.

My first thoughts to Craig’s original post were Diego Garcia and – I appreciate this won’t be top of many people’s lists – the Government’s refusal to ratify the international law on tribal peoples (ILO Convention 169).

There are many blips in our foreign record we try to cover up that aren’t particularly headline grabbing – and not worthy of a top 5 but worth mentioning. The moral dilemmas of Pitcairn Island (rape ‘a way of life’) comes to mind, for example. Technically they are British, but we keep that quiet.

Craig, what part in that definition of a diplomat: “an honest man sent abroad to lie for his country,” did you not understand?

A moral foreign policy is an oxymoron.

A foreign policy not based on a double standard would be a disaster.

Read the Old Testament again and get the hang of it. Within the tribe, murder bad, among tribes murder good or bad depending on whose getting murdered (or tortured or robbed, etc.).

If you don’t like that, then sign up for one World Government, via the undemocratic European Union, and enjoy the most corrupt dictatorship the world will have ever seen.

Craig asks: “But where are Britain’s other most current disgraceful examples of immoral foreign policy, and in particular support of dictators?”

Stepping aside from dictators for the moment (I suspect Central Asia is the obvious place to look currently) , I think Britain’s most disgraceful and perhaps longest standing immoral foreign policy is its support for Zionism ?” the political movement born in Europe in the late 19th century that aimed at imposing Jewish sovereignty over far-away Palestine whose people were 90% non-Jewish, and virtually 100% non-European.

Zionism’s aims of gaining sovereignty were achievable only through three avenues, none of them democratic. Was the non-Jewish population in Palestine to be converted to Judaism? Was it to be exterminated? Or was it to be driven – harassed, dispossessed and terrorised – from the land? Eighty years of well-documented history shows that the slaughter and expulsion of the non-Jewish Palestinians are the avenues that Zionists have followed with impunity.

Britain’s shame is twofold. Firstly, it was the British government’s issuance of the 67-word Balfour Declaration on November 2nd 1917 that initiated the brutal calamity that has befallen the people of Palestine, and secondly, notwithstanding the clause “it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”, Britain has not merely failed utterly to prevent the persecution of the non-Jewish indigenous people, but has now grown to aid and abet the persecutors.

Slavery, the Irish Potato Famine, the Bloody Sunday shootings ?” I suggest, that in this age when governments are ready to admit the injustices of the past, the British government’s starting point for a new foreign policy in the Middle-East should begin with a public repudiation, resilement from, and apology for the Balfour Declaration. Let the British Foreign Secretary use Elizabeth Monroe’s words, taken from “Britain’s Moment in the Middle East”. She says of that egregious document, that “Measured by British interests alone, the Balfour Declaration was one of the greatest mistakes in our imperial history” and Sir Arnold Toynbee in his foreword to “The Palestine Diary” noted that “Jewish immigration was imposed on the Palestinian Arabs by British military power… The tragedy in Palestine is not just a local one; it is a tragedy for the World, because it is an injustice that is a menace to the World’s peace. Britain’s guilt is not diminished by the humiliating fact that she is now impotent to redress the wrong that has been done.”

Britain should condemn Zionism’s undemocratic aims achievable only through ethnic cleansing, should cease paying lip-service to the deceit of the Bantustan-like “two-state solution”, and should press overtly and covertly for a one-state, one-man one-vote democracy to be instituted throughout all three territories (Gaza, Israel and the West Bank, 10,400 sq miles, circa 11 million people) that presently fall under three different codes of Knesset rule.

Rwanda- Kagame

@Daf – spooky. Great minds think alike!

Peter,

Re: Britain and Israel

Before the Balfour Declaration was declared it was checked out with Colonel House, President Wilson’s chief fixer. So it was as much an American initiative as a British one. But the Brits had to make the announcement because they were the ones who were to have the Palestine mandate when WW1 ended.

Further, the Declaration did not envisage a “Jewish State”. It envisaged a home for Jews in Palestine, where it was assumed that the Palestinian Arabs would continue to live. This was not an unusual arrangement at that time. Empires have always felt free to dispose of territory as they thought fit. Britain brought immigrants from the Indian sub-continent to Africa, as well as sending Europeans to Africa and elsewhere. Before WW2, Britain offered to accommodate Germany’s Jews in Ceylon, but the Zionists were having none of that: it was Palestine or nothing.

The British did not comply with the Zionist program for mass Jewish migration to Palestine because it was opposed by Muhammed Amin al-Husseini, a militant Arab nationalist with a criminal record who was appointed Grand Mufti for life by Britain’s Palestine High Commissioner, the Jew, Sir Herbert Samuel, a dedicated Zionist.

Anyway, Britain does not control Palestine today, which is, in effect, an American colony, which serves as a front line base and weapons cache for American forces in the ME.

It would appear, therefore, that the only blame that attaches to Britain in relation to Israel today, stems from Britain’s attachment to and support for the American empire.

It is that attachment to the American empire that is the real issue. It is as an American tributary that Britain is in some measure complicit in the crimes of American empire.

So the question is,what alternative do you think Britain has to subordination to the US?

The BNP have a plan for British neutrality maintained by means of an independent nuclear deterrent. Far-fetched, perhaps. But is there any other option. If so, it has never been mentioned here.

How about ‘British neutrality with no nuclear weapons’?

And what’s with the repeated allusions to the BNP, Alfred? In any case, the BNP are great pals of Israel and of the Israeli strategic aim of hegemony in the Middle East. So, by your previous logic somewhere or other, that must mean the BNP are trying to discredit support for Israel by themselves supporting Israel.

Or could it be that oppressive, intolerant and yes, racist, forces tend to to attract one another? And so, the BNP and Israel make great bedfellows.

re: How about ‘British neutrality with no nuclear weapons’?

That’s a question of strategy. I haven’t the slightest idea whether any kind of neutrality would be feasible. The United States has always demanded that countries chose a side.

Re: And what’s with the repeated allusions to the BNP,

I cited their policy, that’s what’s with the BNP.

If you don’t like their policy that’s fine with me. But as far as I know they are the only party offering neutrality as an option.

Yeah, right, ‘neutrality’ in alliance with Israel, the US’s prime satellite. That’s really logical, isn’t it? Like re-naming ‘soup’, ‘broth’.

Alfred, the BNP are not an alternative to the parties of corporate war. The sad fact that there are no genuine oppositions in this country is worth noting. But just because one lives in a Trappist world and a dog barks doesn’t mean we all go and celebrate the dog.

what about british or rather english role in starting both the first and second world wars and then cold war?

The first world war was planned by british to destroy german who to the envy of british were doing very well in industry without parasitic empire to draw on. so they wanted germany and russia to fight each other.

the secon d waolr war was started by england to make germans wage war agasint russia. in fact hitler could have and should have deastroyed the a=british army rather than letting the coward british escpae through dunkirk but hitler had ben given assurance by war o=monger chuirchill that all postruing by english was for public com=nsnsumption and that england would help germany attack russia. and then england stabeed germany aswell. that is why soviets made pact witgermans to buy time.

one only thing the germans give to english race -thepower of gun, military and violence. in all the germans have beatend english again and again.

in fact the english were planning to make pact with germans as late as 1917 before americans came into picture. the germans whose three fourth of army regiments were fightin agasint the russians both in first and second world war were defeating the enlgish in west despite the engish having all the respurces of empire not only stolen goods bur manpower-even 3 million Indians fopdied ueslessly for the english inw ar.

even then fgermans were willing-that tells you how inferior enlgish are in fighting. that is why english race has deep seated inferioirty complex with germsn who beat then at thier own game.

====================================

incidently itis expected but good news that the germans beat englsn sopundly 4-1. how did england dare dream about beating going to finals of world up-the only time england reached there was in 66 in your own country with bad refreeng and massive oropaganda.

germans have always reached qaurter final since 1938!

remmebr that. and they have beaten in england in all wars and will beat england again only if they get out of your creation nato.

==============================

http://wikispooks.com/wiki/Conjuring_Hitler