Remember, Freedom Is Worth Dying For 150


In the UK, we are understandably preoccupied with the fact that so many of our elected representatives are personally corrupt in terms of filling their own pockets, and appear not to be particularly distinguished or inspiring people. I actually do not believe the oft-repeated mantra that they all went into politics with good motives.

This country has been through a terrible decade. We have launched illegal wars on others, to further the economic interests of a wealthy class, and unleashed death, mutilation, poverty and grief upon millions in foreign lands. In so doing we made ourselves hated and then disliked the fear of retribution. We have substantially circumscribed our own liberties, hard won by our ancestors, and not cared because we were seduced by a dream of limitless wealth and ease. That bubble inevitably burst and proved to be based on an economic lie. Ordinary people will be paying for bailing out the extremely wealthy, for generations.

So extreme frustration is justified. But today, on the twentieth anniversary of the massacre of Tiananmen Square, we should remember that freedom is so important it is worth dying for.

That has never been a remote concept to me. I have several friends who have died struggling for democracy in Uzbekistan in the last seven years. I also still believe that the Second World War and the fight against fascism was a noble and necessary defence. Like many of my generation, there are close relatives I never got the chance to know because they gave their lives for democracy then. My mother’s only brother, for one. My grandparents never really recovered.

Today in China numerous websites, twitter, Flickr, blogger, livejournal and much else is closed down to try to prevent Chinese people from seeing any remembrance of Tiananmen. This blog was blocked there already, as it is is Uzbekistan and several other countries.

About half as many people as died at Tiananmen, died at Andijan in Uzebkistan, also massacred as they protested for democracy, just over five years ago.

When I was in Uzbekistan, the official line I was given by Jack Straw’s FCO was that Uzbekistan was following the “South East Asian Model” whereby economic liberalisation was bringing about social shifts and the development of a strong middle class, which would eventually lead to democracy. The existence of the model was not a nonsensical argument, though in Uzbekistan there was not any actual economic liberalisation, which invalidated the argument against criticising the regime.

In China there has been economic liberalisation. But precious little sign that this has led to real democratic development or even toleration of dissidence.

In those diaries, Zhao called the massacre of peaceful demonstrators at Tiananmen Square “a tragedy to shock the world”, and clearly stated it could have been averted, had any of the party leadership sided with his view that the demonstrators should be permitted to protest or otherwise be peacefully dispersed. The violent crackdown remains to this day one of the great signs that liberalization of China by trade and engagement has been a moral failure.

http://www.casavaria.com/cafesentido/2009/06/03/2891/china-still-seeks-to-hide-what-happened-at-tiananmen-square-20-years-ago-video/

The greatest sign of lack of progress over the last twenty years, is the Chinese government’s attempts even today to deny what happened at Tinananmen Square, and its Herculean efforts to prevent its population from knowing about it.

Two decades ago the air was heady, communism was tumbling everywhere, apartheid was vanishing, freedom seemed possible. We are left with a sense of ashes in the mouth. In China, the repression in Tibet and of the Muslim Uighurs – the latter a far less fashionable cause in the West – continues undiminished. But even toleration of dissent is not increasing, and there seems no end to the totalitarian desire to control what the people may know.

China may be moving towards capitalism pretty quickly. It is not even looking in the direction of political freedom.


150 thoughts on “Remember, Freedom Is Worth Dying For

1 2 3 4 5
  • anticant

    The denizens of the Westminster Bubble – politicians and journalists alike – are in a more unrealistic state of mind than I can ever remember. I am bored silly with their endless chatter about how to best to save “this great party of ours” and keep the New Labour ‘project’ rolling forward.

    As Stuart says, they suffer from the double delusion that this country not only needs them but wants them. We need them like a hole in the head.

    Twelve years ago, Blair’s New Labour had the political ball at its feet. I was one of those who – though not a habitual Labour voter – shared the delusional euphoria of May 1997 [“Things Can Only Get Better”]. Now, after 12 years of massive parliamentary majority, they have lost their way, their authority and their credibility. Most voters are sick to death of them.

    The danger to democracy is that things have reached such a pass that people no longer care who replaces New Labour as long as they go, and the quicker the better. Until they have gone, there is no realistic political process to engage with.

  • George Dutton

    “The propaganda is coming at us from all directions. It is extremely important that Americans begin to do their own research to validate anything and everything they hear in media, or on forums, such as below. Relying (only) on mainstream media, is no longer a reliable source of truth, because they are all controlled by the Obama administration, as are the “Fusion Centers” located in a every state in America. If you would like to give “Mike” your two cents, you can log-on the Benton County Issues.Com without signing-in. Just pick a name and post under “National/Political” section where “Mike” likes to wait patiently for you.”…

    http://tinyurl.com/c3kjyq

    Sounds like eddie.

  • Leo Davidson

    @eddie:

    “Brian Haws – he could have been removed for any number of reasons. His site is an eyesore in my opinion. Any other government in Europe would have removed him long ago, the fact that he hasn’t been evicted shows how tolerant we are.”

    What a load of ignorant rubbish.

    Labour passed the law about protests outside parliament specifically targeting it at Haw because he had become an embarrassment.

    Haw is still there because Labour screwed up and failed to make the law apply to protests which started before the law was passed.

    It has nothing to do with tolerance. If they were tolerant of protest in general then why would they have passed the law in the first place?

    (One does wonder, however, why the law isn’t being applied to the people protesting about Sri Lanka now. Seems the law is only used to stifle protest against our government’s actions and not protest about things happening in other parts of the world. Laws should be like trademarks: Enforce them fairly and consistently or lose them!)

  • eddie

    Leo the governement makes the laws with parliament’s consent. Are you seriously telling me that they could not have amended the law to remove him? Come off it.

    Eddie is not me. I am eddie. Just so that you know. I don’t need to demonstrate, I can find other ways to make my point, thanks.

    Chris – go and look at Wikipedia – there have been numerous studies on deaths in Iraq and the Lancet one is way out of line with the rest of them. Am I happy that 100,000 have died? No. Am I happy that so many muslims have killed other muslims? No. Am I happy that the Kurds and other minorities in Iraq can now live in peace and that Iraq is a functioning democracy? Yes. Am I happy that hundreds and hundreds of thousands have died in Darfur, China, Korea, Zimbabwe and Rwanda (to name but a few)? No. do I wish the west had done more about it ? Yes. Do I wish that people like you would do less bleating about Iraq and Gaza and do more to protest against atrocities in other countries? Yes.

    KevinB – I do apologise for the abuse, but you remain a fool. But at least you know what onanism is, to give you credit. You still haven’t responded to my question about the demolition of the WTC. I ask you questions and you come back with abuse. Have you, or any of you, seen “Man on Wire”? The technical difficulties of getting wire-walking equipment into the WTC was difficult enough, let alone a demolition package – and that was thirty years ago when security was a lot slacker – unless of course the owners and managers of the WTC were in on the act, which stretches credulity to the nth degree.

  • MJ

    eddie: allow to answer your trifling concerns about controlled demolition.

    Yes, it requires a big team to set up. We know however that it was done, because the recent study demonstrates that thermite particles are present in the dust.

    The charges were probably placed when the WTC underwent a major overhaul of its elevators some six months prior to 9/11. Unlikely therefore to be many witnesses. The final touches were probably carried out on the weekend before 9/11 when there was at total power down at WTC to enable “recabling”. Witnesses have testified that the buildings were without electricity and were swarming with workmen who had not gone through the normal electronic ID checks.

    The company responsible was most likely Controlled Demolition Inc (love the name!) which has a history of sensitive government work. Most likely a CIA front.

    The planes that hit the buildings were most likely not those that left Logan. They were probably remotely controlled and had no-one on board. The whole operation was run from WTC7 (its top floors were a CIA station) which is why it too had to be demolished once the operation was completed.

    All quite simple stuff really. Hope it answers your concerns. You can’t hold up your own lack of imagination as evidence I’m afraid. If your can’t take it however, a far more terrifying question should should be troubling your mind: how the hell did all that thermite get into the dust?

    Incidentally the owner of WTC, Larry Silverstein, most probably was involved. A few months before 9/11 he amended the WTC insurance policy to include cover for acts of terrorism. Coincidence or what?

  • eddie

    MJ – I thought you were more sensible than that. Honestly, do you really believe that guff? Yes it is simple. Simple-minded. Come on think about it. All those dozens of operatives setting charges and not one of them has spilled the beans to family or friends? It is simply unbelievable. Can you tell me of a similar conspiracy shared by so many people that has been kept a secret? No. Even where two people commit a crime it usually ends up with one testifying against the other. I repeat, you believe it because you want to believe it and for no other reason. You are wasting your time on this stuff.

  • eddie

    …and if the planes were remote controlled what happened to the ones containing passengers that took off? Where did they go? We know one of them landed in Pennsylvania. What about the others, did they go through the back of the wardrobe? I live in Cambridge. Read what Professors of Engineering at the university say on the subject. I would rather listen to them than stuff peddled by fantasists on the interent. Sorry, I won’t waste my time on this nonsense.

  • MJ

    eddie: no I’m not saying I necessarily believe it. There’s not enough information in the public domain to get a reliable handle on what really happened. I’m just pointing out that it’s feasible. In your earlier post you were holding up your own ignorance and lack of imagination as proof that there could not have been a controlled demolition. I fact there’s enough information around to show that there could. And the presence of thermite in the dust suggests that there most probably was.

    There are several theories around to account for the missing passengers; take your pick.

    I believe the study done by the University of Copenhagen chemistry department was the first of its kind. Not sure that a professor from Cambridge would be best placed to comment unless he was part of the team.

    If you can’t be bothered to waste your time on this stuff may I suggest you refrain from asking others to do so, then get all triumphal when they don’t?

  • KevinB

    eddie,

    regarding we who point out impossibilties and absurdities in the official 9/11 narrative.

    It is not our job to explain how the criminals did it. No one has to explain this at this stage. There are many detailed and interesting theories out there but that is not the point.

    It is, however, incumbent on the proponents of the official conspiracy theory to ANSWER THE DETAILED QUESTIONS AND CONVINCINGLY CONTRADICT THE OBVIOUS IMPLICATIONS OF THE LATEST ASTOUNDING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH and explain to the public at large why anyone should continue believing such an obvious pack of lies.

    Of course, they do not do this.

    They do not even allow the evidence collected by highly qualified academics (and the evidence of many witnesses who heard and saw the explosions) into the public domain.

    I know you will continue with your silly trolling rubbish but other parties will have to read the thread and decide for themselves whose ‘questions’ are serious and whose are not.

  • eddie

    I am not ignorant and I do not lack imagination. I know that no serious engineer believes your crackpot theiries. I can imagine that Mars may have little green men living on it. All the facts I know of tell me that it ain’t so. And I didn’t raise it in the first place, you did. I wouldn’t raise it because it is NOT INTERESTING. Even Craig thinks your theories are cranky.

  • MJ

    If you’re not ignorant and don’t lack imagination then you’ll be the first to concede that the objections you raised were spurious.

    Plenty of serious engineers have very serious questions about 9/11. That’s why engineering forums still hotly debate the matter. It doesn’t help that there is no precedent for a steel building falling the way WTC did that wasn’t a controlled demolition.

  • eddie

    As I said, I’m not wasting my time on this. You haven’t answered the question about how so many people can be in on a conspiracy and for there to be no leaks. Until you do that your fantasies remain fantasies.

  • KevinB

    People,

    eddie is a troll, pure and simple. If I thought he was simply stupid or uninformed I would continue to engage with him…..

    …..but…..he is simply dishonest. He has ZERO INTEREST in verifiably disturbing facts.

    As another matter of fact there are 700 fully qualified engineers and architects who are part of an organisation called “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth”.

    These professionals are declaring to the world that 9/11 was an ‘inside job’. Cover your ears if you like….if you don’t care what kind of world you are going to leave to your children…..but this is serious stuff that will, one day, be fully acknowledged (and accepted as truth) in the public domain.

    See, Richard Gage, the leader of this organisation, being interviewed by Fox TV (of all people)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM

    (by the way, Craig has never had anything to say about my 9/11 posts directly, other than connecting this with banking and globalisation is a step too far for him).

    Another mistake by eddie the troll.

  • Chris

    Eddie,

    you ask for an example of secrecy on a grand scale with no leaks….. Try the Manhattan Project. 100’s of 1000’s of people and not a squeak from any of them.

  • MJ

    “You haven’t answered the question about how so many people can be in on a conspiracy and for there to be no leaks”.

    The number is probably not that high and, since most are in the pay of the CIA, secrecy is their duty.

    You haven’t answered the question about how that thermite got into the dust. Until you do that your fantasies remain fantasies.

  • Chris

    Although I have to profess not knowing what happened on 9/11 the fact that the science is peer reviewed seems very, very persuasive, especially as it reveals un-ignited thermite as well as the chemical fingerprint of spent thermite.

    The question for the eddie’s of this world would have to be: where did it come from and how could the science achieve peer reviewed status if it is merely the ramblings of lunatics as he would suggest?

  • eddie

    Chris

    er, so how do we know about the Manhattan prohject if it is such a secret conspiracy? Doh.

    KevinB – more abuse, no answers. Your usual style. Craig castigated you on these boards for your flights of fantasy. If you want me to find the exact quote I will. Shall I?

    MJ – tell me what thermite is and what its exact chemical properties are and I will then answer your question. I hope you realise that the WTC contained thousands of PCs? Then answer my question about all the “demolition experts” who planted the charges and how come none of their secrets have been leaked.

  • Chris

    Eddie,

    you know quite well that the Manhattan Project was revealed by Government when it suited…. During the whole project itself it remained secret. Stop being obtuse just for the sake of it. It does you no credit.

    Some of the thermite was found in its original form: ergo it didn’t come form a PC or anything else. Sheesh…

  • eddie

    You still haven’t answered the question about the credibility of a whole demolition team keeping a secret for so long. It isn’t credible. Tell me how many people would be involved in demolishing an 18 storey tower block. And then tell me how many would be required to do the twin towers, 110 floors in each. Then tell me where the missing planes went with all their passengers. I bet arsenic and cyanide and all sorts of stuff could have been found at the site. What does it prove? The smoking gun proves nothing. Unless you can answer the fundamental questions your fantasies are meaningless.

  • Jaded

    Jessy you just try too hard. It makes everything so much more obvious. You must have earned a lot of overtime today. Everyone is laughing at your feeble efforts. Keep it up you spook moron! Ha ha. :-0

  • MJ

    eddie: thermite is a synthetic amalgam of superfine particles of magnesium and iron oxide which, when ignited, burns at such a high temperature it can cut through steel. Thankfully it is not present in PCs. As a synthetic compound it has its own distintive chemical fingerprint, which is why particles can be reliably identified.

    Rigging the three WTC buildings in question would require a very large team working over several days. Very few companies have the expertise to bring down a building using thermite but Controlled Demolition Inc is one of them.

    I am not privy to the actual details of the event and do not know what happened to the original planes and their passengers, if indeed they were substituted and did not hit the buildings. As I’ve said before there are several theories kicking around but these are pure speculation.

    Note however that little or no aircraft debris survived the crashes and not a single body recovered.

  • Jaded

    ‘I bet arsenic and cyanide and all sorts of stuff could have been found at the site. What does it prove?’

    This is just too funny to ignore. Please, what sort of dumb question is that? You try so hard and then let slip with a really dumb question. You must have been feeling jaded after all your hard work. If arsenic and cyanide were ‘found’ it would prove cyanide and arsenic were ‘there’. If thermite was ‘found’ it would prove thermite was ‘there’. What do you expect it to prove? Your mask is slipping buddy…

  • KevinB

    **** eddie people. Ignore this troll. He/she is playing a game. He/she is a degenerate dishonest human being.

  • KevinB

    eddie is a troll, pure and simple. If I thought he was simply stupid or uninformed I would continue to engage with him…..

    …..but…..he is simply dishonest. He has ZERO INTEREST in verifiably disturbing facts.

    As another matter of fact there are 700 fully qualified engineers and architects who are part of an organisation called “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth”.

    These professionals are declaring to the world that 9/11 was an ‘inside job’. Cover your ears if you like….if you don’t care what kind of world you are going to leave to your children…..but this is serious stuff that will, one day, be fully acknowledged (and accepted as truth) in the public domain.

    See, Richard Gage, the leader of this organisation, being interviewed by Fox TV (of all people)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM

    (by the way, Craig has never had anything to say about my 9/11 posts directly, other than connecting this with banking and globalisation is a step too far for him).

    Another mistake by eddie the troll.

  • MJ

    I don’t think eddie is either degenerate or dishonest. He simply comes up with the stuff that the average bloke down the pub would say.

    I used to think like eddie on this matter until I actually started sifting methodically through all the available evidence.

    eddie’s main problem is that he is guided solely by his own world-view. If he is faced with evidence that challenges that world-view he simply dismisses it and denigrates the person who brought it to his attention.

    Because he does not allow his world-view to be shaped by evidence of which he does not approve – irrespective of its strength or validity – he is essentially a fantasist. It is not an uncommon phenomenon.

  • eddie

    ah, the old troll response. It’s the norm when you can’t argue your case, accuse the other person of being a troll. Splendid, I can see I am hitting a nerve. None of you has answered my simple question. How is it possible for a huge team of people to demolish the twin towers and yet NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM has spilled the beans since. You must accept that you people are in a tiny minority who believe this garbage. As I said, you believe it because you want to, because it fits with your twisted view of the world. Cock up beats conspiracy ever time in my book. You want it both ways – in your view governments are corrupt and incompetent and yet they can organise these amazingly complex operations. Pull the other one. It’s a sign of mental deficiency.

  • Anonymous

    Is it me or did Obama just admit USA terroist acts on Iran in 1953, which are even continuing today and didn’t Clinton admit to USA suporting terroists in Guatamala who killed about 200,000 civilians……

  • Chris

    Eddie,

    it is not our role to tell you how something was achieved it is merely to highlight the science that renders the conventional thoery impossible.

    If – as seems rather likely given the peer reviewed science here – a particular explosive has been found and that fits perfectly with the observable evidence of the nature of collapse then only the most closed of minds could dismiss it without investigation. I presume that you think that Newton’s Laws can be suspended for one day because they clash with your world view. I’m sorry, but there is no intellectual rigour in your position here and that disappoints me because I do not regard you as a fool.

1 2 3 4 5

Comments are closed.