David Cameron’s people in his Witney constituency seem to have a shakey attitude to democracy too, with the local council taking down posters at the venue for a talk I gave about Murder in Samarkand, on the grounds that it was “political”.
I suppose if politics – and thinking in general – are banned in Witney, that explains why they vote for David Cameron.
http://www.witneygazette.co.uk/forum/letters/8096116.Corn_Exchange_talk/
Does this go for blogs too?
Good to see from the link you’ve posted that you’re getting some support from the Greens. Let’s hope that there’s lots of mutual support between the smaller parties; it’s the best way to put up a challenge to the fake battle between Labour and Conservative.
Having played Witney myself with a political comedy show I can certainly appreciate where you’re coming from.
The audience seemed to like it but one lady took offence to me swearing, when I used the word penis.
Speaks volumes.
Great letter from the Green PPC.
Have added our comment to the local rag’s website, it should appear beneath that article shortly.
I don’t see how a public speech by Craig Murray *couldn’t* be a political event. (I don’t mean popular lectures on how to choose a good value Scotch). At least they allowed you to speak.
“The audience seemed to like it but one lady took offence to me swearing, when I used the word penis.” Daniel Hoffman-Gill
Perhaps she’d never thought of one before.
Alternatively, one might have intoned, in your best Kenneth Williams voice:
“Oooh, What’s wrong darlin’, never seen a prick before?”
Western countries are seeking to establish permanent bases in Afghanistan aimed at dominating the Middle East and Caucasus region, according to a Germany-based Afghan expert.
The West will never withdraw from Afghanistan,” said Matin Baraki of Marburg University in an interview in Berlin on Wednesday.
“The US concept is to remain present in the region. They will never pull out
of Afghanistan. They (Americans) also claimed they would withdraw from
Iraq but they never did,” he added.
Referring to Afghanistan’s strategic significance for the West, Baraki said, “Afghanistan is an unsinkable aircraft carrier for NATO and the US. It’s of
utmost geostrategic importance to them. They did not go to Afghanistan because
of democracy and for defending human rights and women rights.”
Baraki stressed that the new US strategy in Afghanistan was geared at returning
the elements of the formerly CIA-backed Taliban elements to power.
He also predicted that the western strategy in Afghanistan was doomed to fail, pointing to the ill-fated occupation of the war-stricken country by the British and the Russians.
“Afghans don’t want foreign powers. NATO has militarily the possibility to destroy the country, eliminate the resistance … but there won’t be calm for the reconstruction of Afghanistan, the scholar added.
Murder in Samarkand in an excellent starting point to appreciate the strategic battles for Central and Southern Asia that over-ride the hypocrisy of supporting corrupt regimes, together with remaining documents that Craig has presented (many have been taken down) that show complete disregard for human rights and turn a ‘blind’eye’ to corrupt dictators and torture.
The stakes are high in these regions and one can deduce that the future of the Collective Security Treaty Organization and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the two major potential barriers to Western (NATO)military penetration of vast tracts of Eurasia are soon to cause a severe rift between the West (UK, USA) and China/Russia over regional and global dominance.
A Sign of Empire Pathology
“Here is a shocking statistic that you won’t hear in most western news media: over the past nine years, more US military personnel have taken their own lives than have died in action in either the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. These are official figures from the US Department of Defence, yet somehow they have not been deemed newsworthy to report. Last year alone, more than 330 serving members of the US armed forces committed suicide – more than the 320 killed in Afghanistan and the 150 who fell in Iraq (see wsws.org).
“Since 2001, when Washington launched its so-called war on terror, there has been a dramatic year-on-year increase in US military suicides, particularly in the army, which has borne the brunt of fighting abroad. Last year saw the highest total number since such records began in 1980. Prior to 2001, the suicide rate in the US military was lower than that for the general US population; now, it is nearly double the national average.”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16916
Yes, it’s shocking – so even though these are professional soldiers, not conscripts as in Vietnam, the ‘hidden’ toll has been rising for some time.
That war brutalises is a truism, but urban war/ engaging in a guerilla war in residential areas – as in Iraq and Afghanistan – seems to be particularly psychologically damaging. Same thing happened, albeit on a lesser numerical scale, to some army guys who did rotating postings to N. Ireland from 1969-late 1990s.
It would be interesting to glean some idea of the precise mechanisms involved. Is it the constant ‘fight-or-flight’ knife-edge awareness re. IEDs, etc., of not knowing who is a friend and who, an enemy? There may also be the subtext of ‘why are we here?’ and the traumatising effect of seeing multiple children and other civilians killed, etc. as well as possibly poor rehabilitation facilities post-services at home.
It’s also of note that the American Psychological Association (the psychologists’ professional body) repeatedly has been accused by its own whistleblowing members and by various alternative media outlets of being complicit with the design and use torture by the Army, CIA et al.
Thanks for the links Droilin – I read James Cogan’s report here:
uruknet.info/index.php?p=61890
a while back and recently the MailOnline report; a sad story of post traumatic stress:
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1201916/Traumatised-young-soldier-committed-suicide-carrying-dead-babies-bombed-buildings-Iraq.html
You are right Suhayl; I am sure it is the huge burden and stress of not knowing who the enemy is and then realising you have killed or mutilated children, women and innocent citizens in ‘compound’ strikes. The Falklands War was a very different environment, I know from a couple of Naval friends that had short lived nightmares some time after an Exocet went through the ship but they were fine as time passed, still holding memories of our lost friends. The key is the loss can be talked about and shared, something impossible when unknown civilians die or sustain terrible injuries.
Comedy gold Suhayl, comedy gold.
Thank you, Daniel, thank you.
Dreoilin.
That is a shocking statistic. There has been a total blackout of news coverage from the war zones, which meant that military personnel temporarily felt able to exceed all bounds of decency and humanity, and subsequently an inability to share the burden of their own and their leaders’ crimes with the UK and US public.
This double-bind by Cheney and Rumsfield was vastly more evil than the double-bind of dictator Saddam. The complexity of the USUKIS mind-fuck ( if you will forgive my French ) is that Washington is both colonial oil-grab and Zionist anti-Islam fanaticism at one and the same time. Saddam was a dictator to be feared, but he was one-faced. US and now UK policy is a combination of Zionist banking Blackmail over foreign policy, and colonial greed for resources. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were not supposed to be only effective in securing the strategic advantage, but they were also intended to be humiliatingly and obnoxiously cruel, to satisfy the vicious Nazi Zionasty lobbies inside US government and UK parliament.
I suppose in an earlier version of English Witney may have meant No wit, i.e. no brains.