Why is Sunny Hundal a Neo-Con Lickspittle? 222


Sunny Hundal is pulling the Nick Cohen trick of claiming that “Lefties” who fail to applaud every action of Bush, Blair, Netanyahu and Obomber are actually supporting Osama Bin Laden’s cause.

The Taliban is an excrescence but it is not a spontaneous outpuring of human evil. Its roots lie in the devastation of Afghanistan by foreign invasion, first by the Soviets and then by the Americans, coupled with the failings of Pakistani society due in very large part to hideously corrupt governments and politically powerful military, aided and abetted by the West. The Taliban is, in short, as much a symptom as a cause of disaster.

Hundal is a sad figure. He asked me to join Liberal Conspiracy when it started, and I refused on the grounds it was going to be a vehicle for New Labour war criminals. It has become precisely that. Hundal’s basic decency has predictably been eroded as he was sucked in by the neo-con establishment. He joined New Labour and the Guardian and is now in the states working for the drone-killer President who has launched a campaign against free speech which has seen the prosecution of more whistleblowers under Obama than under all previous US presidents combined. Hundal recently helped the anti-whistleblower cause further by publishing a fawning “exclusive” interview with the odious Harriet Harman (Of course it’s exclusive – who the fuck other than sell-out Hundal wants to talk to Harman) repeatedly labeling Julian Assange as guilty of rape.

Hundal’s question “Why do lefties keep ignoring the threat of the taliban to Pakistanis” is a stupid slur. “Why is Sunny Hundal a neo-con lickspittle?” is a question worth discussion.


222 thoughts on “Why is Sunny Hundal a Neo-Con Lickspittle?

1 5 6 7 8
  • Clark

    Nevermind at 16 Oct, 4:05 pm: All the different energy generation methods have their own dangers. Burning coal produced acid rain that wiped out huge swathes of Scandinavian forests. Using oil and natural gas seems to result in protracted war.

    We haven’t tried the various renewable technologies on a large scale yet, so we don’t know what their dangers are. Maybe there are none; wanna bet? Maybe knock-on effects will only become clear after our society has become dependent.

    The Fukushima disaster should not be blamed upon “nuclear”. It was the secrecy and collusion between industry and government that was responsible:

    # The reactors should never have been sited so near the coast in a tsunami zone.
    # Six reactors shouldn’t have been built so close together.
    # The reactors shouldn’t have continued in operation beyond their design lifetime.
    # Emergency generators, or at least their air intakes, should have been sited safely above flood levels.

    Two of these precautions would have prevented the disaster entirely. The other two would have greatly decreased its severity. But I’ve left the worst ’til last, and I’m sorry, I have to shout:

    THE FUCKING SPENT FUEL SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN STORED IN THE FUCKING REACTOR ROOF-SPACE!!!

    It seems that the risk profile of water-cooled solid-fuelled nuclear power disasters is relatively few deaths, but medium-term contamination of land. There may be further damage from contamination, but so far, Chernobyl would seem to indicate that it’s really very minor in comparison with fossil fuels, and possibly, on worst-case estimates, comparable with hydro-electric.

    We should also remember that the Fukushima disaster is really just a minor part of the much larger disaster of the tsunami itself.

  • Clark

    Chris Jones, thanks for your reply of 16 Oct, 5:07 pm, but you didn’t answer my questions:

    “Why do you believe this stuff (the depopulation conspiracy)? What convinced you? Why doesn’t the Right-wing agenda and support behind it make you suspicious?”

    I know that some people and organisations are trying to slow the birth rate. But that’s not what you’re trying to make me “wake up” to, that isn’t why you agree that I’m “a sheep-person so far below the curve”, is it? You’re saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that there is an imminent plot to kill 80% of the global population. It was advocated, amongst others, by Bertrand Russell and Aldous Huxley. And I can’t see it because I’m either brainwashed, or part of it. Have I got your position about right?

  • Scouse Billy

    @TonyRoma – thank you, I just try to share what I think is interesting.

    @Sunflower – yes, I like Sheldrake very much. I was in touch with him a while back to point out that his field theories IMO were comensurate with the work of Tom Campbell at NASA on consciousness and quantum mechanics – google: “thomas campbell monroe institute” – heavy but worth the trouble, in fact, one of the best lectures I have ever seen.

    Funnily enough, it was the other conversant of “A Quest Beyond the Limits of the Ordinary” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXpndnjHvqw (highly recommended), Bruce Lipton that met up with Tom Campbell in June this year and their exchange was recorded in 2 parts on youtube.

    I found it interesting but anyone not familiar with Lipton or Campbell might want to research their work first. At the end they both agree that there are many of us that need to come together so that humanity can evolve for better driven by love and sharing, rather than for worse driven by fear and greed – and boy are there some fear inducing, greed encouraging elements amongst us – put me in the Dragons Den with an M16… 😉

  • Conveyancing Lawyers

    excellent post, very informative. I wonder why the other experts of this sector don’t understand this. You should continue your writing. I’m confident, you have
    a huge readers’ base already!

    [Mod/Clark: I edited this to break the commercial link, but retained the spam because it is referred to in the next comment.]

  • guano

    The presence of trolls like the immediately above is a sign of how much some parties hate freedom of opinion and freedom of expression. The replacement of violent dictators in Muslim countries by the utterly devious Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab Spring is sponsored by the enemies of Islam, viz the Zionist bankers of USIS.

    This new political Islam rules through institutional racism, hypocrisy, lying , spying and greed and they love the internet as a medium for propagation of falsehoods and detest it as a provider of freedom of speech. They love being able to spy on people through their IT equipment, mobiles, laptops and other espionage devices like trackers, cameras and microphones, but they hate the platform which the internet provides for people to dissent from their tentacles of control.

    The adopted son of dictatorial power, political Islam, will become an absolute tyrant if ever the parent, UKUSISRussia and China decide to remove the internet as more dangerous than useful to them. In this new age of religious and political Big Brotherpersecution, the greatest threat to internet freedom comes from political Islam. They want us all to be religious zombie clones.

  • Clark

    Guano, the above was almost certainly submitted by a spambot, automated spamming software. It has no relation to Zionism. This blog’s automated spam filter intercepts about seventy such comments every day. All blogs are bombarded with such automated spam. The amount of it goes up with a blog’s popularity.

    As to Internet based spying, this is an interest of mine (studying it, not doing it). Most spying emanates from the commercial sector, followed by the criminal sector. I don’t see a clear line between the two.

    The amount of state / secret service spying is difficult to quantify. Certainly, the US collects vast quantities of data on its citizens, and the UK retains access to a vast quantity via Internet Service Providers. But I suspect that the amount of this that is ever actually looked at is pretty small. My basis for this suspicion is twofold:

    (1) The state is chronically lazy. Having their monitoring machines whirring away in the background makes them feel very powerful, but can they really be bothered to regularly inspect their fishing nets and sort out the catch from the crap?

    (2) The state prefers to “outsource”.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    “This new political Islam rules through institutional racism, hypocrisy, lying , spying and greed and they love the internet as a medium for propagation of falsehoods and detest it as a provider of freedom of speech.” Guano, at 4:29am on 17.10.12.

    Sounds just like our ruling class, here in the UK, doesn’t it? Or indeed most ruling classes across the globe.

    ‘Political Islam’ (Islamism, Jihadism, Fundamentalism) is an instrument which they – our ruling classes – have used and periodically allied with tactically over the decades in Muslim-majority countries in order to divide-and-rule and erode any nationalistic movements of self-determination (eg. Mossadegh) or even local despotic cadres which do not adhere wholly to their perceived interests (Sukarno, Gaddafi, Assad, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, etc.). They – and it – need to be opposed.

    But to posit that ‘Political Islam’ is some kind of absolute, epochal enemy and that it somehow is what they are trying to impose on us, here in the UK/the West, is a convenient distortion which emanates largely from the Extreme Right. It is a mixture of Neo-con ‘Clash of Civilisation’ rhetoric and old-style xenophobia. It boils down to this: “Be afraid! Be very afraid! The Muzzies are taking over!” and is a descendent of, “There are Reds under the bed! The Russians are coming!” It is designed to perpetuate societal acquiescence for a state of permanent de facto war. In the end, it serves the interests of the ruling classes, the banksters, the military-security complex.

  • nevermind

    Thanks for that Suhayl, political Islam is a construct of the west, especially the fundamental, absolute type that fears all grass roots movements that could possibly usurp Islamic cultural and religious practises.

    That’s why Malala was shot, because of her networking with other girls who want education and betterment, The Taliban does not want a popular person, female or male, proclaiming the basic messages of marxist theory, all forgotten in our western propaganda haste.

    @Clark, you wrote
    ” Maybe there are none; wanna bet? Maybe knock-on effects will only become clear after our society has become dependent.”

    Mirrors concentrating solar power and heating water tp produce steam that is then directed into turbines to produce energy is simple text book plumbing for a sophisticated technologically savvy society as us. Maybe its too simple for us and we are hooked afr more on the destructive elemnt of our existence here than we thought. Do we have a doomsday gene? that seeks for the most dangerous practises possible?

    fair due, the Tsunami theory did not receive enough thinking, the sea wall was no sufficient enough, but this can happen anywhere, even here in our shallow North sea. If we have a co-occurrence of the stone age Tsunami triggered by a Norwegian landslip which de4vastated most Norfth sea countries sea boards, then this will smother Sizewel’s old and new nuclear development, as well as Bradwell’s de-commissioning.

    In France we have seen that nuclear power stations had to shut down for lack of water in their river system and many eastern European nuclear power generators are built in unsuitable earthquake prone terrain, built with less suitable material qualities.

    Like I said, My stance has changed, from an absolute opponent of nuclear power to one that would use it as a last resort, cause |I do not want to see old people die of hypothermia each year, but as it looks like even with nuclear power our elderly are priced off the heat they so desperately need in winter.

    My children are totally immune to my concerns,although critical, something that is understandable in a world of uncertainty and full spectrum dominance. They will have a fight on their hands, or capitulate, to gain the extra points for the newest Iphone/ dingle dangle/ or whatever.

    And

  • Chris Jones

    Clark – “Why do you believe this stuff (the depopulation conspiracy)? What convinced you? Why doesn’t the Right-wing agenda and support behind it make you suspicious?”

    – I’m not sure it is a matter of believing or not believing Clark. We only need to look at the evidence and the written and oral proof of what these small group of of extremists are planning on doing, and have been carrying out for a while via slow kill methods.It’s not a cult of belief or fantasy, it’s simply pointing out what these people have said themselves,and thinking about what this,and other technological/tranhumanism developments could mean for civilisation as we know it. Maybe the more apt question is why don’t you it believe it when the evidence is there for all to see.

  • Komodo

    Maybe the more apt question is why don’t you it believe it when the evidence is there for all to see.

    Give us an instance. Something that has been inadvertantly betrayed to the world by the conspirators. And it would be, er, illuminating to see the reasoning by which you exclude any other interpretation and arrive at your conclusion.

    Warning: If it walks like a Koch and bribes like a Koch, then it probably is a Koch.

  • Sunflower

    @ScouseBilly

    “Funnily enough, it was the other conversant of “A Quest Beyond the Limits of the Ordinary” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXpndnjHvqw (highly recommended), Bruce Lipton that met up with Tom Campbell in June this year and their exchange was recorded in 2 parts on youtube.”

    Thank you ScouseBIlly, absolutely fantastic.

  • Sunflower

    “Bruce Lipton is an Epigenetic Biologist and Tom Campbell is a NASA Physicist and each has stepped outside the box of their respective disciplines to bring to us what we believe will be the future where Biology and Physics share the same concepts and understandings and will bring us much closer to a unified scientific interaction with our whole cosmos.”

    The lowest entropy in an information system is love, the opposite is fear. These guys are really on to something. It’s fascinating to apply what they say to our modern world politics, a society based on fear in order for a few to be able to control the many. But the control system can be destroyed by love 🙂

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWUu9BTi3X8

    And a NASA scientist in the body of a sage… What a treat.

  • Scouse Billy

    Sunflower, delighted that you enjoyed the overdue “conversation” 🙂

    Dean Radin was mentioned and sure enough Tom Campbell met up with him:

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

    Note how Campbell answers Radin’s question about the observer effect in terms of his Big TOE and think of Sheldrake’s morphic resonance – you can see why I saw the parallels between their concepts, i.e. they are describing the same informational process in slightly different ways but Tom is giving flesh to how morphic fields work.

    Btw I cam across Tom Campbell some time ago and was so pleased that I had found someone who thought the same way about consciousness as I did – I once nearly failed a philosophy of mind course for such heretical thinking.

    I wrote an essay on the relationships between Noddy, Big Ears and their “creator”, Enid – you can imagine the reaction 😉

  • Komodo

    The lowest entropy in an information system is love, the opposite is fear.

    Does this mean anything? If so, what, enquiring minds from the physical science and IT fields would probably like to know…

  • Sunflower

    Those enquiring minds should direct their inquisitiveness to the conversation referred to and not require to be intellectually spoon fed by less intelligent new-agers. If they did so, they would (perhaps) realise that consciousness in the dialogue is referred to a system of information and as such it seeks to lower its entropy. The way that is accomplished is through cooperation or fundamentally, love.

    Was expecting someone else to jump the bait.

  • Komodo

    Well, tough. You’ve got me, not someone else. Can you tell me the units you’re using, perhaps? So what you are saying is that love tends to lower the level of disorder in consciousness? You’ve never been in love, mate.

  • Sunflower

    I’m referring to a discourse between two geniuses, one researching in Biology and one in Physics, they are cutting edge scientists in their respective fields. Now you want me to explain what this is all about because you are to lazy to look for yourself.

    Then, since you have not taken the time to watch the discussion I refer to, you make a false assumption and based on that you come to a false conclusion.

    This tells me you are in actuality not as interested as you portray, seems to me you just want to have an argument.

    Please watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWUu9BTi3X8 and I’d be happy to hear your perspective and analysis.

  • Clark

    There’s a language problem here. “Love” as a word is used for multiple emotional states. The Jehovah’s Witnesses didn’t teach me much of any use, but they did teach the difference between (sorry, memory dredge in progress) Agape and eros.

    Komodo, this lot are discussing Sheldrake, which I consider a great improvement over repressed Tesla devices and fake Bosnian pyramids. The ideas here even treat consciousness in terms of information rather than “energy”. Sheldake does actually do experiments and present results.

  • Clark

    Sunflower, based upon your style of argument in the Leave of Absence thread, I’m suspecting that you regard or feel that breaking down the “scientific filters” is an overriding priority. I regard that as mistaken; the filters are vital to the integrity of science. That said, it’s good to see discussion at the boundaries of science, as opposed to way outside of them.

    I again recommend Persig on this subject. He’s only written two books, Zen and the Art… and Lila; the former introduces the filter problem, the latter places it into a larger context of statics vs. dynamics.

  • Komodo

    I am just sick of technical terms with defined meanings being hijacked by artists, in this case with the willing compliance of a chiropractor (!) and a couple of scientists who should know better.
    “Entropy” is being misused above. No doubt it will enter or has entered the lexicon of researchers into the nebulous topic of consciousness.
    See also “tectonic shift”, “step change” etc.

  • Komodo

    (lost a post)
    Too right there’s a language problem. It’s founded in the random insertion of terms with precise definitions into discussions of emotional states.
    I call BA in Creative Writing with Nintendo Studies.

  • Sunflower

    So “Komodo”, home gown expert in advanced physics and biology, is dissing Tom Campbell, a professional physicist with expertise in large-system simulations, technology development and integration, and complex system vulnerability and risk analysis, working mostly in the context of US missile defense systems, including working with the Space and Missile Defense Command, the Missile Defense Agency and NASA and author of several books, for not being scientific.

    In doing this, instead of actually listening to what the physicist Campbell have to say, the scientist Komodo is using the process of scrying, intuition or blind faith to come to his conclusion.

    Now, who is the new-age’er here? Please reboot your mind and have a new go after you watched the video.

  • Scouse Billy

    Sunflower, (fyi) I posted the Tom Campbell Monroe Institute lecture here previously.

    I recall Komodo couldn’t be arsed to hear him out because the first 30 mins is a personal history of his connection to the Institute. I did apologise for not warning of this but suggested that he and others should perhaps skip the first half hour.

    I guess Komodo didn’t bother – so why should we? 🙂

    And, yes, your above observation is spot on IMO.

  • Clark

    Komodo, yes, I know what you mean. The nebulous New-Agery applications of “energy” get me annoyed; I think a lot of the problem stems from translation from East Asian languages, and ancient language into modern. Maybe some new convention would help, like ~energy, ~information, etc., to indicate that a term is being used because it is similar to a defined concept rather than identical with it. Or maybe a convention to indicate that a term is unstable, ie. still being evolved / hammered out.

  • Clark

    Sunflower, steady on:

    “So “Komodo”, home gown expert in advanced physics and biology, is dissing Tom Campbell, a professional physicist with expertise in large-system simulations, technology development and integration, and complex system vulnerability and risk analysis, working mostly in the context of US missile defense systems, including working with the Space and Missile Defense Command, the Missile Defense Agency and NASA and author of several books, for not being scientific.”

    These are just the sorts of disciplines you were “dissing” yourself, to me, because the Big Bang theory breaks down at T=1 sec or so. You’ll find that a bit of consistency goes a long way towards earning the respect everyone is supposed to display reflexively.

  • Sunflower

    Clark, don’t embarrass yourself. Go watch the movie you too. They are moving beyond T=1 in their discussions.

  • Sunflower

    Actually, if you do watch it, you will find that they support my earlier arguments, those you are referring to.

  • Clark

    “They are moving beyond T=1 in their discussions.”

    But without the appropriate disciplines, how can you check it?

    I’ll watch some more videos when I get time. Which is not now.

1 5 6 7 8

Comments are closed.