Friday, 8 April 2011


By Stanley Collymore

On the 18 March 2011 the French government of Nicolas Sarkozy prosecuted a number of French activists whose heinous crime, in the eyes of the lunatic Sarkozy regime, was to stage a number of peaceful protests in the streets and supermarkets around France, but principally in the Paris area, which didn’t inconvenience, harass, obstruct or annoy anyone as they were all conducted amiably and in a cheerful atmosphere, but whose purpose was to draw public attention to and garner support against the continuing, appalling plight of the Palestinian people under Israeli occupation of their land and the control of their lives, and show solidarity with these people by asking shoppers and passersby alike to boycott Israeli produced goods, products and services on offer in France. These jocund demos were similar in nature to the kind of protests that members of the Anti-Apartheid Movement in the United Kingdom and analogous organizations worldwide had successfully used in the face of intransigent western governmental support for apartheid South Africa in contrast to the inflexible opposition and often heavy-handed tactics of containment that they regularly employed against these activists in capitals like Paris, London, Madrid, Lisbon, Rome and many others globally to incorporate Oslo, Athens and Washington, to show their support and solidarity with the oppressed people of South Africa. Noble, courageous and selfless actions that accumulatively and over time piled up irresistible pressure on apartheid South Africa and its western backers that ultimately saw the official dismantling of apartheid in South Africa concomitant with the heralding of a new dawn that ushered in the forces of democracy in that superbly beautiful country.

By no means an easy task for sure but nevertheless well worth the effort, since one of the worst foot-draggers and also an implacable enemy of change for the people of South Africa was the mighty USA, which carried on supporting racist South Africa, that it secretly gave nuclear and biological weapons to, militarily, economically, politically and diplomatically right up to the moment that apartheid fell, the last western government to do so; and only shortly prior to the inauguration of Barack Obama as President embarrassedly took the African National Congress (ANC) that under Nelson Mandela, no less, had become the democratically elected and lawful government of South Africa off its list of terrorists; which meant that luminaries like Nelson Mandela himself and Archbishop Desmond Tutu: both South Africans, both members of the ANC, couldn’t have visited the United States of America without specific authorization from the US State Department, while apartheid ex-leaders who’d sponsored state murder at home and terrorism abroad and others linked to them had no such hindrances put in their way, and in theory Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu could have been arrested by Interpol, sensibly they weren’t, on the basis of this terrorist appellation given to their organization and de facto themselves by the United States if they set foot out of South Africa. How ironic; two universally respected black figures, one a hugely popular, democratically elected president of his country, the other a similarly charismatic, well like man of the cloth, both men immensely revered but deemed to be terrorists for standing up for themselves and their countrymen and demanding the same democratic freedoms which the US deceives a significantly huge part of the world into believing that it’s wholeheartedly wedded to as well as steadfastly committed to promoting for all humanity.

Either totally ignorant of the relative recent past or just too stupid to learn from it, the pathetic, disingenuous and utterly lame excuse that Sarkozy’s state prosecutor gave for this ludicrous action on behalf the state is that it was done to protect the integrity of France’s anti-hate laws, since what these demonstrators, who were mainly students, were doing was anti-Semitic. How on earth he figured that out when no mention was ever made of religion or race for that matter in the equation of what these young people were doing beats me. Routinely the vicious venom spat out aggressively at others, primarily non-whites and others like immigrant gypsy families from other EU countries, notably Romania and Hungry, to France is mindboggling as well as undeniably and overtly racist coming as it frequently does from the French right and ultra far right like Marine Le Pen’s National Front; but amidst the deafening silence from the French populace at large attendant to these racist attacks and outbursts even from Nicolas Sarkozy himself, I don’t see any prosecutions either being contemplated or made; so there’s clearly a hidden agenda behind all this that Sarkozy’s prosecutorial accomplices are quite hell bent on furthering in order to improve his plummeting esteem and support among the French voters.

What makes this current prosecution even more bizarre is the indisputable fact that the Israelis, whose goods and services these young people and others want to see boycotted in France and elsewhere, aren’t Semites; so brandishing state sponsored official accusations that carry dire legal consequences for those accused and found guilty of anti-Semitism by people, French or others, for criticizing Israelis not because of their race or religion but because of their ruthless, illegal and immoral repression of the Palestinians whose country they’ve usurped, is downright idiotic, counterproductive and smacks of McCarthyism and the selective suppression of the right to freedom of speech in order to silence critics of Zionist, apartheid Israel.

European Jews and Zionists in Israel, not necessarily the same thing so don’t conflate them into one, who sit atop the dung heap of the hierarchal system in that stolen land they illegally hold on to are European Caucasians and have never been Semites. Those Europeans that follow Judaism are the descendants of white, European Caucasians whose ancestors converted to that faith, no different in procedural terms to their white kith and kin back in Europe who converted to Christianity, and like all Muslims, whether any of these people are converts or were actually born into their particular faith, belong to the three monolithic faiths: Judaism, Christianity and Island, that were founded by genuine Semites. So while white, Caucasian Europeans are not, have never been, and can never logically be classed as Semites the Palestinians, on the other hand, are biologically and racially Semites; but you’re never told that, are you? And it matters not what religion or none that these Palestinians follow, they’ll always be Semites; in the same way that an Eskimo is biologically and racially an Eskimo but conversely a European living in Canada, whether or not he or she was born in that country, cannot logically confer on themselves or even have someone else do it for them and have them declared an Eskimo

Therefore, while Christians, Muslims and Jews are perfectly at liberty to say that they follow a Semitic religion because the founders of their own faiths were Semites, unless and until any of them can DNA-prove that they are biologically and racially Semites, then it’s totally absurd as in the Eskimo analogy I gave earlier, for them to claim they’re Semites and, furthermore, state that they have an unchallenged right to accuse or harass an individual or persons who criticize them, and justly so, on unrelated issues to their faith or racial origins as being anti-Semitic. It’s the customary bolthole and the refuge of last resort for the inveterate scoundrel or those who want to deflect attention away from the disreputable person or persons they are and, therefore, apply all means, even dishonestly resorting to the law, to silence valid criticism; and I can see, although I personally find it absolutely repugnant, why desperate Zionists, particularly those who have stolen and cloak themselves ostentatiously and dishonestly in the clothes of Judaism, would want and invariably resort to behaving in this lying and utterly despicable manner.

Such people are actually sick, crying wolf as and when it suits them; but their contrived and spurious antics of mortification have been used so frequently that they have essentially worn thin and have become passĂ© and no longer convincing or as effective as they once were. Few people, and certainly no sensible or objectively thinking ones, fall for this blackmailing ruse anymore, or like Nicolas Sarkozy thinks it can still be used effectively and has some mileage left in it still. But no number of sham prosecutions in France or anywhere else come to that of people with consciences will hold back or permanently derail the just cause of the Palestinian people, in the eyes of the world, and their lawful right to have their stolen country restored to them; their right of return to it officially recognized, sanctioned and guaranteed; their right to determine who they should have as their democratically elected and lawful leaders and have their choices recognized, accepted and respected; or how they should run their own lives and affairs without the patronizing paternalism of whites living in Europe and the lands globally that they too have stolen in brutal, genocidal fashion from the indigenous people there, and unasked, persistently telling them what’s best for them, because as they’re expected to think whites always know best.

Sarkozy has finally got his way over Libya and has managed this behind the skimpy fig leaf of that most auspicious and democratic of bodies, the Arab league – a more disreputable bunch of savage Neanderthal cutthroats still living blissfully in the Dark Ages you wouldn’t have wished to meet – dishonestly and corruptly depicted as cover and presented by him and the other usual white suspects from Europe and the entrenched colonialist outposts of the US and Canada as a universal and authentic authorization from the Arab streets, the genuine and unified voices of the Arab masses so to speak, but which it isn’t, to attack Libya. Odyssey Dawn: the farcically named military offensive against Colonel Gaddafi’s Libya, has started; this though against the backdrop of the deafening silence from the same gung-ho advocates and prosecutors of Libya’s war to what is simultaneously happening in Bahrain and Yemen and is much worse there; but that’s only to be expected, such is the rank and self-serving hypocrisy of the west.

France’s new, ludicrously posturing, modern day Bonaparte, as Nicolas Sarkozy evidently sees himself, is in his element; flamboyantly strutting around like a demented peacock while at the same time calculatingly working out how best he can use this military adventurism that he has pushed so hard for and with the world’s media spotlight presently focussed on him, a situation which he is well aware won’t last forever, to his political advantage at home by beating Marine Le Pen in the 2012 presidential elections, and simultaneously keep French oil companies like Total operating in Libya happy and onside. And without any exceptions all the others that are involved in this pre-meditated war have pressing economic, political and even personal issues which they know they must attend to, that bedevil the success of their governments and even their political careers, even though they don’t have the foggiest notion how to effectively deal with these problems to the general improvement in the lives or the overall satisfaction of their volatile electorates who feel, justifiably so, that they’ve been hard done by these incompetent and hopelessly out of touch elitist administrations that run their lives.

There’s Barack Obama: Mr false hope and short change; offering the US voters change which they can’t any longer trust or believe in because domestically and in terms of foreign policy as well it’s the same George W. Bush agenda that enriches and empowers the rich, the banks and the armaments industry: the purveyors of death that literally make a killing from their intimate and financial links with Congress, the Pentagon and the President, while the said president and the law makers who’re constitutionally charged with looking after the population do absolutely nothing for average America, a situation they cynically make much worse by shifting local jobs overseas to cheap-wage locations; ruthlessly dismantling hard-won collective bargaining rights to keep wages down while putting no such restrictions on the bonuses of fat cat bankers and to add insult to injury saddling the already financially hard-pressed taxpayer lumbered with debts of their own, foreclosures of their homes and businesses and the ever worrying prospect of job losses with massive debts from the bailouts given to banks and blue chip, financial institutions that behaved recklessly and even criminally with the money of their trusting investors, some of whom lost everything. In the case of Canada’s prime minster it’s the same story with the added focus that he’s a hugely despised man as well. Belgium: the hapless schizophrenic of Europe; a teetering failed state unable to sort out its affairs and form a viable government despite having held elections several months back, the longest such political shambles in Europe’s history and probably that of the world but yet this conspicuously divided country fractured along European tribal fault lines still patronizingly assumes that it knows what is best for Libya.

Then there’s Denmark and Holland with severe economic problems to contend with and that they are seemingly incapable of getting on top of exacerbated in the wake of these by virulent racism, xenophobia and Islamophobia. But paedophilia and prostitution rampant in both these countries are evidently okay, and being morally upright countries they’ve set themselves up as both judge and jury of the state of affairs in Libya and clearly feel they’re entitled to a piece of the action there. Italy, another bastion of high morals and political probity exemplified in the form of Silvio Berlusconi and his political apparatus there with a prime Minister who doesn’t mind getting his hands dirty in more ways than one and, of course why not in Libya a former Italian colony, in the great hope that in doing so he will deflect the public’s attention and their justified revulsion of him away from his underage sex problems with among others Moroccan minors, plus the overall corruption replete in his private and public lives. Spain: an economic basket case and the home of ETA, and like Italy has a long history of fascism and in Spain’s case global repression and the genocide of indigenous peoples, expertise that this country is confident will be immensely beneficial in Libya’s war, or more aptly the war on Libya. And let’s not forget Greece: a pathetic and despairingly hopelessly corrupt country with a lengthy history of repressive military dictatorships compounded with an incredible incompetence in running its own affairs, hence the begging bowl pathetically held up to the rest of the world and its humiliating status as a pauper. But hey, this Greek regime also in spite of all that still knows what is best for Libya and the Libyans. Honestly, you couldn’t make any of this up!

Germany’s Angela Merkel, meanwhile, cheerleading from the sidelines won’t be a part of the overt operations against Libya. Nothing whatsoever to do with a non-interventionist policy of not interfering in the domestic affairs of another sovereign country or an aversion to selective regime change. God forbid, no! Frau Merkel would very much like to be a part of the action which would put Germany further into the full glare of the world’s spotlight and advance her desire and that of others in her party to see Germany as a permanent member of and another white knight on the UN Security Council; but she has to be extremely cautious about any war moves at this moment in time. A power freak, think back to her treacherous and completely ruthless backstabbing of her mentor Chancellor Helmut Kohl, Merkel badly wants to remain Chancellor of Germany and will do anything to realize this ambition. But she’s no fool; she knows that important elections are looming in one of Germany’s principal states and having previously watched her party have a thorough drubbing in recent state elections caution and damage limitation are absolute prerequisites for her. So there’ll be no German troops sent to Libya, I’m afraid, she privately tells NATO; since dispatching ground forces or strike aircraft there in view of her dodgy domestic situation at home might further isolate, scare off or even annoy German voters, and she couldn’t risk that.

Germany’s absence in operational terms from this Libyan-based, feeding frenzy by ubiquitous, predatory, white Caucasian, military sharks didn’t hamper this particular Libyan adventure in anyway though as sufficient numbers were already in situ to ensure that their selected prey got the very worst of it. In essence an overkill but an undertaking nevertheless that raised a number of very pertinent questions and sets one wondering; why were so many countries, everyone of them, including the world’s only super-power the USA, equipped with the most advanced and sophisticated weaponry needed to subdue a country of just five million people, a mere fraction of their own both individually and collectively; which moreover doesn’t have the firepower to match any of them separately or collectively, yet despite these known facts are still ganging up like demented and terrifying bullies to wreak havoc on it?

Could it be that in addition to a wish for regime change and the cupidity to get their hands fully on and have complete dominion over Libya’s oil wealth, as was done in Iraq, there was another much more hideous motive as well, that of turning Libya into a live firing range for upgraded western weapons or weapons not previously tested in a combat situation as happened with the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War 2; the fire bombing of Dresden and the concomitant saturation bombing of Hamburg also in the Second World War; the systematic use of Agent Orange over Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam during the Vietnamese War, and in the Iraq wars the methodical and widespread use of phosphorous bombs and other ammunition containing depleted uranium; each scenario leaving a legacy of disastrous human consequences that are prevalent to this day?

Many of these countries are arms manufacturers and arms dealers, and the arms industry is a powerful, very influential and a highly lucrative one, and where better or more effectively to show case your latest instruments of death, power and influence than in an actual theatre of war? During the Falkland’s/Malvinas War between Britain and Argentina British submarines and warships used the hitherto unknown, and in battle conditions thoroughly untested French Exocet missile to deadly effect against the Argentineans; an elated France then happily used and would later shamelessly capitalize on the effectiveness of the Exocet missile to promote and enhance enormously its arms sales generally and particularly of this weapon worldwide. For other than what I’m hypothesizing here, with so many of these white, imperialist, former colonialist and Medieval type crusading states queuing up to knock the living daylights out of Libya: a Muslim, North African country that poses no threat to the internal security or overall sovereignty of any of these countries, regardless of whether or not it is engaged in a civil war with factions of its own people, civil wars which many of these same sanctimonious countries have themselves waged in the past, what they are doing would to the mind of any intelligent and objective person seem like using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. But we all know that isn’t the case.

This leaves us with David Cameron, the would-be Tony Blair. Realizing that a summer of discontent with the public sector workers, trade unions, protesting students and a disgruntled public feeling the pinch from the economic crunch they’ve been subjected to as a consequence of untrammelled neo-con liberalism, with unemployment running high, threatened job losses on the way and homes being repossessed at an alarming rate while the banks they were forced to bail out and continue doing so, carry on with their old bankrupt practices, and among these awarding huge bonuses to their bosses, David Cameron well aware that British voters didn’t trust him or his Conservative Party enough to give them an overall majority in the House of Commons even though they desperately wanted to see the back of Gordon Brown, desperately needs a distraction himself away from his mushrooming domestic woes, and going to war with Libya he’s fervently hoping will do that, just as the Falkland’s War did for Margaret Thatcher, another Tory Party leader and British Prime Minister as he himself now is, when her domestic poll ratings were at rock bottom and a similarly convenient war waged against another UK and United States backed dictator saved her bacon.
And were it not that it’s such a deadly serious matter we have the genuinely risible prospect of Barack Obama, David Cameron and the other western suspects in this drama getting into bed with the likes of Morocco: North Africa’s torture capital, Qatar, the UAE, Jordan, Saudi Arabia et all, lauding them as friends and allies whose stability and good governance mustn’t, through the undemocratic and dictatorial practices of Colonel Gaddafi against his own people seeking the right to control their own lives as they see fit which the west never cared about before and really still doesn’t now, be allowed to destabilize these countries or the rest of the Arab region; and to that end these beacons of enlightened democracy, human rights and the rule of law are welcome partners in the west’s combined and concerted bid to remove the capricious Colonel from having the capability to further blight the lives and legitimate hopes of his people; and if having to forcefully employ cruise missiles, submarines, warplanes and the whole panoply of war to achieve this objective, then so be it! The real question is, if like North Korea Libya was in possession of stack of nuclear weapons instead of the vastly second rate, totally antiquated and very much overpriced armaments that the west sold it, would these western countries have been so keen to attack it?. And isn’t it long past the time when the rest of the world constantly browbeaten and blackmailed by these western states with their own nuclear arsenals or under the protection of NATO that has huge stockpiles of them, give the one-finger salute to them And who knows they might even, since their populations are greater, be able to impose their own no-fly zones on the west.

Which planet are Barack Obama and David Cameron on? These Arab League members, some of whom are openly as well as clandestinely using British, US, French, German, Canadian and Norwegian weapons, other military assets and well-tried and tested torture equipment among those from other western countries to maim and kill peaceful protesters in Bahrain and Yemen as they routinely do in their own countries for demanding the same rights Obama and his pals say the Libyan revolutionaries – substitute paid western puppets– and the population generally are legal and morally entitled to, who tolerate no protests of a similar nature in their own states and are well renowned for torture and all other manner of human rights abuses and war crimes sourced out to them by the west, particularly the US under its extraordinary rendition policy as well as implemented on their own volition and committed over several decades are now, these same complicit western leaders are telling us should be seen and regarded as liberators of the Libyan people? Isn’t that analogous to knowingly putting a well known and serial paedophile in charge of the Child Protection Agency of the UK; an inveterate Nazi as minister for Jewish Affairs in the German Bundestag; the Grand Master of the Ku Klux Klan in the United States Deep South as head of the NAACP; or making Silvio Berlusconi Pope because he’s a catholic and lives in Italy where the Vatican is located?

These are people whose hands are literally and copiously dripping with the blood of their own people, and whose raison d’ĂȘtre for existing is greed and power; and in this regard they’re very much like David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy for whom truth or anything vaguely associated with the concept of it don’t feature in any way in the lexicon of their sanctimonious utterances on the vicissitudes of human life.

Just ask yourself, how can anyone with an ounce of commonsense or the most rudimentary of logical thought trust those who are arming the counter revolutionaries in Yemen and Bahrain right under the noses of the US Fifth Fleet there; who illegally invaded Iraq and are still there, never mind what they tell you and want you to believe, occupying it as they’re similarly doing with Afghanistan; who indiscriminately kill thousands of Afghan and Pakistani citizens using unmanned, CIA-operated drones that violate the sovereignty of Pakistan a country with which that United States, Britain or its NATO allies are not at war; that gives Israel carte blanche to do whatever it likes to the Palestinians and routinely provides that Zionist and apartheid state with trusty military, economic, political and diplomatic immunity to carry out its war crimes and crimes against; that openly lied about a CIA killer who gunned down two Pakistanis in cold blood in their own country claiming he had diplomatic immunity, as Barack Obama did knowing it to be a lie, and worse still exerting all sorts of pressure on an extremely crooked, obsequious Pakistani government susceptible to bribes and deeply embedded in the financial pockets of the US not to heed the calls of its people to have this cold-blooded killer tried in Pakistan (just imagine what the situation would have been if the boot was on the other foot notwithstanding the fact that there’s currently an innocent female Pakistani scientist doing a lengthy stretch of prison time in a US jail on manifestly trumped charges against her and for whom the Pakistani government knowing her to be innocent has nevertheless done nothing meaningful on her behalf as she rots where she is ) giving the unmistakeable impression, not that the rest of the world needed to be reminded of this, that only white western lives matter, even when those lives belong to killers? The same west which killed one million Iraqis and displaced another five million in the last Iraq War and before that through punitive sanctions stood by and looked on with total indifference as one million Iraqi children either starved to death or otherwise died from avoidable illnesses due to a lack of appropriate and affordable medicines that UN sanctions against Iraq instigated by the United States stopped them from having, with Madeleine Albright the US Secretary of State at the time when asked about the morality of what was being done and especially to innocent children nonchalantly remarked that it was a price worth paying. This woman is a European Jewish immigrant to the United States who lost relatives, she claims, in Europe’s holocaust; one doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist to work out what her reaction would be if a Neo-Nazi made the same remark about them; but, of course, she too would argue that their lives were far more valuable.

How in view of the above named facts can the rulers of these western countries, and especially the united States, the UK and France regard themselves as the liberators of the Libyan people? It’s a contradiction in terms, and you don’t have to be a genius to work that out.

And whether it’s on the matter of transracial adoptions or the bombings of Libya the western mindset is the same; white European Caucasian control at all costs. David Cameron is a fraud; the British voters suspected as much that’s why they didn’t give him a parliamentary majority in the last held UK general elections despite being eager to dump Gordon Brown another avid Zionist and who the British public rightly regarded as a waste of space. Napoleon Sarkozy will meet his Waterloo in the upcoming French elections and when he does Elba, for a number of reasons, would be a fitting place to send him. It’ll be a miracle if Barack: all promises and no real performances, escapes the ignominy of a one-time presidency that is rapidly looming on his horizon; Merkel won’t win the next German elections, and Silvio Berlusconi, if he’s not in jail will probably be still running around Italy telling anyone who cares to listen to him (few if anyone will I suspect) how terribly misunderstood and hard done by, particularly by the Italian judiciary, that he is. The rest of this sorry bunch of 21st Century Crusaders are forgettable, and rightly so, nobodies eclipsed by their own obscurity; but all the same like nothing better, apart from acquiring power by any means possible, than listening to the sound of their own voices. Not unlike the young black guy on the BBC’s Big Questions programme that triggered this comprehensive, no holds barred article that I’ve written.

That young man waxed lyrically, passionately and embarrassingly sanctimoniously about the wondrous benefits and psychological transformation for him – his personal and deeply grateful Paulian metamorphosis on the Road to Damascus as it were – from being adopted by white parents and brought up as a solitary black child in an all-white home and exclusive white area and community from where he had no contact with Blacks, young or old, during the formative years of his upbringing, and where it would have been infra dig in the household that he was raised in for there ever to have been any references to or discussions about black culture, since the prevailing view was that unlike white culture, which was beneficent and had done so many wonderful and transformatory, beneficial things for all mankind, no such black equivalent ever existed, and significantly there were no current signs that an indigenous salutary black culture was in the process of emerging or that such a prospect was likely to occur in the foreseeable future if ever. He then inferred that no black parents, regardless of who they were, where they came from or what their economic standing and education background were, could ever have equalled let alone rivalled the outstanding attributes, which conveniently he omitted to mention, of his white adopted parents.

On a previous radio programme this guy had viciously slammed everything he considered to be even vaguely black in character. Blacks were, he emphasized, unarguably caricatures of all the racial stereotypes trotted out ad nauseum over centuries of colonialism and in the aftermath of it by whites, which his white adopted parents supported and he unhesitatingly following their lead endorsed. To any discerning person this load of garbage sounded worryingly like a turkey happily voting for Christmas and while avidly doing so encouraging all the other turkeys to do the same, fervently pointing out to them as an inducement how wonderful it would be being the centrepiece of the Christmas dinner table; the fact that to do so they would all have to be killed first deliberately not mentioned or else conveniently or even naively overlooked. Nevertheless, one thing in all of this was absolutely undeniable; the white parents of this evidently confused and thoroughly brainwashed black man had undoubtedly done a great job on him, ensuring that while he was enthusiastically encouraged to know of, understand and scrupulously respect the primacy of white Caucasian culture and additionally and significantly taught to solely indentify with it, nothing but distaste was reserved by them for anything considered to be uniquely black.

Barbados: a modern, stable, liberal, progressive and longstanding democracy also but quite surprisingly and unwarrantedly came in for a rather severe and gratuitous drubbing from this pompous, self-adulatory, infuriatingly conceited, garrulous, abysmally ill-informed, pathetic black man who dismissively regarded his root’s country as just another tourist resort; for when asked about his true origins and firmly but persistently pressed on the matter by a member of the audience when he initially baulked at providing this information he very reluctantly, visibly uncomfortably and quite fleetingly admitted that it was Barbados he came from but then went on to robustly and uncompromisingly stress that he was English.

Knowing Barbados as I do I simply bristled with indignation; just another tourist resort I heard myself repeating. Surely he wasn’t referring to the same Barbados that I knew. The island state that in 1649 founded the American colony of Carolina; provided seven of its first 21 governors as well as governors in others states like Massachusetts. Barbados that took on the might of the British Navy, repulsed it, becoming the first and only colony ever to do this, and in the wake of this humiliating defeat meted out to the British forced Oliver Cromwell who’d sent the British fleet to subdue this royalist island because it refused to recognize his rule of England, to sign in 1652 the Treaty of Oistins, so called because the signing of this historic document took place in the town of Oistins on Barbados’ south coast, effectively pledging among many other things to leave the island, unquestionably England’s richest colony whose enormous wealth contributed immensely to financing the English Industrial Revolution, alone.

Little England as it’s affectionately called because of its unique Englishness and strong royalist sentiments, hence the reason for the quarrel between itself and Oliver Cromwell, which coined the phrase “No Taxation Without Representation” which the US revolutionaries borrowed and effectively used in their war of independence against England, then took wholesale the Treaty of Oistins after their success and incorporated it as their Constitution. A tribute doubtlessly to the primary role that Barbados played in assisting George Washington and his revolutionaries in defeating England, not from any hatred of England but because Barbadians deeply felt that those living in the American colonies should have the right to determine their own future and destiny, a cardinal principal which runs through the veins of every Barbadian man and woman. Part of this link stemmed from the fact that in 1751, aged 19, George Washington went to live on the island with his older brother Lawrence who had gone to Barbados to seek medical care and recuperate from tuberculosis; George who had succumbed to smallpox was similarly and successfully treated in Barbados for his illness and, in doing so, his body naturally developed an immunity to the virus; the true significance of which was only understood years later when George’s army was decimated by smallpox during the American War of Independence. Apart from America, Barbados was the only other place where George Washington lived or visited. Significantly, one of the principal Founding Fathers of the US and whose signature is on the US declaration of independence an its Constitution is a Barbadian, prominent enough in his own right to be tipped as President of the fledgling United States of America. This however infuriated George Washington who so much wanted that job for himself that he organized a political conspiracy against his perceived rival and had the equally famous or infamous, take your pick, codicil to the Constitution inserted which emphatically stated that no one except someone born in the United States of America could become its President. For George quite understandable you might say but laughably unnecessary, since this targeted Barbadian who was exceedingly rich wasn’t in the least interested in having the job and moreover with his huge plantations and other business interests was quite happy to stay Barbadian and British; pragmatically taking the stance of I don’t mind helping you guys win your independence, nevertheless I’m quite happy as I am.

The Constitution of the United States of America was printed by a Barbadian publisher; the first Jews to settle in the United States were wealthy Barbadians who’d made their money on the island from the lucrative sugar industry, and the oldest synagogue in the so-called New World and a UN heritage site is in Bridgetown, Barbados’ capital. And how many Brits or foreign visitors to Lord Nelson’s Statue and Trafalgar Square in London know that these are replicas of those located in Barbados? The first ever Lord Nelson Statue and Trafalgar Square, the second is in Bermuda that followed Barbados’ lead, London’s is the third of these erected some 50 years after the one in Barbados, were commissioned and paid for by Barbadians from all walks of life shortly after the Battle of Trafalgar and were erected on land bought by these people in Bridgetown opposite the House of Assembly, the Barbados parliament buildings where they’re still located, with one slight adjustment; after Barbados asked for and got its independence in 1966 the government and parliament decided to rename Trafalgar Square Independence Square. Nevertheless, the location of the statue and square is both symbolic and important to all Barbadians since their parliament, the second oldest and continuous one after the House of Commons in the former British Empire, now the Commonwealth, was created in 1639, a mere 12 years after the colony was itself established. And let’s not forget that Barbados was for a considerable time a principal and strategic location in the Americas, for it was there that the British West India Regiment that played such crucial roles in England’s and later the United Kingdom’s colonial conquests was based there at the Garrison which is now the home of the Barbados Defence Force, and its capital Bridgetown was a major port and an important economic and cultural centre prior to and for much longer than any of the now quite familiar US cities that are immediately recognizable were ever dreamt of let alone founded.

The Barbados National Archives located in Black Rock a quiet and rather picturesque suburb of Bridgetown is a customary stopping off point for many academics, writers, journalists and ordinary citizens from North America, elsewhere around the region and as far away as Europe who regularly descend on the island to research not only their countries’ past history and their integral links with Barbados but also their own family histories and links to the island.

Proudly, Barbados boasts an excellent educational system that goes back to the founding of this once British Colony in 1627; the vast majority of the island’s grammar schools were set up in the 17th Century and are much older than many major states like Canada and the United States of America, the latter founded in 1776. The educational system which was initially introduced and used by the islanders was understandably British, but Barbados has innovatively and quite independently vastly improved on this and has evolved its own. The Barbados Scholarship that allowed academically bright students to study at very prestigious universities worldwide, in the past primarily in the UK but no longer so because of the evident, deplorable dumbing down of the educational system there, goes back too to the founding of the colony where education was always a priority and still is today, literacy are rates high and continue to remain so. Barbados today stands proudly, along with a very small elite band of other countries, as having a 100% literacy, a state of affairs that is verified by UNICEF. In its annual report on The State of the World’s Children in 2004, UNICEF stated that at the turn of the century in the year 2000, the adult female and male literacy rates in Barbados were 100 percent. It went on further to state that few countries in the world, and that includes the UK and the United States, have attained Barbados’ educational profile; and the only countries which matched Barbados were Eastern European states such as the Ukraine, Latvia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Poland, Belarus, Estonia and Lithuania.

Most Barbadian students, of both sexes, go into tertiary and higher graduate education and the island of Barbados has a an overabundance of university graduates of both sexes many of these with postgraduate qualifications that are in great demand at home and abroad, and it’s not at all unusual to see recruiting teams from the so-called developed countries, particularly the United States, descending on the island to poach its graduates. Education on the island is universal and free at all stages from kindergarten to university postgraduate level; and health care is likewise free and universal through the National Health Service to all Bajan citizens and residents from the point of entry right through to death. Women have always played a major and constructive role in Barbadian society; this is massively reflected in Barbados’ political, economic and civic life. Many of Barbados’ senior diplomats and prominent politicians are women, and Barbados was the first country ever to appoint a female ambassador to the United Nations and who also sat on the UN Security Council. She’s the late Dame Anita Barrow who later became Governor General of Barbados and was the sister of another renowned Barbadian figure Errol Barrow: a distinguished academic who studied at the prestigious LSE in London; a wartime RAF fighter pilot seconded as personal pilot to Winston Churchill; outstanding barrister having been called to the bar in England; founder of the Barbados Democratic Labour Party; Prime Minister, and the father of Barbados’ independence, who among his many achievements for the islanders of Barbados introduced free and universal secondary education – previously this had to be paid for, as well as free, universal health care for all Bajan citizens and residents.

Finally on the topic of Barbados, among a litany of other prominent achievements Barbados is well renowned for its plethora of world famous cricketers, among them the celebrated 3Ws of Clyde Walcott, the great-uncle of Theo Walcott of England and Arsenal football fame; Everton Weekes and Frank Worrell, each of them a knight of the realm, as is the legendary Sir Garfield Sobers; all of them knighted by Queen Elizabeth of England herself who is still constitutionally their monarch also, with Bajans overwhelmingly, even though they attained their independence in 1966, opting for her to stay in the role that each of her royal predecessors had occupied in an unbroken sequence since the founding, under Charles 1 in 1627, of this characteristically most English of colonies that never changed hands from being English until its independence. Then there’s Shirley Chisholm – born in the United States to Bajan parents but raised and educated in Barbados – who became the first female to be elected to the US Congress and also the very first woman to run for the presidency of her birth country the United States of America; and so the list goes on.

But in concluding this piece on Barbados, there are still a few things which you ought to know about this remarkable country. It’s not only the first country to have produced sugar from sugar cane; invented rum and molasses; and created the grapefruit, per populace the island has more centenarians than any other country in the world, and only Cuba, another Caribbean state with which it has always had close family and inter-island links, rivals it in this regard. Yes, there is no doubt that Barbados is a popular destination for upmarket tourists and its tourism goes back centuries to the day when rich Britons sailed out to what they fondly dubbed as Little England to willingly avail themselves of the island’s legendary, excellent climate. Nothing has changed since then except that they fly there now; people like film director Michael Winner; pops stars Cliff Richard, Mick Jagger, Eddie Grant who actually lives there permanently, Cilla Black and other international celebrities like Tiger Woods, not forgetting infamous politicians like former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who either have luxurious homes on the island or use those of friends that have. Among other notable Bajan exports is Sir Richard Stoute one of Britain’s principal horse trainers whose expertise is readily made use of by no less a personage than the Queen herself; and staying in England with its passion for football the English premier league would be much the poorer without the invaluable contribution, past and present, made by the biological sons of Barbados.

A great pity therefore that this renegade son of Barbados who’ve I’ve lambasted on these pages and justifiably so I feel, didn’t bother to check out any of this before he opened his mouth. But there’s nothing whatsoever, except perhaps prejudice, stopping you the reader from doing your personal checks. Google any of these topics or preferably all of them if you care to: The Treaty of Oistins; Barbados’ links with the American colonies; Barbados links with the United States; The West India Regiment; Barbados’ Jews; The earliest Jewish settlement in Barbados; George Washington in Barbados; Rabbi Marc Lee Raphael on Jews in the Slave Trade; The Barbadian Society of Gentlemen Adventurers (those who founded the colony of Carolina in 1649); Irish and Scottish links with Barbados; Cardington College (the first and oldest tertiary educational establishment in the New World, set up in Barbados; still there and now an integral part of the University of the West Indies; Slavery and Economy in Barbados; and finally, British History: Empire and Sea Power. These constitute just a tiny fraction of what’s out there if you use your imagination and initiative to research what I have given you and look for the rest which would further enlighten you. So good luck! And don’t ever fall into the age-old trap that because it’s not taught in British, American, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand or even European schools that it doesn’t exit – very much like the forbearers of these same people arrogantly claiming to have discovered the so-called New World when there were literally millions of people already living there, had done so for millennia, and were fully au fait with these places; and therefore on that rather warped basis the only history there is, or is worth knowing about is a white one.

Not unlike the utterly confused Barbadian I previously wrote about many and perhaps all of the west’s leaders have their own demons to deal with. In Europe’s case it’s the lingering legacy of the European holocaust compounded with latent and virulent anti-Jewish sentiments, and that’s why these European leaders exaggeratedly go to such great lengths to demonstrate their Jewish solidarity; which essentially is quite fraudulent. They’re ardent Zionists and are quite happy to have Zionism conflated with Jewishness and to cynically use the patently emotive backdrop of the holocaust for their own selfish ends in the same way they’re equally prepared to hijack the popular revolutions in North Africa for the same reasons, that would never have been required in the first place had it not been for their inexorable support right up to the very last minute for these ousted dictators that were repressing these same people.

In Barack Obama’s case his demons relate to his father and the circumstances of his own birth. Born to a black African father and white American, Caucasian female in Hawaii, this union of his parents, had it taken place in mainland USA instead of in Hawaii a virtual colony as it then was of that country, Mrs Obama would have been charged under the United States’ immorality and race laws and sent to jail while her husband, Obama’s father, would have been arrested on statutory rape charges for marrying and being in an illegal union a white woman, found guilty and sentenced to death and executed. Having seen his father a veteran of World War 2 who’d fought for Britain, like several thousands of Kenyans and other Africans had voluntarily done in that campaign, tortured and humiliated by the likes of Ian Henderson now doing the same in Bahrain, for asking that their country be given back to them by Britain which had stolen it and Kenyans be allowed to rule themselves, Obama senior, having been humiliated by the British himself and having now emigrated to the explicitly racist United States to study wasn’t in any mood, a situation not dissimilar from that faced by many sensible black men who chose white wives, to countenance racism in any shape or its guises, hence the breakdown of his marriage. And President Barack Obama is like many similar mixed race kids that sadly find themselves caught up in the dilemma he subsequently found himself in, brought up by a white and usually disgruntled mother herself enmeshed in the baggage of her marriage, whose biological family tolerated at best her choice of husband but frequently were implacably antagonistic towards it, and all this compounded by an absent father that mentally for the younger Obama collectively triggered a tsunami of complex and unresolved emotions made considerably worse when as a young man having decided to seek out and get to know his father, dad was unfortunately dead. So the nagging issues going right back to his birth, childhood and one-parent upbringing still remain largely unresolved; the demons are still there and accounts for the noticeable fact that while every previous US president was more than happy to loudly trumpet his roots, however nebulous these might be with certain European countries, Ireland is a case in point, and make a point of going either on private or state visits to them while in office to reconnect these family links, President Barack Obama in marked contrast conspicuously avoids his father’s birthplace Kenya, as he would the Black Death.

Unfortunately it has shown up major personality flaws in this White House warmonger that not since the Roman emperor Caligula created his horse a senator were as conspicuously evident as when Barack was risibly ennobled as a Nobel Peace Price laureate, not least because he is like all warmongers a craven coward who worryingly for the genuine international community of ordinary men and women around the world, not that mendacious, feral bunch of US-led bully boys that grandiloquently confers on itself that title, is firmly under the thumb of the CIA that discourteously (ask yourself why?) for a President of the United States of America, that is the world’s principal economic and military global power, only tells him what it cares to and that he readily and unquestioningly it seems accepts.

President Truman was prudently warned in the 1940s not to have anything to do with what was graphically described to him back then as enclaves of savage fanatics in the Middle East region who would consistently seek to drag the United States into costly wars that financially it could not afford and which politically, in terms of its international standing in the world and national prestige at home, weren’t beneficial either to the domestic or global interests of the country or its citizens, and which would only serve the narrow and demented purposes of the vicious and savage cry-babies that instigated them. Truman didn’t listen, nor have successive United States presidents for that matter done so; so the warring has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The United States is spending over $200 million dollars a day that it can ill afford, bearing in mind the dire economic circumstances that prevail in that country, fighting in what at best is a civil war in Libya, actions that violate the Charter of the UN; and the disparate groups that it, the UK and France, the latter two incorrigible colonialists and imperialists, are backing are essentially and widely believed to be western implants trained by western special forces and those of Mossad and financed by the United States, Britain and France; the real purpose being to put in place a new batch of acquiescent cats paws favourable to the west, who would protect the latter’s oil and gas interests in Libya, even if that means breaking up the country as has happened in Sudan and is on the cards for Iraq given time, and that will facilitate the US in particular and its western allies, notably Britain and France, in managing the outcome of the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia, ensure the continuation of Zionist, apartheid Israel and ably assist in the retention and consolidation of America’s hegemony over the Middle East and in North Africa.

Ask yourself truthfully, how could it possibly be that right out of the blue there is suddenly all these armed revolutionaries running around in Libya who are completely different in character and even in their numbers from their supposed counterparts in Egypt and Tunisia that the world witnessed were completely unarmed and peaceful gatherings as they were and continue to be in Bahrain, Yemen and Jordan, emerging literally overnight from scratch and after years of harsh Gaddafi control that uncompromisingly stifled all dissent to his regime, and furthermore did so most effectively? How could they have done any of the things that they’re now doing or even exist without training and arms from outside of Libya? And crucially, cui bono? Who benefits? Unquestionably it’s the US, France and Britain that are providing them with the means to carry out their insurrection, for make no bones about it that’s what it actually is against Libya; and as a sovereign, independent state Libya in self-defence and under international law has the lawful right to hit back and seek to defeat these people.

Furthermore, UN Resolution 1973 which sanctions a no-fly zone over Libya also prohibits the arming of either side in this, supposedly again, domestic conflict; but despite all the nauseous and stomach churning sanctimony that we hear ad nauseum from the United States and two of the other criminal entities, France and the United Kingdom, that manifestly are deeply involved in this clandestine illegality, the simple fact is they’re all dishonestly and illegally flouting the same UN Resolution they obsessively pushed for in the Security Council and then steamrolled everyone there into giving to them. Proof positive that the attitude of these feral states is really aggressive, lumpen and boorish but nobody wants to talk about that.

It will all come to grief of course, because the principal protagonist in this adept sleight of hand deception, the American Empire whose temperament regularly translates itself into a pervasive demeanour that is extremely and insatiably suspect to the entreatingly persuasive but insincere blandishments of calculating and quite unprincipled manipulators, seems to have learnt nothing from the past predicaments of the British and French who forced to divest themselves, often in violent confrontations, of vast and exceedingly profitable empires pathetically and delusionally continue to deceive themselves that they’re still individually a major force to be reckoned with, and like the punch drunk boxers they’re analogous to don’t know when to quit boxing and get safely out of the ring.

But Barack isn’t the only one with issues that beset him and for which he can’t or is unwilling to find answers. Many in his administration and the wider political sphere of the United Stales are in similar dire straits. America for them is the White Knight capable of doing anything it wants or feels like. What these people don’t realize is that somebody has shot the horse. Furthermore that you either believe in human rights or you don’t; and if you do, you do so regardless of who is violating them or who the victims are; and human rights shouldn’t be selective. That the UN Security Council’s permanent members wielding vetoes in the bargain are the world’s leading arms dealers who support human rights only when the countries concerned don’t have the guts to or are unwilling to stand up for their own human rights. That the United States is a country very much haunted by its own human rights record clinging on dishonestly to the notion that people with the most power and capacity to do harm should have immunity while those least able to do so shouldn’t; hence the rank double standards and conspicuous hypocrisy over the ICC, and Israel’s continuing and premeditated massacres in Gaza.

This article is written therefore as a stark reminder that without constant vigilance to perceive and the undaunted courage and determination to stand up to, confront and resolutely face down the mendacious and extremely dangerous actions of tyrants whoever and wherever they are, we will inevitably descend once more into the eviscerating barbarity that imploded in Europe and consumed the rest of the world in its consequences between 1933 and 1945. Federich Haedel who was German, had never been to Africa, or had ever met or even known anyone who was African, nevertheless felt absolutely confident enough in 1831 to publicly express this opinion of all Africans: “This is the land where men are children, a land lying beyond the daylight of self-consciousness, history and [is] enveloped in the black colour of night. At this point let us forget Africa not to mention it again; for Africa is no historical part of the world.” Vocalized like the true imperialist and colonialist that he was and whose ilk unfortunately still afflict us today in the capitals of London, Paris, Rome, Ottawa, Madrid, Berlin, Copenhagen, Brussels, Oslo and most ironically Washington DC.

The black Roman, Terentius Afer (190-159 BC) who prominently distinguished himself in the field of literature and as a playwright and whose scholarly compositions Julius Caesar, Horace and Cicero used as models and additionally became the standard work for all the schools at the time saw things quite differently, when he authored these words: “Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.” (Translated it reads, I am a man and nothing human is alien to me).

These words are as germane in the context of contemporary world events as when they were first formulated and ought to be compulsory familiarization for every military adventurist from Europe, North America, the rest of the so-called west, and their bevy of ingratiating, venal and self-serving tin pot dictators globally, as well as the UN Security Council that shamelessly and habitually turns a Nelsonian eye to what these people are doing and even sanctions their illegal activities; but I doubt, given who sit on it in a permanent capacity and without root and branch reform of the whole edifice of the United Nations itself, whether the UN Security Council will ever be a meaningful force for promoting and overseeing good governance in the world or be willing to exercise itself with morally testing notions like these.

My question to you is: Who sensibly is, or in their right mind would want to be a Zionist?

Please also see companion articles: Zionist BBC – A dead man walking – AND - Nicolas Sarkozy’s Megalomania – Vichy France Revisited.

No comments:

Post a Comment