Friday, 19 December 2014

UK planning Bahrain base with eyes on Iran

James Stuart for Press TV UK Desk
Speculations are rising among observers that Britain

Britain's announcement that it is planning to build a £15 million navel base in the protest racked monarchy of Bahrain came as a surprise to many observers, not least as it would seem to be in contradiction to both the UK's cuts in naval spending, and their professed support for human-rights and democracy in the region.

Bahrain has been at the centre of continuing protests since 2011, but unlike many of the region's nations where uprisings against governments that were perceived as challenging the west's interests have received much media attention and covert backing from the west, Bahrain's democracy movement has all but been ignored despite having endured severe repression, including scores of deaths, allegations of torture and arbitrary detention by Bahraini security forces.



So the announcement of British Royal Navy plans to build a permanent military presence there has been met with dismay by opponents of the Bahrain regime and is considered as providing a major bolster to the Bahrain monarchy and as being a strong endorsement from Britain that they will continue to give support for whatever measures the regime takes to suppress the democracy movement. This would perhaps explain why the Bahrain regime is reportedly footing £13 million of the £15 million bill for it's construction.

From it's side, the UK government insists that it needs a permanent presence for it's navel forces in the Gulf region to combat piracy. However, the Royal Navy currently has mine-sweeping vessels based in Bahrain which are primarily aimed at countering Iran's navel defences on the other side of the Persian Gulf. It is expected the new base will be able to host destroyers and the currently under-construction Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers. Many observers see this as a direct attempt to contain and challenge Iran and to provide a stable base for British backed insurgency operations in the region, most particularly in Iraq, Syria and, potentially, in Iran itself.

Bahraini opposition activist Nabeel Rajab reacted to the news by stating that the UK was “the only country that openly supported the dictatorship in Bahrain and clearly oppos[es] our struggle for democracy and human rights,”. Nabeel continued, “Taking into consideration the silence of the UK, Bahrain paying that [is] an award to them and for that reason Bahraini people are upset as the information [is] coming out.”

The UK gave up maintaining a major naval prescence in the Persian Gulf when it and France were forced into humiliating retreat over their Suez invasion, when they were militarily defeated by Egyptian forces under the leadership of President Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1953. Since then the British have relied upon a much reduced naval presence in the Gulf, largely allowing the US to take the dominant role. However, this news that the UK will be joining the US's Fifth Fleet in having a permanent base in Bahrain would tend to confirm that the British do not consider themselves out of the game as a global naval power, and still intend to make their stamp on the region. The British invented the concept of “Gunboat diplomacy” at the height of their imperial rule in the 19
th century, and it would seem they are keen to keep the tradition alive in a region where many see them as having played a destructive and divisive role for centuries.

For the British, securing their interests in the oil-rich region is of paramount importance in a time of economic crisis. The fall of the Morsi government in Egypt, and the failure by British and US backed terrorists to overthrow Assad in Syria combined with the continued stability of an increasingly assertive Iran, has left the west's “Arab Spring” project looking badly stalled.
Hostages paraded on TV in 2004

As Russian and Chinese influence and money continues to provide a strong alternative for trade and relations, the western powers are feeling the need to ratchet up their direct presence in the region once again. With the US “pivot to Asia” taking military resources from Iraq and Afghanistan to be redeployed in an attempted “containment” of China, the UK military will be expected to fill some of the gap. The British have never forgotten their humiliation in the Gulf at the hands of Egypt in 1953, nor more recently, when in 2004, and again in 2007, Iranian Revolutionary Guards detained British special forces Royal Marines and Royal Navy sailors after they entered Iranian waters.


The British will be hoping that a major permanent naval presence in the Gulf will mean they can once again hold the whip hand in the region.







Wednesday, 17 December 2014

England: Porn, Protest, Paedophilia, Power and Privilege.

The English will protest outside Parliament about the banning of porn showing fisting and golden showers, but not a raise a peep when it comes to the people ruling them from that Parliament abusing, raping, and in some cases, murdering, vulnerable, desperate and forgotten children.
They will seethe with rage at the tabloid stories of non-white men sexually exploiting white teenage girls (whilst booking their lads away trip to the brothels of Thailand), but elicit barely a tut at news of cabals of child abusers within the highest echelons of government.
Perversion and violence from politicians and policemen is hidden behind smoke screen misdirection of salacious tales of child abusing has-been pop-stars and tv personalities, the connections of privilege, property, power and perversion being swept under the carpet as the big by-gone names are sacrificed to protect those with big, and real, power.
Evidence, long known, but until now suppressed, of our lost children being imprisoned in brothels for the powerful, under the perverse euphemism of "care" leads to no more than the shaking of heads and the turning of the page, so we can gawp at tweenie celebs papped in bikinis and titter at advertising masquerading as news.
In a civilised society, revelations of Prime Minister after Prime Minister presiding over cabals of rapist paedophiles and the murderers of children within their governments should trigger a wave of anger and horror that would shake politics and the seats of power to their foundations. The politicians and the policemen that are, often literally, in bed with each other to hide and protect their depravity, should be being hounded and vilified and dragged out into the public.
But we are not a civilised society. We are a society run by barbarians in suits. Savages with good PR, who have presided over and nurtured a culture that fetishises the sexual objectification of girls and young women, that celebrates the hedonistic worship and pursuit of impossibly youthful flesh. Which elevates abuse and greed as principles of leadership and common sense, and preaches hypocritical empty "morality" whilst deriding the combination of education and empathy from which genuine morality grows. Where "respect" means fear, and compassion is written off as gullibility and weakness.
But in a society where politicians will happily see brown skinned children starved and blown to pieces in the pursuit of corporate profit, why would anyone be surprised that they view the children of the poor at home as being little more than disposable toys?
And in an environment where "lad" culture promotes intimidation, sexual assault and rape as no more than a short cut "pick-up" technique, and little girls are taught by MTV that sex is all you have to give to the world, that your body and your face is all that is of value about you, a society where 1 in 5 women and girls are raped or sexually abused in their lifetime, 90% of them by someone they know, should we be surprised that, actually, no one really gives a shit? Not enough to actually do anything about it anyway.
But lets have a demo to protect the right to watch face-sitting in pornography. We don't want anyone to think we are a nation of prudes now, do we?

VIP paedophile networks 'shut down police investigations which got too close', retired officers claim (Daily Record)

Porn Protesters Stage Mass 'Face-Sitting' Outside Parliament (Huffington Post)

100,000 assaults. 1,000 rapists sentenced. Shockingly low conviction rates revealed (The Independent)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/100000-assaults-1000-rapists-sentenced-shockingly-low-conviction-rates-revealed-8446058.html

Saturday, 15 November 2014

Scottish National Party Still Greatest Progressive Threat To UK Political Establishment - Independence Fight Is Far From Over

My latest with Press TV, abridged comments (with audio) at the link HERE, and my full written reply below...
Press TV: "Well, yesterday the SNP chose its new leader Nicola Sturgeon. She also vowed to continue the fight for her nation’s independence from the UK. Given the fact that Alex Salmond is quitting as the SNP leader and Scotland First Minister, do you think Britain will take Salmond’s warning seriously?" ----

James Stuart: The British political establishment have learnt to take Salmond very seriously. And, unlike Westminster politicians, he is known to follow through on his promises.
When SNP leader and Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond resigned on September 19th, the day after the referendum, there was some gloating that he was a beaten man. But the weeks since have proven the contrary, the Scottish National Party is soaring in the polls. By resigning his position and handing over to his very capable and equally politically formidable political partner, Nicola Sturgeon, Salmond is now unfettered by the responsibilities of leadership, and the gloves are off in his fight for independence.
It is seen as very likely that Alex Salmond with stand for election to the British parliament in May 2015, probably targeting a seat of a senior Liberal Democrat politician, the coalition partners of the ruling Conservatives, and then lead a substantial block of SNP MP's into Westminster, where it looks probable they could hold the balance of power in a hung parliament, leaving Salmond essentially calling the shots over who is able to form a government. Salmond has promised to hold the British establishment's "feet to the fire" over their pre-referendum promises of extra powers for the Scottish parliament, and he looks well placed to see his promise through.
So Salmond is actually left looking stronger, and more of a threat to the British political establishment than at any time in his career. They should certainly take his warning very seriously indeed.

Press TV: "-Salmond says the Scots could take the matters into their own QUOTE democratic hands, what exactly do you think he meant? Or, put better, when in her inauguration speech at the SNP conference yesterday, Sturgeon said she hoped she could see Scotland independent under her watch. Why didn’t SHE warn London about her next move as Scotland’s First Minister in waiting? I mean how significant is Salmond’s threat?" ----

James Stuart: If the UK establishment parties fail to deliver in their promises for more develed powers to Scotland, then they have essentially broken their covenant with the Scottish people. And if the SNP has a majority of Scottish seats to Westminister in May 2015, as the polls suggest, and the SNP is able to form another majority government in Scotland in 2016, then the SNP has a democratic mandate for rule from the people of Scotland that the UK parties do not. The UK government would have no political legitimacy left in Scotland.
New SNP leader, and First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon has already said she expects to see independence for Scotland well within her lifetime, that the 1.6 million votes for independence were the base camp from which we will reach the summit and that the goal is an independent Scotland. Far from the independence issue having being settled by the referendum, it would appear the real fight is only just beginning.

Saturday, 1 November 2014

Was the referendum just the start for Scotland's independence campaign?

Below is the full text of an interview I did with Press TV on the consequences of the Scottish independence referendum.
The abridged version can be read at this link:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/11/01/384423/majority-of-scots-back-2nd-referendum/
Press TV Question : 
An independence referendum was held in Scotland on September 18, with No winning by 55% to 45% for Yes. Despite the No campaign’s victory, we still see that majority of Scots want another vote on the independence. What’s your take on that?
What is the benefit of independence for Scots?
My Answer: Many people, not least those in the British political and state apparatus, believed that the no vote on the 18th of September would be the final nail in the coffin for the Scottish independence campaign. And in the depression of the immediate aftermath, for many independence campaigners, it did feel it could be that way.
However, only a few weeks on and we are seeing the opinion polls showing there is now a small majority in favour of independence, and a substantial 2/3rds majority who believe there should be another referendum on independence within a decade.
This turnaround is not actually very surprising. The No vote won by a margin of just over 5%, and did so on the back of a massive media campaign of fear mongering, particularly by the BBC, who were fully exposed as not a public service broadcaster, but as the British state broadcaster, which were especially targeted at older voters who were led to believe they would lose their pensions in an independent Scotland. Similar claims were made about the future of the NHS in Scotland.
This was combined with vague promises of extra fiscal and political powers to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament that were dressed up, with no actual formal commitment, as “Devo-Max”, the idea that Scotland could have full control over its finances and resources, with just foreign affairs and the military kept under British state control.
This was backed up with "The Vow", published in the most widely read tabloid in Scotland, the Daily Record, which was allegedly made by the three main UK party leaders, Miliband of Labour, British Prime Minister Cameron for the Conservatives and Deputy PM Clegg for the Liberal Democrats. “The Vow,” which implied a “Devo-Max” settlement is widely accepted as swinging the vote to a No, seen as a safe half-way house option by many voters.
However, within hours of the referendum result being announced, Prime Minister Cameron was already back tracking on any promise of new powers for Scotland.
And in the last week it was exposed that the so called “Vow” was a fabrication, compiled not by the Party leaders, but by the editorial staff of the Daily Record newspaper.
Along with this was the announcement by Cameron that UK military forces would once again be bombing Iraq, made within days of the referendum result, and privately admitted by government insiders that it was a decision made before the referendum, but not announced until after in order not to influence the result.
And the cost of the bombing campaign was touted at £2 Billion, a cost greater than that which was suggested as being the "unaffordable" cost of Scottish independence.
Then was the announcement that rather than state pensions being safe in the UK, they are to be cut drastically, plunging many pensioners into even deeper poverty.
And then Lloyds TSB's announcement of 9000 job losses. Much was made by the No campaign of Lloyds and other banks threatening job losses as a result of Scottish independence. In fact those job losses were already planned.
And the privatisation and dismemberment of the National Health Service, a process started under the previous Labour government, is stepping up a gear now.
So with all this in mind, it is hardly surprising that many of those who voted No to independence are now feeling cheated and betrayed.
The most obvious expression of this has been in recent opinion polls which are showing that the Labour Party has lost all credibility in Scotland, and is heading towards disaster in its Scottish working class heartlands in next years UK general election.
Meanwhile, the pro-independence Scottish National Party, is soaring in the polls.
So rather than the referendum being the end of the Scottish independence campaign, it now appears to be just the beginning.
The most striking feature of the independence campaign was the way that ordinary people became politicised and energised about politics in a way that has really never been seen before in this country. And that shows no sign of dying away. The SNP has seen its membership triple from 25,000 to over 80,000 in the weeks since the referendum. Political debate is still very much a major topic of conversation for ordinary people in Scotland now.
And so it is becoming ever clearer to the majority of Scots, particularly working class Scots, that the only way they can guarantee that the resources of Scotland are used in the best interests of the people of Scotland, and not squandered on endless wars and subsiding the greed of the wealthy, and the corrupt banking system, is through full independence.
If, as looks likely, there is a large number of SNP MP's elected to Westminster in 2015, and another SNP majority government in Holyrood in the Scottish elections in 2016, this creates a major headache for the British political establishment, who would have no legitimacy to continue their rule and their austerity policies in Scotland. This headache could quickly become a major political crisis if, as is expected, there is another hung parliament in Westminster, where no one Party has a majority, leaving the Scottish Nationalists holding the balance of power and potentially forcing Labour and Conservative parties into a pact in order to maintain a functioning government.
This will be exacerbated further if the promised UK referendum on leaving the EU takes place and the majority of English voters choose to leave the EU, but Scottish voters choose to remain.
What would be the legitimacy then of the British government to decide Scotland's future? With no political mandate in Scotland the mainstream UK parties have lost their moral right to rule Scotland. The political battle to end their rule has in reality only just begun.

James Stuart political commetator from Edinburgh

Thursday, 7 August 2014

Israel, the SWP and white privilege.

Okay, I know you are all going to be shocked to the very core of your being, but brace yourselves. Im sharing a Socialist Worker article. 

And it gets even more Twilight Zone. Cos Im going to quote Tony Cliff now. Here it comes...

“Israel is not a colony suppressed by imperialism, but a settler’s citadel, a launching pad of imperialism. It is a tragedy that some of the very people who had been persecuted and massacred in such bestial fashion should themselves be driven into a chauvinistic, militaristic fervour, and become the blind tool of imperialism in subjugating the Arab masses.”

Spot on. I guess it's the stopped clock syndrome. Infinite monkeys with typrwriters scenario.

But what about this...

- "Many Israelis hate this corruption, and are angry with the government. They see that the country is tumbling into poverty and the division between the poor and rich is rapidly increasing. Many realise that the education system has deteriorated. People are angry at all of these things.

This does lead to an understanding of solidarity between workers, but this solidarity is easily contained within the context of the Israeli worker against the Israeli boss. It does not extend to Arabs.

There have been many strikes in Israel, but they collapse once the question of the security of the state is raised. Many Israeli workers want a larger share of the pie, but they do not want share it with the Palestinians." -

Absolutely true of course. But doesn't it apply just as much to the situation in England? In the US? Undoubtedly. Change "Israeli" for "English" or "whites", and "Palestinians" and "Arabs" for "immigrants" or "non-white" and it still pretty much stands as a statement of the imperialist nation labour aristocracy and Euro-settler white supremacist culture. And THAT is where the SWP, and the rest of the left, when push comes to shove, fall back in line behind their own imperialist ruling class. Syria, Libya, Ukraine, Russia, China, Zimbabwe, DPRK, Iran, South Africa, Brazil, etc, etc etc. When it comes to imperialism and their own ruling-class vs the oppressed, former colonial, rising nations and peoples of the global south, when it comes to the Labour Party, to the trade unions, to any serious resistance or analysis that deal with the "the question of the security of the state", the SWP et al, and indeed the class they aspire to lead, well, "they collapse... want a larger share of the pie".

And for an Englishman, to an American, they see the whole world exactly the same as an Israeli sees Gaza. A threat to their privilege. And not even really human.

"You ask me what the English workers think about colonial policy. Well, exactly the same as they think about politics in general: the same as what the bourgeois think. There is no workers' party here, there are only Conservatives and Liberal-Radicals, and the workers gaily share the feast of England's monopoly of the world market and the colonies." Engels, 1882.

plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Israeli society: No room for change

Collusion with the oppression of the Palestinians lies at the root of the Israeli left’s weakness, according to socialists Natalie Adler and Ron Oppenheim
http://socialistworker.co.uk/art/16806/Israeli+society%3A+No+room+for+change



The Zionist dream of creating a homeland for Jewish people in historic Palestine produced a nightmare for the citizens of Israel and Arab countries. Constant war and the brutal oppression of the Palestinians have transformed the popular acceptance of Israel around the world into deep revulsion over its actions.
This was most notably seen in the huge anti-war movement against Israel’s recent assault on Gaza. But one place seems to be an exception – Israel itself.
While Britain and the US have witnessed people rise in mass movements against the imperialist policies of their government in the “war on terror”, Israel has seen very little opposition to the state’s wars.
In fact, as last week’s elections showed, Israeli society is moving even further to the right. Natalie Adler and Ron Oppenheim are two young socialists who recently left Israel.

Racism and war distort Israeli society. It is a colonial settler state built on the ruins of Palestine. As a colonial enterprise, Israel is dependent on the backing of imperial powers. In return it acts as imperialism’s watchdog in the Middle East.
Israel has created many myths to justify its actions, among them that it is a democratic and enlightened society founded on socialist principles.
But Israel has very few progressive forces. It is a society where even those who consider themselves to be on the left accept the basic premise that Israel should remain a Jewish state. This means that there are no strong ideological grounds for Israel’s left to found itself on.
Most of the left see the 1967 war – when Israel launched a pre-emptive strike on Jordan, Syria and Egypt, occupying the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Hights – as the root of the present conflict.
They advocate a two state solution, with Israel keeping the majority of historic Palestine while giving some territory back to its original inhabitants.
This is a fatal flaw, for it keeps the left firmly within the boundaries of Zionism. What’s missing is an understanding of the history of Zionism itself and that Israel was founded on the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948. In this light, it becomes obvious that the 1967 war was part of a larger scheme to grab more land.
Moshe Machover and Akiva Orr, two Israeli anti-Zionists, wrote The Class Character of Israel in 1972. In this pioneering Marxist analysis they wrote, “The permanent conflict between the settlers’ society and the indigenous, displaced Palestinian Arabs has never stopped and it has shaped the very structure of Israeli sociology, politics and economics.”
Campaign
The Israeli left accepts the “necessity and legitimacy” of Israel’s existence. The same people who will campaign for peace, want a halt to aggression towards the Palestinian civilians, and advocate returning the occupied territories also accept the lie that Hamas, the Palestinian resistance ­movement, is “backward and must be dealt with”.
So if Palestinian civilians are killed during a military operation it is because Hamas uses them as “human shields”, or because they “operate in densely ­populated” areas. This is why many left wing intellectuals in Israel supported the war on Gaza, as they did the 2006 war on Lebanon.
Many on the left would genuinely like to see Palestinians having freedom and a livelihood – but the moment that Israel’s existence comes into question, they are swept up by nationalism.
This means there is no genuine socialist tradition in Israel despite the feeling among many Israelis that it was founded on “socialist principles”.
Much is made of Israel’s origins as an apparently egalitarian society. In the 1950s the difference between rich and poor was the lowest in the Western world.
The Israeli trade union federation, the Histradut, was a key plank of the foundation of the country. In the first decades of the state it employed the majority of workers. But this union was formed to exclude Arab workers – it was a union that sought to organise only Jewish workers.
This same principle was applied to the Kibbutz movement, the “egalitarian” farming communities. The Kibbutz was once a central part of Israeli society, and was often regarded as a socialist experiment.
In reality these farms were built on land seized from Palestinians – much like all the early Zionist settlements. Despite the equality of life inside the Kibbutz for Jews, Arabs were excluded.
And many of these “socialist” enclaves have now disappeared. Today Israel has one of the highest disparities between wealth and poverty in the western world. Israeli society is riddled with corruption.
Many Israelis hate this corruption, and are angry with the government. They see that the country is tumbling into poverty and the division between the poor and rich is rapidly increasing. Many realise that the education system has deteriorated. People are angry at all of these things.
This does lead to an understanding of solidarity between workers, but this solidarity is easily contained within the context of the Israeli worker against the Israeli boss. It does not extend to Arabs.
There have been many strikes in Israel, but they collapse once the question of the security of the state is raised. Many Israeli workers want a larger share of the pie, but they do not want share it with the Palestinians.
Tony Cliff, a Palestinian Jew who came to Britain in 1947 and went on to found the Socialist Workers Party, wrote, “Israel is not a colony suppressed by imperialism, but a settler’s citadel, a launching pad of imperialism. It is a tragedy that some of the very people who had been persecuted and massacred in such bestial fashion should themselves be driven into a chauvinistic, militaristic fervour, and become the blind tool of imperialism in subjugating the Arab masses.”
This transformation from the “oppressed to the oppressor” has shaped Israeli society, and bred deep-seated racism that permeates all walks of life.
Aggressive
Racism offers an excuse for being oppressive. The other side are “like animals” so they are “aggressive”. But “our actions” are legitimised in the “interest of national defence”.
This racism is advocated through education, politics and the media. But it is not just directed at the Arabs and Palestinians.
There is a high level of racism within Israeli society itself – between the Ashkenazi (European Jews) and Mizrahi (oriental or eastern Jews). There is discrimination against the Mizrahi – they are paid less, and it is harder for them to get jobs or to rise in the ranks in the army.
But these divisions are superseded by the fear and hatred towards the Palestinians. So many at the “bottom” of Israeli society are also those who vote in large numbers for the more extreme Zionist parties.
Most of the characteristic “Israeli ways” are formed by the colonialist nature of the country.
On a subconscious level many Israelis understand that the Palestinians have suffered, but they fall back on racism as a mechanism that can help them cope with this feeling.
At its core Israel is a military state. It is a country constantly at war, because its very existence depends on denying rights of the Palestinians.
Those Israelis who refuse to serve in the army have a much harder time finding work. The army offers very prestigious and well paid jobs, as well as funding higher education. It is very attractive to the majority of Israelis, especially from among the poor.
But it is also within the army that some of the bravest opposition voices have emerged, but always at a high personal cost.
One soldier told us that once he was posted to Palestinian areas he began to confront the ugly truth of Israel. He discovered that Palestinians live in terrible conditions, and was disgusted by the way the military “handles the Occupied Territories”.
When soldiers were bored they would start shooting into crowds of Palestinians, and the Palestinian police would be blamed for “starting an incident” if they fired back. Soldiers he knew would take their weapons and grenades home during the weekend “to kill Arabs”.
He said he entered the army as a “good Israeli boy” and left questioning every aspect of Israeli society. He discovered the secret history of Israel, from the plan Dalet (known as Plan D) – the blueprint for the ethnic cleansing in 1948 – to the realisation that the wars we were told were instigated by “the other side” were started by Israel in order to grab more land.
When Israelis question these myths and lies they face being ostracised from family, friends and work. Many of those who come to similar conclusions end up leaving, or being forced to leave the country.
This is the harsh choice the left in Israel faces – accept Zionism and accept that there will never be justice for Palestinians. Or advocate a one state solution, that is a democratic state for Arabs and Jews. But this means rejecting the notion of a “Jewish only state” and accepting that Palestinians have a right to return.

Sunday, 25 May 2014

SCOTTISH GREEN VOTERS, SAY HELLO TO YOUR UKIP MEP. WELL DONE.

Looks like UKIP got their first MEP in Scotland. The Unionists, from the Guardian to the tories, are crowing and cheering this as a great defeat for the SNP. The same SNP that came first (again) in this election and maintained it's vote from 2009.

Because let's be frank, given the choice between Scottish independence and fascism, even the pinkest of English liberals will not be able to stifle a smug cheer for fascism.

Well, anyway, fucking shame on anyone in Scotland who voted UKIP, you are a fucking disgrace to our nation. 10% for a far-right, anti-immigrant, islamophobic and blatantly ANTI-SCOTTISH party is disgusting, nay, more, it is humiliating. You have now elected as your representative in Europe someone whose party holds Scotland and our democracy in utter contempt, who wants to blame not just our minorities, but every single one of us as a nation, for the economic shambles the neo-liberal politics that UKIP champions has created.

But you know what, I blame Green voters the most. What the fuck were you thinking? This result in on your heads. You were told again and again, the last seat was a straight up fight between the SNP and UKIP. The Greens were not in this game, but by throwing away your vote on them, you took enough votes from the SNP to allow a right-wing scumbag to win. Rather than vote for the SNP, which shares at least some positions with the Greens (not least on independence and investment in renewable energy) and works well with them in parliament, you instead got elected someone who represents the anti-thesis of everything you believe in. You fucking mugs.

Sad day for Scotland. Couldnt give a fuck about how England voted anymore. You are all fucking useless cunts.

Scotland's Ukip MEP: I'll take on Salmond over immigration

THE man who has become Ukip's first elected politician in Scotland has vowed to campaign against Alex Salmond's plans for greater immigration under independence.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/ukip-scottish-candidate-ill-take-on-salmond-over-immigration.24313688

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0DCukOq_js

Sunday, 20 April 2014

KILL THE POOR: FOODBANKS - THE NEW COMMUNIST THREAT!

Just when you think the Daily Mail has plumbed the deepest, filthiest dregs...


No ID, no checks... and vouchers for sob stories: The truth behind those shock food bank claims

  • Mail on Sunday undercover film exposes abuse of charity
  • Scroungers flout Trussell Trust's '9 visits' rule to stock up
  • Repeat visits undermine the Trust's claim of 913,000 users

By SIMON MURPHY and SANCHEZ MANNING
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2608606/No-ID-no-checks-vouchers-sob-stories-The-truth-shock-food-bank-claims.html#ixzz2zPZk5k00


So, "Free" food banks? Basically a communist plot to undermine welfare "reform"! And you know they give food to asylum seekers too? And people who might not be on the verge of actual death through starvation?

It isnt enough that they create the propaganda for demonising and vilifying the poor, the disabled, the unemployed, so that right-wing governments can claim popular support for ripping down the welfare system and throwing hundreds of thousands of the already poorest and most vulnerable into destitution.

No, that was just the start. Now even charity, even this last thin line of hope, of subsistence, this too must be attacked, must be vilified, must be held down and killed.

If anything demonstrates that for the tories and their kind, this isnt just about economics, about politics, about budgets, even just about taking from the poor and giving it to the rich, it is this. This is pure, callous class hatred. They really do want to see the poor suffer, poverty is not enough, you must starve. They genuinely will not stop until people are dying, not in the ones and two, but in the hundreds, then the thousands. Until millions are suffering the most unbearable hunger and pain, and then they can point and say, "They didnt work hard enough" as they wallow in their stolen, inherited loot and laugh at the "stupidity", "laziness" and "ugliness" of the poor.

They enjoy to see us suffer.They hate us. They fear us, and loathe us. And they want us servile or dead. And they know that millions of selfish, greedy, shallow, corrupted, soulless sheep will fawn and crawl before them, whilst turning to put the boot in against their poorer neighbour on their behalf.

They laugh at us. And so they should. Because as always we will do nothing about it. Their contempt at our weakness is justified. They are the ruling-class for a reason. And until our class, as a class, has the guts, the passion, the determination and the hate to make ourselves the ruling-class and turn those parasites into fertilizer, we will have no one to blame but each other - which is exactly what they want.

As for the "journalists" behind this piece of poison, Simon Murphy and Sanchez Manning, Hell has a special place for you. Hope you get there soon.


DEAD KENNEDY'S - KILL THE POOR


"Kill The Poor"
Efficiency and progress is ours once more
Now that we have the Neutron bomb
It's nice and quick and clean and gets things done
Away with excess enemy
But no less value to property
No sense in war but perfect sense at home:

The sun beams down on a brand new day
No more welfare tax to pay
Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light
Jobless millions whisked away
At last we have more room to play
All systems go to kill the poor tonight

Gonna
Kill kill kill kill Kill the poor:Tonight

Behold the sparkle of champagne
The crime rate's gone
Feel free again
O' life's a dream with you, Miss Lily White
Jane Fonda on the screen today
Convinced the liberals it's okay
So let's get dressed and dance away the night

While they:
Kill kill kill kill Kill the poor:Tonight


Tuesday, 8 April 2014

Scottish Independence would by "Cataclysmic" for NATO and western imperialism.


And George Galloway MP and the rest of the loyalist Left wants us to "vote naw", because...well, because why? Because it seems to me, if the British ruling-class is starting to panic and saying independence is "cataclysmic" for their imperialist interest, then perhaps thats a pretty damn good reason to vote Yes!!...


Former NATO secretary general says Scottish independence would be "cataclysmic"




Scottish independence would be "cataclysmic" for the West and would be celebrated by Britain's enemies, according to the former secretary general of Nato, Lord Robertson.
Speaking at the Brookings Institute, Lord Robertson said global stability could be threatened by a "debilitating divorce" between the UK and Scotland.
Taking the debate over independence well beyond the shores of the UK, Robertson urged Britain's allies to speak out against Scottish independence telling the audience, "this is not a purely domestic matter, even though it's a decision that will be taken by the Scottish people."
The former Labour politician warned that the decision to be taken by the Scottish people later this year would affect not only them but generations yet to come and those overseas had every right to make their voices heard.
However, a spokesman for Scotland's first minister Alex Salmond hit back, arguing that an independent Scotland would make a positive contribution to the world and that "It is disappointing but not surprising that Lord Robertson fails to recognise any of that in this crass and offensive speech."

Thursday, 20 March 2014

Russian "imperialism" and the crisis in Ukraine. What is the answer? FUCK NATO.

A lot of liberal bleating that Russia's role regarding Ukraine and Crimea is "imperialist", so they can have an excuse to sit on the fence safely behind their own ruling class, which always seems to be the place you will find them.

Now, even if Russia was acting as an imperialist power, which it isnt (try actually reading some Lenin instead of just taking the word of Socialist Worker or whatever liberal rag you allow to think for you), even if it was, it would not make one jot of a difference to the position of any anti-imperialist in the west.

Because quite simply, the main, in fact the only real enemy is at home. The defeat of western imperialism is our only concern in any conflict.

It is 100 years since World War One started, and still the liberal left is making exactly the same pathetic arguments for its own cowardice and collaboration in the face of the crisis-stricken and bankrupt imperialist ruling-class's inevitable push for war.

And so equally inevitably, the 'third-camp' pitches its tent under the safe and comfortable cover of the imperialist tree.

"A revolutionary class cannot but wish for the defeat of its government in a reactionary war.
...
Socialists must explain to the masses that they have no other road of salvation except the revolutionary overthrow of “their” governments, and that advantage must be taken of these governments’ embarrassments in the present war precisely for this purpose. "

Lenin, Socialism and War (1915)
http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/s+w/
Fuck NATO!