“...and yes, I know who was P.M. in 1994, it was also the year non Fabian John Smith ( and with him 'old Labour') died.”

“John
Apologies, I often work late.
Many thanks for that. I consider some of my posts politically naive, thinking with the heart and not the head. I don't consider it's a fault, just that it's often impractical. It would be nice to produce a more eloquent and readable contributions like yours, I'll keep practising.
The foremost defining moment that fuels my cynicism was Rwanda. I can remember the news bulletins with film of the slaughter and wondered why nothing was being done. This was exactly what the U.N. was about wasn't it?
And the genocide could so easily have been stopped by jamming the radio signal, perhaps replacing it with another message.
But worse than inaction by the UN whose troops were reporting the horrific slaughter was the French collusion with the murderers.
So when Blair tells us it's politically justifiable to remove certain ''tyrants'' for human rights abuses, please excuse my political naivety for thinking he's a hypocrite and a liar.
Respects Max”

“:| PS. I neglected to say thankyou John. . I feel I should. . Your various 'mixed' comments were noted.”

“:| I suppose if we'd just let Hitler finish them all off, and if the Japanese had given the USA a fatal blow at Pearl Harbour, we wouldn't have so many Middle East problems now. . Except of course, we might not all be here either.

Guantanamo Bay detention camp was a holiday camp by comparison

I haven't really got much else to say. . Catch you all again. . Best Charles

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWwl-lr9wNc&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps64xxJq0mg&feature=related
.”

“It is a well known saying that "The truth is the first casualty of war". Indeed we were given proof that it was a casualty well before the Iraq War began - arguably the worst deceit ever perpetrated on the British nation. It has been clear for a long time that the intent to remove Saddam Hussein by military force, was taken years before the event, and that principally the American and British Governments conspired to provide the justification, irrespective of the facts known to them. The truth can be a casualty in peace as well as war and all the protections embedded in the law, public opinion, free press and democratic institutions were unequal to the determined intentions of the main players. (The attempt to bully the BBC, which was largely successful, was just one blatant example) In so doing, the view that only non-democratic regimes undertake aggressive acts against sovereign states, and that "freedom loving" democracies only use force defensively, was decisively shown to be fable. "History is always written by the victor" is another famous aphorism that is already in evidence. The enormous suffering is swept under a Persian carpet of positive propaganda. If nothing else, the Iraq adventure was a wake-up call. Even Western Governments cannot be trusted with the truth as global geo-politics in the control of vital natural resources, are played out.”

“Dear Charles

Thank you for your response to my recent post.

I am sorry that I did not manage to address the subject matter of the 'link' which you attached - although I did read the information therein - I am afraid that I simply ran out of 'characters' on the forum.

"Entirely your own fault", I can imagine you saying, "for writing such lengthy essays!" (You see, I am making an attempt at humour!)

I was interested to read about your grandfather, and the vital role that he played during the second World War.

It brought back memories of my own father, who served with both the RAF and the army during that conflict.

Indeed, I remember my father telling me that the men who served on the North Atlantic convoys were unsung heroes who did one of the most arduous and dangerous jobs imaginable.

They, and all those who served in the fight against fascism, have my everlasting gratitude and respect.

At the end of the war, my father was amongst those troops who remained in Berlin to 'police' the British sector, and I also remember the stories that he used to tell me of the horrors of that situation.

That experience had a very profound effect on my father, and it convinced him of one thing:

War never does the 'ordinary' people any good whatsoever, the only REAL winners are the arms dealers and the spivs.

I note with sadness your repetition of that tired old propagandist argument - often used to discredit people of intellect, decency and conscience - whereupon you "presume" that because I refuse to endorse an unethical and illegal war, I must be some kind of apologist for Saddam Hussein.

Well I am NOT Charles - and if you will forgive me for saying so, quite frankly, I expect better from a man of your obvious intelligence.

Moreover, you intimate that I did not have an alternative 'solution' to the situation - and yet again you are wrong.

The governments of the US and the UK merely had to allow Hans Blix and his team of UN weapons inspectors adequate time to finish the job that they were doing; a task with which the Iraqi regime was complying according to the evidence given by Mr Blix to the Chilcott inquiry.

And of course, with the benefit of hindsight, the USA would have been well advised not to have installed Saddam in the first place !!

In closing, allow me to return to the 'link' that you kindly attached to your previous post.

The list of atrocities outlined by Captain Dan Ouimette makes for disturbing reading indeed; and, personally, I cannot imagine how any person, organisation or regime could claim justification for such acts of violence.

However, the following is a list of nations that have been 'bombed' by the USA since the end of World War 2, and I dare say that, sadly, there are those who might regard such actions as 'just cause':

China 1945-46
Korea 1950-53
China 1950-53
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-60
Guatemala 1960
Belgian Congo 1964
Guatemala 1964
Dominican Republic 1965-66
Peru 1965
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Lebanon 1982-84
Grenada 1983-84
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1981-92
Nicaragua 1981-90
Libya 1986
Iran 1987-88
Libya 1989
Panama 1989-90
Iraq 1991-Date
Kuwait 1991
Somalia 1992-94
Croatia 1994 (of Serbs at Krajina)
Bosnia 1995
Iran 1998 (airliner)
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Afghanistan 2001-Date

Yours respectfully,

John Jackson.”

“Dear max power,

If only all the citizens of the World were prepared to listen to ALL of the facts this planet would not merely be a more enlightened one, it would also be a much safer place to live!.

Once again, I am in admiration of your ability to present the truth in such a succinct and non-confrontational manner.

You have my gratitude for restoring my faith in the power, and the potential, of humanity.

Yours respectfully,

JohnJackson.”

“I¿ll try to add to John¿s reply:
As John said the CIA instigated the Ba'athist coup to put Hussain in power and he¿d still be there if he¿d played ball regardless of any human rights issues, BTW There's a disturbing clip on wikileaks of an Apache 'copter shooting civilians (inc Reuters photographers) that brings home the meaning of ''collateral damage'' in Baghdad. We have an ambivalent view of human rights, if only Rwanda had oil.
The famous quote from Robin Cook 2 weeks before his 'death.' ''Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by Western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al Qaida literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians''
It's hard to define a balance, sorting out the info from the misinfo and false flags. There are no good guys just a lot of suffering and death for the innocent. Someone¿s freedom often gained by the oppression of another. The collateral damage suffered by someone we don't know we're told is the price of our freedom.
Captain Ouimette's mentions Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988, killing 259. He neglects to mention the Iranean airliner shot down 6 months previous by a U.S. warship killing 290, inc. 66 children. The warship arrived home to a heroes reception and they were decorated and Bush snr. said "I'll never apologise for the United States of America, ever, I don't care what the facts are." This crass statement designed to inflame the situation (at the time of the Iran/Iraq war). He doesn't mention CIA interventions in counties to overthrow democratically elected leaders to install their West friendly puppets however corrupt they might be, either way, the small guy looses . Terrorism though will not be beaten by military means, only encouraged, and while there are queues waiting to blow themselves up, we cannot see any end. Oceana¿s perpetual war perhaps?
We have had a frightening glimpse of the future if we let it happen. The lockdown possibilities of the U.S. in the 'Patriot Act', or anti terrorism measures here have the potential to remove our liberties and implement a police state at the drop of a hat whatever the perceived threat, whoever the terrorists might be.
I fully empathise that we are lucky to be living through a relatively peaceful and enlightened age made possible by the ultimate sacrifices of our ancestors and we need to understand very few Germans were Nazis, most Germans thought they were fools but they all sat back and let it happen. But when removing the fanatics we mustn't allow another form of fascism to exist in its place and we must appreciate the cost to others of our present freedom.”

“:| It's all been said before John, and it offered no alternative solution. . I am presuming you would really just like to revive Saddam and return Iraq to his control. . After seeing what it took to remove him, which was quite clinical; you obviously didn't take in Captain Dan Ouimette speech and its implications. . You talk as if there wasn't really a problem before. . When you are bored, research 'The Blockade Busters' my grandfather was a ship's Master. . He came out of retirement and risked his life again and again, to help save this country from Nazi occupation. . People talked similarly about Adolf Hitler and almost left it too late. . . I believe they should have just got on and had a Regime Change. . All the talk of 'legality' is utter nonsense when it comes to defending our freedom. . And it's only just begun. . Millions gave(lost) their lives defending that freedom and you seem to have no conception of what that actually meant or what was involved. . What is galling is that the people who always 'fundamentally disagree' have never got any solution, just platitudes and excuses for the aggressors.”

“Dear Charles

I feel sure that you will not be entirely surprised to find that I disagree fundamentally with just about everything you have to say in the opening paragraph of your latest post.

At the risk of entering into a debate (sorry!!) kindly allow me to disabuse you of the misconceptions under which you are currently labouring.

Bush & B.Liar were the real enemies of World peace and conspired to launch an illegal war using the tragic events of 9/11 as a smokescreen.

There was absolutely no evidence linking the Iraqi regime (as abhorrent as it may have been) to that event; indeed, Bush's former vice-president, Dick Cheney, recently commented that he does not believe Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.

Furthermore, there was not one Iraqi national amongst the reported bombers on that fateful day.

We also know that there were no 'weapons of mass destruction' (or should that be: 'distraction').

In fact, in his report to the Chilcott inquiry into the war, the former chief weapons inspector to the UN, Hans Blix said there was no justification for war, because his inspectors found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction; and he told them that he had needed a few more months to finish his task.

Bush & B.Liar then tried to justify the invasion of Iraq by saying that Saddam had to be removed from power as he presented a threat to peace in the area.

(And lest we forget, it was the US that installed Saddam as their puppet in the first place !)

Of course they quickly realised that would constitute 'regime change' which, of itself, is illegal under international law.

So, once again 'they moved the goalposts', chucking everything in together and adding failure to comply with a UN sanction - which was clearly fatuous given the report from Hans Blix - 'ET VOILA': one phoney war with no expense spared (particularly in relation to the cost in human life).

With regard to Iraq now being a 'relatively normal' country, I would draw your attention to the following report by Sami Ramadani, an Iraqi reporter writing in The Guardian:

"Iraqis who Blair and Bush glorified and brought to power through sham elections are bleeding the nation dry through corruption and the sell-off of Iraq's resources to multinationals. Freedom and democracy is nowhere to be seen. Deploying the US-built Iraqi security forces against the people is common. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have drawn attention to the plight of thousands of prisoners, widespread use of torture, and both judicial and extra-judicial killings.

Meanwhile, the litany of repressive policies gets longer. It is illegal to be a member of a trade union, just as it was under Saddam. Paul Bremer, the US envoy who ruled Iraq after the invasion, revived Saddam's infamous "decree 150" in 2004, effectively banning all public sector unions. Activists are now treated as if they were terrorists. Only last week troops and police raided the offices of workers' unions across the country, following a government decree under the 2005 anti-terrorism act, to ban them and seize their assets.

And now, unlike during Saddam's regime, Al Quaeda has a foothold in Iraq; and that gives lie to yet another myth spun by the real axis of evil - Bush & B.Liar: that we needed to invade Iraq on the grounds of our own national security.

Giving evidence to the Iraq inquiry, Baroness Manningham-Buller, the former head of MI5, said she had advised officials a year before the war that the threat posed by Iraq to the UK was "very limited".

She also said that the invasion of Iraq "substantially" increased the terrorist threat to the UK.

Now I feel sure that you would not be so un-gentlemanly as to contradict the Baroness, Charles.

In closing Charles, I apologise for the length of this 'essay'. Unfortunately, I am not very good at writing abstract commentary about tape-recorders, but I promise to try and think more like a crab when the appropriate occasio”