Britain's Horrendously Murderous Role In The

[itsnotoutthere]

I would have thought yourself - a man who seems to be becoming one of the biggest critics of our government and elites on this forum

- would have been amongst the most outraged by these eventsURLur armed forces being used to make the rich richer and what-not, along with atrocities being carried out in our country's name.

I see I was mistaken.

No i suppose you're right, but that's the trouble these days, where government is concerned it's not even a choice of the lesser of two evils, it seems to be same crap just a different colour rosette. It's becoming clear that it doesn't matter who you vote for because the government always gets in.

[ExpandMyMind]

I read about an accurate term to describe our form of government: elective dictatorship (i used the incorrect term tonight in another thread come to think about it). What it basically means is that, while we get to vote on one of two parties (or even the three), as soon as the voting is finished and the new one is in, all form of the democratic process has ended. They do whatever they want, whether it be go to war or pass self serving (elite-serving) policies, and often that is exactly the opposite of what they have said they would do, with no oversight or accountability whatsoever. It is a dictatorship we live in, albeit one we are fooled into thinking is a democracy.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_dictatorship

At least the Americans have congress, which, to an extent (granted, not a very large extent), represents the people. Though this often leads to the party in power being unable to do what they promised voters (and when it comes to war and foreign policy, it doesn't seem to make much of a difference either) - and they too are never held to account for their actions. Or maybe that particular part of their own democratic process has been shaped and moulded specifically with that in mind, and for that purpose?

It should be noted, that none of this would be possible, however, without the help of the media, who support any government and largely are responsible for shaping views and opinions, effectively indoctrinating the masses. This has been termed as 'manufacturing consent' - http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent:_Noam_Chomsky_and_the_Media

Worth reading and the video worth watching (essential watching to be honest - and you can get it on Google videos).

When our governments spew nonsense about promoting democracy I really do have to laugh. After all, if you couldn't laugh, you'd cry.

Edited February 22, 2012 by ExpandMyMind

[itsnotoutthere]

"while we get to vote on one of two parties (or even the three), as soon as the voting is finished and the new one is in, all form of the democratic process has ended"

Bearing that in mind, watch this & then ask yourself, what if it's the same here :-

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

[ExpandMyMind]

That is the most truthful piece I've ever seen come from a corporate news company. I agreed with every bit of that. I'm surprised it was allowed to air, especially the bit on Ron Paul.

I've seen a few videos of that presenter and he always seems to go against the grain -which is always a good thing with political opinion shows on news stations (it makes people think) -but in that video he takes it to a whole new level.

Amazing. Thanks.

Oh, and yeah, I think that it applies to us as well, though it is probably slightly worse here (for the reason mentioned above).

Edited February 23, 2012 by ExpandMyMind

[hetrodoxly]

Produced by an extreme left wing activist so how much of it is true, just speculation, assumption or just lies i don't know? because there's no balance it makes one believe the OP has a great loathing for Britain

All countries at one time or another have tried to empire build, Britain just happened to be very good at it, the Op might be interested in this snippet

During the 19th century, the British Admiralty patrolled the African coast to catch illegal slave traders.^[10] The Swedish vessel Diana was intercepted by the British authorities close to the coast of Africa while engaged in carrying slaves from Africa to Saint Bartholomew during this period. The case was taken to court in order to test if the slave trade could be considered contrary to the general law of nations. However, the vessel was returned to the Swedish owners on the ground that Sweden had not prohibited the trade and tolerated it in practice.

Britain has given some wonderful discoveries and inventions to the world and made tremendous sacrifices.

[ExpandMyMind]

Sure all countries have been guilty of different crimes in the past, but that is in no way an excuse for what our current form of government has been doing and covering up since WW2 and is doing to this day. Are you actually trying to defend this behaviour? These atrocities? Seriously. What makes it worse (and why I brought this particular event up) is that the human right atrocities of WW2 spurred the populations of countries around the world to change for the better. With international law becoming more concrete and various human rrithts laws - The Geneva Convention and The Declaration of Human Rights - being introduced. Very few wanted to see what happened back then ever happen again. Yet our government continued with murderous and genocidal policies. And to make matters worse, along with it being secret, these policies have often been sold along with the lie that we're actually trying to do good! Trying to be humanitarian?!

I can't believe your taking the apologist stance. That's like someone saying that it's ok for the Gambino family to profit from murder and extortion because sometimes that sort of thing happens in the world. Incredible. Literally.

And the man bases his material on previously declassified documents and quotes from our leaders and such. The evidence cannot be refuted. But you continue to tow the ol' 'left wing activist so must be a government hating liar' line if you want. Once I'm off my phone and have an actual PC I'll be able to supply quotes more easily. But Google the Observer article from the mid 90s in which he exposed Britain's role in Indonesia

And with that last line I really hope you're not adopting the view of 'their enslavement was good for them'. Deplorable, though deplorable is nowhere near a harsh enough adjective for that view to be honest. We all know Britain brought a lot of good inventions to the world, but I fail to see the relevance. .

[Habitat]

I heard last night that combined British debt (Govt, corporate, personal) is running at around 900% of GDP.( "Leading" the world) Seems to me whatever chicanery was gotten up to to protect UK interests has been less than spectacularly successful.

[Space Commander Travis]

this Incredibly brave journalist does sound rather like that Australian bloke who's always going on about the Evil of the West, and always automatically takes the side of whichever little tin pot dictator is currently bravely standing up to the Evil ones. Pilger, that's it, isn't it.

He does seem to have, well, a bit of an obssession throwing around words like "Nazi-style concentration camps", and so, like anyone with an obssession, I do wonder if the balance of his mind is altogether, well, balanced. :-/

[MichaelW]

this Incredibly brave journalist does sound rather like that Australian bloke who's always going on about the Evil of the West, and always automatically takes the side of whichever little tin pot dictator is currently bravely standing up to the Evil ones. Pilger, that's it, isn't it.

He does seem to have, well, a bit of an obssession throwing around words like "Nazi-style concentration camps", and so, like anyone with an obssession, I do wonder if the balance of his mind is altogether, well, balanced. :-/

Yes. John Pilger is probably Australia's best known closet communist. He is a complete and utter **** and I would have much satisfaction in putting a cricket bat in that smug face of his.

Honestly, Ex, you have really outdone yourself this time in terms of the left-wing lunacy this time. Is it a full moon over Scotland?

[ExpandMyMind]

I wouldnt say he has a habit of throwing around that term. I only remember reading it that one time in the book, and considering they were locked up in the same manner and starved in the same manner, the analogy is accurate. Even more accurate than the one thrown around to describe Japanese camps in the US. Another reason it is quite relevant to use that description is that it was so soon after Britain's own troops were amongst those who found the actual nazi concentration camps. I mean for god's sake man, 150,000 of them died with even more being ethnically cleansed. Much of this was carried out with racial motives and Kenyans, being worked to death, were practically British slaves.

Know what? There is the link to the relevent chapter (15). http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=SvRhIh5sbWAC&pg=PA316&lpg=PP1&dq=web+of+deceit&output=html_text

Read it for yourself and decide. It shouldn't take more than 15 minutes. Ignore the author's comments and just read the facts and quotes if you feel him 'John Pilgery'. (who has actually exposed quite a bit himself).

And it should be noted that with Kenya, there was no tin pot dictator. It was a nationalist movement, intended to benefit the people, and supported BY the people. The country is still a mess man, and it's our government's fault.

Edited February 23, 2012 by ExpandMyMind

[ExpandMyMind]

Facts are facts Mikey. You can say all you want about this author's use of words, but there can be no defence for the documented record.

[MichaelW]

You mean the Mau Mau Movement, who apparently decided that genital mutilation was much more productive than other methods? Who are you going to support next? The Khmer Rouge? Haile Mengistu Miriam? Mao?

Yes, I know a bit about the Cold War and hope to make it a speciality of mine. There was a BBC documentary on it which I was absolutely fascinated with and still watch episodes which revealed a lot about the politics behind what was going on at the time.

And yes, I do find the Cold War very interesting.

[ExpandMyMind]

The difference being that the Mau Mau were effectively fighting off an invasion and also that the Mau Mau were hardly a communist force. In fact:

'The causes of the revolt' ... were 'socio-economic and political and amounted, to put it crudely, to the economic exploitation and administrative repression of the Kikuyu by the White settlers and the colonial state'. It was a militia response 'to years of frustration at the refusal of the colonial government to redress grievances over land or to listen to demands for constitutional reform'; and a 'peasants revolt triggered off by the declaration of a state of emergency [declaration of war] and the eviction of squatters from the farms on the White Highlands'.

Declassified British planning files Colonial Office Report:

'There is no evidence that communism or communist agents have had any direct or indirect part in the organisation or direction of the Mau Mau itself, or its activities'.

So why are you mentioning the cold war? Even the British themselves couldn't paint this as part of the great Eastern Evil... It was purely about colonialism and (which is) exploitation of resources.

Even if what you say is true - and it has not been proven to be so - it is not as though they did not have good reason to hate the British enough to do so. If you want to watch a documentary on it, try the one from Chamnel Four. I hear it's supposed to be good.

And read the chapter provided. I know you won't though, because you never read anything that you know will go against your pre-formed and pre-set misconceptions.

Edited February 23, 2012 by ExpandMyMind

[Mr Right Wing]

The difference being that the Mau Mau were effectively fighting off an invasion and also that the Mau Mau were hardly a communist force. In fact:

So why are you mentioning the cold war? Even the British themselves couldn't paint this as part of the great Eastern Evil... It was purely about colonialism and (which is) exploitation of resources.

Britain imports fuel, food and lots of manufactured goods. That means we have to enter into agreements with foreign powers so we can buy their exports. We also export services to other nations so we can balance our books.

Now the unpleasant reality of it all is that threats to the balancing of our books often appear and if not corrected would impact the finances of this country. This is often caused by leaders with global ambitions of greatness.

You say British Governments are immoral for acting to protect our economic interests, I say you've been exposed to idealistic nonsense. We live on planet Earth not a fantasy world. We are engaged in a game of strategic chess for our survival and if we dont want to play it we'd end up with nothing just like most of the third world has.

[ExpandMyMind]

And you, sir, are quite clearly morally bankrupt. Also, none of your post is even relevant to this discussion.

And I should mention that the first paragraph of the quotes above can be attributed to David Maughan-Brown

Edited February 23, 2012 by ExpandMyMind

[Mr Right Wing]

And you, sir, are quite clearly morally bankrupt.

You seem to think that Britains rivals are all sweet and innocent.

[+and-then]

Britain imports fuel, food and lots of manufactured goods. That means we have to enter into agreements with foreign powers so we can buy their exports. We also export services to other nations so we can balance our books.

Now the unpleasant reality of it all is that threats to the balancing of our books often appear and if not corrected would impact the finances of this country. This is often caused by leaders with global ambitions of greatness.

You say British Governments are immoral for acting to protect our economic interests, I say you've been exposed to idealistic nonsense. We live on planet Earth not a fantasy world. We are engaged in a game of strategic chess for our survival and if we dont want to play it we'd end up with nothing just like most of the third world has.

I can't say I agree with some of your other posts about the use of nuclear weapons but in this post you speak my mind about the realities of life in the modern world. Those who ignore those realities completely, destroy their own arguments or chance to be taken seriously.

[ExpandMyMind]

Just because we know certain things to be the 'realities' does not mean we should not strive for change. It is a reality that murders happen, should we then, by applying the same logic, say, 'oh well, I guess that kinda thing just happens'.

Like my previous gangster analogy shows, along with the one above, to hold the opinion that this sort of thing is even anywhere close to ok is completely void of morality.

[MichaelW]

The difference being that the Mau Mau were effectively fighting off an invasion and also that the Mau Mau were hardly a communist force.

So that makes killing civilians and gential mutilation OK then?

So why are you mentioning the cold war? Even the British themselves couldn't paint this as part of the great Eastern Evil... It was purely about colonialism and (which is) exploitation of resources.

Because this is effectively the time period which these events took place.

Even if what you say is true - and it has not been proven to be so - it is not as though they did not have good reason to hate the British enough to do so. If you want to watch a documentary on it, try the one from Chamnel Four. I hear it's supposed to be good.

Not proven to be so? Also, they didn't kill many actual Europeans- their main targets were actually Africans working for the British. Also, why aren't you questioning the acts committed by the Mau Mau? Are you actually justifiying mutilation of massacres of civilians? Wouldn't surprise me.

And read the chapter provided. I know you won't though, because you never read anything that you know will go against your pre-formed and pre-set misconceptions.

This is coming from someone who justifies terrorism against Israeli civilians, says Britain is undemocratic and thay Colombia is a military dictatorship. And I have misconceptions? Want to look in the mirror before you make another balatantly fictional claim?

Edited February 23, 2012 by MichaelW

[smurf0852]

The British people enjoy a high quality of life. We have cars, houses, computers, televisions, NHS, social security, education, etc, etc. Threats to that quality of life pop up all the time.

For instance Gaddafi might decide he's going to nationalise his nations branch of BP. BP may have gone multi-national but its still a British company. Looking at the money BP shareholders invested and the potential lose of tax revenue for our economy do you really expect the British Government to put up with that?

The British Government looks after its people, businesses and counters any threats to our economy. Thats not immoral and if you think it is then thank God you arent Prime Minister because I cam see you being incapable of making difficult decisions.

Money makes the world go around. You want an operation, an education, a car, petrol in your car, food on your plate, a roof over your head, it all needs paying for. Trade plays a big part in that and as an advanced nation one commodity which sells quite well for us is weapons. Our leaders are not corrupt, they arent immoral, they act to balance the books which means kicking butt every now and again when another country does something to threaten our finances.

then why do people with no respect for the working classes (like yourself)expect them to do the fighting for you .why dont they instead take the path of least resistence and not attack innocent people for there resources and just take yours its a lot easier takeing money from a load of inbread slack jawed idiots in this country than fighting dedicated people from overseas who are just trying to defend there way of life.if your so keen on war sign up or put your kids into it.let them come back in a bin bag and be identified by dna so your shares can go up by a penny see how keen you are on difficult decisions you self righteouse fool.

[Space Commander Travis]

Eh? Say again, please?

[Wyrdlight]

Meh.

We have along history of bombing, murdering, raping, pillaging, stealing, subjugating, torturing and warring upon everyone.

All nations do so to a certain extent, the fact is that as a tiny island nation almost utterly dependant on trade, with a small population and a tiny army Britain has needed to be agressive in trade, politics and warfare simply to survive.

The very reason the UK is one of the richest, most powerful and most influential nations on the planet is a direct result of such nastyness in the past.

No nation on this earth of any real standing in terms of economic power, politcal influence or military strength got so by being nice to people.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Wyrdlight

[Mr Right Wing]

then why do people with no respect for the working classes (like yourself)expect them to do the fighting for you .why dont they instead take the path of least resistence and not attack innocent people for there resources and just take yours its a lot easier takeing money from a load of inbread slack jawed idiots in this country than fighting dedicated people from overseas who are just trying to defend there way of life.if your so keen on war sign up or put your kids into it.let them come back in a bin bag and be identified by dna so your shares can go up by a penny see how keen you are on difficult decisions you self righteouse fool.

The British Government is afraid of installing a strong sense of British culture into our people incase it offends the immigrants. Without a strong sense of culture the people create their own which is toxic. You have brought into that toxic culture. Toxic cultures create division in society as people end up with an 'us and them' mentality.

If you dont understand what I'm saying then I will use a business as an example. If the managers dont impose an organisations formal culture onto the staff then it causes problems. To begin with some staff start being negative towards others. Negativity starts to spread around the workplace like a cancer in the body. Before long the negativity has grown so much its created division between the staff and the rest of the business.

Your negativity towards leaders, higher classes and big business is a toxic culture not reality.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Mr Right Wing

[keithisco]

The British Government is afraid of installing a strong sense of British culture into our people incase it offends the immigrants. Without a strong sense of culture the people create their own which is toxic. You have brought into that toxic culture. Toxic cultures create division in society as people end up with an 'us and them' mentality.

If you dont understand what I'm saying then I will use a business as an example. If the managers dont impose an organisations formal culture onto the staff then it causes problems. To begin with some staff start being negative towards others. Negativity starts to spread around the workplace like a cancer in the body. Before long the negativity has grown so much its created division between the staff and the rest of the business.

Your negativity towards leaders, higher classes and big business is a toxic culture not reality.

Define "Higher Classes".....

[smurf0852]

The British Government is afraid of installing a strong sense of British culture into our people incase it offends the immigrants. Without a strong sense of culture the people create their own which is toxic. You have brought into that toxic culture. Toxic cultures create division in society as people end up with an 'us and them' mentality.

If you dont understand what I'm saying then I will use a business as an example. If the managers dont impose an organisations formal culture onto the staff then it causes problems. To begin with some staff start being negative towards others. Negativity starts to spread around the workplace like a cancer in the body. Before long the negativity has grown so much its created division between the staff and the rest of the business.

Your negativity towards leaders, higher classes and big business is a toxic culture not reality.

lol higher classes you have just made my point.what the hell is a class and why the hell do people think because there ancestors worked kids to death for profit .or they came from an inbread genetic line believe they are in a higher one than me.

as for the toxic culture that comes from living in a low wage unfair "class" driven society and the ability to think for ones self without having culture "instilled"in me by a bunch of self loving chinless idiots who call themselves the goverment.

also to clear something up it isnt negativity its hatred utter hatred of the people who have no respect for those in this country who have done all the labour, all the fighting and have never owned anything .so the rich and priviliged can continue in there carefree world and look down there noses at the very people who allow them to exist

Edited February 24, 2012 by smurf0852