The wrath of the warmongers posted by Richard Seymour

This is funny:

Labels: blairites, david miliband, ed miliband, imperialism, iraq, new labour, warmongers

Scenes from the empire. posted by Richard Seymour

Another day, another massacre in Afghanistan, another claim of irresponsibility. Interesting that this rolling wave of slaughter is going on precisely as the liberal media are trying to assure us that Blair was a great guy until he 'made a tragic error' over Iraq. Evidently fearing that the insurgency will spread and take on a fully national character, Karzai's pathetic warlord-gangster-puppet regime desperately wants to negotiate a ceasefire with the 'Taliban', but the masters prefer more head smashing. Intriguingly, one senior regime figure, the mass murderer General Dostum, reckons he can finish the Taliban off within six months by raising 10,000 of his notorious goons. I bet they take him up on that offer. Meanwhile, there's a great fuss about Iran allegedly backing the insurgents (again), but as Malalai Joya points out, Iran's supporters are embedded in the regime that America created. At any rate, since it has been revealed that the US (and Saudi Arabia) are sponsoring terrorist activities in Iran, this whole industry devoted to blaming Iran for the failings of Western imperialism ought surely to be bankrupt by now.

Meanwhile, interesting developments in other outposts of the Empire. Veils are being burned in Somalia, Iraqi oil-workers are striking against privatisation. The escalation in Iraq is being sustained at least until next year, so that they can mount up more bodies to piss on. The government seems to be getting out of line as well - for the first time, it seems to have decided to represent Iraqis in some fashion, and demand a timetable for US withdrawal. Much luck it will have.

Anyway, here's some footage you probably haven't seen on the news. This is footage of US troops gunning down protesters in the streets, shown on Japanese television a few months ago, but not anywhere in the UK or America, so far as I'm aware:

Labels: 'war on terror', afghanistan, blair, empire, iran, iraq, Saudi Arabia, warmongers

Hoon blames Blair; ex-Army Chief supports Iraqi resistance. posted by Richard Seymour

A nice double surprise for the Prime Minister before the polls. Geoff Hoon told the Evening Standard yesterday that Blair was to blame for the chaos and bloodshed in Iraq. Assiduously scrubbing his hands of all that haemoglobular fluid, he reckons he can't be faulted for having supported such a lunatic venture, because it would all have been okay if the occupation had been run slightly differently. Today, even more surprisingly, General Sir Michael Rose - a man who has been called on to support UK military ventures in the newspapers before - has supported the Iraqi resistance. Asked if the resistance were "right" to try to get the American forces out of Iraq, he said:

"Yes I do. As Lord Chatham said, when he was speaking on the British presence in North America, he said 'if I was an American, as I am an Englishman, as long as one Englishman remained on American native soil, I would never, never, never lay down my arms'."

The BBC reports the following remark: "It is the soldiers who have been telling me from the frontline that the war they have been fighting is a hopeless war, that they cannot possibly win it and the sooner we start talking politics and not military solutions, the sooner they will come home and their lives will be preserved."

Now, now. Comparing the Iraqi resistance to American revolutionaries is the sort of thing you can only get away with if you aren't ceaselessly mining Bush's colonic matter. You are a Sir, Michael. That carries responsibilities. You are endowed by the British state, which couldn't be more completely embedded in the yankee yuckhole if it had the stars n stripes permanently embossed on every civil servant's backside, and a Secretary of State for McDonalds. Watch your mouth.

Labels: 'war on terror', blair, elections, iraq, iraqi resistance, warmongers