Return to: Home | Culture | Media

58 comments from readers

ikotubo
13 December 2007 at 16:14

There was a time when I would have criticized anyone who suggested that every society deserves the government it gets. But the more I observe the way the Americans and the Brits relate to their rulers, the more convinced I've become that this is generally true. How many Americans or Brits are willing to question the veracity of what their rulers tell them? How many suspect the supposed impartiality of their media or individual journalists? The sad reality is that Bush would not have embarked on his murderous enterprise in Iraq if he wasn't sure that his fellow Americans would accept all the lies that were told. And Blair would not have joined him if he was unsure of the support of his fellow Brits (Yes, 1 million people protested, but this was out of 60 million, and many were muslims or "the usual suspects"). And, lest we forget, weren't both individuals duly rewarded with electoral victories for their deception? Indeed, how could Mr Howells have made such a ludicrous statement (that his country's values are the same as those of the Saudis!) if he wasn't sure he could get away with it?

Cybertiger
13 December 2007 at 16:42

All Americans celebrate the sanctity of life and yet value the cost of death – in the homeland and overseas.

California has executed 13 felons since 1976 at an estimated cost of $250m per felon. The latest felon to die waited near on 25 years to meet his maker.

Americans expect value for money. Americans invest in death and it’s a very large investment. America expects …

Harry
13 December 2007 at 17:19

"All Americans"? Really Cybertiger, when someone says "All black people are a bunch of...", its offensive. Cant you see how unintelligent your posts are? Dont get me wrong- Ive seen many of your posts, and I know you dont mean any offense. Its just that you arent bright enough to have any opinions.

writeon
13 December 2007 at 19:54

It's Christmas so we shouldn't be too uncharitable regarding those individuals who have seen an opportunity for personal advancement through memebership of BAP. It's natural to want to get on in life when one's young and striving to climb the greasy pole, and the people John Pilger mentions in his article have certainly shown how ambitious they are, if nothing else. They are hardly guilty of apostacy, as it's doubtful they had anything to lose in the first place. Their flexibility and willingness to compromise is their most valuable quality. Principles can be rather onerous. On the other hand, if one's guiding principle is personal ambition and success at any price, then one can combine one's aspirations and principles harmoniously.

Niether are wealth and power to be sniffed at, having experienced both, I prefer them to poverty and powerlessness which tend to blunt the edge of one's enjoyment of life, which can be truly magnificant provided one has sufficient means and appetite.

There's nothing wrong with having a lust for life, provided one doesn't have to climb over too many bodies in the struggle for success. And even then, this struggle is probably necessary in order to seperate the wheat from the chaff, the winners from the losers. It's not always pretty, but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs. And with that happy thought, Merry Christmas!

Carl Jones
13 December 2007 at 21:42

I think this is only the second time I`ve replied to a Pilger article on the Newstatesman. I don`t like to be critical of Mr Pilger, but BAP is a marketing exercise for middle managers. Sure, there are senior neocons and the BBC`s great and good are very pro US.

Davos is the financiers equivalent, but the overiding force is the Bilderberg Group (bilderberg.org), well, its not the top, but its the top as far as anything we can see which is organised. Above this we have the CFR and Chatham House and their agenda is to form decades distant policy which s pursued on the ground by MI6 and the CIA. They create the constructs which enables these policies to reach some sort of conclusion...we could mention the "war on terror"....yes, this does mean false flag terror attacks.

Martin Bright`s article on Unity Mitford has a comment from me. It is an excellent illustration of just who far these elite constructs go.

We must break away from this idea that governments are in control, or that all power lies in Washington....Washington is nothing but an elite decoy and the same can be said for the CIA. To put this in perspective, both the Niger Yellow Cake report and the WMD dossier were works of fiction by MI6. The real power lies in the City of London and that fancy building by Vauxhall Bridge.lol

vernonram
14 December 2007 at 02:50

Pilger's 'Tainted hands across the water' hits the nail on the head: recommended reference manual when situations belly-up, and not merely in the Middle East. Will be worth watching BAP's role in the Bhutto-Musharaff charade of free and fair elections in Pakistan early in January 2008.

Cybertiger
14 December 2007 at 07:30

@Harry

"All Americans"?

Q. What is the collective term for democrat Americans?

A. A banana republic.

PS. ditto for democrat Britons.

Cybertiger
14 December 2007 at 07:32

I'm diappointed in alumni Yasmin Alibhai-Brown - I thought she had more class.

Harry
14 December 2007 at 13:27

"Q. What is the collective term for democrat Americans?

A. A banana republic.

PS. ditto for democrat Britons."

Please clarify: What, exactly, do you mean by "democrat Britons"? Do you mean Liberal Democrats? Do you mean Britons who are pro-democracy? Do you mean Britons who are pro the American Democratic Party? And therefor, what are you trying to say? Or are you just doing the usual- typing in order to make people think you have an opinion?

Cybertiger
14 December 2007 at 14:53

@Harry

"Please clarify: What, exactly, do you mean by "democrat Britons"? .... And therefor, what are you trying to say?"

Allegedly, the US is a democracy. Britain is allegedly a democracy. Britons and Americans are democrats, allegedly. Both democracies export their sham democracy violently around the world. In my opinion, the collective term for a load of sham democrats is a bunch of banana republicans. Comprenez?

Harry
14 December 2007 at 17:30

Ah there it is, a little clarity, without any poetry- how wonderful. One question though. As someone who recently called Che Guevara "the messiah", how, exactly, would you say that British democracy (where people actually vote, of all things), is worse than Cuban democracy? Surely voting is important, isnt it?

Try to keep off the poetic nonsence now- and articulate an actual opinion. You can do it.

Cybertiger
14 December 2007 at 18:20

@Harry

"Surely voting is important, isnt it?"

Only about 50% of banana republicans bother with voting, so how imortant is that? I bothered to vote at the last election but voted 1,2,3 for STV.

PS. STV? Look it up punk!

Harry
14 December 2007 at 18:29

Right. Unfortunately, you still havent answered my question. Let me re-phrase it very slightly:

As someone who recently called Che Guevara "the messiah", how, exactly, would you say that British democracy (where the entire population above 18 years old has the right to vote), is worse than Cuban democracy? Surely voting is important, isnt it?

Cybertiger
14 December 2007 at 20:29

@Harry

"Surely voting is important, isnt it?"

If it was important then surely more would do it - in both banana republics.

Harry
14 December 2007 at 21:17

Erm... One second... So after making the point that Britain and America are "sham democracies", youre now saying that voting, and surely by extension, democracy are not important. Were you calling them "sham democracies" as a compliment?

I suppose that as democracy isnt important, youd prefer it if we all lived under dictatorships, would you?! And I suppose that Cubans dont want the right to vote?! Oh Cybertiger, cant you see the kind of intellectual knots you get into when you dont have any real opinions?! It must be tiring... Maybe its time to try Yahoo chat?

JimmyJames
15 December 2007 at 12:27

Voting is important. But In a number of western democracies we know who the winners will be in advance. The winners will be big corporates and finance houses and the think-tanks that serve them. The parties will as a rule have to pay far more attention to these groups than to the electorate at large. So it doesn't matter very much which mainstream party comes to power.

Pencils
15 December 2007 at 14:30

Cybertiger - I don't know why you're letting Harry away with that. Sheer boredom maybe. It's really wearisome having to repeat this over and over again, but : Harry! Hallo! Sorry to disappoint you ( actually I think you know the truth, really), but Cubans DO have the right to vote, their procedures are far more democratic than ours, and their elected representatives are recallable.

I suspect that what you mean is that Cubans can't vote for a party organised by American billionaires and Mafia spivs, since these are discouraged from pursuing their usual electoral strategy of massively financed propaganda, bribery and assassinations.

May your Xmas Turkey choke you!

Cybertiger
15 December 2007 at 16:53

Thank you Pencils for your valued contribution on Cuban democracy and its shamlessness.

I believe Harry is most tiresomely underemployed - yawn, yawn!! May his Xmas Turkey choke him!

alzwick13
15 December 2007 at 22:58

So, Cybertiger, Pencils, what form of government would you like? You both seem to consider both the US and British systems undemocratic, so give us an example of a Democratic system, or your ideal form of government. That should help answer Harry.

Pencils, if there is only one party on the ballot it does not count as a Democracy. Tell me the name of the opposition part in Cuba that is allowed to run against the Communist Party and I'll start to believe in Cuban Democracy.

It would be even better if both of you could do it without throwing out insults, I know it's hard, but reallly, give it a try.

Cybertiger
16 December 2007 at 12:33

"So, Cybertiger, Pencils, what form of government would you like? etc,etc ..."

Of course, there is no perfect democratic system - even in Cuba. But alzwick13 appears to be one of those tiresome dullards who thoughtlessly accepts the shocking degree of imperfection beloved of our leaders.

Cybertiger
16 December 2007 at 12:37

"When Gordon Brown spoke recently about his government's devotion to the United States, "founded on the values we share" ...."

A people who can see the selection and then oversee the election of George W Bush ... are not friends to be valued ... or shared ... in my humble world view.

ikotubo
16 December 2007 at 15:27

Hey Guys: Before we get carried away with the virtues of democratic governance, it might be helpful to pause and reflect. Yes, it is true that however much we might wish to criticize the notion of democracy itself, it remains the ONLY known means of governing by consent - and indeed, the only way that most people would like to be governed. However, this must not be taken to mean that every government (or society) that claims to be "democratic" is in fact democratic. The odious North Korean regime calls itself "democratic," after all. But leaving the likes of North Korea aside, Hitler's Germany was a democracy in the truest sense; so was apartheid South Africa (that's if you had a white skin). Nor has democracy prevented Israeli rulers from committing atrocious crimes against the Palestinian people. Indeed, I still remember the way the House of Commons casually legitimized Blair's elaborate webs of deception (ironically, not unlike Saddam's own Parliament), while the British people were out in the streets protesting against what was to be an illegal and catastrophic war. In the United States, things were even nastier: a Vietnam vet who had lost both legs in that other illegal war in support of "democracy" was labelled "unpatriotic" by both the media and politicians alike - for daring to urge caution.

Not even the basic Constitutional right to freedom of expression was enough to protect him.

What I'm trying to say - admittedly, not very cogently - is that although democracy is a desirable thing, it has never been a guarantee against arbitrary power and abuse. So yes, let's condemn the Castros of this world, but let's not be tempted to assume that the United States or the UK are models of democracy either.

Harry
16 December 2007 at 22:44

"Cubans DO have the right to vote, their procedures are far more democratic than ours, and their elected representatives are recallable."

Oh come on! You are joking?! Thats even more laughable than the kind of nonsense Cybertiger here comes up with! Obviously, to vote in a way which is meaningful, you have to be able to vote the leading party out of office! You cant honestly tell me that Cubans have voted in free and fair elections to have Fidel run the place for 40 years! Hahaha come on, its laughable... And at the same time as praising Cuban "democracy", youre criticising American and British democracy! Hahaha come its a joke, isnt it?! You cant be serious!!!

"Of course, there is no perfect democratic system - even in Cuba. But alzwick13 appears to be one of those tiresome dullards who thoughtlessly accepts the shocking degree of imperfection beloved of our leaders."

Again Cybertiger, great post! Our leaders are imperfect- yes, Ill give you that! But to agree that Cuba is less imperfect... Thats incredible!

Oh yes sure, Cybertiger! Very open-minded judgement! Ok, Cybertiger and Pencils, let me ask you this, just out of curiousity. Id love to hear what you think of this idea: Do you think that American democracy would be better if we banned people from criticising Bush, and also made presidential terms 40 years long?! That would bring it into line with Cuban democracy. Good idea?! Itd be more democratic, according to your ideals. Dyou like those??

Cybertiger
17 December 2007 at 10:14

Dear Harry

"But to agree that Cuba is less imperfect... Thats incredible!"

Believe it or not, the neo-natal mortality rate is lower in Cuba than the USA – where 45 million hardy democrats have no health insurance. Cuba or the USA – which is the banana republic, Harry?

Harry
17 December 2007 at 11:56

One second Cybertiger, we were talking about democracy, and now youre changing the subject to the neo-natal mortality rate? Come on, stick with it! Whenever I discuss Cuban democracy (or lack of it) for any length of time, communists always try to change the subject to the health service. Yes, Cybertiger, they have a health service- like most capitalist countries. If we were talking about the killing of the jews by Hitler, you wouldnt try to justify it by saying "Yes, but he made the economy work...", would you? Its a completely different subject. Now, lets get back to what we were talking about, shall we, and that question which I asked and you conveniently didnt answer. Here it is again- try to focus now:

"Do you think that American democracy would be better if we banned people from criticising Bush, and also made presidential terms 40 years long, as in Cuban 'democracy'?"

Or cant you answer that one? Did you get yourself into another intellectual knot Cybertiger? It must be hard work not having any real opinions.

writeon
17 December 2007 at 12:03

I have difficulty understanding the nature behind Trolls like Harry. It's such an odd blend. The overbearing, argumentative, insulting, narrow-minded, arrogant, conceited, juvenile... combined with exabitionism, narcism and self-flagalation... it's odd, very odd.

mitchy
17 December 2007 at 12:21

Oh Christ, not you again Harry!? Havent you learned yet that your talking in circles and making baseless accusations at other users of this column means you're not welcome?

Away you go laddie, come back when you've something meaningful to share with the rest of us.

Cybertiger
17 December 2007 at 12:44

“One second Cybertiger, we were talking about democracy …”

… and I thought you were talking bananas.

Harry, you’re a hot shot capitalist businessman - do you sell bananas, big bunches of them … to the Americans? I’ll bet you make a killing selling bananas to the Banana Republic.

Harry
17 December 2007 at 15:04

Wow, what a surprise! Three posts, and not one of them answered my question. Did you not read it? How typical of the left to avoid questions which they dont like the answer to. What about you Cybertiger? I see that youve reverted to the usual poetic gibberish in order to cover up the lack of opinions. You know, if you want to defeat an arguement, you dont do it by playing around with words to try and make fellow idiots giggle. You have to be a lot more intelligent. Answering difficult questions intelligently, and then asking your own might help. In this way, false arguements are found to be false, and a consensus can be found. Asking if I sell bananas is just the kind of purile response I expect from the left. Try harder, please.

I have a feeling that none of the pro-castro lefties in this forum will answer my last question, so let me ask another:

If you lived in a poor country which had the same ruler for 40 years- and then you broke the law by going onto the internet where you read some pampered armchair leftie from the first world explaining that we should call it a democracy, how would you feel?

writeon
17 December 2007 at 16:54

Harry,

As it's Christmas, the season of goodwill, I'll indulge you by aswering you question as honestly as I can. Personally, whilst I like the idea of democracy as a theory, I'm not so sure about its implimentation in practice. If by democracy we mean, rule by the people, implying majority rule or sovereignty, then I don't believe there are any truly democratic states in the world, there never have been, and I doubt there ever will be.

I can understand why you wouldn't consider Cuba to be 'democratic' and I would probably agree with you on most points. I don't think Cuba is a democratic state. But then 'democracy' isn't totally lacking. There are aspects of the Cuban system which have 'democratic' characteristics. Are their elections 'free and fair', that all depends on how one defines these terms. One can argue that the two recent elections in the United States were not totally free and fair either. Al Gore 'won' the election by more than 500,000 votes over his rival George Bush, yet he 'lost' and Bush was appointed to office by a one vote 'majority' in the Supreme Court. On the face of it, I'm not sure how 'democratic' this election really was. One could also look at the number of Americans who vote and presidents are 'democratically' elected by less than a quarter of the electorate. This doesn't sound like a healthy and functioning democracy, does it?

In Britain the system is also described as being democratic, yet over and over again parties with only about 40% of the vote usually form governments with massive majorities 'landslide majorities' in Parliament and are able to push through policies which are against the wishes of the majority of voters. Once again I believe it's debatable whether this system can really be called 'democratic'.

None of this excuses the system in Cuba, which is arguably far less 'democratic' than the 'democratic' systems in the UK or the US, but I do believe it indicates that 'democracy' is a far more problematic system than many people realize or want to admit.

Whilst one can say Castro and his party have ruled Cuba for fifty years and there is no democratic way to remove them from power and change the system to another, one can make the same argument in relation to the United States. Seen from abroad it really doesn't look like radical change in the US is really possible in practice, in theory perhaps. Does one really have two distinct political parties in the US today? I think they have one party with two factions. Both these factions support the system as is, one can choose between the two factions, but one cannot vote the system out in practice, voting the system out is not a real option in the real world, in reality it resembles Cuba where the system can't really be changed by voting either.

But one can of course argue that there is vastly more 'democracy' in the US than in Cuba. I think there is too, yet I also think that the US is also far from being a truly democratic society where the people rule. The people do not rule in the US. The rich and powerful rule, that is an incontravertable fact, whether one likes it or not. The Congress is almost the exclusive preserve of multi-millionaires. The Congress is extraordinarilly unrepresentative of American society as a whole. There are very few women, very few non-whites, no poor people, no working-class, no socialists, no representatives of organised labour, virtually no one who advocates an alternative socio/economic system. It really is odd that a country which is apparently and formall so 'democratic' has a system where recruitment to the lawmaking assembly is almost exclusively reserved for white, middle-aged, millionaires. Is this system conspicuously democratic? I don't believe any reasonable person can think so. In it's own way it just as 'undemocratic' as the Cuban system, only different in how it expresses its 'undemocratic' nature, and this difference is mostly a product of historical, cultural, and economic differences, rather than any 'absolute' democratic difference between the two systems.

Harry
17 December 2007 at 17:16

"But one can of course argue that there is vastly more 'democracy' in the US than in Cuba. I think there is too, yet I also think that the US is also far from being a truly democratic society where the people rule."

and the rest of that post- good, intelligent commentary. Theres pretty much nothing in that which I can disagree with. A merry Christmas to you too.

Cybertiger
17 December 2007 at 18:20

“The people do not rule in the US. The rich and powerful rule, that is an incontravertable fact, whether one likes it or not. The Congress is almost the exclusive preserve of multi-millionaires.”

There we have it – the US and Cuba are both banana republics – it’s just that the US bananarama (plutocratic theocracy full of theocratic plutocrats) has more bananas to the bunch. Punch drunk Harry, of course, is one or two bananas short of a chimps picnic. Happy holidays folks.

Harry
17 December 2007 at 18:42

Oh dear Cybertiger, you just arent capable of making intelligent comments, are you? I suppose that for the rest of this post youre going to be making silly banana jokes? And yet again, youve changed your opinion. Just before you were praising Cuban democracy's "shamlessness", whatever that means, and before that you were calling Che Guevara "the messiah". Now youre calling it a "banana republic". Again, its a shame you dont have any opinions, and its a shame you cant pinch anyone else's long enough to convince anyone that you do. Maybe Yahoo chat would be too intellectual for you?

Cybertiger
18 December 2007 at 10:46

“One can argue that the two recent elections in the United States were not totally free and fair either. Al Gore 'won' the election by more than 500,000 votes over his rival George Bush, yet he 'lost' and Bush was appointed to office by a one vote 'majority' in the Supreme Court.”

For their utterly disgraceful betrayal of the principles and values of democracy, I believe the American people should be made into a gigantic banoffee pie … and sold off in sticky little pieces to the hungry peoples of those other banana republics in the Middle East, Caribbean and South America.

ROBERTS KING
18 December 2007 at 13:15

PILGER IS MERELY STATING THE OBVIOUS THAT DEMOCRACY IS DEAD

THE POWERMONGERS CONTROL THE WORLD AS BROWN OBVIOUSLY AGREES

WE HAVE BEEN INFLICTED WITH THIS SHAM DEMOCRACY IN THE LAND OF OZ FOR 10 YEARS UNTIL THE VOTERS FINALLY GOT THE MESSAGE AND DESTROYED HOWARD IN MASSIVE VOTE OF CONFIDENCE IN NEWBOY RUDD

CRAWLING TO AMERICAN POWER WILL WIN NOTHING FOR THE PEOPLE AS HOWARD AND BROWN MUST SURELY KNOW.

THE ONLY TRUE DEMOCRACY IS ONEPERSON=ONE VOTE REFERENDUMS AS PRACTISED BY LA SUISSE CANTONS.

LONG LIVE PILGER & VIDAL & CHOMSKY

Harry
18 December 2007 at 13:48

"For their utterly disgraceful betrayal of the principles and values of democracy, I believe the American people should be made into a gigantic banoffee pie … and sold off in sticky little pieces to the hungry peoples of those other banana republics in the Middle East, Caribbean and South America."

And how, exactly, would you say that feeding people to other people isnt a betrayal of the principles and values of democracy?

Again, lousy food jokes to cover up a lack of intelligence and a lack of opinions. Although youve already changed your mind several times, you recently said that America, Cuba, and Britain are banana republics- what kind of system would you like?

Shirley Siriwardena
18 December 2007 at 14:00

Thank you Mr Pilger for informing us the reasons behind New Labour's vision. Information is a powerful tool in the hands of people. We cannot make a valid, democratic decision without proper information. That is exactly we are deprived of by the Mass Media.

News for masses is the day to day lives of so called celibrities. Their sex life, drug addictions, etc. Even the so called "Quality Papers" are now on the band wagon with column inches given to so called celebrities.

Agends for the media and the New Labour is set by Murdoch Empire and the rest follow. That is called democracy and Press Freedom. Is it any different with the broadcasting media? Look at the programmes and nesw bulletines and decide for yourselves.

Thank you Mr Pilger for providing us with "REAL NEWS" and thank you NS for publishing.

Shirley Siriwardena

Cybertiger
18 December 2007 at 14:48

“… you recently said that America, Cuba, and Britain are banana republics- what kind of system would you like?”

Too much Banoffee Pie makes me sick. I favour a sweet and sour, benign and malign melange of radically intelligent dictatorship. An intelligent and benign dictator would be the Chef to some very worthwhile cookery – he’d see to it that every breeding pair of bananas throughout the United States of Banoffee Pie (USBP) were sterilised after a single baby banana. Bicycles would be issued to all voting bananas and SUV driving bananas would be shot on sight. Hard working wasters like Harry would be whipped into the left wing of the pudding … and their mouths stuffed with a Peach Melba.

Harry
18 December 2007 at 17:17

Hahaha Cybertiger, that just says it all doesnt it?!!! First, Britain and America are bad places because theyre not democratic. Then, Cuba is better because it has a decent democracy. Then, actually Cuba isnt democratic at all so its bad. And now, as a final complete reversal... Actually, you dont like democracy at all! And look, youve used the usual food poetry gibberish to try to cover up all the intellectual knots!!! You even talk about baby bananas, pies, and bananas that drive- and you round it all off with the usual subtle threat to people who work of being physically punished! Hahaha dear oh dear Cybertiger! Youre just a buffoon arent you?! Come on, admit it- you really dont have any idea whats going on at all, do you?! Seriously, why dyou even post? It must be embarrassing- youre just making yourself into an idiot. And youre giving me so much fun, because I can just spend my time making fun of a complete idiot who isnt bright enough to defend himself!!! Hahaha its unbelieveable!!! Go on, why dont you admit it: you just dont have any opinions, do you?!!!

Cybertiger
18 December 2007 at 20:43

Dear oh dear Harry

"Hahaha dear oh dear Cybertiger! Youre just a buffoon arent you?! Come on, admit it- you really dont have any idea whats going on at all, do you?! Seriously, why dyou even post?"

As ever the hard working Del Boy wheeler and dealer, Harry only ever deals in banana skins. And Harry is only ever seen loitering with malign intent around the tasty offerings of John Pilger. Is it possible that John Pilger ever considers Harry’s banana buffoonery any sort of cogent threat? Harry only slips on his own banana skins. So why does he bother to post?

Harry
18 December 2007 at 21:22

Oh yes banana jokes to you too, Cybertiger! Unfortunately, Im beginning go think that you might be too dumb to even make fun of. Everyone can see you have no opinions, and are only able to pinch them from Pilger. Im bored- and Im out of here. I wont check back for your dull, moronic reply, so Im afraid Ill have to miss the next purile poems and jokes about bananas. Bye, moron.

Cybertiger
19 December 2007 at 09:24

“I wont check back for your dull, moronic reply, so Im afraid Ill have to miss the next purile poems and jokes about bananas. Bye, moron.”

I take it that Harry is now a little wary of communist banana skins – but I’ll bet he takes another quick peak at Pilger land along that evil axis of communism – before heading off to Yahoo chat and intellectual fulfilment.

lroberts
22 December 2007 at 03:09

Thank you Harry and Cybertiger for a rather intesting debate? As with all politics (the art of disagreement) one woman's banana is another man's plantain. Democarcy as far as I undestand it is rule by the many 'demos'. What other organs of the state manifest because of this becomes of interest if we are looking for more sophisticated realtionship between governmnt and the people.

Pilger always attracts like minded people who would like to believe that the world is made up of good and evil. That must be comforting - but what does it inspire us to do?

GideonPolya
22 December 2007 at 08:09

Excellent article by John Pilger. Post-invasion excess deaths (avoidable deaths, deaths that did not have to happen) in Occupied Iraq now total 1.5-2 million of which 0.8-1.2 million were violent deaths; post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 0.6 million; refugees total 4.5 million (for details and documentation (see “Rudd Australia report Card #1. Continued Australian and US war crimes in Occupied Iraq” on New Matilda's Cross-wire). There are now 5 million Iraqi orphans.

The carnage is so appalling that old-line Republican, outstanding writer, editor, editor, economist and “Father of Reaganomics” Dr Paul Craig Roberts has advocated “dump the dollar” in order to stop the “Iraqi Genocide” and the Afghan Genocide (see Counterpunch).

It is even WORSE. The post-invasion excess deaths in he Occupied Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan Territories now total 0.3 million, 1.5-2 million and 3-6 million, respectively; post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 0.2 million, 0.6 million and 2.2 millions respectviely (UNICEF data); and refugees total 7 million, 4.5 million and 4 million, respectively (UNHCR) (see MWC News - it si not reported by the Murdochritic Mainstream media).

The civilized World needs to act NOW – with comprehensive Sanctions and Boycotts against the racist, war criminal, mass murdering, mass infanticidal, mass paedocidal countries of the Racist Bush-ite US Alliance (Bush-ite UK, Canada, Australia and Racist Zionist-run Apartheid Israel) ; by dumping the US dollar NOW; and by eschewing the racist, holocaust-ignoring Mainstream media of the Western Murdochracies that have permitted this continuing atrocity by their lying by commission and omission over this carnage.

Decent humanity must stand up against the evil mass murder, the democratic tyranny, "democratic imperialism" and democratic Nazism of evil UK-US state terrorism and US-Israeli State terrorism.

Decent folk are adamant that "Thou shalt not kill" and in particular "thou shalt not kill children". Decent people MUST ACT by (a) informing others of the continuing atrocities and (b) taking effective, peaceful action against the evil perpetrators, notably in the market place through SANCTIONS AND BOYCOTTS.

People avoidably purchasing goods and services from mass murdering, child-killing "democratic Nazi" countries complicit in the Iraqi Genocide - notably the US, US and Australia - become COMPLICIT in the continuing atrocity.

Ordinary Germans could claim in 1945 that "they didn't know" about the Holocaust but for citizens of the Western Murdochracies enough of the awful truth has been revealed by writers such as John Pilger and Robert Fisk that they can't hide behind this excuse and their complicity in an ongoing Bush War on Arab, Muslim, Asian and non-European Women and Children, the Palestinian Genoicde, the Iraqi Genocide and the Afghan Genocide.

From the latest UNICEF data it can be simply calculated that 608,000 under-5 year old infants will die in the US- or US Surrogate-Occupied Haitian, Somalian, Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan Terrtitories each year - that's about 1,670 ON CHRISTMAS DAY ALONE, 90% avoidable due to gross Occupier war crimes and hence 1,500 AVOIDABLE INFANT DEATHS ON CHRISTMAS DAY ALONE.

Would you buy soap made in Auschwitz? Occupied Iraq and the Occupied Haitian, Somalian, Palestinian and Afghan Territories constitute the Auschwitz of democratic Nazi US, UK, Racist Zionist-run Apartheid Israel and loyal US lackey, politically correct racist (PC racist), climate criminal and war criminal racist white Australia.

Pencils
23 December 2007 at 09:05

Well said, Iroberts. And the likes of Harry would like to see Cuba and Venezuela included in the carnage. My bet is there will soon be a US invasion of Bolivia to support the rich Bolivian states if they try to secede.

I forgot that I'd contributed to this thread. I looked back because I thought it was a new Pilger article; then I remembered. I'm glad I forgot about it, and so didn't waste my time arguing with Harry. He's not worth the candle.

cybertiger, I'm disappointed with you -" both the US and Cuba are banana republics"

Cuba WAS a banana republic BEFORE the revolution. Hardly now.

Real democracy is not just the rule of the majority; the voters must have equal access to accurate and objective information, obviously impossible under capitalism - if I need to explain why, then there's no point trying. So a genuinely democratic system in a capitalist world, must restrict access to capitalist propaganda.

In a real democracy, the elected representatives must do what they were elected to do. Voting them out of office every 4 years is useless if it's just to replace tthem with another lot whose pledges mean nothing, and effectively just look after the interests of the rich. There is no effective democracy in the selection system of any political party in the UK, except the Green party, and even if the Greens had MPs elected, there is nothing to ensure that their MPs will do what they were elected to do.

If the representatives cannot be recalled, then there is no democracy. But. of course, that in itself does not guarantee democracy: look at the forces behind the recall movements in California and Venezuela.

Effective democracy is not possible unless there are very tight restrictions on the concentration of fiancial and media power.

In Cuba, the rules do not allow tthe replacing of their democratic system with and undemocratic one. What does it matter that they cannot replace the communist party with another party, who wouldn't have to do anything they promised, when, within the communist party, they have a say, at all levels, in decision making, and all representatives, including Castro, can be recalled. See Isaac Saney's ' Cuba: a Revolution in motion', for an excellent introduction to the mechanisms of Cuban democracy.

On US 'democracy': there are now OFFICIAL questions about the last election - House Standards committee, I think - I've lost my references to the articles, and I haven't time to look for them at the moment. But here's an article that should be read by the WHOLE WORLD. NOTE TO NEW STATESMEN PEOPLE - YOU ARE FREE TO PUBLISH THIS ENTIRE ON YOUR WEBSITE

" IMPORTANT NOTE: Publication of this story marks a watershed in American political history. It is offered freely for publication in full or part on any and all internet forums, blogs and noticeboards. All other media are also encouraged to utilise material. Readers are encouraged to forward this to friends and acquaintances in the United States and elsewhere. "

From New Zealand's 'Scoop' website - the best ever discussion of the statistics from the exit polls in the last US election: THE URBAN LEGEND at

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0706/S00164.htm

Cybertiger
23 December 2007 at 09:38

@Pencils

"cybertiger, I'm disappointed with you -" both the US and Cuba are banana republics" "

Essentially, I believe the US cultivates bigger bananas. Sorry!

aflatoon
23 December 2007 at 13:45

dear sir, at least we have in john pilger one more person who has the courage of conviction to call a spade a spade.bragging about the virtues of demcracy is one thing and converting it into demoncracy is another thing.as rightly pointed out in the name of tellow cake N wmd the world has been made more unsafe n difficult to live in for the poor N wretched of the earth.they really do not count at all in the media or the ruling elite of the developed world.but the spectre of anthrax n nuclear arms falling in the hands of terrorists have also been the ploy to beat the afro asians into submission.look at the trouble spots N ask the question who is respobsible for all this.?& why? after all if they do not destry the infrastructure of countries like iraq N afghanistan, how the american companies will get business.?destry first N then go there in the name of consruction or reconstruction, who is there to stop u from using or misusing the language of your choice. keep yr voice hushed up as it is christmas ;it will be uncharitable to speak truth with a strong voice. do make us believe that hazrat eisa died on the cross for this only n not for truth , justice N equality of human beings.long live the believers in injustice, hatred n suppression of others who are not like them,

arman najmi india.

writeon
23 December 2007 at 16:49

The problem with the last US presidential election, among many others, was the pivotal result in Ohio, which was a swing state. The exit polls showed a 6% to 7% lead for John Kerry. These polling methods had been refined after the 2000 election, so that their accuracy was deemed to be in the region of 1%, so a 'swing' of over 6% is highly unlikely to put it mildly!

The indications that the election in Ohio was compromised, are overwhelminng and numerous. Ohio spent well over $100,000,000 on new, tamper-proof, electronic voting machines in 2004 after the debacle of 2000, but now they have admitted that the vote in Ohio in 2004 was probably compromised as the voting machines were far from tamper-proof. They have decided to ditch the current system.

What this means is that Kerry most probably won Ohio which would have given him victory. He would have become president, not Bush. So it seems like Bush and the Republicans stole not one, but two presidential elections. Hurrah, for democracy in action!

Cybertiger
23 December 2007 at 17:28

"So it seems like Bush and the Republicans stole not one, but two presidential elections. Hurrah, for democracy in action!"

Right on - Americans are the true bananas of a Banana Republic.

Cybertiger
23 December 2007 at 17:29

@lroberts

“one woman's banana is another man's plantain ... What other organs of the state … becomes of interest if we are looking for more sophisticated realtionship between governmnt and the people.”

In the matter of American relationships, the size of banana matters a lot … and the sophisticated Republican is only interested in – and satisfied by - very big plantains.

“Pilger always attracts like minded people who would like to believe that the world is made up of good and evil.”

I see John Pilger as a black and white minstrel struggling to shine a light on the forces of darkness.

Cybertiger
27 December 2007 at 21:44

What on Earth did Mr Pilger do to deserve elad shetreet?

Cybertiger
27 December 2007 at 21:45

What on Earth did any of us do?

Cybertiger
27 December 2007 at 21:45

Even Harry?

Pencils
02 January 2008 at 16:58

Have you been smoking banana skins, Cybertiger?

Cybertiger
02 January 2008 at 20:51

@pencils

"Have you been smoking banana skins, Cybertiger?"

I've been puffing the fragrant plantain, while the psychotic elad shetreet has gone up in a puff of noxious censorship - and you obviously missed all the fun - as did the lovely Harry!

elad shetreet
07 January 2008 at 18:20

Elad Shetreet is not psychotic.

b2211
26 January 2008 at 00:09

Rapacious American greed rampages through the weaker world. no matter that this is no different from other dominant humans for a million years, just men must resist unto death.

Pat T
29 January 2008 at 14:51

Why is "wealth" a bad word?

Indeed "wealth" simply means improved living conditions. We create those, and history has shown time and again that maximizing wealth creation is the best way to ensure that the wealth is broadly enjoyed.

I'm not sure what this "greed" is that you think "rampages through the weaker world" or what you intend to "resist." Trade is voluntary and therefore all transactions are mutually beneficial in the eyes of all persons engaged in it.