PREVIOUS WEEKS' COMMENTS
2003
Articles previously published under 
''THIS WEEK'S COMMENT'
on Home Page

Robert Kilroy-Silk, a former Labour Member of Parliament, made clearly racist comments against Arabs, not some Arabs, but Arabs in general, of crimes from terrorism to violent suppression of women. Like most racists he is quite ignorant of historic facts. He asked what Arabs had ever done to the benefit of England. The next time he is in Spain he should visit towns like Cordoba or Granada where he will see something of their contributions to European art and architecture. In Granada he should visit the magnificent Palace of Alhambra which was built at a time that his ancestors were living in crude hovels while destroying the benefits the Romans had left, and what's more 300 years before the Tower of London was built.

Each time Kilroy-Silk checks the number of millions in his bank account, he should remember that the numbers before him are, like algebra and geometry a legacy from the Arabs. If he is capable of reading philosophy or is interested in geography he should understand that it was the Arabs who secured and preserved the writings and ideas of ancient Greece. And there is so much more, like the first reading system for the blind, the harnessing of wind power and how to build hospitals. And does he like coffee or marzipan, which were discovered and developed by Arabs?

At least Prince Charles has some idea of the truth. In a speech at Oxford University he said:
“If there is much misunderstanding in the West about the nature of Islam, there is also much ignorance about the debt our own culture and civilisation owe to the Islamic world. It is a failure, which stems, I think, from the straight-jacket of history, which we have inherited. The medieval Islamic world, from central Asia to the shores of the Atlantic, was a world where scholars and men of learning flourished. But because we have tended to see Islam as the enemy of the West, as an alien culture, society, and system of belief, we have tended to ignore or erase its great relevance to our own history."

But there's plenty more like Kilroy-Silk who need toppling off their arrogant high horses:

For example...
M. Chirac, President of the French Republic,
who believes that French culture is superior to all others (this is a racist syndrome not confined to the Anglo-Saxons*) and that everyone living in France must submit to assimilation into the French way while subordinating their own personalities and dignity. Many of them have no morals at all while others, either because of their religion or just plain humanitarian decency, are disgusted by their compatriots' behaviour. So, in order to cover up his anti-Arab, anti-Islam, anti-Jewish, anti-Sikh and anti-Hindu prejudice, he even wants to ban schoolchildren from wearing Christian crucifixes. Will he force Sikhs and certain Jews to cut their hair, which is taboo in certain parts of their religions? Will he deny state education to Sikh boys who wear a turban and the five kakkas or to Muslim girls who wear the Hijab or veil? The repercussions of such a policy might surprise the French President, but he can be sure that it will cause anger and bitter resentment which may take a long time to heal.

And Another Example:
The Racist Northamptonshire County Council
The Labour Party has still done nothing to punish the racist councillors in Northamptonshire who practically destroyed the work of five African Caribbean voluntary organisations within the county. In Wellingborough the result has been the ending of many of the services built up by the African Caribbean Association while employing some Black people to bring the organisation under White control. Rev. Murphy Brown and Cllr. Kallan Simon should reflect on what it means to be an 'Uncle Tom'.
Meanwhile the white Councillor James Ashton, who led the racist attack on the county's Black organisations, should think twice about trying to get elected again in the town. He and other New Labour candidates may be faced with competition from Black people standing on an anti-racist ticket.

Modibu    19th January 2004

And watch this space
for the story of the Asian MP who failed to tackle racism in his constituency.
Modibu

*  Anglo-Saxon Culture
'Anglo-Saxon' is a term used to identify the self-interested and aggressive culture developed from the barbarian Germanic tribes which, following the collapse of the Roman Empire, murderously took over much of Britain wiping out many of the indigenous people. In this country, later to be known as England, Anglo-Saxon culture developed into a racist, militaristic and imperialist society riven by a cruel class system. Fed by harsh fundamentalist beliefs, which twisted ancient scriptures to support their ideas of being a privileged white race, its adherents carried their Anglo-Saxon culture across the Atlantic and other oceans where murderously they took over vast lands while trying to wipe out most of the indigenous peoples, Then in North America and Caribbean they imported many millions of Africans as chattel slaves for life, and later ion Asians etc as indentured labourers who were rarely returned home at the end of their time. All this they described as their 'manifest duty'. And it is these same mores today which lead those who adhere to or call themselves Anglo-Saxon to believe it to be their duty to lead the world.
Kwesi Bacchra 1999

The English like to delude themselves into thinking that they are the world's greatest benefactors of civilised behaviour and that the Anglo-Saxons are the messiah race in terms of democratic government.

They also like to project themselves as leaders in the European Union as well as being the most peace loving nation on earth.

In fact England is one of the most belligerent nations of all time. During the 20th Century there was only one year when no British serviceman died on active service. More important, there was not even one year when British troops failed to kill soldiers or civilians in countries which England considered its enemies.

The ceremony at the Cenotaph, the memorial in Whitehall, London,  which honours those who have fallen in England's bellicose century, commenced as usual with their outdated and racist anthem,:

There stood Mrs Windsor and her right royally parasitic family, looking terribly solemn about the millions of lives of British soldiers her German family has sent to cruel deaths over the centuries mainly to be killed by other Germans. Next to her stood her social capitalist prime minister, Tony Blair. Was he thinking about the British troops he illegally sent to Iraq earlier this year?

 It was appropriate that they should stand together because Blair exercised the powers of the monarchy to send the troops to fight, some of whom would die. By these royal, dictatorial powers British prime ministers do not need to seek the approval of Parliament or anyone else to engage in a long list of activities, which in truly democratic countries require the approval of the elected representatives of the people.

Waiting to honour the dead of all the wars fought by England since 1914, stood ranks of thousands of former-servicemen. Loyal to the memories of their friends, relatives and comrades in arms, who had laid down their lives in mainly dubious causes, they would soon march proudly past the Cenotaph, the national memorial to the fallen.

For centuries ordinary freemen, serfs and slaves in Britain have been forced or persuaded to fight for their rulers. To refuse to fight when ordered was usually met with one punishment, death, and the people were taught from birth to consider such dissenters as cowards. Every British subject was indoctrinated into thinking of their rulers as deserving of unwavering support so that, if the life of a commander, particularly if royal, were endangered, they would risk their own lives and be called heroes. The awarding of medals has always been the the prize and recognition granted to soldiers, but senior officers have usually expected  very considerable financial rewards as well.

British soldiers have been traditionally indoctrinated into thinking of the enemy as wicked, cruel, evil and, if not European, inferior or savage. Therefore they must be killed, while particularly in recent centuries the commanders watch the battle safely behind the lines.

It is time for the people to wake to the fact that they are only cannon fodder so that their masters can play their war games. It is time for them to say "No, we will not fight  for kings, queens and presidents, we will only fight to protect our own, including against our rulers if they oppress us".

KB

11.11.2003 -- 85th anniversary of the ending of the Second European Tribal War.

GUANTANAMO CONCENTRATION CAMP WORSE THAN SADAM'S PRISON

The French have always been protective of their culture, which they snootily consider to be the finest in the world, although they have been happy to impose it on their various colonies over the centuries at the expense of indigenous cultures.

But the French attitude to their own language and culture has been to jealously protect it from foreign influences.  Frequently they have taken strong action, for example by preventing too many Hollywood films being shown in French cinemas or on TV.

Additionally the Alliance Française  has spoken out against the use of Anglicisms being used in their language to replace French expressions; for example 'le weekend', and 'le parking', even though they have never objected to other languages employing French words; again for example 'rendezvous' and 'restaurant' which we all accept as having become English words.

Hollywood Domination
While there is nothing wrong in ensuring that one's own language and culture are not corrupted by Hollywood, if the French had more faith in the strength of their own culture, they would not stoop into the filthy gutter of racism. Resulting from their colonial history, which brought them so much riches during the past half millennium, France now has the largest Muslim and Arab populations in Europe. But the French have never been too happy about this and have kept most of their minorities ghettoised so that they could avoid integrating them.

Now that the numbers of Muslims in France is significantly greater with visibly substantial numbers of Muslim children attending French schools, the authorities are concerned some schools might not reflect French as being the predominant culture. It is not so much a matter of skin colour because a high proportion of the French themselves are dark in colouring, while  the French Antilles in the Caribbean, which form overseas departments of Metropolitan France with full representation in the National Assembly in Paris, are populated by the descendants of African slaves together with the dual heritage from Africa and France.

France itself has been populated for at least 25,000 years, and the first humans were Africans migrating north as the climate became warmer at the end of the last ice-age. Over the millennia there has been assimilation of many populations: the Celts from south central Europe, the Germanic tribes from across the River Rhine, the Jewish Diaspora, and the Vikings and Danes who provided the Normans. While continuously over the centuries there has been an influx Black people from Africa. These latter came from all parts of Africa as merchants and mercenary soldiers during the Middle Ages and from 16th century as slaves who replaced the white Slavic slaves imported through the Crimea.  Also coming north from Africa were the dark skinned Moors and slightly lighter Romany Gitanes.

The French, a people of all colours
In the Central Massif and the Alps the people are mainly of Alpine origin, while in the north west there are the Celtic Bretons and to the south the Corsicans are of Italian extraction. The French therefore are a very mixed race with all shades of skin colour. Colour therefore is not quite the bar to advancement as is the case in England and Central Europe particularly amongst the northern Slavs. These latter have a tendency towards racism against darker skinned minorities, especially Jews and Gypsies,  which should exclude them from the European Union until they learn to conduct themselves in a more civilised manner.

When President de Gaulle resigned in 1969, the presidential powers were exercised by the most senior Deputy until a new president could be elected. He was a Black man from the Surinam Department in South America. While the English press found it necessary to comment on what they thought was a remarkable event, the colour of the man's skin was hardly mentioned in France. If there is noticeable colour prejudice it is amongst the Nordic French, fair skinned and blue-eyed.

Islamic Arabs and Africans during the last half century as well Indo-Chinese etc. have continued the tradition. But what worries the French is seeing obvious evidence that there is now a different and equally valid culture in their midst and they are afraid they will be swamped even though European Christians are vastly in the majority.

Their fear increases when they see schoolgirls who display a sense of modesty in their dress and life style as required by their religion and culture . They stand out against the frequently licentious modes of dress worn by many French girls and thus show that there is no way they can be assimilated into a French nation which is based solely on the Roman Catholic version of Judeo-Christian culture. Of course there should be no question of assimilating anyone; each of us has an absolute right to celebrate our own diversity, and the French must accept that because,  like most European countries, France is now a multi-racial and multi-cultural country.

President Chirac to Decide
Following the recommendation of a French Commission that conspicuous symbols of religion should not be worn,  President Chirac will now decide whether to recommend such a ban and even decree a law to punish any who disobey the cultural dictat. The ban would include the Jewish skull cap and large crucifixes as well as Muslim headscarves and veils. Presumably it would also include Sikh turbans and uncut hair and the ringlets of Assidic Jews, The Commission argues that the French constitution is secular and forbids the interference in matters of the state by any religion, but it does not impose any duty on French citizens to hide their religion.

Christians and those who wear a crucifix as an ornament are not going to complain about not being allowed to wear a large version to school, but Jews will certainly object to not being allowed to wear a skull cap, and are Sikhs going to take off their boys topknot and cut their hair to satisfy this French xenophobia? If challenged in the European Human Rigts Courts, France will almost certainly lose, although they are not distinguished by a willingness to obey the law. Is this also part of their cultural heritage?

KB        13/12/2003

Dr DAVID KELLY, WAS HE MURDERED?

The Dutton Inquiry into the violent death of one of the world's leading experts on WMDs (weapons of mass destruction), Dr David Kelly, is exposing facts that Tony Blair would prefer were never mentioned, for they may force his resignation as prime minister of the second most important country (or so he thinks) in the Anglo-Saxon Empire. Tony's minders on behalf of the mandarins of global capitalism, Alistair Campbell, spin doctor in chief at 10 Downing Street, and his clandestine but real boss, Peter Mandleson, are watching developments with concern because they may have failed to maintain capitalist sleeper Blair in power at a time when the capitalist's preferred Tory party is in disarray, leaderless and unelectable which would lead to their being removed from their positions of wealth and power.

   

Picture courtesy of Dutton Inquiry's web-site

Lord Dutton, the lawyer appointed by Prime Minister Tony Blair to be in charge of the enquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly, world renowned expert on weapons of mass destruction.

hutton.inquiry@dca.gsi.gov.uk

The inquiry which opened on Monday 11th August exposed the significant evidence that Dr Kelly was at no time in a suicidal frame of mind. In fact he told his friends how much he was looking forward to returning to Iraq to establish that, as he was becoming increasingly certain, there were no WMDs which could possibly justify the illegal invasion of that unfortunate country.

Daughter's Wedding
Moreover, Dr Kelly was looking forward to his daughter's wedding in October. Meanwhile Downing Street morons were trying to discredit him by suggesting that he was only a middle range civil servant with limited access to secret documents, and that he was a fantasizer of the Walter Mitty type.

Whereas Dr Kelly would have been unlikely to have been disturbed by such puerile attempts to ruin his reputation, they would hardly have made him depressed. As a man who was close to his family, any such depressions would have been washed away by the prospect of his daughter's wedding. While there is no suggestion that the scientist was  unwell, it is well known that even very sick people can temporarily get better while looking forward to such an event, and the terminally ill have been known to keep themselves alive until after an event like a wedding or graduation. They cannot miss such a joyous prospect.

Was it Suicide or Execution?
When Dr Kelly started out on his afternoon walk, a diversion he enjoyed very much, he was in good spirits according to his family. A contemplative man, he would very likely have been going over recent events in his mind. But would these thoughts have led so rapidly to suicide? It is hardly likely.

Go to Top