Nieuw
onderzoek van Declassified UK (een onderdeel van de Daily Maverick) heeft in weerwil van zwijgen
van het Britse ministerie van defensie (lees: van oorlog) aangetoond, dat
Groot-Brittannië (GB) 145 militaire bases heeft over de
wereld……. ‘Niet zo vreemd dus’ dat de regering van Boris Johnson een extra
budget voor defensie heeft vrijgemaakt waarmee de uitgaven met 10%
stijgen t.o.v. het vorig jaar…… (terwijl dagelijks ruim meer dan 4 miljoen kinderen met honger naar school gaan…..)
Echte
militaire bases heeft GB in 5 landen rond China, een marinebasis in
Singapore, garnizoenen in Brunei, drone ‘test bases’ in Australië, 3
bases in Nepal en een snelle reactiemacht in Afghanistan…….
Op
Cyprus zijn 17 militaire installaties van GB te vinden, inclusief
schietbanen en spionage stations……. Er is militaire aanwezigheid
van het Britse leger in 7 arabische koninkrijken (lees:
bloedige dictaturen…..)……
In
Saoedi-Arabië heeft GB 15 militaire terreinen waarmee GB de terreur
tegen de bevolking steunt en dat reli-fascistsch geregeerde land
helpt een genocide uit te voeren in Jemen…….
In
Afrika heeft GB militairen gestationeerd in Kenia, Somalië, Djibouti, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Nigeria and Mali…….
Een
aantal militaire bases bevinden zich in belastingparadijzen als
Bermuda en de Kaaimaneilanden……..
De
militaire aanwezigheid van GB in het buitenland is veel groter dan
men tot nu toe dacht en daarmee is GB na de VS het tweede land met zoveel
buitenlandse bases, de VS heeft er meer dan 800…… Daarnaast oefenen de VS en GB grote terreur uit in delen van de wereld zoals het Midden-Oosten en dan heeft men in die landen een grote bek over Iran dat het Midden-Oosten zou destabiliseren…… ha! ha! ha! ha! De VS heeft met hulp van GB en andere NAVO-lidstaten deze eeuw al meer dan 2,5 mensen vermoord in illegale oorlogen (ofwel grootschalige terreur), die ook nog eens grote stromen vluchtelingen op gang brachten en terreur hebben gekweekt op de straten van een aantal van de NAVO-lidstaten in Europa….
60
van de militaire bases staan onder Brits bestuur en 85 onder bestuur
van de landen waar die bases zich bevinden, maar waar wel een flinke Britse militaire
aanwezigheid bestaat.
Declassiefied
UK heeft niet de kleine militaire aanwezigheid van GB meegenomen van
militaire missies in VN verband, zoals in Cyprus en Zuid-Soedan…..
Ook de terreuracties van speciale troepen zijn buiten het onderzoek
gehouden, wat me niet meer dan logisch lijkt, daar men nooit gegevens
vrijgeeft over deze terreuracties…… Ook Nederland maakt zich daar
schuldig aan en psychopaat Marco Kroon is zelfs gehuldigd voor
zijn moorddadige inzet tijdens deze buitenlandse terreuracties van
het Nederlandse leger……..
Het volgende artikel geschreven door Phil Miller komt van Information Clearing House en werd eerder gepubliceerd op de Daily Maverick (onder het volgende artikel kan je klikken voor een ‘Dutch vertaling’, dit neemt wel iets meer dan een tiental seconden tijd in beslag):
Declassified
UK: REVEALED: The UK military’s overseas base network involves 145
sites in 42 countries
By
Phil Miller
November
27, 2020 “Information
Clearing House”
– “Daily
Maverick” – Britain’s armed forces have a far more
extensive base network than ever presented by the Ministry of
Defence. New research by Declassified reveals the extent of this
global military presence for the first time – as the government
announces an extra 10% spending on defence.
UK
military has base sites in five countries around China: naval base in
Singapore, garrisons in Brunei, drone testing sites in Australia,
three facilities in Nepal and quick reaction force in Afghanistan
Cyprus
hosts 17 UK military installations including firing ranges and spy
stations, with some located outside UK’s “sovereign base areas”
Britain
maintains military presence in seven Arab monarchies where citizens
have little or no say in how they are governed
UK
personnel are stationed across 15 sites in Saudi Arabia, supporting
internal repression and the war in Yemen, and at 16 sites in Oman,
some run directly by British military
In
Africa, British troops are based in Kenya, Somalia, Djibouti, Malawi,
Sierra Leone, Nigeria and Mali
Many
UK overseas bases are located in tax havens such as Bermuda and
Cayman Islands
Britain’s
military has a permanent presence at 145 base sites in 42 countries
or territories around the world, research by Declassified UK has
found.
The size of this global military presence is far
larger than previously thought and is likely to mean that the UK has
the second largest military network in the world, after the United
States.
It is the first time the true size of this network
has been revealed.
The UK uses 17 separate military
installations in Cyprus as well as 15 in Saudi Arabia and 16 in Oman
– the latter both dictatorships with whom the UK has especially
close military relations.
The UK’s base sites include 60 it
manages itself in addition to 85 facilities run by its allies where
the UK has a significant presence.
These appear to fit the
description of what General Mark Carleton-Smith, Britain’s Chief of
the General Staff, recently termed as “lily pads” – sites which
the UK has easy access to as and when required.
Declassified
has not included in the figures the UK’s small troop contributions
to UN peacekeeping missions in South Sudan or the Cyprus buffer zone,
nor staffing commitments at NATO administrative sites in Europe or
most of its special forces deployments, which are largely unknown.
In het BBC programma The Food Chain (het programma blijft 1 jaar na vandaag te beluisteren) gisteravond aandacht voor het aantrekken van stroperij op o.a bedreigde diersoorten in Afrika en dan m.n. in Kenia…… (al is het zeker dat dit voor alle natuurreservaten in Afrika opgaat……)
Gemeenschappen die zich al 30 jaar bezighouden met de bescherming van natuurreservaten en de vaak bedreigde diersoorten in die gebieden, hebben grote klappen gekregen door het Coronavirus, er komt geen toerist meer en voor de bevolking is er geen sociaal opvangnet…. Daarom niet zo vreemd dat men toch dieren gaat schieten, al gaat het dan meestal om antilopen….
De stropers die wel achter de bedreigde diersoorten aangaan zien hun kans schoon door het virus en intensiveren de jacht op deze dieren, jammer genoeg worden deze stropers gegidst door leden van de gemeenschappen die zich juist bezig zouden moeten houden met de bescherming van die dieren, maar ja als je niets meer hebt…… (ik kan me dat niet voorstellen, maar heb dan ook makkelijk praten vanuit Nederland…..)
Wat men aan conservering heeft bereikt in 30 jaar tijd wordt nu langzaam maar zeker teniet gedaan……
Hier de tekst bij het BBC programma (walgelijk te zien dat de BBC blijkbaar als de VN samenwerkt met het neokoloniale bedrijf Nestlé….):
(voor 1 kilo girafvlees schijnt men op de westerse illegale markt $ 1,000.– te betalen……)
Some
thought Covid-19 would give our planet a breather while many of our
movements and industries were restricted, but there are worrying
signs that in some parts of the world exactly the opposite is
happening.
Emily
Thomas finds out how the pandemic has left many people hungry,
desperate, an d turning to rainforests and wild animals to feed
themselves, whilst for others there’s growing evidence the virus
could be providing cover to make profit at the planet’s expense.
We
hear allegations of illegal slashing and burning of an Indonesian
rainforest to make way for a palm oil plantation and ask Nestle, the
world’s biggest food company, what it’s doing to make sure its
products are deforestation free. The head of the UN’s Environment
Programme explains why it’s more vital than ever for countries to
put environmental protection at the heart of their economic recovery
plans, and a conservation worker in Kenya shares fears that decades
of animal and environmental preservation work is in danger of being
undone.
Contributors:
Michael
O’Brien-Onyeka, senior vice president for the Africa field division
at Conservation International;
Farwiza Farhan, founder of
HAkA;
Benjamin Ware, head of responsible sourcing, Nestlé;
Inger
Andersen, executive director of the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP)
(Picture:
Giraffe at Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. Credit: Getty
Images/BBC)
Zag afgelopen week bij toeval een Heineken reclame en waar ik normaal meteen ‘doorzap’ als er reclames in beeld komen, bleef ik hangen vanwege de woorden ‘social responsible’, als zou Heineken een sociaal verantwoord bedrijf zijn…..
Je zag een knul een mondmasker met z’n handen beetpakken op het deel dat voor de neus en mond moet worden geplaatst…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Nee, ‘echt heel sociaal verantwoord!!’ (‘en uiterst zinvol’) Verder zag je mensen weer ‘heel veel plezier’ hebben met Heineken bier, waar ze afstand hielden van elkaar en tegelijkertijd een tappende ‘bartender’ met mondmasker….. Als mensen aangeschoten raken is het eerste wat overboord gaat de regels tot afstand bewaren, dat moet trouwens al het geval zijn geweest vanaf het moment dat mensen alcohol konden maken en consumeren; je kent het wel op feestjes, mensen die brallend aan elkaar hangen……
Heineken is een fabrikant van de harddrug alcohol, heeft in het buitenland gebruik gemaakt van geld uit ontwikkelingshulp en buit vervolgens arbeiders uit, één en ander o.a. voor een suikerrietplantage in Kenia, ofwel neokolonialisme van de bovenste plank!! En weer: echt heel sociaal verantwoord!!
Zonder leeftijdvermelding kan je dit plaatje van Bol.com zien op Google en over ‘greenwashing gesproken….’
Uiteraard verschijnen in de reclame onverbiddelijk de woorden: ‘geen 18 geen druppel’, alsof dat niet juist de belangstelling trekt van pubers, die daarvoor al het zogenaamde plezier hebben gezien van bierdrinkende mensen…… Ofwel met dit soort reclames worden de ‘puberkatten’ op het spek gebonden!!
Alcohol is de meest dodelijke harddrug, niet vanwege de zwaarte van het middel, maar vanwege het enorme aantal doden dat door deze harddrug valt, in Nederland alleen al 12 mensen per dag (een cijfer van jaren geleden, ofwel dat cijfer moet intussen hoger liggen) en dat is als gevolg van langdurig alcoholgebruik, dus niet de doden die vallen door dronken automobilisten, of door geweld onder invloed van alcohol, om over het grote aantal gewonden vanwege deze zaken nog maar te zwijgen……
Zocht op de site van Heineken naar informatie, maar dan moet je eerst je leeftijd invullen, echter voordat ik m’n geboortejaar kon invullen, kreeg ik al te zien dat ik te jong was om door te gaan….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Ben intussen 65…… Nee, ‘echt een geweldige site!!’
Heineken is een oplichtersfirma die dood, verderf en ellende produceert en verkoopt!!
PS: vanmorgen werd bekend gemaakt dat Heineken het eerste halfjaar van 2020 een verlies heeft gelden van 297 miljoen euro, het bedrijf deed, hoewel er sinds april een licht herstel is te zien, verder geen uitspraken over de rest van het jaar, daar de situatie onzeker is vanwege de Coronacrisis.
Afgelopen maandag werd de 13 jarige Yassin Hussein Moyo doodgeschoten door de politie, dit tijdens het handhaven van de avondklok…… Er waren rellen gaande op straat vanwege het extreme geweld dat de Keniaanse politie in Nairobi hanteert tijdens het handhaven van regels als de avondklok tijdens de Coronacrisis…..
De Moeder van Yassin had hem en zijn kleinere broertjes en zusjes naar boven gestuurd vanwege de rellen op straat, toen de jongen op het balkon van het huis dodelijk werd getroffen door een politiekogel……
Geen wonder dat daarna de vlam geheel en al in de pan sloeg en de politie als reactie nog harder optrad….. Door het ongebreidelde politiegeweld is intussen ook een volwassen man omgekomen toen hij door agenten werd aangevallen…….
Dit was afgelopen donderdag in het BBC World Service nieuws (radio) te horen, benieuwd wat er intussen weer is gepasseerd in Kenia en Nairobi in het bijzonder……..
Carl Theunis, verslaggever voor Vrancks, was vanmiddag te gast in het programma Interne Keuken op VRT 1. Theunis vertelde over het meer dan schunnige feit dat mensen die in Congo, Nigeria en Kenia in het ziekenhuis belanden, maar de rekening niet kunnen betalen, worden gegijzeld…… Eén en ander gebeurt ook in rk ziekenhuizen……..
Moet je nagaan, terwijl het Vaticaan anticonceptie verbiedt, waardoor men niet alleen het dodelijke hiv virus kan oplopen*, maar ook geen controle heeft over het wel of niet krijgen van kinderen…..
Het voorgaande is van belang, daar veel vrouwen worden gegijzeld na een bevalling in het ziekenhuis……
Volgens Theunis gebeurt het dat vrouwen via ‘seksuele diensten’ aan artsen e.d. de rekening betalen……..
Grâce Mbongi is een vrouw die zich inzet voor deze vrouwen en hen vrijkoopt, daarvoor heeft ze een organisatie opgericht met de naam ‘Grâce Monde’.
Overigens zijn er meer landen waar men een dergelijke schandalige gijzeling uitvoert, zoals in de Filipijnen…… (een overwegend katholiek land)
Vanavond op Canvas om 20.10 u. de documentaire die Theunis over dit onderwerp maakte.
* In veel arme landen als Congo is aids nog steeds een dodelijke ziekte, daar de mensen de medicatie niet kunnen betalen waarmee men oud kan worden, ondanks besmet te zijn……. De schatrijke farmaceutische maffia weigert om de medicatie tegen een voor die landen redelijke prijs aan te bieden, terwijl die farmaceuten al lang de kosten voor de ontwikkeling van die medicijnen terug hebben verdiend en ongelofelijke winsten hebben gemaakt op diezelfde medicatie…..
In het hieronder opgenomen artikel van UK Column aandacht voor BBC ‘goede doelen’ organisatie, genaamd BBC Media Action. Volgens deze organisatie is het doel mensen over de wereld te informeren, te verbinden en sterker te maken. Mooie woorden van een organisatie doe wordt gesteund door de BBC, de Britse overheid, de EU, het ministerie van buitenlandse zaken van de VS (ofwel het ministerie van terreuruitoefening), de VN en de Nederlandse overheid……
De schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, Brian Gerrish vraagt zich af of BBC Media Action onze steun en geld verdient, of dat het een gevaarlijke, subversieve organisatie is. Hij stelt dat het laatste het geval is.
BBC Media Action liegt om te beginnen met de stelling dat het onafhankelijk is, terwijl het is opgezet door de BBC, is gehuisvest in een BBC kantoor, mede is betaald met een fikse BBC subsidie, worden BBC pensioengelden gebruikt voor haar werk, de leden van de organisatie zijn door de BBC geselecteerd….. Het hoofd van de BBC World Service Group, Peter Horrocks, is voorzitter van de raad van bestuur…..
Zoals de regelmatige bezoeker van dit en vele andere blogs of/en van alternatieve nieuwspagina’s op de sociale media weten, is dat de BBC allesbehalve als onafhankelijk kan worden aangeduid, het laat de oren hangen naar de zittende regering, niet zo vreemd als je ziet dat ze voor het jaarlijkse budget afhankelijk zijn van die regering…… Bovendien laten de andere financiers geen twijfel over: BBC Media Action is allesbehalve onafhankelijk…….
Erger nog: BBC Media Action voedt onrust met haar programma’s en dat in een groot aantal landen, uiteraard onrust veelal gebaseerd op leugens en halve waarheden…… Het is duidelijk dat men de westerse samenleving als ‘mooi voorbeeld’ neerzet, zonder over alle negatieve ellende te spreken, die de BBC bijvoorbeeld in GB verzwijgt dan wel toeschrijft aan mensen als Jeremy Corbyn….. Mensen als Labour voorzitter Corbyn tegen wie de BBC een hele campagne heeft gevoerd, daar zowel de Tories als de top van Labour niets met hem te maken willen hebben en als de dood waren dat hij de laatst gehouden landelijke verkiezingen zou winnen……..
Over die manipulatie van verkiezingen is met géén woord van kritiek gesproken door de Britse reguliere (massa-) media, terwijl deze media dag in dag uit negatief nieuws over Corbyn brachten (tja, je gaat je eigen valse berichtgeving natuurlijk niet bekritiseren….)
Met de programma’s van Media Action wil men de bevolking in arme landen leren hoe te reageren op corruptie van politici en ambtenaren, dezelfde BBC die niet kan onderzoeken hoe het zit met pedofiele presentatoren als Jimmy Saville en financiële fraude binnen de eigen organisatie……..
Kortom, de BBC brengt onversneden propaganda tegen regimes als dat in Syrië en Kenia, waar uiteraard niet het welbevinden van bewoners wordt gepromoot, maar verandering van regering wordt gepropageerd….. En dat door een zogenaamde onafhankelijke zendgemachtigde, die de illegale oorlogen als die tegen Afghanistan, Irak, Libië en Syrië van A tot Z steunde en nog steunt……
Zelfs over de genocide in Jemen wordt keihard gelogen, zoals ik vanmorgen weer hoorde op BBC World Service radio, waar de presentator een New York Times correspondent wilde verleiden te zeggen dat Iran een uiterst foute rol speelt in Iran, terwijl daar zelfs niet één Iraanse militair is te vinden…… Het viel me mee dat deze correspondent daar niet één keer op reageerde (wellicht later meer daarover)
Voorts bemoeit BBC Madia Action zich met Oekraïne, waar NB bepaalde journalisten het werk onmogelijk wordt gemaakt (ook middels bedreigingen door neonazi’s) en waar zelfs mediaorganen zijn gesloten door de neonazi-junta, die de VS daar parachuteerde…… Ook de Britse regering wil dat Rusland De Krim ‘teruggeeft’ aan die junta in Kiev en ‘zich terugtrekt uit Oost-Oekraïne’, beide zaken die volkomen vals worden voorgesteld door de de Britse regering en de BBC….. Niet vreemd dus dat Media Action achter deze junta staat, sterker nog: de BBC heeft al ver voor de door de VS georganiseerde opstand in Oekraïne lopen stoken tegen de democratisch gekozen regering Janoekovytsj……
Gerrish betoogt dan ook dat BBC Media Action moet worden ontmantelt, voor het ook in Europa nog meer schade aanricht, zoals het in Oekraïne heeft gedaan!
Moet je nagaan, wij betalen via de belasting mee aan deze smerige organisatie…..
Lees het volgende artikel en verbaas je net als ik deed over deze uitermate smerige propaganda organisatie met de naam BBC Media Action:
BBC
Media Action: Subversion From Broadcasting House To Kazakhstan
by
BRIAN
GERRISH
|
Tuesday, 1st July 2014
”Our
mission is to inform, connect and empower people around the world.”
These are mighty words from BBC Media Action, a charitable offshoot
of the BBC funded to £29.5m in 2012 – most of it from the British
Government, EU, US State Department, UN and Dutch government. Most of
the British public and indeed most of the BBC’s licence payers will
have never heard of BBC Media Action let alone understand what this
BBC charity really is.
An
innocent BBC charity deserving our support and money, or a dangerous
subversive organisation? We overwhelmingly think the latter.
The
Media Action mission statement says much and nothing at the same
time. Much in that they are to inform, connect and empower people
worldwide, nothing in that the precise meaning of these words is
unclear. Just what is BBC Media Action really doing and why?
BBC
Media Action funding.
BBC
Media Action Lies From The Start
As
with the political charity Common Purpose, BBC Media Action quickly
seeks to justify its actions as benevolent – we are a charity and
therefore we must be good. Let’s look at the lies. Claiming to be
legally, financially and operationally independent of the BBC, Media
Action was actually funded by the BBC to the tune of £840,000 in
2012, and uses BBC pension funds and BBC Office space. The majority
of the 15 BBC Media Action Board Members are nominated by the BBC,
and Peter Horrocks Director of the BBC World Service Group, is Chair
of Trustees. He is independent of course, as he directs 2,500
journalists and support staff embedded in 113 countries. A vast
propaganda machine and some.
Media
Action builds on the ‘fundamental’ values of the BBC and claims
that accuracy, trust and reliability are amongst these – the 500
victims of BBC paedophile Jimmy Savile suggest otherwise. A cheap
shot? Stay with us as we unpick this pernicious subversive BBC
organisation.
According
to Media Action they operate 100 researchers providing data,
evaluation and insight in 24 countries. They ’surveyed’ 60,000
people in 11 countries in Africa, Asia and the Middle East to ‘inform
our health, governance and resilience projects.’ The immediate
question is what projects and what are they for? At this point we
highlight that Media Action boasts its part in projects funded by the
Department for International Development. So is this the BBC or the
government at work?
Consider
then that BBC Media Action is also funded by the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office as part of the Arab Partnership Peace Fund (APPF) formed
as a result of the Arab Spring unrest. Media Action is used here to
improve ‘opportunities for political, social and economic
participation.’ We ask again – a charity or the British government
at work?
Media
Action’s self praise continues – “Our work is valued by the
development community and by media organisations contributing to
development and better standards of governance in developing
countries.” So the BBC which specialises in politically biased
news, dark drama, foul language, violence, pro EU reporting, skewed
docudramas and explicit sex, is supposedly the appropriate source
vehicle to tell other societies how to govern themselves. The
arrogance might be amusing if it were not for much deeper and dirtier
layers of their work.
‘Governance
and Rights’ BBC Media Action Style
At
this stage we will say it is just a coincidence that BBC Media Action
is active in unstable countries worldwide. Media Action
specialises in ‘governance and rights’ and operates in the Middle
East, former Soviet Union and Europe. It sustained and expanded Radio
Al Mirbad’s programming in Iraq funded by the US Department of
State. Not bad for a charity.
In
Afghanistan they established an ‘independent’ Afghan organisation
staffed by former BBC Media Action employees. In Asia and Cambodia
Media Action has pumped out Loy9 videos and boasts of capturing
100,000 views in 8 weeks in a country of under 15 million people.
Significant views in poor countries unable to defend against western
politically correct culture and BBC ‘propaganda’. Unfair? Then
let’s ask why Media Action is integrating with BBC World Service
and BBC Global News. Is the BBC’s own brand of news essential for
nations to govern themselves. How did Asia manage without the BBC
over the last thousand years?
Following
the money quickly reveals more of BBC Media Action’s real identity.
Enter two subsidiary companies – The Marshall Plan of the Mind Trust
(not trading) and BBC World Service Trust. We will focus on the
Marshal Plan of the Mind later, but before doing so, let’s take a
look at BBC Media Action’s staff. CEO Caroline Nursey is an ex
Director Oxfam and former teacher.
Communications and branding
Director Kirsty Cockburn is ex BBC, Sightsavers and the Overseas
Development Institute (SODI), where she learned that compelling
story-telling is at the heart of the complex world of international
development. James Dean is Director of Policy and Learning, having
spent 20 years at Panos, Earthscan and International Institute for
Environment and Development. The pattern is clear – charity academics
and quasi government organisations, with no practical life
experience, but a supreme confidence they can change the world using
media and education. Media and education with the BBC’s own values
and agendas of course.
Take
Kenya. Sema Kenya is a BBC Media Action and TV programme which
provides a ‘constructive’ platform for Kenyans to challenge their
politicians and public officials. Yes, the BBC which cannot properly
investigate paedophiles or financial fraud in its own organisation is
helping Kenyans learn how to challenge the corrupt political elite.
Yes really.
New
BBC Mindsets For Kenya
The
plot thickens when we examine Sema Kenya and BBC Media Action’s
role around the Kenyan Westgate shopping Mall massacre. Semya Kenya
programmers report they were uncertain as to how to report events
around the Mall massacre. They state “our outgoing Country Director
Judy Houstan, her replacement Andrew Ilves who has recently joined
from the BBC Somali Service and Africa Editor Solomon Mugera coolly
steered the [Sema Kenya] team towards a new mindset.” Mr Ilves was
head of BBC World Service responsible for radio and online output in
Afghanistan, Iran, Tajikstan and the border areas of Pakistan. He is
also Head of Development for BBC Global News – the private BBC
company with £90million in sales. BBC Media Action is independent of
course.
It
could not be clearer that the BBC is directing the mindset of Kenyan
reporting. To what aim?
In
Serbia BBC Media Action has been funded by the EU to oversee the EU
Media Fund and has been working with local film makers on docudramas
to tackle human trafficking. At first glance this sounds benign, but
lets consider what is being produced is not truth and fact, but
‘docudrama’ to drive Serbian mindsets where the BBC thinks they
should go. As in UK the BBC’s truth is usually contaminated with
misleading fiction.
In
Palestine, according to BBC Media Action, the multiplatform debate
show ‘Aswat Min Filesteen’ (Voices from Palestine), meets a
growing need in the Palestinian Territories for trustworthy
programming covering local issues. The quarterly TV show is
produced by BBC Media Action in partnership with Palestinian Public
Broadcasting Corporation and is co-hosted by BBC Arabic’s Nur
Zorgui and PBC’s Huda Kadoumi. Aside from the oxymoron of the BBC
and ‘trustworthy’ programming, how many people in UK realise that
the BBC is creating its own news in Palestine.
BBC
Destabilising Syria
BBC
Media Action has also been meddling in Syria. Cruising on the post
Arab Spring climate in Syria Media Action has been at work to
undermine the authority and control of the Assad government,
assisting people in Syria and those dispersed overseas to challenge
their national government and stating that “given the sensitive and
restrictive media environment, much of the work that is carried out
is either under the radar or focused on less contentious development
themes..” This devious action must surely be considered subversion
within a Nation State. BBC Media Action admit that both the UN and
the EU have been funding ‘fifth column’ media activities in
Syria.
BBC
Media Action is so arrogant and sure of itself that they even tell us
what they are doing. Juliette Harkin, former BBC Media Action Project
Manager and an expert on Syria states..”we [BBC Media Action]
worked in 2004 with individuals within the [Syrian] ministry who
wanted change and tried to get them to be the drivers of that. All
media development work that has been done within Syria has, in my
opinion, been predicated upon this idea that there can be change from
within – you have an authoritarian regime and you find who the
reformers are within that [regime] and work with them”
In
their own words Media Action is a trojan horse which works against
governments of independent nation states – who are they to decide
which regimes are acceptable and which not? Did the BBC create
chemical weapons reports to suit UK, US and EU political agendas to
oust President Assad? Many think so.
BBC
fingers in the Ukrainian pie
As
we have watched the tragedy of the unfolding violence and
destabilisation in Ukraine, we should not be surprised to see BBC
Media Action at work. In 2003 BBC Media Action set up Top Media in
Odessa – a media support project to offer legal advice and training.
Tony Hewson Senior Trainer BBC Media Action is married to a Ukrainian
wife. He publicly states that he has watched Ukrainian TV channels to
see how some of the journalists he had worked with were coping. Did
he help train these ‘independent’ reporters? Hewson boasts …”Back
in the current crisis, Andriy Kulykov, another trainer we worked
with, a former BBC journalist and now one of Ukraine’s leading
talk-show presenters, has also been at the heart of events. He took a
brave step of broadcasting his programme Svoboda Slova (Freedom of
Speech) not in Ukrainian, but in Russian – an attempt to reach out
to all sides. He has also used his BBC journalism training and
experience as a trainer with Media Action, to maintain balance during
his on air interviewing..” BBC balance? Does that mean challenging
and undermining the established government? Did Freedom of Speech
pacify a volatile Ukrainian society or inflame it?
A
‘David’ posted a comment on Mr Hewson’s section of the BBC
Media Action website on 19th March 2014 – 10:44. He remarked…“The
next question is how free are journalists in the Ukraine now. Is the
‘new government’ of Kiev oligarchs allowing press freedom and
non-partisan reports? The BBC could certainly do with some lessons on
the ‘non-partisan’ bit. The reports on the Ukraine and Crimea are
extremely unbalanced!” David seems to also sense a BBC rat.
BBC
Marshall Plan of the Mind
If
we are lifting numerous BBC Media Action lids at this stage, how can
we really show the dangerous power of BBC subversive propaganda? We
return to the BBC ‘charity’ Marshall Plan of the Mind Trust, also
known as BBC MPM. Incorporated 11 September 1992 (removed 29 April
2002), the Trust alleged it was for education, training, the general
public, mankind and providing services. Kari Blackburn, Director of
International Operations for the BBC World Service Trust was
appointed editor of the MPM in 1992. The establishment claimed she
committed suicide by drowning in 1997.
Currently
serving BBC Media Action trustee Michael C McCulloch formerly worked
with the UK Delegation to UNESCO in the 1970s attempting to
‘discourage the Soviet Union from restricting press freedom.’ He
also acted as Private Secretary to Tim Raison the then Minister for
Overseas Development, and much later he served on the Board of the
European Board of Reconstruction and Development. He drew on this
UNESCO experience when appointed to launch the Know How Fund for the
Soviet Union..the British Government’s programme of support for
economic and political reform. McCulloch states..”one of my first
tasks was to expand funding for the BBC Marshall Plan of the Mind
(MPM), devised by former BBC World Service Director John Tusa with
support from Baroness Chalker. MPM focused on the twin tracks of
helping to develop independent media and of using media to help
people in the region understand and make choices about the changes
suddenly unleashed all around them. Creative, exciting, fast-moving
and fun—working with MPM was all of these—who had heard of an aid
programme supporting soap operas before that?!”
This
was no joke by McCulloch. By 1995 BBC MPM was facilitating a
‘British-style social realist soap opera’, Crossroads to
Kazakhstan. According to Ruth Mandel who critically analysed this
initiative, the “making of Crossroads was informed by the
assumption that the medium of television is an appropriate tool to
further the logical and inevitable transition to a capitalist
free-market economy, transforming the national imagination in the
process.” Mandel further indicated…”Cross roads was
conceived as an elaboration of a BBC MPM Radio soap opera in Russia
based on an Archers format, and was funded through Know How Funds,
supported by the government’s Overseas Development Administration
and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. It was produced by the
private London based production company Portobello Media.”
BBC
Media Action British Government’s Know How Fund Propaganda Machine
Mandel’s
excellent analysis ultimately lays the British government’s BBC
propaganda machine bare. “In discussion, one Know How Fund official
admitted that the assistance came loaded with “”unashamedly
political objectives.”” He described the project to support
changes we want; the transition to a market economy will be better
for them, and for us, for politics trade etc. There are real
political objectives rather than simply humanitarian assistance.”
Against this background, the work of BBC Media Action in Kazakhstan,
Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Serbia, Palestine, Kenya, Syria, Ukraine
and elsewhere becomes crystal clear. Political manoeuvering and
propaganda disguised as ‘media assistance.’
‘
Mandel
states..”Crossroads mentally ‘reframed’ Kazakhstan with
issues such as privatisation, banking, entrepreneurship, marketing
reform…and ideological messages , issues of ethnic pluralism and
technology transfer…and British American Tobacco (BAT), Wrigley’s gum
and Smirnoff Vodka all benefited from product placement.”
John
Tusa Chairman BBC MPM stated June 14 1996…”BBC MPM is an
educational, charitable trust…to transfer skills and knowledge of
democratic principles and market economies via national radio and
television to assist the transition process. It is the most
significant project dedicated to mass knowledge transfer within the
former Soviet Union.”
In
typical BBC style John Tulsa spun the true subversive political
objectives as ‘assistance in transition i.e. help for vulnerable
people.” The reality is that the BBC Marshall Plan of the Mind was
the opposite. A vast, dangerous and subversive media propaganda
exercise to break up and reframe nation states into a new British and
BBC designed model, whether they wanted it or not. BBC Media Action
is the spawn of that BBC MPM. Masquerading as a charity, BBC Media
Action is nothing of the sort. It is a hard at work reframing and
destabilising the national mind of vulnerable nation states. BBC
Media Action should be exposed and disbanded as soon as possible.
Left at work, it is capable of inflaming major conflict in Europe –
just observe the fruits of BBC Media Action in Ukraine.
=========================================
Zie wat betreft de anti-Corbyn campagne die wordt geleid door de BCC ook:
Unilever Tea Kenya wordt door voormalige arbeiders van het bedrijf voor het gerecht gedaagd, nadat ze toestemming kregen om in beroep te gaan, zo meldde BBC World Service gisteren in het nieuws van 2.00 u. (CET). Eerder werden deze mensen in het ongelijk gesteld door het ‘gerecht…’
De arbeiders verwijten Unilever niets te hebben gedaan om hen te beschermen tijdens de onlusten in 2007, onlusten die uitbraken na de landelijke verkiezingen…..
Het was destijds al snel duidelijk dat het geweld ook behoorlijk etnisch was getekend, daar veel van de arbeiders van Unilever destijds van andere stammen kwamen, uit een ander deel van Kenia, dan de stammen in het gebied van de Unilever thee plantages.
Unilever heeft een zorgtaak voor haar arbeiders en heeft daar zwaar op verzaakt. Bovendien moesten de arbeiders vluchten voor het geweld (11 van hen werden gruwelijk vermoord) en vanaf dat moment heeft Unilever fijntjes de salarissen niet meer uitgekeerd…….. ‘Logisch’ want deze arbeiders verdienen jaarlijks ‘het enorme godsvermogen’ van (houd je vast) $ 500!!! (GGGVD!!)
Intussen blijft Unilever maar opscheppen hoe groen en duurzaam het bedrijf ‘wel niet is’, zo gebruikt het bedrijf zogenaamde duurzame palmolie, van plantages die niet illegaal zouden zijn gevestigd in landen als Indonesië en zelfs als dit waar is (aantoonbaar in een paar gevallen niet), kan palmolie nooit duurzaam zijn op onze aarde…… Immers zo lang de grote bedrijven palmolie blijven gebruiken zullen derden oerwoud plat blijven branden om zo ook een palmolieplantage te beginnen……..
Het is dan ook een schande dat palmolie in zoveel producten is verwerkt (zelfs bij Ekoplaza) en godbetert wordt aangezien voor biobrandstof, waarvoor het daadwerkelijk wordt toegevoegd aan diesel brandstof…… Palmolie is daarnaast allesbehalve goed voor je ingewanden en aderen, dit i.t.t. bijvoorbeeld (niet overmatig verhitte) olijfolie…….
Schunnig te horen dat Unilever het alweer laat liggen als het gaat om het welzijn van haar arbeiders, terwijl het daar zo over opschept……. Sterker nog: keer op keer bestrijdt Unilever met poepdure advocaten dat het nalatig is geweest in haar zorg voor haar arbeiders in Kenia…… Waar haalt dit geteisem het lef vandaan?? Het is zeker dat Unilever intussen al meer heeft uitgegeven aan advocaten en gerechtskosten, dan het fatsoenlijk schadeloos stellen van alle ex-arbeiders zou kosten…….
Hundreds
of former employees of British-Dutch multi-national consumer goods
giant Unilever Plc have been granted permission to appeal a case in
which they are seeking damages from the company’s Kenyan subsidiary
Unilever Tea Kenya at the British Supreme Court.
The
tea workers had earlier suffered a blow after losing their appeal at
the UK High Court and subsequently at the UK Appeals Court in a case
in which they allege that Unilever Tea Kenya failed to protect them
from the ethnic violence in 2007.
The
tea workers accuse the Kericho-based UK company of “failing to
discharge a duty of care” to take “adequate steps to protect them
from violence” following the contested election of 2007, which saw
a wave of violence sweep across Kenya.
Over
1,300 people were killed at the time while many more were injured and
there was widespread damage to property.
The
218 claimants include the families of 11 victims who were brutally
killed in the violence and a large number of people who suffered
serious violent attacks, including gang rape.
They
allege that Unilever had placed their workers in a position of
“serious risk” because many of the workers were from tribes which
were not local to the area, so were specific targets of violence from
the majority tribe at times of social unrest.
The
claimants also allege that the relevant “crisis management
expertise” resided in Unilever PLC and that these experts were
responsible for ensuring that proper procedures were in place in
Unilever Tea Kenya and that people were trained.
Under
English law, a duty of care arises where there is “proximity,
foreseeability and where it is fair, just and reasonable to impose
such a duty.”
The
UK Court of Appeal however upheld a ruling by the High Court that the
tea producer “owed no duty of care” in relation to the operations
of its Kenyan subsidiary.
The
Court of Appeal judges further reasoned, that “if there is to be a
trial, it will have to take place in Kenya”.
They
added that in such circumstances, the Kenyan courts would be “better
placed to determine issues of foreseeability and what was fair, just
and reasonable in a Kenyan context.”
The
Court of Appeal dismissed the claimants appeal on the basis that
there was “insufficient” proximity between the claimants and
Unilever.
It
stated that the claimants were “nowhere near” being able to show
that they had a good arguable claim against Unilever.
Ahead
of the ruling, four UK Human rights groups had piled pressure on the
multinational urging it to take responsibility and reconsider the way
it is dealing with the case.
The
lobbies included REDRESS, the African Coalition for Corporate
Accountability (ACCA), CORE and Kituo Cha Sheria.
In
February last year the British High Court ruled in favour of Unilever
and its Kenyan subsidiary.
===========================
PS: VVD leugenaar Rutte werkte 10 jaar voor hetzelfde Unilever en heeft voor zijn ex-baas de dividendbelasting afgeschaft……. Hoorde gistermiddag dat veel aandeelhouders van Unilever tegen het verplaatsen van het hoofdkantoor naar Rotterdam zijn, laten we hopen dat deze stap wordt teruggedraaid, oplichter Rutte heeft het dubbel en dwars verdiend!! Zie wat dat betreft:
Het
zat er al een tijd aan te komen,het overlijden van Sudan, de laatst
levende noordelijke witte neushoorn. Sudan leefde de laatste jaren
van zijn leven in het Keniase wildpark Ol Pejeta Conservancy en werd
24/7 bewaakt door gewapende beveiligers…….
De
hoorn van een neushoorn brengt in landen als Vietnam en China wel tot
€ 40.000,– op….. China begint eindelijk met stappen tegen deze
barbarij en het suffe geloof in krachten van deze hoorn.
De
hoogste tijd dat er in alle landen waar deze hoorns en andere onderdelen
van dieren worden gebruikt als geneeskrachtige of kracht schenkende
voorwerpen, aan de kinderen op school wordt onderwezen dat dit je reinste kul
is, zoals al lang geleden wetenschappelijk werd aangetoond……..
Een mooie taak voor de VN, doen ze eens echt iets wat er toe
doet……
Wat betreft de westerse miljonairs die denken recht te hebben deze dieren te vermoorden en onderdelen van deze dieren mee naar huis te nemen, zoals de zoons van het beest Trump, ‘zou je bijna wensen’ dat er een prijs op hun hoofd wordt gezet, zodat ze zelf afgeslacht worden…..
Het vogende artikel ontving ik gisteren van het Care2 team:
What
We Can Learn From the Death of Sudan, the Last Male Northern White
Rhino
While
extremely sad, Sudan’s death was not unexpected. The 45-year-old
rhino had suffered a series of age-related
complications,
and after taking a sudden turn for the worse, he
was euthanized on March 19.
Sudan’s
death leaves just two remaining individuals of this majestic
species: his daughter Najin and his granddaughter Fatu, both of
whom live in the Conservancy.
The
near threatened white
rhino has
two sub-species — northern and southern. As noted above, just two
northern rhinos remain, and there are roughly 20,000 southern
rhinos.
The
critically endangered black
rhino has
four sub-species: One of them went extinct in 2011, and just over
5,000 individuals remain.
So
sad because we end up losing such kinds of species because of human
failure. People used to kill rhinos because of their horns, and many
people have been believing that they’re used as medicine, but it
doesn’t cure anyone at all.
Mutai
is referring to the belief that rhino horns have medicinal value. But
they’re actually made of keratin,
the same material in human hair and fingernails, as well as turtle
beaks and horse hooves.
Rhino
horn is most often ground up for use in traditional Asian
medicine, especially in China and Vietnam. According to
the International
Rhino Foundation,
the powder is added to food or brewed in a tea, which is “guaranteed”
to be a powerful aphrodisiac, a hangover cure or a treatment for
cancer, fever, rheumatism and gout.
One
rhinoceros horn has an estimated value of between $30,000 and $40,000
— and that’s precisely why poachers love them.
The
organization Save
The Rhino believes
that more than 7,245 African rhinos have been lost to poaching in
just a decade. In South Africa, 1,028 rhinos were killed in
2017, which equals just about three rhino deaths every single day.
POACHING
PREVENTION
So
what can we do to prevent this unnecessary slaughter?
Writing
for CNN, Jill
Filipovic notes that
“The response to poaching has to be holistic and global –
addressing, among other things, economic need and lack of
opportunity.” She’s referring to the fact that
some people rely on poaching as a matter of survival.
Living in poverty — perhaps with a starving family — they will do
anything to get money.
But Filipovic
goes on to suggest a bigger approach: The Kenya Wildlife Service
needs to be controlled and refocused. The group has been accused by
Human Rights Watch and others of deaths
and disappearances;
KWS has consistently denied
the accusations.
A
global approach also means looking to China, which has provided the
demand for rhino horns for decades. The country banned
ivory last year,
but government officials must do more to protect this
incredible creature.
And
in the U.S., photos of Donald Trump’s sons with their African game
kills aren’t improving the situation. Legislators need to ensure
that these wild animals are more than trophies for the rich.
Discouragingly,
a new advisory board created to reshape U.S. law on the importation
of the body parts of African elephants, lions and rhinos is loaded
with trophy
hunters.
A
LASTING LEGACY
So
what does the death of Sudan tell us?
It
is not enough to simply blame the poachers. The countries involved
need to band together in what Filipovic calls a “holistic and
global approach.”
Although
scientists around the world are working to develop in
vitro fertilization** techniques,
it’s probably too late for the northern white rhino. Sudan’s
death means that this majestic sub-species may follow the northern
black rhino into extinction, if the international community fails to
act.
Stan van Houcke bracht gisteren op zijn blog een artikel over Pechtold, beter gezegd over ‘de held’ die Pechtold vereert: massamoordenaar Churchill.
Churchill was een groot voorstander van de EU, al moet je daar wel bij opmerken, dat Churchill gezien zijn geschiedenis geen groot voorstander was van democratie. Dat past dan weer mooi bij de EU, waar de democratie ver te zoeken is en dat deelnemende landen als het zo uitkomt, volkomen uitperst en aan de ketting kan leggen, zie Griekenland……. Een dictatuur kan het niet ‘beter’ doen!
Zoals gezegd: Churchill was in feite een massamoordenaar, waar je zelfs WOII niet als bewijs voor nodig hebt……….
Van Houcke nam een artikel over van ‘Crimes of Britain‘, waarin een opsomming is opgenomen, over de enorme misdaden die Churchill beging.
Oordeel zelf over ‘de held’ van de neoliberale hufter Pechtold:
Alexander
Pechtold’s Inspiratiebron
Wat
inspireert Alexander Pechtold?
Op
de schouw in de werkkamer van Alexander Pechtold staan twee beeldjes
van Winston Churchill. Deze Britse politicus wist na de Tweede
Wereldoorlog één ding zeker: alleen met een verenigd Europa kon
vrede en veiligheid gewaarborgd worden.
Tegen
de tijdgeest in stond hij op voor meer Europese samenwerking, en met
die boodschap reisde hij het hele continent over. Hoe actueel! Hoe
inspirerend! Daarover vertelt Pechtold in Optimist in de politiek én
in deze video! #optimist
MIJN
HELD: Alexander Pechtold over Winston Churchill
D66-leider
Alexander Pechtold is fan van Winston Churchill. Hij roemt Churchill
– premier van Groot-Brittannië van 1940 tot 1945 – als belangrijkste
pleitbezorger van het Europese eenwordingsideaal.
England
celebrates their genocides. The ‘Winston Churchill note’ has
entered circulation. Honouring a man who swilled on champagne
while 4 million men, women and children in Bengal starved due to his
racist colonial policies.
The trial of Churchill:
Churchill
was a genocidal maniac. He is fawned over in Britain and held up as a
hero of the nation. He was voted ‘Greatest Briton’ of all time.
Below is the real history of Churchill, the history of a white
supremacist whose hatred for Indians led to four million
starving to death, the man who loathed Irish people so much he
conceived different ways to terrorise them, the racist thug who waged
war on black people across Africa and in Britain. This is the trial
of Winston Churchill, the enemy of all humanity.
THE
TRIAL OF WINSTON CHURCHILL:
Afghanistan:
Churchill
found his love for war during the time he spent in Afghanistan. While
there he said “all who resist will be killed without quarter”
because the Pashtuns need “recognise the superiority of race”. He
believed the Pashtuns needed to be dealt with, he would reminisce in
his writings about how he partook in the burning villages and peoples
homes:
“We
proceeded systematically, village by village, and we destroyed the
houses, filled up the wells, blew down the towers, cut down the great
shady trees, burned the crops and broke the reservoirs in punitive
devastation.” – Churchill on how the British carried on in
Afghanistan, and he was only too happy to be part of it.
Churchill
would also write of how “every tribesman caught was speared or cut
down at once”. Proud of the terror he helped inflict on the
people of Afghanistan Churchill was well on the road to becoming a
genocidal maniac.
Greece:
The
British Army under the guidance of Churchill perpetrated a massacre
on the streets of Athens in the month of December 1944. 28 protesters
were shot dead, a further 128 injured. The British demanded that all
guerrilla groups should disarm on the 2nd December 1944. The
following day 200,000 people took to the streets, and this is when
the British Army under Churchill’s orders turned their guns on the
people.
Churchill regarded
ELAS (Greek People’s Liberation Army) and EAM (National Liberation
Front) as “miserable banditti”, these were the very people who
ran the Nazis out. His actions in the month of December were purely
out of his hatred and paranoia for communism.
The
British backed the right-wing government in Greece returned from
exile after the very same partisans of the resistance that Churchill
ordered the murder of had driven out the Nazi occupiers. Soviet
forces were well received in Greece, this deeply worried Churchill.
He
planned to restore the monarchy in Greece to combat any possible
communist influence. The events in December were part of that
strategy.
In
1945, Churchill sent Charles Wickham to Athens where he was in charge
of training the Greek security police. Wickham learned his tricks of
the trade in British occupied Ireland between 1922-1945 where he was
a commander of the colonial RUC, responsible for countless terror.
In
April 1945 Churchill said “the [Nazi] collaborators in Greece in
many cases did the best they could to shelter the Greek population
from German oppression” and went on to say “the Communists are
the main foe”.
India:
“I’d
rather see them have a good civil war”. – Churchill
wishing partition on India
Very
few in Britain know about the genocide in Bengal let alone how
Churchill engineered it. Churchill’s hatred for Indians led to four
million starving to death during the Bengal ‘famine’ of 1943. “I
hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion” he
would say.
Bengal
had a better than normal harvest during the British enforced famine.
The British Army took millions of tons of rice from starving people
to ship to the Middle East – where it wasn’t even needed. When
the starving people of Bengal asked for food, Churchill said the
‘famine’ was their own fault “for breeding like rabbits”. The
Viceroy of India said “Churchill’s attitude towards India and the
famine is negligent, hostile and contemptuous”. Even right wing
imperialist Leo Amery who was the British Secretary of State in India
said he “didn’t see much difference between his [Churchill]
outlook and Hitler’s”. Churchill refused all of the offers to
send aid to Bengal, Canada offered 10,000 tons of rice, the U.S
100,000, he just point blank refused to allow it. Churchill was still
swilling champaign while he caused four million men, women and
children to starve to death in Bengal.
Throughout
WW2 India was forced to ‘lend’ Britain money. Churchill
moaned about “Indian money lenders” the whole time. The truth is
Churchill never waged war against fascism.
He
went to war with Germany to defend the British Empire, he said this
about India during WW2 “are we to incur hundreds of millions of
debt for defending India only to be kicked out by the Indians
afterwards”.
In
1945 Churchill said “the Hindus were race protected by their
mere pullulation from the doom that is due”. The Bengal famine
wasn’t enough for Churchill’s blood lust, he wished his
favourite war criminal Arthur Harris could have bombed them.
Iran:
“A
prize from fairyland beyond our wildest dreams” – Churchill on
Iran’s oil
When
Britain seized Iran’s oil industry Churchill proclaimed it was
“a prize from fairyland beyond our wildest dreams”. Churchill
meddled in Iranian affairs for decades, he helped exclude Iranians
from their natural resources and encouraged the looting when most
lived in severe poverty.
In
June 1914 Churchill proposed a bill in the House of Commons that
would see the British government become the major shareholder
of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. The company would go on to refrain
from paying Iran its share of the dividends before paying tax to
the British exchequer. Essentially the British were illegally taxing
the Iranian government.
When
the nationalist government of Mohammad Mosaddegh threatened British
‘interests’ in Iran, Churchill was there, ready to protect them
at any cost. Even if that meant desecrating democracy. He helped
organise a coup against Mosaddegh in August 1953. He told
the CIA operations officer that helped carry out the plan “if i had
been but a few years younger, I would have loved nothing better than
to have served under your command in this great venture”.
Churchill arranged
for the BBC to send coded messages to let the Shah of Iran know that
they were overthrowing the democratically elected government. Instead
of the BBC ending their Persian language news broadcast with “it is
now midnight in London” they under Churchill’s orders said “it
is now exactly midnight”.
Churchill
went on to privately describe the coup as “the finest operation
since the end of the war [WW2]”. Being a proud product of
imperialism he had no issue ousting Mosaddegh so Britain could
get back to sapping the riches of Iran.
Iraq:
“I
am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against the uncivilized
tribes… it would spread a lively terror.” – Churchill on the
use of gas in the Middle East and India
Churchill
was appointed ‘Secretary of State for the Colonies’ in 1921 and
he formed the ‘Middle East Department’ which was responsible for
Iraq. Determined to have his beloved
empire
on the cheap he decided air power could replace ground troops. A
strategy of bombing any resistance to British rule was now employed.
Several
times in the 1920s various groups in the region now known as Iraq
rose up against the British. The air force was then put into action,
indiscriminately bombing civilian areas so to subdue the population.
Churchill
was also an advocate for the use of mustard and poison gases. Whilst
‘Secretary for War and Air’ he advised that “the provision of
some kind of asphyxiating bombs” should be used “for use in
preliminary operations against turbulent tribes” in order to take
control of Iraq.
When
Iraqi tribes stood up for themselves, under the direction of
Churchill the British unleashed terror on mud, stone and reed
villages.
Churchill’s
bombing of civilians in ‘Mesopotamia’ (Kurdistan and Iraq) was
summed up by war criminal ‘Bomber Harris’:
“The
Arab and Kurd now know what real bombing means within 45 minutes a
full-sized village can be practically wiped out, and a third of its
inhabitants killed or injured, by four or five machines which offer
them no real target, no opportunity for glory as warriors, no
effective means of escape”. – Arthur ‘Bomber’ Harris
Ireland:
“We
have always found the Irish a bit odd. They refuse to be English” –
Churchill
In
1904 Churchill said “I remain of the opinion that a separate
parliament for Ireland would be dangerous and impractical”.
Churchill’s ancestry is linked to loyalism to Britain, he is a
direct descendent of the ‘Marquis of Londonderry’ who helped put
down the 1798 United Irishmen rising. He would live up to his
families reputation when it came to suppressing revolutionary forces
in Ireland.
The
Black and Tans were the brainchild of Churchill, he sent the thugs to
Ireland to terrorise at will. Attacking civilians and civilian
property they done Churchill proud, rampaging across the country
carrying out reprisals. He went on to describe them as “gallant and
honourable officers”. It was also Churchill who conceived the
idea of forming the Auxiliaries who carried out the Croke Park
massacre, firing into the crowd at a Gaelic football match, killing
14. Of course this didn’t fulfill Churchill’s bloodlust to
repress as people who he described as “odd” for their refusal “to
be English”, he went on to advocate the use of air power in
Ireland against Sinn Fein members in 1920. He suggested to his
war advisers that aeroplanes should be dispatched with orders to use
“machine-gun fire or bombs” to “scatter and stampede them”.
Churchill
was an early advocate for the partitioning of Ireland. During the
treaty negotiations he insisted on retaining navy bases in Ireland.
In 1938 those bases were handed back to Ireland. However in 1939
Churchill proposed capturing Berehaven base by force. In 1941
Churchill supported a plan to introduce conscription in the North of
Ireland.
Churchill
went on to remark ”the bloody Irish, what have they ever done for
our wars”, reducing Ireland’s merit to what it might provide by
way of resources (people) for their imperialist land grabs.
Kenya:
Britain
declared a state of emergency in Kenya in 1952 to protect its system
of institutionalised racism that they established throughout their
colonies so to exploit the indigenous population. Churchill being
your archetypical British supremacist believed that Kenya’s
fertile highlands should be only for white colonial settlers. He
approved the forcible removal of the local population, which he
termed “blackamoors”.
150,000
men, women and children were forced into concentration camps.
Children’s schools were shut by the British who branded them
“training grounds for rebellion”. Rape, castration, cigarettes,
electric shocks and fire all used by the British to torture the
Kenyan people under Churchill’s watch.
In
1954 in a British cabinet meeting Churchill and his men discussed the
forced labour of Kenyan POWs and how to circumvent the constraints of
two treaties they were breaching:
“This
course [detention without trial and forced labour] had been
recommended despite the fact that it was thought to involve a
technical breach of the Forced Labour Convention of 1930 and the
Convention on Human Rights adopted by the Council of Europe”
The
Cowan Plan advocated the use of force and sometimes death against
Kenyan POWs who refused to work. Churchill schemed to allow this to
continue.
Caroline
Elkins book gives a glimpse into the extent that the crimes in Kenya
were known in both official and unofficial circles in Britain and how
Churchill brushed off the terror the colonial British forces
inflicted on the native population. He even ‘punished’ Edwina
Mountbatten for mentioning it, “Edwina Mountbatten was
conversing about the emergency with India’s prime minister,
Jawaharlal Nehru, and the then colonial secretary, Oliver Lyttleton.
When Lyttleton commented on the “terrible savagery” of Mau Mau…
Churchill retaliated, refusing to allow Lord Mountbatten to take his
wife with him on an official visit to Turkey”.
Palestine:
“I
do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the
manger.”
In
2012 Churchill was honoured with a statue in Jerusalem for his
assistance to Zionism.
He
regarded the Arab population Palestine to be a “lower
manifestation”. And that the “dog in a manger has the final right
to the manger”, by this he meant the Arabs of Palestine.
In
1920 Churchill declared “if, as may well happen, there should be
created in our own lifetime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish State
under the protection of the British Crown which might comprise three
or four millions of Jews, an event will have occurred in the history
of the world which would from every point of view be beneficial”.
A
year later in Jerusalem he told Palestinian leaders that “it
is manifestly right that the Jews, who are scattered all over the
world, should have a national centre and a National Home where some
of them may be reunited. And where else could that be but in this
land of Palestine, with which for more than 3,000 years they have
been intimately and profoundly associated?”.
At
the Palestine Royal Commission (Peel) of 1937, Churchill stated
that he believed in intention of the Balfour Declaration was to make
Palestine an “overwhelmingly Jewish state”.
He
went on to also express to the Peel Commission that he does “not
admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red
Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit
that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a
stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put
it that way, has come in and taken their place”.
Four
years later he wrote of his desire for a ‘Jewish state’to be
established after the second war world. The establishment of the
colonial settler state however was done on the watch of the British
Labour Party under Attlee, who were always there to back their Tory
counterparts when it came to British foreign policy.
Saudi
Arabia:
“My
admiration for him [Ibn Saud] was deep, because of his unfailing
loyalty to us.” – Churchill
Prior
to 1922 the British were paying Ibn Saud a subsidy of £60,000 a
year. Churchill, then Colonial Secretary, raised it to £100,000.
He
knew of the dangers of wahhabism, but was content to use the House of
Saud’s twisted ideology for benefit of British imperialism.
Just as the British had done a few years earlier when they teamed up
with Al-Saud and their wahhabism to wage an internal war in the
Ottoman Empire. He described Ibn Saud’s wahhabis as
“intolerant, well-armed and bloodthirsty’.
Of course, as long as they were on the side of the British, Winston
was happy.
Churchill
went on to write that his “admiration for him [Ibn Saud] was deep,
because of his unfailing loyalty to us”.
Churchill
meeting with Ibn Saud whom he showered with money and gifts. Britain
foisted Wahhabism on the region. He gifted Ibn Saud a special
Rolls-Royce in the mid 1940s.
South Africa:
Thousands
were sent to British run concentration camps during the Boer wars.
Churchill summed up his time in South Africa by saying “it was
great fun galloping about”.
Churchill
wrote that his only “irritation” during the Boer war was “that
Kaffirs should be allowed to fire on white men”.
It
was Churchill who planted the seed to strip voting rights from black
people in South Africa. In June 1906, Churchill argued that
Afrikaners should be allowed a self-rule which would mean black
people would be excluded from voting.
He
went on to state to Parliament that “we must be bound by the
interpretation which the other party places on it and it is undoubted
that the Boers would regard it as a breach of that treaty if the
franchise were in the first instance extended to any persons who are
not white”.
Other mentions:
‘BRITISH
GUIANA’:
Churchill
ordered the overthrowing of the democratically elected leader of
‘British Guiana’. He dispatched troops and warships and suspended
their constitution all to put a stop to the governments
nationalisation plan.
CHINA:
“I
think we shall have to take the Chinese in hand and regulate them”
– Churchill His hope from this was for “Ayran stock to triumph”…
ERICH
VON MANSTIEN:
Churchill
donated funds for this Nazi war criminals defence when he was on
trial after WW2.
IMMIGRATION
TO BRITAIN:
Churchill
suggested the motto “Keep England White” when debating the
adoption of new laws limiting immigration from the Caribbean.
MUSSOLINI:
Churchill
extolled Mussolini – “If I were Italian, I am sure I would have
been with you entirely from the beginning” and “what a man
[Mussolini] ! I have lost my heart!… Fascism has rendered a service
to the entire world”.
ON
HIS OWN PEOPLE:
Churchill
suggested “100,000 degenerate Britons should be forcibly
sterilised/others put in labour camps to halt decline of British
race”. He also went on to suggest that “for tramps and wastrels
there ought to be proper labour colonies where they could be sent”.
SUDAN:
Churchill
bragged that he personally shot at least three “savages” whilst
there.
ROBERT
EMMET (IRISH REPUBLICAN LEADER):
Churchill
plagiarised his famous “we shall fight on the beaches” from
Emmet’s speech from the dock.
RUSSIA:
He
urged the US to “wipe” out the Kremlin with an atomic bomb hoping
it would “handle the balance of Russia”.
WORLD
WAR 1:
“I
love this war. I know it’s smashing and shattering the lives of
thousands every moment”.
WORLD
WAR 2:
Churchill’s
cabinet during WW2 obsessed about British people viewing black GIs
favorably.
Overigens heeft Churchill in het gebied dat nu Irak wordt genoemd, begin 20er jaren van de vorige eeuw inderdaad een paar keer mosterdgas laten gebruiken tegen opstandige stammen…….
Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht aantreft, dit geldt niet voor de labels: A. Harris en RUC.
In de Kots Nieuwsshow (Radio1) gistermorgen, aandacht voor de rol die Heineken in Burundi speelt. Dit bedrijf dat voor 60% door Nederlanders wordt bestuurd, heeft zich bemoeit met de autocratische president, die de grondwet opzij zette, zodat hij nog een termijn ‘zijn volk’ kan bestelen…..
Om die grondwet opzij te kunnen zetten, was een rechter van het constitutionele hof nodig en daar heeft Heineken voor gezorgd. Men gaf deze corrupte zak ‘aan baan’ in het bedrijf, waar hij tegen een fiks bedrag niets hoefde te doen, later werd deze hufter opgenomen in de raad van bestuur, uiteraard tegen een nog hoger bedrag…… Zaak geregeld en de president kon blijven zitten……
Heineken Nederland verschuilt zich achter de Burundese werknemers, ook al heeft Heineken Nederland zoals gesteld een duidelijke meerderheidsstem …….
Hier was mij iets ontgaan: Rutte heeft vorig jaar de VN toegesproken en daar het Nederlandse ‘ontwikkelingswerk geroemd. U weet wel: het desastreuze beleid van hare PvdA leeghoofdige hufterigheid Ploumen: Nederlandse bedrijven krijgen een zak belastinggeld en daarmee moeten ze of hun bedrijf in een ontwikkelingsland uitbouwen, of daar een bedrijf opzetten…..
Rutte durfde in de VN, Heineken Burundi als voorbeeld te noemen…. Te zot voor woorden dat hij reclame durfde te maken voor een Nederlands bedrijf en dan ook nog een harddrugsproducent……. Aangevuld met de hierboven vermeldde informatie over Heineken Burundi: hoeveel bewijs heeft u nog nodig om te zien, dat deze grijnzende VVD hufter een hopeloze boerenlul is??!!!
Oxfam Novib berichtte een paar maanden geleden, dat het ontwikkelingsbeleid van Ploumen een totale mislukking is >> de belastingcenten zijn weg en er is voor de bevolking geen bliksem gedaan………* Het meest lullige is wel, dat succesvolle ontwikkelingsprojecten zijn gesneuveld, zodat dit waardeloze beleid kon worden ingezet…….
Overigens ook in Kenia heeft Heineken een zak Nederlandse belastinggeld gekregen om daarmee kleine boeren van hun grond te laten flikkeren, dit door corrupte ambtenaren en politie….. De grond was nodig voor de door Nederland met belastinggeld gesubsidieerde suikerrietteelt van Heineken, dit t.b.v……. de harddrug alcohol!!!!**
We staan er weer mooi op in de wereld, een corrupt en hypocriet land, dat wordt geleid door uitermate inhumane en onbeschofte lobbyisten voor het bedrijfsleven!!!
Nederlands
English
Русский
Español
简体中文
Français
Deutsch
हिन्दी
Italiano
Português