Thursday, December 27, 2007

Igniting the Pakistani Tinderbox

AP is reporting that Benazir Bhutto has been assasinated. What an utter, utter tragedy for her family, her supporters and her country. I make no pretence of understanding the ins and outs of Pakistani politics, but I know enough to know that this terrible event may well ignite the tinder box. Pakistan has been a key ally in the fight against terrorism but it sits on the very edge of the precipice today. It cannot be allowed to fall into the hands of those who wish to turn it into a radical Islamist state. They will be celebrating today. The response of the Musharraf government will tell us how serious it is - and how capable it is - about dealing with its internal terrorist threat.

62 comments:

Paddy Briggs said...

Pakistan is "a key ally" - with friends like them who needs enemies? Remember violence breeds violence. Musharraf had no legitimacy and where such imperatives rule is it surprising that opponents also resort to violence? Bush and Blair/Brown should be ashamed for making a common cause with Musharraf and his gang. There can be no doubt that Ms Bhutto was killed as a result of the breakdown of law and order and that Musharraf is to blame. Not (maybe) for the assassination - but indirectly the blood is on his hands - and Western leaders who sustained the Pakistani Dictator have blood on their hands as well.

Johnny Norfolk said...

This again shows we are dealing with fanatics. we have so many in our country and the day cannot be far off when we have to deal with them, rather than apease as Labour does.Talks tough does nothing.

verity said...

She was corrupt, as they all are. Didn't her husband make out like a bandit when she was PM. (Sounds just like home.)

I can't remember, but did she ever have any democratic legitimacy? I seem to recall that she inherited the mantle from her father, but was never actually voted in. (Sounds just like home.)

Anyway, we need to repatriate tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Pakistanis and accept no more "immigrants"/"asylum seekers" from countries under islamic law. They are bonkers and infantile and have no place in the advanced West.

Re Bhutto's death, I really don't care, except that it illuminates why we shouldn't cozy up to immature, over-emotional, violent islamics.

Theo said...

Nuclear Bunker anyone!!!

Daisy said...

Well they were going to succeed at some stage. Maybe now Britain Europe and America will start to get tough on Islamic militants. Lets hope we don't have a repeat on Britains streets of celebrating yobs on the streets of Britain as we did after 9/11!

It really is time to take action by tightening up immigration and asylum laws.

Yak40 said...

The British created Pakistan in their hurry to leave India. Can't help thinking of that when I see the apparent urgency in creating an independent Kosovo.

freedom to prosper said...

I said she would be dead by the week-end but nobody was interested. However why is her life more valuable than all the others who have died in this mad house?

David Anthony said...

My first thought was .. is there anyone who could possibly replace her?

The obvious answer left me feeling cold.

tim said...

So you reckon al Queda need an excuse to resort to violence and kill a secular politician?
Thats what they were set up for Paddy.

M. Hristov said...

This is, indeed, a tragedy. The death of a lady who represented a link with the west. A non-military democratic feudal leader educated at Oxford University with secular views. A lady who represented the sort of families with whom the west, in the shape of Britain and subsequently the U.S., have been allied for centuries.

Furthermore, the death is a major setback for western policy in the region. The U.S. seems to have been encouraging an alliance between President Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto. The aim being to cement western influence but this assassination may well prove fatal to that ambition.

We cannot afford for Pakistan to fall into the hands of Islamic militants. Not only because Pakistan is in a geographically strategic position, being next to Afghanistan but also because Pakistan has nuclear weapons.

Yet, we could learn something from this. Islamic militancy in Pakistan is partly a result of U.S. policy during the period of Soviet occupation in Afghanistan. Washington did not realise, or chose to ignore, the fact that the USSR was “on its last legs” and, instead, encouraged Islamic militants, who were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. Now we all have to fight the descendants of those militants ourselves. The U.S. sowed the wind and we are reaping the whirlwind.

N.B. As I write this I am listening to News 24. Benazir Bhutto’s cousin is blaming President Musharraf for the assassination. If the Bhuttos maintain this stance then this is very dangerous for the stability of Pakistan.

Atlas shrugged said...

Paddy Briggs

I would not assume any thing of the kind. When things like this happen its usually the last people that you might think did the deed that actually turns out to have done it. For all we know right now it could just as easily have been her own family.

The west, over the last few weeks has been collectively distancing itself from the Musharraf government. This should be a massive clue. Although don't expect any one in the mass media or the BBC to pick up on it.

My advice if you want to know the real truth over things like this. Is to keep an open mind and trust no one with any type of vested interest AT ALL.

If the west starts moving into the area with anymore then pea shooters, I think we may have our answer.

Savonarola said...

Benazir Bhutto/Benzir Bhutton.

Should you have the time and inclination to understand why Pakistan and most other states, where Islam and government are bound together in a dysfunctional embrace, read V S Naipul's 'Among the Believers'.

The only so called Muslim states that seem to have a degree of stability and economic success are Malaysia and Indonesis both of which benefit from the industry of a Chinese mercantile class.

John M Ward said...

I do hope this isn't true. I met the lady only a few months ago, and realised that without her the path back to a decent Pakistan would be very much harder to navigate.

Although I am sure I am far from alone in almost expecting this to happen ever since her return to her home country, some if not all of us wished that it would not occur in reality.

A sad day indeed, if it is confirmed....

Osama the Nazrene said...

This just shows the idiocy of Bush, Blair, Duncan-Smith et al in going into Iraq before really squashing the Islamist terrorist Teleban maniacs.

The Americans should have continued their bombing with air sucking bombs till these people were bombed back to the stone age.

Bhutto at least knew who the real enemy of the West was which is why she died.

Yak40 said...

"Washington did not realise, or chose to ignore, the fact that the USSR was “on its last legs” ... "

Who in the 80s believed the USSR really was on its last legs ? The West in general was adamant that it was as big a threat as ever.

Hindsight is easy.

austrian said...

"The response of the Musharraf government will tell us how serious it is - and how capable it is - about dealing with its internal terrorist threat."

Wise up, Iain. Mussarraf was behind the assassination.

old and angry said...

Big Brother cyclops has been on T.V accusing the terrorists of cowardice, and of being afraid of democracy....
Sounds like the pan calling the kettle black!
Afraid?, as in, denying us a vote on the EU Treaty....

verity said...

Osama The Nazarene notes: "The Americans should have continued their bombing with air sucking bombs till these people were bombed back to the stone age."

Why bother? They never left the Stone Age. That is their problem. They cannot adapt to modern life. The reason these people have never invented anything is, their allah had already invented everything necessary for humans to have back in 800 AD, so wicked to try to improve on the work of allah. They can never get out of this mindset until they have a reformation and I do not see that happening any time soon.

Savonarola - that is a very good point.

Yak40 - The British created Pakistan because they were in a hurry to leave India? Not true. We could have left India as all one country with PM Nehru in charge. The Brits allowed themselves to be persuaded that it would be to everyone's advantage to set up a separate muslim state with the elegant, educated civilised Jinnah as the PM.

But no one foresaw that islamics would fly into a frenzy trying to destroy the modern world, which they find threatening to their belief system.

Wherever there is a dependence on emotion and violence instead of rational discourse, you'll find the islamics. The voters of the West should be united in returning large numbers of these people to their native environment. The British don't want them. The French actively loathe them. It baffles me why some governments saw the need to import an obvious problem.

judith said...

I have recently been reading Lord Curzon on Afghanistan (there's showing off for you!).

There is a tribal way of life in that part of the world that appears to regard assassination and warfare as de rigeur, and has done so for millenia.

It is a self-delusional farce to believe that such cultures are thirsty for democracy, and we should not be throwing away our military's lives, nor our money, nor our diplomatic efforts on forcing our way of life upon them.

We should simply and firmly be ensuring that our frontiers are secure, and that such cultures are not allowed to subvert our own.

Oliver McCarthy said...

Isn't the most likely culprit the ISI? They're riddled with nationalists (who hate Bush co. just as much as some of the commentariat here) and they created the Taliban in the first place. The assassin himself was clearly trained and well-disciplined and saw Bhutto for what she was - a puppet of the West being set up by Musharraf as the acceptable face of military dictatorship. Now that she's gone, what's Plan B?

penlan said...

I find it extremely unnerving to think that Pakistan is almost a failed state yet possesses nuclear weapons.Is it or has it ever been a viable political entity?If it is not,what can be done? (if anything).

Adrian Yalland said...

Bhutto was invited to speak at my univeristy and it drew a huge crowd. Although she was quite an old-school left winger, she had an amazing intellect.

I remember her clearly talking about how Pakistan needed taking from a medieval state, which was feudal in its politics, corrupt and with the vast majority of the population disenfranchised. She said that Pakistan needed it's own period of enlightenment - especially on issues such as womens' rights.

I don't know how true the allegations are about the curruption, but I do know that a pro-western, pro-indian, pro-democracy and anti extremist leader in Pakistan would have been a very useful ally to have.

But didn;t we all have a sense that this would happen? I know I did.

Phil BC said...

I certainly have no time for Bhutto, her politics or her record, but none but the most blinkered loon and/or fundamentalist Islamists will be celebrating her assassination today. This can only whip up the spiral of political violence in Pakistan, leading to many more tragedies and making the operation of "normal"| politics very difficult indeed.

Adrian Yalland said...

I don't think that Musharif's people or the security forces were behind this - Musharif will be soon in a position where, in order to contine in power, he needs democratic legitimacy. Bhutto could have been that, and I suspect this was part of the deal for her return - he drops the corruption charges and she props him up.

However, it is possible that an anti-Bhutto person in the security forces could have been involved. It sounds strange that a killer could get so close to her!

Given that she was fiercely anti-militant, is secular in her outlook, and stands for just about everything the Taliban and Al Qeda stand for (modernity, progress, women's rights....) she was their no.1 target.

The point is, we need a strong democratic and modern facing Pakistan to be a better influence in the region. Now we have a Pakistan standing on the edge of who knows what!

The first thing that needs to be done is sort out the pourus borders with Afghanistan.

verity said...

Penlan -Well, it failed when it was E Pakistan and W Pakistan, which was a surpassingly daft idea. I don't think it's viable and I don't think any islamic country that doesn't have oil is viable because they are stuck in the Dark Ages when allah handed down his list of rules. They've never moved forward from then.

What can be done? Repatriation of large numbers of non-contributing immigrants from the region because their primitive ideas nestle unchanged in their minds. Let Saudi Arabia take them in as houseboys and taxi drivers. Or just give the government of Pakistan money. They have plenty.

Oliver McCarthy - You say that some people hate Bush as much as do some of the members of the commentariat here. Actually, I don't think any of our commentariat hate Bush. Just flea-ridden little socialist trolls who come flying in when Bush is mentioned.

Judith hits the nail on the head: It is delusional to belief that such cultures hunger for democracy. They don't. They hunger for the tribal ways and they find Western ideas disturbing and destabilising.

We should not be putting our military at risk in the region, and we should not be putting our own people in their own country at risk, either, by importing them. It is only too clear that vast tranches of them cannot settle.

Votedave said...

A shocking, horrifying and saddening death of a beautiful and brave woman.

Sea Shanty Irish said...

SHOCKED but not surprised by tragedy for Pakistan, and my first thoughts today are for all the wonderful Pakistani people I personally know, in the US, Canada & UK.

SHAMED but not surprised by customary incompentence of Cheney administration. Distraction of unjust, criminally incompentent Iraq war means we've left Afghans in the lurch, thus further militarizing & destablizing Pakistan. Talk about chickens coming home to roost . . . on heads of chickenhawks!

SCORNFUL but hardly surprised by reactionary rajbumpf so prominently featured here: pathetic Paki-bashing unworthy of a hopped-up hoodie. On such a day, have you no shame?

THANKFUL but wary for cautious rapprochement between Pakistan and India, without which the situation would be even more serious.

HOPEFUL but not very that new geneneration of leadership shall emerge in and for Pakistan.

And OVERJOYED that someone would trot out at this moment of crisis such a timely figure as the imperial & imperious Lord Curzon: an overpromoted supertwit whose career took off when he married an heiress (and wife 2 was a Guiness) but crashed & burned due to machinations of equally fraudlent Lord Kitchener.

Footnote: all 3 of Ld C's daughters AND his 2nd wife bent over backwards for Sir OSWALD MOSELY at one time or another. Average Lahore ditchdigger wouldn't touch this crew with a muckrake.

Anonymous said...

It was a Labour government that gave independendence to India and Pakistan. Another big mistake -- the countries turned out not to be ready for it.

Hamish McGlobbie

verity said...

Sea Shanty Irish, out of his depth as usual. "SCORNFUL but hardly surprised by reactionary rajbumpf so prominently featured here". Raj? Do you know when India became independent? Nineteen forty-seven. Sixty years ago! I would suspect that very few here are old enough to look back and remember Independence, even, never mind the actual raj before it.

Trite. Trite. Trite.

There will never be true rapprochement between India and Pakistan because the Indian mind thinks freely and the Pakistani mind is tethered to the 800s. India annually applies for more high tech patents than any country in the world saving the US and Germany. I would be surprised if Pakistan had ever applied for one, the camel harness already having been invented.

Oliver McCarthy said...

verity, I think I'm in love.

Anonymous said...

"I can't remember, but did she ever have any democratic legitimacy? I seem to recall that she inherited the mantle from her father, but was never actually voted in."

Why don't you establish the facts before you rush in?

She was elected as leader of the Peoples Progressive Party which her late father had founded.

She became Prime Minister twice, after legitimate general elections.

She may well have been corrupt (by our standards) but she was a very brave woman who had her country's best interests at heart and was a strong supporter of the West.

verity said...

[10:41 to me] "Why don't you establish the facts before you rush in?"

I didn't rush in. I said I didn't recall the facts. I said I didn't recall that she had won a legitimate (insofar as any election in Pakistan can be legitimate) election. What is your problem?

I don't like nepotism and don't believe she would have advanced so far had her father not been PM.

We should face the fact that politics in the area are even sleazier than those in Britain. I seem to remember that her husband made huge amounts of money all of a sudden. Is he still around?

I am sorry she died such a grotesque death, but she knew the risks.

M. Hristov said...

We cannot retreat into “splendid isolation”. We cannot shut out the world. We cannot expel or ethnically cleanse populations. That has never worked, Verity. It didn’t work for Hitler or for Stalin and it wouldn’t work for us.

All we can do is pick up the pieces of our shattered policies, whether they be shattered by assassination or natural death and “think through” a new answer. We cannot be constrained by dogma or fear of those who we judge to be more primitive than us. If we have confidence in our ideas and truly believe them to be right then we will triumph. We have in the past.

We triumphed over Soviet communism because it was internally flawed and, yak40, it was clear that it was flawed and liable to crumble long before it actually did. Not clear to the general public, perhaps but clear to those in power, I am sure. We will triumph over radical Islam in the same way.

Those who say that we must “stoop” to the methods of Stalin and Hitler betray their real feelings. A total lack of self confidence and a secret belief that capitalism is flawed.

Anand said...

Who is Verity and why hasn't anyone done something immediately to deport her from any State on earth?

Mrs Bhutto never had any corruption charges proven against her. Besides that this nonsense of deporting people from Islamic States: Pakistan is not run under Islamic law in the same way Saudi Arabia is for example -how on earth would you define what that is -other than it become an entirely abhorrent racist idea.

Mrs Bhutto - whatever the allegations against her - was brave enough to risk her life and die for democracy and something she was passionate about.

For you to put up the kind of posts you have on the day another human being dies is disgusting in itself and I hope you appreciate people reading these posts will forever remember you -Verity - as a stain on the sheet of humanity in all avenues from moral, social and intellectual perspectives. Please re-read your posts and realise you and your mind and soul are now tarnished with those words and this is the sort of legacy you will leave on earth should God ever take your life -but hopefully for your sake not in such courageous circumstances as that of Mrs Bhutto.

Anonymous said...

Yak40 said...

"Who in the 80s believed the USSR really was on its last legs ?"

Me, and a couple of other wise people.

simon said...

I don't care what happens in Pakistan! All that lot out there are all 'bodmin' and should be ignored! All the 'bodmin' lot in our country attending 'radical Muslim establishments' ahould all be rounded up and expelled forthwith. If people attend places with 'extremist/ bodmin' preachers they should expect to deal with the consequenses.

cassandra said...

Annand,

Verity speaks the truth where you spout rubbish.
The ony "stain on humanity" that I see is Islamist evil, a religion of cruelty and barbaric intolerence.
Pakistan is a nation of tribes who prefer to live in the 'middle ages' and that is their right but that system should have no place in the Western democratic world! What has Pakistan given the world?

Suicide killers?

Ignorant and hate filled Mullahs preaching evil?

Inter tribal violence and endemic corruption?

A perverse desire to cause pain and death and destruction?

May I suggest that before you critisise Verity you look at your societys failings first.

davod said...

"If the west starts moving into the area with anymore then pea shooters, I think we may have our answer."

The West? What F....g West. There is no West. The EU cannot even find ten repeat ten helicopters to help a peacekeeping mission in Africa.

Lets face it. We are worse off than the days before Chamberlain's famous speech before the German invasion of Poland. At least then several countries were trying to increse thir military preparedness.

Now, who even cares about military preparedness?

And you talk about the size of the gun the West will use when it goes into Pakistan!

verity said...

m histrov- I am baffled: We cannot retreat into “splendid isolation”. We cannot shut out the world. We cannot expel or ethnically cleanse populations. That has never worked, Verity.

Where did I say I thought Britain should "retreat" into "splendid isolation"? Britain has always traded with the world, it settled much of the world and its language holds together the powerful Anglosphere. I cannot imagine what you are talking about. I said we are going to have to disengaged from rogue, bonkers states. Pakistan is an islamic nut job and offers absolutely nothing to Britain. We should disengage. And repatriate hundreds of thousands of unintegrated Pakistanis who want to live under their Dark Ages shariah law. (Easy. Go back to Pakistan.)

We cannot be constrained by dogma or fear of those who we judge to be more primitive than us.

Fear? Are you mad? These people have yet to earn a place in civilisation. It would help if an islamic had ever invented something.

The rest of your post is too naive to be bothered to comment on. You clearly know absolutely nothing about islam.

Hi, Anand. I have a cat called Anand, but he is intelligent.

verity said...

Pakistan's only export is suicide bombers.

Perhaps they should be isolated for a while while they contemplate how to haul themselves out of tribalism, "elders" and their Dark Ages "religion" aka "cult". From the 800s and not one word changed, not one attitude changed during the ensuing course of the history of the rest of the world.

They're still stuck in the Dark Ages. The reason islamics have never invented anything is, allah had already thought of everything when he dictated his notes to mohammad and it would be blasphemy to think up new things.

Anonymous said...

Where does this ignorant notion that Islamic countries have never invented anything come from? Alcohol (distillated spirits) and algebra spring to mind. Our numbering system is also of islamic origin and far cleverer than the Roman system it replaced.

Islamic architecture, art and ceramics were all at a far more advanced stage earlier than in the West.

verity said...

[12:29] So-called "Arabic" numerals came from India and simply transitted the Middle East on their way to Europe.

Algebra - was developed long before the 800s when islam was invented. Al-Jabra assimilated Greek mathematical thought but the notion of algebra goes back to those Hindus again. Pre-islam.

Distilled spirits, invented around 2,500 years ago, by the Chinese and Japanese concurrently. I don't believe there was any islam in China and Japan 2,500 years ago.
Way pre-islam.

In Britain, we've had mead since around 500 BC - 1100 years pre-islam.

Not exactly a hotbed of creative thought, given that it is discouraged.

Some islamic architecture is very beautiful. The Taj Mahal is heart-stopping. I've never seen much in the way of islamic art, given that mohammad didn't want people creating things in the image of humans. That's allah's job. That's why they cut the noses off statues. Some Persian miniatures are lovely though, but the Iranians are a different race and march to their own drum. You can buy drawings and paintings of mohammad in Iran.

judith said...

Yes, thank you SSI, I have read the story of Curzon's daughters; I just happen to be in the middle of reading his account of a lengthy unofficial visit to the Emir Abdur Rahman Khan of Afghanistan in 1894. Whatever one's views of Curzon, he was a recognised expert on what he referred to as the Central Asian problem.

I would like to quote one passage:

"In the 13 years before my visit, the Emir had consolidated his rule over one of the most turbulent peoples in the world by force alike of character and of arms, and by a relentless savagery that ended by crushing all opposition out of existence, and leaving him the undisputed but dreaded master of the entire country."

Sadly, this appears to be relevant to the area's past, present and future.

Anonymous said...

Algebra in its modern form with first formulated by Abu Bakr al-Jaraji in about 990 and moslem chemists were the first to distill pure alcohol in the 12th century - I never said that they invesnted alsoholic drinks of which mead is a primitive example.

Islam is not the only religion to ban the human image in its religious art (although this is not a universal prescription) Scottish Calvinism is another example.

verity said...

[4:30] I believe it was religious icons that Calvin thought were de trop, not renderings of human beings.

Re distilled alcohol, I would be astonished if the Chinese hadn't got there first. The C12th seems awfully late for the discovery of the distillation of alcohol.

Pity the muslimns never figured out how to refine petroleum, eh?

John M Ward said...

Oliver McCarthy wrote: "verity, I think I'm in love."

Steady on, lad!

Verity probably has a number of fans and followers on here, and I seem to be becoming one myself. That should be enough for any fellow...

Even so, I am just starting to write an anime-style story (and illustrations), and one of the four main characters will probably be named Verity, I have decided, as a tip-of-the-hat to the lady herself, The name also seems to suit the character I am writing.

Makes a change from politics; and if Boris can write novels, well, I can do something similar -- so there!

M. Hristov said...

As you clearly cannot take a hint, Verity, I shall have to make it crystal clear to you.

What you propose is ethnic cleansing. It is illegal and is unacceptable in the modern world. Period.

What you betray, by your ignorant postings, is a total failure to comprehend other cultures.

What you show, by your labelling of me as naïve, is that you really have no faith whatsoever in modern capitalism to triumph over other ideologies.

Very very sad.

verity said...

m.hristov writes: As you clearly cannot take a hint, Verity, ... Incorrect. I clearly have no interest in taking a hint, or instruction, from you.

Ethnic cleansing? My, you are a drama queen. I am suggesting repatriating (living)individuals who are a threat to our country on pressurised planes or boats that have ample supplies of food and water onboard.

It is illegal. It is?

Well in Cherie and Tony Blair's dreamworld, and Gordon Brown's dreamworld, repatriating individuals who are a threat to the state may be illegal, but not (yet) in our laws.

What you betray, by your ignorant postings, is a total failure to comprehend other cultures. How many "other cultures" have you lived in, sweetheart? I don't mean, how many ethnic neighbourhoods have you lived in and whether you "comprehended" them.

What you show, by your labelling of me as naïve, is that you really have no faith whatsoever in modern capitalism to triumph over other ideologies.

What I show is, I have no faith in socialist governments to have the will to triumph over "other ideologies". Capitalism, I trust. All others pay cash.

Very very sad. Awwww ...

Neil craig said...

"What you propose is ethnic cleansing. It is illegal and is unacceptable in the modern world. Period"

Since we involved ourselves in 3 separate wars (in Croatia, Bosnia & Hercegovina & Kosovo specificly for the purpose of engaging in ethic cleansing & indeed genocide without any British leader facing even a day of jail time for it it is clearly entirely legal.

Our problem is that Musharef is clearly engaged in just as much hypocrisy over the"war on terror" as we are. Just as we assisted our al Quaeda friends in genocide & ethnic cleansing (&even imprisoned the moderate Moslem Fikret Abdic for the "crime" of opposing them) so he, while on the one hand fighting them, on the other hand provides them with a safe haven in northern Pakistan so that they can keep fighting in Afghanistan.

Of course we all know this. If the "war on terror" was a serious effort we would do something about it. Equally if making genocide illegal was serious we would do something about it. Since they are merely providing government with a sometimes useful enemy & sometimes useful allies we will continue to say how dreadful everybody else is while eschewing any principled action ourselves.

verity said...

Neil Craig - Doubtless what you write is correct.

Not only is deporting undesirable aliens not a crime against humanity, but it is perfectly legal. As is deporting undesirables. As is offering £5,000 or so to third generation Pakistanis who have somehow never quite got the hang of democracy to go away perfectly legal.

The crime against humanity is that they are here in the first place.

More iffy, but popular in my book, would be refusing to deploy any more NHS funds to fix up, or ameliorate, birth defects caused by Pakistani incest. They don't seem to have grasped, as every other tribe in the world has grasped, that marrying first cousins for generation after generation produces weak people with a lot of defects. Pakistanis account for 31% of the treatment of birth defects on the NHS. Why should the Brits pay for this deliberate condition?

Bradford's Anne Cryer has been a voice in the wilderness trying to get marriage to first cousins outlawed for years.

M Histrov, stop trying to demonstrate what a great liberal soul you are. Employment for mahatamas is in short supply these days. There isn't even a job for you in India.

M. Hristov said...

m.hristov writes: As you clearly cannot take a hint, Verity, ... Incorrect. I clearly have no interest in taking a hint, or instruction, from you.

Answer : You clearly do not understand subtlety and are also not going to listen to other peoples views.

Ethnic cleansing? My, you are a drama queen. I am suggesting repatriating (living)individuals who are a threat to our country on pressurised planes or boats that have ample supplies of food and water onboard.

Answer : Your argument is completely ridiculous. It is the forcible transfer of persons that is objectionable not the way such people are transferred.

It is illegal. It is?

Answerr : Ethnic Cleansing can fall into the definition of a crime against humanity and, as such, a person who ethnically cleanses a population can be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court.

Well in Cherie and Tony Blair's dreamworld, and Gordon Brown's dreamworld, repatriating individuals who are a threat to the state may be illegal, but not (yet) in our laws.

Answer : Wrong. We are party to the Rome Statute and, therefore, are bound by the decisions of the International Criminal Court.

What you betray, by your ignorant postings, is a total failure to comprehend other cultures. How many "other cultures" have you lived in, sweetheart? I don't mean, how many ethnic neighbourhoods have you lived in and whether you "comprehended" them.

Answer : A few more cultures than you, clearly.

What you show, by your labelling of me as naïve, is that you really have no faith whatsoever in modern capitalism to triumph over other ideologies.

What I show is, I have no faith in socialist governments to have the will to triumph over "other ideologies". Capitalism, I trust. All others pay cash.

Answer : There are very few socialist governments left.

Very very sad. Awwww ...

Not only is deporting undesirable aliens not a crime against humanity, but it is perfectly legal. As is deporting undesirables. As is offering £5,000 or so to third generation Pakistanis who have somehow never quite got the hang of democracy to go away perfectly legal.

Answer : What you seem to have suggested is the wholesale removal of the Pakistani population of this country. On the grounds that they are backward. This is totally unacceptable and illegal.

The crime against humanity is that they are here in the first place.

Answer : Incitement of racial hatred is a crime on our statute book and you would do well to remember that.

More iffy, but popular in my book, would be refusing to deploy any more NHS funds to fix up, or ameliorate, birth defects caused by Pakistani incest. They don't seem to have grasped, as every other tribe in the world has grasped, that marrying first cousins for generation after generation produces weak people with a lot of defects. Pakistanis account for 31% of the treatment of birth defects on the NHS. Why should the Brits pay for this deliberate condition?

Answer : You overlook the fact that there is a precedent for this treatment. That is the removal of medical help which was previously given. All Britons currently living in France who have lived there for more than two years and who are not of pensionable age have had all free medical treatment withdrawn. Who has done this. Nicolas Sarkozy. Who has he done it to. Us. However, you and your mates are so ignorant about all this that you still think the sun shines out of the little poltroon. I think that you will find that the so called ignorant Musliims aren’t stupid enough to accept that sort of treatment even if the Brits in France are.

Bradford's Anne Cryer has been a voice in the wilderness trying to get marriage to first cousins outlawed for years.

Answer : Both the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church ban this. The Anglican Church still allow it. I suppose you want all Anglicans deported now.

M Histrov, stop trying to demonstrate what a great liberal soul you are. Employment for mahatamas is in short supply these days. There isn't even a job for you in India.

Answer : I am simply not a backward person who thinks that all problems can be solved by exporting them.

verity said...

Hristov (I will forego the title I would have given him, out of respect to Iain), explain this: "Answer : Incitement of racial hatred is a crime on our statute book and you would do well to remember that."

"Racial hatred". Hmmmmmm. Still don't get it. Is "terrorist" a new race, under the Nulabour jackboot definition?

Could you be a good chap and let us know of what race you speak? Do you think "Pakistani" is a race, for example?

Do you think, oh, Bolivian is a race? Cubans? Nova Scotians? People from Sydney?

Do you understand the anthropological definition of race (hint: there are only five)? Or do you think race means nationality?

Do let us know! We're all Agog! Agog is a race of people who think you're a nutjob.

I couldn't read all the way through your post, as all the turgid type is the same and way too dense. Learn to do HTML, there's a good little chappie.

And don't forget to let us know how many countries you've lived in! An internationalist such as yourself should have lived over at least one donor kebab, a chippie and at least one Indian. A Chinese would add immeasurably to your credentials as there are so many regions in China ...

verity said...

Hristov writes: "Answer : Both the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church ban this [first cousin incest]. The Anglican Church still allow it. I suppose you want all Anglicans deported now.

1. This is a practice not indulged in in the Anglican church, so multiple birth defects generation after generation, as with the Pakistani immigrants, don't happen.

In addition, I believe most Anglicans are the indigenes. "Deport them" you suggest. Are you daft?

2. Histrov says: "Answer : Incitement of racial hatred is a crime on our statute book and you would do well to remember that."

Not really. I don't give a monkey crap. I've forgotten already. What?

Define the differences between races. You can't? You mean you're not a geneticist and have no background in anthropology, yet you are accusing anonymous strangers of "racism"? Or are you just so specially intelligent and talented that you don't need to learn actual definitions? Given your intuition, an' all ... it was just beamed from outer space into your pores?

How is it every argument with a leftoid is steered toward the imagined cookie monster of 'race'. Why so obsessive? What's bothering you?

BOO!

Give it a rest, you silly provincial little git.

And try to learn HTML.

Anonymous said...

M. Hristov said...

"I am simply not a backward person who thinks that all problems can be solved by exporting them."

Yet you are very keen on importing them.

Those who have a problem with England being predominantly populated by English people forfeit all claim to be here. As I'm sure you will discover once the lib/lab/cons are out of the way.

verity said...

Anon [7:15] Well said!

M. Hristov said...

Verity has stooped to crude insult based on no knowledge of me at all. How satisfying.

No mention of Sarkozy. No defence of his attitude to the English. I am surprised.

Right wing hero Sarkozy attacking the English. Doesn't quite fit your world view, does it Verity.

As you are clearly a Londoner(or think you are), I suggest you take a few steps outside your door and mix with some real foreigners. I suggest you don't tell them that you wish to deport them. That would be a conversation stopper.

neil craig said...

Hristov
Verity has previously discussed living in Singapore so may know more about multi-ethnic societies than you.

Despite all your bleating about racial niceness & "law" you are clearly uninterested in criticsing real genocide when it is carried out by those you support.

That is the point about principle & indeed law. It has to apply even when you don't like it. If you don't it isn't a principle.

verity said...

M Histrov, a great little digger who doesn't know when to stop, writes: As you are clearly a Londoner(or think you are), I suggest you take a few steps outside your door and mix with some real foreigners.

I suggest you are an idiot. Every time I "take a few steps outside my door",I encounter nothing but "foreigners". I live overseas. In fact, they encounter me, given that they are the indigenes and I am the foreigner.

You posted this, addressed to me, further up the thread: What you betray, by your ignorant postings, is a total failure to comprehend other cultures.

Your "conclusions" about me are driven by fantasies based on malice and an intense hatred of the right.

M. Hristov said...

It is axiomatic that we will make assumptions about each other from what are essentially anonymous postings. It is also right that those assumptions may well be wrong. Sometimes we may all become a little too heated, particularly when we discuss emotional matters. You are right that I detest the extreme right but then this is only natural in a person whose close relatives were killed or exiled by various extreme right regimes. You are wrong to assume that I “hate the right”. I feel totally at home with the current Conservative leadership, although you may not classify them as being “of the right”. You may have fallen into an easy trap, which is to believe Sarkozy is a natural ally of the Conservatives. In fact, he had lunch with Tony and Cherie Blair and supports Blair’s candidacy for the Presidency of Europe.

verity said...

M Hristov - Sarkozy is a career politician. He will make his alliances where he can to further his cause, which is the advance of the right. Politics breeds strange bedfellows and if he has to pretend to respect Tony Blair, he will do so. If he has to sit across a lunch table from Blair and the manatee, he will (although I am sure he required a bottle of wine all to himself). As would any other politician. But Sarkozy is definitely a man of the right. Cute, too.

Cameron is not of the right at all. He is centre left. The socialists moved the goal posts to the far left, so Cameron feels rather daring occupying the centre left ground. I would not be surprised to learn that he was a member of Common Purpose.

I am genuinely sorry to read that members of your family were killed or exiled, but I do not know of any régime of the right that has committed cold-blooded, brutal murders. This is usually a habit of those on the Left, like Hitler and other Fascists and Brown Shirts, and the Supreme Soviet which also, of course, occupied the extreme Left. The murderous Castro and Ché Guevara were also very far lefty "revolutionaries".

Right wingers want to conserve what is good, preserve social cohesion and spread wealth through capitalism.

Kind regards, and pax.

verity said...

M Hristov - Sarkozy is a man of the right, sure enough, and a skilled, patient politician. Politics makes strange bedfellows and if he has to pretend to go along with Tony Blair's ambitions, and have lunch with Blair and the manatee, while hiding his own feelings, he is capable of doing so to gain his own ends. He probably needed a whole bottle of wine to himself,but he's definitely of the right. Cute, too.

I am genuinely sorry to read that some of your family were killed or exiled for political purposes. Usually, the people who act thusly are of the far left - like Hitler and the Brown Shirts and, of course, Kruschev and the Supreme Soviet. Ché Guevara and Fidel Castro were murdering lefties as well, posing as "freedom fighters", as were so many others. (Freedom from what? Freedom?)

The right wants to preserve what is good, including a cohesive society through free will, and spread wealth through capitalism, not diktat.

Cameron is a man of the left, although he can pose as being centre right because the thuggish Blair moved the goalposts even further left to make his destructive policies look "centre".

But I thank you for your post. Pax.

verity said...

Apologies for the double posting. The screen went blank. I couldn't get it to reappear. Apologies.