Global anti-war demonstrations March 18th and March 19th 2006

On March 16, 1988, an estimated 5,000 civilians were killed and 10,000 injured when Iraqi air forces bombarded Halabja with mustard and other poison gases. Many years after the massacre, the people of Halabja still suffer from very high rates of serious diseases such as cancer, neurological disorders, birth defects and miscarriages.

Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons attack on Halabja was not an isolated incident. It was part of a systematic campaign ordered by Saddam Hussein and led by his lieutenant, Ali Hassan al-Majid, the infamous "Chemical Ali," against Iraqi Kurdish civilians. International observers estimate Iraqi forces killed 50,000 to 100,000 people during the 1988 campaign known as "Anfal" which means "the spoils." Further, the Iraqi regime also killed thousands of Iranians with chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq War from 1983 to 1988.

Was the Iraq war of 2003 an unjust war? I certainly don't think so.

Dear "Friend",

Firstly, i agree fully with your assesment of saddam and the horrors that he caused the peoples of Iraq on numerous occasions.

however, recognising one evil does not mean that we support another in the form of the US and British attack upon Iraq for which ordinary citizens suffer the most pain.

i am sure that you are aware that when saddam was carrying out his atrocities against the Kurds he was considered a friend of the US and received substantial funds from them. Hardly the action of a country whose only intention is liberation i am sure you will agree?

i am also sure that you are aware that the US gave Saddam permission to put down rebellions that arose after the end of the 1st gulf war? Hardly the actions of a naiton that supports peoples liberation?

Your crude "your either with us or against us" arguement simply doesn't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

If you are concerned with the welfare of the people of Iraq then you, as we all should, should oppose any form of oppression that they face - not just the ones that suit our ideological stance.

"If you are concerned with the welfare of the people of Iraq then you, as we all should, should oppose any form of oppression that they face - not just the ones that suit our ideological stance."

Including those that suit the ideological stance of the SWP/R*****T, who are more than happy to let that homophobic dickwad MCB leader Sacranie (who was deeply involved in demonstrations calling for the death of Salman Rushdie back in 1989), and also allow platforms for Muslim Association of Britian spokesman Dr Azzam Tamimi, who glorifies martrydom (read: suicide bombing) in the name of "...for the sake of defending your homeland, for the sake of defending your community". And no, I am not a Zionist, but IMO the value of an Israeli life is equal to that of a Palestinian life is equal to any human life. Also it's well documented that George Galloway is a grade A fuckwit.

As much as I hate the war on terror and condemn any attack on the Iranian people (note I say PEOPLE, as opposed to government), I don't know if I can bring myself to attend a march organised by the SWP in all but name. Especially since I have been on at least four such marches though london (plus another two in Manchester) in the past, and just seen the war machine carry on regardless, and no I don't want to just "do nothing", just not do that, even if I don't really know what I want to do.

Reclaiming the “Orange Revolution”
by Jordan Thornton
www.dissidentvoice.org
September 18, 2005

Send this page to a friend! (click here)






Cindy Sheehan's courageous actions in Texas have captured the imaginations of an American public desperate for an end to this madness. We must give them something they can get behind, while the Bush/PNAC Regime is vulnerable, and before the next big Distraction we all sense is imminent. Let's send an unmistakable message of unity and determination to the world, and end this now before things get any worse.

Since the demonstrations which reversed the electoral decision in the Ukraine, I've heard and seen many Ukrainians talking about large groups of foreigners who were pivotal to their planning. Many of these groups were the ones responsible for paying for the food, shelter, and orange banners used by the protestors. I didn't think much of this, or the accusations of funding from agencies such as the CIA, until I saw the same thing occurring in Lebanon.

Then, a reporter for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Carol Off, did a piece explaining that the "spontaneous, grassroots" protests in the Ukraine were the result of CIA funding and planning over a period of ten years.

Sadly, the report lauded these tactics of Regime Change, but nonetheless, proved my point.

One thing I've noticed is the tightly-controlled Western media's willingness to ignore the unsubstantiated allegations made in Syria and Lebanon that the Central Intelligence Agency, or Israel's Mossad, or both, were responsible for actions like the assassination of Rafiq Hariri, and behind the recent Opposition Movements, while at the same time, parroting over and over the same unsubstantiated claims about Syria, emanating from the White House den of LIARS and thieves. Even media outlets which I consider better than the rest, like the CBC, are guilty of such irresponsibility. When pro-Syrian demonstrators turned out in the hundreds of thousands, proving the anti-Syrians to be the minority voice, the media downplayed these numbers.

Just feels a bit too staged for my taste ... What I find the most irresponsible about all of this is the fact that whoever is behind this, they are attempting (and succeeding) to divide the Lebanese People, and cause conflict both within the country, and towards Syria. This, of course, aids the Israelis and PNAC Americans, who both have an interest, and want to invade and occupy Syria (and perhaps Lebanon as well), as called for repeatedly by the agenda which has seen Bush/PNAC illegally invade two Arab nations already.

The CBC chose Janice Stein, a Zionist "Middle East Expert" to comment on the situation, and she said when she saw the demonstrations she "saw the colour orange". This was after the first anti-Syrian demo, when the colour scheme wasn't so pronounced. Since then, orange flags, placards, etc. have started “spontaneously" appearing in great numbers.

When I was in university, my Design professor brought in some Colour Researchers from the University of Edmonton, who lectured on the psychological, but also the PHYSICAL effects, colours have on the human body and mind. This red-orange colour is one of the "comfort colours", and you will no doubt remember seeing it in countless commercials (ING Direct, and the creepy, stereotypical European banker, anyone ...?).

Since the CIA, or some similar agency, is ultimately behind these carefully stage-managed displays, you know they understand what they're doing. I believe that we should be taking a cue from them, and striking while the iron is hot. This orange color scheme has been carefully crafted in order to transmit "armchair understanding" of these two manufactured crises, and make them appear to be popular uprisings.

Even though it was our Enemy putting it out there, for their own purposes, we should seize the opportunity to claim it for ourselves, since this IS a popular uprising, for the betterment of the world. After all, we have been granted an unprecedented peek inside the CIA's Handbook for Non-Violent Revolutionary Change, and you know damn well that they have studied all of the relevant psychological factors. We should not squander the opportunity we've been provided, and act while the soft underbellies of these monsters is exposed.

If you are to protest, from now on, DRESS IN ORANGE, and CARRY SIGNS OF ORANGE, rally at the feet of power, and the media, DEMANDING that the democratic Will of the People not be ignored. I guarantee this will send an instant message, not only to the Bush/PNAC/Bliar Regime, but to all Americans and to the world that sees it.

Keep your signs easy to read and understand, things such as "FIRE THE LIARS", "INVESTIGATE, IMPEACH, PROSECUTE" and at media centers, "LIARS", or "TRAITORS", or "COWARDS".

Groups should design some Talking Points, and designate members to speak with the reporters on-scene. In larger centers, you should inform the media of what's going to happen, and call the station’s News Director or Assignment Editor, and request to be interviewed. You could even take it further, and offer your services as an Activist Analyst for the day, just like they use ex-military personnel, and members of Right-Wing "Think-Tanks" to undermine our work. If they refuse, acknowledge their hypocrisy, stage a noisy rally at their front doors, contact their competitors, and when they arrive (and they will), talk to them.

Let's test these LIARS and War Criminals, and their media puppets, and see just how much they truly respect "Freedom & Democracy", the words upon which they attempt to justify the atrocities upon which they've built their fortunes.

Regardless of what happens, the message will be sent. We have nothing to lose. If something comes of this, then great. Follow up and celebrate. If the rallies are ignored, or treated by the police as those in the past, then you've just PROVEN these men to be the Hypocrites we all know them to be ... and this message will be transmitted in no uncertain terms around the world.

I'd like to see as many people as can not simply Rally for a few hours but for DAYS. Those who cannot make it there, plan and hold your own local rallies, and not only gather where your Government officials meet, but also where the media does its business.

Let's take this thing that was designed to dupe people into supporting what the Fascists in DC want, and turn it on its head. Let's use it as a tool for bringing that Fascism to its knees, and demonstrate the good intentions that were to be assumed about the "Orange Revolutionaries".

Remember, that we are the Majority, and Truth is our greatest Ally.

The only way we can fail, is if we fail to ACT.

P E A C E . . . ?

Jordan Thornton is an independent journalist, political activist, and screenwriter, who spent the past decade within the mainstream media, both in Canada and the United States. He can be contacted at pilgrim112 at hotmail.com

 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Thornton0918.htm

Quite agree with the Kurd writer, Saddam was a major league murderer and sunofabitch. Also agreed that US has only intervened due to regional control of oil and corporate profits; other major dictator maniacs like Mugabe are fine as they have no oil. But Stop the War is a very, very confused organisation. On the one hand they toady to Muslim fundamentalists, who have no interest whatever in democracy or rights, but are hell- bent on creating a Shariah state with every kind of repression, which if it came to pass on a major scale would take the world backwards about 700 years. German and Galloway seem to be entirely consumed by their love of these religious nutters who would happily consign them to the gallows once in power. And this is from people who are previously from a socialist and atheist tradition. Anything to get at the US! But so misled. At the end of it we have a wierd and chilling alliance of anti-semites, US-haters, Muslim fanatics and SWP-has-beens, clamouring for what - withdrawal and disengagement from the Middle East. Which would result in what exactly? Presumably a victory for Iran, the destruction of Israel (I can hear the cheers from the secretly or not so secretly Jew-hating British far left faxcists!) and then - fantastic - a genuine Muslim bomb!

All sad symptoms I fear of the decline of the West and a particular variation of deranged politics in the post coldwar world.

What we really need is a full UN engagement to the problems of the Middle East and a withdrawal from oil addiction, both of which are very difficult but which are in no way assisted by mindless SWP-backed Muslim demonstrations.

The previous post raises some provocative issues: does the stop the war coalition seek a return to Muslim fundamentalism - and if so, what does that mean for human rights (and especially, for the rights of women and gay/lesbians, and dissenters, &Co) - and what of the anti-Israel factions within the STW group? To what extent do genuine anti-war sentiments get hijacked for other purposes, and how is it possible when protesting on a mass scale to tease out these nuances of complexity, and to respond appropriately.
As one of the London marches yesterday I was aware of how many issues were being drawn into the march, and the socialist party (and all of its affiliates) were out in force, producing placards and banners in great profusion, many of which depicted Bush and Blair as terrorists. The speeches afterwards were pretty good generally, but again different people had their own agendas, as is to be expected. But, the complexities of the issues were not really addressed. On the one hand, a withdrawal from Iraq at present would probably not be the best thing for the Iraqis. We have created such a bleeding mess over there that if we were to pull out now, the fragility of the structures that do exist are likely to just collapse. It would make more sense to begin the US/UK withdrawal while replacing the troops with genuine peace-keepers from the UN, but I haven't seen, nor did I hear yesterday, for any calls for such a strategy to be developed. Then, what does one do with Iran. To be fair, one speaker (the deputy of the Liberty group) did address the old school fundamentalism in Iran (for example, how marches joining in solidarity for International Women's Day were arrested and suppressed) and how a real democracy needs to be built up there, but there are few plans that detail how to go about achieving that. I suppose that we must also ask ourselves how we in the US/UK, with our crippled models of democracy can try to develop democracy elsewhere, especially given how the UK/US vilifies more genuine models of democracy such as those in Venezuela with Chavez, for instance. Perhaps Venezuela should be the architect of democracy in foreign countries, rather than the US/UK which (a) have such an atrocious track-record over the years for dirty deals and geo-political one-upmanship; and (b) have a seriously skewed domestic model of democracy which is based on capital and (mediatised) influence, rather than on genuine community leadership. One must also pose the question however about whether or not there is a basic contradiction - even hypocrisy - in attempting to force western style democracies on non-western countries, just because we think it is right for those countries to be democratic.
A further thread of complexity arises when we unravel the notion of nuclear power in the Middle East: is it fair for Israel to have some 200 nuclear warheads while the US/UK turn a blind eye to both the Israeli proliferation of nukes and their brutal treatment of Palestine, and to simultaneously condemn Iran for developing civil nuclear power, which is irreconciably interwoven with nuclear armament development, on the basis that Iran might develop a bomb and become a major threat in the region and ultimately, globally? To whom might a nuclear Iran pose a threat? Presumably to Israel and western interests in the region. Is Iran likely to become a global threat? Only to the extent that Iran follows Islamic expansionist policies, I suppose. Would the west (and the world) approach these issues differently if we didn't have such a reliance on an oil-based economy? If so, would it not change the entire thrust of western foreign policies if we invested what we currently invest in armaments in renewable energy sources, building small-scale fuel producing systems, and greater efficiency measures to be deployed across every home and industry in the UK and the US. Would we find our foreign policies would themselves change because our values have changed and we no longer need to guard the precious resources that drive our economies that are located in far-flung regions of the globe?
There are further threads to unravel in this complex ball of twine which binds us. The question remains however: how do we communicate and tackle such complexity in demonstrations and the sound-byte media culture? Do we not smooth over the cracks by saying stop the war, when Islamic fundamentalism (just as dangerous as Christian fundamentalism) is the sole contender for an alternative in the Middle East?