Anti-war, pro-human rights

Twilights about to post here declaiming Outrage PR like this as part of a wider officially sanctioned campaign preparing us for war with Iran. Although I admit the anti-occupation, anti-Iranian statement is an improvement, I still think there is some proof of the conspiracy theory.

The fact Outrage are attacking Iranian treatment of homosexuals as abhorrent is only credible if they had given equal prominence to similar treatment of homosexuals by Saudi Arabia. In fact, for transexuals Iran is the most tolerant place outside of Castro Market, SF, and Saudi Arabia is not.

Without such balance it is easy to see this as the hypocritical treatment of 'friendly nations' and 'unfriendly nations' typical of propaganda, and suspicion may even be drawn from Tatchells previous strong stance against another 'unfriendly nation', Zimbabwe, as opposed to other equally gay-intolerant 'friendly nations'. Tatchell could well have pursued the exact same strategies if he was a minister in the Blair government without risking his job.

When Tatchell stood as a prospective Labour MP, this was not an accident or aberration on behalf of the local Labour part, as described in the press at the time. This was part of a long term strategy by a widespread, and loosely connected group of individuals, in anticipation of the times in which we now live.

Hitler's mates were a bunch of oddballs to say the least, each with their own interests and agendas. However, long before ANYONE even dreamt of the effect Hitler would have on the course of Human history, each of these individual points of energy were playing key roles in ensuring that Hitler would be in a position to see through each and every one of his ambitions.

Every time I, or people like me, post a response to Tatchell's BLACK PROPAGANDA, Tatchell has the post analysed by his psy-op team in one of Blair's agencies, so that the next foul tirade that he and his team publish can be evolved to take account of expected counter-propaganda attacks.

Joseph Goebbels is famous as THE nazi propaganda master, NOT because he was the only important propagandist working for Hitler, BUT because he was intelligent enough to ALWAYS examine the words of the enemies of the nazis, so that he could refine his evil messages in ever more sophisticated ways. Goebbels was NOT trying to convince the INTELLIGENT enemies of Hitler, instead his words were designed to have maximum impact on that great bulk of humanity that, unknowingly for the most part, are ALWAYS under the influence of control propaganda from whoever happens to be their DIRECT masters at any given time.

If you have been bought up with the EVIL idea that monarchy and empire are a good idea, you are already conditioned to swallow any idiotic message, for example.

Using statistical methods similar to those that correctly calculated the levels of mass murder in conflicts like the Vietnam War (at the time, the US government lied massively about both the scale of US and Vietnam casualties), we know that Blair has EXTERMINATED close to 500,000 humans in Iraq (this figure, using the legal concept of DIRECT RESPONSIBILTY through illegal criminal action, includes all those people that WOULD NOT HAVE DIED if Blair's supreme WARCRIME, aggressive war against Iraq, had not taken place).

Now, Tatchell's people frequently claim that one-in-ten of all humans are gay. This means that Blair has EXTERMINATED FIFTY-THOUSAND HOMOSEXUAL HUMANS.

We all know that Blair is on the verge of war with Iran. Unlike Iraq, there is no fig-leaf for this action, and, unlike Iraq, Iran has not been earlier softened up by genocidal sanctions. The sanctions war against Iraq was maintained because Saddam could not PROVE A NEGATIVE, namely that he no longer had certain weapons, or certain physical weapons programs. Proving a negative is IMPOSSIBLE when the other side is not really motivated by the concerns they PUBLICLY talk about. For instance, we now know that Saddam's regime showed (to the total satisfaction of any reasonable person) that they had fully complied with all UN demands a few years after the so-called First Gulf-War. We also know that the UK and Israel were used to fake evidence across the sanctions years to falsely show that Iraq had NOT complied, and that this fake evidence was used by the US to "persuade" other nations to maintain sanctions against Iraq indefinitely.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE MAIN JUSTIFICATION FOR BLAIR'S WAR WITH IRAQ WAS (as pushed endlessly in all the pseudo-liberal publications like The Guardian)? It was that since Saddam would never comply with the UN requirements (a TOTAL lie), an invasion was essential, otherwise the Iraqi people would suffer under sanctions forever.

HITLER KNEW THAT ***ANYTHING*** BAD THAT WAS SAID ABOUT JEWS, JEWISH LEADERSHIP, JEWISH CULTS, JEWISH HISTORY, OR JEWISH INDIVIDUALS, NO MATTER HOW TRUE OR FALSE, WOULD DIRECTLY SERVE HIS INTENTION TO WAGE HORRIBLE WAR AGAINST ***ALL*** JEWS.

As such, Hitler was aware that regardless of the details of such propaganda, all the masses would hear was "jews are bad", "jews are stupid" etc. Of course, all the time, the German people considered themselves a damned sight more liberal than even the population of the UK or the US today (an amazing fact, but true).

Blair's coming war with Iran will GENOCIDE millions in its early phase. ANYTHING the Iranians do in response to Blair's initial strike will be used as an excuse to ramp up the war to levels vastly beyond anything seen in WW2. The moment Iran is attacked, we will be told that we will FOREVER be in danger of revenge attacks from muslims, unless we take them all out. Initially it won't be phrased like this. Instead, we will be told that our safety requires that muslims are led ONLY by people we directly approve of, so that we KNOW their leaders are planning nothing against us. MORE PROVING A NEGATIVE.

Hitler had plenty of operations like OUTRAGE laying the grounds for his future crimes. Today, a careful focus is placed on Hitler's extreme racist (and totally ineffective) propaganda. Hitler's REAL propaganda successes with his own population were achieved with forms of clever disguised propaganda that are rarely discussed, because these methods are in widespread use today by Blair, and the Mass Media that he controls.

I want you to try a mind experiment. It is 1940, and you are an intelligent, left-wing gay Brit in nazi Germany. You are there to single-mindedly spread one message. With stories about the horrific mistreatment of gay men in the UK, you demand the people of nazi Germany learn all they can about the actions of the UK government and clergy against homosexuals, and do EVERYTHING they can to bring about the downfall of such people. You appear on nazi Radio, in nazi newspapers, and distribute leaflets. Each time, to cover yourself, you spend a few seconds saying things like "I oppose War with Poland" (NEVER HITLER'S CRIMINAL WAR AGAINST POLAND), and "I oppose any attack on the UK" (NEVER HITLER'S IMMINENT ATTACK AGAINST THE UK). Then, at great length, you go on to give the people of Germany a vast list of crimes carried out by the UK regime, and make it CLEAR that they should make your claims their highest priority.

DO YOU THINK SUCH AN INDIVIDUAL WOULD HAVE BEEN REGARDED AS A GREAT ASSET BY HITLER? It's a stupid question, isn't it. Hitler made great use of many such people.

I will remind you all again that Tatchell is now a member of the UK Green Party. The Green Party is, of course, a German movement that has its beginnings in the many embryo nazi philosophies (all those films of lightly dressed young German men and women exercising in the great outdoors as a vision of human perfection) that promoted an idyllic fantasy. Today, the German Green Party has demanded the BANNING of the Turkish movie "The Valley of the Wolves", a fictional action movie telling the story of US atrocities in Iraq (based on fact), and showing the defeat of US terrorists by Turkish special forces.

It is no co-incidence that Tatchell joins the 'Greens' at the self-same moment in history when one can point to official Green Party racist attacks against muslims.

Blair requires that his agents provide for a FULL SPECTRUM ATTACK against muslims. Thus a young person joins the UK Green Party (perhaps a gay guy inspired by Tatchell). That person notices that the German Green party is the most successful. As a result, that person learns of the German Green Party demand to ban the Turkish movie, and is thus conditioned by his party of choice to back US atrocities in Iraq. It seems silly when described this simply, but these are the pathways created by sophisticated psy-ops (psychological operations).

By the way, I find it very hard to accept the comment titled "Intercepting Twilight" at face value. For me, this comment is nothing more than another refinement of the Black Propaganda methods of Blair's people, and I consider it as a clever continuation of the message contained within the OUTRAGE article. More psy-ops is done within the comment forums on the internet (usually for more innocent PR purposes, like promoting video games or films) than within main articles.

To conclude- ANY VERBAL OR WRITTEN ATTACK ON ANY ASPECT OF IRAN AT THIS TIME IS DESIGNED TO FACILITATE AN IMMEDIATE AND GENOCIDAL WAR UPON THAT NATION. It is not possible therefore to express any minor concern about Human Rights within Iran without becoming DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for the worst possible CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY that Blair's war will involve. The logic of this situation is to work in all ways possible to defeat and punish Blair and all his agents, so that you are free once again to safely consider rights issues within Iran and all other nations currently targetted for extermination by Blair. When the Germans had fallen under the spell of Hitler, they had ONLY ONE IMMEDIATE DUTY, and that was to correct the World threatening evil within their own nation. We are in the self-same situation.

Juan Cole has an important analysis of Sistani's statement on his blog:

 http://juancole.com/2006/03/sistani-on-homosexuality-andrew.html

'Let me begin by saying that the charge leveled by some, and mentioned at Pandagon, that Sistani has called for the killing of Sunnis, is completely untrue. The implication given by exiled gay Iraqi, Ali Hili, of the London-based gay human rights group OutRage, that Sistani has called for vigilante killings of gays, is untrue, though it is accurate that Sistani advises that the state make homosexual activity a capital crime; it is also accurate to call this "sick."'


queer against borders

what will you do when you see gay activists marching against the war on iran? will two forces brew within twilight? you are a fool, and worse than that, a fool who opposes criticism of a foul regime. guess who said this -

"Under this regime, laughter, happiness and love are a crime and sexual discrimination, flogging and executions are the norm. The regime imprisons, tortures and executes people for their beliefs. It executes children and teenagers. It stones women and men to death and hangs gays for consensual sex. Under this regime, workers are denied the right to organise and strike; labour activists are routinely beaten up and imprisoned. There is no freedom of expression and opposition political activity is banned. Women are treated as second-class citizens and sexual apartheid rules. Young people are denied the prospect of any meaningful life; their protests for rights and freedoms are violently suppressed. The list is endless."

More BLACK PROPAGANDA?

No, it's that well known neo-con fascist, HITLER, Siamak Amjadi, Secretary of the International Federation of Iranian Refugees (UK)

Get off your hobby horse and onto a pike.

Here is Peter Tatchells break with the peace-movement where he called for the invasion of Iraq.  http://www.petertatchell.net/international/antiwar.htm
He justifies this due to the extension of the death penalty to sentencing for homosexuality in 2001. He fails to point to a single case where a homosexual was killed in Iraq for his sexuality, yet he has condemned over a 100,000 Iraqis to death. That's about 16,000 gay Iraqis Peter Tatchell has helped murder - thats hardly gay friendly is it ?.

So Outrage can go to hell until they out Peter Tatchell as a war-monger, or else they should rename themselves 'NuLab Gays for Genocide', that's all they are.

For some reason I wanted you to be right, but you are not...

"I agree with my fellow protesters. A war on Iraq smacks of neo-imperialism. It has little to do with fighting terrorism or destroying weapons of mass destruction. The US wants to grab access to Saddam's huge oil reserves, and create a pro-western client state in the Middle East."

"The issue is not whether there should be regime change, but how. There is a credible alternative to a western-engineered invasion. It is an uprising by the Iraqi people: a Vietnamese-style guerrilla war in tandem with a 'people power' campaign of civilian resistance, like they had in Czechoslovakia and the Philippines in the 1980s. This is what the anti-war movement should be supporting loud and clear."

"This aid should include simple, effective things like funding pirate TV and radio stations to break Saddam’s censorship of the media and give the Iraqi opposition a means to mobilise resistance inside the country. A campaign of civilian resistance could include tactics like workplace go-slows, mass sick leaves, industrial and military sabotage, and rent and tax refusals."

"Regime change must come from within. It cannot be imposed. A change of regime must lead to a democratic state, and not to a new form of autocratic rule - by a US military governor. Democracy is the key to human rights and to regional peace and stability. It could also be infectious."

so, try again Twilight,, ooops, I mean BigGayAli

Oops. My last comment was a bollocks hissy-fit, as anyone who read the link can see it disproves everything I said. And Tatchell is now a green having left the party in support of Ken Livingstone only to be later criticised by Ken for being Islamophobic. My bad.

My first point about Outrage only highlighting abuses in Zimbabwe and Iran ( and previously Iraq ) while ignoring 'friendly' nations that are just as homophobic still holds true just as this map partly proves.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_laws_of_the_world

'I want you to try a mind experiment. It is 1940, and you are an intelligent, left-wing gay Brit in nazi Germany...etc....do you think such an individual would have been regarded as a great asset by Hitler?'

Quite frankly, no! If you were openly gay in Nazi Germany, you would have disappeared without trace in no time at all, so I cannot see that your example has any credibility whatsover as a comparison between Peter Tatchell and his alleged relationship with the British State. As for your comment about Hitler/Goebbels spreading all sorts of rumours about the Jews 'no matter how true or false'. Try re-reading some of your own posts sometime.

“America under the Bush's is a place of terror and fear. We back American calls for regime change from within. The liberation of the USA must be by and for the people of the USA” said Mr Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.

Juan Cole is lying. The press release by Outrage's Ali Hilli is here:

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/03/335840.html

Nowhere does it say that Sistani has called for "vigilante killings", and there is absolutely nothing referring to the killing of Sunnis.

The essence of what Mr Hilli is saying is that Sistani's fatwa, which Jaun Cole verifies as accurate, gives theological justification to those groups who target gays and that if Sistani's faction gained power they would execute gays - which Cole also admits is true.

Even more lies - some people should be ashamed.

BigGayAli claims:
"Here is Peter Tatchells break with the peace-movement where he called for the invasion of Iraq. "

Not only does he lie, but he provides the link to expose his lie. Follow the link he provides and the very first line by Tatchell says:

"I share its opposition to an invasion of Iraq"

Tatchell goes on to say that invasion isn't the answer:

"The issue is not whether there should be regime change, but how. There is a credible alternative to a western-engineered invasion. It is an uprising by the Iraqi people"

He then warns:

"a western invasion might strengthen Saddam’s standing"

He then declares:

"Regime change must come from within. It cannot be imposed."

How the fuck is this "calling for the invasion of Iraq" you lying scum!?

BGA/Twilight's idea that Outrage have never protested agianst Saudi Arabia would be "interesting" if it were true. But of course it isn't.

 http://bent.com/index.php?output_article_int_54d4cded49950458710ca4ba404f2900=6&area=news&cat=13&tier=1&article=724

If you think that Americans face under Bush anything remotely comparible to what Iranian's face under their regime, you are seriously deluded.

>How the fuck is this "calling for the invasion of Iraq" you lying scum!?

It isn't, and I did immediately retract what I'd said. I was tired and I'd been reading lots of contradictory stuff about Tatchell, and I posted too quickly after spotting his calls for 'regime change'. Then I noticed that one of the sites I'd been reading was actually a far-right website pretending to be liberal, then I reread my post and I retracted what I'd said. All in 5 minutes. If I could have deleted that post I would have, it was well past my bedtime and I did groan when I'd read what I'd posted. So whether I'm scum or not, it wasn't a lie, simply a mistake. And my admission of error was there for you to read before you called me lying scum.

Tatchell and Outrage have done a lot of good brave work in the past. To the general British public though, they are known for only two international issues, their attacks on Zimbabwe's treatment of gays, and their attack on Iran and Iraq's treatment of gays. In the case of Iraq, it was due to the implementation of a death penalty that seems unfortunately more common than most people would think, certainly not limited to Iraq which to the best of my knowledge never actually implemented it. That was part of Saddam's attempt to appeal to the Islamists he'd previously scorned, just when he added a religious slogan to the flag of Iraq. Whereas the same unjust law had already killed hundreds in 'friendly' regimes without Tatchell generating a tenth of the column inches or news bites. (If you doubt Iraq's comparatively tolerant attitude to gays in that region then ask Salman Pax, I'm no Iraqi.)

These are indeed worthy campaigning points. They are however unbalanced, given that Zimbabwe isn't the worst country in Africa, and given Iran is no worse than Saudi Arabia and in some respects better.
Certainly, Tatchell and Outrage have attacked Blair's friends Saudi Arabia, and some of Blair's other friends in Africa, but they do get get reported as such nor as much, which certainly is at least partly the medias deliberate fault. However Tatchells complaints against friendly states have simply not been made in the same depth or the same degree, even a cursory glance at Google reveals that both for actions and for statements, but if you insist I could could a statistical comparison to prove this point, it would take me about some time and I won't if your response isn't more rational.

Tatchell/Outrage was - and is - unbalanced in foreign affairs towards a position that agrees with our governments politics. That's the point of the propaganda model. It isn't that western press didn't report on the genocide in East Timor at all simply because a client state was doing the genocide, compared to Cambodia, it was that the enemies of our state were condemned more loudly and more often. It's bias useful to 'our' state, and it is universal to all propaganda. That's why the Guardian is as evil as The Times – because they represent the two limits of permissible argument, two sides of the same counterfeit coin.

Zimbabwe wasn't singled out for special Outrage! until Blair declared war on Zimbabwe over the veterans occupation of white-owned farms.
Iraq wasn't singled out for special Outrage! until Blair had already promised to Bush he'd back the unjustified invasion there.
Now Iran is being singled out for special Outrage !

I think Ken Livingstone is right to call Tatchell islamophobic, because it is a fact and a justifiable fact given that current Islam is homophobic, much like Christianity was until recently. I'm not suspicious of Tatchell for that. I am suspicious that I - and most people I know - only associate homophobia abroad with Blair's most recent enemies thanks to a previous Labour party member. Now he's a Green – big deal, it's the same difference, he still wants to be sitting in Westminster encouraging violent regime change abroad. He is an activist in the mould of Peter Hain.