Micheal Cobley

Interstellar Tactics




Eastercon: Getting Psyched Up

Just to let you know that with just a coupla days till Eastercon I`m currently focussing heavily on the writing (including notes towards the project after Humanitys Fire). So there wont be a lot of blogging here until the Monday/Tuesday. But I would like to make mention of a couple of outstanding events which have surfaced from the mass-consensual news stream, 1st being the death of Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protests in London earlier a few days ago; video has surfaced, via the Guardian, showing that Tomlinson was shoved violently to the ground by a policeman a short while before he collapsed and died of a heart attack. I’ve seen the vidage and its horrible and shocking. I also saw another still of a police medic standing as part of a riot police barricade and holding a baton aloft – a medic! Suffice to say that it seems clear that London police are out of control and are starting to resemble the police in some of the less egalitarian parts of the world.

The other event concerns one Tony Blair, former prime minister of this benighted land, largely responsible for the despair and cynicism which now blight British politics, not least due to the way in which he lied relentlessly to get Britain involved in a war of aggression against the poverty-stricken, almost defenceless nation of Iraq. It appears that the Toothy One is in the running for president of the European Union – words fail me.

Be Sociable, Share!

Other Posts of Potential Interest:

  1. Hey – what's the worst that could happen?
  2. A Cage Called Gaza
  3. 42 Days (1008 Hours or 60,480 Minutes) Detention Without Charge
  4. Why We Write: Describing The World Or Changing It

4 Comments already, do join in...

  1. Qatux Says:

    April 8th, 2009 at 7:58 pm

    I remember reading about some people who were arrested because it was thought “they may be planning to disrupt the G20″ – and I thought hey-up is that a crime? Can no one protest any more? Ok, if they were planning violence against the G20 – terrorism – fair enough, expect the police to be interested – but just planning to disrupt?

    Personally I didn’t think overthrowing Sadam was too bad of an idea. It was the events afterwards that don’t seem to have been thought through.

  2. rockitboy Says:

    April 8th, 2009 at 8:05 pm

    Sure, theres always gonna be a small number of peabrains who want to noise up the plods and smash,er, summink. But Blair and now Brown have let the dogs off the leash, basically. The way the climate camp was stamped on was grotesque and anti-democratic.

    As for getting rid of Saddam – well, there were several ways it could have been done, like doing what the Americans did to keep most of the troops in their barracks, ie bribe the generals with huge wads of dosh and the promise of a sweet life off in the Bahamas or somewhere. If the aim had been to get rid of Saddam, they could have thrown enough money and some generals would have figured out how to do it. But ditching Saddam was not the aim; the aim was to keep control of Iraq and its oil, and a coup might have led to the danger of the Iraqi people being listened to rather than the oil corporations. Democratic control of Iraq’s resources by its people? Oooh, that will never do. Guess we’ll just have to smash the place up, then.

  3. Qatux Says:

    April 9th, 2009 at 3:56 pm

    I’m no apologist for ‘W’ but as i recall the Americans had been throwing money at various internal and external Iraqi dissidents for years – ever since they realised their mistake in stop stormin’ Norman 150ml from Baghdad in the first Gulf war. Trouble was they kept dying in very unpleasant ways. Recall those two ‘humiliated’ Iraqi ‘princesses’, relatives of Saddam, but they were more lucky than their husbands who were ‘executed’. Bribes only work when you’ve a chance of collecting.

    The trouble with interfering is managing the aftermath. Democracy is fine but the Shi’a are in the majority and many of them would favour cessation and a possible link with Iran. Kurds too would be happy to split off in the north. Most of the ex-Saddam military are Sunnis, stuck in the middle with little of the oil. So when the Americans go – there’s civil war with lots more (new) outside interference. And their Israeli ‘friends’ even more likely to hit Iran. Makes me wonder if anyone in power could actually organise a booze up in a brewery.

  4. rockitboy Says:

    April 9th, 2009 at 4:18 pm

    If the Yanks were putting money into dissident groups it was singularly ineffective, unlike when they bribed the generals before the invasion. Also, theres no doubt that the 11 years of sanctions decimated the Iraqi middle class, which is where any real muscle for a coup would have come from.

    Anyway, the trouble with interefering is the ghastly bodycount if you go in full bore. Blair and Bush must have know what the consequences of unleashing military machines on Iraqi cities would have been – tens of thousands of innocent deaths. The notion that any aftermath can be managed or reconstruction carried out by the same people who inflicted such vile horror on defenceless civilians is an abominable one. Yeah, we kicked in your front door, shot your dog, your wife and your youngest daughter, and wrecked your electricity and water while we did it, but now we`re going to take up residence in your house while we rebuild it. Well, first we`ll build this really cool annexe with all mod cons for us to live in. Then we`ll get round to fixing your stuff. In the meantime, have a burger and a Simpsons DVD.

Feel free to join (or start!) the conversation:

Please be aware: the first time you leave a comment it will be checked and has to be approved before it appears live on the site (so there may be a short delay while we put the kettle on...)

Spam protection: What's the sum of 11 + 13 ?