|
Chronicle
Friday, 07/02/03
Foundation Meeting, Ocean Road Community Centre, South Shields.
Saturday, 15/02/03
London March and Rally
Saturday, 01/03/03
Public Forum and Stall, Hebburn Shopping Centre
Prayers of the People for Justice and Peace, prayer vigil organized South Tyneside Churches Together, All Saints, Cleadon.
Saturday, 09/08/03
Nagasaki Day, Vigil, Public Forum and Stall, South Shields town centre. Lauch of pamphlet ‘Silence is Shame’. Distribution of Open Letter to David Milband M.P. - and postcard.
+
Who We Are And What We Stand For
The South Tyneside Stop The War Coalition is a local group of people with diverse political, religious and cultural views.
It was founded by a group of concerned South Tynesiders shortly before the U.S. led invasion of Iraq in March.
We now believe that being against a prolonged U.S./U.K. occupation of Iraq is not enough - we should have a positive vision of how to build a better world without war.
We are not a political party with a fixed set of ideas that all supporters are expected to sign up to - indeed, we celebrate diversity and open debate, believing them key to a more prosperous and peaceful world.
Although U.S. President George Bush has announced the end of military action, Iraq is still an occupied country in a state of disorder - and the world is still in a state of uncertainty as to whether further military action will happen elsewhere as part of the war on terror.
South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition believes that the control of world events should not be left to the decisions of President Bush, Tony Blair and a few other powerful and rich people.
Millions of British people - including many who eventually decided to support the war - were deeply troubled by the idea of Britain being involved in a military invasion of another country, against normal United Nations conventions, and according to a plan mostly devised by a right-wing American government but with the British government playing a major part.
More than a thousand people from South Tyneside signed our petitions against the war, and dozens took part in public meetings, demonstrations, peace vigils and other actions, locally and nationally.
During our campaigning, we also found many examples of people in the borough taking independent anti-war actions - including putting banners on their houses, taking part in prayer vigils, as well as lobbying politicians via telephone, mail, email, text messages and other forms of communication.
Large numbers of people still believe that the war was unjustified, illegal by the normal standards of international law, and likely to make the world a more dangerous place over the medium, and long terms.
Many believe that terrorist attacks are likely to increase in number and severity in future as a consequence of the war.
The South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition has more than a dozen active supporters - and more than one hundred people have indicated that they want to continue to help our work in various ways.
A major focus of our present campaigning is against the war-mongering right-wing zealots at the heart of the present American government and the support they receive from the British government.
However, the anti-war movement is not anti-American, on the contrary, it supports the rich diversity of the American People and that their culture, which we believe is better represented in our counterpart anti-war groups in the USA than in the present American government.
South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition has a local-based, do-it-yourself approach to campaigning and the primary question we ask is: How can people acting on a relatively small-scale, locally, influence wider events nationally and internationally?
We also affirm that: Another world is possible! We must create it!
+
Home Truths
South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition has a DIY approach to campaigning.
Hilary is not the wife of a former U.S. president, so she cannot earn millions from her family life-story nor tout it around t.v. and radio studios and press sessions. She told it in the best way she could: by displaying a home-made anti-war banner on her South Shields home. Hilary explained: her husband Fred died aged 37 in 1980; his father Fred was injured in WWII and invalided out of the Royal Navy aged 31 in 1943; his father Fred was killed at Gallipoli aged 47 in 1916; his father Harry died in an Afghan war aged 40 in 1879; his father Fred died in an Indian war aged 52 in 1857. She said: ‘It is a very personal protest, which may seem selfish, but I know how war affects families.’
[July 2003]
+
Reflection And Outrage
Looking back over the past few months and seeing what half truths, exaggerations, falsehoods and red herrings which have been thrown to the British public concerning the appalling Iraq war, continues to fill me with rage.
Before the invasion millions of British people were opposed to the invasion of Iraq for many reasons, some on moral grounds or religious grounds and some because the facts did not add up and they could see through the veil of deception.
My own reasons were that I do not believe in war and that no man has the right to kill another man, and because I oppose this war my integrity has been questioned and it has even been suggested that my allegiance lies with Saddam
My own views were strengthened by reading a report by Operation Desert Rescue stating that 42% of the population in Iraq were under 15 years of age, so I ask the question, ‘how can any civilized person relinquish their responsibility for these children? Who can ever forget the horrifying photograph of 13 year old Ali Abbas with his arms blown off or Ahmed Mohammed Hamza who lost his left leg below the knee and lost his right hand, apart from physical pain these and many other children have had to endure we cannot imagine what mental scar’s these children will carry throughout their lives. We have all seen the harrowing pictures of parents carrying their dead or badly burnt children………and for what? To get rid of Weapons of mass destruction?….. To liberate the Iraq people?…… or for Oil?
It appears that both the UK and US know no bounds in bad taste when it comes to trying to justify or sell the war to the general public or give it the feel good factor. Who could devise a PR stunt like putting the ‘bad guys’ onto a pack of playing cards thus liking the whole scenario to a cheap sideshow conjuring trick, or the stage managed ‘rescue’ of Jessica Lynch and the ‘dodgy’ or ‘sexed up’ dossiers.
Bush and Blair went ahead with the invasion of Iraq in defiance of Global opinion. When the war had begun I protested alongside my friends and comrades and like-minded people and we watched many people pass us by, some tooted their car horns in support of us, many ignored us and as we left our protest I was outraged because everyone was not outraged.
As time passes more grotesque facts come to light ……the use of Napalm, unexploded bomblets from cluster bombs in inhabited areas.
Does anyone really believe that the world is a safer place and will history judge Tony Blair right, as he believes he is, the questions are endless?
With all its shams, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world ...
[Alan Trotter, August 2003].
+
Better Informing The BBC
[Emails sent to BBC Radio 4 News by South Tyneside Stop The War Coalition supporter John Tinmouth. Readers will note that John suggested that Alistair Campbell’s ‘days were numbered’ 14 days before Tony Blair’s chief spin doctor actually fell from power. The BBC failed to mention this.]
Trust in the Government
An earlier contributor to your programme indicated that personal changes at Number 10 were necessary to inaugurate a new era of honesty in government, and restore public trust.
Personnel changes are certainly necessary a clean sweep in fact, and they must include Tony Blair. After all, Campbell is only the puppet, not the puppet-master, only the monkey, not the organ-grinder. Blair, the organ-grinder, will never regain public trust because, with Mandelson, he set the whole thing up years ago he, too, must go.
John Tinmouth, South Shields.
[John adds: Sent to PM Programme on Thursday 21st August 2003. They actually broadcast it my second fifteen minutes of fame. Pity they hadn’t done “Campbell, Orwell and The dossier” which I sent last week it was much better.]
Campbell, Orwell, And The Dossier
What happens to you if your life is dedicated to being economical with the truth, or telling downright lies (and misnaming this as spin), whenever the actual truth is politically inconvenient? Answer: the truth becomes a stranger to you, so much so that you forget its vital importance in supporting the trust without which our society and politics cannot function healthily. In the world of political spin, it becomes more important to further you political aims by disregarding it, and turning to spin. Ask Campbell: in his own parlance, he would probably say, “we don’t do truth”.
This is why Campbell can say that he had, quote “no input, output, or influence” in the rewriting of the notorious dossier, despite the fact that, in correspondence between himself and the chairman of the Joint Intelligence committee, Sir John Scarlett, he suggested fifteen amendments, most of which were adopted in the final version. To those of us who still believe that words mean what they say, he had in fact both input, output, and influence influence through tremendous political pressure. However, in Campbell’s nightmare Orwellian world, these constraints don’t apply words don’t have to mean what they say, truth is lies and vice versa, and we are in the terrifying world of 1984.
I have a question for Campbell if spin is a more valuable commodity than truth, how come Blair’s poll ratings, and especially those concerning his trustworthiness, are so low? And how come his, Campbell’s, own days are probably numbered? What a pit such a clever man cannot see it but we, the public, and our debased politics and damaged society, have paid the real price.
John Tinmouth, South Shields
[John adds: Sent to Today and PM Programmes on Thursday 14th August 2003. Unfortunately, they didn’t use it.]
September 2003
Secrets Of The Mafia
Health Secretary John Reed, sounding for all the world like some ageing Soprano capo, was once again dragged out this morning, on the Today programme, to defend family boss Antonio “Honest Joe” Blair. The Scottish hit man was attempting to protect the boss of all bosses against the Intelligence and Security Committee charge that Blair had ignored the assessments of intelligence chiefs that war with Iraq would increase the terrorist threat. Reed said that don Antonio was entitled to exercise his own judgment. Quite so. A pity that the don, in keeping this information from the House of Commons and we, the public, denied us the opportunity to exercise ours.
The Caledonian enforcer was also quick to get in the point that the Intelligence and Security Committee, despite making several criticisms of the notorious dossier, had concluded that it had not been “sexed up” by the Downing Street Mafia. That’s all right then - if the Intelligence and Security Committee said it, it must be true. On the other hand, having already experienced the forensic skills, judgment, and truth-delivering ability of the Foreign Affairs Committee, most of us would prefer to wait for Hutton, who may yet give Blair the cement overcoat.
John Tinmouth, South Shields
[The BBC did not broadcast this.]
03.10.03, Lies And Deceit - The Weapons Of Mass Destruction
It was with a wearying sense of sameness that we heard Jack Straw today, after the Iraq Survey Group said they had found no weapons of mass destruction, defending the indefensible his and Blair’s position that they had led us into war because Iraq was a, quote, “serious and imminent threat”. So much for the supposed new policy of openness we heard the same old evasions, lies and deceit. Nothing has changed.
Blair, of course, does not appear himself to defend the government’s position. He hopes the public’s scorn and derision will stick to Straw and not to himself. After all, Straw, like Hoon, is expendable, as long as Blair can cling to power. It won’t work, Tony - the same old culture of spin, lies and deceit still prevails, and you will be blamed for it, since nothing happens in this squalid and sordid government without your approval.
Note: sent to Radio Four’s PM programme on Friday, 3rd October 2003. They didn’t use it.
John Tinmouth
28.11.03, The Big Con-versation
The Government’s much-trumpeted “Big Conversation” with the people starts today. Let us remember it in it’s more apposite abbreviated form the Big Con.
We should not be misled by the well-cut suits - con man Blair will be as tricksy as ever in this dialogue of the deaf. Blair’s audiences will no doubt be as hand-picked, tame, and reliable as those worthies who were bussed into Sedgefield to meet and curtsy before the great man and his friend Bush. Free speech is a luxury he doesn’t want to afford.
And anyway, isn’t this whole thing a damaging admission of the complete lack of ideology at the heart of New Labour? A government with a strong ideology would have a clear vision of what it wanted to do.
John Tinmouth
South Shields
+
Contribution To People's Assembly
[Text version of speech delivered to the 2nd People’ Assembly for Peace, in London, by Roger Nettleship, on behalf of South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition, Saturday, 30 August 2003.]
It is a great honour to stand here at the Peoples' Assembly for peace to be among you and bring to you greetings of South Tynesiders opposing the continued occupation of Iraq as well as opposing the threat posed to world peace caused by the US, Britain and other powers as they continue to threaten Syria, Iran, Cuba, DPRK and other countries.
Silence is Shame! Is the title of a pamphlet produced by South Tynesiders of diverse political, religious and cultural views who all active and outspoken not just against the Anglo US occupation of Iraq and the threat posed by US and Britain to other countries but most importantly what unites us is a positive vision of a better world without war.
It is right that the Peoples' Assembly for peace is going to make its declaration. That it is pointing the finger at Tony Blair and the Labour government for ignoring the overwhelming opposition to the war against Iraq. It is right that the PA is pointing the finger at Tony Blair for ignoring international law and it is right that the PA is pointing the finger at Tony Blair for using lies about WMD to launch a war of aggression.
The media is of course full of the Hutton Enquiry. Hutton's enquiry only seeks to inquire into the tragic death of Doctor Kelly yet Tony Blair and the government are responsible for a far worse crime against the peace, for thousands of dead civilians and iraqi soldiers as well as British soldiers. Not to mention as well the huge waste of resources on weapons of mass destruction which were used by the coalition. Therefore, the people's assembly rightly calls for an enquiry into the whole war. In my view for it to be a real people's enquiry then it must not stop at indicting the war criminals responsible but more importantly it must deal with the political arrangements that allow such wars to take place. In this way it could deal with the issue of why the present political process can be used to ignore the views of the overwhelming majority of people, why the present political process can be used to ignore international law and most importantly a peoples enquiry could raise the issue of how the people can establish an anti-war government in Britain so that such aggression can never take place in the future again. In my view, such a peoples enquiry would be a major contribution to the political life of the country.
In the view of those active in South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition the most important thing about the movement against war in Britain is that it is a movement where the people strive to keep the initiative in their hands. We must build modern political arrangements with everyone fully participating and inclusive democracy that keeps the initiative in their hands as the only guarantee that the movement can achieve its aim.
We consider that the Peoples Assembly for Peace is an important step for the anti-war movement. The Peoples Assembly for peace with it pre-decided agenda has provided and important national focus for all of our work and is an important initiative in itself. But the discussion on how it should be developed should go on. It is important that if the people are to keep the initiative in their hands, if the Peoples Assembly is to blossom as a true tribune of the people then the Peoples Assembly has to be developed as such a modern political arrangement where the agenda is decided on the floor of the Assembly with direct involvement of the whole movement.
My view would be that it also has to ensure that the party system that dominates Parliament where the parties and not the people choose the candidates is not repeated in the Assembly. Each delegate has the same rights and is selected by meetings of the people in their various collectives purely on the basis that they represent their interests and the interests of the movement against war.
In conclusion, I would like to wish our discussions success.
‘Another world is possible. We can create it.’
+
'AlfaBet.Zoop'/‘Alphabet Soup’
When giving evidence to a House of Commons select committee inquiring into the events in the run-up to the war in Iraq, Robin Cook, former Foreign Secretary and Leader of the House, described the expereince of reading intelligence reports as akin to eating ‘Alphabet Soup’.]
‘Axis of Evil’
Iraq, Iran, North Korea, according to George Bush’s crude, ignorant and paranoid scapegoating rhetoric. Perhaps the world has been forewarned of a calculated American government plan of attack.
‘Awe’
What a ‘typical’ t.v. viewer was expected to experience when watching images of US firepower during the Iraq war - to be proceeded or followed by ‘Shock’. Not to be confused with ‘Signs and Wonder’.
‘Blow-backs’
Unexpected consequences. Might be cock-ups; might be conspiracies. Examples: the effects of western backing for Saddam Hussein during the Iraq-Iran war; the effects of CIA support for Osama bin Laden against the USSR in Afghanistan.
‘Collateral Damage’
Civilian human beings killed by military weapons - according to a disgusting military euphemism. Some apparently conservative present estimates suggest between 5,500 and 7,200 Iraqi civilian human beings died in the recent war.
‘Democratic Imperialism’
A good/bad example of oxymoron, or contradiction in terms. A doctrine of the systematic ousting tyrants by the use of external force and replacing them with more ‘western-friendly’ governments. Whether the policy and/or its end results are truly ‘democratic’ - as most democrats would understand the concept - is doubtful. Somewhat mysteriously, the doctrine is a meeting point of some on the British centre-left and the American right.
‘Education’
Not equivalent to telling people what to think, nor to ‘propaganda’ or ‘spin’ - contrary to the apparent belief of of leading figures in the British ‘New Labour’ movement, and others..
‘Freedom-Fighters / Terrorists’
Take your pick of designations. Usually people of unrelenting ideology and violence either way - who tend to have a habit of changing side [see ‘Blow-backs’]. What drives people to the violent extremes of political action is an unresolved issue. Noam Chomsky, among others, has highlighted the way ‘terrorism’ is a word usually only applied to violence by the relatively weak against the relatively strong. The Pentagon doctrine of ‘Shock and Awe’ is surely a terrorist notion. The black American writer Walter Mosley has pointed out that while mostly white corporate America was claiming surprized innocent victim status after 11 September 2001, poorer black Americans were generally not surprized by the events, and had a better understanding of the sort of rage and anger in the poorer world that had produced them. He said: ‘You cannot ignore rage. It just does not go away. It only goes away when the causes of that rage are addressed.’
‘George’
A first name shared, coincidentally, by Mr Bush and Mr Galloway. One is a right-wing U.S. president. The other is a maverick British Labout MP. They are not perhaps presently on the best of first-name speaking terms.
‘Hanoi’
A city in the Far East that experienced some of the worst ever urban ‘Carpet Bombing’ [the new euphemism for which is ‘Vertical Envelopment’, apparently] during the Vietnam War - and much consequent human suffering. At the time, George Bush, always to be found a long way from the human consequences of warmongering, it seems, was evading front-line military service in the war, apparently thanks to his father’s contacts in the U.S. military and intelligence services.
‘Intelligence Report’
Any old ill-informed rubbish nowadays, apparently.
‘Japanese Pick-up Truck’
Vehicle in which bin Laden was said to be riding when the last reasonably believable sighting of him was made ... somewhere near Kandahar, southern Afghanistan, mid-September 2001. The exact brand of the truck is uncertain.
‘Kirkuk’
Key point in northern oil-fields of Iraq. A much prized corporate asset.
‘Lies Told in the Run-up to War’
Take your pick - from the run-up to the Iraq war, or any other.
‘Mass Destraction’
Mass media manipulation technique involving the methodical diverting of public attention away from many deceptions mendaciously delivered by militaristic dispatchers, ministerial dispersants and other mediumistic delinquents about such doubtful matters as the recent possession of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ by Iraqi tyrants. Issue-obscuring word play, in other words.
‘Neo-Conservatives’
Term of self-reference favoured by right wing war-mongering ideologues in the Bush administration - led by Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and others. Traditional conservatives believe in dealing with the world pragmatically as it is. These ‘new’ conservatives believe in fashioning the world in their own image. Some say ‘neo-con’ neatly sums up a bunch of re-branded truth-distorting con-merchants.
‘Ottoman Empire’
Significant reference point in medium- and longer-term Middle Eastern historical analysis. Up to its collapse during the First World War [1914 1918], the Ottoman Empire had long controlled much of what is now known as Iraq. The territory was organized into three quite distinct provinces, reflecting geographical, cultural and ethnic distinctions - one province was centred around Mosul in the north, another around Baghdad in central Iraq, and another around Basra in the south. In the post-war grab of former Ottoman territory, Britain, with League of Nations sanction, cobbled together what was first called the ‘mandate’ of Iraq out of these provinces, along with some desert areas to the west. Faisal was the first British sanctioned king of the nation of Iraq from 1921 onwards. A sort of independence was granted in 1932. Tribal conflicts and other unrest - often provoked by internal and external military and commercial interests - led to an almost 50-year pattern of disorder, reaction, coup and counter-coup - and the occasional British re-invasion, as in 1941. The pattern was apparently changed in 1979, when Saddam took power as a brutal strong-man ruler. But although he was a tyrannical leader of Iraq for more than 20 years, it is perhaps a mistake to imagine Saddam ever fully in control of the nation - people with real authority do not have to slaughter people as a show of their power. The disorderly sequence of repressions and revolts, as well as external military adventures, and general gangsterism, which marked his years in power suggest a complex interplay between a ruthless ruler and an essentially unstable nation-state.
‘Pentagon’
A confined space in Washington, USA, in which the wider world is widely misunderstood.
‘[al] Qaeda’
A name given to what - in the absence of concrete evidence - can perhaps only adequately be described as an insubstantial haze of illusions. Apparently it is a loose structured pseudo-Islamic terrorist organization that first emerged out of diverse groups fighting against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. It was almost certainly originally supported by the American CIA. Its nominal leader is Osama bin Laden, an overgrown adolescent millionaire fantasist - who may or may not still be alive [although his state of vitality/mortality hardly seems to matter any more, given his quasi-mythological status]. There are no proven links between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. In fact, despite the widespread linking of bin Laden and Saddam in public consciousness, there has only every been one significant report of an association between al Queda and a representative of Saddam’s regime. Among the swirl of stories about the contacts of Mohammed Atta, supposed significant al Queda player, and alleged leader of the September 11th hijackers, there was a widely reported story [apparently started by a man who falsely claimed significant involvement with the Czech intelligence services] that Atta had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague, in the Czech Republic, in April 2001. Washington ‘hawks’ jumped on this report as proof positive of close connexions between their favourite bogey-men. But when the story was more carefully investigated, it proved to be almost certainly untrue. Even the CIA and FBI concluded that the report of the meeting was not substantiated by any credible evidence.
‘Resolution’
A recently revised United Nations term for a sad state of international confusion, disagreement, deliberate misrepresentation of agreed phrasing, and general bad faith.
‘Sweets and Flowers’
What Pentagon officials seriously expected US troops to be greeted with as they entered and occupied Iraq.
‘Twin Towers’
Significant reference points in recent world history. More or less every aggressive international diplomatic or military act by the American government for the foreseeable futuer is likely to be justified by back-reference to the terrorist assault on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre in New York on 11 September 2001.
‘Uranium’
‘Weapon grade’ uranium almost certainly was not smuggled into Iraq from Niger, nor most probably any other part of Africa, nor very likely anywhere else - contrary to suggestions made by members of the present British government and others.
‘Depleted’ uranium is now certainly polluting the environment, and most probably damaging the health of many people, in parts of Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, and the wider world - due to its use in shell-tips, etc, by U.S., U.K. and other armed forces.
‘Victory’
An elusive concept in modern ‘asymmetric’ warfare.
‘Wolfowitz’
Sometimes a person’s name does indeed seem to influence character.
‘X’
Marks the precise target sport that ‘smart’ weapons often miss - contrary to impressions suggested by the edited highlights of ‘bomb-cam’ footage the military authorities feed to the mainstream media.
‘Yes-Man/-Woman’
The role most likely to be played by a representative of the present British government when in close proximity to a representative of the present American government.
‘Zag’
A diversionary tactic by a government spin-doctor, etc
‘Zig’
Proceeds and/or follows a ‘Zag’.
[Philip Talbot, July 2003]
+
Basically ... Claire Agrees With John
Blair Appeal
Blair, in his speech last Monday [10.11.03], told those who were against the war in Iraq that he respected their right to protest - er, thanks, guv’nor, very gracious of you we’re sure - and asked for all to rally round the most important cause - the need to rebuild Iraq. Translated, this is a plea for us to forget about the fact that he lied to the nation, and to parliament, to get us to go to war.
We can now see, from the Hutton enquiry and other events, that Blair’s lies about the war, though his most serious ones, are only part of an entire culture of lies and deceit which said, in effect, “don’t lie - except when the truth is politically embarrassing”. This culture was created by Mandelson as an attempt to control and manipulate New Labour’s image even before they came to power, and then continued by Campbell when Mandelson fell. After Hutton’s enquiry phase ended, we heard that there was to be a clean sweep at Downing Street - unfortunately not including Blair - and a new era of openness in the government’s communications. Campbell went. Now, however, it is an open secret at Westminster that Mandelson is back unofficially, advising Blair on a daily basis. So we have swapped the merely odious for the truly poisonous. And the lies and spin will go on.
It’s not just the war - it’s the lies, stupid!
A damaged Blair, as opinion polls show, now widely perceived by the electorate as untrustworthy, has little to look forward to. The report of the Hutton enquiry looms in the new year. Continuing casualties and losses in Iraq will hurt him further - yet an over-hasty scramble out of Iraq, without due regard for the needs of the Iraqis, as recently floated by Bush as an attempt to save his, Bush’s, own electoral skin, will highlight the whole failed war and occupation policy. At home, Blair’s government is increasingly seen as taking the taxes but not delivering, and the Tories at last have a leader who can take Blair on. And - horror of horrors - Rupert Murdoch hinted last Thursday that the Sun’s support for New Labour cannot be counted on - dare Blair scuttle a second time around the world to kiss the ass of the Dirty Digger - or will the electorate see this as a tad less than seemly for a British Prime Minister?
Yet the parliamentary Labour party fails to act. Could it be that they still see this deeply flawed, badly damaged man as an electoral asset? The mind boggles.
Note: Sent on Monday 17th November to the following MPs:
Diane Abbott
Tony Blair
Gordon Brown
Menzies Campbell
Jeremy Corbyn
Frank Dobson
George Foulkes
George Galloway
Michael Howard
Glenda Jackson
Peter Kilfoyle
Clare Short
Two of these replied:
Clare Short, whose message was: "I am afraid I basically agree with you."
Also, a member of George Galloway's staff who sent me stuff about a new political movement called the "Unity Coalition".
Atrocity In Istanbul
Apologists for Bush and Blair are already claiming that the atrocity in Istanbul is evidence of the need for the Iraq war and the fight against terrorism.
The single greatest cause of Muslim anger and grievance is the massive injustice done to the Palestinians, and the pro-Israeli stance of America which prevents it being rectified. A fair settlement for the Palestinians would greatly reduce Muslim grievances and the terrorist threat. Instead, what do Bush and Blair do? They attack and occupy a Muslim state, Iraq, which neither they nor anyone else has succeeded in linking with Al’Queda or any other terrorist group.
Does any reasonable person think that the net effect of their actions and inactions is likely to reduce the terrorist threat? Certainly, Britain’s secret services thought the Iraq war would, on the contrary, increase this threat, and told Blair so before the war started.
John Tinmouth
South Shields
Short attacks Blair over Istanbul bombings
Clare Short has attacked Tony Blair for the al-Qaeda bombings on British targets in Istanbul.
The former cabinet minister claimed on Friday that the terrorist attacks were part of "an unfolding and cumulating tragedy . . . that was predicted by many, many serious people before the Iraq war, if the problem of Iraq was mishandled". Describing the prime minister as messianic, rightwing and shallow, Ms Short, who resigned this year, said the bombings, in which 27 people died, were a continuation of what was happening in Iraq.
In an interview to be screened on GMTV's Sunday programme , she accused the prime minister of making a spectacular mistake over Iraq, "and swallowing the whole argument" of US neo-conservatives . . . hook, line and sinker".
British government officials have said the Istanbul bombings were unrelated to the Iraq war, because al-Qaeda had hit at a range of targets before the US-UK coalition moved to topple Saddam Hussein. Some senior government officials believe the bombings may reinforce public support for Mr Blair's stand on Iraq and the war on terrorism. But Ms Short's comments may stoke the backbench hostility to the prime minister over the war.
+
LINKING UP WITH IRISH PEACE CAMPAIGNERS ...
In Dublin’s fair city, in mid-November 2003, all around the main shopping areas there were notices about the Irish anti-war movement and their plans to blockade Shannon Airport on December the 6th because the American military have been using this airport as a pit stop for aircraft on route for Iraq.
Meanwhile, I was looking for any information about protests against the state visit of George Bush in London at that time - I had tried the various web sites that were suggested with no results.
While making my way back to the hotel on Wednesday night, 19th November, I spotted a flyer posted on a lamppost informing me that there was to be a demonstration outside the American Embassey on Thursday the 20th protesting about the state visit of George Bush in London.
Time was short I had to find where the Embassey was situated and make plans to get there. As it turned out there was no need to worry as the area was not too far away from the City centre, in an area called Ballsbridge.
While preparing to go to the embassy I passed the eternal flame which was commissioned by Amnesty International, the flame is housed in a spherical sculpture of chains welded together and around it’s base is the text:
THE CANDLE BURNS NOT FOR US, BUT FOR ALL THOSE WHOM WE FAILED TO RESCUE FROM PRISON, WHO WERE TORTURED, WHO WERE KIDNAPPED, WHO DISAPPEARED, THAT IS WHAT THE CANDLE IS FOR.
This text immediately brought to mind the ‘souls without rights’ who are held in camp X-ray at Guantanamo Bay
We arrived at the Embassy where about 150 people were making their presence known.
There was people of all ages, nationalities and religions with a common bond to unite them.
There were home made banners as well as the usual printed ones and the rainbow flags proclaiming Peace in different languages.
I spoke to a young man who informed me that the protest was arranged at very short notice in support of our brothers and sisters who are demonstrating all over the U.K. against the visit of George W. Bush.
When I had a good look around I noticed several men observing the protest from a distance. Many people present were carrying cameras to record events. Not all of them were members of the press or general public.
People were invited to use the megaphone to address the crowd and there were several speakers from the Irish peace movement as well as an American speaker who spoke with passion expressing his anger and shame for what his country was doing.
He asked the assembled crowd not to forget that there was a huge peace movement in the USA but the outside world does not get to know about it.
When our American brother was finished a young Italian man spoke of his dissatisfaction of his country’s involvement in Iraq and calling the present Italian leader Berlusconi ‘a Facist’.
The crowd were thanked for their support and slowly dispersed under the watchful eyes of the ‘observers’ who were still standing on the periphery.
Alan Trotter [November, December 2003]
+
Still Waiting For David to do the Decent Thing ...
Letter to Shields Gazette, 04.12.03
In a letter to the Shields Gazette on Wednesday, 3rd December, Mr. G Smith of Kensington Court, South Shields, called for the resignation of David Miliband (MP for South Shields and Minister of State for School Standards) because of his support for tuition fees.
We consider that there are also other grounds for Mr. Miliband’s resignation. In March this year, shortly before the war with Iraq, the Gazette asked him a number of questions on the Iraqi crisis, one of which was “Is there any scenario in this crisis where you may resign on principle as Clare Short and Robin Cook have threatened to do?” Miliband stated that his “bottom lines are that the Government acts in accordance with international law, pursue international cooperation at every stage……” Shortly afterwards, Britain joined with the US in a war against Iraq, without a fresh UN resolution (which it had tried, and failed, because of international opposition, to obtain), and thus condemned by the great majority of international lawyers as illegal. Both Clare Short and Robin Cook resigned. We still await any action by David Miliband, or even a defence of his conduct. Perhaps voters will remember this at the next General Election.
Alan Newham and John Tinmouth
+
Press Release
WE HAVEN’T GONE AWAY …
WE HAVE ORGANIZED A PUBLIC FORUM FOR THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH TYNESIDE:
‘AFTER IRAQ, WHAT NEXT FOR THE WORLD?’
Committee Room C, South Shields Town Hall
7pm, Wednesday 21st May.
Although U.S. President George Bush has announced the end of military action, Iraq is still an occupied country in a state of disorder and the world is still in a state of uncertainty as to whether further military action will happen elsewhere as part of the “war on terror”.
South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition believes that the control of world events should not be left to the decisions of President Bush and a few other powerful and rich people.
Before and during the war, millions of people around the world, including hundreds in South Tyneside - many of whom were not normally involved in political campaigns -took various forms of action against a military solution to the tragedy of Iraq under the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.
Millions of British people - including many who eventually decided to support the war - were deeply troubled by the idea of Britain being involved in a military invasion of another country, against normal United Nations conventions, and according to a plan mostly devised by a right-wing American government. Being against the war was not unpatriotic nor was it a weak pacifistic option.
More than a thousand people from South Tyneside signed our petitions against the war, and dozens took part in public meetings, demonstrations, peace vigils and other actions, locally and nationally.
During our campaigning, we also found many examples of people in the borough taking independent anti-war actions including putting banners on their houses, taking part in prayer vigils, as well as lobbying politicians via telephone, mail, email, text messages and other forms of communication.
We notice that since the formal end of the war, via the ShieldsGazette/Unicef appeal, South Tynesiders have raised more than £1,000 to help Iraqi children affected by food and water shortages.
Large numbers of people still believe that the war was unjustified, illegal by the normal standards of international law, and likely to make the world a more dangerous place over the medium- and long- terms.
Many believe that terrorist attacks are likely to increase in number and severity in future as a consequence of the war.
The ongoing South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition is a local group of people with diverse political, religious and cultural views. We celebrate diversity and open debate, believing them keys to a more generally prosperous and peaceful world.
We have more than a dozen active supporters who regularly attend meetings and other events - and more than one hundred people have indicated that they want to continue to help the group’s work in various ways.
We believe that being against a prolonged U.S./U.K. occupation of Iraq is not enough - we should have a positive vision of how to build a better world without war.
So we ask: “How can people acting on a relatively small-scale, locally, influence wider events nationally and internationally?”
This question clearly has relevance to issues other than the situation in Iraq. Many people we talked to during our campaigning [including opponents as well supporters of our aims] said they often felt powerless when they read, watched or heard news of events around the world or even closer to home.
To discuss this question, along with many others, we have organised a public forum to be held in Committee Room C, South Shields Town Hall, 7pm, Wednesday, 21st May.
All are welcome to contribute to the way forward:
by taking part in the forum;
by attending our regular meetings on the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays of each month at Trinity House Social Centre;
by contacting us via the addresses listed above.
by visiting our new website: http://philiptalbot.users.btopenworld.com/s.t.stop.war.coal.html
[This press release was mostly drafted by South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition supporter Philip Talbot, in consultation with other group supporters. All full sentences in the press release can be directly quoted as if coming from his mouth.]
+
Press Release
AN Open FREE DISCUSSION
Trinity House Social Centre
Tuesday, 18th November, 2003
7.30pm
Free ADMISSION ALL WELCOME
Guest Speaker: Dr Barry Gills
[Barry holds joint Anglo-American citizenship and is a lecturer in International Relations at Newcastle University.]
While George Bush and his supporters in the British Government are using failing and out-dated violent forms of international relations in Iraq and elsewhere, South Tyneside Stop the War Coalition is searching for more peaceful alternative ways.
To coincide withthe week of the American President’s official state visit to Britain we have organized an open and free public discussion at:
Trinity House Social Centre, Laygate, South Shields, on Tuesday, 18th November, 2003, at 7.30pm. Admission is free and all are welcome.
Guest speaker is Dr Barry Gills, a lecturer in International Relations at Newcastle Univeristy who holds joint Anglo-American citizenship.
Philip Talbot of STSTWC said:
"We oppose the state visit of George Bush to Britain, as a guest of the Queen,because it gives official endorsement to his policies at a time when most British people do not support what he stands for. Recent polls show at least 60% of the British public are not happy with Bush's handling of world affairs.
"We question the motives of the peoplewho arrangedthevisit at this time- it seems a deliberately provocative gesture by the British and American governments, designed to incite trouble and to foster an atmosphere of fear and antagonism. We are searching for better ways.
"Like most British people, our group is not anti-American. With ourmeeting we are trying to make a local contribution to better human relations through the sort of open-minded and free discussionthat Bush himself shuns.
"Our meeting, with an Anglo-American expert in international relations as guest speaker, will give the people of South Tyneside the chance to learn more about the current state of world affairs and to express their own views in a friendly environment.
"All are welcome to attend - even those who oppose our anti-war position."
For more details visit our website:
http://philiptalbot.users.btopenworld.com/s.t.stop.war.coal.html
For more details of events in the wider North-East: http://tyneside.sdf-eu.org/stopthewar/
For more details of national and international events: www.stopwar.org.uk/
[Notes. Polling evidence: a Populus survey for the Times on 11/11/03 showed 60% of voters disapproved of Mr Bush's handling of Iraq. The poll found only 40% of respondents thought the personal relationship between Mr Blair and Mr Bush benefited Britain. Support for the war came to just 37% of those questioned.]
+
|
