How Green is Blue this week? (The pollution-race of the Tories)

The British Conservative party, in other word the ‘Tories’ like to picture themselves as blue, perhaps in contrast to the red colour often associated with the Left. So how green is blue nowadays? I have to admit that I did not follow the Paris show, as I thought the actions will speak for themselves. And they did. A few days after the Paris show was finished and the participants congratulated to themselves, the British Tory government announced a few very significant changes, which will intensify their commitment to destroy the earth with much faster speed then ever before.                            

(1) The government is scraping support for large-scale solar energy projects. The solar energy project only required a £3 yearly contribution in every household’s bill. This project was clearly a threat to the the government, because it was nearly becoming self-sufficient and soon it could have become the cheapest low-carbon energy source. So the government mutt have panicked and to stop the solar energy project to succeed they suddenly pulled this support, claiming to prioritise the lowering of customer bills (ridiculous claim as £3/year per household is a very reasonable contribution for a better future. To have an idea of the worth of £3: if you want to buy a coffee  you could easily pay £2.50)

(2) The Government has just granted NINETY-THREE (yes, 93) fracking licenses in England and Wales. Luckily they could not touch Scotland, as the Scots were clever enough to ban fracking (of course they English did not want them to become independent – just see what a good example they would create?) So where are they going to be digging for the modern gold: oil and gas? The licences include many places which are described as “national parks and areas of outstanding beauty”. In case you would like to know which firms will do the dirty work: licences were granted for Ineos, a Swiss chemicals giant which owns the Grangemouth Refinery in Scotland (could they kick them out?) and Cuadrilla, a fracking company backed by British-Gas owner, Centrica.

I could not express my horror better than Adian Harrioson, whose letter was published yesterday in ‘The Independent’: “a number of studies, including one from Cornell University, have shown that the countless drilling of new wells demanded by the process results in the release of such large amounts of methane, a greenhouse gas far more immediately dangerous than CO2, that over 20 years it is considerably more damaging to the climate than coal.The cynicism and idiocy of a government which, just a week after signing up to a green agenda in Paris, turns its back on renewables and then plumps for this filthy, landscape-destroying, economically disastrous option which at best might last a decade, is breathtaking.”

Does it make any difference which party is dominating Britain after the election tomorrow?

DOES IT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE who we vote for? And what would happen in the Green Party would get the majority in the British Parliament tomorrow? I do know theGreen Party would TRY to make real change, but I have NO DOUBT they would be stopped. Yesterday the front page of Evening Standard clearly told the readers: Vote for the Conservatives! During the last few months the right wing media have tried their best to frighten the shit out of voters in England to make them hate and fear the Scots, in case Labour gets in as they claim Milliband ( teh weak man) will be dominated by the popular strong woman who is described as ‘the most dangerous woman in Biritsh politics’. Just before the Scottish independence vote all the English major party leaders (including Labour, Lib Dem and the Tories) used disgusting technics to fighten the shit out of Scottish people, they informed them they will be starved to death if they vote for independence. So what would the same English parties and their media do, if a miracle happened and the Green Party would get the majority vote? They would tell people that death is awaiting them as the Greens are not interested in the so called ‘economic growth’, which is fundamental principle of the religion of modern politics and brain-washing. Almost no one questions the concept and the ideal, people don’t try to link the aim of ‘economic growth’ (for the sake of economic growth) to the divisions, mass-poverty and political domination which it creates.  For hundreds of years they have been brain-washing people that ‘economical growth’ will lead to salvation. Instead, it lead to slavery, teh destruction of the earth and our immediate enviroment, wars and  increasing starvation in large parts of the world. Now England is one of those countries wehre mass-starvation ahs been artifically created, where last year ONE MILLION people were forced to go to the ‘Food Banks’. The media creeated a witch-hunt against people who were forced into poverty by the recent Labour, Lib Dem and Tory policies. In cotnrary to popular imagination people can’t just walk into food banks. No, it is not a free self-service for the lazy selfish people how some TV programmes. would like us to beleive. Most food-bank only accept professional referrals, where the professionals must prove that the person or the family really don’t have any money and any food. And maximum 3 referrals are accepted a year per eprson or family. Just low income or living on minimal benefits (e.g. £70/week) is NOT accepted as a cause for referral, there must be additional reasons. One of the most common reason is when the Benefit Office STOPS someone’s benefits to punish them, for reasons such as the offices loosing the paper work (or online applciation going missing); or if a job-seeker is unnable to make the compulsory 25  online job applications per week; not being able to travel to medical tests (not having the money or the transport for disabled people), or failing these strange tests which are arranged to profit private health companies, who  are perhpas instructed to fail as many disalbed or sick people as they can. i met people who have failed these medical tests who were blind, or their legs or arms had been amputateed etc. but they were told they coudl still work, they don’t deserve the disability benefits. This is the Uk world in which we are asked to vote, and the Tories are promising to continue making the rich richer and the poor poorer as this is supposed to be good for ‘economic growth’. In my opinion the Liberal Democrates and Labour parties have been invovled in the same process for decades, but not to the same extent. They are killing people at home a bit slower (e.g. by the hidden privatisation of the NHS which they have all supported to some extent). But Labour is not different abroad, they kill others with as much enthusiam as the Tories, see Tory Blair’s record. Labour has just as happily started and continued wars than the Tories. In contrast to the major 3 parties the UK Green party does represent a fundamentally different approach, however so far they have failed to convince enough people to support them to make a difference in the Parliement. However I will vote for them as I believe their message will get stronger even if they won’t get more than their single Brighton seat, which Russel Brand is trying to help them to keep.

Who is laughing? And who is doing the killing?

On the 3rd of May 2015 the so called ‘American Freedom Defence Initiative’ organised a competition offering $10 000 for the best caricature of Prophet Mohammed. The event took place in the Dallas suburb of Garland, Texas, United States, in a building belonging to a private school, not in New York where the main organiser lives, but in Garland, which is described as the most ethnically mixed town in the country.

Two hundred people turned up to compete and the organiser privately bought in 40 police men in addition to the other security staff provided by the school. We have been informed that two young men turned up with guns and one of them has lightly injured one of the security guards. The two gun-men were killed in no time. Their dead bodies were left on the street for hours while experts were searching for potential bombs. The people participating in the event were moved to another location, and it seems, the competition was completed, as the winner’s name has been published.

The intention to provoke tension and to create violent conflicts between people who could happily live next to each other has many old and new forms. Not for the first time in history, ‘divide and rule’ dominates international and domestic politics in many powerful countries, inc. the USA, UK, Russia, India. It is tragic that many ‘ordinary’ people are willing to be polarised, deciding that another group of ‘ordinary’ people are their enemy. The political and economical elite greatly benefits from these divisions and hatred. They covertly or openly encourage the divisions (while in the West also paying lip-service to ‘equal opportunities’, ‘universal human rights’ etc). They don’t like to dirty their own soft hands with blood, but they encourage, pay or order others to do the dirty work.

Conscription – in times of potential wars  – is a demand on a mass scale to attack and kill those whom your political leaders perceive as their enemy, and to sacrifice your life. Where there is no conscription, manipulation needs to achieve that a large number of people should ‘want’ to kill and die for the interest of their political and economic elite, and their families, friends, schools, Churches are expected to stand behind ‘our heroes’. It is useful if the the fighters personally believe that they are killing for noble causes. On addition serious efforts are made to create a general public perception and consensus that the paid armies are fighting and killing for noble causes.

The people who ‘voluntarily’ join the killing fields (any type of killing fields) are normally poor. They are often in desperate need of money, a job, or a purpose in life, or they may wish to achieve (strangely conceived) ‘self-respect’. They may even have something to revenge for: either in their communal (or ethnic) history, or perhaps the story of their family or personal traumas provide extra motivation. They may be full of frustration and anger created by their own collective or individual life-histories, ready and willing to turn these feelings against any ‘enemy’ named by others, by powerful manipulators. I imagine, all over the world many people join the police, the security firms, the armies or any type of religious military crusade (including the much talked about ‘jihad’) because in these organisations they will be respected and rewarded if they act violently. Many fighting people who believe in this or that religion may be doing the killing in the name of their God, while others refer to ‘patriotism’ – despite the fact that most of the wars nowadays are being fought far away from the soldiers’s and the fighters’ homeland. If I was a soldier I would not like to know that I am simply serving the economical and  political purposes of the economical and political elite. If I was religious, perhaps I would like to think I am fighting for my religion. Or for my country. Or both. Sounds heroic and noble.

Muslim and Christian people have not always fought each other. For the rest of the article I will refer to the Western and US powers as Christian, despite the fact that a large percentage of the population have other religions, and many are atheists. The UK and the US governments still claim the Christian religion as their right, and recently in their so called ‘War on terror’ they have increasingly used religious – and colonial – language. There are many places in the world where Muslim and Christian people (and others following Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist religions and life-styles) were living in peace right next to each other for centuries.

The only time Christians and Muslims are encouraged to hate each other are times when a crusade was/is initiated by political leaders, who often managed to get their religious leaders to work for them too. This happened whenever the rulers of powerful Christian or Muslim countries wanted to dominate the same piece of land, wanted to extend their empires in the same direction. However when they turned in other directions, they managed to ignore each other and they stopped concerning themselves about the rights and wrongs of Christianity or Islam. For example they were not focusing on hating each other when Spain, Portugal and England decided to expend to South and North America. Instead of thinking about Islam they were busy hating the population they found in the Americans whom they named ‘Indians’ and whom they wanted to ‘civilize’ (make them useful for their purposes). Similarly when  the Islamic empires decided to extend towards India, then it must have become more important for them to convert Buddhists and Hindus into Muslims, and they have achieved this to some degree.

Therefore the crash of Islam and Christianity depends on a simple question: do the political leaders of powerful Islamic and Christian countries are fighting for the control of the same part of the world?

The current answer is: YES. They do want to control the same part of the world. The part which is known in the West as the ‘Middle East’.

The above on the left is the original secret Sykes-Picot map of 1916: “A” would go to France, “B” to Britain. And the map on the tight shows the same in a clearer form. The map below shows the extent of military power physically present in the Middle East, now.

US bases in the Middle East

It has a long history, but where are we now? In Texas in May 2015 a few (perhaps) naive and potentially dangerous ‘ordinary’ people decide to organise a ‘caricature competition’ to help this nasty fight. Some of the participants may believe it is really about ‘freedom of speech’, while others may have turned up desperate for the $10 000 top price, but it is clear that this event was organised to provoke. They invited a Dutch politician known about his racist views as the ‘Guest of Honour’.  He is not naive and not ‘ordinary’. He is part of the power elite, his party is the 4th most popular in the Netherlands. Then two (perhaps) naive and dangerous ‘ordinary’ young men jump like puppets, rushing there with the intention to kill some of the participants. In the name of  their ‘God’. At least this is what we were told by the media – they did not speak. Then a few (perhaps) naive and potentially dangerous ‘ordinary’ people, who are paid security guards or private police, immediately kill those who seemed to want to kill the competitors. Who benefits? Who is laughing?

Pamela Geller, the organiser of this event must have expected an attack as she herself paid 40 private police officers to guard the building, it costs her $10 000 according to The Guardian. She said she paid because this is “the high cost of freedom”.

The Guest of Honour “Wilders has campaigned to stop what he views as the “Islamisation of the Netherlands”. He compares the Quran with Mein Kampf and has campaigned to have the book banned in the Netherlands. He advocates ending immigration from Muslim countries, and supports banning the construction of new mosques.” (Wikipedia)

And who is Pamela Geller, the American woman who organised this event? According to The Guardian she is the co-founder of the ‘American Freedom Defence Initiative’ which is behind the contest to award $10,000 for the best cartoon depiction of Mohammed. She is a New Yorker who writes a blog called ‘Atlas Shrugs’ that campaigns to stop the “Islamisation” of America. Pamela Geller used to be a housewife not interested in politics until 9.11 when she turned. After the shooting yesterday she used her blog ‘Atlas Shrugs’ to declare: “This is a war. This is war on free speech. What are we going to do? Are we going to surrender to these monsters?”

BBC World Service broadcasted a short interview with the Mayor of Garland. He explained that the event has nothing to do with the town. They did not ask his permission, in fact it was authorised by a private Education Authority which provided the venue. He made it clear he was not happy about this competition. He said his city is the most ethnically diverse city in the States, and the neighbourhood which is the most ethnically diverse neighbourhood. So why they picked this one?

In January 2015 a large conference was organised in Garland by the local Muslim Community, to plan how they should stand up AGAINST Islamic fundamentalism. While the conference was taking place thousands of white people were protesting against them. One of the placards said: “Muslims, go home! And take Obama with you!” Here it is:

Garland, US Anti-Muslim Demo Jan 2015