Category Archives: Government Oppression

Conservative Review

The Left's violence is only logical Conservative Review While the modern Left shares the older progressives' understanding that power creates right, it does not share their blind faith in institutions like government. No, society's social institutions and government structures are tools of oppression. The ...

Read the original here:

The Left's violence is only logical - Conservative Review

Tel-Aviv, Israel (Photo public domain)

Israels LGBTQ film festival has a queer problem. Heading the call of the grassroots Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement in support of Palestinian equality, the South African queer filmmaker John Trengove whose film, The Wound, opened the festival in Tel Aviv, on June 1 announced his boycott days before the ceremony. Many quickly followed his example. As a recipient of state funds, TLVFest is complicit in the Israeli governments anti-Palestinian equality agenda. Such complicity is all the more manifest given the political environment in Israel where its cultural ministry the source of its funding is helmed by the far-right Miri Regev. That TLVFest accepts state funding all but guarantees the festival wont challenge reactionary politics. Such a compromised role has turned off many artists.

Responding to the BDS campaign, TLVFest directorYair Hochner argued that Trengoves approach was misguided because, he said, We work hard to promote messages that the [Israeli] government doesnt promote. Rather than an alternative vision, as characterized by Hochner, Israels mainstream gay rights movement has embraced what many queers have termed homo-nationalism subsuming LGBTQ identity to the dominant nationalist and racialist identity that, in Israel, translates into tacit if not avowed support for Israels military occupation over Palestine that blights the lives of Palestinian LGBTQs.

Many LGBTQ Israelis have enlisted their bodies in the states pinkwashing propaganda. The Israeli military has hired gay and trans soldier-spokespersons to instrumentalize Israels relatively progressive record on gay rights as a distraction from its deeply illiberal record toward Palestinians. Even the voices of Palestinian LGBTQs inside Israel have been pushed aside. At a 2009 LGBTQ solidarity rally in Tel Aviv, Palestinian speakers were banned from the podium for fear theyd draw parallels between anti-gay and anti-Palestinian discrimination. Whether out of conviction or opportunism, TLVFest takes no clear and persistent stand on Palestinian equality despite taking place just miles from the open air prison that is occupied Palestine.

Hochner sought to flip the script and portray BDS supporters as close-minded partisans whove decided not to treat us like culture-loving people who are interested in dialogue. Dialogue would only be productive when TLVFest is ready to publicly recognize the unequal treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli state. Until then, dialogue sessions would serve no purpose except delaying the promise of equality until the next dialogue, and the one after that. Moreover, TLVFests official statement to the BDS campaign disingenuously claimed that it is impossible to hold a festival without government support. In May, Tel Aviv staged the Human Rights Film Festival committed to confronting the occupation and providing a forum to Palestinian and Israeli dissident voices. And it did all this without accepting a shekel from the State of Israel.

TLVFest directors betrayed their obliviousness toward the real violence Palestinians confront daily when they charged that BDS activists acted violently against a film festival. When Palestinians take up arms, theyre condemned as terrorists. When they start a movement committed to peaceful solidarity, theyre condemned as violent all the same.

What BDS seeks to impress upon Israelis is that there can be no normalization of half a century of occupation: a film festival is not an innocuous cultural event when it receives funds from the left hand of the government while the right hand demolishes homes and steals land. Through direct pressure, BDS aims to induce Israelis to firmly demand their government end its oppression. Israelis, like TLVFest, who turn a blind eye to the occupation and then deride BDS, only add insult to injury.

As a queer individual whos traveled to Israel, I felt a natural bond with many of our Israeli brothers and sisters who were shaped by their experiences as LGBTQs to stand up in defense of other oppressed people. But I also saw that there is nothing inherently redemptive about being LGBTQ. Gay people like all people are susceptible to nationalist intolerance. LGBTQ solidarity must be premised on shared values so that we work together to advance equality between Palestinians and Israelis. The Israeli queer group Black Laundrys spirited slogan, Theres no pride in the occupation, shows the true path toward queer activism.

Khelil Bouarrouj is a junior fellow at the Institute for Palestine Studies.

Originally posted here:

There's no Pride in Israeli occupation of Palestine - Washington Blade

In its 56 years of existence, Amnesty International has stood up for those who dare to speak truth to power in the face of oppression and abuses of human rights. We have seen regimes come and go, and have seen the power of courageous and peaceful protest in bringing about change. But what we are seeing now around the world is a dangerous and sweeping trend of dehumanizing and divisive rhetoric seeping into politics, resulting in oppressive policies that are putting human rights defenders at risk.

Its not just happening in a few isolated areas.

Agendas that advance an us versus them mentality and that feed on hate and fear threaten to push back human rights and stifle dissent around the world.Very recently, this poisonous political climate hit home for our organizationwhen Taner Kilic, the chair of Amnesty International Turkey, was arrested on the completely fabricated charges of being tied to a political movement connected to last years coup attempt.

The evidence against Taner would be laughable if the consequences werent so dire. Turkish authorities are claimingthat his use of a popular encrypted messaging app is an indication of criminal behavior. They are seizing on any link, however tenuous, to try to justify keeping Taner in detention. Taner is just one of thousands, including reporters, activists, and former government employees, who have been imprisoned, unemployed or disappeared as part of President Erdogans brutal crackdown on anyone who dares to be or is even perceived to be critical of his government.

Using imprisonment or the threat of arrest to silence critics is nothing new. Thirty years ago, I myself was imprisoned in a South African jail for five months for my activism against apartheid. But today, leaders like Erdogan seem to be more emboldened than theyve been in decades in being so open about their oppression.

The fact that many of these leaders have the tacit and sometimes blatant approval of leaders like President Trump makes the stakes for human rights defenders that much higher.Trump has already hosted and praised Erdogan in Washington, D.C. while Turkish security forces attacked protesters.

His notorious affinity for VladimirPutin may also encourage further hostility toward civil society by the Russian government. Amnestys Moscow office was inexplicably sealed for days late last year. Just this week, hundreds of protesters were arrested across the country. Also this month, Russian NGO leader Valentina Cherevatenko was charged under a law that requires organizations that receive federal funds to register as foreign agents. She faces years in prison. The prime minister of Hungary, Viktor Orban, liked this law so much that he successfully championed a similar iteration of it in his own parliament. Orban had previously caught our attention with his cruel hostility to migrants and refugees at the border, and rose to power on an unapologetically anti-immigrant agenda. He was thefirst leader of an E.U. or NATO country to formally endorse Trumps presidential campaign and claimed to have been invited to the White House shortly after Trumps election.

Trump has also expressed admiration for Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte, who justified thousands of extrajudicial killings by demonizing drug dealers and addicts. Duterte said it was funny that Amnesty would be calling on him to stop the killings.

And despite the warm reception given to Donald Trump in Saudi Arabia, human rights defenders are left to languish out of sight. Activists like the blogger and poet Raif Badawi, who has spent four years of a 10-year sentence in prison for writing pieces critical of the government, and faces being whipped publicly for 1,000 lashes.

While no one country can claim to be the vanguard of human rights, when particularly powerful countries like the United States turn a blind eye to human rights abuses, it contributes to a global climate in which other governments follow suit. Theresa May recently said that she was willing to repeal human rights laws that stand in the way of counterterrorism efforts.

Thats why its more important than ever that those who believe in human rights to stand firm wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied. Even if it seems like the powers that be arent responsive. We are already seeing our persistence pay off. Despite President Trumps dismissive rhetoric and hateful policies like the Muslim ban, the State Department has been quietly returning to a human rights focus, raising the number of refugees to be allowed into the country and even speaking out on behalf of Taner Kilic.

Change only happens when we stand up and speak out. We will not allow the politics of hate and fear to become normalized. When human rights defenders are unfairly maligned as enemies of the state, everyone suffers.

See the original post here:

Oppressive politics is on the rise: Donald Trump's support for strongmen is fueling a global crackdown on activism - Salon

Kolkata:West Bengal BJP president Dilip Ghosh on Saturday claimed that the ruling Trinamool Congress is not willing to resolve the Darjeeling unrest to gain political benefit in the region by trying to create a divide between Nepali and Bengali communities.

Representational image. Reuters

Ghosh, who earlier advocated a tripartite meeting between the Central and state governments and the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha (GJM) leaders to resolve the unrest, alleged that the Mamata Banerjee government is trying to fuel "anti-Nepali sentiment" among the Bengalis living in north Bengal.

"The state government is not willing to discuss the Darjeeling unrest because they do not want to solve it. The issue gives them political benefit," Ghosh told IANS.

"They are trying to create a divide between the Nepali community and the Bengalis living in the hills. North Bengal is not a stronghold of Trinamool. That's why they are trying to strengthen their base by fuelling anti-Nepali sentiment," he said.

Taking a swipe at Chief Minister Banerjee, the BJP leader said that "it's funny she had to depend on the army, which she once termed as extortionists, to save her face in Darjeeling".

"The state police have no role in the hills now. They have been driven away to the plains. The army has been called in to maintain law and order," Ghosh said.

The picturesque Darjeeling district in the northern West Bengal is on the boil for more than two weeks over demands for a separate state of Gorkhaland. It has been facing an indefinite shutdown for the last 10 days.

While GJM, which is spearheading the movement for Gorkhaland, has repeatedly rejected any possibility of talks with the state government accusing it of "oppression and high handedness", the state government maintains that it is ready for a discussion after the situation in the area becomes normal.

Read more:

Darjeeling unrest: Mamata Banerjee govt not solving Gorkhaland issue for political benefit, says BJP - Firstpost

The best time of day in Landers is the early morning hours in the cool of the day when the summertime flies are still asleep.

It has become my retirement ritual to smoke a morning cigar and follow our national happenings on Fox and Friends.

This ritual has inspired me to write opinions about the national political debate on the opinion page of our local newspaper.

None of my opinions are really welcomed by the paper but to their credit, most are printed.

You see, I was before the election and am to this very day an avid Trump supporter who is, in my opinion, the greatest American hero of my lifetime.

His election by the people has given me great joy and a renewed hope that my country will return to being the land of the truly free.

Former President Obama has taken up residence in the Dark House of Washington to direct radical left politics.

I am sure our paper will call this term racist but it is really about morality, about honesty, about truth and fairness.

The term, Dark House, reflects the divide between good and evil, between the oppression of government and the interests of the people, it is the divide between Darth Vader and Han Solo in the Star Wars saga.

The dark side navigates the national interest by protecting those who are complicit with the dark agenda and punishing those who stand with the people of America.

This dark side small ball reduces the political discourse to hate mongering when the function of our government should be to protect and facilitate people opportunities.

The dark side ignores our laws, deceives and condones violence against Americans as necessary to further the dark agenda.

Our political system, our justice system, even the medical community are only tools to punish all who may dissent.

Our court system is about making political statements not the law of our land.

The Internal Revenue Service is about making political statements not administering the collection of taxes in a just manner.

Our intelligence services are about making political statements not protecting the security of the people.

Our foreign services before Trump have been about making political statements here at home and not making our world safer.

The dark side has only one creditable issue that must be addressed by our current Republican politicians.

Politicians of the left rightly disparage the wealth gap in America but wrongly champion the redistribution of wealth as the solution.

The so-called Affordable Care Act is not really about the health of the people but about further depleting the wealth of the middle class.

Redistribution from on high is a perversion of our world order as our world has always existed.

Our world is a competitive place.

In biological terms, our world moves according to the survival of the fittest.

In economic terms, our world moves according to the effort personally expended to build a future for you and yours.

Effort does not always bring the results we crave but effort always results in a more fulfilled life.

America has always been about hard work and the pride it brings to the individual.

Instead of the middle class carrying the burden of healthcare for the poor and those with pre-existing conditions, lets be fair, our hard-working politicians should tax stock market transactions.

A $1 health care tax per transaction would bring $30 billion a month to the crisis.

This seems only fair but the swamp will resist.

Politicians of both parties, including Barack Obama, are in debt to the special interests of the few.

Go here to see the original:

Beware of the dark side in both politics and in life - Hi-Desert Star

June 23, 2017

Panger Aonok, Advocate

The idea to forge a Pan Naga Organisation was first visualized by the men of the Naga Labour Corps amidst the First World War. They were recruited by the Imperial British Government and deployed in France and Asia Minor to assist the British and its allies in logistics as non-combatant soldiers in their war against the Central power led by Germany. It was during the said foreign sojourn that they came in contact with people of the civilised world and were fascinated by their lifestyle which was built on the modern concept of liberty, equality and fraternity. Besides, they realized that they were neither European nor Indian. Awakened by the above ideals coupled with bitter experiences in the theatre of war they eventually realised the need to have unity, brotherhood and the urgency to inculcate the spirit of comradeship amongst the Naga tribesmen. After the end of the war, back home in the Naga Hills, the remnants of the Labour Corps along with some politically conscious Naga tribesmen formed the Naga Club, a socio-politico organisation with a view to pursue certain goals of common interest. Meanwhile the Indian Statutory Commission, popularly known as the Simon Commission, which was appointed under the Government of India Act, 1919 came to India and also visited Kohima on 10th January, 1929. The Naga Club submitted a memorandum stating inter alia their opposition to include the Naga Hills from the purview of the proposed reform scheme and further raised a demand for self-rule in the event of the British relinquishing power in India. They told the said Commission member Mr. Atlee and Mr. Cadogan that you are the only people who have ever conquered us and when you go we should be as we were.

Pursuant to the recommendations of the Commission, the Government of India Act, 1935 was passed and a part of the demand of the Nagas was conceded. Accordingly on 1st April, 1937 the Naga Hill District became an Excluded Area within the province of Assam. This meant that no Act of Central or Provincial legislature would apply to the Naga Hills without the concurrence of the Governor of Assam and the power to administer the Naga Hills was placed directly under the jurisdiction of the Governor of Assam. It is in the fitness of things that the government of Nagaland has erected a monolith and is set to build a memorial park to commemorate the contribution and sacrifice of the Naga Labour Corps. In Garo Hills, the Garo Labour Corps who went to France are remembered every year and it appears that no such day is organised to remember the Naga Labour Corps. The writers would suggest that June 28th ought to be chosen as the day for remembering the Naga Labour Corps since the treaty of Versailles was signed on that day in the year 1919 that brought the World War I to an end.

The next important landmark political development in the history of Nagas is the formation of the Naga National Council (NNC) in March, 1946. The initial objective of NNC was to achieve maximum autonomy within the province of Assam, however the temperament of the NNC began to change rather quickly and under its banner the Nagas started to demand complete independence. Following the demand of the NNC in January, 1947, the then Governor of Assam Sir Akbar Hydari held political negotiation with the top leaders of NNC which culminated in the signing of the historic Nine Point Agreement, however the agreement failed to see the light of the day. Apparently it was drafted hurriedly as the clauses were worded with ambiguous and equivocal language which eventually resulted in both sides interpreting them to suit ones own purpose. The chief point of conflict was Clause -9 which according to the Nagas was the crux of the agreement. The Nagas interpreted Clause-9 to infer right to secede and to opt out of the union at the end of ten years. But Sir Hydari Ali took a diametrically opposite stand and warned the Nagas that India would use force against them in the event the people of Naga Hills refused to join the Union of India. In view of the contradictory interpretation of Clause -9, the agreement was destined to die a natural death and was soon pushed into historical oblivion.

Shortly a delegation went to Delhi to call Mahatma Gandhi to apprise him of the resolve of the NNC to declare Naga independence on 14th August, 1947. Gandhiji gave them a patient hearing and told the members of the delegate that they have every right to be independent and assured his willingness to stand by the Nagas in their fight for independence. But as destiny would have it, Gandhiji was soon assassinated by the cruel hand of an assassin Shri NathuramVinayak Godse on 30th January, 1948. In the wake of the failure to implement the Nine Point Agreement, the extremists within the NNC who favoured complete independence gained control of the organization and toyed with the idea of armed struggle. The moderates who denounced the cult of violence resigned en masse from NNC. Over the years the persistent demand of NNC for self-rule was put into cold storage by the Central Government of Nehru on the ground that the desire for independence was held by a handful of educated Nagas and to disprove such a notion, the NNC held a plebiscite in the year 1951, in which ninety nine per cent of the people voted for a separate Naga country. With the overwhelming mandate of the people, the NNC supremo and others met Prime Minister Nehru as many as three times between 1951-1953 and put forth the desire of the Nagas for self-rule as evident from the result of the plebiscite but to no avail due to the indifferent and unrelenting attitude of Nehru. The Nagas boycotted the First General Elections held in 1952. A.Z. Phizo was all set to internationalise the Naga issue and many Naga tribesmen flocked to take on the armed might of the Indian Government. They formed the Home Guards and many joined the fledgling fighting force. Womens wing was organised to perform the duties of nurses, cooks, tailors and were assigned as couriers in the espionage game. The Naga youth movement came into being and the members became the auxiliary forces of the Home Guards.

The arms and ammunitions dumped after the Second World War were collected. More weapons were captured during raids on police station and a good number of Assam Police Personnel were either captured or killed and their arms were snatched and taken away. Home Guards volunteers were trained in the art of handling modern weaponry. Arson, looting, murder, intimidation became the order of the day. The Assam Police and limited numbers of Assam Rifles failed to contain the uprising and thus the Indian Army was called in to assist the civil administration. The Naga Hills and Tuensang Frontier were declared as disturbed areas and subsequently the Armed Forces Special Power Act, 1958 (AFSPA) was promulgated in the year 1958. The said Act provides a wide range of power to the Indian Army such as to shoot, to arrest, to search without warrant etc. The Armed forces operating in disturbed area enjoy full legal immunity. Under the protection of AFSPA, 1958, the Indian Army let loose a reign of terror and violated the human rights of innocent civilians with impunity. In the wake of the imposition of AFSPA fierce encounter ensued in regular interval. Skirmishes took place on a daily basis and many innocent civilians were killed in crossfire thereby causing large scale collateral damages to both public and private properties. The following is the lists of heinous crime perpetrated by the Indian Army with impunity: (1) Murder and extra judicial killings; (2) physical assault leading to maiming of limbs; (3) sexual assault and rape; (4) outraging the modesty of women; (5) detention without legal defence; (6) desecration of churches; (7) grouping of villagers; and (8) acts of arson such as burning down of dwelling houses, granaries, church buildings etc.

There are innumerable instances of crime committed by the Indian Army but owing to constraint of space, it is pertinent to mention one deplorable incident which shocked the conscience of the Naga people. The said incident occurred on 11th July, 1971, a Sunday, in which incident a unit of the 1st Maratha Regiment led by the Commanding Officer swooped down on Yankeli Village in Wokha District and picked up four minor girls; the eldest amongst whom was a girl of 17 years. They were forcibly dragged inside the church precincts and were sexually assaulted and raped by the Commanding Officer and his subordinates taking turns in the pulpit, which is the sanctum sanctorum (holiest of the holy) of a Christian church. The Indian Army not only committed this heinous crime against humanity in the most perverted and revolting manner but also desecrated the sanctity of the church with impunity.

Waging a war against India had broken many a Naga home. Hundreds of young women were widowed, thousands of young patriots perished in one of the most inhospitable terrains and jungles of India and Burma (now Myanmar) in their fight against the mighty Indian Armys crack Mountain Division on one side and the fighting-fit and ruthless Burmese army under the Junta regime on the other. As a result of this senseless ethnic conflicts and internecine rivalries many children became orphans and homeless, who struggled and fought hard against all odds to survive.

Another milestone in the Indo-Naga political conflict is the signing of the cease fire agreement on 25th July, 1997, between the Government of India and the Naga leaders. The said Agreement was followed by several rounds of political talks which was instrumental in recognising the unique history of the Nagas by the Government of India in July 11th, 2002. Subsequently, in the year 2003, the then Prime Minister of India Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee in exercise of his sovereign power publicly declared the Government of Indias recognition of the unique historical past of the Nagas. The declaration is a turning point in the long and chequered history of the Nagas struggle for the right of self-determination and thereafter the balance of power and convenience is leaning in favour of the Nagas vis--vis the Government of India to amicably settle the long drawn Indo-Naga political conflict through peaceful means.

The recognition is in no way the magnanimous gesture of the Government of India but owes its origin to the distinctive historical background, socio-cultural diversity, legal and constitutional framework being inherited from the British era Government which has been zealously guarded and upheld by the Nagas under the leadership of A.Z. Phizo and a galaxy of stalwarts who joined the movement and played stellar roles at different relevant points of time. The political acumen, statesmanship and tenacity of the Naga leaders coupled with the fighting prowess, perseverance and will power of the underground fighters is yielding dividend as evident from the signing of the Framework Agreement. However, factional feud, egoism and schism has become endemic in the current Naga political scenario which is the Achilles heel that comes in the way to further carry forward the peace process to its logical end. Uncertainty still looms greatly over the fate of the Indo-Naga peace talk chiefly due to the mushrooming of political groups. After decades of violence and oppression, the Naga people are now yearning to restore peace and harmony. To this end, it would be prudent for all leaders of diverse group to reconcile themselves in the Christian spirit to forgive and forget and come together under one platform for political negotiation with the Government of India and resolve the issue amicably through peaceful means.

The Rev. LongriAo, Apostle of Peace, and Naga conscience keeper, as Chief of Liaison Committee of Naga Peace Council had once said that in reconciliation there is no victor or vanquished and there is no humiliation involved. The Bible says, Blessed are the Peace maker, for they shall be called the Children of God.

Follow this link:

The Yoke of Oppression - The Morung Express | The Morung Express - Morung Express

More than 150 years after Gen. Robert E. Lees surrender at Appomattox Court House, we are still fighting the Civil War, highlighting that more than states rights and maybe even more than slavery, the War Between the States was a clash of cultures.

How else can one describe how people look at monuments to the Confederacy today and see such radically different things? To some, they are monuments to bravery and heroism in the face of inevitable defeat. To others, they are monuments to a political system built on oppression oppression not only of blacks held captive in chattel slavery but of poor whites held down by the plantation aristocracy.

Just as the Civil War was a cultural battle between a rapidly industrializing, mercantile North and an agriculture-dependent, feudal South, so, too, the modern battle over Confederate monuments often comes down to culture.

On the one hand, there is the Old Souths preoccupation with tradition, honor and all the sorts of aristocratic, upper-class virtues one finds in old Arthurian romances. On the other, there is the New Souths hard-nosed pragmatism, which focuses on the commercial values of the middle class.

Perhaps no one has ever understood this divide better than Mark Twain, a man of the South who ultimately sided with and moved to the North. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthurs Court both take the side of common-sense pragmatism over what Twain saw as aristocratic hypocrisy.

The debate over Confederate monuments isnt just about race. Its about one side that wants to honor its past, and another that fears scaring away business and tourists. And now the divide isnt North vs. South, but between different groups within the South.

That is why the most sensible compromise in dealing with Confederate monuments is to leave the matter to the local governments whose taxpayers ultimately foot the bill for the monuments upkeep.

New Orleans decided to take its Confederate monuments down. Agree with the decision or disagree with it, it was the citys decision to make, and no other level of government stopped them.

The same, however, cannot be said in Alabama. Here, the state Legislature has stepped in where it is not needed, forbidding the removal or renaming of monuments and buildings without first going through a cumbersome review and approval process. The new laws backers say theyre protecting history, but none of this would be an issue were not other states and cities re-evaluating their Confederate memorials, many of which were erected during the height of the civil rights era and with, at best, dubious motives.

That is why Hanceville Mayor Kenneth Nail might ought to be careful what he wishes for.

Nail has written the mayor of New Orleans a letter asking to take New Orleans unwanted Confederate statues off its hands.

New Orleans leaders have other plans for the monuments and are unlikely to say the least to gift them to Hanceville. So, Hanceville may have dodged a bullet.

Once erected, the monuments would be subject to Alabamas new law, and who is to say that in a few years the people and leaders of Hanceville would feel the same about maintaining Confederate monuments and unwanted hand-me-downs from another state at that?

South Carolina lowered its Confederate flag for good when it threatened to cost the state business.

The spirit of Twains Connecticut Yankee prevailed even in the sharpened edge of the Confederacy. It might someday prevail in Hanceville and other Alabama cities and towns, too.

Thats the real reason the modern-day aristocrats in Montgomery took the decision out of local hands and into their own.

Follow this link:

Leave monuments choice up to local governments - Times Daily

I havent been in Camden this afternoon, so I cant vouch for there being no marches of activists holding banners with the words Labour Out and Corbyn Must Go, but somehow I doubt there are and I certainly havent seen them on the news. But why not? Last week we saw no end of left-wing activists out on the streets trying to exploit the Grenfell Tower tragedy for their own party political purposes trying to present it as a case of callous Tories treating the lives of the poor as worthless as they slash their way through budgets with abandon.

Yes, Kensington and Chelsea is a Conservative-controlled borough but it turns out that is was far from alone in cladding its tower blocks with flammable cladding. Today, it emerges that five blocks in Labour-controlled Camden have also been clad with a similar material, which is now to be removed as quickly as possible. Meanwhile, fire officers will man the corridors 24 hours a day.

The cladding of tower blocks with flammable materials is a scandal, but it is one in which all three main political parties have their fingers. Across the country, 600 blocks have been clad (not necessarily with the same materials as those at Grenfell Tower, though many are now being tested). They span council areas of all colours. The cladding of tower blocks began under the Blair government whose Decent Homes Initiative, which demanded that 95 per cent of social housing be brought up to specified insulation standards by 2010 but which failed to lay down adequate fire standards. It was a Labour-controlled Southwark Council which was fined 570,000 for the fatal fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell in 2009 which was found to have spread as a result of renovation work. The practice of cladding continued under the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition and under a standalone Conservative government.

The fact that all parties might be culpable in cladding tower blocks hasnt stopped Jeremy Corbyn, however, who continues his attempt to turn Grenfell Tower into a parable about class oppression. From Hillsborough, to the child sex abuse scandal, to Grenfell Tower, the pattern is consistent: working-class peoples voices are ignored, their concerns dismissed by those in power, he said this afternoon. Yet Hillsborough victims werent all working class. While child sex abuse has been exposed among children in care in Rotherham, Oldham and elsewhere, it has also come to light in private boarding schools where childrens complaints were equally ignored.

If Corbyn is going to continue this line of attack he might at least check his facts first. Last week he said: The ward where this fire took place is, I think, the poorest ward in the whole country. Actually, it comes in at number 3823 out of 32,844 wards in the governments deprivation index: not even in the top 10 per cent. The most-deprived is Jaywick, on the fringes of Clacton, Essex, and the next two are in Blackpool. Corbyn might pitch himself as a champion of the working class, but in doing so exposes his own London-centric, middle class prejudices.

Read more:

Labour and the Lib Dems are as much to blame as the Tories for Grenfell Tower - Spectator.co.uk (blog)

Today, Saudi Arabia and its sycophant allies (Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt) have resorted to extortion in their dealings with Qatar. This internal dispute among the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council was joined by the United States when President Trump ignorantly supported the Saudi position of falsely condemning Qatar during and after his recent trip to Saudi Arabia.

To deflect attention from their own longstanding funding of Muslim extremists in Mosques and Madrassas (with ample proofOsama bi Laden, the creation of Al-Qaeda, 9/11 and funding of ISIS by Saudis if not by the Al-Sauds) and to expunge all criticism of their oppressive rule (absence of any political rights, free press and representative government), the Al-Sauds of Saudi Arabia falsely accused Qatar of being the main sponsor of terrorism. With his off-the-cuff comments and dangerous tweets, President Trump endorsed the Saudi position, a stand that now has global consequences.

An emboldened Saudi Arabia has embargoed Qatar, an act of war. It has threatened Qatar, a sovereign nation. And today, Qatar was given 10 days to comply with a list of demands or face unknown consequencesa rare case of blatant coercion from one country to another. The demands include:

- To shut down the broadcasting system of Al-Jazeera and stop funding other news outlets

- To close down a Turkish military base established by formal treaty by two sovereign nations

- To sever diplomatic and all relations with Iran

- To sever all relations with the Muslim Brotherhood and other organizations deemed threatening to the interests and legitimacy of the House of Saud

- To stop funding to any organization labeled as terrorist by the United States

- To expel citizens of a number of countries

- To follow the political, economic and other dictates of the Gulf Cooperation Council

- To pay an unspecified sum of money

While these demands are repulsive, they are even more outrageous coming from a regime that many consider to be among the most repressive in the world.

While some may think that this mafia-style extortion is thousands of miles away and of little concern to America, they should think again. President Trump has put the United States smack in the middle of this Saudi power play with consequences that go far and wide.

Saudi Arabia is essentially annexing a sovereign nation by telling it to do as the Al-Sauds demand or face possible invasion. Americas support of this muscular power play will earn it hundreds of millions of enemies around the world, endanger American interests and the United States be seen as a pariah nation.

The U. S. will offend an important NATO ally, Turkeysomething that could endanger the alliance by inducing a confrontation between Saudi Arabia and Turkey and also endangering the roughly 11,000 U.S. servicemen stationed in Qatar and also the future of the airbase where they are stationed.

Iran may renew its claim to Bahrain, a claim that the Shah of Iran was willing to rescind if there was a fair plebiscite (a fairness that was even questioned at the time) and if Bahrain was to remain an independent nation (something that has been clearly breached by Saudi Arabia in may ways with oppression of the Shia majority (65% of Bahrains population) that organizations have labeled as crimes against humanity. More broadly, Iran cannot stand by as Saudi Arabia with U.S. support is on a rampage in the Persian Gulf. Iran-U.S. relations will plummet to a new low and hostilities in the region will multiply.

Where will Iraq stand in all this? We believe that Iraq will in time stand squarely with Qatar, Iran and Turkey in opposing this American supported coercion, and this, in turn, will endanger U.S. servicemen and women in Iraq and U.S. interests even farther afield.

President Trump should take a deep breath, study a little history of the Middle East, consider what made America great in the eyes of much of the world in the immediate post-WWII era and what has reversed this admiration, put his own business interest aside, and pursue carefully considered policies to promote human rights, democratic values, peace and Americas interests in this dispute and more broadly in the Middle East.

But first things first, President Trump should immediately undo the mess that he has helped create before tensions escalate and matters get out of hand.

The Morning Email

Wake up to the day's most important news.

Original post:

Trump Is Complicit In Saudi Arabia's Extortion Of Qatar - HuffPost

Once he gets out of the hospital, Rep. Steve Scalise ought to change his position on gay marriage and a host of other issues. Thus saith George Takei, MSNBCs Joy Reid, and a number of other liberal voices who are demanding that the Majority Whip see the error of his conservative ways after his attempted assassination was thwarted by Special Agent Gay Black Woman.

Gay Black Woman is not, as you might guess, the special agents given name. Its Crystal Griner. But considering Scalises politics, Griners name and bravery had to play second fiddle to her sex, sexuality, and race. It was just too deliciously ironic, you see, that a Republican now owes his life to someone composed of such non-Republican identities.

For those of us with a higher-than-Alanis standard of irony, however, this raises the question, um, wait, why is that ironic? Had Scalise ever said, I oppose same-sex marriage because those who engage in homosexual relationships are incapable of bravery, then, sure, the irony would be clear. Had this been the logic behind Scalises pro-traditional-marriage views, the first thing he should do when he gets out of the hospital is acknowledge that Officer Black Gay Womans bravery proved the goodness of gay marriage.

But Scalise never argued that homosexual unions shouldnt be considered marriage because gay sex renders people incapable of valor or selflessness. Nor has he ever suggested that gay marriage should be illegal because gay people dont deserve to have their lives protected. Like most conservatives, hes argued that, because homosexual unions are incapable of procreation, theyre incapable of being what marriage is. And Crystal Griners courage, commendable as it is, neither contradicts nor even addresses Scalises argument. So expecting her courage to change his position is just as illogical as expecting Pope Francis to convert to Lutheranism simply because a German mechanic fixed the papal golf cart.

Why, then, are all these voices on the left conflating Griners courage with her gayness? Why do people believe that Scalises supposed anti-gay bigotry should be destroyed by Griners bravery? The answer, it seems, is intersectionality, a mindset that has spread like wildfire through many leftist circles in recent years.

If youre not familiar with intersectionality, think of it as Identity Politics 3.0. The first version of Identity Politics told us that there are two classes the privileged oppressors (rich, white, straight, etc.) and the disadvantaged oppressed (poor, black, gay, etc.). Identity Politics 2.0 then told us that your self-chosen identity is part of your humanity.

Those who engage in homosexual acts, for example, are not men who have sex with other men. They are gay men. Their gayness is part of their very being, and because of this, to oppose same-sex relations is to oppose them as human beings. Now, intersectionalityIdentity Politics 3.0tells us that these various identities are all interconnected and overlapping, forming an elaborate series of identity tunnels that effectively unionize the oppressed against their oppressors.

This is why, for example, the Values and Principles of the Womens March declare, we believe Gender Justice is Racial Justice is Economic Justice. In other words, the struggles of women are connected to the struggles of minorities, which are connected to the struggles of the poor. So if you rich white ladies dont check your privilege by supporting the political agendas of minority women and poor women, well toss you across the picket line with the oppressors where you belong and strip you of your feminist credentials.

But as the shooting in Alexandria makes clear, intersectionality doesnt simply insist on the connection of various identities. It also insists on the transfer of good works from one identity to another, a kind of moral Marxism that seeks the redistribution of virtue. Crystal Griner is Special Agent Gay Black Woman. Her various identities cannot be separated from each other, which means that the goodness produced by Griner the Police Officer can be attributed to Griner the Lesbian.

With a trick like that in your back pocket, why bother even engaging Scalises argument? If you want to prove the goodness of your political agenda, just hit the intersectionality button and youll teleport straight from the line of scrimmage right into the end zone!

To see this trick in action, consider how Rev. Dr. William Barbers master class on how to prevent Republicans from being victims, even after they were targeted for assassination. In response to Paul Ryans statement an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us, Barber said, This cant just be a moral ethic that you apply to congress. Thats why the real question is will one or two days of changes in personality mean a fundamental change in public policy? A black man from my alma mater saved their lives. Will they go back to work and restore the voting rights act and stop systemic racism against black people thats happening through voter suppression and racialized redistricting? A lesbian black woman saved them. Will they go back to work and promote laws that no longer attack the rights of the LGBT community?

In other words, the oppressed did something good, which proves that the policies supported by the oppressed are good, so Republicans better get on board if they want me to stop considering them oppressors.

Of course, if a conservative Christian saved George Takei from a psycho, knife-wielding Star Trek fan, the actor and LBGT activist would most certainly not be expected to reconsider his support of Obergefell v. Hodges. By design, intersectionality never works in a conservatives favor. Because privileged identities are oppressive by nature, and because all identities are connected, any good produced by those with privilege is always tainted with the oppressiveness flowing through the tunnels. This is why, for example, when white Christians adopt non-white children, they arent consumed with holy desires, but with a white savior complex.

Its also why privileged, conservative politicians cant offer up anything but corrupted fruit. Mitt Romney, by virtue of being a white male, was a sexist. And even his binders full of women, his attempt to actively include women in his cabinet, was evidence of his misogyny. By virtue of being a white male, John McCain was a racist, which is why his career-long praise of John Lewis didnt stop John Lewis himself from comparing McCain to George Wallace. Because they are Republicans, everything Republicans do is tainted with oppression. They have no good works. And the only way they can change that, as Dr. Barber noted, is by becoming Democrats.

The great problem with intersectionality, however, is not merely that it puts conservative politicians at a competitive disadvantage, but that it puts them at risk for violence. Political violence has always been rare in the United States, due in large part to the design of the American government, imperfectly as that design has been executed at times. When you cant be thrown in jail for airing a minority opinion, when you cant be fined for having the wrong religion, when you have the right to defend yourself from mob violence, violent revolution against the mob isnt necessary. When your political adversaries dont have the power to oppress you, you have the luxury of trying to convince them instead of having to kill them.

But intersectionality insists that your political adversaries do have the power to oppress you because our white-male-designed government issurprise, surprisean oppressive system. And because the privileged are oppressors by nature, they will use that system to oppress you. And because you cant convince these reprobates not to oppress you, you have only one option left to protect yourself: violence. Granted, the vast majority of those who embrace intersectionality have enough of a moral foundation to avoid this. Most of them wont take this doctrine to its logical end. But those looking to sanctify their bloodlust just might. In fact, it appears the shooter in Alexandria already did.

What I find saddest about the Alexandria shooting is the perpetrators hatred. What I find saddest about the coverage of that shooting is that so many people dont view Scalise and Griner any differently than the shooter did (or at least would have, had he known who Griner was). Rep. Homophobe McBigotFace Gunned Down by Vigilante Hero in Defense of Blacks, Gays, Women and Oppressed People Everywhere is clearly the headline that Alexandrias shooter was writing in his murderous mind. Rep. Homophobe McBigot Faced Saved by Officer Black Gay Woman, the essential headline from many on the left, is not all that different.

Perhaps when Scalise and Griner have healed from their wounds, theyll sit down and have a conversation about gay marriage. If they do, Im sure theyll view each other as friends who disagree rather than as enemies in class warfare. Im sure that, instead of calling each the straight white male and the gay black woman, theyll call each other by name. We ought to do the same.

See more here:

Why Being Saved By A Black Gay Woman Doesn't Delegitimize Steve Scalise's Politics - The Federalist