ISIS against democracy!

6 posts / 0 new
Last post
ISIS against democracy!
Printer-friendly version

The loathsome Cameron has been on TV this morning. He's in Indonesia which  is a favourite recruitment area for ISIS. So says Sky News, ignoring the fact that the UK also contributes here.  But Sky, as a broadcaster with total allegiance to the bourgeois like  all broadcasters, never misses a chance to shit on foreigners, and Indonesia is Muslim too just to make it worse. Yet despite this,  speaking in a beautifully sculpted tropical garden, the shapely mosque behind the PM served only to add gravitas and religiosity to his peevish words and wreath him in clouds of sweet smelling  incense. At least in theory. 

Anyway, Cameron says the British army will attack ISIS on the streets of London should they, or  rather when they turn up, and wants to bomb Libya  again (if that doesn't make things much worse there then what will? Though this might offer an excuse and an opportunity - by accident of course - to kill off a few boat people and other African refugees in search of a phoney nirvana in Europe where the streets are all paved with gold and you gotta believe it). The PM also wants to start bombing Syria and maybe parts of Iraq again "to protect democracy" (if that doesn't attract IS to England it's difficult to imagine what will!). The best way to protect democracy is with bombs. Everyone should know this and repeat it whenever  possible. 

But surely Cameron must be carrying out  Obama's secret wishes?  Surely he couldn't indulge in this amount of lunatic deranged cockiness without America's go ahead? Or is he just competing with Monsieur Hollande in a sabre rattling contest?   And is all this massing of anti-terrorist forces in England's green, very wet  and formerly pleasant land not also aimed at  working class repression, just in case that class should finally  get pissed off, given all the misery of austerity and the weakening economy, the massive reinforcement of the state against the class and it's well-being,  and begin dragging itself to its feet again for a  final assault. When this eventually starts to happen it will undoubtedly be presented by our current rulers  as an act of terrorism and treated accordingly.  The bourgeoisie, that class  most  soaked in blood, are ready and waiting. 

Meanwhile, in the same news bulletin, Obama was shown dancing an African ethnic dance not very elegantly in Kenya, his fatherland you know. He has tried not altogether successfully to convert Kenya's rulers to the delights of homosexuality, but they remain dogmatically straight. It's god's law don't forget.

Gay liberation  is turning out to be about the only reform the ruling class has on offer today. Well at least it's cheap! Better than trying to reform Health Care which capital can no longer afford. After all Health Care was only intended  as a temporary sop to those who survived the Second World War in the developed economies. Why would anyone think that it could go on for ever, or be free for ever?  It's the same with education.  Everything costs money. And if you want to change that then you'll have to get rid of capitalism...

Dirty Money

From Indonesia PM Cameron went to Singapore where he delivered a humdinger of a speech about Dirty Money in the city of London.  Why did he choose to make this speech in Singapore? Is Singapore seen as a major source of Dirty Money or as one of the places  where it is laundered?   

But London is full of Dirty Money Cameron insists, and it's got to stop and he will personally see to it that it does stop and that those behind it face a firing squad or worse.  After all,  some people - he didn't actually mention the incredibly exploited and state-controlled  British working class - actually have jobs and work hard to make a little money called poetically by the Chancellor "a living wage" ("living wage" refers exclusively to the  working class, as  the bourgeoisie would be dead on it within a week) while others in the form of  cliques and gangs can make millions without raising a finger (he means the bourgeoisie and its financial wizards). All this is hardly fair and has to stop. (Ever since his paltry election win the PM has been keen to demonstrate his devotion  to the working class and it's preparedness to submit to austerity for the sake of capital.) 

But I doubt he would have made quite the same speech in London, unless of course we've reached that point in capitalism's decay when attacks on Dirty Money have become acceptable as smoke screens for its perpetuation. Is this some new Machiavellian ploy? 

But for myself, I think all money is dirt and dirtying and detest not having enough at the same time. But if Cameron got the response he appears to want and Dirty Money and the even dirtier City of London  and its filth covered financiers stopped their dirty money-making deeds, wouldn't that be curtains for a sizeable portion of the British Economy. And, in the end, isn't all money, in so far as it is used under capitalism as a means of measuring people's individual worth as human beings, and is a negation of humanity and human feeling, the dirtiest thing on the planet or even in the universe?  It contaminates like radioactive waste and needs abolishing. 

Phoney Nirvana

Yes and yes. You cut to the chase here Fred, with flashing swordplay of the mightier pen: theoretical 'gravitas and religiosity' utterly failing to transform his 'peevish words'. Angels and ministers of grace defend us from 'important speeches' - except in the sense you add of searching for these or those Machiavellian deliberations that decided which form and tone of lie would go best with this or that photo-opportunity (before the banquet where whatever dirty deal is done)

When it comes to 'money-laundering', machinations to the power of ten scarcely covers it. And also, intertwined with whatever they may be, is the sheer accumulation of irreconcileable contradiction piled on irreconcilable contradiction that Capitalism IS after 30 or so cycles.

The very term itself seems to me to have one of those unscrutinised bourgeois premises, the falsity and relativity of which Marx ruthlessly set about revealing from the start. 

Of these is the question of what value is (or isn't) in Capitalist mode and how metal money and finally paper money came to be the universal representation of value: how ten zillion bits of paper in a hoard had the contradictory qualities of being useless yet represent all value: alienated, perverted value.

He also made a point of the distinction between ordinary money as just ordinary money and the point where quantity change it into a different thing: Capital : Nation sized: International sized: but before I derail into a dronologue......

I agree: what on Earth is the difference between 'a dirty pile of stolen misrepresentation of human worth'  and a 'clean pile of stolen misrepresentation of human worth'?

The Bourgeois State - and CamCam the Clown in this case - raise the issue, pontificate posture and vow (to be broken next week) about money-laundering. Hmmm...

Because it gives their National / Imperialist Profiles a boost ? and the high horse that a State gets on can attract others and The Global Agglomerations of Capital (Murdoch Inc.) who can boost their profile by appearing to align with The Dog that only eats organic food?

There is a more au courant reason which was on the tip of my brain but .... I will have to come back on it .. owing to sudden onset synapse failure ......

Here are some of the assets of the Qatar Investment Authority ; very small country with a King and Queen (who apparently has 'Gulf chic') one border -Saudi Arabia. The average yearly earning per capita is £90,000.

Just in the U.K It owns a chunk of the Stock Exchange : most of Canary Wharf: bought the major share in Barclays Bank  It is a major shareholder in Sainsbury's. Owns Harrods and vast square footage of new appartment developments nearby. Oh yes bought The Olympic Village once all that running and jumping had stopped and is hosting the next World Cup for which the Moslem drink laws will be relaxed, which is very thoughtful.

 Looking nice and clean                                                                          

Royal Mafiaferraseratis doing synchronised clamping 


Thank you so much dear comrade AS.  Your insights amaze as ever. But it's the photos I love  and I can't do photos on my iPad! I'm kinda wheel-clamped. 

Bourgeois Tango a deux

Love the photos! me too Fred a computor Luddite!!

  - "Do ye see yon birkie, called a Lord? who struts and and stares an all that, he's but a cuff for all that". (R. Burns- 'A mans a man for all that')







Following on ...

Dirty Money
Here is that au courant context mentioned above. Your reading of the situation was spot on and the questions apposite Fred.

The substance of this or that machination of the ruling class are worth some research and depiction  but most usefully from the overarching international view and assessment of the global condition' of Capitalism and the  class struggle.

The Imperialism blog of baboon is an invaluable, comprehensive, updating source commendably oriented to this end. Yes the story below has all the usual ingredients of hypocrisy, false dichotomy, do nothing until you are found out etc. but overall it reveals Capitalism hoist on its own petard from which all its competing and colliding elemenrts can nonetheless wildly spray ideological or real bullets. It has no way out.

At a fundamental level the 'stolen misrepresentation' depiction above is the case. The reality is mystified but  Marx was emphatic: this mystification is not an illusion. money is the 'mental form' : alienated, perverted value which is not what it  appears to be but is weightily, ruthlessly, powerfully 'not what it appears to be'. 

The Finsbury Park Mosque in London was, as you know, the 'pulpit' of the Reverend Hook and Eye (Abu Hamzar). Mohammed Kozbah is the new chairman and with the commitee has had the task of working to turn around the damage - in good faith in my opinion. Instead of banking with an Arab bank  - they chose the English Bank HSBC . Now before you laugh, I know that you don't have to go far on this site to read in depth about HSBC's international organised criminal enterprise,  From our perspective,  it makes no difference.

But from the point of view of yer average committee of yer average religious institution, trying 'to integrate' into this allegedy 'multicultural society' (i.e. monocultural = commodity based) in line with Headmaster Cameron's school rules, well use the local high street bank.

HSBC closed the Mosque's account in September 2014 : no reason given other than the bank was 'de-risking' (more on how risk is calculated another day - basically: type 'Finsbury Park' and  'Mohammed' into the bespoke search engine and up comes 'terrorist') So Mr Kozbah said what choice did we have but to go back to one of the many Arab Banks.

Ha! HSBC had been and investigated in the U.S in 2012 and received a $2 billion fine and £28 million plus in the U.K  How's this for State hypocrisy, contradiction, machination. The Government prosecuted them, amongst other things, for violating the Trading with the Enemy Act. (outrageous: that's The C.I.A's job)

But HSBC didn't close this particular Mosque's account  or any other client's then. 'Only' the Government had slapped them. Why September 2014. Because the first civil case ever brought against a Bank for liabilities to victims of terrorist attack was concluded in favour of the victims (300 or so) and because many other civil actions by those maimed traumatised in bomb blasts etc. are in the pipeline - both against banks and huge corporations.

22nd of September 2014

A federal jury on Monday found Arab Bank liable for knowingly supporting terrorism efforts connected to two dozen attacks in the Middle East, the first time a bank has ever been held liable in a civil suit under a broad antiterrorism statute. Arab Bank, a major Middle Eastern bank with $46 billion in assets, was accused of knowingly supporting specific terrorist acts in and around Israel during the second Palestinian uprising of the early 2000s.

The verdict is expected to have a strong impact on similar legal efforts to hold financial institutions responsible for wrongdoing by their clients, even if the institutions followed banking rules, and could be seen as a deterrent for banks that conduct business

The plaintiffs in this case, about 300 victims of 24 terrorist attacks, said the acts had been carried out by Hamas, and accused Arab Bank of supporting the organization by handling transfers and payments for Hamas members.

The case has a long history of controversy. It has split the Obama administration and drawn the attention of the Supreme Court, and has the government of Jordan, where the bank has its headquarters, arguing that it opens the entire Middle East banking infrastructure to severe risk. And it has some bank executives watching the trial with frayed nerves, concerned that a finding of liability here could mean that doing business in many areas of the world may become too risky.

So Fred it seems that only when the banking system knows it can be successfully sued for facilitating terrorism in hundreds of civil cases by citizens, who win and  bourgeois media power(for its own purposes)can blast away does it require an 'important speech' from CamCam the Clown - who incidentally has been as aimiable to 'Gulf Chic' as was Gordon the Brown.

As baboon said re Tunisia. prior to that incident, 87 people killed there 154 over there is passed over until the reality is made local, very public with very real faces and words. Then the questions are asked. So with this case for the injured. In fact Egyptian U.S citizens recently brought a class action  - legal sense only I hasten to add - against the F.B.I. for brutalising them in detention in non U.S locations. 

The federal judge quite frankly admitted his embarrassment in having to deny the case even going forward because there is a constitutional precedent but added:

“It’s troubling to think about the FBI and CIA … any U.S. official can detain a U.S. citizen forever without remedy.”

Which in an odd way is a sort of 'ideological proof' that all law and moralising is but the law and moralising of the ruling class. And  in contradiction with itself if its own principles are applied to itself.

The ultimate mystifying and crazy case in this area would be for a thousand U.S citizens to successfully sue the C.I.A which they can't ..but even if that happened and they 'won' in the show trial of the century (exclusive to SKY) what? Pay them 5% of the Pentagon's war -chest ( whose total is $52 ish billion - yearly budget $490 billion) : roll a few Dept Heads while the N.S.A and Black Ops carry on before,after and throughout without interruption.


Here is another ongoing example of civil prosecution of corporate entities for 'facilitating terrorism' relating to Colombian Paramilitaries / American Corporation.  Not a bank but obviously banks are the greater or lesser minions of the owners of the means of exchange  and involved de facto in all Capitalist transactions. Again, although if a victim gets a pay out bravo, but it is repressive tolerance is it not? Especially in this case where the U.S Army and its Commander in Chief were as heavily involved if memory serves

(You can get the latest Stock Market prices for banana futures here as well....its only a class action not Class Action)