Winston Churchill justifies the UK-France-Israeli conspiratorial 1956 invasion of Egypt.

Below (maybe, digitally for the first time) is Winston Churchill’s statement endorsing the UK/France/Israeli invasion of Egypt October-November 1956. Churchill is clearly in favour of the conspiracy by claiming it was all Egypt’s fault that Israel is invading it. The invasion left the UK and France with no option but to “restore peace”. Churchill’s pack of lies was made to his constituents and printed in the Guardian on the 5th November 1956.

In the inter-war years Churchill was known as an advocate of using mustard gas on Arabs and Kurds to quell rebellions against the British Empire. He had supported the colonisation of Palestine with European Jews at the expense of the indigenous population in a genocidal manner,

“I do not admit that the dog in the manger has the final right to the manger, even though he may have lain there for there for a very long time…I do not admit, for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia…”

But to his constituents he refers to British history in the region as an endeavour to “confer on them the benefits of justice and freedom from internecine wars.”    Continue reading

Advertisements

Can the Muslim Brotherhood ever tell the Truth?

Anyone that has ever known Muslim Brotherhood type of Islamists knows them to have a peculiar relationship, if not a highly tenuous relationship, with being truthful. Dr. Hazem Kandil’s (Lecturer in Political Sociology at the University of Cambridge) book, “Inside the Brotherhood” has made this assessment after studying the relationship between the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and its own members:

“The Brotherhood’s most frequent violation, however, had always been disinformation. In the words of a particularly harsh dissident, Brothers “lie as often as they breathe” (Khirbawi 2012: 269). Again, it is all religiously sanctioned. Prophet Muhammad once said Continue reading

The Empire’s Balfour Declaration and the Suez Canal

For the average British pro-Palestinian human rights activist, the Balfour Declaration, published ninety- five years ago on the 2nd November 1917, is only mentioned in passing in their publications or agitations. For them, the declaration seems to have drafted in, one autumn day most likely alongside the brown and crimson leaves for then to triumphantly and jubilantly land on Lord Balfour’s, the British foreign secretary, desk. For them, it is more convenient to strongly imply that the Palestinian predicament began when the young United Nations partitioned Palestine on the 29th November 1947 or when the British Empire’s Palestine mandate officially ended on 15th May 1948. For them, the fact that up to 400,000 Palestinians under the Empire’s watch were ethnically cleansed between these latter two dates literally doesn’t warrant a footnote.[1]

This is certainly the impression given by reading the literature of “revolutionary socialists” as well as other supposedly pro-Palestinians. In his book “Imperialism and Resistance”, “revolutionary socialist” John Rees argues Continue reading

British Colonial Strategy and the 9/11 Blowback.

Osama bin Laden gained his reputation as a militant Islamist during the Western backed counter-insurgency – so-called “jihad” – against the Soviet Union’s invasion ofAfghanistanin the 1980’s

The main strategy employed by the West during this campaign to contain and repel the Soviet invasion was to recruit Islamists from around the world[1] in a war against ‘godless communism’.

Needless to say, this alliance or collusion between the West and Islamist did not originally arise with the invasion ofAfghanistanby Soviet troops. Its provenance can easily be traced back to the challenges faced by British Imperialism in the earlier part of the twentieth century. Continue reading

The British Origins of Modern Islamism.

“…If you can look into the seeds of time

And say which grain will grow and which will not…”

The ‘War on Terror’ has now taken in the war and invasion of Afghanistan (began 2002) and Iraq (began 2003).  There was also the failed Israeli (with the overt acquiescence of Saudia Arabia, Jordan and Egypt) attempt to destroy the Lebanese resistance and re-establish itself in southern Lebanon (within a self-declared 72 hour time-frame).  One of the reasons for these wars is that civilisation is at loggerheads with a militant and violent brand of political Islam which gained its ultimate murderous expression in the terrorist acts of September 11th 2001 in New York and Washington.  One of the terms that seems to be obtaining wide and popular currency in describing this violent brand of political Islamism is ‘Islamofascism’.  But how historically and politically accurate is this term? Continue reading