Are Iraqis better off ten years after the invasion? Is Iraq becoming more stable and is its economy booming?

Supporters of the Iraq war are constantly telling us how great life in Iraq is these days. Scottish Labour party member Doug Maughan writing to the Sunday Herald claims Iraq is progressing nicely along the long, hard road to stability, adding that Iraq’s economy is booming (1).

This echoes Blair’s biographer John Rentoul who hilariously recommended Jeffrey Archer in the Times saying much the same thing back in 2010 “Today [Baghdad] is a boom town, rather than a bomb site. If I were a young man, looking to make my fortune, I would be off to Iraq like a shot.” (2).

Are Iraqis really better off than they were before the invasion?

Iraq certainly goes boom, boom, boom with each set of bombs set off by Al Qa’ida, let into the country by the invasion; and growing stronger again since short-lived US funding of ‘Awakening’ militias to fight them ended in 2009  (3) – (9).

Today NATO are quietly collaborating with the Saudi and Qatari Sunni dictatorships (sorry “monarchies”, because it sounds nicer) to arm, fund and train Sunni Islamist armed groups, in order to target the Shia/Alawite axis of Iran, Assad and Hezbollah ; and this Islamic civil war is spreading from Syria to Lebanon and Iraq, with Al nusrah in Syria and Al Qa’ida in Iraq now openly allied to one another (10) – (14).

Perhaps the fact that the Shia government of Iraq has refused to place sanctions on Syria is relevant there. It may have led the Saudis and the US government may have decided they would rather not have a Shia government in Iraq (15).

Polls of Iraqis don’t back up the dominant British and American media story that “of course” Iraqis are better off now than before the invasion either.

A Zogby poll of Iraqis in 2011 found only 30% thought Iraq was better off than before the invasion, 42% worse off, the rest the same or didn’t know (16). From various interviews with Iraqis the fact that under Saddam you could at least know what was and wasn’t safe to do, while since the invasion you could be killed just due to your religion, or kidnapped to extort money from your family, or caught in crossfire, is one of the major reasons.

A Greenberg poll in April 2012 found a majority believing the country was headed in the right direction only among Shia, with most Sunni Arabs and Kurds disagreeing, showing that sectarian divisions are if anything even worse than under Saddam (17).

As for the supposedly “booming” economy a Gallup poll in March this year found 55% of Iraqis say the jobs and unemployment situation has become worse since the end of 2011 and 34% say it’s stayed the same (18).

Inequality, homelessness and hunger have if anything become worse problems even than under Saddam and sanctions. For much of the occupation many Iraqis were searching for food in rubbish bins, many of them refugees created by coalition offensives on cities, or by sectarian fighting (see sources 41 to 49 on the blog post on this link).

Another cause of these problems is corruption under both the Coalition Provisional Authority and elected Iraqi governments. Under Paul Bremer and the Coalition Provisional Authority billions of dollars of Iraqi UN oil for food funds went missing (19).

Saddam Hussein was certainly a brutal, torturing and genocidal dictator, but his genocides and massacres were over by 2000 – and sanctions could have been lifted at any time as Saddam had proven in 1991 he wouldn’t risk using chemical weapons any more once all the superpowers were his enemies rather than his allies.

So by 2003 war was bound to kill far more Iraqis than it saved, especially run by Cheney and Rumsfeld, the architects of the Latin American death squads in the 80s, who brought the “El Salvador option” to Iraq, with units like the Iraqi Police Commandos (20).

The occupation’s brutality almost matched Saddam for torture and even massacres of civilians, complete with targeting ambulances, like the one in Falluja in April 2004, only stopping short of Saddam's genocides (21) – (22).  Today US trained Iraqi units kidnap and torture Iraqis with all the same torture methods used under Saddam, including rape and pulling out nails with pliers, often just to extract ransom money from their families (23) – (25). Iraqi forces frequently fire on and kill unarmed demonstrators; while US trained Iraqi Special Forces summarily execute suspected insurgents or dissidents the same way they did under Saddam (26) – (30).

The supporters of the Iraq war do have a point in asking how the Arab Spring would have turned out if Saddam had still been in power. The results might, as they suggest, have been bloody, as in Syria, but then that would be no more bloody than the occupation or the sectarian fighting and Iraqi government brutality during and since it.

While life has improved for many Kurds and Marsh Arabs, with the southern marshes now partially restored, the Marsh Arabs were at war with occupation forces for years ; and disputes between the Kurdish regional government and the Iraqi central government over whether the former can negotiate contracts with foreign oil companies or only the central government can do so has been added to Sectarian violence between Kurds and Sunni Arabs who settled in Kurdistan under Saddam. This could produce civil war if a compromise is not reached.

It’s certainly to be hoped that life will improve for Iraqis, but the outlook isn’t good – and if it does improve it will be despite the invasion and occupation and NATO and the Gulf monarchies encouraging a Sunni-Shia civil war across the Middle East, not because of them.

(1) = Sunday Herald 28 Apr 2013 ‘Iraq well on the road to stability’, http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/letters/iraq-well-on-the-road-to-stability.20907120

(2) = Independent ‘Eagle Eye’ 26 Jul 2010 ‘Iraq, land of opportunity’,
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/07/26/iraq-land-of-opportunity/

(3) = Reuters 20 Mar 2013 ‘Al-Qaida claims responsibility for Iraq anniversary bombings’,
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/03/20/us-iraq-violence-qaeda-idUSBRE92J09C20130320

(4) = BBC News 15 Apr 2013 ‘Iraq deadly bombings hit Nasariyah, Kirkuk and Baghdad’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863

(5) = Washington Post 30 Apr 2013 ‘Wave of bombings further tests Iraq’s stability’,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/wave-of-bombings-further-tests-iraqs-stability/2013/04/29/558ea356-b0fb-11e2-9a98-4be1688d7d84_story.html

(6) = BBC World Service 13 May 2009 ‘Awakening Councils face uncertain future’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2009/05/090513_awakening_wt_sl.shtml ; ‘Sunni Awakening Councils, or Sahwa, were paid by the Americans to keep the peace in their neighbourhoods. Often former insurgents who had fought with al-Qaeda, they turned against their former allies and drove them out of much of Iraq. However, the Shia-dominated government has taken over responsibility for the groups and many Sahwa members say they are now being sidelined.’

(7) = McCLatchy Newspapers 01 Apr 2013 ‘Iraqi government at odds with U.S.-funded militias’, http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Iraqi-government-at-odds-with-U-S-funded-militias-1433562.php ; ‘the militias, known as the Sons of Iraq or Awakening councils… undercutting support for… al-Qaida in Iraq …Under the program, the United States pays each militia member a stipend of about $300 a month and promised that they'd get jobs with the Iraqi government. But the Iraqi government, which is led by Shiite Muslims, has brought only a relative handful of the more than 100,000 militia members into the security forces. Now officials are making it clear that they don't intend to include most of the rest.’

(8) = The Hill 29 Jun 2012 ‘Pentagon condemns return of al Qaeda in Iraq, promises 'unrelenting' response’,
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/240877-pentagon-condemns-return-of-al-qaeda-in-iraq-promises-unrelenting-response

(9) = Council On Foreign Relations 18 Mar 2013 ‘Al Qaeda in Iraq’,
http://www.cfr.org/iraq/al-qaeda-iraq/p14811

(10) = Washington Post 16 May 2012 ‘Syrian rebels get influx of arms with gulf neighbors’ money, U.S. coordination’,  http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/syrian-rebels-get-influx-of-arms-with-gulf-neighbors-money-us-coordination/2012/05/15/gIQAds2TSU_story.html

(11) = Sunday Times 09 Dec 2012 ‘Covert US plan to arm rebels’,
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1173125.ece

(12) = Reuters 14 Nov 2011 ‘Syria urges Arab League to reconsider suspension’,
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=245466  ; ‘Gabriel Ben-Dor, director of national security studies at the University of Haifa… Ben-Dor said the decision should also be viewed within the context of Arab and Western attempts to contain an emboldened Iran.…“They’re hoping to dismantle the axis of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah... to isolate Iran even more by depriving it of its only major ally in the Middle East.”’

(13) = guardian.co.uk 09 Apr 2013 ‘Al-Qaida in Iraq admits links to Syrian jihadist fighters’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/09/alqaida-iraq-admits-jabhat-alnusra

(14) = BBC News 10 Apr 2013 ‘Syria crisis: Al-Nusra pledges allegiance to al-Qaeda’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22095099

(15) = BBC News 27 Nov 2011 ‘Syria unrest: Arab League adopts sanctions in Cairo’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15901360

(16) = Zogby Research Services November 2011 ‘Iraq: The War, its consequences and the future’, http://aai.3cdn.net/2212d2d41f760d327e_fxm6vtlg7.pdf

(17) = Greenberg Quinlan Rossner Research May 2012 ‘A Major Shift in the Political Landscape - Graphs for the report on the April 2012 National Survey’,
http://www.ndi.org/files/NDI-Iraq%20-%20April%202012%20National%20Survey%20-%20Presentation.pdf , page 28

(18) = Gallup 12 March 2013 ‘Iraqis Say Security Better as Result of U.S. Withdrawal’,
http://www.gallup.com/poll/161312/iraqis-say-security-better-result-withdrawal.aspx

(19) = Reuters 19 Jun 2011 ‘Iraq hunting $17 billion missing after U.S. invasion’,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/19/us-iraq-usa-money-idUSTRE75I20S20110619

(20) = New York Times Magazine 01 May 2005 ‘The Way of the Commandos’, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/magazine/01ARMY.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

(21) = BBC News 23 Apr 2004 ‘Picture emerges of Falluja siege’,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3653223.stm

(22) = Iraq Body Count 26 Oct 2004 ‘No Longer Unknowable: Falluja's April Civilian Toll is 600’, http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/reference/press-releases/9/

(23) = Amnesty International Annual Report 2012 – Iraq – Torture and other ill-treatment,
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iraq/report-2012#section-4-5 ‘Torture and other ill-treatment were widespread in prisons and detention centres, in particular those controlled by the Ministries of Interior and Defence. Commonly reported methods were suspension by the limbs for long periods, beatings with cables and hosepipes, electric shocks, breaking of limbs, partial asphyxiation with plastic bags, and rape or threats of rape.’

(24) =  Amnesty International World Report 2010 (covering 2009) – Country Report Iraq, http://report2010.amnesty.org/sites/default/files/AIR2010_AZ_EN.pdf#page=123 ;(once pdf loads, scroll down to page 125 (by PDF page number) or 178 (number marked on page); ‘Iraqi security forces committed gross human rights violations including extrajudicial executions, torture...and did so largely with impunity....Torture methods reported included beatings with cables and hosepipes, suspension by the limbs for long periods...electric shocks to the genitals...breaking of limbs, removal of toenails with pliers and piercing the body with drills. Some detainees were alleged to have been raped….In May inmates of the womens’ prison in al Kadhimiya told members of the parliament’s human rights committee that they had been raped while held in prison or detained elsewhere’

(25) = Guardian 16 Jan 2012 ‘Corruption in Iraq: 'Your son is being tortured. He will die if you don't pay'’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/16/corruption-iraq-son-tortured-pay

(26) = Amnesty International Annual Report 2012 – Iraq – Excessive Use of Force,
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iraq/report-2012#section-4-6 , ‘The security forces used excessive force in response to anti-government protests in Baghdad and other cities, particularly in February and March, using live ammunition, sound bombs and other weapons to disperse peaceful protests. At least 20 people were killed in the protests that began in February.’

(27) = guardian.co.uk 04 Mar 2011 ‘Baghdad protesters converge on Liberation Square’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/04/baghdad-protesters-iraq-driving-ban ; Security forces around Iraq clashed with protesters last Friday in the country's most widespread and violent demonstrations since a wave of unrest began to spread across the Middle East. At least 14 people were killed

(28) = Reuters 23 Apr 2013 ‘Tensions high after Iraq forces raid Sunni camp, 23 dead’,
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/04/23/uk-iraq-protests-idUKBRE93M07F20130423

(29) = Amnesty International 25 Apr 2013 ‘Iraq: Rein in security forces following the killings of dozens at protest in al-Hawija’,
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE14/006/2013/en/9e32213c-789c-48a7-81ca-083659d185e6/mde140062013en.html

(30) = The Nation 22 Jun 2009 ‘Iraq's New Death Squad’,
http://www.thenation.com/article/iraqs-new-death-squad

Salmond and Grampian police should be ashamed for aiding Trump’s illegal campaign against the people of the Menie Estate ; but it doesn’t show Scotland is too small to be independent – the same happens in the US and UK regularly

Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond, The Telegraph and Grampian police should be ashamed for allowing and aiding Trump’s use of illegal methods to try to force people out of their homes and farms on the Menie Estate in Scotland but the main cause of the problem isn’t Scotland being too small to stand up to big money, similar things happen in the UK and US all the time. The cause of the problem is allowing big banks, firms and billionaires to make political donations and allowing revolving doors between jobs with them and with government departments giving contracts to them and regulating them. (If you just want to know what you can do rather than read the rest, scroll down to the ‘what you can do’ bolded sub-heading)

I'd thought Donald Trump was the obvious contender for balloon self-inflated by his own arrogance. Maybe Neil Midgely, deputy editor of the Telegraph newspaper is a contender too. He has a review of the documentary ‘You’ve been Trumped,’ which is Anthony Baxter’s film showing Trump’s SNP government and Grampian police backed campaign to try to force out people out of homes and farms they’ve lived on all their lives, by illegal methods including letting Trump’s employees cut off their water and electricity supplies, build earth berms round their houses and many other intrusions on to and damages to their property (1).

Midgely writes " But the …documentary…was so biased in favour of the protesters that it was hard not to end up rooting for Trump and his monolithic capitalist plans. There were endless sympathetic chats with the locals who wouldn’t sell their eyesore properties to Trump….When Trump’s men infuriated the locals – by apparently cutting off their water supply, or building mounds of earth outside their windows – the film’s implicit suggestion was that it was all done out of spite. And if spite was the motive, it was spite so bracing as to be a rare and precious thing. It was also cheering to see the busybody film-maker, Anthony Baxter, at one point carted off by the local constabulary. " (2).

First off Neil, they’re not “protesters”. The word you’re looking for is “residents” – people who’ve lived (and in some cases farmed) there for all their lives. They had considerable sympathy and support from many people and there were a few protests in favour of them, which get brief coverage in the documentary – but most of it is interviews with the residents, with police, with Trumps’ spokespeople (who unsurprisingly didn’t have much to say other than threats of getting the documentary makers arrested and charged), clips of Trump making his own case and film of what Trump’s employees and the police were doing, along with interviews with legal experts and experts on the likely impact on jobs from the development (which found, in opposition to Trump’s claims that local people would get a lot of jobs on it, most of the jobs would be likely to go to Polish and other EU migrant workers).

I thought that Conservatives were all for property rights, Neil ;  Seems not in your case. Seems you're quite happy for billionaires who've bought political influence to come in and take peoples' property and try to force them out of their homes to make way for another frigging golf course (because of course there's a massive shortage of them in Scotland - e.g St Andrews for instance has none, obviously), so long as they're oiks and not your golfing buddies.

I thought Conservatives were for upholding the law. Seems not in Neil’s case. He’s fine with money trumping the law; fine with Trump's money, or the promise of some jobs, getting police to let him illegally cut off peoples’ water and electricity supplies and steal parts of their land from them and even build earth berms round their houses.

I thought Conservatives were meant to be for civil liberties. In Mr Midgely’s case, seems not. He enjoys seeing people arrested on trumped up charges of 'breach of the peace' and handcuffed for merely interviewing the people involved.

I very much hope that you are a victim of similar injustices in future Neil – that your property is stolen by developers, that your electricity and water are cut off to try to force you out of your home – and that the police and government similarly either aid the developers or look the other way as your property  and rights and civil liberties are ridden roughshod over by big money. Then you might understand what you got wrong here.

On top of that Trump was determined he should get to build not just on 90% of the site he wanted, but that it had to include destroying an SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest) containing rare species too. We don’t exactly have a shortage of golf courses in Scotland. St Andrews alone has more than you could count and there are huge numbers of others all over the country. If we lost a golf course we could replace it. If we lose rare species to extinction there is no getting them back though. They are gone forever.

The smartest political calculations can go wrong when they leave out right and wrong

SNP First Minister Alec Salmond decided to over-rule the elected local council’s planning committee – and it’s SNP chairman in 2009 – to give Trump exactly the planning permission he wanted. His government must have either looked the other way or else seen to it that the then SNP headed Aberdeenshire local council got the police to do a mixture of looking the other way as Trump’s employees broke the law on other peoples’ property, guarding the law breakers as they did so; and harassing and arresting the documentary makers (including by arresting them and putting them in a cell for four hours by mis-using the catch-all ‘breach of the peace’ charge).

Salmond calculated that he would gain more votes by the jobs created and sports coverage of the new golf course than he would lose by allowing an arrogant billionaire to over-rule the local council, destroy habitat for rare species and force people out of their homes. Even the most charismatic and intelligent politician can get his sums wrong where he doesn't factor in right and wrong though. In a case of poetic justice he’s suffered negative media coverage (largely due to Anthony Baxter’s work) combined with a feud with Trump over plans for offshore wind turbines off the coast of his golf course development. The recession created by the financial crisis has also reduced investment and demand for Trump’s development, which might fail yet.

Next time Salmond is engaging his brain purely as a vote calculating machine he should remember this and take right and wrong into account too.

Why it’s not caused by Scotland being a small country – and not an argument against independence

However those arguing that this shameful episode is due to Scotland being too small to resist big money’s influence and using it as an argument against independence have it wrong too.

The British and US governments cave in to big firms, banks and billionaires constantly. Just look at the NHS contracts going to Circle Healthcare whose shareholders lobbied for privatisation and donate to the Conservative party ; or US military aid of over $1bn a year to Egypt, openly given to subsidise US arms firms that make political donations to Presidential and congressional campaigns, particularly Lockheed Martin (3) – (9).

That’s not to mention all the white-washing of the pollution of water and air by fracking and on land oil drilling in the US due to the big oil and gas companies buying up political influence and even funding biased scientific studies (thankfully countered by neutral ones).

So the problem isn’t the size of the country, but big money buying influence through private donations to election campaigns and political parties; revolving door syndrome allowing people to go between jobs in those firms and the government departments giving contracts to and regulating them ; and governments’  choosing jobs from multinationals, which may go overseas as quickly as they arrived, over backing smaller businesses based in their own country. (the last problem being the relevant one with Trump and the SNP – though it’s possible Salmond also hoped to get donations for his party, though I’ve found no evidence he got any) (10) – (11).

The solution is to make it a criminal offence to give or receive private political donations,   or to go from a job in a government department to a company given contracts or regulated by it, or vice-versa, for 5 or 10 years; and provide limited, equal, public funding to all candidates in elections.

What you can do

Sign the petition against Trump’s illegal campaign to drive people out of their homes .

Join and/or donate to the Tripping Up Trump campaign group against forced compulsory purchase orders being issued purely for the benefit of big developers.

 

 

Sources

(1) = Independent blogs 18 Oct 2012 ‘You’ve Been Trumped! Director Anthony Baxter speaks about his new documentary’, http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/10/18/you%E2%80%99ve-been-trumped-director-anthony-baxter-speaks-about-his-new-documentary/

(2) = Telegraph 21 Oct 2012 ‘You've Been Trumped, BBC Two, review’,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/9621334/Youve-Been-Trumped-BBC-Two-review.html

(3) = Herald letters 23 Oct 2012 ‘Trump documentary highlights the vulnerability of smaller economies’ http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/letters/trump-documentary-highlights-the-vulnerability-of-smaller-economies.19214235

(4) = Conservative Home website ‘Big cash donors to the Conservative party, by ‘donor group’ January 2001 to June 2010’, https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?authkey=CM2egqgB&key=0AtAQVk3Qj4FYdEJKVTg3aTZteV9pcnFZbXBvN3lRcUE&hl=en&authkey=CM2egqgB#gid=0

(5) = Observer 05 Jun 2011 ‘Questions grow over private care firm Circle Health ahead of flotation’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jun/05/questions-grow-over-circle-health

(6) = guardian.co.uk 05 Nov 2011 ‘Private firm to run NHS hospital’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/nov/10/private-firm-run-nhs-hospital

(7) = NYT 23 Mar 2012 ‘Once Imperiled, U.S. Aid to Egypt Is Restored’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/24/world/middleeast/once-imperiled-united-states-aid-to-egypt-is-restored.html?_r=0 ; ‘An intense debate within the Obama administration over resuming military assistance to Egypt, which in the end was approved Friday by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, turned in part on a question that had nothing to do with democratic progress in Egypt but rather with American jobs at home…. The companies involved include Lockheed Martin, which is scheduled to ship the first of a batch of 20 new F-16 fighter jets next month’

(8) = Center for Responsive Politics – Organisation Profiles – Lockheed Martin,
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000104 (shows Lockheed Martin executives and PAC committees donated over $2 million to candidates in the 2012 election cycle including Obama and Romney and members of congressional committees on defense spending)

(9) Center for Responsive Politics - Lockheed Martin: All Recipients ; Among Federal Candidates, 2008 Cycle, http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000104&type=P&state=&sort=A&cycle=2008 (shows similar donations including to Obama and McCain’s campaigns in 2008)

(10) = Guardian 15 Oct 2012 ‘MoD staff and thousands of military officers join arms firms’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/15/mod-military-arms-firms

(11) = Guardian 22 Oct 2012 ‘Blurred boundaries between public service and private interest’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/healthcare-network/2012/oct/22/public-service-private-blurred-boundaries ; ‘the resignation from the NHS Commissioning Board of Jim Easton to become managing director of the private provider Care UK…Previous senior officials in the Department of Health transferring their wallets to the private sector include Matthew Swindells, chief information officer at the DH who joined KPMG, along with Mark Britnell and Gary Belfield, who had run the DH commissioning programme; Simon Stevens, Tony Blair's senior health advisor from 1997-2004 became a vice-president for United Health; and Penny Dash, formerly DH director of strategy, left for McKinsey.

Alfie Meadows charges parallel Mark Kennedy tactic of charging victims of police violence

Alfie Meadows, the student who almost died after having his skull fractured by a policeman during the student protests – and who other police tried to prevent getting to hospital afterwards – is still facing a trumped up charge of violent disorder, presumably intended to make it look as if ‘he was asking for it’ to save face for the police and avoid charging the police officers responsible, despite his mother and his lecturer being among many witnesses who say he was not involved in any violence towards police (1).

Meadows has to appear in court next month.

This parallels other cases in which police who have made unprovoked attacks on protesters have charged the victim with violence or assaulting a police officer – including charges brought against undercover police officer Mark Kennedy. During protests against the Drax power station in 2006 Kennedy recalled intervening to stop police hitting a woman protester with batons. They knocked him to the ground and jumped up and down on his back, causing permanent injuries to his spine, then charged him with assaulting a police officer. The charges were only dropped once it was found out he was an undercover officer himself (2) – (3).

You can sign the petition calling for charges against Meadows to be dropped on this link and if you want to help the campaign in other ways you can find out more on this link.

EDIT 25th April 2012 : It seems the Meadows case may not be as straightforward as it first seemed as Meadows seems to have admitted to having taken part in lifting and pushing metal barriers towards police (4).

(1) = Barnett & Whetstone Press 05 May 2011 ‘Injured Alfie faces violence charge at demo’, http://www.barnet-today.co.uk/news.cfm?id=16190

(2) = Guardian 02 Feb 2012 ‘Beaten by colleagues, mishandled by bosses: how Mark Kennedy went rogue’ , http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/02/how-mark-kennedy-went-rogue

(3) = Channel 4 (UK) 14 Nov 2009, 9pm GMT ‘Confessions of an undercover cop’, http://www.channel4.com/programmes/confessions-of-an-undercover-cop

(4) = Channel 4 News 10 April 2012 'CRIME: Alfie Meadows on trial for violent disorder during student protests', http://www.itnsource.com/en/shotlist/ITN/2012/04/10/T10041257/

The failure to charge Trayvon Martin's killer shows racism is still endemic in the Southern states of the US

Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17 year old black boy, was shot dead by George Zimmerman, a latino member of an informal neighbourhood watch group in Florida earlier this month. Police and prosecutors in Florida have so far claimed there is insufficient evidence to charge Zimmerman with any crime.

Zimmerman phoned 911 to tell the police that he thought Martin was acting suspiciously (Martin had bought a drink and some sweets from a shop and was walking home). He says he followed Martin in his truck, got out of it when he couldn’t see where Martin had gone – and that Martin then jumped him from behind as he walked back to his truck and was punching him, leading Zimmerman to fear for his life, at which point he shot Martin twice in self-defence.

This story seems unlikely given that Zimmerman was an armed man, while Martin was an unarmed boy. The fact that Martin was 6 foot 3 inches tall and weighed 140 pounds, while Zimmerman is 5 feet 9 inches tall and weighs 250 pounds may make things marginally less clear cut.

Three witnesses – people who lived on the street Martin was killed on – say they heard what sounded like a boy crying in fear for help and begging for his life, followed by two shots.

While Zimmerman’s story sounds far fetched, some say a ‘Stand Your Ground’ law passed by the State of Florida would mean that if his story was true he could be argued to have been acting within the law.

The relevant section of the law reads ‘A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.’

However, looked at from Martin’s likely point of view, even if Zimmerman’s story was true, Martin might be the one who had the right to defend himself with any means he thought necessary if he thought his life was in danger – which he reasonably could when approached by a man who had been following him and who was armed with a gun.

The current and former members of the Florida state legislature who drafted the law say that Zimmerman can’t use it as a defence whether his version of events is true or not as he was told by the 911 operator that he did not need to follow Martin as police officers were on their way.

What is completely unacceptable about this case is that Florida police and prosecutors have so far refused to bring any charges against Zimmerman. Their claim that there’s insufficient evidence even to bring charges seems far fetched given the three witnesses who heard the events combined with phone call recordings of Zimmerman’s 911 call and Martin’s phone call to his girlfriend.

Zimmerman’s 911 call is on youtube here – at 1 minute 39 seconds he tells the operator ‘They always get away’. At one minute 52 seconds he can be heard saying “fucking coons”.

 It is inconceivable that if the dead boy was white or latino and the killer was black that the police would not have arrested and charged them by now. Unless Zimmerman is charged the message sent to Americans – and to the rest of the world – will be that the Southern states of the US have not really changed since the segregation and lynchings of black people by the Klu Klux Klan in the past – that twenty-first century America is still a country of white supremacists in which black people can be killed without consequences. If that message is sent, expect a big fall in tourism to Florida and the rest of the US.

George Zimmerman’s father Robert has claimed in interviews that there had been repeated burglaries by black youths in the neighbourhood – but he also claimed before the 911 recording was released that Zimmerman had never followed or confronted Martin at any point – something contradicted by his son’s own account to the 911 operator ; and even if there were these burglaries there was no justification for killing Trayvon, though Zimmerman also said in the 911 call that Martin was putting his hand to his waist-band and was holding something (this turned out to be a can of iced tea and a packet of skittles (sweets)).

Even if Zimmerman did believe Martin was a burglar ‘casing’ houses, as he suggested in the call, this would still mean Zimmerman is a dangerous man, prone to suspecting people based on little or nothing and to follow them armed with a gun which he is very willing to use.

For a comprehensive summary of the facts of the case and links to the various mainstream media in Florida and the US reporting them, see this link.

To sign the Martin family’s petition to the Florida police and legal authorities demanding that Zimmerman be charged and tried for Martin’s death click this link

Police are not confused about how much force they can use in what situation - given past abuses of their authority they can't get a blank cheque

Claims made by police spokesmen on BBC News 24 that police are “confused” about what level of force they can use and that this is making it difficult for them to deal with rioters need to be taken with a huge pile of salt. The line they’re pushing is that in the past police have ended up in court for simply trying to prevent crimes. They know that’s a lie. The only police who ended up in court or fired were those involved in the shooting of Jean Charles De Menezes after massive incompetence by senior officers given the power of life and death over others; and others like the officer who repeatedly assaulted bypasser Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protests; the officer who attacked the loud but tiny environmentalist protester Nicola Fisher with a baton (and got off with it) ; and the officer who dragged a prisoner across a police station before throwing her face down into a cell.

Others who should be facing charges of grievous bodly harm and endangering lives have got off with it. They include the policeman who beat peaceful student protester Alfie Meadows so hard with a baton that he would have died if he hadn’t had emergency brain surgery – and the officers who tried to turn the ambulance carrying him away from the nearest hospital as protesters being treated in the same hospital as injured police offended their sensibilities (presumably on the usual theory held by the stupidest and worst police officers that all protesters are criminals).

 Some police spokesmen are trying to use the riots to reverse planned job and funding cuts. That’s fair enough. I support increasing the number of police and i'd guess most people do. However they’re also using them to try to demand a blank cheque to use any amount of force they feel like in any situation and to try to get the public to place them above the law. That won’t wash.

If they’re confused about how much force they can use when they’re not up to the job – they can use what the law allows – the amount required to defend themselves and others and to prevent serious crimes – and no more.

No blank cheques to beat up anyone they like.

The initial rioting in Tottenham seems to have been caused by police shooting Mark Duggan (who may or may not have been armed but we now know definitely did not fire first – or at all) and by fifteen riot police subsequently beating a single 16 year old girl who was one of a large group of family, friends and neighbours of Duggan demanding answers from them, after she threw a leaflet and possibly a stone. That underlines the fact that giving the police a blank cheque to do as they please and believing them without question (even though their spokespeople lied about De Menezes , Tomlinson and other cases) will not make the public safer or reduce crime, but is likely to cause it instead.

The police know that when they act in self-defence or the defence of others with the amount of force necessary in the situation they’ll have public support and be acting within the law. They have to be in no more doubt than the rioters that they can’t launch random attacks on people or break the law without facing consequences. If the police were allowed to be above the law, it would only breed contempt for it and them, which would be bad for everyone.

Riot police beating 16 year old girl protesting Duggan shooting may have sparked the first riots - in Tottenham , London

The riots across London and other English cities have obviously involved a lot of opportunist theft and violence many actions that can’t be justified in any way, like the burning of public housing and three men run over and killed by a hit and run driver in Manchester – and far from it all being children out of control, there are plenty of looters in their 20s and some parents sending their children to loot shops according to eyewitnesses.

The shooting of Mark Duggan doesn’t seem to have been the only spark that started the first riots, in the Tottenham area of London, though. Reports by eyewitnesses  quoted on the Guardian website say that after Duggan was shot and killed by armed police, Tottenham community leaders and Duggan’s partner, family, friends and neighbours, among others, came on to the street to demand to know exactly what had happened. Hours later, with no answers provided, a 16 year old girl approached a line of riot police saying “We need answers, talk to us” and throwing a leaflet and possibly a stone at them. Fifteen riot police then jumped on her with shields and batons and began to beat her, triggering a riot (1).

Various eye-witnesses all agree that the initial gathering in the street was peaceful. Some claim some of the group were armed and carrying petrol, ready for looting and burning, though others deny this (2).

The media has quoted Metropolitan police spokespeople as saying Duggan was a “well-known” “major player” (i.e senior gangster) who was armed with a gun at the time he was shot (3).

This might be true. Or it might not. Metropolitan police spokespeople have said many things that turned out to be completely untrue about people they’ve shot the wrong people dead in the past, most notably Jean Charles De Menezes, the Brazilian electrician shot as a suspected suicide bomber in in an operation involving unbelievable levels of incompetence, carelessness and stupidity from people trusted with the powers of life and death over others.

Met spokespeople claimed De Menezes ‘jumped the ticket barrier’ on entering an underground station (CCTV footage and eye-witnesses disproved this), claimed he was wearing a bulky jacket with wires coming out of it (again proven false) and that police had called in medics by helicopter to try to revive him after the shooting (which seems pretty unlikely since they’d shot him 8 times in the head).

Similar lies by police came in the case of Ian Tomlinson, a newsagent walking home, who was ‘kettled’ along with (mostly peaceful) G20 protesters after a handful of protesters smashed a bank window. Police then set a dog on him and one officer hit him with a baton and shoved him twice, resulting in his death. They then invented stories about protesters pelting them with bottles as they tried to save the life of Tomlinson, who had supposedly had a heart attack due to the protesters’ actions. They went on to employ a coroner known to be dishonest to deal with the post-mortem. (In this case the policeman involved was eventually fired).

This does not prove they are lying about Duggan having had a gun, but it means the word of the police can’t be automatically trusted and we have to wait for a full investigation to find out the facts.

Initial investigations by the Independent Police Complaints Commission have found that the police’s original claim that Duggan was shot after firing on armed police officers is wrong. IPCC investigators found the bullet lodged in one officer’s radio, which Duggan had supposedly fired,  was a police issue one, not the kind of ammunition in the gun they claim Duggan had (4). This suggests that the police fired first, the police were the only ones who fired ; and at least one police officer lied about this, though it’s possible other police genuinely believed Duggan had fired the shot that hit the radio.

We can’t be certain whether either side is telling the truth or the whole truth here of course, about the shooting or the beating, but given the extremely poor record on honesty of Metropolitan Police spokespeople, anyone taking claims as fact without waiting for an inquiry will be relying on a source that has proven less than reliable in the past.

(1) = Guardian.co.uk 07 Aug 2011 ‘Tottenham riots: a peaceful protest, then suddenly all hell broke loose’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/07/tottenham-riots-peaceful-protest

(2) = See (1) above

(3) = Telegraph 08 Aug 2011 ‘London riots: Dead man Mark Duggan was a known gangster who lived by the gun’, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8687403/London-riots-Dead-man-Mark-Duggan-was-a-known-gangster-who-lived-by-the-gun.html

(4) = Guardian.co.uk 09 Aug 2011 ‘Mark Duggan did not shoot at police, says IPCC’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/09/mark-duggan-police-ipcc

In Bahrain as in Libya unarmed protesters and medical staff are being killed with helicopters, live fire and snipers

Bahrain’s military and police, along with Saudi and UAE troops are now doing everything Gaddafi’s forces have been condemned for. They are killing unarmed protesters using ground forces and helicopters, as well as firing at medics, seizing ambulances and using them to attack protesters ; and preventing doctors treating the wounded and using snipers to stop the wounded or doctors getting into hospitals. They are also occupying hospitals and beating doctors and nurses there, resulting in the deaths of wounded patients who haven’t been treated as a result. Snipers have been killing protesters in Bahrain for weeks now. The only reaction from the Obama administration is to tell the King of Bahrain that he should show more “restraint” and claims that the US government is “deeply concerned”. Similar actions by Gaddafis forces in Libya warranted reference to the International Criminal Court and talk of military intervention from the air (1) – (6). Hilary Clinton has even ludicrously suggested that Saudi forces sent into Bahrain to help crush the protests “should be used to promote dialogue” (7).

Amnesty International reports that even in earlier incidents “Dr Hani Mowafi, a US medical doctor who was part of the Amnesty International team, found a pattern of fatal and serious injuries during February’s violence showing that the security forces used live ammunition at close range, and apparently targeted protesters’ heads, chests and abdomens. They also fired medium-to-large calibre bullets from high-powered rifles on 18 February. The worst violence before today took place early on the morning of 17 February, when five people were killed. Witnesses told Amnesty International that, in scenes that would be repeated on 16 March, tanks blocked access to the Pearl Roundabout as police used shotguns as well as tear gas, batons and rubber bullets to disperse protesters, many of whom were camping there. Among the injured were people clearly identifiable as medical workers, who were targeted by police while trying to help wounded protesters at or near the roundabout.” (8)

If western governments are to have any credibility they must condemn these attacks on civilians and medical staff as much as they have those by Gaddafi’s forces in Libya, end all provision of arms and ‘crowd control’ devices to these governments and consider military intervention in Bahrain too if necessary.

Clinton has also described the attacks on the protesters as “sectarian violence” as if this was a matter of equally armed Sunnis and Shia fighting one another (9). This is nonsense, just as it was in Iraq. This is democracy protesters (Sunni and Shia) against a dictatorship. While some of the wealthier Sunnis back the dictatorship this is merely to preserve their own jobs from competition with the majority. In Iraq similarly some Shias were loosely allied to the US and Iranian governments (the SCIRI faction of mostly wealthier shia) while others – the Sadrists who represented most of the poorer Shia – demanded an immediate end to the occupation. When Sadr was targeted by US forces during what were meant to be peace negotiations he fled to Iran and accepted Iranian support. In Iraq too US forces promoted divisions between Sunnis and Shia in order to try to focus them on fighting one another rather than Coalition forces.

(1) = guardian.co.uk 16 Mar 2011 ‘Bahrain unleashes forces on protesters' camp’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/16/bahrain-protesters-military-operation-manama ; Military troops have opened a large-scale assault against hundreds of anti-government protesters occupying a landmark square in Bahrain's capital. At least two protesters and three policemen were reported to have been killed, and hundreds injured when riot police overran Pearl roundabout, the focal point for a two-month anti-government uprising.

Gunfire was heard throughout the capital and at least five helicopters were circling scenes of clashes, amid widespread panic on the streets below.

Riot police also entered Manama's Salmaniya medical centre for the first time since the demonstrations began and doctors reported they were being prevented from reaching the hospital and treating patients inside.

(2) = BBC 15 Mar 2011 ‘Bahrain king declares state of emergency after protests’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12745608

(3) CNN 16 Mar 2011 ‘Witnesses: Security forces attack protesters and doctors in Bahrain’,http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/03/16/bahrain.protests/index.html Security forces blocked highways leading to the capital and formed a ring around the country's main hospital, Salmaniya Medical Complex, not letting people enter or leave, witnesses said. Security forces then stormed the hospital and beat staffers, several doctors there said.  Doctors have been hiding in rooms, said Yousif Sharaf, a doctor at the hospital. "We are trapped," Sharaf said. "We are asking for the security forces to please stay outside the hospital. They are beating the staff." Fatima Haji, another doctor, also said she was trapped in the hospital."We are in a small group hiding," Haji said, her voice rising with emotion. "This is a government hospital. How can this happen in a government hospital?"Haji said two people had died in the hospital Wednesday morning, and she feared for the other patients there because the doctors were not able to work.

(4) = BBC News 20 Feb 2011 ‘Bahrain protests: Your stories’,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-middle-east-12504658

(5) = BBC World Service 16 Mar 2011 ‘Bahrain security forces in crackdown on Pearl Square’,http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2011/03/110316_bahrain_sl.shtml

(6) = BBC News 16 Mar 2011 ‘Bahrain crackdown on protests in Manama's Pearl Square’,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12755852

(7) = Independent 17 Mar 2011 ‘Bahrain protesters driven out of Pearl Square by tanks and tear gas’,http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/bahrain-protesters-driven-out-of-pearl-square-by-tanks-and-tear-gas-2244165.html

(8) = Amnesty International 17 Mar 2011 ‘Evidence of Bahraini security forces’ brutality revealed’,http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/evidence-bahraini-security-forces%E2%80%99-brutality-revealed-2011-03-16

(9) = See (7) above

Russian and Chinese government propaganda on Libya?

There have been reports from the Voice of Russia Radio of almost half the casualties being soldiers – without specifying how many soldiers were rebels and how many Gaddafi loyalists.The Chinese Xinua news agency also reported in the early stages of the protests in Benghazi that two policemen were hung by rioters and the managing director of a hospital was tortured to death by them (1) – (2).

It’s possible that these reports are true or closer to the truth than other media, but we also have to remember that these governments have their own ulterior motives and that most of the media in China and Russia are controlled by the governments of one party states with rigged elections. If Gaddafi survives then Libyan oil and arms contracts are likely to move from American and European firms to Russian, Chinese and Indian ones. Gaddafi has already started talks with the ambassadors of these countries on this (3). So there’s even more likelihood of their reports containing propaganda than those of the western media.

Xinua news agency have not been exactly unbiased on the causes of riots in Chinese occupied Tibet and Xinjiang, or on police responses to them. There’s no reason to think they’re more unbiased on Libya.

We also have to take account of the fact that Russia Today (RT) and Voice of Russia Radio get most of their funding from the Russian government – and that Russian journalists critical of their government often end up murdered, like Libyan journalists have in the past under Qaddafi, or having their legs and skulls broken (4) – (5). If you watch RT’s coverage of Chechnya for instance you’ll get the impression that the Russian government and their client thug Kadyrov in Chechnya are very humane democrats, with all killings in the country being the actions of “western forces” or terrorist groups. In fact Kadyrov, like Russian forces under Putin, kills anyone who defies his rule in order to keep the main oil and gas pipeline from the Caspian to Moscow under Russian control. Kadyrov has said that he approves of “honour killings” and worse than this many supposed “honour killings” are actually kidnappings followed by rape and murder, then presented by police as an “honour killing” (6). Russian forces along with Kadyrov’s  have tortured, murdered and raped their way across Chechnya for the last 25 years (7) – (9). When Russian journalist Anna Politskaya wrote articles about Putin and Kadyrov’s involvement in this, she was poisoned and when she survived that, shot dead. After the murder of human rights activist Natalya Estemirova, who was investigating the killings of women in Chechnya, Kadyrov said that she was a woman who “never possessed any honour, dignity or conscience” (10).

You will struggle to find out any of this from Russia Today or Voice of Russia coverage, which includes nothing but Kadyrov and Russian government officials condemning the killings, mixed with fawning interviews of Kadyrov telling them that all human rights activists are after is money and that all murders in Chechnya are caused by agents of the US, years after the US ended all support for Chechen rebels to get Russian support for UN resolution 1441 on Iraq (11) – (12). RT and Voice of Russia are the propaganda arms of the Russian government.

(1) = Voice of Russia 23 Feb 2011 ‘Libya riots kill 111 troops, 189 civilians’,http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/02/23/45700481.html

(2) = Xinua news 19 Feb 2011 ‘Two policemen hanged in Libya protests’,http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-02/19/c_13739109.htm

(3) = Xinua news 14 Mar 2011 ‘Gaddafi urges Russia, China, India to invest in Libya's oil sector’,http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-03/14/c_13778113.htm

(4) = guardian.co.uk 08 Nov 2010 ‘Russian journalist beaten unconscious outside office’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/08/russian-journalist-beaten-unconscious-office

(5) = guardian.co.uk 10 Dec 2010 ‘Russian journalist cleared of slander in road controversy’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/russia-beketov-cleared-slander-journalist

(6) = St. Petersburg Times 03 Mar 2009 ‘Chechen President Kadyrov Defends Honor Killings’,http://www.sptimes.ru/index.php?story_id=28409&action_id=2

(7) = Human Rights Watch 13 Nov 2006 ‘Widespread Torture in the Chechen Republic’,http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2006/11/13/widespread-torture-chechen-republic

(8) = Human Rights Watch 13 Aug 2009 ‘Killing with impunity in Chechnya’,http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/08/13/killing-impunity-chechnya

(9) = Human Rights Watch 09 Mar 2000 ‘Rape Allegations Surface in Chechnya’,http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2000/01/19/rape-allegations-surface-chechnya

(10) = See (6) above

(11) = Russia Today 27 Jan 2011 ‘The US should leave the Caucasus alone – Chechen leader’,http://rt.com/news/kadyrov-chechen-negative-image/

(12) = Guardian 24 Sep 2002, 'Russia lifts objections after Chechen 'deal'', http://www.guardian.co.uk/chechnya/Story/0,,797846,00.html

Being shot, tortured or jailed without trial doesn't become better or worse depending on the ideology used to justify it

The continuing protests for democracy and jobs across the Middle East and North Africa show that undemocratic governments of different ideologies and forms of government are all more similar than any of them would like to think.

They may vary the rhetoric they use to justify their rule and their actions, but they’ve all been jailing their own people without fair trial for decades, torturing and murdering them – and they all send their police or soldiers to shoot unarmed demonstrators in the street the moment it looks like their power might be threatened.

Which ideology you’re being jailed, tortured or shot for makes far less difference to those on the receiving end than those trying to justify it might think.

This holds whether it’s supposedly to defend the Revolution and the Republic in Libya and Egypt, to defend the Islamic revolution in the semi-theocratic Islamic Republic of Iran, or to defend the monarchy in the Kingdom of Bahrain (and held for Iraqis tortured in the name of democracy too – because democracy, as George Orwell said, is more often an undefined word used to justify unjustifiable actions than a reality).

Democracy does exist in a very real sense for the protesters who see it as fair elections, the right not to be jailed without trial, tortured or murdered by the government – and – though this gets less press – the right to a job and a living wage (most of the demonstrations having  included demands for jobs and better pay from the start).

The hypocrisy of democratically elected governments who back many of these dictatorships (the only exceptions being Syria and Iran) continues, with bans on sales of arms and “crowd control” devices, just a bit late and - on their past records - unlikely to last long.

If the Obama administration fails to back a transition to a National Unity government before elections democracy protesters may be jailed and tortured

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statement of support for Mubarak’s chosen successor – former Intelligence chief Omar Suleiman – risks throwing away any prospect of real democratisation in Egypt and the pro-democracy protesters being jailed and tortured one by one as they return home if protests start to grow smaller (1). The fact that this will happen away from the television cameras will not make it any less horrific than the televised attacks and injuries we have seen recently.

A change of who is heading the regime is not a change of regime. Former Bush (senior) administration member Peter Galbraith has written of being told by the US National Security Council at the end of the 1991 Iraq war that “Our aim is to get rid of Saddam, not his regime” (2). It looks depressingly like the Obama administration has the same position on Egypt, though I hope they prove me wrong on this and make US aid to the Egyptian government conditional on an end to the banning of opposition parties and to the jailing and torture of government opponents.

This is especially sad as the Obama administration’s position before this had moved from support for Mubarak towards greater support for the demonstrators – and this certainly seemed to help prevent Egyptian military attacks on protesters and to help end the attacks by plain clothes police and hired mobs on them.

Failing to back the pro-democracy protesters will also weaken moderates who want a transition to democracy and strengthen the arguments of extremists who see force as the only way to overthrow the dictatorship – making a Sunni version of the Iranian revolution and a government deeply hostile to the US more likely in the long run.

The arguments for backing the dictatorship are empty – even an Islamic state like Iran couldn’t be any more brutal than Mubarak’s (and Sulieman’s) police torturers; no Arab state will go to war with an Israeli military so much stronger than them that it could swat them all simultaneously like flies; there are plenty of democrats among the protesters and every possibility of a transition to democracy.

As the US ambassador to Egypt wrote in 2006 ‘We do not accept the proposition that Egypt's only choices are a slow-to-reform authoritarian regime or an Islamist extremist one; nor do we see greater democracy in Egypt as leading necessarily to a government under the MB [Muslim Brotherhood]’ (3)

The US government should not be backing Suleiman but the National Unity government of all opposition parties proposed by ElBaradei and the protesters to organise free and fair elections. Even a compromise involving some of the more progressive members of Mubarak’s NDP party along with all opposition parties would be a big step forward and ensure the NDP could not have the pro-democracy protesters arrested one by one.

(1) = Guardian.co.uk 06 Feb 2011 ‘Egypt protests: Hosni Mubarak's power fades as US backs his deputy’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/06/egypt-protests-hosni-mubarak-sulieman

(2) = Galbraith, Peter W. (2006) ‘The End of Iraq’, Pocket Books, 2007, Ch4, page 46

(3) = Guardian.co.uk 06 Feb 2011 ‘WikiLeaks cables: Egypt's Omar Suleiman demonised Muslim Brotherhood’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/06/wikileaks-egypt-omar-suleiman-muslim-brotherhood

Mubarak, the Egyptian Army and Obama all remain responsible for attacks by hired thugs and plain clothes police

The thugs attacking Egyptian pro-democracy protesters and attacking reporters are clearly not mostly spontaneous “pro-Mubarak protesters”, but mostly people paid to demonstrate for him, hired thugs and plain clothes police like those Mubarak used to attack opposition campaigners during the 2005 Presidential election and referendum – which were rigged (1) – (9).

(There may also be some pro-Mubarak demonstrators who simply support him because they have watched Egyptian state TV as their only source of information, or because they work for the government or rely for their jobs in it on the patronage of regime members or relatives in it).

The army were ordered to allow them into Tahrir Square and given no order to stop Mubarak’s brigades attacking (10).

Mubarak hopes this tactic will let him avoid responsibility for the people they injure and kill. He can’t. While the Obama administration continues to provide his government with financial aid they are responsible too. They should cut all aid until he is gone and an all party transitional government is in place.

State Department official P J Crowley said that “We reiterate our call for all sides in Egypt to show restraint and avoid violence.”, as if the attackers (many armed with guns, knives, iron bars and machetes) and those attacked or defending themselves were equally responsible for it. British Prime Minister David Cameron’s statement that “if” the violence was orchestrated by the Mubarak government then it would be “utterly unacceptable” pretended that there was any question about whether Mubarak organised it, even after his use of similar tactics over decades (11) – (12).

These and Obama’s vague statements differ markedly from their straightforward condemnation of the Iranian government when it similarly used Basij plain clothes militia to beat, terrify and kill pro-democracy protesters.

While early statements from the White House suggested financial aid to the Egyptian military might be cut if they harmed protesters - and this has played a very positive role - Secretary of State Clinton later reversed this, saying there were no plans to cut military aid to Egypt. The Obama administration is on the edge of giving Mubarak the impression that he can kill and terrify pro-democracy demonstrators just so long as he doesn't use the army to do it

(1) = Amnesty International 02 Feb 2011 ‘Egyptian army urged to protect protesters’,http://amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/egyptian-army-breaks-promise-protect-protesters-2011-02-02 ; ‘clashes erupted with organized groups of pro-government supporters attacking protesters in Cairo and across Egypt... …An Amnesty International fact-finding team in Egypt reported that the violence appeared to be orchestrated in part by the authorities to suppress continuing protests calling for political reform…In previous election years, Amnesty International documented how hired thugs were used by the Egyptian authorities in order to intimidate voters and to disperse gatherings of their political opponents’

(2) =  AP 02 Feb 2011 ‘Mubarak backers attack foes with firebombs, bricks’,http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110202/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt ; ‘The protesters accused Mubarak's regime of unleashing a force of paid thugs and plainclothes police to crush their unprecedented 9-day-old movement… They showed off police ID badges they said were wrested off their attackers.’

(3) = MSNBC 02 Feb 2011 ‘'Total mayhem': Mubarak supporters, protesters clash in Egypt’, http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/41383377/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/ ; ‘Several protesters claimed the government sent in plainclothes policemen and hired "thugs" to instigate violence….“We caught a lot of people with police IDs on them,” another witness told Al Jazeera…’

(4) = Guardian News Blog 02 Feb 2011 6.04 p.m summary of events ‘Egypt protests - live updates’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2011/feb/02/egypt-protests-live-updates ; The violence of the pro-Mubarak supporters appears to be organised, with policemen and hired thugs seemingly involved.  – also see eyewitness accounts from western reporters and Egyptian protesters at 2.29p.m, 2.43 p.m , 4.56 p.m and 5.11 p.m

(5) = AFP 02 Feb 2011 ‘Egypt troops fire warning shots as protesters clash’,http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110202/wl_africa_afp/egyptpoliticsunrestdemoclash ; ‘A witness said organisers were paying people 100 Egyptian pounds (12 euros, $17) to take part in the pro-Mubarak rally, but this could not be confirmed.’

(6) = Human Rights Watch Sep 2005 ‘From Plebiscite to Contest? Egypt’s Presidential Election’, http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/mena/egypt0905/egypt0905.pdf

(7) = Guardian 26 May 2005 ‘Dissent quashed as Egypt votes on reform’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/may/26/brianwhitaker ; ‘Security forces and violent gangs cracked down on dissenters yesterday as Egyptians voted in a constitutional referendum that opposition parties have denounced as a sham….smaller groups of protesters who ventured on to the streets were set upon by security forces or pro-Mubarak gangs. In one incident, police withdrew to let a gang beat up more than a dozen supporters of the Kifaya ("Enough") movement, which is calling for an end to the president's 24-year rule.

Elsewhere, 150 government supporters attacked Kifaya members with sticks. Police looked on as Mubarak loyalists attacked a woman with batons and tore her clothes.’

(8) = Guardian 27 May 2005 ‘Egypt claims 83% yes vote for change’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/may/27/brianwhitaker ; In some cities, plainclothes government agents beat protesters and dozens of arrests were made.

(9) = guardian.co.uk 02 Feb 2011 ‘Supporters of Hosni Mubarak attack foreign journalists in Egypt’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/02/hosni-mubarak-supporters-attack-foreign-journalists

(10) = guardian.co.uk 02 Feb 2011 ‘Mubarak supporters stage brutal bid to crush Cairo uprising’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/02/hosni-mubarak-supporters-violence-cairo ; ‘Yesterday, army and activists staffed checkpoints to prevent violence; today, Egyptian soldiers made no effort to prevent confrontation…..At one stage, they moved out of the way to allow pro-Mubarak demonstrators to reach their opponents….Among those attacking the square were groups of armed men who appeared to be plainclothes police officers. Credible reports spoke of some of those involved in the assault in Tahrir Square having been paid by the regime….On one boulevard leading from the square, a group of men had been deployed with weapons in their hands, clearly under orders.

(11) = BBC News 02 Feb 2011 ‘Egypt unrest: White House condemns Cairo violence’,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12349662

(12) = guardian.co.uk 02 Feb 2011 ‘David Cameron condemns 'despicable' violence in Egypt’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/feb/02/egypt-transition-of-power-david-cameron