Wednesday, July 25, 2012

BRYAN ROSTRON: Look north for the true hearts of darkness



At the high court in London, three elderly Kenyans are seeking redress for their torture at the hands of British troops during the Mau Mau rebellion
BRYAN ROSTRON
Published: 2012/07/25 07:37:47 AM

IMAGINE that an ageing Nazi who is wanted for war crimes is found living quietly in a Sussex village but the German government objects that it is too long after the event for a fair trial to be possible. There would be international outrage. Yet this, essentially, is a defence that the British government now claims.




At the high court in London, three elderly Kenyans are seeking redress for their torture at the hands of British troops during the Mau Mau rebellion.




Last week, the British government made it clear to the court that it does not dispute the truth of their claims: among other abominations, one of the men was publicly castrated with pliers; the woman, then 15, was raped with a bottle.




These abuses, however, took place from 1952 to 1960. There is also a bureaucratic paper trail. Researchers recently unearthed 8000 secret files (17000 pages), which lay bare the extent of the violence inflicted on Mau Mau insurgents. A number of suspects were tortured to death. Some were burned alive. Sexual violence was rampant. Documents show that the British cabinet was made aware of at least some of these atrocities but chose to do nothing.




Here are the statistics of that 1952-60 struggle compiled by the late historian Basil Davidson: "11503 Mau Mau killed, 1035 captured wounded, 1550 captured in action, 26625 arrested and 2714 surrendered, indicating a gruesome relationship between killed and captured. Against this, British and colonial forces lost 167 troops, while 1819 ‘loyal civilians’ were killed — this last category included Africans and Asians. The total number of European civilians killed was 32."




More recent historians say the total number of Mau Mau dead may be double the 11000 estimate. Even so, for many, the term Mau Mau remains shorthand for barbaric terror. This is an indication of European myopia regarding the crimes committed in the name of colonialism.




In German South West Africa, which is today Namibia, there was a concerted attempt between 1904 and 1908 to exterminate the Herero people. As I previously noted in Business Day, this is a rare case in which the intent to commit genocide was actually documented, both by Gen Lothar von Trotha and the German general staff.




In the Congo, once the personal fiefdom of King Leopold II of Belgium, the sadistic brutality and depravity is laid bare in Adam Hochschild’s harrowing King Leopold’s Ghost. It is estimated that between 1880 and 1920, about 10-million Congolese died from the colonists’ depredations. In 1908, when Leopold was forced to hand his private colony over to the Belgian state, all the archives were incinerated. Ash and smoke covered the sky over Brussels for eight days.




"I will give them my Congo," declared Leopold defiantly, "but they have no right to know what I did there."




Yet every time there is conflict in Africa, some lazy subeditor will write a headline to include the unthinking phrase, "heart of darkness". In fact, in 1898, as Joseph Conrad sat down to write his great novella of the same name, a French expedition set out from Senegal to conquer the Chad basin and unify all the French territories in west Africa. It became a homicidal odyssey of rape, torture and massacre.




The leaders, Capt Paul Voulet and Lt Julien Chanoine, left behind them a trail of slaughter and burned settlements. When a villager killed two of his men, Voulet ordered 150 women and children executed in retaliation.




Guides who displeased Voulet were strung up alive so their feet could be gnawed by hyenas and the rest devoured by vultures. As word filtered back to Paris, the governor of Timbuktu, Lt-Col Klobb, was sent after them. He followed an "infernal trail" of devastation and charred bodies.




When Klobb caught up, Voulet ordered his men to shoot him.




Voulet and Chanoine were then shot by Klobb’s troops.




In 1902, after an inquiry, the French ministry of colonies ruled that the two psychopaths "had been driven mad by the dreadful heat".




Once again, it was Africa’s fault.




Conrad’s Heart of Darkness appeared in 1902. Seafarer Charles Marlow, aboard the yawl Nellie on the Thames, begins to tell his companions about his bizarre quest for the crazed Kurtz in Africa. And Marlow remarks of London: "This also has been one of the dark places on earth."




It still is, it seems.




• Rostron is an author and a freelance journalist

Asbel Kiprop - Athletics - Olympic Athlete | London 2012

Asbel Kiprop - Athletics - Olympic Athlete | London 2012

Policy Change: "Terrorists" Are Now "Insurgents


This is the biggest Orwellian rewrite I have ever experienced.

For years the label "AlQaeda" and "terrorists" were practically used as synonyms. But, following the Obama administrations lead, the New York Times has now rewritten its stylebook and relabeled "AlQaeda" from "terrorists group" to a somewhat neutral "insurgency".
BAGHDAD — In a coordinated display intended to show they remain a viable force, Iraqi insurgents launched at least 37 separate attacks throughout the country on Monday morning, setting off car bombs, storming a military base, attacking policemen in their homes and ambushing checkpoints, Iraqi authorities said....
So there are now "insurgents" in Iraq? Should we support them?
Further into the piece it becomes clear who these "insurgents" are:
The attacks, coming in the early days of Ramadan, the monthlong Muslim religious rite, were predicted Sunday in an audio message attributed to the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Bakir Al Baghdadi, and posted on the group’s Web site. Mr. Baghdada vowed that a new offensive, which he called Breaking Down Walls, would begin soon.
Hmm - Al Qaeda now "predicts" such atrocities? Would not "announce" be a more factual word? Are we supposed to doubt that AlQaeda in Iraq committed these killings today after it only "predicted" them? Why?
On Twitter Yemen specialist Gregory Johnsen asked: Why is the NYT calling al-Qaeda in Iraq "Iraqi insurgents"
My short answer was: b/c AlQaeda in Syria are "rebels"
The longer answer is that the Oceania no longer at war with Eurasia. It is now allied with Eurasia and at war with Eastasia. The New York Times, as the paper of record, is just documenting that shift though without acknowledging it.
The U.S. and its assorted poodles are now allied with those radical Sunni AlQaeda fighters. But as the U.S. would never support "terrorists" they now have to be renamed and rather suddenly become "insurgents" (in Iraq) or "rebels" (in Syria).
This is a bit ominous for the Iraqi premier Maliki. This relabeling after the devastating attacks today makes clear that he is now on the same regime change targeting list that Syria's Bashar is on.
Al Qaeda associated groups have for quite some time been running terrorist campaigns against the governments of Syria and Iraq. Support for them from the U.S. and its Saudi allies has been more or less open for quite some time. Relabeling them as "insurgents" and "rebels" is the official declaration of this cooperation as a new U.S. policy.
Source: Moon of Alabama

Poverty, inequality in America reaches record proportions


 By Cyrus Safdari 
 The domestic context: a nice war with Iran would do much to distract people from this reality: The ranks of America's poor are on track to climb to levels unseen in nearly half a century, erasing gains from the war on poverty in the 1960s amid a weak economy and fraying government safety net Here's a fun fact: The top 10% of the population in the US owns 75% of the nation's wealth, while the bottom 50% of the people own only about 1% percent of the nation's wealth. Yes, that's not a typo: Half of the US population, all together, own only ONE PERCENT of the nation's wealth. And this has been goingon for a while so its not a temporary Democrat vs. Republican thing: The study found that the share of wealth held by the top 10 percent of households grew from 1989 to 2010. In every other segment of the remaining 90 percent of households -- i.e. the middle and lower class -- that share went down. It should be noted that while poverty levels are reaching 1962 levels, the income disparity in the US has exceeded the robber-baron days of the turn of the last century. In fact, today in America, the average CEO earns in a single day what an average worker earns in more than a year (the top CEOs earn more in a year than workers earn in 3,489 years) and this trend in disparity continues to grow. According to a Columbia University Nobel prize winner, the American Dream is dead: In the last 30 years the share of national income held by the top 1% of Americans has doubled; for to the top 0.1%, their share has tripled...Because the children of those at the top of society tend to do better than those at the bottom — thanks, in part, to better education, health care and nutrition — the income inequality that's slowly emerged over the past 30 years will only widen in the next 10 to 20 years. Internationally, Brand America already took a massive beating with the Iraq/Afghan wars, what with Bush's lies about WMDs and the legalization of torture etc. and now it turns out that America is having a hardtime feeding its own people: In 2010 48.8 million Americans lived in food insecure households, meaning they were hungry or faced food insecurity at some point during the year. That’s 12 million more people than faced hunger in 2007, before the recession, and represents 16.1 percent of the U.S. population...nearly half of the households seeking emergency food assistance reported having to choose between paying for utilities or heating fuel and food. Nearly 40 percent said they had to choose between paying for rent or a mortgage and food. More than a third reported having to choose between their medical bills and food. Apart from the specific case of Iran, the bigger question is how will this affect American "soft power" projection in the world...or do we not care about that anymore since the US military budget has continued to expand* despite efforts to reduce it? (*Note that in the past, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were largely funded through supplementary spending bills outside the Federal Budget, so they are not included in the military budget figures from past years.)