Saturday, January 31, 2015

Boris Johnson: jihadis are porn-watching 'wankers'

Frances Perraudin, Shiv Malik Saturday 31 January 2015

London mayor says men who fight with Islamic State are ‘very badly adjusted in their relations with women’ because of sense of failure

London mayor Boris Johnson made his comments in reference to an MI5 report on the profile of jihadis

London mayor Boris Johnson made his comments in reference to an MI5 report on the profile of jihadis. Photograph: Oli Scarff/Getty Images

Boris Johnson has described men who go to fight with Islamic State as “literally wankers” who watch porn because they can’t meet women.

Citing a report from MI5 on the profile of jihadis, the mayor of London said: “If you look at all the psychological profiling about bombers, they typically will look at porn. They are literally wankers. Severe onanists.”

Seriously Boris, calling terrorists ‘wankers’ is really not helpful
There is some truth in Johnson’s attempt at ‘demystifying’ jihadis, but it gets us no closer to understanding what drives people to kill for a cause

Ally Fogg

Johnson described British jihadis as “tortured” and “very badly adjusted in their relations with women”, something he said was a symptom of “their feeling of being a failure and that the world is against them”.

“They are not making it with girls and so they turn to other forms of spiritual comfort – which of course is no comfort.”

He continued: “They are just young men in desperate need of self-esteem who do not have a particular mission in life, who feel that they are losers and this thing makes them feel strong – like winners.”

Johnson, who is one of the leading candidates to be the next Tory leader, made the comments in an interview with the Sun newspaper a week after he visited the Kurdish regional capital of Irbil to see the Peshmerga fighters who are pushing back against the Isis insurgency in Iraq. The visit, during which he posed for pictures with an AK47, was interpreted as an attempt to demonstrate his credentials as an international statesman.

Speaking on Sky News later on Friday, Johnson defended his comments, saying they weren’t “remotely controversial”.

He argued that there was plenty of evidence to support his point: “The crucial thing is that these are young men, principally young men who are growing up without much sense of success in their lives, without a feeling that the world holds much for them and … their problems need addressing in all sorts of ways.”

Johnson, who is likely to return to the Commons in May as MP for the safe Tory seat of Uxbridge and South Ruislip, said the best solution to the problem of young men becoming radicalised was to provide them with jobs. London had much lower youth unemployment than Paris, where 12 were killed in an attack by Islamic fundamentalists at the beginning of January, he added.

“The whole thing is ludicrous,” said Charlie Winter from the Quilliam Foundation, an organisation set up by ex-Islamists to challenge and counter extremism.

He said it was “completely unquantifiable” to try to second guess whether a jihadist was suffering from isolation and loneliness.

“To imply that they don’t have social skills is again a generalisation … that has no evidence behind it. They are integrated, many of them are very well educated.”

Mohammed Khaliel, director of the community cohesion organisation Islamix, said: “These are the type of comments you’d expect from the EDL, the BNP and possibly Ukip.

“Somebody in a position of responsibility should be making responsible comments,” he said. “For somebody allegedly aspiring to be prime minister of the country, is this really the style and level of comments that he should be making?

“He’s trying for election in Uxbridge and he thinks any publicity is good publicity, but he doesn’t care about the discord that it causes in the community.”

A spokesman for David Cameron said Johnson had an “ever lovely turn of phrase”, but declined to say whether the prime minister endorsed the comments. “You’ve heard the prime minister talk a great deal around the terror threat,” he said.

The chancellor, George Osborne, said during a visit to Portsmouth on Friday that while Johnson’s remarks were colourful he was “right not to be nice about these people”.

Johnson has provoked controversy in the past with comments on Islamic extremism. Writing in his column in the Daily Telegraph last August, the mayor said that jihadist men, such as the member of Isis dubbed Jihadi John who killed the American journalist James Foley, are told that they will be welcomed in heaven by 72 virgins if they die in battle.

Johnson wrote: “I suspect most of us don’t give a monkey’s what happens to this prat in heaven, whether he meets virgins or raisins – we just want someone to come along with a bunker buster and effect an introduction as fast as possible.”

Referring to Johnson’s interview in the Sun, the Conservative party chairman, Grant Shapps, said he could use all sorts of words to describe “any Brit who leaves and fights against this country’s interests like that”.

“I think the mood has decisively shifted in favour of people saying: ‘This country will give all of us our education for free, it will give all of us our health for free, but don’t expect to go off and fight against this country’s interests and expect to swan back in’. I think Boris’s comments will have been driven by that.”

The government’s counter-terror and security bill, which is currently passing through parliament, would create extra powers to block some terrorist suspects from returning to Britain from Syria and Iraq. The bill’s terms allow a person’s passport to be invalidated for up to two years, preventing them from returning to the UK during that time.

In the Sun interview, Johnson agreed with comments made by the culture secretary, Sajid Javid, that Muslim communities face a special burden to help to track down Islamist extremists. Johnson said clerics had not been “persuasive in the right way with these people”.

He said he wanted to hear a “proper angry Islamic theological denunciation of what is going wrong”.

“We won’t succeed if western politicians just go around bashing and blaming Islam; that is hopeless … This problem can only be addressed if Muslim authorities and clerics find a powerful and compelling way of setting up an alternative narrative for young people that makes this seem irrelevant.”

Boris Johnson: jihadis are porn-watching 'wankers' | Politics | The Guardian

Boris Johnson tracks fight against Isis and builds trade ties in Kurdistan

Patrick Wintour, political editor Friday 23 January 2015

London’s mayor trip to fledging state coincides with Iraqi leaders’ meeting in London to discuss countering Islamic State

Boris Johnson, London mayor

Boris Johnson's trip to Erbil is in part to back UK forces training peshmerga soldiers in Kurdistan. Photograph: Keith Larby/Demotix/Corbis

Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, has gone to Kurdistan to examine firsthand the progress being made to push back the forces of Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.

City Hall, in London, declined to give details of the visit, for security reasons, but said the trip was also meant to strengthen economic ties between London and Kurdistan.

Johnson, who travelled in the kind of secrecy only possible if accompanied by the Sun newspaper, was holding high-level talks in Erbil, the capital of Kurdistan, a city once regarded as an island of security, but which has more recently come under threat from Isis forces. At one point Isis took territory just 18 miles from the regional capital.

With every move of the mayor open to interpretation, especially by his arch rival, the home secretary, Theresa May, the visit will raise eyebrows from those who believe he is burnishing his credentials as an international statesman capable of thinking more broadly than the next London police committee meeting.

Ironically, his absence from the capital coincided with the arrival in London of many senior Iraqi leaders to discuss the progress of the fight against Isis. The discussions are being jointly hosted by the foreign secretary, Philip Hammond, and the US secretary of state, John Kerry.

London Mayor Boris Johnson takes aim with an AK47

London Mayor Boris Johnson takes aim with an AK47 during a visit to the see the British Troops training the Peshmerga. Photograph: Andrew Parsons / i-Images

Johnson told the Evening Standard newspaper: “I’m going to support some of our guys out there who are trying to train the peshmerga fighters, so we will see firsthand some of the good Britain is doing in the area.”

Johnson has been a long-term supporter of Kurdistan, and his official said: “He wants to see firsthand the work being done to keep ISIL [ISIS] at bay, the same ISIL that wants to send back terrorists who would blow themselves up in London given half a chance.”

In May last year Johnson hosted a visit by Nechirvan Barzani, the prime minister of the fledgling nation state of Kurdistan, and several of his ministers, on a first official trip to the UK. Johnson discussed the Kurds’ plans to build hotels and ski resorts in their country as well as transform Erbil into “the natural banking centre of the Middle East”.

Boris wrote last August: “Standard Chartered Bank has established [itself in Kurdistan], as well as many other firms. They are going not simply because Kurdistan has theoretically the sixth largest oil deposits in the world, but because the place is an oasis of stability and tolerance. They have a democratic system; they are pushing forward with women’s rights; they insist on complete mutual respect of all religions.”

He also took a hard line about British citizens going to Syria or Iraq “without good reason”, adding that they should be subject to surveillance and possibly arrested if they no longer swore allegiance to the UK.

Boris Johnson tracks fight against Isis and builds trade ties in Kurdistan | Politics | The Guardian

Thursday, January 29, 2015

We must stop Angela Merkel’s bullying – or let the forces of austerity win

Owen Jones Thursday 29 January 2015

Germany can’t be allowed to strangle Syriza at birth. The fate of millions across Europe depends on it

Alexis Tsipras

‘If Syriza extracts concessions, it will help shift the balance of power in Europe.’ Photograph: Alexandros Avramidis/Reuters/Corbis

Angela Merkel is the most monstrous western European leader of this generation. Politicians who inflict economic cruelty on a mass scale, trashing the lives of millions as they do so, do not end up in courts to face justice. But Merkel undoubtedly stands tried and convicted in the dock of history already. The EU’s high priests of austerity conjure up the words of Charlie Chaplin’s rousing speech at the end of The Great Dictator: “Machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts”. The Greeks have rebelled against machine men – and women – and they are crying out for others to follow.

However, Merkel, the EU bureaucrats and international financiers are cruel but not stupid: they know hope is a contagion, and will do all they can to stop Syriza inspiring others. Merkel has already demanded that Alexis Tsipras, the new Greek prime minister, ignore his democratic mandate and stick to foreign-imposed austerity measures.

In the run-up to the election, leaks from the German government suggested a Greek exit from the Eurozone: a clear message to the Greek people not to vote the wrong way. For those who want Europe to have a future that isn’t one of falling living standards, rising insecurity and stripped-away social provision, it is the policies of Merkel and the rotten elites she represents that must face a reckoning.

Consider the Nobel prizewinning economist Paul Krugman’s skewering of a policy that has hacked away a quarter of the Greek economy. As Krugman notes, the troika – the IMF, European Central Bank and European commission – promoted “an economic fantasy”, for which the Greeks have paid. They projected that unemployment would peak at 15% in 2012, but it hurtled to over 25% instead. He demolishes the lie that the Greeks did not impose enough austerity: they cut even further than was planned, and as the economy collapsed so did the tax revenues.

The Greeks must live within their means; they are suffering from years of profligacy, unlike the thrifty German state, or so the mantra goes. Greece is certainly more afflicted by the scandal of tax avoidance and evasion than most nations, and Syriza promises a welcome radical crackdown on both.

But the myths that underpin what is barely veiled collective punishment would be destroyed. As a Bloomberg editorial put it: “Every irresponsible borrower is enabled by an irresponsible lender.” Germany ploughed money into countries such as Greece and Spain – that’s the “magic” of deregulated markets – and in doing so “lent more than they could afford”. German banks and their political champions should have known this would end in disaster.

So why didn’t they act? Simple: greed. As Kevin Drum, a US writer, explains: it provided “German savers with a place to invest their money” and, crucially, “provided the periphery with enough cheap capital to act as a thriving market for German exports”. Who were the first EU countries to exceed the budget rules tied to the single currency, but Germany and France? Powerful as they were, they faced no comeback. Does that absolve the Greek elites – note, not the Greek people – of their role in calamity? Of course not. But Merkel should be begging for forgiveness too.

All Europe’s leaders have to offer is broken societies and broken people. Over half of young people in Spain and Greece are without work, leaving them scarred: as well as mental distress, they face the increased likelihood of unemployment and lower wages for the rest of their lives.

Workers’ rights, public services, a welfare state: all won at such cost by tough, far-sighted people, all being stripped away. There is a certain smugness expressed in Britain: just look across the waters at how bad things could be. Certainly Britain has been free of the euro. It has employed quantitative easing on a grand scale – though for the benefit of banks rather than people, and in an unsustainable, credit-fuelled mini-boom.

But in any case, British workers have suffered the biggest fall in their pay-packets since the Victorian era, and one of the worst of any EU country. Britain’s rulers, just like those everywhere else in Europe, have punished their own people for the actions of an ever-thriving elite.

That’s why Greece has to be defended urgently – not just to defend a democratically elected government and the people who put it there. European elites know that if Syriza’s demands are fulfilled, then other like-minded forces will be emboldened. Spain’s Podemos, a surging anti-austerity movement, will be more likely to triumph in elections this year. Syriza has already achieved change: the European Central Bank’s limited quantitative easing is partly a response to its rise.

Even that well-known radical Reza Moghadam, Morgan Stanley’s vice-chairman of global capital markets and ex-head of the IMF’s European department, confirms Syriza’s strong negotiating position. The precedent of an exit from the Eurozone would lead to the market punishing other members, and to calls for the erasing of half of Greece’s debt. A victory is possible, but it depends on popular pressure right across Europe. If Syriza extracts concessions, it will be a stunning victory for all anti-austerity forces, and will help shift the balance of power in Europe.

But if Greece loses, as those governments and banks that will now try to suffocate Syriza at birth intend? Then austerity will triumph over democracy. The future of millions of Europeans – Greek, French, Spanish and British alike – will be bleak indeed. That is why a movement to defend the already ruined nation of Greece is so important. Defeated Germany benefited from debt relief in 1953, and we must demand that for Greece today. We must champion Syriza’s call for the end of an austerity policy that has achieved nothing but social ruin, across Europe in favour of a strategy of growth.

Syriza’s posters declared: “Hope is coming”. Its election must represent that everywhere, including in Britain, where YouGov polling reveals huge popularity for a stance against austerity and the power of big business. A game of high stakes indeed: one that, if lost, will mean countless more years of economic nightmare.

This rerun of the 1930s can be ended – this time by the democratic left, rather than by the fascist and the genocidal right. The era of Merkel and the machine men can be ended – but it is up to all of us to act, and to act quickly.

We must stop Angela Merkel’s bullying – or let the forces of austerity win | Owen Jones | Comment is free | The Guardian

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Explainer: Why Muslims don't like cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed

By Hannah Walmsley with Kim Lester Friday 16 January 2015

A Muslim pilgrim reads the Koran Photo: Muslims consider it blasphemous and sacrilegious to present images of their prophet in any form. (Reuters: Mohammed Salem)

Related Story: Charlie Hebdo cartoons would be banned in Australia: Tim Wilson

Among Muslims, it is considered blasphemous and sacrilegious to illustrate the Prophet Mohammed in any pictorial form.

Professor Amin Saikal, director of the Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies at the Australian National University, said opposition to illustrations of the Prophet had a long history.

"It's simply because Islam has been opposed to any form of icon worship," Professor Saikal told 666 ABC Canberra.

"Therefore, there is no accurate drawing of the Prophet and it has been banned from the very beginning."

The image on the cover of this week's French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo featured the Prophet Mohammed.

He was depicted with a tear in his eye and holding a sign saying "Je Suis Charlie" above the banner "All is forgiven".

The print run for the latest edition of the magazine was expanded to five million, after it sold out within hours of appearing on news stands.

The front page image was drawn by cartoonist Renald Luzier, known as Luz, for publication one week after 12 people were killed at the magazine's Paris offices.

Some newspapers and online news websites featuring the cover image acknowledged cultural sensitivity with warnings that images had the potential to offend.

Professor Saikal said opposition to presentation of images of the Prophet was universal within Islam.

You would not find any depiction of the prophet of Islam and even some of his close companions throughout the history of Islam by Muslims themselves.

Professor Amin Saikal

"The difference lies between Muslims and Christians who have, in a lot of ways, demystified images of Jesus Christ, whereas in Islam or in the Muslim world, that has not really been done," he said.

"There have been descriptions of the prophet by his biographers who wrote about him two centuries after his death, which basically try to describe his personality and perhaps to some extent, his physique.

"Beyond that, Muslims have been opposed, and for that matter Islam has been opposed, to any form of icon worship or embracing [of] an icon as a form of holy person like the prophet of Islam, particularly if it is an image which is intended to demean the prophet."

Sensitivity to cultural values

Charlie Hebdo has always sought to be provocative in its cartoons of all religions, current events, and prominent personalities.

During its 44-year history, the magazine has frequently published images of the Prophet Mohammed.

"You would not find any depiction of the prophet of Islam [or] even some of his close companions throughout the history of Islam by Muslims themselves", Professor Saikal said.

"A number of years ago an extreme Zionist in Israel drew a pig with the name of the prophet in the middle of it and, of course, that was extremely offensive.

"One thing is to really be satirical in terms of making people laugh. It is another thing to be satirical and make people laugh without being really sensitive to cultural norms and cultural values of others.

"The history of Charlie Hebdo shows that they've not been only satirical, but in the same way it has been very provocative.

"That has really played into the hands of some extremists in the Muslim world to react as violently as they have.

"Of course there has been no need for that violence.

"If the Prophet himself had been alive and he'd have seen all of these cartoons and so on, probably he would have shrugged it all off.

"During his life he was persecuted. He suffered a great deal, which compared to what these cartoons have depicted was something totally different."

Explainer: Why Muslims don't like cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Friday, January 23, 2015

Forget the EU - let's take on the world with our TRUE friends: As the Greek elections threaten to shatter Europe, DANIEL HANNAN says Britain's destiny lies with the booming Commonwealth

By Daniel Hannan for the Daily Mail 23 January 2015

  • As Greece heads to vote people are urged not to go with the opinion polls
  • Syriza - poised to win - plans massive splurge in benefits and pensions
  • Rest of the world has shaken off credit crunch but Europe still suffering
  • A collapse would be bad for Britain where countries are our suppliers

Greece has been brought to ruin by excessive government spending. So what do Greek voters plan to do about it? If opinion polls are to be believed, they will opt for a massive further increase in spending.

Syriza, the far-left party poised to win Sunday’s general election, plans a massive splurge in benefits, including free electricity for 300,000 households, a hike in pensions, more free healthcare and a 50 per cent increase in the minimum wage. Oh, and it wants Europe to write off a large chunk of its debts.

Reflecting the contradictory anger of an electorate squeezed by years of austerity, Syriza says it wants Greece to do all this while staying in the euro. In other words, it wants the euro, but not any of the measures necessary to support it.

Greece voters will be taking to the polls this week and opinion polls suggest they will opt for a massive further increase in spending

Greece voters will be taking to the polls this week and opinion polls suggest they will opt for a massive further increase in spending

The Brussels elites, who in 2011 went so far as to topple an elected Greek prime minister and impose a civilian junta on Athens, are in despair. The president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, who himself holds no elected office, has instructed Greeks not to vote the way polls suggest they will.

Mr Juncker is well aware that the Continent’s economy is in no condition to take another battering over the euro, whose value is already at a near-record low.

So desperate is the European Central Bank to kick-start the stagnated economy of the Eurozone that yesterday it announced a staggering programme of so-called ‘quantitative easing’ which will see more than a trillion euros pumped into the system.

The truth is that although the rest of the world has shaken off the bug of the credit crunch, the EU has picked up a chronic, debilitating condition. More than six years after the financial crash, every continent on the planet is growing satisfactorily — except Europe.

Or, more specifically, the Eurozone. The main non-EU economies, Norway and Switzerland, are as prosperous as ever. And the EU states that kept their currencies — Britain, Denmark, Sweden, Poland — are also doing pretty well. The British economy, indeed, has just overtaken France’s and is projected to overtake Germany’s within a generation.

But while the recovery here is moving up a gear, Eurozone finance ministers are still twisting their ignition keys uselessly, their engines whining and spluttering but refusing to start. Germany, France and Italy together account for two thirds of the Eurozone. All three are stalled.

The president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, has instructed Greeks not to vote the way polls suggest they will

The president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, has instructed Greeks not to vote the way polls suggest they will

France’s economy has technically edged back into growth but only because of a large injection of state cash, mainly in the healthcare sector. Yet state spending is the medicine that sickened the patient in the first place.

Indeed, when it comes to rampant state spending, France is the most engorged nation in Western Europe: government expenditure accounts for 56 per cent of the economy. Only 40 per cent of French people are in employment of any kind, and more days are lost through strikes than anywhere else in the EU (27 days per thousand people, as opposed to 3.4 days in Germany). France last ran a balanced budget in 1974. There was bound to come a moment when the money ran out, and we have reached that moment now.

As for Italy, its economy has contracted for 12 consecutive quarters, and its debt has jumped over the past year by 5.5 per cent of GDP to 133.8 per cent. Indeed, Italy’s economy hasn’t grown since the euro was introduced in 1999.

It’s true that there are some signs of recovery in the states hardest hit by the 2008 banking crisis, notably Ireland. But for every gleam of light there is a thundercloud elsewhere. Belgium, for example, has just found that its debt level is far higher than was previously thought.

The real concern in Brussels, though, is Germany. Until now, the EU’s largest state had borne the weight of monetary union. Other countries saw their productivity fall, their competitiveness eroded, their exports down. But, unthanked and uncomplaining, the Germans picked up the slack. They did so partly from a sense of historical responsibility — a sincere if incorrect belief that European integration made war less likely — and partly because, so far, the euro has brought them several advantages.

It’s true that the financial meltdown in the Mediterranean countries forced German taxpayers to write out IOUs to more profligate governments. But it also pushed down the value of the euro, allowing German exporters to benefit from an artificially cheap exchange rate.

Stoically, German businesses shouldered the burden of monetary union. Never mind that all they received in thanks from southern Europe were shrieks of ingratitude, sometimes accompanied by nasty references to the Nazi era. As long as Germany kept exporting, the euro was safe.

But Germany is beginning to sweat and sway. Its economy is showing no real growth. German exports, until now the Eurozone's unequivocal success story, are falling faster than at any time since before the financial crisis began.

Some blame the tit-for-tat economic sanctions with Russia, imposed because of the war in Ukraine. Others argue that a weak euro disguised the effect of years of under-investment in their industries. Whatever the explanation, a report by the country’s five leading economic institutes says the economy has ‘stagnated’ and predicts a rise in unemployment.

The European Central Bank is desperate to kick-start the stagnated economy of the eurozone, pictured, Mario Draghi, head of the ECB

The European Central Bank is desperate to kick-start the stagnated economy of the Eurozone, pictured, Mario Draghi, head of the ECB

We in Britain should be concerned. A Eurozone relapse is bad news for us — not only because the countries concerned are our friends, but also because they are our suppliers and customers. Our exports to the rest of the EU are in decline but still account for a hefty 44 per cent of the total. When Europeans spend less, we suffer.

We’ll be affected in other ways, too. As unemployment falls in the UK but rises in the Eurozone, more Europeans will make the understandable decision to seek work here — and, under EU rules, we’ll have to treat them as if they were British workers.

When it comes to immigration from outside the EU, the Coalition has reduced the net influx by closing down bogus language schools, issuing fewer work permits and enforcing deportation orders.

But these reductions have been more than wiped out by a surge in numbers from the rest of the EU — something which, as long as we are members, we can’t regulate. As we learnt recently, one Latvian in 30 now lives in Britain, and one Pole in 60.

Will the EU now undermine our growing economy? Will the painstaking measures that have edged us back to prosperity after Gordon Brown’s incontinence be cancelled out by the EU’s financial problems?

Alexis Tsipras, leader of Syriza Party, which is currently top of the opinion polls

Alexis Tsipras, leader of Syriza Party, which is currently top of the opinion polls

Don’t imagine that these problems are temporary. While the single currency has certainly accelerated the EU’s economic decline, it did not cause it. The underlying problem may be simply stated. Too few Europeans are generating wealth and too many are consuming it. And that problem can only get worse as the population ages.

Europe’s working age population peaked in 2012 at 308 million, and will fall to 265 million by 2060. The ratio of pensioners to workers will, according to The Economist, rise from 28 per cent to 58 per cent — and even these statistics assume the arrival of a million immigrants from outside the EU every year.

Emmanuel Todd, the French demographer, has observed that these figures disguise big variations within Europe: Britain and Scandinavia have much younger populations than the Continent. He points out that the Anglo sphere — the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Britain — will soon be more populous than mainland Europe, and concedes that Britain would be better off forming a union with the other English-speaking democracies.

He is absolutely right. We are members of the only trade bloc on the planet that is shrinking. The calculation we made when we joined the EEC in 1973 has turned out to be terribly wrong.

Then, we looked across the Channel and saw what looked like a stupendous success story. We decided to hitch our carriage to what seemed — with the booming German, French and Italian economies — to be the most powerful locomotive on the planet.

Our timing could hardly have been worse. Western Europe had indeed outperformed the UK between 1945 and 1973, as it bounced back from World War II. But this rosy picture changed with the surge in oil prices in 1974, which ended Europe’s economic miracle. Far from hitching our carriage to a locomotive, we had shackled ourselves to a steamroller.

Worse, we had done so at precisely the moment when English-speaking economies were beginning a growth spurt that endures to this day. In 2013 the Commonwealth’s economy overtook the Eurozone's.

All the core Anglo sphere countries are projected to grow this year by between 2.5 and 3.1 per cent. India, according to the International Monetary Fund, will grow at 6.4 per cent. But we can’t sign a bilateral free trade agreement with with any of these countries. We surrendered our trade policy to Brussels on January 1, 1973, and in the process turned our back on close trading partners such as Australia and South Africa.

You could just about make the argument, in the early 1970s, that regional trade blocs were the way forward. But no one seriously believes that in the internet age. Geographical proximity has never mattered less.

Far-left party Syriza plans a massive splurge in benefits, including free electricity for 300,000 households, a hike in pensions, more free healthcare and a 50 per cent increase in the minimum wage. Pictured, supporters

Far-left party Syriza plans a massive splurge in benefits, including free electricity for 300,000 households, a hike in pensions, more free healthcare and a 50 per cent increase in the minimum wage. Pictured, supporters

Perhaps, decades from now, the past 40 years, during which we tore up our traditional trading relationships and artificially redirected our trade to Europe, will be seen as an aberration.

When French president Charles de Gaulle vetoed Britain’s entry into the EEC, he gave a very good reason. The UK, he explained, was ‘insular, maritime and linked by her exchanges, her markets and her supply routes to the most diverse and often farthest-flung of nations’.

Indeed. And those far-flung Commonwealth nations would make a far more natural trade bloc than the EU. It never made much sense to abandon a diverse market, which comprised agricultural, industrial and service economies, in favour of a union of similar Western European states.

Winston Churchill made the same point as De Gaulle, albeit more pithily. ‘If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.’

Quite so. The world’s leading English-speaking democracies — the U.S., Canada, Australia and India — are growing handsomely. And these are countries where Britain has strong cultural links. What a contrast with the European Parliament, where we are forever hectored and criticised by people who resent us for having kept our currency and for our commitment to Anglo-Saxon capitalism.

As we enter what may be the sixth year of the euro crisis, we should ask ourselves a fundamental question: why do we put up with being ruled by people who dislike us?

Forget the EU - let's take on the world with our TRUE friends: As the Greek elections threaten to shatter Europe, DANIEL HANNAN says Britain's destiny lies with the booming Commonwealth | Daily Mail Online

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah dies at 90

Ian Black, Middle East editor Friday 23 January 2015

Abdullah’s half-brother Crown Prince Salman has ascended to the throne

King Abdullah

Abdullah became king in 2005 but had effectively been in charge since his brother Fahd’s stroke in 1995. Photograph: Brendan Smialowski/AP

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has died aged 90 after a short illness, state television announced late on Thursday. He has been succeeded by Crown Prince Salman, his half-brother.

The news came after the king was admitted to hospital on 31 December suffering from pneumonia. His condition was said to have improved a few days later.

Rumours of the king’s death circulated on social media before Saudi TV began broadcasting Qur’anic verses – often a sign of bad news – and the announcement was made. He is to be buried on Friday afternoon.

Beyond confirmation that Salman has ascended the throne lie troubling questions about the succession, the stability of an unreformed absolute monarchy and the prospects for its younger generation of royals at a time of turmoil in the region – including the destabilising crisis in Yemen.

Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, who had been king since 2005 and effectively in charge since his brother Fahd’s stroke in 1995, accepted limited change after 2011 in response to the Arab spring. Yet Saudi women are still not allowed to drive, citizens are unable to vote except in municipal elections and public beheading by sword remains a standard feature of the judicial system. Political parties are banned.

Salman is widely believed to be unwell, with speculation he is suffering from dementia or Parkinson’s disease, though Saudis deny that. He is 79, so there is bound to be uncertainty about his rule.

Stability and continuity are likely to be his guiding principles, at a time of alarm over the rise of Isis in Iraq and Syria, turmoil in neighbouring Yemen, the kingdom’s rivalry with Iran and controversy over its resisting calls for OPEC production cuts as the price of oil has plummeted.

In recent months, Salman has begun to play a more active role and has represented the country at important meetings abroad. He also serves as deputy prime minister and defence minister.

Salman served as the governor of Riyadh province for years and enjoys a reputation for good governance. He acted as the family enforcer, discreetly settling problems with some of the thousands of royals who live in the capital. He was also active in collecting funds to support the mujahedeen who were encouraged to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s – Osama bin Laden was the most famous of them – and he worked closely with the Wahhabi clerical establishment.

Salman stands to be succeeded in turn by Prince Muqrin, 69, the deputy crown prince, an RAF-trained fighter pilot and former intelligence chief whose prospects are often questioned because he was born to a Yemeni rather than a Saudi mother of “approved” tribal lineage.

If Muqrin does come to the throne, he is likely to be the last of the sons of the founder of Saudi Arabia, King Abdulaziz (Ibn Saud), who died in 1953. That will be the end of an era for a family, the Al Saud, who literally gave their name to a wealthy but autocratic country that controls 20% of the world’s oil reserves and dominates a strategic and volatile region.

US president Barack Obama saluted the late King’s commitment to close US – Saudi ties and offered condolences. “As a leader, he was always candid and had the courage of his convictions,” Obama said in a statement. “One of those convictions was his steadfast and passionate belief in the importance of the US-Saudi relationship as a force for stability and security in the Middle East and beyond.

“The closeness and strength of the partnership between our two countries is part of King Abdullah’s legacy,” the statement added.

Muqrin’s position was confirmed last year by the 35-member allegiance council in a move designed by Abdullah to guarantee a smooth succession. But that manoeuvre apparently faced opposition from less prominent surviving sons of Ibn Saud, especially Prince Ahmed. That means there could still be an argument – something the Al Saud have tried hard to avoid.

“I don’t think they are crazy enough to have an internal conflict over the throne,” said a Saudi writer. “The lesson is whatever you do, you do it in private and you don’t let rivalries upset the stability of the family’s rule,” argues a former diplomat.

Bruce Reidel, a CIA veteran and now a Brookings Institution expert, said: “If and when Muqrin ascends to the position of crown prince, the kingdom will face the unprecedented challenge of picking a next in line from the grandsons of Ibn Saud. That will raise questions of legitimacy not faced in the last century of Saudi rule.”

Predicting events inside this large and secretive clan is notoriously difficult and often described as a sort of Arabian version of Cold War-era Kremlinology. But one clear possibility is that younger royals will demand a greater role.

Abdullah’s sons, Prince Mitab, head of the National Guard, and Prince Mishaal, governor of Mecca, both mistrust Crown Prince Salman and his “Sudairi” wing of the family, named after one of Ibn Saud’s favourite wives. Mohammed bin Nayef, the interior minister and son of the late Crown Prince Nayef, is another highly regarded figure of the same generation who is also much admired in the west.

Maintaining the family consensus will get harder the closer the younger generation get to power, experts argue.

Another issue for Salman will be managing Saudi relations with the US, the source of disappointment in Riyadh and impetuous moves by Abdullah in the last year after Obama sought to negotiate a nuclear deal and a wider rapprochement with Iran as well as failing to act militarily against the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, whose overthrow the Saudis are still seeking.

Saudi participation in Obama’s anti-Isis coalition may have helped ease tensions.

The Saudis – the king’s formal title is “guardian of the two holy places” (of Mecca and Medina) – bill themselves as the leaders of the Sunni Muslim world, a role that has taken on increased significance in the face of the jihadi threat and the atmosphere of sectarianism across the region.

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah dies at 90 | World news | The Guardian

Sunday, January 18, 2015

Charlie Hebdo: French president Francois Hollande defends freedom of speech amid worldwide protests over Prophet Mohammed cover

Sunday 18 January 2015

What happened to:

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."?

Niger protesters angry over Charlie Hebdo cover Photo: More than 1,000 people threw rocks at police and burned tyres in Niger's capital. (AFP: Boureima Hama)

Related Story: Obama, Cameron vow to help France seek justice for Paris attacks

Related Story: Photographer shot in anti-Charlie Hebdo protest recovering

Related Story: Belgium deploys troops after foiling 'terror' plot

Map: France

French president Francois Hollande says anti-Charlie Hebdo protesters in other countries do not understand France's attachment to freedom of speech.

He was speaking a day after the satirical weekly's publication of a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed sparked violent clashes, including deaths, in some Muslim countries.

"There are tensions abroad where people don't understand our attachment to the freedom of speech," Mr Hollande said during a visit to the southern city of Tulle.

"We've seen the protests, and I would say that in France all beliefs are respected."

Demand has surged for Charlie Hebdo's first issue since two militant gunmen burst into its weekly editorial conference and shot dead 12 people at the start of three days of violence that shocked France.

A cartoon image of Mohammed on this issue's front page - showing the Prophet shedding a tear and holding a sign saying "all is forgiven" - has outraged many in the Muslim world, triggering violent demonstrations in Algeria, Niger and Pakistan.

The magazine's distributors said its print run had been lifted to 7 million copies, dwarfing its usual circulation of only 60,000.

The shootings in Paris were prompted by Charlie Hebdo's previous publication of Mohammed cartoons, a depiction many Muslims consider blasphemous.

"We've supported these countries in the fight against terrorism," Mr Hollande said.

"I still want to express my solidarity [towards them], but at the same time France has principles and values, in particular freedom of expression," he added.

 

Anti-Charlie Hebdo protests break out in Africa

A violent mob torched at least seven churches in Niger's capital Niamey on Saturday as protests raged on against the publication, French news agency AFP reported.

About 100 helmeted riot police stood in front of the Niamey cathedral at midday, protecting it from a crowd of stone-throwing youths.

The Drum: Charlie Hebdo v 18C


Michael Bradley is critical of the debate over 'freedom of speech' and Australia's proposed 18C laws.

In a second day of clashes in the former French colony, police fired tear gas to disperse some 1,000 youths in front of the city's grand mosque and protesters in several parts of the city were reportedly armed with iron bars and clubs.

A police officer and three civilians were killed on Friday in the city of Zinder, while churches were burned and Christian homes looted.

Five people were killed during the riots in Niamey and the toll from protests in Zinder climbed from four to five dead, Niger's president Mahamadou Issoufou said.

It was not clear whether the fifth person killed in Zinder was a police officer or a civilian.

Islamic scholars in Niger have appeared on national television to remind protestors that Islam is a religion of peace.

"Don't forget that Islam is against violence. I urge men and women, boys and girls to calm down," said Muslim elder Yaou Sonna, speaking on behalf of around 20 of his peers.

Several Algerian police officers were injured in clashes with demonstrators in Algiers after rioting broke out at the end of a protest.

Protests also turned violent on Friday in the southern Pakistan city of Karachi, where police used tear gas and a water cannon against demonstrators outside the French consulate.

A photographer for AFP was also wounded by a gunshot during the protest.

 

Thousands rally in Russia, protest graffiti appears in Gaza

About 15,000 people rallied in Russia's Muslim North Caucasus region of Ingushetia on Saturday.

The crowd gathered for the officially sanctioned meeting in the regional capital Magas to protest "against cartoons of the prophet, Islam phobia and insulting the beliefs of Muslims," the local government's press service said.

Regional head Yunus-Bek Yevkurov described the publication of caricatures of the Prophet as "state extremism on the side of several Western countries" in a statement addressed to the protest.

"Instead of decisively condemning these destructive steps, the political authorities in the West are trying to set people of different religions and nationalities against each other," the statement said.

Russia's media watchdog on Friday warned publications that printing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed was against the country's law and ethical norms.

Media and communications ombudsman Roskomnadzor said that publishing the caricatures could be qualified as "inciting ethnic and religious hatred" and punished under anti-extremism laws.

Although Russia's leadership extended its condolences to France, and foreign minister Sergei Lavrov participated in the unity march staged last weekend, pro-Kremlin commentators and Muslims accused the cartoonists of provoking the attack.

Another rally against the cartoons was due to be held on Monday in the neighbouring region of Chechnya.

Chechnya's leader Ramzan Kadyrov said those who drew Mohammed cartoons were "people without spiritual and moral values" and pledged that 500,000 people would participate in the rally.

Meanwhile, protest graffiti was also sprayed outside the French cultural centre in Gaza before dawn on Saturday.

"You will go to hell, French journalists," read one of the slogans daubed on the walls of the cultural centre compound, which has been closed since it was damaged in a fire last October.

"Anything but the prophet," read another.

Police were deployed outside the compound's main gate as well as on the adjacent main road, AFP reported.

Charlie Hebdo: French president Francois Hollande defends freedom of speech amid worldwide protests over Prophet Mohammed cover - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Friday, January 16, 2015

Don't give in to the politics of fear. Our peaceful future depends on it

Jeff Sparrow Friday 16 January 2015

It’s time to re-examine the disastrous consequences of the “war on terror”. If only because it might help us resist the politics of fear today

donald rumsfeld

‘Rumsfeld calculated, perfectly calmly, that the panic provided the administration a brief opportunity to push through long-desired policies.’ Photograph: Jacquelyn Martin/AP

The CIA tortured men to death because Americans were frightened.

That was Barack Obama’s explanation for the atrocities contained in the Senate report (remember that?), a document that, while heavily censored, gave a glimpse of the almost medieval barbarisms employed by the agency in its secret dungeons.

“I understand why it happened,” Obama said. “I think it’s important when we look back to recall how afraid people were after the Twin Towers fell and the Pentagon had been hit and the plane in Pennsylvania had fallen, and people did not know whether more attacks were imminent, and there was enormous pressure on our law enforcement and our national security teams to try to deal with this.”

 

Bill Clinton agreed.

It was “a very frightening time in America”, the former president explained.

“A lot of people did a lot of things that they thought were necessary to protect us that may have been inconsistent with or flatly contradictory to international norms.”

But these claims must be immediately amended, for not everyone was frightened after 9/11. Some people reacted with chilling deliberation.

“Need to move swiftly,” secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld said on the day of the attack. “Near term target needs – go massive – sweep it all up, things related and not.”

Rumsfeld calculated, perfectly calmly, that the panic provided the administration a brief opportunity to push through long-desired policies, irrespective of their relationship to 9/11.

The most obvious was an attack on Iraq, plans for which began almost immediately.

Rumsfeld’s private calm (those notes to his aides were never meant to leak) contrasts starkly with the hysteria that dominated the public sphere, an hysteria to which he contributed.

For the last three months of 2000 – and for much of 2002 – politicians and pundits competed with each other to proclaim just how scared they were.

Fear became, paradoxically, an overt expression of strength: the more bizarre and over-the-top you sounded, the more “serious” you seemed about national security.

Thus, almost without exception, terrorism “experts” assured the public that a second wave of 9/11-style attacks would take place imminently.

Looking back at that time, Rudy Giulani, the former New York City mayor, remembered “[a]nybody, any one of these security experts, including myself, would have told you on September 11, 2001, we’re looking at dozens and dozens and multi-years of attacks like this.”

The circulation of letters containing powdered anthrax – later attributed to a disgruntled scientist – allowed the rhetoric to ramp up further. Attorney general John Ashcroft painted scenarios in which terrorists used crop-dusting planes to poison the heartland, while President George W. Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and – of course! – Rumsfeld pointed the finger at Saddam Hussein, already a familiar villain.

“The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas weapons for over a decade,” explained Bush.

Naturally, people were frightened. Naturally, as Rumsfeld understood so well, that fear provided a political window.

Something must be done, the cry went up. Do it now! Do it at once!

In 2015, we’re still living with the consequences.

Torture’s one of them.

On 16 September 2001, in the very early days of the panic, Dick Cheney explained during an NBC interview: “We also have to work, though, sort of the dark side, if you will.”

Everyone knew what that meant. But something had to be done, and torture was certainly something.

The rectal “exams” and “rehydrations”, the beatings, the water tortures and the other techniques of interrogatory enhancement followed more or less inevitably.

The Senate report might have now entirely disappeared from the American political scene but does anyone truly think that, around the world, the deeds performed in Cheney’s black sites have forgotten?

As Robert Fisk pointed out the other day, France’s relationship with its Muslim minority is still marked by the Algerian struggle for independence, a bloody conflict marked by terrorism on the one hand, and torture, assassination and repression on the other. That war ended half a century ago but its consequences are still being felt.

Similarly, Obama might want to look forward rather than back when it comes to torture but the past will have its due, irrespective of whether that suits the presidential agenda or not.

If we’re serious about peace, we might begin by re-examining the disastrous legacy of the “war on terror” so far, rather than just plunging ahead as if the million or more lives lost and the trillions of dollars spent meant nothing at all.

No matter how much politicians want to forget it, Rumsfeld’s war – the Iraq invasion he “swept up” in the panic – will be shaping international politics for decades to come, including in France.

Unfortunately, in the wake of the Paris atrocities, we seem to be reliving those initial weeks after 9/11, a “scoundrel time” in which the understandable numbness that so many feel provides fertile ground for demagogues and political operators.

Already, the cry’s gone up for pat solutions and decisive action – which, as we saw in 2001, invariably means politicians slapping a fresh coat of paint on their personal hobbyhorses, however weather beaten these might be.

Many of the leaders marching under the “Je suis Charlie” banner are simultaneously dusting off schemes for stricter anti-terror regimes.

Free speech is sacred – and here’s a plan to retain all your internet data.

“In politics,” said Samuel Taylor Coleridge, “what begins in fear usually ends in folly.”

The future lasts a long, long time. Let’s remember that ideas that were terrible yesterday remain so today – and the next day and the day after that and for all the other days in which we’ll be affected by them.

Don't give in to the politics of fear. Our peaceful future depends on it | Jeff Sparrow | Comment is free | The Guardian

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Add faith phobia to my crimes: I have no respect for religions that have little respect for me

Suzanne Moore Thursday 15 January 2015

Now is a time to remember that tolerance has to be reciprocal or it is not tolerance at all

Gunmen kill 12 at French magazine Charlie Hebdo

A woman reads the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in a bookshop in Paris. Photograph: Caroline Blumberg/EPA

Voltaire is being quoted everywhere at the moment, although some say his words were different to what we are being told. He actually wrote in a letter in 1770 to Abbot le Riche: “I detest what you write but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.” And of course lives have been taken rather than given for writing what many detest.

The arguments go back and forth between those who think Charlie Hebdo should not have published its latest cover image of Muhammad and those – and I am one – who think that they are publishing anything at all is amazing and heartening. The image of a crying man does not offend me. I am not a Muslim but I see that the cover has been read as yet more provocation, even an undoing of the unity of the marches in Paris and other cities. To certain scumbag preachers it is “an act of war”.

Equally disturbing is this talk of blasphemy. Jesus H Christ, remind me what year this is. At one end of the spectrum we have talk of blasphemy, then at the other a kind of liberal anxiety about bad manners – as if showing images was akin to bringing the wrong wine to a dinner party. To all of this, I must say I am pretty gobsmacked. There is a kind of faux respect floating around that I do not trust at all. For it is fearful.

Last week I asked for us to continue in our disrespect and I meant it. Why must I have respect for religions that have little respect for me? That seek to curtail the rights of women? That find me unclean? I am not just talking about Islam here, but pretty much all religion. So there is some equal opportunity offence for you. Faith phobia. Add it to the list of my crimes.

I don’t have to go back to seventh-century texts to find faiths in which women are not seen as equal to men. This is from the founder of another religion: “A society in which women are taught anything but the management of a family, the care of men and the creation of the future generation is a society which is on the way out.” That’s L Ron Hubbard for you. And you can satirise Scientology all you like.

In the mess of blood and tears and accusations of racism flying around, cultural difference is a sensitive issue. Offence is often caused by the conflation of culture, religion and identity. Recently, at the Jewish Museum in Berlin, I saw an exhibition on circumcision, titled Snip It!, that revealed many of the similarities between this ritual practice for Jews and for Muslims. Unravelling the cultural is key in understanding the differences within faiths as well as between them. Where there is ignorance of how identities are formed there can be no tolerance. The lost boys who cling to dogma do not even know their own history, never mind anyone else’s.

Voltaire once asked what tolerance meant and said this wonderful thing: “It is the consequence of humanity. We are all formed of frailty and error; let us pardon reciprocally each others’ folly – that is the first law of nature.” There is the crux: reciprocity. I keep hearing that free speech is a right with a responsibility, although surely it cannot attempt to be responsible to everyone. If tolerance is about something reciprocal, then it becomes very difficult. And important.

Out of courtesy we may choose not to publish images that cause hurt but we are not duty-bound by that. Do I have the right to enter the male-only spaces of many sacred places? It may be none of my business what women of faith do but I am offended by segregation, by literal interpretations of texts, by the treatment of women as second‑class citizens.

Oh sure, this is the wrong time to bang on about gender when cartoonists and Jews are being slaughtered in Paris and thousands are being killed and raped in Nigeria. Because isn’t it always? When hate speech is everywhere, when anti-Semitism thrives, when we are nervous about publishing images of Muhammad – and this is just Europe – then women’s rights are not top of the agenda. But let’s make the connection here between those who would ban imagery and those who wouldn’t.

There is no right never to be offended. Images are removed quietly sometimes. The artist Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ is withdrawn from Associated Press images. This photograph had already been attacked in France after demonstrations by Christians and the far right. Actually, I am offended daily by images of women reduced to body parts but I do not incite violence. So, please, let’s not talk about the fundamentalism of those of us who believe in free speech. Rather like feminism, we would actually like it to start.

There is much discussion of us and them, but the “them” are not simply or only Muslims. There are ultra-conservative forces at work at the moment, some deadly, and what they all share is an absolute refusal to give women agency and autonomy. So don’t ask me to have respect for these kinds of fundamentalism that have none for me.

Critique is not blasphemy. Texts can be reinterpreted. Tolerance has to be reciprocal or it is not tolerance at all. We should at least be honest now. Those who don’t believe in any god have as many rights as those who do.

Add faith phobia to my crimes: I have no respect for religions that have little respect for me | Suzanne Moore | Comment is free | The Guardian

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Egypt’s Grand Mufti Warns Charlie Hebdo Against Publishing Mohammed Cartoon

January 13, 2015 1:26 pm

Rupert Murdoch @rupertmurdoch   Maybe most Moslems peaceful, but until they recognize and destroy their growing jihadist cancer they must be held responsible.

The upcoming Jan. 14 cover of Charlie Hebdo will feature a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed on its cover. Photo: Twitter.

JNS.org – Egypt’s Grand Mufti has warned the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo against publishing a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed on the cover of its latest edition.

“This edition will cause a new wave of hatred in French and Western society in general and what the magazine is doing does not serve coexistence or a dialog between civilizations,” the office of Grand Mufti Shawqi Allam, one of the region’s most influential Muslim clerics, said in a statement, Reuters reported.

“This is an unwarranted provocation against the feelings of… Muslims around the world,” the statement added.

On the cover of its Jan. 14 edition, Charlie Hebdo will feature a cartoon of Mohammed holding a sign saying, “Je Suis Charlie” (I am Charlie), with a headline above the cartoon reading “Tout Est Pardonne” (All Is Forgiven).

While the Grand Mufti called the attack on Charlie Hebdo as a “terrorist” act, he called the magazine’s decision to run the new cartoon a “racist act” that would incite more Muslim violence.

Egypt’s Grand Mufti Warns Charlie Hebdo Against Publishing Mohammed Cartoon | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

Australian PM says he'll now use Daesh instead of ISIL for 'death cult' – but why?

Fred McConnell Monday 12 January 2015

Tony Abbott says the new name deprives the group of legitimacy, but why do its members hate it and what makes naming them so complicated?

Islamic State fighters parade through Raqqa in Syria. One militant holds a US M16 assault rifle

Islamic State fighters parade through Raqqa in Syria. Photograph: Reuters

Tony Abbott has announced that from now he will refer to the Islamic State group as “Daesh”, on the grounds that the terminology deprives the group of legitimacy among Muslims.

“Daesh hates being referred to by this term, and what they don’t like has an instinctive ­appeal to me,’’ the Australian prime minister told the Herald Sun.

“I absolutely refuse to refer to it by the title that it claims for itself [Islamic State], because I think this is a perversion of religion and a travesty of governance.”

Western leaders and media have struggled for a consistent terminology to identify the group, which was initially known in English as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), then the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (Isis) and subsequently often simply as Islamic State (IS). Al-Sham is often translated as Syria but can also refer specifically to Damascus or even the entire Levant region.

“Islamic State” is near enough a literal translation from the group’s name in Arabic, Al Dawla al-Islamyia, yet the original is more of a religious concept than a political one. Our translation is misleading because it implies a western conception of bureaucratic statehood.

The Arabic equivalent relates to the Qur’anic ideal of a universal Islamic community or Uma, united by faith and spirituality, and bound in religious terms by sharia. No matter what term the media use, English cannot adequately capture that meaning.

In that light, Abbott’s insistence on “Daesh” seems like a canny workaround. He, like the French president, François Hollande, is essentially saying: you don’t get to name yourselves. It solves the problem both of legitimacy and of semantically flawed translations.

Daesh is also an acronym, but of the Arabic words that mean the same as Isis: Al Dawla al-Islamyia fil Iraq wa’al Sham.

As such, it loses all meaning in non-Arabic contexts. With Daesh – or Da’ish, with the emphasis on a long “e” – the Islamic association is nowhere to be found. Abbott manages to further neuter the term by mispronouncing it “Dash”. Perhaps this itself is a subtle power move.

It is not just the lack of the word “Islamic” in the new term that frustrates Isis. In adopting the term Abbott joins many Arabic speakers who also use Daesh.

In Arabic, the word lends itself to being snarled with aggression. As Simon Collis, the British ambassador to Iraq told the Guardian’s Ian Black: “Arabic speakers spit out the name Da’ish with different mixtures of contempt, ridicule and hostility. Da’ish is always negative.”

And if that wasn’t infuriating enough for the militants, Black reports that the acronym has already become an Arabic word in its own right, with a plural – daw’aish – meaning “bigots who impose their views on others”.

 

Australian PM says he'll now use Daesh instead of ISIL for 'death cult' – but why? | World news | The Guardian

Monday, January 12, 2015

Global outrage at Saudi Arabia as jailed blogger receives public flogging

Ian Black, Middle East editor Monday 12 January 2015

Kingdom stays silent as protesters contrast its opposition to Paris attacks on free speech with its own attacks on free speech

US Secratery of State John Kerry (2L) an

US secretary of state John Kerry attends a Gulf Cooperation Council meeting in Jeddah. Saudi Arabia is a strategic ally of the US and UK. Photograph: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

Saudi Arabia is remaining silent in the face of global outrage at the public flogging of the jailed blogger Raif Badawi, who received the first 50 of 1,000 lashes on Friday, part of his punishment for running a liberal website devoted to freedom of speech in the conservative kingdom.

Anger at the flogging – carried out as the world watched the bloody denouement of the Charlie Hebdo and Jewish supermarket jihadi killings in Paris – focused on a country that is a strategic ally, oil supplier and lucrative market for the US, Britain and other western countries but does not tolerate criticism at home.

Badawi was shown on a YouTube video being beaten in a square outside a mosque in Jeddah, watched by a crowd of several hundred who shouted “Allahu Akbar” (God is great) and clapped and whistled after the flogging ended. Badawi made no sound during the flogging and was able to walk back unaided afterwards.

“Raif was escorted from a bus and placed in the middle of the crowd, guarded by eight or nine officers,” a witness told Amnesty International.

“He was handcuffed and shackled but his face was not covered. A security officer approached him from behind with a huge cane and started beating him.

“Raif raised his head towards the sky, closing his eyes and arching his back. He was silent, but you could tell from his face and his body that he was in real pain.”

Badawi’s wife, Ensaf Haidar, told the Guardian from Montreal on Sunday: “Many governments around the world have protested about my husband’s case. I was optimistic until the last minute before the flogging. But the Saudi government is behaving like Daesh [a derogatory Arabic name for Islamic State or Isis].”

Saudi Arabia joined other Arab and Muslim countries in condemning the murder of 12 people at the Paris satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo but angry comments highlighted its double standard in meting out a cruel punishment to a man who was accused of insulting Islam.

One cartoon circulating on social media showed a man resembling Badawi being flogged alongside the words: “Saudi Arabia condemns the terrorist attack on freedom of expression in Paris …” Another image showed a pencil being flayed by whips.

One woman at Sunday’s Paris solidarity rally carried a placard declaring: “I am Raif Badawi, the Saudi journalist who was flogged.” Others protested at the presence of the Saudi foreign minister.

Badawi was sentenced last May to 10 years’ imprisonment and 1,000 lashes – 50 at a time over 20 weeks – and fined 1m Saudi riyals (£175,000). He has been held since mid-2012, and his Free Saudi Liberals website, established to encourage debate on religious and political matters in Saudi Arabia, is closed.

He is expected to receive another 50 lashes this Friday.

Arabic Twitter users condemned Saudi Arabia for behaving like Isis – part of the argument that the fundamental values promoted by the Saudi state do not differ from those that are carried to a brutal extreme by the jihadi group that controls parts of Syria and Iraq.

“Just a reminder,” tweeted one Tunisian woman. “Those who criticise Isis, which beheads and flogs people, and lines up children to watch, are the ones who are making excuses for the flogging of a man in Saudi Arabia. They are all Isis.”

Saudi Arabia is one of five Arab countries in the US-led coalition fighting Isis. It has arrested hundreds of people for alleged links to terrorism and imposed penalties on those travelling abroad to fight – though it still wants the overthrow of the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad.

About 2,500 Saudis have fought with Isis.

The US, EU and others publicly urged Riyadh not to go ahead with the flogging. Britain’s Foreign Office said: “The UK condemns the use of cruel and degrading punishment in all circumstances.”

A spokesman said on Sunday that concerns about the case continued to be expressed “at all levels”. There is no sign that the Saudis’ western allies will take any punitive action to back up their protests.

“The Saudis have a policy for inside the country where they want to show that they are pious and protect the faith,” said Ali al-Ahmed, of the Washington-based Institute for Gulf Affairs.

“Outside they project the opposite impression, that they are liberals and that it’s ordinary people who are savage and conservative.

“That’s why the west says: ‘Yes, we need to protect the Saudi royals because the alternative is Osama bin Laden.’

“It’s worked for the Saudis and it gives the west an excuse not to support any kind of change or reform.”

Badawi’s punishment is part of a wider campaign against domestic dissent. His lawyer, Waleed Abu al-Khair, was sentenced to 15 years in prison last July because of criticism of human rights abuses.

His case resumes on Monday, with the government reportedly seeking an even harsher sentence.

Fadhil al-Manasif is facing 14 years in prison on charges stemming from his assistance to journalists covering protests over the treatment of Shia Muslims in the Sunni-dominated country.

 

Global outrage at Saudi Arabia as jailed blogger receives public flogging | World news | The Guardian

Islamic State: US facing long war to retake Iraqi territory and defeat Islamist insurgents

By North America correspondent Michael Vincent Monday 12 January 2015

Islamic State fighter on top of tank in Syria Photo: An Islamic State tank rolls into a Syrian town in June 2014 (Reuters: Stringer)

It was the week before Christmas when the general in charge of America's effort to fight Islamic State delivered his blunt assessment.

When a reporter at the Pentagon asked Lieutenant General James Terry when there would be a significant "turning point" on the battlefield, he nominated Christmas 2017.

"I think you're at least talking a minimum of three years," the Operation Inherent Resolve commander said.

"[Islamic State] has proved to be resilient. And again, as I look at it from a military standpoint, the first air strikes were, what, 8 August? And so this is December. What's that? Four months.

"I think we've made significant progress in halting that offensive... the ability for them to continue to expand, you know, in terms of terrain and geography out there."

US-led air strikes may be containing the militants, but the main "boots on the ground" needed to retake Iraqi territory and defeat Islamic State are not ready.

The international effort to train the Iraqi national army has not yet begun.

In case General Terry's timeframe was not clear, he repeated it.

"I still think, in terms of building some of the capabilities that are required there, [we're] probably about three years down the road minimum," he reiterated.

 

Obama administration's mixed messages on ground campaign

US Air Force F-15E Photo: A pair of US Air Force F-15E Strike Eagles flying over northern Iraq early in the morning of September 23, 2014. (AFP: US Air Force/Senior Airman Matthew Bruch)

The messaging from the Obama administration has been mixed.

The president has said he is not Iraq's air force. But, for now, he clearly is.

I still think, in terms of building some of the capabilities that are required there, [we're] probably about three years down the road minimum.

Lieutenant General James Terry

So far the US Congress is backing him, budgeting $US5 billion for the air strikes and army training over the next nine months.

US secretary of state John Kerry clearly expects a concerted ground campaign against Islamic State soon.

He told a Washington DC forum on Mid East relations on December 7 that "Iraq's national army is preparing to launch a counter-offensive. And we are confident that they will do so when the time is right, not in a matter of years but a matter of months."

That's a much more optimistic timeframe that America's military has in mind.

 

Reconstructing Iraqi army 'like building an airplane in flight'

Iraqi troops meet during a training exercise Photo: Iraqi troops discuss strategy during a training exercise

"It's easy to create an individual soldier. Eight weeks and you've got a man who is basically trained," says retired Major General Paul Eaton.

General Eaton oversaw the last US mission to train Iraq's military after the fall of Saddam Hussein.

He likens the current attempt to reconstruct the army during this conflict to "building an airplane in flight".

The Iraqi defence force has multiple problems it must overcome, but it has to succeed in its impending counter-attack - or there will be dire consequences.

"Initial failure carries a severe penalty," General Eaton warns.

"This should be a soft timeline based on success as opposed to [setting] an artificial date.

"[The aim] is to stabilise, contain [and] collapse the perimeter around ISIS until they are no longer a problem."

 

Problem 1: Iraq's ghost soldiers

Iraqi troops east of Baghdad Photo: Iraqi soldiers hold a checkpoint east of Baghdad in January 2014, after Islamic State-linked fighters took control of Fallujah (AFP: Ali Al-Saadi)

By some estimates the Iraqi national army has collapsed from a total of 400,000 soldiers to just 85,000.

The problems are well documented - soldiers going AWOL or simply not existing.

"We had problems with ghost soldiers even back before 2011 [when the US pulled out]", General Eaton said.

Inflated numbers have been blamed on officers inventing names on paper and pocketing the salaries.

That's why the US sent hundreds of assessors into Iraq in 2014 to audit exactly what the numbers and capabilities of the Iraqi forces were.

 

Problem 2: Going AWOL

Islamic State fighters at a checkpoint in Mosul in June Photo: Islamic State fighters at a checkpoint in Mosul in June (Reuters)

Thousands of Iraqi soldiers fled when Islamic State swept across Iraq.

"We also had soldiers go home and not come back," General Eaton said.

But now there has been "a system in Iraq where soldiers question their own legitimacy, their chain of command, their mission and their own government - that's the issue."

General Eaton blames previous prime minister Nouri al-Maliki for purging the Iraqi forces of competent officers and widening the Sunni-Shia sectarian divide.

So after all of America's billions in support, his assessment of the Iraq military folding in the face of Islamic State is "it's a disappointment, but not a huge surprise".

It may only take two months of training to give a new soldier the necessary physical and military skill sets - "how to operate their kit, form a rifle squad platoon", as General Eaton describes it.

But he says building morale and convincing troops there is a reason to fight will take time.

"Belief in institutions, the government, the constitution, the chain of command - knowing that they will be resupplied with food and water and ammunition when they need it - that you will be medevac'd if you get hurt - that resilience - that is the most difficult to develop," he said.

That goes to the current US military's timeline of three years.

 

The biggest battle: Mosul

Damaged vehicles belonging to Iraqi security forces on a street in Mosul on June 10, 2014. Photo: The aftermath of the Iraqi army's retreat from Mosul in June 2014 (Reuters/Stringer)

Mosul, Iraq's second biggest city with a population of a million people, fell to Islamic State fighters after four days of fierce fighting in June.

"Urban combat is challenging in the best of conditions - that would be a really bad place to find out if you've pulled together an army that's going to work," General Eaton said.

"Mosul is a serious undertaking - bigger than Fallujah. Fallujah was tough - there were very heavy losses to US forces when we had to retake Fallujah [in 2004]."

"These ISIS guys, they will reinforce Mosul. We've seen the fanatic fighters of ISIS. Urban warfare and fanatic fighters means you're going to have casualties, and casualties heavy enough to put into question the continuation of the battle."

He predicts that Iraq's army will face smaller battles to "blood" it, just as the Allies invaded North Africa first before attempting to invade Europe during World War II.

"Little steps for little feet - it would be far better for the Iraqi army to see small successes building to a large success in Mosul," he said.

That's where the foreign advisors will come into play.

Iraqi families fleeing violence in the northern Nineveh province including its capital Mosul gather a Kurdish checkpoint. Photo: Iraqi families flee into Kurdistan after the Islamic State capture of Mosul (AFP: Safin Hamed)

"[Prussian general and military theorist Carl von] Clausewitz calls it the directed telescope. You have an advisory body, [a] 10-man team at the battalion level who will report back and say these guys are ready or they're not ready. They give an assessment. That will allow the US leadership to properly advise at a higher level whether the forces are competent and whether there's a reasonable expectation of a victory that's not going to be Pyrrhic."

US political pressure will also play its part.

"The American citizen will see value in supporting an alliance to exorcise this evil called IS. So as long as the casualty count is very low, and dollar amount manageable, there will be modest pressure to accelerate an outcome," General Eaton said.

"I personally believe that we're talking a long effort - years. Good, slow and relatively inexpensive, but successful."

A success the next US president will be hoping to inherit.

Islamic State: US facing long war to retake Iraqi territory and defeat Islamist insurgents - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Sunday, January 11, 2015

Sleeper Cell Awakes France's Worst Fears in 3 Days of Terror - ABC News

By JOHN LEICESTER Associated Press  PARIS — Jan 10, 2015

Associated Press

Blood-curdling, al-Qaida-inspired murder that tore at the heart of the nation which raised him wasn't ghoulish enough for Cherif Kouachi. His body, felled by elite soldiers' bullets and stun grenades, wasn't yet cold when he also came back from the dead.

Kouachi had picked up the phone when a reporter for news channel BFM rang the printing plant, his and his elder brother Said's final redoubt, where an army of soldiers, police officers, and helicopters cornered them after a 40-plus-hour manhunt through villages and woodlands of northern France.

BFM waited until after the brothers and another member of their terror cell, who killed four hostages in a kosher grocery in Paris, were dead before broadcasting its haunting audio. Sounding determined and so chillingly sure of himself and his extremist Islamic rhetoric, Kouachi's fluent French put words to France's worst nightmare: its own sons, heads filled with jihadi dreams of murder and martyrdom, coming home from foreign battlefields to wage war.

"We are the defenders of the Prophet," he said. "I, Cherif Kouachi, was sent by al-Qaida from Yemen."

———

Paris will never quite be the same after the carnage that started Wednesday. Never again will fears of home-grown terrorists coming back battled-hardened by extremist training, indoctrination and fighting in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere to commit mass murder be just theories. As Prime Minister Manuel Valls would later say: "There will be a before and an after."

Heavily armed, dressed head-to-toe in black, the Kouachi brothers forced their way into the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo as the satirical magazine's staff gathered for an editorial meeting. Household names in a country which regards cartoons as serious literature and a gateway to reading for children, Charlie's artists had already been up to their usual mischief, tweeting moments earlier a cartoon of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of the Islamic State group, sending New Year wishes with the words "above all, good health!"

More than merely cheeky, the weekly's drawings are often grossly offensive. Proudly calling itself an "irresponsible newspaper," it put an erect male member on its front cover as long ago as 1974. But it had its place in French newsstands and hearts. It may not always have made them laugh, but its very existence demonstrated that freedom of speech was alive and kicking. Charlie Hebdo artist Jean Cabut, known simply as Cabu, also featured in and drew for a fondly remembered children's television program in the 1980s. His killing by the Kouachi brothers felt, to some, like the death of their childhoods, too.

Shouting "Allahu akbar!" ? God is great in Arabic ? the Kouachi brothers had, in their own words, come to avenge Charlie Hebdo's caricatures that have repeatedly poked fun at the Prophet Muhammad, some showing him butt-naked. Charlie's cartoonists knew this was incendiary stuff. A firebombing destroyed their offices in 2011. Editor Stephane Charbonnier, known as Charb, had a police bodyguard and was on an al-Qaida hit list. After the assassinations, distraught people around the world flooded social media with the phrase "I am Charlie." But that isn't, strictly speaking, true: not everyone has the courage to keep going to work in the face of such danger.

The gunmen headed straight for Charbonnier, killing him and his bodyguard first, said Christophe Crepin, a police union spokesman. Also sprayed with bullets and murdered were seven other journalists, among them leading cartoonists, a maintenance worker and a visitor.

A grisly photo showing trails of blood and papers strewn across the office floor testified to the cruelty that, in weeks and months ahead, will test how attached the French ? non-Muslims and the estimated 5 million who follow the teachings of the Quran ? are to their liberties and to each other.

Back outside, the gunmen rejoiced.

"Hey! We avenged the Prophet Muhammad. We killed Charlie Hebdo!" they were heard yelling on amateur video.

It also showed them coolly interrupting their getaway to kill another policeman, finishing him with a shot to the head as he writhed injured on a sidewalk. The officer was later identified as Ahmed Merabet, a Muslim. The phrase "Je Suis Ahmed" ? I Am Ahmed ? caught fire on social media.

———

Police unions were horrified to see weapons of war, semi-automatic rifles firing high-velocity rounds, used against officers who arrived on mountain bikes and in flimsy Renaults. Already, debate has begun on whether security services need bigger weapons and more resources to keep better track of hundreds of men and women who have travelled overseas for jihad. The challenge for France and other European democracies who know they could be the next targets is to boost security without compromising on liberty.

The Kouachi brothers exploited what is both democracies' weakness and strength: fundamental respect for citizens' rights, even for those suspected of terrorist links and sympathies. Cherif Kouachi, 32, was convicted on terrorism charges in 2008. Said, 34, is believed to have trained and fought with al-Qaida forces while in Yemen. Both were barred from travel to the United States, according to a senior U.S. official, because of such links. But Said had no criminal record, and the latest legal case against Cherif was ultimately thrown out.

Their competence with weapons, the way one kept guard while the other executed Merabet, the attack timed for the editorial meeting, made immediately clear the gunmen were trained, focused and working to a plan. That Said Kouachi left his ID card in their getaway car, leaving a trail police jumped on, was simply baffling.

That same afternoon, just hours after the attack, police identified the Kouachi brothers as suspects and later released their mug shots, both with small chin beards and close-cropped hair. The hunt was on.

———

The trail led SWAT teams backed by helicopters to the Picardie region north of Paris, through which troops marched a century earlier to the gory trenches of World War I. Back in Paris, under leaden, tearful skies, the mood was morose.

Everyone coped with the numbness of shock as they could. Absurd as it must have seemed, I walked the Champs-Elysees to work with my right arm thrust in the air, clutching a pen. Others left flowers, candles and, of course, drawings at makeshift shrines.

A midday national moment of silence, with people falling quiet mid-phone call, the gargantuan bell of Notre Dame Cathedral tolling like a mournful heartbeat, and strangers staring at each other on halted subway trains, brought the welcome respite of solidarity. The mutual sharing of shoulders to lean on bore out the enduring truth of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," the national motto of a famously squabble-fond country that Charles de Gaulle once complained is ungovernable.

But as lights on the Eiffel Tower were extinguished that night in tribute, the Kouachi brothers appeared, incredibly, to have slipped the dragnet, having robbed a gas station and later vanished into woodlands. That and the shooting death of a policewoman in southern Paris early that morning doomed the city to an uneasy sleep.

———

Friday, Jan. 9, 2015 ? like Wednesday, Jan. 7, for that matter ? will, for the French, always be one of those "where were you when?" days.

It started with news of the Kouachi brothers, one injured in the throat in an earlier shootout with police, finally cornered in a printing house near Paris' main international airport, Charles de Gaulle, which closed two runways as helicopters buzzed over the terrorists' hideout.

It ended, however, not only with their deaths but also with four hostages killed at a kosher Paris supermarket by a long-time friend of the Kouachis and the sinking realization that these three days of terror were more than radicalized brothers on a murderous rampage. This was the awakening of a sleeper cell of three, possibly more, home-grown terrorists who plotted and turned on their country together.

Like Cherif Kouachi, the Paris hostage-taker, Amedy Coulibaly, also came back to haunt France even in death.

In a telephone interview with BFM from inside the grocery store, extracts of which the channel also broadcast after police killed him, Coulibaly explained with unnerving nonchalance that he and the Kouachis "synchronized the operations" and that while the brothers attacked Charlie Hebdo, "I started to do the police." He is thought to also have killed the policewoman in Thursday's shooting. BFM said he claimed allegiance to the Islamic State group.

Seemingly determined to go out in a blaze, as self-styled martyrs, the Kouachis came out firing, continuing to shoot at elite forces even after stun grenades blew them off their feet, said Francois Molins, the Paris public prosecutor. At that point, they were shot and killed.

Almost simultaneously, reportedly as they heard Coulibaly reciting final prayers, police assaulted the grocery to stop him carrying out his threat to kill his 15 hostages if the Kouachis weren't freed.

Fierce exchanges of fire ended with Coulibaly running toward the heavily armed officers and felled by their hail of bullets.

Three days of bloodshed were over. But the terror they caused is not. Authorities have yet to collar Coulibaly's widow, Hayat Boumeddiene, sought herself as an "armed and dangerous" suspect and who once posed for a photo holding a crossbow in her Islamic veil.

"We're a country at war. What I saw today was a war," said Daikh Ramdan, a Paris service station manager rattled after witnessing the thunderous booms and gunshots of Coulibaly's end.

"You have the impression you are already dead, you are vulnerable, you're cold, your heart is beating, you breathe hard," he said. "It's very complicated. You have the impression you are no longer a man, no longer a man."

Sleeper Cell Awakes France's Worst Fears in 3 Days of Terror - ABC News