Masopher’s Mind

There is a catch phrase that has buried its meme little head into my mind. Leonidas my ancient namesake who undermanned with his 300 volunteers bravely faced down the greatest empire of its time. Chomsky says that propaganda is the “civilized societies” version of death squads and armies. I agree.

Newspapers: This is blasphemy! This is madness!

Masopher: This is PROPOGANDA!

The latest “mindfuck”. Until I think of a cool name like meme I will use mindfuck.

Gillian Gibbons a bleeding heart Liverpudlian arrested by Sudanese authorities for allegedly insulting Islam by allowing her class to name a teddy bear “Muhammad”. However, it was later revealed that an office assistant, Sara Khawad, had filed the complaint and was the key witness for the prosecution.

Office politics gone bad. Gladly (for me) it now got the more clownish tabloid politicians and British politicians involved as well as the hapless Sudanese politicians and Imams.

Section 125 of the Sudanese Criminal Act, for “insulting religion, inciting hatred and showing contempt for religious beliefs”. This carries a maximum sentence of imprisonment, a fine, or 40 lashes.

This is a maximum sentence. Only a real hangman judge bent on civil authority would have imposed that. This law covers everything from teddy-bear naming to writing the Prophets name and all his Sudanese Imams names in faeces and calling it a tasteful representation of the history and nature of this 1500 year old religion. In the British press this was carried as the actual sentence that she would have gotten. British Press and by reference, British people thought the worst of the Sudanese Justice system. Sudanese Judges disregard the implications of their actions outlandish grossly disproportionate sentences are handed out and little white ladies get their heads lopped off for using the name of the prophet inappropriately in front of impressionable little kids.

In December 1 it was reported that in Saudia Arabia a man was beheaded for murder. Around the same period, in war torn Afghanistan, several policemen were beheaded by the Taliban and in England and Sudan a teacher was almost beheaded for naming a teddybear. Actually no. In Sudan a few ignorant yokels with machetes and a intense hatred for British policy wanted a beheading. In England the entire civilized society was led to assume that this was more than remotely possible.

Gibbons was found guilty of “insulting religion”, one of the three counts against her, and was sentenced to 15 days’ imprisonment and deportation. The media hype on this guaranteed that, there was no way that Sudanese Imams and British Press could have left her in peace.

The press have a job, to totally blow everything out of proportion: To sensationalize stimulate and sell. And after British condemnation, the Imams have a job to protect their position as well, to allay their congregation and of course defend Islam from being attacked in the British press again.

Now let us look at the true barbarians just as Perseus looked at the Medusa with his polished shield.

Let us start with a quick history Lesson:

In the 19th Century soon to be EU member Turkey brought Islam to Northern Sudan.

In the 20th Century, Colonial Egypt began demarking the boundaries of Sudan in typical gerrymandering fashion noted with most of Africa and the Middle-East: Splitting up tribes, lumping ancient enemies together in a single country, landlocking potential threats and the like.

In the mid 20th Century Sudan became a military client of Britain and then the Soviet Union and began using the (credit) bought weapons to fight for power and autonomy from each other.

In the late 20th century Sudan played host to a young Saudi Billionaire fresh out of Jihad against the soviet empire and spoiling to take on the last remaining global hegemony. He reportedly set up numerous charities and organizations including Al-Queda.

In the early 21st century the Sudanese government was implicated being allied with militant Muslims in an ongoing civil war and extermination of the men women and children western province known as Darfur. Neighbouring (former French Colony) T’Chad then declared war on Sudan.

In the same year that Sudanese and Chadians went to war, December 2005, Tony Blair then Prime Minister of Britain attempts to hold innocent untried suspects for 90 days.

July 26, 2007 Alan Travis Home affairs editor of The Guardian reports that [P]rime minister [Brown] insisted that MPs will have to agree a new limit of anywhere between 28 and 58 days.

In November 2007, The Times reports that a young bookstore worker, Samina Malik, 23, was found guilty at the Old Bailey of possessing records likely to be used for terrorism by a majority of 10 to one. She was convicted of writing poetry sympathetic to and idealizing Jihad. The investigators found no plans to commit terrorist acts; she had no links to terrorist cells; she was a liberal Muslim, did not wear the hijab, used Hi-5 (the Facebook for the third world <my(nority) space>) worked in a book store.

Under the Terrorism Act 2000 she could spend 10 years in prison for being a Muslim that writes and fantasizes about what Muslim’s thousands of miles are doing in a real war between them and their enemy. No poetry written explicitly names a race class or nation. Like many young people and minorities she is fantasizing about fighting a nameless faceless foe.(that is probably a Jungian reference)

Compare this now to the videogames graphically expressing the murder of Russians, Muslims, Asians, Eastern Europeans, South Americans and Africans.

A quick wikisearch gives me a sample of what is ‘hip’:

America’s Army, SOCOM: US Navy SEALs series, Brothers in Arms series, Delta Force series, Hidden & Dangerous, Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45, SWAT series, Rainbow Six series, Ghost Recon series, Soldier of Fortune series, Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis, Vietcong series, Deadly Dozen series.

Surely a computer simulation program that rewards a young person for committing acts of war, murder and terrorism against ethnic minorities can also be construed as at least on par with a poem about chopping off an ‘unbelievers’ head.

I am 100% for the freedom of expression, whether it be by the skilled representations of game developers, or well crafted euphemisms of think tanks that advise world leaders to systematically slaughter and terrorize indigenous populations and to quickly lock away potential troublemakers for the regime. Most importantly I am 100% for the freedom of expression for an introverted Muslim girl and a kind hearted Liverpool teacher. I am not for the sensationalism and pandering to the public it makes us stupid and ignorant (HAHA! See how I tied it all together in the end!).

References:

‘Lyrical terrorist’ convicted for jihad poems Times Online November 8, 2007
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2831648.ece

Saudi authorities behead a man for murder The Associated Press
Published: December 1, 2007
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/12/01/africa/ME-GEN-Saudi-Beheading.php

Short History of Sudan, Dr. Mohamed H. Fadlalla, iUniverse, 30 April 2004

Sudan: The Criminal Act 1991 Arab Law Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1994), pp. 32-80

Taliban behead 7 Afghan policemen Pakistan Dawn November 24, 2007 http://www.dawn.com/2007/11/24/top18.htm

Terrorism Act 2000 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2000/20000011.htm

Wikipedia First Person Shooter September 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-person_shooter

For the embattled state of Pakistan the feeling of too many cocks in one henhouse is now very strong. I expect to see pretty soon a fox or two in this henhouse. It’s a rock paper scissors deal. Bhutto can kick Musharraf’s ass, Sharif can beat Bhutto and Musharraf can take out Sharif.

Corrupt western puppet Bhutto returning from the UK; Conservative pro-Islamic, Bin-laden connected Sharif returning from Saudi-Arabia and Musharraf who has tried to play both sides of the US/Islam conflict. It’s now decision time for Pakistan, a real decision. All three are implicated in bribery corruption and being power hungry its just which one has the support of the more thugs, fawning paki goatherders and bawling mommas. Further reading has indicated to me just how much Musharraf has undermined himself supporting western interests in Afghanistan, standing down from the India confrontation and forging ties with Israel. He has been likened to a river boat gambler throwing in all his chips including his presidency and army position on his centrist course but unfortunately by not taking a side he had only his army on his side. With stepping down from the army he loses his army and he is in serious threat of losing his presidency as well.

This three way footrace between the president and returned exiles will become more interesting in the coming months.

Hugo Chavez: One of my favourite living politicians. El Presidente of Venezuala. Fighting with his internal demons, namely the banana republic oligarchy who were sadly not decapitated in a communist revolution. Sadly not because I wish death on them but because the interaction between the democratically elected charismatic leader and them confuses the issue as to his intentions. Because of their actions through coups and blatant ridiculous propaganda force him to cling to power and act more leftist than I think he truly is. Were it not for the polarizing influences of the old families, Venezuela would be more susceptible to more subtle machinations but with them in place it means Chavez has to keep up his wildly undiplomatic but highly entertaining antics. (His Spanish and US confrontations)

He is a new left that has emerged in South America, a so called Bolivarian, which sums up to nationalist/continental-ist left. A People proud of being a people and of course bucking the globalization policy originating from the U.S. Chavez is unwittingly playing up the goal of globalization, by uniting South America he will make it that much easier for what I think is the unification of the planet. However the argument as always is the semantics of how to get there. Bolivarianism is not Banana Republic vassalism that the oligarchs want and it is not becoming a client US state as in Columbia and El Salvador.

Without a doubt Chavez is remaking himself into a reincarnation of his mentor Fidel Castro, but without an overt betrayal/confrontation with the US the relations will sum up to just a charismatic blowhard in a chamber of sleepy old crooks. The US needs Venezuela and Venezuela needs the US and the world needs peace. So far he has resisted the temptation of “going dictator” but as mentioned, the oligarchs make him resisting temptation that much harder.

The US interest in Venezuela is complex. There is Oil and resources, religious and political lobbies that are losing steam because they don’t have any more Oil money and there is communism. Chavez courts communism openly and allies himself with former soviet clients as well as Russia. For the most part if it looks like a fish, swims like a fish and stinks like a fish then its probably a fish. But communism was a ludicorous and abysmally failed experiment which quickly turned into an industry centred around murder espionage propaganda and military. Surely he cant want that?!

So with all that background, France’s new president Sarkozy is doing some big swing politics. He wants South American anti-gov rebels to release a potentially valuable future ally which will give France a much needed foothold in the West. And he wants Chavez to do it. Chavez has at most militarily aided and at least sympathized with FARC. He can get the job done. Chavez is as well a neighbour and a regional influence (Bolivia, Brazil, the Caribbean, Ecuador, Argentina). He also builds relationships with almost everyone including the UK, Israel and Iran. Colombia on the other hand is a major supplier of US cocaine (and coffee!) and major customer of US weapons.

The tensions are obvious. Bolivarianism decrees that Chavez strengthen ties with anybody that leaders who will promote a united (socialist) South America and undermines anyone that adheres to US hegemony. The FARC is one example of USSA, and apparently Colombia’s military commander is another. Unfortunately the Franco-American ties are on a rebound and Chavez is…so Colombia’s President, Álvaro Vélez will find himself short on support.

Funnily enough, Vélez is Harvard and Oxford among other things, making his Political skills and leaning surprisingly pro-left. Simon Bolivar is the first President of Columbia. Aside from the FARC assassination of his dad, and Columbia’s relationship with the US, and of course political jealousy/vanity the two should get along.

References? I don’t need em, I don’t invent stuff I just read a lot and write. What have I read? Newspapers from around the world and wikipedia?