London 24th February 2007 Demonstration

[Lsmaker112]

okay nice of pple demonstrating but i cannot belive, how many have died on. Iran-iraq war, usa-iraq war, usa/iran-afghanistan war, usa-vietnam war, palestine-israel war, and all have occured in the recent 50-60 years - thats nearly 1 war every 10 years. isnt it astonishing?

[fayik123]

the next big war we face is a natural resource war. When people are low on resources you will understand the true worthlessness of capitalism and people will sudenly wakeup and realize that they can't eat paper money. It is gonna go madmax in the future at some pointand there will be no choice but to kill for survival

[missarabia]

thats very true. its quite a worrying thing.

[ajjhelum]

HAAAAAA HOOOOOOOOOOO! what is it good for,da dada deee dooo

[ReTsU19]

You british fill your mouth whining about Iraq, while you still occupy the argentinean Malvinas islands (but you name it Fuck...sorry, "Falklands" islands...right?)you british righties are really hypocrite... u_u

[neoconhitman]

but occupying the Falkland Islands didn't result in the death of over half a million people.

We occupy the Falklands because it (somehow) gives us a claim on Antartica ... and all the natural resources which the west intends to plunder once they have melted the ice.

[ReTsU19]

Doesn't matter whatever reasons you may put: occupying another country's land is called "imperialism". Much more if it is to ransack their natural resources. Before Iraq, you pull out of Malvinas!

And, mind you, Iraq's war ended looong ago. Around 2 or 3 years. The butchery you can appreciate since then, and the one that produces 150 deaths per day more or less, was an inner conflict between Chiis and Sunis. That sounds more as a Civil War rather than an international war, doesn't it?

1st.

[bt05313]

the majority of the people of the world say NO to war and that is the truth.

war should only ever be last resort to achieve a necessary goal.

[TheSalisburyTory]

Tony Blair will be remembered for freeing Iraq from tyranny. He will be remembered for allowing Democracy a chance to flourish in Iraq. He will be remembered for sticking to his principles unlike Galloway who is friends with such 'honourable' leaders as Castro & Saddam.

[neoconhitman]

Tony Blair has not freed Iraq from tyranny. He has made it worse. Look at the facts. Democracy is not forced on people with violence. Galloway was never a friend of Saddam. For that you need to look at Bush and his mates. Blair stick to his principles? I've only one word to say to that. Trident.

[TheSalisburyTory]

Galloway in my opinion was Saddams friend. I'm sure your aware of his 'Your Excellency' speech to Saddam in 1994. But also in his book 'I'm not the only one' he says the Shi'ites slaughtered by Saddam in 1991 were a fifth column. He sycophantically says that Saddam plotted Iraqis own Great Leap Forward. Are you seriously saying Galloway wasn't Saddams friend.

[neoconhitman]

As you are well aware Galloway ran a charity that did more to help the Iraqi people than than anyone in the Tory party. The Tories were too busy selling Saddam weapons. If Galloway was a friend of Saddam then every hypocritical Pro-Bush supporter was his best mate. Galloway wasn't part of the Government that allowed the slaughter of Iraqis was he? He didn't turn a blind eye to the gassing of the Kurds did he? For that you need to look a bit closer to home.

[TheSalisburyTory]

'The disappearance of the Soviet Union' was 'the biggest catastrophe of my life'(Galloway). According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Arms transfer database, 'Imported weapons to Iraq (IRQ) 1973-2002', the USSR supplied 57% of weapons whilst Britains sales were a fifth of a percent.

[neoconhitman]

Now why don't you quote the whole text surrounding that Galloway quote. You can try to avoid the issue but the bottom line is that the US and UK still invaded Iraq, killing thousands of people, creating 4 million refuges. It is still wrong as it was in 2003. You pro-Bush supporters just can't deal with that fact so you must dig up quotes from peoples interviews to try and score points. A bit like when you leaked the name of a CIA agent just to silence her husband.

[TheSalisburyTory]

So 8 million people voting in January 2005, under the threat of death from terrorists, shouldn't have been allowed to do so because we invaded? Gay Iraqis should live in silence and fear because troops should not be their helping them to build a better future?

[neoconhitman]

Of course people being able to vote is a good thing. It is the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis and the 4 million refuges that I am concerned about. Voting is great but being alive is better. Voting is great but doing so in a land polluted by chemical weapons isn't so great. And you keep forgetting the invasion was not about regime change (illegal under international law). It was the WMDs.

[BritishTory]

International Law? What respect did Saddam have for that? 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 949, 1051, 1060, 1115, 1134, 1137, 1154, 1194, 1205, 1284 & 1441, these are all Security Council resolutions Saddam ignored. 'Voting is great but being alive is better', so being alive wondering whether your town will be gassed is better? Wondering whether Uday Hussein will rape your daughter is better? I would rather be dead! That's not being alive, it's a pitiful existence.

[neoconhitman]

So just because Saddam broke some international laws gives us the right to ignore them as well? If you can't abide by the law you have no right to moan at someone else. If breaking UN resolutions is a justification for war why have we never invaded Israel which has broken far more resolutions than Saddam could have ever dreamed of. If I was choosing a baby sitter I would choose Uday over a US Marine any day.

[BritishTory]

'If I was choosing a baby sitter I would choose Uday over a US marine any day' What a disgusting, vile statement to make!. Stand in front of a family who has been torn apart by Uday & tell them how lovely he was. Maybe your right, the next time a fascist dictator bent on domination begins to re-arm. We should go to the UN & tell him what a naughty man he is & would he mind not re-arming or he faces 'serious' consequences.

[neoconhitman]

Saddam was not a fascist.

Also if you have got a problem with dictators why is it that the US Government is so quick to support them?

The military dictatorship in Pakistan for example. It has been receiving billions of dollars in military aid ... despite locking up anyone who speaks out against their dictator.

[BritishTory]

Saddam would never respect international laws. The comments of his cousin: Ali-Hassan al-Majid, prove that. This is what Majid said upon being told to solve the Kurdish 'problem', "I will kill them all with chemical weapons! Who is going to say anything? The international community? F**k them!". I think it's safe to say that with comments like this, International law meant nothing to them. Because of this it was necessary to move in.

[neoconhitman]

Why don't you "move in" on other countries that ignore international law?

[TheSalisburyTory]

The Mariam appeal recieved funds from the Oil-for-Food program. And your right Galloway wasn't part of the government but describing slaughtered Shi'ites as 'a fifth column who actively undermined the Iraqi war effort in the interests of their country's enemy' is hardly a damning condemnation is it.

[neoconhitman]

So you are saying that a country doesn't have the right to use violence against people who seek to undermine its Government? I think it is wrong. I don't care what Galloway thinks. But you seem to be confused. Saddam fighting anti-Government 'terrorists' is wrong. The US fighting anti-Government 'terrorists' is OK. If Saddam was wrong then why is the US continuing his work? Anyone killing iraqi civilians is a war criminal. Whether they be a dictator or an alcoholic-draft-dodger.

[TheSalisburyTory]

Robert Beeston of The Times wrote of Halabja, 'There was a plump baby whose face, frozen in a scream, stuck out from the protective arm of a man, away from the open door of a house that he never reached'. Please tell me your not calling that child an anti-government terrorist?

[neoconhitman]

Of course I'm not. Anyone killing a child or civilian is a war criminal. I am consistent in that view. Are you? Why is it that you all of a sudden so concerned about Iraqi children when no one gave a stuff at the time it happened. You are trying to rewrite history. The reason for the invasion was not to save Iraqi children. It was WMDs all the way.

[BritishTory]

If you don't care what Galloway thinks then why do you allow him to be part of the stop the war coalition. A man who sees violent jihadists who kill gay Iraqis, as resistance fighters. A man who supported the USSR invasion in 1979. Yet he opposed the US liberation in 2001. So don't try to paint me as a hypocrite.

[neoconhitman]

? These are the first posts you have made so how have I managed to previously paint you as a hypocrite? You have clearly confused yourself by posting under multiple user names. The US haven't 'liberated' anything in 2001. They invaded just like the Russians did, and just like the Russians they are getting their arses kicked by their former allies.

[BritishTory]

To liberate is to set free. Gay Afghans no longer fear death by being buried alive then having a wall pushed upo them. So therefore they have been liberated. Yes the darlings of the anti-war left, the loveable rogues you like to call the 'resistance' may kill gay afghans which is why we should stay the course & fight them. But the anti-war left will sacrifice the lives of those afghans by calling troops home & still calling violent jihadists the 'resistance' & not criticising their actions.

[neoconhitman]

An unjust war has got nothing to do with 'left' or 'right'. In your eyes it was left-wing-liberal-hippies who complained about the gassing of the Jews. It is the only argument you can construct to justify your own hypocrisy.

If the US and UK are liberating Afghans from the Taliban why didn't they do it instead of selling the Taliban weapons during the 1980s?

The answer is that they don't give a stuff about Afghans. Neither do you. You pick and choose when to support the Taliban.

[Swissoncrack]

Bollucks, tony was a laptog.

[joefonzie92]

Hey gente, un saluto dall'Italia!!! I was here!!! (sono qll coi capelli castani e il cappuccio verdino in basso a destra nel fotogramma a 4,19 sec.)PEACE 4E!!!!

[HARRYLOCOFANCLUB]

STRONG NON-VIOLENT PROTEST CAN CHANGE THE WORLD ! LOVE, Harry (I gave a Peace concert on Parliament Square the 23th of June)

[neoconhitman]

:-) It's funny how people like Blair seem to love other people using non-violent means but are happy to use extreme violence to make their own points!

[jeeoislam]

Brilliant

[RoboCorpse3000]

"We do not want a replacement for Trident nuclear weapons ---which the UK hasn't even got control over.----[emphasis mine]"

I was not aware of this. I would like to know more about this lack of missile control, so would you elaborate a bit? I'm curious now. Thanks!

[neoconhitman]

The UK nuclear arsenal is not independent despite what Blair's ministers say. We need the US to provide technical support. Therefore if we don't do what the US says then we lose our deterrent. What is the point in having a deterrent that relies on another country to be operational? Trident is an American design. It is effectively a US system that we pay for and that is sat on our land. It would never be used to defend the UK unless the US gave us permission.

[jeeoislam]

george galloway love him or like him hes in my opinion the best speaker of the century.....

[chinsup]

the new nukes are independent the current system isnt read up about it the same problem almost happened with the JSF but thats independant now when there completed

[neoconhitman]

The new nukes will, like the old ones, be an American design with key components and services provided by the US. Trident submarines have to return to the US for servicing. Hardly independent. JSF can't possibly be independent by any stretch of the imagination. Their serviceability will rely heavily on the US. We might as well abolish the Royal Air Force and just rent the US Air Force for money.

[chinsup]

its design doesnt mean anything its like americans have to have british citiczens to do some of there equipment, the same vis versa a new agreement between the US and UK will allow them to independantly control, uprgrade, maintain, and delpoy each other(each others from origin) this would include nukes and nuclear submarines

[neoconhitman]

That is simply not the case unfortunately. The US can operate their nukes without us. We can not operate Trident without US assistance. Nothing would change. We would be buying an American system and sticking a British flag on it.

[chinsup]

yea trident look at the new system!

[neoconhitman]

The proposed new system is a re-worked D5 trident missile ... which is American. The warhead contains plenty of US supplied parts. Trident is not independent and neither is the proposed new system. So not independent at all.

[santino666]

Long live Communist anti-war movements in Britain

[neoconhitman]

Long live the freedom for people of sub-normal intelligence to post on YouTube making silly comments. This isn't the 1960's. The new invisible enemy is muslims not baby-eating-communists. Haven't you heard?

[mikzysw8]

i was dere

[dbww]

I was mearely pointing out Galloways hypocracy when he says that we should spend our money on supporting British pensioners & yet he thinks we should give millions to Africa. Couldnt that money too be used to stop British pensioners freezing? As for the war thing, Im not blaiming you for the violence but am saying that if we did pull out like you say we should the violence would get worse & more would die. You seem not to understand this.

[neoconhitman]

That is not hypocrisy. He is saying we should spend our money saving lives not fighting wars and buying US weapons of mass destruction. There is no need to spend African aid money when we have plenty of spare money to spend on war. Hypocrisy is when Blair and Bush say they value freedom and democracy but help support dictatorships like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

[dbww]

AHH George Galloway. British pensioners freezing eh, I dont hear him saying we should stop throwing money at Africa. Oh and even if you didnt agree with the war in the first place if you pulled coalition troops out now it would decend into even more violence than there is now. They wouldnt all just get along like you seem to think they would.

[neoconhitman]

What have Africans got to do with us spending 76 billion pounds on nukes while at the same time destroying the NHS? You pro-war people have spent 4 years proving you are unable to make simple predictions. Blair and Bush started the war. No point blaming me for the violence. I don't think the Iraqis will all get along whatever we do because we trashed their country.

[lmurcutt]

nice one, that was wicked, nicely put together :)

now if we get your video shown on the tv somehow ... ;)

[adycousins]

Smashing stuff duck!

[OxfordMedicTim]

That was such an amazing day!

I was right at the front of the demonstration with the SSAW, school students against war!

Great vid!

xxx

[wotdoesitmatter]

thanks for this, you've put this together brilliantly. it was a great day.

[neoconhitman]

Thanks. It was a great day. Given the rain in the morning I was suprised how many people turned up anyway. Obviously the police reported there were only 3 people there but we know the truth :) Once again the Sun shone on another demonstration!