Thursday, August 04, 2016

Syria’s warlords were nobodies

Syria’s warlords were nobodies. Now they are rich men with sex slaves
As Isis lose ground the other Islamist militias have a vested interest in keeping the civil war going

The other day I was speaking to a Kurdish journalist who was held in Isis captivity for ten months. He and a colleague had had the bad luck to run into an Isis checkpoint in Syria. ‘How do you perform the midday prayer?’ they were asked after their car was waved to a halt. Unable to answer — they were not believers — they were immediately beaten around the head. Then one of the jihadis from the checkpoint was put into the back of their car and they were told to drive to the Isis base. The fighter had a pistol pointed at them the whole time, which was superfluous because he was also wearing a suicide belt. ‘Make a move and I’ll detonate myself,’ he said. ‘We’ll all die together.’

Paul Wood and Lara Prendergast discuss the Syrian crisis:

At the base, the emir, or commander, was so delighted to have two infidel prisoners that he got on to his radio to spread the good news. ‘All units, all units,’ he gleefully proclaimed: ‘We have two journalists. Thanks be to God.’ He ordered them to be handcuffed, blindfolded and taken to jail. It was the start of an ordeal of constant beatings and death threats that came to an end ten months later when the Kurds arranged a prisoner swap. Some time after they arrived in the cell, a new inmate joined them. It was the emir who had ordered their detention. It seems he had been declaring rich local Muslims to be infidels in order to steal their money — but had overplayed his hand and was now in his own jail.
The emir was a Syrian in his late twenties. When the revolution started he had volunteered for the Free Syrian Army. Next, he joined the al-Qaeda group in Syria, the Nusra Front. Finally, he defected to Isis, because they were closer to God, and because they gave him a car and a house. He spent his time in the cells abusing the other prisoners as infidels but mostly ‘all he wanted to talk about was girls’, said the Kurdish journalist. The emir’s story has many familiar elements: the journey from the FSA, through Nusra, to Isis; the greed and corruption of many in the revolution, including those who profess religious motives; and the risible hypocrisy — hilariously exposed by the emir’s sex-obsessed prison talk — of those wrapping themselves in a black flag to dictate the morals of others.
Many Islamic State fighters joined up because Isis were the strongest, richest and most successful group. But now that they look like losers, the defections are gathering pace, hastening the collapse of the ‘Caliphate’ predicted in this magazine in January and which may be starting to happen now. The latest loss is the important town of Manbij. The battle is still going on, but commanders of the advancing Kurdish forces say Isis fighters are shaving off their beards and trying to slip away among groups of refugees. Some have even been captured dressed as women. Only a month ago, according to local activists, Isis had publicly executed a whole family, including two children, for trying to flee.

Of course, even after the caliphate is gone, the so-called Islamic State’s jihad against the West will continue. In fact, as I wrote here in January, its death throes will be marked by more killing in the West, though it seems that the recent horrific attacks in France and Germany were the work of (possibly deranged) individuals, and only later claimed by the Isis leadership. Syria’s war without end will go on, too, because Isis occupies only one corner of a crowded battlefield. Earlier this year, a think-tank produced a handy graphic designed to explain the Syrian conflict. Different coloured lines showed who’s killing whom, who’s arming which side, and whose money keeps the war ticking along. It looked like the world’s most complicated cat’s cradle; it was also reminiscent of a circular firing squad.
The conflict grows steadily more complicated. Take the American offer to Russia of an alliance to carry out joint bombing raids against Nusra, that is to bomb al-Qaeda in Syria. Nusra then cunningly changed their name and announced they were severing the link to al-Qaeda. Many US officials think that is a con. But if the Americans do go ahead and bomb, it will be another example of the United States literally fighting on both sides of the war. Russian military sources recently said one of their helicopters in Syria had been shot down by an American TOW missile. It was supposedly fired by Isis — if so, it’s not clear how they got hold of it — but any of the rebel groups might have launched it. Russia is killing them in large numbers, along with even larger numbers of civilians, as part of its effort to keep President Assad in power.
American policy is still, officially, to depose President Assad. But if they join Russia in targeting the most effective anti-regime rebels, the group formerly known as Nusra, then the Russians will have more bombs left over to drop on the other rebels, the ones the Americans support. The madness extends further. The US airstrikes support the Kurdish militia in Syria, the YPG, because it is the most effective force against Isis. Yet the YPG is in a tacit alliance with the regime, and has found itself in skirmishes with the Arab rebels backed by the Americans. Both are now in a race to occupy territory vacated by Isis fighters as they retreat in northern Syria. And as the US-backed YPG moves through the north, it has come under artillery fire from Turkey, America’s Nato ally. Meanwhile, in the fight against Isis in Iraq, the US finds itself acting as the air force for Shia militias funded and directed by Iran.
It is not just the US that suffers from strategic incoherence. For years, Turkey let Isis keep safehouses and operate rat-lines for volunteers and supplies across its Syrian border. Isis were fighting the Kurds and Turkey’s logic, presumably, was that the jihadis would keep Kurdish nationalism in check. But now Isis suicide bombers are blowing themselves up in Turkey and there may be thousands of jihadi ‘sleepers’ in the country, according to one intelligence source. The Kurds in Syria have anyway managed to establish something that looks very much like their own state, encouraging a resurgence of the bitter conflict between Turkey and its Kurds across the border. (After last month’s failed coup, the Turkish military and security services are now occupied with internal matters rather than their fight with Isis or the Kurds.)
Starting, or escalating, a war with Turkey made no sense at all from the Islamic State’s point of view. Isis is believed to have carried out five to seven attacks in Turkey. The lesson of Afghanistan, and many other conflicts, is that it is almost impossible to defeat an insurgent group that has a rear safe area — yet this is exactly what Isis has denied itself in bringing the war to Turkish soil. It made no sense, either, for Isis to sacrifice so many of its fighters to the battle with Nusra. They have almost identical ideologies — indeed they were one organisation before they split — yet their side-war has often been bloody enough to overshadow the struggle with the regime.
Nusra, as it used to call itself, is coming out on top. According to some reports it has gained 3,000 to 4,000 recruits in northern Syria since spring. This is part of the reason the US proposed an attack, though it’s less than a year since the ex-CIA director and Afghanistan commander General David Petraeus was arguing that elements of Nusra could be peeled off to fight Isis alongside the Americans. If the US bombs now, that is likely to drive Nusra back to al-Qaeda.
The other big beneficiary of the current mess is President Assad. Increasingly, there are moves to rehabilitate him as the alternative to rule by the jihadis. For a long time it has been an article of faith among the dwindling numbers of the ‘moderate’ opposition that Assad incubated the jihadi movement, creating the enemy he needed to unite his own people and win international support. This was in fact exactly what had happened, the commander of one of the biggest Salafi rebel groups in Syria, told me once. He had been in prison before the uprising. He and his cellmates all went on to important leadership positions in Isis, Nusra, and other jihadi groups. They were all freed within weeks of street protests against the regime getting under way.
Some say all this is America’s fault. Firstly, at the start of the conflict, President Obama declared that Assad should go, encouraging many in the uprising to think they had a superpower ally and so victory was inevitable. Secondly, the US then failed to intervene decisively — letting Saudi and Kuwaiti donors put their imprint on the emerging armed groups. People in rebel-held areas did turn to the jihadis in 2013 when the Americans failed to bomb the regime, as President Obama had threatened after the chemical attacks outside Damascus. But the character of the armed uprising was always Islamist, or at least Islamic. The battle cry of every single armed group I met in about a dozen trips inside Syria was not ‘Democracy’ but ‘God is great’. This is one reason why a US training scheme produced ‘only four or five’ rebel fighters despite spending half a billion dollars, as an embarrassed general admitted to Congress last year. (Yes, those figures are correct.)
The US could not have changed the nature of the uprising, though it could perhaps have nudged it in a more moderate direction. This is clearly not going to happen while Obama sees out the last months of his presidency —but even a more engaged US president would struggle with the forces driving the conflict. All sides in the war have been corrupted and degraded by fighting it. Last month there was a report that the US-backed Noureddine Zinki Brigade in Aleppo had beheaded a 12-year-old boy in front of cheering bystanders. The child was said to have been captured while fighting for a pro-regime militia.
Syria’s agony will go on, not just because of big power politics but, more importantly, because so many rebel leaders had nothing — were nothing — before the war and now have everything. One brigade commander made bricks in the sun for a living and now drives a BMW. Two Yazidi sisters told me that the ‘emir’ who bought them as sex slaves had been the village odd job man, who used to beg their father for work. The emir who captured the Kurdish journalist may have ended up in jail, but there are many more like him, for whom war is a business. And business is good.
Paul Wood has spent four years covering the Syrian war for the BBC.


KCC support Westland's Bullying?

Bullying at Westland’s

I have now had replies from two sources MP Gordon Henderson and Ofsted. Our MP’s staff has replied the following:

Dear Martin,

Thank you for your further email to Gordon about your concerns about Westland’s Academy, he has asked that I respond on his behalf.

Having read your account I would urge your friend to contact the police. If he is unhappy in any with their response then he can, of course, contact Gordon directly.

Similarly, if he has a complaint against the head teacher he should raise this in the first instance with the Chairman of the Swale Academies Trust. Details are on the Trust’s website. Again, if he is not happy with the Trust’s response to his complaint then Gordon would be happy to follow up.

This advice is very sensible but the Swale Academies Trust never replies, if you have concerns then go through the process if still no joy contact Gordon Henderson I know Gordon and know he will help if he can.

I have had two responses from Ofsted the latest is printed below, in the first reply there was a very interesting paragraph:

The information you have provided includes specific concerns of a safeguarding nature. It is important to understand Ofsted does not have the legal jurisdiction to investigate such matters. This responsibility falls to the police, NSPCC and the local authority. Ofsted has contacted the local authority to advise them of your concerns. The local authority has advised us that they are confident in the school’s management and the concerns will not be investigated further. If you would like to discuss this further please contact the local authority directly.
The Authority is Kent County Council they have not replied to my complaint and have told Ofsted that Westland’s is OK, so KCC is OK with Bullying what an organisation and puts its head in the Sand to bullying. Will anyone do anything about Bullying at Westland’s before some one is injured badly and when will the CEO be held responsible for his actions

Dear Mr Clarke

Name of School: Westlands School

Ofsted reference: CAS-362198-PDD7DX

Thank you for sharing your concerns about the above provider. Ofsted takes this information seriously and will make it available to inform the inspection planning process of the school’s next inspection.

Your correspondence has been passed to Ofsted’s Complaints about Schools team to review. The team will establish whether Ofsted can consider your complaint further and aim to respond to your complaint within 30 working days of the date of this acknowledgement.

If your complaint contains information which Ofsted feels raises concerns of children not being safe, we have an obligation to forward your complaint to the respective local authority, without delay. This is so the appropriate agencies can consider the concerns.

During the review of your complaint, the school, its board of governors and other organisations may be contacted. If you wish to remain anonymous in this correspondence please inform the Complaints about Schools team as soon as possible by emailing CASenquiries@ofsted.gov.uk or phoning Ofsted quoting the above reference.

Regards,

Kirandeep Kahlon
Ofsted - Applications, Regulatory and Contact team
Telephone: 0300 123 4666
Ofsted on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/ofstednews





What is the Olympics?

The times are always changing that is true and The Olympics is no exception.
Some of us may remember when the Olympics were Totally Amateur. Yes Countries like the USA, DDR and the USSR would abuse the system by putting athletes in College or in the Army where they could train full time. In GB that was not the case we treated being an Amateur with great pride, to us the Olympics was not about money but was about struggling against the odds, funding was limited and hard work was the order of the day the true British Spirit. No we did not win many medals but we Brits had pride in our athletes just for competing and a medal was an added bonus with the medallist being treated as Hero’s. As someone who was a reserve for 1980 Olympics in Judo a complaint was made against me because I coached Judo as living this they said made me a Professional and I had to go through an investigation, which the accusation was rejected.
Now we have a Millionaire anti English Tennis Player carrying the Banner for Team GB we have Millionaire athletes competing, many athletes of all sports earn money from advertising and promoting various objects and services. UKSport pour money into certain Olympic sports. All of this has produced GB gaining many more medals. Yet this has been at the detriment of Non Olympic Sports and those Olympic Sports who do not win medals who receive little or No government support.
When the Olympics were an Amateur event we Brits would criticise the USA, DDR and USSR for using the Games as a Political Event to promote their own Political system. The idea being who ever won the most medals must have the best country, ridiculous you say but since then many countries including the UK have fallen into the trap. British Olympic Committee and British Government now associate success with medal tally rather then the amount of athletes in the UK competing and the benefit to the country as a whole. The Olympics by definition is elitist but in Amateur days the person who had a Job, supported a family could dream of being an Olympian this cannot happen to day.
The Olympics is rightly called the Greatest Show on Earth it has become a show for people to make money and promote ideology BUT is it just a Sporting Event? The Olympics has become more political then ever the banning of Russia on the doubtful claim that the Russian Government organised Drug abuse is proof that certain countries have undue Political Influence over the I.O.C.
As you can see by the tone of the letter I would like to return to the days of amateurism but this will not happen and if GB is to attract athletes to compete in this event we have to accept that they must be paid for what they do. Olympics is not just about sporting ability is also an entertainment industry and just as Film Stars, Pop Stars and entertainers are paid large sums of money so should an athlete be paid well.
Because large sums of money are involved you will get corruption and you will get Athletes taking drugs both will never be eradicated only diminished




Real Hate Crime

The real hate crime scandal

Believe what you see on the streets, not the media hype

Britain is in the grip of an epidemic, apparently. An epidemic of hate. Barely a day passes without some policeman or journalist telling us about the wave of criminal bigotry that is sweeping through the country. It’s been bad for years, they say, but has become worse since the EU referendum. Police forces tell us that hate crime has ‘soared’ in recent weeks; there’s been an ‘explosion of blatant hate’, according to some newspapers. Twenty-first-century Britain, it seems, is a pretty rancid, rage-fuelled place.If you feel this doesn’t tally with your experience of life in Blighty in 2016, you aren’t alone. There is a great disparity between the handwringing over hate crime and what Britain is actually like. The open racism even I can remember in the 1980s has all but vanished. Racist chants at football matches are a distant memory. Hard-right, foreigner-bashing parties may be thriving on the Continent, but they are dying over here. The likes of the BNP and EDL have withered due to lack of interest. This is a British triumph.
It’s not vainglorious to say that Britain is the most tolerant country in Europe, perhaps the world. In France, for instance, a national news-making hate incident is the attempted burning down of a mosque, which happened last month in Toulouse. In Britain, it is somebody shouting something nasty on a bus.
It’s almost impossible to argue reasonably that Britain is a bigoted country where ethnic minorities are somehow kept down. On the contrary, they are now more likely than whites to hold top jobs (doctors, lawyers, chief executives). More than a million Londoners voted for Sadiq Khan in May, giving him the largest direct mandate enjoyed by any individual in British history — not bad for the capital of a nation in which, according to Lady Warsi, it has become ‘socially acceptable’ to despise Muslims.
Yes, the statistics are scary, and nobody should downplay the hurt caused to those who are attacked and abused. The number of hate crimes recorded by the cops has grown year by year. Six years ago, there were 42,255; in 2014-15, there were 52,528.
But these figures need to be taken with a fistful of salt. There is something wrong with the way we report and measure hate crimes in this country. The numbers do not necessarily speak to any objective spread of hate in modern Britain. On the contrary, what the BBC calls an ‘epidemic’ is a product of the authorities redefining racism and prejudice to such an extent that almost any unpleasant encounter between people of different backgrounds can now be recorded as ‘hatred’.
Consider the Brexit aftermath. The police say that 3,192 reports of hate incidents were received in the last two weeks of June, and 3,001 in the first two weeks of July. Apparently that constitutes a rise of 48 per cent and 20 per cent respectively on last year’s levels of incidents. But can we engage in some scepticism here? Many of these incidents (the police can’t at the moment say how many) were reported through True Vision, a police-funded website that allows anyone anywhere to report something they either experienced or witnessed, anonymously if they like. No evidence is needed. Everything is instantly logged as a hate incident. This inevitably presents a warped view of reality.
Already, two infamous post–Brexit ‘incidents’ have been debunked. It was widely claimed, for instance, that an attack on a tapas bar in Lewisham, south London, was a hate crime; actually, police say it was a burglary. A photo of four boneheads in Newcastle holding a banner saying ‘Stop Immigration, Start Repatriation’ was widely shared as evidence of xenophobia. But Geordies have pointed out that those idiots have been holding up that banner every weekend for ages, long before Brexit.
Beyond the post-Brexit hysteria, it’s incredible how subjective the idea of ‘hate crime’ has become. The police and the Crown Prosecution Service first agreed a common definition of hate crime ten years ago and started measuring national hate-crime levels in 2008. A hate crime, the police say, is ‘any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic’. They monitored ‘five strands’: crimes driven by prejudice based on race, religion/faith, sexual orientation, disability, and gender identity.
The police’s ‘Hate Crime Operational Guidance’ now stresses that the victim’s perception is the deciding factor in whether something is measured as a hate crime. No evidence is required. ‘Evidence of… hostility is not required for an incident or crime to be recorded as a hate crime or hate incident,’ the guidance says. ‘[The] perception of the victim, or any other person, is the defining factor… the victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception.’ So you don’t need actual evidence to prove hate crime, just a feeling. The police are discouraged from asking for evidence. This is reflected in the policies of individual constabularies. So the ‘Hate Crime Procedure’ of the Surrey Police says ‘apparent lack of motivation as the cause of an incident is not relevant as it is the perception of the victim or any other person that counts’. No clear hateful motivation? Doesn’t matter. Record it as a hate crime anyway. Indeed, even when nothing hateful was said to the victim of a crime, still the police must record the incident as a hate crime if the victim perceives it to be so. The police guidance gives the example of a gay man being ‘sworn at and threatened’ by an assailant who said absolutely ‘nothing… about his sexual orientation’. If this gay man ‘perceives that he was targeted [because] he is openly gay’ then the police must ‘record this as a hate crime based on sexual orientation’. Think about this. If any gay man is shouted at in the street, by anyone, about anything, with no mention of sexuality, that can be recorded as an anti-gay hate crime. There’s no need for any proof whatsoever that anything anti-gay in sentiment was said or even intimated.
The unhinged subjectivity of the hate-crime definition becomes even clearer on the issue of what is called ‘secondary victimisation’. This is when a victim of an alleged hate crime feels that the police are not being sensitive enough and thus compound the ‘hate’ he or she has experienced. The police guidance says ‘secondary victimisation is based on victim perception, rather than what actually happens. It is immaterial whether it is reasonable or not for the victim to feel that way’. Again, this sanctification of perception over ‘what actually happens’ has trickled down into hate-crime policies of local constabularies. So the ‘Hate Crime Policy and Procedure’ of Greater Manchester Police says that if a hate-crime victim feels indifference from the police, this ‘victimises them a second time’ and ‘whether or not it is reasonable for them to perceive it that way is immaterial’. Truth, then, is ‘immaterial’.
In a world obsessed with evidence-based public policy, it is odd that a new crime category which explicitly eschews evidence in favour of emotion is subjected to such little scrutiny. And it gets worse: the prosecution of a hate crime doesn’t actually have to prove that hatred was the motivation. The CPS states: ‘The prosecution does not… need to prove hatred as the motivating factor behind an offence.’ The CPS says any crime that involves ‘ill-will, ill-feeling, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment, or dislike’ on the basis of a ‘personal characteristic’ could be a hate crime. So unfriendliness can now be criminal. Next time you read about a hate-crime epidemic, bear that in mind.
Burglaries and robberies are often recorded as hate crimes. According to the Home Office, of all the hate incidents in the Crime Survey for England and Wales, 8 per cent are burglaries. And 1 per cent is bicycle theft. A racially motivated bike theft? You might think stealing is just about stealing, but if the victim thinks his stuff was nicked because he’s foreign, gay or trans, then it is recorded as hate crime.
The ‘Hate Crime Operational Guidance’ demands ‘increasing the reporting and recording of hate crime’. It specifies that success should not be measured by a reduction in hate-crime levels, perhaps because this will give people the impression that community life in Britain is getting better, and we can’t have that. ‘Targets that see success as reducing hate crime are not appropriate,’ it says, as this won’t ‘motivate managers’ to ‘promote positive recording’ or ‘increase the opportunity for victims to report’. So ‘success’ has one meaning only: creating evidence to suggest the problem is getting worse. The police are incentivised to find hatred, because their goal isn’t to tackle crime so much as to create a public impression of mass hatred.
Why are our authorities so willing to push this deceptive agenda? Why is our country determined to see itself as bigoted? It’s because creating a panic about hate crime gives officials and others a sense of purpose and history. But the squalid search for, and exaggeration of, hatred is dangerous and, to use a word so popular on social media, divisive. It is a slur on the white working classes to claim that what they think and say — on immigration, Europe, life in general — is racist. Such a perception convinces minorities that they should live in fear. It spreads anxiety and silences discussion. It rips Britain apart.
According to one leftie online magazine, Britain now evokes ‘nightmares of 1930s Germany’. But this doesn’t square with the reality of our country today, and you shouldn’t believe it. The hate-crime epidemic is a self-sustaining myth — a libel against the nation
6 August 2016
9:00 AM



.

Wednesday, August 03, 2016

Art and Marcella


Some of you may remember Marcella O'Hare (O'HARE GEORGE) the brilliant little Judo Player from the 1970's she is now a grandmother and has recovered from a very serious illness. She is an artist and lecturer and lives in Wales. Val and myself considered her our adopted 3rd daughter in those days, here is some of her art which I enjoyed