Thursday, 15 November 2012


One of the most significant things about the current white settler aggression against Gaza, Palestine and the resistance to it is the IRANIAN MADE FAJR MISSILE FIRED AT AND LANDING NEAR tEL aVIV (claimed by Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas armed wings)!

Lets see Tunis, Cairo, Ankara or Doha give Gaza better missiles than that if they think they are the standard bearers of independence of the region! Jokers.

Anyway, this is a historic advancement of the Palestinian resistance, and shows that Hamas have still not yet totally capitulated and still have strategic links to Hizbullah and Iran, this strategic link is in danger due to Hamas' own foolishness, but it will be lost on NO ONE that it was an IRANIAN missile that got the resistance missile to tel aviv. Amazing.

Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm



Introduction - Problematics of enemy infiltration in radical and anti-imperialist circles

Sukant Chandan,
Sons of Malcolm
15 Nov 2012

The post 1991 era has been politically defined by a collapse of revolutionary ideologies, movements and countries which gave leadership to the resistant-oppressed peoples of the GlobalSouth. The revolutionary ideologies that defined the previous decades of Maosim, African Socialism, Pan-Africanism, varying forms of Marxism manifested in the national liberation and socialist struggles, and many Left and anti-imperialist Nationalist ideologies have all suffered major set backs and are not in the mass conciousness any longer.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and white imperialism wastes no time in filling the vacuum left by this historic defeat. white imperialism has filled this vacuum with all kinds of divisive and reactionary ideologies, from the quasi-far-right ideologies of david icke and the complex matrix of white middle class right-wing conspiracy nutters, to reactionary cultural nationalisms promoted by imperialism to ensure the nations, ethnicities, and regions of the GlobalSouth do not find common cause against our common enemy of european/'western' white imperialism.

This article below shows one example of how our enemies intel services operates. What seems to be a radical or progressive website turns out to be run by africom, the military command for Africa of the yanks.

This is but a more blatant form of infiltration that is going on. twitter and facebook and the internet are ideal forums for white imperialism to infiltrate our ranks and fill our youth with anything but anti-imperialist liberation ideology whose traditions lie in our previous struggles and ideologies of the GlobalSouth.

Brother Roshan Muhammed Salih has written this important article on the subject of imperialist infiltration and spying in our ranks or more specifically in the english Muslim community.

The nature and level of infiltration varies, but the bottom line is that if people and organisations are not opposing white imperialism then they are working for white imperialism even if they are not in a formalised or structured relationship with the enemy.

But whenever secret papers come out generations after the period, history shows that enemy infiltration is very extensive, showing 30-50% of activists in some organisations and networks have some kind of collaborating relationship with the enemy.

enemy infiltration has become complex and multifaceted which needs to be exposed and analysed.

But as I said, the bottom line is that if people or organisations are not taking a consistently clear line against white imperialist policies, and not advocating unifying ideologies of the GlobalSouth, then there is something dodgy.

Know your enemy, know your allies and friends.

Revealed: U.S. Military Admits Running Propaganda ‘News’ Sites in Africa

[source] looks, at first glance, like an African news website. It has what appear to be authentic news stories, as well as a glossy design. But as it turns out, the site isn’t run by African journalists. It’s run by the U.S. military.

Sabahionline is one of several African propaganda news sites set up by the U.S. military’s AFRICOM operation, designed to make African readers more friendly to U.S. policies. The operation is also designed to counter Islamic extremists in Somalia and elsewhere.

Omar Faruk Osman, the secretary general of the National Union of Somali Journalists, said Sabahi is the first website of it’s kind that he’s seen.

“We have seen portal services by al-Shabab for hate and for propaganda, for spreading violence. We are used to seeing that. In contrast we have not seen such news sites before. So it is something completely unique,” Osman said.

 The U.S. government and military say the purpose of the fake sites are to counter extremism “by offering accurate, balanced and forward-looking coverage of developments in the region.”

The U.S. military’s African news sites report news with an anti-terror slant.

“The Internet is a big place, and we are one of many websites out there. Our site aims to provide a moderate voice in contrast to the numerous violent extremist websites,” wrote the creators of the site in a statement from AFRICOM.

The site averages 4,000 unique visitors per day.


Interesting interview with Ali Abunimah on al-Jazeera here.

Ali rightly slaps back al-Jazeera at 02:18 when the presenter soft peddles the line that the white settler state is defending itself. Ali then uses this as a chance to make clear that Al-Jazeera is not reporting on the daily attacks by the white settler israel on Palestinian fishermen off the coast of Gaza.

The final blow Ali delivers is again correctly stating that in the response of the new 'revolutionary' regime in Cairo, to quote: "..and of course the Arab governments that do absolutely nothing. I mean is there really any difference in practice between the policies of the so-called revolutionary government in Egypt and the regime of President Mubarak? Egypt continues to maintain its relations with israel, continues to carry out basically security subcontracting for israel in the Sinai, instead we should be seeing Egypt leading the Arab world to ask what Arab countries could be doing to help Palestinians to confront israel, instead what they are doing is to figure out how to repress their own people and stay in power."

The the al-Jazeera presenter actually defends Egypt by saying that Egypt has condemned the killings and has recalled its ambassador to israel, which are moves which will do nothing to challenge Ali's correct analysis that basically Egypt is still very much collaborating with zionism and imperialism in relation to Palestine.

Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm


Palestinian Islamic Jihad fighters, PIJ is one of the most principled 
of the Palestinian liberation factions

Gaza and the impact of the nato-friendly Arab spring

Sukant Chandan
Sons of Malcolm
15 Nov 2012

Unlike the nato war on Libya, NO AlJazeera rolling coverage, no UN sec council rush to implement no fly zone, no rush from Muslim organisations to rush fighters to Gaza with open support from the white imperialist media, no rush from Qatar, Turkey, Saudi, Tunis, Cairo to send in armed men to fight israel. Beyond this: no move to stop the ridiculous bloodshed in Libya and Syria to re-focus the battles against zionism and imperialism. The last two years shows that those who supported and support the nato death squads in Libya and Syria put the interests of the enemeies of the GlobalSouth above the interests of the Palestinians, Lebanese, Libyans, Syrians in their anti-imperialist and anti-zionist strategic existences.

Palestine due to the last two years of utter counterrevolutionary stupidy in the region has dropped from the front pages of the white imperialists. However, the consistent anti-imperialists maintain that the struggle of the region is focused on defeating zionism, imperialism and its primary allies and military bases (Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain etc); that unity in struggle between the armed factions (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, PFLP, DFLP, PRC etc) is of paramount importance to the strength of the Palestinian resistance and as Palestine as a resistant part of the international GlobalSouth.

I hope Hamas realise that their shenanigans in playing footsie with nato and its allies in the region has got them nowhere, that the enemy will continue to blast them, and if they cannot realise this, I hope the brothers and sisters on the ground in Gaza realise this and continue to take inspiration from the legacy of the united National and Islamic Forces which was shown in the Second/Al-Aqsa Intifada.

I personally dont think the white settler jewish state will launch a ground invasion as this would potentially re-focus away from Assad etc to the real enemy, but if zionist state does launch ground invasion, they will do so knowing that they can carry out this massacre in a stronger position than in 2008/2009 operation cast lead, as so many Arabs are busy killing each other and nato/turkish/Gulfie behests in Syria and Libya.

Victory and Unity to the National and Islamic Forces in Palestine and across the region against zionism and imperialism, and for Hizbullah, Syria and Iran to launch wars of liberation against the zionist state and imperialism in the region.

Wednesday, 14 November 2012


I have all kinds of differences with Tariq Ramadan, but he has shown himself to be a thinker in 'political Islam' who cannot be bought by any regime or state. He is an independent and critical thinker, and at a time when so many are throwing themselves into the arms of the gulf monarchies and nato, it is refreshing!

Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm


To speak about people starting to be on the streets and changing everything with no influence and nothing done beforehand – this is simplistic and dangerously naive. We have bloggers and cyber dissidents who trained, even in the West, to push towards this. There is a clear will coming from Western countries to change dictator regimes. That is clear.

To see that everything was under control and coming from the West – this is going too far.
We’ve got to take not the political but economical side of the story. For the Americans, as well as Europeans – they needed change in the regimes in order to keep the markets. 

We have now many new actors on the markets that are threatening monopoly of relationship between the Middle East and Northern Africa – and the West. They are China, India, Russia, South Africa and Latin American countries, add to this one Turkey.

I’m not saying it’s a big conspiracy. I say now we’re going to see if people on the streets are able to go towards true democracy processes.


“the Islamist parliamentary victory in Morocco can be duplicated in Algeria because the West believes that supporting the revolutions is in its interest, and that it does not contradict the liberal tendencies of savage globalization. At the same time, the West wants to keep the conflict contained within each state, first to preserve its interests, and second to ensure Israel’s security.”

Nabila Mounib 



President Hu Jintao at Communist Party Congress 2012

How will China confront next ten years of white imperialist onslaught?

Sukant Chandan
Sons of Malcolm
14 Nov 2012

We can see an overview of the Chinese Communist and State leadership handover by one of the more thinking but right-wing media outlets of the british white power structure.

The west in general on the one hand is not happy at all with outgoing President Hu Jintao leaving the leadership with a clear left-ward rhetoric and strategy:

In a valedictory state of the nation address after a decade in power - called "Firmly march on the path of Socialism" and delivered beneath a huge hammer and sickle - he insisted that "public ownership is the mainstay of the economic system" and warned that the party must "resolutely not follow Western political systems".

The language was peppered with anti-reform code words and pointed references to "Mao Zedong Thought", as well as a warning not to fall into "wicked ways".

And speculates as to the 'reformers' - meaning those who seek to take China in a direction of liberal and western style capitalist reforms (let's call it 'white capitalism', which is very different from East Asian capitalist countries mainly in the role of the state towards the economy) - are being sidelined:

Mr Hu’s speech reflects a complex power-struggle behind the scenes as hardliners - some linked to former leader Jiang Zemin - reassert control, forcing the outgoing leader to change his message.

The ideological manouvering have profound implications as 70pc of top cadres in the party and the Chinese military retire, the most sweeping hand-over of power since the revolution in 1949.

Reformers have been left in deep confusion. The incoming premier Li Keqiang - a Hu protegee - was a key sponsor of the World Bank/DRC report. He offered his "unwavering support" for the findings at the time. It is unclear where he now stands.

As delegates scrutinised the seating arrangements, they spotted at once that leading reformer Wang Yang had been banished to the margins.

President Hu Jintao at the Congress address makes it clear that western-style reforms will create fundamental dangers to anti-imperialist and socialist China. These are quite clear and forthright words from Hu on this issue, which is interesting, however it is far from decided which way the party and state leadership will take China, as the white capitalist oriented leaders have been getting a lot of space in the leadership with the world bank/China development research council, which called for further white capitalist reforms, getting air time in the leadership.

However, to a large extent whatever happens internally to China is not the business of anyone apart from the people of China. From an anti-imperialist internationalist point of view however, China turning towards white capitalism will and does endanger the very nature of he Chinese anti-imperialist state, and China falling in an Arab spring type white imperialist operation would be a major blow to the world struggle for independence against imperialism on a massive historic level.

This again is reported in this article and quotes President Hu on this regard:

Mr Hu - a self-effacing, austere figure known for his theme of "social harmony" - said the growing gap between rich and poor is leading to social contraditions" and warned than unchecked corruption had become a mortal threat.

"If we fail to handle this issue well, it could prove fatal to the party, and even cause the collapse of the party and the fall of the state. We must thus make unremitting efforts to combat corruption."

Plain words there.

President Hu has also stated previously and correctly that the offensive of white imperialist cultural attack on China is a major and fundamental arena of defending Chinese socialism and anti-imperialism:

"We should deeply understand the seriousness and complexity of the ideological struggle, always sound the alarms and remain vigilant and take forceful measures to be on guard and respond,"

China and allied countries who are under the same onslaught, an onslaught which is probably the most important issue for our peoples to confront, resist and defeat, could easily launch an international campaign and smash this genocidal cultural offensive of white imperialism. But there is no sign whatsoever of this, and one can only but be confused as to why the Chinese leadership would state such a correct thing as Hu has, but seems to do nothing and its own Chinese independence is whittled away every hour and every second by white imperialist cultural offensives.

Interestingly there is very little in terms of China's internationalist strategy apart from importantly quoting Hu in developing China's maritime capability to face white imperialism's "pivot to Asia" which is a military containment police against China:

For geo-strategists, the bombshell was his call to "build China into a maritime power" to match its economic clout. Even clearer was Wu Xiaoguang, a delegate at the congress and the chief designer of China’s first aricraft carrier the Liaoning.

"The number of aircraft carriers a country has is linked with the pursuit of its national interests. What I can tell you is that the Liaoning is only just the beginning," he said.

Hardly a "bomb shell", just a very basic and simple approach to national self defence against the most vicious and violent white imperialist world presence, especially with the usa armed bases developing around the world, nato, etc.

While China is gradually building up its defences, anti-imperialist internationalism is not raised much in the reporting on the Congress, and although China has finally taken elemental steps of anti-imperialism by blocking white imperialism at the united nations on Zimbabwe and now Syria, China along with the rest of the GlobalSouth seems to lack the political will to lead an effective and victory oriented anti-imperialist approach. The nato operation on Libya and the subsequent brits, yanks, and french recolonisation drive on Africa (an attach on the whole GlobalSouth) is indicative of the absence of anti-imperialist political leadership in China and in the general GlobalSouth.

But all in all, China remains perhaps the most important anti-imperialist as well as socialist country for internationalists to support, as not only is it an example of a former colonised country 'standing up' and a marvel to the whole world, but is also the most important, despite its limitations, anti-imperialist country and bulwark in the world.

All in all I would agree with the summation of this Congress and President Hu's leadership of the last ten years with the world of an old brother of mine:

Farewell to Hu Jintao. His decade as premier has seen the People's Republic grow beyond expectations, lives transformed, millions lifted from poverty and a rate of growth and modernisation that has astounded the world and confounded critics. But also many old problems persisted, some deepened, and new ones have developed.

The next generation of leaders have much to live up to, and many deep problems and contradictions of development still to resolve. But China continues of its forward march and Hu will be remembered in balance as a good leader who did good things and helped not only keep Chairman Mao's declaration on the founding of the PRC, that "The Chinese people have stood up" but overseen the Chinese people charging forward with confidence and pride.

And finally, of President Hu himself who said on thurs 08 Nov 2012:

"The Scientific Outlook on Development was proposed by the 16th CPC Central Committee in 2003, against the backdrop of rapid economic growth and a series of problems including excessive consumption of resources, serious environmental pollution and a widening gap between the rich and poor.

The concept has championed people's interests and advocated comprehensive, coordinated and sustainable development. At the Party' s 17th National Congress, the concept was written into the CPC Constitution.

Over the past ten years, China's economy has risen from the sixth to the second place in the world. Its economic, scientific and technological strength have increased considerably. Its overall national strength and international competitiveness and influence have also been enhanced substantially.

Hu said these historic successes are attributable to the correct guidance of the Party's basic theory, line, program and experience.

The Scientific Outlook on Development was created by integrating Marxism with the reality of contemporary China and with the underlying features of our times, and it fully embodies the Marxist worldview on and methodology for development, he said."

Long live socialist and anti-imperialist China.

For China to play a more assertive socialist and anti-imperialist internationalist role in our world struggle.

related links:
Huey Newton on China
Malcolm X on China
Friends of China


There is only one country in the world where I have generally full trust in that country and its system to raise our children in a all round and wonderful manner, to respect and serve community and family, to respect and love anti-imperialist liberation and internationalism, to respect and look up to the elders, to build for the future, a place without white imperialist cultural infiltration of depraved sexualisation of childhood, division of elders from youth/children. There is one country and one country only that has withstood so far the cultural moral devastation visiting us, a devastation that so many of us incl myself are even unaware and accept in many ways both concious and subconscious. Major respect and Long live that wonderful country - THE PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF KOREA. A shining example to all our nations and societies. I wish all our children could be educated and raised there.
- Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm


Patrice Lumumba Writing from his prison cell - "We are not alone. Africa, Asia and free liberated peoples in every corner of the globe will ever remain at the side of millions of Congolese"

Malcolm X - "Lumumba is the greatest Black man who ever walked the African continent"


Sunday, 11 November 2012




MI5 is systematically spying on Muslims, 
now what are we going to do about it?

By Roshan Muhammed Salih

Personally I hate the victim mentality that many British Muslims have. But after several months of researching a documentary and a book on police/MI5 spying I have to admit – British Muslims are definitely victims.

Since 9/11 the British state has conducted perhaps its biggest peacetime spying operation on its own citizens, its Muslim citizens.

Young Muslims are being targeted in schools, colleges and universities because the government believes they might turn into terrorists. Community leaders are being targeted because the state believes they control their followers. Women are being targeted because the authorities think they control the homes where potential terrorists grow up. And huge resources are being thrown at monitoring internet activity in particular.

The evidence for this is overwhelming – it can be found in many news articles where MI5 tactics have been exposed; it has been documented by several human rights organizations which have been approached by young Muslims complaining of harassment; and it can be found on the Home Office website itself if you’re willing to read between the lines.

After all, MI5 itself admits that the main area of its work is directed against al-Qaida-inspired terrorism. Its budget for 2012 was £2.1 billion, so what do you think this money is being spent on - cuddly toys?

MI5 tactics

Now let’s talk tactics. What methods are the police/MI5 using to target the community?

Well, they are planting bugs in mosques, offices and restaurants. They are using undercover officers who pretend to be converts to provoke conversations about jihad in the hope of entrapping their victims. They are blackmailing vulnerable people who may have committed a crime or a personal indiscretion into working for them.

One Muslim man who admits to working for MI5 told me: “What MI5 wants is access to the community so they will target people who occupy positions of responsibility. It’s basically impossible to say ‘no’ to them - they blackmail for financial reasons, they blackmail with threats of imprisonment, they allude to your own personal health. What they want is information.”

Some may say, well that’s fair enough. Britain faces a terrorist threat and the police have a job to do. And that job will inevitably involve covert surveillance.

That’s fine, I too acknowledge that the government has the right to go after the bad guys that exist in our community. But they don’t have the right to go after the whole community, and that is exactly what is happening.

For example, take the hundreds of security cameras that began appearing in the Sparkbrook and Washwood Heath areas of Birmingham in 2010.

When the police were challenged over the cameras they were evasive and pretended that is was a big scheme to combat traffic and anti-social behaviour. But then it emerged that the money for the cameras had come from a counter terrorism fund.

Were the cameras targeted at terrorists? No, they targeted the Muslim community as a whole.

Steve Jolly, the civil liberties campaigner who uncovered the scandal told me: “Despite the cameras being taken down I still think the police are spying on Birmingham’s Muslims. But they’ll just do it in a different way now, they won’t get caught.”


In fact, Prevent - the government’s counter terror strategy - seems to be more about countering ideas and ideology rather than catching real terrorists. It has led to convictions such as that of Ahmad Faraz in Birmingham who was jailed for selling books or Samina Malik in Southall who was convicted for writing poetry. No plans, no plots, no explosives, just supposedly subversive ideas.

But the truth is that we don’t have a full picture yet of what the police/ MI5 are doing. We can only look to history and previous counter-terrorism models to discern the likely pattern.

A good starting point would be the COINTELPRO programme in the US which was a series of covert FBI projects aimed at monitoring, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting political organizations.

Allegedly, tactics included discrediting targets through psychological warfare; smearing individuals in the media; harassment; wrongful imprisonment; and illegal violence, including assassination. Targets included communists, the civil rights movement and other so-called subversives.

Similar methods seem to have been used against Northern Irish dissidents during the Troubles and even against non-violent groups such as the environmental and animal rights movements.

Many of you will be familiar with the police spies Mark Kennedy and Bob Lambert who infiltrated the environmental and animal rights movements. They had sex with women under false pretenses and even fathered children they later abandoned. Lambert later became an academic with suspiciously close ties with many Muslim leaders and organizations.

Any Meinke, a left-wing activist who says he’s been subject to police monitoring said: “They know everything about you, they have a database of literally about 15,000 protestors in the radical left. Now it’s the Muslims’ turn.”

Now these tactics seem to have been transferred to the Muslim community, the case of Munir Farroqi – who was convicted of terrorism in 2011 – being the most obvious example. He’s currently serving an 18 year prison sentence after being found guilty of trying to recruit people to fight British soldiers in Afghanistan.

Undercover policemen pretending to be Muslims spent a year frequenting his home, accepting the family’s hospitality and asking them questions about Islam.

But all the time they were wearing secret recording devices and were filming what was being said. After thousands of hours of secret recordings they managed to get Farooqi to say this:

“Jihad is not just go and give your life away, no. If we’re going to go there we’ll make sure we take at least forty, fifty people with us.”

Again, no plot, no plan, no explosives, no fighters, no jihad, just some words which his family allege were taken out of context.

Muslim collaboration

But it’s important to recognize that this spying is not simply a one-way street – there is a lot of Muslim collaboration going on, either willingly or under duress.

Many young men have told me their stories of being approached by MI5 to spy, often accompanied by threats of travel bans, unemployability or “making your life hell.” But for all of these cases we know about how many more examples of those who have acquiesced are we ignorant of?

Then there are the Muslim organizations which accept government funding; those with close ties to government and police; the radicals who have been on jihad who are allowed to operate freely while others are arrested and persecuted; those who may have radical credentials and an outwardly religious or radical persona, but whose words and actions usually result in the division, demonization and disruption that the government wants.

Some Muslims who may not be outright spies also have dangerously close ties to the security services. They work together sometimes when their interests coincide, they hate each other the rest of the time.

Rizwaan Sabir, a former PHD student who was arrested after Nottingham University tipped off police that he was reading an al-Qaida manual, finds this deeply hypocritical. “If you are fighting on point of principle and reason then I think it’s very important to keep a clear boundary over who you partner with. Negotiation, discussion and communication are very important – especially between two warring sides or two sides that are at the opposite ends of the spectrum – but fighting one day and then becoming best friends the next day, it just shows hypocrisy.”

Now I’m probably starting to sound paranoid and after months of researching this subject I may be guilty of that to a certain extent. I am also not saying that all of the above are spies, but I am saying that given the assault that we are being subjected to, at least we have the right to doubt and to ask questions.


As for MI5 and the police, unsurprisingly they would not cooperate with my research. But just for the record, MI5 does deny harassing Muslims.

On its website it says it doesn’t investigate any group or individual on the grounds of ethnicity or religious beliefs. And it says it only carries out investigations if there is a clear national security reason for doing so.

A barrister contact of mine – who has represented several terror suspects – has a different view. He describes MI5 as criminals with a license to commit crime. They are completely unaccountable, have no oversight and can do whatever the hell they want – legal or illegal.

He also believes that it suits them to exaggerate the threat of Islamic terrorism because this has become a huge money-making industry. They are quite happy with this high tension situation.

Former London police commander Ali Dizaei (who was also subject to MI5 surveillance) doesn’t go that far. But he believes the power to decide who gets investigated by undercover officers and who doesn’t should be decided by a judge and not by the police itself.

“If there is any threat to the national security of this country there will be a need to carry out some level of surveillance. However, the key word in all of this is proportionality. Just because you have a fine grain of intelligence which says someone may be a threat to national security that does not give you a license to carry out phone taps, intrusive surveillance, tracker surveillance and everything else. Any profiling of any community has to be based on real, substantive intelligence and not on the basis of innuendos.”

Countering the spies

Finally, what the hell can we do about all this?

Well here I should admit that I do not have all the answers. We need to come together as a community to talk about this openly and to formulate responses in coordination with sympathetic non-Muslims.

But here are a few ideas. Firstly, I think we should blow the lid on this scandal. The mainstream media aren’t going to cover it because they are ultimately part of the establishment, so it’s up to us to keep this in the spotlight.

We should document any kind of MI5 harassment and put it into the public sphere; we should scrutinize MI5 itself and its complete lack of accountability; we should beware of new converts who are more interested in politics than religion; we should put pressure on our own organizations to boycott government funds; and most of all we need to quit the in-fighting and come together as a community to counter the counter-terrorism.

Above all, keep your own nose clean. Do not get involved in lunatic terror schemes, be careful before you shoot your mouth off, do not have an affair, consort with prostitutes, accumulate huge debt or do anything illegal or potentially embarrassing. It may be used against you.


Has Birmingham Stop the War Coalition been brought into disrepute?

Nu'man Abd Al-Wahid
Yam-Yam Yemeni

One of Birmingham’s local “Stop the War (StW) Coalition” groups held a meeting on the 7th November 2012 to discuss the Libyan situation. Surely a group, which in theory, at least, claims it opposes western intervention and was formed on the basis that it opposed the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq was going to highlight the extreme shortcomings of the British led intervention in Libya? I should’ve known better.

And who did Stop the War invite to give an assessment of what has been happening in Libya since Gadhaffi’s lynching? Why, none other than the person they invited last year to give a pro-NATO talk on Libya. I presume we live in the era of ‘War is Peace’, so why not?

However, the local StW convener, Stuart Richardson, promoted this talk on the basis that the speaker was offering his own personal perspective. But this misses the point entirely. I always thought that StW existed to oppose western interventions. Isn’t this what it says on the tin? – or on their ‘About Us’ page. Maybe on the 10th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, Birmingham StW could invite Clare Short or Tony Blair to give their personal perspective on the invasion of Iraq?

In other words, if I want to hear pro-NATO speakers I turn on the BBC/ITV/Sky or I would possibly go to a Conservative/Lib Dem/Labour Party/EDL meeting. I certainly don’t expect to arrive at a StW meeting to listen to pro military interventionists.

Allow me to draw an analogy, if I were to attend a conference on learning more about the benefits of vegetarianism, I simply shouldn’t expect the convener of the conference or the head of the vegetarian group to be eating a chicken or BLT sandwich when I arrive!

Yet this is precisely what has happened at this local Birmingham StW group two years in a row. The meeting began bizarrely enough with the pro-NATO speaker showing a you-tube clip of a person being lynched in an army barracks in 1995. The speaker claimed that this is what it was like in Libya but it could’ve been anywhere in the Maghreb, especially as there was no sound to the clip. The speaker claimed that the clip exemplified Gadhaffi’s rule before the “revolution”. I am sure that by “revolution” he was referring to the NATO-Islamist coup that ended the Jamahariyya.

From this he proceeded to address the killing of the American ambassador. Here, he offered a bizarre hotchpotch of insinuations of why the Ambassador was killed. He claimed that the American compound wasn’t protected properly and then he said that 23 of the 30 Americans stationed at Benghazi were CIA agents and he also claimed that the American ambassador did not respect local customs, the evidence of this was the Ambassador’s female colleague wearing a skirt at a meal with Libyans!

Bizarrely, he made no mention that al-Qaeda had announced the death Abu Yahya al-Libi, one of their senior commanders of Libyan origin, days earlier until I raised it in the Q&A.

After his sickening insinuations on the death of the American ambassador the speaker then began developing some kind of theory on the bombing of Gadhaffi’s motorcade just before his lynching. Only God knows what points the speaker was attempting to make. He claimed that NATO bombs hit the front of the convoy and the rear but did not hit the middle where he claimed Gadhaffi was seated. He then played another you-tube clip to show the bombed convoy surrounded by charred bodies and gloating Islamists. After a couple of minutes of watching these gruesome images, I led the calls for him to stop playing the clip.

I would have to say, even by Birmingham’s StW standards this was the most ridiculous and absurd anti-war meeting I have ever been to. If there was any accountability in StW, the local convenor, Stuart Richardson, would be sacked for organising this meeting alone, let alone that he seems to have invited the same pro-NATO speaker twice.

Birmingham StW has totally failed to address key issues on Libya. From the moment William Hague falsely claimed Gadhaffi had fled to Venezuela to the current fact that there may now be 300-400 militias in Libya it has remained silent. The other glaring omissions from this talk was the fact that with all the talk of “African” (i.e. read, black) mercenaries at the start of the Libyan “uprising” the only foreigners present were the six MI6 agents that had to be rescued. The same is now happening in Syria. The pro-interventionists are claiming that Hizbollah/Russia/Iranian troops are on the ground, yet the evidence points to the fact that Libyans/Afghans/Gulfies/Turks Islamist mercenaries are on the ground assisting the FSA.

No mention was made of the murderous racism inflicted on Black Libyans and Black Africans. No mention was made of the ethnic cleansing of the Tawargha, a town of 30,000 black Libyans. No mention was made of Libya’s frozen billions in European banks. No mention was made of bombing Libyan infrastructure including the water pipeline bring in water from the south of the country to the north. No mention was made of the up to 30,000 people currently being detained in Libyan prisons by the various militias. No mention was made of the lies that led to the intervention such as Gadhaffi’s army being high on Viagra and raping its way through Libya. Even StW hero, the Guardian’s in house “anti-imperialist”, marketing gimmick Seamus Milne, claims that the NATO bombing killed up to 30,000 people.

Just as I was beginning to think that this meeting couldn’t get worse, Stuart’s comrade, “Ali” suggested that the best way forward for Libya was for Cameron, Obama and William Hague to offer good advice to the new Libyan government! No joke!

Revolutions are supposed to provide people new hope but what has replaced Gadhaffi is nothing but NATO/UK/Islamist engineered brutal mayhem and worse Libya is now an imperialist base. To the speaker’s credit he admitted that the national past time in Libya is now looting and none of the militias are listening to the weak central government. Although he disagreed with my assertion that this central government exists only on paper.

Needless to say Birmingham StW has totally fudged the wider issue of why the British state has been leading the calls for interventions in Libya and now in Syria and not the United States. StW has also keenly fudged addressing the revitalised geo-political relationship between UK and Islamists.

On the basis of this absurd meeting, I call upon all anti-war activists and people with a robust acquaintance with common sense, to join me in urging ‘Stop the War Coalition’ head office in London to resign Stuart Richardson as he has brought anti-war activity into disrepute two years in a row by inviting the same pro-NATO speaker to an anti-war platform.

Friday, 9 November 2012


My sections at 4:19, 11:58, 19:58 and (great comment from Scott Rickard on Libya and Gadaffi at 23:40) 25:15.


Good on Russia Today for being the only channel that is reporting with any semblance of balance and truth on Libya and the recent devastation of Bani Walid by the nato-organised death squads in Libya.

One only has to go to the british state's own website about their own travel advice on Libya to know that Libya is not a safe place to visit, its not safe for its own citizens as its run by some 400 death squads.

Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm


Excellent interview here with Syrian President Assad. Assad states correctly that Syria is the last country of secularism in the region which is generally true although the FLN Algerian goverment is also an important resistant nation that nato and its allies wants to overthrow. Assad makes this comment to try and engage with the 'secular' white imperialists, however, white imperialism does not care one bit for secularism, as its clear for all that they are promoting 'islamism' that fits their own strategies such as the Muslim Brotherhood and pro-Al-Qaeda groups who are nothing but their death squads doing white imperialist dirty work. 

While this interview is excellent, the world anti-imperialist movement has yet to come up with any viable plan or even suggested plan as to how we are going to effectively defend our people from white imperialist war be it soft coups, sanctions, cultural imperialism or open war.

Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm



Of course the white power structure is still very much in charge in the usa, and notions that the white elite are losing power is inaccurate. Nevertheless, what these terrified squeals of the white chauvunists expose is the deep seated fear that Black and non-white people who are not in agreement with a white imperialist system are growing in strength against those who want to maintain the white power structure status quo forever.

Sukant Chandanm Sons of Malcolm


Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly said tonight that if President Barack Obama wins re-election, it’s because the demographics of the country have changed and “it’s not a traditional America anymore.”

“The white establishment is now the minority,” O'Reilly said. “And the voters, many of them, feel that the economic system is stacked against them and they want stuff. You are going to see a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama. Overwhelming black vote for President Obama. And women will probably break President Obama's way. People feel that they are entitled to things and which candidate, between the two, is going to give them things?”

“The demographics are changing,” he said. “It’s not a traditional America anymore.”


"White America died last night. Obama's reelection killed it. Our 200 plus year history as a Western nation is over. We're a Socialist Latin American country now. Venezuela without the oil."

While it's clear that Obama has been used and allowed himself to be used for yankee imperialist crimes, especially the operations against Libya and Africa in general and now Syria, it is also clear that the struggle in the usa is polarising. It is polarising along the lines of the Black, Asian, 'Latino' leadership with white allies, which is, however contradictorily, represented by Obama, and then on the other hand we have the white opposition led by the republican, tea party and an array of growing white militias.

Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

Buchanan: ‘White America’ Died Last Night


Conservative political pundit Pat Buchanan stoked controversy today by claiming that Barack Obama's reelection has 'killed White America'.

The paleoconservative nativist is no stranger to racial controversy, having previously been accused of writing books with racist and anti-semitic undertones.

But the former Nixon advisor was more explicit on the G. Gordon Liddy Show this morning. When asked for his reaction to Obama's victory, Buchanan replied brazenly:

"White America died last night. Obama's reelection killed it. Our 200 plus year history as a Western nation is over. We're a Socialist Latin American country now. Venezuela without the oil."

Stunned by his clear racisim, Liddy tried to walk his guest back from the ledge:

"With what you just said right there...You seem to imply that white people are better than other people. That's not really what you're saying is it?"

"Of course that's what I'm saying," Buchanan replied "Isn't it obvious? Anything worth doing on this Earth was done first by white people."

"Who landed on the moon? White people. Who climbed Mount Everest? White people.  Who invented the transistor? White people. Who invented paper? White people. Who discovered algebra? White people."

"And don't give me all this nonsense about Martin Luther King and civil rights and all that. Who do you think freed the slaves? Abraham Lincoln. A white guy!"

Carte Blanche

"But we're not led by Lincoln anymore, we're led by an affirmative-action mulatto who can't physically understand how great America once was."

"I cried last night G. I cried for hours. It's over for all of us. The great White nation will never survive another 4 years of Obama's leadership"

Liddy tried to reason with Buchanan, reminding him that he shares similar positions with the President on Afghanistan, Iraq, and relations with Russia:

"Of course I agree with half of what he does,"  Buchanan answered, "He's half white! That's not the half I'm worried about."

Buchanan served as a speechwriter in the Nixon White House. He was fired as an MSNBC analyst this year following the publication of a book many considered to be racist.

Thursday, 8 November 2012


we were not made to live like you

We are a generation of blind patriots,
Floating amidst a sea of culture clashes and contradicting tides.
We roam.
Scattered across the corners of the globe,
We walk motionless, live lifeless and inhale; but we remain breathless.
We do not own the memories of our elders,
Nor share the scars that define our history
Yet the pain of loss lingers in our veins giving our blood a darker hue.
We relish our fluidity,
Our ability to assimilate and exist in these concrete jungles;
Though this was not our destiny.
We sought shade beneath square silhouettes,
Hung our heads in respect when passing celestial buildings
And bit our tongues during the winter months.
But we were not made to live like you;
To think like you;
To be like you.

Our skin is thinner than yours,
Our ribs bent further and spine’s curved into submission.
We cannot stomach food that comes in packages,
Fruits so filled with chemicals that they would make our throats itch
And water so metallic in its essence, its very scent could make us flinch.
Our feet stutter against concrete roads;
Limbs cower from gusts of wind that travel up our trouser legs and seep into our spine’s
And our skin is dull here; dark and dry
Beneath skies so grey, one would think the sun was shy.
This was not meant for us,
We come from a people who live to rove,
Drifting across the seething Serengeti, guided by the harmattan winds.

Our hearts beat a different rhythm and our souls dance in tribal motions.
We exist in English but come to life in our native tongues;
Ululating a lovers lullaby beneath a blistering sun.
No, we were not made to dance like you;
To dream like you;
To love like you.
And mama said, her accent thick as cement,
“Do not let them bury me in their coffins when I die. Shroud me in white sheets and bury me beneath red sands and saffron skies”.
I watched her then;
with her smooth chocolate skin,
Dark sunken eyes and brown trembling lips.
She sits tightly clenching prayer beads with henna covered finger tips as if, Silent prayers could take her back 20 years.
She ages quicker here,
Her skin curled inwards in an attempt to veil itself from the cold and the bite of their lies.
Yet in these coldest of climates she remains sun kissed.

We continue to survive and elevate
Because thinner skin does not define the texture of our blood,
Or its rummaged warmth, destined to be living;
And living we are.
Even though the souls of our feet are strangers to the soil of this land,
We continue to strive through perishing pains and out cried goodbyes.
And the native remains sewed onto our tongues,
So that we taste the sourness of England with the sweetness of Somali sentiments-
As if without each other they would no longer function,
And we would no longer breathe those tones that have heavy African inheritance
But stay soulful to the eardrums of anyone that lusts flavour.
We are the red wine to the meal,
Coloured and colourings are foamed through every spec that made us different. Missing our roots and dust
But again we are living;
And living we are.
Cultured in tokens of wishful seeds that you could never begin to suffice in.
Separated but succulent;
Our ancestors would be proud of the embedded warrior that lies in the depth of our coloured and colouring skins.

- Farah Gabdon (c) 2009

Wednesday, 7 November 2012


OBAMA: Four yrs plus ago I defended Obama on two planks: 

1 - I thought the rise of Obama was positively an indicator that the yankee white imperialism was resigning itself and trying more or less to accept in some way the rise and power of the GlobalSouth (China, Russia, SCO, Asean, Alba, Bric, Basic etc)

2 - I thought the rise of Obama was an indicator positively (however (problematic) to the 
rise of Black, 'Latino' and Asian power in the usa (which is *the* basis for revolutionary progressive change there), and a bulwark against the mass white supremacy of the republicans/tea party/growth of white militias etc.


Obama is the perfect branding for another four years of white imperialist escalating offensives against the peoples of the GlobalSouth; Obama is the perfect branding in a period of deepening and the biggest crisis facing white financial capital ever.

The white imperialists are using Obama, and Obama is allowing himself to be used for the recolonisation of Africa (Libya and Africom etc), and growing hostilities with Russia&China etc.

I think in general the election game is a distraction and divergence from the necessity of building effective militant internationalism with our Homelands in the GlobalSouth, and effective grassroots organising: the two basis of effective resistance and towards justice for us (and our ancestors), liberation and freedom.

My dream is that Obama respects his GrandDad in Kenya who was a Mau-Mau and tortured by the brits, but it seems Obama is staying loyal to his white side of his family which is more in harmony with his white imperialist masters.

- Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

Sunday, 4 November 2012



The Empire's Balfour Declaration and the Suez Canal

by Nu’man Abd al-Wahid*

For the average British pro-Palestinian human rights activist, the Balfour Declaration, published ninety- five years ago on the 2nd November 1917, is only mentioned in passing in their publications or agitations. For them, the declaration seems to have drafted in, one autumn day most likely alongside the brown and crimson leaves for then to triumphantly and jubilantly land on Lord Balfour’s, the British foreign secretary, desk. For them, it is more convenient to strongly imply that the Palestinian predicament began when the young United Nations partitioned Palestine on the 29th November 1947 or when the British Empire’s Palestine mandate officially ended on 15th May 1948. For them, the fact that up to 400,000 Palestinians under the Empire’s watch were ethnically cleansed between these latter two dates literally doesn’t warrant a footnote. [1]

This is certainly the impression given by reading the literature of “revolutionary socialists” as well as other supposedly pro-Palestinians. In his book “Imperialism and Resistance”, “revolutionary socialist” John Rees argues that the Israeli state began to take a shape on Palestinian land as a result “of the decline of the Ottoman Empire” and on the basis of this ‘shaping’ the British state “committed” itself to the Balfour Declaration.[2]

Being committed to a proposition does not necessarily mean that the proposition originated with the upholders of the commitment. The notion that the British government may have written and issued the Declaration is quite simply overlooked.

Furthermore, according to Rees, this Balfour Declaration “heralded the increase in Jewish settlers”. In other words it wasn’t the British Empire that dictated the terms of European Jewish immigration to Palestine but the “Balfour Declaration”. Actually, the pattern of immigration proved to be one of the early bones of contention between British Imperialism and right-wing Jewish-Zionism. The Empire wanted an incremental approach to immigration so as not to totally aggravate the indigenous population, while Zionists of the Vladimir Jobotinsky hue wanted mass Jewish immigration as soon as the British Empire officially wrenched itself into Palestine.

What’s galling about “revolutionary socialist” Rees’s analysis of the Balfour Declaration and Palestine is that he makes no attempt whatsoever to connect the Balfour Declaration to the perceived economic and political needs of the British Empire. In his hands the declaration is some random document of ethereal provenance which the British state somehow found itself “committed” to one November morning in 1917.[3]

Another “revolutionary socialist”, Richard Seymour in his book the “Liberal Defence of Murder”, argues that “British colonialists prepared some of the legitimacy for a future Zionist state in its response to” the Palestinian uprising between 1936-1939 “by advocating the partition of Palestine.” [4] This is not true because the Zionist proposition found legitimacy in 1917 otherwise it is unlikely the declaration would have been issued. Lord Balfour was very unequivocal in this. And so were the British Prime Minister, Lloyd George and his Colonial Secretary, Winston Churchill. In a meeting they informed the head of Zionist Federation, Chaim Weizmann “that by the Declaration they had always meant an eventual state.”[5]

One of the strategies employed by the British to bring about the “eventual state” was to deny real democracy to Palestine, as Lloyd George instructed Churchill: “You mustn’t give representative government to Palestine.”[6]

Once again the demand for democracy was a factor when the first Palestinian uprising erupted in 1936. The then British Colonial Secretary, William Orsmby-Gore confirmed in parliament that:

“…The Arabs demand a complete stoppage of all Jewish immigration, a complete stoppage of all sales of land, and the transfer of the Government of Palestine…to what they call a National Government responsible to an elected democratic assembly. Those are their three demands, and quite frankly, those demands cannot possibly be conceded.”[7]

As such the British were hell bent on creating their Zionist entity in Palestine by denying democracy to Palestine and military crushing the indigenous population. So for Seymour’s framing of the Zionist state within the context of a ‘legitimate’ British response to the Palestinian uprising is erroneous, simply places the cart before horses and avoids the geo-politics on why the British Empire wanted a Zionist state in Palestine.

However, the geo-politics behind the Empire’s Zionist enterprise in Palestine was not eschewed by respected opinion of the period.

In 1917, C.P. Scott the then editor of the Guardian was in no doubt about why Palestine should be colonised by European Jewry. After claiming that Palestine is not a country, he insisted “it will be a country; it will be the country of the Jews. That is the meaning of…” the Balfour Declaration. The fact that in 1917 the population of Palestine was 80,000 Jewish and 700,000 Arab Palestinian literally meant nothing to the editor of this great liberal bugle.

Clearly the Guardian’s dictum “comment is free, but facts are sacred…” never quite extended to Palestine. After all, the Arabs of Palestine were “at a low stage of civilisation” and that they contain within “itself none of the elements of progress…” according to the esteemed and progressive editor.

He further stated that the British government’s deliberate policy will be then “to encourage in every way in our power Jewish immigration…with a view to the ultimate establishment of a Jewish State.”

Scott continued to reason that there should be a Zionist state in Palestine because, “Palestine has a special importance for Great Britain because in the hands of a hostile Power, it can be made…a secure base which a land attack on Egypt can be organised…” Therefore, it is in Britain’s interest that “no Power should be seated in Palestine” that “is likely to be hostile” to British Imperialism.[8]

The left-wing New Statesman magazine was far more blunt in legitimising support for the Balfour Declaration and Zionism. It was also more specific on why there should be a Zionist state in Palestine. It informed its readers that the “special interest of the British Empire in Palestine is due to the proximity of the Suez Canal.” The only obvious conclusion is then to imperatively “effect a Zionist restoration under British auspices.”

After all, the New Statesman added, the then position of Jews as “unassimilated sojourners in every land but their own can never become satisfactory…It is far better…to make a nation of them” in the interests of Empire.[9]

The Guardian’s and New Statesman’s reasons legitimising the Zionist entity in Palestine were echoed by a prominent left-wing politician in this period, Colonel Josiah Wedgwood. He argued that Palestine was the “Clapham Junction” of the British Empire. As such a “friendly and efficient population” is required to settle there. And as Egyptians did not want the British occupation of their country, Palestine should be settled with “men on whom we can depend, if only because they depend on us…The Jews depend on us.”[10]

History testifies that the colonial-settler state of Israel essentially came about not as a result of the “decline of the Ottoman Empire” (“revolutionary socialist” John Rees) or as a legitimate British response to the first Palestinian uprising in the 1930’s (“revolutionary socialist” Richard Seymour) but as a result of the British Empire’s need for security for Egypt and specifically the British owned Suez Canal.

The Empire’s first military governor of Jerusalem, Sir Ronald Storrs had claimed that Egypt was the “jugular vein of the British Empire.”[11]

It the turn of the twentieth century, eighty per cent of the shipping passing through the Suez Canal belonged to the Empire. [12] Therefore, with Palestine in close proximity to the canal it was thought best to colonise it with European Jews so as to pre-empt any challenge to the British presence in Egypt either from the indigenous Arabs or another foreign power.

The newly European Jewish settlers were to be the Praetorian Guard of Egypt and specifically of the Suez Canal. As such, in the words of Winston Churchill, European Jews would then “be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire” [13] rather than “unassimilated sojourners in every land.”

* Nu’man Abd al-Wahid is a UK based freelance Yemeni-English writer specialising in the political relationship between the British state and the Arab World. His focus is on how Great Britain has historically maintained its interests in the the Middle East. A collection of his essays are posted at the blog: .


[1] Rosemarie M. Esber, “Under the Cover of War”, (Alexandria V.A.: Aribicus Books and Media, 2009). This is an excellent account of the ethnic cleansing that took place under the British Mandate.
[2] The Balfour Declaration stated that the British government will “…view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object…” quoted in Christopher Sykes, “Cross Roads to Israel”, (London: Collins, 1965), pg. 15
[3] John Rees, “Imperialism and Resistance”, (London: Routledge, 2006), pg.74-76
[4] Richard Seymour, “The Liberal Defence of Murder”, (London: Verso Books, 2008), pg.66
[5] Max Egrenot, “A Life of Arthur James Balfour”, (London: Collins, 1980), pg. 314.
[6] Richard Toye, Lloyd George and Churchill, (London: Macmillan, 2007), pg220
[7] Commons Debates, Fifth Series, Vol. 313, Column 1324, 19th June 1936.
[8] The Guardian, 9th November 1917
[9] New Statesman, 17th November 1917
[10] Josiah Wedgwood, “The Seventh Dominion”, (London: The Labour Publishing Company Limited, 1928), pg.3. Clapham Junction is a main a busy termini in central London.
[11] Sir Ronald Storrs, “Orientations”, (London: Readers Union Ltd., 1939), pg.155
[12] Roger Adelson, “London and the invention of the Middle East, 1902-1920”(London: Yale University Press, 1995), pg.32
[13] Winston Churchill, “Zionism vs. Bolshevism”, Illustrated Sunday Herald, (London), 8th February 1920.