Sunday, April 01, 2007

He's not a satirist, he's a very naughty boy

Check out this piece by Terry Jones (he of Monty Python fame). It's a piss poor slice of satire about the situation with the kidnapped British sailors currently being illegally held by the deranged state of Iran for their own egregious propaganda purposes. Jones applies a particularly pernicious brand of moral equivalence that seeks to draw a parallel with the treatment of the sailors by the Iranian regime with some of the methods employed against terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere.

It's a shame, because I'm a huge fan of Python but I now have no other option than to consider Mr Jones a tosser of the highest order. If you feel like further lowering your opinion of certain members of human society, read some of the comments underneath wherein large numbers of the self-hating left lap up his poorly considered bilge like thirsty goats.

For the record, the abduction of the sailors is an act of piracy, pure and simple. They were operating in Iraqi waters, under the auspices of the United Nations, on behalf of the government of Iraq. Iran's kidnapping and public parading of their hostages serves no purpose other than to stick up two fingers to Britain and the west and to try and buy some sort of bargaining chip in the ongoing row over Iran's intention to enrich uranium. The only conclusion we can draw is that Iran remains a menace to the region, we cannot believe a single word they say about anything and we should double our efforts to ensure that this crackpot Islamic dictatorship never gets its hands on any nuclear material, no matter how innocent they claim their intentions to be.

12 comments:

Joe said...

I would be the first person to highlight Iran's human rights record and suchlike, before i'm labeled and apologist for the regime, and i would agree that Mr Ahmedinejad is as insane as your average mental patient. I would agree that these tactics used by Iran to further their abhorrent manifesto.

However i'm not sure the point of Terry's article was to in some way trivialise Iran's crimes, rather to highlight the fact that our governments are responsible for similar crimes - those that live in glass houses and all that...

ph said...

I am afraid that there is only really one way of dealing with the middle east. That is to stop trying to 'fix' anything, let them sort it out (irrespective of the consequences) and keep the oil flowing (if necessary) by paying off whatever despot can deliver it.
Rather selfish approach I know, but I think that everyone would be happier with this approach.

Citizen Sane said...

Hi Joe. I understand what Terry is trying to do, I just disagree fundamentally with the position that he is taking: namely that we should consider the incarceration of terror suspects in the same way as the abduction of British military personnel acting on behalf of the UN Security Council. I don't agree with torture or abuse of suspects, and have serious misgivings about Guantanamo Bay, etc, but the internment of suspected terrorists is not the same as kidnapping the crew of a British naval vessel operating within the rules of international law. That is the implication of his piece.

PH - Well, that has pretty much been the approach for the last 50 years.

ph said...

Well- on and off. Every so often we think we can fix things, and it makes things worse.

discoriggall said...

Neither side looks good here, but I don't think it was wrong of Terry Jones to write this.. and I don't really understand why it makes him a tosser of the highest order.
The Iranian gov't is terrible, but to label it an "Islamic dictatorship" is just wrong. It's not, it's an Islamic democracy, and the incumbent leader seems to be increasingly unpopular at home, and may well be replaced at the next election there. Sure, make sure they don't get nuclear material, but don't demonise them too much, it was foreign demonisation (axis of evil) that in part elected this conservative government in the first place.

Anonymous said...

I see your point Mr Citizen sir - but whereas there are potential differences in the way these people were captured, this is really just semantics. They haven't knowingly been tortured, is what it basically comes down to, unlike the residents of Guantanamo bay. This IS a cheap political trick by Iran, but one that as yet, as far as I am concerned, has not reached the humanitarian immorality as Guantanamo bay. I would much rather be in the position of this unfortunate woman, then spend an eternity in an orange jumpsuit - speaking of which, why hasn't the department in charge of Capm X Ray been taken to court for crimes againt fashion?

Discoriggall - labelling Iran a democracy is at best using the term VERY loosely, and at worst a barefaced lie. No international organisation worth it's salt in impartiality will tell you otherwise.

discoriggall said...

...they have elections... the previous government was very different, so I can assume there is a modicum(?) of choice available to the population. Elections in Iraq under Saddam, or in the USSR under communism - now that was sham democracy.. Please explain to me how undemocratic Iran is (we know about the Ayatollah, but then he's not the current complaint, is he?). I'm sure it's as least as democratic as anywhere else in the region, and I suspect more so.

Citizen Sane said...

discoriggal - you are right that Iran holds elections. But does that make it a democracy? Does having four legs and a tail make something a dog? The fact is, while the president is 'elected', all candidates are selected by a permanent council of unelected (and unremovable) clerics in the first place. And no president of Iran is able to do anything that they do not want to happen. Ahmadinejad is nothing more than the bitch of the clerics and if he goes, then some other bitch will be appointed. That is sham democracy my friend.

anonymous - I agree up to a point. The policies of Bush and co (Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition, the torture debate) have backfired spectacularly here and Iran has a perfect opportunity to use it to their advantage. Which they are, not surprisingly, milking to the full. Let's just never lost sight of the fact that they hang homosexuals, cut out the tongues of union leaders, arm and fund Shia militias, hold state sponsored conferences about Holocaust denial and have referred to Israel being "wiped off the map". So their humane treatment of our sailors is nothing more than the lipstick on the pig.

discoriggall said...

...but you still have to admit there is a big difference between Ahmadinejad and the previous administration, so there is flexibility in the system. And OUR MPs are chosen by their respective parties, in closed systems and most of them seem only to do what they're told (with a few notable exceptions). Most of Parliament is made up of spineless little jobsworths. What kind of democracy is that?

Citizen Sane said...

I'd agree that it's flexible compared to most countries in that part of the world and Iranian people do enjoy a greater level of freedom than, say, Saudi Arabia. But that's hardly saying much. Our system of Parliamentary democracy is far from perfect, but it's still one of the best there is. As Churchill said: "Democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the other ones that have been tried." And there is a difference between following a party line and being appointed by a theocratic elite. If we don't like our government we can object, criticise or challenge without being executed. Or, we can join in the process ourselves. In Iran we could face arrest just for having this conversation.

Joe said...

Saney - as a gay man myself (well - just about - i only left my teens last tear) myself, i totally agree with your assessment of the regime, but until they do anything similar with the hostages, we can't accuse them of anything in this case.

(BTW i was anonymous, only becaise of the fact that Blogspot is a bugger to use)

ph said...

CS - lipstick on pig - what a fine analogy