Hammond, the British Foreign Secretary, has to go

Another perfect display of priggish, pig-faced insolence, arrogance, top-down anachronistic neo-colonialist bilge from the one and only Philip Hammond from Essex, England, who thinks he decides who governs Syria... the British Foreign Secretary who under his own standards and those of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office he heads, simply has to go.

Philip Hammond is at it again, making sh*t-headed barbed quips which underline the sinister nature of those who hold high offices controlled by the Lobbies (banking, finance, energy, pharmaceuticals, food and weapons) in the FUKUS Axis (France-UK-US). This week he hit the headlines once more with insinuations that Russia does not respect the rules of what he calls the "international system" and urged Moscow to do more towards creating a post-Assad Syria.

What is Hammond's international "system"?

For a start, let us take his words at face value and entertain the notion that there does indeed exist an "international system", which Philip Hammond and his puppet-masters across the Pond obviously obey but then again this has nothing whatsoever to do with international law.

So what is this international "system"? Is it the one that took sides in an internal conflict in the sovereign Republic of Serbia where Kosovo Albanian terrorists were attacking police and emergency services, beheading Serbs and selling their organs, and in which those who support Mr. Hammond's "system" sided with the terrorists, namely Ushtria Çlirimtare ë Kosovës, led by one Hashim Thaçi who later admitted to counts of terrorist activity? Is this "system" which Mr. Hammond supports the one that fires weapons coated with depleted uranium leaving the theater of war contaminated for years to come? Is this the "system" which committed an act of international piracy and kidnapping, seizing Slobodan Milosevic against any law in force in the Republic of Yugoslavia or the Republic of Serbia, taking him to The Hague, holding him illegally until his death/murder?

Hammond's "system" commits war crimes

Is Mr. Hammond's "system" the one that launched an illegal attack against Iraq based upon blatant, shitfaced lies, destroyed a sovereign state, incurring up to one million deaths, creating rampant unemployment, leaving swathes of territory radioactive, occasioning the birth defects of tens of thousands of children? Is Mr. Hammond's "system" the one that then doled out rebuilding contracts, without tender of course, to White House cronies?

Is the "system" which Mr. Hammond refers to the one in which former Secretaries of the Defense Ministry of the United Kingdom had close links to the Pentagon and arms contracts? Is this "system" the one which only hands out weapons contracts for arms tested in the field of battle, meaning that the Pentagon and its Poodles which Mr. Hammond at the FCO and the Defense Ministry he used to head represents have to invent wars for the lobbies to hand out prizes?

Is this "system" the one that sided with terrorists in Libya on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's own list of proscribed groups (for example LIFG) and sided with terrorists to overthrow a peaceful state, is this the "system" which said "Gaddafy must go" without consulting the people of Libya, is this the "system" which strafed the water supply and then the water pipes factory and then the electricity grid "to break their backs" (By "their" read "women, children, babies)?

Is this the "system" which supported marauding gangs of thugs and shipped in bearded weirdos from the four corners of Hades to wreak havoc on the country with the highest Human Development Index in Africa, attempting to turn it once again into the world's poorest and most underdeveloped nation which was what Muammar al-Gaddafy inherited?

Is this the "system" which declares brazenly and matter-of-fact that "Assad has to go" and that talks about a "post-Assad Syria" as Hammond does, as if we were still in the age of drawing lines on maps and saying "this side of the line is ours and the other side is yours, eh what?"

Pig-headed arrogance

And how about that for an example of pig-headed arrogance, insolence and intrusion? Where and when does this "system" which Mr. Hammond refers to take into account the wishes of the Syrian people, expressed in a free and fair democratic election held in 2014, in which the vast majority of the population voted to maintain Bashar al-Assad as President?

Should it not be the people of Syria and not Mr. Philip Anthony Hammond, from Essex, England, deciding who their President should be?

And now as regards the insinuation that Russia is not following the law. Did Russia invade Iraq? Did Russia strafe Iraqi fields of cereals with military aircraft to destroy the crops and deprive the civilian population of food in the 1990s? Or did Russia tell Washington and its Poodles that an invasion of Iraq would be a foreign policy disaster and did Russia not urge the USA and its Poodle in Chief the UK to go through the UN Security Council? Did the UNSC give the go-ahead for the attack? The answer is no, it did not.

Did Russia invade Libya? Did Russia invent lies about the Syrian government using chemical weapons in al-Ghouti? Did Russia create a narco-trafficking enclave in Kosovo? Did Russia target civilian structures in Iraq and Libya with military hardware? Did Russia mastermind a Fascist Putsch in Ukraine?

No, it did not. Russia showed extreme patience with the neo-Fascist forces which swept to power in Ukraine just before the son of the US Vice-President Biden was chosen as special advisor to the Ukrainian energy lobby and just after it was revealed that Ukraine is rich in shale gas deposits. This, despite the fact that these armed groups of thugs were making death threats against Russian-speakers and Jews and had started perpetrating Fascist massacres in Eastern Ukraine.

So if this is the "system" which Philip Hammond defends, then let us all call loud and clear for his resignation. Ladies and Gentlemen, the times of Colonialism and Imperialism have passed. It is time for a multilateral approach to foreign policy, using the UNSC as the forum for debate, dialogue and discussion - the fundamentals of Democracy - and it is time that this approach used development rather than deployment as its modus operandi in crisis management, taking into account the will of the people in the respective theater of activity, not interfering but respecting.

Philip Anthony Hammond, from Essex, England, does not fit into this mindset and therefore, Philip Hammond must go!

Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey


Twitter: @TimothyBHinchey

Hammond, the British Foreign Secretary, has to go. 57692.jpeg

*Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey has worked as a correspondent, journalist, deputy editor, editor, chief editor, director, project manager, executive director, partner and owner of printed and online daily, weekly, monthly and yearly publications, TV stations and media groups printed, aired and distributed in Angola, Brazil, Cape Verde, East Timor, Guinea-Bissau, Portugal, Mozambique and São Tomé and Principe Isles; the Russian Foreign Ministry publication Dialog and the Cuban Foreign Ministry Official Publications. He has spent the last two decades in humanitarian projects, connecting communities, working to document and catalog disappearing languages, cultures, traditions, working to network with the LGBT communities helping to set up shelters for abused or frightened victims and as Media Partner with UN Women, working to foster the UN Women project to fight against gender violence and to strive for an end to sexism, racism and homophobia. A Vegan, he is also a Media Partner of Humane Society International, fighting for animal rights. He is Director and Chief Editor of the Portuguese version of Pravda.Ru.


Subscribe to Pravda.Ru Telegram channel, Facebook, RSS!

Author`s name Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey