A Right Royal Quarrel - Revisited

 As we know, Charles Spencer has written a new book about his late sister, Princess Diana. It's called "Swan Song: Diana, my sister. Beautiful. Beloved. Hunted". At the risk of sounding cynical, that sounds like a precis of the book and, knowing what we know, why bother to read it? After all, haven't enough books, articles and TV documentaries been made about the late princess already? Well, apparently not. Again, as we know, a huge row has broken out between Spencer and the King. As the BBC comments:

"Earl Spencer claims in a new book the then-Prince of Wales said "we'll forget her soon enough" during an argument over whether Princes William and Harry should walk in Diana's funeral procession. In a strongly worded response, Buckingham Palace said the King was "mindful that the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgement and colour memory in ways others do not recognise, even many years after such a loss".

Now, were the Royal family not involved, and were the Earl not an aristocrat, there would have been no publicity at all about Diana's death and no book written about that tragic event 25 years later. Personally, I think this matter should  dropped from the public arena and the princess left to rest in peace. I know that many people will agree with me but, unfortunately, we are going to be bombarded with the issue on all the media outlets, and thus it will be difficult to avoid.

For people are taking sides on this issue. Rory Stewart, who is a friend of the King, said on BBC Newsnight:

“I know the King, I simply cannot believe that he could have said something like that”. 

And other commentators, such as Gyles Brandreth, are defending the King. I have not found any defenders of the book online, but I'm sure they will make an appearance. Earl Spencer has reacted with matching indignation to the royal denial. Quoted in the Guardian, he says:

Spencer said: “It was astonishingly provocative and below the belt because it was essentially trying to say I’d lied without the king being able to deny what I’d said. I also thought it was a rather poor imitation of the ‘recollections may vary’ quote, which was a much more elegant way of putting things, but in these circumstances entirely out of place. He added that “Diana would be cheering from the rafters at this book”

Which side are you on? If, like me, your answer is "Neither", I wish you well with your other media choices. As for the book, well, all this controversy will do book sales no harm. TV and press interviews will bring the interviewees a few quid. That might sound cynical, but as a musician I know once said: "There's one problem with being a cynic: you're always right".

As for the earl himself, he would be well advised to look through his own back catalogue. I have one of his books - a good one - which should stand as a warning to him. It's called "Killers of the King: The Men Who dared to Execute Charles 1". As we know, the Parliamentary regime that replaced the Stuarts did not last and the King's son, Charles 2, was restored to the throne. Now, as Jennie Erikson says, in her review:

"This book is, at its core, an account of the bloody revenge meted out to all Parliamentarians involved in the execution of Charles I. After Charles I's death, England was briefly ruled by a republic before the monarchy was restored by the dead king's son, Charles II. In Killers of the King, Charles Spencer (the author and, confusingly, the third Charles in this review) delightfully reveals an intense personality trait of the young new king: when it came to bloodthirstiness and revenge, the Count of Monte Cristo had nothing on Charles II! Spencer discusses in detail Charles' life-long quest for revenge against those who had a hand in his father's death."

And the revenge was bloody indeed. Many of the people who carried out the execution were hung, drawn and quartered. Others, who fled abroad, were hunted across Europe and the American colonies. Even the corpse of Oliver Cromwell was dug up and publicly decapitated. Earl Spencer had better start looking over his shoulder. Charles 3 might show vindictiveness in other ways.

Still, as my colleague, Rednev, said on Facebook, what does the issue about Diana matter to people under 40 in this country and around the world? In another 25 years, this whole issue will have passed into history.

Nigel and an Opportunist's Dilemma

 I'd rather not be blogging about Nigel Farage (NF) again so quickly, but the current controversy over his refusal to condemn the Southampton riots - fully justified in being regarded as disgraceful - is lacking in one respect, I think. The Prime Minister spoke accurately when he said, in reply to NF's two-tier policing" speech about the Henry Nowak murder,  in the House of Commons:

“His [Mr Farage’s] response has been to appeal for rage, rage. That’s his response to a father who has lost his son and asked for that not to happen. Exploiting this tragedy to create grievance and division would be wrong in any circumstances, but to do it when the family are expressly saying ‘please don’t’ is unforgivable. It shows exactly who he is.”

It certainly shows NF to be an opportunist, as he always has been. We have, for example, seen him attempt to exploit anti-Semitism, among other topics, to his advantage. He keeps quiet about it now, but:

"In 2017, Farage came under fire for antisemitism after an LBC interview in which he described the so-called US “Jewish lobby” as a concern of his.
He has spoken of a "new world order" and the threat of a "globalist" government, often singling out Goldman Sachs and George Soros".

He has sought to ingratiate himself with both Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin:

"Farage ... defended Trump’s infamous "grab ’em by the pu**y" comment, saying that, "men say dreadful things sometimes".
If all of us were caught out on what we’ve said on a night out after a drink, none of us would be here," he added."

As for Putin: 

"Vladimir Putin is a nationalist Russian. He wants to get back — at least I thought he wanted to get back — the Russian-speaking areas [of Ukraine] into his country," ... He (NF) said that the invasion was "abhorrent" but also "predictable", and blamed Putin’s actions on the EU and Nato provoking him".

It may be fanciful, but I am certain that, in the awful event of NF becoming Prime Minister, we would see him welcoming Trump and Putin on state visits to this country - perhaps both at the same time.

But this is not the main issue here. I said above that the main issue about NF's blathering over two-tier policing and the anger over his refusal to condemn the riots in Southampton last week is lacking an appreciation of one unspoken fact.

 

This fact is that NF is caught in a dilemma when it comes to violence of this type - but don't expect him to admit it. He cannot afford to be seen as condoning lawlessness - crime is a major Reform UK issue - but neither can he afford to alienate the angry individuals who attend such riots, or the right-wing rallies that blight our capital city periodically. Still less can he afford to upset the organisers and inciters of these events, such as Tommy Robinson, Paul Golding, Katy Hopkins, Laurence Fox, Elon Musk, etc,etc. All these extremist luminaries have supported NF and Reform UK in various ways, but in particular, at the last General Election. If they turned against him, he would lose a lot of popular (not to say populist) support. That, I believe, is why NF is so ambivalent on this issue.

But there could be another problem for NF if he condemned right-wing populist violence, even though he might not be aware of it. The extreme Right thrives on violence, be it physical or online. They are by no means averse to using violence and terror tactics against those they class as being traitors, and while NF might have bodyguards, the neo-Nazi psychopaths, of whom we see many on anti-migrant protests or "Unite the Nation" marches, could well target Reform UK members and officials. 

In other words, NF and his followers could become a persecuted minority. They might then appreciate the feelings of other such minorities, in this country and elsewhere. 

And why so many become refugees...

Nigel Shares the Love!

 

Nonsense, of course, but I thought it would attract your attention. You, dear reader, might be an admirer of Nigel Farage (NF) seen above. If so, you will appreciate the picture. If, like me, you are not someone who appreciates NF, the picture will not be acceptable. Perhaps not, but you, like me, will be amazed that so many people regard this man with such affection. And that is a good starting point for this blog post.

NF, I think, is becoming a complete megalomaniac. As we know, there is understandable controversy over the horrible murder of Henry Nowak and his death under arrest by the Southampton police. As we know, there is an issue of racism involved, and questions raised about "two-tier policing". We know from previous incidents, such as the Southport murders in 2024, that NF feels impelled to speak out publicly on such matters. NF blamed the murders of the three young Southport girls on Muslim asylum seekers. Well, we know how accurate that was. NF blamed the police for not providing full information, but that didn't stop the rioting in Southport and elsewhere. He is at it again, seeking fit to "address the nation" on the topic. This, to me, is evidence of NF's megalomania. Only the Monarch or a religious leader has the authority to "address" the nation. 

As for NF's "address", he says of the Henry Nowak murder: "... the rights and privileges of white people matter less than ethnic minorities”, adding that “white lives matter…” and there needs to be “an end to anti-white prejudice”. This echoes what Zia Yusuf, a Reform UK associate of NF, has said elsewhere: “White people are now demonstrably the biggest victims of racism in Britain”.

The Byline Times comments: "Now I’m not sure what definition of “demonstrably” Yusuf and Reform are using here, but official figures demonstrate that black people in the UK are around 16 times more likely to be the victims of racial hate crime, per head of population, than their white counterparts, with Asian people being around nine times more likely".

Not that such details will concern NF. He has other fish to fry. Henry Nowak's father has appealed for calm, but he has been ignored by NF, along with the right-wing press, the Tories, Tommy Robinson and the Far Right. In much the same way, appeals for calm by parents of one of the three murdered Southport girls were ignored by NF and the rioters in Southport, who staged a violent confrontation with police outside the  Southport Mosque, despite the fact that the murderer did not come from a Muslim family. Well, as NF would say, quoting Lenin, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs. NF had his reputation to consider - and an opportunity to exploit, as he has now. I believe he has condemned last night's rioting in Southampton, but I cannot find any trace of it. What is remembered of NF's address is his call for the public to act with "pure, cold rage". There is a picture of it below.

This leads to a question that has not been examined yet. In fact, I haven't seen any comment about it anywhere. The riots that happened in Southampton last night concern me because they have been organised suspiciously quickly. I don't know how many of the rioters were locals, but I remember that, during the post-murder riots in Southport, 2024, the majority of the rioters were said to be outsiders, inspired and mobilised in part by Daniel Thomas ("Tommo"), an associate of Tommy Robinson, who was on holiday in Cyprus.

Well, Tommy Robinson was present at the protest/riots in Southampton last night. Thanks to Searchlight magazine, we know that other far Right luminaries: Paul Golding (Britain First); Nick Tenconi (UKIP); "Tommo" and Laurence Fox were also present. And there were overtly fascist and neo-Nazi elements in the crowd. Searchlight says here: 

"Then, following a call from Robinson himself that Digwa’s family should be driven out of Southampton, the demonstration moved towards Digwa’s family home in Portiswood.

Now, the mood and character of the demonstration changed. Masked figures moved to the front, nazi salutes were being thrown and ‘White Power’ was being chanted.

Officers were targeted with stones in St Denys. Bins were set alight and rolled towards police lines. Riot shields went up. Hampshire Constabulary deployed its helicopter, additional riot vans and mounted officers as the situation deteriorated across multiple locations. By late evening, the violence had not abated".

To conclude, I think that we should be concerned that many non-political people are being drawn to such events and are being influenced by extremist ideas. I can only hope that there will be no more riots inspired by the Nowak murder and/or Farage's "two-tier policing" nonsense. I also think that we who oppose right-wing extremism should review our ways of dealing with it. The beast needs to be tamed and caged.

Essa Suleiman and Several Recurring Themes

 

The Golders Green attacks have raised a number of issues of concern. The growth of anti-Semitism is prominent among them, quite rightly. British Jews see it as another manifestation of hatred directed against them and which has caused a number of British Jews to leave Britain for Israel. Richard Manville (see link) told the BBC:

Richard says he now lives in a constant state of anxiety.

"I don't feel safe walking down the street," he says. "I have to look over my shoulder. I'm constantly aware when I drive my car and I'm checking the wing mirrors."
"This isn't happening in a distant place," Richard points out. "It's the United Kingdom. It's England. It's Manchester. It's Salford. And it's round the corner to me."

Richard is not an isolated case, As The Guardian reported:

"British Jews feel under siege and worry about their children displaying religious symbols in public, community leaders have said. There have been a series of attempted arson attacks at Jewish sites ... including incidents at two synagogues in London and one at a building used by the charity Jewish Futures. Four Jewish community ambulances were also set on fire in north London in the early hours of 23 March. Parents are picking children up from stations, fearing drop-offs at nurseries and schools, and choosing universities based on safety rather than academic fit. Some avoid wearing religious or Hebrew symbols, while many think twice before attending large Jewish events".

The concern for the safety of British Jews is set to have political consequences. Keir Starmer has said that there is a case for some protest marches against Israel to be banned. As the BBC reports today:

"Asked if he wanted tougher policing of language used during marches, or if he wanted to stop some protests altogether, Sir Keir Starmer told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I think certainly the first, and I think there are instances for the latter."

The "instances" include chants which call for violence against Jews. I doubt that policing of language will go unchallenged, as, unless the chants and slogans are overt calls for violence, forms of words can be interpreted in different ways. But it needs to be discussed.

Another issue is that of the anti-Zionist lobby and their role in promoting, or rather not promoting, anti-Semitism. Stop the War Coalition says:

" We believe that the statements by Jonathan Hall KC, suggesting that the Palestine marches should be subject to a ‘moratorium’ because of the series of antisemitic attacks in North London, are unacceptable. 

We condemn unequivocally these attacks, as we do all forms of antisemitism and racism. No one should be attacked for their race or religion. 

...Our marches are against the treatment of the Palestinians in Gaza in protest at the role of the Israeli government, and the complicity of the British government in these attacks. 

These marches are supported by many Jewish people who attend. They are not the ‘hate marches’ described by right wing politicians but expressions of solidarity and support for those under attack".

Now, I have maintained from October 7th, 2023, that the whole Gaza tragedy was deliberately provoked by Hamas, who launched vicious attacks against Israel in the full knowledge that there would be a ferocious Israeli reaction. I believed then, and believe now, that Hamas wanted to lure Israel into a war of attrition which would bring international opprobrium, with the possible beneficial side-effects of (1) widening the conflict and (2) causing political and social turmoil in the lands of Israel's allies. I hardly need to spell out that, thanks to considerable help from Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, the first of these strategic aims has been remarkably successful. The rise of anti-Semitism and pro-Palestinian activity in the UK are examples of the success of the second strategic aim.

Hamas knew they could count on support from pro-Palestinian organisations in the lands of their enemies. This is not to say that organisations such as Stop the War support Hamas directly, but they can be relied upon to side against Israel. After 7/10/23, had Israel held back from retaliation and just fired one artillery shell into Gaza, killing one dog in a Palestinian family's back yard, Stop the War and others would have been demonstrating in London, protesting against this wicked Zionist murder of a family pet. This does not mean that I blame anti-Zionist organisations and individuals for the rise in anti-Semitism, but their campaigning, combined with the Gaza and Iran wars themselves, has undoubtedly raised the political temperature whereby real antisemites, be they fascists, IRGC/Hamas supporters or just plain anti-social psychotic thugs, feel empowered to attack Jews.

Which leads me to my last cause of concern: the man in the picture above, Essa Suleiman. Regular readers of this blog know that one of my recurring themes has been, and still is, the unprovoked attacks on innocent members of the public by dangerous mental health patients. This issue continues to haunt us, as we have seen in the inquiry into the Valdo Calocane murders in Nottingham, June 2023. At the inquiry, a former psychiatric nurse, Gary Carter said of the triple murderer, Calocane: 

"Asked what went wrong with Calocane's care in the community, he said he had learned 95% of what he knew about Calocane since the fatal attacks in June 2023.
"Basically, this man in a nutshell, he lied, he deceived, he out-manoeuvred medical staff in particular, on the ward and in the community. He wasn't honest," he said.

It looks as if something similar happened with Essa Suleiman. If anything, his being at liberty is even more baffling, as he had a history of violence, a hatred of Jews and mental instability. 

In December 2008, when (incredibly) working as a security guard at a primary school, he was jailed for 9 years for stabbing two policemen and an Alsatian police dog.
Besides this, it has been reported that he had other convictions for assaults on police officers. He had been referred to the Prevent deradicalisation programme in 2020, but it was - obviously - unsuccessful. There are also reports that he haunted vigils held for the hostages formerly held by Hamas in Gaza, where he was verbally and physically abusive towards Jews.

As for his mental instability, the Jerusalem Post says:

"In court on Friday, it was revealed that Suleiman was living in supported accommodation for people discharged from a secure hospital. South London and Maudsley NHS Trust then confirmed that Suleiman was under the care of their mental health services until the start of this week".

The similarities with the Valdo Calocane case are pretty clear to me. We can only be thankful the the three knife attacks he carried out last Wednesday did not result in three deaths, as did those carried out by Calocane. In turn, let's hope that the victims make a full recovery, that there will be a full investigation into why Suleiman was at liberty and serious action taken to prevent dangerous individuals like him being released from secure incarceration.

Donald Trump: Who's a Nice Guy?

 

I didn't actually want to write another blog post about DT so soon, but present events make it necessary. As we know, Trump's war against Iran has not gone according to plan, even though he does not admit it. Instead, he has followed the rule espoused by an old secondary school teacher of mine: "When in the wrong, attack!". Most offensive to most people, of course (i.e. all Roman Catholics), are Trump's denouncements of the first American Pope. DT has accused the pontiff of being "WEAK on Crime and terrible for Foreign Policy" in a long Truth Social post. He later said to reporters he was "not a big fan". He has been scathing of Keir Starmer and NATO over what he sees as lack of support for his undeclared war with Iran, His insult to British and NATO casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan have caused considerable (and justified!) resentment. Even the Royal British Legion, not known for taking a critical stance in political matters, issued a critical missive refuting Trump' remarks. 457 British soldiers were killed in Afghanistan, yet, according to Trump:

"They'll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan ...and they did, they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines".

In my previous post, I said that Trump would turn on his domestic critics in the US, should the war go against him. I was wrong. He is moving against them now. As "The Hill" reported, his first targets were the Democrat Party:

“The Radical Left Democrats, a Party that has completely lost its way, are complaining bitterly about the very necessary and important attack, by the United States and Israel, on Iran,” Trump wrote in a Monday evening Truth Social post.
“What most people understand is that they are only complaining BECAUSE I DID IT and, if I didn’t do it, they would be screaming — Why didn’t ‘TRUMP’ attack Iran, he should do it, IMMEDIATELY? There’s nothing surprising about this!” the president added.

Even former supporters have received the lash of his tongue. The BBC says here:

"In launching his attack on four conservative commentators who have been critical of the joint US-Israeli war against Iran, Donald Trump wrote that they were "stupid people" and that "nobody cares about them"...The US president singled out two former popular Fox News evening-programme hosts, Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, and right-wing conspiracy theorists Alex Jones and Candace Owens, for criticism".

US citizens who oppose the war should beware; DT's hostility is bound to get worse.

But no-one has noticed Trump's latest insult - this time to an American singer, long-venerated by fans of heavy metal, heavily disguised though it may be. He has been threatening Iran again. His war of choice has not gone his way, despite his blustering and absurd claims of victory. He has said:

"My Representatives are going to Islamabad, Pakistan - They will be there tomorrow evening, for Negotiations," he writes on social media.
"We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran," he adds. Warning there will be "NO MORE MR NICE GUY" if talks fail, Trump says these bridges and power plants will "come down fast, they’ll come down easy".

Have you spotted the insult? The metal music reference was a clue. "No More Mr Nice Guy" is an old metal standard by that grand old stager, Alice Cooper. How he must feel being quoted by Trump is beyond imagination. Known to Rock history as "The Godfather of Shock Rock", Alice is 78 years old and unlikely to be fazed by any snide references by Donald Trump. As a lyrics writer myself, I wouldn't like one of my songs to be quoted by Trump. I do hope Alice replies, musically for preference.

Now, there has been a lot of speculation about Donald Trump's mental health. As Ariano Baio says in The Independent:

Ty Cobb, an attorney who served as White House counsel during President Donald Trump’s first term, once again raised alarm bells at the president’s cognitive decline, claiming it has “accelerated” and that Trump now shows signs of dementia. Cobb, who has repeatedly raised similar concerns about Trump, told MS NOW’s Ari Melber Thursday that Trump, 79, “is somebody who is just lost.”
“His vocabulary has shrunk, he’s resorted to profanity and threats, totally impulsive– suggestive of the absence of any frontal lobe controls,” Cobb said.

I am sure that is accurate, but. speaking personally, Trump remains an example of what can happen when the type of bloke that we in the UK would call "the pub loudmouth" is put in charge. This is the type, usually right-wing, usually racist, who stands at the bar and propounds all manner of evils that he could resolve at a stroke. I suppose a US version of the term would be "Barfly"? I am informed that DT is teetotal, but he's still the type. The pub loudmouth usually has a coterie of admirers who feed his ego and no criticism from any outsider is allowed. Does this not sound like Donald Trump, albeit on a smaller scale? And we can all see that Trump is failing to learn a lesson that the pub loudmouth never has to face - the fact that simple solutions lead to far more complex problems.

I am well aware that some people will criticise me for treating what is a highly serious matter with a degree of levity. No levity is intended about a conflict that Donald Trump wanted and which has led to the deaths of thousands of people. Wikipedia reports up to 3, 636 dead in Iran alone. By no means am I seeking to trivialise this war, but I hope that one thing is clear: it is absurd for Donald Trump to speak of "No More, Mr Nice Guy", when his actions before and during this war prove him to be nothing of the kind.

Alice Cooper - will he be a nice guy to Trump?

Donald Trump - His Legacy

 

Donald Trump, like the rest of us, is not getting any younger. As a not-so-venerable old age approaches him, perhaps we can come to an assessment of the man and his future legacy. In other words, how will we remember him?

I think we will remember him, putting it simply, as The Master of Disaster. Looking back over what he has done in his two terms as US President, there is ample evidence to support his claim to that title. Not that the disasters he has caused have affected him personally, of course. He retains supreme confidence in his abilities, as do a depressingly large number of people in the USA, and here. This is in spite of the fact that he has besmirched the office of President with a long list of unpleasant incidents, allegations and, putting it delicately, legal difficulties. Cosmopolitan has listed most of them:

1970s: Discrimination against Black renters

1980s: Sexual misconduct allegations begin

September 2005: Trump is caught on tape advocating “grabbing women by the pussy”

April 2016: Trump is accused of raping a 13-year-old girl 

October 2016: A journalist accuses Trump of assaulting her in Mar-a-Lago

21 June 2019: E Jean Carroll accuses Trump of raping her in a department store 

And, of course, it does not stop there. Among others, there are the murky affairs of alleged Russian interference in he 2016 election campaign, the Hush money payment  to Stormy Daniels and the allegation that he incited the Capitol building riot of January 6, 2021, by his supporters. Now, Trump has pleaded not guilty in all these matters, and has, in some cases, been exonerated by the senate and/or the US Supreme Court, but this is hardly a record to be proud of. I would argue that this is a disaster of itself, and I can only wonder at how he has survived into his second presidential term.

But it does not end there. Into his second term, Trump has responded to populist demands in two ways. He has released all the rioters convicted after the Capitol riots, overturning the decision of the courts and showing contempt for the US Capitol police who faced that riot and the feelings of the relatives of the five policemen who lost their lives as a result of that riot - four by suicide. If no-one else, it was certainly a disaster for those relatives. It also calls into question Trump's respect for his country's democratic traditions by what can only be described as his condoning of anti-democratic political violence.

The second way Trump has pandered to the wishes of his admirers is by unleashing the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), in a hunt for illegal aliens. As we know, ICE agents have conducted themselves like an occupying army in their own country, using violent tactics when carrying out arrests and being confronted by protesters. ICE have done their work so enthusiastically, that they have even arrested US citizens - and shot two dead. I am sure that many US citizens would concur with my view that Trump has been a human relations disaster for the United States. I can only offer my support to all such sane Americans - especially since Trump has admirers here who would like to emulate his "achievements".

But, having caused disaster in the USA, Trump seems to have decided to impact internationally. He has made some surprisingly ineffective efforts to end the war in Ukraine. He has made statements that appeared to menace the independence of Greenland. There was his Boys' Own adventure into Venezuela, where, as we all know, US Special forces made an illegal entry into that country and arrested its president. He then imposed his terms upon Venezuela, justifying it by saying he was protecting the interests of the USA. 

This Venezuelan affair, I would argue, has led to Trump's biggest disaster yet. Because he, to his satisfaction, "succeeded" in dealing with an apparent Venezuela threat, he has jumped to the conclusion that he could carry out a similar short, sharp, operation against Iran. It's becoming clear that is not going to happen. Like a good PC war games player, Trump has listed all the "victories" of the US/Israeli action so far: the missile strikes, the Iranian missile sites destroyed, the liquidation of the Iranian leadership, etc.  

Alas for Trump the PC wargamer - the Iranian regime isn't playing by the same set of rules. Despite fearful punishment, the fighting arm of the Iranian government - the Revolutionary Guard - is still fighting. And, as we know, the Middle East is ablaze with missile strikes from both sides. Al Jazeera says:

"So far, Iran has launched strikes across nine countries in the region: Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. An Iranian drone also struck a runway at a UK military base in Cyprus".

And, in just 14 days, thousands of people have been killed and injured. The worst casualties, of course, have been in Iran. According to Al-Jazeera , 1,444 Iranians have been killed and 18,551 injured - so far. For an up-to-date casualty list in all countries involved, click on THIS LINK. 

Now, as regular readers of this blog know, I absolutely detest the dictatorship in Iran. I shall shed no tears for any casualties they suffer, but widespread killing of civilians is not the way to change a government. If anything, the regime will be strengthened by the common suffering inflicted upon the Iranian population. Trump has shown himself to be be utterly insensitive on this matter to the point of stupidity. He previously encouraged the Iranian people to rise against their government and promised to send help. He didn't. Then, after this war began, he said:

"...to the great, proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand. Stay sheltered. Don’t leave your home. It’s very dangerous outside. Bombs will be dropping everywhere".

Nobody seems to have told him that houses are not bomb proof and cannot withstand direct hits from either bombs or missiles. The school building certainly didn't protect 168 children who were killed at the Minab elementary school. Mass casualties are not the best way to make friends and influence people. The new Ayatollah Khameni is hardly likely to want to negotiate with the people who killed his father. The economic war against America's allies will continue, perhaps leading to a worldwide recession. This war is already a human and economic disaster - and is set to get worse.

But back to the Donald himself. If the war goes to his satisfaction, he will become even more confident that he has a role to play on the world stage. Greenland, Mexico and Ukraine could well become targets for his imperial ambitions. World War Three could become a lot more likely to happen.

However, if, as is more likely, the war does not go his way, he will immediately start to find scapegoats. He will blame allies, especially the UK, for not supporting him properly. He might turn on the Iranians, blaming them for not seizing their chance to rid themselves of the Mullahs. He will blame everyone but himself, apologising for nothing and explaining nothing. The human(and humanitarian) disaster he has inflicted upon the world will mean nothing to him. But he won't stop there...

If Trump's war fails, I have no doubt that he will seek every kind of retribution against opponents and critics of the war in the United States itself. He will regard them as traitors and saboteurs, absolving himself of any blame, and be out for what he sees as justified revenge. And this will be nothing new. In September last year, Anthony Zurcher of the BBC In Depth wrote:

 

"Donald Trump swept back into the White House this year promising, among other things, retribution against his perceived enemies. Nine months later, the unprecedented scope of that pledge – or threat – is fully taking shape.
He has vocally encouraged his attorney general to target political opponents. He has suggested the government should revoke TV licences to bring a biased mainstream media to heel. He has targeted law firms he sees as adversaries, pulling government security clearances and contracts".

Reuters looked at this in detail, saying that Trump had 470 people who had upset him in his first stint as President, and afterwards, marked down for retribution. They commented:

"The Trump vengeance campaign fuses personal vendettas with a drive for cultural and political dominance, Reuters found. His administration has wielded executive power to punish perceived foes – firing prosecutors who investigated his bid to overturn the 2020 election, ordering punishments of media organizations seen as hostile, penalizing law firms tied to opponents, and sidelining civil servants who question his policies. Many of those actions face legal challenges".

All this was bad enough, but, should Trump fail over Iran, his campaign against those he perceives as being internal enemies will be much worse. He will bring his disaster home, and blame others for it.

To conclude, I know that some people will say that I have only scratched the surface of this topic. Perhaps, but I intended to show why I believe Trump to be eligible for the title of "The Master of Disaster", and I hope that I have succeeded.

Mind you, there could well be someone who is happy at Trump's (mis)adventure in the Middle East. Guess who...