SYNERGY Friday 20th March — Friday 17th April 2015
This month including; A brief history of ISIS The War on Terror Golden Dawn Economic Overview
Emily Whiteley & Ben Stoddart
THE WAR ON TERROR Since 2001, the War on Terror has been an international military campaign against the threat of Islamic terrorist organisations such as al Qaeda and ISIL. However, it is arguable that the “war” is costing the participants (and society) more than bargained for. If we were to cut straight to the initial issue- and arguably the government's most important issue- this 14 year, and ongoing, crisis has caused an almost unspoken economic liability in which billions of dollars have been spent on the protection of America alone (not to mention the addition of the war efforts making it trillions). Now, if we put that aside, we are left with the inhumane and unspoken tragedies. Since when was it excusable to murder, not only uninvolved civilians, but the unlawful execution of three American citizens, such as the son of Anwar al-Awlaki, who posed no threat. (You know what they say... you cut your nose off to spite your face) These deaths were subject of one of many drone strikes, such as one in Yemen which has been proven to actually double recruitment of al-Qaeda so perhaps more problems are created then solved, with inexcusable bloodshed. Arguably, this war is indoctrinating the public with the message that torture of prisoners in places such as Guantanamo Bay is for our sake. Please, tell me again how rape and sexual abuse of people who are already imprisoned is protecting us? Another important question to be asking is: if a terrorism is defined as “the use of violence and intimidation for the pursuit of political aims” what makes our agendas so different? (If hypocrisy was a crime I can name a few world leaders who’d be in trouble - or using their advantages of power to avoid the punishments…) I’m beginning to question whether this is a battle worth fighting...
INSIDE THIS ISSUE Inside Story............................................................................................................2 Inside Story............................................................................................................2 Inside Story............................................................................................................3 Inside Story............................................................................................................3 Inside Story............................................................................................................4 Inside Story............................................................................................................4
The war on terror, a subject that seems very relevant to discuss after the disgusting events that took place in France over recent weeks. Myself being to the right of the political spectrum seems to be torn away from my normal political viewpoint on a few issues, this being one, where I take a much more liberal stance on the situation. I strongly believe that the war on terror is a false one and one that was fuelled massively by a poor and overly aggressive western foreign policy throughout the last 40 years. I very much take a viewpoint that if a country has an issue that is not directly affecting us, we should not get involved. We have seen it time and time again with endless Middle Eastern conflicts, unbelievable cost, and unbelievable blood loss with frankly very little to show for it. I feel that the impact of western intervention in the Middle East has caused a vicious back class and placed us in a vicious cycle of terror and hatred. The thing that is definitive for me is if I was in the place of the young men in the Middle East feeling under constant watch from western military what reason would I have not to take up arms and fight back, I can’t think of any and I doubt many people will...
Inside Story............................................................................................................4
SPECIAL POINTS OF INTEREST
Briefly highlight your point of interest here.
Briefly highlight your point of interest here.
Briefly highlight your point of interest here.
Briefly highlight your point of interest here.
Photo courtesy of: http://www.stencilrevolution.com/ photopost/2012/09/Soldiers-Painting-Peace-by-Banksy.jpg
Catherine Mullier
Golden Dawn While many of you may be content knowing only about the far-right parties Britain has to offer (we do have quite a variety to choose from), I really think you should ask yourself: are you truly content limiting yourself to just these ones when there are so many other options out there? One such example is the party that I’m going to introduce you to today that is so extreme (they’re basically Nazis) they make UKIP look pathetic in comparison. www.thebusinessinsider.com
In the wake of a left wing party’s victory in Greece it would be easy to forget about Golden Dawn (Greece’s neo-Nazi party that won around 10% of the vote in the European elections) but I really don’t think we should. Describing them as Nazis does seem a little over -the-top, I will admit but, after looking at the following evidence, I rather think it’s justified: -their slogan when they ran for the Greek elections in May 2012 was ‘So we can rid this land of filth.’ -many of their members are currently under investigation/have been arrested because the Golden Dawn party is categorised as a ‘criminal gang’ -’several high profile members were found to have Nazi memorabilia in their homes’-The Telegraph -Ilias Kasidiaris, a Golden Dawn MP and spokesman, is known to have a swastika tattoo -Ilias Panagiotaras, another MP, said that Hitler was a ‘great personality’ and described homosexuality as a ‘sickness’ -their symbol is an ancient Greek symbol, curiously similar to a swastika I mean, normally a political party who are this unashamedly pro-Nazi would be almost laughably ridiculous, but they have a significant voter base that could be set to keep on expanding. As if that isn’t bad enough on its own, this trend of far-right parties gaining support is happening all across Europe and, if I’m honest, there’s really nothing funny about it at all.
Hannah Thomson
Struggle vs Speculation Sia's latest hit single 'Elastic Heart' was released on the 7th January 2015. The video has since gained over 105 million hits on YouTube and generated great media attention in both positive and negative lights. The video, directed by Sia and Daniel Askill, features the same dancer, Maddie Ziegler whom was used in Sia's 'Chandelier' video in 2014 but with the addition of actor Shia Labeouf. The two dancers perform a contemporary fight dance that sees both Ziegler, aged 12 and Labeouf, aged 30, interacting with each other in a very suggestive manner. It is the intimate atmosphere within the routine that has led to controversial views on not only the video but actor Shia Labeouf himself with accusations of him being a paedophile being generated through the press. Sia personally apologised for these comments by tweeting ‘I anticipated some ‘paedophilia!!!’ cries for this video’ and went on to also say how her ‘intention was to create some emotional and artistic content, not to upset anybody’. The general public's interpretation of the video was immediately negative. Speculation grew and conformed into ideas of Labeouf playing a sexual predator, Maddie’s character being groomed because of the 18 year age gap and the video began to be labelled as creepy, inappropriate and uncomfortable but still continued to climb the charts, debuting at no.17 but reaching no.3, and quickly gaining views on YouTube. The videos concept and driving force was to mirror the themes of struggle and relationships between a parent and a child as the song’s lyrics regard Sia’s relationship with her own father.
Choreographer, Ryan Heffenton, set out to create a ‘spontaneous and dynamic art form’ as he revealed in an interview with YouTube channel ‘DanceOn’ that the dancers were actually playing the same person just in different self-states. Maddie represented childhood and Labeouf adulthood with the general message being that your childhood will always leave you behind. This was expressed by the cage acting like a skull and the two dancers fighting to remain together but ends with Ziegler leaving Labeouf in the cage with him desperately reaching out for her. It was both Sia and Shia that came up with the concept for the routine as both artists believe in the ‘healing power of art’ and Shia went on to say, in the same interview for ‘DanceOn’ that ‘being here to make art is some sort of redemptive thing for myself’. It was said that Sia chose Labeouf to feature in the video because he could bring the emotional ark that she needed because of what he was experiencing in his personal life. She wanted to ‘push the boundaries and have someone lay their soul on film’ and the unique collaboration between the actor and young dancer highlights this perfectly. The idea that the automatic reaction to this video was adverse and unfavourable raises the question of where does the line between art and inappropriateness lie? As a modern society we overlooked the delicate relationship that a person holds with themselves and disregarded the complex beauty of love and struggle and instead quickly generated paedophilic connotations because of the gender and age differences.
THE MODERN SIGNIFICANCE OF PROPAGANDA Hanna Baker As everyone knows, the influence of the internet has spread like wildfire across the world in the past 20 years. This is nothing new. Another fact that everyone is already aware of is how major media companies have used subtle (and sometimes blatant) propaganda to spread views for a long time. In particular, people tend to think of the brash posters of the 1940s, advocating the war effort against the Germans in numerous ways. Some of us will also tend to think of the news, and the fact that we may be influenced by reporters to think a certain way. It’s not quite as outrageous as a 1940s poster, but it’s still noticeable.
“All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is con-
However, nothing quite compares to how quickly people have taken to voicing their opinion via social media websites, and it’s often easy to forget how many views things can accumulate online, regardless of how many followers you post it to. The sensation of funny videos and pictures being the sole things to go viral was a modern development. Now, we see that the same platforms are spreading more serious topics.
stant pressure to make peo-
To give an example, I will use Charlie Hebdo. The atrocious attack on the magazine company was something documented well and thoroughly by the news - however, the biggest report on the issue seemingly came from twitter. Within two hours of the attack, #jesuischarlie had been tweeted 20,000 times, causing it to trend.The numbers only doubled as time went by.
can have is to ratify decisions
And while this is on one hand a marvellous thing for young people - it is incredibly important to be aware of world issues, after all - there is also a downside. Simultaneously, whilst the amount of support and sorrow for the victims of the attack rose, so did a murmur about islam. Alongside #jesuischarlie, the words ‘muslim’ and ‘jihad’ were trending within the same space of time. Let me remind you that this was only two hours after the attack had taken place, and despite the fact that the two convicted of the attack did end up being extremists, there were many factors within two hours that could not have been determined. E.G: what was the state of their mental health? What was their family background like? Had they ever previously had issues with editors of the magazine? Similarly, at the same time, a video on facebook was getting mass attention. This video documents a speech given by a woman, about why the peaceful majority is irrelevant if there is a minority which are ruthless. Although I couldn’t find the original facebook video that was shared onto my timeline, it’s on youtube under the name of ‘Brigitte Gabriel educates moderate muslims’ with nothing shy of 100,000 views. The argument that Gabriel gives is not a bad argument at all - however, it is dangerous if spread within the first few hours of an attack before any real information has been gathered or dispersed to the public. All we knew at the time was that the attack was conducted by two men, and they were both muslim. This is not enough to classify it as a terrorist attack, by any definition. There was plenty of evidence to suggest that it was, but simply not enough to guarantee. The reason this is worrying is because it means people will begin to doubt the peaceful majority of the muslim population, as a result of two people (who at this point, may or may not have been mentally unstable) yet, if the same thing were to happen with a christian terrorist attack (For example, the ones in Norway in 2011) the outcome would be massively different. On the day of the Norwegian attack, there was not a single trend about christian extremists (not even in the later hours). Discrimination becomes clear when isolated events are compared, and the thing which fuels discrimination is negative propaganda and internalised racism. What point am I trying to make by all of this? Well, simply that the people who spread propaganda are no longer those in government positions. It is now a tool that is accessible to all sectors of the public, no matter what their educational, political, or religious background is.
ple feel that they are helpless, that the only role they and to consume.” - Naom Chomsky
A Brief History of ISIS “There was never a good war or a bad peace.” Benjamin Franklin Anna Lamche On the third of February 2015, Jordanian pilot Muadh al-Kasasbeh was set alight while locked in a cage by members of ISIS. A video of his violent death was posted online and Fox News even embedded the full 22-minute video on their website, their justification being viewers must ‘see for themselves the barbarity of ISIS’. However, one cannot consider the terrorism of ISIS in isolation. To truly understand the conflict, we must delve into the complex history of the Middle East. We will begin in 1999, although this is by no means the very beginning of ISIS. Established by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, ISIS began originally as a militant group known as Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad. In 2004, its name was changed to al-Queda in Iraq (AQI) after pledging allegiance to Osama bin Laden’s network. After the American Invasion of Iraq in 2003 toppled Saddam Hussein, the AQI played a key role in the Iraqi Insurgency. At the time, AQI had a lot of support for the Countries’ minority, the Sunnis. The Sunnis were furious both with the Americans who had removed Saddam Hussein (a Sunni) from power and the Shias who had taken over the government. AQI seemed to be an alternative force representing the Sunnis. However, the AQI did not just want to rid Iraq of America’s presence. They aimed to create a very traditional Islamic State. The AQI banned music, smoking, and even the cutting of women’s hair. AQI began beheading civilians who disobeyed their strict rules. By 2006, AQI had completely lost the support of the Sunni Muslims. They were simply too brutal. The Sunnis partnered with US forces to push AQI from the country. AQI were defeated but undestroyed. By 2008, AQI become heavily involved in the fighting in Syria. Their tactics were so brutal and their ambitions so grand that Al Qaeda disavowed any ties with the group. Those who had formerly called themselves AQI renamed themselves ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. In a letter written to David Cameron by the Islamic Society of Britain and the Association of Muslim Lawyers it was made clear that ISIS had no real ties with Islam. “it is neither Islamic, nor is it a State. The group has no standing with faithful Muslims, nor among the international community of nations,” they wrote. Back in Iraq, the Prime Minister Nouri alMaliki had been ruling on Sectarian lines. He was a Shi’ite Muslim who had set about empowering the Shias and violently breaking up Sunni parties and arresting Sunni politicians. The minority Sunni
population began to hate and fear Prime Minister Maliki. And so, when ISIS returned, they did so as the Sunni Champions against a punitive government. Gradually, ISIS grew strong enough to challenge the Iraqi government in Mosul, a mainly Sunni city. When roughly 1,500 ISIS soldiers challenged almost 30,000 Iraqi Army troops in Mosul, most of the Iraqi troops fled. As the majority of the troops were Sunni, they refused to fight and die for a government who did not care for them. And so ISIS continues to act in Sunni territory. Only a tiny percentage of Sunnis actively support ISIS goals. They allow the organization to act in their territory because they are an alternative to the often brutal Shi-ite government. There have been those in the media that have seemed to blame all Muslims for terror. In the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks in January, Rupert Murdoch tweeted: ‘Maybe most Moslems peaceful, but until they recognize and destroy their growing jihadist cancer they must be held responsible’. We must remember that every religion has its extremist minorities. The KKK existed as a terror organization and yet it has never been synonymous with Christianity. The vast majority of all people who practice any religion are peaceful. This we must strive to remember. *Note: More recently, ISIS had been referred to as ISIL in the Western media. ISIL is an acronym for Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.
‘Levant’ is a more general term referring to a region stretching from southern Turkey through Syria to Egypt. It also includes Lebanon, Israel, some Palestinian territories and Jordan. Sources: picture 1: The AQI flag (not the ISIS flag) : http://archive.adl.org picture 2: Iraqi security forces fled as IS advanced into the city of Mosul: http://www.bbc.co.uk picture 3: source: screenshot of Rupert Murdoch’s tweet. Picture 4: http://www.globalresearch.ca/
Chloe Daniel
Five things which shaped the world we live in today
Pearl Harbor- On 7th December 1941 the Japanese Navy attacked an American naval base in Pearl Harbour. It was a turning point in world history because it was after this event that America decided to join world war two. This arguably changed the course of the war. Not only that but it changed America's role in the world forever. Prior to Pearl Harbor America had been isolationist however they could never go back to being this way after intervening in the war.
The 1960’s- The 1960’s as a whole was a pretty amazing decade. It changed the way that we view both culture and politics today. Fashion changed and many styles still worn today such as the mini skirt were created. Politics also changed massively in this decade, the civil rights movement took off dramatically and the Space Race and Cold War were at their height.
Assassination of Franz Ferdinand- trigger of events leading to the start of ww1. Ferdinand was the heir to the Austro- Hungarian throne. Sarajevo in Bosnia had been annexed by Hungary, which Serbia wasn’t happy about. Ferdinand was visiting the army in Sarajevo. The assassins planned to assassinate Ferdinand along the main road, he decided to return home however no one told the driver that the route had changed, he therefore had to stop the car and turn around. Here Ferdinand was shot. Austria Hungary then declared an ultimatum on Serbia which was rejected so they then declared war on them.
Fall of the Berlin wall- The Berlin wall cut off West Berlin from East Berlin and East Germany. It was known as the Iron Curtain. The wall divided Germany from 1961- November 9th 1989. Families were torn apart and people trying to cross the wall risked their own life, they were often shot. The fall of the wall was significant because it meant the Soviets now had less of a grip over Eastern Europe, the cold war was drawing to a close.
Invention of the internet- The internet was invented by Tim Berners- Lee in 1989. The internet has changed the lives of many people and will continue to change the lives of those to come. The internet means humans are now able to do things which would have never have been deemed possible before. We can now buy clothes and food without even having to leave our house. We also now have a constant access to information anytime and anywhere.
Economic Overview: UK & USA Matty Morrell
The subject of economics is often misinterpreted by many individuals; in hindsight it is the social science which examines economic activity to gain an understanding of factors which are accountable for the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services in an economy by agents in a geographical location. These agents include firms, government and individuals. The United Kingdom has the sixth largest economy by measurement of GDP (as depicted by the International Monetary Fund) at 2.678 trillion USD (2013). GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is the monetary value of all goods and services within an economy- calculated upon an annual basis. The current UK inflation rate is decreasing due to the current low price levels of fuel and energy; this has brought the UK’s inflationary rate to a record low at 0.3%. The Bank of England whom controls inflation rates as part of a monetary policy. Inflation is a rise in goods and services which consumers purchase. The current target for inflation is 2% this allows a gradual expansion of the economy and induces growth. The forecast for the inflation rate is negative for the UK , Trading Economics predict that by quarter 2 of 2015 the inflation rate will contract to –0.3%
The economy however is improving upon an employment basis whereby the level of unemployment fell by 97,000 to 1.86 million in the three months leading to December- the current unemployment rate is 5.7% which compares to 6.3 in May 2014. The level of pay including bonuses has also increased by 2.1%. In comparison to the UK economy, the US is the largest economy with a GDP of 16.678 USD (as depicted by International Monetary Fund). The US inflation rate is -0.1% (deflation) this suggests that the economy’s prices are detracting and economic growth is tightening rather than expanding. The unemployment rate for the US is 5.5% this depicts a healthy image as the US have a larger population than the UK therefore implying that more work is available within the US economy. In hindsight the current low energy and fuel prices have impacted negatively upon both the UK and the US in terms of inflation (or deflation in US’s case). Deflation is a decreasing price in goods and services, this is initially seen as positive due to an increase in public expenditure. However firms will be supplied with less and if deflation persists then wages and government expenditure will also follow the decreasing trend and can lead to a downturn in the economy.