Lost in Translation: Dan Hardie and his pal Ed Vaizey

"It seems almost incredible that after the catastrophe of the Iraq war, but the signs are growing that the Bush administration wants to do it all over again- this time to Iran", writes Seumas Milne in today's Guardian.

It is indeed incredible, but what is even more incredible is that a group of self-styled 'anti-war' bloggers, led by a attention-seeking drama queen named Dan Hardie, seem to think that the most urgent issue facing the anti-war movement is not stepping up public pressure to prevent a war on Iran, but linking arms with pro-war neo-cons in a campaign to grant asylum to Iraqi interpreters who worked for an illegal occupying army.

I've already commented on the rather dubious 'anti-war' credentials of those promoting this particular campaign, here and here. But whatever credibility Hardie et al do have as 'anti-war' campaigners, have surely gone for good when it's been revealed that among the speakers at the group's meeting next week is the notoriously pro-war MP for Wantage, and signatory to the principles of the Henry Jackson Society, Ed Vaizey.

There are, as Mick Hall comments here, much wider implications to this story that go beyond the translators in question.
The campaign takes the focus away from the disastrous invasion of Iraq, and holding those responsible accountable in a court of law- and also, just as importantly, away from the plans being hatched, right at this very minute, for another illegal assualt on Iran.
And, as The Exile has pointed out, the campaign gives the warmongers a last chance to claim a 'victory' and a propaganda coup out of the collosal death and destruction they have caused in Iraq.
A propos of the interpreters campaign, Mick Hall asks:

"It would be interesting to know who originally dropped this particular pebble into the WWW/media pond. Could it have been someone at the heart of the US or UK Administrations?".

The involvement of the Henry Jackson Society in the campaign strongly suggests that Mick's suspicions could be right.


UPDATE. Surprise, surprise: it seems that the government has caved in and will be offering asylum to the intepreters. Little matter that the public has had no say in the matter, and that the cost will be met by taxpayers, the majority of whom never wanted the Iraq war in the first place. And of course, there will no rights of asylum for the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, who did not collaborate with an illegal, occupying army and whose lives have been turned upside down by the invasion.