http://www.presstv.ir/live.html

The present period is similar to all others within the era. The dominant imperialist power, the United States, actively engages in all those traditional types of imperialist activities and more to maintain and enlarge its worldwide military, economic, cultural and political empire. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. has intensified its campaign of wars and interference against smaller countries, consolidated its military presence in Europe through expanding NATO, which it dominates, and now appears ready to single out larger and more powerful countries, in particular China and Russia, that it considers must be brought under U.S. control almost certainly through war unless the people’s anti-war movement can rise to the occasion and stop it.

Through an expanded NATO, the U.S. has brought Europe under its military control or at least into an uneasy compliance. The U.S. continues to strengthen its military presence in Europe with new bases such as the largest ever in Kosovo, which it built after dismembering and conquering Yugoslavia in its final war of the twentieth century and by positioning missile installations along the entire north/south frontier of Eastern Europe.

In Africa, the U.S.-led NATO predatory war against Libya destroyed a regime that was considered not fully annexed within the U.S. Empire. Now, the U.S. brandishes conquered Libya as a spoil of war and stern lesson to all who would defy the dominant power and cosy up to any other, especially China and Russia at this time or have aspirations of independence and sovereign rule. To ensure its continued superiority in Africa, the U.S. military has launched an extensive drone war in country after country and let loose its Special Forces and mercenaries to assassinate and terrorise the continent to ensure it remains within its sphere of influence.

In Asia, the U.S. has destroyed Iraq, annexed the Persian Gulf states, is waging war against Afghanistan and Pakistan, and is preparing similar attacks on Iran and Syria or at least their gradual strangulation and internal destruction through blockades and the use of political and military mercenaries. The U.S. is strengthening its existing military bases throughout the continent and in the South Pacific, continuously adding and consolidating bases and installations such as the new U.S. Marine base in Darwin Australia and the massive new military complex on Jeju Island in the Republic of Korea even in the face of opposition from the vast majority of the people in the area.

The U.S. has convinced the ruling circles of India that their interests are best served through joining the U.S./Japan military alliance to isolate China within Asia.

In Japan, the current dominant section amongst the militarists and ruling political class has promised the U.S. to suppress any opposition to the U.S./Japan military alliance, in particular the anti-war movement in Okinawa that wants U.S. bases removed entirely from its territory. For its own imperialist interests, the current dominant section amongst the Japanese militarists and ruling political class has for the moment decided to strengthen its war alliance with the U.S. and just recently announced the purchase of a fleet of U.S. built and -controlled F-35 stealth fighter jets. The Japanese purchase of F-35s along with other pro-war governments such as Canada effectively finances the U.S. led arms race and prods China, Russia and others to waste the people’s resources by trying to match U.S. weapons, which adds to the economic crisis pounding the world and the scale of destruction imperialist wars will bring.

The U.S. is preparing to poke China and Russia with provocations that will lead to war, most likely involving internal disputes within their countries, utilising independence movements such as those in Taiwan or Tibet, or expanding into a full-blown international conflict a regional dispute in the South China Sea between China and a smaller country. The provocation and response will set the stage for the U.S. to launch large-scale military operations.

The fact that certain U.S. monopolies have extensive economic interests with China that would be disrupted when war breaks out is overwhelmed by the reality that imperialism is inherently adventurist and anti-conscious of the mutual destruction its actions will generate. The ruling imperialist elite believe they can gain more from war than what they may lose. Besides, in the mould of the German Nazis, the U.S. ruling class considers its military power invincible. The first and second world wars proved conclusively the inhuman anti-conscious nature of the imperialist ruling class. It is driven by forces beyond the control of reason and can only be stopped by people everywhere organised into conscious anti-war anti-imperialist movements and governments.

The time to oppose imperialist war is now and not wait for a catastrophic conflict to begin. The objective reality of this era proves that imperialist war is inevitable unless the people empower themselves with an anti-war anti-imperialist movement and government.

The reality that the ruling political class in the country is extremely pro-war and fully engaged and annexed within U.S. imperialism’s global empire and war machine. Two examples give credence to this view:

Any call to use even more resources to interfere in the internal affairs of Syria and prepare conditions both within that country and internationally for a U.S. led NATO military assault and regime change, which would be one more step into the abyss of a catastrophic worldwide imperialist war.

The time to stop war is now!

A Date with Iran: A Cry for Peace
Open letter from Peace Routes

‘That which is false troubles the heart, but truth brings joyous tranquillity’
by the Sufi poet Rumi

At a time when it is increasingly obvious that our Government is leading our nation towards war with Iran, ‘Peace Routes’ extends a hand of friendship to the 75 million people of Iran who live in a country that, as far as we know, has not threatened another nation in centuries.

We wish to see peaceful dialogue between our two nations because only with understanding and deep listening can channels of communication be opened and war avoided. We believe that the current sanctions in place against Iran should be removed as they present obstacles to dialogue which can only be open when both sides speak without prior conditions.

The Iranian people are now living under the shadow of escalating military agression. They have already suffered greatly from the interference of other nations. In 1953, the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh was overthrown and the Western- backed ‘Shah’ was installed, a dictator who ruled for 26 years. In 1980, after the revolution, Iran was invaded by neighbouring Iraq starting a war which lasted for 8 years. This history would explain Iran’s striving to remain free from foreign intervention.

We implore the media to take a responsible attitude by giving factual and balanced reporting that reflects the true situation including the perspective of the Iranian people on current events. This will contribute to cooling the flames of fearful responses to aggression.

‘The past is prophetic in that it asserts loudly that wars are poor chisels for carving peaceful tomorrows.’ Martin Luther King Jr.

In friendship and peace,

Peace Routes

For more information please contact us via

http://www.peaceroutes.blogspot.com/2012/01/date-with-iran-cry-for-peace.html

Some 20,000 staff providing advice on tax returns will hold half-hour walkouts on Monday over alleged moves towards privatisation.

The officers, who work at call centres and enquiry offices, are also planning more action on 31 January, the deadline for online self assessment returns.

The Public and Commercial Services Union said the strikes are against the government’s hiring of two private firms in trials to run call handling.

HMRC denied any plan to outsource jobs.

The year-long trials are being held from February with two companies, Sitel and Teleperformance, at Lillyhall in Cumbria and Bathgate in West Lothian.

The PCS – the largest union representing civil servants – said the trials would pave the way towards privatisation in the department – a claim rejected by the tax office.

“The project is not about outsourcing or replacing HMRC jobs,” a spokesman for the Revenue said. “It is ultimately about finding ways to improve the service we provide to our customers.”

Staff will walk out for 30 minutes from 10:00 GMT, and again at 16:30 GMT. Those on late shifts will also leave half an hour prior to their usual 19:00 GMT finish.

“When jobs in HMRC and the civil service are being cut in their tens of thousands, it is entirely wrong to start handing contracts to private companies,” said Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the PCS.

“Instead of privatising ever more of our public services, the government should be investing in its own staff to ensure they are equipped and trained to provide the essential services they are proud to deliver.”

BBC

Now we see clearly the response of the ailing Western powers which were thrown off kilter as their system of client states creaked, cracked and began to fall apart.

It is war – actual and threatened.

The drumbeats for war with Iran are getting louder, and the escalating provocations by Western capitals are developing a logic of their own.

It admits of no alternative and points in only one direction – towards military conflict.

Or, to put it more accurately, towards open military conflict. The head of Britain’s MI6 has already called for covert military operations in Iran which are, of course, an act of war – and they have been taking place. So are the drone overflights, which are also legally an act of aggression.

Are there great difficulties facing any such venture? There most certainly are. Huge ones, which would make it a disaster of world historic proportions. But it is a false, if comforting, logic which says that on account of such catastrophic consequences war with Iran is unthinkable.

Many will recall that “unthinkable” was the then foreign secretary Jack Straw’s response to the proposition a few years ago. We now know, thanks to the Guardian, that that is no longer the position of the mandarins of the British state. It is, in fact, to sign up our country to a war in advance.

And now we have the British government taking Iran’s English language Press TV station off the Sky platform. The justification will bring a smile even to those who are most inured to the catalogue of double standards applied by the West to the Middle East. There was a mistake, you see, in the original application for a broadcasting licence. It should not have been granted because Press TV is not headquartered in Britain and therefore could not pass the tests for editorial accountability required by the regulator. All fair, impartial and very British is the reasoning. Nothing to do with our bellicose foreign policy.

Except there is the rather glaring inconsistency that CNN, Fox News, etc are also not headquartered in Britain, yet were not only given broadcasting licences but still have them and face no prospect of this impartial rule being applied to them. I don’t know which of David Cameron’s Eton/Oxford-trained chums came up with this wheeze imagining that it would convince anyone, but their parents and the taxpayer have wasted their money on his education.

We already knew, thanks to Wikiileaks, that the British government was assuring its allies in the Middle East and elsewhere that it was investigating all avenues to get Press TV off Sky. One of those allies is, of course, the bloated House of Saud.

With the fall of Mubarak, it has been elevated to the role of gendarme of reaction within the region, invading Bahrain – an act reported seriously only by Press TV – leading interference across the region by the Gulf Co-operation Council, which represents monarchical states including the distinctly non-Gulf Jordan and Morocco, under the shameless guise of promoting “democracy,” and fomenting murderous sectarian division aimed at weakening Iran and anyone who supports its independence.

This is the same House of Saud which received $30 billion of war lanes the other week from a US which is busy telling us it is for the people against the military in, for example, Syria.

And it is a US where the grotesques in the Republican primaries are outbidding each other over who would be first to pull the trigger in the Gulf and who is more in thrall to Israel’s Binyamin Netanyahu.

The rapid turn of events is alarming even some Establishment figures, from foreign policy wonks in Washington to former heads of Israel’s internal and external spy agencies. We can be sure that tortured deliberating is going on at the highest levels.

But it would be light-minded in the extreme to imagine that the existence of those making plausible and rational arguments against unleashing what would turn out to be a major war – much bigger than the one-sided assault on beggared Iraq – means that they will either prevail or necessarily act as a brake on the slide down the bloody slope.

If this was about rationality and plausibility, we would never have gone to war with Iraq. Cast your mind back exactly 10 years ago.

We had gone to war in Afghanistan. Indeed, we were told by Tony Blair and George Bush that it was all but over and there would be a swift move to democracy, development and stability. We know now that there had been a sharp debate in the White House immediately following the events of September 11 2011 over whether to attack Iraq first or invade Afghanistan and then Iraq.

Both countries, of course, had nothing to do with with September 11 – not a single one of their citizens was involved. The attackers were overwhelmingly Saudi.

But throughout 2002, as the Stop the War movement rolled into towns and cities across the country, we were told by wise heads in the op ed columns that so great were the risks and so unfeasible the aims of war on Iraq that sense would prevail and it would not take place. And their arguments against the war were cogent. Some of them were a reflection of the some of the arguments we made – that there would be resistance, that the war would lead to further wars, that there were no weapons of mass destruction, that there was no al-Qaida in Iraq but that there would be as a result of invasion, and, as anyone who knew anything about the region could see, that toppling Saddam Hussein would massively increase the power and influence of Iran within Iraq and throughout the region.

The Establishment divisions grew and the argument escalated internationally.

It was not a prelude to an outbreak of sanity, however. It was a precursor to war, the decision for which had already been made. In the same way the sanctions and UN resolutions were not an alternative to war, but a prelude to it.

Ten years on, we face an eerily similar situation, but with an Iran which, as predicted, is stronger. It would be folly to hope against all the evidence to the contrary that our leaders this time will bow to rational argument if left to their own devices.

They have their own warped rationality, summed up by one national security insider in Washington who said: “You think war with Iran would be tough now? You’re right. But it will be even tougher if we leave it five years.”

Even in their own terms, their attempts to defend their hegemony in the Middle East lead to incendiary contradictions as the plates shift afloat a magma of boiling popular anger.

So we have a US administration which is desperate to establish some relationship with – and shackles on – whatever government arises in Egypt as an alternative to military rule.

Yet at the same time Obama wields an extremely expensive veto at the UN security council at the end of last year yet again blocking condemnation of Israel’s settlement-building.

Obama’s approval rating in Egypt stands at 3 per cent, lower even than George Bush’s and less than a 15th of Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and his Iranian counterpart Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Or we have a French government which knows full well that encouraging a pro-Western policy by Nato member Turkey is crucial to attempts to turn the strife in Syria into the imposition of a friendly government that will abandon any notion of resistance to imperialism and Israel. Then the same French government picks a fight with the whole of the Turkish political class by supporting a law that would make denial of the Armenian genocide illegal. As for the systematic murder by French imperialism of the Algerians, Vietnamese and many others – well, you can justify that all you want.

Then there is the British government. As well as its own inanities, it also follows the US and French in theirs, from Israel to what is increasingly recognised to be the bloody blunder of Libya.

Finally, there is the false counsel that the deepening economic crisis means that they simply don’t have the money for war, especially one that would make the previous oil shocks look merely like an irritating case of gazumping.

It is true that the Pentagon now faces financial constraint – and the US accounts for 75 per cent of Nato military spending.

Obama has officially announced what has long been known to be the new military doctrine — to draw down as many forces as possible in Europe and the Middle East and to redeploy into a more aggressive posture encircling China.

Hence the withdrawal from Iraq and the doomed attempt to exert influence there from an absurdly named “embassy” of 16,000 people including 5,000 mercenaries, which means that the private sector picks up the bill for their pensions, missing body parts and so on.

This is precisely the point. For decade after decade the US state could provide guns as well as butter in the form of rising living standards and economic growth. Now it can provide no butter. But it has every intention of providing guns.

According to its own warped logic it has no alternative.

Facing a growing China and shifting balance in the world economy, the one thing that US capitalists have is a super-abundance of guns which can be used to extract other people’s butter.

So don’t imagine that financial strictures and the strains of shifting the military balance to the Pacific mean that there is more likelihood of the US, with its allies, accepting Iran as a major, independent regional power in the Gulf — the most important oil-producing area on the planet.

The opposite is the case. It is more likely to lead them to calculate that it is better to “take down” Iran now, which is why they are concerned about Syria, in order not to leave a gigantic problem as they are forced to refocus elsewhere.

It’s more likely to leave them more dependent on arming bellicose and volatile allies in the region to hold the fort during and after — Saudi Arabia and Israel.

And if you think the dysfunctional US political system has a tendency to produce crazies, it is nothing compared to Riyadh and Tel Aviv.

Does this mean that war is inevitable? Far from it. The mobilisation of mass opinion can shift the calculus, allied as it now can be with the revolutionary developments in Egypt, Yemen and elsewhere.

We need to raise the alarm in order to agitate that mass.

We also need to stand foursquare against all the softening-up arguments that are being deployed to send us to sleep — from new dodgy dossiers to fanciful suggestions that perhaps just a little bit of military action in Libya, or Syria, will be welcome and an alternative to wider suffering and conflagration.

It is not. It is what it always has been — stepping stones to greater slaughter.
The Stop the War Coalition national steering committee meets next Saturday. I urge you to follow its deliberations and calls to action.

LEAD TO GROWING FRUSTRATIONS AND ANGER

Firstly

, congratulations on the fantastic show of determination, confidence and increasing
anger by hundreds of thousands of public sector workers

‐ supported by a growing alliance
of our youth, pensioners and anti cuts groups

‐ in cities and towns across our nations on 30
November.

It was a day for our trade union movement to stand united and proud and we
did!

Secondly

, you will have read over the past few days of ‘deals’ being reached between
government and the joint unions over the future the schemes affecting millions of public

sector workers.

This is simply not true. Despite the rhetoric from government ministers, no
‘deals’ have been concluded in any of the schemes.

The position of your union,

Unite, is very clear. We have approached discussions in each of
the three schemes in which we have members; Civil Service, Health and Local Authorities,

in a professional and committed way in order to explore every option in an attempt to

convince government that its attack on public service workers is unjust and unacceptable.

In return, government has imposed changes, failed to negotiate in good faith, refused to

provide necessary information and forced deadlines and timetables into very complex and

difficult negotiations that are simply unacceptable.

In each scheme various solutions have been sought to address our concerns, this update

gives a brief summary of Unites position in respect of each scheme.

1.

Civil Service. Despite our best efforts and those of the joint unions we have not signed
up to the final ‘Heads of Agreement’ document put forward by government. This is a

position shared by the PCS union and follows extensive discussions with our leading lay

members within the sector who believe that the ‘offer’ is simply not good enough.

2.

Health. While we remain concerned about the lack of progress in key areas contained
in the final ‘Heads of Agreement’ document and have not had the opportunity to

consult fully with our senior lay leadership in the sector we

have not signed up and
have been clear that we will not be bounced into accepting anything by false deadlines

imposed by government.

We will be consulting fully with our national lay committee in the new

‐year on the
proposals in Health and our members will rightly decide our future course.

3.

Local Government. Only in Local Government ‐ where we are negotiating with the
employers directly and not government

‐ has any genuine progress on the real issues
between us been possible and a ‘Principles Document’ was agreed with the employers,

following full consultation with our leading lay membership, between Unite, Unison

and the GMB and the Local Government employers group.

This framework allows for further negotiations over the next year on a range of issues

that are of central importance to our membership. This agreement however,

has now
been suspended

following the issuing yesterday of a letter from the Communities
Secretary; Eric Pickles, detailing an imposed ‘cost ceiling’ for the employers and other

issues of serious concern.

We are now seeking an urgent meeting with Ministers and will not be lifting our

suspension before a reconvened meeting of our lay national committee has had an

opportunity to discuss and evaluate this development in the new year, we will be

guided as always by our members.

As you can see from the above, negotiations is all three schemes has been extremely

frustrating and with government refusing to lift its impositions on RPI/CPI, contributions

increases and an increased state retirement age, very difficult at best.

Whatever the outcome of actual detailed negotiations, if and when these finally start in the

new

‐year, it will be you, our members that will decide whether any deal is indeed
acceptable.

We are a proud lay democracy and your leadership is extremely proud of you.

Whatever develops on the many fronts we face as a labour movement as we enter 2012,

we wish you the best of wishes for the season and look forward to continuing our struggles

in the new

‐year.
In solidarity

Len McCluskey

General Secretary

A Decent Pension Is a Right!

Workers’ Weekly salutes all the millions of workers taking action on November 30, 2011, in
defence of their right to a decent pension. It is completely unacceptable that the government
is attempting to dictate and issue threats to the public service workers who are fighting to
defend their pensions.
It is the people who should be holding the government to account. Why is the government issuing
threats and attacking pensions in this way when the workers fight for what is theirs by right? It is a
similar story with the National Health Service. The government is attempting to steamroller
through its dictate that the NHS should be re-organised to serve the interests of the private
monopolies. This is wrecking activity of the social economy, its infrastructure and its social
programmes.
The Coalition has entrenched its dictate with the Fixed Term Parliaments Act so that it can pursue
its aim to confront the workers’ movement and impose the interests of the monopolies over the
rights of the people. This is not only an affront to the working class and an attack on the people’s
claim to a decent standard of living and the public good. It is proving extremely destructive to the
economy and the fabric of society as a whole.
This is a government made up of two parties that each received a minority share of votes cast at the
general election, and who together are in power with a minority share of the electorate’s votes.
What kind of legitimacy for a governmental programme is this, never mind the fact that the
measures they are imposing were not in their manifestos and are ones for which they cannot
conceivably be considered to have a mandate?
Then the government has the effrontery to claim that the strike mandated by up to 3 million
workers is what is damaging the economy. The Coalition sang a different tune when it declared a
public holiday for the royal wedding. No, it is the striking workers who are declaring enough is
enough and that the wrecking of the economy to serve monopoly right has to stop. Marches, rallies,
picketing and protests are being held the length and breadth of the country with this sentiment.
The government and the media in its service have been doing everything in the build up to the
strike to blame public sector workers for the so-called disruption to public services that is supposed
to be caused by this strike. Far from it. It is the government that is behind the disruption of public
services. It is giving priority to the massive interest payments to the owners of government debt, a
debt which is run for that very reason. The government is further robbing the pension funds of their
surplus to pay the financiers under the guise of paying off the government deficit, and is further
proposing earmarking £20bn of pension funds money to be paid to construction monopolies and
the like. It is the government which is ignoring the claims of public service workers who are the
producers of added value in these services and should have first claim on it. It was the government
that arrogantly said that they would impose on public sector workers their plan for cuts to pensions
if the trade unions did not agree to these cuts by the end of October. Therefore, it is the
government’s refusal to consider the claims of the public sector workers and their trade unions on
their pensions which must be considered the cause of any disruption to public services.
Only when the government received intelligence
that told them that public sector workers were not
going to stand for it and were about to vote
overwhelmingly for the strike did they appear to
make some “concessions” at the last minute. Those
“concessions” were not an offer in negotiations
according to the trade union negotiators. They were
political statements from Parliament which have no
weight in law and cannot be challenged. This
“offer” from the dispatch box of changes on protection for more older workers and increasing the
calculation of average pensions nevertheless still maintained the increase of the pension
contributions from public sector workers by up to 50% and still reduced the pensions overall and
still would force younger public sector workers to work to nearly 70 years of age to receive their
work pension.
There is an urgent need for an effective Workers’ Opposition to hold the government to account.
The government’s attack on pensions must be defeated. An alternative direction for the economy is
required so that workers’ rights are guaranteed, their livelihoods, including pensions, safeguarded,
and responsibility for the public good put as the centrepiece of the social economy.
Hands Off Pensions! Fight for Decent Pensions for All!

Workers’ Weekly

Pensions are part of the struggle for the ALTERNATIVE and against austerity.What kind of pensions do we want?

A decent standard in old age for all?

Decent pensions are a right in modern civilised society. Pensions should be fully funded out of the added value and as part of the claim on the social product.Workers wages and pensions are not a cost. Labour is the producer of all wealth.

Develop the discussions on the alternative.

Stop paying the rich, invest in social programmes.

An injury to one is an injury to all.
Unity is strength!!!

Leather workers in Turkey have been engaged in a bitter dispute with an employer which has included mass sackings, factory closures, and more.

At one point the employer invited the workers to come to work in Istanbul, but refused to give them a day to find a place to live. So workers stayed overnight in the factory.

Here’s the amazing bit: the employer decided that this constituted an “occupation” of the factory and tried to call in the police. When that didn’t work, they sacked 36 workers.

The struggle has gone on since May 2011 and the union has called for an international campaign to protest these anti-union measures.

Please take a moment to send your message – click here.

And please – forward on this message to your fellow trade union members.

Thank you.

Eric Lee

Labour Start

The Maquarie conmpany, we will not refer to them as “Wightlink”, are the high finance enemy, part of the same oligarchy who are in the process of bankrupting the whole of the world economies. RMT belongs to the working class, it is their union and represents their voice. It is for this reason that they are attacked. Every worker knows that they have to support their elected representatives.RMT is affiliated to our Trades Council and we will stand besides them.

The workers, the whole island, united will stand together in these difficult times against those who only want to take out of the econmomy rather than put into it.It looks like RMT and the ferry workers are having to take the first stand against the financier Maquarie, and make no bones about it this class, with one or two of its agents, are going to make more moves to extort from the Isle of Wight. Their first step is to move against the organised opposition and their leaders.

*******************************
Union To Ballot Over Wightlink Industrial Action

This has just been published by the RMT Union, in their words – Ed Ventnor Blog

Transport Union RMT confirmed today that it is to ballot for strike action and action short of a strike all members on Wightlink’s Portsmouth routes over the victimisation and unfair dismissal of an RMT union representative.

The rep, who cannot be named at this stage for legal reasons, was dismissed by the company on blatant and trumped up charges when his only real crime was actively supporting his members and following the democratically agreed policies of the union.

Campaigned against new rosters
Specifically, he had been instrumental in leading a union campaign against the imposition of new rosters and highlighting management deficiencies which had led to the intervention of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency on the grounds of safety.

A local manager took exception to the strong campaigning role of the union and as a consequence bulldozed through dismissal on the grounds of the most minor of infringements.

RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said:

“Regularly challenging the company”
“Once again RMT finds itself having to defend an elected and accredited union representative, whose only real crime is to continually defend the members he represents, regularly challenging the company and ensuring all agreements are followed correctly.

The events leading up to our member’s dismissal appear farcical and clearly show an employer jumping at the opportunity to remove an effective representative.

Portsmouth routes could be affected
As a result, and in order to obtain justice in the face of this blatant victimisation, RMT will commence an immediate ballot for strike action and action short of strike covering all Wightlink [Guernsey] Ltd members who work on the Portsmouth routes.

RMT remains available for talks and we will pursue all channels to obtain justice in this case.

Sourced from: http://ventnorblog.com/2011/11/16/union-to-ballot-over-wightlink-industrial-action/#ixzz1dvILeBBh