Tuesday, 25 July 2017

Category » Articles

Liberal Future: Alderney & Sark Youth Say BreXit Now!

.

A YEAR has come and gone since the EU Referendum. As everyone should know by now, on 23rd June 2016, a majority of the electorate took the brave and historic decision to get Britain out of the EU. On a national turnout of 72.2%, 17,410,742 (51.9%) people voted to free Britain from the shackles of the European Union. Indeed, as the Guardian at the time – https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2016/jun/23/eu-referendum-live-results-and-analysis – noted, ‘Britain has voted by a substantial margin to leave the European Union.’

Despite this, members of the elite still don’t get it. One particular case which raised the hackles of many people involved the well-known evolutionary biologist and writer, Richard Dawkins. Here’s what he had to say: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39218108

Liberal Future are the first to concede that Dawkins raises many valid points. We feel that Cameron called the EU Referendum in an attempt to both shut up the Eurosceptic wing of the Tory party and kill off the threat of UKIP. (Ironically, the Eurosceptic wing of the Tory party walked all over Cameron and internal rumblings within UKIP seem to have killed it off. That’s politics, folks!)

Dawkins also notes that Cameron should have insisted on a 2/3 majority for the EU Referendum, held a ‘cooling off’ period and so on. Maybe he should of – but the fact is he didn’t and that the majority of the electorate opted for Brexit. We wonder if Dawkins would still be calling for a 2/3 majority and so on if the Remain camp had won the vote?

.
Dawkins then gets arrogant and nasty. He infers that the Brexit vote was achieved by a simple majority of “ill informed voters.” Those who opted for a form of self-determination are “ignorant” and “misled.” Is he really saying that nearly 17.5 million voters can’t be trusted to make up their own minds and vote accordingly? Talk about stereotyping on a mass scale!
.
Liberal Future is not a class or racially based organisation, but we feel that Dawkins really believes that the (white) working class – and especially the English and Welsh White working class – shouldn’t have the vote. This is especially so if they are going to vote the ‘wrong’ way! Quite apart from the fact that all classes, racial and ethnic groups voted Leave it suits some to ‘pigeon hole’ votes into fixed groups. Maybe calling folks “ill informed” and “ignorant” is his ‘polite’ way of saying that we’re all Untermensch?
.
In short, Dawkins is saying that we should simply just know our place. He views ordinary working folks as mere economic units of production: we can be cast aside when not needed (or cheaper labour can be imported) or when we vote the wrong way! We should know our place – as long as we use our brawn and/or brains in the ‘correct’ way and pay our taxes, we’re ok. Our function is to keep the elite in comfort, not to think for ourselves and vote against the wishes of the establishment.
.
Others have reached a similar conclusion when it comes to Dawkins and other elitists. As the author Mick Hume – http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-%e2%80%93-free-speech-how-do-we-protect-it-%e2%80%93-tyranny-of-the-minority-part-2 – has previously noted: ‘In the Left-wing New Statesman magazine, Professor Richard Dawkins, the leading evolutionary biologist and renowned humanist was unable to suppress his true feelings that the large slice of humanity who voted Leave were ‘stupid, ignorant people’. He protested that ‘it is unfair to thrust on to unqualified simpletons the responsibility to take historic decisions of great complexity and sophistication’.
.
Presumably such decisions would be better left to highly intellectual minds such as his own. Great atheist that he is, he appears to think the rest of us should have blind faith in people like him.’
.
As the Brexit negotiations continue and the date for Britain quitting the EU grows ever closer, the blood pressure of the elite will go through the roof. They’ll probably ditch all niceties and try every trick in the book to derail democracy and stifle self- determination. You have been warned!
.
• THIS ARTICLE should be read in conjunction with the following:
.
Liberal Future Says BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-says-%e2%80%a6-brexit-now
.
Liberal Future: English Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/english-youth-says-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Scottish Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/scottish-youth-say-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Ulster Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/ulster-youth-say-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Welsh Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/welsh-youth-say-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Cornish Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/cornish-youth-say-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Guernsey, Manx and Jersey Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-guernsey-manx-and-jersey-youth-say-brexit-now
Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

From The Liberty Wall – Free Speech: How Do We Protect It? – The Historical Importance Of Magna Carta Day
THURSDAY 15th June marked the 802nd Anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta. As National Liberals will know, its signing – by King John and his Barons – represented the first time a Monarch accepted that he/she had responsibilities and their ‘subjects’ had rights.

We feel that the signing of the Magna Carta was the first step in establishing the right to free of speech and assembly. These rights were further strengthened during the reign of King William III (who, along with his wife Mary, were crowned joint monarchs of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1689) which ensured ‘Civil and Religious Liberties for all.’

To mark Magna Carta Day our friends at Free Speech: How Do We Protect It? – https://www.facebook.com/groups/1607711629485795/ – produced an e-poster and article, which we reproduce below. They asked their supporters to viral it out via social media to remind everyone of the historic importance of the day and to wish everyone a Happy Magna Carta Day.


The following article – supplied by Free Speech: How Do We Protect It? – examines why the issue of freedom should remain central to any political agenda.

.

The Historical Importance Of Magna Carta Day

FREEDOM LOVERS recently took time out to celebrate Magna Carta Day. However, immediately afterwards we resolved to re-double our efforts to defend free speech, especially – but not exclusively – from establishment attacks.

Why? Because we feel that the establishment will use the rise of Islamist terrorism in Britain as an excuse to clamp down both on freedom of speech and assembly. During the recent election campaign Theresa May made plenty of noise about the need to curb ‘extremism’ as well as combating terrorism. Free Speech realises that much of this noise, to some degree or other, would have been sound bites, designed to appeal to reactionary Tory ‘right’ supporters – basically, the ‘flog ‘em and hang ‘em brigade.’

However, freedom lovers should be wary of Theresa May’s approach for several reasons.

Firstly, at the moment Theresa May is down – but she’s not out. And that makes her a very dangerous woman indeed. Election promises aside, she does have a reasonably long-term record of wanting to clamp down of Human Rights legislation. And when it comes to freedom of speech and assembly she is more ‘hawkish’ than many of her fellow Tories.

Secondly, her ‘government of certainty’ with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) may wish to lay down a marker when it comes to Islamist terrorism. It’s probably fair to describe the DUP as a socially conservative political party that is totally opposed to any terrorist group which threatens the United Kingdom. This is hardly surprising given Ulster’s recent past. With this in mind, we’re concerned that it wouldn’t be difficult to persuade the DUP to clamp down on ‘extremism’ in the name of fighting Islamist terrorism.

Free Speech feels that it would be sheer hypocrisy and political opportunism for the establishment to use the terrible events of Manchester and London to justify clamping down on freedom of speech. Our position is simple: either we all have rights or none of us have rights.

(As an aside, are we alone in wondering if the Manchester suicide bomber and London Bridge terrorists are, to some degree or another, mere pawns in a wider geopolitical ‘war of position’?)

Thirdly, May – and others on the reactionary right – talk a lot about ‘extremism’ but never seem to provide a legally binding definition of ‘extremism.’ What exactly is ‘extremism’ – indeed, how would you define it? We’re worried that its definition could be left so vague that it could potentially include those opposed to capitalism right through to those who would go out and kill people in the name of Allah.

With all of this in mind, we feel that it’s essential that we stand up for the right of free speech and assembly – as well as the concept of Civil and Religious liberties for all. Free Speech appreciates that, on a personal level, it may become very uncomfortable to make a principled stand on this issue. No doubt, some elements of the establishment mainstream media will twist our position and produce fake news stories claiming that we support terrorism!

However, if freedom lovers don’t make a principled stand, who will? We should not abandon our ancient rights (effectively granted by the signing of the Magna Carta at Runnymede in 1215) and merely surrender to political expediency, media pressure, the need to be ‘popular’ or simply go with the herd.

Remember, the establishment is smart and will use any excuse as an opportunity to ban groups and organisations. Any legislation designed to silence ‘extremists’ will simply be the thin end of the wedge. In the past the establishment has picked on ‘unpopular’ groups – in the recent past it was the British National Party or Religious (but non-violent) fundamentalists – and demonised them. If the ‘unpopular’ group is not banned outright, the establishment will try to make it near nigh impossible for it to organise. It will be subject to numerous restrictions and smear jobs. ‘Counter gangs’ could also be used to fight it on the streets.

To reiterate, when making any informed decision subjects relating to freedom, we must always examine the cold hard facts, figures and evidence. In addition, we should not let our emotions get the better of us. As we noted earlier, we should not abandon our ancient rights and merely surrender to ‘political expediency, media pressure, the need to be ‘popular’ or simply go with the herd.’

As a pressure group, Free Speech is not interested in being ‘popular’ – we’re only interested in being right. And it is right and proper to both support free speech and assembly and the concept of Civil and Religious liberties for all.

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Caledonian Voice says Happy Brexit Day!

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Nations without States Conference ‘Today and Tomorrow’

We must call for a referendum to determine the political status of all ‘national peoples’ in the world!

The Nation Without States (NWS), an independent organisation and pressure group for self-determination sponsored by the National Liberal Party (NLP) hoisted a conference on 30th April 2017 to bring all the stateless people together to fight for their right to self-determination in London. Fourteen speakers covering at least ten different nationalities addressed the conference of over 100 delegates over the two sessions.

At the welcome note, Mr Graham Williamson, Councillor and Chairman of the NWS, who chaired the event, stated that “Despite the right to self-determination being part of the first article of the United Nations Charter, it is not willingly adhered too. Despite there being perhaps 200 nations looking to be empowered or simply recognised, only a handful have become free since the great periods of decolonisation in the 1940/50/60’s e.g. East Timor, Kosovo, South Sudan.


He further stated, “Whilst this usually involves a minority peoples struggling against a majoritarian one, it crucially involves a world community (or at least its elites) backing the latter against the former. This is partly due to self-interest i.e. fear of their own oppressed nations but also what the global elites expect. Whether it be the UN, OAU or the EU, ‘separatist’ movements are ultimately unwelcome”.

The conference explored the opportunities for self-determinist struggles at present (today) and the future (tomorrow). Many activists from various oppressed ethnicities attended this event and gave speeches of the problems they face in their own countries.
.
Mrs Melani Dissanayake, a Human Rights Lawyer from Sri Lanka who is currently working as a volunteer researcher with the International Centre for Prevention and Prosecution of Genocide (ICPPG) and Tamil Information Centre (TIC) represented the Tamils from Sri Lanka in this event and invited them to act immediately before it is too late. The full version of her speech as follows;

“Good evening ladies and Gentleman.

First of all, I must thank you all for inviting me to this event and giving me this golden opportunity to speak to you today.

Coming from the Singhalese Majority Community in Sri Lanka, I am proud to be here today and support you in your struggle right to Self-Determination and justice for the oppressed. I must specially thank the National Liberal Party (NLP) who sponsors the Nation Without States (NWS) to host this very important event.

As a Human Rights Lawyer, I have represented and assisted a number of Tamils detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act – known as PTA, the most draconian act, specially designed t suppresses the freedom struggle of Tamils in Sri Lanka.

The denial of the right of self-determination to the Tamil people in Sri Lanka who have been subject to an agenda of genocide since independence in February 1948 is deeply disappointing.

This history of Sri Lanka confirms that the Tamils existed for more than 3000 years in Sri Lanka. Therefore, their Right to self-rule is legitimate. As Professor Paul. E. Peiris stated;
“The Tamils continued their rule until 1833 when the British invaded Sri Lanka and destroyed the Kingdoms”.

The British united the Island was for their administrative ease of the Tamils. This ended the sovereignty of Tamils in the North and East of Sri Lanka.
When the British left Sri Lanka in February 1948, they acted in the most irresponsible way and handed the power to the Singhalese Majority. This is called the Independence Day of Sri Lanka. But the bitter truth is – this is the inauguration day of Tamil Genocide in Sri Lanka. Since this day, the Sri Lankan successive Governments embarked on a programme of discrimination, marginalisation, Sinhalisisation and Buddhisisation on aiming at assimilation, disintegration and ultimate disappearance of Tamils as a race and nation in Sri Lanka.

The discriminatory legislations introduced by the Sri Lankan Government, triggered the Tamils to realise their need for self-determination.

The Sinhala only Act of 1956 and the Standardization Act of 1972 further relegated the Tamil language with the Tamil students being denied of admissions to universities on merit, leaving them angry and frustrated.

However, the now- violence struggle of Tamils was suppressed by the violent riots. In 1956, in 1958, in 1971, in 1977 and in 1983 mass massacres directed against the Tamils in all parts of the Island by the Security forces with the blessing and support from the State. These were aimed to make them feel as unwanted inferior citizens or aliens in their own country.

The crushing of non-violent agitations with brutal force forced the Tamils to restore to violence as a self-defense. Finally, the Tamils were forced to take arms, as their last resort, and fight for their existence.

The freedom struggle led by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam [LTTE] was portrayed as terrorism by the Sri Lankan Government. The West was also misleading and made to proscribe the LTTE as terrorists. In the name of “war against terrorism”, the Sri Lankan Government mercilessly killed more than 1,40,000 innocent Tamils. The violation committed by the Sri Lankan state forces during the war perfectly fulfils the legal requirements of the crime of Genocide.

The most draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1979 – known as the PTA – is specifically targeting the rebelling Tamil youth in Sri Lanka. The sixth amendment of the Sri Lankan Constitution criminalises anyone who speaks about independence or a separate state. These were aimed to deny the Right of Self-Determination to the Tamils in Sri Lanka and to silence their voice for freedom.

The Tamils are now left to ensure their existence with no other alternative but to resort to the Right of self-determination granted in the UN Covenant. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 has its preamble even endorsed the right to rebellion against tyranny and repression so that human rights should be protected by the ‘Rule of Law’.

If the Tamils in Sri Lanka, fail to call for their right of self-determination, their very existence will be in question.

We must call for a referendum to determine the political status of Tamil people in Sri Lanka. Tamils cannot afford to suffer the systematic Genocide any longer. Hoping for justice from the UN and International community will not be sufficient. Tamils must continue to fight to ensure its survival and preservation of its culture, language, history and religion in Sri Lanka.

I am shocked to see that some Tamil Organisations such as the British Tamil Forum (BTF) and Global Tamil Forum (GTF) began to dance to the tune of the Sri Lankan Government and began to betray their own People. This situation must immediately change. Tamils of Sri Lanka need the support from other nationals and organisations such as NLP and NWS.

In conclusion, I hereby promise you that, we, the Singhalese brothers and sisters who follow lord Buddha genuinely, will stand by you in your struggle for Self-Determination.

Thank you all again for giving me this opportunity. Every human being in this world must enjoy the right of Self-Determination”.
At the conclusion of the Conference a petition was launched and signed by speakers calling upon the UN to support the call to de-criminalise the cause of self-Determination wherever it be found.
.

Elected Assemblyman Dr. Jeffrey Kitinam, who flew all the way from Sabah (North Borneo), signs the petition

.
An online petition has also been raised:
Article 1 of the United Nation’s Charter (1945), International Covenants on Human Rights (1966), and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and people (1960) states that Self-Determination is a right.

Yet this human right is ignored by many states around the world. Some make it illegal under Sedition Laws, e.g. in India or Malaysia, others in their Constitution e.g. in Sri Lanka (Article 157A), some under Treason Laws e.g. in Nigeria and others by simple extra-judicial action against individuals supporting self-determination. All lead to arrest, imprisonment and sometimes worse.

We urge the United Nations to lobby and support campaigns against the use of legal instruments that ban and/or make it illegal to call for self-determination, including national recognition and/or support for separation within a state.
You can sign this via António Guterres (Secretary-General of the United Nations): UN: De-criminalise Self-Determination!
Other speakers at the conference were:


Jawad Mella – Syrian Kurdish President of the Kurdish National Council
Bernard Dube – Matabele activist
Ranjit Srai – Secretary of Parliamentarians for National Self-Determination
Akli Sh’kka – Imuhagh International Youth Organisation for Justice and Equality
Mehrab Sarjov – Campaign Director for an Independent Baluchistan from Iran
Faisal Maramazi – Ahwazi Democratic Popular Front
Mahmoud Mzreh – Sec. General of the Ahwazi Democratic Front
Araz Yurdseven – GIAP (Independence for South Azerbaijaini Party) UK Representative
Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan – President of STAR (State Reform Party – Sabah) and Assemblyman (MP)
Doris Jones – Chairperson of Sabah & Sarawak Union
Ms Melani Dissanayake – Sri Lankan Human Rights Lawyer
Yogalingam Sockalingam – MP of the Tamil Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam
Graham Williamson – Chairman of Nations without States
Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

National Liberal Debate 22 – The Manchester Bombing: What Should Our Response Be?

BBC presenter Andrew Neill says that the 'time for rhetoric is over' as he criticised the 'choreographed response' to the recent Manchester bombing. Here suicide bomber Salman Abedi killed 22 people and left 120 injured.

THE MANY problems faced by Britain – whether economic or social – are not going to be solved by screaming and shouting. Thus, the National Liberal Party is not interested in ‘hitting the headlines’ using the tired formula of macho–posturing and gesture politics. These problems will only be overcome by a combination of careful thought and action.

This means that we favour informed and reasoned debate. Here we concentrate on arguments, points of view and facts. We are not interested in personalities, prejudice or promoting self-interest.

The National Liberal Party seeks to build an organisation that encourages free speech and debate. To do this, we also attempt to take into consideration as many views as is possible in open debate. Thus, members and supporters are always encouraged to have their say.

We’re also interested in encouraging people to develop their debating skills. That’s why the NLP has introduced a new series of articles called Have Your Say! Whilst each subject will be announced on this web-site, they’ll be conducted in full on the National Liberals Facebook site, which can be found here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/52739504313/

Before we start this debate we’d like to remind folks of our ground rules:

• First of all, say what you think – but think what you say.

• Secondly, just debate the issue(s) raised. There should be no personal attacks.

• As previously noted, we’re simply not interested in personalities.

• Please note that we may ask selected members and supporters to play ‘devil’s advocate’. Hopefully, this’ll help sharpen the debating skills of all involved!

• Finally, it should be remembered that all of the views expressed in Have Your Say! are personal and should not be taken to be the official view of the NLP itself.

Our latest debate asks one simple question. In the wake of the terrible Manchester bombing, what should our response be?

To share your views, simply look out for this article on the National Liberals facebook site https://www.facebook.com/groups/52739504313/?fref=nf and have your say in the comments section.

• THIS ARTICLE should be read in conjunction with the following:

President Trump, The Death Penalty, The EU Referendum & International Women’s Day – What Do They All Have In Common?

http://nationalliberal.org/president-trump-the-death-penalty-the-eu-referendum-international-women%e2%80%99s-day-%e2%80%93-what-do-they-all-have-in-common

National Liberal Debate 21 – Running Scared Of Religious ‘Child Abusers’

http://nationalliberal.org/national-liberal-debate-21-%e2%80%93-running-scared-of-religious-%e2%80%98child-abusers%e2%80%99

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

From The Liberty Wall – Nations without States – Syria’s ‘Hierarchy Of Suffering’ (Part 2)
THE END of last month saw Nations without States (NwS) reproduce the first part of an article – http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-%e2%80%93-nations-without-states-%e2%80%93-syria%e2%80%99s-%e2%80%98hierarchy-of-suffering%e2%80%99-part-one – by Bob Fisk. The article itself had originally appeared in The Independent. Fisk is is the multi-award winning Middle East correspondent of The Independent.

The original article was published after two horrific attacks in Syria – one of which led US President Donald Trump to launch a missile attack on a military facility loyal to President Bashar al-Assad’s government. The other attack was carried out by opponents of President Assad, but there was no retribution by the US. With this in mind, Fisk appears to argue that there is a ‘Hierarchy Of Suffering’ in Syria.

This is the second part of Fisk’s original article. NwS has reproduced it in an effort to stimulate debate concerning the situation in Syria. It goes without saying that there are no official links between Robert Fisk, The Independent or Nations without States.

.

If Trump cares so much about Syrian babies, why is he not condemning the rebels who slaughtered children?

US President Donald Trump (left) and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad (right). Trump sudenly went from being the devil incarnate to a ‘good guy’ after launching a missile attack on a pro-Assad military facility.

There’s no doubting the flagrant, deliberate, vile cruelty of Saturday’s attack. The suicide bomber approached the refugee buses with a cartload of children’s cookies and potato chips – approaching, I might add, a population of fleeing Shia civilians who had been starving under siege by the anti-Assad rebels (some of whom, of course, were armed by us). Yet they didn’t count. Their “beautiful little babies” – I quote Trump on the earlier gas victims – didn’t stir us to anger. Because they were Shias? Because the culprits might have been too closely associated with us in the West? Or because – and here’s the point – they were the victims of the wrong kind of killer.


For what we want right now is to blame the “evil”, “animal”, “brutal”, etc, Bashar al-Assad who was first “suspected” to have carried out the 4 April gas attack (I quote The Wall Street Journal, no less) and then accused by the entire West of total and deliberate responsibility of the gas massacre. No-one should question the brutality of the regime. Nor its torture. Nor its history of massive oppression. Yet there are, in fact, some grave doubts about Bashar’s responsibility for the 4 April attack – which he has predictably denied – even among Arabs who loath his Baathist regime and all it stands for.

Even the leftist but hardly pro-Syrian Israeli writer Uri Avneri – briefly, in his life, a detective – has asked why Assad should commit such a crime d (1) when his army and its allies were winning the war in Syria, when such an attack would gravely embarrass the Russian government and military, and when it would change the softening western attitude towards him back towards open support for regime change.

And the regime’s claim that a Syrian air attack set off explosions in al-Nusra weapons store in Khan Shaykoun (2) (an idea which the Russians also adopted) would be easier to dismiss if the Americans had not used precisely the same excuse for the killing of well over a hundred Iraqi civilians in Mosul in March; they suggested that a US air strike on an Isis arms lorry may have killed the civilians.

But this has nothing to do with the weekend’s far more bloody assault on the refugee convoys heading for western Aleppo. They were part of a now-familiar pattern of mass hostage exchanges between the Syrian government and its opponents in which Sunni opponents of the regime in villages surrounded by the Syrian army or its allies have been trucked out to Idlib and other “rebel”-held areas under safe passage in return for the freedom of Shia villagers surrounded by al-Nusra, Isis and “our” rebels who have been allowed to leave their villages for the safety of government-held cities. Such were the victims of Saturday’s suicide bombing; they were Shia villagers of al-Foua and Kfraya, along with several government fighters, en route to what would be – for them – the safety of Aleppo.
Whether or not this constitutes a form of ethnic cleansing – another of Bashar’s sins, according to his enemies – is a moot point. Al-Nusra did not exactly urge the villagers of al-Foua and Kfraya to stay home since they wanted some of their own Sunni fighters back from their own encircled enclaves. Last month, the governor of Homs pleaded with Sunnis to leave the city on “rebel” convoys to Idlib to stay in their houses and remain in the city. But this is a civil war and such terrifying conflicts divide cities and towns for generations. Just look at Lebanon 27 years after its civil war ended.

But what ultimately proves our own participation in this immoral and unjust and frightful civil war is our reaction to those two massacres of the innocents. We cried over and lamented and even went to war for those “beautiful little babies” (3) whom we believed to be Sunni victims of the Assad government. But when Shia babies of equal humanity were blasted to pieces this weekend, Trump could not care less. And the mothering spirit of Ivanka and Federica simply dried up.

And we claim that Middle East violence has nothing to do with us.

(1) http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1492111523

(2)  http://www.independent.co.uk/topic/khan-sheikhoun

(3) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-basarl-al-assad-syria-military-strike-sarin-nerve-gas-a7671291.html

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close