From: mwananchi@yahoogroups.com on behalf of FELIX DIAWUOH (fad57@msn.com)
Sent: Sun 2/14/10 3:00 PM
To: mwananchi@yahoogroups.com
Lil Joe,
I appreciate your efforts in trying very hard to keep up with me in making sense out of your non-sense. I have been debating with you for years to make sure our lines of differences and agreements will be very clear. The real politics at the United Nations as I perceive it is revealed in this piece I sent to Boston Herald and was published in 2002. I have re-posted it below. Almost 8 years later and with changes in many democratic Governments of the world, most of the Oppressive Regimes and their terrorist groups have the same leaders with their rhetoric and violent operations unchanged. It is very clear that we are at war, declared or undeclared, for good governance to stop political oppression and terrorism. You are on wrong side of this battle and the worst is that either you do not know it or you refuse to know.
Felix.
............................
April 22, 2002
The Editor,
The Boston Herald
Boston.
Dear Editor,
HUMAN RIGHTS AND DIPLOMATIC POLITICS--TRUE VICTIMS (3)
I wish to commend your newspaper on the issue of modern day slavery in Sudan perpetrated by the Moslem majority in the north on the predominantly Black Africans minority who are Christians and traditional religious worshipers in the south ("JP minister: Helping free slaves in Sudan an inspiring mission"-- article and "Today's slaves at issue"-- editorial, dated April 16th and 20th, 2002 respectively.
Through your many editorials and articles over the years, your Paper has consistently exposed the hypocrisy of many Human Rights activist groups including the United Nations Human Rights Commission itself. The United Nations Security Council is yet to pass a resolution to condemn the Government of Sudan on the issue of slavery and appoint a monitoring team to ensure that this shameful practice is discontinued. Ironically, Sudan is a current member of the United Nations Human Rights Commission. The U.N. Human Rights Commission's selective application of International Law and Geneva Convention which are often cited only when these alleged breaches are committed by any of the "should know better" democratic Governments or the easier to blame countries as scapegoats. The United Nations' member countries are therefore selectively targeted for the alleged breaches on the issues of self-determination, religious plurality, commitment of war crimes for deliberately targeting civilians in conflicts and many other breaches of the basic Human Rights principles under the United Nations Charter.
Oppressive military, One Party, Monarchy or Theocratic dictatorships are allowed to burry their Human Rights abuses while same Governments shamefully accuse the United Nations of being biased and applying double standard against them. In some circumstances the biased United Nations Security Council Resolutions directed at Democratic countries are vetoed (fairly or unfairly) but many are allowed to pass through abstentions mostly in the Security Council. Many other biased Resolutions are also moved to the UN General Assembly to be approved by majority vote counts the mostly Authoritarian Regime. Some are also either later repealed or their implementation stalled due to conflicting interests of the members countries. The mockery of many of these Resolutions, however, become very clear when the United Nations' true double standard of absolving the dictatorship Regimes is exposed with the actual historical facts and events on the ground.
The United Nations Security Council just passed unanimous resolution to send a monitoring team to Jenine Refugee Camp in the West Bank to investigate whether crimes were committed in Israel's war against terrorism and suicide bombings of innocent civilians. This Resolution could not stand on its own weight and test of fairness to be implemented and is now abandoned but has left its indelible mark on the many other previous stains of its anti-Israel bias. The various charges of massacre of hundreds of innocent Palestinian civilians and bull-dozing of homes had no factual truth on the ground in the combat between Israel Defense Force and Palestinian Militants in bomb-making houses, some with booby-traps, detonating to kill anybody who dared to enter them. News reporters and the International Red Cross staff could not go into the Camp during the period of the fighting even though the Israel Defense Force had been charged for preventing them in visiting the area of the gun battle. Ordinary civilians had already been ordered to leave the area. The so-called Forces of Resistance had decided to stay to fight a gun battle with the Israeli soldiers. Who uses what level of force to be excessive or acceptable ii such a combat is a judgment by the international community and Human Rights groups to condemn Israel Defense Force. More often than not, this judgment is used to weaken the moral and military resolve of self-defensive war against terrorism. This in turn limits the capacity of democratic States to defend and protect their freedom as well as preventing the loss of innocent civilians lives against groups and States determined to use violence to pursue their cause. This is what emboldens the Islamic terrorist groups in the global terrorism
There is a higher presence of news reporters, Peace and Human Rights activists as well as members of the International Red Cross staff per capita concentration in Israel and the disputed territories of West Bank and Gaza than anywhere in the world. These groups are united and engaged in various forms of humanitarian and self-righteous campaign of moral propaganda war against the State of Israel. At times their blatant bias against the State of Israel is below the level of human intelligence and borders on the line of Anti-Semitism. Unfortunately, the special interest in protecting and defending the Human Rights of those waging terror and suicide bombings against innocent Israeli civilians at parties, shopping malls, motorways, and restaurants. This special attention to Palestinian rights also limits the world's attention, its human and financial resources to help thousands if not millions of other victims of human atrocities in many other parts of the world, especially in Africa.
Ironically, this misplaced diplomatic approach raises the demands for appeasement of those engaged in violence for their political and religious objectives. Focusing more attention on appeasing those engaged in violence also provides more financial creates further incentives for more terrorism. This is the mockery of diplomatic politics in the pursuance of Human Rights agenda and the elusive commitment to alleviate world poverty and human misery in the 21st Century. Posterity is yet to pass its judgment if there are any lessons we would wish to draw from these events as world leaders continue to be blindfolded by ignoring the evil forces of terrorism.
The causes of freedom, Human Rights and justice cannot therefore be pursued through the lens of diplomatic expedience. Voting blocks in the from regional, organizational or religious unions make it convenient for activists to concentrate their actions along the lines of priorities of interests of those voting blocks. These priorities often disregard the plight of actual victims of Human Rights abuses, poverty and human misery as those governments who are directly responsible are absolved by the defaulting silence on their actions. This is the fate of the slave victims of the Black Africans in southern Sudan and other victims of human atrocities of the violent conflicts in Africa. Their conditions are often raised in Summits, Conference Halls and Peace Conferences often attended by the same perpetrators as heads of States or rebel groups with no references to their accountability for the breaches of International Law.
Meanwhile, the same diplomatic politics continues to pursue an elusive global peace based on Human Rights protection and the application of International Law in the Middle East and in the Balkans while the very groups and governments disrespecting these rights and International law continue to blame the international community for the violent conflicts they perpetrate upon themselves. Many known terrorist groups and governments sponsoring them are still untouchable and some are even being prodded to join forces for peace conferences and negotiations for the resolutions of the ever evasive peace in the Middle East. As if this blindfolding of our eyes at the sight of evil is not enough, the protracted Arab-Israeli conflict has always been fatal romantic attraction and always exploring ways of appeasing the evil in a clothing of beautiful bride.
Diplomatic politics in the Middle East is yet to draw the lines between human progress in peace and democracy as opposed to terrorism, oppression, and human misery. This has been the paradox of the conflict of civilizations. Which side will prevail will depend on the nature of coalition forces as well as drawing hard and thin lines between universal principles of human freedom as opposed to terror and oppressive systems of governance. In any conflict where this hard thin line is not drawn, the conflict is unduly protracted. Peaceful resolutions are interpreted differently by two different systems of human principles of law and order, trust and mistrust, love and hate, leadership responsibility and mismanagement, collective and absolute powers. When these factors are ignored, each can be cannon of a fatal bullet to any peace agreement.
Human intelligence and people of good will however continue to explore the nature of diplomatic politics and human rights activism. This human desire for peace and justice arises out of the convictions of good human principles. However, this good human principle is confused with our respect for relative morality, respect for other cultures, religions and systems of governance. This is based on our belief in the hope that over time, principles of good governance will be respected by those who rule by terror, oppression, and disregard for human progress. Empirical evidence brought about by the improvement in informational technology is however increasing the human knowledge on some of these illusive assumptions of human progress. Free access to historical, political, economic, cultural and religious documentaries which draw clear lines between rhetoric and reality in the diplomatic politics and Human Rights activism as well as differences between effective and ineffective systems of governance are easily available to expose the illusions of bad governance and leadership. The failure of the diplomatic politics and Human Rights activism have therefore been the result of the relative morality for the good and bad governance, democracy and dictatorship, terror and self-defense, true oppressors and the oppressed, as well as true victims of human misery and politicized victims.
Support or excuses for hate and violence as a result of being victims of oppression or occupation in an unresolved Arab-Israeli conflict of wars whilst the voices of actual victims of poverty and human misery are silenced undermines our human civilization and global peace. The diplomatic political strategy of calming the groups and governments which use hate and threats of violence to back their demands and political objectives has been tried for over 50 years since the partitioning of the British Mandate of Palestine in 1947. After each major war the granting of concessions and appeasement have provided them the propaganda tool and perceived moral basis to use violence to pursue their cause. Ignorance is therefore no more an excuse. It is rather the diplomatic failure of passing wrong UN Resolutions to justify the hate mongering politics in the Arab world. Furthermore, while some Resolutions, Human Rights reports and diplomatic strategies have not being working in the Middle East, more innocent lives in hundreds of thousands are being lost in wars and factional conflicts in many other parts of the world year after year. No lessons are being drawn from the past and present for the success in defeating human evil of terrorism and building progressive societies in global peace for better future.
Almost 8 months after the highest fatality of innocent civilians by terrorist attack on U.S. soil on September 11, 2001, most of the terrorist groups like the al Qaeda, Hezbullah, Islamic Jihad, Abu Sayyaf and many others including their financial networks like Barakaat are still in operation in many countries with the same governments harboring and sponsoring them. The September 11 terrorist attack was a wake up call on the international community's avowed commitment to rid the world of terrorism. Prior to this tragic incident, many similar ones but on smaller scales had been happening from the 70's through the 80's and 90's and now there is still the potential to carry these terrorist activities far into the 21st Century. Meanwhile, diplomatic politics and the international community are bugged down on the definition of terrorism, who are the perpetrators and who are the victims. International conferences and regional blocks of countries are therefore without consensus on the diplomatic squabbles on the following issues:
1. The acceptable International Laws applying to the dismantling of the terrorist groups when terrorism itself cannot be defined universally defined and no U.N. Security Council Resolution has ever been passed to condemn or identify the acts of terrorism and those known groups of perpetrators or their State Government supporters.
2. The acceptable degree level of military force which can be used to dismantle these groups and their bases, as well as forcing them to comply with the Universal Human Rights as enshrined in the United Nations' Universal Human Rights Charter.
3. The unachievable objective of eradication of poverty while attributing it as the root cause of terrorism. This makes combating terrorism an illusionary dream.
4. Stopping Oppressive Regimes from sponsoring terrorist groups whilst these governments are in the coalition to fight the terrorism.
5. Building democratic institutions in those areas where terrorist groups operate with same countries being suspicious of outside influence to modernize their societies.
6. Using unilateral or bilateral initiative in the UN and the conflicting responses of various Governments due to their conflicting national, political and economic interests in supporting the terrorist groups countries.
These above gray areas are the indecisive areas of diplomatic politics which the terrorist groups and oppressive governments continue to exploit. Their sympathizers are able also derive their self-righteous and moral authority to support the terrorist groups politically, religiously and financially. On one hand, the present application of International Law, respect for Human Rights, criticisms and condemnations are reserved for democratic governments and their civilians who are the targets of the hate and violence by the very terrorist groups and Oppressive governments who do not respect these very same basic human principles. On the other hand the democratic governments and the democratically minded Non-Governmental Organizations are not allowed to preach the virtues of freedom, liberty and pursue of happiness in tranquility to the Oppressive Regimes and their terrorist groups. These voices are reduced to sound bites or pushed on the sidelines behind the rhetoric of the vocal voices of victimhood and their determination to pursue their violent struggle to destroy our civilization. The voices of actual victims of oppression and human misery are equally silenced in most of the oppressed societies. The diplomatic language of hate and pursuance of political and religious goals through violence therefore become very clear and vocal for those who wish to see the evil in the eyes. Free loving people at one stage or the other are therefore either forced to confront this evil by military force thus creating the cycle of violence or be intimidated into submission to evil.
Alternatively, therefore, the lessons of good governance, pursuing peace through peaceful negotiations, leadership responsibility and political stability are the only means to an end for peace, economic progress, as well as social and political justice. Human development indicators of countries and societies reflect on countries with success stories and those are the ones embarking on their internal pursuance of common sense of governance without internal contradictions of pursuing peace and justice while sponsoring terrorist groups, waging wars and oppression its citizens. These are the obvious lessons some progressive non-governmental organizations have learnt and are applying them at the grass-root levels of many countries in Africa and Latin America. Whether the cup is half-full or half empty is a matter of whose voice is being heard whether it is out of rural town in the jungle of Africa or the politicized Gaza Strip in the Middle East.
Felix Amankona Diawuoh
Executive Director -Boston Chapter
The Free Africa Foundation,
Milton. MA 02186
(617) 698-2730
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: Mwananchi@yahoogroups.com
From: liljoe.radical@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 12:16:30 -0800
Subject: Re: [Mwananchi] Amid Turmoil at Home, Iran Eyes Seat on Top UN Human Rights Body
I meant to say China was invaded by imperialist Japan.
On 2/14/10, Lil Joe
I didn't post anything about "the horror's world war II, an imperialist war in any case - capitalist governments waged war on each others countries. The governments of Germany and Japan, the same as of the US, Britain, France and the Kuomintang represented their own national bourgeoisie. The reason I didn't post the activities of the defunct governments of Japan and Germany is because those governments no longer exist and it was the Allies that made up the UN and are the Permanent Members of the UN Security Council. The United States uses the UN against its enemies - North Korea, Iran having nuclear capacity and bombs, while supporting US policies against them ignore US friends having bombs - in addition to Britain and France, also Israel, India and Pakistan having nuclear weapons. The photos show that US imperialism is however the only country to use these nuclear bombs.
It was Felix who raised the issue by his usual use of demagogic flowery rhetoric about the UN having lost its "moral conscience and common sense", whatever that means. I was actually posting the facts rather than rhetoric, rather than denouncing Iran I showed why by Felix rhetorical criteria the US should be thrown out the UN and excluded from any consideration of being on the so-called"'Human Rights Commission".
I didn't just post the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by US imperialism. I also posted articles showing US imperialist occupation forces behind the massacres of communists and trade unionists in South Korea, as well as innocent civilians including women and children in South Korea and South Vietnam. I posted information about US imperialism overthrowing the elected government in Iran and installing the repressive quisling government.
Communism never existed. However, the Soviet Union was invaded by imperialist Germany just as China was invaded by imperialist Japan. I did post on repressive 'third world governments' - e.g. the governments of South Korea, South Vietnam and Iran working with US imperialism massacring communists, trade unionists and civilians. The question is why is it that Felix and Ayittey never write about these, or denounce the Israeli terrorism and nuclear arsenal?
Lil Joe
On 2/14/10, FELIX DIAWUOH
Lil Joe,
You have intentionally posted these pictures from the archives showing the horrors of the WW II. Strangely, you excluded all the horrors and atrocities of the Nazi Holocaust and the Japanese occupation of China and Korea as well as the post-WW II atrocities committed in the Communist countries and other Third World countries. In order to get to the issues George and I are raising, what is your opinion? Make your case or shut up.
Felix.
No comments:
Post a Comment