Indecent
Published in L'Expression
(Algeria) on 7 February 2012
by Karim Mohshen (link to original)
(Algeria) on 7 February 2012
by Karim Mohshen (link to original)
Translated from
by Deonca Williams.
Edited by Laurie Henneman.
In all likelihood, there exists a “halal” veto wielded by the West, particularly the United States, and there is also a "taghout" [Editor's note: "false idol"] veto “allowed” from other countries!
This veto occurred well after Russia and China vetoed the West’s resolution against Syria.
This veto is alive and well, particularly in all of the French and American states.
We understand that the West, in particular the United States, is, in theory, very concerned for Syrian citizens who, according to them, were "massacred" by the "tyrant" of Damascus.
People really want to believe this.
It could be — but we doubt it — that Paris, Washington and even London are all acting without any ulterior motive other than to "protect" the Syrians.
However, the facts do not lie, and since when has this triple alliance cared about the lives of Arabs killed by the dozens by Israel?
When Israel was slaughtering Syrians who occupied the Golan in 1967, neither the U.S. nor France said or did anything to halt the killing of Syrians.
We do not want to be cynical; rather, we simply want to state a fact that has been established by history.
Israel’s hallmark is the targeted killing of thousands of Palestinians.
These killings occur daily, weekly, monthly and annually by Israel without any censor except for al Assad, who finds fault with Israel's crimes.
Better yet, the United States abuses its veto, to ensure impunity so that the Jewish state can complete its dirty work.
Such was the case among other events, such as when we look back at a July 2006 veto. Washington did everything possible to allow time for Israel to "liquidate" the Lebanese Hezbollah — and also, in January 2009, it allowed the Jewish state to subdue the Palestinian Hamas.
Among the five permanent members of the Security Council, it is the United States that used, ad nauseam, the right to block a U.N. resolution.
Paris refuses to allow China and Russia to "block" the "international community." What "community?" There is a handful of states that impose the world's sole reading of international law. What we still have is the United States threatening to veto to prevent the admission of Palestine to the U.N.
We understand very well that politics has its little mysteries, or mood swings, but the concept that what is good for some is not good for others is still beyond comprehension.
But such ridiculous comments have been made in response to the Sino-Russian double veto from countries that themselves have used the veto without moderation in recent years.
Assuming that Moscow had wanted to postpone the vote, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice explained "... when people are dying every day and the people of Homs are attacked, then it is not matter of waiting."* How about that!
Mrs. Rice did not have such scruples when Israel assassinated Palestinians between December 2008 and January 2009.
It is much easier for Hillary Clinton, the top U.S. diplomat, to back the Russian-Chinese veto than "to take responsibility for the horrors that occur in Syria."
We did not see Mrs. Clinton with the same fears of "endorsement" when Israel committed its crimes against the Palestinians. Palestinians were being killed daily by Israel’s occupying army, all while the United States vetoed to allow its Zionist allies to finish their "work."
And the head of British diplomacy throws in a punch while accusing Beijing and Moscow of having "bailed out" and encouraging the "brutal" al Assad regime.
He speaks with a forked tongue when we consider how Britain supposedly represents the Palestinians, yet abandoned the Palestinians to face horrors at the hands of criminal groups such as Irgun, Stern, etc.
The best comes from U.N. Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon who, in the same spirit, laments that the "role" of the U.N. is "diminished" by the double veto.
We should not forget that Mr. Ban has not been so outspoken about the U.S. spate of veto wielding (57 exactly) to protect Israel.
If the U.N. has been weakened, it is because the U.S. abuses the veto and the U.N. lacks the ability to enforce its own resolutions, especially when it comes to ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
In fact, all of this is indecent!
*Editor's note: While accurately translated, this quote could not be verified.
This veto occurred well after Russia and China vetoed the West’s resolution against Syria.
This veto is alive and well, particularly in all of the French and American states.
We understand that the West, in particular the United States, is, in theory, very concerned for Syrian citizens who, according to them, were "massacred" by the "tyrant" of Damascus.
People really want to believe this.
It could be — but we doubt it — that Paris, Washington and even London are all acting without any ulterior motive other than to "protect" the Syrians.
However, the facts do not lie, and since when has this triple alliance cared about the lives of Arabs killed by the dozens by Israel?
When Israel was slaughtering Syrians who occupied the Golan in 1967, neither the U.S. nor France said or did anything to halt the killing of Syrians.
We do not want to be cynical; rather, we simply want to state a fact that has been established by history.
Israel’s hallmark is the targeted killing of thousands of Palestinians.
These killings occur daily, weekly, monthly and annually by Israel without any censor except for al Assad, who finds fault with Israel's crimes.
Better yet, the United States abuses its veto, to ensure impunity so that the Jewish state can complete its dirty work.
Such was the case among other events, such as when we look back at a July 2006 veto. Washington did everything possible to allow time for Israel to "liquidate" the Lebanese Hezbollah — and also, in January 2009, it allowed the Jewish state to subdue the Palestinian Hamas.
Among the five permanent members of the Security Council, it is the United States that used, ad nauseam, the right to block a U.N. resolution.
Paris refuses to allow China and Russia to "block" the "international community." What "community?" There is a handful of states that impose the world's sole reading of international law. What we still have is the United States threatening to veto to prevent the admission of Palestine to the U.N.
We understand very well that politics has its little mysteries, or mood swings, but the concept that what is good for some is not good for others is still beyond comprehension.
But such ridiculous comments have been made in response to the Sino-Russian double veto from countries that themselves have used the veto without moderation in recent years.
Assuming that Moscow had wanted to postpone the vote, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice explained "... when people are dying every day and the people of Homs are attacked, then it is not matter of waiting."* How about that!
Mrs. Rice did not have such scruples when Israel assassinated Palestinians between December 2008 and January 2009.
It is much easier for Hillary Clinton, the top U.S. diplomat, to back the Russian-Chinese veto than "to take responsibility for the horrors that occur in Syria."
We did not see Mrs. Clinton with the same fears of "endorsement" when Israel committed its crimes against the Palestinians. Palestinians were being killed daily by Israel’s occupying army, all while the United States vetoed to allow its Zionist allies to finish their "work."
And the head of British diplomacy throws in a punch while accusing Beijing and Moscow of having "bailed out" and encouraging the "brutal" al Assad regime.
He speaks with a forked tongue when we consider how Britain supposedly represents the Palestinians, yet abandoned the Palestinians to face horrors at the hands of criminal groups such as Irgun, Stern, etc.
The best comes from U.N. Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon who, in the same spirit, laments that the "role" of the U.N. is "diminished" by the double veto.
We should not forget that Mr. Ban has not been so outspoken about the U.S. spate of veto wielding (57 exactly) to protect Israel.
If the U.N. has been weakened, it is because the U.S. abuses the veto and the U.N. lacks the ability to enforce its own resolutions, especially when it comes to ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
In fact, all of this is indecent!
*Editor's note: While accurately translated, this quote could not be verified.