البيت الآرامي العراقي

Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Welcome2
Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  619888zqg202ssdr
البيت الآرامي العراقي

Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Welcome2
Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  619888zqg202ssdr
البيت الآرامي العراقي
هل تريد التفاعل مع هذه المساهمة؟ كل ما عليك هو إنشاء حساب جديد ببضع خطوات أو تسجيل الدخول للمتابعة.

البيت الآرامي العراقي

سياسي -ثقافي-أجتماعي


 
الرئيسيةالرئيسيةبحـثس .و .جالتسجيلarakeyboardchald keyboardدخول

 

 Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!

اذهب الى الأسفل 
كاتب الموضوعرسالة
Dr.Hannani Maya
المشرف العام
المشرف العام
Dr.Hannani Maya


Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Usuuus10
Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  8-steps1a
الدولة : العراق
الجنس : ذكر
عدد المساهمات : 60486
مزاجي : أحب المنتدى
تاريخ التسجيل : 21/09/2009
الابراج : الجوزاء
العمل/الترفيه العمل/الترفيه : الأنترنيت والرياضة والكتابة والمطالعة

Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Empty
مُساهمةموضوع: Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!    Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Icon_minitime1الجمعة 22 أبريل 2011 - 21:26

Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!



Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  1c1db69e200e54f6563748833640wi-vi
For over eight years, members of Britain's parliament and those sitting on city councils, have refused to give a progressive voice to Iraq’s refugee's and our religious minority communities, who have been forced to flee as a result of violence and sectarian persecution.


Silence has allowed unimaginable terror, poverty and further acts of ethnic cleansing to be imposed on these already vulnerable people, leaving them now displaced in countries like Syria, Jordan, the USA and UK.


On May 5th, for Britain’s local government government elections, we are asking that people repay the silence of the establishment, by voting against the three major political parties of Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative Party and instead we ask that people cast their ballots for independent candidates, local campaigns or smaller political parties!


You can also contact Members of Parliament to explain why you wont be voting for their political party at the elections, through the website theyworkforyou.com



Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Google Buzz

Reactions:
0 comments Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Icon18_email Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Icon18_edit_allbkg Links to this post
Labels: British Elections, Liberal Democrats, May 5th, the Conservative Party, The Labour Party






if (window['tickAboveFold']) {window['tickAboveFold'](document.getElementById("latency-4075403659975077013")); }

The Extermination of Iraqi Christians



Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  142
Last week an Iraqi Muslim scholar issued a fatwa that, among other barbarities, asserts that "it is permissible to spill the blood of Iraqi Christians." Inciting as the fatwa is, it is also redundant. While last October's Baghdad church attack which killed some sixty Christians is widely known—actually receiving some MSM coverage—the fact is, Christian life in Iraq has been a living hell ever since U.S. forces ousted the late Saddam Hussein in 2003.



Among other atrocities, beheading and crucifying Christians are not irregular occurrences; messages saying "you Christian dogs, leave or die," are typical. Islamists see the church as an "obscene nest of pagans" and threaten to "exterminate Iraqi Christians." John Eibner, CEO of Christian Solidarity International, summarized the situation well in a recent letter to President Obama:



<BLOCKQUOTE>The threat of extermination is not empty. Since the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, more than half the country's Christian population has been forced by targeted violence to seek refuge abroad or to live away from their homes as internally displaced people. According to the Hammurabi Human Rights Organization, over 700 Christians, including bishops and priests, have been killed and 61 churches have been bombed. Seven years after the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Catholic Archbishop Louis Sako of Kirkuk reports: "He who is not a Muslim in Iraq is a second-class citizen. Often it is necessary to convert or emigrate, otherwise one risks being killed." This anti-Christian violence is sustained by a widespread culture of Muslim supremacism that extends far beyond those who pull the triggers and detonate the bombs.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Like a Baghdad caliph, Saddam appears to have made use of the better educated Christians, who posed no risk to his rule, such as his close confidant Tariq Aziz. Moreover, by keeping a tight lid on the Islamists of his nation—who hated him as a secular apostate no less than the Christians—the latter benefited indirectly.


Conversely, by empowering "the people," the U.S. has unwittingly undone Iraq's Christian minority. Naively projecting Western values on Muslims, U.S. leadership continues to think that "people-power" will naturally culminate into a liberal, egalitarian society—despite all the evidence otherwise. The fact is, in the Arab/Muslim world, "majority rule" traditionally means domination by the largest tribe or sect; increasingly, it means Islamist domination.


Either which way, the minorities—notably the indigenous Christians—are the first to suffer once the genie of "people-power" is uncorked. Indeed, evidence indicates that the U.S. backed "democratic" government of Iraq enables and incites the persecution of its Christians. (All of this raises the pivotal question: Do heavy-handed tyrants—Saddam, Mubarak, Qaddafi, et al—create brutal societies, or do naturally brutal societies create the need for heavy-handed tyrants to keep order?)


Another indicator that empowering Muslim masses equates Christian suffering is the fact that, though Iraqi Christians amount to a mere 5% of the population, they make up nearly 40% of the refugees fleeing Iraq. It is now the same in Egypt: "A growing number of Egypt's 8-10 million Coptic Christians are looking for a way to get out as Islamists increasingly take advantage of the nationalist revolution that toppled long-standing dictator Hosni Mubarak in February."


At least Egypt's problems are homegrown, whereas the persecution of Iraq's Christians is a direct byproduct of U.S. intervention. More ironic has been Obama's approach: Justifying U.S. intervention in Libya largely in humanitarian terms, the president recently declared that, while "it is true that America cannot use our military wherever repression occurs… that cannot be an argument for never acting on behalf of what's right."


True, indeed. Yet, as Obama "acts on behalf of what's right" by providing military protection to the al-Qaeda connected Libyan opposition, Iraq's indigenous Christians continue to be exterminated—right under the U.S. military's nose in Iraq. You see, in its ongoing bid to win the much coveted but forever elusive "Muslim-hearts-and-minds™"—which Obama has even tasked NASA with—U.S. leadership has opted to ignore the inhumane treatment of Islam's "Christian dogs," the mere mention of which tends to upset Muslims.


Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum.


The grand irony, of course, is that Christian persecution has increased exponentially under U.S. occupation. As one top Vatican official put it, Christians, "paradoxically, were more protected under the dictatorship" of Saddam Hussein.What does one make of this—that under Saddam, who was notorious for human rights abuses, Christians were better off than they are under a democratic government sponsored by humanitarian, some would say "Christian," America?


Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Google Buzz

Reactions:
0 comments Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Icon18_email Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Icon18_edit_allbkg Links to this post







if (window['tickAboveFold']) {window['tickAboveFold'](document.getElementById("latency-2848748703642477409")); }

Iraq was a war for oil



Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!  Iraq_oil_baer_050908
On Tuesday, the Independent newspaper published documents revealing that detailed plans to exploit Iraq’s oil reserves were discussed by ministers in the UK Labour government and some of the world’s largest oil companies, including Britain’s BP, in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.


The mass of official documents confirm that, eight years on and following the death of an estimated 1 million civilians, the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq was indeed a war for oil.The documents came to light only due to Freedom of Information requests over a period of five years by Greg Muttitt, an expert on Iraqi oil policy, who works for the British charity Platform. Muttitt has written a book, Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq, published this week.


The documents illustrate the imperialist character of the war. The Independent notes: “BP was concerned that if Washington allowed TotalFinaElf’s existing contact with Saddam Hussein to stand after the invasion it would make the French conglomerate the world’s leading oil company. BP told the Government it was willing to take ‘big risks’ to get a share of the Iraqi reserves, the second largest in the world.”At the time, it was known that Iraq had vast oil reserves, but the best estimates of a reserve of 112 billion barrels was based on decades-old seismic data. It is estimated by some geologists that Iraq’s reserves could be 45 to 100 billion barrels higher.


The documents reveal that in late 2002, at least five meetings were held between British civil servants and ministers and two of the Big Oil conglomerates—BP and Shell.At one of the meetings, Baroness Symons, then trade minister, informed BP that the Labour government supported British energy firms being given a share of Iraq’s oil and gas reserves. She said this would be a reward for Prime Minister Tony Blair’s military commitment to US plans for regime-change.


The Independent reveals that minutes of one meeting, held October 31, 2002, “show that Lady Symons agreed to lobby the Bush administration on BP’s behalf because the oil giant feared it was being ‘locked out’ of deals that Washington was quietly striking with US, French and Russian governments and their energy firms.”


The minutes of the meeting note that Symons would “report back to the companies before Christmas” regarding the effectiveness of her lobbying.Publicly, the oil companies stated they had “no strategic interest” in Iraq. One week prior to the invasion, Shell said that reports of meetings between the company and the British government over potential oil contracts were “highly inaccurate.”“We have neither sought nor attended meetings with officials in the UK government on the subject of Iraq,” Shell said.





Read more »
الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل
 
Vote No to Ethnic Cleansing!
الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة 
صفحة 1 من اصل 1

صلاحيات هذا المنتدى:لاتستطيع الرد على المواضيع في هذا المنتدى
البيت الآرامي العراقي :: منتديات عامة متنوعة Miscellaneous General forums :: منتدى باللغة الانكليزية English Forum-
انتقل الى: