genocide

unacknowledged genocides

antarchi's picture

Genocide...

“...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

from The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Article 2

ethnic cleansing under NATO guidance

antarchi's picture

Following NATO's victory over Yugoslavia and occupation of Kosovo, there then transpired the "largest ethnic cleaning in the Balkans [in proportionate terms]" (Jan Oberg), with some 150,000 Serbs put to flight along with thousands of Roma—with thousands of Roma suffering the loss of houses torched by the returning Kosovo Albanians. All this was done under NATO authority.

forgetting gospic

antarchi's picture

In late September 1991, over 120 Gospic Serbs, including prominent professors and judges, were abducted and murdered, their bodies destroyed or hidden.

...this was the first massacre carried out as a deliberate act of ethnic cleansing, designed to frighten the Serb population of Croatia into fleeing. Yet it was ignored by the world's media. The name of Gospic never became part of the litany of atrocities repeated by news media covering Yugoslav wars.

— Diana Johnstone, Fool's Crusade

expropriation and removal of the poor

antarchi's picture

In 1895, Theodor Herzl, Zionism's chief prophet, confided in his diary that he did not favour sharing Palestine with the natives. Better, he wrote, to "try to spirit the penniless [Palestinian] population across the border by denying it any employment in our own country... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."

— Jonathan Cooke

moral obligation to intervene

antarchi's picture
Two years later, a Commons Select Committee would conclude: ‘Britain had a legal right to intervene [in the Turkish assault on Cyprus], she had a moral obligation to intervene, she had the military capacity to intervene. She did not intervene for reasons which the government refuses to give.’

free passage to attila

antarchi's picture
The reality is that Britain had both the means and the obligation to stop the Turkish assault on Cyprus. After first ensuring Turkish hostility to the Greek majority, it had imposed a Treaty of Guarantee on the island, depriving it of true independence, for its own selfish ends: the retention of large military enclaves at its sovereign disposal. Now, when called on to abide by the treaty, it crossed its arms and gave free passage to the modern Attila, claiming that it was helpless – a nuclear power – to do otherwise.
Syndicate content