| |
Kidnap and torture by British Soldiers in Iraq
Sunday, 20 May 2007 - 6:57 PM SL Time |  | |
Robert Verkaik reveals evidence of systemic ill-treatment of civilians by British soldiers in the aftermath of the overthrow of Saddam.
The British Army is facing new allegations that it was involved in `forced disappearances`, hostage-taking and torture of Iraqi civilians after the fall of the regime of Saddam Hussein.
One of the claims is made by the former chairman of the Red Crescent in Basra, who alleges he was beaten unconscious by British soldiers after they accused him of being a senior official in Saddam`s Baath party.
For more go to: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article2556468.ece |
Source(s)
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article2556468.ece |
Abdulsalaam
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 832
Member Profile
|
20 May 2007 12:19:47 GMT Report for Abuse
|
The Brits lecture to us on human right violations. For them we are so bad that they cut off the last installment of funds already pledged for tsunami aid and put on hold any future aid.
What are their troops doing in Iraq? What right do they have to occupy a sovereign country that is thousands of miles away where their disciplined and well trained soldiers kidnap and torture Iraqi civilians not sparing even a former chairman of the international humanitarian relief organisation Red Crescent?
If SRr Lanka is to be punished for what happens within the borders of Sri Lanka, how much more worse is the conduct of the Brits in a country far away from UK where they have no business to be in?
British hypocrisy is revolting. |
nirupam
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1951
Member Profile
|
21 May 2007 22:23:40 GMT Report for Abuse
|
There is no army of any country that is is clean and hasn't been involved in abuses of civilians ihn any occupation. If British who are supposed to be the 'best trained and behaved' beahave in such brutal manner think of thosearmies who are not watched by the cameras of the international media.
US and UK invaded Iraq without the approval of the UN Security Council though these two were the co-founders of UN. Subsequently more civilians are dying every day than under Sadam Hussain who they went to oust. Sri Lankan army of mostly Sinhalese speaking soldiers is in occupation of Tamil areas in the Northeast without the consent of the population. Moreover paramilitaries are rearmed and have a blank cheque to do anything with impunity. We hope UN will send a UN peace keeping force to monitor the human right abuses. |
Abdulsalaam
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 832
Member Profile
|
22 May 2007 11:30:14 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Sri Lankan army of mostly Sinhalese speaking soldiers is in occupation of Tamil areas in the Northeast without the consent of the population.
Nirupam, don't forget the North and East is part and parcel of the Sri Lankan territory and the Sri Lankan forces have every right to be in the North and East. They do NOT need the consent of the people of the North or East to deploy there. The SL forces are therefore NOT occupation forces like those in Iraq or Palestine or Somalia. |
saleemtariq
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
Member Profile
|
25 May 2007 09:20:39 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Abdulsalaam,
They do NOT need the consent of the people of the North or East to deploy there.
SL army comprised of 99.9% Sinhalese and speak an alien language to that of the population in the North and most of East. As such this is an struggle of Sinhalese V Tamil speaking people. This is an occupation because no local population or their representatives approved their 'deployment' even if you want to refrase it?
There is no difference whatsoever in the manner these occupation forces behave either in Iraq and Afghanistan or in the Northeast of Sri Lanka. Look at what they do, no difference. Kidnapping, torture, rape of women and arming of local traitors to hunt down the local population.
If you are a Muslim you must have been brought up among Sinhalese and therefore no surprise that you hold Sinhalese 'mentality'. |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4345
Member Profile
|
25 May 2007 21:38:52 GMT Report for Abuse
|
British and Americans are Terrorists ! I'm sorry my friends but there are not other words to describe them !
Abdulsalaam,
Sri lanka was created and united by force by British for administration. I personnaly feel the Sinhala army is an occupant army. The army is 99 & Sinhala and the occupied population is 99% Tamil. So yes it's an occupation with my definition. Sri lanka was united and now is divided , the Sinhala army is so clearly now an army of occupation. There is no point to discuss about it.
Edited By - KURAL - 25 May 2007 21:39:09 GMT |
Abdulsalaam
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 832
Member Profile
|
26 May 2007 18:18:31 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Saleem Tariq/Kural
Any body can claim anything but a claim doesn't become fact. The claim can have some legitimacy if it is accepted by others; still it cannot become reality.
The claim of 'occupation' and its attempted justification on the ground that the SL Army is 99% Sinhala and it is deployed in areas which is 99% non-Sinhala will find no acceptance anywhere except with Ealamists for the simple reason that the deployment is within the legitimate borders of SL. To say that SL forces deploying within Sri Lanka is 'occupation' is ridiculously laughable.
When an unsustainable claim is accepted, it can get some legitimacy as in the case of Israeli occupation of Palestine, but it is still not reality as the Palestinians are yet to give their approval. |
nirupam
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1951
Member Profile
|
26 May 2007 22:12:59 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Abdulsalaam,
SL Army is 99% Sinhala and it is deployed in areas which is 99% non-Sinhala will find no acceptance anywhere except with Ealamists for the simple reason that the deployment is within the legitimate borders of SL.
Not before long husband could do anything to his wife within their house but now the law is that he is committing a crime if he hits her. we cannot hide behind 'legitimate borders' any longer. Look at what happened to Pakistan that 'deployed its army' in and bombed East Pakistan with the facilitation of Sri Lanka. They are two independent countries.
Sinhala army's kidnapping and killing Tamils must be wrong even if the law made by an 'ethnic majority' enables the president not stop them or not to investigate any such crime or give impunity to the perpetrators. Because of people like you and your mentality secession becomes inevitable.
Edited By - nirupam - 26 May 2007 22:14:34 GMT |
Abdulsalaam
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 832
Member Profile
|
28 May 2007 08:55:04 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Nirupam
You miss the point. I am answering the allegation that SL Forces deployment in the North and East is 'Occupation'. It is certainly not.
If SL Forces commit serious human rights violations, that cannot be condoned. All those involved in such violations must be brought to book. If not, sooner or later, they will face the wrath of the people which will ultimately decide the fate of the deployment. The SL forces have been in the North and East for well over 20 years now and it is strange that the people have not resorted to any open resistance against the SL forces if there had been grave human rights violations. Why is that? |
|
