United Nations Definition of "Terrorism"
"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them."
F.B.I Definition of "Terrorism"
"Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear to be intended
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping"
Now that we have a working definition of the term "terrorism", let us revisit the single-largest war-crime in recent memory. Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan. Here follows some interesting facts;
In total, over 95 per cent of the combined casualties of Nagasaki & Hiroshima were civilian.
From the time the first bomb was dropped, the estimated death toll reached around 200,000 people in 1950.
Conventional wisdom for dropping both atomic bombs was that it was necessary to bring about a speedy conclusion to the war and save hundreds of thousands of lives. But extensive scholarly research in the US, using primary sources from the time, shows that this just wasn’t true.
By the time the bomb was ready for use, Japan was ready to surrender. As General Dwight Eisenhower said, ‘Japan was at that very moment seeking some way to surrender with minimum loss of face. It was not necessary to hit them with that awful thing.’So if Japan was ready to surrender, why were atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Significant factors include:
US’s desire to establish its dominance in the region required US occupation of Japan, enabling it to establish a permanent military presence, shape its political and economic system and dominate the Pacific region without fear of Japanese resurgence....... (sound familiar?)
US wanted to demonstrate its unique military power – to gain political and diplomatic advantage over the Soviet Union in the postwar settlement in both Asia and Europe. (sound familiar?)
US also secured the otherwise impossible opportunity of testing its nuclear weapons on human beings and collecting data of the fall-out effects on the region,
It is quite obvious from the above information, that the F.B.I and United Nation's definition of TERRORISM aptly applies to the Nagasaki and Hiroshima atomic bombings. Which brings us to the main point of this article......(Read the full story>>>> http://www.stopwar.org.uk/news/remembering-hiroshima)
All of my school teachers and their generation tried to justify Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and they did so by regurgitating the pro-USA narrative of their day. They believe the American Atomic Bomb Terrorist Attacks were justified and they taught us all to believe the same conclusion. Since when is murdering over 200, 000 innocent civilian, non-combatants justifiable? It never is! Neither is it justifiable to murder even a single innocent civilian, non-combatant!
In reality those who support and justify the Nagasaki and Hiroshima incidents, are in fact supporting mass terrorism. And in the current narrative of our day, isn't it a crime to support and aid terrorists, nay, even to support terrorist ideology, let alone propagate it?
What about the aggressive and illegal occupation of Iraq in 2003, which saw 26 nations invade the country and left a staggering 600, 000 + people dead, according to a report issued in 2006? Was not that an act of international terrorism? Of course it was!! So why haven't these 26 participating nations been brought to justice and sent to Guantanamo Bay? Why the double standards?
I cannot help but observe that when colonial aggressor-nations carry out terrorist attacks on other "sovereign" nations, its acceptable and not considered "terrorism", But when these same sovereign nations resist colonial occupation, it is "terrorism" of the highest degree?
We currently live in a world where it is confirmed that colonial-terrorists nations like the USA, UK, Israel and other Nato Member States, not only actively and openly justify their own terrorism, but they are complicit in financing other forms of terrorism in the Middle-East, Africa and other parts of the globe.
If you cannot see clearly by now that many Nato Member States are guilty of mass international terrorism of the highest degree and that they fit precisely into their own definition of terrorism, word for word, then you my dear reader can officially consider yourself brainwashed.
The question you need to ask yourselves at this point is......"Would colonial terrorist-nations, terrorize their own citizens to further their own political agendas?". I will let you the reader decide for yourself.
I will finish by leaving you with one last thought. Any nation which can drop nukes on an innocent civilian population, wouldn't have any problems killing a measly 3000 of its own people during 9/11 in exchange for billions of dollars of resources abroad. A very small price to pay for such a big return, don't you think?
_________________________________________________________________________________
Before you leave, you have a choice to make.
Which Will You Choose?
Add Me To Keep Truthers United!!
No comments:
Post a Comment