Britain’s not-so-popular Prime Minister
If one wants to compile a list of politicians, who preach exactly opposite to what they have in their heart, no doubt British officials would be placed at the top of the set, and indeed your outrageous statements at the United Nations (UN) General Assembly would guarantee you a place on top .
Dear David, I praise your confidence in the ridiculous claim of Britain supporting poor countries in the beginning of your speech. A man at your position should have reached the highest level of confidence induced by ignorance that easily forgets your respective governments’ negative colonial role in exploiting half of the countries of the world in recent centuries and instead speaks of Britain’s commitment to fight against poverty in poor nations. Could you deny the hatred of the UK’s previous administrations, Kings and Queens felt among billions of citizens of the countries you looted?
In your speech, you represented your government in shamming manner as a supporter of the spread of democracy in the world, particularly in the Middle East. My forgetful friend, I still remember happy images of your country’s former Prime Minister Tony Blair, hand in hand with the Libyan slain dictator Muammar Gaddafi and signing multi-billion dollar contracts with Ghaddafi’ government. Gaddafi’s notorious son called you, Tony Blair’s predecessor, Uncle Tony and you are still trying to portray Britain as a patron of democracy under the Libya invasion ?
Referring to Britain’s illegal invasion of Iraq, you claim to be spreading democracy by overthrowing Saddam. British Prime minister, the so-called Iron Lady Margaret Thatcher supported blood thirsty Saddam while he was aligned with Britain’s interests. He just distanced from you and you invaded Iraq illegally and you still claim to be spreading democracy? Where was democracy and human rights values when Saddam was massacring hundreds of thousands of Iranians, Kurds and Arabs in the region? British respective governments were simply supporting him according to well-documented evidence.
Calls are mounting for trying Blair for committing war crimes in Iraq. Blair, like you, played dirty game invaded countries under the pretext of democracy. Now, you are following the same path, so be careful not to suffer the same fate.
Head of the UK coalition government, you poured scorn on dictators as if you really don’t like them in your heart. If dictators are bad, why do you host the killer of Bahraini women and children as a special guest in 10 Downing Street every several weeks and pose with him in front of media cameras?
By the way, what’s up with … , the British intelligence officer who strengthened the foundations of Bahrain’s dictatorship for decades contrary to the will of the Arab country’s people? May I ask you what Britain’s security advisors are doing in Bahrain right now apart from supporting a dictator?
British forces in Congo are currently violating human rights of people who are against Joseph Kabila. Why didn’t you mention his name as a dictator? The most reactionary and backward absolute monarchy exists in Saudi Arabia (even based on your own statements), so why are you insisting to omit the Arab state’s decrepit and violent ruler from your remarks? You even endanger the interests of your country on dictators’ behalf. Indeed you still remember Al-Yamamah scandal.
Mr. Cameron, even your presence in the UN is an insult to other nations, so do not offend the world nations more by your ridiculous statements.
Britain and its governments committed crimes not for democracy but indeed for oil and mineral resources. You invaded Iraq not because of its dictator Saddam Hussein but rather because of its vast oil resources. You toppled Muammar Gaddafi and attacked Libyan not for bringing democracy but rather for reaching the oil resources that exist in the northern part of the African country. Your death-defying silence on the crimes of Bahrain’s Al Khalifa, international terrorism of Saudi Arabia’s Al Saud etc is because of oil, not democracy.
David, despite your specious pose during the speech, when I want to select a part of your remarks as the dirtiest political game with people’s blood, I will definitely choose the part, which as you claimed, contained the statements of a teenage Syrian called Wael about the governmental violence in Syria. Shame on you, even the pain and suffering of the people are abused by you and your allies as a ladder to achieve dirty aims. After you told us a tale about the Syrian teenager’s emotional trauma, now let me tell you some stories.
A few months ago, armed terrorists (those who are provided with weapons and intelligence by you and your government) shot a 10-month-old infant called Massa Shabugh in his uncle’s arms along with four other people only because the baby was crying. Several days before this crime, the so-called freedom fighters, whom you defended in the UN, hanged the last survivor of a Syrian family, who was just 3 years old.
The massacre of Syrian families, beheading by Wahhabi Takfiries are all stories that happen in Syria on daily basis while your government proudly announces its commitment to support criminals, who are responsible for those incidents.
You speak of Syrian citizens while the Syrian Freedom Army, whose 70 percent of its insurgents are non-Syrian (based on Western intelligence organizations’ acknowledgment), is killing people in the Arab country like a rabid dog under the full support of your government.
Does a person, who has a direct hand in these crimes, have the moral authority to preach the UN for its inaction on the issue of Syria? The political circus that you created in the General Assembly also included Britain’s internal affairs. You said, “Democracy is not- and never has been- just about simply holding an election. It is the rule of law, with the majority… It’s about not one person, one vote, once prepared to defend the rights of the majority.” However, when you said the above-mentioned sentences with a specious pose and a cold face, I had a strange feeling of surprise, nausea and of course derision.
Dear Sir, the most credible academic centers in your own country describe the democratic voting system in Britain as “unfair, disproportionate and lame”. Do you remember the famous article of Patrick Dunleavy and Chris Gilson from London School of Economics? The overall picture of the country’s election system is as follows, “The general voting system (also used for local councils in England and Wales) is a very ancient and now rather primitive system, dating back to mediaeval times when techniques for counting were very rude. The system has survived so long because it favors the top two parties, who pile up most votes in their ‘safe’ areas.”
You are a Prime Minister who is the fruit of the 2010 disgraceful vote and the result of Britain’s ailing voting system. Now, how do dare to deliver a lecture on the arrangements for democracy in an open society?
You say that in non-democratic societies “the rule of law [is] twisted for the benefit of the law.” I agree with you on this point, but the more I investigate, the more I come to the conclusion that your country is the best example which suits the above description. Your laws easily change for the benefit of some members of the royal family and a handful of businessmen and bankers, who are considered as the root cause of the current economic crisis. Don’t say that it is not the situation because I can still hear the cries of the members of the Occupy movement and anti-monarchy activists.
One year passed and once again the British officials shamefully turned the UN rostrum into a scene of a bitter comedy about hypocrisy and telling lies.
It is not obvious that how many times we should watch this ridiculous performance. However, it is evident that every day the old fox is becoming weaker and more decrepit and sooner or later these tricks will have no effect on the minds of the people across the world.