http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.aspx?as=adimarticle&ae=windows-1252&f=uk_-olgbtopnews&t=4023&id=2545936&d=20060319&do=
http://newsbox.msn.co.uk&i=
I must admit I find the result in Belarus hard to believe.
How could as many as 2.2% vote for a man like Milinkevich, who would have handed his country and its assets on a plate to the Empire?
Surely, this can't be right. Who, in their right mind, would vote for poverty, unemployment, inequality and the sending of Belarus soldiers to the next country The Empire decides to invade?
Isn't it wonderful to see 'The National Endowment Against Democracy' and all the other Empire-financed 'NGO's lose all that money!
ps For all those who don't believe the elections were 'fair'- like the wonderful elections in the U.S. when voters have the choice between two identical pro-big business, pro-war parties- have a look at the views of independent election observers from around the globe on the link below. And please, please, please, don't write in with any clap-trap on how Milinkevich was denied media access in Belarus' state owned media. How many times do you see anti-NWO figures handed the microphone in Western media? How much opportunity, for example were defenders of President Milosevic given on CNN/Sky News or the BBC to put their view this past week?
The bias of the NWO media would make Joseph Goebbels drool with approval- so let's not go criticising others.
http://www.belarusembassy.org/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
So when are you emigrating to what sounds like a veritable paradise on earth?
I must admit it will be seriously tempting when the fascistic ban on smoking in enclosed public places comes into force in the 51st State next year.
Neil Clark accepts us to swallow a link to a Belarus government website? How about this one from Amnesty International:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR490022006?open&of=ENG-BLR
Neil Clark, you are supporting a regime that imprisons and disappears its political opponents. Leave your rants about Bush and Blair out of this for a minute, and face up to it -- you are an apologist for dictatorship.
No, you're an apologist for a dictatorship that imposes sanctions on and then bombs any country which doesn't do as it says- and when that still doesn't work- incarcerates and then murders the President of the country involved.
Please don't give me lectures about 'dictatorships' and 'human rights'.
It's impossible to have a discussion with you. You simple ignore any questions put to you. This 'dictatorship that imposes sanctions on and then bombs any country which doesn't do as it says' you accuse me of supporting -- that'd be Amnesty International, would it? Maybe you think they're just puppets of your precious 'Empire' too.
With respect, it's impossible to argue with you. I don't recall you sending in Amnesty International reports on the NATO war crimes in Yugoslavia. And what about Guantanomo Bay?
The Empire has along track record of imprisoning or bumping off people it doesn't like- Allende, Palme, and now Slobo- why, instead of targeting your bile on one of the few countries that is not in their clutches- don't you challenge your energies on battling against the real villains?
This is a classic case of 'whataboutery'. Rather than answer a question you say, What about x, y or z? instead. Your only response to my question is to assume I'm sort of apologist for your 'Empire'. I'm not, actually. Guantanamo Bay is an appalling affront to human rights. Lukashenko's Belarus is too. Are you capable of holding those two thoughts inside your head at the same time? You seem incapable of conceding that there might be *anything* wrong with Belarus. That takes some nerve.
I am not 'incapable of coneding there is anything wrong with Belarus' -read my piece from The First Post, posted on this lbog on Saturday.
And also read Jonathan Steele's Guardian piece last week for a good, fair account of the situation in Belarus.
ps I think to equate Belarus and Guantanomo Bay is pretty disgusting.
I am not equating the one with the other. But nobody who cared about human rights would answer a question about Belarus with, Yes but what about Guantanamo bay? The only ethical stance is total and equal solidarity with victims of human rights abuses everywhere, whether in Belarus or anywhere else. So don't start playing Victimhood Top of the Pops.
The fact is, Belarus is less "socialist" and dictatorial than US allies in Central Asia are. Islam Karimov is one of the biggest commies on the planet, but apparently his human rights violations, far worse than Lukashenko's, are acceptable.
The truth is, Lukashenko is targeted not because he is a "socialist" or a "dictator", but because he has refused to turn his country into a New World Order protectorate.
"For all those who don't believe the elections were 'fair'- like the wonderful elections in the U.S. when voters have the choice between two identical pro-big business, pro-war parties..."
And where electronic voting machine companies are progressively taking over the entire electoral system, despite the fact there isn't a skerrick of accountability - no paper record of your vote - nothing.
It's unspeakably horrifying.
Post a Comment