Main image – Getty Images
- By Basil Hashim
The deputy leader of the SNP has backed the new far-right power of the police to shoot-to-kill in the event of a terror attack. Although what constitutes a suspected, potential, terror attack is open to massive levels of abuse and misinterpretation.
Stewart Hosie said he would trust police officers to take the “necessary action” if someone was posing a “real and immediate risk”.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said on Monday he was “not happy” with police operating a shoot-to-kill policy.
Mr Hosie told BBC Scotland he “would not take the Jeremy Corbyn line on this”.
The new rules have appeared in retaliation to the shootings in Paris last Friday which left 129 dead, 97 seriously injured and up to 100 people with minor injuries.
The problem with this plan however is the bizarre over aggressive, hypocritical and quite frankly phony justifications that France and Britain are using to push in illegal and undemocratic new laws and actions.
The attacks were after all carried out by French and Belgium citizens, not Arabs, not refugees, not Syrians. Yet France responded with illegally bombing Syria killing many Syrian civilians in the process. Although France has been illegally bombing Syria for months, it’s brutal campaign was dramatically up scaled over the weekend.
The attacks, which were the acts of 8, individual French and Belgiums, sparked mass violence in racially motivated attacks against mainly female, lone Muslims across France over the weekend and this week. A totally unjustified reaction, in the same way that kicking your pet kitten because your emails got hacked at work would be.
Several State Governors in the USA have refused to allow Muslim refugees into their State, a false bravado considering that they lack any sort of power to do so. Migration of refugees fleeing the very terrorist atrocities that hit Paris, only on a much larger scale, is under federal jurisdiction, and can not be altered by a mere Governor with racist views.
The fact is quite simple, the refugees are fleeing terrorism and western illegal invasion, regime changes and western bombs that have killed millions of civilians over recent years. The refugees are fleeing the same terror groups that the west claims to be fighting. So blaming the refugees for the horrific events that took place in Paris on Friday is just blaming the victims. The attackers, as has been verified by Parisian police, were French and Belgium, not refugees, not Syrian. The attacks were domestic, and a matter for French and Belgium internal affairs to combat.
There was no such rash reactions when the Russian civilian passenger jet was blown up by the same terror group in Egypt earlier this year, not the same knee-jerk reactions when hundreds of civilians were slaughtered in Lebanon in recent weeks, again by the same terror group.
But rather than looking at the motive to the attacks, which the attackers claimed was in retaliation to France’s illegal invasion, occupation and bombing of multiple counties in the last generation: Algeria, Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Palestine (by proxy of supporting Israel). Then perhaps taking the peaceful option of say, not, destroying other nations illegally causing the deaths of millions of civilians, France took a different approach, more bombs, because we all know two wrongs make a right?
You can not create peace by increasing the levels of illegal war fare. The attacks on Paris were horrific and unjustifiable. So too are the attack on the civilians the French are now taking part in. Peace comes through diplomacy, not through bombs. It appears only Corbyn and George Galloway are brave enough in British politics to stand up and ask for this rare ideology of peace these days.
Britain’s response to the Paris attacks could have been one of solidarity
Britain could have offered aid in the form of intelligence, medical supplies, practical aid. Instead Britain offers shoot to kill, sparking fear in to every “foreign looking” person on this already intolerant island. Official polls last year showed that over 80% of all Muslims in Britain has been subject to a racially motivated physical attack during that year. 94% subject to open racial discrimination. The fear and divides between communities within Britain is exactly what groups such as Da’ish Al-Dawla want. Divide and conquer, and Britain is playing right into their hands.
We should be standing shoulder to shoulder in solidarity, regardless of colour or creed, we should be supporting each other through peace, education and understanding.
Yet a large proportion of British citizens when polled by The International thought that Islam and Muslims were two different things, often thinking that Islam meant terrorists. It is this bigoted institutionalised racism that needs to be addressed in order to live in harmony.
Islam forbids suicide, so why do people call Muslims suicide bombers, when by definition all suicide bombers can not actually be Muslim?
Cameron today threatened that despite a no vote in the British Parliament and despite the UN forbidding it, he may lead Britain into an active war against Syria, in a worrying echo to the illegal war Blair waged in Iraq, the very war that created the troubles we see today. Cameron is already bombing Syria and Iraq using drones, even to target his own British citizens, in a move that the international community has held as an illegal war crime.
Without respecting the sovereignty of other nations, the legitimacy of other leaders or the rules of international or domestic laws, it would appear that Cameron is waiting to go down in history as just another war criminal.
Mr Hosie told the Good Morning Scotland programme: “There is no negotiating with someone who is prepared to fire hundreds of rounds at civilians with a machine gun.”
Prime Minister David Cameron has said the police should be allowed to kill a terrorist if it allowed lives to be saved.
But Callum Steele of the Scottish Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, said such talk was “particularly unhelpful” as it “raises tensions and brings additional and unnecessary emotion into what is by any measure a difficult topic.”
So far in British politics George Galloway from the Respect Party and Corbyn from the Labour Party have been the only two individuals to actively speak out for peace.