However you define Civil Liberties, Civil or Human Rights, more and more governments are today finding it necessary to place an upper limit on tolerance, defining what they considered the norms or conversely the excesses in their interpretation and application of the same. They do so in the face of ever-increasing violent acts of home grown terrorism. However in redefining Civil Liberties, to confront terrorism western governments do so under restraint; one fettered by the burden of western political correctness, the restriction of looking cagily over the shoulders on how to counter without confrontation the false piety of narcissistic habitual government bashers. People who abuse the language of rights and tolerance, those that tell us fat people can no longer be called fat or thin people skinny, that murderers should not be given life sentences and terrorist investigations are all politically motivated.
Theresa May, the British home secretary, said at the last Conservative party conference; “If we do not act, we risk sleepwalking into a society in which crime can no longer be investigated and terrorists can plot their murderous schemes undisrupted.” I agree, the “Rights” and “Political Correctness” culture of recent years has to be seen as running its’ course, has been allowed to get out of control. However one has to ask, will we see a real change in emphasis, of definitions applied, a realization that terror is terror irrespective of perpetrator, situation or of guise. Or will the application remain the same, at the whim of the rich and powerful; continue to be of one using that universal language of Rights, one that ignores the fact that the majority of the worlds seven and a half billion people, on a daily basis still struggle just to survive, are afforded no basic “Rights” other than, that to exist. That 10% own most of the worlds wealth.
Personally I feel it will it be a continuance of the old “behind closed door” policy where the West will continue using the Human Rights platform to criticize others, as provision of proof that they care, while it hypocritically applies its own repressive measures to combat the war on Terror, a war purely of its own making. They are not really concerned of being seen as “fiddling while Rome burns” or fearful of the hysteria generated by negative media coverage after each successive terror attack, this they accepted as being par for the course, part of the game. As acceptable as collateral damage, a requirement for further justification of their own hypocritical standings. The application of Rights will still, be determined by the rules of the west and its friends, for the balance - the majority, Human Rights will remain a ambiguous quest, used by the west as a big stick to garner headlines, a tool for country bashing in the western media by the chosen few members of the narcissistic Human Rights club. The reality is therefore there will be no change in application, the change will be in the methodology used to distract and deflect criticism of the west as it seeks to legalizes its current hypocrisy.
Cause and effect will have no bearing on this matter as western countries finds themselves in retreat on liberties and rights, as they are forced to confront the reality of the monster they helped create. As these nations seek to redefine for their own purposes their position, while claiming change is a consequence needed to maintain cultural values, to preserve the security and safety of nations. They will however also emphasize the bestiality of the foreign enemy as they confront home grown yet sympathetic terrorists; they will of course claim the moral high ground, but it will be one assumed by right of might.
For years Governments in the west have been happy to sit on “obese” backsides financing a narcissistic few to play judge and jury on their Human Rights behalf. For too long the west has been using human rights aficionados to finger wag at other political systems that were singled out by them as if they were the root cause of the world ills. Does it never occur to people that a drone attack in some obscure village in Asia or Africa that kills an entire family as a consequence of taking out one man is worse than the public beheading of a murderer in a square in Saudi or that so called satirical religious cartoons are far more offensive to a majority worldwide than calling gays queer or a British Bobby a pleb. The fact that such cartoons are not representative of free speech but a vindictive attack on the rights of others, a form of collective punishment seems to have been missed. Similarly that the right to misrepresent the truth of in any form of media warrants more than an apology as was the case recently with Fox News, it is in fact a crime and can be the subject of serious penalty in many places around the world. The west must realize that Rights, liberties and personal values are not universal and are certainly not only those valued by them. How often does one read the claim that, western values are aspirational, the norm by which all others systems should be judged, yet to me and I am sure many others the right to bear arms as in enshrined in the US constitution is as archaic as is a public flogging, yet one only remains defended.
Having lived in the Islamic world with out mishap since 1977 I can honestly say my own personal freedoms and values have never once been compromised by state or system. Can many a migrant that moved to the west say that of their experience in their adopted country furthermore can all native people of colour claim the same in the USA or even Europe? Everybody I know here in Bahrain and around the Middle East, was as appalled as I at the latest round of terror attacks in Australia and Europe, all saw the attacks as an affront to Islam, to Humanity. All condemned the acts publicly without condition and saw the perpetrators as hijackers of Islamic values and belief . When the new, and in my opinion, obscene cartoons insulting their Prophet reappeared on the new cover of Charlie Hebdo the indignation of my friends, true Moslems, the sense of their betrayed was in these circumstances totally justifiable, furthermore to then have such cartoons defended as freedom of speech by many western governments and Rights activists simply added insult to injury.
With the narcissistic few as the blunt end of the stick the west, particularly the USA, entrenched in their democratic glass house, has financed foreign interference in their pursuit of their interests as the forerunner and justification for military intervention time and time again throughout the Middle East. Now with the rise of “Daesh” or “ISIS” who are not representative of Islam, its principles or tenets in any shape or form, the world is better informed. It is western governments who consequently now find themselves under the spot light as they muddy the waters over who is responsible for the rise, origins and source of finance for this new and hideous enemy. It is time to assign responsibility, but will the west accept its share of the blame in creating an enemy that has no morals, one that’s only loyalty is to death and martyrdom, “Daesh” are not an enemy born out of circumstance but one born out of consequence, of western interference.
As countries move to tighten state controls in response to both real and hyped threats, no doubt majorities will stand in line behind their respective governments. The radical fringe and those with vested interests will bellow with outrageous indignation, the press will have a field day. The narcissistic human rights aficionados will shout loudest, they will not relinquish their egos easily. They have after all the most to lose. They have over the years created niche empires in the pay of western governments and have been allowed to wield power way above their station. Will they turn on their financial hobby-horses or will their puppet masters allow them to continue festering internal descent within other Middle East countries, even those that are now allies in the “War on Terror”, as a reward for silence on the home front. Employment as a Right for redundant rights aficionados, redeployment of a sort as they act as a cover, a distraction to ensure the western media doesn’t look too closely behind the rhyme or the reason for the redefining of western definitions of rights and liberties at home. a certainty provided that is they concentrate on the brutality of the enemy.
It is time to ask just how many dissent groups can the west foster only to further down the road have to face them as the enemy. History is certainly repeating itself in a never-ending player redefinition in the “War on Terror”. “Daesh” or “IS” have opened wide Pandora’s box. The West will not find an Aladdin’s lamp in the Middle East any longer to rub, simply put there are no jinni around these days to close the lid, I also ponder, if the aim of this latest episode in the war on terror is actually intended to close the lid at all. If it was why is the West continuing to court, to nurture Iran, encouraging its' hovering hand. Surely they must realize this will ensure that the lid remains firmly open!
US Middle East Foreign Policy; a cornucopia of Diplomatic Hogwash
US Openly Approves Hong Kong Chaos it Created
Theresa May: British values will prevail over extremists
Cameron’s pledge to scrap Human Rights Act angers civil rights groups