Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
UN LEADER BAN Ki-moon is “shocked” by the reports of a new massacre in Syria and demands an independent inquiry, his spokesman said Monday.
Reports of hundreds of bodies found in Daraya near Damascus on Sunday after raids by government troops highlighted the lack of protection for civilians in the Syria conflict, said Ban’s spokesman Martin Nesirky.
“The secretary general is certainly shocked by those reports and he strongly condemns this appalling and brutal crime,” Nesirky told reporters. “Where hundreds of civilians have been killed in Daraya, this needs to be investigated immediately in an independent and impartial fashion.”
The UN Human Rights commissioner Navi Pillay is trying to get information on the massacre, Nesirky said.
More than 330 bodies have been found in Daraya after President Bashar al-Assad’s troops went on house-to-house raids, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
“Wherever there are atrocities, whoever is responsible needs to be held accountable,” Nesirky said. The Daraya case “underscores again the lack of protection for civilians that there is in Syria and the urgent need to prevent loss of life.”
Syrian activists say about 25,000 people have been killed since an uprising against Assad started in March last year.
Provisional government
French President Francois Hollande warned Monday that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime would be a legitimate reason for a foreign intervention.
“We with our allies remain very watchful to prevent the use of chemical weapons by the regime, which would be for the international community a legitimate cause for direct intervention,” Hollande said in a speech to French diplomats.
Hollande also said France was ready to recognise a provisional Syrian government once it was formed and urged rebels to establish one as soon as possible.
Calling for an “intensification of efforts for the political transition to take place quickly,” Hollande urged the Syrian opposition to form a “provisional, inclusive and representative” government.
“France will recognise the provisional government of the new Syria as soon as it is formed,” he said.
Hollande also confirmed France was working with its partners on the possible establishment of buffer zones within Syria to receive people displaced by the conflict and prevent them flooding over the borders with neighbouring states.
Turkey in particular has been pushing for such a move, which would require military back-up to ensure the security of the refugees.
“We are working … (on) the initiative of buffer zones proposed by Turkey,” Hollande said, adding that “we are doing so in coordination with our closest partners.”
Hollande also said the opposition of Russia and China to action against the Syrian regime was weakening the United Nations.
“I am saying to Russia and to China that their attitude in the Syria crisis is weakening our capacity to fulfill the mandate given us by the United Nations charter,” he said.
“Our country only participates in operations to keep the peace or protect civilians by virtue of a mandate and therefore a resolution of the United Nations Security Council,” Hollande said.
“For this the (Security Council) members must take their responsibility to allow it to take decisions,” he said.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I’m by no means a fan of the man, I abhor much of what he stands for, but he’s right that if you disagree with him, you need to engage in debate. He is an elected MEP! Exposing him is the only way his message will be broken down.
Yes, this is an extreme case (ie BNP) but the stifling of open debate on certain issues doesn’t sit well with me.
Agree but it is pleasurable to notice the medicine maker taste his own medicine.
Not when he uses it as an opportunity to appear the more reasoned and diplomatic side. What he stands for is exclusion and by excluding him, his opponents give him a rather large stick to hit them with.
I would have thought that he, more then most, would know what a Fascist is – if he looked at himself in the mirror , he would be staring at one !
Have any of the Thumb Downers even taken the time to read up on what Mr Griffin and his Party – The British National Party stand for ?
He and his Party represent modern day Naziism .
He represents everything that is absolutely gross and dangerous in modern society in my opinion.
That’s right Eddie! Let’s show these fascists that democratic society won’t tolerate their nonsense! Let’s deny them their right to free-speech! Even better, we’ll threaten violent protest if any DOES plan to provide them with a platform!
(slow clap)
Eddie, as repugnant as most of Mr Griffen’s view are, I’m pretty sure he isn’t advocating throwing anyone into the gas chambers.
Not letting people like him speak lends weight to the idea that there might be something in what he says.
We have laws against incitement to hatred, that ought to be enough censorship.
@Donal. I’m sure he wouldn’t advocate that at a Trinity debate. But if you read thru any if the aid to Africa or Turkish earthquake threads here it’s pretty scary how mean some can be when purse strings are stretched.
Stopping him debating at Trinity was PC gone mad but so is all this a lot of the PC free speech thing.
This man is an eleceted European politician and is perfectly entitled to speak here. If you dont like what he was has to say then dont listen to him!! Do these fools protesting not understand the meaning of Free Speech?
Of course the man and his Party are entitled to Freedom of Speech , in the same way that his opponents have the same equal right of protest !
Protest to the point where his opponents seek to vetoe his right to speak at trinity college?? Why try and censor him? As i said he’s an elected politican and he can say whatever he damn well likes. You dont have to attend the lecture nor do you have to agree so what right have you to try and block his participation?
The whole point of freedom of speech is to protect the unsavoury views held by people like Mr. Griffin. If someone comes to you and says the world is flat then it is important to question and think, why that person is wrong? Don’t take solace in the false security that consensus provides.
Italian fascism not far removed from Irish Socialism.
http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/06/italy-fascists-true-mussolini-ideology?cat=world&type=article
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire
Most immigrants to Britain were ex-colonial subjects who fled the countries that Britain abandoned when their game was up. I’ve no interest in listening to whining from a British parliamentarian about immigration Voltaire or not! If The Philosophy Society of TCD want to listen to this man as a exercise in social discourse, or whatever? Let them at it! But if he gets on a soapbox on my street I’ll set the dog on him!
Funny that true speech gets red thumbs from those looking for free speech.
Bang on Reada! Those people should abstain from red thumbing!
O how my heart yearns for a perfect world free of acrimony…
Yeah! Soon we’ll be told to stay quiet for telling a drunk on the luas to shut up.
Whoa guys – get a room!
@LesEnfant Perdu. I knew that was coming. Am I psychic or what? Note to self. Only engage in conversation if you’re having a good ole barney. Lol
Ha! The BNP are renound for bringing people from all walks of life together!
Is it ok for someone else to give the same views as him at the debate or is the issue with him as a person? At least he is willing to listen to others arguments in a debate… Don’t agree with his views for a split second, but many do. we need to talk about it!
Yep. He should be free to speak. And Trinity should be free to invite him. You may be on thin ice, though, in suggesting that Nick Griffin is willing to listen to others. For him, it’s just another platform from which to spew his rhetoric. Having witnessed fascism in action in England for decades, I am in no doubt that listening is not something far right politicians and activists value. Given the activities of the far right, from the National Front, to Column 88 to the BNP and English Defence League, it’s seems odd that Nick Griffin should have a problem with “a form of left-wing fascism”…
I have to agree with some on here. The man is entitled to say what he wants to say. Do we have to hear it? That is a matter of personal choice. So, do we ban people like him from speaking in public? My answer to that is no. If we do that, we allow this guy an opportunity to take his cause and his reasoning underground. That in turn will lead to us being as bad and as negative as him. The issues he raises weather we like them or not..and i DON’T, will fester and manipulate themselves into other areas of our society. Allow this man to speak, but we must challenge him and make him look the bigoted person he is.
sure, many of Hitler’s policies were left wing too. That doesn’t make them non-fascist. It’s that deceptive stance of “i’m centrist! I am!” which has allowed extremely xenophobic and right-wing policies to take over in the United States. It’s very ironic that he has accused the protestors of using fascist methods when clearly he wishes the police had used some fairly fascist methods to ‘“come down” on people who disrupt events’
…So, I’m curious, If you put yourself in his position and with your own views. What would you have said about not being able to voice those opinions? Or you wouldn’t care? If you wouldn’t care about voicing you’re opinions, then it would be obvious that, you would not be suited for such a position to represent those that elected you. Also, Hitler is the past, and so is Nazi Germany. However, If we want to start using such terms, it would seem the vision of Hitler and his henchmen, is current day EU. Which the Germans, a long with the French control.
“Have any of the Thumb Downers even taken the time to read up on what Mr Griffin and his Party – The British National Party stand for?” Wonders Eddie Barrett.
So you’ve “read up” on what the BNP stands for, eh, Eddie? So would you be happy to have the fact that the BNP stood out strongly against the war in Iraq before it happened made known here? Isn’t it odd how the happy-clappy, left-wing types who would put the foreigner first and the indigenous British last in in the UK, are entirely happy to go slaughter the same foreigner in his own back yard?
I have a question for the sneerers. Is 600,000 foreigners in, 200,000 native Brits out every year an acceptable statistic? If you think it is then you have admit theat you are definitely on the side the side of those who do not give a damn about the wishes of the British people. Ever since the 1950s, in opinion poll after opinion poll, we have made it known that we wanted ALL immigration to stop. There is something deeply unpleasant in the nature of those who would force a society that works to tolerate the entry of millions of alien peoples into its midst. All the while cursing those who would put a stop to what the generality of the population DO NOT WANT.
You know, last year, around 250,000 foreigners were arrested in Britain. This is the lovely, fluffy “diversity” and “difference” at the sharp end. This is the true “gross and dangerous” face of the Multicult. Cohesion? How often do characters like Eddie Barrett use that word. Hey, Eddie! Would you put your mother in the same room as the 250,000, safe in the knowledge that they would cohere with her in an entirely positive way?
The crimes committed by the foreigner in Britain since the globalists began doing their damnedest to destroy our world don’t count, do they? They are certainly not to be spoken of in polite, PC circles. If we don’t mention the murders, rapes, gang rapes, paedophilia, drugs, prostitution, theft and routine intimidation, it isn’t really happening, is it?
What Eddie and co. don’t like is the bloke who dares to point to the herd of elephants in the room. The truth-teller. He’s the greatest enemy of those who would spin and lie away the world our ancestors willed to us.
I’m one of those who would put those who made the Nation first in the land that they made. Which is why I, along with most Nationalists, would never have invaded Iraq. I’ll tell you this, Eddie: if you were to ask the Iraqi people whose philosophy they would rather have had shaping the future back in 2003, very few would have chosen that of Tony Blair and co. On the other hand, that of British Nationalism would, I’m sure, have suited them very well.
It is amazing how someone can say so much and be so wrong……
Sorry Liam, but you seem to ignore most of it.
Oh man that is funny. sure they are “Fascist’s” themselves. And anyone that supports “the new” shale gas industry ( which it isn’t watch Gas land people it’s really scary stuff ) should not be allowed to talk.
Tangent of the year award!
My question is this: If we allowed the BNP to talk and engage in discussion with them, would they do the same to us if, god forbid, they would come to power?
My guess is they wouldn’t, but that’s exactly why we should let them speak. Otherwise we’d just be sinking to their level!
I’m all for free speech. It’s the unavoidable listening to that I’ve a problem with.
if sinn fein had been allowed speak to the media during the troubles it probably would have saved hundreds of lives
Leslie Alan Rock says “So, do we ban people like him from speaking in public?”
If that were to happen, it would seem those who are doing so are the real fascists. However, that will be the time when the pen is put down for the sword. Unfortunately, that time is coming. Those who do think that this Country owes the World, and that the British are nothing but slaves, may be strong with the pen but weak with the sword.
I abhor the BNP and all it stands for but the right to freedom of expression is paramount in a democracy. This character should have been allowed speak!
Great to see DCUfm in the news again after the Bertie interview a few weeks ago!
“It is amazing how someone can say so much and be so wrong.”
Hi, Liam. Perhaps you could point out some of the wrongness?
guess colonizing half the world wasnt such a good idea after all
Not an acceptable comment from a so called public representative. Bigotry, sectarianism, or simply inciting others is no way to deal with those holding extremist views on either side. All he proved was no one has a monopoly on hatred.
Hi, the full interview can be heard on http://www.dcufm.com/.
Enjoy
have your say