Myanmar’s leader Aung San Suu Kyi, a Nobel laureate and once a
darling of the international media, has now become the target of a
torrent of criticism from the Left, with of its most notable spokesmen,
including Desmond Tutu and Malala Yousafzai, claiming that she is
turning a blind eye to the genocide of the Rohingya Muslims in her
country. But for her part, Aung San Suu Kyi says that the claims of genocide are “fake news.” And she has an excellent case.
Aung San Suu Kyi said that “there were many fake news photographs circulating which were ‘simply the tip of a huge iceberg of misinformation calculated to create a lot of problems between different communities and with the aim of promoting the interest of the terrorists.’”
In this, even the relentlessly pro-jihad BBC admits that she is right, reporting that “many – but not all – of the pictures come from other crises around the world, with one tweeted by Turkey’s Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek dating back to the Rwandan genocide in 1994.”
Also, given the large-scale “Palestinian” industry of faking Israeli atrocities, it doesn’t strain credulity in the least that Islamic jihadis and supremacists may be fabricating atrocities against the Rohingya in order to sway public opinion. Historian Richard Landes notes that “the term ‘Pallywood’ refers to the staging of scenes by Palestinian journalists in order to present the Palestinians as hapless victims of Israeli aggression. They are able to succeed in this endeavor in large part due to the credulity and eagerness of the Western press to present these images, which reinforce the image of the Palestinian David struggling valiantly against the overpowering Israeli Goliath. Pallywood has led to astonishing lapses in Western journalistic standards in which badly staged scenes regularly appear on the news as ‘real events.’”
Nor are the “Palestinians,” whose very nationality was invented by the KGB and Yasir Arafat for propaganda purposes in the 1960s, the only Muslims who have realized the usefulness of the dictum of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam: “War is deceit” (Bukhari 4.52.268). The establishment media applies the term “genocide” not just to the Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar today, and to virtually any Israeli action against the “Palestinians,” but also to the massacre of Muslim civilians in Srebrenica in 1995.
That massacre was unquestionably heinous, but it is not at all clear that it rises to the level of an attempt to exterminate an entire people. In an introduction to her article “Srebrenica as Genocide? The Krstić Decision and the Language of the Unspeakable,” published in the Yale Human Rights & Development Law Journal, Vol. VIII in 2005, Katherine G. Southwick writes:
In August 2001, a trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) handed down the tribunal’s first genocide conviction. In this landmark case, Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, the trial chamber determined that the 1995 Srebrenica massacres—in which Bosnian Serb forces executed 7,000-8,000 Bosnian Muslim men—constituted genocide. This Note acknowledges the need for a dramatic expression of moral outrage at the most terrible massacre in Europe since the Second World War. However, this Note also challenges the genocide finding. By excluding consideration of the perpetrators’ motives for killing the men, such as seeking to eliminate a military threat, the Krstić chamber’s method for finding specific intent to destroy the Bosnian Muslims, in whole or in part, was incomplete. The chamber also loosely construed other terms in the genocide definition, untenably broadening the meaning and application of the crime. The chamber’s interpretation of genocide in turn has problematic implications for the tribunal, enforcement of international humanitarian law, and historical accuracy. Thus highlighting instances where inquiry into motives may be relevant to genocide determinations, this Note ultimately argues for preserving distinctions between genocide and crimes against humanity, while simultaneously expanding the legal obligation to act to mass crimes that lack proof of genocidal intent….In order to take over areas for the Republika Srpska, the Bosnian Serbs pursued a process of “ethnic cleansing,” using military means to force non-Serb populations to flee.
The hysterical claims of a Serbian “genocide” are as much motivated by propaganda purposes as is the “Palestinian” industry of manufacturing Israeli atrocities. With those claiming “genocide” in Myanmar already caught using fake photos, it cannot be dismissed out of hand that they, too, are mindful of Muhammad’s adage, “War is deceit.” Muhammad’s contemporary followers don’t seem to have any hesitation about taking his words to heart.
Source
Aung San Suu Kyi said that “there were many fake news photographs circulating which were ‘simply the tip of a huge iceberg of misinformation calculated to create a lot of problems between different communities and with the aim of promoting the interest of the terrorists.’”
In this, even the relentlessly pro-jihad BBC admits that she is right, reporting that “many – but not all – of the pictures come from other crises around the world, with one tweeted by Turkey’s Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek dating back to the Rwandan genocide in 1994.”
Also, given the large-scale “Palestinian” industry of faking Israeli atrocities, it doesn’t strain credulity in the least that Islamic jihadis and supremacists may be fabricating atrocities against the Rohingya in order to sway public opinion. Historian Richard Landes notes that “the term ‘Pallywood’ refers to the staging of scenes by Palestinian journalists in order to present the Palestinians as hapless victims of Israeli aggression. They are able to succeed in this endeavor in large part due to the credulity and eagerness of the Western press to present these images, which reinforce the image of the Palestinian David struggling valiantly against the overpowering Israeli Goliath. Pallywood has led to astonishing lapses in Western journalistic standards in which badly staged scenes regularly appear on the news as ‘real events.’”
Nor are the “Palestinians,” whose very nationality was invented by the KGB and Yasir Arafat for propaganda purposes in the 1960s, the only Muslims who have realized the usefulness of the dictum of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam: “War is deceit” (Bukhari 4.52.268). The establishment media applies the term “genocide” not just to the Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar today, and to virtually any Israeli action against the “Palestinians,” but also to the massacre of Muslim civilians in Srebrenica in 1995.
That massacre was unquestionably heinous, but it is not at all clear that it rises to the level of an attempt to exterminate an entire people. In an introduction to her article “Srebrenica as Genocide? The Krstić Decision and the Language of the Unspeakable,” published in the Yale Human Rights & Development Law Journal, Vol. VIII in 2005, Katherine G. Southwick writes:
In August 2001, a trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) handed down the tribunal’s first genocide conviction. In this landmark case, Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, the trial chamber determined that the 1995 Srebrenica massacres—in which Bosnian Serb forces executed 7,000-8,000 Bosnian Muslim men—constituted genocide. This Note acknowledges the need for a dramatic expression of moral outrage at the most terrible massacre in Europe since the Second World War. However, this Note also challenges the genocide finding. By excluding consideration of the perpetrators’ motives for killing the men, such as seeking to eliminate a military threat, the Krstić chamber’s method for finding specific intent to destroy the Bosnian Muslims, in whole or in part, was incomplete. The chamber also loosely construed other terms in the genocide definition, untenably broadening the meaning and application of the crime. The chamber’s interpretation of genocide in turn has problematic implications for the tribunal, enforcement of international humanitarian law, and historical accuracy. Thus highlighting instances where inquiry into motives may be relevant to genocide determinations, this Note ultimately argues for preserving distinctions between genocide and crimes against humanity, while simultaneously expanding the legal obligation to act to mass crimes that lack proof of genocidal intent….In order to take over areas for the Republika Srpska, the Bosnian Serbs pursued a process of “ethnic cleansing,” using military means to force non-Serb populations to flee.
The hysterical claims of a Serbian “genocide” are as much motivated by propaganda purposes as is the “Palestinian” industry of manufacturing Israeli atrocities. With those claiming “genocide” in Myanmar already caught using fake photos, it cannot be dismissed out of hand that they, too, are mindful of Muhammad’s adage, “War is deceit.” Muhammad’s contemporary followers don’t seem to have any hesitation about taking his words to heart.
Source