Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-05-Speech-3-115"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010905.5.3-115"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We are opposed to terrorism on the grounds of the measures that it uses and also because those committing acts of terrorism often seek to impose an oppressive regime on their own people.
We are, however, disgusted by the hypocrisy of the report, which, despite criticising terrorist groups, dismisses state terrorism from its area of concern, where this type of terrorism is, or has been, carried out by states that call themselves democratic and which are now part of the European Union.
To take the case of France as an example, where army generals claim that acts of torture and assassinations perpetrated during the war against the Algerian people were to prevent them from freeing themselves from colonial oppression – is this not legitimising terrorism?
Or must we dismiss these disgraceful actions, albeit only by maintaining our silence, on the pretext that these acts of terrorism were committed openly, if not on the recommendations of the highest state authorities?
And how many acts of terrorism were committed by the United Kingdom in India or in Kenya before these countries were decolonised? How many acts of terrorism are being committed now by the United Kingdom in Sierra Leone?
The report makes no mention of state terrorism, which is as bad as the terrorism committed by smaller groups. On the other hand, however, the report is cynical enough to include ‘extremist ideological conceptions’ or ‘intellectual assistance’ in the list of areas to combat, which obviously opens the way to attacks on the freedom of opinion itself.
We therefore voted against this report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples