Act of International Criminal Court to prosecute only Africans is illegitimate.

Reacting to Jurist  report on " Africa leaders should be immune from ICC prosecution: AU "

The bullying of third world countries by international agencies, especially courts is not something new and it is a regular phenomena since the formation of UNO and other institutions which came to existence subsequently. International criminal law might have taken a new turn ever since the Nuremberg trials, but the disgust stems from the maxim - "Selective application of law is no law" . Are we to assume that in this civil world it is only in Africa people commit crimes especially state sponsored ie., the crime where leaders take an active role in engaging in war crimes, crimes against humanity and/or genocide?

Whenever you hear about a case in International Criminal Court (ICC), there is a high degree of probability that the accused will be from third world, mostly from Africa. Mired in poverty, illiteracy and political corruption and at the receiving end of super powers they remain robbed off their wealth. Oppressed by the European colonial powers they continue to remain as a second class civilians and their very state of life is a blot on the legitimacy of civilized world.

The interest and alacrity which colonial powers shown in robbing off the wealth of Africa is not shown when it comes to contributing towards its development. It is a misnomer to claim that whatever little the developed world is doing is due its generosity but in my opinion it is firstly a misplaced argument and secondly it must be seen as if they are giving it back to the rightful owners from whom they have taken forcefully. The rosy picture given by the the departments of international development of developed countries on their contribution towards global development cannot taken at face value.

Yes. There is no doubt that by providing 70% of funding which is required to run ICC, EU uses it to settle political scores and for the purpose of arm twisting in the resource rich Africa. And in this light the threat by African Union to pull out of ICC is highly legitimate and AU must make the regional institutions stronger and establish an ICC like setup exclusive for Africa and try all cases there, probably with an international supervision. And the former colonial powers must not be allowed to use new tools to loot Africa.

If we ever have to try all the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the European Colonial powers, especially by the countries like Portugal, Spain and Britain we may have to establish hundreds of such courts.

Anders Breivik : Conflict of Moral Intentions and Immoral Actions

It always amazed me the level of convictions these two young men had. But the substance on which they had allegiance is totally different. One is Extreme patriotism, the other one is extreme religious fanaticism and fundamentalism. Where as one wanted to save his country from distortion and the other wanted to de-stabilize a neighboring nation state. With respect to Anders Breivik’s act of killing more than 70 people motive sounds to be moral when it is juxtaposed with Kasab’s. An interesting point for us to note is how the legal systems reacted in both these cases. Anders is undoubtedly a patriot and wanted to save the whole continent from an eventual degeneration. Though I do not subscribe to the means he employed to fulfill his objective but I have due respect for his intentions. Unlike Kasab he did his own study and came to conclusion or identified the deep malice of the whole continent. Generally this is a result of uncontrolled/unguided reading I suppose? But the Pakistani Terrorist was indoctrinated and was told that his family will be given some money as a favor to his martyrdom. Now Pakistan being a failed state, there is an utter disregard for people’s development. Apart from Allah mongering there is no genuine attempt to improve the life standard of ordinary mortals. I would not talk much about Kasab or Pakistan much out here as I feel I might end up wasting a lot of ink.

Richard Millet just pre-empted what I thought. Ie., Breivik gave to Norway what it deserves. Let’s not forget that the Ottoman Empire spread from the modern day Spain to frontiers of India and swayed the whole North Africa and the cultural distortion it carried out too much for normal person to understand in a short time. I have glanced around 100 pages of European Declaration of Independence Doc 2083. And you cannot deny even a single statement out there; all that is written is indeed a monumental truth. I know many have questioned his scholarly ability to compose such a document, but that is not what we should be discussing but the actual substance. And his sympathy towards Hindus is natural. The prophetic religion’s main aim was/is/will be to establish a Islamic caliphate in this world and the blood thirsty Jihadists are working round the clock to accomplish their goal with full confidence and conviction though no body is sure when that will happen. Now the argument is are all those who are against this fanatic jihadism are standing up together for a formidable defense. The answer is certainly no. May be he wanted to wake up the whole Europe in general and Norway in particular from a deep slumber and gather the attention. But what he failed to realize is that it is only in video games when people/enemies are killed there is no impact and gives pleasure to oneself with out harming any real human beings, I am not talking about Ra-One movie by the way. By murdering innocents he blurred the distinction between him and the jihadis. The another fact which this European savior has failed to notice/realize is that for the current state of world affairs, let it be racism, political instability and many other issues Europe is responsible. He must also have tried to let every one that Europe is at fault first and the violent Jihad seemed to have taken birth to counter crusaders. Scholars have agreed that Christendom and Caliphate’s intention is to rule the world based on a common code. When different competing actors wanted to rule this world, violent quarrel is consequential. When a society is oppressed or in danger from external forces, the oppressed or those in danger must rise up to the occasion and defend. After being relieved from Europe’s tyranny, every body has learnt being more civilized at least in public. So in an era like this the dubious methods employed by Breivik are indeed uncalled for.

Yes. Violent Islam is a threat to the whole world’s stability. But this does not seem to be an appropriate response. The sheer number of Islam followers is increasing because any form of contraception is considered as a sin. On a lighter note may be until the time Indians and Chinese are there the counter balance is assured. I opine that governments must bring uniform laws to control birth rate. Through this dangers of multiculturalism can be over come. There may be many other best ways; it is for the adept political scientists to comment. I am admiring the manner legal proceedings have concluded, and the judiciary is in the verge of pronouncing the number of years for which he must be imprisoned, which might be up to 21 years and in worst case for life he should be in jail.

In a way I see no difference between Breivik and Kasab because both are mass murderers. But one had moral and the other had immoral intentions. I am only subscribing to the moral intentions though not the actions or means employed.