|
|
 Re: لربيكا أن تختار بين ميثاق السلام وأجندة الانفصال !؟ (Re: adam khatir)
|
still i think u need to go and read the agreement carefully so as to have a better understanding, i never came accross any article that calls for propogating the seperation, let the time come ,so far there is only one country called sudan , the agreement clearly stated that both parties should work together to make the unity attractive, im sure u r overclever but we should be bound by the terms not giving yr own hopes
,,,,,
Dear Adam
I guess, if it were not because you may claim some hollow victory, like many Islamist ideologues do, where there may be none at all, I would not waste my time to respond to you. As I have to do this thing again and again, I would like you to read the following: Article 1.4 of Part A(AGREED PRINCIPLES), clearly states the "The people of South Sudan have the right to self-determination, inter alia, through a referendum to determine their future". The Latin phrase "inter alia" means, in plain English, "among other things". "Self-determination" RSD, means, the right to decide their status vis-a-vis the Sudan, as a whole. The people given this right are "the people of South Sudan" not South England or Darfur. The people of South Sudan would determine their future[/U, meaning the peoiple of South Sudan would decide whether they want to remain as part of the old Sudan, or would want to be independent with their own country. This article is further elucidated by the provisions of the AGREED TEXT ON THE RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION FOR THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH SUDAN (Articles 1.3 through 2.6).Chief among these articles is Article 2.5, and I quote, "At the ened of the six(6) year interim period, there shall be an internationally monitored referendum, organized jointly by GOS and the SPLM/A, for the people of South Sudan to: confirmthe unityof the Sudan by voting to adopt the system of government established under the Peace Agreement, or to vote for secession".
The word "secession" in English language means withdraw or separate. Withdraw or separate from what? Off course, from the old Sudan. So, my dear Adam, you prefer the unity of Sudan,i.e., Southerners after six years to vote for unity. In order to be able to do that, assuming you were a southerner, you should have the right to speak out in public rallies, write in the media talk to Khalid Misha'al of HAMAS or to the Grand Ayatolla Khameeini that you are for the unity of the Sudan. Equally, me who has chosen, a priori, separation has the same rights to exercise accorded to you by the democratic process to speak in rallies, write this intervention in Sudaneseonline.com, speak to Tony Blair or Shimon Perez that I want the people of the South to vote for separation . As to the phrase of Article 2.4.2 "...of making unity attractive". There is the first question who shall make it attractive? What are the elments in making unity attractive? This phrase, Adam, means nothing, it is a " ziada lil mustazid". Please do not depend on it. You better try another trick, icluding war.
(عدل بواسطة charles deng on 02-21-2006, 08:08 AM)
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
فيس بوك
تويتر
انستقرام
يوتيوب
بنتيريست