Dictatorships welcome at royal wedding, except Syria

This video is called Look who came to the royal wedding: dictators, torturers, human rights abusers.

From daily The Guardian in Britain:

Syrian ambassador’s royal wedding invitation withdrawn

Foreign Office decides ambassador’s presence at ceremony would be ‘unacceptable’ at a time when UK is at loggerheads with Damascus over Syria‘s crackdown on protesters

Hélène Mulholland, political reporter

Thursday 28 April 2011 10.51 BST

Buckingham Palace has rescinded its royal wedding invitation to the Syrian ambassador, Dr Sami Khiyami, on the grounds that it is “not appropriate” for him to attend.

The decision was made after the foreign secretary, William Hague, ruled it would be “unacceptable” for a representative of the Syrian government to attend in light of the killing of hundreds of pro-democracy demonstrators. …

Crown Prince Salman al Khalifa of Bahrain has already pulled out of the wedding because of controversy over the brutal response to demonstrations in his country.

So, one representative of a bloody dictatorship, Bahrain, pulling out himself, as opposed to being disinvited by the British royals, probably because he was afraid of pro-democracy protests.

Another dictatorship’s, Syria’s, representative disinvited.

However, not disinvited, and not pulling out themselves, quite some other dictatorships oppressing and/or killing their own people are expected at the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton.

They include: Swaziland, the kingdom of Lesotho, the Malaysian monarchy, Thailand, kingdom of Bhutan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Morocco, Brunei, Abu Dhabi (part of the UAE), Tonga.

Ex-King Constantine of Greece, no longer a king because of his dealings with Greek military dictators, is on the list as well. As are the pretenders to the thrones of Romania and Yugoslavia.

In the twisted views of the British royals and the British Conservative government, there are dictators who are sons of bitches … and dictators who are our sons of bitches.

The difference between Syria and say, Saudi Arabia, is not that one regime murders and tortures, and the other one doesn’t. They both do.

However, in Saudi Arabia, the dictator wears a royal crown. Assad in Syria doesn’t. Saudi Arabia has lots of oil and deals about that with corporations like BP. Syria doesn’t. Tyrannies like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE, and Qatar have NATO countries’ military bases. Syria (though a military ally during the 1991 Gulf war) doesn’t.

So, the disinvitation of Assad’s ambassador is not about bloodshed, as the British government hypocritically claims. It is about lack of oil, lack of monarchy, and lack of military bases.

However, the lack of oil in his country not just hurts the Syrian dictator. It also prevents Syria from getting a bloody NATO military invasion as happens in Libya. United States Senator McCain, a warmonger for escalation in Libya, has already said that, unlike Libya, Syria should not be invaded.

In Libya there is lots of oil, but no royals and no Western military bases. If Gadaffi would have managed to crush the Libyan rebellion quickly, “efficiently” and without public opinion in the West noting it too much, like in Saudi Arabia etc. … so far … there would be no Libyan war now, and Gadaffi or a representative of Gadaffi would be at the London royal wedding along with Swazi, Saudi, and other bloody royals.

The greenwashing of the royal wedding: here.

Hueys Over Yemen: Is U.S. Aid Suppressing Another Mideast Freedom Struggle? Here.

Bahrain gives death penalty to Shia protesters: here.

This 13 February 2012 video is called US-Backed Bahraini Forces Deport 2 American Peace Activists Acting As Human Rights Observers.

Amnesty: Bahrain must stop execution of protesters: here.

Thai editor challenges culture which allows child rape: here.

THAILAND: Debate on Monarchy Tests Academic Freedom: here.

Saudi Arabia: 135 Guantanamo files released: here.

As the world prepares for the royal wedding between Prince Harry and soon-to-be Princess Kate, it’s important to take a look back at our own American traditions, and what our founding fathers had to say about royalty. We are, after all, a nation born out of a revolution against a monarchy. With that in mind, we present to you Thomas Jefferson’s letter, “On the Breeding of Kings.” We’re guessing that Jefferson wouldn’t have been enthused by the pomp and pageantry: here.

Syrian Women Reflect on Rare Political Victory: here.