How many innocent Palestinian does Israel has to slaughter? Irish MP questions government
Dublin: In a powerful exchange within the Irish Parliament, Member of Parliament Richard Boyd Barrett confronted Prime Minister Leo Varadkar over Ireland's response to the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. Boyd Barrett condemned Israel's actions, labeling them as war crimes and genocide, and called for immediate international sanctions and accountability.
Varadkar, in response, stressed Ireland's commitment to promoting peace and justice in the region, advocating for a two-state solution and collaboration with the European Union, the United States, and Middle Eastern nations.
In his speech on October 24 in the Irish Parliament, Richard Boyd Barrett, raised a poignant question to the Prime Minister of his country, stating, "How many innocent Palestinian civilians, men, women, and children, does Israel have to slaughter? How many war crimes does Israel have to commit? How much death and destruction does Israel have to visit upon the people of Gaza and Palestine before you will call for and impose sanctions on Israel and expel the Israeli ambassador from this country? How much longer will the international community turn a blind eye to the suffering of the Palestinians?"
He continued, asserting, "We cannot ignore the gravity of the situation. The world must hold Israel accountable for its actions. The continuous loss of innocent lives demands immediate attention. The international community must step in and demand justice for the Palestinian people."
He further emphasized the necessity of international intervention, saying, "It is our moral duty to stand against the atrocities being committed. Israel's actions cannot go unpunished. We must call for and impose sanctions on Israel, expel the Israeli ambassador from our country, and urgently refer Israel to the International Criminal Court for its crimes against humanity and war crimes."
He highlighted the undeniable facts surrounding Israel's actions, stating, "In front of the world, by their own admission, Israel is committing war crimes. This isn't a matter of opinion; they have declared their intention publicly. Israel is displacing more than a million Palestinians from their homes in Gaza, ethnically cleansing them, which constitutes a crime against humanity. They have publicly stated their intention to deny 2.2 million people access to water, electricity, medicine, and life-saving equipment. These atrocities are unfolding before the eyes of the world, and they continue unabated."
He continued, expressing deep concern over the ongoing violence, saying, "Every minute, children are being slaughtered by Israeli artillery in a relentless bombardment of residential complexes, hospitals, schools, and civilian infrastructure. The gravity of these actions cannot be overstated. The international community must recognize the urgency of the situation and take immediate steps to address these egregious violations of human rights."
He lamented, "They just go on and on, and you do nothing. Nothing but words of concern, yet no action to hold them to account. It is undeniably premeditated war crimes and genocide. Scholars and academics, including Jewish people in the United States, Canada, and around the world, have labeled these actions as genocidal."
Quoting Israeli officials, Boyd Barrett revealed the shocking rhetoric used by some in power, stating, "An Israeli General brazenly declared, 'Human animals must be treated as such; there will be no electricity and no water, there will only be destruction.' A minister openly stated, 'We are fighting human animals; we will act accordingly; we will remove every restriction on the IDF.' Another minister, Smotrich, asserted, 'There is no such thing as the Palestinians.' Furthermore, the President of Israel referred to the people of Gaza and said they are all responsible."
He went on to mention a significant incident, saying, "Before October 7th, Netanyahu appeared in front of the UN General Assembly with a map of Israel that had removed all references to Palestine, a clear declaration of intent to destroy the Palestinian people and steal all of their land."
In response to Richard Boyd Barrett's concerns about the situation in the Middle East, Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar emphasized the need to protect innocent lives, both Palestinian and Israeli. He expressed his condolences for the Israeli citizen who lost her life due to violence in the region and highlighted the importance of multilateral actions in addressing the crisis. Varadkar stated that individually imposed sanctions would not be effective and underscored the significance of keeping lines of communication open with countries involved in the conflict, including having ambassadors in place.
Varadkar condemned collective punishment and hostage-taking, affirming Ireland's stance against targeting civilian infrastructure. He also acknowledged Hamas's objective, which he described as seeking the destruction of Israel, raising concerns about the existence of a Jewish state established by the UN.
In response to Prime Minister Leo Varadkar's comments, Richard Boyd Barrett retorted, asserting the world's responsibility in addressing the harsh realities of the Israeli regime. Barrett pointed out, "The world is responsible for failing to call out the reality of the Israeli regime. It is an apartheid regime that was established through the ethnic cleansing of 750,000 Palestinians. This regime continues its policies of ethnic cleansing on a daily basis, particularly in East Jerusalem and across the West Bank, regardless of the presence of Hamas."
He went on to provide historical context, stating, "Even in the absence of Hamas, back in 1987 during the First Palestinian intifada, young people rose up because their entire future had been stolen from them. They faced severe oppression under the Israeli regime and military. At that time, there was no Hamas; there was no significant Palestinian resistance organization. Yet, Israel responded to their legitimate grievances with brutality, murder, administrative detention, and ethnic cleansing. These actions have persisted day in and day out."
Boyd Barrett criticized the lack of acknowledgment from governments, including Varadkar's, regarding the Israeli regime's apartheid policies and ongoing ethnic cleansing. He argued, "Your government refuses to even label them as an apartheid regime, let alone acknowledge the war crimes and ethnic cleansing that numerous human rights organizations have pleaded with you and European governments to address. The world has given Israel the license to conduct the savagery we are witnessing today. They are responsible for the crimes we are witnessing. If we genuinely want to end these senseless deaths, we must hold Israel accountable for its actions."
Prime Minister Leo Varadkar further clarified Ireland's role in promoting peace and justice in the Middle East. He highlighted the importance of collaboration with the European Union, the United States, and other countries in the region such as Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon. He also advocated for a new peace initiative and a two-state solution, emphasizing the need for normal contacts and economic relations between Palestine and Israel.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
