debut: 2/16/17
39,440 runs
Mr Al-Rawi warned supporters to expect “six months of terror, torture, lies, frivolity and persecution.”
Mr. Al-Rawi’s remarks are not simply inflammatory—they are reckless and dangerously irresponsible for someone of his stature. To invoke terms like “terror” and “war” in the context of a democratic process is not only hyperbolic but also profoundly damaging to the fabric of our democratic society. These words are not just expressions of disappointment; they are calculated rhetoric designed to stoke fear, anger, and division. This is not the behavior of a leader who respects the principles of democracy or the rule of law. It is the behavior of someone willing to undermine national unity for political gain.
Let us be clear: the democratic process is not a war. Elections are not battlegrounds, and political opponents are not enemies. To frame the political environment in such combative and apocalyptic terms is to distort the very nature of democracy. It sends a dangerous message to supporters that conflict, rather than dialogue, is the appropriate response to political loss. This kind of rhetoric creates a toxic environment where trust in institutions erodes, and people begin to see their fellow citizens as adversaries rather than members of a shared society.
Furthermore, Mr. Al-Rawi’s choice of words is not merely a lapse in judgment—it borders on incitement. Under the Sedition Act, promoting disaffection or hostility between groups is a criminal offence, and for good reason. Language like this has the potential to escalate tensions, provoke unrest, and even incite violence. Given the heightened emotions surrounding elections, Mr. Al-Rawi’s rhetoric is not just inflammatory; it is dangerous. It teeters on the edge of legality and crosses the line of ethical responsibility.
As a former high-ranking official, Mr. Al-Rawi should know better. He has a platform and influence that come with great responsibility. Instead of using that platform to promote unity and encourage constructive opposition, he has chosen to sow discord and fear. This is not leadership; it is demagoguery. It is an attempt to weaponize disappointment and frustration for political ends, regardless of the consequences for social cohesion or democratic stability.
In a time when national unity should be a priority, such rhetoric is a betrayal of the values that underpin our democracy. Mr. Al-Rawi’s words deserve not only criticism but also scrutiny under the law. Politicians must be held accountable for their actions and their speech, particularly when that speech has the potential to destabilize a nation. This is not a matter of partisan politics—it is a matter of safeguarding the integrity of T&T's democratic system and the peace of our society.
Sarge
Mr. Al-Rawi’s remarks are not simply inflammatory—they are reckless and dangerously irresponsible for someone of his stature. To invoke terms like “terror” and “war” in the context of a democratic process is not only hyperbolic but also profoundly damaging to the fabric of our democratic society. These words are not just expressions of disappointment; they are calculated rhetoric designed to stoke fear, anger, and division. This is not the behavior of a leader who respects the principles of democracy or the rule of law. It is the behavior of someone willing to undermine national unity for political gain.
Let us be clear: the democratic process is not a war. Elections are not battlegrounds, and political opponents are not enemies. To frame the political environment in such combative and apocalyptic terms is to distort the very nature of democracy. It sends a dangerous message to supporters that conflict, rather than dialogue, is the appropriate response to political loss. This kind of rhetoric creates a toxic environment where trust in institutions erodes, and people begin to see their fellow citizens as adversaries rather than members of a shared society.
Furthermore, Mr. Al-Rawi’s choice of words is not merely a lapse in judgment—it borders on incitement. Under the Sedition Act, promoting disaffection or hostility between groups is a criminal offence, and for good reason. Language like this has the potential to escalate tensions, provoke unrest, and even incite violence. Given the heightened emotions surrounding elections, Mr. Al-Rawi’s rhetoric is not just inflammatory; it is dangerous. It teeters on the edge of legality and crosses the line of ethical responsibility.
As a former high-ranking official, Mr. Al-Rawi should know better. He has a platform and influence that come with great responsibility. Instead of using that platform to promote unity and encourage constructive opposition, he has chosen to sow discord and fear. This is not leadership; it is demagoguery. It is an attempt to weaponize disappointment and frustration for political ends, regardless of the consequences for social cohesion or democratic stability.
In a time when national unity should be a priority, such rhetoric is a betrayal of the values that underpin our democracy. Mr. Al-Rawi’s words deserve not only criticism but also scrutiny under the law. Politicians must be held accountable for their actions and their speech, particularly when that speech has the potential to destabilize a nation. This is not a matter of partisan politics—it is a matter of safeguarding the integrity of T&T's democratic system and the peace of our society.
Sarge
