BBC tows the "company line" when it comes to police harassment
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Xmas Themes For Uploaded Photos
Next: Just out: 'Hot - Life in the Australian outback' - could use some help
From: Chris H on 16 Dec 2009 12:57 In message <jPCdnYN_xJqpi7TWnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil Harrington <never(a)home.com> writes > >"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >news:ik8ei5h758blf1uunh3smer0bcnbso7tgi(a)4ax.com... >> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:32:05 -0500, "Neil Harrington" <never(a)home.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>news:p51ei5dats21570jh7pm07ftn4p9l3di10(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:39:58 -0500, "Neil Harrington" <never(a)home.com> >>>> wrote: > >Utter nonsense. Where on earth did you get the idea that war has to be >declared in order to exist? International Law. >Such a polite formality as a declaration of war >is a relatively recent thing in the history of warfare, This is true. >and as you have >noted it's generally being abandoned anyway. But only by the USA. >> Chris has a lot of misconceptions about the US, but I haven't seen him >> make any statement that indicates that he feels that the UK is at war >> with Ireland. > >Here's part of his reply to me two days ago: > >________________ > >>If you think continuing sporadic terrorism is "the war," that must mean you >>think you've never won "the war" against Ireland, after a century or so. > >Correct. We never won "the war" as there was no war. Anyway there are still bombs and killing even now several this year. Also it was never against "Ireland" It is a Police action against CIVILIAN criminals. There were many groups in Northern Ireland, PIRA, UDA (and many splinters and derivatives). Apparently one side was Pro British and one side Anti-British. However both sides attacked and killed British Forces, soldiers, policemen and government officials. I was serving at the time. At no time was there a War in the legal sense. There was no country to fight. Southern Eire did not want the terrorists anymore than the UK did. The UK did sound out Southern Ireland about taking over NI but they were not at all interested. There can be no united Ireland. The political wing of the PIRA (Nationalists) stood in open elections both north and south of the border. They polled very low results and only got the occasional seat. In fact it really only happened because the Unionist vote split into two factions other than for councillors in republican areas. So even if Ireland was united the PIRA and UDA terrorists would still be criminals (not hero's) and still treated as criminals by the United Ireland. Southern Ireland prosecuted the "nationalist" terrorists anyway. They were seen as civilian criminals by the governments north and south. In ALL cases all the criminals were tried in civil courts. All be it modified ones for a while. The whole lot including the military were subject to civil process. There were no "enemy combatants" no military other than the UK military (who came under Civil law). The terrorists were civilian criminals and tried as such. Re Bloody Sunday. Despite several TV crews and lots of witnesses some 25 years on no coherent picture has evolved. Part of the problem, I think, is this far on is people on both sides now actually believe as fact the "cover stories" they gave initially. So I am not sure that it is possible to reconstruct what happened. Some mutually exclusive stories of what happened will stand lie detector tests. There is guilt on both sides. There is also a political dimension to it and many players are now "respectable" politicians. It would not help the situation to lock up some of the former members of the PIRA who are now legitimate political figures keeping a lid on the situation. However soldiers are always expendable. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: tony cooper on 16 Dec 2009 13:10 On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:33:10 +0000, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote: > >>>However the next election could be the end of the USA as we know it. If >>>the people loose faith with Obama as the cure is only half way done the >>>alternative is Palin....... >> >>I've been around long enough to not be surprised by anything that >>involves politics, but I don't see Palin as a serious candidate in the >>next election. She'll be relegated to a fund raiser and an >>attention-grabber for other candidates in the next presidential >>election. > >I agree but there are many Americans who will think you are a complete >imbecile as she is apparently far better qualified in every department >than Obama and will be the next US president (for life)... (ask Neil :-) If people like Neil and Bill think I'm an imbecile, then I know that I'm on the right track. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: tony cooper on 16 Dec 2009 13:23 On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:57:04 +0000, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote: >In message <jPCdnYN_xJqpi7TWnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil >Harrington <never(a)home.com> writes >> >>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>news:ik8ei5h758blf1uunh3smer0bcnbso7tgi(a)4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:32:05 -0500, "Neil Harrington" <never(a)home.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>news:p51ei5dats21570jh7pm07ftn4p9l3di10(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:39:58 -0500, "Neil Harrington" <never(a)home.com> >>>>> wrote: >> >>Utter nonsense. Where on earth did you get the idea that war has to be >>declared in order to exist? > >International Law. Wha? What international law covers this? There's not one even close. There are international laws about waging war, but none that require what any sovereign nation must do to declare war. In the case of the US, only Congress has the power to declare war and that is set by the Constitution. > >>Such a polite formality as a declaration of war >>is a relatively recent thing in the history of warfare, > >This is true. > >>and as you have >>noted it's generally being abandoned anyway. > >But only by the USA. What are you talking about? The UK, and several other nations, have troops in the Middle East actively participating in combat. Has the UK declared war? The UK never formally made a declaration of war against the Falklands. I know you don't like us, Chris, but you really stick your foot in your mouth with some of these absolute statements that are patently false. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Chris H on 16 Dec 2009 14:15
In message <7h8ii5t7rf6od6c1knarefm6pcl9rsvhob(a)4ax.com>, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> writes >On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:33:10 +0000, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> >wrote: > >> >>>>However the next election could be the end of the USA as we know it. If >>>>the people loose faith with Obama as the cure is only half way done the >>>>alternative is Palin....... >>> >>>I've been around long enough to not be surprised by anything that >>>involves politics, but I don't see Palin as a serious candidate in the >>>next election. She'll be relegated to a fund raiser and an >>>attention-grabber for other candidates in the next presidential >>>election. >> >>I agree but there are many Americans who will think you are a complete >>imbecile as she is apparently far better qualified in every department >>than Obama and will be the next US president (for life)... (ask Neil :-) > >If people like Neil and Bill think I'm an imbecile, then I know that >I'm on the right track. We seem to be agreeing far more than we should :-))) -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ |