Us Uses Foreign States To Torture People

[cheesemonster2005]

For trigger-happy also read fast-reacting. And don't make the mistake that those who shot Menzies don't regret it. Those who recognise that actions such as that have to happen feel as much sorrow as those who claim it shouldn't have happened at all. It's just they are not as naive. But to suggest that you can only win this by fighting fairly then you have never fought ANYTHING. They view a fair fight as a weakness to be exploited. As to the bog-trotters - they deluged us in filth. Yes civilians died in Bloody Sunday. Well here's a thought. If you don't want to be shot at by British Troops then don't riot. Don't spit at them. Don't fire at them. Don't fire-bomb them. The joke is that they were all that stood between your shitty, piss-smelling houses and the Protestants that wanted to burn you out!

 

Bollocks - Wednesday night!

 

I respect your opinions especially as you say you are one of those fighting terrorists.

 

I'm sure the police who shot Menzies regret it. I don't think they should be punished as they did what they were trained for. It should, however, highlight the difficulty of the action needed. Just one mistake can turn the public against you like it may have done for some with regards to Menzies and like it did for many after Bloody Sunday.

 

Your attitude towards the Catholic houses shows little regard to the political situation where many lived in shitty, piss-smelling houses because the Protestants had denied them jobs and the rite to vote (because of certain restrctions). The British army often did protect Catholic families but the few mistakes they made caused progress to halt and peace to be further away.

 

They were protesting not rioting. The protest was illegal but so were all protests at that time (and possibly even now) in the 6 counties. I hope you don't make my comments out to be offensive. I respect the army as they do a job I could never do.

[mollag]

It's the likes of me that keep the likes of you free. With us around you don't even have to question your moral stance. You don't even need to get your hands dirty. We'll do it for you.

 

 

 

. As to the bog-trotters - they deluged us in filth. Yes civilians died in Bloody Sunday. Well here's a thought. If you don't want to be shot at by British Troops then don't riot. Don't spit at them. Don't fire at them. Don't fire-bomb them. The joke is that they were all that stood between your shitty, piss-smelling houses and the Protestants that wanted to burn you out!

 

Bollocks - Wednesday night!

 

First off you did nothing for me, you were paid to do a job, you were no superhero, agin you would never have my agreemennt to brutalise anyone, rather we would find another method, a civilised one.

 

Your final comments sums it up, right wing, bigoted and racist

[P.K.]

It's the likes of me that keep the likes of you free. With us around you don't even have to question your moral stance. You don't even need to get your hands dirty. We'll do it for you. As to the bog-trotters - they deluged us in filth. Yes civilians died in Bloody Sunday. Well here's a thought. If you don't want to be shot at by British Troops then don't riot. Don't spit at them. Don't fire at them. Don't fire-bomb them. The joke is that they were all that stood between your shitty, piss-smelling houses and the Protestants that wanted to burn you out!

Your final comments sums it up, right wing, bigoted and racist

Since when has defending those living in squalor been right wing, bigoted and racist? I think you've engaged keyboard before your brain is in gear.

 

you would never have my agreement to brutalise anyone, rather we would find another method, a civilised one.

So mollag, you are rising to my challenge. Well good. This world has been fighting fire with fire since man took his first steps. We could do with some "blue sky" thinking on the militant islamic terrorist problem.

 

Defeat the terrorists or go under. Because like it or not they are still headed our way. Just how do you bleeding-heart liberals propose to stop them? All laughable suggestions welcome.

Well mollag, the stage is yours. Let's hear your civilised method to stop them....

[cheesemonster2005]

First off you did nothing for me, you were paid to do a job, you were no superhero, agin you would never have my agreemennt to brutalise anyone, rather we would find another method, a civilised one.

 

Your final comments sums it up, right wing, bigoted and racist

 

How true.

 

Soldiers just do a job. If they are told to do something, they do it. If they were told to shoot civilians then again they'd probably do it.

[P.K.]

Apart from your (incorrect) idle speculation do you have any "civilised" ways of stopping militant islamic terrorists?

[mollag]

PK

As i said before i dont offer a method and neither do you, all you offer is childish" if you dont do this then this will happen" scenarios without merit. This post line was with regard to torture which you supported, many more do not, ie the lords, the UN, the law, the USA constitution and even tonight Condy Rice.

Again i say it is plainly wrong and brutal and we have as much to fear from those who promote these brutalities as we have from the terrorists you "assure" us you will destroy. Havent seen much slowdown in Iraq despite the brutality.

 

Re your postings about bogtrotters, shitty piss smelling houses etc, can you not see the bigotry?

 

God love you, you come from a strange place

[P.K.]

I don't agree with physical torture but only because the results are unreliable. Like I posted earlier pharmaceuticals are more likely being used. As to the Law Lords ruling that suspects cannot be detained on information obtained via dubious means all that will do is make it harder for the police and the intelligence services. The interrogations will still take place, this ruling will make no difference to that. The information will still be acted upon, this ruling will make no difference to that. But now they will have to work harder obtaining enough to detain suspects and stop what they might be up to. This ruling may let them carry out their nefarious acts by slowing our reactions. Not exactly a step forward, is it?

Re your postings about bogtrotters, shitty piss smelling houses etc, can you not see the bigotry?

Nope. I see no bigotry whatsoever in some people living in squalor. By all means spell it out. Perhaps using pm to stop boring the dwindling readership?

God love you, you come from a strange place.

How true is that!

[Lonan3]

Just to clarify one aspect of the law lords' ruling -

From The Guardian:

 

Yesterday's ruling does not oblige the security and intelligence agencies to change their view that evidence from torture may be necessary to save lives in the fight against terrorism.

 

The question is: To what use can that information be put? The courts, and Siac in particular, will be under a greater obligation to question the information they are given by MI5 and MI6.

 

But these agencies can take comfort from sympathetic comments by some of the law lords, notably Lord Hope, and the four-to-three majority which said the burden of proof should not rest, as Lords Bingham, Nicholls and Hoffman suggested, on the courts having to show the evidence was not obtained through torture, but on the lower test of balance of probabilities.

[manxchatterbox]

on short stop over re-fuellings by US registered small jets exactly how many aren't examined by Special Branch / IOM Customs ?? and why not??

[Chinahand]

As ever with my posts the below is far too long … but when people make hugely sweeping statements the only way to respond, if you don’t want it to descend into a slanging match, is in detail and patiently!

 

Al Qaeda will be defeated when the populations that currently sympathise with them and provide passive support to them (allowing them to prosletize, recruit and train) renounce them.

 

To achive this you would have to start by closing down all the Madrasas in places like Pakistan, Iran and so on, the House of Saud would have to go, the State of Israel would need to be wiped off the map, Sharia Law would have apply everywhere etc etc. Face it, it just ain't going to happen. So at the moment we are into containment and the best weapon for that is intelligence.

 

I think that defeating terrorism is a decades long process and taking your points one by one:

 

Madrasas are being much more strictly controlled; an even more successful effort will be the establishment of good alternative schools in the countries where poverty means that the only education available is from a Madrasas. That takes development and aid money; both of which are occuring.

 

Over the House of Saud, I agree with you that its prosletizing of Wahhabiism has been a major element in spreading uncompromising Medieval Islam, but Al Qaeda attacks in Saudi have fundamentally changed attitudes. Plus the government is having to reform itself ... due to both internal pressure: huge numbers of under-/un-employed youth due to the failure of the gov to change oil wealth into social prosperity; and due to external pressure from the US etc who see the mis-rule of the Sauds creating the environment where terrorist attitudes thrive. You'll say this will take a thousand years, but look at Jordan, or Lebanon. Both countries have changed fundamentally in there attitudes towards terrorism. The same can be said for Eygpt where the destruction of its tourist industry by terrorists have resulted in large anti-terrorist demos.

 

Lebanon is the most interesting case study hear; I'm not saying its perfect; and I awaite the Rog post about Hezbollah. But peace has totally changed its political and religious landscape. 15 years ago radical lebanese Shi'ites were the islamic bogey men. Please note these were Shia's about as friendly to Al Qaeda as Iain Paisley is to Jerry Adams. The Israeli withdrawl has taken the gun out of lebanese politics for the vast majority of Lebanese and its politcs are verging on democracy ... the current car bombs and assassinations are the last gasp (hopefully) of the old guard who are marginalized and rely on a crumbling Syrian regime for support.

 

Your comments on Israel imply to me that you think the Peace Process is bound to fail and that the only solution the Arab world will accept is the distruction of Israel ... again I'm waiting for the Rog post about Muslims never compromising. I totally disagree with you. I firmly believe that political violence will be taken from the mainstream of Palistinian life if a viable Palistinian State is created. There will still be a minority of fanatics and the biggest problem the two states will have to face is combatting them, because their actions threaten the existence of both states, but the peace agreements Israel has achieved across the Arab world shows how a peace process does work. Eygpt is now guarding the border with Gaza to stop terrorists and arms inflitrating; previously they actively planned invasions via the same routes.

 

On Sharia law I also think you are wrong. Rog has posted about how all Muslims are fundamentalists as all must accept the Koran as the word of God. OK if thats your definition I agree with you (though I think its more complicated than that)... BUT how those words are interpreted is a huge, contested field where there are very large differences of opinion. There is a moderate voice in Islam ... try talking to an Islamic theologian in Malaysia or Indonesia.

 

Even the meaning of the word Jihad is massively contested let alone the rights of women, the veil and what the Koran says about interest rates and finance.

 

It seems to me that you basically think Islam cannot undergo a Rennaisance and will always be locked into a world view dominated by long beards and violent struggle. If you have that opinion I suppose I can understand why you think the only way to end terrorism is via the assassin and the gulag.

 

You say my prescription for creating an environment where moderate Islam will reject violence “ain't going to happen.” And have listed a whole load of reasons why not. When I look at what is happening in the Middle East and in wider Islam I see fundamental reasons for saying it is you who are wrong on this … it’ll take years, and death and violence will no doubt result, sometimes justifiably, often not, but what will finally end it is a changing of peoples attitudes and world views, not killing and bombing people. Do you really think I’m wrong to say that?

 

Strange how people can look at the same thing and see different things.

[magneto]

"Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies.

 

Think-Tank members include:

Paul Wolfowitz

Richard Perle

Douglas Feith

Elliot Abrams

David Wurmser

 

Rather interesting links on Clean Break

 

Clean Break 1

 

Clean Break 2

[P.K.]

I actually read Chinahand's post carefully. I think it's 15 minutes of my life I would like back!

 

Madrasas are being much more strictly controlled; an even more successful effort will be the establishment of good alternative schools in the countries where poverty means that the only education available is from a Madrasas. That takes development and aid money; both of which are occuring.

From what I understand Madrasas in places like Pakistan are becoming more radical. So where you get your "controlled" from I do not know.

 

Over the House of Saud, I agree with you that its prosletizing of Wahhabiism has been a major element in spreading uncompromising Medieval Islam, but Al Qaeda attacks in Saudi have fundamentally changed attitudes. Plus the government is having to reform itself ... due to both internal pressure: huge numbers of under-/un-employed youth due to the failure of the gov to change oil wealth into social prosperity; and due to external pressure from the US etc who see the mis-rule of the Sauds creating the environment where terrorist attitudes thrive. You'll say this will take a thousand years, but look at Jordan, or Lebanon. Both countries have changed fundamentally in there attitudes towards terrorism. The same can be said for Eygpt where the destruction of its tourist industry by terrorists have resulted in large anti-terrorist demos.

The House of Saud inviting in the infidels for the first Gulf War was one of the major factors that led to the formation of Al Queda. Which is why so many Saudis take part in their atrocities and still do. So much for attitudes changing. The government can reform itself as much as it likes and it will make little difference. The parallels between Saudi and the neighbours you quote cuts no ice with me - they have little or no oil income. The thing is what would happen to the country if the House of Saud fell or was pushed? I personally think it could tear itself apart.

 

Lebanon is the most interesting case study hear; I'm not saying its perfect; and I awaite the Rog post about Hezbollah. But peace has totally changed its political and religious landscape. 15 years ago radical lebanese Shi'ites were the islamic bogey men. Please note these were Shia's about as friendly to Al Qaeda as Iain Paisley is to Jerry Adams. The Israeli withdrawl has taken the gun out of lebanese politics for the vast majority of Lebanese and its politcs are verging on democracy ... the current car bombs and assassinations are the last gasp (hopefully) of the old guard who are marginalized and rely on a crumbling Syrian regime for support.

Agreed. But 15 years ago there was no Al Queda. Also Lebanon has little or no strategic importance to the west and therefore to Al Queda. Basically I don't think it's that relevant.

 

Your comments on Israel imply to me that you think the Peace Process is bound to fail and that the only solution the Arab world will accept is the distruction of Israel ... again I'm waiting for the Rog post about Muslims never compromising. I totally disagree with you. I firmly believe that political violence will be taken from the mainstream of Palistinian life if a viable Palistinian State is created. There will still be a minority of fanatics and the biggest problem the two states will have to face is combatting them, because their actions threaten the existence of both states, but the peace agreements Israel has achieved across the Arab world shows how a peace process does work. Eygpt is now guarding the border with Gaza to stop terrorists and arms inflitrating; previously they actively planned invasions via the same routes.

I think you have missed the point. While the State of Israel exists radical Islamists have something on which to focus hatred and whip up fervour. The current fruitcake (sorry) in charge of Iran being an excellent example.

 

On Sharia law I also think you are wrong. Rog has posted about how all Muslims are fundamentalists as all must accept the Koran as the word of God. OK if thats your definition I agree with you (though I think its more complicated than that)... BUT how those words are interpreted is a huge, contested field where there are very large differences of opinion. There is a moderate voice in Islam ... try talking to an Islamic theologian in Malaysia or Indonesia.

Fine. I don't agree. I tell you what, if you need to talk to a Muslim in the Far East why not one in Bali?

 

Even the meaning of the word Jihad is massively contested let alone the rights of women, the veil and what the Koran says about interest rates and finance. It seems to me that you basically think Islam cannot undergo a Rennaisance and will always be locked into a world view dominated by long beards and violent struggle. If you have that opinion I suppose I can understand why you think the only way to end terrorism is via the assassin and the gulag.

I do not think any religion can evolve while it is based around a set text that will never change.

 

You say my prescription for creating an environment where moderate Islam will reject violence “ain't going to happen.” And have listed a whole load of reasons why not. When I look at what is happening in the Middle East and in wider Islam I see fundamental reasons for saying it is you who are wrong on this … it’ll take years, and death and violence will no doubt result, sometimes justifiably, often not, but what will finally end it is a changing of peoples attitudes and world views, not killing and bombing people. Do you really think I’m wrong to say that?

The reasons you have listed I do not think are relevant to the situation we are currently facing. Take the "home grown" 7-7 nutters.

 

Strange how people can look at the same thing and see different things.

If we were all the same we wouldn't get on! [/irony]

 

I tend to concentrate on the real world, the one we live in. I'm not keen on speculation as you can "what if" something forever if you choose to do so. Thanks to modern communications world-wide Islamic terrorism is now a fact of life (and death), one we have to deal with. I also think it will still be with us when those reading this are long gone.

[Phildo]

As to the bog-trotters...

Hurrah! Nothing like cheap racism to really add validity to your views on world politics. Come on, Enoch, tell me more.

[P.K.]

Racism doesn't come cheap.

 

In any event I'm a man of my time. Take the Black and White Minstrel Show, where did it all go wrong....

[Phildo]

Racism doesn't come cheap.

There is NOTHING so cheap as bigotry.