BIGDAN Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 The reason the government couldn't do anything because the IRA didn't just come out and ask for bills. They had their little fundraising groups like NORAID someone mentioned. Our judicial system is a piece, so it's not as easy as just saying "Those are going to the IRA, so now its illegal." There's a big process for it. I understand mate, we had the same people collecting funds here, still do by the way in Kilburn London, and its supposed to be all over now but as far as I know and have been told the IRA have turned to being criminals and run their areas just as violently as when the troubles were happening. I knew people who died as a result of the "Troubles" both in Ireland and here in the UK. They blew up one of my local pubs in Woolwich and killed many people in the UK, it took the bombing of the financial district of London before the UK government would even talk to them. What the terrorists/freedom fighters need to do is stop killing the innocent and attack the money making parts of any country, you get listened to more quickly and achieve better results. But we also have to define just whos who, IRA-HAMAS, fredom fighter or terrorist, I can see it from both sides and they really are similar, how about you? Regards, Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I'm split honestly. I understand what they're trying to do, and I love the idea of their overall goal (no offense). But the way they're going at it...its just wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Conflicts like Israel and Palestine go back for ages, and nothing will change history. Placing the blame for past events is counter-productive. The only thing that matters is the here and now, where for some time now everyone has tried to broker a peace between these two. And neither wanted to forgive/forget past acts, who did what. Now, after a really long time, Israel made a significant concession towards attaining peace. They pulled out of Gaza with the understanding that action would be a step towards peace/co-existence. Instead, Hamas has parlayed Israel's withdrawal into an opportunity to attain a better vantage point from which to continue their attacks. Hamas has ignored the concessions made by Israel and continue along a stated goal of removing Israel from the face of the earth. AT THIS POINT IN TIME Hamas, and by extension the Palestinian people who freely elected Hamas to represent them (thus giving tacit approval to Hamas' stated mission), are terrorists. Whereas Israel targets, to the best of their ability, strictly strategic locations from which Hamas launches their attacks, Hamas launches rocket attacks indiscriminately into Israeli populations. That their attacks are not as effective is not an issue. Yes, there are many Palestinian casualties, but then in typical terrorist strategy, they often launch their attacks from civilian locations, using the Palestinians as human shields to keep world opinion turned in their favor. And for the record, "proportionate response" is perhaps the most idiotic concept since "exit strategy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Right on Brother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 that piece on 60minutes was pretty insightful last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Didn't see it, was too busy working a shit job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 yeah, we got done in the studio early so i managed to catch it. It's pretty sad what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I am a Rebel after all What a waste of perfectly good bedsheets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 yeah, we got done in the studio early so i managed to catch it. It's pretty sad what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians. two sides to that coin my friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 There sure is, but seeing it from a non-Israeli-biased opinion for once was a real eye opener. The Palestinians are building Israeli condos on Palestinian land and live in poverty at the bottom of these hills while the Israelis live freely on top of them, barring any intergration for non-Jews and keeping all fresh water supplies, leaving the surrounding lower lands with little to no water for Palestinian agriculture. I'm pro-Israel but that's fucked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Looks like I'm gonna have to look that up tomorrow. Sounds good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Anybody who doesn't understand why Guantanamo was a black mark on the U.S. doesn't really understand the US Constitution, Declaration of Independence, or the Bill of Rights...in fact, has no understanding of any of the documents underpinning this country. Which is why I am not surprised that ole "W" himself approved of what was going on at Guantanamo...for if there is anyone more clueless than George W. Bush about what our country is about, I have yet to find them...unless it is some of the troglodytes here that still defend the little cur. Case in point: Larry King's execrable interview with George and Laura Bush just the other week before Obama took office. All through these last 8 years, Bush has made me wince when he would declare that he was just doing his job of protecting America from attack...that it was the President's most important job. And during the King interview, he said it again as defence of what he has done these past 8 years in office. Well, sorry Bushie, but that is NOT your job. Your sole, most important duty, as defined in the Constitution, and as defined in the very oath you take upon taking office, is as follows: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Note also that the phrase "so help me god" does not appear...that was ad libbed by Washington. But it is the Constitution the President swears to defend and protect...not the country. And a President who defends the country while wiping his ass with the Constitution does dishonour to the United States. Hence, the importance of Obama's statement in his Inaugural Address that: "As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake." Oh, and to the bozos who think that any information gleaned from waterboarding and other tortures actually led to information that kept us from being attacked, every intelligence expert knows that is bullshit and that information gotten by means of torture usually proves useless. And to the Bush teabaggers who praise Bush for keeping us from attack after 9/11? I got an Alien-Defense-Potato I keep in my kitchen...it must work as I've yet to be kidnapped by Aliens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 The only problem with Obama's freezing of Guantanamo is that it was an executive order, which I don't usually care for as it should be unconstitutional, but hey whatever works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Well, sorry Bushie, but that is NOT your job. Uh, sorry, it IS his (the President's) job. Your sole, most important duty, as defined in the Constitution, and as defined in the very oath you take upon taking office, is as follows: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." sole (sōl) adj. 1. Being the only one most (mōst) adj. Superlative of many., much. 1. Greatest in number Oops. At least you can claim being half-right. Prolly wouldn't have bothered to point out how your own words contradict each other if you weren't so strident in going back to the "Bush" well. He's gone - let it go, already. Bush is the only person/place/thing blamed for more things than El Nino. And I'm sure if we're attacked again, that too will somehow be Bush's fault - it won't have anything to do with President Obama's decision to release terrorists. Oh, and to the bozos who think that any information gleaned from waterboarding and other tortures actually led to information that kept us from being attacked, every intelligence expert knows that is bullshit and that information gotten by means of torture usually proves useless. Of course. Pure bullshit. Useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 It's not really a matter of "does torture work" but should we employ it, and still be schocked when our enemies use it? Torture is below this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Bush is the only person/place/thing blamed for more things than El Nino. HA! Bush still lags way behind Clinton in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Maybe if this strategy were employed then, there may never have been a need for Gitmo. I don't necassarily agree with his method but the outcome was very effective. They didn't name it the Pershing Rocket (Missile) for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 KO - Did Gitmo Create Terrorists? Jan. 26: Former U.S. military interrogator Matthew Alexander talks about the 61 former inmates of the prison at Guantanamo Bay who may have returned to the battlefield. US Interrogator "Matthew Alexander" Exposes the Idiocy of the Bush Torture Regime "Matthew Alexander," who served as an interrogator for the U.S. military in Iraq, explains the fruitlessness and counter-productivity of the Bush torture program, and describes the successful (and ethical) interrogation techniques he used to actually produce positive results. "Matthew Alexander" is the author of the new book "How to Break a Terrorist." From "Countdown with Keith Olbermann," December 3, 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 It's not really a matter of "does torture work" but should we employ it, and still be schocked when our enemies use it? Torture is below this country. Which takes it back to the question of what is torture? We aren't pulling fingernails. We aren't hooking electrodes to genitals. Some of our own soldiers undergo waterboarding as training. As such, I don't particularly consider waterboarding torture. And certainly not in the same sense as the non-debatable forms mentioned above. (cue the "then let's waterboard YOU and see how you like it" responses) Are any methods of interrogation acceptable? Or do we just ask if they'd perhaps be willing to provide us with any information? Seriously, everyone raises hell about all this, but just what IS considered justified? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted January 27, 2009 Author Share Posted January 27, 2009 Okay, you go ahead and believe waterboarding isn't torture. Meanwhile, I'll accept the word of people who would know....members of our military who have come forward and said that yes, it is torture. I am aware what goes on in SERE training, and so are they. So if they call it torture then I think it's safe for me to do likewise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Okay, you go ahead and believe waterboarding isn't torture. Meanwhile, I'll accept the word of people who would know....members of our military who have come forward and said that yes, it is torture. I am aware what goes on in SERE training, and so are they. So if they call it torture then I think it's safe for me to do likewise. Then there's no distinguishing for you? Playing Barry Manilow's "Brandy" 24-7 is the same as electric shock? And my previous question remains - is there ANY form of interrogation that's acceptable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 And my previous question remains - is there ANY form of interrogation that's acceptable? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bi0LTsvNL9o I sat down with some hardened members of Al Qaeda and by treating them nicely, by showing them respect, and showing that I understood their culture and religion, I was able in one case, in the case of the man who ultimately led us to Zarqawi, in a matter of six hours, I was able to convince him that we could work together and get over the past, and work towards a better Iraq by working together, Sunnis and Americans together. -"Matthew Alexander", U.S. Interrogator and Author of How to Break a Terrorist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bi0LTsvNL9o I'm YouTube-own'd here at work, but I'll certainly view this when I get home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.