howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
13 February 2010
11:2440488i thought i had lost the plot until alec reminded us the chap was ethiopian.
13 February 2010
12:1040491Why should we not mention one set of victims without mentioning others? If we talk about WWI do we have to dredge up the Falklands, WWII, Vietnam? Wherever there is war there are victims - that includes the innocent who lose their lives and the innocent who lose years out of their lives.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,698
13 February 2010
12:2040494Barry - yes to your first rather than second point, but hey you knew that didn't you
Sid - I asked you because you raised the "war on terror" point
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 641- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 2,335
13 February 2010
12:5140496Oops Howard, I think I'll go back to speaking to flowers, I remember getting a coffee table from MI5 once, so secretive they kept back the assembly insrtuctions.
13 February 2010
14:2240501Bern, either you are being deliberately obtuse, or you just don't get what I am saying. I'm not sure which it is, but maybe that's because you think I am a piece of female anatomy.
The point is this, we should not just remember the Birmingham 6 as sufferers at that time, we should also remember those who were blown apart or burnt to death that night too. The press, and consequently most of the public, have forgotten those victims in their rush to condemn the security forces and legal profesion for locking up 6 innocent people, allegedly. I just happen to think the real victims were those who had their lives terminated that night, and we would do well to be respectful and remember them too. Not much to ask for IMO.
The same is true for those killed in the Omagh bombing and the Asian newspaper shop owner killed in the Canary Wharf bombing.
But, if we want to heal the wounds of history, we also need to acknowledge the broader canvas on which the life of Ireland has been played out, and one could say we are reaping the problems sown over many generations. That doesn't mean we should continue in the same way. Partition was largely about protecting Churchill money in Harland & Wolff, not about doing something right for the Irish.
I am passionately republican when it comes to Ireland, which is of course, diametrically against what I want for England. I think.
There, I hope that helps. We can chat about WW1 & 2 and Vietnam wars too if you wish, but I blame the latter on the French for screwing up a nation they didn't really want as a colony.
In fact, if you think about it, our early kings were French and they started the Irish problem too. Say no more.
13 February 2010
14:4940504You know, we agree! I think I was simply p***ed off with the British high and mighty attitude to self defence: if you are not with us you are against us. The Brits often seem to believe (in common with the Americans) that unless an entire race or nation worships the British way of life it is implicitly gointg to want to blow it up or subvert it. I reserve the right, though, to mention the collateral victims such as the B6 without having to affirm my support and sympathy for the victims of the people who actually commited the crimes - sympathy with one group doesn't cancel out sympathy for another.....as you point out. One way we differ: I am republican through and through, whether it is for Ireland or for the UK!!!!! Apart from that i am relatively harmless.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
15 February 2010
09:4640658Ross - you may well be happy to sacrifice the lives of 10's of thousands of inoccent men, women and children in order not to offend your principals. I sincerely hope that MI5, MI6 and others in the security services are made of sterner stuff and would use whatever means to prevent such a tragedy and that does include waterboarding, sleep deprivation and even the ripping off of finger nails if necessary.
Bruce Anderson has written a very interesting artice on this subject with which I fully agree, word for word. It is on this link:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/bruce-anderson/bruce-anderson-we-not-only-have-a-right-to-use-torture-we-have-a-duty-1899555.html15 February 2010
10:4640660Not sure what makes you think Ross would sacrifice people, BarryW.......? Have you heard something I haven't?
Having some respect for the principles of freedom and liberty doesin NO WAY imply a wish to reduce anyone elses rights. Apparently we all have the right to be innocent until proven guilty, freedom of speech and freedom of thought, all on the proviso that they do not impinge on others freedoms.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
15 February 2010
11:1240663Read our exchange on this thread Bern. He says so.
15 February 2010
11:3540665What ever happened to a sense of humour....?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
15 February 2010
12:3840668Whats a sense of humour got to do with it.
i posed a direct question to Ross, ethics against preventing a mass murder, whats more I checked his answer with him. he would stick to his ethics even if not doing so would result in thousadnds of deaths.
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,698
15 February 2010
22:1740715Barry I do not believe that torture is at all effective method for extracting useful information. The "ticking bomb" example you use to justify your stance is nonsensical as if we get to the stage of being in that situation our security services have failed hugely.
Ethically I do not approve of murder, nor do I approve of torture - it really has nothing to do with being made of sterner stuff; in fact I staunchly believe that NOT resorting to abuse and torture requires one to be made of much sterner stuff than those that do; as torture is the easy option. The abuser/torturer is demeaned and dehumanised as much if not more so than the person being abused.
All the evidence I have seen from the likes of the FBI and Met Police is clear that people tend to tell you what they think you want to hear when you torture them rather than telling you the truth. The FBI have shown that when investigated the vast majority of information obtained under duress is useless and they for one are convinced that there are much better interrogative techniques for obtaining quality information.
As an aside using torture removes any moral stance one can have about our citizens being tortured by foreign regimes etc.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
15 February 2010
22:2640717Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
15 February 2010
22:3440721Well Ross, there is no way I would want to tie the hands of our security services when trying to get information on a threatened terrorist incident. To hell with scruples, there are more important things when it comes to life and death situations. Quite frankly I would not care at all what happens to terrorists.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 February 2010
22:4140722do you not think that getting at the truth is important barry?
proper surveillance and acting on information recieved followed by intelligent people interviewing suspects is what gains results.
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,698
15 February 2010
23:1940724Do you care what happens to UK citizens Barry?
If we use torture, we expose our citizens to retribution, further we cannot morally or ethically complain if it does happen to our own.
Finally, today it is a terrorist, tomorrow it is a climate protester, the day after it could be someone who just disagrees with the government or state, where does it stop?
Do we end up like Zimbabwe where you can get tortured for opposing the government?
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
16 February 2010
07:5540728Ross - yes, that is why the Security Services hands must not be tied when chasing down terrorists. I am not saying give them carte blanche, I made that clear in an earlier response. It is a difficult subject but you can go too far in both directions.
16 February 2010
09:3840735Actually, you can't. Once you start sanctioning torture there is no valid response when defending our own against either torture or allegations of torture. It is one thing to assertively interrogate, and to gather intelligence, and quite another to torture.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
16 February 2010
09:4040737Define torture though Bern.
Sleep deprivation is one way of reducing resistance and something I would not describe as torture.
16 February 2010
09:4740739The 1984 United Nations Convention Against Torture (Article 1) provides a definition of torture that is considered customary.
International humanitarian law (IHL) differs somewhat from this definition in not requiring the involvement of a person acting in an official capacity as a condition for an act intended to inflict severe pain or suffering to be defined as torture.
The ICRC uses the broad term "ill-treatment" to cover both torture and other methods of abuse prohibited by international law, including inhuman, cruel, humiliating, and degrading treatment, outrages upon personal dignity and physical or moral coercion.
The legal difference between torture and other forms of ill treatment lies in the level of severity of pain or suffering imposed. In addition, torture requires the existence of a specific purpose behind the act - to obtain information, for example.
The various terms used to refer to different forms of ill treatment or infliction of pain can be explained as follows:
Torture: existence of a specific purpose plus intentional infliction of severe suffering or pain;
Cruel or inhuman treatment: no specific purpose, significant level of suffering or pain inflicted;
Outrages upon personal dignity: no specific purpose, significant level of humiliation or degradation.
Methods of ill treatment may be both physical and/or psychological in nature and both methods may have physical and psychological effects.
