MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
PM Theresa May travels to Scotland to pledge for “a more united nation”
Prime Minister Theresa May will meet Nicola Sturgeon in Scotland later on Monday for the first time since the SNP announced their proposals for a second independence referendum. At the beginning of a week that will see Article 50 triggered on Wednesday, the PM will say she wants to “build a more united nation”. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesShe better wears those fancy leather trousers of her....
Mar 27th, 2017 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse -1All those thistles...ya now...
Will be interesting to see how exactly she is told to 'talk to the hand' by Nicola Sturgeon. The vote to raise an artical 30 by the Scottish parliament is tomorrow. It will most likely be in favour of that. (To submit the request to WM for by in to hold a referendum) What the WM Gov does with that is their prerogative.......If they refuse, bear in mind that ScotGov has already said holding an unofficial referendum that has no recognition by WM will not be amongst the possible actions of ScotGov. This week could be very interesting indeed!!
Mar 27th, 2017 - 12:32 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Oh to be a fly on the wall !
Mar 27th, 2017 - 12:41 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Will be interesting to see how exactly she is told to 'talk to the hand' by Nicola Sturgeon. The vote to raise an artical 30 by the Scottish parliament is tomorrow. It will most likely be in favour of that. (To submit the request to WM for by in to hold a referendum) What the WM Gov does with that is their prerogative.......If they refuse, bear in mind that ScotGov has already said holding an unofficial referendum that has no recognition by WM will not be amongst the possible actions of ScotGov. This week could be very interesting indeed!!
Mar 27th, 2017 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Reminds me, must order a Turkey for Easter...
Mar 27th, 2017 - 03:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I thought Westminster had already said only that it is 'not the time', didn't hear them say 'No'.
Mar 27th, 2017 - 09:11 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Surely NS best bet is to wait until 2020/21 when the result of leaving (good or bad) will be known. If as many in the SNP believe, that Brexit will be the death of the UK, then surely she can only profit and get her way as they will be clambering to leave a sinking ship. Trying to force a referendum now will show that all she cares about is Scotland and 'Freedom', to the detriment of the rUK. It may just play into WM hands.
TWIMC
Mar 27th, 2017 - 09:31 pm - Link - Report abuse -3《“Trying to force a referendum now will show that all she cares about is Scotland and 'Freedom” 》... says the Engrish Turnip above about Nicola..., that wee bonnie ging fury...
I say...:
What else should a Scottish First Minister care about?
England and the Engrish yoke...?
Little shit stirrer Think fails once again...
Mar 27th, 2017 - 10:41 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Wee Jimmy firmly booted into the long grass.
Caring about Scotland ought to mean caring about the country it's currently a part of, if only because she might lose the referendum again. Even if she wins, she should be able to look after Scotland's interests without throwing the rest of the UK under the bus. (And I would say the same for the UK leaving the EU.)
Mar 27th, 2017 - 11:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Mr. DemonTree...
Mar 28th, 2017 - 08:00 am - Link - Report abuse -1You say...:
”... she (bonnie wee Nicola) should be able to look after Scotland's interests without throwing the rest of the UK under the bus”
I say...:
Scotland can't throw the rest of the UK under the bus...
For Scotland..., the UK IS the bus...
I think that Ms.Sturgeon would be better employed in sorting out the failings of her government with current issues in Scotland.
Mar 28th, 2017 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0As for Mrs. May, someone should remind her that 48% of the UK electorate did NOT vote for Brexit never mind a HARD Brexit. They seem to be ignored.
She has filled her cabinet with die-hard anti-EU zealots.
Does anyone in this country have a clue as to what they are doing ?
@Think
Mar 28th, 2017 - 12:11 pm - Link - Report abuse -1You do know that Braveheart wasn't a documentary about life in modern Scotland right?
@Clyde15
Agreed. I doubt 52% would have voted for hard Brexit if there had been options, but now the government is pandering to the most extreme elements. I don't think anyone in this country does have a clue what they are doing. No plans for Brexit, no contingency plans if they can't get an agreement. Labour want the UK to have the same benefits as being in the single market, which is manifestly impossible without actually being in it. And then there's the Daily Mail who have shown exactly what their priorities are - I'm sure readers of that paper got a nice balanced view to make a decision on, NOT.
Mr. DemonTree...
Mar 28th, 2017 - 02:49 pm - Link - Report abuse -1You say...:
“@Think... You do know that Braveheart wasn't a documentary about life in modern Scotland right?”
I say...:
@DemonTree... Of course I know that...! There weren't no buses in Bravehart's time..., silly lad...!
SNP and Scottish Greens in favour. 69 votes. Tories, Labour, LibDems against. 59 votes. A majority in favour. Applause in chamber - That's the vote passed in the Scottish Parliment to formally seek WM aproval for the Independence Referendum.
Mar 28th, 2017 - 04:12 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Thanks for the good news..., my compact Scottish foe in the Falkland/Malvinas issue ;-)
Mar 28th, 2017 - 04:19 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Theresa says NO! Are they deaf?
Mar 28th, 2017 - 04:21 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Theresa kicked Wee Jimmy's ball into the long grass and she wasn't even wearing football boots!
I dearly hope WM refuse to grant this article 30. Then we won't have to wait for a referemdum.
Mar 28th, 2017 - 04:23 pm - Link - Report abuse -1TWIMC
Mar 28th, 2017 - 04:34 pm - Link - Report abuse -1On other Engrish news... Engrish courts have just confirmed that the price of killing a muslim prisoner of war in cold blood is about three years...
I Think them muslims will find this a cheap price...
In other Argie News Jabba has been left on the Continental Shelf just like the other old Harpy. Not surprising really.....
Mar 28th, 2017 - 04:50 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Think
Mar 28th, 2017 - 07:47 pm - Link - Report abuse +2The bleeding heart sheds crocodile tears again...pardon the mixed metaphor.
He did the bloke a huge favour...he sent him to paradise as a martyr.
Of course you are the expert on the subject of stress in warfare. What the f***k do you know about it. They are fighting an enemy who does not wear a uniform, who will happily murder women and children in the name of his twisted religion. Shoot young girls for the crime of going to school, set off car bombs in market places, behead parents in front of their children and you are going boo hoo at the injustice of one insurgent, who was mortally wounded being sent off to paradise. For me,the only crime was that the marine did not dispose of more of them.
Get real!
By the way, what has this got to do with the subject header ?.
..................... Keep calm....................
Mar 28th, 2017 - 09:17 pm - Link - Report abuse -3and respect the Geneva Convention.
Marine A, B & C know all about Geneva..., laddie
Think supports folk who crucify opponents, push gays off tall buildings, put people in cages cover them with petrol then sit back and watch, arm children with pistols and get them to shoot prisoners in cold blood. Doesn't surprise me... a warped mind and set of values that we see exhibited daily on Mercopress.
Mar 29th, 2017 - 08:55 am - Link - Report abuse +1Next holiday suggestion for little shit Think - Helmand Province. Any bets as to how long he will last?
WARNING...
Mar 29th, 2017 - 07:41 pm - Link - Report abuse -1The listening of the following audio footage can seriously impair your driving capabilities...
Specially if you're a muslim...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KjtzgWzh9fk
He didn't kill the fighter because he was Muslim, Think. It was because they were at war and he had seen the other side had do worse things to his friends.
Mar 30th, 2017 - 07:39 am - Link - Report abuse +1Mr. DemonTree...
Mar 30th, 2017 - 08:51 am - Link - Report abuse -1Precisely what I'm saying... lad...
Any muslim with impaired driving capabilites can excuse him/herself with your own words...:
“I didn't drive over them pedestrians because they were infidels... It was because there is a war and I have seen their side do worse things to me friends....”
The Geneva Convention is OUR agreed way to “shuffle off this mortal coil”....
And Marine A, B & C make crystal clear at the end of the video...that they are as well-versed about the Geneva Convention as they are about Shakespearian prose...
@Think
Mar 30th, 2017 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Maybe the guy who was shot in that field could have said so (do we even know his name?), but the latest terrorist in London could not. He was born in Britain, and lived here all his life. Most of the violence he ever saw was what he committed himself. He didn't watch his friends die, he watched a few IS propaganda videos and went off to murder innocent people.
Besides which, Sgt Blackman did not go to the nearest Afghan village and shoot 40 random civilians in the street, let alone being ordered to do so by the authorities. He killed a wounded prisoner, a soldier who had chosen to fight and was injured in battle, who would have done the same if he'd had the chance. And the UK government prosecuted him and sent him to jail for it because they actually do care about the Geneva Conventions.
It's not remotely comparable to the IS terrorists, and anyone who thinks so is completely delusional.
Mr. DemonTree...
Mar 30th, 2017 - 08:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Haven't we just recently discussed the topic of those heroic Anglo Pilots... that fly high on their machines anywhere in Afghanistan where there is a wedding..., a funeral..., a birthday..., a festival or any other sort of gathering and kill civilians by the dozen...?
I Think we did...
And you think they killed those people deliberately do you? They planned and ordered those pilots to bomb wedding parties?
Mar 30th, 2017 - 10:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There's a big difference between accidentally killing civilians, even if they were careless, and doing it as a deliberate strategy with the objective of causing terror.
Geeeeeeeee...
Mar 30th, 2017 - 10:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Try to keep up with the times...lad...
Lets shoot anything that moves and call it “accidentally” later is soooooo 70's
In 2017 one says...: Lets shoot anything that moves and call it “colateral damage” later...
People of Afghanistan today are terrorized of cloudless days... (Drones see much better on cloudless days...)
The deliberate strategy with the objective of causing terror is evident... For Afghans, anyway...
And no, there ain't no difference between “ causing accidental collateral damage” and “carelessly killing civilians”...
Not for the dead..., not for their families..., not for their friends..., not for their co-religionists...
And how does killing Afghan civilians benefit America in any way? It just turns people against them who were otherwise supportive, and creates more enemies and more trouble.
Mar 30th, 2017 - 11:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is a big, big difference between killing civilians accidentally during a war, and purposely killing them to try and provoke a war that anyone sane wants to avoid.
And something else I didn't know, that since the start of the insurgency in 2006, the number of Afghan civilians killed by insurgents has consistently been higher than those killed by the US forces. I daresay IS do not include that in their propaganda.
Why are you so keen to excuse these terrorists anyway, but condemn the NATO forces for doing much less?
Mr. DemonTree...
Mar 31st, 2017 - 07:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0You ask...:
And how does killing Afghan civilians benefit America in any way?
I say...:
Depends who America is..., lad...
The weapons industry conglomerate...
The mining industry complex...
Trump's supporters...
To name a few...
You say...:
“There is a big, big difference between killing civilians accidentally during a war, and purposely killing them to try and provoke a war that anyone sane wants to avoid.”
I say...:
No difference whatsoever for them Afghans... being killed by an Anglo bombing raid...whilst attending the funeral of their whole clan... exterminated by a previous Anglo air raid against a weeding party...
You say
“... since the start of the insurgency in 2006, the number of Afghan civilians killed by insurgents has consistently been higher than those killed by the US forces.”
I say...:
Silly me... Here was “Thinking” that American policy was NOT TO do body counts...
https://www.iraqbodycount.org
You say...:
“Why are you so keen to excuse these terrorists anyway, but condemn the NATO forces for doing much less?”
I say...:
I don't excuse terrorists...
I condemn NATO for behaving like terrorists... And thereby creating them...
In the specific case of MarineA..., I commend England previous decision of a lifesentence in view of the overwhelming evidence against the soldier...
In the same case..., I condemn England devaluation of the Geneva Convention by freeing MarineA after just three years...
Clear enough...?
A typical simplistic Think statement with out knowing the facts.
Mar 31st, 2017 - 10:53 am - Link - Report abuse +1To quote the judge at the hearing
“ The stressors and his adjustment disorder had been factors in ”substantially“ impairing his ability to form a rational judgment ”
You know better than the judge who has all the facts at his disposal. Your arrogance is palpable.
If this had been a civilian he would have been charged with manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.
Of course in your eyes he must be guilty....he is English...that fits in with all your prejudices
@Think
Mar 31st, 2017 - 11:48 am - Link - Report abuse +1It's the US air force who are in charge of bombing legit targets and not weddings and funerals. From what I have read the major problem is the lack of ground troops, leading to an over-reliance on airstrikes which by their nature are not discriminating. It doesn't help the army to stir up people against them, it just makes their job harder. You can say they shouldn't be there in the first place, or that if they are going to start a war they ought to fund it properly, but I think it's fantasising to say they are bombing weddings on purpose.
“No difference whatsoever for them Afghans”
So do you condemn all wars, fought for whatever reason? Because you sure can't ever fight one and guarantee not to kill any civilians. You can avoid targeting them purposely, and do your best to minimise civilian casualties, but that is all.
“American policy was NOT TO do body counts”
The numbers don't come from the US army, and your site says the same thing about Iraq; a large majority of civilian deaths were caused by IS, and most of them were deliberately executed. It's astonishingly hypocritical to complain about Iraqi civilians being killed and then join a group that murders those same civilians as a deliberate policy.
“I commend England previous decision of a lifesentence [...] I condemn England devaluation of the Geneva Convention by freeing MarineA after just three years.”
If you ever commended anything Britain has done that is news to me. And none of us know all the details. I think they were right to prosecute him, but I do have some sympathy for what an individual soldier does under the stress and horror of war. It's very different to a deliberate policy created by the government.
And this is a silly argument anyway. You could just as well claim that the US were justified in invading Afghanistan and then Iraq because they saw 3,000 civilians killed in the WTC attacks. They had a choice of how to respond and so did IS and their terrorist supporters.
You two Sassenachs ABOVE have diverted this thread long enough...!
Mar 31st, 2017 - 02:30 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Back to its original theme...:
ALBA GU BRÀTH...
Got no answer? You were the one who brought up the subject. And Clyde15 isn't a Sassenach, get your insults straight.
Mar 31st, 2017 - 04:51 pm - Link - Report abuse +1No insult..., lad...
Mar 31st, 2017 - 05:21 pm - Link - Report abuse -1You are a Sassenach...
And he is a Sassenach...
http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/ScotLit/ASLS/SWE/TBI/TBIIssue13/Sassenach.html
Simples...
From your link:
Mar 31st, 2017 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“In modern Scotland, however, the Gaelic term has been adopted into general usage as sassenach, denoting something or someone English.”
Aren't you going to tell me whether you condemn all wars, since they inevitably result in civilian casualties?
And how seeing civilians die is totally a good excuse for people to join IS, but not for Americans to support a 'war on terror'?
Mr. DemonTree...
Mar 31st, 2017 - 07:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -1If the least interested about my opinions on War & Peace..., you can search the MercoPress archive after “armed farces”...
I already know you would prefer Argentina to have no armed forces, but that doesn't answer my question. Is all war wrong? Argentina fought one against Spain for independence. We can be pretty sure civilians were killed; were they acceptable collateral damage? How about the Cuban revolution? That was certainly not bloodless. Were Britain and France wrong to keep their promise to Poland and declare war on Nazi Germany?
Mar 31st, 2017 - 08:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And you haven't answered my second question at all.
TWIMC...
Apr 01st, 2017 - 09:48 am - Link - Report abuse -1Please find attached the 2013 judgement of MarineA... which I fully agree with...
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/r-v-sergeant-blackman/
Even with its relatively “cheap tariff” for murder... each an every word in it is an example of thousand years of evolutionary effort to develop Law & Justice...
- The latter judgements on this case are just a degradation of such effort...
Mr. DemonTree
All the answers you say you are interested in are included in my earlier posts...
The judgement seems very reasonable, and I am inclined to agree, but I'd need to see the appeal as well to know why they came to a different conclusion.
Apr 01st, 2017 - 06:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +1But either way it's not an excuse for terrorism. America did not create IS, although no doubt the Iraq war contributed. They didn't create Al Quaida either even though the CIA helped to train them.
You are just anti-American, and so according to you if Americans kill civilians it is America's fault, while if IS kill civilians it is also America's fault. It's nonsensical. If you go out and shoot civilians or mow them down with a lorry, that is something you chose to do. Whatever may have 'inspired' your action, it is ultimately on you how you respond.
And your answer is a cop-out. Those aren't especially difficult questions, why are you so afraid to answer them?
D.T.
Apr 01st, 2017 - 06:18 pm - Link - Report abuse +1It is pointless trying to have a sensible discussion with the pig ignorant Think.
He has his own agenda which consists of denigrating anything to do with England and mouthing “ pro Scottish comments ”which are embarrassing to any Scot that I know.
His use of the term sassenach or lowlander is an example of his ignorance when he refers to me
I was born in Argyll...which even Voice will admit is in the Highlands. My grandparents and forebears came from Lochaber and Mull which, if he cared to look at a map are in the Highlands.
But no, he has to continue with his snide remarks because he has nothing else to offer.
He is probably a professional Troll in the pay of the Argentine Embassy or else a fabrication of someone with Scottish connections who likes shit stirring for personal gratification.
Don't you ever wonder how he can spend so much time pulling out references as his one above ?
It is also interesting to see that a lot of his postings from“Argentina” are in the middle of the night OR or corresponding to 08:00 BST onwards.
So it's probably best NOT to try a reasoned discussion with this “humble” ...in an Uriah Heap fashion...Chubut dweller.
Lowlander Clyde15 just above...
Apr 01st, 2017 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Fourteen (14) lines attacking the messenger...
Zilch (0) lines discussing any topic...
Typical Lowlander...
@Think
Apr 01st, 2017 - 09:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 04 lines attacking Clyde15 and half the people in Scotland (turns out you're not so fond of them after all, surprise), and 0 discussing any topic. And this is your 5th post dodging my simple question.
Aye Clyde was born a Teuchter alright I passed his house (born in) today...
Apr 01st, 2017 - 11:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It would have been a fairly remote and rural location in those days so a Glaswegian would have definitely called him a Teuchter....
The Gaelic speakers would call anyone that doesn't have the Gaelic a Sassenach...
Don't know where they got it from as there have never been any Saxons in Scotland...
Picts, Scots, Britons, Vikings and Angles...but never any Saxons...
Mr. Voice...
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 12:26 am - Link - Report abuse -2And what does one call a fallen Highlander...?
Mr. Think...
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 07:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Clumsy...
;-)
Mr. Voice...
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 09:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0Clumsy what...
;-)
Thicko
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 11:49 am - Link - Report abuse +2On other Engrish news... Engrish courts have just confirmed that the price of killing a muslim prisoner of war in cold blood is about three years...
I Think them muslims will find this a cheap price...
I believe that YOU started the diversion of the main topic..... see your post above !
I only came in to counter your anti-English baloney. Change it to anti-British if you wish to be correct. There are Scots, Welsh and N.Irish serving in the RAF and other branches of the military. As to this stupid masquerade of supporting “Scotland”....total crap.
You only do it to try and drive a wedge between UK posters. All you have managed to do with me is give me a profound dislike for Argentinians which I did not have before I came on to these forums. Scotland does NOT want any supposed support from you as it smacks of complete insincerity.
You claim Scandinavian descent but of no specific country and live in a humble cabin in Chubut. How believable is that.
Think is clearly resident in Brook Street or under their instruction. He is just a shit stirrer and naive posters fall for it all the time. His parrot is of the same ilk.
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 12:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Lowlander Clyde15...
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 01:34 pm - Link - Report abuse -2- You say...:
“All you have managed to do with me is give me a profound dislike for Argentinians which I did not have before I came on to these forums.”
- I say...:
Not an unexpected reaction from a deculturalized Scot that disrespects his own heritage...
- You say further...:
“You claim Scandinavian descent but of no specific country and live in a humble cabin in Chubut. How believable is that.”
- I say...:
As belivable as four/five of the oldest squatting families in Malvinas being of Scandinavian descent and living in quite humble dwellings...;-)
Speaking about Scandinavian heritage... I just draw attention to my immaculated one to counter the complete and utter unjustified haughtines displayed by many of them Engrish in here...
Everybody knows that..., since the beging of times..., we Vikings have been a couple of notches above them Engrish...
God be with ye...
El Think...
This thread has been most revealing. Think claims to love Scotland but believes HE is a better judge of Scotland's history, culture, and future prospects than actual Scots. Calls someone who disagrees with him a 'typical Lowlander' and 'fallen Highlander' because what? Only highlanders are 'real' Scots in his view?
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 02:22 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Calls English posters haughty and then boasts about being 'a couple of notches above them Engrish' and his 1000 year old family tree.
Claims in this thread to care about Muslims but in others he calls Arabs 'sandn***ers'.
Loves to jump in to call other posters haughty or hypocritical, or post anything bad about Britain or England he can find, but if the topic becomes too awkward for him he disappears or dodges the question.
Think, if you are going to spend your time accusing other posters of hypocrisy, haughtiness and ignoring facts that don't suit them, you ought to spend a little more time looking in the mirror.
TWIMC
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 03:26 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Ahhhh.... those luuuuvely haughty Engrish...They never fail to amaze us...
Lord Howard..., for example... Making friends in Europe as we speak...
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39472207
Little shitstirrer Think's support for Scotland as welcome as a turd in a swimming pool! Bahahahaha...
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 04:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for us 'haughty' English, confident, proud of our record of human rights throughout the ages and not in the least intimidated by a load of second rate wankers is more like it.
Think
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse +3Disrespect Scottish culture ? What would you know about it apart from seeing it on shortbread tins and bottles of booze...which seem to affect what little cognisant capacity you demonstrate.
My avatar says it all !!
Lowlander Clyde15
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 05:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -3Very nice new picture you choose...
Very fitting too... A Lowland Gorilla... ;-)))
Shitstirrer Think, a Scandinavian? The only thing vagually resembling that is that he acts like an unpleasant and stupid little troll incapable of any rational or meaningful discussion. Having listened to his gobshite for a long time he is obviously a Nazi racist or of Nazi heritage.
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Same ole same ole...
Apr 02nd, 2017 - 10:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Attack the poster for holding a different point of view...
I'm quite, sure according to the law of averages, that the British point of view may not always be the correct one...
...but to the British it always will be...
Certainly the Highlander, their culture, their way of life and the Clann was different to the Lowlander and was destroyed by a combination of persecution and progress by both Scotland and England.
There are no Highlanders anymore, the Lowlands are only referred to geographically...for me it's usually “Oh aye yer stay across the water do yer?” ...meaning the Clyde...
The Gaelic speakers are not Clann or Highlanders...just Teuchters...
Mr. Think knows all this, he's just winding you in...
He is neither a Troll nor Stupid...he has an agenda and from his point of view...quite rightly so...
No, Voice, not for having a different point of view. For ignoring the facts, for gratuitously insulting other posters, and for the arrogance of claiming to know better than the people who actually live there. And for the hypocrisy of doing the very things he berates other posters for.
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 03:55 am - Link - Report abuse +2“he's just winding you in...
He is neither a Troll nor Stupid...he has an agenda and from his point of view...quite rightly so”
“Winding you in” sounds a lot like trolling to me. And I do not wish ill on Argentina or its people, so I am not very sympathetic to Think's 'agenda', or inclined to believe in his opinions that so conviently help to further it.
And by the way, there is no 'British point of view' on this or most other subjects. We each have our own view, and it's trivially obvious that everyone believes their own view is the correct one. Since Think is now refusing to debate the subject further, preferring to post irrelevant links instead, he has no more chance of changing mine.
Parrots just repeat what they hear repeatedly from their keepers, why is anyone surprised at a parrot's seeming defence of the indefensible?
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 08:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Pretty Polly!
TWIMC...
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 10:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0I notice that one of our Anglo posters above is “losing its cool” about me calling them Arab civilians by their Anglo given slurname...: “Sandniggers...
I note this same Anglo poster has previously protested about me calling them Arabs by their Anglo given slurname...: ”Sandniggers...
After reading his many postings above..., absolving..., condoning and rationalizing the killing of said “Sandniggers”..., as long as it is defined as “Colateral Damage”..., one must conclude that the logic must be...:
- One may not call them Sandniggers...
- But one may kill them Sandniggas...
BTW...
Interesting reactions in Europe about them Engrish “Rattling their Sabres” about Gib...
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39475127
Some Spanish media are even comparing the Chauvinist Engrish of today with the Argentinean Junta of 1982...
Not flattering...
Not flattering at all...
At least..., that's the way I Think...
@Think
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 12:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“- One may not call them Sandniggers...
- But one may kill them Sandniggas...”
You refused to answer my question above, but I can answer it. IMO some wars are justified, and that means that yes, sometimes one may kill soldiers of some other nation, and must accept some civilian casualties too. This goes for Iraqis or Afghans, or in other circumstances for Germans or Britons or Argentines.
I've never thought the Iraq war was justified, and I am not sure about the Afghan one, but I do think the US and British and other allied forces have mostly fought according to the Geneva conventions, and Britain punished a soldier who broke them, while IS and their terrorist sympathisers have no regard for them whatsoever. Yet you seem to think the former justifies the latter. I don't. The Geneva conventions are supposed to apply to everyone. If you expect British soldiers to follow them despite the enemy abusing them, you should hold 'sandniggas' to the same standard.
)
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 02:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0?
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 03:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well....
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 03:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here is where you..., Mr. DemonTree and bonnie Lowland Gorilla Clyde15 go completely wrong...
You two surely normal British citizens in each their end of Life & Country..., living a perfecty normal British life... but morphing into a Brutish organism as soon as Jingoism arouses your Inner Svine...
But don't take me word for it...
Read what His Honour..., Engrish Judge Jeff Blackett says about opinions like yours..., in his excellent 2013 judgment of MarineA...:
《 That Afghan man, as an injured enemy combatant, was entitled to be treated with
dignity, respect and humanity. Some commentators and members of the public have
said that you should not have been prosecuted and that you have not committed a
crime because it was killing within a conflict. Some also suggest it is legitimate to
kill wounded enemy combatants because, as you said after you shot the insurgent, it is
nothing they wouldn’t do to British casualties. Those commentators are very wrong:
if the British Armed Forces are not assiduous in complying with the laws of armed
conflict and international humanitarian law they would become no better than the
insurgents and terrorists they are fighting. Hearts and minds will not be won if British
service personnel act with brutality and savagery. If they do not comply with the law
they will quickly lose the support and confidence of those they seek to protect, as well
as the international community. You and all Service personnel learn this throughout
your training - you demonstrated that you knew that then, because you tried to cover it
up, and you know it now.》
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/r-v-sergeant-blackman/
Do yourselves a a favour, lads... Read that judgement ..., repeatedly... You may learn something...
Herewith..., I rest me case...
El Think ..., (lifelong admirer of some Engrish things as good judges..., Hardy tackle..., Rudge Whitworth bikes... Clark's desert boots..., etc..., etc..., etc...)
@Think
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 04:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Pulling together is what people do when they are attacked, it's nothing sinister.
And I already agree with that judgement, I agreed the first time I read it. I only disagree that British courts giving too lenient a sentence (in your and their opinion), is a good reason for someone to go out and murder a bunch of random civilians. Apart from the obvious hypocrisy of doing such a thing, it achieves nothing but more war and more needless deaths.
Yes a 2013 judgement ! What about the verdict in the LAST hearing when new facts were presented. How convenient of you to ignore that ! It does not fit in with your preconception of the event. My reply to you 3 days ago-
Apr 03rd, 2017 - 05:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The stressors and his adjustment disorder had been factors in ”substantially“ impairing his ability to form a rational judgment ”
You know better than the judge who has all the facts at his disposal. Your arrogance is palpable.
If this had been a civilian he would have been charged with manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.
In the UK a person cannot be charged with murder if he is suffering from some mental disability. Medical experts say that marine A was suffering from combat stress disorder which impaired his decision making process. As a result of this, the sentence was downgraded to manslaughter.
What is your problem with this ? On review, the judiciary ruled that this was the case.
No one has said that killing a prisoner does not constitute a breach of the Geneva Convention. He was tried and found guilty of murder...BY THE UK AUTHORITIES.
On appeal, it was proven that he was suffering from severe stress which clouded his ability to make rational decisions. The verdict was changed to manslaughter. He got no more favourable treatment than any other accused or convicted person.
It is the definite opinion here that he was hung out to dry by an uncaring MOD.
However, I am sure that none of this will register with you.
His main crime was being English so he must be guilty.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!