Printable View
Hair-splitting?Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor74
You are a lawyer, you know quite well the vast difference between a sweeping generalisation and an accurate description.
Your point about posts defending "fanatical despots" is fair enough, but too often a post pointing out the failings/lies/crimes of Western Governments is used as an excuse by some people to somehow "prove" that you are a friend/supporter of terrorism/fanatics.
Maybe if successive American administrations had not been involved in some extremely shady and deadly dealings in these countries, the welcome would have been better?Quote:
Originally Posted by Metrostars
On top of that, supporters of teams tend to do whatever they can to upset and annoy the opposition.
Fact No.1.-The Americans started this conflict.
Fact No.2.-Tony Blair is an arse-licking coward who would do anything to stay in the US good books.
Fact No.3.-There is well paid work in Iraq for civilians, non-military personnel, and this provides a great opportunity for people like Bigley to earn some cash for the latter years of his life.
Fact No.4. Yes there is an element of danger attached.
Synopsis: Ken Bigley would still be alive today if Mr. Bush wasn't driven by his fathers demons, and also if Mr. Blair wasnt a yes man for him. He did not deserve to die, none of the innocent civilians in any conflict do.Anyone on here who is justifying this as an act of war or saying its his own fault is a very shallow individual, and those who call him greedy obviously have no families and money worries of their own to consider because if they did, then they'd surely understand why people like Mr. Bigley take these chances.
Shame on you all. :mad:
Why, because we dare to have a different opinion to you, that goes against the grain of the media hysteria?Quote:
Originally Posted by joeSoap
Opinion is the key word there....and you all know mine now. I'm not saying you're not entitled to one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
But it doesn't make me shallow. IMO it would be shallow to risk your life, and potentially leaving the women you love a widow, for extra bucks. But again that's just my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by joeSoap
My old man worked on oil tankers, and during the Iran Iraq war could've taken mega money to work the gulf. He wouldn't take the potential risk for the sake of the family, despite the fact that the money would've made us a hell of a lot better off....
News today is all about the mass graves in Iraq. Toddlers clutching toys, mothers holding babies, shot in the head, along with all the people who were gassed. Investigators think that 300,00 people were killed by Saddam's soldiers. That's 100 world trade centres. I honestly feel for Bigley's family, I really do, but Saddam was a f*cking monster.
Western intelligence was apalling; he had no suitcase sized nukes, no missiles primed with anthrax ready to hit Cyprus within 45 minutes. At best Bush and Blair are gullible, at worst they're outright liars. The war has been a b*lls up. They brought down the dictator, and left a huge sucking vaccum in his place. The American puppet administration probably won't last long,and the whole thing'll drag on forever.
The two women Bigley's murderers wanted released were germ and chemical warfare specialists. Same crowd who filled the graves with slaughtered innocents whose bodies they're digging out of the ground today. Letting them go right now really isn't an option. They need to stand trial.
Bigley was working in a ridiculously dangerous part of the world. The risks to his personal safety were incalculable. Westerners walking round in that part of the world right now are invaluable, either for political demands, or cash, which can be used to set up gangsters and warlords building their own empires in the post Saddam Iraq.
Thing is, a hell of a lot of that went on when Saddam was still a "good guy". There's been many many times when the US/UK should've gone after Saddam, with good reason. Instead they waited until it was convenient for the US, based on lie's...Quote:
Originally Posted by green goblin
Agreed, and also does anyone else think that the Saddam issue was very personal for Bush because of his fathers inability to finish the job in '91?
Surely ridding the world of Al Qaida and Bin Laden should have been the priority at the time, not Saddam.
Having said that I'm gad he's out of the picture.Don't be surprised for them to 'capture' Bin Laden just before the election either. They could already have him in storage for emergencies in the polls... :D ;)
Well, sadly that's true. When it comes to world leaders, we're never ever going to be short of w*nkers. He killed all these people when he was the West's bitch. He was a madman, but a secular madman, and Reagan and Thatcher thought he was a safe bet compared to a perceived wave of born again Muslims.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
They pulled the same trick in South America don't forget, propping up torturers, liars and thieves with cash, guns and training, purely to stop the Reds. Pinnochet may yet still face justice for his crimes. And he was arrested coming out of Thatcher's house after afternoon tea.
They are still attempting to pull that off. If anyone saw the excellent documentary on Chavez in Venezuela, and how what actually happened was portrayed by the US in particular, and the Venezuela right wing media compared to what actually did happen....Quote:
Originally Posted by green goblin
Didn't see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
But, yes you're right. Same as it ever was...
Chavez - Inside the Coup it was called. Think the BBC part funded it, so it should've been on the beeb at some point and will no doubt be repeated. Keep an eye out for it, as it is excellent.Quote:
Originally Posted by green goblin
Bowling for Columbine was on RTÉ2 last Fri. night, highlighted amongst other things the way the US threw money at dictatorships in Guatemala [ I think], Iraq, Iran, Chile and Afghanistan. And of course it blew up in their faces.
Too right fella!Quote:
Originally Posted by davros
I'm personally all for us putting every Euro of the Celtic Tiger economy into supporting Branson's space mission to the hilt, and us all fecking off to build the colony of New Hibernia on Mars, thus re-painting the red planet green, and finally populating it with millions of actual little green men. F*ck the lot of 'em, we're out of here!
They are soldiers that's their job. So if they get caught up in fighting and happen to die, well then that was a potential side effect of their career choice. Or did they just join up to make a deafness claim?Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor74
No, the reason he was out there in the first place is relevant, IMO. Which was to make a financial killing, because he was essentially getting danger money. Unfortunately, he found out what the risks were.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor74
I dare say me or you could get a job out there for big bucks. I won't because the risks are too great, despite the fact the mortgage could be paid off in a year or two.
spot on davros. I made this point to some Americans in a politics tutorial in college once. They were going on about the evils of fundamentalism, what they don't appreciate is that their country is fundamentalist too-the US is based on fundamentalist capitalism and the belief that their system is best and everyone should do the same as them. Al Qaeda believe Islamic fundamentalism is best and everyone should do the same. They are two extremes, and extremism won't solve anything. They both have justifiable grievances with the other, but finding a middle ground is the only possible solution.Quote:
Originally Posted by davros
Saw that yeah. And the US calls itself a democracy :rolleyes: Its so similar to their participation in the overthrow and murder of Salvador Allende in Chile in 73.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
well if he is warned that continuing his job might lead to it and has the chance to another job but says "No, I'll take the risk, the money here is better" then yeah, tough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor74
Conor, you're an intelligent guy, its relevance is staring you in the face.It is precisely because of his income/career that he put himself in the position in the first place. that doesn't make it, or justifiable or acceptable. But it is connected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor74
One of the lads at work had the web site which showed Bigley and the Americans being beheaded,I wish I hadn't watched it now because it was the most disturbing thing I have ever seen.The people who did this to another human being are nothing but animals who deserve nothing but a worse death themselves.
Oh Christ, you can't see things like that without being damaged by it. People, just don't. Please.Quote:
Originally Posted by DolansWaistcoat
Thing is, they're not animals, they're people like you and I, and that's what makes it even worse. If it was a .mov of some guy being eaten alive by a crocodile it'd almost be better in a dreadful way, if you know what I mean. An animal doesn't have a choice, it's just doing what it does to survive. The fckers who killed Bigley had a choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DolansWaistcoat
But no worse than Americans, right Eanna?
Can't argue with you there. No right-thinking human being would do what they did to him. But you have to wonder why they're not right thinking, and what made them think like they doQuote:
Originally Posted by DolansWaistcoat
But in their own eyes they are right-thinking, and that the western world per se is screwed up. Probably some truth in that, but we in the western world, americans included, would never subject a man to such a death and broadcast it on the net.Quote:
Originally Posted by Éanna
I know about Guantanamo Bay, Lindie England and all that which I don't condone either btw, but western civilisation is not teaching these people how to do this....and neither I believe is their religion. They are pure, blood thirsty barbarians, probably deprived of free speech and a worldly education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Éanna
Well thats the huge question. Especially given there are other regions which have suffered much worse "exploitation" (so to speak) from the West, and suffer larger atrocities than the middle east. Latin America has been exploited and generally messed around with by all the big powers at various stages pretty much since 1492, yet you dont tend to get things like this happening over there. Similarly, other countries have it substantially worse than Palestine in terms of occupied land - eg Armenia.
NB Im not saying the exploitation is right or wrong per say, more questioning why there is such a huge difference in reaction in different parts of the world.
You're spot on there. So the key to the question is why are Islamic extremists doing these things? I don't think any one factor can be blamed, but I do think "the west" has to look at itself for some of the answers. Like how muslims in france and britain are treated, how the turks are treated in germany and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
I'll give you a bit of trivia that might explain the hostility:
You know croissants, those delicious french breakfast snacks? The reason they are shaped as they are is because they represent the Muslim crescent (similar to the Christian cross) and they were made to celebrate victory over the moors during the time of the crusades. Now if we in the western world didn't have much access to education, were living in poverty an ignorance and saw pictures of people smearing jam on crucifixes and eating them for breakfast, I'd say some people would get kind of annoyed.
Similarly, there are several towns in the south of spain called "Matamoros" which literally means "kill moors" from the time when the moors were driven out of Spain by the christians.
Now I know these are irrelevant historical facts, but when people hear things like that and see the western powers on friendly terms with the governments which oppress them, then maybe they're entitled to get a bit ****ed now and again.
But cant those things be applied across to the situation in Latin America too? In Spanish towns, for example, there is usually a statue to Cortez or some other person associated with the conquistadors, even in Latin America itself places are named after such things (eg the Sea of Cortez, Bahia California) - how come, given the living conditions for most Latin Americans are broadly similar to those experienced by Middle Easterners, the level of reaction is so different? For instance there are sizable communities of Latin Americans in "Western" countries (eg Ecuadorians in Spain, or even Cuban and Mexicans in the US), they dont tend to get fair treatment and most have to work in dead-end jobs and suffer from a fair bit of descrimination. Equally well many of those who remain living in Latin America have suffered too, at the hands of regiemes propped up by the West (eg those "Dissappeared" by the Argentine Junta or executed in Stadiums in Chile). To me there seem to be lots of parallels between the plight (so to speak) of Muslims and Latin Americans but I dont get why the reaction to the oppression/conditions is so different.
There are a lot of similarities, but i guess it comes down to culture in many ways. Very hard to work out why one group of people reacts differently to another
Ya you're right to call them animals is to insult the animals who only kill out of instinct.Quote:
Originally Posted by green goblin
You mentioned a crocodile there,I'd have no problem whatsoever with throwing the scum who commit these crimes to a few hungry crocs.On second thoughts that would be too quick a death for them :mad:
Those people who did this should be punished, there's no question about that. But punishing the perpetrators of one crime won't solve anything. You have to take a two-pronged approach:
1. Punish anyone guilty of these crimes.
2. Investigate what motivated them to do so, and try to explain to people who may follow them what you're doing and why you're doing it.
Very true, Eanna, but very hard at the same time. The easy option is for people to say 'Oh, that's what they do in that religion'. Couldn't be further from the truth. Thses religions, such as Islam, etc, are all based on decency and kindness to all other life, be it human or animal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Éanna
Where do they get these ideas from?Who knows? Are they almost mercenary killers frightened into these acts by their bosses-bear in mind, one of them helped Bigley's attempt at escaping AFAIK- or is it much more sinister?
Will this become bigger, will more and more of these killings happen(there's enough as it is) but will it grow? Let's hope not.
well if "the west" (sorry about the "s but I hate the phrase) reacts only by promising to hunt down those responsible, I can only see it getting worse. It is very hard to do anything but want to punish those responsible, but that is the only way forward. Blaming it on "murderers" or on Islam just doesn't work. The US, Britain and other countries have taken a very simplistic view- "we're good, they're evil." That has never worked and never will. Put it this way, however good a cowboy Bush is, he won''t shoot his way out of this.
So, do you envisage a situation where these people do as they please and go unpunished? The human rights abuses they perpetrate against their own for not following the will of allah or whoever it is they worship should go ignored?
I don't think so.
The problem here is that the Americans are only seeing dollar signs and using the human rights issue as a smokescreen.
So, what is the solution?? :mad:
unplug Sky, stop buying the "irish" Mirror and concentrate on why we have a political system based on a civil war?Quote:
Originally Posted by joeSoap
i dont think there is a quick fix solution. Muslims and christianity have been fighting since mohammeds brother went-a-converting. maybe the solution is to stop the US acting like the world police, its tampering in issues that have nothing to do with it have led to much of the instabilities around the world. but then again, they're gold in them thar dunes.
money makes the world go round, as they say, and therefore people will always fight over it, and people like Ken Bigley and others will continue to die...
Who was it that actually killed him anyway? Media reports suggest that it was the actual leader of this militant group that carries out the executions himself....sick bast*ard
the media need a new monster.Quote:
Originally Posted by joeSoap
so of course, to go one better than osama's evil "sitting in a cave" routine, they've decided that this fella actually does the murder himself.
yeah, but whats his name?
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
or billy as his friends call him.
not very interested in getting into this but in a totally discreditable situation the leader doing the dirty work in a warped way is kinda creditworthy.
so you think its cool that the leader personally got his hands dirty on this one?? :eek:
I believe it creditworthy in a normally run company if the MD or senior management roll up their sleeves and pack boxes or work on production lines, but this......please tell me you're kidding me.