Treason
Join Date: May 2002
Location: No longer a hot and sandy place....but back to the UK for an indefinite period
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ideal solution would be if they become martyrs for their cause. They would die happy and we would be helping them get what they desire.
BFB
BFB
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard/read recently somewhere that the "72 virgins" promised to the "Martyrs" to look after their needs in paradise were a mis-translation from the orginal Sanskrit (or whatever). Modern scholarship reveals that they are not "virgins" but "Raisins"! The muhajadin must have a passion for fruitcake. We should continue to help them satisfy it.
Stephen Farrell of The Times broke the story of the two Brit traitors on the Times front page on Wednesday. They are aged 23 and 21 years and fighting for the Mahdi army against the Americans in Najaf. By fighting against our allies, I believe they are committing treason. If they were fighting against the Brits in the Basra area I believe there would be an open-and -shut case against them. The story was juxtaposed with that of 20 year-old Private O'Callaghan who became the 62nd British soldier killed in Iraq. Daniel McGrory wrote: "(O'Callaghan) grew up just a few miles away in South London from another young man of almost the same age who today carries a gun in Iraq and boasts of wanting to kill allied soldiers. Swaggering around Najaf with his uncle, this masked gunman swears allegiance to the same radical militia who killed Private O'Callaghan and wounded five of his comrades in an attack in Basra on Monday".
If captured it would be pointless to hand over these men to the Americans to interrogate at Guantanimo Bay. They have not committed Treason against the Americans and could reasonably claim protection as POWs under the Geneva Conventions. If they were tried for Treason in a British court (and the fact that this law has not been invoked since 1945 is irrelevant), they could at worst be sentenced to life imprisonment, which would impose a heavy burden on the taxpayers. Best if they were not taken prisoner .
If, as PrOOne seems to suggest, the European Declaration on Human Rights gives rights to individuals to exercise lethal force against the armed services of their own country because they do not agree with the policy of their country's elected government, then either the Act should be amended in the light of global terrorism, or we should abrogate the Declaration forthwith.
Stephen Farrell of The Times broke the story of the two Brit traitors on the Times front page on Wednesday. They are aged 23 and 21 years and fighting for the Mahdi army against the Americans in Najaf. By fighting against our allies, I believe they are committing treason. If they were fighting against the Brits in the Basra area I believe there would be an open-and -shut case against them. The story was juxtaposed with that of 20 year-old Private O'Callaghan who became the 62nd British soldier killed in Iraq. Daniel McGrory wrote: "(O'Callaghan) grew up just a few miles away in South London from another young man of almost the same age who today carries a gun in Iraq and boasts of wanting to kill allied soldiers. Swaggering around Najaf with his uncle, this masked gunman swears allegiance to the same radical militia who killed Private O'Callaghan and wounded five of his comrades in an attack in Basra on Monday".
If captured it would be pointless to hand over these men to the Americans to interrogate at Guantanimo Bay. They have not committed Treason against the Americans and could reasonably claim protection as POWs under the Geneva Conventions. If they were tried for Treason in a British court (and the fact that this law has not been invoked since 1945 is irrelevant), they could at worst be sentenced to life imprisonment, which would impose a heavy burden on the taxpayers. Best if they were not taken prisoner .
If, as PrOOne seems to suggest, the European Declaration on Human Rights gives rights to individuals to exercise lethal force against the armed services of their own country because they do not agree with the policy of their country's elected government, then either the Act should be amended in the light of global terrorism, or we should abrogate the Declaration forthwith.
FlatusVeteranus,
ECHR certainly gives rights to the individual, murder however is murder, as is conspiracy to murder and attempted murder, no LAW gives any one person that right. Governments however, put themselves above the Law by granting that very right to members of it's armed forces.
As to these two individuals, if they are caught what would be done with them, they may well have dual nationality, would you treat them as Brits or Iraqi's? . Also, ask yourself this, how many members of the IRA and it's offshoots who were caught during the troubles were ever charged with Treason? They were British citizens, they took up armed conflict against the UK armed forces and the British state, they killed and maimed hundreds of members of the forces, yet why do you think they were NEVER charged with Treason?
BTW,
I do think that your handle is THE best on pprune Flatus!
ECHR certainly gives rights to the individual, murder however is murder, as is conspiracy to murder and attempted murder, no LAW gives any one person that right. Governments however, put themselves above the Law by granting that very right to members of it's armed forces.
As to these two individuals, if they are caught what would be done with them, they may well have dual nationality, would you treat them as Brits or Iraqi's? . Also, ask yourself this, how many members of the IRA and it's offshoots who were caught during the troubles were ever charged with Treason? They were British citizens, they took up armed conflict against the UK armed forces and the British state, they killed and maimed hundreds of members of the forces, yet why do you think they were NEVER charged with Treason?
BTW,
I do think that your handle is THE best on pprune Flatus!
Nixor ut Ledo
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In a Beaut of a State
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regards to pr00ne's other post .......I think that it is the first time EVER that I have seen the words "I am a Barrister" without the usual end of the sentence which reads "and this is going to cost you lots"
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flatus,
You are making a common mistake...it's not 72 Virgins, it's 72 Virginians. Here's the real story:
After his death, Osama Bin Laden went to heaven. There he was greeted by George Washington, who proceeded to slap him across the face and yell at him, "How dare you try to destroy the nation I helped conceive!"
Patrick Henry approached and punched Osama in the nose and shouted,"You wanted to end our liberties but you failed."
James Madison entered, kicked Osama in the groin and said," This is why I allowed our government to provide for the common defense!"
Thomas Jefferson came in and proceeded to beat Osama many times with a long cane and said, "It was evil men like you that provided me the inspiration to pen the Declaration of Independence!"
These beatings and thrashings continued as John Rudolph, James Monroe and 66 other early Americans came in and unleashed their anger on the Muslim terrorist leader.
As Osama lay bleeding and writhing in unbearable pain an Angel appeared. Bin Laden wept in pain and said to the Angel, "This is not what you promised me"
The Angel replied, "I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you in heaven. What did you think I said?"
You are making a common mistake...it's not 72 Virgins, it's 72 Virginians. Here's the real story:
After his death, Osama Bin Laden went to heaven. There he was greeted by George Washington, who proceeded to slap him across the face and yell at him, "How dare you try to destroy the nation I helped conceive!"
Patrick Henry approached and punched Osama in the nose and shouted,"You wanted to end our liberties but you failed."
James Madison entered, kicked Osama in the groin and said," This is why I allowed our government to provide for the common defense!"
Thomas Jefferson came in and proceeded to beat Osama many times with a long cane and said, "It was evil men like you that provided me the inspiration to pen the Declaration of Independence!"
These beatings and thrashings continued as John Rudolph, James Monroe and 66 other early Americans came in and unleashed their anger on the Muslim terrorist leader.
As Osama lay bleeding and writhing in unbearable pain an Angel appeared. Bin Laden wept in pain and said to the Angel, "This is not what you promised me"
The Angel replied, "I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you in heaven. What did you think I said?"
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Triple Hooked
You are, of course, entitled to your view, illogical though it is.
Quite coincidently, I'm the duty Legal Aid solicitor in our local Magistrates Court on Monday morning. As in the UK, the fees for such work are less than what it costs me to attend. I'll pass your views on to the persons in custody, who are frightened, confused and otherwise perplexed by being arrested and charged over the weekend.
You are, of course, entitled to your view, illogical though it is.
Quite coincidently, I'm the duty Legal Aid solicitor in our local Magistrates Court on Monday morning. As in the UK, the fees for such work are less than what it costs me to attend. I'll pass your views on to the persons in custody, who are frightened, confused and otherwise perplexed by being arrested and charged over the weekend.
Argus
You forgot to mention that all these people are innocent of any wrongdoing, or that some of them may have almost as much knowledge of their rights as you do.......
Taking cover now ......
(Personally I have nothing against lawyers/barristers/solicitors etc,.... apart from the fact that one that lives near me is using the law as a weapon to make peoples lifes miserable over trivia, I don't trust the one that is running my country, and I trust even less the one in charge of our armed forces! Then again my own solicitor is a kindly gentlemen who has helped my family beyond the call of duty on several occasions! Lawyers are like everyone else in the world - EVEN PILOTS - there are nice ones and there are #@#*##*s!! It is the ratio of good to bad that often varys between different professions/trades/callings. Still, as you so rightly say Argus, my view may be illogical, but I am entitled to it!!)
You forgot to mention that all these people are innocent of any wrongdoing, or that some of them may have almost as much knowledge of their rights as you do.......
Taking cover now ......
(Personally I have nothing against lawyers/barristers/solicitors etc,.... apart from the fact that one that lives near me is using the law as a weapon to make peoples lifes miserable over trivia, I don't trust the one that is running my country, and I trust even less the one in charge of our armed forces! Then again my own solicitor is a kindly gentlemen who has helped my family beyond the call of duty on several occasions! Lawyers are like everyone else in the world - EVEN PILOTS - there are nice ones and there are #@#*##*s!! It is the ratio of good to bad that often varys between different professions/trades/callings. Still, as you so rightly say Argus, my view may be illogical, but I am entitled to it!!)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biggus
I didn't realise that Mr Hoon is some one who professes to be learned in the law.
As you said, there is a ratio of good to bad in any profession. Unfortunately, many of my professional colleagues feel moved to inflict themselves on long suffering electorates through some misapprehension of vision, conviction, energy and altruism. Please don't judge the rest of us by the crassness of some.
I didn't realise that Mr Hoon is some one who professes to be learned in the law.
As you said, there is a ratio of good to bad in any profession. Unfortunately, many of my professional colleagues feel moved to inflict themselves on long suffering electorates through some misapprehension of vision, conviction, energy and altruism. Please don't judge the rest of us by the crassness of some.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PrOOne
Do sovereign states really "grant the right" (to murder) to members of their armed forces? Or do they impose an obligation on them to obey lawful commands? I think language is very important.
I am puzzled why the Treason law was never invoked against the IRA and its various clones. Political and moral cowardice, I suspect. Or it may be due to the fact that HM forces in NI were acting in aid of the civil power to suppress civil disturbance, rather than to repel an external aggressor. In this context, I wonder when the old Riot Act was repealed. It was still on the statute book when I did officer training back in the early 50s I remember being lectured on it in Air Force Law lectures and there was a small pamphlet which suggested finding a bucket of paint and a brush and painting a line in front of a hostile crowd and then shouting (once a magistrate had been found to read the Act!) "anyone who crosses that line will be shot dead, etc etc". Shooting low to wound was discouraged as a sign of irresolution.
Personally I believe the Act should have been retained and used. It used to sicken me watching young thugs hurling Molotov Cocktails at our soldiers with seeming impunity. The appropriate response should have been high velocity rounds aimed to kill. Much of what has been called "peace-keeping" seemed to be merely making targets of our soldiers - difficult targets, maybe, but an essentially passive role suited more to riot police (eg the French CRS) than to soldiers.
My monica was a free translation done for me by a local friend, recently deceased unfortunately. After a double first in Greats he spent his working life in your profession.
Do sovereign states really "grant the right" (to murder) to members of their armed forces? Or do they impose an obligation on them to obey lawful commands? I think language is very important.
I am puzzled why the Treason law was never invoked against the IRA and its various clones. Political and moral cowardice, I suspect. Or it may be due to the fact that HM forces in NI were acting in aid of the civil power to suppress civil disturbance, rather than to repel an external aggressor. In this context, I wonder when the old Riot Act was repealed. It was still on the statute book when I did officer training back in the early 50s I remember being lectured on it in Air Force Law lectures and there was a small pamphlet which suggested finding a bucket of paint and a brush and painting a line in front of a hostile crowd and then shouting (once a magistrate had been found to read the Act!) "anyone who crosses that line will be shot dead, etc etc". Shooting low to wound was discouraged as a sign of irresolution.
Personally I believe the Act should have been retained and used. It used to sicken me watching young thugs hurling Molotov Cocktails at our soldiers with seeming impunity. The appropriate response should have been high velocity rounds aimed to kill. Much of what has been called "peace-keeping" seemed to be merely making targets of our soldiers - difficult targets, maybe, but an essentially passive role suited more to riot police (eg the French CRS) than to soldiers.
My monica was a free translation done for me by a local friend, recently deceased unfortunately. After a double first in Greats he spent his working life in your profession.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Grobelling through the murk to the sunshine above.
Age: 60
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Argus
You must drive to the court in a pretty thirsty motor car, or do you pay your chauffeur too much?
Most of the poor bewildered folk in this position in the UK are arrogant, aggressive, obnoxious and (when a solicitor turns up) sanctimonious scum, who don't deserve to have a penny of taxpayer's money squandered in their direction.
fees for such work are less than what it costs me to attend
who are frightened, confused and otherwise perplexed by being arrested and charged over the weekend
Pub User:
Careful, you could be charged under the official secrets act for revealing this info. You would then need one of the underworked and overpaid self centred egotistical nerds to lighten your wallet and come up with a feeble but politically correct excuse to get you off.
Most of the poor bewildered folk in this position in the UK are arrogant, aggressive, obnoxious and (when a solicitor turns up) sanctimonious scum, who don't deserve to have a penny of taxpayer's money squandered in their direction.
Pub user,
You say;
“Most of the poor bewildered folk in this position in the UK are arrogant, aggressive, obnoxious and (when a solicitor turns up) sanctimonious scum, who don't deserve to have a penny of taxpayer's money squandered in their direction.”
May I ask how you come to such a conclusion?
ZH875,
Sure hope you never need a Lawyer!
You say;
“Most of the poor bewildered folk in this position in the UK are arrogant, aggressive, obnoxious and (when a solicitor turns up) sanctimonious scum, who don't deserve to have a penny of taxpayer's money squandered in their direction.”
May I ask how you come to such a conclusion?
ZH875,
Sure hope you never need a Lawyer!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flatus Veteranus
The Riot Act,1714 was repealed by the Statute Law (Repeals) Act, 1973. However, the common law right and duty of justices to suppress a riot at any moment with whatever degree of force may be necessary was not affected at that time.
My recollection from the late 60s is that the British Army was deployed to Northern Ireland in aid of the civil power, primarily because the Royal Ulster Constabulary had lost the confidence of the populace, and was unable to maintain law and order. Again, if memory serves me correctly, the Army relied initially on a common law power to suppress riots. However, over the years, various pieces of legislation were enacted to codify the Army's powers of riot suppression, arrest, questioning of suspects and detention.
Interestingly, in Oz, post September 11, 'treason' has been recently redefined in Federal legislation to allow the offence to be made out when a person assists another country or organisation engaged in armed hostilities against the Australian Defence Force, such as in Iraq. This came too late to 'catch' two Australians who had been captured by the US in Afghanistan and interned in Guantanamo Bay.
Part 5.1—Treason Division 80—Treason 80.1 Treason
(1)
A person commits an offence, called treason, if the person:
(a) causes the death of the Sovereign, the heir apparent of the Sovereign, the consort of the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister; or
(b) causes harm to the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister resulting in the death of the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister; or
(c) causes harm to the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister, or imprisons or restrains the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister; or
(d) levies war, or does any act preparatory to levying war, against the Commonwealth; or
(e) engages in conduct that assists by any means whatever, with intent to assist, an enemy:
(i) at war with the Commonwealth, whether or not the existence of a state of war has been declared; and
(ii) specified by Proclamation made for the purpose of this paragraph to be an enemy at war with the Commonwealth; or
(f) engages in conduct that assists by any means whatever, with intent to assist:
(i) another country; or
(ii) an organisation;
that is engaged in armed hostilities against the Australian Defence Force; or
(g) instigates a person who is not an Australian citizen to make an armed invasion of the Commonwealth or a Territory of the Commonwealth; or
(h) forms an intention to do any act referred to in a preceding paragraph and manifests that intention by an overt act.
Penalty: Imprisonment for life.
The Riot Act,1714 was repealed by the Statute Law (Repeals) Act, 1973. However, the common law right and duty of justices to suppress a riot at any moment with whatever degree of force may be necessary was not affected at that time.
My recollection from the late 60s is that the British Army was deployed to Northern Ireland in aid of the civil power, primarily because the Royal Ulster Constabulary had lost the confidence of the populace, and was unable to maintain law and order. Again, if memory serves me correctly, the Army relied initially on a common law power to suppress riots. However, over the years, various pieces of legislation were enacted to codify the Army's powers of riot suppression, arrest, questioning of suspects and detention.
Interestingly, in Oz, post September 11, 'treason' has been recently redefined in Federal legislation to allow the offence to be made out when a person assists another country or organisation engaged in armed hostilities against the Australian Defence Force, such as in Iraq. This came too late to 'catch' two Australians who had been captured by the US in Afghanistan and interned in Guantanamo Bay.
Part 5.1—Treason Division 80—Treason 80.1 Treason
(1)
A person commits an offence, called treason, if the person:
(a) causes the death of the Sovereign, the heir apparent of the Sovereign, the consort of the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister; or
(b) causes harm to the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister resulting in the death of the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister; or
(c) causes harm to the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister, or imprisons or restrains the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister; or
(d) levies war, or does any act preparatory to levying war, against the Commonwealth; or
(e) engages in conduct that assists by any means whatever, with intent to assist, an enemy:
(i) at war with the Commonwealth, whether or not the existence of a state of war has been declared; and
(ii) specified by Proclamation made for the purpose of this paragraph to be an enemy at war with the Commonwealth; or
(f) engages in conduct that assists by any means whatever, with intent to assist:
(i) another country; or
(ii) an organisation;
that is engaged in armed hostilities against the Australian Defence Force; or
(g) instigates a person who is not an Australian citizen to make an armed invasion of the Commonwealth or a Territory of the Commonwealth; or
(h) forms an intention to do any act referred to in a preceding paragraph and manifests that intention by an overt act.
Penalty: Imprisonment for life.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Grobelling through the murk to the sunshine above.
Age: 60
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pr00ne
Many moon ago I was one of the senseless souls who walk our streets of an evening, feebly attempting to protect life and property. I spent many a weekend in the city centre, fighting, being abused and assaulted and with the help of my colleagues dragging a token few of the worst individuals into the nick.
Thankfully, I saw the light (blue) and left to be cossetted by the military. Life was (very) cushy by comparison; I went to war twice, but nothing ever compared to those Friday nights.
Many moon ago I was one of the senseless souls who walk our streets of an evening, feebly attempting to protect life and property. I spent many a weekend in the city centre, fighting, being abused and assaulted and with the help of my colleagues dragging a token few of the worst individuals into the nick.
Thankfully, I saw the light (blue) and left to be cossetted by the military. Life was (very) cushy by comparison; I went to war twice, but nothing ever compared to those Friday nights.
Gentleman Aviator
(c) causes harm to the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister, or imprisons or restrains the Sovereign, the Governor-General or the Prime Minister; or
Cannot imagine much sympathy here for the concept that harming TB (or, in his absence, 2 Jags the Rescue Hero?) would be Treason????
