Iraq murder trial charges dropped
Once again, it bears repetition, it’s NOT the Government or the Labour party doing the investigating, it is the Special Investigation Branch of the British Army Royal Military Police.
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again, it bears repetition, it’s NOT the Government or the Labour party doing the investigating, it is the Special Investigation Branch of the British Army Royal Military Police.
But someone did beat this young Iraqi to death
- No body.
- No burial site.
- No death certificate.
- Family refused to give DNA samples or allow any investigation that may yield forensic evidence, so quite where talk of a 'matching blood sample' found on a soldier's rifle came from is beyond me.
- No reliable evidence that an incident ever took place, or that this person even existed, in fact.
Jacko, I'm a little shocked at your lack of objectivity here - not what I have come to expect of you, old boy. I'd expect this kind of thing from a Tabloid journalist, not a respected aviaton journo such as yourself. Which brings me to:
Apologies if I'm wrong, but there's still a dead 18 year-old Iraqi attracting flies out there somewhere.
And I don't think he tripped over and banged his head after a boozy night out at a Baghdad go-go bar
And I don't think he tripped over and banged his head after a boozy night out at a Baghdad go-go bar
the Paras have to be sat down in a quiet room and told that if they are going to dish out a bit of street justice again they should do it in the privacy of their own homes.
It is because of moronic statements like these from third-rate gutter journalists that we have so many problems with public perception. I strongly advise you to get out there yourself, on patrol with the troops, and see for yourself what they have to face on a daily basis before you make statements like these.
This case was POLITICALLY motivated ffrom the start. The reason? around 1 million Muslim votes up for grabs, many of whom deserted Labour at the last election. Join the dots, people. It's not f**king rocket science, although it is obviously beyond the average Tabloid journalist.
16B
8 x 2 blades,
Sorry, it’s the likes of you who cannot see beyond the end of their politically blinkered and conspiratorial nose who are being naïve, not me.
You seem to forget that it was Blair who sent the troops to Iraq in the first instance and Blair who supports their continued presence, so he is hardly likely to be actively campaigning for this sort of prosecution now is he? Especially when it failed at the first hurdle in such a dramatic and embarrassing fashion!
Now, interesting comment on my perceived support for Blair, if he, to quote you; “pulled out a gun and shot someone on live TV you would still defend him” of course I would you loon, that sort of thing is what I do for a living!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BUT, and it’s a huge BUT that you seem to conveniently ignore, I strongly believe that we were WRONG to invade Iraq, that Blair was WRONG to take us in, that his justification before and after the action was WRONG and that we are in an unholy mess in this so called “war on terror” because Blair has gone about it in the totally WRONG manner! DO I make myself clear 16blades??????????????????/
Agree 100% about the body issue, you seem to think the quote about the lad being beaten to death in Iraq was from me, sorry, but I have consistently said that as there was never a body produced, never a grave found and never a death certificate produced this whole thing was a cock up from start to finish and should NEVER have gone to court.
Sorry, it’s the likes of you who cannot see beyond the end of their politically blinkered and conspiratorial nose who are being naïve, not me.
You seem to forget that it was Blair who sent the troops to Iraq in the first instance and Blair who supports their continued presence, so he is hardly likely to be actively campaigning for this sort of prosecution now is he? Especially when it failed at the first hurdle in such a dramatic and embarrassing fashion!
Now, interesting comment on my perceived support for Blair, if he, to quote you; “pulled out a gun and shot someone on live TV you would still defend him” of course I would you loon, that sort of thing is what I do for a living!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BUT, and it’s a huge BUT that you seem to conveniently ignore, I strongly believe that we were WRONG to invade Iraq, that Blair was WRONG to take us in, that his justification before and after the action was WRONG and that we are in an unholy mess in this so called “war on terror” because Blair has gone about it in the totally WRONG manner! DO I make myself clear 16blades??????????????????/
Agree 100% about the body issue, you seem to think the quote about the lad being beaten to death in Iraq was from me, sorry, but I have consistently said that as there was never a body produced, never a grave found and never a death certificate produced this whole thing was a cock up from start to finish and should NEVER have gone to court.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I hate to defend the RMP, who on the 2 occations I have dealt with them, were not exactly wonderful, I don't think they actually initiate any prosecutions.
My understanding is that they investigate, and report the facts. Then someone else makes the decision to prosecute based on that investigation.
To say that pressure was put on them to prosecute is therefore wrong.
It may well be that pressure was applied to the decision making authority.
I do find it odd that there was no critisum of the Army Legal Serices or Senior Officers for bringing the case. They saw the investigation, and therefore the evidence, they could and should have called a halt to it, if it did not support the charge.
My understanding is that they investigate, and report the facts. Then someone else makes the decision to prosecute based on that investigation.
To say that pressure was put on them to prosecute is therefore wrong.
It may well be that pressure was applied to the decision making authority.
I do find it odd that there was no critisum of the Army Legal Serices or Senior Officers for bringing the case. They saw the investigation, and therefore the evidence, they could and should have called a halt to it, if it did not support the charge.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Shropshire
Age: 73
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proone
Your puppy like adoration of all things Blair and New Labour is actually quite endearing. However, you need to get out more and talk to servicemen and women who bear the brunt of his political horse trading. Doesn't matter how much you rant and bluster, the fact is that there was significant political pressure applied to mount these prosecutions to appease many in Blair's party apparatus who didn't necessarily share his pro American stance.
As for NI, it's sickening to see the terrorists being granted amnesty whilst maliciously pursuing members of HM Forces who served there with distinction. There is no doubt that Blair has given too much away to the terrorists who were under real pressure from the USA after 9/11. Read up on it man and get real.
Your puppy like adoration of all things Blair and New Labour is actually quite endearing. However, you need to get out more and talk to servicemen and women who bear the brunt of his political horse trading. Doesn't matter how much you rant and bluster, the fact is that there was significant political pressure applied to mount these prosecutions to appease many in Blair's party apparatus who didn't necessarily share his pro American stance.
As for NI, it's sickening to see the terrorists being granted amnesty whilst maliciously pursuing members of HM Forces who served there with distinction. There is no doubt that Blair has given too much away to the terrorists who were under real pressure from the USA after 9/11. Read up on it man and get real.
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, Pr00ne, those particular comments re: the body etc were not aimed at you, but the journo fraternity.
If you do disagree so vehemently with Blair's actions over Iraq, why are you so quick to fanatically defend everything else the lying, cheating, thieving, slimy, slippery excuse for a politician does? It often seems like you are in love with the bloke.
Your'e not his wife, perchance, are you?
16B
If you do disagree so vehemently with Blair's actions over Iraq, why are you so quick to fanatically defend everything else the lying, cheating, thieving, slimy, slippery excuse for a politician does? It often seems like you are in love with the bloke.
Your'e not his wife, perchance, are you?
16B
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Way up high
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Naive, me?
Now then, I may be a litle naive in all matters political, but if I have read the Telegraph and some of the posts above correctly, I am led to believe that our troops, past and present are to be prosecuted for hunting down and 'dealing' with terrorists in N. Ireland. Nothing strikes me as more perverse than a situation in which one can be trained to do a job, carry out this job successfully saving countless lives in the meantime (Gib) and then be prosecuted for actually doing said job. Not to worry though 'cos those individuals actually bombing, killing and maiming as a matter of course, will be pardoned from a lengthy jail term. Hopefully the government will also apologise to them for having taken up so much of their time and hand tham a little compensation to ease the pain! Un-flaming-believable. 'Nuff said!!!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 47
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I seem to recall a case before that of the 7 Paras. I may be a little sketchy on the details but I believe that there was an investigation into the actions of a soldier during TELIC by the RMP. They investigated and the charge was brought before his CO. The CO dismissed the charge but Lord Goldsmith (or his department) disagreed and forwarded the case to the crown prosecution service. I seem to remember that the individual was found not guilty but had been effectively tried twice. It smacked of political interference and would also explain the prosecution of the latest 7. I would be grateful if anyone could fill in the blanks or provide more detail on the case I mentioned.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
How can HMG possibly get away with the (if true) news that the SIB has started looking into killings in NI by the Army, some of which were approved by ministers? If yesterday's Telegraph is to be believed, operations such as the SAS ambush of the IRA with the JCB as they attempted to massacre the occupants of a police station (Op Judy) are to be "reviewed". There could well be political pressure to get a few soldiers in the dock as part of the "peace" process.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Shropshire
Age: 73
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its true A_A, the Government has formed a group to investigate a significant number of shootings / deaths / injuries of the terrorist players involved. Loughgall figures prominently due to the accusations of the propaganda machine and the families of the East Tyrone Bde casualties of a shoot to kill policy.
Never mind the explosives in the JCB and the fact that all eight were heavily armed and, quite unusually, involved in the attack on the RUC Station indicating they were going for maximum opposition casualties.
On the two previous attacks mounted by ET Bde, both had utilised JCB Digger Blades loaded with explosive and in the ensuing aftermath they had indulged in the murder of all or most of the station occupants. Your monicker would suggest more than a passing acquaintance with, or or knowledge of, the incidents in question (??) so please forgive me... granny, eggs etc
(Blair and New Labour of course is still in thrall to the power wielded by Adams and McGuinness, and have been consistently outmanoeuvred by wily Sinn Fein tactics - peace, but at any price ?)
Never mind the explosives in the JCB and the fact that all eight were heavily armed and, quite unusually, involved in the attack on the RUC Station indicating they were going for maximum opposition casualties.
On the two previous attacks mounted by ET Bde, both had utilised JCB Digger Blades loaded with explosive and in the ensuing aftermath they had indulged in the murder of all or most of the station occupants. Your monicker would suggest more than a passing acquaintance with, or or knowledge of, the incidents in question (??) so please forgive me... granny, eggs etc
(Blair and New Labour of course is still in thrall to the power wielded by Adams and McGuinness, and have been consistently outmanoeuvred by wily Sinn Fein tactics - peace, but at any price ?)
Twonston, I think you are referring to the case of Trooper Kevin Williams. His CO (who had based his decision that NFA was required on advice from the Army Legal Service) was second-guessed by the Army Prosecuting Authority, who then referred the case to the Attorney General. It was decided that as the CO had dismissed the case, a civil trial was required.
Times story
Telegraph Story
Grauniad Story
Times story
Telegraph Story
Grauniad Story
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
The Times: Our abused disarmed forces.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Thanks Orac, I wouldn't have seen that very good article in The Times. Libby Purves has hit the mark very well with that, IMHO.
Her final sentance:
"Politicians must grasp that it is not enough to wear a poppy on TV and pose with tanks. If you’re going to have an army, treat it with respect."
Her final sentance:
"Politicians must grasp that it is not enough to wear a poppy on TV and pose with tanks. If you’re going to have an army, treat it with respect."
16 blades and stafford,
I don’t “fanatically defend everything else” that Blair does, I simply react when I see ridiculous claims of him being personally responsible for everything from body armour being withdrawn in Iraq to him overseeing prosecutions of UK forces for ‘war crimes.’
A lot of folk on this site are very quick to place blame on Blair when it rightly should be placed at the feet of some very senior officers in uniform. Others merely allow their own political agenda to get in the way and cloud their judgement.
I am far from some fanatical Blairite, to me he has been a huge disappointment but in no way do I see him as the lying conniving slimy toad that you seem to, he is no worse than most senior politicians but certainly no better.
I do not know the man but I do frequent the periphery of what may be described as his very outer social circle, I hear a lot that is totally at odds with what a lot of posters think is Blair’s opinion and motives.
stafford,
How do you KNOW that there was “significant political pressure to mount these prosecutions?”
The fact is that you DON’T but it suits your own political agenda and opinion to believe that there was!
shandyman,
Yes, you are extremely naive!
I don’t “fanatically defend everything else” that Blair does, I simply react when I see ridiculous claims of him being personally responsible for everything from body armour being withdrawn in Iraq to him overseeing prosecutions of UK forces for ‘war crimes.’
A lot of folk on this site are very quick to place blame on Blair when it rightly should be placed at the feet of some very senior officers in uniform. Others merely allow their own political agenda to get in the way and cloud their judgement.
I am far from some fanatical Blairite, to me he has been a huge disappointment but in no way do I see him as the lying conniving slimy toad that you seem to, he is no worse than most senior politicians but certainly no better.
I do not know the man but I do frequent the periphery of what may be described as his very outer social circle, I hear a lot that is totally at odds with what a lot of posters think is Blair’s opinion and motives.
stafford,
How do you KNOW that there was “significant political pressure to mount these prosecutions?”
The fact is that you DON’T but it suits your own political agenda and opinion to believe that there was!
shandyman,
Yes, you are extremely naive!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Shropshire
Age: 73
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proone
I note you don't actually take issue with the assertion, just the man playing the ball ? You failed to comment on the malicious political actions reference NI which leads me to believe you think there might be some substance there too.
I'll concede your point that I DON'T KNOW that there was significant political pressure to mount the prosecutions, just as you DON'T KNOW that there wasn't. However, if it walks like a duck...
NI just proves my point and reinforces our belief that the Blair Government is sacrificing good servicemen on the altar of pc politicking. Too many credible sources are pointing out the role of Goldsmith and the Government in these show trials. Another New Labour clusterf
k
I note you don't actually take issue with the assertion, just the man playing the ball ? You failed to comment on the malicious political actions reference NI which leads me to believe you think there might be some substance there too.
I'll concede your point that I DON'T KNOW that there was significant political pressure to mount the prosecutions, just as you DON'T KNOW that there wasn't. However, if it walks like a duck...
NI just proves my point and reinforces our belief that the Blair Government is sacrificing good servicemen on the altar of pc politicking. Too many credible sources are pointing out the role of Goldsmith and the Government in these show trials. Another New Labour clusterf
k
stafford,
Far from not commenting, this is what I wrote on the relevant thread;
“Far from calling for a Ministerial denial of any enquiry, have we seen any confirmation other than a Torygraph assertion that such an enquiry is actually under way?
Seeing as what is being done to and for convicted terrorists I would be amazed if there is any attempt to prosecute a member of the armed forces for any action during the troubles, it would be a legal minefield with the precedents that have been set.”
You may wish to see the NI situation as reinforcing your own political point of view but you are letting emotion cloud the facts. Which party was in power when the Stalker enquiry into a shoot to kill policy in NI was ordered?
Far from not commenting, this is what I wrote on the relevant thread;
“Far from calling for a Ministerial denial of any enquiry, have we seen any confirmation other than a Torygraph assertion that such an enquiry is actually under way?
Seeing as what is being done to and for convicted terrorists I would be amazed if there is any attempt to prosecute a member of the armed forces for any action during the troubles, it would be a legal minefield with the precedents that have been set.”
You may wish to see the NI situation as reinforcing your own political point of view but you are letting emotion cloud the facts. Which party was in power when the Stalker enquiry into a shoot to kill policy in NI was ordered?
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Shropshire
Age: 73
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proone,
I do hope you are right and that this proposal withers on the vine ! If it was being run up the pole to test opinion then my MP certainly now has mine.
As for the Stalker enquiry, IIRC the results were never formally published since Stalker was removed and replaced by another senior officer. To be fair to Stalker, I think he even stated in his book that he found no evidence of a shoot to kill "policy". The fact that we were accused by the European Court in Strasbourg, at the instigation of the IRA propaganda machine and the Labour opposition says it all since the Government of the day had to go through the motions. If you remember, the Government fought very hard to have evidence given in camera despite the best endeavours of the IRA and the families to identify certain soldiers giving evidence, eventually from behind screens.
I contend that the current political motivation in both Iraq and retrospectively NI is there - we obviously won't agree until you see the evidence in the actions currently being considered against former and serving servicemen.
The findings on Loughgall were that the players involved had their human rights violated due to the lack of a "credible" inquiry - how ludicrous is that following a military operation where heavily armed combatants were shot dead during the commission of a crime with the intent of mass murder
I do hope you are right and that this proposal withers on the vine ! If it was being run up the pole to test opinion then my MP certainly now has mine.
As for the Stalker enquiry, IIRC the results were never formally published since Stalker was removed and replaced by another senior officer. To be fair to Stalker, I think he even stated in his book that he found no evidence of a shoot to kill "policy". The fact that we were accused by the European Court in Strasbourg, at the instigation of the IRA propaganda machine and the Labour opposition says it all since the Government of the day had to go through the motions. If you remember, the Government fought very hard to have evidence given in camera despite the best endeavours of the IRA and the families to identify certain soldiers giving evidence, eventually from behind screens.
I contend that the current political motivation in both Iraq and retrospectively NI is there - we obviously won't agree until you see the evidence in the actions currently being considered against former and serving servicemen.
The findings on Loughgall were that the players involved had their human rights violated due to the lack of a "credible" inquiry - how ludicrous is that following a military operation where heavily armed combatants were shot dead during the commission of a crime with the intent of mass murder
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do frequent the periphery of what may be described as his very outer social circle
I hear a lot that is totally at odds with what a lot of posters think is Blair’s opinion and motives
16B
And then of course there is this, in this weekends Times
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...861864,00.html
I think that this Government has lost the faith of the Armed Forces. No wonder there is a recruiting crisis. Overstretch can only get worse.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...861864,00.html
I think that this Government has lost the faith of the Armed Forces. No wonder there is a recruiting crisis. Overstretch can only get worse.
16 blades,
I can assure you it is no worshipping harem! Not exactly HIS either old chap. You may think that it all becomes so much clearer but quite frankly you are way off the mark. The last time I had a really good word to say about TB was around 2000, since then it has been a huge dissapointment and that was BEFORE this totally disastorous invasion of Iraq, which, despite what folk on here are saying, WILL go down as the one single thing he will be remembered for for all time, not an epitaph I would want!
stafford,
Stalker was replaced by Colin Sampson; Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Constabulary after being accused of various wrongdoings by the RUC, the whispering campaign was that he was TOO near the truth for comfort!
Colin Sampson’s report was never made public and the Attorney-General of the day merely announced that the 11 members of the RUC investigated would not face prosecution for reasons of national security.
As I said the existence of any campaign to prosecute members of the security forces would face huge difficulty in light of the actions that came out of the Good Friday agreement, you simply cannot treat members of both sides differently and anyone in the Govt will know this, an amnesty is just that you cannot apply it on one side and not the other. The existence of a shoot to kill policy within the RUC and collusion with Loyalist death squads is indeed shameful and abhorrent, but no more shameful or abhorrent than the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians and off duty members of the security forces and their families, for which a full and 100% amnesty has been agreed.
I can assure you it is no worshipping harem! Not exactly HIS either old chap. You may think that it all becomes so much clearer but quite frankly you are way off the mark. The last time I had a really good word to say about TB was around 2000, since then it has been a huge dissapointment and that was BEFORE this totally disastorous invasion of Iraq, which, despite what folk on here are saying, WILL go down as the one single thing he will be remembered for for all time, not an epitaph I would want!
stafford,
Stalker was replaced by Colin Sampson; Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Constabulary after being accused of various wrongdoings by the RUC, the whispering campaign was that he was TOO near the truth for comfort!
Colin Sampson’s report was never made public and the Attorney-General of the day merely announced that the 11 members of the RUC investigated would not face prosecution for reasons of national security.
As I said the existence of any campaign to prosecute members of the security forces would face huge difficulty in light of the actions that came out of the Good Friday agreement, you simply cannot treat members of both sides differently and anyone in the Govt will know this, an amnesty is just that you cannot apply it on one side and not the other. The existence of a shoot to kill policy within the RUC and collusion with Loyalist death squads is indeed shameful and abhorrent, but no more shameful or abhorrent than the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians and off duty members of the security forces and their families, for which a full and 100% amnesty has been agreed.