|
How's this for an idea. Seeing as how the United States still has Saddam Hussein in jail tell the people of Iraq the Western world screwed up! We didn't find any WMD so we sure are sorry! We'll fix it by putting Mr. Hussein and his thugs back in power and when we leave things will be the same as before we came.
That will get their attention! |
This thread is an example of a good debate. Then someone comes along who tries to flame it with irrelevant posts and drivel. They are now gone to the sin bin - and so will any others who do the same.
The thread is interesting, keep it that way please gentlemen, and ladies. PPP |
Gents, let's not turn this excellent and even - handed discussion into a personal slanging match. If you want to do that, just f*****g PM or e-mail each other!
To reflect earlier posts, IMHO 'Democracy' will not work in the ME - they are not a 'nation' (ANY ME nation) as we know it - Arabs particularly, and muslims in genral, tend to align themselves tribally (a concept we do not understand fully in the west) and do not recognise centralised authority the way we do, unless it is enforced upon them (a la Saddam). They also do not respect ANY show of weakness (the 'withdrawal' from Fallujah will be percieved in the Islamic world as such). You do not have to 'win' a battle / war in the eyes of Islam to be seen as a victor; if you merely 'stood up to' a superior force you are a hero - even if you well and truly had your @rse kicked. I see all the anti-Bush / anti-coalition / anti semetic / anti Israel / pro-European / pro Piers Morgan and his filthy rag / pro 'let's tax the 'rich', hard working people of the world and give their hard earned money to lazy useless f*****s who have never lifted a finger to earn it' / Guardian readers / anti-globsalisation / 'one world, one tribe' / anti 'Racisim' (any white, christian, heterosexual man who speaks up for himself and his own nowadays seems to be slapped down as a racist / homophobe / bigot) / 'liberal' / 'new' enlightened wealth-guilty westerner ...............(in my experience, most of you naysayers and conspiracy theorists will fit into most of the above categories) has already jumped on this particular bandwagon with their 'modern', '21st century', 'enlightened', 'inclusive' views. My response to these people is...........start from around November 2002; how would you have handled this problem??? This is a difficult situation. The Western world relies on Oil. It is our God. (anyone who thinks otherwise should remember that it only took a handful of Farmers / Truckers to blockade 3 refineries for a few days a couple of years ago and the country (uk) was brought to a virtual standstill). The rights and wrongs of oil dependence can be debated until the cows come home, but it is a fact. We need oil, and it is not a simple 'attitude adjustment' to switch to a Hydrogen based economy (it takes a considerable amount of energy to electrolyse water to produce Hydrogen; the only way this can be achieved on the required scale would be much more widespread use of nuclear-generated electricity, if CO2 emission targets are to be met) I reaLLY WISH THE TREE-HUGGING BRIGADE WOULD MAKE THEIR MINDS UP ON THIS ISSUE! You don't get 'owt for 'nowt (yorkshire paraphrase of the laws of thermodynamics). The upshot of all this is that we need the ME on side, at least politically. Muslims in general (and Arabs in particular) respect overt displays of strength and will not forgive displays of 'weakness'. If we apply our own narrow views of diplomacy, 'fairness' and our oh-so-precious concept of 'human rights' we will never earn any respect in the ME and any attempt to stabilise the region will be doomed to failure. In all the disgust at the pictures that the media have managed to 'produce' over the last few days, consider this: if I had ever been shot down whilst on ops in the ME, and the worst I suffered was to be P****d on whilst some idiot took a photograph, I would have considered myself VERY fortunate indeed! We may think that we hold ourselves to higher standards, but the one thing this furore proves is that human nature is A: Universal; and B: Evil, no matter where you were born or what system we were brought up under. Those who argue 'moral high ground' will always lose because we are as human as 'they' are. There are only ever 2 sides in a conflict; there are no 'goodies' and 'baddies' - there are only winners and losers. No side ever believes that they are in the wrong or we would never fight. Bit deep and philosophical I admit, but I'm in that kind of mood right now I'm afraid! I apologise if this had turned into a rant, but I havent ranted on here for a while!........... **All spelling and grammatical errors are induced by recently restored abiility to make my own choices and get p****d if i so choose, having recently returned from sausage-side** *** Sorry, PPP if my intro now seems irrelevant - started writing this post when original personal slanging match was still here - was intersted in discussion that had preceeded! need to type f a s t e r....!!*** |
16 blades,
A very good "rant", would appear to have the benefit of a lot of recently aquired local knowledge. Thankyou. Prospector |
According to the BBC, a Brit mil person has told them:
They believe the rifle is an SA80 mk 1 - which was not issued to troops in Iraq. They say soldiers in Iraq wore berets or hard hats - and not floppy hats as in the photos. They also believe the wrong type of Bedford truck is shown in the background - a type never deployed in Iraq. Can't offer any comment, so put it here for what it's worth to see if anyone else can verify these points. |
Are we seeing Samuel Huntington's 'Clash of Civilizations' being played out here?
That could possibly explain why there probably is very little hope for Iraq at the moment. |
Beagle’s story on Page Two about the KGB’s rather novel reaction to a Russian being kidnapped in Beirut back in the 80’s is worth expanding upon. The full story, as I heard it at least, was that the KGB resident, (or Station Chief in CIA-speak), sent his people out to identify the kidnappers. He then captured one of their male relatives, removed and stuffed his testicles into his mouth and nailed – nailed! – a note to the kidnappers into the man’s chest saying that the same fate would befall each and every male member of the family unless the hostage was returned.
A cab delivered the hostage unharmed to the Russian embassy that same afternoon, and there were no more Russians kidnapped in Beirut. I’m not for one moment suggesting the Americans do anything even half way as radical as this, but they (or their political leaders) have misjudged the situation and the culture in Iraq terribly. The Arabs respect strength, and if the Coalition had stomped quite hard on the first instance of unacceptable behaviour after the invasion, the vast majority of the Iraqi masses, who are now out on the streets siding with what appears to be ‘the strength’, would have understood – and respected – the new order and kept their heads down. The winning hearts and minds approach was seen as weakness and the politically inspired retreat from Fallujah will be touted by the Arabs as an Arab military victory over the infidel for decades - even centuries - to come. Democracy in a society not educated nor prepared for it can only result in anarchy. It’s attainable in Iraq, as it is anywhere, but not for some to come. To force it on to them will result in total chaos. They say that history is written by the victors. They way we’re going, there’s a very good chance it’s going to be written in Arabic. |
Wiley, some good points there.
These people are completely alien to the concept of "Democracy" as we know it. Democracy is not a linear concept even in the western world. E.G. proportional representation vs one man - one vote vs the US weighted model etc. What right do we have to impose our values on these people? especially when it seems that we haven't agreed a model amongst ourselves... Food for thought? |
Thank goodness for the straight forward thinking and talking by both 16 Blades and Wiley.
I spent far too long last night trying to say the same thing without causing offence or upsetting the Western idealists and eventually "lost" my words with a Chateau bottled inspired missed key. The thread started by asking the question is there any hope for Iraq. The answer, regrettably, is a resounding NO, as long as the fundamentalists have the upper hand. As it's their land,their culture and religion, and their contempt for all ways Western and Christian (and in fact everything else which does not accord to their version of Islam) we, the Coalition have absolutely no right to tell them how to conduct their lives, as long as they remain in their land. I've spent 3 years living with and training probably the "best" that the ME has to offer and one of the most important things I learned from them is that our soft Western ways are seen as an incredible weakness to them and consequently can, should and will be exploited at every opportunity. Reference the alleged prisoner abuse pictures-they are not pretty but are the reality of the type of warfare which our troops face. I suffered far, far worse humiliation as an RAF Aircrew Officer undergoing routine Resistance to Interrogation training back in the 70's. Time may have moved on but the atrocities committed by the mainly Islamic terrorists are worse now than ever. Sorry Beags you're wrong IMHO its not time for the Mess pistol, more a case of tightening security WHATEVER IT TAKES. |
I'll be very surprised if we and the US haven't completely withdrawn from Iraq by Christmas. Post-30th June, I think there will be hastily arranged area 'handovers' to tribal/religious leaders and we'll get the hell out of there. Let's face it, it's already happening in Fallujah.
|
Now that it has been placed here as to why the photos appear to be fake, I would like to back up my previous post and say why I think those reasons IMHO don't stand up.
Good comment by Roghead ref the UK RtoI course, and humiliation. There are also reasons why any RtoI training/briefings in a unit can only be given by the course trainers. I haven't yet seen todays papers, but the reasons from yesterdays papers were given as; Each scene appears to be static; As they may be trophy photos, then this would be the case ie posed. Clean clothes & Iraqi flag T Shirt; With the type of material of the T shirt, dust doesn't tend to cling to it. (Modern football shirts are made of the same and always look clean unless wet/muddy) Again in a trophy photo this may have been given to prisoner to wear for effect to clarify the prisoners 'side' Rifle no marks/ scratches; If these are highly professional infantry soldiers then this would be expected of them, ie to take care of their weapons in such hostile conditions. Soldiers boots not laced in standard military way; Never heard of standard military way apart from drill boots. (take a look at any unit and boots will be laced differently). Webbing left open - in breach of regulations; Personal standards slipping, happens all the time at one time or another. Never realised it was a regulation per-say, but self pride. Tactical badges normally worn on right arm would be visible; Yes they would be if the photos showed the areas where the badges should be, ie upper part of arm. (however on one photo union flag badge is shown to be worn where it should be). In some areas of operation any unit identification is removed as SOP, however not believed to be the case here. The soldier is not wearing standard headgear of helmet or beret; Those who have floppie hats tend to wear them, whether on ex in Germany/UK/Canada etc or ops in ME when not on patrol to protect from sun or look 'cool'. (most tend to be cut down for extra old sweat value) The soldiers hands look very soft - more like an office worker than a squaddie; The best yet, men care products must be bought more by squaddies than any other male social group, maybe apart from footballers. Immaculate fingernails and general body care is immense in the younger generation these days. Photographic expert say such photos (digital) would normally be in colour; Normally, but as there appears to be a 'glow' in the pictures these could be taken using an infrared digital camera. This would also explain the apparent cleanliness of the location. Just my thoughts and as I said before like most others, I hope they aren't true. However IMHO the reasons given don't stand and besides all of this, the damage has already been done. If they are faked, I bet we can all guess who did it.:cool: |
Yes, that tw@t Piers Morgan and his neo-communist cohorts, no doubt. I cant believe I had the opportunity to punch his lights out once and I didnt take it!
It is rather convenient that the 'prisoners' in the photos appear to be wearing Iraqi football shirts, rather than the kind of clothes one would expect the locals to be wearing. A very clean, brand new looking shirt at that. I also noticed the lack of MND(SE) patches on the desert shirts in the pictures, the lack of sand / dust on the floor / clothes / walls, etc (dust gets EVERYWHERE in theatre), and as already pointed out, the immaculately clean rifle. Even freshly serviced weapons racked up in the armouries over there are nowhere near as clean as that. IMHO those pictures were NOT taken in Iraq. |
If none were sent this time to the gulf with the QLR the fact the pictures clearly show the floor of an old Bedford 4-tonner invalidates any claim to have been taken in theatre. Fakes, too much just doesn't add up.
|
Hmm, seems to be a bit of propaganda going on here. Without access to the originals and their provenance it's a bit difficult to make any concrete statements but here goes:
SOURCE: Claims to be from "an attacker" and/or his pal - let's see the evidence then. The lack of source information casts immediate doubt on the whole thing. Newspaper, hostile power, Iraqi dissidents, some foolish students/UAS/UOTC bods etc CONTENT: Pictures look as if they may be staged - that may have been the intent of the troops(?) committing these acts. Consider the "condition" of the victim - looks well fed and take a look at the lower legs and feet (what you can see); there don't appear to be any injuries consistent with the claims made in the article AND they don't look like any Iraqi's legs I've ever seen (no comments please). As for the other inconsistencies such as 4 tonner, boots, uniforms and rifle - one needs access to the originals to make definitive judgements however, if you and your mates had just been kicking seven shades out of someone then some of the effluvia would have ended up on the clothes of those present and there is no evidence of this. AUDIENCE: This is intended for the public, firstly the UK public and then the rest of the world. Also consider the effect this is having on members of the govt - where would you make cuts or savings if you were in a position to make those judgements having been presented with this "evidence"? Also to be considered are the Iraqi people who will have seen these images on TV and the internet - gain the support of the uncommitted! MEDIA: Photographic - pictures speak volumes but they can easily be faked or set up/staged. In the current climate of www a picture with or without words attached is a powerful tool in warfare. EFFECTS: What is the desired effect of these photos? Here's a starter for ten: Sway public opinion away from support to the war - could be a newspaper thing or others with a vested interest. Turn those Iraqis in Iraq (or out) who currently support the coalition effort against them. Maintain the support of the loyal. Gain the support of the undecided within Iraq. Get Tommy Atkins and his mates to question the reasons for them being there. And that is my opinion for the moment - so far it appears to be a propaganda (dirty word) effort by someone as yet unidentified. Furthermore it is having an effect - we are considering it! Personally I hope that I am right because the whole thing if true disgusts me. At the moment it just doesn't add up but the damage has been done - looks like a good campaign to me.... Comments many and varied expected and welcomed. |
If nothing else the saga of these photos proves the wisdom of assuming innocence until proof of guilt - and these photos are a long way short of proof.
As for who is spreading this propaganda, look no further than the tabloid publishing the photos. |
Sorry to water your strawberries Vortex, but how do you explain this picture?
http://www.army.mod.uk/img/royalsign...ic10_small.jpg Much larger pic can be found at14 Sigs Regt site. I know it's not the same unit, but.......... I say the front vehicle is a Bedford 4 ton and the others in the compound are DAFs. Recognition features, front mudguards, rear mudguards, cabin structure/size/shape, smaller rear cabin window, fuel tank, front bumper. You can compare the differences in the same photo. Another thing you may notice is that all the vehicles have covers on the back, which has been said as not being fitted. The arguments to substantiate that they are fakes don't stand up, IMHO. I reckon they are trophy photographs, set up for a good story in the NAAFI back home, and it's all gone horribly wrong. p.s. Kuwait is classed as 'in theatre' and in my brief search for a bedford pic there are many pics of personnel in Iraq and Kuwait with no badges on their uniform at all,bar rank. Not another badge shortage! I believe man has set foot on the moon, however I can also prove that those photos are faked! HOWZAT!! |
Whats going on?
:confused:
In todays Daily Express, who have been giving us reasons why these photos are faked, on page 5 is a picture of 'a soldier in Basra' What struck me was how clean, nay immaculate, his SA80 was, no dirt, no scratches, positively pristine. Also, although we can see the whole of his right arm, despite being told that is where soldiers wear their unit insignia, there are no badges! Added to that his clean, well manicured hands with slightly limp wrists (see the pic), this picture REALLY looks like an office worker, trust me. Just struck me as a bit strange that these features in one set of photographs make them fake and with the same features in a different photograph we take as true. Under the title, "ON GUARD: A British soldier on patrol after a shooting in Basra" Is he really? :confused: |
Hey SS slow down. Now, go back and re-read what I actually said not what you thought I said. So for those not listening first time this is what I actually said
“If none were sent this time to the gulf with the QLR”. Go here for some more detailed explanations of what is wrong. It simply does not add up, too many small, but vital inconsistancies. You moon comment is not valid. The mirror are giving gash responses to valid questions about the pictures. I agree it probably is a posed shot gone wrong to an extent. But I have no doubt the QLR were not beating up Iraqis last year as has been alledged. Those that want to believe these are real will anyway. But lets be honest the tabloids are hardly paragons of truth and justice. We all wail how full of sh1te they are when they write about aviation subjects, why should this story be any more true? Oh yeah and here is a snap of me on guard duty :hmm: http://www.arrse.co.uk/html/index.php |
Vortex, your statement was,
If none were sent this time to the gulf with the QLR the fact the pictures clearly show the floor of an old Bedford 4-tonner invalidates any claim to have been taken in theatre. Fakes, too much just doesn't add up. 'the pictures clearly show the floor of an old Bedford 4-tonner invalidates any claim to have been taken in theatre. Fakes, too much just doesn't add up' Well, the picture was (could have been) taken in theatre... does that add up for you? Its a pic from the 14sigs site to show Bedfords were/are in theatre:ok: Besides my point is this; I reckon they are trophy photographs, set up for a good story in the NAAFI back home, and it's all gone horribly wrong.Not necessarily QLR I also would like to point out that the reasons the experts are giving proving them to be fake pictures are not valid reasons as I have mentioned previously. IMHO Let me do the adding up for you, from your link; 1. Claim: Sources close to the Queen's Lancashire regiment believe the rifle is an SA80 mk 1 - which was not issued to troops in Iraq. The rifle would have had a carrying sling attached. Some experts have said they believe it's a replica. "believe the rifle is an SA80 mk 1" And these are experts! I and others have in the past, been told to remove slings in order for weapons to be carried at the alert without the temptation to relax alertness state of weapon. Perhaps there was another reason the sling wasn't on. The fact this one hasn't doesn't make it a fake photo. A sling is an accessory to the weapon and can be removed for any reason. 2. Claim: The condition of the weapon is "pristine", whereas it would be scuffed and dirty if it had seen action. It also has no cover over the barrel and no identification number on the butt. "Pristine condition" Look at the photo on page 5 of todays Daily Express of 'a soldier on duty in Basra'. His weapon appears to be in pristine condition. Barrel covers are again accessories, and heaven forbid this 'soldier' may have lost his! Butt numbers on SA80s are mostly on the top cover as if on the handle or butt, they get worn off in use, especially in sandy conditions. Refer again to Dailt Express page 5 picture, no butt number visible. 3. Claim: The army doesn't use potato sacks as hoods, but dark room curtains. The hood was too clean and "ironed" for something that would have been crumpled up in someone's pockets. Its a sandbag that the Army does use. They have been used as hoods, especially if the 'proper' ones aren't available. Straight from the stores, they do look in an ironed state. Who said they had been in someones pockets? 4. Claim: "Why would the soldier be wearing webbing that is undone? Normally soldiers are very particular about that," said former commander Colonel Bob Stewart. Experts have also said it is unusual for the pouches not to be full. Because he is a scruffy un-self disciplined individual. (REMF?) Empty before being filled maybe? 5. Claim: The stream of urine does not look authentic. Among the claims are that shadows have been added to the drops of urine, that the wet patch on the hood is fake, and that the droplets are coming from a bottle of water. Its a still photo. At the correct shutter speed even waterfalls give this effect and will produce shadows. The water bottle thing is possible, even I wouldn't agree to be pi@@ed on for a trophy photo. 6. Claim: The wrong type of Bedford truck is shown in the background - a type never deployed in Iraq. Some have also said it is too clean. As previous post. (REMFs?) 7. Claim: Col Stewart threw doubt on the captive's "slightly silky" football shirt, bearing an Iraqi flag. "Is that the sort of shirt that a captive might be wearing?" he said. Other analysts have said the shirt would be out of place in the Shia area of Basra. The type of material tends to stay clean until the wet/muddy stage as mentioned before. Maybe a souvenir shirt fron the NAAFI? Dressing the prisoner to identify him as Iraqi 8. Claim: Soldiers tie laces in a parallel, rather than criss-cross, fashion. As the article itself says, "soldiers tie laces the way they are most comfortable with". Never known it to be regulation as previously given for reason, apart from when on drill parade. 9. Claim: Soldiers operating in this area wouldn't tuck their trousers into their boots, but would leave them outside with an elasticated bottom to stop sand getting in. Combat 95 trousers have ties around the bottoms of the legs. MANY soldiers use that method rather that elastics, which by the way, get lost or perish in the conditions. 10. Claim: The shirt would be sweaty, dirty and dishevelled after alleged beatings. There are no bruises or marks on the captured man. As previous shirt point. Possibly taken at the start of it all, hence the damage hasn't been done yet. 11. Claim: Regiment sources say soldiers wear berets or hard hats, not floppy hats. Soldiers who have these hats tend to wear them in preference to normal issue hats. I'm sure there's a lot out there! When not actually out on duty/patrol this would be allowed to happen as they offer better protection from sun stroke/sunburn than helmet or beret. 12. Claim: The captive's posture does not suggest he is being tortured. The body would be curled up, legs pulled into the foetal position. "It is not the posture of someone who has suffered pain," said Col Stewart. Taken at start of 'proceedings' If he's hooded he won't be able to see whats about to happen and therefore won't be able to react. Also hands tied behind back. 13. Claim: Divisional markings should have been visible under the flag on the soldier's left sleeve. Unit marking right sleeve, union flag on left I believe is the norm. However if you look at any selection of soldiers this differs. The right arm is not shown properly especially where badges should be. I refer you back to todays Daily Express, no badges despite areas where they should be being clearly visible. There's also a badge shortage. In theatres of Ops unit identification is normally a no no. "Only give your No, Rank, Name, DoB", seems to ring a bell. So to wear the badges and then not be able to say which unit you are doesn't make sense. 14. Claim: Experts have questioned the sharp quality of the photos - former Guardian picture editor Eamonn McCabe compares them with the fuzzy, badly composed pictures of American soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners, published last week. The Mirror's pictures are "all too clinical" to be trusted, he said. A good quality digital camera as opposed to a click and go. Look at, for example, the difference in different peoples photos of the same event/party/mess do/wedding ETc. Point made. I'm sorry to have to repeat myself in greater depth, but I think this makes it clearer. So Vortex, does that add up enough for you? I say again; The arguments to substantiate that they are fakes don't stand up, IMHO. I reckon they are trophy photographs, set up for a good story in the NAAFI back home, and it's all gone horribly wrong. I believe man has set foot on the moon, however I can also prove that those photos are faked! HOWZAT!! |
I guess people will believe what they want to believe but the really damaging part of this saga is that the Worlds' press has already published believable stories and, whatever the truth of the matter, those stories will be the ones that influence opinion. If they are untrue the correct story will not sell newspapers and will not be published or read.
What a sad world we live in where all it takes to destroy trust is a tabloid story - never mind about proof. |
We can sit here scoring points off each other all day, which is not my intention at all. If you are an ex-squaddie, which from you profile you appear to be surely all the little inconsistancies don’t add up to intelligent scrutiny.Circumstantial evidence is still evidence?
The point about bedfords was the QLR did not use them! The pictures are claimed to be of the QLR on patrol. Not 14 sigs etc, and I agree there will be bedfords in theatre, that was not the point. The supposed soldier in question says they used the same trucks all the time and that was in the back of one. Well they are not bedfords in the QLR. So how can it be in the back of a QLR truck? The question has been asked and the mirror cannot answer it satisfactorily. Some of the other points I think are crap as well but too much is just not right for this to convice me they are anything other than faked/staged. At least we agree that it is something that has all gone horribly wrong. I find it difficult to believe this sort of bahaviour can take place without more people being aware of it and taking action. Anyway moving on I see the boys over on the other board have made it into todays Times on the subject. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...097504,00.html it also raises wider questions about the Military, morale and funding etc Excerpt of the full article. Copyright Libby Purves/ The Times etc… The soldiers’ own voices, mournful and ashamed, are the last set which I would offer you. If the first voice said “Westerners abuse Arabs” and the second “Armies are brutal”, the soldiers’ voice has a simpler message: “Men are fallible.” If you follow the army rumour website (arrse.co.uk) it is usually full of wicked jokes and gung-ho cynicism: my favourite strand was the evil suggestion that overseas personnel, who at an election may name any UK constituency as their likely base, should name Sedgefield and get the PM out. When the American abuse pictures appeared, there was indignation and the occasional laddish joke: one long thoughtful posting ends “. . . and to add insult to injury, the bird who is tormenting them is a right moose”. But this week, with the British pictures out, the tone is quieter, heavy with disgust and shame. Listen: “Really hope it isn’t true . . . thank God Mike Jackson didn’t talk a load of crap, spin it and blame the media . . . ****e happens in any walk of life, I would like to think we are better than that . . . bad apple . . . absolutely stomach churning, heads need to roll right the way up the chain of command if this is true . . . I hope all those involved get beasted out of sight . . . whether these prisoners are murderers, terrorists or not, those in charge had a duty of care . . . we are meant to be a disciplined force not a bunch of cowboys . . . why didn’t the guy with the camera stop it happening? . . . .**** this, I’m going for a morose beer somewhere.” Of all the cries — Westerners hate Arabs, all war is wrong, armies are beasts — I prefer that soldier’s simple conclusion. ****e happens. Men are fallible. We struggle to be better. May the Muslim world, please God or Allah, have the grace to believe that. Join the Debate at [email protected] |
If you are an ex-squaddie, which from you profile you appear to be surely all the little inconsistancies don’t add up to intelligent scrutiny. Circumstantial evidence is still evidence? I'll ask Flying Lawer on that one, never seemed to work for Frost though!;) If it is the case though, I think we'd better keep watching the skies. http://www.metaldreams.net/martians.jpg Lets see what is said in Parliament this afternoon. (Not about the martians! But you never know!) Thanks for the offer, but i won't be contacting the press:uhoh: |
This whole episode is disgusting from start to finish. I'm not talking about the allegations of brutality - they will be investigated and the truth will out in the end.
What I find wholly reprehensible is that a newspaper editor feels free to publish such damaging unproven cr*p without giving a second thought to the consequences. I'd like to take Morgan and his bunch of anti-war cronies out to Iraq and place him with the guys on the front line. Those guys (and gals) who daily risk their lives to give the Iraqi people a chance of normal life. By normal life I mean water, electricity and the day to day existance without fear of being rounded up, imprisoned, tortured and executed because they had the temerity to criticise the regime that dominated their every waking moment. I'm not going to get into the debate about the degree of civilisation practised by the indigenous population of the ME. But no matter who they are, they are still entitled to the basics of life as human beings. The Brit Forces in Southern Iraq have done a fabulous job in winning over the locals and providing their basic essentials. There are factions hell bent on trying to turn the locals against the Coalition Forces by undoing their good works (blowing up newly-installed water systems, pylons, pipelines, etc) and pillocks like Morgan are feeding them additional help to achieve their aims. If just one British Serviceman is hurt as a result of the Daily Mirror irresponsibility, then the paper should be hounded to bankrupcy. I, for one, will never ever buy that rag as long as I live. I also decline to comment on SilsoeSid's posts - I support our guys 100%. |
I also support 'our boys' 100%, I haven't said otherwise.
I feel you won't comment on my answers to the fake pictures because you also know, if you have served/are serving, that what I say makes sense. If you say otherwise, you must be one of the few who has been told; "If you don't tie your laces in a way that the gurkhas will be able to recognise you, you will be charged." "You will also be charged if you are found with a webbing pouch undone." or; You have never taken a sling off a rifle/SA80. Never seen a sandbag used as a hood, hence the phrase bagged and tagged! (not hooded and cuffed!) Never used the string ties at the bottom of your combat trousers when your elastics have gone missing/broken. Never aquired a floppy hat and worn it when it would make life a bit more comfortable. (Is sunburn still a self inflicted wound!) Never encountered a badge shortage or been on exercise/ops where you are told to sanatise yourself. Never taken care of your personal hygene/nails. Always maintained a squaddie physique of bulging muscles. I think thats enough to make this point I say again; The arguments to substantiate that they are fakes don't stand up, IMHO. I reckon they are trophy photographs, set up for a good story in the NAAFI back home, and it's all gone horribly wrong. I believe man has set foot on the moon, however I can also prove that those photos are faked! HOWZAT!! Guess I'd better repeat his aswell for the hard of reading; I also support 'our boys' 100%, I haven't said otherwise. |
An intelligent a reasoned reply from SS. I wasn’t going to bother replying but it is a slow morning at the office.
If you are an ex-squaddie, which from you profile you appear to be surely all the little inconsistancies don’t add up to intelligent scrutiny. My last post was wasted on you then You clearly haven’t even seen the photos. Where in the pictures are the trousers tied with the cord at the bottom. The consistant point made all over has been the fact they are tucked in to the boots. It doesn’t even look like they are tied with the cord. But you seem to explain the fact they are clearly tucked into boots and not held up with elastics, as is common practice, by saying they are tied by the cord at the bottom. Obviously your levels of reading and comprehension need some work. Circumstantial evidence is still evidence? Crikey,and after watching all those crime dramas, I thought circumstantial evidence never stood up in court. (Without evidence, which didn't make it circumstantial anymore!) Thanks for the offer, but i won't be contacting the press I was hoping by pointing a few things out for you to get you to start asking the right questions about things that are obviously not right with the photos. Instead you get all out of shape and start waffling some crap about martians because you cant take the time to think for yourself. You still seem a bit too slow to see that all the little inconsistancies, which on their own mean nothing, added up raises questions. The fact you believe anything that comes from a tabloid like the Mirror should have warned me really. You’re not a fishead are you? You appear to be as thick as one. |
As a civvy, I find it a tad shocking that at least six Iraqis are acknowledged to have died in British custody in Iraq.
The Iraqis managed not to kill any of their UK prisoners back in '91 despite quite deliberately engaging in the kind of beatings and low-level torture that we supposedly don't do, though I suppose the number of prisoners they had was tiny. Before anyone leaps up warning everyone that I'm a journo on a fishing expedition, let me do it, and clarify exactly what I am fishing for: which is - Some reassurance that six deaths in custody in these circumstances is normal, entirely to be expected, and is no cause for concern. (I believe the Yanks have killed 26 of theirs!) |
Jacko
Your sentiments are shared by the vast majority of us - we do hope all the questions are answered in the same way that (the media) eventually exonerated Tim Collins. (But not until the mud slinging at a tough, honourable soldier had spread enough doubt with only minimal evidence and the word of an American bleeding heart with an axe to grind; recognise the scenario with the gutter reporting style of the Mirror ?) By all means, ask pertinent questions about any perceived wrongdoing but at least do the honourable majority the courtesy of the benefit of the doubt until the evidence has been analysed and the truth found . Also ask how many Iraqis have been assaulted by other Iraqis in captivity by the way ;) |
Vortex,
The boot issue is explained by the boots not being fully done up. If the trousers were done up with the cord, then the weight of the trousers would make it look as if they were not done up with anything, but merely tucked in. The type of trousers are quite baggy at the bottom believe it or not and not known for being in the drainpipe fashion. Even with elastics, and the boot not fully done up the appearance would be similar. The statement about the vehicle was, that the type of vehicle, Bedford, has not been in theatre, which it clearly has. So when you said; Something only looks wrong when it is wrong. To an unknowing civi, these points brought out to PROVE these pics are fake make sense in a way, because the press has told them so. However any serviceman/ex-serviceman will be able to spot these things in a different light because of experience and realise that these things can be explained. Thanks for the insult, makes your case so much stonger. :p The martian photo, as you haven't realised, highlights that I too believe that photos aren't always what they seem to be. According to your logic; The photo was taken on Earth You can clearly see a space craft. There are two martians visible. These martians are green. They wish to surrender/negotiate, hence white flag. Therefore, green Martians have visited Earth and wish to talk. They have the technology to visit us and therefore may well be more intelligent:ok: I keep knocking, but there doesn't seem to be anyone at home! :p ;) |
I think the inconsistencies which on their own can be explained. The fact there are so many causes me to err on the side of caution rather than just dismiss them as you have. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree and move on. |
I should perhaps clarify that while I am a bit of a liberal, I don't entirely disapprove of taking a fairly robust line with prisoners who are suspected of being terrorists (for example) and I don't have a particular problem with some of the humiliations shown in the photos (though the fact that they were photographed and publicised is clearly hugely damaging). In my simplistic mind, there's a huge difference between hooding people, naked, standing them in stress positions, humiliating them and the like, and actually administering beatings, breaking jaws, knocking teeth out, raping them with broomsticks and killing them. I suspect that all are against the spirit of the Geneva Convention, but in my mind there is a difference between humiliation and brutality.
Moreover, there does seem to be a danger that some of the things done to humiliate these prisoners does far more damage to those administering them..... |
I agree with jacko, a certain tough line has to be taken with prisoners. If you are just going to be nice to them they are hardly likely to tell you anything usefull, nothing to fear is there. But a line must obviously be drawn somewhere.
I am curious to know exactly what is allowed under the GC? Been 8 years since I left and I simply can’t remember. I don’t believe hooding is a problem. Not sure about stripping naked for interrogation but I seem to remember that was allowed. So who has the low-down? |
I wonder how often newspaper editors such as Morgan, when offered photos and stories such as these, think, 'Because of the obvious security, morale, morality and legal issues here, I will take this stuff to MoD first and give them a reasonable chance to investigate/refute/confirm the allegations before I publish them in my sweaty little publication.'
Jacko, you must know how their minds work, so what is the answer? |
Some extracts from the GC 111 relevant to treatment of POWs:
Art 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions: (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. (2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict. Art 13. Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest. Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity. Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited. Art 14. Prisoners of war are entitled in all circumstances to respect for their persons and their honour. Art 17. Every prisoner of war, when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information. No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind. |
Guys, regarding te GCs
They detail "rules" but what are the remedies in the event of a violation, who has juristiction? especially in the case of "occupying powers" as is now the case in Iraq? |
The jurisdiction and the remedy lies with the offending party:
Art 129. The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the present Convention defined in the following Article. Each High Contracting Party shall be under the obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed. or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts. It may also, if it prefers, and in accordance with the provisions of its own legislation, hand such persons over for trial to another High Contracting Party concerned, provided such High Contracting Party has made out a prima facie case. Each High Contracting Party shall take measures necessary for the suppression of all acts contrary to the provisions of the present Convention other than the grave breaches defined in the following Article. In all circumstances, the accused persons shall benefit by safeguards of proper trial and defence, which shall not be less favourable than those provided by Article 105 and those following of the present Convention. Art 130. Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, compelling a prisoner of war to serve in the forces of the hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a prisoner of war of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in this Convention. Art 131. No High Contracting Party shall be allowed to absolve itself or any other High Contracting Party of any liability incurred by itself or by another High Contracting Party in respect of breaches referred to in the preceding Article. Art 132. At the request of a Party to the conflict, an enquiry shall be instituted, in a manner to be decided between the interested Parties, concerning any alleged violation of the Convention. If agreement has not been reached concerning the procedure for the enquiry, the Parties should agree on the choice of an umpire who will decide upon the procedure to be followed. Once the violation has been established, the Parties to the conflict shall put an end to it and shall repress it with the least possible delay. |
We are signatories to the Convention and are therefore bound by all its rules and conditions.
SiloeSid, clearly you believe the photographs to be real or you are just stirring it. I'm not going to waste any more time in arguing the case - it's pointless. The damage is done, whatever the case. I will await the investigation at whatever level it is held. But I will be mad as hell if Morgan and his bunch hide behind the journalistic 'protecting their sources' arguement. I want those that gave those photographs to the newspaper identified and testifying before the inquiry. |
FJJP,
To clear up my viewpoint, as I've mentioned previously; The arguments to 'substantiate' that they are fakes don't stand up, IMHO. I reckon they are set up for a good story in the NAAFI back home, or taken to backup a story, and it's all gone horribly wrong. I don't think that these are the actual 'torture' pictures, (if there are any). SS |
If the recent allegations are found to be true, a much deeper investigation must take place. The UK Armed Forces must be purged of all those who consider routine violence against captives to be in any way acceptable.
The stories emerging of what these sadistic thugs have been up to under the guise of 'tactical questioning' are horrific. Quite clearly such acts contravene the Geneva convention and those who have perpetrated them are guilty of war crimes and should be punished accordingly. Any views from the Cornish camping club or the Bedfordshire Disco queens....?? |
It seems now that the photographs will make no difference, whether faked or not. Testimony by eyewitnesses will have more power than a printed image.
All those who have attended a CSRO, RtoI or Conduct after Capture course will know what goes on and what would be the likely outcome with units giving in house briefings/courses. A little knowledge is dangerous, as proved by the actions of a few and as such has totally undermined all the hard work, perseverance and dedication to duty that has gone on post Op Telic. The photos have had their day and I think that has now exhausted itself, Wait now for the future revelations and because of the ATD LOAC briefings, there aren't many legs around to stand on. Interesting to see how far uphill the sh$t will run :wink: Sorry you wasted your time SS, but we do not like giving houseroom to that particular link |
Good call on the link to arrse Siloesid.
Not quite sure which side of the fence your are sitting on though? It appears your hard work was generated by yourself. And I think your mention of the Moon landing photos being faked and a huge conspiracy regarding that may well have earned you the position of pick up driving trailer trash. Good move.:ok: |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 14:13. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.