Guantanamo hell
What are peoples opinions about the USA holding 600+ people from around the world for well over a year now, who have not been charged and refused basic human rights and legal aid. The 2 Brits amungst them have apparently been ruled out of facing the death penalty this morning, although I don't know how reliable the source is. But everyone else from countries less privilleged than the UK (in forms of favours owed by the US) is still fucked.
They will not receive a fair trial, as they have no legal advice, will be tried under a millitary rules rather than civilian rules. And they will pay the ultimate price.
Through my basic education, I can only make links with the past to Hitler, concentration camps, lack of human rights and degrading conditions. The War on Terror? A nice name to wrap the whole thing up in. A bold statement I know, but why the hell has the US got any rights to detain people from out of their duristiction, indefinetly?
These people are being used as scape goats for Sept 11th, which was the perfect crisis for the US goverment to gain more control over areas of the World economy. They were given a reason or excuse to go to war, and kick arse around the world. This reason or excuse was that 1000s of people had been killed in the WTC, yet they have given themselves a set of tools to detain forever anyone they see fit, without trial or jury. As I said in past threads regarding the US just as the War on Iraq was being justified by 2 goverments around the world, the domination of oil was their key target. Not the fact they want to steal the oil, but I wonder how much oil has been exported from Iraq and surrounding countries since I posted my thread? My guess based on a quick scan of google and from the BBC news archives confirms that the sanctions and grip the US and UK imposed on Iraq:
My main point though is that we vote for these pricks to be ripping the world to bits, causing massive indirect suffering to millions of people. And then we all go and vote for them to do it again next year because, well either we think politics is bollocks, or would like to pay a penny less tax that last year. These are war crimes in progress, huge long turds spouted by the goverment to cover it up, and sucked to a shiney point by the media (Sky, ITV, CNN, NBC, Fox, and all news papers), which most of Joe public slurp down for breakfast, blaming anyone who comes into the limelight and can be scapegoated.
The UK is as much to blame as the US for all of this. Our goverment doesn't raise their voices about matters like this. They would rather be singing badly in Oriental places rather than go and do some good humaitarian work for the 100's of poor sods who have been locked up for over a year with god knows what happening to them. I can't imagine it would be breakfast in bed and Sky TV though (like our prisons)? Who the hell knows, and I certainly do not trust a word which is echo'ed from Bush or Blairs mouths anymore.
Oh, and one last thing. Why the hell were we in such a rush to go to war? We couldn't wait for anything. We couldn't wait for reports from the UK inspectors. We couldn't wait for their work to be finished and be conclusive. It had to be immediate action, right now.
Now the smoke has cleared, the bodies have been burried and the blood washed off the streets (by the US soliders who now occupy Iraq, again another little reference to Hilter - didn't he also occupy countries?), now everything is clean and the goverments say war is over... why are we waiting? The Prime Minister says we should wait for the WMD to be found, if they are indeed there and the intelligence is accurate.
Bush has also scapegoated someone who included inaccurate intelligence in his speech. And? Bush - you were wrong in what you said - admit it, don't blame someone else. Bush should be held ultimately responsible for things we says, or the country does. The blame shouldn't go down the line to some Senior official who is nearing retirement, it should be Bush's neck on the line. Basically, he can get away with anything by passing the blame down the line. Hilter also did this, indirectly, by allowing his immediate subbordinates control of their own domains. Any actions taken were not his own directly, so therefore wasn't responsible. However he was held accountable in the end.
Will Bush be for his War on Terror? His Terrible War Crimes imo.
What are peoples opinions about the USA holding 600+ people from around the world for well over a year now, who have not been charged and refused basic human rights and legal aid. The 2 Brits amungst them have apparently been ruled out of facing the death penalty this morning, although I don't know how reliable the source is. But everyone else from countries less privilleged than the UK (in forms of favours owed by the US) is still fucked.
They will not receive a fair trial, as they have no legal advice, will be tried under a millitary rules rather than civilian rules. And they will pay the ultimate price.
Through my basic education, I can only make links with the past to Hitler, concentration camps, lack of human rights and degrading conditions. The War on Terror? A nice name to wrap the whole thing up in. A bold statement I know, but why the hell has the US got any rights to detain people from out of their duristiction, indefinetly?
These people are being used as scape goats for Sept 11th, which was the perfect crisis for the US goverment to gain more control over areas of the World economy. They were given a reason or excuse to go to war, and kick arse around the world. This reason or excuse was that 1000s of people had been killed in the WTC, yet they have given themselves a set of tools to detain forever anyone they see fit, without trial or jury. As I said in past threads regarding the US just as the War on Iraq was being justified by 2 goverments around the world, the domination of oil was their key target. Not the fact they want to steal the oil, but I wonder how much oil has been exported from Iraq and surrounding countries since I posted my thread? My guess based on a quick scan of google and from the BBC news archives confirms that the sanctions and grip the US and UK imposed on Iraq:
And also don't forget this little nugget of information too:http://www.bbc.co.uk/business/features/businessreview/articles/23032003.shtml said:Before the first Gulf War, Iraq was producing about 3.5m barrels a day. This is down to about 2.8m due to sanctions but pushing it back beyond the original levels to about 6m-7m barrels a day will take about a year since the supply infrastructure will have to be improved and the Ministry of Oil reorganised. Iraq is believed to have assets of more than 200bn barrels, compared with about 260bn barrels in Saudi Arabia.
...
Reeve believes oil prices will suffer a sharp slump in the second half of 2003 and next year to average only $19 a barrel. That could hurt a lot of Middle East producers, some two-thirds of arab states.
The implications are far-reaching, both politically and economically. Government spending could be hard hit and in countries such as Saudi Arabia, where about 95% of people are employed by the government, living standards could fall sharply. Economic adjustments could be harsh.
I don't know if anyone else will say that Opec set the prices of oil, but obviously with tactics like this the price that Opec sets relates to the state of world and middle easten economys. The US is influcening the price of oil, making people buy American rather than Middle Easten, a nice butt fu**ing method they picked up from their corporate ways.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2804953.stm said:The US's emergency reserve was last used in September 2000, when low stockpiles boosted prices to $37.80 a barrel.
My main point though is that we vote for these pricks to be ripping the world to bits, causing massive indirect suffering to millions of people. And then we all go and vote for them to do it again next year because, well either we think politics is bollocks, or would like to pay a penny less tax that last year. These are war crimes in progress, huge long turds spouted by the goverment to cover it up, and sucked to a shiney point by the media (Sky, ITV, CNN, NBC, Fox, and all news papers), which most of Joe public slurp down for breakfast, blaming anyone who comes into the limelight and can be scapegoated.
The UK is as much to blame as the US for all of this. Our goverment doesn't raise their voices about matters like this. They would rather be singing badly in Oriental places rather than go and do some good humaitarian work for the 100's of poor sods who have been locked up for over a year with god knows what happening to them. I can't imagine it would be breakfast in bed and Sky TV though (like our prisons)? Who the hell knows, and I certainly do not trust a word which is echo'ed from Bush or Blairs mouths anymore.
Oh, and one last thing. Why the hell were we in such a rush to go to war? We couldn't wait for anything. We couldn't wait for reports from the UK inspectors. We couldn't wait for their work to be finished and be conclusive. It had to be immediate action, right now.
Now the smoke has cleared, the bodies have been burried and the blood washed off the streets (by the US soliders who now occupy Iraq, again another little reference to Hilter - didn't he also occupy countries?), now everything is clean and the goverments say war is over... why are we waiting? The Prime Minister says we should wait for the WMD to be found, if they are indeed there and the intelligence is accurate.
Bush has also scapegoated someone who included inaccurate intelligence in his speech. And? Bush - you were wrong in what you said - admit it, don't blame someone else. Bush should be held ultimately responsible for things we says, or the country does. The blame shouldn't go down the line to some Senior official who is nearing retirement, it should be Bush's neck on the line. Basically, he can get away with anything by passing the blame down the line. Hilter also did this, indirectly, by allowing his immediate subbordinates control of their own domains. Any actions taken were not his own directly, so therefore wasn't responsible. However he was held accountable in the end.
Will Bush be for his War on Terror? His Terrible War Crimes imo.
Last edited: