The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Western soldiers torture Iraqis.
Iraqis kill Western Soldiers.
Western Soldiers kills Iraqis.
And so on so forth.
Just remember that we "won" this phony war last year. Rejoice that all is well and the smiling Iraqis welcome our heroic conque - sorry - liberators.
Hell, they even tore down that monolithic statue of Hussein in a spontaneous celebration of being free...well, ok, it was stage managed by the media (as was the classic flag-raising at Iwo Jima) but that's not the point is it, you cynical communist terrorist lover?
I'd still like to know where Saddam Hussein is in all this.
For such an "Evil Hitler", there seems to be zero interest in what's happened to that "vile, despicable murdering tyrant"
He's vanished, with a tacit agreement to never ever mention his current state in the media.
But I get a sneaking suspicion he'll be wheeled out just in time for the elections, especially with public opinion swinging away from support and to "just get these guys home please".
The invasion was launched on lies and deliberately false information concerning non-existent WOMD (almost a year later and nothing still, despite all concerned being in captivity, you'd think with the amount of anti-military/government/invasion feeling they'd show a couple to say "See? Now go back to soap operas" eh?).
And since the "liberation", there has been nothing but trouble. Bombs going off, soldiers & civilians being killed, acknowledged torture and possible murder of prisoners in captivity.
I'd say, purely as a propaganda coup for the idiot fundamentalist terror groups, we've handed them a world-stage of attention.
And don't fall for the idiotic Daily Mail type argument of "Well in the heat of battle, emotions run high" as an excuse. These weren't soldiers being tortured, these were people in captivity. Held in jail, unable to do anything except be tortured, humiliated and possibly murdered (depends which news source you listen to on that last point).
Before anybody tries to defend/justify the treatment of these prisoners, remember the absolute outcry and fury from the Western press when those two downed pilots were shown beaten and bloody as hostage in the last war.
Where's the difference? Except those pilots were enemy combatants in a time of war. These Iraqis are prisoners being held after the "victory in freeing Iraq".
The torture and beating of prisoners is wrong, whatever your colour/religion. You can't excuse it with rhetoric and nationalistic pleas for leniency because these soldiers have been having a hard time and wanted revenge - or whatever the hell reasons are being offered.
And with all this current hostility and anti-government feeling building with the British public towards those genuine photographs and rising resentment that "our boys" are dying months after we "won"?
Keep your eyes peeled for yet another media blitz from Blair warning about "IMMINENT RICIN TANKS AT HEATHROW FERTILISER FOILED!!!!!" narrowly avoided terrordeathkill plot to whip us back up into a "Dirty bloody Arab Immigrant" frenzy.
It's with a weary sigh that I hope I'm wrong on that point, because it's happened each and every time we've begun to question what the point of the invasion was.
So inbetween soap opera awards and scare stories about the brown tidal wave of immigrants coming to live in your house and do bumsex to your decent white family, our "heroic police/army" will foil/expose/avert some nefarious evil plot to do some vague nasty in our green and pleasant land.
The scary thing is, with Hussein "gone" and Bin Laden "ineffectual", I wonder who the next bogeyman will be to keep us timid and frightened of each other instead of realising that we all share this planet and we all want the same things.
North Korea? Nope, because they could actually kick our ass.
China? Nope, for the reasons above.
What this world needs is a really good villain to justify those billions of pounds in weapons sales and every-inscreasingly fascist laws to "protect us" from "them".
Identity Cards to be carried at all times, and let's put your DNA on there. Because if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to be afraid of right?
Let's have CCTV everywhere for your protection. Because as we all know, having constant 24/7 surveillance has radically reduced the levels of street crime and drunken violence hasn't it?
Let's have all internal flights in the UK finish with your photograph being taken for "security purposes" (because many, many terrorists fly from Heathrow to Inverness with deadly killer stuff instead of just driving with a tiny, tiny millionth of a percentage of a chance of being pulled over)
Don't you feel safer and happier already?
I mean it's nice to know we're being looked after so well isn't it? And for those evil, vile criminals that consider leaving their road-tax a week or so until they get paid before reknewing, the commercial kindly informs you (with ominous low-resonance music) that the DVLC know where you live, what car you drive and exactly how long you have left on your tax.
I feel so reassured that I'll never be killed by terrorists with all this added security and comfort.
The only thing that's been left out of this Orwellian warm-hug from your government is the fact that nothing will stop somebody if they are determined to do damaged.
September 11th 2001 proved that.
A handful of fanatics armed with box-cutters - not missiles, not weapons of mass destruction, not violent games/Tarantino movies but box cutters - achieved what Hussein with his invisible magic WOMD had never ever done (ok, so he had no desire to attack the West but hey, he had a moustache and spoke different).
So shut up and be happy. Surrender the very essence of your being, the chemical components that make up your existence, in order to stave off some in-the-future possible tragedy.
Watch your idiot television shows that pump banal effluent into your homes, read your "OK! HI! CELEBGOSSWOW!" magazines and lust for the truly pointless and trivial.
Bury your heads in the sand and blindly trust that people who sell weapons to people they later declare as evil for using those weapons.
Believe the lies and horseshit fearmongering designed to keep you servile and meek, domesticated cattle that are considered too stupid to be told what's going on until years later.
Stay indoors and swallow the Mein-Kampf like ideals of the Daily Mail who want you to hate immigrants/single mothers/homosexuals.
Whatever you do, do not rub your eyes and refuse to be kept asleep anymore.
Over a million people marched in protest of this sham invasion, the largest ever public demonstration in our country's history.
And it was ignored and written off as "leftist"
And look where we are now.
It'll get a lot worse before it gets better, that I promise.
So kids, don't forget to keep watching for the inevitable "LOOK! TERRORISTS NEARLY KILLED YOU!!!!!!" reports to shame you into docile acceptance that we're doing the right thing.
Shut up.
Be Happy.
Be inside.
Be afraid.
Be intolerant.
Be pumped full of sedative entertainment.
Be good little citizens and don't question, because it's all far too complicated for you and me to understand and see through.
Iraqis kill Western Soldiers.
Western Soldiers kills Iraqis.
And so on so forth.
Just remember that we "won" this phony war last year. Rejoice that all is well and the smiling Iraqis welcome our heroic conque - sorry - liberators.
Hell, they even tore down that monolithic statue of Hussein in a spontaneous celebration of being free...well, ok, it was stage managed by the media (as was the classic flag-raising at Iwo Jima) but that's not the point is it, you cynical communist terrorist lover?
I'd still like to know where Saddam Hussein is in all this.
For such an "Evil Hitler", there seems to be zero interest in what's happened to that "vile, despicable murdering tyrant"
He's vanished, with a tacit agreement to never ever mention his current state in the media.
But I get a sneaking suspicion he'll be wheeled out just in time for the elections, especially with public opinion swinging away from support and to "just get these guys home please".
The invasion was launched on lies and deliberately false information concerning non-existent WOMD (almost a year later and nothing still, despite all concerned being in captivity, you'd think with the amount of anti-military/government/invasion feeling they'd show a couple to say "See? Now go back to soap operas" eh?).
And since the "liberation", there has been nothing but trouble. Bombs going off, soldiers & civilians being killed, acknowledged torture and possible murder of prisoners in captivity.
I'd say, purely as a propaganda coup for the idiot fundamentalist terror groups, we've handed them a world-stage of attention.
And don't fall for the idiotic Daily Mail type argument of "Well in the heat of battle, emotions run high" as an excuse. These weren't soldiers being tortured, these were people in captivity. Held in jail, unable to do anything except be tortured, humiliated and possibly murdered (depends which news source you listen to on that last point).
Before anybody tries to defend/justify the treatment of these prisoners, remember the absolute outcry and fury from the Western press when those two downed pilots were shown beaten and bloody as hostage in the last war.
Where's the difference? Except those pilots were enemy combatants in a time of war. These Iraqis are prisoners being held after the "victory in freeing Iraq".
The torture and beating of prisoners is wrong, whatever your colour/religion. You can't excuse it with rhetoric and nationalistic pleas for leniency because these soldiers have been having a hard time and wanted revenge - or whatever the hell reasons are being offered.
And with all this current hostility and anti-government feeling building with the British public towards those genuine photographs and rising resentment that "our boys" are dying months after we "won"?
Keep your eyes peeled for yet another media blitz from Blair warning about "IMMINENT RICIN TANKS AT HEATHROW FERTILISER FOILED!!!!!" narrowly avoided terrordeathkill plot to whip us back up into a "Dirty bloody Arab Immigrant" frenzy.
It's with a weary sigh that I hope I'm wrong on that point, because it's happened each and every time we've begun to question what the point of the invasion was.
So inbetween soap opera awards and scare stories about the brown tidal wave of immigrants coming to live in your house and do bumsex to your decent white family, our "heroic police/army" will foil/expose/avert some nefarious evil plot to do some vague nasty in our green and pleasant land.
The scary thing is, with Hussein "gone" and Bin Laden "ineffectual", I wonder who the next bogeyman will be to keep us timid and frightened of each other instead of realising that we all share this planet and we all want the same things.
North Korea? Nope, because they could actually kick our ass.
China? Nope, for the reasons above.
What this world needs is a really good villain to justify those billions of pounds in weapons sales and every-inscreasingly fascist laws to "protect us" from "them".
Identity Cards to be carried at all times, and let's put your DNA on there. Because if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to be afraid of right?
Let's have CCTV everywhere for your protection. Because as we all know, having constant 24/7 surveillance has radically reduced the levels of street crime and drunken violence hasn't it?
Let's have all internal flights in the UK finish with your photograph being taken for "security purposes" (because many, many terrorists fly from Heathrow to Inverness with deadly killer stuff instead of just driving with a tiny, tiny millionth of a percentage of a chance of being pulled over)
Don't you feel safer and happier already?
I mean it's nice to know we're being looked after so well isn't it? And for those evil, vile criminals that consider leaving their road-tax a week or so until they get paid before reknewing, the commercial kindly informs you (with ominous low-resonance music) that the DVLC know where you live, what car you drive and exactly how long you have left on your tax.
I feel so reassured that I'll never be killed by terrorists with all this added security and comfort.
The only thing that's been left out of this Orwellian warm-hug from your government is the fact that nothing will stop somebody if they are determined to do damaged.
September 11th 2001 proved that.
A handful of fanatics armed with box-cutters - not missiles, not weapons of mass destruction, not violent games/Tarantino movies but box cutters - achieved what Hussein with his invisible magic WOMD had never ever done (ok, so he had no desire to attack the West but hey, he had a moustache and spoke different).
So shut up and be happy. Surrender the very essence of your being, the chemical components that make up your existence, in order to stave off some in-the-future possible tragedy.
Watch your idiot television shows that pump banal effluent into your homes, read your "OK! HI! CELEBGOSSWOW!" magazines and lust for the truly pointless and trivial.
Bury your heads in the sand and blindly trust that people who sell weapons to people they later declare as evil for using those weapons.
Believe the lies and horseshit fearmongering designed to keep you servile and meek, domesticated cattle that are considered too stupid to be told what's going on until years later.
Stay indoors and swallow the Mein-Kampf like ideals of the Daily Mail who want you to hate immigrants/single mothers/homosexuals.
Whatever you do, do not rub your eyes and refuse to be kept asleep anymore.
Over a million people marched in protest of this sham invasion, the largest ever public demonstration in our country's history.
And it was ignored and written off as "leftist"
And look where we are now.
It'll get a lot worse before it gets better, that I promise.
So kids, don't forget to keep watching for the inevitable "LOOK! TERRORISTS NEARLY KILLED YOU!!!!!!" reports to shame you into docile acceptance that we're doing the right thing.
Shut up.
Be Happy.
Be inside.
Be afraid.
Be intolerant.
Be pumped full of sedative entertainment.
Be good little citizens and don't question, because it's all far too complicated for you and me to understand and see through.
Page:
Yup, I'd vote for you.
The last few lines of that felt like Radiohead lyrics, heh.
Well said.
The last few lines of that felt like Radiohead lyrics, heh.
Well said.
Rosalind wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how relevant this is to your post. I'd like to ask you,
> Is it possible to the correct thing?
It's possible to not do the wrong thing when it's abundantly clear what the results will be. Maybe the right thing can't always be done; is that any reason to go charging down a route that, in this case, has led to the world being made less safe?
>
> I'm not sure how relevant this is to your post. I'd like to ask you,
> Is it possible to the correct thing?
It's possible to not do the wrong thing when it's abundantly clear what the results will be. Maybe the right thing can't always be done; is that any reason to go charging down a route that, in this case, has led to the world being made less safe?
Skarra wrote:
>
> Well he didn't specify that enough. The whole terrorist
> scaremongering seemed to blend in with the have a go at the
> Government bits.
It was pretty damn clear to me; I think this says more about your viewpoint (overanxious to defend the government) than it does about Goatboys post.
>
>
> No, but every single Government since the dawn of time has been
> hypocritical. I'm not saying its right, just the norm. And the status
> quo is one of the most difficult things to alter, especially when it
> concerns Government.
If you're not saying it's right, why try to make the point that "It wasn't THIS government who sold the weapons to Iraq"? If you acknowledge that they're arming brutal dictators, why are you trying to say that, because T.Blair didn't personally authorise sales of arms to Saddam, the government must therefore be acting for all the right reasons?
>
>
> Yes there was evidence, David Kay commented on it. I'll say it again,
> all the countries with reasonable intelligence services, France and
> Germany included, their intel suggested that WMD were being developed
> in Iraq. He went on to say the Governments of the co-alition forces
> did what they believed to be for the best, and he aggreed, until that
> intel was found to be wrong. As i've said in the past, its one thing
> to say MI6 screwed up, but much worse to accuse the Government of
> some of the things its being accused of.
Okay; so what about North Korea? If the US and UK governments really had a hard-on for stopping dictators getting WMD, why didn't they beat a path to their door? How about Syria? They're developing WMD. As are (allegedly) Iran. Libya were until recently. There are any number of nations with questionable leaders developing WMD. They are no more a threat than Saddam. In the case of NK, they're demonstratably MORE fof a threat.
As to all the intel; well, I'm sorry but that's a skewed vision you've given that neatly avoids the fact that much of the intel was cribbed from an old phd thesis. It's all very well saying "We relied on the intel, and that turned out to be wrong". But it's looking more and more likely that the governments looked for intel that would support their case, and instructed agencies to ignore that which did not (though admittedly, I'm talking mainly of the US here; however, that didn't stop Blair going along with it)
> I might add, has anybody provided any hard evidence that the
> Government lied, not to my knowledge.
>
Quite true. But neither has anyone provided evidence, hard or otherwise, that they were telling the truth. Looking at the mess Iraq is rapidly becoming, I'd say that they should have made rather more sure of their facts.
>
> I know something stinks, but i think its wrong to instantly look at
> Labours nappy and assume it was them. As i've said, there is hard
> evidence to say that the Intel pointed to WMD in Iraq. Yet there is
> none that i'm aware of that the Government flat out lied. As David
> Kay sais, the Governments appeared to act in the best wishes of their
> country.
Hang on; 'hard evidence that some intel pointed to WMD'? Not 'hard evidence of WMD'? So now we're down to discussing the questionability of the intel, yet we were assured the intel was spot on were we not? Lets be honest here; look at the Lawyerspeak used by both governments to justify this ugly little land grab. There is NO hard evidence whatsoever to say that the government told the truth either, but if you can't see that the balance of probabilities quite clearly points to them being less than truthful, then you're not being supportive; you're being blinkered, and I'd be surprised at you if that's the case.
As for it being in our best wishes; how can that be when you look at the opposition to the war? Our best interests?Mm, yeah we've given terrorist more recruits and more reason to strike at us. This stupid, pointless war has pretty much guaranteed that the world is a lot less safe than it was beforehand.
>
> Well he didn't specify that enough. The whole terrorist
> scaremongering seemed to blend in with the have a go at the
> Government bits.
It was pretty damn clear to me; I think this says more about your viewpoint (overanxious to defend the government) than it does about Goatboys post.
>
>
> No, but every single Government since the dawn of time has been
> hypocritical. I'm not saying its right, just the norm. And the status
> quo is one of the most difficult things to alter, especially when it
> concerns Government.
If you're not saying it's right, why try to make the point that "It wasn't THIS government who sold the weapons to Iraq"? If you acknowledge that they're arming brutal dictators, why are you trying to say that, because T.Blair didn't personally authorise sales of arms to Saddam, the government must therefore be acting for all the right reasons?
>
>
> Yes there was evidence, David Kay commented on it. I'll say it again,
> all the countries with reasonable intelligence services, France and
> Germany included, their intel suggested that WMD were being developed
> in Iraq. He went on to say the Governments of the co-alition forces
> did what they believed to be for the best, and he aggreed, until that
> intel was found to be wrong. As i've said in the past, its one thing
> to say MI6 screwed up, but much worse to accuse the Government of
> some of the things its being accused of.
Okay; so what about North Korea? If the US and UK governments really had a hard-on for stopping dictators getting WMD, why didn't they beat a path to their door? How about Syria? They're developing WMD. As are (allegedly) Iran. Libya were until recently. There are any number of nations with questionable leaders developing WMD. They are no more a threat than Saddam. In the case of NK, they're demonstratably MORE fof a threat.
As to all the intel; well, I'm sorry but that's a skewed vision you've given that neatly avoids the fact that much of the intel was cribbed from an old phd thesis. It's all very well saying "We relied on the intel, and that turned out to be wrong". But it's looking more and more likely that the governments looked for intel that would support their case, and instructed agencies to ignore that which did not (though admittedly, I'm talking mainly of the US here; however, that didn't stop Blair going along with it)
> I might add, has anybody provided any hard evidence that the
> Government lied, not to my knowledge.
>
Quite true. But neither has anyone provided evidence, hard or otherwise, that they were telling the truth. Looking at the mess Iraq is rapidly becoming, I'd say that they should have made rather more sure of their facts.
>
> I know something stinks, but i think its wrong to instantly look at
> Labours nappy and assume it was them. As i've said, there is hard
> evidence to say that the Intel pointed to WMD in Iraq. Yet there is
> none that i'm aware of that the Government flat out lied. As David
> Kay sais, the Governments appeared to act in the best wishes of their
> country.
Hang on; 'hard evidence that some intel pointed to WMD'? Not 'hard evidence of WMD'? So now we're down to discussing the questionability of the intel, yet we were assured the intel was spot on were we not? Lets be honest here; look at the Lawyerspeak used by both governments to justify this ugly little land grab. There is NO hard evidence whatsoever to say that the government told the truth either, but if you can't see that the balance of probabilities quite clearly points to them being less than truthful, then you're not being supportive; you're being blinkered, and I'd be surprised at you if that's the case.
As for it being in our best wishes; how can that be when you look at the opposition to the war? Our best interests?Mm, yeah we've given terrorist more recruits and more reason to strike at us. This stupid, pointless war has pretty much guaranteed that the world is a lot less safe than it was beforehand.
I read your post. I'm a little ill today, so I'm not sure if I got your gist or not, but I'd still like to say a few things.
Awful things happen everyday, they happen in Iraq, they happen in Hull, they happen to people we don't know and to people we do know. If I think about all the sad things in the world I can't sleep. Some times I don't sleep. Tuesday night all I could think about was that while I was warm and comfy in my bed, people may have been trapped under rubble in Glasgow, not able to be in their beds. Remember when people were being held hostage in Russia? I was addicted to the news. I had it on all the time, and I refreshed the BBC news homepage constantly.
I heard a story from some ambulance men about a young teenage girl who took an overdose of paracetamol after an argument with her boyfriend, and told nobody until she started to get pains in her abdomen, at which point she and the boyfriend had made up. In the ambulance on the way to the hospital she said that she didn't want to die, and pleaded with the ambulance men to tell her she would be okay, but by then it was already to late. I think of that girl often and it still upsets me.
Yesterday my heart was breaking for Maxine Carr. Condemed by the world as a child murderer.
What am I supposed to do? Is it my responsibility to feel grief and pain for everyone? Should I turn my back on all of the awful things that go on, and be happy. Should I feel guilty when I feel happy? Am I the only person in the world who feels like this?
I'm not sure how relevant this is to your post. I'd like to ask you, Is it possible to the correct thing?
Awful things happen everyday, they happen in Iraq, they happen in Hull, they happen to people we don't know and to people we do know. If I think about all the sad things in the world I can't sleep. Some times I don't sleep. Tuesday night all I could think about was that while I was warm and comfy in my bed, people may have been trapped under rubble in Glasgow, not able to be in their beds. Remember when people were being held hostage in Russia? I was addicted to the news. I had it on all the time, and I refreshed the BBC news homepage constantly.
I heard a story from some ambulance men about a young teenage girl who took an overdose of paracetamol after an argument with her boyfriend, and told nobody until she started to get pains in her abdomen, at which point she and the boyfriend had made up. In the ambulance on the way to the hospital she said that she didn't want to die, and pleaded with the ambulance men to tell her she would be okay, but by then it was already to late. I think of that girl often and it still upsets me.
Yesterday my heart was breaking for Maxine Carr. Condemed by the world as a child murderer.
What am I supposed to do? Is it my responsibility to feel grief and pain for everyone? Should I turn my back on all of the awful things that go on, and be happy. Should I feel guilty when I feel happy? Am I the only person in the world who feels like this?
I'm not sure how relevant this is to your post. I'd like to ask you, Is it possible to the correct thing?
Light wrote:
> Skarra wrote:
>
> >Lots of stuff.
>
> Sorry Skarra, but that reads like the nitpicking sophistry of a
> blairite apologist.
> As far as I can tell, Goatboy is saying that the
> media are just as much to blame for all the scaremongering, so why
> are you saying "Blame the media!".
Well he didn't specify that enough. The whole terrorist scaremongering seemed to blend in with the have a go at the Government bits.
> Wasn't this government
> that sold the weapons to Iraq? Oh...so all those weapons we're
> currently selling to Indonesia (to pick an oppressive, authoritarian
> country at random), that's okay then?
No, but every single Government since the dawn of time has been hypocritical. I'm not saying its right, just the norm. And the status quo is one of the most difficult things to alter, especially when it concerns Government.
> And the WMD point...look, I
> know you're very much pro government and you have faith in them doing
> the right thing, but the fact that there is precisely no evidence
> whatsoever of any WMD (and yeah, i know there has been the occasional
> "See this secret lab!" story; the reason those stories are
> never mentioned again is cos they're rapidly discredited) a full year
> on sorta indicates that the government are, quite simply, lying.
Yes there was evidence, David Kay commented on it. I'll say it again, all the countries with reasonable intelligence services, France and Germany included, their intel suggested that WMD were being developed in Iraq. He went on to say the Governments of the co-alition forces did what they believed to be for the best, and he aggreed, until that intel was found to be wrong. As i've said in the past, its one thing to say MI6 screwed up, but much worse to accuse the Government of some of the things its being accused of.
I might add, has anybody provided any hard evidence that the Government lied, not to my knowledge.
> Look, I like you and I like the way you put arguments together. But
> this one was very visibly "Start with the assumption the
> government is right, and look for evidence accordingly". Try
> looking at the whole situation without holding onto the insistence
> that Labour can do no wrong, and you'll see that something stinks.
I know something stinks, but i think its wrong to instantly look at Labours nappy and assume it was them. As i've said, there is hard evidence to say that the Intel pointed to WMD in Iraq. Yet there is none that i'm aware of that the Government flat out lied. As David Kay sais, the Governments appeared to act in the best wishes of their country.
> Skarra wrote:
>
> >Lots of stuff.
>
> Sorry Skarra, but that reads like the nitpicking sophistry of a
> blairite apologist.
> As far as I can tell, Goatboy is saying that the
> media are just as much to blame for all the scaremongering, so why
> are you saying "Blame the media!".
Well he didn't specify that enough. The whole terrorist scaremongering seemed to blend in with the have a go at the Government bits.
> Wasn't this government
> that sold the weapons to Iraq? Oh...so all those weapons we're
> currently selling to Indonesia (to pick an oppressive, authoritarian
> country at random), that's okay then?
No, but every single Government since the dawn of time has been hypocritical. I'm not saying its right, just the norm. And the status quo is one of the most difficult things to alter, especially when it concerns Government.
> And the WMD point...look, I
> know you're very much pro government and you have faith in them doing
> the right thing, but the fact that there is precisely no evidence
> whatsoever of any WMD (and yeah, i know there has been the occasional
> "See this secret lab!" story; the reason those stories are
> never mentioned again is cos they're rapidly discredited) a full year
> on sorta indicates that the government are, quite simply, lying.
Yes there was evidence, David Kay commented on it. I'll say it again, all the countries with reasonable intelligence services, France and Germany included, their intel suggested that WMD were being developed in Iraq. He went on to say the Governments of the co-alition forces did what they believed to be for the best, and he aggreed, until that intel was found to be wrong. As i've said in the past, its one thing to say MI6 screwed up, but much worse to accuse the Government of some of the things its being accused of.
I might add, has anybody provided any hard evidence that the Government lied, not to my knowledge.
> Look, I like you and I like the way you put arguments together. But
> this one was very visibly "Start with the assumption the
> government is right, and look for evidence accordingly". Try
> looking at the whole situation without holding onto the insistence
> that Labour can do no wrong, and you'll see that something stinks.
I know something stinks, but i think its wrong to instantly look at Labours nappy and assume it was them. As i've said, there is hard evidence to say that the Intel pointed to WMD in Iraq. Yet there is none that i'm aware of that the Government flat out lied. As David Kay sais, the Governments appeared to act in the best wishes of their country.
*clap*
I agree.
I agree.
I think Goatboy should be Prime Minister
Skarra wrote:
>Lots of stuff.
Sorry Skarra, but that reads like the nitpicking sophistry of a blairite apologist. As far as I can tell, Goatboy is saying that the media are just as much to blame for all the scaremongering, so why are you saying "Blame the media!". Wasn't this government that sold the weapons to Iraq? Oh...so all those weapons we're currently selling to Indonesia (to pick an oppressive, authoritarian country at random), that's okay then? And the WMD point...look, I know you're very much pro government and you have faith in them doing the right thing, but the fact that there is precisely no evidence whatsoever of any WMD (and yeah, i know there has been the occasional "See this secret lab!" story; the reason those stories are never mentioned again is cos they're rapidly discredited) a full year on sorta indicates that the government are, quite simply, lying.
Look, I like you and I like the way you put arguments together. But this one was very visibly "Start with the assumption the government is right, and look for evidence accordingly". Try looking at the whole situation without holding onto the insistence that Labour can do no wrong, and you'll see that something stinks.
>Lots of stuff.
Sorry Skarra, but that reads like the nitpicking sophistry of a blairite apologist. As far as I can tell, Goatboy is saying that the media are just as much to blame for all the scaremongering, so why are you saying "Blame the media!". Wasn't this government that sold the weapons to Iraq? Oh...so all those weapons we're currently selling to Indonesia (to pick an oppressive, authoritarian country at random), that's okay then? And the WMD point...look, I know you're very much pro government and you have faith in them doing the right thing, but the fact that there is precisely no evidence whatsoever of any WMD (and yeah, i know there has been the occasional "See this secret lab!" story; the reason those stories are never mentioned again is cos they're rapidly discredited) a full year on sorta indicates that the government are, quite simply, lying.
Look, I like you and I like the way you put arguments together. But this one was very visibly "Start with the assumption the government is right, and look for evidence accordingly". Try looking at the whole situation without holding onto the insistence that Labour can do no wrong, and you'll see that something stinks.
More applause from this end.
Goatboy wrote:
> Western soldiers torture Iraqis.
> Iraqis kill Western Soldiers.
> Western Soldiers kills Iraqis.
> And so on so forth.
> Just remember that we "won" this phony war last year.
> Rejoice that all is well and the smiling Iraqis welcome our heroic
> conque - sorry - liberators.
> Hell, they even tore down that monolithic statue of Hussein in a
> spontaneous celebration of being free...well, ok, it was stage
> managed by the media (as was the classic flag-raising at Iwo Jima)
> but that's not the point is it, you cynical communist terrorist
> lover?
How was it stage mannaged by the media? Were there directors off shot saying, 'ok, and just one more time'? I think not.
> I'd still like to know where Saddam Hussein is in all this.
> For such an "Evil Hitler", there seems to be zero interest
> in what's happened to that "vile, despicable murdering
> tyrant"
> He's vanished, with a tacit agreement to never ever mention his
> current state in the media.
> But I get a sneaking suspicion he'll be wheeled out just in time for
> the elections, especially with public opinion swinging away from
> support and to "just get these guys home please".
He may be zero interest by the media, but that doesn't mean there's zero interest elsewhere. After all, there are lots of things the media ignore. Anybody with sense would know that just because it isn't in the media, doesn't mean it isn't happening.
> The invasion was launched on lies and deliberately false information
> concerning non-existent WOMD (almost a year later and nothing still,
> despite all concerned being in captivity, you'd think with the amount
> of anti-military/government/invasion feeling they'd show a couple to
> say "See? Now go back to soap operas" eh?).
If the information was deliberately falsified, why hasn't Parliament spoke up yet? By that i mean the two seperate Parliamentry inquiries into the war.
And didn't you hear David Kay's report. He, before the war, saw all the intelligence, and it did look like WMD did exist. So what were the politicians to do? Ignore their intel?
> And since the "liberation", there has been nothing but
> trouble. Bombs going off, soldiers & civilians being killed,
> acknowledged torture and possible murder of prisoners in captivity.
> I'd say, purely as a propaganda coup for the idiot fundamentalist
> terror groups, we've handed them a world-stage of attention.
Nothing but trouble? There is good going on in Iraq you know. The media might not show it, because they believe its boring, but things like work in schools, the infastructure of the country(roads), electricity, water etc, massive improvements have been made there over the year.
> And don't fall for the idiotic Daily Mail type argument of "Well
> in the heat of battle, emotions run high" as an excuse. These
> weren't soldiers being tortured, these were people in captivity. Held
> in jail, unable to do anything except be tortured, humiliated and
> possibly murdered (depends which news source you listen to on that
> last point).
And nobody is saying its right. The first of the court martials is soon, next week i think. And its in public.
> Before anybody tries to defend/justify the treatment of these
> prisoners, remember the absolute outcry and fury from the Western
> press when those two downed pilots were shown beaten and bloody as
> hostage in the last war.
Has anybody? No. Everybody, including the military higher ups have condemed these actions.
> The torture and beating of prisoners is wrong, whatever your
> colour/religion. You can't excuse it with rhetoric and nationalistic
> pleas for leniency because these soldiers have been having a hard
> time and wanted revenge - or whatever the hell reasons are being
> offered.
No reasons are being offered. No justification has been offered, as everybody knows there is none. As i said, there are court martials for those involved.
> Keep your eyes peeled for yet another media blitz from Blair warning
> about "IMMINENT RICIN TANKS AT HEATHROW FERTILISER
> FOILED!!!!!" narrowly avoided terrordeathkill plot to whip us
> back up into a "Dirty bloody Arab Immigrant" frenzy.
What, so the UK isn't under threat from terrorism then? Perhaps you should tell MI5 that, as they seem to disagree.
> It's with a weary sigh that I hope I'm wrong on that point, because
> it's happened each and every time we've begun to question what the
> point of the invasion was.
Interesting point, same one as brought up on Question Time a few weeks ago? So, i assume you have some proof that the Government is passing orders on to the relevant agiencies telling them to conveniently foil a major terrorist plot. I mean, with all the people involved, if that were the case, somebody must have leaked some sort of document saying its all a plot to divert attention. Does anybody have any proof what so ever, or is this just Clair Short type allegations with no proof?
> So inbetween soap opera awards and scare stories about the brown
> tidal wave of immigrants coming to live in your house and do bumsex
> to your decent white family, our "heroic police/army" will
> foil/expose/avert some nefarious evil plot to do some vague nasty in
> our green and pleasant land.
Who is saying that about immigrants, the media are, and the Tories, but it sure as $hit ain't the Government.
> The only thing that's been left out of this Orwellian warm-hug from
> your government is the fact that nothing will stop somebody if
> they are determined to do damaged.
> September 11th 2001 proved that.
> A handful of fanatics armed with box-cutters - not missiles, not
> weapons of mass destruction, not violent games/Tarantino movies but
> box cutters - achieved what Hussein with his invisible magic WOMD had
> never ever done (ok, so he had no desire to attack the West but hey,
> he had a moustache and spoke different).
But suppose Saddam had developed WMD, as the intel showed, there was a good chance of that going into the hands of terrorists.
And your right, if they really want to attack, they will, but does that mean we should do nothing to stop them, i hope not!
> So shut up and be happy. Surrender the very essence of your being,
> the chemical components that make up your existence, in order to
> stave off some in-the-future possible tragedy.
Thats the most extreme end of synical though. After all, there is a terrorist threat, 9/11, Bali, Madrid etc... What should we do, carry on as though there was no threat? Make no changes to make terrorism just that little bit harder?
> Bury your heads in the sand and blindly trust that people who sell
> weapons to people they later declare as evil for using those
> weapons.
Urm, it wasn't this Government that sold those weapons.
> Believe the lies and horseshit fearmongering designed to keep you
> servile and meek, domesticated cattle that are considered too stupid
> to be told what's going on until years later.
> Stay indoors and swallow the Mein-Kampf like ideals of the Daily Mail
> who want you to hate immigrants/single mothers/homosexuals.
Well those are just typical right-wing views. If you don't like them, vote Labour.
> Whatever you do, do not rub your eyes and refuse to be kept asleep
> anymore.
> Over a million people marched in protest of this sham invasion, the
> largest ever public demonstration in our country's history.
> And it was ignored and written off as "leftist"
> And look where we are now.
> It'll get a lot worse before it gets better, that I promise.
So, are Governments to rule by concensus? The Government listened to those protestes, thats why they fumbled about with the UN for ages.
> So kids, don't forget to keep watching for the inevitable "LOOK!
> TERRORISTS NEARLY KILLED YOU!!!!!!" reports to shame you into
> docile acceptance that we're doing the right thing.
So why is it that every time MI6 foils somethin', it isn't screamed from the rooftops.
> Shut up.
> Be Happy.
> Be inside.
> Be afraid.
> Be intolerant.
> Be pumped full of sedative entertainment.
> Be good little citizens and don't question, because it's all far too
> complicated for you and me to understand and see through.
The only people that do scare mongering is the Media. The things you have a go at are typical right wing ideas, and the medias fault. I know things Iraq look like $hit at the moment, but its better than it was.
> Western soldiers torture Iraqis.
> Iraqis kill Western Soldiers.
> Western Soldiers kills Iraqis.
> And so on so forth.
> Just remember that we "won" this phony war last year.
> Rejoice that all is well and the smiling Iraqis welcome our heroic
> conque - sorry - liberators.
> Hell, they even tore down that monolithic statue of Hussein in a
> spontaneous celebration of being free...well, ok, it was stage
> managed by the media (as was the classic flag-raising at Iwo Jima)
> but that's not the point is it, you cynical communist terrorist
> lover?
How was it stage mannaged by the media? Were there directors off shot saying, 'ok, and just one more time'? I think not.
> I'd still like to know where Saddam Hussein is in all this.
> For such an "Evil Hitler", there seems to be zero interest
> in what's happened to that "vile, despicable murdering
> tyrant"
> He's vanished, with a tacit agreement to never ever mention his
> current state in the media.
> But I get a sneaking suspicion he'll be wheeled out just in time for
> the elections, especially with public opinion swinging away from
> support and to "just get these guys home please".
He may be zero interest by the media, but that doesn't mean there's zero interest elsewhere. After all, there are lots of things the media ignore. Anybody with sense would know that just because it isn't in the media, doesn't mean it isn't happening.
> The invasion was launched on lies and deliberately false information
> concerning non-existent WOMD (almost a year later and nothing still,
> despite all concerned being in captivity, you'd think with the amount
> of anti-military/government/invasion feeling they'd show a couple to
> say "See? Now go back to soap operas" eh?).
If the information was deliberately falsified, why hasn't Parliament spoke up yet? By that i mean the two seperate Parliamentry inquiries into the war.
And didn't you hear David Kay's report. He, before the war, saw all the intelligence, and it did look like WMD did exist. So what were the politicians to do? Ignore their intel?
> And since the "liberation", there has been nothing but
> trouble. Bombs going off, soldiers & civilians being killed,
> acknowledged torture and possible murder of prisoners in captivity.
> I'd say, purely as a propaganda coup for the idiot fundamentalist
> terror groups, we've handed them a world-stage of attention.
Nothing but trouble? There is good going on in Iraq you know. The media might not show it, because they believe its boring, but things like work in schools, the infastructure of the country(roads), electricity, water etc, massive improvements have been made there over the year.
> And don't fall for the idiotic Daily Mail type argument of "Well
> in the heat of battle, emotions run high" as an excuse. These
> weren't soldiers being tortured, these were people in captivity. Held
> in jail, unable to do anything except be tortured, humiliated and
> possibly murdered (depends which news source you listen to on that
> last point).
And nobody is saying its right. The first of the court martials is soon, next week i think. And its in public.
> Before anybody tries to defend/justify the treatment of these
> prisoners, remember the absolute outcry and fury from the Western
> press when those two downed pilots were shown beaten and bloody as
> hostage in the last war.
Has anybody? No. Everybody, including the military higher ups have condemed these actions.
> The torture and beating of prisoners is wrong, whatever your
> colour/religion. You can't excuse it with rhetoric and nationalistic
> pleas for leniency because these soldiers have been having a hard
> time and wanted revenge - or whatever the hell reasons are being
> offered.
No reasons are being offered. No justification has been offered, as everybody knows there is none. As i said, there are court martials for those involved.
> Keep your eyes peeled for yet another media blitz from Blair warning
> about "IMMINENT RICIN TANKS AT HEATHROW FERTILISER
> FOILED!!!!!" narrowly avoided terrordeathkill plot to whip us
> back up into a "Dirty bloody Arab Immigrant" frenzy.
What, so the UK isn't under threat from terrorism then? Perhaps you should tell MI5 that, as they seem to disagree.
> It's with a weary sigh that I hope I'm wrong on that point, because
> it's happened each and every time we've begun to question what the
> point of the invasion was.
Interesting point, same one as brought up on Question Time a few weeks ago? So, i assume you have some proof that the Government is passing orders on to the relevant agiencies telling them to conveniently foil a major terrorist plot. I mean, with all the people involved, if that were the case, somebody must have leaked some sort of document saying its all a plot to divert attention. Does anybody have any proof what so ever, or is this just Clair Short type allegations with no proof?
> So inbetween soap opera awards and scare stories about the brown
> tidal wave of immigrants coming to live in your house and do bumsex
> to your decent white family, our "heroic police/army" will
> foil/expose/avert some nefarious evil plot to do some vague nasty in
> our green and pleasant land.
Who is saying that about immigrants, the media are, and the Tories, but it sure as $hit ain't the Government.
> The only thing that's been left out of this Orwellian warm-hug from
> your government is the fact that nothing will stop somebody if
> they are determined to do damaged.
> September 11th 2001 proved that.
> A handful of fanatics armed with box-cutters - not missiles, not
> weapons of mass destruction, not violent games/Tarantino movies but
> box cutters - achieved what Hussein with his invisible magic WOMD had
> never ever done (ok, so he had no desire to attack the West but hey,
> he had a moustache and spoke different).
But suppose Saddam had developed WMD, as the intel showed, there was a good chance of that going into the hands of terrorists.
And your right, if they really want to attack, they will, but does that mean we should do nothing to stop them, i hope not!
> So shut up and be happy. Surrender the very essence of your being,
> the chemical components that make up your existence, in order to
> stave off some in-the-future possible tragedy.
Thats the most extreme end of synical though. After all, there is a terrorist threat, 9/11, Bali, Madrid etc... What should we do, carry on as though there was no threat? Make no changes to make terrorism just that little bit harder?
> Bury your heads in the sand and blindly trust that people who sell
> weapons to people they later declare as evil for using those
> weapons.
Urm, it wasn't this Government that sold those weapons.
> Believe the lies and horseshit fearmongering designed to keep you
> servile and meek, domesticated cattle that are considered too stupid
> to be told what's going on until years later.
> Stay indoors and swallow the Mein-Kampf like ideals of the Daily Mail
> who want you to hate immigrants/single mothers/homosexuals.
Well those are just typical right-wing views. If you don't like them, vote Labour.
> Whatever you do, do not rub your eyes and refuse to be kept asleep
> anymore.
> Over a million people marched in protest of this sham invasion, the
> largest ever public demonstration in our country's history.
> And it was ignored and written off as "leftist"
> And look where we are now.
> It'll get a lot worse before it gets better, that I promise.
So, are Governments to rule by concensus? The Government listened to those protestes, thats why they fumbled about with the UN for ages.
> So kids, don't forget to keep watching for the inevitable "LOOK!
> TERRORISTS NEARLY KILLED YOU!!!!!!" reports to shame you into
> docile acceptance that we're doing the right thing.
So why is it that every time MI6 foils somethin', it isn't screamed from the rooftops.
> Shut up.
> Be Happy.
> Be inside.
> Be afraid.
> Be intolerant.
> Be pumped full of sedative entertainment.
> Be good little citizens and don't question, because it's all far too
> complicated for you and me to understand and see through.
The only people that do scare mongering is the Media. The things you have a go at are typical right wing ideas, and the medias fault. I know things Iraq look like $hit at the moment, but its better than it was.
Page: