Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Patrick Finucane

I never said he was fair game, only that there are people I feel more sympathetic towards than someone whose actions helped terrorists to walk free. I'm sure he was only doing his job and all that, but so were the British army and the RUC.

Do I think they deserved legal representation, due process etc? No I don't. Why should we grant people something they themselves denied to so many others? If you call yourselves an army then you should expect to be treated like one. Prisoners of war don't get trials or due process.

None of that is very anarchist of me I know, but fuck it I just don't like terrorists.

Well there you have it....:rolleyes: lawyers doing there jobs getting stiffed..this guy hasn`t the slightist clue of British military history...or indeed British legal systems (but thats what happens when you leave school with no qualifications it cant be helped...bless them..)has not even the slighist clue about civil legslation..its quite sad actually....
The brillant thing is that and get this " Prisoners of war dont get trails or due process"""""""""
jesus we nearly wet our selves to the toilets............
and this gezzer actually thinks he even might be educated........
 
Point taken butch. It was the second one I didn't get - I thought you were saying that the German state even under Willy Brandt was run by poorly (or not at all) denazified ex-Nazis and that was why the RAF were right to oppose it.
It wasn't so much Brandt and the federal government of the time but the Christian democrats and officials in Lander,cities etc who included a lot of ex Nazis.
 
A referendum on hanging would attract a strong yes vote.

Really? You base this opinion on...?
What, on stories in the media that tell you that (generally based on a sham poll or freephone survey), or on something more substantive?

I suspect the former, but hope for the latter.
 
It wasn't so much Brandt and the federal government of the time but the Christian democrats and officials in Lander,cities etc who included a lot of ex Nazis.

The old catch-22 that allied Civil Affairs formations had to deal with as German territory was taken over in '45, and which played out after: State and federal civil servants had been required to be Party members - should that have necessitated their total exclusion or not, and in the birth of the Cold War era, did the power-elites in the west see complete denazification as the best course in a nation that would be on the frontline of that Cold War?
 
Posssibly the most stupid idea ever.
No that was baader meinhoff a useless bunch of cunts appalled that the people running the state were ex nazis.
Exactly who else was going to run the place?
If you didnt join the nazi party that was end of career or death much like the communist or baathist partys.
West germany was fat rich and happy waa waaa lets kill people cunts :(
Utter bollocks from first to last. You really can't even get basic facts right can you?
 
I think you, and most leftists, gravely underestimate the innate right-wing, reactionary nature of the British public.
Is that the same right-wing nature that's been mediated to the British public? Tbh, I don't think Britain is massively right-wing. Take Scotland, it has only one Tory MP. The Tories got slaughtered in the Holyrood elections and UKIP struggles to get enough votes.
 
Is that the same right-wing nature that's been mediated to the British public? Tbh, I don't think Britain is massively right-wing. Take Scotland, it has only one Tory MP. The Tories got slaughtered in the Holyrood elections and UKIP struggles to get enough votes.

Even more damaging for Idaho's position is that this wasn't always the case in Scotland; innate right wing Britishness seems to have been effectively overcome...makes you think.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice
 
Even more damaging for Idaho's position is that this wasn't always the case in Scotland; innate right wing Britishness seems to have been effectively overcome...makes you think.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice
"damaging for his position "?! The language you use is bizarre. As if we are major political players in some international convention. Maybe that's how you see yourself. Perhaps that explains the faintly embarrassing practice of signing every post.
 
"damaging for his position "?! The language you use is bizarre. As if we are major political players in some international convention. Maybe that's how you see yourself. Perhaps that explains the faintly embarrassing practice of signing every post.

You put forward an argument about innate right wing Britishness; that was your position, that was the case you were making. You could have a bit of courage and try to defend it or you could ditch in light of the posts it prompted. Alternatively you could try and deflect any criticism with a bit of name calling; 'look at that Louis who does he think he is'.

Louis MacNeice

p.s. Signing every post is a hang over from being a letter writer; I don't find it embarrassing although I'm aware that some people do find it annoying.
 
Is that the same right-wing nature that's been mediated to the British public? Tbh, I don't think Britain is massively right-wing. Take Scotland, it has only one Tory MP. The Tories got slaughtered in the Holyrood elections and UKIP struggles to get enough votes.
In truth, my assertion that the UK is fundamentally right wing is so ill defined as to be neither provable nor unprovable. It's a piece of cheese. Any answer would stem from a position of faith and assumption.
 
Pat Finucane murder: PM's decision not to hold independent inquiry upheld

A Belfast court has upheld David Cameron’s decision not to hold an independent inquiry into the 1989 loyalist murder of the Northern Irish solicitor Pat Finucane.

Finucane’s family brought a judicial review against the government’s refusal to establish a Bloody Sunday-style inquiry into his murder after a previous investigation found there was collusion between Finucane’s killers and the security forces.

In his judgment at Belfast high court on Friday, Mr Justice Stephens said: “I uphold that the decision was lawful and accordingly I dismiss that part of the challenge.”
 
It's being discussed on other threads, but does derve a thread of its own.

Here's the BBC - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-20662412 Contains a link to the Report.

Like the family says, it's funny that all those to blame are dead:

"At every turn, dead witnesses have been blamed and defunct agencies found wanting. Serving personnel and active state departments appear to have been excused".

I'm divided 50:50 between the thought that a state does what it needs to do, and the thought that the state must act within its own laws.

Northern Ireland was vicious and brutal place.

We were fighting against people who described them selves as an army, yet had no respect for the rules of war. they were the scum of the earth. People who brutalised their own community. People who, for example, dragged a mother away from her children and tortured her to death, then hid the body, only recently disclosing the location. They did this on the suspicion that she may have been an informer. There are really no adequate words to describe the base depravity of this self-styled army.

It is completely unbelievable that Finucane was unaware of the deeds of the people he defended. It is reasonable to believe that Finucane shared the ethos of those whom he defended. From a government viewpoint, Finucane required to be removed, and they could not do it themselves, so the job was 'contracted out'.

I shed no tears for Finucane, he was well aware of the deeds of the people he defended, and by silence, colluded in those deeds. His death however, is a stain on the character of the government of the time, and is not excusable. The state must operate within its own laws, and on this occasion (one of a number of occasions), it did not do so. Those responsible will not answer for it, and that is unacceptable.
 
Back
Top Bottom