Why no real outcry about tory racism?

[Captain Nemesis]

Timing is everything.

So who decides when the time is right?

You?

Newspaper proprietors?

Bigots?

Politicians seeking peace?

 

[Brigade77]

Not one of you have first hand knowledge of any of the wildly fluctuating topics being discussed here on this very thread. Not one of you have displayed any possibility that you might have actually sat down & thought it through.

Not one of you is anything other than the product of your MSM of choice.

 

[Lower]

No matter how clear evidence of criminal behaviour is, the accused are still interviewed by the police, and still stand trial where they are allowed to defend themelves.

Unfortunately, when it comes to international relations where force is being used by foreign powers with no regard for the law, you can't rely on your own country's enforcement of its laws against individuals when another country has chosen to disregard them.

It would have been a bit pointless for France to attempt to prosecute German soldiers for murder when they were invading their country.

Russia needed to see that the UK and its allies weren't going to accept that kind of behaviour without consequences, and the total prevarication by Corbyn would have made Russia believe they could get away with whatever the wanted.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

Not one of you have first hand knowledge of any of the wildly fluctuating topics being discussed here on this very thread. Not one of you have displayed any possibility that you might have actually sat down & thought it through.

I wrote this because fillyboy didnt think through his claim that Corbyn is a "keen supporter of terrorist orgnisations"

I was about to do something pointless and ask you for proof, but then I remembered that you could not care less if what you say is true, all that matters is another opportunity for you to dribble out more bigotry.

I wrote this because transam didnt think through his claim Johnson is not racist

So why does he make racist remarks?

I wrote this to add to what ellal wrote when he illustrated the lack of thought that Lower put into his "[Corbyn] inviting terrorists to the houses of parliament or allowing himself to be put on a platform with extremist or terrorist groups"

The Queen has met with a terrorist, as has the next King.
Margaret Thatcher was on good terms with a terrorist.
Tony Blair met a terrorist.
There is a statue of a terrorist in Parliament Square.

I wrote this because of another post full of lack of thought from Lower

Do you deny the validity of his perception?
When we bombed and shelled civilians in a military operation condemned by the UN, what were we?
"Jaw-jaw is better than war-war." Harold Macmillan
No matter how clear evidence of criminal behaviour is, the accused are still interviewed by the police, and still stand trial where they are allowed to defend themelves.

I wrote this because sxturbo didnt think through what he said about Muslims blowing up gigs and going on mass-murder sprees

Do you have any data on the number of terror incidents carried out by Muslims vs the numbers carried out by Christions, Jews, Hindus etc?

 

[Lower]

So who decides when the time is right?

You?

Newspaper proprietors?

Bigots?

Politicians seeking peace?

Government ministers, public opinion and historians.

 

[Lower]

Not one of you have first hand knowledge of any of the wildly fluctuating topics being discussed here on this very thread. Not one of you have displayed any possibility that you might have actually sat down & thought it through.

Not one of you is anything other than the product of your MSM of choice.

Do you expect a dissertation on the subject followed by a critical peer review? Its a DIY forum.....

 

[Captain Nemesis]

Unfortunately, when it comes to international relations where force is being used by foreign powers with no regard for the law, you can't rely on your own country's enforcement of its laws against individuals when another country has chosen to disregard them.

Nor can you be expected to be viewed as morally superior to that other country if you too ignore the laws and international treaties which require you to investigate alleged crimes properly.

It would have been a bit pointless for France to attempt to prosecute German soldiers for murder when they were invading their country.

False analogy.

It would have been a contravention of the Geneva Convention for France to just shoot any captured Germans who they suspected had committed crimes.

Russia needed to see that the UK and its allies weren't going to accept that kind of behaviour without consequences, and the total prevarication by Corbyn would have made Russia believe they could get away with whatever the wanted.

Yes - because the consequences from, for example, the murders of Georgi Markov and Alexander Litvinenko had really given them pause for thought.

 

[transam]

a keen supporter of terrorist organisations though.

true he is also anti EU

anti NATO

Pro putin and that Chinese bloke

admirer of Fidel Castro and that fruit cake in Venezuela

Anti US

 

[Lower]

Nor can you be expected to be viewed as morally superior to that other country if you too ignore the laws and international treaties which require you to investigate alleged crimes properly.

False analogy.

It would have been a contravention of the Geneva Convention for France to just shoot any captured Germans who they suspected had committed crimes.

Yes - because the consequences from, for example, the murders of Georgi Markov and Alexander Litvinenko had really given them pause for thought.

I think you've missed the point of my analogy.

I'm not suggesting that France shot any captured Germans. I'm suggesting that it would have been pointless for the French to attempt to prosecute and imprison the German soldiers who were invading their country. The only option they had was to fight back and they failed at that.

With the skripal poisonings, who do you suggest that the police go after? The actual poisoners were Russian GRU acting on orders from senior people within Russia. The poisoners had left the country and therefore weren't available for arrest. The people that ordered the poisoning weren't in our country and weren't available for arrest. The people who ordered the poisoning knew they were acting against both our and international law, and clearly just didn't care. Therefore trying to pursue them using UK or international law would be a waste of time and perceived as weakness.

The is certainly a place for Jaw Jaw, but that assumes you're dealing with someone reasonable. When you're dealing with a despot or an effective dictator who chooses to ignore local and international law you need to take stronger action. The Jews in Germany didn't fight back and complied with what they were being asked to do. They may have been morally right, but 3 million of them were killed as a result.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

The is certainly a place for Jaw Jaw,

Jaw jaw refers to political discussion, not legal processes.
In the cases that you referred to, political processes, i.e. jaw jaw had been exhausted.
Legal processes came afterwards.
When there is no legal process available, then political pressure, or jaw jaw, is the only option.

 

[Vinty]

The people who ordered the poisoning knew they were acting against both our and international law, and clearly just didn't care

The UK has never acted against international law?

 

[Brigade77]

The UK has never acted against international law?

Apart from those times that we don't like to talk about, at least not on your MSM's.

If it isn't on your MSM (of choice) then it simply does NOT exist, does it?

 

[Brigade77]

With the skripal poisonings, who do you suggest that the police go after? The actual poisoners were Russian GRU acting on orders from senior people within Russia. The poisoners had left the country and therefore weren't available for arrest. The people that ordered the poisoning weren't in our country and weren't available for arrest. The people who ordered the poisoning knew they were acting against both our and international law, and clearly just didn't care. Therefore trying to pursue them using UK or international law would be a waste of time and perceived as weakness.

2x KGB / GRU agents entered the UK on a mission to extinguish Skripal.

We know their exact movements, from the time the plane landed, through the sightseeing of the cathedral & well into the smearing of death on Skripal's door handle.

I don't know about yours, but it doesn't make any sense in my reality.

 

[Lower]

2x KGB / GRU agents entered the UK on a mission to extinguish Skripal.

We know their exact movements, from the time the plane landed, through the sightseeing of the cathedral & well into the smearing of death on Skripal's door handle.

I don't know about yours, but it doesn't make any sense in my reality.

In my opinion, the Russians were sending a message that they could do what they wanted, when they wanted.

If they had just wanted to assassinate Sergei Skripal, there would have been much more discrete ways to do so. But using Novichok, a substance known to have been invented by Russia and not available elsewhere, they effectively told the world that they were the perpetrators.

Who the message was for, i do not know. But trying to pursue them through legal routes would be a waste of time.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

But trying to pursue them through legal routes would be a waste of time.

Isn't there an international arrest warrant out for them?
Obviously they'd have to leave Russia for it to be implemented.