Antony Loyd is a veteran war correspondent, who has reported from Bosnia, Chechnya and Iraq. Following the expulsion of ISIS/Daesh from the city of Mosul in Iraq, he has described the killing of some prisoners by Iraqi forces and the beating and brutalizing of others. Please see his 3-column article in The Times for Saturday 22 July. This describes the rough justice dealt out by an Iraqi judge in Hamdaniya, near Mosul.
It appears that the Iraqi component of the anti-Isis coalition is repeating old mistakes, by allowing atrocities against captured enemies. I remember only too well the massacres of Bosnians by Serbs in Srebrenica, the wrong done by Americans to their prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and by British forces in Basrah.
Some may say that such things are bound to happen. I reply that responsible Governments must try their utmost to prevent them. If they fail to do so, the jihadis, who believe in their duty to conquer the world, will have yet another grievance, with which to gain new recruits. It is our duty to stop terror and war continuing for generations to come. Battles must be won, but we must also win hearts and minds.
First, dear and noble Lord Hylton – you
and each and all “in power” or “influence” –
must establish your-selves and what you “stand-for” – “Sustainworthy”.
“Longest-Term Self-&-Civilisation Sustainworthy –
& Sustainworthy-ing of all ‘subjects’ and others-worldwide”.
Peruse, scrutinise, and learn-from :
Documentaries such as “How Many People Can Live On Planet Earth”,
Personal Lifeplace Developmental sources & guidances such as
“The Busy Person’s Guide To Easier Movement” (Wildman);
“Your Body: biofeedback at its best[without instruments, machinery or artificiality] (Jencks);
“Continent In Crisis” (Prof David Smith) –
“This Changes Everything” (Naomi Klein)
[despite the focus compelled to be the ‘politically-correct’ “Climate Change” which is so ‘foggy’ it should have said clearly “Climate Worsening”] – not Naomi’s “fault” –
but that of each and all-of-You up there on-high.
Not only these Iraq War Crimes but a seething-mass of other Wastefully-and Criminally Destructive ‘Happenings’ and Future-Intentions will continue to swallow-us like “sinkholes” and will sooner rather than later “Extinct” us –
– and whether or not the hidden but “Good Extra-Terrestrials” have already developed a superior “race”
with which to start occupying all our failed –
buildings and better-utilising left-overs –
our homes, workplaces, infrastructures, and various countrysides –
[soon utterly-vacant and empty of humankind]
may turn out to be not only “impossible” –
but “God’s Revised Purpose” –
Unless we set about genericly “resilienting” and “sustainw-worthy-ing”
our peace-building-and-maintaining “Human-Core”
——— And there is a bit more —————
War Crime in Iraq, Britain is responsible for, is singular. Tony Blair lying to Parliament and through that House, to the British people.
This outrage began the decent of lifestyle the Iraqi people could expect. The mess they are in now and the horrors they face today are directly due to Blair and his cohorts, backing Bush, who would not have gone ahead with his Father’s wishes, without the UK on his side. It is this opening of madness that destroyed faith throughout the Middle East and brought about mass movement of people, who believe to this day, they can use Europe and the UK, as fodder for their living aspirations. Whilst at the same time, believing they can bring their unacceptable cultural practices to our shores for us to founder in.
Blair, and those who backed him, have to be held accountable by the British people, with the families of those who died, for this ignorant plot of lies and ill thought through decision making.
His permanently grinning and unrepentant face is evil personified and nauseating to the gut. The devil certainly pays his followers well for selling their souls, doesn’t he.
Under interrogation when asked who they serve they would say “the Caliph”. If asked who they feared they would say “Allah!” If asked by what law they should be judged they would say “by Sharia Law”. For the IS fighter there is no separation between Islam and the State.
With a new Parliament a renewed Parliamentary Oath.
Before this, religious restrictions prevented Roman Catholics, Jews, Atheists and Quakers from taking their place. Opponents saw them as subversive intent on changing or undermining the Crown and established church.
Supporters countered by saying that the Lord Chancellor could prevent any Act in either house from starting. If an Act became conflicted the house had the power to repeal it. With these safeguards in place supporters won the day and oaths would evolve secularism.
But what if a 19th century opponent had foresight could see the future what would they observe from an Islamic viewpoint? In the early 21st century in government a Roman Catholic and a Jew would remove the Office of Lord Chancellor from the Woolsack and with it a necessary but contrived separation of State and Church.
The constitutional instruments of both would merge into one to make a religious state no different to the one being established by IS and already established by the Vatican. In Parliament Atheist and other infidels would need removing but the Parliamentary Oaths Act 1866 keep them in place?
British military attacking IS would be waging Christian Jihad upon them and arms sales to neighbouring states would be perceived as a pursuit of Christian Jihad by proxy.
In the next government infidels would create a social reform in direct conflict with Judaic religious law. Social reformers in the established church and in the absence of protection from civil law, petition for the protection of religious law in ceremonies made possible by social reform. Is there a connection here to Islamic terrorism?
Research Paper 00/17, 14/02/2000: The Parliamentary Oath.
Parliamentary Declaration Bill. HL Deb Mar 7, 1882 v267 cc317-9
Just ‘by the way’ :
Senex cites “Research”:-
now I have an ‘enormous’ problem with “Research” –
especially with such “public research” as should be possible in such places as local universities libraries.
At Plymouth University (no doubt in all universities) you are “pre-required” to be a serious “time-waster” –
by the month and year of publication NOT appearing on the quickly-visible-whilst-still-on-the-bookshelf spine of the book.
[I have asked the authorities about this, and handed in a written request for such time-saving to be done; to no avail].
No – you have to be “academicly-competitive” and take the volumes down and thumb carefully through the early pages and adjust your glasses to read the small print where that date would (alone) be shown or hidden somewhere in one of the lines.
Small wonder so many British citizens find it practically-impossible to be participatively “democratic”.
A likely “spin-off” from such “competitive” inhibitions –
is the sparsity of democratic participation in this (quite taxpayer-costly) “Hansard Citizenship-Education-included” Lords of the Blog
two-way reach-out to the Public.