Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

17 year old British kid banned from the US for life

2»

Comments

  • #52
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    gizmo wrote: »
    As I said, in this context no. If this man is indeed innocent, there is nothing stopping him from coming forward and proclaiming his innocence. Given the level of interest from civil rights groups there is no way anything would happen to him if he did this. Also taking into consideration the fact that Obama has used the state secret act so seldom since coming into office it's quite obvious there is a strong case against him otherwise such measures would not have been taken.

    As for the subsequent links, can you please link to some stories regarding the innocent deaths at the hands of Mohammed Ali Hamadi? How about because of Baitullah Mehsud? Or maybe Hakimullah Mehsud?

    Do you even know who these people are? What they have done? Probably not unfortuantely, yet I'm sure it'll be easy to find hundreds of articles about how the US have "slaughtered" hundreds of people in Pakistan. While I'm all for denouncing the heavy handed tactics of the US military when it's called for, the bias in the other direction sickens me equally.

    Why do you put the slaughter of innocent civilians in inverted commas? That's disgraceful behaviour.

    I actually didn't know who any of the terrorist chaps, (according to wiki at least) were beforehand, no. But what is the connection between them and innocent civilians being murdered in drone attacks!!!????


  • #53
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    gizmo wrote: »
    As I said, in this context no.
    And out of this context?


  • #54
    Yawns
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭Yawns


    Wouldn't it be nice to get every1 in Ireland and the UK to sign a petition which has that kids email as it's context? It'd be a nice record for the guiness world book if so many people get banned from entering the US :D


  • #55
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmBnvajSfWU


  • #56
    gizmo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Why do you put the slaughter of innocent civilians in inverted commas? That's disgraceful behaviour.
    No, it's bad journalism and the reason I put it in inverted commas was to highlight the sensationalist nature of it. Of course it is a tragedy they were killed but the media reporting on them with such hyperbolic terms is not only untrue but disrespectful.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I actually didn't know who any of the terrorist chaps, (according to wiki at least) were beforehand, no. But what is the connection between them and innocent civilians being murdered in drone attacks!!!????
    Quite a lot actually, they were three of the prominent terrorists killed in the last waves of the strikes.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    And out of this context?
    That doesn't make sense, the context is that the President has used an executive order to allow a capture or kill order to be placed on a US citizen who is a known terrorist and is hiding in a non-extradition country. Should he be able to do this on anybody? Of course not. Would he do it anyway? Of course not. He's doing it for the above reason and for the above reason alone. What would you prefer him to do, just forget about him because he's a US citizen? Should known terror subjects who are US citizens be left alone for fear of upsetting civil rights groups?


  • #57
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,894 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    I heard Obama is a radical Islamic sleeper cell terrorist who plans to destroy the United States by expanding health care coverage.


  • #58
    Squall Leonhart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,794 ✭✭✭Squall Leonhart


    gizmo wrote: »
    No, it's bad journalism and the reason I put it in inverted commas was to highlight the sensationalist nature of it

    Totally agree with Gizmo on this.

    Brown Bomber, posting the way you do only serves to stir up ignorant hatred. Presenting only one side of a topic is misrepresentation. Force feeding people stories of 'slaughter' is poor journalism. Cows are slaughtered, pigs are slaughtered.

    Civilians dying in wartime is an unfortunate fact of life. I wish it weren't so, but it is. Obama, you can be certain, does not condone the spilling of innocent human blood.


  • #59
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Paul Cosgrave wrote: »
    Totally agree with Gizmo on this.

    Brown Bomber, posting the way you do only serves to stir up ignorant hatred. Presenting only one side of a topic is misrepresentation. Force feeding people stories of 'slaughter' is poor journalism. Cows are slaughtered, pigs are slaughtered.

    Civilians dying in wartime is an unfortunate fact of life. I wish it weren't so, but it is. Obama, you can be certain, does not condone the spilling of innocent human blood.

    I Must have missed the whole US vs Yemen-Pakistan war so. UAV's vs civilians, that's some contest.

    I'd like you and Gizmo to tell me what is an acceptable ratio of for you both- civilians killed vs supposed terrorists killed to justify these attacks.

    Bet you don't answer the question and give some long winded answer ;)


  • #60
    Squall Leonhart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,794 ✭✭✭Squall Leonhart


    The simple answer is, there are no simple answers.

    Life isn't always as black and white as you'd like it be, there are a thousand shades of grey.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,894 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I Must have missed the whole US vs Yemen-Pakistan war so. UAV's vs civilians, that's some contest.

    That's the problem with fighting an unconventional war.


  • #62
    gizmo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I Must have missed the whole US vs Yemen-Pakistan war so. UAV's vs civilians, that's some contest.

    I'd like you and Gizmo to tell me what is an acceptable ratio of for you both- civilians killed vs supposed terrorists killed to justify these attacks.

    Bet you don't answer the question and give some long winded answer ;)
    I haven't done that to you yet BB so I won't start now. :) What Paul said is indeed perfectly correct however I'd go one step further and say no ratio is acceptable. But why then, you may ask, do I support these strikes, or at least their aims? Well unfortunately just like I admit there is no acceptable answer, I also do not believe that these terrorists can be allowed to operate without any action taken against them. The reason the Pakistani government has probably called in the US drones is because their alternative, open fighting with soldiers, would more than likely result in a higher death toll with both civilian and casualties. Were a better solution available I don't think either the US or Pakistani governments would hesitate to jump at it.


Advertisement