Keith Houchen Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Did anyone ever think they'd see the day that Kiffy & Mickey would be on the same side of a debate regarding the oppression of Muslims? David should try and sort out the Middle East next. I have a dream that Palestinian children and Israeli children can play side by side, they will not be judged by their lack of foreskins or religious headgear but on the loudness of their vuvuzelas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share Posted October 18, 2011 If anything good has come of this thread, it's that both Mickey & Kiffy are that bit closer to being on the same page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbins Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 No proof other than him openly claiming responsibility? That wasn't till much later, and as we know, people claiming responsibility for impressive acts of terrorism happens every time there's an attack. You can't really take a man like that at his word, when he's using it to boast and inflate his own power rather than confess his guilt.  They DID request his extradition but the Taliban refused unless he was tried by their choice of courts and the US had to prove his guilt before they would send him. Well they needed some evidence, that's pretty standard for extradition requests. It's true that the Taliban made demands based on handing him over, but that would be a starting point for negotiations. The Americans had no interest in negotiations, they wanted revenge.  Oh and resolution 1368 may eb of interest. http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2001/SC7143.doc.htm Can't see anything there that says they can go and invade Afghanistan without getting clear backing from the Security Council.  To be fair sadam did rather bring the sanctions on himself Eh? Saddam didn't suffer from the sanctions. The Iraqi people did. They suffered far worse under the sanctions than previously under Saddam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted October 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted October 19, 2011 That wasn't till much later, and as we know, people claiming responsibility for impressive acts of terrorism happens every time there's an attack. You can't really take a man like that at his word, when he's using it to boast and inflate his own power rather than confess his guilt.   Thats very true on the claiming stuff, its why the IRA had agreed codewords with the British so we'd know when it was a threat from them. And yes, I got my timeline mixed up on when he claimed responsibility, apologies there. However there was evidence anyway before the invasion, the NSA had evidence as hours after the attack Al-Qa'edah members had called saying they had 'hit the target'. Some interesting stuff here  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/am...led-671334.html  Well they needed some evidence, that's pretty standard for extradition requests. It's true that the Taliban made demands based on handing him over, but that would be a starting point for negotiations. The Americans had no interest in negotiations, they wanted revenge.  As above. They had evidence but the Taliban refused to admit eyewitness accounts and recorded phone calls as evidence.  Can't see anything there that says they can go and invade Afghanistan without getting clear backing from the Security Council.  It does however state that they recognised the right to self defence as a result of these attacks. Also   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbins Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 And yes, I got my timeline mixed up on when he claimed responsibility, apologies there. However there was evidence anyway before the invasion, the NSA had evidence as hours after the attack Al-Qa'edah members had called saying they had 'hit the target'. Some interesting stuff here http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/am...led-671334.html Interesting that the article seems to strongly imply that "hit the target" phone call was probably bollocks. Also it was mentioned as being from "supporters of Bin Laden" rather than Al-Qaeda members. That seems pretty vague. The rest of the article seems to make the point that there's virtually no evidence of any real link to Bin Laden at all.  It does however state that they recognised the right to self defence as a result of these attacks. Also  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrAzY Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 What do people think of the polls carried out in Afghanistan that suggest that most of the general population prefer the current government to that of the taliban and support (to an extent) the presense of the US Military Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted October 20, 2011 Author Share Posted October 20, 2011 What do people think of the polls carried out in Afghanistan that suggest that most of the general population prefer the current government to that of the taliban and support (to an extent) the presense of the US Military Do you have a link to this information? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrAzY Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 What do people think of the polls carried out in Afghanistan that suggest that most of the general population prefer the current government to that of the taliban and support (to an extent) the presense of the US Military Do you have a link to this information? Â http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressrele...y/11/poll.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Of Swing Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 Everyone knows that %82 of polls are made up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted October 20, 2011 Author Share Posted October 20, 2011 What do people think of the polls carried out in Afghanistan that suggest that most of the general population prefer the current government to that of the taliban and support (to an extent) the presense of the US Military Do you have a link to this information? http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressrele...y/11/poll.shtml It's just a pity they can't carry out a poll that asks those who died at the hands of invading forces how they feel, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted October 31, 2011 Author Share Posted October 31, 2011 Well, I finally got round to buying my white poppy today. I've noticed a few more of them kicking about this year than in previous years, which is a good sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Birmingham's Poppy launch had to be brought forward to avoid protests by Extremists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 The Sun aren't too happy about the latest ruling by FIFA;  England footie stars have been barred from wearing poppies on the pitch by FIFA jobsworths. The FA wants players to display the emblem with the Three Lions badge on their shirts in next Saturday's friendly against Spain.  But the world governing body FIFA, run by scheming Sepp Blatter, has vetoed the request. It claims any change to official kits breaches FIFA rules.  The Wembley game falls between Armistice Day next Friday and Remembrance Sunday.  A source said the FA hopes for a change of heart by FIFA and "negotiations are continuing".  War veterans yesterday blasted the FIFA bureaucrats. Peter Hodge, ex-honorary general of the Normandy Veterans Association, said: "We should not allow them to dictate to us.  "We fought for freedom and that includes the right to wear a poppy. It's absolutely crucial that England display a poppy.  "FIFA's stance is very small-minded when you consider that without the sacrifice of our young men they would not exist."  Falklands veteran Simon Weston said: "It is not about altering the shirt, it is about recognising the sacrifice of so many."  The England stars will be allowed to wear poppies during training on Armistice Day, and the whole squad and management will observe a two-minute silence.  A FA spokesman said: "The FA are proud supporters of our Armed Forces."  All 20 Premier League clubs are to wear poppies on their shirts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members SpursRiot2012 Posted November 5, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 5, 2011 Aren't they likely to fall off during games?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted November 5, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 5, 2011 Wouldnt they be more like a sewn on pattern than an actual pinned on poppy? After all the pins could be dangerous in a clash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.