Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Britain Drops 'War on Terror' Label

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
4dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 09:54 AM
Original message
Britain Drops 'War on Terror' Label
Source: Military.com

The words "war on terror" will no longer be used by the British government to describe attacks on the public, the country's chief prosecutor said Dec. 27.

Sir Ken Macdonald said terrorist fanatics were not soldiers fighting a war but simply members of an aimless "death cult."

The Director of Public Prosecutions said: 'We resist the language of warfare, and I think the government has moved on this. It no longer uses this sort of language."

London is not a battlefield, he said.

"The people who were murdered on July 7 were not the victims of war. The men who killed them were not soldiers," Macdonald said. "They were fantasists, narcissists, murderers and criminals and need to be responded to in that way."



Read more: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,159067,00.html?wh=wh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
1. K&R.
Good idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spirit of wine Donating Member (228 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:03 AM
Response to Original message
2. This is the first step to a political freedom that
Helps bring the citizens of England a little closer to reality. Congratulations to them for real leadership on this issue. If America were only this fortunate to have a top-down realization of a "war-on-semantics" only shoots us in the foot.

-Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rAVES Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
3. The Ghoul: "the terrorists war on us"
TEll that one to the Iraqis....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellenfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
4. k&r . . . finally some sanity. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustAnotherGen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
5. Ditto
Finally - some sanity in this world.

Does this mean we can get rid of the word: Islamofascists?

I asked for that from Santa this year but alas, I think I read it somewhere yesterday. Hmph!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. The only people who use it are those glued to RW pundits
Anyone with a brain doesn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rockybelt Donating Member (938 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Yeah
we can replace it with Amerifascist now thanks to the shrub
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Magleetis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. Christofascist
is more like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
6. This should be the absolutely first thing the next (Democratic) president
does in 09. I mean 5 seconds after the inaugural speech is finished. Maybe between the swearing in and speech if possible. The second thing is to abolish "Homeland Security" and put it back the way it was. That should be done no more than 5 seconds after abolishing the term "war on terror".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greiner3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. abolish "Homeland Security
Won't happen with hil or obama as president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. FEMA was vile --- even in its earliest days, you could see the potential for abuse--!!!
Agree with you on this ---
and they quickly hooked up with Blackwater in NO --- I think . . . right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #6
61. 1st thing to do by a Democratic President
is to return our freedoms, the Constitution, our laws and agencies by negating the Patriot Acts, Military Commission Act, FEMA rulings, etc.

Return our agency boxes as they were pre-crony/privitization (stealing) Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressive_realist Donating Member (669 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
7. Didn't take the UK long...
To restore sanity to their political discourse -- once they kicked Blair to the curb. It was long overdue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
10. RW media will howl and wail about this to no actual effect
:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
groovedaddy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
12. Hip Hip Hoorah! for the Brits...they actually have some sense!
I thought it was wrong from the beginning. People who kill innocent people are criminals, nothing more. As soon as you put an ideological tag on any group, you galvanize many other potential supporters for their cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeff30997 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
13. Excellent!
K&R for the Brits!:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
14. I salute the British Government for finally rejecting the asinine Orwellian language
of the "War on Terror".:patriot:

Maybe in century or two our own government will catch up, it could be the British had an advantage as England was Orwell's home.

I'm happy to kick and recommend this and only wish I could recommend it twice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #14
31. Me 2, maybe there is hope for humanity still (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
15. Beautiful --- !!!
Sanity returns --- ?

And a wonderful slap at Bushco --- !!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finite Donating Member (98 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
17. Good..
but I wouldn't read into it too much. Britain's politicians still have their tongues firmly up Bush's backside, added to which we've got a raft of new measures being introduced cracking down on civil liberties in the name of 'security', plus 20% of the world's CCTV cameras are in good old Blighty.

I suppose even for this surveillance-happy government, the phrase 'War on Terror' was a step too far!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #17
34. Welcome to DU
You can tell how screwed things are here when we are dancing in the streets that there is the slightest bit of sanity. Oh, and you are right about the CCTV cameras. I'm only surprised that it is only 20%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave123williams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
18. Yeah; anybody else disturbed by the fact that * thinks America is a battlefield?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #18
64. Yes
it is Bush's battle field to destroy our democracy (and his political enemies...the other party and the American people). It is the goal of the Neo Cons to destroy democracy around the world not spread it.

All disasters and "events" have been in Democratic cities and areas of the country (911, Katrina, S.California fires, MN bridge, LA highway, etc.). IF he wasn't directly responsible for these events, his refusal to make us safe and invest in our infrastructure is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
67. Yep, it's what they argued in the Padilla case
That the entire planet was now a "battlefield" and so battlefield rules applied - the MSM didn't really cover that - we had an Administration claiming it ought to be able to detain anyone without question, even in the U.S., since it was part of the battlefield in the "War on Terror." The media missed the fact this essentially argued that the Bill of Rights was completely obsolete. Even if wrong, and the courts held this was wrong, it still shows where they were coming from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
19. War IS terror
that's why it's a stupid slogan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
21. Hallelujah!
Now if our medieval government would do the same...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
architect359 Donating Member (544 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
22. Good. It's time, it is.
First thing that I read on DU this morning. First piece of good news for the day. We tend to use the word "war" a tad too easily, I think. "War" on drugs, "war" on crime, etc.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." - Inigo Montoya :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
23. Boy is England changing its tune but words don't mean
anything make your society free don't oppress them

video cameras have to be reduced its ridiculous
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gristy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Words do mean a great deal
They're huge.



BERKELEY With Republicans controlling the Senate, the House, and the White House and enjoying a large margin of victory for California Governor-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger, it's clear that the Democratic Party is in crisis. George Lakoff, a UC Berkeley professor of linguistics and cognitive science, thinks he knows why. Conservatives have spent decades defining their ideas, carefully choosing the language with which to present them, and building an infrastructure to communicate them, says Lakoff.

In 2000 Lakoff and seven other faculty members from Berkeley and UC Davis joined together to found the Rockridge Institute, one of the few progressive think tanks in existence in the U.S. The institute offers its expertise and research on a nonpartisan basis to help progressives understand how best to get their messages across. The Richard & Rhoda Goldman Distinguished Professor in the College of Letters & Science, Lakoff is the author of "Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think," first published in 1997 and reissued in 2002, as well as several other books on how language affects our lives. He is taking a sabbatical this year to write three books none about politics and to work on several Rockridge Institute research projects.

more: http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #23
63. I agree
They are stepping up their spy programs and taking away Birtish rights. Their fear propaganda not much differnt than ours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
24. Wow, governmental officials with some common sense!
How do we get some of these?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
26. Finally! some "thinking" prevails
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
27. Now if we could only bring sanity back to OUR country. Hooray for the UK!
Throw away EVERYTHING the REPUKE War Crminials have done since the 2000 coup:

Get rid of Homeland Security Department
Get rid of ANY and ALL repuke appointees (TRAITOROUS PARTISAN POLITICAL MOLES) in EVERY FEDERAL AGENCY
Get rid of the Patriot Act
Get rid of GITMO

RESTORE our Democracy - NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diane in sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #27
42. I agree with you completely--all Bush actions, appointees, signing statements and laws
should be purged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flordehinojos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
28. oh, the chief prosecutor is right on target!
if that had been our initial focus after 9/11 we would not have been invading or occupying any country or countries ... we would have been in hot pursuit of a bunch of criminals and of those who helped them.

When great minds understand no little shit can get away with the horrors the bushit boy has put this country (and iraq) through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
29. Very good idea
to call the terrorists "soldiers" or to call their actions a "war" really raises them up to a level they don't reach in reality. Call them for what they are-thugs out to fulfill their own agenda, not representing any religion or nation or ethnic group in reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Genanderson Donating Member (36 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. Then again...
Our military is undoubtedly the most powerful force of any nation. And yet, who is it that is currently kicking our asses in Iraq? Who is making it an unwinnable fight there? The same people we are calling "terrorists" is it not? For a group so powerful as to defeat the most powerful army in the world, I think the word "criminals" or "thugs" is actually a huge understatement. These people cannot be defeated by violence, thus war does not work. Indeed, more violence begets more "terrorists". The more we kill, the stronger they get.

Certainly it is a war, but it's one we cannot fight militarily, correct? The only ways to reduce terrorism is through diplomacy, national cooperation, and by not changing our way of life (well, except in response to protecting the environment. It's necessary in that case). Ignore it and throw any we find it jail and we minimize it. But otherwise we lose.

So if this redefining of what we are dealing with helps us to not respond in ways that help our enemies, then it's no doubt a good thing, even if the resulting label is not quite accurate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. The situation in Iraq is not terrorism, but civil war
with many different groups causing the violence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Genanderson Donating Member (36 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. Really?
Groups fighting groups = civil war, but groups fighting nations = crime? Odd how they can create a war in one aspect, but not in another. If you say so....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trashcanistanista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
30. K&R for the Brits
Terror is in the eye of the beholder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
33. We can't do that here. The conservative talks shows would not have anything to talk about.
War on terror, Islamofacists, the religion of death and all that shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
35. An "aimless death cult"?

Sounds just like Skull & Bones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nealmhughes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
37. Criminals, purely and simply is good in my book, but criminals have rights. . .
Therefore, if the US were to follow suit, that would mean that the nebulous existance of "not soldier nor insurgent nor criminal" but "terrorist" would be dropped into a category that includes basic human rights of counsel, arraignment, trial before a jury of peers, etc.

What good are the Star Chamber, the Bastille West and lettres de cachet then? All the trappings of le Nouveau Ancien Regime would need to be erased.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
39. No more NEOCON PROPAGANDA for Britain
Easy for them, not so much for us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #39
60. Blair helped Bush
with the WMD lies and war of aggression (remember the Downing Documents). He was a propagandist for war. Now they withdraw living us on the hook...their off shore banks full of war profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftishBrit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #60
66. Blair isn't in office any more...
Edited on Tue Jan-01-08 02:50 PM by LeftishBrit
and this is precisely why the withdrawal and the end of the 'war on terror' slogan are possible.

ETA: as Muriel Volestrangler points out, the Foreign Office were already recommending this a year ago, but IMO it couldn't be fully put into practice till Blair went.

I hate him for collaborating with Bush; have never voted for him even in 1997; and would like to see him in the Hague - but that doesn't mean that the British troops should obliged to stay in Iraq as a punishment for Blair's actions.

I hope that there will soon also be a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eroded47095 Donating Member (47 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
40. ExACTLY!
"Sir Ken Macdonald said terrorist fanatics were not soldiers fighting a war but simply members of an aimless "death cult.""

No need to elevate them to "soldier" status.

Not exactly supporting the troops neither, doing that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
41. "...simply members of an aimless 'death cult.'"
Well it's a death cult all right, but it is hardly aimless. Their aim is to impose Islamic rule on everyone or at least on everyone in the Middle East.

Why don't we all be honest and call it a war on established Islam? That's what it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. I see it as something much bigger than that...

surely, they are recruiting members in the name of Islam, but the death cult itself is much more far encompassing. It pits Christians versus Muslims, east versus west, extremists versus moderates, war-mongers versus those who don't want to play along. It ultimately serves the established order of the ruling aristocracies and, as such, is right-wing in nature. It empowers the military-industrial-complex and ensures that all sides have the necessary weaponry, and more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #45
49. All that is true, of course.
Nevertheless, none of it would matter without throngs of young people willing to die for Allah. I see at its root a conflict between the more or less secular West and the theocratic Middle-East.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #49
57. At its root may also be a class struggle....

in the Middle East where oil sheiks are building ski resorts inside of their own mansions, much of the population finds it hard to survive. The population sees this waste of resources amongst those who are influenced by the West and it may produce anger about the situation, which the theocrats can spin for their own purposes. We probably have a similar situation in our own Bible Belt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #57
59. The few elite of the world
live better than kings but their citizens live in poverty and fear. It is a world Fascist goal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ForeignSpectator Donating Member (970 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
43. Sounds like pretty good news...
...the water is right there, now the (US)horse just has to drink from it in '09... oh the sanity is almost unbearable...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Little Star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
44. Bout Time!! I only wish we could be next to make clear the
difference. This * admin's practice of manipulation of words is what keeps the sheep fearful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScooterFibby Donating Member (55 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
46. Thank God - Yes, they are CRIMINALS!
At last, a voice of sanity from the Coalition of the "Willing".

The only way to fight terrorism is by sapping their movement of recruits.

The only way to discourage recruitment is not by increasing fascism, population control, and thought policing, but by showing the values of the other side.

We need to increase actual good works by our side and cease attacking cities with our military might.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
47. Finally someone realizes the truth. They are run-of-the-mill criminals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doc Martin Donating Member (233 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
48. Can we drop the fascist "Homeland" label???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Didereaux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #48
52. may seem a small, maybe petty thing, but THAT should be a PLANK!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugabear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #48
58. Exactly my thoughts when they created the damned thing
I'm sure that * wanted to go with "Fatherland" but was overruled. Even "Homeland Security" has such a Nazi ring to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlyingSquirrel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 04:25 AM
Response to Original message
50. Rec #50 and....
:applause: B-) :toast: :party: :smoke: :beer: :thumbsup: :headbang: :yourock: Britain!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
51. A War on a "Feeling"?
I never could ride that short bus of thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
53. Sort of the same thing Kerry said in 2004
Kerry said it was a criminal problem and we should be involving all crime fighting assets especially diplomacy..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #53
62. Did Kerry mean criminals here or over there?
I'd ask that question since our Congress won't even talk about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deny and Shred Donating Member (453 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
54. Terrorism just the new Communism
Since WWII, there emerged a national security apparatus in US aimed at containment and/or rollback of Soviet Union and it's 'evil' Communist empire. This apparatus made a lot of people rich, and involved destabilizing many governments, even democratically elected ones. With the imminent fall of the Soviet Union, Bush I launched the first Iraq War. 8 years later, his kid the second one. Terrorism is simply a new enemy to keep the covert apparatus alive, and the military/industrial profits flowing.

This book is a hell of a primer on post WWII US foreign policy through late 80's, the players involved, the internal debates, etc.
http://books.google.com/books?id=AX-8RWhxTfgC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=goulart+coup&source=web&ots=49MWeJq86h&sig=L6Xkj5scSiu9MAT3y_f_F5JtTCM#PPA46,M1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. Outraged War Baby
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/wahl/077

As a War Baby I have to go through two lies from government which brought fear into my life.

Russia was no threat to us since they could hardly feed themselves. They weren't more powerful than us...Reagan lied to get his Cold War military industrial spending. We ducked under desks, cowered in hallways, built bomb shelters, and stored water and crackers for years in my youth.

Now we are living the "Islamic terrorists over there and everywhere" lie of unending war. We are supposed to watch our neighbors (especially brown Middle Eastern looking ones), look out from our roofs, be careful at the mall, check our shoes for bombs and not take drinking water on planes (could this be for profit?), build military bases all over the world (while closing our own), just hand out billions of dollars for illegal wars of aggression without any over sight. We knew before the Shock & Awe of a small county at war for over twenty years that, they didn't have WMD. Our leaders with the help of Britain and Israel lied to us about the dangers before the world at the UN.

The Cold War was about fear and lies...profits for the few just like now. It started the President Wilson right after WWI with his plan for World Government. The Neo Cons ever since Reagan have been robbing and stealing from our treasury. Ever since the lie of 911, they leave us in huge debt and looking for shelter with huge domestic disasters (911, Katrina, and Southern California fires). They have their own bank accounts and ruin our democracy for their own power. It is not about keeping us safe but their own power for World Government and religious rule by a few favored organizations (like royals of the old days).

How come the wars are always about oil\resources. It consists of robbing another countries resources\wealth and taking away our rights by own leaders who meet in secret behind closed doors? We are freeing them by killing and destroying them?

WTO and NAFTA are organizations striving for the Americas Union without our vote (or any other countries' citizens), discussion, or permission? These leaders are undemocratic and violate the Magma Carter with their FEMA, Patriot Acts, and Military Commissions Act, etc. which they pass in the dead of night...cowards that they are.

I'd say this cartoon\picture is worth a thousand words. This War Baby feels the same about not living in a free, peaceful, democracy. I'd say the few elite who meet at the Bilderger behind closed doors have no idea how to run the world. I'd question their "good intentions for the world". Their arrogance and criminal intent is obvious since it is all so secret.

We don't control our own destiny. I think, they use our wealth, power, and lives to for their own self interest not even caring about the survival of our planet let alone humanity. If this isn't true why haven't they returned our rights, made their meetings open, and demanded accountability for those who destroy us (even genocide)? The secret economic and world leader meetings should be declared illegal by our government. We are a democracy are we not?

Impeach them and try them under RICO and the World Court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-29-07 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
55. I agree....they should be before a court
They should be called criminals not terrorist. Whole nations shouldn't suffer because of their war agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-31-07 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
65. This actually happened a year ago: "Britain stops talk of 'war on terror'", Dec 10 2006
Foreign Office has asked ministers to ditch the phrase invented by Bush to avoid stirring up tensions within the Islamic world

Jason Burke
Sunday December 10, 2006
The Observer

Cabinet ministers have been told by the Foreign Office to drop the phrase 'war on terror' and other terms seen as liable to anger British Muslims and increase tensions more broadly in the Islamic world.

The shift marks a turning point in British political thinking about the strategy against extremism and underlines the growing gulf between the British and American approaches to the continuing problem of radical Islamic militancy. It comes amid increasingly evident disagreements between President George Bush and Tony Blair over policy in the Middle East.
...
Not all British government figures are abiding by the advice, issued by the Foreign Office's Engaging with the Islamic World Unit. Writing in the Sun recently, Gordon Brown, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, referred to 'our police and armed forces in the front line of the war on terror'.

'One of the problems will be getting all parts of government to abide (by the new guidelines),' said Hindle, the RUSI expert. 'Whether the Home Office will want to follow remains to be seen. And politicians all have their own agendas.'

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,1968668,00.html


That didn't stop Gordon Brown announcing it again, in July 2007, as if it was a new idea of his own once he became PM:

Brown drops 'war on terror,' redefining the fight
By David Rieff
Published: July 22, 2007

When terrorists tried to blow up civilians in London and Glasgow, Gordon Brown, the new British prime minister, responded in his own distinctive way.

What had just been narrowly averted, he said, was not a new jihadist act of war but instead a criminal act. As if to underscore the point, Brown instructed his ministers that the phrase "war on terror" was no longer to be used and, indeed, that officials were no longer even to employ the word "Muslim" in connection with the terrorism crisis.

In remarks to reporters, Brown's new home secretary, Jacqui Smith, articulated the basic message. "Let us be clear," she said, "terrorists are criminals, whose victims come from all walks of life, communities and religions."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/22/news/terror.php


But one of Brown's hallmarks is repeatedly announcing something that's already been decided, to try and get the good headlines, and the kind of "jolly good!" comments we can see in this thread. Notice the first time this was posted on DU, back in July, it only got 12 recommendations - maybe there was something more important in the news then: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1405172#1407637
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superconnected Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
68. At least their country is making progress over this stupidity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Sep 24th 2021, 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC