Sgt Blackman’s conviction for shooting a mortally wounded Taliban terrorist is reduced from murder to manslaughter…justice is served…the BBC’s reaction, as given to us by Tony Livesey a couple of minutes ago [around 17:30] on 5 Live, is that perhaps we should be giving some justice to the Taliban fighter.
Blackman’s lawyer, Jonathan Goldberg, essentially, very politely, well, not really, told Livesey to fuck off and stick his political correct attitude up his arse. If only more people stood up to the self-appointed, holier-than-thou, moral thought police that BBC employees believe themselves to be.
It would appear that most rational people would have sympathy for Marine A. But not the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39282574
This is a quote from Jonathan Beale
Defence correspondent, BBC News
“There is much public sympathy for Blackman, 42, but few people who have watched the full video of the killing – recorded by another marine’s helmet-mounted camera – would describe him as a hero.”
Doesn’t the fact that he was out, fighting in Afghanistan already make him a hero?
I will only be completely happy when this brave individual gets a full pardon, plus the compensation he fully deserves..
Now sack the senior officers who abandoned him.
This is one of those events which shows up the BBC for the anti British subversive self serving organisation it has become. I am an ordinary joe . I have no connections with the armed services.
All I would add to RM Blackman and his colleagues is “Thank you”.
Since the election of the Tory Government and since the brexit vote in theory the political landscape should have changed from the Tory/Lib years and you would have thought the BBC would now reflect this fact.
Plainly this has not happened and I think since the BBC was given its “traitors charter” renewal, if anything it has become even more shrill in pushing its “progressive” agenda at the expense of compassion for our own people and common sense.
Basically I am not surprised Livesy took this angle as he and the BBC represent the hypocritical, metropolitan, liberal chattering classes who love all things anti establishment but would be the first to demand protection from the state if they felt their physical safety was ever being directly threatened.
As for Sergeant Blackman – These bastards will never have any sympathy for a man who would put his life on the line for his country. Because as far as they are concerned they have no country and see living in the UK purely as an expedient method for making lots of money.
In addition they see this as their divine “right” and therefore feel that they should never have to give anything back to their country.
If you are a thousand miles away it is easy to forget that someone has put his life on the line so the easy world you live in still functions smoothly.
This viewpoint is further magnified by the BBC who are also just an extension of the liberal metrosexual bubble and these liberals and and liberal media are locked together in some gross mutual masturbation excercise of self validation.
Not only do they lack the imagination to show any sympathy to blokes like Blackman. For all the above reasons they are innately hostile to anyone who shows any degree of pride or loyalty to their country. Probably because a small part of them realises that he has done stuff they could not even dream of and we cant have our liberals feeling inadequate so lets just bin everyone in the army as knuckle dragging physchos who just want to kill our favourite brown people. So we can occupy the moral high ground.
I say this as an ex lefty and I truly believe this is part of the reason why the liberals hate him and what he represents so much.
This I believe is why we are where we are. The media speculates why we are short of recruits for the armed forces – I wonder why – maybe they should ask Sergeant Blackman.
Naturally, the ‘populist’ vote is for Sergeant Blackman; a brave soldier and a good example of every fighting man – and woman – who does a sound job for his/her own country, and also helps others out where there are tyrants in charge and killing innocent citizens indiscriminately.
The rest of the lefty media can go and fuck themselves, and wallow in their fake angst. They piss all over good soldiers like Sergeant Blackman, just to make a fake blame story up.
Typical BBC, utterly shameful.
Scrob – years ago in general these disloyal bastards would have kept their traitorous, unpatriotic views to themselves.
But what our disgusting state broadcaster has done is given an air of mainstream “respectability” to these modern day Judases (all in the name of free speech) so these days they feel comfortable to spew their bile over the airwaves whenever the fancy takes them.
Oak,
I think that the chattering classes have become the establishment which is why it taking so long to get rid of them and their deranged ‘ progressive’ policies. The BBC is their deafening foghorn and they have successfully permeated every branch of the establishment. No matter what type of government we elect, unless that government has an almighty purge , we will continue to be run by New Labour placement and women.
Agreed – DT. Unfortunately decades of being led by these decadent, self regarding tossers has meant that the values of loyalty to ones country and to ones family have been turned on its head and the only thing that really matters now is putting ones own pet, new age prejudices and values first, even if it ends up destroying the very fabric that has kept society functioning smoothly.
We are in a middle of a great social experiment spearheaded by the likes of Harmon, Geldof and the BBC where the likes of Blackman and co are necessary sacrificial lambs to show just how much we care for everyone (even if they want to destroy us). – the progressive left – truly are a cancer on our future and everything normal people hold dear.
I suspect these arseholes dont even know what they eventually want. They just do it because they can. They will keep changing the rules so that eventually society no longer resembles anything we can even remotely recognise. When they have finally ruined the country for everyone they will probably piss off to Necker Island or similair fully protected by their huge income.
“We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.”
George Orwell
Except that Orwell never said it, nor did he write it either the nearest he came was in the road to Wigan pier “Those who “abjure” violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.”
This miss-attribution comes from Richard Grenier who said: “As George Orwell pointed out, people sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
The devil in the detail here is that Grenier said that Orwell pointed out, and not that he actually said it. That however was too subtle for those who wanted him to have actually said it.
Thoughtful,
Grenier got it wrong as he always did !!!
Then where is the correct attribution ?
What do you mean by ” correct attribution” ? How do you define the word ” correct ” ???
Edmund Burke, apparently; but a truism whoever first said it.
Winston Churchill.
IMO, Rudyard Kipling expresses the sentiment most successfully in “Tommy”:
O it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ ” Tommy, go away ” ;
But it’s ” Thank you, Mister Atkins,” when the band begins to play
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it’s ” Thank you, Mister Atkins,” when the band begins to play.
It is totally irrelevant who said it first, except for pedants in such matters.
The simple fact is that the statement holds true whether it originates from the greatest philosopher the world will ever know or the bumbling drunk propping up the bar in his local pub.
This is the best I’ve got. But, as you state, Amounderness, it is a truism, whoever said it. https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070529213021AAe9Hqo
Here’s my problem with what has happened; The people that maintain the Geneva Convention and the UN have consistently refused to define what a terrorist is and when a terrorist/militant/freedom fighter becomes a soldier fighting for a defined state.
All through history soldiers are defined by insignia or uniform defining who they are.
When “combatants” wander around dressed as civilians whilst carrying an AK47 in their armpit are defined as soldiers there is a problem. So at what point does a civilian defined by his appearance become a soldier and his treatment and actions are covered by the Geneva Convention?
Its all very well to tell our soldiers that their actions are governed by the terms of the Geneva Convention and contraventions are a crime when the people they are fighting fail to follow the same rules and conventions. If this lose application is observed on the battlefield then does the same convention apply to the same operatives conducting terrorists attacks here in the UK. Were the 7/7 bombers enemy combatants accorded the rights of the Geneva Convention? Where is the dividing line between criminal behaviour and legal combatant?
These are serious issues. Sgt Blackman shot an armed man dressed as a civilian because he had lethal intention. This, in my book, is police action and not a military action. He shot a criminal with lethal intent and not an enemy combatant because the man disqualified himself by dressing as a civilian to lull a soldier into believing he was not a threat.
Sgt Blackmans only mistake was that someone in the party filmed it. As someone whose been there, I can safely say this was not the only incident. These people were trying to kill us. Things happen in war, otherwise, to quote Arnold J Rimmer, it would just be a rather nasty argument with lots of pushing and shoving. We have rules of engagement of course but it’s easy to quote that sitting behind your computer or in a court room.
Alan
I’m sorry but on this occasion you are wrong. I listened to ‘radio poo’.. sorry ‘2’ and apparently the Taliban terrorist was in fact a ‘fighter’. I know this because the female reporter told me twice in the same news item… he was a ‘fighter’ I tell you, a ‘fighter’!
Disgraceful !
This is what the Taliban were up to in Al Beeb’s own words – “Taliban gunmen”, more like bloody Nazis.
“The girl who was shot for going to school”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24379018
how many germans were shot for being out of uniform, ffs if we cant support our own troops, we wont have any troops
we should fight by the standards of the opposition!
COME THE DAY all the libtards will be hiding behind the likes of Sgt Blackman
I have just watched the bBBC Panorama Special, which went into the events of that Afghan battlefield in gruesome detail, with lots of army men describing what it was like and what happened in Blackman’s incident. Not a hint of the leftie anti-British meme.
That’s probably why they put it on so late at night.
Isn’t it about time that a British Government started looking after its own ?
They are quick send our boys out to do their dirty deeds but very slow to defend them …….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37544280
Perhaps a number of MPs or members of their families, past and present, have had a vested interest – money making ‘human rights’, legal eagles ?
The British Government care more for Illegal Immigrants than it does for its servicemen.
Haven’t watched it yet but filmed by Chris Terrill who has been embedded with the Marines for a long time and won his green beret by completing the marine tests [The 55 year old Commando] Panorama is more often than not a world apart from the BBC as a whole…it’s specialist investigations often reach conclusions, such as John Ware’s on Islamic issues, that are at odds with the BBC liberal worldview, and as such the conclusions are roundly ignored by the rest of the BBC who carry on delivering the same old tired stuff about the ‘religion of peace’ and how immigration is wonderful and the EU is the saviour of world peace and prosperity.
For example…the BBC is already twisting the words of the marines to ‘retry’ Blackman and portray him as ‘immoral’ and out of control..
‘Few people who have watched the full video of the killing – recorded by another marine’s helmet-mounted camera – would describe him as a hero. Panorama tries to look beyond the narrow focus of the helmet camera that led to Blackman’s conviction and questions whether, in the slow attrition of war, they began to think as a pack and lose their moral compass.‘
You can see the BBC web report is entirely negative and is attempting to paint all troops in the same light as they paint Sgt Blackman…
‘Rob Driscoll admits to some sleepless nights but adds: “I’m glad Al did what he did because all my guys went home”.
Louis Nethercott, another Royal Marine on the patrol, tells Panorama: “I think it was just another day in Afghanistan and that’s the way it goes out there.
“And none of us got hurt so it was a successful day as far as I’m concerned”.
Chris Terrill asks another Royal Marine who was on that tour whether he thought this was the only time such an incident occurred during the Afghan war.
His answer – “No”.’
Alan
While our present government watches and does nothing . Scrap the licence fee.
Agree – I watched it too. I noticed it was made by an independent company for the BBC and the presenter wasn’t the usual BBC royalty – adie – Simpson – humphrys – to take the anti military party line. so maybe that explains the sensitive treatment of what happened- and hiding the programme away at 2300 would suggest the BBC wouldn’t want many people to see it.
I look forward to the day sgnt Blackman is released. I hope he doesn’t accept any invitation from the BBC to be interviewed by them and is able to rebuild his life.
A bit off topic but if someone tugs a hijab it makes top billing on al-Beeb for days along with usual hate crime, Islamophobic, right wing extremist crap.
Yet this for some reason goes completely ignored.
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/1-500-acid-attacks-recorded-165918301.html
Col. Richard Kemp on Israeli “War Crimes” in Gaza http://tinyurl.com/hplyyex
The insurgents that we have faced, and still face, in these conflicts are all different. Hizballah and Hamas over here, Al Qaida, Jaish al Mahdi and a range of other militant groups in Iraq. Al Qaida, the Taliban and a diversity of associated fighting groups in Afghanistan. They are different but they are linked.
They are linked by the pernicious influence, support and sometimes direction of Iran and/or by the international network of Islamist extremism.
These groups, as well as others, have learnt and continue to learn from each others’ successes and failures. Tactics tried and tested on IDF soldiers in Lebanon have also killed British soldiers in Helmand Province and in Basra.
These groups are trained and equipped for warfare fought from within the civilian population.
Do these Islamist fighting groups ignore the international laws of armed conflict? They do not. It would be a grave mistake to conclude that they do. Instead, they study it carefully and they understand it well.
They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy’s main weaknesses.
Their very modus operandi is built on the, correct, assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules.
It is not simply that these insurgents do not adhere to the laws of war. It is that they employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. Their entire operational doctrine is founded on this basis.
In Gaza, as in Basra, as in the towns and villages of southern Afghanistan, civilians and their property are routinely exploited by these groups, in deliberate and flagrant violation of any international laws or reasonable norms of civilised behaviour for both tactical and strategic gain.
One of several things I don`t understand about Sgt Blackmans case is that irregular forces who don’t identify themselves as combatants by “wearing emblems visible from distance” are not covered by the Geneva Conventions. Surely the Taliban are “irregular forces” and should therefore be treated accordingly, along with the other terrorists hiding among civilian populations. We know that these guys sometimes operate with suicide belts…why take the chance of helping a wounded terrorist? a man, or woman who may detonate explosives as first aid is performed or as placed into a helicopter to be removed to hospital.
Our troops must also be allowed to learn from the tactics employed by Islamist terrorists in the various environments in which they operate.
“We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.” Winston Churchill.
I always thought that the Geneva Convention only applied in times of war, E, were we officially at war with Afghanistan or the Taliban or what ever the current term for the rag heads was applicable at the time?
Anyway, nevermind all that, I see the BBC has an article on its favoured subject, doesn’t it make one all warm and fluffy inside?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-39279635
No that does not make me happy. It shivers me timbers and boils my blood.
Me too, but try not to worry too much, the adherents of the various branches of Islam are frequently at each others throats and will be again as events in Syria, Iraq and Yemen continue to play out between the Sunnis and Shias and their various offshoots, they will kill more of each other than “the West” ever will.
The trick is to stay out of the crossfire.
embolden,
Yes, lets hope they all kill each other. Big problem for the BBC is to explain why Ropers are killing each other. Doesn’t quite fit the narrative !
The BBC will continue to promote the false narrative….RoPers kill each other because…..the West/The Jews.
embolden,
Of course. Silly me ! It is obvious when you think about it.
I don’t know if this has already been posted, but it’s a very well made little cartoon satirising anti-Israeli prejudices. Well worth a look.
Excellent.
David and Goliath again.
The question is. Would a Taleban fighter abide with the Geneva convention, and not summarily execute a British soldier.
Terrorists aren’t expected to play by the rules….that’s why the Geneva conventions don`t apply….I`m not so confident to say that about various EU human rights laws, that our politicians have signed up for without thinking through the consequences.
I suppose if the current leftyliberal idiots were present in WWII, they would vehemently oppose bombing Germany, as civilians – wimin and children would be killed. Never mind that Germany was bombing civilians in Britain, Poland and elsewhere.
And the commanders who sanctioned the bombings would have had no chance.
Ambulance chasing lawyers would be going round Germany after the war to find civilians who had been bombed- with the promise of huge damages against the MOD.
Not to mention health and safety failings, sanctioning bombings without carrying out proper safety assessments.
If there is a WW3 the winners will be the lawyers and their clients.