Text 5137, 197 rader
Skriven 2010-02-22 15:26:10 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
   Kommentar till text 5132 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: The Dubai Connection
============================
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Robert Bashe on Monday February 22 2010 at
13:05:

MV>>> Everyone can be LABELLED a terrorist.

RB>> Depends on what they do.

MV> No, it depends on whoever does the labelling.

No it depends on what they do.

MV>>> You are giving everyone an excuse to eliminate a political opponent.
MV>>> Just label him/her a terrorist et voila.

RB>> ;-) You don't believe that yourself.

MV> It is not a matter of belief, it is matter of logic.

If it were, we wouldn't be talking. You believe in absolutes, I don't except in
mathematics, and certainly not in human behavior.

MV>>> People who advocate these methods are no better than dictators like
MV>>> Saddam Hussein, Videla en Pinochet, that they claim to want to free
MV>>> this world of.

RB>> If you can't tell the difference, I guess there's no point in my
RB>> trying to point it out.

MV> If you can not see the similarities, I guess there is no point in me
MV> trying to make you see it.

Since there are no similarlties except in your own mind.

MV>>> Bad is in the eye of the beholder. And are you sure they never make
MV>>> mistakes?

RB>> When someone sends a hit squad to specifically eliminate someone?
RB>> Possible but certainly not the rule.

MV> 27 Afghan cilvilians killed when US air force attacks three minivans.
MV> They "thought" they were filled with Taliban. Sorry, small mistake...

You really should read what I write. OK, I'll emphasize it: SPECIFICALLY
ELIMINATE. Did that get through?

MV> Would you like to be one of those mistakes?

I repeat: specifically eliminate. Maybe you don't know what that means: it
means that you personally are targeted. And the chance of that happening to me
- or to you - are as close to zero as you can get without actully being zero.

RB>> You and your "fair trials"...

MV> Everyone has the right to a fair trial. That is at the basis of our
MV> soiciety. Drop that and you are back at the law of the jungle. No
MV> exceptions. One can not be a "lttle pregnant".

How you try to excuse mass murderers, Michiel. I do wonder.

RB>> I often wonder where and under what circumstances you would attempt
RB>> to try someone like the Hamas guy who was killed in Dubai... in
RB>> Israel? In one of the Palastinian courts? In a Hamas court in Gaza?
RB>> In the Hague?

MV> First of all, I would like to know what he has actually done to be
MV> labelled a terrorist. The mere fact that he was a member of Hamas is
MV> not enough for me.

"Member"? You should read a bit to find out who this guy really was.

RB>> And what your reaction would be if he actually were convicted of
RB>> multiple murder and terrorism: "Kangaroo court!"? And if he were
RB>> acquitted: "justice has been done!"?

MV> That depends on what would emerge in court.

He surely loved his family and his dog.

RB>> Aside from which, someone would first have to arrest the guy and ship
RB>> him out - naturally by force, such things don't happen voluntarily -
RB>> to the proper venue.

MV> You mean it is easier to just shoot him from an ambush. Yes, ouf
MV> course. But that also goes for a shoplifting suspect.

Oh, man... now you're comparing kumquats and grapefruit.

RB>> I might remind you that even such people as Mr. Mladic and Mr.
RB>> Karadzic have not been brought to justice yet - Mr. Karadzic was only
RB>> arrested and handed over tio the Hague after being betrayed by one or
RB>> more of his former cronies, and Mr. Mladic, who drew a pension in
RB>> Belgrade up to a few years ago, is still at large.

MV> Your point?

That people like you help mass murderers avoid justice. Doubtless the above two
had great friends too, all of whom thought that they were innocent and would
not get a fair tral and anyway who gves a damn about a bunch of moslems who are
dead anyway?

RB>> The fact is that your "fair trials" simply don't exist, and even when
RB>> people try to make them fair, as in the Hague, the people involved
RB>> don't usually volunteer to be tried. So either you use force or
RB>> nothing happens.

MV> The end justifies the means?  No thanks.

Although you take exactly that standpoint when it comes to punishing mass
murderers. They have no problems doing what they do, and you then fight
furiously to avoid punishing them.

RB>>>> You and I wouldn't be worth the trouble.

MV>>> Tell that to the family of Fernando Pereira

RB>> You could also have been on one of the airliners the Palastinians
RB>> have bombed.

MV> Or in one of the buildings in Gaza or Libanon that the Israelis
MV> bombed.

And still you wouldn't have been specifically targeted. This seems to be
something that Ward has some problems understanding too.

RB>> However, that doesn't mean you were personally targeted. Neither was
RB>> Fernando Pereira.

MV> He is dead just the same.

Was that the subject here?

MV>>> So you think it is allright to abuse an antiterrorist law as an
MV>>> instrument in a financial conflict?

RB>> I think you might be amazed to see what all is "abused" at various
RB>> times to achieve an end.

MV> That it happens does not mean it is right. The end does NOT justify
MV> the means.

Sez you.

MV>>> The Hamas leaders do not commit genocide.

RB>> Give them time.

MV> So now we are judging people not by what they have done, but by what
MV> you think they may do...

;-) And you are behaving like "Peace in our time" Nevile Chamberlain.

RB>> Have you really never heard the old threat about "driving the jews
RB>> into the sea"? And do you think that's just a good joke among
RB>> friends?

MV> I think it is mostly rhetoric.

Like the arab attacks on Israel starting in 1947. Already forgotten?

MV> Actions speak louder than words, and when it comes to actions, I see
MV> Israel driving the people of Gaza into the sea, not the other way
MV> around.

Already forgotten.

RB>>>> Does that mean you condemn Stauffenberg and the rest for attempting
RB>>>> to assassinate him? I doubt it.

MV>>> Winners write history. Hitler lost, so his failed murderer went down
MV>>> in history as a hero. Had Hitler won, Colonel von Stauffenberg would
MV>>> have been on the same list as John Hinckley and Mehmet Ali.

RB>> Maybe, but that wasn't my question.

MV> I can't answer the question without taking sides.

That doesn't seem to have bothered you up to now. Why now, when you would have
to show your colors?

MV> If you condone killing people form the other side by hit squads, don't
MV> be surprised if the other side does it to your side too.

Are you so certain that they don't?

Cheers, Bob

P.S. I sometimes stand in wonder of your naivete, but maybe you haven't had the
experience I once had... one time in England, in the 1970s, I had the
opportunity to talk with a fellow who had been with the English secret service
for many years. The things he told me curled my toenails, as I was at the time
young and inexperienced, as you now appear to be. That's why I now call you
naive, when you prattle about justice and judicial proof in connection with
terrorists. I have no direct experience with that, but unfortunately enough
indirect information to know that you've led a very protected life indeed.

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)