Jump to content

Recommended Posts

An inquiry has found that Iraqi hotel worker Baha Mousa died after suffering "appalling" and "gratuitous violence" in a "very serious breach of discipline" by UK soldiers. Yet only one soldier has served one year's imprisonment for these crimes. I really do not believe that justice has been done in this case, and join the injured detainees' solicitor in calling for all those responsible to be prosecuted.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/19448-justice-for-baha-mousa/
Share on other sites

Jupiter's dick, I'm TIRED of this by rote cant about Blair and his supposed crimes. . He sent us to war on a mistaken premise - that doesn't absolve the soldiers responsible for specific acts of violence against a specific individual from personal liability . Yes they must be brought to justice and prosecuted under UK and international statutes.


Exactly what should Blair be tried for in this or any other instance? Don't give me some vague old pony about "war crimes" . Name the specific statutes or precedents he has violated and the forum which would be competent to try these alleged violations.

northlondoner, sorry that this is from Wikileaks, but it accords with what I studied in International Public Law:


"A war of aggression, sometimes also war of conquest, is a military conflict waged without the justification of self-defense usually for territorial gain and subjugation. The phrase is distinctly modern and diametrically opposed to the prior legal international standard of "might makes right", under the medieval and pre-historic beliefs of right of conquest. Since the Korean War of the early 1950s, waging such a war of aggression is a crime under the customary international law.


Wars without international legality (e.g. not out of self-defense nor sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council) can be considered wars of aggression; however, this alone usually does not constitute the definition of a war of aggression; certain wars may be unlawful but not aggressive (a war to settle a boundary dispute where the initiator has a reasonable claim, and limited aims, is one example).


The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, which followed World War II, called the waging of aggressive war "essentially an evil thing...to initiate a war of aggression...is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."[1] Article 39 of the United Nations Charter provides that the UN Security Council shall determine the existence of any act of aggression and "shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security".


The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court refers to the crime of aggression as one of the ?most serious crimes of concern to the international community?, and provides that the crime falls within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, the Rome Statute stipulates that the ICC may not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression until such time as the states parties agree on a definition of the crime and set out the conditions under which it may be prosecuted."

It's Customary Law, sort of like Common Law on an international level that built up over centuries. It's been codified by various UN Conventions and the International Criminal Court treaty more recently.


I'm sure if you do a bit of digging you will be able to fund the actual bits of the various treaties that refer to it if you want to. I can't remember off the top of my head but might dig out my old International Public Law books if I can be arsed!

The whole debate is petulant.


If it was obviously a crime, then charges would already have been leveled. They haven't because it's not clear.


Snooty bulletin board legal heroes may attribute this to the 'New World Order' preventing justice, but given the track record of European socialist litigants that's unlikely to be the reason.


Trotting out definitions from Wikileaks is irrelevant. Last time I checked Wikileaks wasn't a global regulator, but a crowd of spotty revolutionaries with egos that eclipsed their intellect.


That aside, arguing about legality is evidently fruitless when using it to judge issues of this import, actions of this scale, that are instigated by the same people who write the rulebooks.


Why Piersy keeps pursuing this I have no idea. It seems petty. It feels like using 'law' as a comfort blanket. ;-)

Rather more trenchantly put than I would have expressed it perhaps, but ....what H said.

Common law only really works as an amswer here if you are dealing with a unified national legal system - remember common law is defined and enforced by a country's courts. In the absence of that you'd need to have a specific internationally agreed and enacted instrument or treaty, surely ? I aint no legal expert , but in all the heat and emotion of this I have never seen anyone even mention the law under which Blair et al should be tried.

I guess it would be under the Rome statute of the ICC.


'War crimes' would be a daft charge. There might be an option under 'crimes of aggression', but I doubt it would stick. I also doubt there would be much support for it.


The main question was whether an additional mandate from the UN was required for the invasion. The real answer is nobody knew for sure, and nobody can prove it was.


I suspect a lot of countries publicly protesting about the invasion were secretly pretty relieved.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • If you don't want foxes constantly visiting your property, the onus is really on you, the homeowner, to fox-proof your garden. They are protected wildlife and beautiful, highly misunderstood creatures that are permanently established in the urban landscape. To deter them, you must focus on prevention: install plastic spikes or similar humane deterrents on the tops of fences, make sure there are no holes, and fill in any gaps they may be using for dens. For a scent deterrent, you can use products containing ammonium sulphate (often found in certain lawn treatments and available on eBay) and spray the area regularly. I've had foxes visiting me for the last four years and have successfully treated three for mange using Ivermectin in targeted bait, observing them safely with Ring cameras. The ones that feed them responsibly with high-quality health food such as raw eggs, raw chicken scraps, or dried and wet dog food actually improve their overall health and discourage them from nuisance behavior like bin diving, eating urban garbage, and digging in the garden for worms. Even if you were to kill a fox that lived on your property, it would only temporarily result in a "vacuum" which another fox would quickly fill. On average, they are lucky to get to two years old, being killed mostly by cars and injuries which, if untreated, often kill them. They are more intelligent than dogs or cats but live short, precarious lives in the dark of night, existing on the edge of human society because we tried to exterminate them in former times when they were a threat to our scarce food. This paranoia and acute survival instinct is bred into them by natural selection.They tend to stay away from where they are not wanted if you make it obvious enough.  Ammonium Sulphate is cheap as chips - get some - or don't oh and don't use bone meal fertiliser that has the opposite effect !      https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/254700292293?_skw=ammoniumj+sulpahte&itmmeta=01K7P00MMT1V5AMR8D9TBENQ4R&hash=item3b4d5208c5:g:ussAAOSwrjtfRj92&itmprp=enc%3AAQAKAAAA8FkggFvd1GGDu0w3yXCmi1fhnp4DjTtHUNe%2BAYGnIWDuSA2kLbS2bPIC7IEg2onglhHOMSUoJzUxMv38IxLKTJErXQHj8c%2FSNLfwiXm5ycJu2aq%2FJTA%2BEmFnhZZPphhLJMS389zG%2BI%2Bn4F%2FCgPygQrw%2FFgm%2BpHTBZ2ybbRBdaHgmrSyQElrbIDrJ6r7WbUwSWpVHBEsut1w36hGngeldoniAbxBzRlmhz4fg3ZblkYyx62nUyDXhUwbHTcjCqjVGOYlgKtYpy2YuTfs0LRf42yG6I58t%2BXt4MW6fh5QTLuYk1t%2Fn0Fak6Edo8MOH%2B%2FUVCA%3D%3D|tkp%3ABFBMgMyCwL1m   Ammonium sulphate is used as a fox deterrent primarily by utilizing its **strong, pungent odor** when it gets wet, which mimics the smell of a predator's urine or a contaminated area that foxes naturally avoid for safety and territorial reasons. Here is a simple breakdown of how to use it: ### 1. The Principle Foxes rely heavily on scent to communicate and navigate their territory. They instinctively avoid areas that smell like they have been marked by a rival fox, a predator, or are contaminated and unsafe. Ammonium sulphate, often sold as a lawn or garden feed, releases a foul, sharp smell (often compared to ammonia) when damp, which foxes perceive as a warning signal. ### 2. Application Method The most common method for using ammonium sulphate as a deterrent is direct scattering: 1.  **Identify Target Areas:** Locate the specific points where the fox enters your garden (under a fence, through a hedge), where it digs, or where it rests. 2.  **Apply the Granules:** Liberally **scatter the ammonium sulphate granules** over the target areas, focusing on entry points, around bins, and over disturbed soil. 3.  **Frequency and Activation:** The deterrent works best when the granules get damp (from dew or rain). For best results, **reapply regularly,** especially after heavy rain or if you notice the fox returning. ### 3. Key Considerations * **Sourcing:** As you noted, the chemical is often found in commercial lawn products like "Scoot" or can be purchased as pure **ammonium sulphate** fertilizer from garden centers or online. * **Lawn Safety:** Since it is a nitrogen-rich fertilizer, avoid dumping large, concentrated piles on your grass, as it can cause **chemical burns** and yellowing. Scattering it thinly and strategically is key. * **Humane Method:** This method is considered **humane** as it relies solely on scent and irritation to deter the fox, not physical harm. The fox simply chooses to go elsewhere.
    • hope the feedback goes to the library teams to encourage more libraries and more library use
    • and even since Tory austerity, they've been opening new build modern libraries - Canada Water, Camberwell, Una Marson, Grove Vale. 
    • Agree! I feel very lucky to live in a borough that has such great libraries. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...