Beardy Abu Bloke on his travels to the USA

[Skyhawk-N]

.

[Bill McCarthy]

Are they selling tickets for the departure airport goofers gallery yer !

[Timothy]

Is he still living next door to Timothy's sister ?

Sorry, been busy at Friedrichshafen.

No, they moved a while ago. Something of a shame, she thought, as the chances of being burgled with police cameras pointing at her house and officers pacing up and down outside were zero.

[Steve D]

I'd still rather have all our protections for these people than abandon them [our principles/systems] and risk sinking to their barbaric, unintelligent, level.

I completely agree. But, the recent Jack Straw/extraordinary rendition furore seems to suggest that our masters are not above abandoning our protections, principles and systems when it suits them. Ironically, of course, it was done in the same apparent cause as the attempt to rid us of AQ. In some (well, many) ways, I'm much more alarmed that an elected UK government saw fit to spirit away an individual without due process in that case, than I am about the fact that this AQ business is taking an inordinately long time to play out.

[JoeC]

Our masters and the systems they create are often not the benevolent leaders we would want. As shown in a recent release of Foreign Office papers. Unfortunately even us chipper Brits do the wrong thing if left without any external checks and balances.

[Pete L]

ACLB probably won't be planning any Pakistan holidays for a while - there's gratitude - ennoble a bloke for votes and he puts a bounty on your head.

Do we have an extradition treaty anywhere that might want to put Blair on trial for war crimes?

[Pete L]

Dunno if its normal practice or not - DM making scandal out of routine paperwork perhaps - but it appears the court checked on Monday if AQ would be making an appeal and said he still had time.

[rustle]

But in my opinion that misses the point slightly. Our system is not perfect, and this odious/obnoxious oik** is playing it, but I'd still rather have all our protections for these people than abandon them [our principles/systems] and risk sinking to their barbaric, unintelligent, level.

I don't think anyone is suggesting 'abandoning' the protections, and I don't think that we can only have the existing ones or nothing at all. We need SENSIBLE protections that can not be taken advantage of so easily, resulting in wasting tens of millions of pounds/euros and dominating the politics of an entire nation for weeks, months, even years.

And I don't believe that having a more pragmatic approach we will descend to chaos and risk the breakdown of society.

Sorry, been walking the dog.

So who should determine these SENSIBLE/pragmatic protections?

As with any particularly irksome "case" there are immediate calls to change things, but is that the right time to think about changing the rules: When someone/something so loathsome is affected by them?

[Skyhawk-N]

.

[Gerard Clarke]

Only connect! If we let things continue to go all ratshtye in dusty places, then the consequences for us may be grave.

Ah, the old Domino Theory!
Was used as a justification for the Vietnam war, but I don't remember us all going commie when South Vietnam fell...

Not the domino theory; the connections are more subtle than that. Instability and misgovernment in some areas may spawn or harbour terror groups which have a pop at us. The problem is that, if we intervene to make things better (acting in our own long term interest), things may get worse for at least a while.

[Steve D]

Not the domino theory; the connections are more subtle than that. Instability and misgovernment in some areas may spawn or harbour terror groups which have a pop at us. The problem is that, if we intervene to make things better (acting in our own long term interest), things may get worse for at least a while.

The present problem, from what I can see, is that things have gotten worse, and there is a general incipient failure of nerve among the politicos who should really be holding the line.

If we withdraw from Afghanistan without finishing the task, I wouldn't be surprised to see that, 10 years down the line, the country has reverted to where it was before we started. With added impetus from various other Islamo-fascist groups who have rallied to its cause.

[Gerard Clarke]

Sooner than ten years, I reckon. If we pull out, the Taliban will have the place back in the seventh century before you can say Insha'Allah.

PS: "gotten" ?????
Ah, yes, seventeenth century.

[Flyin'Dutch']

If we withdraw from Afghanistan without finishing the task, I wouldn't be surprised to see that, 10 years down the line, the country has reverted to where it was before we started. With added impetus from various other Islamo-fascist groups who have rallied to its cause.

I wish I could be as confident/hopeful as you apparently are that matters will not slide back to how they were, even if 'we finish the job'

[Steve D]

PS: "gotten" ?????

Indeed. I first wrote 'got' but it's an ugly word in the context and 'gotten' just seems better somehow. I'd like to claim it back off the yanks and see it restored to more common usage.

PS, if I'm going to apologise for anything in that post, it'd better be the gratuitous abuse of tenses, I think.

[rustle]

I wish I could be as confident/hopeful as you apparently are that matters will not slide back to how they were, even if 'we finish the job'

I agree with you Frank. I think this is a rather romantic view of the world that Team GB can put Humpty back together again then leave him to his own devices and trust/assume he won't fall off the wall.