|
United States41934 Posts
On April 09 2013 06:55 layabout wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 06:41 KwarK wrote:
Hunger striking for a cause, sure. Hunger striking against the Iron Lady because you don't like the uniform you have to wear in prison, fucking idiotic. The guy suicided in a hopeless quest for something utterly trivial, he deserves no respect for that, a vain and futile gesture at the end of a life filled with them. Idiotic or not his actions were politically motivated and he died a martyr to his cause. The fact that his actions killed innocents does not change that they were political. Denying the political nature of the actions of the IRA by treating them as common criminals only served to widen the division between communities and make a peaceful resolution harder to attain.
The cause he died for is a cause celebrated by children around the nation every single "non school uniform day". It's utterly absurd.
|
On April 09 2013 06:55 layabout wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 06:41 KwarK wrote:
Hunger striking for a cause, sure. Hunger striking against the Iron Lady because you don't like the uniform you have to wear in prison, fucking idiotic. The guy suicided in a hopeless quest for something utterly trivial, he deserves no respect for that, a vain and futile gesture at the end of a life filled with them. Idiotic or not his actions were politically motivated and he died a martyr to his cause. The fact that his actions killed innocents does not change that they were political. Denying the political nature of the actions of the IRA by treating them as common criminals only served to widen the division between communities and make a peaceful resolution harder to attain.
i disagree, the moment people start dying you give up any legitimacy as a political movement.
|
Northern Ireland23732 Posts
I cannot believe that even in this day and age so much of the IRA's activity is given such a pass. In an age where we invade entire countries under the guise of preventing terrorist activity.
Atom, Amnesty International defining a political prisoner, does not mean Kwark is ignorant if he disagrees with said definition. He clearly is aware of what a political prisoner is, and felt it inapplicable in this context, or inapplicable in general when said political agitators kill civilians.
And yeah just ignore all that I post, from somebody who lived at the tail-end of the troubles and sees the problems that lionising thugs, on both sides cause.
|
United States5162 Posts
And just to make it clear, again, Amnesty International calls anyone who jailed for comminting a crime for a political reason a political prisoner, which is not the same definition they use for someone jailed because of their beliefs or expression of those beliefs, a prisoner of conscious.
From Wikipedia under Political Prisoner(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_prisoner)
"Some understand the term political prisoner narrowly, equating it with the term prisoner of conscience (POC). Amnesty International campaigns for the release of prisoners of conscience, which include both political prisoners as well as those imprisoned for their religious or philosophical beliefs. To reduce controversy, and as a matter of principle, the organization's policy applies only to prisoners who have not committed or advocated violence."
|
Alongside Churchill, Thatcher was one of those leaders that made the world stand up and take notice. Condolences to those who appreciated her and to those who will have to suffer through the next two months of Jimmy Carr jokes.
|
On April 09 2013 02:06 Passion wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2013 21:34 UdderChaos wrote:As an English student, i think one of my friends recent status's puts it well: Lot of people expressing their disgust at Margaret Thatcher's premiership who weren't even born by the time she'd resigned. Bizarre. R.I.P Maggie I guess it's clear he wasn't a history student. Yet of course, expressing their disgust on such day seems inappropriate.
I might as in an student, from England lol.
|
People should do some reading on political prisoner vs prisoner of conscience. Amnesty International applies the term political prisoner very widely, but they advocate for the rights and release of prisoners of conscience, which a person who is arrested for purely political reasons with out committing a violent crime. The below spoilers contains a copy pasted bit of information some people in here need to read.
+ Show Spoiler +AI uses the term “political prisoner” broadly. It does not use it, as some others do, to imply that all such prisoners have a special status or should be released. It uses the term only to define a category of prisoners for whom AI demands a fair and prompt trial. In AI's usage, the term includes any prisoner whose case has a significant political element: whether the motivation of the prisoner's acts, the acts in themselves, or the motivation of the authorities. “Political” is used by AI to refer to aspects of human relations related to “politics”: the mechanisms of society and civil order, the principles, organization, or conduct of government or public affairs, and the relation of all these to questions of language, ethnic origin, sex or religion, status or influence (among other factors). The category of political prisoners embraces the category of prisoners of conscience, the only prisoners who AI demands should be immediately and unconditionally released, as well as people who resort to criminal violence for a political motive. In AI's use of the term, here are some examples of political prisoners:
a person accused or convicted of an ordinary crime carried out for political motives, such as murder or robbery carried out to support the objectives of an opposition group;
a person accused or convicted of an ordinary crime committed in a political context, such as at a demonstration by a trade union or a peasants' organization;
a member or suspected member of an armed opposition group who has been charged with treason or “subversion”.
Governments often say they have no political prisoners, only prisoners held under the normal criminal law. AI however describes cases like the examples given above as “political” and uses the terms “political trial” and “political imprisonment” when referring to them. But by doing so AI does not oppose the imprisonment, except where it further maintains that the prisoner is a prisoner of conscience, or condemn the trial, except where it concludes that it was unfair.
So yes by the broadest possible definition he was a political prisoner, but even according to AI, he was not one who was unjustly arrested. The shooter is tuscon for example, has just as much a right to be called a political prisoner as the hunger striking terrorist we are arguing about.
|
Thatcher the milk snatcher. My thoughts would be with her kids who have now lost both their parents but I spare no sympathy for her. The damage she did to my country was spectacular.
|
On April 09 2013 06:58 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 06:55 layabout wrote:On April 09 2013 06:41 KwarK wrote:
Hunger striking for a cause, sure. Hunger striking against the Iron Lady because you don't like the uniform you have to wear in prison, fucking idiotic. The guy suicided in a hopeless quest for something utterly trivial, he deserves no respect for that, a vain and futile gesture at the end of a life filled with them. Idiotic or not his actions were politically motivated and he died a martyr to his cause. The fact that his actions killed innocents does not change that they were political. Denying the political nature of the actions of the IRA by treating them as common criminals only served to widen the division between communities and make a peaceful resolution harder to attain. The cause he died for is a cause celebrated by children around the nation every single "non school uniform day". It's utterly absurd.
The difference between being recognized as a political prisoner and being labeled a criminal is not trivial for somebody who believes in a cause to the extent that they would willingly give their own lives or take the lives of others.
|
That's terrible, why weren't we invited? But honestly, as much as it hurts, Scotland is not unique, lots of people in England and Wales loathe her as well.
|
On April 09 2013 06:57 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 06:53 nunez wrote:On April 09 2013 06:45 KwarK wrote:On April 09 2013 06:43 Atom Cannister wrote:
I think I'll just leave this here. You can fight against Amnesty International all you want.
In Amnesty International's use of the term, here is an example of a political prisoner:
a person accused or convicted of an ordinary crime carried out for political motives, such as murder or robbery carried out to support the objectives of an opposition group. I don't need to fight against Amnesty International because Amnesty Internation don't run the prison system, Her Majesty's democratically elected government does. Was Bobby confused about this? Is that why he was so sure he was a political prisoner even after everybody explained to him that he wasn't? The guy was a moron. having a democratically elected government, or any kind of government does not give you a free pass to do as you wish against the electorate (hope i am using this word correctly), or that's my opinion at least. isn't that why amnesty exists in the first place? Of course it doesn't. It gives you a free pass to do that which is legal. In this case what the government wished to do was imprison a man who had broken the law as a criminal. Oddly enough he didn't contest that he'd broken the law but he contested being forced to wear a prison uniform. That was literally what he died for.
yes, and it seems to me that there is some discussion to be had on whether or not he has actually broken the law as a criminal, since being responsible for civilian casualties is not always criminal. at least that's what i thought you were discussing.
i don't know either way, i am trying to follow your discussion. i thought you and atom were talking past each other.
edit: or i am just plain wrong and one of you is plain right. i don't know, that's why i post.
|
Just as a point, Thatcher is almost universally despised in the North, particularly in Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle, in Northern Ireland amongst the Catholics and in Scotland. It doesn't surprise me there are parties being held to mark her death. For a lot of people, her coffin dodging was beginning to threaten whether they'd see the end of her life.
In dealing with the trade unions, particularly with Scargill, she savagely battered the economy of the North to fund the economy of the South, increased the North/South divide and caused almost permanent damage to the economy of the North without providing any funding to drive private enterprise there.
Then there was the Poll Tax.
Yeah. I don't think any American has the ability to comment on Thatcher's politics.
|
On April 09 2013 02:21 mdb wrote:
I`m very surprised so many british people didnt like her. I`ve always thought that she was highly respected in UK.
She was a polarizing figure to say the least. You either loved her or hated her. Her policies were about as far right as you can swing in a democracy and so people react to her according to their position on the political spectrum. Her personality was in line with her nickname, the Iron lady, hard and unsympathetic. It's not a surprise you're seeing people react to her death as dramatically as they are.
On April 09 2013 07:29 Evangelist wrote:
Yeah. I don't think any American has the ability to comment on Thatcher's politics.
Everyone has the ability to comment on Thatcher's politics. Just because they didn't live it, doesn't mean they can't make educated comments on the effects of her governance.
|
Northern Ireland23732 Posts
Americans can go ahead and comment if they want, as long as they vaguely know what they are talking about!
|
|
|
Mixed views, overall positive.. I think  Had she been born in the USA she would have made a scary ruthless intelligent president.
|
So many people say they have grievances about Thatcher but most have no idea what she actually did and if they do, they don't really know much more about the political situation in that era...
RIP.
|
Thought I'd link the BBC obituary.
Obituary: Margaret ThatcherMargaret Thatcher, who has died following a stroke, was one of the most influential political figures of the 20th Century. Her legacy had a profound effect upon the policies of her successors, both Conservative and Labour, while her radical and sometimes confrontational approach defined her 11-year period at No 10. Her term in office saw thousands of ordinary voters gaining a stake in society, buying their council houses and eagerly snapping up shares in the newly privatised industries such as British Gas and BT. But her rejection of consensus politics made her a divisive figure and opposition to her policies and her style of government led eventually to rebellion inside her party and unrest on the streets. cont
|
I'm not overly familiar with her politics and life, and I'd rather not commentate on that as an American, but I've read about her decisions in the Falklands war with Argentina, and for those difficult and ballsy decisions alone (sending the fleet across the world), I think she should be commended.
RIP
|
On April 09 2013 07:30 fire_brand wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 02:21 mdb wrote:
I`m very surprised so many british people didnt like her. I`ve always thought that she was highly respected in UK. She was a polarizing figure to say the least. You either loved her or hated her. Her policies were about as far right as you can swing in a democracy and so people react to her according to their position on the political spectrum. Her personality was in line with her nickname, the Iron lady, hard and unsympathetic. It's not a surprise you're seeing people react to her death as dramatically as they are.
Loved her or hated her is one of the phrases i keep hearing and to be honest i feel like it kind of trivializes the effect she had on people (not having a go at you but it has grated on me over the day).
She either made your future bright and saved you from mediocrity or completely destroyed your community.
I have lived in many places throughout England in the last 10 years: London, Leeds, York, Preston, Mansfield and Manchester. You can really see first hand the difference in the society and a huge part of this was Thatcher and her policies. This is not meant as praise or criticism of her, i'm just trying to convey the extraordinary transformative effect she had on England and what it meant to be from the north/south.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
