Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Eagle

Sarkozy Arrested, Bush And Blair Next?

Recommended Posts

Sarkozy was arrested and detained this morning acused of corruption. This is the first time ever that a former french president is arrested.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28103223

(it's quite noteworthy that the Beeb avoids using the word 'corruption' and 'arrest' despite many other news sites use exactly these words... :rolleyes: )

I wonder if this will be the trigger that compells US and UK prosecutors to accuse and arrest Bush and Blair for their crimes (which are even more serious than what Sarkozy is being accused of)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good spot - classic BBC newspeak!

Don't hold your breath for Bush/Blair arrests though, it'll never happen. The traditional (and common sense) moral/legal framework through which they would ordinarily have been considered guilty of crimes against humanity has been successfully displaced from the contemporary imagination by complex and meaningless legalese and pseudo-religious post-hoc justifications. It is a serious thought-crime to believe their actions were anything other than well-intentioned and just.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This war crime thing always puzzles me.

This country is sovereign. Therefore, it can declare war as it sees fit.

The United Nations is a corrupt joke full of nutcases; just see it's views on the Falkland Islands of late. Guardians of democracy they are not. I wouldn't base any higher authority whatsoever on that mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of Italian politicians got arrested for corruption while I was there in the 1990s.

Puts a perspective on the difference between them and us. Our politicians were less corrupt, because they didn't have the same kind of power. Our Judiciary (and the City - though that was less obvious back then) are much more corrupt, for much the same reason. Our heart of corruption is above the law (by virtue of judicial immunity) and cannot be criticised (by virtue of contempt laws).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This war crime thing always puzzles me.

This country is sovereign. Therefore, it can declare war as it sees fit.

By that argument, there were no german war crimes in 1939-45. Was the whole Nuremberg process nothing more than a corrupt show-trial?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the whole Nuremberg process nothing more than a corrupt show-trial?

Well, given that the accused were found guilty of breaking laws that were made after their crimes had been committed and that one of the judges was the bloke in charge of Stalin's show trials, plus one or two other bits and bobs, maybe just a bit.

and fwiw my understanding is that the UK and the US haven't declared war on anywhere since the 40s, far too much of a constitutional minefield. Their governments engage in 'kinetic military actions', 'police operations', 'humanitarian interventions', euphemisms like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the UK and the US haven't declared war on anywhere since the 40s, far too much of a constitutional minefield. Their governments engage in 'kinetic military actions', 'police operations', 'humanitarian interventions', euphemisms like that.

Those euphemisms can be destabilising! :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the whole Nuremberg process nothing more than a corrupt show-trial?

Were it a real trial, a significant number of Western military leaders would have been in the dock, not to mention Stalin. I can understand the desire to bump off the sick bastards who ran the Nazi party and its industrial murder apparatus, but I can't understand people defending Nuremberg as though it was anything but a show-trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   224 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.