Anyway, this guy's a double **** because he's not only made false accusations, he's possibly brought some discredit to the entire process of checks and balances for illegal or inhumane practices by our armed forces
Anyway, this guy's a double **** because he's not only made false accusations, he's possibly brought some discredit to the entire process of checks and balances for any possible illegal or inhumane practicesincidents by individual members of our armed forces
You make it seem like normal operating procedure. Do you know something we don't?
Anyway, this guy's a double **** because he's not only made false accusations, he's possibly brought some discredit to the entire process of checks and balances for any possible illegal or inhumane practicesincidents by individual members of our armed forces
You make it seem like normal operating procedure. Do you know something we don't?
...and today it is announced that after 3, 000 claims - yes, count them you greedy lawyers, solicitors and ball hangers, often based on straight lies - not one conviction.
Phil Shiner is a shyster - stuck off for actively and knowingly encouraging false claims - but he is the tip of a shameful legal iceberg.
It may dismay Leuth and his provocative (but liked by a few on here) statement above, but at last these shameful claims (and their 'right-on' insinuations) can be laid to rest.
Yeah, the UK armed forces have never done anything unethical ever, and there's no reason to hold any of them to account under any circumstances. Sure.
I know we all bloody love our brave brave boys God queen and country lawks ma'am coo er but mendacious lawyers are no reason to ensure that the rules of conflict are rigorously upheld. Unless you fackin' hate the Geneva Convention as yet more bloody EU bureaucracy that we need to be freed from, idk.
I would hope and imagine that any good & noble soldier - the majority, I'm sure - would agree with this. They're employed workers, after all, with a code of conduct that's perhaps a little more important than most, and it should be a point of honour that they stick by it.
I don't reflexively hate the armed forces (even if I'm often disgusted by foreign policy errors) and I think they have the potential to undo a lot of wrong that British troops have inflicted upon the rest of the world over the past 500 years. They have a potentially vital peacekeeping role in war-torn states and they act as a powerful defence force to ensure that Britain won't be messed with. But when they don't abide by their codes of conduct, people suffer undeservedly, and suffer greatly.
It is only right that the means to prosecute soldiers for malpractice exist. It is essential. A pox on the man who falsely impugns, who fabricates the evil of others, but an unaccountable army is a very dangerous thing.
It is to the credit of the British Army that no prosecutions have stuck in this instance, although I'm sure there are plenty of grey areas in the fog of war where the benefit of the doubt rightly goes to the accused party. This isn't to say that the Army are 'getting away with it' due to endemic corruption. This is to say that war is hell, and war is complicated - a legal minefield.
What one simply cannot do is fabricate evidence, though. So I'm glad this malevolent man is no longer able to further obscure the path to justice.
The Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) would close in the summer and around 20 remaining cases be given to the Royal Navy Police, he said. MPs have branded the probe, which has spent £34m but led to no successful prosecutions, an "unmitigated failure". The IHAT was set up in 2010 to probe allegations made by Iraqi civilians. The decision to close the team comes after a public inquiry exposed the behaviour of a human rights lawyer in charge of many of the abuse allegation cases. Phil Shiner, from the now-defunct law firm Public Interest Lawyers, was struck off for misconduct in February. As a result, IHAT's caseload would be reduced from 3,000 to 20 cases by the summer, a Ministry of Defence statement said. "Exposing his [Mr Shiner's] dishonesty means many more claims he made can now be thrown out and the beginning of the end for IHAT," said Sir Michael. "This will be a relief for our soldiers who have had allegations hanging over them for too long. Now we are taking action to stop such abuse of our legal system from happening again."
They have not stuck, as you say, because the accusations have been PROVEN to be baseless. I really dont see what you dont understand about that.
Your insinuations may be clever in your mind, but hopefully one day you will experience enough of life to see them for what they are.
I hope you understand foreign policy is political, and the military are non political.
Not insinuating anything. I'm saying that because he didn't have enough evidence to prosecute, he made stuff up, which is plain wrong. I don't think we're in disagreement here. And the bit about foreign policy being political and military being non-political - isn't it obvious from my post that I understand that?
Comments
Do you know something we don't?
Phil Shiner is a shyster - stuck off for actively and knowingly encouraging false claims - but he is the tip of a shameful legal iceberg.
It may dismay Leuth and his provocative (but liked by a few on here) statement above,
but at last these shameful claims (and their 'right-on' insinuations) can be laid to rest.
I know we all bloody love our brave brave boys God queen and country lawks ma'am coo er but mendacious lawyers are no reason to ensure that the rules of conflict are rigorously upheld. Unless you fackin' hate the Geneva Convention as yet more bloody EU bureaucracy that we need to be freed from, idk.
I would hope and imagine that any good & noble soldier - the majority, I'm sure - would agree with this. They're employed workers, after all, with a code of conduct that's perhaps a little more important than most, and it should be a point of honour that they stick by it.
I don't reflexively hate the armed forces (even if I'm often disgusted by foreign policy errors) and I think they have the potential to undo a lot of wrong that British troops have inflicted upon the rest of the world over the past 500 years. They have a potentially vital peacekeeping role in war-torn states and they act as a powerful defence force to ensure that Britain won't be messed with. But when they don't abide by their codes of conduct, people suffer undeservedly, and suffer greatly.
It is only right that the means to prosecute soldiers for malpractice exist. It is essential. A pox on the man who falsely impugns, who fabricates the evil of others, but an unaccountable army is a very dangerous thing.
It is to the credit of the British Army that no prosecutions have stuck in this instance, although I'm sure there are plenty of grey areas in the fog of war where the benefit of the doubt rightly goes to the accused party. This isn't to say that the Army are 'getting away with it' due to endemic corruption. This is to say that war is hell, and war is complicated - a legal minefield.
What one simply cannot do is fabricate evidence, though. So I'm glad this malevolent man is no longer able to further obscure the path to justice.
I really dont see what you dont understand about that.
Your insinuations may be clever in your mind, but hopefully one day you will experience enough of life to see them for what they are.
I hope you understand foreign policy is political, and the military are non political.
The Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) would close in the summer and around 20 remaining cases be given to the Royal Navy Police, he said.
MPs have branded the probe, which has spent £34m but led to no successful prosecutions, an "unmitigated failure".
The IHAT was set up in 2010 to probe allegations made by Iraqi civilians.
The decision to close the team comes after a public inquiry exposed the behaviour of a human rights lawyer in charge of many of the abuse allegation cases.
Phil Shiner, from the now-defunct law firm Public Interest Lawyers, was struck off for misconduct in February.
As a result, IHAT's caseload would be reduced from 3,000 to 20 cases by the summer, a Ministry of Defence statement said.
"Exposing his [Mr Shiner's] dishonesty means many more claims he made can now be thrown out and the beginning of the end for IHAT," said Sir Michael.
"This will be a relief for our soldiers who have had allegations hanging over them for too long. Now we are taking action to stop such abuse of our legal system from happening again."
That says it all!!!