There is no "war on terror"

aidanjm

Lifer
Aug 9, 2004
12,411
2
0
This great little article was linked on Andrew Sullivan's blog. I think this Director of Public Prosecutions is voicing an attitude that is shared by most sane people. What he fails to mention, though, is that the "war on terror" is really a political tool that was used to make a second invasion of Iraq possible. Just like the "war on drugs" was a political tool allowing "tough on crime" and "save the children!"-based political campaigns.


There is 'no war on terror'

Outspoken DPP takes on Blair and Reid over fear-driven legal response to threat

Clare Dyer, legal editor
Wednesday January 24, 2007

The Guardian

The director of public prosecutions, Sir Ken Macdonald, put himself at odds with the home secretary and Downing Street last night by denying that Britain is caught up in a "war on terror" and calling for a "culture of legislative restraint" in passing laws to deal with terrorism.

Sir Ken warned of the pernicious risk that a "fear-driven and inappropriate" response to the threat could lead Britain to abandon respect for fair trials and the due process of law.

He acknowledged that the country faced a different and more dangerous threat than in the days of IRA terrorism and that it had "all the disturbing elements of a death cult psychology".

But he said: "It is critical that we understand that this new form of terrorism carries another more subtle, perhaps equally pernicious, risk. Because it might encourage a fear-driven and inappropriate response. By that I mean it can tempt us to abandon our values. I think it important to understand that this is one of its primary purposes."

Sir Ken pointed to the rhetoric around the "war on terror" - which has been adopted by Tony Blair and ministers after being coined by George Bush - to illustrate the risks.

He said: "London is not a battlefield. Those innocents who were murdered on July 7 2005 were not victims of war. And the men who killed them were not, as in their vanity they claimed on their ludicrous videos, 'soldiers'. They were deluded, narcissistic inadequates. They were criminals. They were fantasists. We need to be very clear about this. On the streets of London, there is no such thing as a 'war on terror', just as there can be no such thing as a 'war on drugs'.

"The fight against terrorism on the streets of Britain is not a war. It is the prevention of crime, the enforcement of our laws and the winning of justice for those damaged by their infringement."


Sir Ken, head of the Crown Prosecution Service, told members of the Criminal Bar Association it should be an article of faith that crimes of terrorism are dealt with by criminal justice and that a "culture of legislative restraint in the area of terrorist crime is central to the existence of an efficient and human rights compatible process".

He said: "We wouldn't get far in promoting a civilising culture of respect for rights amongst and between citizens if we set about undermining fair trials in the simple pursuit of greater numbers of inevitably less safe convictions. On the contrary, it is obvious that the process of winning convictions ought to be in keeping with a consensual rule of law and not detached from it. Otherwise we sacrifice fundamental values critical to the maintenance of the rule of law - upon which everything else depends."

His comments will be seen as a swipe against government legislation allowing the indefinite detention of suspected terrorists without trial, later held incompatible with human rights by the courts, and the replacement law that permits suspects to be placed under control orders instead of being brought to trial.

Sir Ken referred to the government's opt-out from the European convention on human rights to pass the detention law - possible under the convention only if the "life of the nation" is threatened. "Everyone here will come to their own conclusion about whether, in the striking Strasbourg phrase, the very 'life of the nation' is presently endangered," he said. "And everyone here will equally understand the risk to our constitution if we decide that it is, when it is not."

The criminal justice response to terrorism must be "proportionate and grounded in due process and the rule of law," he said. "We must protect ourselves from these atrocious crimes without abandoning our traditions of freedom."
 

shadow9d9

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2004
8,132
2
0
Intelligent people know this and have known this for a while. This is nothing new. It is a way to make other people look "unpatriotic" if they don't fall for the garbage.
 

SSSnail

Lifer
Nov 29, 2006
17,458
83
86
You don't think they helped build the current civilization by being stupid do you? The Brits do know what they're doing, they've been in this conquering, buying, selling and building nations for quite a while now. Most importantly, they're not ignorant or arrogant either.
 

toolboxolio

Senior member
Jan 22, 2007
872
1
0
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Intelligent people know this and have known this for a while. This is nothing new. It is a way to make other people look "unpatriotic" if they don't fall for the garbage.

Agree.

However, you must notice that the previous sayings have 3 words which use 3 syylables, total. They are simple and were not observed in detail by the majority. J dub messed up and pushed the limit by adding extra syylables to the popular 3 word / 3 syylable propaganda rhetoric of previous chiefs. The extra ennunciation effort that follows J dub's rhetoric (in regular conversation) has people frustrated and thus have questions of doubt arise about the topic it entails.

As a result, ironically, laziness has forced the public to speak out against the government's monopoly on "thinking." Not because there is a strong opposition to the "war on terrorism," but because it takes extra effort to say when having a casual political topic to regurgitate when trying to sound smart around others.

If he had only said, "War on boom," the majority would have submitted without question.
 

toolboxolio

Senior member
Jan 22, 2007
872
1
0
Originally posted by: Pens1566
When W says "War on Terr", it only has three syllables. :)

I noticed that too, which means he is smarter than he appears.

He was trying to cheat by using only three syylables to abide by the Propoganda Institute of Silly Sayings (PISS for short).

But people caught on. He has to cut even more funding from the education department for that one to fly.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,918
2,884
136
Originally posted by: Pens1566
When W says "War on Terr", it only has three syllables. :)


He is from the south, its called an accent. Do you make fun of black people in the inner city that can't speak proper english?
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Pens1566
When W says "War on Terr", it only has three syllables. :)


He is from the south, its called an accent. Do you make fun of black people in the inner city that can't speak proper english?

So you admit he can't speak proper english! Well, that's certainly a good start... :p
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,918
2,884
136
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Pens1566
When W says "War on Terr", it only has three syllables. :)


He is from the south, its called an accent. Do you make fun of black people in the inner city that can't speak proper english?

So you admit he can't speak proper english! Well, that's certainly a good start... :p

There aren't many people that do speak perfect english, the ones that do usually sound pretty silly. Do you speak with any kind of accent?

 

Termagant

Senior member
Mar 10, 2006
765
0
0
I happen to have a perfect non-regional accent. And when I hear people speaking regional or improper English, I non-regionally laugh maniacally.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Pens1566
When W says "War on Terr", it only has three syllables. :)


He is from the south, its called an accent. Do you make fun of black people in the inner city that can't speak proper english?

So you admit he can't speak proper english! Well, that's certainly a good start... :p

There aren't many people that do speak perfect english, the ones that do usually sound pretty silly. Do you speak with any kind of accent?

No way! I know how to speak proper english. Why? You think I'd want to sound retarded on purpose? No thanks.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,918
2,884
136
Originally posted by: Termagant
I happen to have a perfect non-regional accent. And when I hear people speaking regional or improper English, I non-regionally laugh maniacally.


lol
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,918
2,884
136
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Pens1566
When W says "War on Terr", it only has three syllables. :)


He is from the south, its called an accent. Do you make fun of black people in the inner city that can't speak proper english?

So you admit he can't speak proper english! Well, that's certainly a good start... :p

There aren't many people that do speak perfect english, the ones that do usually sound pretty silly. Do you speak with any kind of accent?

No way! I know how to speak proper english. Why? You think I'd want to sound retarded on purpose? No thanks.


Oh I see, people that have accents sound retarded to you. Thanks for the clarification. :roll:
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: JD50
He is from the south, its called an accent.
W was born in New Haven, went to Yale, and despite his family's claim to be Texans, G H W Bush and kin are Kennebunkport Texans. W's southern roots are as authentic as his Crawford Texas "ranch".
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: JD50
Oh I see, people that have accents sound retarded to you. Thanks for the clarification. :roll:
No problem, that's what I'm here for! :laugh:

Liberalism in a nutshell :thumbsup:
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,918
2,884
136
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: JD50
He is from the south, its called an accent.
W was born in New Haven, went to Yale, and despite his family's claim to be Texans, G H W Bush and kin are Kennebunkport Texans. W's southern roots are as authentic as his Crawford Texas "ranch".

Ok, does any of that change the fact that he has an accent?

 

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: Aimster
we need to cause wars to make more terrorists to have a war on terror

DUH

Cause that's how we got hit on 9-11, duh.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9.11 and neither did Iran.

Yep
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Termagant
I happen to have a perfect non-regional accent. And when I hear people speaking regional or improper English, I non-regionally laugh maniacally.


lol

That's wicked retahhhded.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: Aimster
we need to cause wars to make more terrorists to have a war on terror

DUH
Cause that's how we got hit on 9-11, duh.
Yes it is, in a sense. OBL reportedly turned against the U.S. when we violated Islamic holy lands by stationing forces in Saudi Arabia. Why were we there? Because of the first Gulf War. DUH.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
"The fight against terrorism on the streets of Britain is not a war. It is the prevention of crime, the enforcement of our laws and the winning of justice for those damaged by their infringement."

That is the exact philosophy followed by the Clinton administration. The idea that terrorism was a ?crime? problem, not a larger broader problem was followed for eight years. We see where trying to fight it as a crime got us on 9-11.

The idea that we are fighting a ?war? in New York or London might be a little bit of a stretch, but then again how much have the lives of people living in these two cities changed since the start of this ?war??

If we are not fighting a global war on terror, then what would you call it? And how do you suggest we respond to the Osamas of the world who want to destroy us and our institutions and replace them with Islamic based ones?

Very easy question for you aidanjm, if it is not a ?war on terror? what is it?

BTW: You should read about how law enforcement goes after the mafia. They don?t just go around arresting the hit men and the bag men; they came up laws and ways to go after the mob bosses. Because they understood that as long as they left the bosses alone the mobs power would never diminish. There would always be another bag man or hit man willing to give it a try. Just like there will always be crazy people who will straps bombs to their bodies. It is only by going after the leaders of these groups will we be able to put an end to the ?war.?
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Ah, yes, the RICO Act. The very Act used by the US Government in the 1990s to create the illusion that Al Qaeda is a large, organized group in order to prosecute them (successfully, for the large part).'

Oh and btw, from the SotU address:
In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers have ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American people.

But, go ahead and try to wage war on an ideology using bombs and bullets. How's it working out so far for ya?