Comments on: A Troubled World of Trouble http://www.newsdissector.com/blog/2005/02/28/a-troubled-world-of-trouble/ Danny Schechter's daily media dissections Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:16:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.9 by: Final Historian http://www.newsdissector.com/blog/2005/02/28/a-troubled-world-of-trouble/#comment-270 Tue, 01 Mar 2005 04:03:09 +0000 http://www.newsdissector.com/blog/2005/02/28/a-troubled-world-of-trouble/#comment-270 "There are continuing illegal demonstrations underway in Beirut demanding that Syria leave Lebanon" The Solidarity movement was illegal too. Your moral equivocating is disgusting. “There are continuing illegal demonstrations underway in Beirut demanding that Syria leave Lebanon”

The Solidarity movement was illegal too. Your moral equivocating is disgusting.

]]> by: Joseph F Dunphy MBA http://www.newsdissector.com/blog/2005/02/28/a-troubled-world-of-trouble/#comment-268 Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:59:01 +0000 http://www.newsdissector.com/blog/2005/02/28/a-troubled-world-of-trouble/#comment-268 There is a tremendous contradiction of having American Catholic soldiers fighting side-by-side in Iraq with UK soldiers who have been alledged to have participated in shoot-to-kill orders against Catholics in Northern Ireland. Very little press coverage of this issue, let alone mainstream press. Likewise, Abu Grhaib prison interrogation techniques have a strong resemblance to the list of techniques used against republican prisoners in Long Kesh prison, especially in the wake of Blood Sunday 1972. Such techniques were examined by a series of European Commission, with mixed results--sometimes condemned, but never officially declared torture. Failure to fix the problem legally now extends some European blame to the Abu Grhaib situation, also hardly commented on. A series of human rights commissions has charged the UK with one of the most extensive records of human rights abuses in the EC, largely due to the Northern Ireland situation. Is this just an academic or parochial concern for the Irish and their sympathizers. Read enough history of WWI, and you will learn that it was a rebellion by English officers, who refused to put down a rebellion by the Orange sympathizers, that helped tilt the momentum of history towards initiating WWI. Ireland wished to remain neutral toward Germany, and the officers wouldn't have it. Historians later figured that, behind the assasination of the arch-duke (also partly over worries of a revival of a Catholic revival of the Holy Roman Empire), the situation in Northern Ireland played a significant role in initiating WWI. Note to US citizens: Some English troops remained in Ireland, to guard (or repress) republicans, while Americans (including Catholics) went to the front, instead. This issue is not particularly well covered anywhere, even in blogs. It is one of the contradictions of current foreign policy. Try this thought: An American Catholic soldier can fight in Iraq with a UK soldier; yet go to visit Belfast, and he could be shot coming out of church services by the same UK soldier or his unit. And no government would raise much of an objection. Business as usual. There is a tremendous contradiction of having American Catholic soldiers fighting side-by-side in Iraq with UK soldiers who have been alledged to have participated in shoot-to-kill orders against Catholics in Northern Ireland. Very little press coverage of this issue, let alone mainstream press. Likewise, Abu Grhaib prison interrogation techniques have a strong resemblance to the list of techniques used against republican prisoners in Long Kesh prison, especially in the wake of Blood Sunday 1972. Such techniques were examined by a series of European Commission, with mixed results–sometimes condemned, but never officially declared torture. Failure to fix the problem legally now extends some European blame to the Abu Grhaib situation, also hardly commented on. A series of human rights commissions has charged the UK with one of the most extensive records of human rights abuses in the EC, largely due to the Northern Ireland situation.
Is this just an academic or parochial concern for the Irish and their sympathizers. Read enough history of WWI, and you will learn that it was a rebellion by English officers, who refused to put down a rebellion by the Orange sympathizers, that helped tilt the momentum of history towards initiating WWI. Ireland wished to remain neutral toward Germany, and the officers wouldn’t have it. Historians later figured that, behind the assasination of the arch-duke (also partly over worries of a revival of a Catholic revival of the Holy Roman Empire), the situation in Northern Ireland played a significant role in initiating WWI. Note to US citizens: Some English troops remained in Ireland, to guard (or repress) republicans, while Americans (including Catholics) went to the front, instead. This issue is not particularly well covered anywhere, even in blogs. It is one of the contradictions of current foreign policy.
Try this thought: An American Catholic soldier can fight in Iraq with a UK soldier; yet go to visit Belfast, and he could be shot coming out of church services by the same UK soldier or his unit. And no government would raise much of an objection. Business as usual.

]]>