PDA

View Full Version : Prisoners Slaughtered in Manila



JAWS
19-Feb-06, 06:35
There are reports that Police in Manila have stormed a Prison where there were disturbances and murdered at least 20 prisoners.

Should the culprits be allowed to go unpunished or should there be an enquiry into the abuse of the Human Rights of the Prisoners. Surely the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights must cover such unwarranted violence against people in Custody.

Are we going to ignore such behaviour just because the dead victims were Muslims? Should the Government be demanding that the Government of the Philippines explain how such State Sponsored Barbarity can to occur?

Are other people as disgusted with such activities as I am?

_Ju_
19-Feb-06, 11:35
I was just wondering about the legitimacy of decrying Manila's prison wardens when Guantanamo is only now being looked at by this government? ( I do not condone either, before someone thinks I do. I just don't think abase horror and condemnation from Tony Blairs government would be coherent with the atitude taken to Guantanemo, other detention facilities and interrogation techniques used.)

JAWS
19-Feb-06, 19:57
I was just wondering about the legitimacy of decrying Manila's prison wardens when Guantanamo is only now being looked at by this government? ( I do not condone either, before someone thinks I do. I just don't think abase horror and condemnation from Tony Blairs government would be coherent with the atitude taken to Guantanemo, other detention facilities and interrogation techniques used.)
I am not saying if either of those situations are right ot wrong. There are many complaints about the Human Rights of those in Guantanamo from many sources.
All I am asking is if people who are concerned about all Human Rights will demand that the Human Rights of those prisoners in Manila, who have been gunned down and killed, should have the abuse of their Human Rights looked into?

Do they not deserve their Human Rights to be protected or are the Human Rights of some more important than others and if that is the case then why should that be?

badger
19-Feb-06, 19:59
If we're going to start discussing all the human rights abuses that are going on all over the world it's going to keep us busy for a long time. Children in the Philippines are regularly murdered by the police or imprisoned for long periods simply for being on the streets. And I'm not talking about any kind of humane juvenile prisons either. But then children all over the world are regularly abused, neglected, enslaved etc. - where to start? Maybe it would be easier to discuss countries where there is no abuse, only unfortunately I can't think of one.

JAWS
19-Feb-06, 21:32
Be fair badger, there's a whole continent whare it doesn't occur.
Does anybody know the total population of Antarctica? :Razz

landmarker
19-Feb-06, 22:01
I think we've got enough to worry about.
For my part, I can't get too exercised about dead Muslim convicts in Manila.
Sorry, that's just the way it is, whatever their religion they do not figure highly in the pecking order of concern. I don't like globalisation as it gives us all too much to ponder....we can only take on board so much suffering. Let's rectify our own back yard first.

jjc
19-Feb-06, 22:52
There are reports that Police in Manila have stormed a Prison where there were disturbances and murdered at least 20 prisoners. That’s a very misleading statement. Perhaps if you had provided a link to the story (like this one (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4349471.stm)) you could be excused missing out some of the salient details… you know, little things like the fact that the ‘disturbance’ you mention was actually a day-long stand-off after inmates staged a prison break, stole their guards’ guns and killed three of them.

Do I think that there should be an inquiry on the basis of their human rights being breached? Based only on what you wrote in your opening post I think I probably would think that; but having read a number of reports on what actually happened I really don’t. That’s not to say that there shouldn’t be an inquiry of some sort into the attempted prison-break and the actions that followed, but that wouldn’t be on the grounds of human rights.

But let’s cut to the chase, eh Jaws? You didn’t start this thread because you are outraged at the actions of the police in Manila and we all know that. You started this thread to make a point about the video of the soldiers in Iraq – just as you started the thread about the shooting of the policewoman in Nottingham not because you were overwhelmed with sympathy for her but because you wanted to make a point about the video of the soldiers in Iraq. But at least the story of the policewoman in Nottingham was current – the story of the prison siege in Manila is coming on to a year old. I’m now quite convinced that you are sitting there trawling the internet for stories that you can post about in order to attack “people who are concerned about all Human Rights” (otherwise known as “people who disagreed with you about the video of the soldiers in Iraq”). How about you keep to a one subject/one thread rule? If you can’t, at least try to report the stories you are digging up a little more accurately, eh? [disgust]

JAWS
20-Feb-06, 01:25
That’s a very misleading statement. Perhaps if you had provided a link to the story (like this one (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4349471.stm)) you could be excused missing out some of the salient details… you know, little things like the fact that the ‘disturbance’ you mention was actually a day-long stand-off after inmates staged a prison break, stole their guards’ guns and killed three of them.

Do I think that there should be an inquiry on the basis of their human rights being breached? Based only on what you wrote in your opening post I think I probably would think that; but having read a number of reports on what actually happened I really don’t. That’s not to say that there shouldn’t be an inquiry of some sort into the attempted prison-break and the actions that followed, but that wouldn’t be on the grounds of human rights.

But let’s cut to the chase, eh Jaws? You didn’t start this thread because you are outraged at the actions of the police in Manila and we all know that. You started this thread to make a point about the video of the soldiers in Iraq – just as you started the thread about the shooting of the policewoman in Nottingham not because you were overwhelmed with sympathy for her but because you wanted to make a point about the video of the soldiers in Iraq. But at least the story of the policewoman in Nottingham was current – the story of the prison siege in Manila is coming on to a year old. I’m now quite convinced that you are sitting there trawling the internet for stories that you can post about in order to attack “people who are concerned about all Human Rights” (otherwise known as “people who disagreed with you about the video of the soldiers in Iraq”). How about you keep to a one subject/one thread rule? If you can’t, at least try to report the stories you are digging up a little more accurately, eh? [disgust]


Jjc, just because the Manila incident is one your old, does it alter the facts that the prisoners were killed after the police told them to give up within 15 minutes or else! And after a period of 15 minutes stormed the place. Would not negotiation have been a far better option?

As for the thread about Policewoman Rachael Bown being shot, and Police Woman Yvonne Fletcher being shot in London outside the Libyan Embassy and what happened to the Memorial to her placed there be very careful.

If I were you I would do the same about my post concerning Sergeant Major Darren Leigh and the Posthumous Military Medal which you must have seen during the time you spent being appalled by the fact that people on the board who you always previously thought were decent could post such things. . .

Be advised, you are treading on very personal and dangerous ground in your accusations or that I had to trawl through the net in order to become aware of them.

I shall, in all probability, very shortly be starting a thread about an incident which occurred some time ago but is still current.

JAWS
20-Feb-06, 12:04
The location of the story you requested is at

http://pakistantimes.net/2005/03/16/top11.htm

What particularly caught my attention was the comment by the President's Press Secretary that. “The terrorists got what was coming to them.”

And also that after they had agreed to surrender they had the audacity to ask for food first and as a result the attack took place after a 15 minute warning.

Had this been posted on the Video Thread I would have been rightly accused of changing the subject!

badger
20-Feb-06, 12:49
Be fair badger, there's a whole continent whare it doesn't occur.
Does anybody know the total population of Antarctica? :Razz

Well there's a challenge not to be resisted. Actually not many but there are people there so who knows? I suppose with such small, presumably hand-picked, occupants of the bases they'd have to be pretty nice to each other or they wouldn't last long. Or maybe even there (human nature being what it is) the guys at the top bully the ones at the bottom who dare not say anything. Took me to a fascinating site though
http://www.vb-tech.co.za/Antartica/
which I'll have to return to later as I'm supposed to be painting shelves :~(

JAWS
20-Feb-06, 12:57
Badger, do we still have our "Personal Wick Representative" down there or has she returned?
Does anybody know?

jjc
20-Feb-06, 13:28
Would not negotiation have been a far better option? Quoting from your source:

“The raid began after authorities gave the inmates a 15-minute deadline to surrender – an ultimatum that came after hours of fruitless negotiations.”



As for the thread about Policewoman Rachael Bown being shot, and Police Woman Yvonne Fletcher being shot in London outside the Libyan Embassy and what happened to the Memorial to her placed there be very careful. Sorry, but aside from the fact that a policewoman was shot, how are these two related? How does the shooting of Yvonne Fletcher give you carte blanche to use the shooting of Rachael Brown to attack other posters here?

Oh, and just what should I be ‘very careful’ of? [para]


Be advised, you are treading on very personal and dangerous ground in your accusations I’m not making this personal Jaws, you are. I understand that there may be good reason for you to be personally involved when it comes to Darren Leigh and that is why I avoided passing comment on that situation… but your personal involvement in that incident does not automatically make your comments on other incidents accurate, fair or unquestionable so I’d thank you to keep your belligerent threats to yourself in future. [mad]

JAWS
20-Feb-06, 14:41
I’ve stayed clear of this thread for the past few days because I honestly don’t understand what’s going on here. I may not have agreed with everything that everybody has said on this board in the past, but I’ve always thought that the members here are basically decent people… yet here we are on page 10 of a thread started to justify the beating of children in custody. I’m so appalled that, for the first time ever, I find myself ashamed to have a login here.
You were saying.

Both the shooting of Rachael Bown and the Murder of Yvonne Fletcher including what happened to her Memorial are personal to me.
I make no claim to knowing them personally, but, none the less what happened them is still of great personal concern to me.

Sergeant Major Darren Leigh was the nephew of one of my closes friends and was informed that he was to receive the Military Cross only hours before he died.
“Last August he led a baton charge on a crowd of 300 in Basra — through a barrage of missiles and gunfire — despite grenade injuries to his legs.” Is how it was described in the local paper, presumably taken from the reason given for him receiving his award.

I assume that the description of the incident bears no resemblance to the incident on the video, after all, the crowd there were not given the opportunity to allow such things to occur.
There is a simple innocent looking technique for setting up the sort of situation which ended with Darren’s wounds, and most Terrorist know how to use it.

I am afraid that I see a great link between the two incidents, even if others do not wish to do so, and can well envisage the incident shown, very selectively, on the video having ended in a similar manner and yet another body being returned to the UK and being used simply as piece of useful propaganda by certain sections of the press, the media and the Anti-War Movement.

I am sorry if my opinions are so offensive but they are my opinions. Just as I accept others have the right to express their opinions, I reserve the right to express mine in like manner.
I will continue to express my opinions until such time as it is deemed I am outside the rules of the board or am committing offences which are against the law of the land.
I accept that others are free to express their opinions even though I may disagree with them and see no reason why I, and others, should not be extended the same right.

My comment about "treading on dangerous ground" was intended to indicate that the persons and incidents mentioned were of more than pieces of news but were matters to which I have an emotional and personal attachment and that was all I intended to indicate.

jjc
20-Feb-06, 16:21
You were saying. I’m sorry but I don’t understand. What has that quote got to do with this discussion?


Both the shooting of Rachael Bown and the Murder of Yvonne Fletcher including what happened to her Memorial are personal to me.
I make no claim to knowing them personally, but, none the less what happened them is still of great personal concern to me. Is there some way that you could be concerned about these incidents other than personally? Unless you are able to channel other people’s concern you are as ‘personally’ concerned about these incidents as anybody else without any true personal connection to them.

Don’t get me wrong – I don’t doubt that you are troubled by both crimes…. I’m just astounded that you would try to hide behind feigned ‘personal’ involvement when your use of them to argue a separate point is questioned.


Just as I accept others have the right to express their opinions, I reserve the right to express mine in like manner. […] I accept that others are free to express their opinions even though I may disagree with them and see no reason why I, and others, should not be extended the same right. And nobody – not one person – has tried to stop you… you, however, have attempted to use threats to silence people who don’t agree with you. Come down of your high horse Jaws; there are some toys down here that you need to put back in your pram.

Gleber2
20-Feb-06, 17:18
Cheer up Jaws we can throw our toys at each other and laugh.
I am a relative newcomer to this forum and I must admit that I have had many hours of enjoyment from it as have most of the people who post regularly. After a couple of weeks on the Forum, I almost pulled out completely because there was a feeling of distaste as I trawled through the threads. This feeling of distaste always manifested itself after reading a post from Jjc.
In the beginning, I played his game and fought back against his arrogant,insulting,nit-picking holier than thou attitude until the point came when he stopped replying to my posts and and I had had enough.
The culmination of the situation came when I received a PM from the aforementioned. Under the heading"Relax,it's only only a message board"(the typing mistake was his,not mine). In this message he stated that he was not picking on me and was not very interested in my posts anyway.He went on to point out that I was following him round the board and deliberately making sly digs at him and trying to provoke arguement.This had been noticed by several people and I was creating a bad impression and I should change my ways for my own good. I cannot,unfortunately,repeat this message verbatim as I junked it some time ago but this was the gist of it.
I have often wondered what I was being threatened with should I not change my ways for my own good. And now our worthy Jaws is being accused of threatening people who don't agree with him.

I could well be wrong, but Jjc comes accross as being rather young and probably lacking in real life experience. A middle class upbringing,Uni(How twee,only a fairly young graduate would use such a word) education and then on to lifetime carreer. No sign of children in his posts and very few answers when asked to provide a background which would warrant such intellectual arrogance. A person who uses facts and figures from the net as his mandate for hubris-like certainty in his opinions and words. A statistic is history as soon as it is written down and the information which is shot at those of us who disagree with him as if from a bow is also rooted in the past.
Life in the real world is now and tomorrow and those of us with years and experience under our belts know this and develop a sense of humour which,although a little twisted at times,helps to alleviate the pain of living in a reality such as ours where anger,violence,pain and abuse exist everywhere and even managed to spread through an innocent Messageboard such as this.
I have spent a lifetime travelling and working all over the world and have survived situations that most people would consider fiction. I have argued,debated,discussed and fought over more subjects than I care to think about in more places than I can remember and I can safely say,from what I have learned over that period, that, if I had met Jjc on that road through life, I would have walked away from him to avoid violence. Live and let live I have always believed,but when a point of view is couched in a vituperative,nit-picking way,and one is told to "Grow up!" when one is merely stating ones opinions on a public notice board, it is very difficult not to get angry.
I have posted many times on this board and have not felt this sort of anger towards any other poster.
Perhaps,as time makes him grow up,Jjc might come off the high horse he rides through the moral high ground that his posts would suggest he thinks he occupies and come into the real world where shouting facts and figures in a loud voice gets you nowhere.
This my opinion and no-one is being forced to read it.:confused

Saveman
20-Feb-06, 17:43
Using Private Messages in discussions in the main forum is objectionable IMHO.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Gleber2
20-Feb-06, 18:07
This was not a private message. The subject matter is relevant across several threads and is my publicly stated feelings towards the bad feeling being generated in the Forum by certain individuals. The situation has been lurking behind PM's for long enough. Some people can say what they want and in any way they want but scream and shout when others do it.Sauce and geese and ganders come to mind. Black bottomed pots and kettles also.
I take your point Saveman, but we are talking about threats made,supposedly by Jaws and having received one in PM form I decided to make this PM unprivate. If I offend C'est la vie.

JAWS
20-Feb-06, 18:16
I’m sorry but I don’t understand. What has that quote got to do with this discussion?

Is there some way that you could be concerned about these incidents other than personally? Unless you are able to channel other people’s concern you are as ‘personally’ concerned about these incidents as anybody else without any true personal connection to them.

Don’t get me wrong – I don’t doubt that you are troubled by both crimes…. I’m just astounded that you would try to hide behind feigned ‘personal’ involvement when your use of them to argue a separate point is questioned.

And nobody – not one person – has tried to stop you… you, however, have attempted to use threats to silence people who don’t agree with you. Come down of your high horse Jaws; there are some toys down here that you need to put back in your pram.
I shall allow others to make any judgements, the whole various threads are for everybody to see and nothing is hidden.

wickerinca
20-Feb-06, 19:35
Well said Gleber2. One's opinions are formed by the journey through life. When I was about 11, I wanted to be a nun...........age 14 I was probably veering way off to the left politically but without even knowing it!......but now I am middle aged, comfortably off (well reasonably).........and widely travelled and still don't know much more that when I was 20 except in the things I have seen and heard and lived through.
We could get into the "freedom of speech" debate again but I don't think that there is much point........we all have our own opinions and some will never change!

Forgot where I was going with this post.................was watching the ducks feed.......oh! Yes!! Jjc....throat.......hands.........mine......thrott le!!:evil :lol:

Good thing that we are faceless behind our computer screens:lol:

jjc
20-Feb-06, 19:37
Well said Gleber2.

Good thing that we are faceless behind our computer screens:lol:
Faceless, yes... but people often forget that we are not without feelings behind our computer screens.

Cheers everybody.

wickerinca
20-Feb-06, 19:48
Faceless, yes... but people often forget that we are not without feelings behind our computer screens.

Cheers everybody.

Don't know why I bother using 'smilies':eyes :lol:

Saveman
20-Feb-06, 19:57
The extent this has degenerated is unbelievable.

If you've got a problem with someones attitude, tell them and get over it.

If you've got a problem with someones opinion....well frankly: tough....it's still a free country...thankfully. You've got the opportunity to reply.
It says a lot about you when your opinions can be expressed without getting personal.
Getting personal is easy and a cop out.

If you think someones singling you out or resorting to bully tactics, report it.