Story in today's press about the soldier who is being put on trial for a so called "war crime". He punched a Taliban suspect who is accused of blowing up and killing his best friend after laying a previous bomb. The soldier lost it for a few seconds after the fanatic laughed in his face after being arrested whilst laying another.

O.K. he was wrong but being charged with a "war crime" which, if found guilty will mean prison and the loss of his career for losing it with a piece of poop for a few seconds is nothing more than a massive over reaction.

If it wasn't for the P.C. brigrade the problem would never have surfaced if the neccesary course of action had been taken whilst he was planting the device.

PC brigade have an impact on all walks of life in the modern world and sadly in a lot of instances lead to things like this. This is why ive said before things like the Human Rights Act does vey little good and lots bad.

The taliban suspect will get released,wrongful arrest, get £1 million of deserved compensation and the soldier will return to england disgraced and on the scrap heap.....don't you know this is what our soldiers are dieing for, these people have human rights!.....

Believe me, the PC brigade wont let this go without their pound of flesh...an example will be made of this soldier to pacify the local leaders.

Should of shot the scum, then asked questions.

it's nothing to do with the Human Rights Act !!! It's like blaming the Dangerous Dogs Act when you get a parking ticket !! entirely different things

The soldier could face a court martial under international war crimes legislation for "inhumane treatment" of a prisoner. He could also be charged under British military law,

I didnt say it was. I said the PC brigade were causing the issues as they do in instances where the human rights act intervenes. (such as prisoners having the right to have TV's in their cells etc)

All driven from the same source for me, do-gooders.

Why bother with questions ?

Are you really East Ham?

Care to point to any piece of legislation that mandates prisoners have a TV in their cells?

cod'ead wrote:Are you really East Ham? Care to point to any piece of legislation that mandates prisoners have a TV in their cells? Dont know what East Ham means mate? My wife has been on courses with senior officials from prisons in the UK who have said it is mandated that prisoners have the rights to TV's etc. I didnt realise til i read this article that they pay for the TV's. £1 per week is stupid, especially in view of the comparison made in this article. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ients.html

cod'ead wrote:Are you really East Ham? Care to point to any piece of legislation that mandates prisoners have a TV in their cells? Dont know what East Ham means mate? My wife has been on courses with senior officials from prisons in the UK who have said it is mandated that prisoners have the rights to TV's etc. I didnt realise til i read this article that they pay for the TV's. £1 per week is stupid, especially in view of the comparison made in this article. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ients.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1667945.stm This one here talks about spending cash to give all prisoners TV's because it helps them apparently.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1667945.stm This one here talks about spending cash to give all prisoners TV's because it helps them apparently.