Chagos Archipelago

[Rat Faced]

Why not?

Israel managed it

[Biggles]

Just another example of Blair's compassionate foreign policy.

People are just pawns to move as they please. There is no sense that these islanders are even classed as people. At the end of the day, if you have something they want they will just take it.

[Rat Faced]

I dont think any Blairites (or Bushites) are going to comment

[hobbes]

I dont think any Blairites (or Bushites) are going to comment

I actually looked into this last night. When compared to what else is going on in the world and the fact that the island these people now inhabit is a lush tropical resort, I hardly call this a big deal.

Not puppy dogs and kitty cats, as you seem to think all other countries abide by, but still, not a big deal at all, big picture-wise.

The real point is that it just another barb thrown and the US and UK for agendas' sake. We could post "atrocities" like this all day about just about any country we chose.

Why anyone would think that return people to their island would cure drug abuse, illiteracy, and prostitution is beyond me.

Mauritiusis one of those islands that one does not hear about often, but it is not because it is not a beautiful place. The picturesque island sits off the Africa's east coast and is well-known for tourism and for tea.

Save these poor people from this hell. It is almost as bad a Hawaii .
Or I guess we could have buried them all in shallow graves

[Rat Faced]

Hobbes, your looking at the best parts.

The people im speaking of, live in shanty towns and cardboard boxes...

Nice place to be when the Tropical Storms hit; especially knowing that your own Home, on an equally beautiful island, is being used by US Civilian Contractors...

Granted, on a Global Scale, there arent many of these Islanders.... does that mean they have less rights?

If so, may i point out that the USA is hardly overcrowded, and assumes plenty of Rights.

[Biggles]

Whilst it is true that they were not tortured prior to ejection, if that is to be our criteria it does rather open the field as to what is permissable and what is not.

I would be most unimpressed if told by some gun bearing thug to get out of my house and move to a foreign land. Perhaps others are more sanguine about these things.

[hobbes]

Whilst it is true that they were not tortured prior to ejection, if that is to be our criteria it does rather open the field as to what is permissable and what is not.

I would be most unimpressed if told by some gun bearing thug to get out of my house and move to a foreign land. Perhaps others are more sanguine about these things.

Biggles,

You seem to be defending RF rather than actually addressing the point of my post. Please quote me where I stated that this was permissible or that I supported the original action?

I was not stating that this was "right", but that it is hardly something worthy of comment given the nature of true atrocities we see today. We could have saved a lot of time and money by taking these people and turning them into fertilizer.

My point was to say that this is more a post to fullfill a persons anti-US agenda, than to objectively search the world for atrocities and point them out.

No, it is the fact that the US was involved that prompted the post, and not the actual transgression.

Such parallel situations and far far worse occur routinely today. I'm waiting for Rat to point out all these other situations.

As to laying a 40 year old situation at the feet of Bush and Blair, that is preposterous. Let us stop being so coy. The island was taken over 40 years ago. What else do you call it when everyone is removed from the island for the purpose of a military base. Yeah, here's some land, here's some money, we'll give it back when we are done. The wording was politic talk for a buy out. They have as much chance of getting their island back as American Indians have of getting theirs back.

They can chose to be like American Indians and live in alcoholic delirium on reservations and pine for the fjords, or realise that they have been conquered and move on. T

I'm sure millions went into building the military base there, and the location is still strategic. Do you think they will close the base? Do you think they want civilians around? There are 3000 people left, who haven't been there for 40 years. It realistically is not going to happen.

I can understand why these people are pissed off, but this hardly is an atrocity. Why can they not get a job or read 40 years later? Seems the island they are on is doing pretty well both politically and economically, hardly paints the picture of a "barren" existence painted by the original article. I also loved the suggestion that this was simply done because they are black. "I'll play the race card, for a hundred".

So, I am not justifying anything, just looking for a little posting balance from RF. Big picture, this is small potatos.

Perhaps, if the US took my house by "eminent domain", I could still be mad at them 40 years later, but could I blame them for my living in a cardboard shack and being illiterate?

America's bad See also the Nepal thread.

[Rat Faced]

Actually, its more an anti-Blaire thread..

Yes, the US was involved, however its the UK that "Done the deed".

Its Blaire that has used The Royal Perogative to overturn the High Court....

We talk of all these countries where the Law is not followed by the Governments, and see that the UK is no different....

This wasnt a Parliamentary Decision, it was a Blaire Decision.

[Biggles]

Hobbes

I had read it as an anti-Blair thread.

It was initially a British action, albeit in response to a US request. The decision was, however, ours.

I appreciate that as injustices go it is at the lower level of the spectrum. However, Blair has lecured us on morality on a number of occasions and the recent High Court move by the islanders was an opportunity for him to put his money where his mouth is. That the result was predictable goes without saying, but it is worthy of pointing out nonetheless.

The issue puts me in mind of that rather catchy song of a few years ago "If you tolerate this, your children will be next" (Manic Street Preachers)

The world may not be all pink fluffy bunnies but that is not an excuse to cross the road to drive over any that you might see.

However, Blair will probably win the next election because his opponent gives the impression he would gleefully cross the road to get the fluffy bunnies.

[hobbes]

Politicians- bah