BBC Panorama: War Crimes Scandal Exposed (18/11/19)

[chuggafugga]

Well fancy that, according to the BBC Panorama has evidence that war crimes where covered up.

I wonder if it won't be a surprise that smug journo gets a kicking anytime soo?

A qualified journo takes it upon himself to carry out an unauthorized investigation into alleged war crimes and make up his own mind, no need for court etc!

Bearing in mind he's no qualified criminologist etc and obviously it's his job to not report the news as it happens, but conjure up BS which shocks and horrors the world

It's certainly riling up the community on FB just the thought of the allegations

 

[dingerr]

Why is his investigation unauthorised?

 

[dingerr]

Criminologists don’t investigate crimes.

 

[Slime]

I haven’t seen the show, but the trailers say the original detectives involved are interviewed, and that they say cases were ‘closed down’ as quickly as possible, so not allowing crimes to come under scrutiny.

This must surely mean the cases have been assessed.
I think I might wait for the follow up programme detailing the cases whereby foreign nationals killed, shot at or blew up British forces.

 

[Mölders 1]

I don't buy into it.

No other Army could have/would have shown such restraint as the British did/have during Operations, Banner, Telic and Herrick etc.

 

[Ninja_Turtle]

I watched it, hardly the 'sweeping expose' that was advertised. Although they did acknowledge the damage Phil Shiner and PIL did to the whole process regarding turning public and governmental support towards the military.

There is also a reason why prosecutors are independent of the police.

As the site's 'Resident RMP' I'm not going to say much more (although the bulk of the story was about IHAT). What I would like to know is, when are the investigators who leaked confidential material to journalists, and then went on record, going to be spoken to?

 

[chuggafugga]

Why is his investigation unauthorised?

Probably because its not endorsed by the MOD or UK Gov for that matter..

 

[dingerr]

Probably because its not endorsed by the MOD or UK Gov for that matter..

So you don’t know, just threw out a random comment. Thick doesn’t cover it.

 

[LEGZ30]

You have to wonder why, in a one hour documentary about concealing things, not once did the BBC mention that there is an independent body that decides whether to prosecute or not.

In fact the only time the SPA gets a mention is in a quote from the MoD near the end without any explanation of what it is.

 

[dingerr]

Did the programme mention how the cünts conducted their investigations?

 

[Ninja_Turtle]

Did the programme mention how the cünts conducted their investigations?

Get off that fence, you'll get splinters.

 

[LeoRoverman]

Has any one killed Blair, ah no war crime then.

 

[Arkanstigger]

Probably because its not endorsed by the MOD or UK Gov for that matter..

I don't think that's quite how investigative journalism works.

 

[philhove]

Sent to BBC today

Dear Panorama

BBC Panorama - WAR CRIMES EXPOSED:
Slurring British Military without Proven Evidence


I am an Army Veteran who served on operations in countries from Falklands to Arabia during my 25 years service.

Through watching your tax funded programme last night and reading press and online articles, I am getting increasingly paranoid about it now. I am genuinely apprehensive and worried that you, together with other Political and Establishment figures, are out to criminalize or 'get me' and a lot of my military colleagues.

I am sure I am not alone. One just have to look on military colleagues blogs or Facebook pages to see the enormous amount of fear like mine, that your high profile programme last night generates unnecessary fear for veterans. This site has many such comments:



What I find totally incomprehensible is that it is the British tax funded broadcaster making these unproven slurs on us ex-military. BBC an organisation that my father, ex-World War II, Desert Rat hero, my son ex-Military too and I, have all mandatory had to contribute to since the broadcasting licence inception.

Immediately it came to mind last night watching the programme that if it is our National broadcaster making these unproven slurs, even more people will be thinking bad of those of us who were sent on operations on behalf of the nation.

Those ant-British forces people in politics, religion and naive members of the population who will now be thinking us soldiers are sort of evil and undisciplined, corrupt, acting out some psychopathic fantasies, during our arduous and sometimes distressing duties..

When the reality is entirely the opposite for us who diligently did our sometimes extremely unpleasant, distressing duty with fortitude and courage, hoping our Government decision to send us to war were truthfully and honestly justified for putting us, (including our adversaries), in such dangerous and perilous situations.

There are often split second decisions to be made which can be questionable later: Just look at the dilemma faced by the British soldier who did the mercy killing of a POW whilst I was in Falklands campaign:

I wish to complain officially about your programme last night, as you come across as totally unfit for service dealers in such low grade, unproven slurs on the military.

Yours sincerely,

 

[dun_n_dusted]

Has any one killed Blair, ah no war crime then.

That technically wouldn't be a War Crime or even a crime against humanity. Possibly worth a Nobel Peace Prize though!

 

[Andy Farman]

So you don’t know, just threw out a random comment. Thick doesn’t cover it.

The government does not employ the BBC to carry out criminal investigations, neither do the MOD, ergo, it was not an official investigation. What part of that is the difficult bit you cannot grasp?

Thick truly does not cover it..

 

[chuggafugga]

The government does not employ the BBC to carry out criminal investigations, neither do the MOD, ergo, it was not an official investigation. What part of that is the difficult bit you cannot grasp?

Thick truly does not cover it..

Perhaps I should have indicated that I felt it was a side of "bias" towards the interests of the Journalists agenda, to promote his own article

Either way @philhove let us know what answer you get, if any!

 

[Filthy_contract]

I think that posters here don't understand the concept of an independent broadcaster and a free and open society. The permission of the Government is not required; moreover this is a journalistic investigation conducted with the Sunday Times.

Spittle-flecked letters to the BBC simply reinforce the self-belief that soldier'eros are somehow beyond reproach and beyond the law, whereas the much of the army consists of young lads from dysfunctional backgrounds with single-digit reading ages, and then they are fired up and given control of a weapons system. What the f**k could go wrong?

 

[dingerr]

The government does not employ the BBC to carry out criminal investigations, neither do the MOD, ergo, it was not an official investigation. What part of that is the difficult bit you cannot grasp?

Thick truly does not cover it..

Why are you telling me? Tell him you stupid cünt.

 

[dingerr]

Sent to BBC today

Dear Panorama

BBC Panorama - WAR CRIMES EXPOSED:
Slurring British Military without Proven Evidence


I am an Army Veteran who served on operations in countries from Falklands to Arabia during my 25 years service.

Through watching your tax funded programme last night and reading press and online articles, I am getting increasingly paranoid about it now. I am genuinely apprehensive and worried that you, together with other Political and Establishment figures, are out to criminalize or 'get me' and a lot of my military colleagues.

I am sure I am not alone. One just have to look on military colleagues blogs or Facebook pages to see the enormous amount of fear like mine, that your high profile programme last night generates unnecessary fear for veterans. This site has many such comments:



What I find totally incomprehensible is that it is the British tax funded broadcaster making these unproven slurs on us ex-military. BBC an organisation that my father, ex-World War II, Desert Rat hero, my son ex-Military too and I, have all mandatory had to contribute to since the broadcasting licence inception.

Immediately it came to mind last night watching the programme that if it is our National broadcaster making these unproven slurs, even more people will be thinking bad of those of us who were sent on operations on behalf of the nation.

Those ant-British forces people in politics, religion and naive members of the population who will now be thinking us soldiers are sort of evil and undisciplined, corrupt, acting out some psychopathic fantasies, during our arduous and sometimes distressing duties..

When the reality is entirely the opposite for us who diligently did our sometimes extremely unpleasant, distressing duty with fortitude and courage, hoping our Government decision to send us to war were truthfully and honestly justified for putting us, (including our adversaries), in such dangerous and perilous situations.

There are often split second decisions to be made which can be questionable later: Just look at the dilemma faced by the British soldier who did the mercy killing of a POW whilst I was in Falklands campaign:

I wish to complain officially about your programme last night, as you come across as totally unfit for service dealers in such low grade, unproven slurs on the military.

Yours sincerely,

Cringeworthy.