Blairs law, Medalling in extremism
Discussion
Been off line for a week so i don't know if it's been done yet.
I heard about this on the radio today and it scared me.
From what i can gather, the government is drawing up a list of websites, books, and organisations that if you get involved with you'll be deported.
that is of course if you a foreign national to start with.
So there are some good points and bad to this.
Anyone know anything more yet?
Or care to comment?
>> Edited by bilko2 on Saturday 6th August 01:12
I heard about this on the radio today and it scared me.
From what i can gather, the government is drawing up a list of websites, books, and organisations that if you get involved with you'll be deported.
that is of course if you a foreign national to start with.
So there are some good points and bad to this.
Anyone know anything more yet?
Or care to comment?
>> Edited by bilko2 on Saturday 6th August 01:12
Ol' Mr Blair doesn't do angry very well.
If you meddle with terrorism, or even engage in it, you'll get sent back from whence you came.
If you fail to blow something up, Madge will feed and water you with television and video games for the rest of your life.
If you actually blow something up, God will give you all you could ever dream of in heaven.
It seems to me that he's reversed the stakes. Those who have meddled, or even engaged, before have had the benefit of being put up by Her Madgesty.
Does this mean that meddling, or even engaging, is just not good enough anymore?
Terrorists.... You must try harder!
Edited to turn the medals into meddles
>> Edited by dilbert on Saturday 6th August 02:09
If you meddle with terrorism, or even engage in it, you'll get sent back from whence you came.
If you fail to blow something up, Madge will feed and water you with television and video games for the rest of your life.
If you actually blow something up, God will give you all you could ever dream of in heaven.
It seems to me that he's reversed the stakes. Those who have meddled, or even engaged, before have had the benefit of being put up by Her Madgesty.
Does this mean that meddling, or even engaging, is just not good enough anymore?
Terrorists.... You must try harder!
Edited to turn the medals into meddles
>> Edited by dilbert on Saturday 6th August 02:09
bilko2 said:
Been off line for a week so i don't know if it's been done yet.
I heard about this on the radio today and it scared me.
From what i can gather, the government is drawing up a list of websites, books, and organisations that if you get involved with you'll be deported.
that is of course if you a foreign national to start with.
So there are some good points and bad to this.
Anyone know anything more yet?
Or care to comment?
>> Edited by bilko2 on Saturday 6th August 01:12
hmmm, throwing trouble makers out of the country
i'm kinda in favour of such a policy.
Gazboy said:
At last. I was listening on Capital on my way home, and though, finaly Teflon sees sense. Then that wet behind the ears spokeswoamn for Liberty opened her gob and said it's an infringement of their basic human rights. In a nutshell, she thinks Abu Hmaza and his mates should be able to stay and preach the streets with hate.
i know the daft bint you mention. she is everywhere at the moment but fails to see the bigger picture. its as if she is somehow disconnected with reality.
i think we are a pretty tolerant people (the english), but there is a limit to what we will put up with, and the recent attempts in London have reached that limit. its a very fine line the bombers have crossed.
Gazboy said:
At last. I was listening on Capital on my way home, and though, finaly Teflon sees sense. Then that wet behind the ears spokeswoamn for Liberty opened her gob and said it's an infringement of their basic human rights. In a nutshell, she thinks Abu Hmaza and his mates should be able to stay and preach the streets with hate.
Shami Chakrabarti she's called and for someone who isn't an elected representaive of the people, she's definitely getting a disproportionate ammount of airtime.
I'm sure if you look back a year or two you'll find lots of people suggesting such a thing and being called racists by the bien pensants and Blair's crew.
Yet suddenly it's a great idea.
Unfortunatley, given that it'll doubtless be implemented in a cack handed PC mollycoddling way, or killed outright in the human rights courts, I doubt it actually amounts to anything more than another of Blair's ill-considered outbursts, like marching yobs to cashpoints or suchlike.
Yet suddenly it's a great idea.
Unfortunatley, given that it'll doubtless be implemented in a cack handed PC mollycoddling way, or killed outright in the human rights courts, I doubt it actually amounts to anything more than another of Blair's ill-considered outbursts, like marching yobs to cashpoints or suchlike.
Given that these bombers were brits, how is this measure going to help anyone (except the government, who are one step closer to being able to demonise anyone they like by labelling them terrorists, and then basically do anything they like to them).
If we change our laws and way of life in response to these threats, then we have let them win a victory over us. People have fought and died to preserve these freedoms, now we're going to give them up in a knee-jerk reaction to some political extremist?
If we change our laws and way of life in response to these threats, then we have let them win a victory over us. People have fought and died to preserve these freedoms, now we're going to give them up in a knee-jerk reaction to some political extremist?
Blair, for a change, has got it absolutley right but unfortunatley not before time.
It was mentioned yesterday, the deafening noise of the barn door being slammed shut, long after the horse had bolted.
Sums it up quite well in my opinion.
Oh, and human rights? Abu Hamza and his ilk forfeit their human rights a long time ago.
It was mentioned yesterday, the deafening noise of the barn door being slammed shut, long after the horse had bolted.
Sums it up quite well in my opinion.
Oh, and human rights? Abu Hamza and his ilk forfeit their human rights a long time ago.
tinman0 said:
Been off line for a week so i don't know if it's been done yet.
I heard about this on the radio today and it scared me.
From what i can gather, the government is drawing up a list of websites, books, and organisations that if you get involved with you'll be deported.
that is of course if you a foreign national to start with.
So there are some good points and bad to this.
Anyone know anything more yet?
Or care to comment?
>> Edited by bilko2 on Saturday 6th August 01:12
hmmm, throwing trouble makers out of the country
i'm kinda in favour of such a policy.
So why didn't he say that?
What happens though if the terrorists "come from this country"? No-one else is going to have them. I suppose we could chuck them in the sea.
Perhaps we could have different rules for muslim extremists as we do for british terrorists.
dilbert said:
What happens though if the terrorists "come from this country"? No-one else is going to have them. I suppose we could chuck them in the sea.
This changes aren't all about deportation, they give the police much greater powers of arrest to deal with this country's filth as well as other countries.
Personally speaking, the ones that are born here need locking up.
I've mentioned this before but groups like al-hujaharoon campaign against the right of freedom to speech, and the right to vote, and the idea of a democracy.
These are values which are intrinsic to our way of life. We should not get into a discussion about whether everyone having a vote is right and the topic of "freedom of speech" is not up for discussion - ever. These things are set in stone.
So if you are against these values - which many radical Muslims are - regardless of where you were born - your right to partake in our society should be severly limited.
As I said, there are some things that are off limits and we need to make that clear. Our society has fought for these freedoms over hundreds of years. It is quite wrong that they should be up for discussion by anyone regardless of their status in this country.
I've mentioned this before but groups like al-hujaharoon campaign against the right of freedom to speech, and the right to vote, and the idea of a democracy.
These are values which are intrinsic to our way of life. We should not get into a discussion about whether everyone having a vote is right and the topic of "freedom of speech" is not up for discussion - ever. These things are set in stone.
So if you are against these values - which many radical Muslims are - regardless of where you were born - your right to partake in our society should be severly limited.
As I said, there are some things that are off limits and we need to make that clear. Our society has fought for these freedoms over hundreds of years. It is quite wrong that they should be up for discussion by anyone regardless of their status in this country.
sorry, cross treading now. But mine came first
I think it's another example of locking the door after the horse has bolted. Or to put it another way..not taking care of the root of the problem.
As with so many laws passed recently - banning hoodies being the most comical.
What we need are very specific definitions so these laws aren't used against law abiding citizens.
What happens in 3 years when i finally loose my job and house because of the periodic bu$$ering i recieve from the CSA? After i join the Fathers for justice and decide i want to take direct action?
What happens in a few years when ID cards are forced onto us and we have to pay out large amounts for them.
What happens when i want to go on a march? I went on the fox hunting marches BTW.
What happens when i want to vocalise my opposition to darling putting a black box in my car?
There are so many things that could be considered as extreme that we need clear definitions.
Yes, it will help get rid of the terrorists but you don't think it took these attacks on London to make up these laws do you?
Are we saying that there was no way we could have got rid of hook et all without these laws?
Oh, and meddling???
What sort of vague durassic language is that comming from the prime minister.
Half arsed, not thought out , flash in the pan, appeasing, mellow dramatic.
Next he'll be using words like hocus pokus to describe the vague evils of sports cars.
>> Edited by bilko2 on Saturday 6th August 19:22
I think it's another example of locking the door after the horse has bolted. Or to put it another way..not taking care of the root of the problem.
As with so many laws passed recently - banning hoodies being the most comical.
What we need are very specific definitions so these laws aren't used against law abiding citizens.
What happens in 3 years when i finally loose my job and house because of the periodic bu$$ering i recieve from the CSA? After i join the Fathers for justice and decide i want to take direct action?
What happens in a few years when ID cards are forced onto us and we have to pay out large amounts for them.
What happens when i want to go on a march? I went on the fox hunting marches BTW.
What happens when i want to vocalise my opposition to darling putting a black box in my car?
There are so many things that could be considered as extreme that we need clear definitions.
Yes, it will help get rid of the terrorists but you don't think it took these attacks on London to make up these laws do you?
Are we saying that there was no way we could have got rid of hook et all without these laws?
Oh, and meddling???
What sort of vague durassic language is that comming from the prime minister.
Half arsed, not thought out , flash in the pan, appeasing, mellow dramatic.
Next he'll be using words like hocus pokus to describe the vague evils of sports cars.
>> Edited by bilko2 on Saturday 6th August 19:22
bilko2 said:
sorry, cross treading now. But mine came first
I think it's another example of locking the door after the horse has bolted. Or to put it another way..not taking care of the root of the problem.
As with so many laws passed recently - banning hoodies being the most comical.
What we need are very specific definitions so these laws aren't used against law abiding citizens.
What happens in 3 years when i finally loose my job and house because of the periodic bu$$ering i recieve from the CSA? After i join the Fathers for justice and decide i want to take direct action?
What happens in a few years when ID cards are forced onto us and we have to pay out large amounts for them.
What happens when i want to go on a march? I went on the fox hunting marches BTW.
What happens when i want to vocalise my opposition to darling putting a black box in my car?
There are so many things that could be considered as extreme that we need clear definitions.
Yes, it will help get rid of the terrorists but you don't think it took these attacks on London to make up these laws do you?
Are we saying that there was no way we could have got rid of hook et all without these laws?
Oh, and meddling???
What sort of vague durassic language is that comming from the prime minister.
Half arsed, not thought out , flash in the pan, appeasing, mellow dramatic.
Next he'll be using words like hocus pokus to describe the vague evils of sports cars.
I really can't believe some people on here. Maybe you're right though, maybe the government should just let the terrorists and terrorist supporters get on with it and use the country in any way they like, just in case it may cause a bunch of moaning old gits to start griping about a some perceived injustices which will never happen.
>> Edited by IvIark on Saturday 6th August 20:41
Ivlark
Did you read my post?
I do not condone terrorism and for you to say i do is incredibly insulting.
Insulting because you think you can pull the wool over my eyes.
You are playing the equivilent of the race card in politics here. Branding me as a loony sympaphiser when clearly i am not and hoping I and everyone else just nodds and agrees.
What are you a YES MAN?
Because thats what you sound like to me. Agreeing with tony's plans without question because the big bad terrorists are out there.
PAH!.... Well i aint terrorised but i am concerned!!!
Concerned because most of the wannabe's have been caught now, concerned because the IRA are handing in their arms. And all without the aid of Tony's new meddle laws.
Still not a lot has changed realy as i was never scared of the people with their finger on the button; more the people that make policy.
Get a grip man and take your spin elsewhere.
Did you read my post?
I do not condone terrorism and for you to say i do is incredibly insulting.
Insulting because you think you can pull the wool over my eyes.
You are playing the equivilent of the race card in politics here. Branding me as a loony sympaphiser when clearly i am not and hoping I and everyone else just nodds and agrees.
What are you a YES MAN?
Because thats what you sound like to me. Agreeing with tony's plans without question because the big bad terrorists are out there.
PAH!.... Well i aint terrorised but i am concerned!!!
Concerned because most of the wannabe's have been caught now, concerned because the IRA are handing in their arms. And all without the aid of Tony's new meddle laws.
Still not a lot has changed realy as i was never scared of the people with their finger on the button; more the people that make policy.
Get a grip man and take your spin elsewhere.
bilko2 said:
Ivlark
Did you read my post?
I do not condone terrorism and for you to say i do is incredibly insulting.
Insulting because you think you can pull the wool over my eyes.
You are playing the equivilent of the race card in politics here. Branding me as a loony sympaphiser when clearly i am not and hoping I and everyone else just nodds and agrees.
What are you a YES MAN?
Because thats what you sound like to me. Agreeing with tony's plans without question because the big bad terrorists are out there.
PAH!.... Well i aint terrorised but i am concerned!!!
Concerned because most of the wannabe's have been caught now, concerned because the IRA are handing in their arms. And all without the aid of Tony's new meddle laws.
Still not a lot has changed realy as i was never scared of the people with their finger on the button; more the people that make policy.
Get a grip man and take your spin elsewhere.
I didn't say you condoned terrorism, you just sounded like so many others do on PH and that is too ready to criticise without putting your brain in gear about what your priorities really are. Nor am I playing any race card equivalent and nor could I give a shit whether you agree with me or not.
If a chain of events can somehow unfold in your mind that suggests to you that this is some government ploy to allow them to slowly move onto the less obvious things to control such what car you choose to drive then I don't quite understand how your mind works. To me the important thing is getting these tossers out of our country because until then, there's a possibility that someone's out there who won't think twice about exploding a bomb and negating any worry you may ever have had about having to join Fathers' For Justice.
If your definition of a "yes man" is someone fully supporting ANY government who will adopt a hard line against these sort of arseholes, then I'm guilty as charged.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff