Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 majorities are rare in democracy though, everyone in the country has different opinions on something but better to leave a party in power that know where they are than revert to a coalition government, which worked so well in germany before the Nazis how can u hate John Howard The aussie political stance is spot on on many issues prefer their ethic of concentrating on the protection of their own over the rest. Harsh, maybe? but if you wont who will?
lush Posted 7 July 2005 Author Posted 7 July 2005 breadandcheese,i agree that sadam should be evicted, i was for the war when it started too, but ive realised through family and friends who are there and have been there, that this is ALL about money. PLEASE READ THIS BIT...why dont we attack mugabbe? hes just as bad as sadam was, why? BECAUSE THERES NO FVCKING MONEY TO BE MADE, thats why. Once again, i agree with your i.d card stance. 133888[/snapback] if one of his supporters made an act of terrorism against the USA or UK i'm sure they would! It's hard to accept but 9/11 added pressure already built on saddams reputation and past to 'go into iraq'. I disagree with this style of action, maybe they should intervene now? I couldn't comment as i know far less on this situation so see no need to blag my way through a disscussion about it. 133893[/snapback] WHERES the evidence to suggest sadams mob attacked the twin towers??? 133902[/snapback] Osama mob you mean, i dunno, other than his self-confessed videos i'm sure theres a bit more evidence in the terrorists etc 133907[/snapback] I said sadam, you said one of his supporters, what you onabout osama for?
Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 saying no is too late though!Elections happen once every 4 years on average, that is your chance to choose the person you want to represent you! The Government is then made. Anything must go through parliament as a bill and is voted on hence we are a democracy. We have put them people in that position with our authority to do what they do. By voting them you agree with everything they do, a concept many British fail to understand. A dictator is a ruler with complete and unrestricted power. If he had that power then the I.D. cards would already be out. The reason we have an election is to vote the person you want to put forward your thoughts. Thus, what the Prime minister says, is what you say. 133905[/snapback] Do you think the war started after the 2001 election, or before? In the last one, NL got the worst presidencial victory in donkey`s. ``We have put them people in that position with our authority to do what they do. By voting them you agree with everything they do`` and then you say ``A dictator is a ruler with complete and unrestricted power`` So you agree then that blair is a dictator tell me how many people new we were going to fight innocent iraqis for money, before the 2001 election? then tell me if a government COULDVE been elected to avoid the war? and how many knew of this intrusion of liberty via the i.d card system before the last election? Then tell me if a government couldve been elected that wouldnt have introduced the i.d card system? 133918[/snapback] Do we currently have I.D cards? then no i do not agree as if he was then we would be sitting here with them. You've now started talking about political election techniques. Your not telling me the conservatives wern't going to bring a light something new if they were elected? It's what you do. I'm not agreeing they should do it, but if you've got visions of doing something that a lot of people may not agree on, then you leave it till after being elected. That's fact enough. Nothing to do with me nor can i argue for or against it. Surely your mature enough to realise that whoever you vote for is going to bring up something new.
Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 breadandcheese,i agree that sadam should be evicted, i was for the war when it started too, but ive realised through family and friends who are there and have been there, that this is ALL about money. PLEASE READ THIS BIT...why dont we attack mugabbe? hes just as bad as sadam was, why? BECAUSE THERES NO FVCKING MONEY TO BE MADE, thats why. Once again, i agree with your i.d card stance. 133888[/snapback] if one of his supporters made an act of terrorism against the USA or UK i'm sure they would! It's hard to accept but 9/11 added pressure already built on saddams reputation and past to 'go into iraq'. I disagree with this style of action, maybe they should intervene now? I couldn't comment as i know far less on this situation so see no need to blag my way through a disscussion about it. 133893[/snapback] WHERES the evidence to suggest sadams mob attacked the twin towers??? 133902[/snapback] Osama mob you mean, i dunno, other than his self-confessed videos i'm sure theres a bit more evidence in the terrorists etc 133907[/snapback] I said sadam, you said one of his supporters, what you onabout osama for? 133924[/snapback] because one of numerous reasons were to do with connections between saddam and osama. I can't prove there were any. You cannot prove there were not.
lush Posted 7 July 2005 Author Posted 7 July 2005 saying no is too late though!Elections happen once every 4 years on average, that is your chance to choose the person you want to represent you! The Government is then made. Anything must go through parliament as a bill and is voted on hence we are a democracy. We have put them people in that position with our authority to do what they do. By voting them you agree with everything they do, a concept many British fail to understand. A dictator is a ruler with complete and unrestricted power. If he had that power then the I.D. cards would already be out. The reason we have an election is to vote the person you want to put forward your thoughts. Thus, what the Prime minister says, is what you say. 133905[/snapback] Do you think the war started after the 2001 election, or before? In the last one, NL got the worst presidencial victory in donkey`s. ``We have put them people in that position with our authority to do what they do. By voting them you agree with everything they do`` and then you say ``A dictator is a ruler with complete and unrestricted power`` So you agree then that blair is a dictator tell me how many people new we were going to fight innocent iraqis for money, before the 2001 election? then tell me if a government COULDVE been elected to avoid the war? and how many knew of this intrusion of liberty via the i.d card system before the last election? Then tell me if a government couldve been elected that wouldnt have introduced the i.d card system? 133918[/snapback] Do we currently have I.D cards? then no i do not agree as if he was then we would be sitting here with them. You've now started talking about political election techniques. Your not telling me the conservatives wern't going to bring a light something new if they were elected? It's what you do. I'm not agreeing they should do it, but if you've got visions of doing something that a lot of people may not agree on, then you leave it till after being elected. That's fact enough. Nothing to do with me nor can i argue for or against it. Surely your mature enough to realise that whoever you vote for is going to bring up something new. 133925[/snapback] Do you actually pay any attention to what you read? Do you understand ALL of this: ``We have put them people in that position with our authority to do what they do. By voting them you agree with everything they do`` and then you say ``A dictator is a ruler with complete and unrestricted power`` So you agree then that blair is a dictator ...or just what you want to like? You were also onabout electing folk for policies, if WE dont know what they are, WE CANNOT VOTE FOR THEM, jeez your slow.
lush Posted 7 July 2005 Author Posted 7 July 2005 breadandcheese,i agree that sadam should be evicted, i was for the war when it started too, but ive realised through family and friends who are there and have been there, that this is ALL about money. PLEASE READ THIS BIT...why dont we attack mugabbe? hes just as bad as sadam was, why? BECAUSE THERES NO FVCKING MONEY TO BE MADE, thats why. Once again, i agree with your i.d card stance. 133888[/snapback] if one of his supporters made an act of terrorism against the USA or UK i'm sure they would! It's hard to accept but 9/11 added pressure already built on saddams reputation and past to 'go into iraq'. I disagree with this style of action, maybe they should intervene now? I couldn't comment as i know far less on this situation so see no need to blag my way through a disscussion about it. 133893[/snapback] WHERES the evidence to suggest sadams mob attacked the twin towers??? 133902[/snapback] Osama mob you mean, i dunno, other than his self-confessed videos i'm sure theres a bit more evidence in the terrorists etc 133907[/snapback] I said sadam, you said one of his supporters, what you onabout osama for? 133924[/snapback] because one of numerous reasons were to do with connections between saddam and osama. I can't prove there were any. You cannot prove there were not. 133928[/snapback] WTF are you onabout dude hehehehehehe Start again mate?
Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 you know why this country has become as great as it is? because we have the freedom to say what we think and argue with respect but if you have to start adding personal slate's then why bother, it just makes your argument a hell of a lot weaker. I could say that someone who doesn't even know crude is an oil is slow but i didn't, it's petty. Theres nothing slow about what i read and write mate, i speak from my heart and head without the need of a textbook sheepish response. About the policies; then more fool you for voting! Vote for a party you know whose policies are all told.......oh wait, you'll be struggling to find one. Welll yes, i understand PERFECTLY what a dictator is thanks and i know how elections/parliament run. You asked why we don't intervene in Zimbabwea like with Saddam, so i mentioned Osama because he is the man connected to 9/11. The connection then is between osama and saddam. Neither me nor you can prove whether Uk and USA had a reason to attack iraq as neither of us can prove whether saddam and osama have/do not have any connections in terms of weapons etc
Thracian Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 Blair is not a terrorist. We have always been a target for terrorism in the last 30-40 years. It isnt fair to not allow any asylum seekers or refugees on the chance that a few may be terrorists, because thats what we'd have to do to stop the few that get through the net. Theres terrorist plans against us every day, most of which are found out and stopped because of our good intelligence and police services. This is just one that they didnt stop. Our country has done amazingly well to get till now without having a major attack. 133694[/snapback] Sadly life is not about right and wrong, justice or injustice it is about winning or losing. And we must decide whether it is worth fighting (peacefully,I hasten) for our way of life or having it swamped by outsiders who would impose their own ideals. Life has always been about survival - of either the fittest, the cleverest, the luckiest, whatever. It isn't fair that a lion stalks an injured wildebeest at the back of the herd. It's life and its harsh. One of our problems is having a sense of fairness and justice which over-rides our need to protect our way of life because, make no mistake, we won't change the thinking of the outsiders, at least those who would lead them, and we certainly shouldn't try by violently fatal means as I explain in my conclusion. Another problem is having nothing to unite us. We are more interested in our houses, our possessions, our comforts than protecting our country and our way of life. We don't even club together to help our own as many immigrant families do. They live in groups and all meet regularly at their places of worship not only for religious reasons but because it gives them power, because it gives them protection, because it gives them brotherhood. (It also makes them vulnerable to manipulation). Our churches are all but empty. Proabably the most passionate and relevant gathering we have left is at the football ground. And while we live with those problems, people who represent other ways of life gradually infiltrate the seats of local and national government, climb the ladders of power and play on our sense of fairness to usurp more power. That is not THEIR FAULT because, rightly or wrongly, they care about what they believe. It is OUR FAULT because we don't or we don't care enough to stand united and defend what we have built and what is already being eroded. So the sooner Blair stops pontificating about what he is "going to do" about beating terrorists and actually makes some uncomfortable decisions the better. It is time Blair concentrated on protecting England, the English way of life, the English people and stopped being arrogant enough to believe he can be missionary to the world. Other people might not want to be changed any more than us. We can still set examples, still give advice, still offer assistance, still do a lot of worthy things but our politics should be neutral and our focus should be on sorting OUR problems and protecting our heritage...by whatever means is necessary (like denying access to our Welfare Service to any foreigner who hasn't paid into it, like re-introducing National Service, like closing our borders either wholly or partially). Oh yes, and we should get out of Iraq. It is a farce in any case, with the same psychopaths running the torture chambers who were there in Saddam's day. But it is NOT our responsibility though it MIGHT be the responsibility of the United Nations or some still-to-be-formed International Government Organisation to which we might subscribe. And being party to killing people (except, perhaps in direct self-defence) is categorically against the Commandments and what is the value of a Commandment if it is ignored every time it just happens not to be convenient?. It is a question I might ask the leaders of other religious persuasions but I won't because they have to set their own standards and answer for them later if they truly believe what their religion asks for. .
Babylon Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 we will lose a vast amount of liberty, something weve fought in wars to protect, something millions of our forefathers died for to protect133875[/snapback] They died protecting us from the bloody nazis mate. Not protecting us from the government knowing whether you take out books about making bombs at home. Or how much you spend on shopping a week. 133882[/snapback] r u fvcking brain dead or a wind up merchant? of course what u stated, it ensured LIBERTY you thick tw@ 133891[/snapback] I absolutly love how you ignore every question I pose you. And you call me a thick twat... you compare trying to stop millions dying in gas chambers, to the government knowing your fingerprints. cookoo ID cards are not going to end terrorist attacked but they could help. They could also help solve murders, rapes and any other crime you can mention. In turn maybe even preventing them. Imagine your mum getting stabbed and killed. They find the knife with fingerprints on it but they aren't in the current database. Would you still be happy having your civil liberties intact but knowing your mums killer could of been brought to justice had his fingerprints been taken as part of the ID card scheme.
Thracian Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 ID cards are almost a certainty now! 133659[/snapback] Dont be silly, how is a credit type card going to stop someone making and planting a bomb, to kill innocent people On the morality side of them, you`d actually want a government to take most of your liberty away? no of course not, millions wont bother paying or using them. 133695[/snapback] We have cameras tracking your every movement, we have agencies looking at every email, listening to every call made and now people will say the ID cards are a necessity. Would somebody please explain to me how any of these measures have or will prevent any further attacks. They don't and as such there must be another reason why they are in place or people want to introduce them. 133717[/snapback] Just thoughts but: Why do we need security cameras on every corner when we never used to?. Why do we need hyper security at every airport, railway station, national place of importance when we never used to?. Why do we need to consider the use of Identity Cards when we never used to. Why in the land of Free Speech, do we have to to consider every word we say when we never used to? And, If we didn't need the security cameras, the concrete ring-fence protection, the massively-expanded security service machinery, the identity cards, etc, etc could we not save billlions and billions of pounds that could be spent on reducing poverty or healing the sick?. And a last question. Is anyone proud of what has been achieved in this once Green and Pleasant Land over such a short time?
Thracian Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 i personally feel the loss of liberty statement is an exaggeration. How we can be compared to a dictatorship is laughable when you consider the likes of Hitler and more recently Saddam. The extent of a loss of liberties can be cancelled out by the opportunity to live out my life! 133885[/snapback] It wouldnt if we had i.d cards. type liberty in ya google and read about what youve lost? A dictator isnt only a sadam style creature, its one in which someone of more power than another dictates what the other does, remember that for this convo. When millions voted with their feet against the war, and blair said no, then you dont live in a democracy, as we would like it. we now have hatred laws, thats dictatorship upon freedom or speech. 133900[/snapback] saying no is too late though! Elections happen once every 4 years on average, that is your chance to choose the person you want to represent you! The Government is then made. Anything must go through parliament as a bill and is voted on hence we are a democracy. We have put them people in that position with our authority to do what they do. By voting them you agree with everything they do, a concept many British fail to understand. A dictator is a ruler with complete and unrestricted power. If he had that power then the I.D. cards would already be out. The reason we have an election is to vote the person you want to put forward your thoughts. Thus, what the Prime minister says, is what you say. 133905[/snapback] This is not a democracy. How can anyone say that when the Government get 35% of the vote and not even a majority in England. I despise John Howard in Australia but at least he can say he has more tha 50% of the popular vote so can even Bush (though that one be a bit iffy ). Blair has unbridled power due to the lack of democracy and a written Constitution in the UK. He is in effect an unelected dictator. 133913[/snapback] Spot on and England's the fall-guy again.
Babylon Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 Why do we need security cameras on every corner when we never used to?. 133947[/snapback] Thankfully we do as I would probably not be here now if we didn't. If the camera wan't there the police would never have stopped my head being kicked around the floor like a football by a group of thugs. Of course according to you lot they are there to spy on you as you go about your not very important lives.
lush Posted 7 July 2005 Author Posted 7 July 2005 we have the freedom to say what we think and argue with respect but if you have to start adding personal slate's then why bother, it just makes your argument a hell of a lot weaker.I could say that someone who doesn't even know crude is an oil is slow but i didn't, it's petty. Theres nothing slow about what i read and write mate, i speak from my heart and head without the need of a textbook sheepish response. About the policies; then more fool you for voting! Vote for a party you know whose policies are all told.......oh wait, you'll be struggling to find one. Welll yes, i understand PERFECTLY what a dictator is thanks and i know how elections/parliament run. You asked why we don't intervene in Zimbabwea like with Saddam, so i mentioned Osama because he is the man connected to 9/11. The connection then is between osama and saddam. Neither me nor you can prove whether Uk and USA had a reason to attack iraq as neither of us can prove whether saddam and osama have/do not have any connections in terms of weapons etc 133937[/snapback] wrong, we dont completely have freedom to say what we think. `but if you have to start adding personal slate's` then you say in attack upon me: `textbook sheepish response` contradiction, oh yes. of course i know what crude oil is, i couldnt understand for the life of that particular debate why the hell he or she was mentioning it. I voted against dictator blair, so not a fool, a winner of democracy. To your very last point, why attack iraq then if we dont have a justifyable reason? That to me tells me blair is a terrorist if indeed he invades a country and kills innocent people. and when millions of us and around the world tell him hes wrong, and then hes prooved wrong, and he sticks 2 fingers up to us, yes then he enrolls in a dictator formation.
Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 unfortunately Thracian we don't live in a world that would accept us without those things there are some evil people in the world and the only reason events like today haven't occured already is because of such things u mention being in place. We have evolved and revolutionised so much that such pre-cautions are needed. Think how easy it is to travel to anywhere in Europe. In the days we had basic technology it took days just to travel across England! But with the benefitial inventions there are the ones only produced to cause havoc. They do exist and any second they could be used to wipe out a whole country, continent or even the world. It really makes u think when we have to protect ourselves from each other, but unfortunately it's how the world works!
Guest CL Blue Army Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 Its a fuking discrace! Why do they bomb our country! If i was Tony Blair i would chuck them out! They need ID cards and they need them now! KICK THEM OUT
Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 we have the freedom to say what we think and argue with respect but if you have to start adding personal slate's then why bother, it just makes your argument a hell of a lot weaker.I could say that someone who doesn't even know crude is an oil is slow but i didn't, it's petty. Theres nothing slow about what i read and write mate, i speak from my heart and head without the need of a textbook sheepish response. About the policies; then more fool you for voting! Vote for a party you know whose policies are all told.......oh wait, you'll be struggling to find one. Welll yes, i understand PERFECTLY what a dictator is thanks and i know how elections/parliament run. You asked why we don't intervene in Zimbabwea like with Saddam, so i mentioned Osama because he is the man connected to 9/11. The connection then is between osama and saddam. Neither me nor you can prove whether Uk and USA had a reason to attack iraq as neither of us can prove whether saddam and osama have/do not have any connections in terms of weapons etc 133937[/snapback] wrong, we dont completely have freedom to say what we think. `but if you have to start adding personal slate's` then you say in attack upon me: `textbook sheepish response` contradiction, oh yes. of course i know what crude oil is, i couldnt understand for the life of that particular debate why the hell he or she was mentioning it. I voted against dictator blair, so not a fool, a winner of democracy. To your very last point, why attack iraq then if we dont have a justifyable reason? That to me tells me blair is a terrorist if indeed he invades a country and kills innocent people. and when millions of us and around the world tell him hes wrong, and then hes prooved wrong, and he sticks 2 fingers up to us, yes then he enrolls in a dictator formation. 133952[/snapback] none of the stuff in bold makes sense you voted against dictator blair, a winner of democracy??? You've not just said that.... How can you contradict yourself by having both? There is either a democratic government or if he's a dictator there will be no democracy for you to win from. Although i'm sure you'll make some excuse about why you said that. Yes, me and you do not have a justifiable reason. But we do not know everything in the world affairs, they pretty much do. If anyone is in a position to make the call it is them. Again you call them innocent people, how naive do you have to be? Iraq, the place of love and paradise!
Babylon Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 Its a fuking discrace! Why do they bomb our country! If i was Tony Blair i would chuck them out! They need ID cards and they need them now! KICK THEM OUT 133958[/snapback] Who are you referring to when you say they?? Terrorists don't wear badges saying "kick me out i love bin-laden"
Thracian Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 we will lose a vast amount of liberty, something weve fought in wars to protect, something millions of our forefathers died for to protect133875[/snapback] They died protecting us from the bloody nazis mate. Not protecting us from the government knowing whether you take out books about making bombs at home. Or how much you spend on shopping a week. 133882[/snapback] r u fvcking brain dead or a wind up merchant? of course what u stated, it ensured LIBERTY you thick tw@ 133891[/snapback] I absolutly love how you ignore every question I pose you. And you call me a thick twat... you compare trying to stop millions dying in gas chambers, to the government knowing your fingerprints. cookoo ID cards are not going to end terrorist attacked but they could help. They could also help solve murders, rapes and any other crime you can mention. In turn maybe even preventing them. Imagine your mum getting stabbed and killed. They find the knife with fingerprints on it but they aren't in the current database. Would you still be happy having your civil liberties intact but knowing your mums killer could of been brought to justice had his fingerprints been taken as part of the ID card scheme. 133943[/snapback] There are many, many issues and potential threats to the introduction of identity cards which have nothing to do with terrorists. Not least the eventual compulsion to include medical data which will categorically be used against people (as well as for them) making it hard or impossible for those with certain conditions to get jobs, obtain insurance, travel abroad etc. etc. It is a very far-reaching subject.
lush Posted 7 July 2005 Author Posted 7 July 2005 Blair is not a terrorist. We have always been a target for terrorism in the last 30-40 years. It isnt fair to not allow any asylum seekers or refugees on the chance that a few may be terrorists, because thats what we'd have to do to stop the few that get through the net. Theres terrorist plans against us every day, most of which are found out and stopped because of our good intelligence and police services. This is just one that they didnt stop. Our country has done amazingly well to get till now without having a major attack. 133694[/snapback] Sadly life is not about right and wrong, justice or injustice it is about winning or losing. And we must decide whether it is worth fighting (peacefully,I hasten) for our way of life or having it swamped by outsiders who would impose their own ideals. Life has always been about survival - of either the fittest, the cleverest, the luckiest, whatever. It isn't fair that a lion stalks an injured wildebeest at the back of the herd. It's life and its harsh. One of our problems is having a sense of fairness and justice which over-rides our need to protect our way of life because, make no mistake, we won't change the thinking of the outsiders, at least those who would lead them, and we certainly shouldn't try by violently fatal means as I explain in my conclusion. Another problem is having nothing to unite us. We are more interested in our houses, our possessions, our comforts than protecting our country and our way of life. We don't even club together to help our own as many immigrant families do. They live in groups and all meet regularly at their places of worship not only for religious reasons but because it gives them power, because it gives them protection, because it gives them brotherhood. (It also makes them vulnerable to manipulation). Our churches are all but empty. Proabably the most passionate and relevant gathering we have left is at the football ground. And while we live with those problems, people who represent other ways of life gradually infiltrate the seats of local and national government, climb the ladders of power and play on our sense of fairness to usurp more power. That is not THEIR FAULT because, rightly or wrongly, they care about what they believe. It is OUR FAULT because we don't or we don't care enough to stand united and defend what we have built and what is already being eroded. So the sooner Blair stops pontificating about what he is "going to do" about beating terrorists and actually makes some uncomfortable decisions the better. It is time Blair concentrated on protecting England, the English way of life, the English people and stopped being arrogant enough to believe he can be missionary to the world. Other people might not want to be changed any more than us. We can still set examples, still give advice, still offer assistance, still do a lot of worthy things but our politics should be neutral and our focus should be on sorting OUR problems and protecting our heritage...by whatever means is necessary (like denying access to our Welfare Service to any foreigner who hasn't paid into it, like re-introducing National Service, like closing our borders either wholly or partially). Oh yes, and we should get out of Iraq. It is a farce in any case, with the same psychopaths running the torture chambers who were there in Saddam's day. But it is NOT our responsibility though it MIGHT be the responsibility of the United Nations or some still-to-be-formed International Government Organisation to which we might subscribe. And being party to killing people (except, perhaps in direct self-defence) is categorically against the Commandments and what is the value of a Commandment if it is ignored every time it just happens not to be convenient?. It is a question I might ask the leaders of other religious persuasions but I won't because they have to set their own standards and answer for them later if they truly believe what their religion asks for. 133940[/snapback] Well said Thracian, i couldnt agree more, and i`d love all of us English to read this, which brings me to one particular paragraph you wrote: `It is time Blair concentrated on protecting England, the English way of life, the English people` blair is a foreigner to our country, his number 2 gordon brown, the chairman of new labour etc etc etc I doubt blair cares one iota about the English way of life, or even the british peoples ways of life. what i think he does care about, is destroying britishness for a more marxist european state of europe, something i dread may cost me my life one day, attacking it.
Babylon Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 we will lose a vast amount of liberty, something weve fought in wars to protect, something millions of our forefathers died for to protect133875[/snapback] They died protecting us from the bloody nazis mate. Not protecting us from the government knowing whether you take out books about making bombs at home. Or how much you spend on shopping a week. 133882[/snapback] r u fvcking brain dead or a wind up merchant? of course what u stated, it ensured LIBERTY you thick tw@ 133891[/snapback] I absolutly love how you ignore every question I pose you. And you call me a thick twat... you compare trying to stop millions dying in gas chambers, to the government knowing your fingerprints. cookoo ID cards are not going to end terrorist attacked but they could help. They could also help solve murders, rapes and any other crime you can mention. In turn maybe even preventing them. Imagine your mum getting stabbed and killed. They find the knife with fingerprints on it but they aren't in the current database. Would you still be happy having your civil liberties intact but knowing your mums killer could of been brought to justice had his fingerprints been taken as part of the ID card scheme. 133943[/snapback] There are many, many issues and potential threats to the introduction of identity cards which have nothing to do with terrorists. Not least the eventual compulsion to include medical data which will categorically be used against people (as well as for them) making it hard or impossible for those with certain conditions to get jobs, obtain insurance, travel abroad etc. etc. It is a very far-reaching subject. 133963[/snapback] Agreed, i'm sure you could argue 'til the cows come home about the pro's and cons. Putting medical data on there is something I would not agree with. In my eyes MI5 having my eye and fingerprint scan won't make any difference to my life unless I commit a crime (something i'm not planning on doing) Medical data like you point out, could be used in a way that could alter my life.
Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 That to me tells me blair is a terrorist if indeed he invades a country and kills innocent people. hey lush, this might come as a shock but.... Terror 1 Terror 2 Terror 3 this is what the people you brush with the word innocent do and this is to their OWN people!
lush Posted 7 July 2005 Author Posted 7 July 2005 I absolutly love how you ignore every question I pose you. And you call me a thick twat...Imagine your mum getting stabbed and killed. They find the knife with fingerprints on it but they aren't in the current database. Would you still be happy having your civil liberties intact but knowing your mums killer could of been brought to justice had his fingerprints been taken as part of the ID card scheme. 133943[/snapback] What questions? (notice the ?, that means a question has been asked...) yes then imagine producing a law that stopped that kinda thing happening in the first place i.e make it law that you will die if found guilty of murder, theft, rape etc etc etc would you think twice, i rather think so, and if you didnt, you`d die, and society would be MUCH healthier without you. i.d cards? grow up!!
Steven Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 That to me tells me blair is a terrorist if indeed he invades a country and kills innocent people. hey lush, this might come as a shock but.... Terror 1 Terror 2 Terror 3 this is what the people you brush with the word innocent do and this is to their OWN people! 133977[/snapback] That has the sickly hand of US counter intelligence all over it.
Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 I absolutly love how you ignore every question I pose you. And you call me a thick twat...Imagine your mum getting stabbed and killed. They find the knife with fingerprints on it but they aren't in the current database. Would you still be happy having your civil liberties intact but knowing your mums killer could of been brought to justice had his fingerprints been taken as part of the ID card scheme. 133943[/snapback] What questions? (notice the ?, that means a question has been asked...) yes then imagine producing a law that stopped that kinda thing happening in the first place i.e make it law that you will die if found guilty of murder, theft, rape etc etc etc would you think twice, i rather think so, and if you didnt, you`d die, and society would be MUCH healthier without you. i.d cards? grow up!! 133981[/snapback] bloody hell about time, we agree on something. But the death penalty is another thread somewhere (and coincidentally i was in the minority for again )
Benji Posted 7 July 2005 Posted 7 July 2005 That to me tells me blair is a terrorist if indeed he invades a country and kills innocent people. hey lush, this might come as a shock but.... Terror 1 Terror 2 Terror 3 this is what the people you brush with the word innocent do and this is to their OWN people! 133977[/snapback] That has the sickly hand of US counter inteligence all over it. 133982[/snapback] as much propaganda as they want to use, you can't say they don't exist
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.