http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4422086.stm
Makes you wonder how long he'll last, doesn't it?
Blair defeated on Terror Laws
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4422086.stm
Makes you wonder how long he'll last, doesn't it?
"War! What is it good for? Absolutely NOTHING!"- War, Edwin Starr
Senator
Kind of ironic... when the liberal party gets back in power, they'll probably try something very similar, and will probably get away with it.
Of course, such an "anti-terror" law isn't as bad as putting cameras all over the place and disarming the public.
Just another step on the journey to totalitarianism. Sigh.
Heresy grows from idleness.
No cause for such alarm. There are many ways for you to die - I'm just one of them.
Vicarius
Uhm...the 'liberal' party (I pressume you mean Labour) is in power. The propostion was made by these 'liberals' and was rejected by the conservatives. Tony Blair is a liberal (at least in an American dictionary, we mostly refer to them as 'socialists')...Kind of ironic... when the liberal party gets back in power, they'll probably try something very similar, and will probably get away with it.
For my name is Legion
Good that he was defeated... Bad for Blair. 'till now I actually liked the guy.
In the long run, we are all dead - John Maynard Keynes
Under the patronage of Lvcivs Vorenvs
Holding patronage upon the historical tvrcopolier and former patron of the once fallen, risen from the ashes and again fallen RvsskiSoldat
Vicarius
That's ironic, I despise the guy, but this was the first time I actually was in agreement with him...Good that he was defeated... Bad for Blair. 'till now I actually liked the guy.
For my name is Legion
We are situated on very different positions then...
In the long run, we are all dead - John Maynard Keynes
Under the patronage of Lvcivs Vorenvs
Holding patronage upon the historical tvrcopolier and former patron of the once fallen, risen from the ashes and again fallen RvsskiSoldat
Dux Limitis
And socialists like me mostly refer to him as a traitor.Originally Posted by Torment
I think the confusion is that "new labour" isn't realy socialist anymore, they are centre.
But they are the most left-winged major party in Brittain.
Senator
:laughing:Yeah, shows how much I know about British politics... when I get three hours of sleep, I don't know much about anything!
Last edited by First Crusader; November 09, 2005 at 12:14 PM.
Heresy grows from idleness.
No cause for such alarm. There are many ways for you to die - I'm just one of them.
Dux Limitis
American politics are unique, conservative americans can't grasp it is that much different. Which is why they ban foreign parties from the republican conventions.:laughing:
Yeah, shows how much I know about British politics... when I get three hours of sleep, I don't know much about anything!
Liberals, conservatives, etc, are VERY different overseas.
And "disarming the public" is a europeon initiative, not just british. If europe is a totalitarian society because of it that is hilarious. If anything MOST of the countrys allow more freedoms than the US.
Swear filters are for sites run by immature children.
Senator
More social freedoms perhaps, but no where near the amount of political freedoms.
Not even close.
In the United States, the People are sovereign. The Franchise isn't just a set of rights--it IS the State. This is no clearer demonstrated than in the concept of the initiative, referendum, and recall--the strongest weapons of the Citizenry.
I think being in prison for 90 days without charge is worse than not owning a gun, to be honest. Britain has got on fine without guns for years, so why do we suddenly need them now?
I think it's a step away from a totalitarian state.
"War! What is it good for? Absolutely NOTHING!"- War, Edwin Starr
Nice to see the Commons use a bit of common sense for once, rather than relying on the Lords. Howard put a nice question to Blair in PM questions - something like 'can you name one case where, evidence came to light 90 days after an arrest?'
No the extra detention time is a nice bonus for the coppers but would of made zero difference to any terrorist attack on this country. Something our MPs actually got for once.
If we could actually trust the police to not use anti-terrorist measures as a magic get in jail free card, then they might of actually got some support. Anti-terrorist measures are used for ejecting people from the Labour party conference, taking a camera from a labour party member, against political t-shirts and walking on a cycle path.
...but I think Germany with home advantage will raise their game as always for the big ones and win the title. Post #260
Dux Limitis
Social freedoms is all i care about really, political freedoms doesn't really matter. If you are free to do most of which you want to why would you need political freedoms? The only reason you would need them is to give yourself more freedom to live how you wish.
I dont know enough about europe to judge their political freedoms though.
One thing that severely annoys me about europe though is, for example, in london how they can get so easily away with having camera on every corner. Reminds me of 40s anti-soviet propoganda like 1984.
Swear filters are for sites run by immature children.
That's Ffips backwards
lol now thats interesting.. never really thought about that one. You dont have them? We have police cameras in quite a few places and ive never thought of them as violating my privacy, i am in a public place after all. Then theres crime programs where they show how theyve only been able to prosecute based on the footage..
Civitate
We (the US) have them at some traffic lights to catch you running a red light.
We have them, on roads to catch people speeding (known as "speed-camera's").
We have camera's in our towns and cites, and usually in most public buildings such as shopping centers, libraries, city council buildings ect ect.
no, i don't feel my privacy violated at all.
they are used to catch criminals, not spy on people.
you really think they have hundreds of staff watching all these camera's at once?
they are there for archive purposes, a crime is commited, someone reviews the video archives.
Gruffles
I must agree with Bigfootedfred here. I have no problem with a camera watching me when I am in a public place. What's the difference between that and putting more cops on the street (something proven to reduce crime). The only difference I can see is about $100k / year (at minimum) being saved on salaries/per camera. It sounds pretty smart and finactually sound, if you ask me.
Faithfully under the patronage of the fallen yet rather amiable Octavian.
Smile! The better the energy you put in, the better the energy you will get out.
Comes Rei Militaris
I was incorrect in my original assertation. Apparently there was a clause that the police had to go to a judge every 7 days to keep the suspect under detention.
Michael howard (not someone I'm particularly fond of, it must be said) asked a pertinent question as to whether there was any evidence that this clause was actually needed.
the words 'police state' were also used. Whilst we are now where near one, it would be a step on this particular slippery slope...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
