David Davies to Resign?
13 June 2008, 10:23 AM
#61
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 9,781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MP DOES SOMETHING OTHER THAN BEING A DICK
The Daily Mash - MP DOES SOMETHING OTHER THAN BEING A DICK
"Labour politicians ridiculed his stance claiming that by not being a dick he was actually being even more of a dick."
"Labour politicians ridiculed his stance claiming that by not being a dick he was actually being even more of a dick."
13 June 2008, 10:55 AM
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Daily Mash - MP DOES SOMETHING OTHER THAN BEING A DICK
"Labour politicians ridiculed his stance claiming that by not being a dick he was actually being even more of a dick."
"Labour politicians ridiculed his stance claiming that by not being a dick he was actually being even more of a dick."
Dave
13 June 2008, 12:03 PM
#64
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway,I'm as sick to the back teeth of alleged'terror hyper alert' as I am with 'global warming'
I do however feel that having ID cards,CCTV in my bedroom and civil servants watching what I type on scoobynet gives me a real feeling of too much big brother going on.Glad someone is prepared not to see all our civil liberties go down the pan.Too late I suspect though
GB if you are reading this
(maybe just stop invading everyone would help the world chill a bit)
13 June 2008, 01:58 PM
#65
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You night even stop "sleep walking" into the secret agenda of the egregious bunch of creeps who are undermining everything this country has ever stood for!
Les
13 June 2008, 04:57 PM
#67
BANNED
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Father of the Banned
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie, a vocal supporter of 42 day terror detention, has said he is "90%" likely to challenge Mr Davis, if Labour does not stand, guaranteeing a contest.
Davis could be without a job, then who will pay for his Mansion?
Is that my Shadow Home Secretary I see legging it?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/Virtual...ameronnew1.jpg
Davis could be without a job, then who will pay for his Mansion?
Is that my Shadow Home Secretary I see legging it?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/Virtual...ameronnew1.jpg
14 June 2008, 02:14 AM
#70
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you would do well to listen carefully to what he said in that link from warren m. He has been a highly principled man in the past with a good record. What he says is absolutely true and if you have any sense of honesty, especially to yourself, you might just extract your head from that unpleasant place and stop trying to belittle a man who is standing up for our personal liberties.
You night even stop "sleep walking" into the secret agenda of the egregious bunch of creeps who are undermining everything this country has ever stood for!
Les
You night even stop "sleep walking" into the secret agenda of the egregious bunch of creeps who are undermining everything this country has ever stood for!
Les
I know it makes for good headlines and good conspiracy theories, but how exactly have your civil liberties been affected?
As for David Davies, well having listened to the guy I believe that he does feel strongly about this, but I'm not sure were his principles start and end, this debate reminds me of a famous Churchill story of when he was sat next to a woman at a dinner party
Churchill - "if a man offered you a million pounds would you sleep with him?"
The Woman - "probably, yes"
Churchill - "would you do it for a pound?"
The Woman - " certainly not, what kind of a woman do you take me for?"
Churchill "well I thought we'd already established that"
This change in the law (if it comes in) does not affect your civil liberties in any way shape or form. It might however, stop something terrible happening, or someone who should of been prosectuted being let free.
If anyone gets locked up for 42 days and then released without charge then I'll change my mind on this. Also if that does happen then the Policeman in charge of the investigation should be sacked, the Home Secretary resign, and the Judge who allowed it to happen be degowned (or what ever it is you do to get rid of judges)
Anyone would think that this debate is happening in a vaccum and that there isn't a threat facing this country from terrorists.
14 June 2008, 12:20 PM
#71
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Les come off it matey
I know it makes for good headlines and good conspiracy theories, but how exactly have your civil liberties been affected?
As for David Davies, well having listened to the guy I believe that he does feel strongly about this, but I'm not sure were his principles start and end, this debate reminds me of a famous Churchill story of when he was sat next to a woman at a dinner party
Churchill - "if a man offered you a million pounds would you sleep with him?"
The Woman - "probably, yes"
Churchill - "would you do it for a pound?"
The Woman - " certainly not, what kind of a woman do you take me for?"
Churchill "well I thought we'd already established that"
This change in the law (if it comes in) does not affect your civil liberties in any way shape or form. It might however, stop something terrible happening, or someone who should of been prosectuted being let free.
If anyone gets locked up for 42 days and then released without charge then I'll change my mind on this. Also if that does happen then the Policeman in charge of the investigation should be sacked, the Home Secretary resign, and the Judge who allowed it to happen be degowned (or what ever it is you do to get rid of judges)
Anyone would think that this debate is happening in a vaccum and that there isn't a threat facing this country from terrorists.
I know it makes for good headlines and good conspiracy theories, but how exactly have your civil liberties been affected?
As for David Davies, well having listened to the guy I believe that he does feel strongly about this, but I'm not sure were his principles start and end, this debate reminds me of a famous Churchill story of when he was sat next to a woman at a dinner party
Churchill - "if a man offered you a million pounds would you sleep with him?"
The Woman - "probably, yes"
Churchill - "would you do it for a pound?"
The Woman - " certainly not, what kind of a woman do you take me for?"
Churchill "well I thought we'd already established that"
This change in the law (if it comes in) does not affect your civil liberties in any way shape or form. It might however, stop something terrible happening, or someone who should of been prosectuted being let free.
If anyone gets locked up for 42 days and then released without charge then I'll change my mind on this. Also if that does happen then the Policeman in charge of the investigation should be sacked, the Home Secretary resign, and the Judge who allowed it to happen be degowned (or what ever it is you do to get rid of judges)
Anyone would think that this debate is happening in a vaccum and that there isn't a threat facing this country from terrorists.
When it comes to this change in the law, you have to think to the future, not just at the immediate moment. Like ID cards with all the information which will be available from them if they get their way, can you be crtain that you could trust a future government with the power that this sort of legislation provides for them? how do you feel about this lot's proposal to be able to section someone without the need for medical backing? Now why would they want to do that?
Les
Les
14 June 2008, 02:35 PM
#72
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As must have been pretty obvious, I was objecting to the way you were running him down in your first post insinuationg that he was just taking a non risky step purely for effect.
When it comes to this change in the law, you have to think to the future, not just at the immediate moment. Like ID cards with all the information which will be available from them if they get their way, can you be crtain that you could trust a future government with the power that this sort of legislation provides for them? how do you feel about this lot's proposal to be able to section someone without the need for medical backing? Now why would they want to do that?
Les
Les
When it comes to this change in the law, you have to think to the future, not just at the immediate moment. Like ID cards with all the information which will be available from them if they get their way, can you be crtain that you could trust a future government with the power that this sort of legislation provides for them? how do you feel about this lot's proposal to be able to section someone without the need for medical backing? Now why would they want to do that?
Les
Les
I do feel slightly uneasy about being on the same side of an arguement as McKenzie, as I loath him with a passion.
Well I'm not convinced by the arguement for ID cards either, but as a matter of practicality, rather than principle.
There is probably a case for being able to use technology to solve and prevent crime. How could there not be?
We all feel threatened by ID cards but have absolutely no problem in giving our personal information to unaccountable organisations like credit card companies, banks, insurance companies ect ect.
I think we all want the same things here, a safer, happier and healthier country, we may differ on some of the ways of doing that.
15 June 2008, 01:43 AM
#74
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 June 2008, 11:05 AM
#75
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Martin,
Far from being a freak show, it was the only significant protest which would really attract attention that he could make. It is no good telling Flash and his lying mates about it in the House, as ever they will take no notice of what he says and more to the point, what the people of this country want. Having seen what they are putting in place for the future and how they remain in denial, and just do exactly what they want for their convenience and not that of the people, the electorate does not trust them any more.
Please tell me how he and his creepy foreign secretary can say that they will ratify the Eu constitution (please dont bother to tell us that it is a treaty) when it is now dead in the water because of the Irish referendum? What is the reason behind all that then?
Les
Far from being a freak show, it was the only significant protest which would really attract attention that he could make. It is no good telling Flash and his lying mates about it in the House, as ever they will take no notice of what he says and more to the point, what the people of this country want. Having seen what they are putting in place for the future and how they remain in denial, and just do exactly what they want for their convenience and not that of the people, the electorate does not trust them any more.
Please tell me how he and his creepy foreign secretary can say that they will ratify the Eu constitution (please dont bother to tell us that it is a treaty) when it is now dead in the water because of the Irish referendum? What is the reason behind all that then?
Les
15 June 2008, 11:18 AM
#76
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Martin,
Far from being a freak show, it was the only significant protest which would really attract attention that he could make. It is no good telling Flash and his lying mates about it in the House, as ever they will take no notice of what he says and more to the point, what the people of this country want. Having seen what they are putting in place for the future and how they remain in denial, and just do exactly what they want for their convenience and not that of the people, the electorate does not trust them any more.
Please tell me how he and his creepy foreign secretary can say that they will ratify the Eu constitution (please dont bother to tell us that it is a treaty) when it is now dead in the water because of the Irish referendum? What is the reason behind all that then?
Les
Far from being a freak show, it was the only significant protest which would really attract attention that he could make. It is no good telling Flash and his lying mates about it in the House, as ever they will take no notice of what he says and more to the point, what the people of this country want. Having seen what they are putting in place for the future and how they remain in denial, and just do exactly what they want for their convenience and not that of the people, the electorate does not trust them any more.
Please tell me how he and his creepy foreign secretary can say that they will ratify the Eu constitution (please dont bother to tell us that it is a treaty) when it is now dead in the water because of the Irish referendum? What is the reason behind all that then?
Les
As for the EU treaty I 100% agree with you, this just makes a mockery for us all
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post