Blair Mutiny

[Terry]

All over the uk news and papers at the mo. I back tony blair for having the balls to attempt to introduce this new "90-day" captivity law on fighting terrorism, as do most of the british public, so why the hell have all those mp's turned against him?

It's the first time blair has been defeated in house since he began his campaign... and i for one think this is one of the best ideas he's had so far!!!

Tel me how u feel guys.

[Trojan]

I love Blair and your Country. If I were to ever get a call asking to bring my knowledge to fight and defend your Country I would drop everything to preserve my heritage and yours. Don't f**k with sacred ties! Cheers! A pissed off Trojan!

[Lucky]

yeah.. to get out of this bull in us i might just move to the uk as soon as im 18.. i dont want to be bombed cause i live near a buisy city u know.. BEER City.

[-live-wire-]

You live in Milwaukee ?

[Trojan]

Yea, lets take a trip in the Bird and have a tour! FREE BEER! w00t!

[Hellfighter]

i think 1/2 of the United States people should move into U.K. we be fighting who get a job in no time bucko j/k

but it a good ID he had. but there maybe some holes in it, he may need to patch up, then it may get pass in.

think he need to redo thats all. it sounds good, but if they voted no there has to be a reason? what ever it is he's party need to rethink it and fix so all partys like it totally. never hurt to try again a 2nd time around after they look it over and see why it did not get pass the first time.

[DevilDog#1]

It was passed after it was revied for 35 days.

I believe no has the right, however serious the crime is, to be held without a charge. If you do pass laws then he should be ready for the other countries to take steps against UK citizens who commit crime in host countries and not send in tanks to bust the jails to save their citizens.

Double standards and policies of hypocrisy works both ways.

[Lakie]

i agree with DD1, one of the fundamental arguments about iraq was that saddam hussein held prisoners without charge,
everyone jumps up and down about that with china aswell....

So either China is a very forward thinking country, or theres something else at play here...

The right to know ones charges is one of the fundamental things that prevents a country from becoming a police state..

And lets not forget that these laws typically also try to prevent judicial review of decisions, even if its colsed doors stuff, the fact the government dosent want independant review of cases must mean their up to something...

[Lucky]

yezzerprs. i live in milwaukee. home of pabst, miller and anoter i cant rembember

[Erik]

I have about as much respect for Blair as I do for Bush...which means I agree with the majority on his approval rating.

Sorry m8.

[Trojan]

Send me to the Jungle! F**k the Desert!

[BADDOG]

We shall have to see if this has damaged his future as leader of the Labour party or indeed as Prime Minister but as he has already stated he will go I'm sure it pretty academic either way.

Perhaps if he and the idiots in the Conservative party before him hadn't allowed all and sundry, (and no matter how extreme their views I may add), to come and live here in the U.K. such legislation as was being proposed would not have become neccessary.

Dealing with terrorism is devilishly difficult and we are faced with fanatics who have no care for who's life they sacrifice for their "beliefs" so this is somehting that we will have to face again in the future.

As to a solution to this very difficult problem, holding someone without charge for 90 days or any length of time for that matter whilst investigating their involvement or not in acts of terrorism or conspiring to commit acts of terrorism well there is no easy solution.

That we have to do something is clear but what that something is? Well that's another matter altogether.

Warm regards

[DevilDog#1]

I wonder why weren't these "policy changes" made when IRA conflict was going on ...

[BADDOG]

Originally posted by DevilDog#1
I wonder why weren't these "policy changes" made when IRA conflict was going on ...

For the answer to that question you would have to go back to the Wilson government of the late 1960's and for that matter Ted Heath, Jim Callaghan, Thatcher, John Major and find out why they didn't make any substantial policy changes regarding terrorism when they were in power.....it's a well know fact that Thatcher negotiated with terrorists although she pretended to be tough on them as indeed all the other did too.


Warm Regards

[Terry]

wow, some pretty heavy views on this and i agree with all of u. As much as i back this policy of holding the accused for 90 days until proven innocent, i also agree that nobody should be held unless proven guilty.

I guess part of my decisions are made by the racist part of me. I'm not a strong racist, but there are certain groups that do nothing but p*ss people off and i dont care for them much.