[voodoo]

I've been thinking. This obsession of liberals with tolerance is what is leading to this. Tolerance over everything. Tolerance over freedom.

They are taking away our rights and increasing the watch over us. They hate our freedom as much as the terrorists. I think the liberal utopia is freedom without responsibility. That isn't reality however and this crap enrages me.

And like so often before, we have the UK and Labour to thank for it. Thanks guys, perhaps we'd have a better union without you and the USA. Because, you know.. perhaps you'd rather become the 51st state? Hm?

The move to beef up relaxed security procedures in Europe came as John Reid, the Home Secretary, warned human rights would have to be balanced against the threat from terrorism.

Regardless, this means fingerprinting, iris scanning and all the stupidity of a paranoid society. Meanwhile, in trains and ships nothing is being done for added protection and quite frankly, nothing has been done for added protection in civil aviation anyway.

It is all a big show. Last week (in the UK of course) the commanding pilot of a jet was denied taking a metal fork aboard in his carry-on luggage. He asked the guard what would stop him from pointing the plane to the ground or even using the axe in the cockpit.. (he has a point)

Halfwits and appeasers have taken over. I don't like that one squat and I don't like to see the EU follow the stupidity of the US. Thanks to the UK however, we might.

The plan to extend biometric procedures - already enforced in the United States, Canada and Australia - to Europe comes after Mr Reid held talks with ministers from five other European countries. He said Europe would not allow terrorists to undermine the "common European values that bind our societies together".

The proponents of terror "would abuse our open societies, would misuse our freedoms and adapt the latest technology to their evil intent and have no regard for human life or for human rights".

Fear, fear, fear. I don't buy it and frankly I'd rather die in a terrorist attack than to lose my freedom.

It gets even more stupid and perhaps terrifying, but I'm too dazed to comment more on it. Behold...

Other measures agreed in the wake of last week's terror threat include a commitment to stamping out radicalism by stricter policing of the internet, replacing extremism with a "European" model of Islam, a 250 million research project into liquid explosives and a meeting of security services across Europe this month.

http://www.airportbusiness.com/artic...tion=5&id=7689



V

[moodymonster]

Labour can take a long walk off a short pier.

Most people in the UK don't care what the gov't is doing until it's in their face.

"We have walked blindfold into tyranny and live in a democracy that exists in form but not substance. Parliament is a rubber stamp of the executive while general elections are and will shortly become the legalistic 'tinsel' which purports to confer a legitimacy upon a system many people neither know or care they live under until it impacts upon their lives directly and they ask a question that was answered two series of 'Neighbours' ago."

can't remember who said that, but I got it from somewhere.

and yup, we are led by cowards - we went through the IRA bombing campaigns and nothing like what is happening now happened. Even when the cabinet was bombed in Brighton... the gov't of the day didn't respond like Tony's.

There has been a direct bomb attack on the British Government at the Conservative party conference in Brighton.
At least two people have been killed and many others seriously injured, including two senior Cabinet ministers.

The blast tore apart the Brighton Grand Hotel where members of the Cabinet have been staying for the Conservative party conference.

Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her husband Dennis narrowly escaped injury.

BBC ON THIS DAY | 12 | 1984: Tory Cabinet in Brighton bomb blast

Margaret Thatcher: "All attempts to destroy democracy by terrorism will fail" - or maybe not...

[Doofy]

OK, as you know I detest Labour as much as the next guy.

However... ...this fingerprinting thing for European travellers has been on the cards for a *long* time. And it comes not from Labour, but from above. Yep. Those lovely folks in Brussels.

It looks like it's coming from Labour simply because they're the most eager to implement the measures and we have sort of a "test bed" thing going on here. The all-imposing national ID card and central database thing? From Brussels... ...we're just testing it. The pay-per-mile black box in your car thing? From Brussels... ...we're just testing it. And so on and so on.

The following article is worth a read if you want to know what's really going on over there in Babel:
Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship | The Brussels Journal

So sorry V, the UK leaving the union won't help one bit. There needs to be a concerted effort by a whole lot of Europeans to abolish the EU and replace it with something we can all believe in, something which doesn't seek to control our lives.

[yakkiebah]

How on earth is this fingerprinting sh�t going to prevent planes from being blown up by terrorists? Do terrorists have a special type of fingerprints?

Can't we deal with terrorism like Israel does? Seems to work pretty well. We don't see Israel turning into some crap big-brother state.

Doofy is right, regardless of the threat of terrorism it would have happend anyway. My next vote goes to the party who is the most anti-EU/terrorism and pro-US/Israel/libertarian.

[Sky Captain]

It will make suspects easier to track.
And one day we all may be required to have a fingerprint match just to fly.(finger/bio scanner)

Welcome to the Beast™.

[nonhuman]

Is this something that will just apply to EU passport holders, or to everyone? It sounds like it's a scheme to operate in concert with new biometric EU passports, but I don't really know enough about the situation.

Will I, as a US citizen, be fingerprinted if I fly to/from Europe? If so I have to say I won't be visiting Europe any time soon, which is a shame as I was really looking forward to spending Christmas with my future sister-in-law in Ireland (not to mention visiting friends all over the EU).

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Will I, as a US citizen, be fingerprinted if I fly to/from Europe? If so I have to say I won't be visiting Europe any time soon, which is a shame as I was really looking forward to spending Christmas with my future sister-in-law in Ireland (not to mention visiting friends all over the EU).

Hey.. that's the same reason I won't be visiting the US. Not until they stop taking fingerprints. Might be a while..

V

[moodymonster]

isn't it at the moment that UK visitors to the states get finger printed and photographed as a matter of course?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Is this something that will just apply to EU passport holders, or to everyone? It sounds like it's a scheme to operate in concert with new biometric EU passports, but I don't really know enough about the situation.

Will I, as a US citizen, be fingerprinted if I fly to/from Europe? If so I have to say I won't be visiting Europe any time soon, which is a shame as I was really looking forward to spending Christmas with my future sister-in-law in Ireland (not to mention visiting friends all over the EU).

I've sort of lost track of what's currently going on, but there should be some info in here:
http://www.euractiv.com/en/justice/b...article-132063

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

It will make suspects easier to track.

At the expense of tracking people who are not suspected of any wrongdoing, just because it's possible.

And one day we all may be required to have a fingerprint match just to fly.(finger/bio scanner)

That's the day I start taking the train. When the government has probable cause to believe that I've done something wrong, as evidenced by a warrant, they can track me all they want. Until then, I want them out of my life.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by voodoo

I've been thinking. This obsession of liberals with tolerance is what is leading to this. Tolerance over everything. Tolerance over freedom.

Are the Liberals in the UK different from the Liberals in the US? I'm confused. From what I've seen, it's the Conservatives who are pushing for tighter security measures at the expense of freedom.

[moodymonster]

In the UK the Conservatives seem to be asking for existing laws to be enforced and not too interested in new ones like ID cards etc.

Libs in UK... hmmm.... not sure... LibDems... the party you vote for if you don't like Labour or Conservative.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Doofy

However... ...this fingerprinting thing for European travellers has been on the cards for a *long* time. And it comes not from Labour, but from above. Yep. Those lovely folks in Brussels.

The lovely [<- sarcasm] people in Brussels are made up of party-appointed politicians from every single EU country. That means, Labour had a hand in it. There is no 'Brussels' in the sense that it lives as an entity outside national politics.

I can't say that I have anything fundamentally against passports containing a photo or even a fingerprint - pretty much the same thing - however I don't trust my government or any govermnent to keep such information automatically, without reason.

What we're seeing here is scare tactics from the Labour government in the UK. Scare people into submission. The EU doesn't have the imagination nor the inclination to use such things. This is local politics.

It looks like it's coming from Labour simply because they're the most eager to implement the measures and we have sort of a "test bed" thing going on here.

Exactly. Labour is embracing and extending some ideas about a pan-EU ID card of the next generation. The EU is concerned about passports, not ID cards. Your driver's licence is basically the EU ID card. If you don't have a driver's licence, the a passport is the only other proper ID card.

The all-imposing national ID card and central database thing? From Brussels...

No, from the UK. Brussels is interested in a next generation passport and AFAIK, passports are large, unweildy and most importantly optional.

The pay-per-mile black box in your car thing? From Brussels... ...we're just testing it.

Actually, those things are already in action in Germany and other countries in rental cars. Private corporations have access to this information and can turn off your rental if you're trying to drive it across the border. Soon, however this may become mandatory in all cars.

Still, GSM phones can be located already and you can be monitored more or less just by carrying your phone. Rocket science it is not. Due to the nature of the GSM system, it will always be possible to pinpoint you.

Turning off the phone is a solution and GPS controller chips in cars are not mandatory. They be one day, but that day is far ahead and something that will be in the hands of consumers. The EU is not interested in such petty things. The UK, however, has been turning into a big-brother society.

The following article is worth a read if you want to know what's really going on over there in Babel:
Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship | The Brussels Journal

I have read that interview before and I am of the firm opionin that Vladimir Bukovsky is clinically insane. He also hates Europe and has a fetish with America and should live there in that utopia of government survelance etc etc.

I am sorry but he is talking about things like the collapse of the EU and regaining of national identities - something that isn't going to happen soon and they haven't been lost, respectively.

He goes on to claim that the countries that form the EU didn't join voluntarily because some voted more than once about joining. Not considering that the opinions of people change, so did the Union. Perhaps it was more appealing in the second election? It is stupid, frankly.

There are countries like Norway, Switzerland and Iceland that are still outside the EU and won't be joining anytime soon. Nobody is forcing anyone.

If we, the members of the EU, find ourselves in a spot we don't want to be in, then it is because we brought it upon ourselves and it is up to us to fix it.

So sorry V, the UK leaving the union won't help one bit. There needs to be a concerted effort by a whole lot of Europeans to abolish the EU and replace it with something we can all believe in, something which doesn't seek to control our lives.

The UK has a very tight relationship with the US. That is fine, but that is not good for the rest of the member states of the EU. I really feel that the UK should withdraw from the Union, as it is. Perhaps make a proper alliance with the US.

Every single country in the EU has veto rights. No single law can be enforced unless every single nation agrees. If our nation starts agreeing with things that we don't like, then politicians we don't agree with are in control of it.

I respect your opinion and understand where it is coming from, but I stand firmly behind the EU. It is the best we can make right now and its powers are very much exaggerated, because after all these years the European countries still can't really trust each other. Not the least because despite the Union, everybody is thinking about themselves.

We are not united like the US. We just happen to stand in the same general area with our backs together. We have a common history and a common culture. We are unified by a common goal of peace and prosperity.

Still, we are and will always be, citizens of the individual countries Europe. We are nationalists at hart. Every single one of us. We are proudest of our own country. Our part of the Union.

That is something ex-commies like Vladimir Bukovsky can never understand. We are one and we are many.

V

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Are the Liberals in the UK different from the Liberals in the US? I'm confused. From what I've seen, it's the Conservatives who are pushing for tighter security measures at the expense of freedom.

What one has to understand is that UK "liberals" are actually so far left that they're almost Stalinist. Or at least they'd like to be if we'd let them get away with it.

Time and again I see people think that the "right" is the enemy when in fact the exact opposite is the case - the "left" are usually the people who take liberties away. For example, how many libs know that Margaret Thatcher actually voted in favour of gay marriage?

UK Conservatives have pledged to do away with all this ID card nonsense. They're currently ticking most of the right boxes for a win.

Originally Posted by moodymonster

Libs in UK... hmmm.... not sure... LibDems... the party you vote for if you're mental.

Fixed.

[BlueSky]

I wonder what they do about terrorists who have lost their fingers in a bad suicide-bombing attempt. Seems to me a fingerless suicide bomber could travel anywhere, anytime without fear of being fingerprinted. Of course he'd have to pull the switch with his teeth or something, but I suppose we could check fingerless travelers for teeth, and if they do have teeth, extract them on the spot. Of course, that probably wouldn't be enough, as the terrorist could use his feet...so maybe some hobbling (like in "Misery") would be in order. Then just to be safe, sew his mouth shut with 50 lb. line so he can't bark out orders to possible hidden accomplices and insert live angry wasps in his nose in case he tries to hum out any orders.

The best thing about this approach is that it only discriminates against fingerless people, and who cares about them anyway.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by voodoo

The lovely [<- sarcasm] people in Brussels are made up of party-appointed politicians from every single EU country. That means, Labour had a hand in it.

Of course. However, Labour had no power when Maastricht came into play.

Originally Posted by voodoo

What we're seeing here is scare tactics from the Labour government in the UK. Scare people into submission. The EU doesn't have the imagination nor the inclination to use such things. This is local politics.

Sorry V, you're wrong. This is EU driven, all the way.

Originally Posted by voodoo

Exactly. Labour is embracing and extending some ideas about a pan-EU ID card of the next generation. The EU is concerned about passports, not ID cards. Your driver's licence is basically the EU ID card. If you don't have a driver's licence, the a passport is the only other proper ID card.

I'm tellin' ya - the EU is driving this ID card thing.

Originally Posted by voodoo

Turning off the phone is a solution and GPS controller chips in cars are not mandatory. They be one day, but that day is far ahead and something that will be in the hands of consumers. The EU is not interested in such petty things.

If the EU isn't interested in such petty things, why does it do things like specify the shape of bananas? They're into micro-management, all the way.

Originally Posted by voodoo

(VB) goes on to claim that the countries that form the EU didn't join voluntarily because some voted more than once about joining.

Well, I wasn't given a vote. And those of the previous generation were voting to join the EEC, not the EU.

Originally Posted by voodoo

There are countries like Norway, Switzerland and Iceland that are still outside the EU and won't be joining anytime soon. Nobody is forcing anyone.

If we, the members of the EU, find ourselves in a spot we don't want to be in, then it is because we brought it upon ourselves and it is up to us to fix it.

So, how do we do that? I want rid of the un-elected bureaucrats such as Mandelson. I want the commission to actually sign off on its accounts. I want them to stop doing things like banning bull-bars, EU-wide. How do we get them to do that, short of knocking the whole sorry mess down and starting again?

Originally Posted by voodoo

Every single country in the EU has veto rights. No single law can be enforced unless every single nation agrees.

And then the EU continues to hammer the dissenting country until they say yes. See the Constitution vote in France and what Brussels is currently doing about it.

Originally Posted by voodoo

I respect your opinion and understand where it is coming from, but I stand firmly behind the EU. It is the best we can make right now and its powers are very much exaggerated, because after all these years the European countries still can't really trust each other. Not the least because despite the Union, everybody is thinking about themselves.

I stand behind Europe and the European people (even the French!)... ...just not the politicians. The EU has been created by politicians, not by the people. Why should we trust it?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by BlueSky

I wonder what they do about terrorists who have lost their fingers in a bad suicide-bombing attempt. Seems to me a fingerless suicide bomber could travel anywhere, anytime without fear of being fingerprinted. Of course he'd have to pull the switch with his teeth or something, but I suppose we could check fingerless travelers for teeth, and if they do have teeth, extract them on the spot. Of course, that probably wouldn't be enough, as the terrorist could use his feet...so maybe some hobbling (like in "Misery") would be in order. Then just to be safe, sew his mouth shut with 50 lb. line so he can't bark out orders to possible hidden accomplices and insert live angry wasps in his nose in case he tries to hum out any orders.

The best thing about this approach is that it only discriminates against fingerless people, and who cares about them anyway.

The terrorists have got around that one already:

[voodoo]

You provide many good questions, Doofy. I cannot answer them all..

I stand behind Europe and the European people (even the French!)... ...just not the politicians. The EU has been created by politicians, not by the people. Why should we trust it?

There, I agree with you 100% and the less actual executive power that is given to the EU, the better. We have enough trouble just keeping out local politicians in line

However, I do support a 2nd generation passport. Something that cannot be forged for a thousand dollars like the current ones. The shelters of the terrorist will be eradicated from within Europe - simply because we don't like 'em. The borders of the Union need to be strengthened and the identities of citizens moving in and out of it need to be verified.

The rest, we need to keep an eye out for and also - I am sad to say - on the first, second, third and fourth generation of muslim immigrants.

V

[Doofy]

V...
Is this UK driven, or EU driven?

IDABC - SE: Biometric passports introduced in Sweden and Norway

In addition to starting issuing biometric passports, Sweden has also introduced on 1 October 2005 a national ID card containing biometric data. The new ‘national identity card’ (nationellt identitetskort) is not compulsory (*yet*) and does not replace previous paper ID cards. It can be used as a proof of identity and citizenship and as a valid travel document within the Schengen area.

Highlights mine.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by voodoo

There, I agree with you 100% and the less actual executive power that is given to the EU, the better. We have enough trouble just keeping out local politicians in line

Amen Bro.

Originally Posted by voodoo

However, I do support a 2nd generation passport. Something that cannot be forged for a thousand dollars like the current ones. The shelters of the terrorist will be eradicated from within Europe - simply because we don't like 'em. The borders of the Union need to be strengthened and the identities of citizens moving in and out of it need to be verified.

The rest, we need to keep an eye out for and also - I am sad to say - on the first, second, third and fourth generation of muslim immigrants.

Concur. I've nothing against the introduction of newer passports. Just the central database side of things.

[voodoo]

The UK is not in the Schengen area so the UK is *not* involved in this one.. however as I wrote above I am all for 2nd generation *passports*. Not mandatory biometric ID cards. Those I abhor.

Passports are optional and serve a purpose when monitoring who should be let into Schengen and who should be let in and then observed.

Citizens of the EU/Schengen would hold these passports and be granted exepmtion from terrorist profiling. Terrorists could not forge these passports. Draconian? Yes.

Optional for citizens, yes. This is actually doing something. This I support. Of course I am against a central database, but is it avoidable in this case of the passports?

V

[Eug]

This obsession of liberals with tolerance is what is leading to this.

Strange logic. How does liberal ==> fingerprinting?

Most liberals I know think it's a violation of civil liberties.

don't like that one squat and I don't like to see the EU follow the stupidity of the US.

Interesting you mention the US, considering their current administration is quite conservative.

[Landos Mustache]

Does anyone actually believe that "They hate our freedom" crap?

[moodymonster]

I think the gov't isn't massively keen on freedom - probably don't realise it either. (speaking of UK)

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

Does anyone actually believe that "They hate our freedom" crap?

Sadly I think they do.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by moodymonster

I think the gov't isn't massively keen on freedom - probably don't realise it either. (speaking of UK)

You've made some very good posts here moodymonster.

If I had any disagreement then I would have commented on it already. Well said.

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

Does anyone actually believe that "They hate our freedom" crap?

No, I'm just making fun of this catchphrase of the Bush administration on the motives of terrorists and the irony that it is actually our own government that seems to hate our freedom the most.

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Eug

Strange logic. How does liberal ==> fingerprinting?

Because the liberals want everyone to stay as equals - everyone be damned.

Most liberals I know think it's a violation of civil liberties.

I'd agree, but the discrimination of minority groups is more of an issue to many liberals than the individual civil liberties. Since they can't have both, they choose the former.

Interesting you mention the US, considering their current administration is quite conservative.

The Bush administration is not conservative. It is for civil surveilance, big government, central federal control, foreign manipulations, invasions to liberate people from bad dictators and environmentally they are evil.

A conservative, is non of the above and the Bush administration has been called 'compassionate-conservative'. The difference between Teddy Roosevelt - conservative, and Karl Rove - not conservative.

V

[moodymonster]

Originally Posted by voodoo

You've made some very good posts here moodymonster.

If I had any disagreement then I would have commented on it already. Well said.

V

thanks

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by voodoo

The Bush administration is not conservative. It is for civil surveilance, big government, central federal control, foreign manipulations, invasions to liberate people from bad dictators and environmentally they are evil.

A conservative, is non of the above and the Bush administration has been called 'compassionate-conservative'. The difference between Teddy Roosevelt - conservative, and Karl Rove - not conservative.

Bush and his cronies are considered conservative, and thus your criticism of liberals makes no sense here whatsoever. Most liberals would want nothing to do with Bush and Rove and friends.

Basically, you're making up your own definitions, to suit your strange logic here to blame all the world's evils on liberals.

[villalobos]

Originally Posted by Doofy

OK, as you know I detest Labour as much as the next guy.

However... ...this fingerprinting thing for European travellers has been on the cards for a *long* time. And it comes not from Labour, but from above. Yep. Those lovely folks in Brussels.

It looks like it's coming from Labour simply because they're the most eager to implement the measures and we have sort of a "test bed" thing going on here. The all-imposing national ID card and central database thing? From Brussels... ...we're just testing it. The pay-per-mile black box in your car thing? From Brussels... ...we're just testing it. And so on and so on.

The following article is worth a read if you want to know what's really going on over there in Babel:
Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship | The Brussels Journal

So sorry V, the UK leaving the union won't help one bit. There needs to be a concerted effort by a whole lot of Europeans to abolish the EU and replace it with something we can all believe in, something which doesn't seek to control our lives.

I don't know. I have been first fingerprinted TWO years ago, while going to the US.... I think this is where this is coming from, all your anti-EU paranoia put aside.

[villalobos]

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Is this something that will just apply to EU passport holders, or to everyone? It sounds like it's a scheme to operate in concert with new biometric EU passports, but I don't really know enough about the situation.

Will I, as a US citizen, be fingerprinted if I fly to/from Europe? If so I have to say I won't be visiting Europe any time soon, which is a shame as I was really looking forward to spending Christmas with my future sister-in-law in Ireland (not to mention visiting friends all over the EU).

All right kids, the biometric passport is a requirement from the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Bush and his cronies are considered conservative, and thus your criticism of liberals makes no sense here whatsoever.

Umm, Bush and his cronies are not considered conservative, and thuse your criticism of my comment makes no sense here whatsover.

Most liberals would want nothing to do with Bush and Rove and friends.

What has that got to do with anything? - except pointing out the obvious. They sure are no liberals.

Basically, you're making up your own definitions, to suit your strange logic here to blame all the world's evils on liberals.

Now you have to concentrate really hard: the world is not split into liberals and conservatives. Bush is neither. His faction is sometimes called neo-conservative or compassionate conservative. This discussion isn't even about him or his political leanings, rather it is centered around *European* politics.

The group in discussion in particular are the UK Labour, who define themselves as socialist liberals these days. They are the liberals I am referring to, as you would have noticed had you paid attention to what I wrote.

Bush and his cronies are but a sideshow in this discussion, a tangent of no particular importance. The Americans here will have to deal with him. He is not our concern.

If you can't accept the definitions I make because they don't fit your understanding of politics, please don't insult me by thinking you know better, where in this case you don't. Frankly, you annoy me with this "making up definitions" crud.

The hyperbole you make at the end is the worst.

V

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by voodoo

I've been thinking. This obsession of liberals with tolerance is what is leading to this. Tolerance over everything. Tolerance over freedom.

They are taking away our rights and increasing the watch over us. They hate our freedom as much as the terrorists. I think the liberal utopia is freedom without responsibility. That isn't reality however and this crap enrages me.

And like so often before, we have the UK and Labour to thank for it. Thanks guys, perhaps we'd have a better union without you and the USA. Because, you know.. perhaps you'd rather become the 51st state? Hm?



Regardless, this means fingerprinting, iris scanning and all the stupidity of a paranoid society. Meanwhile, in trains and ships nothing is being done for added protection and quite frankly, nothing has been done for added protection in civil aviation anyway.

It is all a big show. Last week (in the UK of course) the commanding pilot of a jet was denied taking a metal fork aboard in his carry-on luggage. He asked the guard what would stop him from pointing the plane to the ground or even using the axe in the cockpit.. (he has a point)

Halfwits and appeasers have taken over. I don't like that one squat and I don't like to see the EU follow the stupidity of the US. Thanks to the UK however, we might.



Fear, fear, fear. I don't buy it and frankly I'd rather die in a terrorist attack than to lose my freedom.

It gets even more stupid and perhaps terrifying, but I'm too dazed to comment more on it. Behold...



http://www.airportbusiness.com/artic...tion=5&id=7689



V

In a reallllllly faaaar out way of looking at this whole world and all of the things going on within it, this can be seen in a whole new way.

What if the whole world was ALREADY a democracy of sorts.

The terrorists are merely citizens of the democracy who are voting for change in their own way and the free world nations and leaders are adapting to that citizenry and accommodating that portion of the realm in the way which represents a compromise between the two competing factions.

The Islamic jihadists want a more reigned in society and culture. Their version of reigned in and controlled is the Koran and it is too severe.

The liberal freedom lovers of the realm (even the truly confused left wingers) want TOTAL freedom despite everything, and that is too far in the opposite extreme.

The governments of the world are responding to the wishes of part of it's constituency (the jihadists) by exercising greater control, however minutely or unobtrusively, by beefing up surveillance and security.

The governments of the world are also being responsive to some it's freedom loving constituents (the right wing infidels) by increasing security and surveillance.

And in response to the right wing infidels as well as the confused left wingers the governments of the world are responding by holding fast to the core values of freedom, justice and democracy.

Just a thought in passing.

[Spliffdaddy]

...with the entire world suckling from Uncle Sam's teat.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

...with the entire world suckling from Uncle Sam's teat.

I used to say to my friends, "I don't mind a one world government as long as it's OUR government."

To which I'd add, "and as long as it's not Sharia government."

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by voodoo

Now you have to concentrate really hard: the world is not split into liberals and conservatives. Bush is neither. His faction is sometimes called neo-conservative or compassionate conservative. This discussion isn't even about him or his political leanings, rather it is centered around *European* politics.

The group in discussion in particular are the UK Labour, who define themselves as socialist liberals these days. They are the liberals I am referring to, as you would have noticed had you paid attention to what I wrote.

Bush and his cronies are but a sideshow in this discussion, a tangent of no particular importance. The Americans here will have to deal with him. He is not our concern.

If you can't accept the definitions I make because they don't fit your understanding of politics, please don't insult me by thinking you know better, where in this case you don't. Frankly, you annoy me with this "making up definitions" crud.

The hyperbole you make at the end is the worst.

Uh, you're the one that brought up the US of A in the first place in your little bizarre "liberals" rant.

I've been thinking. This obsession of liberals with tolerance is what is leading to this. Tolerance over everything. Tolerance over freedom.

They are taking away our rights and increasing the watch over us. They hate our freedom as much as the terrorists. I think the liberal utopia is freedom without responsibility. That isn't reality however and this crap enrages me.

And like so often before, we have the UK and Labour to thank for it. Thanks guys, perhaps we'd have a better union without you and the USA. Because, you know.. perhaps you'd rather become the 51st state? Hm?

Talk about hyperbole...

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Uh, you're the one that brought up the US of A in the first place in your little bizarre "liberals" rant.

I can't help it if you don't understand what I'm talking about. Everyone else who posted seems to understand just fine. Your own incompetence is no fault of mine.

Talk about hyperbole...

Yeah talk about hyperbole.. do you know the meaning of the word? Apparently not.

I brought up the relationship between the US and the UK. Otherwise, no. I did not bring up the US. You got your panties in a twist because of one sentance where mention the US in passing *in realtionship with a whole other country*.

Perhaps if you read the posts that you replied to, then you wouldn't look the fool you appear to be now.

V

[Eug Wanker]

I brought up the relationship between the US and the UK. Otherwise, no. I did not bring up the US. You got your panties in a twist because of one sentance where mention the US in passing *in realtionship with a whole other country*.

Make up your mind already.

"I didn't bring up the US."
"I just mentioned the US in passing."

[red rocket]

I'm surprised that anyone from outside the US would adopt their strange conservative/liberal dichotomy. It doesn't make the remotest sense in terms of international politics.

Personally, I would rather identify the opposing mindsets as (A) libertarian and (B) anti-libertarian.

Given that I'm in the (A) camp, I'd like to express my disgust at the increasing trend of governments to turn human beings into branded cattle. Fucking bastard politicians, the shits never gave a damn about personal freedom or anything else that threatens their monopoly on power. Lying filth, people aren't living in perpetual fear, as much as the governments and the 4th estate would like us to.

Anyone willing to trade in their liberty for safety, doesn't deserve either.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Make up your mind already.

"I didn't bring up the US."
"I just mentioned the US in passing."

They're not the same thing. I did not bring up the US as a topic of discussion and all the other people - you know the ones who didn't get a knee-jerk reaction from something I wrote - got that.

I mentioned the US as the ally of Blair. That is not bringing up the US as a topic of discussion.

As I said before, everybody else got it, I can't help it if you don't know the difference. That is your little problem.

I did not bring up the US, you did. I mentioned the US in passing when describing the situation that the UK finds itself in politically.



V

[moodymonster]

As people in the UK come back from their holidays, lots of people seem to be asking why the, sometimes, huge price discrepancy exists between the UK and the rest of the world. Yet another situation people find themselves in because they don't give a toss about what is going on until it smacks them in the face.

Although this does tend to happen every summer... we also get royally bent over on fuel.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by voodoo

They're not the same thing. I did not bring up the US as a topic of discussion and all the other people - you know the ones who didn't get a knee-jerk reaction from something I wrote - got that.

I mentioned the US as the ally of Blair. That is not bringing up the US as a topic of discussion.

As I said before, everybody else got it, I can't help it if you don't know the difference. That is your little problem.

I did not bring up the US, you did. I mentioned the US in passing when describing the situation that the UK finds itself in politically.



V

Your grammatically gymnastic attempts at backtracking are pretty transparent.

It certainly doesn't help make your strange anti-liberal rants any more believable.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by voodoo

Umm, Bush and his cronies are not considered conservative,

Um since when?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Eug

Your grammatically gymnastic attempts at backtracking are pretty transparent.

It certainly doesn't help make your strange anti-liberal rants any more believable.

Grammar? Do you know how long ago you lost track of what you were actually talking about?

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Um since when?

What is conservative about them Kevin?

V

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Um since when?

Mostly by other conservatives, though also by people like me who get all pedantic about the terms "liberal" and "conservative".

To be liberal is to favor change from the status quo: nothing more, nothing less. There are many ways one can be liberal, and not all of them agree of very much. Relative to the contemporary US, Communists, Nazis, Greens, and the Natural Law Party are all liberal, yet any one of these would be horrified at the thought of identifying with the other three.

Bush and company are another kind of liberal, and not one that most modern Democrats would want to identify with. And why would they? The Democrats were in power for some 35 years, and during that time they were able to legislate most of their platform as they knew it back then. Now that another group is in power and seeks to alter or outright undo much of that legislation, it is only natural that the Democrats would seek to block that: in doing so, they have become conservative.

But despite it making sense, I admit that it does seem strange: liberal has become conservative, and conservative has become liberal. These are strange times indeed that we live in.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Mostly by other conservatives, though also by people like me who get all pedantic about the terms "liberal" and "conservative".

To be liberal is to favor change from the status quo: nothing more, nothing less. There are many ways one can be liberal, and not all of them agree of very much. Relative to the contemporary US, Communists, Nazis, Greens, and the Natural Law Party are all liberal, yet any one of these would be horrified at the thought of identifying with the other three.

Bush and company are another kind of liberal, and not one that most modern Democrats would want to identify with. And why would they? The Democrats were in power for some 35 years, and during that time they were able to legislate most of their platform as they knew it back then. Now that another group is in power and seeks to alter or outright undo much of that legislation, it is only natural that the Democrats would seek to block that: in doing so, they have become conservative.

But despite it making sense, I admit that it does seem strange: liberal has become conservative, and conservative has become liberal. These are strange times indeed that we live in.

Exactly. Now prepare to be accused of playing with grammar and changing definitions to suit your agenda.. :sigh:

V