House of Commons shooting?
Discussion
TTwiggy said:
As long as they're white/Christian.
Errr - I don't think you'll find many people who fit that description in the UK anymore.Thankfully we don't live in a nation where if you aren't purporting to be a Bible thumper you aren't considered fit to run for office...
Funny how such a secular state as the US is so obsessed with God, isn' it?
M
Greg66 said:
bmw535i said:
Im pretty sure I'm not a terrorist.
Terrorists always say that. bmw535i said:
I don't think saying hello to a terrorist means I'm involved in terrorism.
Terrorists always say that. bmw535i said:
Europa1 said:
Say you frequented a cafe which MI5 watches because it believes it is a meeting place for extremists, or you unwittingly are mates with an extremist - you might be regarded as being peripherally involved.
I don't think I would be regarded as being involved in terrorism in your scenariodel mar said:
TTwiggy said:
bmw535i said:
Most people would have nothing to fear from additional surveillance and scrutiny.
As long as they're white/Christian.anonymous said:
[redacted]
It is and I feel that this may be descending into sophistry. The point being, arrest and detainment without trial or appeal, indefinitely on nothing more than 'suspicion of involvement' is open to and historically ALWAYS has been abused.
Ms Isaac Hunt and bmw335 seem to be welcome the idea of surrendering all our freedom to the security forces, safe in the knowledge that they won't be harmed as they're not terrorists. I think that shows an astonishing naivety of history.
Here is the thing. When I was young, drink driving was almost acceptable. If someone got done, it was bad luck.Ms Isaac Hunt and bmw335 seem to be welcome the idea of surrendering all our freedom to the security forces, safe in the knowledge that they won't be harmed as they're not terrorists. I think that shows an astonishing naivety of history.
However, society has progressed. Drink driving is no longer tolerated and society has little sympathy for those caught.
It is called progression.
Go back a few decades and gays were sectioned and given "therapy". Thankfully this no longer happens.
It is called progression.
Just because something has happened historically, it doesn't mean it will happen in the future.
Locking people up without evidence or trial.
It is called progression.
Except it's not, is it? It's regression.
Having the freedom to do as you please and go where you like is progression. Equality for women is progression. Living in a Police state is not progression and if you think that a security apparatus granted absolute power would never make mistakes or abuse it, then you're daft.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Pathetic and sub-Daily Mail I'm afraid.marcosgt said:
TTwiggy said:
As long as they're white/Christian.
Errr - I don't think you'll find many people who fit that description in the UK anymore.bmw535i said:
Greg66 said:
bmw535i said:
Im pretty sure I'm not a terrorist.
Terrorists always say that. bmw535i said:
I don't think saying hello to a terrorist means I'm involved in terrorism.
Terrorists always say that. bmw535i said:
Europa1 said:
Say you frequented a cafe which MI5 watches because it believes it is a meeting place for extremists, or you unwittingly are mates with an extremist - you might be regarded as being peripherally involved.
I don't think I would be regarded as being involved in terrorism in your scenariopoo at Paul's said:
Sky showing a load of "important" god botherers at a press conference, all makes of religion. f
k off the lot of you.
I have to say, whilst I'd defend anyone's freedom to choose a religion, I do think they are both archaic and divisive and at the root of the issue, even if inadvertently.k off the lot of you.bmw535i said:
Well I suppose if the security services considered saying hello to a terrorist an act of terrorism I would be investigated. I suspect most of them would not consider it to be one though.
Woah! Now it's "involved in an act of terrorism". Before it was "involved in terrorism". The latter can be photocopying the weekly newsletter. The former is packing the bomb jacket.
If you're involved in an act of terrorism there are plenty of tools available to deal with. Indefinite detention without trial isn't needed.
Saying hello to a terrorist might get you investigated because it shows a relationship; and that begs the question of the nature of the relationship. I doubt the security services dismiss everyone who isn't wearing a bandit mask and firing an AK47 into the air.
Burwood said:
not at all but i would expect the security services to look at your internet history etc and make a determination as to whether it was curiosity or something else.
Imprisoning people indefinitely based on the, no doubt confidential, reasoning of the security services. When did people start seeing East Germany as a desirable model for a society?These terrorists are a largely ineffectual collection of mentally disturbed f
kwits. I wish people would get some perspective. Their impact on our country as a whole should be basically nil and would be if we had any sense.bmw535i said:
p1stonhead said:
So you say. Lets thrown you in prison until we can be sure.
Well I suppose if the security services considered saying hello to a terrorist an act of terrorism I would be investigated. I suspect most of them would not consider it to be one though.Greg66 said:
Woah! Now it's "involved in an act of terrorism". Before it was "involved in terrorism".
The latter can be photocopying the weekly newsletter. The former is packing the bomb jacket.
If you're involved in an act of terrorism there are plenty of tools available to deal with. Indefinite detention without trial isn't needed.
Saying hello to a terrorist might get you investigated because it shows a relationship; and that begs the question of the nature of the relationship. I doubt the security services dismiss everyone who isn't wearing a bandit mask and firing an AK47 into the air.
There was no intention to mislead. I meant the same thing I.e. Involved in terrorism.The latter can be photocopying the weekly newsletter. The former is packing the bomb jacket.
If you're involved in an act of terrorism there are plenty of tools available to deal with. Indefinite detention without trial isn't needed.
Saying hello to a terrorist might get you investigated because it shows a relationship; and that begs the question of the nature of the relationship. I doubt the security services dismiss everyone who isn't wearing a bandit mask and firing an AK47 into the air.
I don't think saying hello to a terrorist would get me investigated for involvement in terrorism.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff