A couple of pages back in a fit of Hubris, Cock was foolish enough to place a wager that the BNP wouldn’t get any MP’s elected to Westminster at the next general election. Yesterday Cock’s chances of winning that bet took a serious hit because the Czeck President finally caved in to pressure and signed on to the EU Constitution Lisbon treaty.
Today Tory leader David Cameron announced his intention to break his “cast-iron” promise to hold a refferrendum on the constitution if elected. The Tory party is already beginning to split because of this disgraceful betrayal of trust.
What the British need to do is take an idea from the “fucking Yanks” and organise their own “Tea Parties”…
Grass-roots Conservatives reacted with anger to the announcement that the party would not go ahead with a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty
Internet message boards were inundated with message from angry Tory supporters.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Here is another example of the British people being betrayed by their government
Sifu, what is this government getting out of this posted example?
Nothing, Harringay Council is a total fuck up, if you remember the Baby Climbie story being all over the news, that was Harringay.
Yes, I do remember.
Those people take imbecility to a level of irresponsibility which makes it appear they are being controlled by Satan, having fun with humans.
By the way, speaking of the devil, it was on the evening local news last week ( I went away so I couldn’t post then ) that council states where there are gun gangs are now going to be patrolled by the same branch of the police that guards Bliar and the American Embassy with the same Heckler Koch MP5 submachine guns.
They actually showed footage of the officers and their “Hello Kitties” in their handling gun position walking around the building. So I remembered you and the case you made on Britain not needing/wanting to change the law on guns.
This could be the beginning of change…
Not really any big change, that department has always been responsible for armed response. There have been armed officers on the streets in these areas for years it just hasn’t been heavily publicised.
Each time I am back in the UK I notice more armed police out and about. Not really surprising but a shame in my opinion.
I’m sure Sifu will see it as Labour getting their storm troopers out on the street ready to gun down the plebs if they step out of line.
It is a cause and effect relationship that occurs with gun control. Once the people are prevented from maintaining law and order in their community crime goes up which then creates an excuse for the government to send in the troops to crack down on the crime wave it has created.
That is why the American founding fathers wrote the second amendment. So the government can’t manufacture a crisis that requires it self to send in armed personnel and crack down on civil liberties to deal with the problem they have created.
If this is cause and effect, amazing that it has taken 80 years for the effect to follow the cause.
It hasn’t been 80 years since the 1997 gun control act created a free for all. You quite obviously have not been keeping up with the latest news since you have been living in Mexico.
OK read back in this thread to where you last made this point. Then read where I explained that the 97 laws had very little impact and effected a tiny number of people.
Yes we did go over this before and you were full of shit then and you are full of shit now. Before the 97 laws there were people who legally owned firearms and kept them in their homes. Your attempt to spin doctor it into there weren’t a lot of firearms is a load of crap. Criminals don’t do risk assessment studies based upon the statistical probability of their ending up on the wrong end of a gun because they aren’t that smart.
All they knew was that after 1997 the chances of their ending up on the wrong end of a gun while committing a crime had been reduced to ZERO. That is why there was an immedediate increase in the amount of gun crimes committed starting in 1997 and it has been going up ever since.
[/quote]
Less than 0.1% of the population in the UK had a gun prior to the 97 law change, that is effectively none. Bear in mind that the 0.1% included a large number of antique firearms that would have been virtually useless for self defence. Criminals were not holding back on crime for fear that they hit the 1 house in a thousand that had a gun in it.
[quote]
Your argument that because it has been illegal since the twenties to use a firearm for self defense no one in Britain who owned a firearm would use it for self defense is absurd. Maybe you would do nothing to defend yourself or your family but most people are not like you.
Gun crime doubles in a decade
Gun crime has almost doubled in the last decade despite high profile Government campaigns to tackle the problem.
By Tom Whitehead, Home Affairs Editor
Published: 7:00AM GMT 27 Oct 2009
Offences involving firearms have increased in all but four police areas in England and Wales since 1998, figures obtained by the Tories reveal.
One part of the country has seen the problem increase almost seven fold as the availability of guns, and criminals’ williness to use them rises.
The number of people injured or killed by a gun has also doubled under Labour.
And if this is the cause and effect, why are there more shootings per capita in the US? Surely there should be less.
Because the US is a different country. Surely you don’t have a clue as to how one society can be different from another if you are going to ask such silly questions. Especially after I have repeatedly given you the answer. The murder rate in the US has been steadily declining for the last 17 years whie in Britain the murder rate has been going up.
Why don’t you ever ask why the murder rate in Mexico is higher than the US?
Because I know that the murder rate in Mexico is mainly higher due to US drug policiess.
So you think that the criminals and corrupt government officials having a monopoly on firearms has nothing to do with what is going on there? It’s all the fucking Yanks fault.
I don’t disagree that the drugs trade is a problem. All those drugs funnel into Texas where the murder rate is a fraction of Mexico. It’s the helplessness of the Mexican people who are prevented from playing a role in keeping order that is making a bad situation worse. [/quote]
If it were not for the illegal drug trade a lot of the shootings simply wouldn’t happen. Shootings here are either to do with drugs or kidnapping.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
A couple of pages back in a fit of Hubris, Cock was foolish enough to place a wager that the BNP wouldn’t get any MP’s elected to Westminster at the next general election. Yesterday Cock’s chances of winning that bet took a serious hit because the Czeck President finally caved in to pressure and signed on to the EU Constitution Lisbon treaty.
Today Tory leader David Cameron announced his intention to break his “cast-iron” promise to hold a referendum on the constitution if elected. The Tory party is already beginning to split because of this disgraceful betrayal of trust.
What the British need to do is take an idea from the “fucking Yanks” and organise their own “Tea Parties”…
Grass-roots Conservatives reacted with anger to the announcement that the party would not go ahead with a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty
Internet message boards were inundated with message from angry Tory supporters.
[/quote]
This is nothing new, Cameron has said all along there would be no referendum if the treaty was ratified. Legally they cannot back out once it is ratified.
Can’t have a dynamic growing society based on reason, while moralists prattle on about ‘social good’, unselfishness, and the ‘obligation to give back’. Unselfishness leads to a country of serfs, which you Brits have.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Here is another example of the British people being betrayed by their government
Sifu, what is this government getting out of this posted example?
Nothing, Harringay Council is a total fuck up, if you remember the Baby Climbie story being all over the news, that was Harringay.
Yes, I do remember.
Those people take imbecility to a level of irresponsibility which makes it appear they are being controlled by Satan, having fun with humans.
By the way, speaking of the devil, it was on the evening local news last week ( I went away so I couldn’t post then ) that council states where there are gun gangs are now going to be patrolled by the same branch of the police that guards Bliar and the American Embassy with the same Heckler Koch MP5 submachine guns.
They actually showed footage of the officers and their “Hello Kitties” in their handling gun position walking around the building. So I remembered you and the case you made on Britain not needing/wanting to change the law on guns.
This could be the beginning of change…
Not really any big change, that department has always been responsible for armed response. There have been armed officers on the streets in these areas for years it just hasn’t been heavily publicised.
Each time I am back in the UK I notice more armed police out and about. Not really surprising but a shame in my opinion.
I’m sure Sifu will see it as Labour getting their storm troopers out on the street ready to gun down the plebs if they step out of line.
It is a cause and effect relationship that occurs with gun control. Once the people are prevented from maintaining law and order in their community crime goes up which then creates an excuse for the government to send in the troops to crack down on the crime wave it has created.
That is why the American founding fathers wrote the second amendment. So the government can’t manufacture a crisis that requires it self to send in armed personnel and crack down on civil liberties to deal with the problem they have created.
If this is cause and effect, amazing that it has taken 80 years for the effect to follow the cause.
It hasn’t been 80 years since the 1997 gun control act created a free for all. You quite obviously have not been keeping up with the latest news since you have been living in Mexico.
OK read back in this thread to where you last made this point. Then read where I explained that the 97 laws had very little impact and effected a tiny number of people.
Yes we did go over this before and you were full of shit then and you are full of shit now. Before the 97 laws there were people who legally owned firearms and kept them in their homes. Your attempt to spin doctor it into there weren’t a lot of firearms is a load of crap. Criminals don’t do risk assessment studies based upon the statistical probability of their ending up on the wrong end of a gun because they aren’t that smart.
All they knew was that after 1997 the chances of their ending up on the wrong end of a gun while committing a crime had been reduced to ZERO. That is why there was an immedediate increase in the amount of gun crimes committed starting in 1997 and it has been going up ever since.
Less than 0.1% of the population in the UK had a gun prior to the 97 law change, that is effectively none. Bear in mind that the 0.1% included a large number of antique firearms that would have been virtually useless for self defence. Criminals were not holding back on crime for fear that they hit the 1 house in a thousand that had a gun in it. [/quote]
I disproved this lie of yours a couple of months ago. That statistic was only for hanguns and does not represent total firearms which was much igher than that. Even today! In 2007 it was 5.6 percent. Before 1997 people could get a lot more than flintlocks. The Hungerdord shooter owned and used an AK47, while the Dunblane shooter owned two Browning High Powers and two Smith and Wesson .357 Magnums. All those guns were legally purchased. Before 1997 people could legally own AK’s and Highpowers but you are trying to bullshit us that people didn’t have modern firearms back then.
29 United Kingdom 5.6 2007
You are such an idiot! You are completely out of touch with reality and don’t know how people behave in the real world. The vast majority of criminals are not sophisticated enough to take the time to look up gun ownership statistics and then do the maths to calculate their chances of geting shot.
You are completely illiterate of the street. These mathematical figures that you are throwing out there like the mean something are not within the realm of understanding of a street thug.
What street thugs do have the capacity to understand is a major new policy, heralded in all the news papers and on the telly that all “LAW ABIDING SUBJECTS” within the realm are to surrneder ALL of their firearms so they are ALL now DEFENSELESS.
The 1997 total gun ban was something that criminals could understand and they responded to it by arming themselves to take advantage of the opportunity that the law created. That is why gun crime and murder in the UK has been going up every year since 1997.
[quote]
Your argument that because it has been illegal since the twenties to use a firearm for self defense no one in Britain who owned a firearm would use it for self defense is absurd. Maybe you would do nothing to defend yourself or your family but most people are not like you.
Gun crime doubles in a decade
Gun crime has almost doubled in the last decade despite high profile Government campaigns to tackle the problem.
By Tom Whitehead, Home Affairs Editor
Published: 7:00AM GMT 27 Oct 2009
Offences involving firearms have increased in all but four police areas in England and Wales since 1998, figures obtained by the Tories reveal.
One part of the country has seen the problem increase almost seven fold as the availability of guns, and criminals’ williness to use them rises.
The number of people injured or killed by a gun has also doubled under Labour.
And if this is the cause and effect, why are there more shootings per capita in the US? Surely there should be less.
Because the US is a different country. Surely you don’t have a clue as to how one society can be different from another if you are going to ask such silly questions. Especially after I have repeatedly given you the answer. The murder rate in the US has been steadily declining for the last 17 years whie in Britain the murder rate has been going up.
Why don’t you ever ask why the murder rate in Mexico is higher than the US?
Because I know that the murder rate in Mexico is mainly higher due to US drug policiess.
So you think that the criminals and corrupt government officials having a monopoly on firearms has nothing to do with what is going on there? It’s all the fucking Yanks fault.
I don’t disagree that the drugs trade is a problem. All those drugs funnel into Texas where the murder rate is a fraction of Mexico. It’s the helplessness of the Mexican people who are prevented from playing a role in keeping order that is making a bad situation worse.
If it were not for the illegal drug trade a lot of the shootings simply wouldn’t happen. Shootings here are either to do with drugs or kidnapping. [/quote]
No shit Sherlock. If you give poor desperate people a cash cow to fight over they will tear each other apart. That is what the war on drugs has done to Mexico and it is also what has happened in the US ghetto.
When people cannot fight back they become victims. Then criminals are encouraged and the scale of crime quickly escalates beyond the ability of the police to deal with it.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Here is another example of the British people being betrayed by their government
Sifu, what is this government getting out of this posted example?
Nothing, Harringay Council is a total fuck up, if you remember the Baby Climbie story being all over the news, that was Harringay.
Yes, I do remember.
Those people take imbecility to a level of irresponsibility which makes it appear they are being controlled by Satan, having fun with humans.
By the way, speaking of the devil, it was on the evening local news last week ( I went away so I couldn’t post then ) that council states where there are gun gangs are now going to be patrolled by the same branch of the police that guards Bliar and the American Embassy with the same Heckler Koch MP5 submachine guns.
They actually showed footage of the officers and their “Hello Kitties” in their handling gun position walking around the building. So I remembered you and the case you made on Britain not needing/wanting to change the law on guns.
This could be the beginning of change…
Not really any big change, that department has always been responsible for armed response. There have been armed officers on the streets in these areas for years it just hasn’t been heavily publicised.
Each time I am back in the UK I notice more armed police out and about. Not really surprising but a shame in my opinion.
I’m sure Sifu will see it as Labour getting their storm troopers out on the street ready to gun down the plebs if they step out of line.
It is a cause and effect relationship that occurs with gun control. Once the people are prevented from maintaining law and order in their community crime goes up which then creates an excuse for the government to send in the troops to crack down on the crime wave it has created.
That is why the American founding fathers wrote the second amendment. So the government can’t manufacture a crisis that requires it self to send in armed personnel and crack down on civil liberties to deal with the problem they have created.
If this is cause and effect, amazing that it has taken 80 years for the effect to follow the cause.
It hasn’t been 80 years since the 1997 gun control act created a free for all. You quite obviously have not been keeping up with the latest news since you have been living in Mexico.
OK read back in this thread to where you last made this point. Then read where I explained that the 97 laws had very little impact and effected a tiny number of people.
Yes we did go over this before and you were full of shit then and you are full of shit now. Before the 97 laws there were people who legally owned firearms and kept them in their homes. Your attempt to spin doctor it into there weren’t a lot of firearms is a load of crap. Criminals don’t do risk assessment studies based upon the statistical probability of their ending up on the wrong end of a gun because they aren’t that smart.
All they knew was that after 1997 the chances of their ending up on the wrong end of a gun while committing a crime had been reduced to ZERO. That is why there was an immedediate increase in the amount of gun crimes committed starting in 1997 and it has been going up ever since.
Less than 0.1% of the population in the UK had a gun prior to the 97 law change, that is effectively none. Bear in mind that the 0.1% included a large number of antique firearms that would have been virtually useless for self defence. Criminals were not holding back on crime for fear that they hit the 1 house in a thousand that had a gun in it.
I disproved this lie of yours a couple of months ago. That statistic was only for hanguns and does not represent total firearms which was much igher than that. Even today! In 2007 it was 5.6 percent. Before 1997 people could get a lot more than flintlocks. The Hungerdord shooter owned and used an AK47, while the Dunblane shooter owned two Browning High Powers and two Smith and Wesson .357 Magnums. All those guns were legally purchased. Before 1997 people could legally own AK’s and Highpowers but you are trying to bullshit us that people didn’t have modern firearms back then.
29 United Kingdom 5.6 2007
You are such an idiot! You are completely out of touch with reality and don’t know how people behave in the real world. The vast majority of criminals are not sophisticated enough to take the time to look up gun ownership statistics and then do the maths to calculate their chances of geting shot.
You are completely illiterate of the street. These mathematical figures that you are throwing out there like the mean something are not within the realm of understanding of a street thug.
What street thugs do have the capacity to understand is a major new policy, heralded in all the news papers and on the telly that all “LAW ABIDING SUBJECTS” within the realm are to surrneder ALL of their firearms so they are ALL now DEFENSELESS.
The 1997 total gun ban was something that criminals could understand and they responded to it by arming themselves to take advantage of the opportunity that the law created. That is why gun crime and murder in the UK has been going up every year since 1997.
Your argument that because it has been illegal since the twenties to use a firearm for self defense no one in Britain who owned a firearm would use it for self defense is absurd. Maybe you would do nothing to defend yourself or your family but most people are not like you.
Gun crime doubles in a decade
Gun crime has almost doubled in the last decade despite high profile Government campaigns to tackle the problem.
By Tom Whitehead, Home Affairs Editor
Published: 7:00AM GMT 27 Oct 2009
Offences involving firearms have increased in all but four police areas in England and Wales since 1998, figures obtained by the Tories reveal.
One part of the country has seen the problem increase almost seven fold as the availability of guns, and criminals’ williness to use them rises.
The number of people injured or killed by a gun has also doubled under Labour.
And if this is the cause and effect, why are there more shootings per capita in the US? Surely there should be less.
Because the US is a different country. Surely you don’t have a clue as to how one society can be different from another if you are going to ask such silly questions. Especially after I have repeatedly given you the answer. The murder rate in the US has been steadily declining for the last 17 years whie in Britain the murder rate has been going up.
Why don’t you ever ask why the murder rate in Mexico is higher than the US?
Because I know that the murder rate in Mexico is mainly higher due to US drug policiess.
So you think that the criminals and corrupt government officials having a monopoly on firearms has nothing to do with what is going on there? It’s all the fucking Yanks fault.
I don’t disagree that the drugs trade is a problem. All those drugs funnel into Texas where the murder rate is a fraction of Mexico. It’s the helplessness of the Mexican people who are prevented from playing a role in keeping order that is making a bad situation worse.
If it were not for the illegal drug trade a lot of the shootings simply wouldn’t happen. Shootings here are either to do with drugs or kidnapping.
No shit Sherlock. If you give poor desperate people a cash cow to fight over they will tear each other apart. That is what the war on drugs has done to Mexico and it is also what has happened in the US ghetto.
When people cannot fight back they become victims. Then criminals are encouraged and the scale of crime quickly escalates beyond the ability of the police to deal with it. [/quote]
It can’t help you with your appalling grammar, sentence structure or lack of ability to follow simple logic but it might just start to make your wall of text posts more readable.
As for your arguments, several other British people have posted on this very thread that you are totally misguided in your view of firearms in the UK.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Sifu wrote:
It can’t help you with your appalling grammar, sentence structure or lack of ability to follow simple logic but it might just start to make your wall of text posts more readable.[/quote]
Ha ha ha, very funny. I guess you don’t know this but American English is based upon Websters dictionary, which spells a number of words differently from the Oxford dictionary.
[quote]
As for your arguments, several other British people have posted on this very thread that you are totally misguided in your view of firearms in the UK. [/quote]
You are deluding yourself. There have been a handful of British people coment on this thread and they have not been supporting your point of view. You need to come back to planet earth and stop believing your own spin.
Here is another typical assault from Britain. They get something like this in the papers just about every week where some innocent person is brutally assaulted and maimed or killed and their assailant gets a slap on the wrist. In this case the attacker recieved a 6 year sentence which with the automatic sentence reducton means he will only serve about three years.
You will have to follow the link to read the full story because I don’t want cock to strat crying that I posted too much information.
A mother blinded in a sickening attack after she asked a yob to stop swearing in front of her 13-year-old daughter today accused the law of failing victims.
Seamstress Julie Hobson, 38, needed surgery to remove her left eye after she was repeatedly punched by Thomas Wilkinson.
A shocked neighbour who tried to intervene later said the force of the blows seemed enough to ‘knock her head off’.
Here is another typical assault from Britain. They get something like this in the papers just about every week where some innocent person is brutally assaulted and maimed or killed and their assailant gets a slap on the wrist. In this case the attacker recieved a 6 year sentence which with the automatic sentence reducton means he will only serve about three years.
You will have to follow the link to read the full story because I don’t want cock to start crying that I posted too much information.
A mother blinded in a sickening attack after she asked a yob to stop swearing in front of her 13-year-old daughter today accused the law of failing victims.
Seamstress Julie Hobson, 38, needed surgery to remove her left eye after she was repeatedly punched by Thomas Wilkinson.
A shocked neighbour who tried to intervene later said the force of the blows seemed enough to ‘knock her head off’.
“All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customerâ??s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.”
“They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.”
“All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customerâ??s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.”
“They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.”
“All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customerÃ?¢??s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.”
“They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.”
The original proposal to keep the data on a central database was rejected because it was not secure enough and universally hated. So instead the government will be paying out £2 billion over ten years to private companies to hold the data for them (according to this article- I couldn’t find this story in the times or the independent yet and I don’t trust anything at all in the other papers- barely trust a word in these three).
Basically their going to sneak another peice of “anti terror” legislation in through the back door.
“All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customerâ??s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.”
“They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.”[/quote]
Britain is a creeping police state because the British are too brain washed and lacking in the proper revolutionaary ideology to understand what is happening to them and how to proceed. All of Europe is really lacking because Europeans look to the wrong role models for ideas.
What is really sad about the British is all they need to do is look to the American founding fathers for ideas on how to free a people from the tyranny of the British government and secure a free state. The rest of Europe would do well to study the American founding fathers as well.
People like Cockney will make fun of this idea as being representative of American colonial backwardness, but Thomas Jefferson said that when the people fear the government there is tyranny, but when the government fears the people there is freedom.
In Britain people believe the proper relationship is the people should fear their government. They also believe that those who govern them are their “betters” so they put politicians up on a pedestal.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Sifu wrote:
It can’t help you with your appalling grammar, sentence structure or lack of ability to follow simple logic but it might just start to make your wall of text posts more readable.
Ha ha ha, very funny. I guess you don’t know this but American English is based upon Websters dictionary, which spells a number of words differently from the Oxford dictionary.
As for your arguments, several other British people have posted on this very thread that you are totally misguided in your view of firearms in the UK.
You are deluding yourself. There have been a handful of British people coment on this thread and they have not been supporting your point of view. You need to come back to planet earth and stop believing your own spin. [/quote]
Ispell uses American English. And every time I spell check one of my posts I have to bounce through all the errors in yours. It is time consuming and annoying.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Here is another typical assault from Britain. They get something like this in the papers just about every week where some innocent person is brutally assaulted and maimed or killed and their assailant gets a slap on the wrist. In this case the attacker recieved a 6 year sentence which with the automatic sentence reducton means he will only serve about three years.
You will have to follow the link to read the full story because I don’t want cock to strat crying that I posted too much information.
A mother blinded in a sickening attack after she asked a yob to stop swearing in front of her 13-year-old daughter today accused the law of failing victims.
Seamstress Julie Hobson, 38, needed surgery to remove her left eye after she was repeatedly punched by Thomas Wilkinson.
A shocked neighbour who tried to intervene later said the force of the blows seemed enough to ‘knock her head off’.
[/quote]
And had the yob had access to a gun he might have shot her like the thousands of people who shoot people in the US each year. Not sure what your point is.
“All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customerÃ??Ã?¢??s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.”
“They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.”
Britain is a creeping police state because the British are too brain washed and lacking in the proper revolutionaary ideology to understand what is happening to them and how to proceed. All of Europe is really lacking because Europeans look to the wrong role models for ideas.
What is really sad about the British is all they need to do is look to the American founding fathers for ideas on how to free a people from the tyranny of the British government and secure a free state. The rest of Europe would do well to study the American founding fathers as well.
People like Cockney will make fun of this idea as being representative of American colonial backwardness, but Thomas Jefferson said that when the people fear the government there is tyranny, but when the government fears the people there is freedom.
In Britain people believe the proper relationship is the people should fear their government. They also believe that those who govern them are their “betters” so they put politicians up on a pedestal.[/quote]
I don’t think most people in the UK fear the government I think they actually have contempt for it.
And as for the telegraph piece about email, internet and phone snooping, I think the US is already ahead of the UK on that. Anyone who thinks that their phone calls, google searches, email use etc is not already being monitored and categorised is extremely naive. The amount of information that Google holds on your average American would terrify Winston Smith.
I don’t agree with the legislation and would be amazed if any UK telecomms company actually has the technological integrity of networks and systems to be able to deliver on it (in the passed I worked for BT and Cable & Wireless in the UK.)
“All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customerÃ???Ã??Ã?¢??s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.”
“They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.”
Britain is a creeping police state because the British are too brain washed and lacking in the proper revolutionaary ideology to understand what is happening to them and how to proceed. All of Europe is really lacking because Europeans look to the wrong role models for ideas.
What is really sad about the British is all they need to do is look to the American founding fathers for ideas on how to free a people from the tyranny of the British government and secure a free state. The rest of Europe would do well to study the American founding fathers as well.
People like Cockney will make fun of this idea as being representative of American colonial backwardness, but Thomas Jefferson said that when the people fear the government there is tyranny, but when the government fears the people there is freedom.
In Britain people believe the proper relationship is the people should fear their government. They also believe that those who govern them are their “betters” so they put politicians up on a pedestal.
I don’t think most people in the UK fear the government I think they actually have contempt for it.
And as for the telegraph piece about email, internet and phone snooping, I think the US is already ahead of the UK on that. Anyone who thinks that their phone calls, google searches, email use etc is not already being monitored and categorised is extremely naive. The amount of information that Google holds on your average American would terrify Winston Smith.
I don’t agree with the legislation and would be amazed if any UK telecomms company actually has the technological integrity of networks and systems to be able to deliver on it (in the passed I worked for BT and Cable & Wireless in the UK.)[/quote]
Unfortunate that we should have to rely upon the governments technical ineptness to protect from this kind of thing.
I know how much google does. Have you ever tried running firefox with no script activated and google blocked? The damn google scripts come up on nearly every website. Governments should be legislating to protect peoples’ privacy not the other way around.
The gun ownership in the US won’t help them until government intrusivity becomes unbearable. It will take standard of living affecting type serious impositions upon their freedom before the average american will actually get off their ass and do something. BUT at least they have the option as a last resort. In the UK we rely entirely upon the benevolence of our government officials- we just have to hope we never elect the wrong ones- NB heavy sarcasm. There is no safty catch to British society.
(Sorry about my spelling I’ve no spell check on IE)
“All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customerÃ???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.”
“They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.”
Britain is a creeping police state because the British are too brain washed and lacking in the proper revolutionaary ideology to understand what is happening to them and how to proceed. All of Europe is really lacking because Europeans look to the wrong role models for ideas.
What is really sad about the British is all they need to do is look to the American founding fathers for ideas on how to free a people from the tyranny of the British government and secure a free state. The rest of Europe would do well to study the American founding fathers as well.
People like Cockney will make fun of this idea as being representative of American colonial backwardness, but Thomas Jefferson said that when the people fear the government there is tyranny, but when the government fears the people there is freedom.
In Britain people believe the proper relationship is the people should fear their government. They also believe that those who govern them are their “betters” so they put politicians up on a pedestal.
I don’t think most people in the UK fear the government I think they actually have contempt for it.
And as for the telegraph piece about email, internet and phone snooping, I think the US is already ahead of the UK on that. Anyone who thinks that their phone calls, google searches, email use etc is not already being monitored and categorised is extremely naive. The amount of information that Google holds on your average American would terrify Winston Smith.
I don’t agree with the legislation and would be amazed if any UK telecomms company actually has the technological integrity of networks and systems to be able to deliver on it (in the passed I worked for BT and Cable & Wireless in the UK.)
Unfortunate that we should have to rely upon the governments technical ineptness to protect from this kind of thing.
I know how much google does. Have you ever tried running firefox with no script activated and google blocked? The damn google scripts come up on nearly every website. Governments should be legislating to protect peoples’ privacy not the other way around.
The gun ownership in the US won’t help them until government intrusivity becomes unbearable. It will take standard of living affecting type serious impositions upon their freedom before the average american will actually get off their ass and do something. BUT at least they have the option as a last resort. In the UK we rely entirely upon the benevolence of our government officials- we just have to hope we never elect the wrong ones- NB heavy sarcasm. There is no safty catch to British society.
(Sorry about my spelling I’ve no spell check on IE)[/quote]
I was referring more to the ineptness of telecomms companies than the government but hell, put them together and you get a total clusterfuck!
On the gun issue, as I have said a few times I think the US and the UK are at opposite ends of the spectrum when the ideal probably sits somewhere in the middle.
For the spelling thing, seriously, ISpell is really good and runs on IE.
I heard to pass English Girl Scouts, you have to be willingly gangbanged by a flock of immigrant Africans and Muslim men, after which point you are awarded the ‘Queen’s Medal For Heroism In Diversity.’ Is this not true?
