new concession for terror bill. - Page 11

garinda · 12-06-2008, 00:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

I don't want to be part of the party of common sense!

You're obviously not, if you're a Conservative, especially over this lily livered debacle.

blazey · 12-06-2008, 00:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

well the guy next door to me, who i had a brew with yesterday aint no spooky terrorist, but he sure is muslim, so yes yer right ya do need to leave the comfort of yer university n speak to " Real" people.

There are people older than most forum users on my course whom I speak to, most courses have at least one or two mature students, and I personally know quite a few with being so involved with continuing education. What do these people class as exactly

It is a strange conception that university students don't interact with the 'real' world, as if we don't step foot off campus every now and again

cashman · 12-06-2008, 00:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by blazey

There are people older than most forum users on my course whom I speak to, most courses have at least one or two mature students, and I personally know quite a few with being so involved with continuing education. What do these people class as exactly

It is a strange conception that university students don't interact with the 'real' world, as if we don't step foot off campus every now and again

wasn't infering that all students dont interact with real people blaze, i was talking to Richard Head.

garinda · 12-06-2008, 00:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

wasn't infering that all students dont interact with real people blaze, i was talking to Richard Head.

Is he at that noble seat of education, Hull, as well?

shillelagh · 12-06-2008, 00:48

It seems everybody whos online at the minute is reading this thread - how nice it is to have a popular thread

blazey · 12-06-2008, 00:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

wasn't infering that all students dont interact with real people blaze, i was talking to Richard Head.

Yes but it has often been used as an argument against myself and I'm fed up of seeing it repeated to every student who airs an opinion on the forum.

It just gets a bit repetitive that's all.

blazey · 12-06-2008, 00:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Is he at that noble seat of education, Hull, as well?

Isn't that obvious

I knew straight away without even being told.

andrewb · 12-06-2008, 00:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

You're obviously not, if you're a Conservative, especially over this lily livered debacle.

Indeed because the common sense attitude would just be to go with how you feel rather than looking at evidence. LOL!

Rindi can I ask you which you think is the best at preventing terrorists from killing. Security services or increasing detention without charge from 28 to 42 days?

BERNADETTE · 12-06-2008, 00:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rosencrantz

And I think we've firmly established that you're all talk until you have the faintest worry that this might affect you in some way. How long did it take you to look up "diatribe"? Big words don't make big ideas. Thanks for totally countering what I said rather than going "NO NO NO BE QUIET YOU'RE WRONG" and proving me utterly right. I appreciate it.

The threat of terroism affects us all and for your information although we may not be at uni we do know the meaning of words we quote without resorting "look them up" as you put it. You are trying and belittle people and it just don't wash!

blazey · 12-06-2008, 00:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

You're obviously not, if you're a Conservative, especially over this lily livered debacle.

Please bear in mind that some of us do actually agree with the bill and are happy to see it passed!

garinda · 12-06-2008, 00:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

Indeed because the common sense attitude would just be to go with how you feel rather than looking at evidence. LOL!

...or by just blindly following the party line. Though I do concede, because you got so huffy, that you actually believe in what you say on this one, even though you, and the Conservatives, were wrong.

In answer to your question both.

Rosencrantz · 12-06-2008, 01:02

So, to summarise, despite no one ever needing 28 days, despite 28 days being more than 90% of countries in the world, even ones that all those darn terrorists hate (such as America) need to pin a crime on anyone, despite 28 days being enough time for a moron to cross-check anyone but a potentially fraudulent company executive with an army of accountants...

We still somehow see 42 days as necessary. Does that about summarise it? Seems right to me!

grannyclaret · 12-06-2008, 01:03

I think that this thread and the Tory Tory Tory one,,are top contenders for the next Hissey fit Award,,,,,,,I must try and remember,,,,,

andrewb · 12-06-2008, 01:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

...or by just blindly following the party line. Though I do concede, because you got so huffy, that you actually believe in what you say on this one, even though you, and the Conservatives, were wrong.

In answer to your question both.

I know you're aware that not only did Liberal Democrats vote against this, but also quite a chunk of Labour MP's too. In fact it only got through with Brown bribing the UDP.

Rindi can I ask you which you think is the best at preventing terrorists from killing. Security information or increasing detention without charge from 28 to 42 days?

garinda · 12-06-2008, 01:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rosencrantz

Britain is a fantastic place to live, this cynicism will surely be one of the greatest things I leave my children. I can't wait until no one takes newspapers seriously any more, so when people like David Davies spell out in clear, concise sentences "there is NO need for this" they can kick in with the see-no-evil-hear-no-evil-speak-no-evil cynicism and just vote for whatever puts the "ragheads" behind bars.

In fact I can't wait until the media starts screaming "despot, despot!" and we all vote for the man wrapped in a flag, carrying a sword of truth and a shield of justice, with the home secretary who will happily sign that 42-day form for the least of political dissenters. I'm sure the people of Accrington will lead the charge in living on our knees rather than dying on our feet, where we'll throw away whatever freedoms we possibly can just to make the blanket a little warmer at night.

Oh wait, no, I suppose I'll understand the undermining of liberty better when I'm older, right guys? Or maybe I just need to leave the comfort of my university and get into the real world where spooooooky Muslim terrorists hide under every desk and we need 42 days to work out whether they're out to kill us or not. Right, right...

Perhaps your views are a little coloured, and prejudiced.

You said in another thread, and I quote.

'Starting a war against something as vague as "terrorism" is a little absurd!'
http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f...tml#post535578

It probably doesn't seem vague to the two little children who live in our town, and whose mother was killed by the London bus bomb.