Lib Dems Support IS and agree with Paris Killings.

[Conniff]

Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg has defended his opposition to the so-called snoopers' charter, insisting "blanket" data retention is "not very British".

 

 

Nick Clegg branded a 'w****r' by Home Office.

 

 

Mr Clegg was ridiculed by the Home Office after demanding an apology for Mrs May's claims the Lib Dems behaved 'outrageously irresponsible' for blocking new data laws.

 

 

http://no1forum.co.uk/showthread.php?489-Lib-Dems-Support-Isis-Terrorism-and-the-Islamist-Murders&p=859#post859

[SabreSheep]

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

• This was first written by Franklin for the Pennsylvania Assembly in its Reply to the Governor (11 Nov. 1755)
  

[SabreSheep]

Im with the lib dems on this one.

 

Civil liberties have been eroded enough.

There will ALWAYS be excuses to curtail them. There will always be an ENEMY to fear and to act as an excuse to do so.

 

We do not beat Islamic State by removing civil liberties and sleep walking into a similar society in order to combat it.

[Conniff]

So you not worried if something like what happened in Paris or a Lee Rigby should happen in your town.

 

There will always be an ENEMY to fear and to act as an excuse to do so.

Not an enemy like this one. At least you could see your enemy, not any more.

 

What Liberties are you losing - none.

[SabreSheep]

Just like when they brought in all the powers in the labour government under anti terrosim legislation.

 

To be used to combat the extremists they said. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3620110/The-police-must-end-their-abuse-of-anti-terror-legislation.html

 

Right to privacy comes to mind. The general population does not trust the government or local authorities not to abuse their powers as it is. Lets not hand them any more.

 

And there has always been a hidden enemy. IRA for example. I do not remember the need to mass survey everyBodys POST or Landlines then either

 

PLUS once granted, those powers are at the mercy of whoever gets into the next election. Id hate to see UKIP having the power to access that data to fullfil their agendas. Next thing you know, anyone that was not born in this country would be deported

Edited January 19, 2015 by SabreSheep
addition

[caro]

I am outraged at the Paris killings and that atrocities are carried out in the name of Islam or any other religion. People who do these things are using religion as an excuse and are not genuine devotees.

 

I do not believe that we should allow such fanaticism to change the way we live our lives or impact on the freedoms we enjoy. Obviously we have to be sensible and on our guard, but any more than that, and they've won. We can't allow that.

 

I am no fan of Nick Clegg BTW.

[unclebulgaria67]

Most of the people that have carried out these terrorist acts in western countries have been under surveillance by the security services. It has not stopped them.

 

There are so many ways for people to communicate secretely, that passing laws on what the security services can do, will make little difference.

 

Best practice is to stop people from wanting to commit terrorist acts in the UK. If we do silly things like sending letter to Muslim leaders asking them to do more, then it might just provoke those who are tempted into carrying out radical acts. Would we expect a government to issue letters to other religious leaders, when they have a problem within their religion.

 

Another thing to think about, are the acts carried out by those who just want to kill. I suspect that criminals in the US have killed more people in the last 10 years, than were killed in 9/11. We see mass shootings in the US, almost on a weekly basis. Is the US likely to implement proper gun controls cross most states ? Very unlikely, as the NRA and many US politicians won't allow constituitional rights to be messed around with.

[Conniff]

Most of the people that have carried out these terrorist acts in western countries have been under surveillance by the security services. It has not stopped them.

 

There are so many ways for people to communicate secretely, that passing laws on what the security services can do, will make little difference.

 

Best practice is to stop people from wanting to commit terrorist acts in the UK. If we do silly things like sending letter to Muslim leaders asking them to do more, then it might just provoke those who are tempted into carrying out radical acts. Would we expect a government to issue letters to other religious leaders, when they have a problem within their religion.

 

Another thing to think about, are the acts carried out by those who just want to kill. I suspect that criminals in the US have killed more people in the last 10 years, than were killed in 9/11. We see mass shootings in the US, almost on a weekly basis. Is the US likely to implement proper gun controls cross most states ? Very unlikely, as the NRA and many US politicians won't allow constituitional rights to be messed around with.

 

 

The thing is UB, no other religion does this.

 

 

The difference between the US and Islamists is the US killings are done by nutters or aggrieved people, the Islamists do it because they enjoy doing it.

 

 

I think all girls should have the midwife remove their virginity at birth and then there will be no point in being a martyr as there won't be 40 virgins for them when they get up there.

[unclebulgaria67]

And of course the British never went on crusades killing innocent people and commiting crimes !

 

I accept that there is a problem of radicalisation within parts of the Muslim community, but it is how you deal with it. I don't think the west will convince all but the most moderate Muslims that they should embrace western style freedoms and democracy. Quite a lot of them want to live in a different way.

 

The best option, is for Muslims to sort this problem out themselves. It would help if people from Saudi and Qatar were not supporting some of these terrorists financially. The west wanted to get rid of Assad and parliament was being asked to back British involvement in supporting anti Assad freedom fighters. Parliament voted against this action and a year later we will find that some of these freedom fighters were actually IS, wanting to set up a worse regime than Assad.

 

There are reports coming back from Helmand, that IS is looking to get together with Al Qaeda and the Taleban. There was a feature on the Armed Forces TV channel which I watch occasionally, as it now on Virgin Media. Once the British and US troops left, the Afgany armed forces have faced problems.

 

I predict that within 5 years that British troops will be involved in more action somewhere, which is why I think the cuts to troop numbers is short sighted. You cannot deal with terrorist armies just using drones and air power.

[Conniff]

Your talking hundreds of years ago, we have moved on since then. Crusades have absolutely nothing to do with present day problems.

 

 

I agree we will be involved again, probably Africa.

 

 

You can deal with terrorist armies with drones and air power, it depends on the weapon you carry in that plane.

[hoyauk]

Your talking hundreds of years ago, we have moved on since then. Crusades have absolutely nothing to do with present day problems.

 

 

I agree we will be involved again, probably Africa.

 

 

You can deal with terrorist armies with drones and air power, it depends on the weapon you carry in that plane.

 

Rather than fight the symptoms, we in the West need to take a hard look and consider why people are acting this way. I am a strong believer the phrase 'One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter'

[caro]

Your talking hundreds of years ago, we have moved on since then. Crusades have absolutely nothing to do with present day problems.

 

 

I agree we will be involved again, probably Africa.

 

 

You can deal with terrorist armies with drones and air power, it depends on the weapon you carry in that plane.

 

 

Ireland was a bit more recent, allegedly due to religion. Not on the same scale as IS, but nonetheless deadly.