it just keeps getting worse

Printable View

08-13-2005, 08:10 PM
Cloud No.9

it just keeps getting worse

well after my prime minister said he would change the huma rights act to deport "suspected" terrorists and "supporters" easier. he has now said he will deport them to countries that could torture them. whiich is another breach of the act.

there is one man who is a cleric who ordered muslims not to talk to the police about bombers. now is it just me or was this not the exact same stance of the ira? it was practiced openly. th ira would not tolerate catholics talking about the ira. and this was accepted.

so since when has the government decided that not only is this an offence but it is an offence that you can now be deported to a country in which you are doomed to torture?

should it be allowed that the london bombings be used as the new reichstag fire? i once asked what it would take for you to commit treason. my simple answer is if my government decides to abstain from it's duty to protect my human rights.
08-13-2005, 08:13 PM
lordblazer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

well after my prime minister said he would change the huma rights act to deport "suspected" terrorists and "supporters" easier. he has now said he will deport them to countries that could torture them. whiich is another breach of the act.

there is one man who is a cleric who ordered muslims not to talk to the police about bombers. now is it just me or was this not the exact same stance of the ira? it was practiced openly. th ira would not tolerate catholics talking about the ira. and this was accepted.

so since when has the government decided that not only is this an offence but it is an offence that you can now be deported to a country in which you are doomed to torture?

should it be allowed that the london bombings be used as the new reichstag fire? i once asked what it would take for you to commit treason. my simple answer is if my government decides to abstain from it's duty to protect my human rights.

not really a breech of act.More like a loophole he found, and plans on using it.
08-13-2005, 08:16 PM
Cloud No.9

it's not a loophole. he said he will change the act.

and the act does not give rights. it swears ther government to protect them. it's not a responsibilty that can be shirked.
08-13-2005, 08:18 PM
lordblazer

Its a loophole so the UN can't sanction him XD.

lol
08-13-2005, 08:23 PM
Cloud No.9

yeah that makes a big difference to me....

and what is the loophole anyway that allows him to go around abstaining from protecting my rights?
08-13-2005, 08:34 PM
lordblazer

yyeah pretty much.lol the woorld is in deep. lets complain together.
08-13-2005, 09:03 PM
Hawkeye

criminals, protection of, the law!
08-14-2005, 01:18 AM
nik0tine

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

criminals, protection of, the law!

Turncoat?
08-14-2005, 10:12 AM
Endless

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

well after my prime minister said he would change the huma rights act to deport "suspected" terrorists and "supporters" easier. he has now said he will deport them to countries that could torture them. whiich is another breach of the act.

there is one man who is a cleric who ordered muslims not to talk to the police about bombers. now is it just me or was this not the exact same stance of the ira? it was practiced openly. th ira would not tolerate catholics talking about the ira. and this was accepted.

so since when has the government decided that not only is this an offence but it is an offence that you can now be deported to a country in which you are doomed to torture?

should it be allowed that the london bombings be used as the new reichstag fire? i once asked what it would take for you to commit treason. my simple answer is if my government decides to abstain from it's duty to protect my human rights.

News source? Because if you're talking about Bakri, I suggest you re-read the news.
08-14-2005, 02:00 PM
BloodyQueen

Is it just me, or is anyone else getting infuriated by the constant use of the phrase "Islamic terrorists" in the media? The IRA are rarely refered to Catholic terrorists, and I've never heard any Christian abortion clinic-bombers being refered to as Christian terrorists, so it seems unfair that the media is assuming that all terrorists are Muslim. Where does that leave George Bush?
08-14-2005, 03:24 PM
Madame Adequate

Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodyQueen

Is it just me, or is anyone else getting infuriated by the constant use of the phrase "Islamic terrorists" in the media? The IRA are rarely refered to Catholic terrorists, and I've never heard any Christian abortion clinic-bombers being refered to as Christian terrorists, so it seems unfair that the media is assuming that all terrorists are Muslim. Where does that leave George Bush?

I have no qualms whatsoever to abortion clinic bombers and murderers of abortionists being referred to as Christian terrorists - if they are Christian. Same goes for the IRA. If a member was Catholic, he was a Catholic terrorist. I don't care if they call him it. So you can probably surmise from that that, if a terrorist is Muslim (As they all appear to have been.), he's an Islamic/Muslim Terrorist.
08-16-2005, 02:37 AM
Optium

Quote:

Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF

Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodyQueen

Is it just me, or is anyone else getting infuriated by the constant use of the phrase "Islamic terrorists" in the media? The IRA are rarely refered to Catholic terrorists, and I've never heard any Christian abortion clinic-bombers being refered to as Christian terrorists, so it seems unfair that the media is assuming that all terrorists are Muslim. Where does that leave George Bush?

I have no qualms whatsoever to abortion clinic bombers and murderers of abortionists being referred to as Christian terrorists - if they are Christian. Same goes for the IRA. If a member was Catholic, he was a Catholic terrorist. I don't care if they call him it. So you can probably surmise from that that, if a terrorist is Muslim (As they all appear to have been.), he's an Islamic/Muslim Terrorist.

Right but the fact is they DON'T call them Christian/Catholic terrorists.
They're pointing out that there is widespread racism (or...theism?) against
Muslims.

.opt