Major Incident In London

[thenodrog]

So which non-democratic model do you suggest we follow Theno .... a Taliban-style  theocracy or a military junta?

339826[/snapback]

As I detect a note of sarcasm in an immature yah boo sucks attempt to score cheap points I will ignore your silly question and attempt to answer the question that you should have asked if your manners were as they should be and if your interest is genuine, which is 'why do you think that tnr'?

Simply that in my opinion parties in political power in modern democracies are often swayed from making decisions which are for the long term good because of the short term fear of unpopularity in the eyes of the electorate which could see them lose forthcoming elections. The Poll Tax unquestionably got rid of the Thatcher govt so is the Blair govt now wary of following suit? Can we trust whichever government of the time to make decisions for the good of the country rather than the good of the party?

Furthermore (and I am generalising wildly here to illustrate my point) but do millions of people in our society deserve or even can be trusted with the responsibility of a vote? This might raise a few eyebrows but for example should the empty trailer trash participants and viewers of the likes of Big Brother or Gerry Springer deserve the exact same voting status in this country as the more intelligent and deep thinking participants and viewers of Question Time?

I cannot be bothered elaborating further to this but I'm sure that you'll get my drift ES.

Edited August 18, 2005 by thenodrog

[Scotty]

But as usual you don't offer an alternative Theno. Democracy may have flaws but what would you replace it with?

[American]

Furthermore (and I am generalising wildly here to illustrate my point) but do millions of people in our society deserve or even can be trusted with the responsibility of a vote?  This might raise a few eyebrows but for example should the empty trailer trash participants and viewers of the likes of Big Brother or Gerry Springer deserve the exact same voting status in this country as the more intelligent and deep thinking participants and viewers of Question Time?

I cannot be bothered elaborating further to this but I'm sure that you'll get my drift ES.

339971[/snapback]

Sadly, Gordo, that's what a lot of the hard core Muslims feel.

Oh, and it's Jerry Springer.

[salothsar]

As I detect a note of sarcasm in an immature yah boo sucks attempt to score cheap points I will ignore your silly question and attempt to answer the question that you should have asked if your manners were as they should be and if your interest is genuine, which is 'why do you think that tnr'? 

Simply that in my opinion parties in political power in modern democracies are often swayed from making decisions which are for the long term good because of the short term fear of unpopularity in the eyes of the electorate which could see them lose forthcoming elections.  The Poll Tax unquestionably got rid of the Thatcher govt so is the Blair govt now wary of following suit?  Can we trust whichever government of the time to make decisions for the good of the country rather than the good of the party? 

Furthermore (and I am generalising wildly here to illustrate my point) but do millions of people in our society deserve or even can be trusted with the responsibility of a vote?  This might raise a few eyebrows but for example should the empty trailer trash participants and viewers of the likes of Big Brother or Gerry Springer deserve the exact same voting status in this country as the more intelligent and deep thinking participants and viewers of Question Time?

I cannot be bothered elaborating further to this but I'm sure that you'll get my drift ES.

339971[/snapback]

I might have to go for a lie down after this but I tend to agree with you to a certain extent theno. There are many forms of democracy and non are perfect. In fact all are flawed and in all of them that I can think of the administration is overly concerned with re-election or their legacy rather than the best interests of their country. The 2 can coincide of course but often they don't. Rightly or wrongly, this is one of the reasons China will become the next superpower. They are not constrained by democracy and can implement long term plans that they believe will have long term benefits for the country as a whole, but will be deeply unpopular in the short term. Plans that, in a democracy, would see the party booted out of power.

I also have concerns sometimes that some eligible voters aren't always able to make a completely informed and rational decision regarding who should lead the country. However, I'm not sure voter elligibility should be determined by the kind of television programs you watch. As for Elton John fans though........

[Guest Dik Bleek]

Sadly, Gordo, that's what a lot of the hard core Muslims feel.

Could you explain what you know about this subject?

[thenodrog]

But as usual you don't offer an alternative Theno.  Democracy may have flaws but what would you replace it with?

339972[/snapback]

Your first sentence was rather churlish and unecessary Scotty but totally within character of course so I shall not take offence.

For democracy to work properly the electorate need to be responsible and politically aware which is increasingly rare today amongst many of the lower orders, with 'I dont care in fact couldn't give a flying flerk' being about the most common political comment that I hear so often from sections of the younger voters.

So totally off the cuff and for the sake of this debate (and to satiate your and ES's bloodlust) I'll have a stab ...........

........this is probably contentious but what about allocating extra votes depending on individual circumstance? eg How about one basic vote for absolutely everybody convicts, asylum seekers, illegals, those people 'enjoying' the benefit system for over 12 months etc and with extra votes for people depending on circumstance? 1 extra vote for 18-30's, 2 votes for 30-40's, 3 votes for 40-50's, 4 votes for 50-60's and then reducing similarly every decade on. Another extra vote for homeowners (max 1). An extra .5 vote for married people with dependent children under 18 (allows kids some token representation, but also gives extra votes to people who care about the future legacy to their descendants). Double the total number of previous votes allocated for all workers and nett taxpayers.

So if my maths stack up an ordinary working bloke in his 40's, married with a mortgage and kids gets 11 votes in total whilst a complete dolloper gets 1. Just like the dollopers our pensioners who are living longer nowadays have too high an influence (now classed as the grey vote by politico's I believe) so assuming they have no mortgage a 75 year old will get 3.

Simple eh? And in the interests of fair play the people that are carrying the greatest burden get the biggest say.

Now for your suggestions Scotty and Ewood Spark please............... Oh and no collusion!

Edited August 19, 2005 by thenodrog

[adopted scouser]

Prefer your version of PR to the Lib Phlegms. Theno.

Why should brain dead, dole scrounging, 'world owes me a living' chavs expect equal voting rights to working tax payers ?

When are you running ?

[thenodrog]

Prefer your version of PR to the Lib Phlegms. Theno.

Why should brain dead, dole scrounging, 'world owes me a living' chavs expect equal voting rights to working tax payers ?

When are you running ?

340059[/snapback]

Thanks scouse.... but prob is which party dare suggest or implement it? Truth is there are too many who for reasons already touched on would not want to see such a system in place. We'd probably have to have a coup d'etat by the army first to dismantle the old system and replace it with the new.

Edited August 20, 2005 by thenodrog

[blue phil]

  This might raise a few eyebrows but for example should the empty trailer trash participants and viewers of the likes of Big Brother or Gerry Springer deserve the exact same voting status in this country as the more intelligent and deep thinking participants and viewers of Question Time?

.

339971[/snapback]

Question Time viewers , Theno !! Are you going soft ? They should be first up against the wall .....

[broadsword]

They tolerated Blair's lies over Iraq and voted him back into office ! I suspect standards have slipped to such an extent that the average bloke in the street doesn't care anymore . Don't expect a single resignation over this relatively "minor" affairinvolving a Brazilian.......(Now if it'd been a so called British Asian killed ... )

339667[/snapback]

Wasn't it only 20% of the electorate actually voted for him?

Fair do's looks like I may have got it wrong over this incident ... looks a terrible mess.

[blue phil]

Wasn't it only 20% of the electorate actually voted for him?

340211[/snapback]

A presidential system is preferable to our "elected dictatorship" system of government . At least Bush can claim to have a personal mandate and has to answer directly to the electorate every five years .

I reckon the Tories and/or Libs should look to overhaul the whole system from top to bottom and have directly elected and accountable officials in every walk of life from the PM right down to the local mayoral level . Even police chiefs should be accountable (I think they are in the states ?) . INDIVIDUAL personalities with a direct mandate and a fixed term of office , rather than party hacks , should be our reps . At present we are a million miles away from having a true democracy in GB .

Why the hell a Tory leader can't dream up something along these lines I don't know . They've nothing to lose and everything to gain by devolving power locally

[92er]

A presidential system is preferable to our "elected dictatorship" system of government . At least Bush can claim to have a personal mandate and has to answer directly to the electorate every five years .

Four?

And he can't stand again.

[Ewood Spark]

........this is probably contentious but what about allocating extra votes depending on individual circumstance?  eg How about one basic vote for absolutely everybody convicts, asylum seekers, illegals, those people 'enjoying' the benefit system for over 12 months etc and with extra votes for people depending on circumstance? 1 extra vote for 18-30's, 2 votes for 30-40's, 3 votes for 40-50's, 4 votes for 50-60's and then reducing similarly every decade on. Another extra vote for homeowners (max 1).  An extra .5 vote for married people with dependent children under 18 (allows kids some token representation, but also gives extra votes to people who care about the future legacy to their descendants).  Double the total number of previous votes allocated  for all workers and nett taxpayers.

Theno, after denouncing Democracy you then go on to concoct yet another flavour!!!! Your idea is not without merit though and it would be an interesting debate on how the extra votes could be earned.

ps where did you disappear to after half time last week? I'm sure I spotted you on the front row before the rain set in.

[thenodrog]

ps where did you disappear to after half time last week? I'm sure I spotted you on the front row before the rain set in.

340246[/snapback]

Standing behind the very back row ES. Great view compared to the pitch level worms eye view that I/we 'enjoyed' for the first half. Damned glad that it rained and forced our move really.

[FourLaneBlue]

There are many forms of democracy and non are perfect. In fact all are flawed and in all of them that I can think of the administration is overly concerned with re-election or their legacy rather than the best interests of their country. The 2 can coincide of course but often they don't. Rightly or wrongly, this is one of the reasons China will become the next superpower. They are not constrained by democracy and can implement long term plans that they believe will have long term benefits for the country as a whole, but will be deeply unpopular in the short term. Plans that, in a democracy, would see the party booted out of power.

There's no way I could actually see a democracy working in China...it is such a huge country with supposedly 1.3billion people (although the actual figure could be anything up to three or even four hundred million more) that it is hard to envision wide-ranging democractic reforms taking place without leading to divisions that don't exist yet. I'd guess to say that most Chinese aren't bothered about democracy...it's taken many years of repression but now the population generally trusts the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to adminster reforms to help the people. While this has lead to much corruption it does mean that long-term projects can be pursued by the government. The downside is that many people may suffer but on the upside...utilitarianism comes into play and it can work as the greatest good for the greatest number.

An example is the colossal Three Gorges dam being constructed on the Yangtze River, the largest dam in the world. It means a terrible environmental cost will be reaped and millions of farmers have to be forcibly relocated but...it will provide desperately needed power for a huge region of central China. In the UK...I could never see this being passed.

China certainly does not have anything like an ideal system - a perusal of human rights sites proves that. Yet...it works in its own way...and proves that democracy is not the only way. Indeed, it's not close to being always the best way. China may not have the personal freedoms of the UK...but it's a damn sight safer place to walk down the street at night. It will be the next superpower in time...of that there is no doubt. Economists are predicting 2020 as the year China overtakes the USA as the largest economy in the world. I'm not sure that would happen if it was opened to democratic reforms too quickly...a problem with democracy is that it can polarise and lead to tribalism. A one-party system at least avoids that.

On another note...the Chinese government has no worries about cracking down hard on terrorist attacks that have taken place in the more remote, sparsely populated areas of the West of the country. No messing about with bills through government. It's not a price I'd like the UK to have to pay because of terrorists...but it works.

[thenodrog]

Wasn't it Churchill who on the subject of China advised that the best policy was 'to let sleeping dogs lie'?

Edited August 20, 2005 by thenodrog

[thenodrog]

Anyway..........Cat got yer tongue Scotty? It's not like you to take this long in responding to my posts. I replied to your request quickly enough.

[Scotty]

Anyway..........Cat got yer tongue Scotty?  It's not like you to take this long in responding to my posts.  I replied to your request quickly enough.

340749[/snapback]

You just can't help yourself can you?

Well, I think your version of democracy is frankly a joke. I'm sure there are plenty of 40-something, married "dollopers" who, according to you, would receive more votes than an intelligent, single 20 year old. It's like reading the work of an 8 year old.

As for my suggestions, I'm not the one complaining about the current system am I? As soon as I do feel free to ask me for an alternative.

[thenodrog]

You just can't help yourself can you?

As for my suggestions, I'm not the one complaining about the current system am I?  As soon as I do feel free to ask me for an alternative.

340765[/snapback]

So thats that then Scotty? No clear, free or forward thinking? No idealism? No personal 'Scotty Utopia' out there? In fact nothing to offer at all except poor quality criticism.

Cant say I'm all that suprised.

[Scotty]

Cant say I'm all that suprised.

340770[/snapback]

Just like I'm not surprised that you're baiting away as usual.

[Gareth]

Home Office's secret policy of targeting young Brazilians

Immigration officials have been carrying out a secret policy of barring young Brazilians from entering Britain, after a tip-off that gangs of people traffickers were smuggling them in to work in the black economy.

I think the Met Police took "target" the wrong way....

[promoted2001]

Home Office's secret policy of targeting young Brazilians

Immigration officials have been carrying out a secret policy of barring young Brazilians from entering Britain, after a tip-off that gangs of people traffickers were smuggling them in to work in the black economy.

I think the Met Police took "target" the wrong way.... 

340922[/snapback]

ba-da-bum chaa!

[thenodrog]

Home Office's secret policy of targeting young Brazilians

Immigration officials have been carrying out a secret policy of barring young Brazilians from entering Britain, after a tip-off that gangs of people traffickers were smuggling them in to work in the black economy.

I think the Met Police took "target" the wrong way.... 

340922[/snapback]

Just think....... if our immigration officers at the points of entry had done their job properly this chap would still be basking in the warm Brazilian sun.

Sliding doors eh?

Edited August 22, 2005 by thenodrog

[Gareth]

Staff say Stockwell Tube shooting was caught on camera

STAFF at Stockwell Underground station have protested at police suggestions that closed-circuit television cameras were not working when an innocent man was killed by police hunting potential suicide bombers.

Senior officers are reported to have told the independent investigation into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes that they had no footage from inside the carriage or from on the platform because all five cameras were not working.

But the Tube workers have challenged the police claim, allegedly telling investigators from the Independent Police Complaints Commission that three out of the four cameras covering the platform were definitely working on the morning of July 22.

Staff say that they do not know why the camera inside the carriage would not have filmed the moments when the Brazilian electrician was shot dead by armed police.

Scotland Yard declined to answer questions, saying that the matter was in the hands of the IPCC. The first officers on the scene after Mr de Menezes was shot took away all CCTV tapes but allegedly found them blank. Station staff decided to break the confidentiality of what they told the IPCC because they fear they are being blamed for failing to maintain the cameras.

A London Underground spokesman said: “Everything now has to go to the IPCC.” However, one senior Tube official said: “What are the realistic odds of five cameras — four on the platform, one in the carriage — all being on the blink?”

Hmm... Tube staff say the cameras were working fine, but once the films gets into the Met's hands the film become blank...

More from the Independent:

According to a report he would have passed eight cameras, two in the station entrance pointing at the barriers, another aimed at the Northern Line escalator and another on the way down.

When Mr de Menezes reached the bottom of the escalator, another camera would have captured him. And as he turned on to the platform one above the track and three more at each end of the platform would have caught him on film, the reports say.

All Northern Line Tube trains are equipped with CCTV - at either end of the carriages, but the only photograph published of the incident seems to have been taken from a doorway.

Edited August 23, 2005 by Gareth

[thenodrog]

From aol news

London Bomber's Message From the Grave

London suicide bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan blamed the British public for the July 7 atrocity in a chilling terrorist video and warned: "We are at war''.

He was shown in a film broadcast by Arab television channel al Jazeera in which al Qaida made a direct claim to have been behind the bombings.

The video, recorded as a final message before his suicide attack, saw the father-of-one teaching assistant tell the public they would be targeted again in future.

Speaking in a slow, calm tone and with a distinct Yorkshire accent, Khan warned: "Until we feel security, you will be our target. Until you stop the bombing, gassing, imprisonment and torture of my people, we will not stop this fight.

"We are at war and I am a soldier. Now you too will taste the reality of this situation.''

He added: "Our words are dead until we give them life with our blood.''........

.......The suicide bomber, who killed six people on a Circle Line train at Edgware Road, can be seen fiddling with a pen and glancing at notes. Khan, 30, who lived in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, claimed bombings in London and in Madrid in 2004 were the fault of Western citizens.

"Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetuate atrocities against my people and your support of them makes you directly responsible, just as I am directly responsible for protecting and avenging my Muslim brothers and sisters,''

What adjectives can be used to describe these revelations from a citizen of this country? Revelations that clearly put religion before nationality, that also put the doctrines of a backward and cruel religion way above democracy.

Chilling? Yes, Shocking? Yes, Sickening? Definitely, Worrying? Definitely,

Suprising? Not in the slightest! 'Entirely predicatable' would be most accurate definition imo. Unfortunately this was not the (almost forgivable) solitary action of a madman was it? This was a co-ordinated, fanatical and murderous action of many individuals. Undoubtedly there are many people residing still in this country who had prior knowledge of this atrocity and many more who will condone it.

I take no satisfaction from having my predictions of the past proven accurate but I still struggle to understand the mind set of individuals who chose to ridicule and criticise to the point of stupidity and obstinancy, whilst totally refusing to acknowledge or perceive any threat or problem from the fanatical followers that Islam breeds in this country. Individuals who think the answer to all our problems is to pander and appease every whim of a section of society.

So you can cry 'racist' or 'bigot' all you like guys, you can carry on shoving your heads as far up your own asres as you like but neither action is likely to resolve this situation in our country.

Problem is that I see no ready solution either.

Edited September 2, 2005 by thenodrog