Originally posted by docb77
Well, The US will have a new president in a little over 2 years. I don't know when they'll call for elections in the UK or if Blair can run again.
blair wont run again, he already has a nice job at some company after his term.. ye and bush cant stay another 4 years since presidents are only allowed to have two terms in office..
but a new puppet for the globalists wont be hard to find.. not in america nor in britian.
interestingly, one of the people arrested in connection with the "terror plot" has already been released without charge.
Following on from previous "terror arrests" in England I wait for more of them to be released without charge, as has been the trend recently.
Strange that when people get released all goes quiet in the media. Fanfare and praise for the police when arrests are made, quietly swept under the carpe when people are released.
Also love the way that those arrested, before they have been formerly charged with anything, have their names and addresses plastered over the news.
One more thing: of all those in England arrested using the anti-terror laws 90% have been released without charge.
Farsical.
It is obvious that more people get arrested than charged, for example in murder cases, the arrest - charge rate must be similar as many suspects are arrested and spoken to for info, so they can be eliminated from the investigation. Thats because to arrest someone in the uk the police only need 'reasonable grounds to suspect' someone is guilty. If you compare that to 'beyond reasonable doubt' to get a conviction in court and the cps only charge when there is realistic prospect of conviction.
Its better to turn over all the stones and find what you're looking for than to leave some un-turned and not get a result. Especially with something as important as terrorism.
Terrorists only need to get lucky once. The Police need to be lucky every time, and they mostly have been, hence the countless foiled attacks (ie - mininstry of sound bombing that would have killed 2000 people in London that was foiled by MI5 and the police) hence there being over 60 terrorism cases awaiting trial in England. But that doesn't seem to get noticed does it.
For someone to be arrested for any "normal" crime requires that there is some form of evidence to suggest they are guilty. Fair enough.
However, "Tony's Terror Laws"TM allow police to arrest people without evidence. Not very fair at all. Unsurprisingly 90% of the time the people arrested without there being evidence are then released because no evidence is subsequently found.
It's a nonsense. Trying to protect our democratic way of life by removing the principles of said life.
Just shows whats possible if your mad enough, these were educated british citizens (pakistani backround), how the hell did they get so brainwashed. One day something nasty is going to happen again, you can´t stop this every time. And 9/11 is the inspiration and the one to beat.
Well it helped distract attention away from Lebanon so Isreal can kill a few more civillians with conventional weapons.
Originally posted by baracustastic
For someone to be arrested for any "normal" crime requires that there is some form of evidence to suggest they are guilty. Fair enough.However, "Tony's Terror Laws"TM allow police to arrest people without evidence. Not very fair at all. Unsurprisingly 90% of the time the people arrested without there being evidence are then released because no evidence is subsequently found.
It's a nonsense. Trying to protect our democratic way of life by removing the principles of said life.
The laws themselves don't allow the Police to arrest with less grounds than other offences, but you're right in that the more grave the offence, the easier it is to justify arresting people(say you raid a house and find your suspect, everyone else in there is likely to get arrested too). The problem is that if it is informant based info, it is simply the word of a person. Normal offences are the same in that people get arrested based on someones elses allegation (eg a security guard sees a shoplifter at it, detains him, and his word is good enough as long as he's willing to go to court and give evidence). But if someone says they know of a terrorist threat (and give sufficient details) and doesn't want to go to court, the police still have to act as the matter is too serious. i think in the case of this recent matter, it had to be done. The worst case scenario of not acting doesn't bare thinking about.
Originally posted by Bicnarok
Just shows whats possible if your mad enough, these were educated british citizens (pakistani backround), how the hell did they get so brainwashed. One day something nasty is going to happen again, you can´t stop this every time. And 9/11 is the inspiration and the one to beat.Well it helped distract attention away from Lebanon so Isreal can kill a few more civillians with conventional weapons.
I don't just think that the nasty thing thats going to happen stops at terrorism either. The tension can be felt between pissed off Muslims and pissed off non-muslims. There'll probably be pretty bad riots soon in the UK. too many members of the muslim community are quire blatantly saying/showing how much they dislike the way of life and that they believe the this country should be run under Islamic legislation. This will give the right wing racists an excuse to act aswell as normal brits who are pissed off at their way of life being slagged off by people who are happy to enjoy free education/freedom of speech/not getting stoned for adultery but still complain.
Re: Thwarted Terrorist Attack On The USA.
Originally posted by -Tired Hiker-
Thanks Britain for saving our asses. 🙂 George Bush will try to take all the credit though, I'm sure. 😬
You're so quick to say "George bush will probabley take the credit" yet you never give Bush any credit for what he has done to fight terrorism..kind of ignorant on your part 😬
Re: Re: Thwarted Terrorist Attack On The USA.
Originally posted by KidRock
You're so quick to say "George bush will probabley take the credit" yet you never give Bush any credit for what he has done to fight terrorism..kind of ignorant on your part 😬
Like what? Bombing the country that had nothing to do with attacking America?
-AC
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thwarted Terrorist Attack On The USA.
Originally posted by KidRock
Always looking at the negatives. Typical.
Well yes, suffering the most horrific human event since the holocaust and then going after a completely innocent (vis-a-vis the event) country tends to stand out a bit as a rather large, noticeable negative.
The only reason his actions seem positive are because you're of a similar mind. That being a rather stupid one.
-AC
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thwarted Terrorist Attack On The USA.
Originally posted by KidRock
Always looking at the negatives. Typical.
So many Dilbert comic strips go like this...
PHB: Excellent news, our profits are through the roof after 6 months of the Balltropic 6000
Dilbert - But it is responsible for the death of thousands and as a result we are looking at bankruptcy in the resulting lawsuits.
PHB: Always looking at the negatives. Typical.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thwarted Terrorist Attack On The USA.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriThe only reason his actions seem positive are because you're of a similar mind. That being a rather stupid one.
-AC
Personal insults now? That means you have nothing to bring to the table here. Too bad, I was looking to hand you your ass. Oh well, good day.
Imperial_Samura This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click