Friday, June 02, 2006

General Chat no 8

Only 12 comments yesterday and 2 of them deleted. Hope for better today. I saw in the paper today, that if enough MP's signed the early day motion 1088, we could bring Tony Blair to account for his actions in Iraq. How can we put pressure on our MP's.

22 Comments:

Blogger spiv said...

I signed in support of the movement to impeach Blair several weeks ago now. It will take a long time, granted. See

http://www.impeachblair.org

He has led this country into an illegal war in which many of our fine young men and women who serve in the armed forces have been either killed or put at risk.

9:45 am  
Blogger blueboy said...

Thanks Spiv, went to the web site and signed to impeach Blair. Like you said it will take a long time, but lets hope we can bring him to account, however long it takes.

9:59 am  
Blogger stansted said...

The front page of the Sun newspaper is taken up with a full-blown picture of the flag of St. George,with a caption 'Up Yours.'

It is saying to the English supporters of our soccer team, (who, a large number happen to be Sun readers) ignore the busy-body PC brigade who, wish you not to offend our ethnic guests by flying the flag of St. George.

The Sun are caught in a dilemma, on the one hand, they suppport New Labour and the Multi Cultural programme, but Cultural Correctness demands the flag of St.George be banned as part of destroy Britain programme.

On the other hand, the Sun promotes the English soccer team whose supporters, (their readers) have adopted the St, George flag as their talisman.

This state of affairs has placed the Sun newspaper in a deep dilemma.

They (Sun) are also aware that the BNP's flagship flag is the St. George, but as we all know the Sun hates, detests and villifies everything the BNP represents, so what are they to do?


They say 'Up Yours' fly the flag, but all of the time secretly holding their nose.

The Sun newspaper is a total disgrace, still it's nice to see their hand has been forced - It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good!

10:01 am  
Blogger spiv said...

Stansted, I couldn't agree with you more.

10:15 am  
Blogger wdgglgleuug4y9 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10:30 am  
Blogger spiv said...

Scotland, I'm intrigued as to why you keep deleting your comments?? I enjoy reading them, then, suddenly, they are gone!!

"I only pray we are ready for it" - are you referring to likely terrorist attacks which we are stirring up, much as if we were poking a big stick into a wasps' nest? Because, if so, I rather fear we are not ready, we do not have the calibre of political leadership necessary.

11:12 am  
Blogger shieldwall said...

something that really worries me,considerably,is the idea of (SOCA)the Serious Organised Crime Agency,not having to swear allegiance to the crown but instead to the Government of the day,i.e...Labour.Frightening thought is it not,it looks like Tony has his very own SS,he and his odious cohorts will enjoy unleashing them upon the population,definitely the political police,and we are supposedly the Nazis!.

11:22 am  
Blogger spiv said...

Shieldwall, you actually raise a very interesting point, and to develop it further, I have mentioned in the past, although it has been scorned by some, that using the so called "war on terror" as an excuse, this Government has introduced the most draconian money laundering regulations of any country in the world.

Now the words 'money laundering' conjures up thoughts of serious criminals laundering their proceeds of drugs smuggling, terrorism funding etc. But a few short years ago Blair linked 'money laundering' to the proceeds of any crime, even as low as 1 penny. Now, stop and think about that for a moment, nick a pen from work and that is now 'money laundering' (a small perk to most people, but not Blair).

And who has he pressganged into being the 'covert' agents to report people to SOCA - yup, all accountants, lawyers, estate agents, insurance salemen, banks, building societies and other professional persons. So mention, even as a joke, to your insurance agent that £5 'cash in hand' job you did last Saturday and he is leggaly obliged to fire off a 'suspicious activity report' (known as a SAR) to SOCA. Don't believe me? Well, check the SOCA website. The insurance agent can't even drop you any hint he has done so, if he did he could serve a five year stretch for "tipping you off".

And I know Paulbad derides this, but, the problem for him and everyone is that it is not me I have to report (in my capacity as an accountant), it is my clients, friends, associates, even you!!! And I would make it quite clear that I would have no hesitation in reporting a drugs smuggler or terrorist, it is just that even the stupid 'crimes' have to be reported. Try getting a copper to do anything becasue your pen is stolen!!

I have no idea why people are not up in arms about this, but again Britain is fast asleep.

11:51 am  
Blogger wdgglgleuug4y9 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

12:05 pm  
Blogger Philip Bryant said...

Your debate here raises a question that's been bothering me, perhaps one of you could explain something. The BNP (and most of us) are opposed to the war in Iraq, yet they (as we) would surely agree that the war on Iran is not only necessary but unavoidable, and that the war in Iraq is a precurser to it. This sounds a bit hypocritical...do we or don't we support the war against Islamic fundamentalism whether it be in Iraq or Iran?

My own view is that I don't oppose the Iraq war par se, only the fact that it is an 'illegal' war and that we were lied to about the reasons for getting involed.

1:32 pm  
Blogger Philip Bryant said...

involved....

1:33 pm  
Blogger wdgglgleuug4y9 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1:58 pm  
Blogger spiv said...

Phil, you ask "do we or don't we support the war against Islamic fundamentalism whether it be in Iraq or Iran?"

Are we at war against Islamic fundamentalism?? Or are we at war to try to control the declining oil reserves? We thought we were at war to "smoke out terrorists", then that became "to stop Saddam using WMD".

Sorry mate, but why are we at war?? I'm becoming confused.

And, of course, given that we (both Britain and the US) are illegally invading Islamic nations, are we then not the aggressors?? And, if so, maybe one can then start to understand why terrorists seek to 'defend'
themselves. Or are our armies thought of as terrorists by the Middle Eastern cultures? Ask yourself how we feel at the thought of them coming here and imposing their cultures on us. See the problem here??

Who started it, or is it an ever increasing windup of both sides? I have no answers, but am merely acting as a 'devil's advocate'.

2:44 pm  
Blogger Philip Bryant said...

Spiv

I'm as confused as you, that's why I bought the issue up. Of course, the confusion comes about as a direct result of being lied to by our so-called 'leaders', which brings us back to the question as to whether B.Liar should be impeached. All politicians who lied to us should be made accountable by law, IMO, surely that would stop all the confusion!

2:50 pm  
Blogger blueboy said...

Interesting programme on the history channel tonight about Saddam's relationship with the US. I guess most of us no about the relationship,still should be interesting. It's on at 9pm.

3:06 pm  
Blogger spiv said...

were we lied to, I very much believe so. If Blair had come to us as a nation and asked "Saddam is a bad boy, shall we go after him?" we could all have decided properly. But he did not. He lied, and that is why, in my own opinion, he should be impeached.

I agree with Scotland though, if it does ever happen it will take a long long time, and that is even "if" it does.

Blueboy, I'll be looking out for it. And another question to pose, why has Osama Bin Laden never been caught?? Ever start to ask yourself what his connections with America are. He was even in an American hospital in the Middle East just prior to the 9/11 atrocities. Smoke and mirrors comes to mind, does it not?? And why did the Pakistani Defence Minister (I believe, but, if not, it was a high ranking Pakistani minister) send $100,000 US Government dollars to the lead highjacker just two weeks prior to 9/11?? Smoke and mirrors again??

Sorry Blueboy, may or may not be relevant to your blog item, but is it all not part of the background that led us to war??

3:16 pm  
Blogger blueboy said...

Spiv, don't worry about my blog item, that's why i post under general chat, so as you can post any comment you like.

3:58 pm  
Blogger wdgglgleuug4y9 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

4:31 pm  
Blogger wdgglgleuug4y9 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

4:33 pm  
Blogger white rose said...

evening all..

spiv you asked...

"And another question to pose, why has Osama Bin Laden never been caught??"

I was listening to some guy on the talk radio I can't remember his rank but he was either some military special unit type or ex CIA or something... He told the USA via radio that they had been tracking Bin Laden and Zarkawi for yonks and could have killed both many times over but were told by Bush etc to lay off.. when they had Bin Laden in their sight, on more than one occasion, he was either on the border or in Pakistan.. The reason they were given to back off was that they feared if they were to kill him or & Zarkawi, the Muslims in Pakistan would assassinate Musharaff and.. well they have nuclear weapons... so BOOOOOOM I suppose. The guy telling this story couldn't understand Bush & Co's.. (what I think he considered) overly cautious attitude.

5:38 pm  
Blogger shieldwall said...

it is hardly worth posting on fatty Griffins blog anymore isnt it,but i believe every now and then somebody should post this web address on it,so others can pop in and make a comment,whether good or bad,just to spice it up,what do you reckon troops?.

7:43 pm  
Blogger wdgglgleuug4y9 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

7:37 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home