|
Post by superox on Feb 12, 2011 8:53:18 GMT
After the people's uprising in Egypt which country will see the next revolution? Many see Algeria as the next focal point.
I'd like to see an uprising in Iran - now that would be spectacular.
|
|
|
Post by alessandro on Feb 12, 2011 9:32:44 GMT
Perhaps it's been a quickly learnt lesson for Thames Valley police about what happens to authoritarian police forces eventually.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Feb 12, 2011 10:50:08 GMT
Perhaps it's been a quickly learnt lesson for Thames Valley police about what happens to authoritarian police forces eventually. I wonder what a revolution would be like in England, lots of tutting, and shaking of heads.
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Feb 12, 2011 12:10:36 GMT
Tunisia seemed to start it all off, and now most of the Arab states are now thinking "Hang on a minute, we can do something about this". I wouldn't be surprised if Libya gets in on the act as well. Gaddaffi has pretty much alienated the country from the rest of the world, and the general public are the ones who have suffered.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Feb 12, 2011 12:15:39 GMT
As long as they don't make a bee-line for the UK they can blow eachother to smithereens for all I care
|
|
|
Post by yellowhun on Feb 12, 2011 12:20:15 GMT
As long as they don't make a bee-line for the UK they can blow eachother to smithereens for all I care Exactly my concern. You can just imagine all the "do-gooders" wellcoming all with open arms. Incidentally, it was reported on the news last night that Saudi could be one of the next. Just imagine a load of oil millionaire assylum seekers wandering around Harods.
|
|
|
Post by superox on Feb 12, 2011 13:01:52 GMT
It took the Russian's hundreds of years to have the 1917 uprising against the Tsar with their revolution.
The Egyptians took 18 days. Who's next?
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Feb 12, 2011 14:14:07 GMT
As long as they don't make a bee-line for the UK they can blow eachother to smithereens for all I care Exactly my concern. You can just imagine all the "do-gooders" wellcoming all with open arms. Incidentally, it was reported on the news last night that Saudi could be one of the next. Just imagine a load of oil millionaire assylum seekers wandering around Harods. As long as the rest of the EU chip in as well. It's all very well Brussels lecturing us on their 'human rights' etc. yet when you walk around Brussels there's hardly a muslim in sight. What's wrong with the rest of Europe taking in asylum seekers? Why does it always have to be us? What's good for the goose....
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 12, 2011 17:30:31 GMT
Exactly my concern. You can just imagine all the "do-gooders" wellcoming all with open arms. Incidentally, it was reported on the news last night that Saudi could be one of the next. Just imagine a load of oil millionaire assylum seekers wandering around Harods. As long as the rest of the EU chip in as well. It's all very well Brussels lecturing us on their 'human rights' etc. yet when you walk around Brussels there's hardly a muslim in sight. What's wrong with the rest of Europe taking in asylum seekers? Why does it always have to be us? What's good for the goose.... When has brussels been lecturing us on asylum seekers' human rights? The only human rights they've been lecturing us on recently are those of prisoners.
|
|
|
Post by dannyc on Feb 12, 2011 18:15:32 GMT
Perhaps it's been a quickly learnt lesson for Thames Valley police about what happens to authoritarian police forces eventually. I wonder what a revolution would be like in England, lots of tutting, and shaking of heads. well some on this forum would never rise up like they did in Egypt to soft to try .
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Feb 12, 2011 19:12:11 GMT
As long as the rest of the EU chip in as well. It's all very well Brussels lecturing us on their 'human rights' etc. yet when you walk around Brussels there's hardly a muslim in sight. What's wrong with the rest of Europe taking in asylum seekers? Why does it always have to be us? What's good for the goose.... When has brussels been lecturing us on asylum seekers' human rights? The only human rights they've been lecturing us on recently are those of prisoners. There was the case of Abu Hamza, who when he is released from prison, Britain wanted to strip him of his dual-nationality and kick out of the UK as his presence 'isn't conducive to the public good', but the European Court of Human Rights said 'Oh no you can't do that because Egypt has already stripped him of his citizenship and he can't be stateless'. The European Court of Human Rights has also blocked his extradition to the USA to face terror charges, and previously blocked him as well as other militants being deported because they may face torture on extradition. Anyway I've had a look and the ECHR is actually in Strasbourg, France and not in Brussels, but my points are the same. That is what really bugs me most about our asylum system, that people can come here inciting murder and hatred, yet the ECHR are harping on about their human rights. What about OUR HUMAN RIGHTS? Our human rights to go to work on an underground train without it being blown to smithereens. Asylum seekers should be treated like 'guests' in our country, and like a 'guest' at a any party, if they abuse that privilige, then they are kicked out.
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 12, 2011 19:36:34 GMT
When has brussels been lecturing us on asylum seekers' human rights? The only human rights they've been lecturing us on recently are those of prisoners. There was the case of Abu Hamza, who when he is released from prison, Britain wanted to strip him of his dual-nationality and kick out of the UK as his presence 'isn't conducive to the public good', but the European Court of Human Rights said 'Oh no you can't do that because Egypt has already stripped him of his citizenship and he can't be stateless'. The European Court of Human Rights has also blocked his extradition to the USA to face terror charges, and previously blocked him as well as other militants being deported because they may face torture on extradition. Anyway I've had a look and the ECHR is actually in Strasbourg, France and not in Brussels, but my points are the same. That is what really bugs me most about our asylum system, that people can come here inciting murder and hatred, yet the ECHR are harping on about their human rights. What about OUR HUMAN RIGHTS? Our human rights to go to work on an underground train without it being blown to smithereens. Asylum seekers should be treated like 'guests' in our country, and like a 'guest' at a any party, if they abuse that privilige, then they are kicked out. I suppose it depends on whether you think its right to allow someone to be deported to a country where they might end up getting tortured. I mean if you personally believe that torture is wrong, is strikes me as somewhat hypocritical not having a problem with deporting people to other countries knowing that they will be tortured when they get there.
|
|
|
Post by dannyc on Feb 12, 2011 19:50:55 GMT
There was the case of Abu Hamza, who when he is released from prison, Britain wanted to strip him of his dual-nationality and kick out of the UK as his presence 'isn't conducive to the public good', but the European Court of Human Rights said 'Oh no you can't do that because Egypt has already stripped him of his citizenship and he can't be stateless'. The European Court of Human Rights has also blocked his extradition to the USA to face terror charges, and previously blocked him as well as other militants being deported because they may face torture on extradition. Anyway I've had a look and the ECHR is actually in Strasbourg, France and not in Brussels, but my points are the same. That is what really bugs me most about our asylum system, that people can come here inciting murder and hatred, yet the ECHR are harping on about their human rights. What about OUR HUMAN RIGHTS? Our human rights to go to work on an underground train without it being blown to smithereens. Asylum seekers should be treated like 'guests' in our country, and like a 'guest' at a any party, if they abuse that privilige, then they are kicked out. I suppose it depends on whether you think its right to allow someone to be deported to a country where they might end up getting tortured. I mean if you personally believe that torture is wrong, is strikes me as somewhat hypocritical not having a problem with deporting people to other countries knowing that they will be tortured when they get there. so how would you deal with people like that then .
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 12, 2011 19:54:14 GMT
I suppose it depends on whether you think its right to allow someone to be deported to a country where they might end up getting tortured. I mean if you personally believe that torture is wrong, is strikes me as somewhat hypocritical not having a problem with deporting people to other countries knowing that they will be tortured when they get there. so how would you deal with people like that then . I guess you'd love to be the one applying the jump leads to his c#ck eh?
|
|
|
Post by dannyc on Feb 12, 2011 20:02:55 GMT
so how would you deal with people like that then . I guess you'd love to be the one applying the jump leads to his c#ck eh? no you'd be there first with your lips around it wouldn't you .
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 12, 2011 20:04:39 GMT
I guess you'd love to be the one applying the jump leads to his c#ck eh? no you'd be there first with your lips around it wouldn't you . That's quite impressive for you danny! I'll give you that one. I take it you're in favour of torture then.
|
|
|
Post by dannyc on Feb 12, 2011 20:07:45 GMT
no you'd be there first with your lips around it wouldn't you . That's quite impressive for you danny! I'll give you that one. I take it you're in favour of torture then. yes for people like that otherwise they can cause harm to the rest of the population would you want that .
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 12, 2011 20:26:59 GMT
That's quite impressive for you danny! I'll give you that one. I take it you're in favour of torture then. yes for people like that otherwise they can cause harm to the rest of the population would you want that . How is torturing them going to stop them causing harm to other people?
|
|
|
Post by luvthepink on Feb 12, 2011 20:52:06 GMT
What gets on my tits and i find acutely embarrassing is the way the West love to stick their noses in and the journalists positively gloat at the turmoil,what they dont seem to see is that Radical Islam will get a foothold in these countries and we will have the same thing happening as in Iraq,saddam Hussain kept the peace i Iraq for years using an iron fist (the only thing these primitives understand) Egypt have a peace pact with Israel at the moment...do you really think they will stick with this when the Brotherhood " take over eventually? Armaggedon is on the horizon and we seem to be celebrating it....i just hope we stay out of it and let the primitive cnuts blow themselves to kingdon come....dont hold ya breath tho we'll be swamped with lillylivered so called asylum seekers who will watch OUR troops get killed on their behalf rather than go fight themselves...f*ck all those muslims ....as soon as Iran gets near owning a nuke Israel will obliterate them and it will all go off anyway....must admit i cant feckin wait
|
|
|
Post by luvthepink on Feb 12, 2011 20:57:03 GMT
yes for people like that otherwise they can cause harm to the rest of the population would you want that . How is torturing them going to stop them causing harm to other people? you torture them and get information out of them .....THEN you act on the information and stop attrocities such as 9/11 etc......worst thing ever was to close guantanamo.....bame that half muzzy Obama for that....t*at!!!
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 12, 2011 21:05:12 GMT
How is torturing them going to stop them causing harm to other people? you torture them and get information out of them .....THEN you act on the information and stop attrocities such as 9/11 etc......worst thing ever was to close guantanamo.....bame that half muzzy Obama for that....t*at!!! Yeah, but torturing abu Hamza is not going to stop *him* killing anyone is it, as danny implied it would. And why would the information you got from torturing him be of any use. He's just going to say whatever he thinks his interrogators want to hear.
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Feb 13, 2011 9:40:38 GMT
There was the case of Abu Hamza, who when he is released from prison, Britain wanted to strip him of his dual-nationality and kick out of the UK as his presence 'isn't conducive to the public good', but the European Court of Human Rights said 'Oh no you can't do that because Egypt has already stripped him of his citizenship and he can't be stateless'. The European Court of Human Rights has also blocked his extradition to the USA to face terror charges, and previously blocked him as well as other militants being deported because they may face torture on extradition. Anyway I've had a look and the ECHR is actually in Strasbourg, France and not in Brussels, but my points are the same. That is what really bugs me most about our asylum system, that people can come here inciting murder and hatred, yet the ECHR are harping on about their human rights. What about OUR HUMAN RIGHTS? Our human rights to go to work on an underground train without it being blown to smithereens. Asylum seekers should be treated like 'guests' in our country, and like a 'guest' at a any party, if they abuse that privilige, then they are kicked out. I suppose it depends on whether you think its right to allow someone to be deported to a country where they might end up getting tortured. I mean if you personally believe that torture is wrong, is strikes me as somewhat hypocritical not having a problem with deporting people to other countries knowing that they will be tortured when they get there. Not at all. I'm saying that asylum should be conditional on the basis they behave themselves. It's not hypocritical at all. If Abu Hamza gets deported then tortured as a result, we can still hold our head high as a nation and say "Well you had your chance on many occasions to mend your ways, but but you decided to throw it back in our face. You're on your own now pal". I don't like these extreme right-wing nut-jobs like Nick Griffin any more than you do, but when it comes to extremists, this country is far too soft. Let's make it clear though that I don't have a problem with 98% of the asylum seekers. It's the extremists that want to commit mass murder that I have a problem with. I think it's a bit bad that you are happy to admit people into this country who want to kill us.
|
|
|
Post by KLYellow on Feb 13, 2011 10:08:55 GMT
My view is it could happen in a number of countries in the next 5 or 10 years. It could even happen in suprising countries including the UK and China!
My thoughts are. We are seeing sentiments from both Germany and UK that social & cultural intergration are not working. It is possible that over the next couple of years that the divides become more apparent and disruptive. A trigger for this could be economy related, possibly as countries such as the UK lose key markets and jobs.
The divide between rich and poor is also a concern for several countries. I have always thought this could be a major issue for China in years to come. With something like 98% of the wealth in China owned by 3% of the population it would not suprise me if the 97% rise up. If such a large percentage rise up, it is highly likely the armed forces would side on the majority.
Therefore I feel Tunisia, Egypt are only the start of things to come and could possibly spread like a disease, affecting countries around the world. As said am sure we will be suprised by some countries that it effects
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Feb 13, 2011 11:38:01 GMT
If the West didn't start wars against Middle East Countries none of this would happen, certainly 7/7 wouldn't.
If you're looking for someone to blame look no further than Mr Bliar. HE took us to war, HE signed up to the Human Rights Convention back in 1997 and his pal Brown signed us up to the EU Constitution without giving us a referendum.
|
|
|
Post by Belgian Yellow on Feb 13, 2011 14:43:13 GMT
If the West didn't start wars against Middle East Countries none of this would happen, certainly 7/7 wouldn't. If you're looking for someone to blame look no further than Mr Bliar. HE took us to war, HE signed up to the Human Rights Convention back in 1997 and his pal Brown signed us up to the EU Constitution without giving us a referendum.Again more of your anti-Labour propaganda. It was Anthony Eden your Tory PM who took us into the war. Bliar wasn't even born at the time.
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 13, 2011 15:34:00 GMT
I suppose it depends on whether you think its right to allow someone to be deported to a country where they might end up getting tortured. I mean if you personally believe that torture is wrong, is strikes me as somewhat hypocritical not having a problem with deporting people to other countries knowing that they will be tortured when they get there. Not at all. I'm saying that asylum should be conditional on the basis they behave themselves. It's not hypocritical at all. If Abu Hamza gets deported then tortured as a result, we can still hold our head high as a nation and say "Well you had your chance on many occasions to mend your ways, but but you decided to throw it back in our face. You're on your own now pal". I don't like these extreme right-wing nut-jobs like Nick Griffin any more than you do, but when it comes to extremists, this country is far too soft. Let's make it clear though that I don't have a problem with 98% of the asylum seekers. It's the extremists that want to commit mass murder that I have a problem with. I think it's a bit bad that you are happy to admit people into this country who want to kill us. So you would be perfectly happy with the idea of deporting someone, knowing they would be tortured when they reached their destination? Sorry i just don't think that's right.
|
|
|
Post by luvthepink on Feb 13, 2011 16:34:42 GMT
Not at all. I'm saying that asylum should be conditional on the basis they behave themselves. It's not hypocritical at all. If Abu Hamza gets deported then tortured as a result, we can still hold our head high as a nation and say "Well you had your chance on many occasions to mend your ways, but but you decided to throw it back in our face. You're on your own now pal". I don't like these extreme right-wing nut-jobs like Nick Griffin any more than you do, but when it comes to extremists, this country is far too soft. Let's make it clear though that I don't have a problem with 98% of the asylum seekers. It's the extremists that want to commit mass murder that I have a problem with. I think it's a bit bad that you are happy to admit people into this country who want to kill us. So you would be perfectly happy with the idea of deporting someone, knowing they would be tortured when they reached their destination? Sorry i just don't think that's right. you dont really buy all that "i'll be tortured" crap they all come out with that b*llshit as they know the do-gooders will fight their corner
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 13, 2011 16:43:20 GMT
So you would be perfectly happy with the idea of deporting someone, knowing they would be tortured when they reached their destination? Sorry i just don't think that's right. you dont really buy all that "i'll be tortured" crap they all come out with that b*llshit as they know the do-gooders will fight their corner Well which country has it become blindingly obvious routinely practices torture? If I were a terror suspect facing extradition to the US I'd play the 'i'll be tortured card' for all its worth! I'm hardly fighting his corner anyway, i think he should have been banged up in this country for years to come, but since there weren't the grounds for that I would have a moral objection in sending him to a country which is known to torture just his type of person.
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Feb 13, 2011 18:13:19 GMT
Not at all. I'm saying that asylum should be conditional on the basis they behave themselves. It's not hypocritical at all. If Abu Hamza gets deported then tortured as a result, we can still hold our head high as a nation and say "Well you had your chance on many occasions to mend your ways, but but you decided to throw it back in our face. You're on your own now pal". I don't like these extreme right-wing nut-jobs like Nick Griffin any more than you do, but when it comes to extremists, this country is far too soft. Let's make it clear though that I don't have a problem with 98% of the asylum seekers. It's the extremists that want to commit mass murder that I have a problem with. I think it's a bit bad that you are happy to admit people into this country who want to kill us. So you would be perfectly happy with the idea of deporting someone, knowing they would be tortured when they reached their destination? Sorry i just don't think that's right. I don't see why we should be concerned for their welfare when they clearly don't give two hoots about anyone else's welfare in this country. These selfish turds deserve NO SYMPATHY what so ever. Anyway it's not as though we are the ones doing the torturing. We have been quite generous to open our doors and let them in to our country, but they have turned round and thrown it back in our face. It's case of biting the hand that feeds you. Once they start to behave like humans, then and only then can we start discussing their 'human rights'.
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Feb 13, 2011 18:19:11 GMT
So you would be perfectly happy with the idea of deporting someone, knowing they would be tortured when they reached their destination? Sorry i just don't think that's right. I don't see why we should be concerned for their welfare when they clearly don't give two hoots about anyone else's welfare in this country. These selfish turds deserve NO SYMPATHY what so ever. Anyway it's not as though we are the ones doing the torturing. We have been quite generous to open our doors and let them in to our country, but they have turned round and thrown it back in our face. It's case of biting the hand that feeds you. Once they start to behave like humans, then and only then can we start discussing their 'human rights'. So its OK for them to be tortured as long as our hands aren't dirty, oh the hypocrisy! If the 'selfish turds' deserve torture why don't we just do it rather than sending them elsewhere. Where does it stop? terrorists, asylum seekers, regular criminals, suspects? After all, if you think someone's a child killer or a rapist, why not hook him up to a car battery and all.
|
|