Re: The Bigger, Badder, Even More Serious Thread [3]

[Mrs Figg]

more CCs?  

[Pettytyrant101]

The bedroom tax in the Uk rumbles on- now its been in force for a few months-

"The impact is at least as bad as we had anticipated, in many respects even worse," says David Orr, chief executive of the National Housing Federation.
"What we've seen are really bad effects on individuals, people whose lives have been turned upside down, who are very frightened about the future," says Mr Orr.
Rent arrears have soared in some areas while larger houses are lying empty as people refuse to move into them.
One of the government's stated aims for cutting housing benefit for people with spare rooms was to get them to move, thereby freeing up homes for families living in overcrowded properties.
Ministers say this is starting to happen but two housing associations have told BBC News that since the welfare change, they have large family homes lying empty because tenants cannot afford to move into them.
"The numbers of empty homes we've got to let are increasing significantly. People are now telling us that because of bedroom tax, they can no longer afford to move into the bigger family homes, and as a consequence of that we're getting fewer lettings and more empty houses."
Across the country in Merseyside, it is a similar story. Cobalt Housing, which owns nearly 6,000 mainly family homes in Liverpool, says the benefit change is putting "terrible pressure" on tenants.
"We have perfectly good, three-bedroom homes that people are telling us they can't afford to live in, because of the bedroom tax," says managing director, Alan Rogers.
Rent arrears are also on the increase - as they are in other parts of the country.
East Ayrshire Council says its arrears have increased by 340% following the benefit cut.
Increases in arrears have been reported in Dundee, Bolton, Manchester, Cambridge, Leeds, London, north and south Wales.
"Some people who have never been in arrears in their entire lives are in arrears and are horrified that they are in that position," says David Orr from the National Housing Federation.- BBC News

So just to be clear, a policy everyone said was unfair, would cause unnecessary hardship and would not achieve any of if its stated aims, is so far, unfair, causing unnecessary hardship and not achieving any of its stated aims.

[Mrs Figg]

yup that sounds about right. its like the poll tax all over again. why on earth do they have to fiddle about with these new laws, every five minutes they try to reform benefits, and its always for the worst. its Always the vulnerable that suffer. Thatcher tried that ruse and she got some rioting as a result.

[Pettytyrant101]

Benefit reform plays well with the middle classes and they are the ones who elect governments.

The poor are an easy target, you can call them scroungers, spongers, workshy, you can blame single mothers and imply they get pregnant just to get a house, you can paint them as just taking and taking from the system, specifically from the workers of the lower middle classes. And they can get away with it because so few of them bother to vote.

If you look at the political rhetoric in this country since the banking collapse you would be forgiven for believing that the economy crashed because of the welfare state, not the banking sector.
And in terms of legislation passed there has been far more reducing the welfare state than reforming financial sectors.
In England the NHS is being part privatised in what is a massive overhaul that was not in any manifesto, across the country local council services, benefits for the poor, care of the elderly, housing are all cut, or reformed to be harsher or harder to qualify for.
The entire welfare payment system is being replaced by Universal Credit in what is a ginormous IT overhaul.
Its clear from this the problem all along therefore was not the wealthy gambling the nations wealth recklessly and without check, but the poor for being poor.

Meanwhile reform in the finance sector on the other hand has, um, Im sure someone got a slap on the wrist for something near the start.....

[Pettytyrant101]

Sometimes Parliament does something so astonishing its clear the mad men are running the country. And they are unscrupulous bastards.

A Parliamentary committee set up to make recommendations following the MP's expenses scandal-in which MP's stole hundreds of thousands of pounds from the tax payer and got little more than being asked to pay it back and a slap on the wrists,have recommended that to stop a similar scandal happening again, wait for it, MP's should get a £10,000 pay rise.

Now in the real world, if I fraudulently claim thousands in expenses from the company who employs me, I go to court and then to jail.
What doesnt happen is my employer says, 'obviously we are not paying you enough, have 10 grand so you dont need to steal it again. And we'll just forget about it being a crime.'

Is it just me or is giving MPS a 10,000 quid reward each for being thieves, whilst simultaneously implementing policies cutting jobs and benefits and services, rather blatantly taking the piss, and then rubbing our faces in it?

[azriel]

No, its taking the piss on the grandest scale imaginable ! & yes, our faces are pushed so far into the shit the pigs look down on us ! Im just as angry at you on hearing that little gem ! Fooking bastards !!!! I have no hope of a decent life at the moment,at all. & I say "decent", not well off, or wealthy, or climbing up the ladder, just "decent". We are going further & further back to the Dark Ages its unimaginable ! I blame the Normans ! Oh fuck ! what a fucked up crap country this is !

[Pettytyrant101]

The more I study Orwell's 1984 the more frightening it gets- more so when you know that he in essence did the same job as Winston, the books main character, in creating propaganda- in Orwell's case during WW2.

But the more I look around the more I see- take names- in 1984 the place which tortures people is the Ministry of Love. The place that puts out propaganda is the Ministry of Truth and the place that deals with shortages is the Ministry of Plenty. Orwell calls it doublethink (well a part of doublethink)

in the real UK the department that deals with crime is called the Ministry of Justice.
Yet today I watched on the news as a, no doubt unpleasant man, was deported from this country to a country well known for torture and who had in fact tortured him in the past (but that's ok because they have given us 'assurances' they wont do it again)- and the reason we are deporting him is because the evidence against him was obtained under torture so it would be thrown out of a UK court. So we are sending him to be tried somewhere with a less vigorous set of laws and protections.
And there was our Prime Minister beaming from the television in delight and triumph as he watched the Ministry of Justice send a man back to the people who tortured him in the first place.

We have a Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, whose  main job is to pay subsides to not grow stuff or fish, in a world where millions starve to death.

We have a Ministry of Defence which has never defended anything (it didnt exist during WW2)- what it actually does is fight wars in other peoples countries in the role of aggressor.
It should be called the Ministry of War- but that would be the truth, and thats not doublethink!

In the book the name Big Brother is chosen as it is an appeal to the family, whilst the Party seeks to break the bonds between family members.
In the UK we have the Home office, which appeals to a sense of safety and familiarity- its main job is immigration and integration, what they actually do is stop people entering the country and then those who do they keep separated from the indigenous population by putting them all together in single streets or council estates.


In 1984 the Party announce chocolate rations will go up by 5 grams, a week later its actually reduced by five grams. Winston corrects the original prediction so it matches what the Party are now saying. And people forget about the original promise and only remember the new version.

In the Uk we were in a recession last year, this year the government announced it never happened and they had the stats to prove it. And people are just believing it. Despite the evidence of reality that it happened and is still happening with all the continued austerity.

In 1984 a Party slogan is 'Proles and Animals are Free'-meaning by this that the lower working class and the poor dont need to be taken into account- provide them with tv, sport, trashy magazines and newspapers, pornography, the lottery and alcohol and illicit drugs and they are perfectly controllable and fill their lives up without ever seeing the bigger picture or the controls over them.
All you need do is either promote those of worth to you or 'remove' the trouble makers.
And when needed you drop a bomb on them, blame the enemy and stir them up into a patriotic frenzy so they will put up with further curbs on their rights or lives.

All of this is perfectly true in the real Uk where the lower working class and poor are among the lowest turnout to vote and where it can be hard to find people with a genuine interest in politics or even an awareness of major world events. And I hate saying that because I am that class, but its true.
Its also true a major attack, terrorist event, death of soldiers all stir up that patriotic frenzy which has in recent times been the wave on which laws have been passed, laws which curb freedoms we previously had.

And now the government have everyone believing several troubling things- that the poor are to blame for societies ills and economy, that we should leave the European convention on human rights and massively curb immigration, and we should spy on our own people for own protection.

And most frightening of all to me is thought-crime.
In 1984 even thinking of committing a crime is enough to have you 'vanish', and they monitor you all the time, even in your sleep to see if you are displaying signs of such thoughts.

Now we aren't there yet in the Uk, but in the last ten years or so something fundamental has changed.
Once upon a time this country prided itself on living by the maxim 'I might not agree with you, by I will give my life to defend your right to say it.'
Now you can arrested for voicing certain views. And I am not talking about the right to verbal abuse someone based on their race for example, rather just voicing concerns about services been stretched, not enough housing being built ect can get you labeled. And from there easily censured now.
Same with marriage, if the law finds its just and fair and equal to have it, that's fine, but to deny people the right not to agree with it is not.
And in Scotland we have the anti-sectarian laws- where what was once banter and rivalry between fans now gets you arrested.
Whilst individual laws are not the problem,the underlying theme is deeply troubling. That you can be arrested for holding an opinion that is not in accord with  the 'official' opinion.


And I am starting to get nervous. I am starting to think 1984 hasnt actually happened yet, but the year is drawing closer.

[Eldorion]

I agree the United Kingdom has some serious problems when it comes to protecting freedom of speech, but don't both of the gay marriage laws contain numerous assurances that people don't have to have anything to do with gay marriage if they don't want to?

[Pettytyrant101]

Yes- but the overall mood from the top of society down through the politics and media is not to go along with it is not allowable. Society will turn its back on you and ostricise you for not sharing that opinion.

A good example regards race is my gran- who believed in equal rights but thought that blacks and whites shouldn't marry because 'it wasn't fair on the children being not one thing or another.'
If she voiced that view, and she often did, in public now and was overheard- it is likely someone would be offended and report her to the police, and she could find herself being at the least questioned.
That sort of thing is dangerous- views like hers can be tackled with education and greater understanding over generations better than censoring her every could.
And it also dangerous creating  a culture in which people watch each other for signs of not going along with the official line.
Totalitarian states like Stalins and Hilters didnt rely on an army of secret police, they relied on a small secret police and the public grassing up their neighbour for looking foreign, being gay, jewish, black ect.
And you can go right back to the times of the Catholic Church and find some poor women who lives alone and has a pet cat being dragged off to the fires- its all the same thing. Just different degrees.
And in the UK censoring, ridiculing, and ostracizing people whose views are not in line with policy is becoming increasingly common, with the law backing it up.

[Eldorion]

A good example regards race is my gran- who believed in equal rights but thought that blacks and whites shouldn't marry because 'it wasn't fair on the children being not one thing or another.'

I'd say she didn't believe in equal rights then, at least not entirely.

If she voiced that view, and she often did, in public now and was overheard- it is likely someone would be offended and report her to the police, and she could find herself being at the least questioned.

I ... what? That's completely absurd. Then again, so is arresting people for making offensive statements on Twitter.

[Pettytyrant101]

I'd say she didn't believe in equal rights then- Eldo

I should clarify that- she said she believed in equal rights, but with that, rather major, caveat.

"That's completely absurd. Then again, so is arresting people for making offensive statements on Twitter."

Yes it is on both counts- as is people here who have been arrested for posting things on facebook.

'Police and prosecutors in the UK are accused of being "incredibly heavy-handed" when dealing with online trolls and abusive messages.
It follows several cases where young people have been arrested, fined or jailed after posting insulting comments on their Twitter and Facebook accounts.
Olympic bronze medallist Tom Daley received a message about his dad, who died last year.
Following that a 17-year-old was arrested in Weymouth
His computer and phone were seized and he was given a harassment warning, which will stay on his record.
The Association of Chief Police Officers in a statement is say: "People have a right to publish their views but when these views become indecent, threatening or offensive then the individuals they affect also have the right to report them.
"The police will assist with any prosecution."' -BBC

The problem there of course is who decides what constitutes 'indecent, threatening or offensive' and note the reliance and promoting in the police statement of peoples right to tell tales on each other to the police- 'youve been offended by someone, thats an infringement of your rights, you have a right to report them and if its not an opinion we agree with either, we will help you get them.'

'A backlash of anger following the killing of Drummer Lee Rigby has led to several people facing charges over comments posted on social media sites.
Incidents have been reported to police across England with arrests in Lincoln, Bristol, Woking, Hastings and Southsea.
Some have been accused of offences under the Communications Act, and others have been arrested on suspicion of inciting racial or religious hatred.
The forces involved have reminded people such comments are unacceptable.'

Consider that last line- unacceptable to make a comment. And thats unacceptable as in we will arrest you for your comment. For stating your opinion. Even if it is unpleasant I cant go along with that, and it worries me.
"I would die to defend your right to say it'- not in the UK, more' I will tell the authorities on you for having made a comment stating your opinion and they will arrest you if its an opinion you are not allowed to hold.'

[Lancebloke]

Petty - I think there is so much wrong is your last few posts that it will take me longer than the time I have on the train to reply. I will try later.

Just to pick up on the last set of points. Abu qatada, for example, is a piece of shit. He openly incited violence and supported extremism. That, in my opinion, is enough to put him on a plane back to where he came from and let him deal with the consequences of being a moron.

You talk about re-educating people. You talk about immigration. How do you educate people that come to this country in their 20s, 30s or older that have already had their education? And by that I mean their views on the world are pretty much set. And what is to say this 'education' of yours isn't deeply offensive to them? Do we then not 'educate' them and instead let them off to do as they will and clean up the body parts later?

For someone who had had plenty of life experience, I find some of your comments very naive. People need to be held accountable for certain actions. And I don't just mean immigrants. I mean the paparazzi that climbs the tree to get a picture of Cheryl Cole's tits as she lays in her garden. The bullies at school that post insult after insult of social media and ends up with someone committing suicide.

I don't know how you can honestly suggest that some of the things being passed in to law are not in the best interests of the majority of people living here. If someone wants to think that gays should burn and some celebrity should kill themselves for being too fat then fine. They are morons. But to go and preach it everywhere and force it down the throats of those people is fucked up and if it means locking the bastards up... lock them up.

You know, I do think a good chunk of politicians are slimy pieces of crap that actually have their own interests at heart... but I do think there are also a few that think 'if that were my son/daughter/friend etc, what would I expect to happen.' They dont sit there wondering how else they can infringe on other peoples freedom.

And the human rights convention has turned in to a farce. The principle of it is great. The reality of it is often ridiculous.

(Disclaimer - I am providing a counter arguement to what I think were some relatively weak points... this doesnt mean that I havent seen examples where the law had gone too far).

[Pettytyrant101]

Abu qatada, for example, is a piece of shit- Lance

I dont disagree- but beyond shouting his mouth off he has not actually done anything- he was originally arrested and fled to the Uk on charges of conspiracy to cause death- his group never got passed the planning stage- and for his part in that plot he should have gone to jail (which a court would probably not have done as the evidence he was part of the plot was gained under torture which is inadmissible in a UK court). But even if he had gone to jail he would almost certainly have been out in less time (and less expense to the tax payer) than its taken to extradite him.
The reason the European court of human rights kept preventing it is because WE were breaking the rules we signed up to- namely that you cant send someone for trial in a country you know routinely tortures prisoners.

"He openly incited violence and supported extremism."

So did Gerry Admas and every member of Sein Fein- worse they carried out violence and sectarian extremism and were responsible for the deaths of many many innocent people- they now part run NI as politicians.


"You talk about re-educating people. You talk about immigration. How do you educate people that come to this country in their 20s, 30s or older that have already had their education?"

I think you misread me here- I never said anything about educating immigrants- I was talking about people like my Gran- and that views like hers are better countered through education over generations rather than by censuring in law and making voicing her opinion illegal.

"I mean the paparazzi that climbs the tree to get a picture of Cheryl Cole's tits as she lays in her garden. "

Damn it I missed that!  

We already have loads of laws dealing with this- they are just poorly enforced or not at all.
Look at the press scandal that brought down News of the World- everything they were doing was already illegal- it required no further laws to sort, no need for further censure- problem was they had the police in their pocket too- but the police were acting illegally too, again no need to create new legislation curbing press freedoms (which is what is happening) just proper enforcement of laws already on the statute books.

"The bullies at school that post insult after insult of social media and ends up with someone committing suicide. "

Again there is no need for new laws curbing peoples freedoms or watching everything everyone says or writes- there are harassment, stalking, threatening behaviour laws ect all of which amply already cover this sort of behaviour within law.

"I don't know how you can honestly suggest that some of the things being passed in to law are not in the best interests of the majority of people "

I dont think the purpose of law is to pander to the majority- if that were the case we would have the death penalty in this country and castration for sex offenders amongst other extreme laws.

"And the human rights convention has turned in to a farce."

We helped draft and create it. And we have exemptions from loads of it, as we do lots of euro laws.
Like all systems it will have is extreme examples of silliness- its still the best protection a european citizen has against actions taken by their own government- offering an independent court of appeal higher than their countries government.

[leelee]

In our country we all seem to know that as soon as you get where you want , sort of, the politicians will simply change things while we are sleeping.
We have had a leader who was best friends with Castro and who imposed martial law upon the country when a foreign diplomat was kidnapped and murdered by one of our forever extremist  group . When a reporter said "you can't do that, take away our freedoms like that, he replied "just watch me" and he did so and we were ordered to be shot if we were found out past nine oclock at night.
We have had a prime minister who headlocked a dissenter, much like our hockey players do, and hit him one because he was speaking threatening things, I doubt if that person went to jail. And his wife, our first lady chased a burglar from their house with a knife because the guards were asleep. Oh and the best friend of Castro, well his wife was found in the closet smoking dope and then went to a psychiatric hospital and we all thought it was great to get well and not give a care about what anyone thought
We just brought down a premier I rather liked, because he foisted on us the hst and right in the middle of his term we all ganged up on him and threw his party out.
We all have different thoughts but we are all polite. That seems to be what counts.
We admire all the cameras and wish we had them like England, and we wish it was the law that all people had to vote at election like in Australia. Oh well.....So we say Good day eh and meet at Tim Horton's or the Pantry to voice our opinions and we shore ourselves up for a whole year so we can withstand our police in riot gear and take the punches, those guys not only body build and do karate , they all play hockey and forget some of us don't. But even if we are in jail if someone takes negatively about our RCMP we don't allow it. We are dysfunctional, but we are polite and if we see cruelty or meaness to someone we get pretty choked and fight it.  Weird Al sings don't want to be one of us , but when he came here and performed , it was one of our favorite songs. And of course we stood in line politely while we waited for his autograph.

[azriel]

sorry to lighten the mood but, dear sweet LeeLee brought this guy up.....


actually Weird al has got a great voice, when he's not taking the mickey !

[azriel]

Sorry LeeLee, youve started me off !

[Norc]

i dunno what this thread is about, maybe i've timed it right, maybe not. but anyhow, just watch this video.

[Mrs Figg]

I agree with Lance.
Abu qatada groomed and indoctrinated young men to blow themselves and thousands of innocent people on 9/11. He didnt do the dirty deed himself because he is a coward, he sent others to their deaths while he sat in his nice comfy house in England bleating about his 'rights'. I personally hope he gets the death penalty. Its one less arsehole in the world, when you live by spreading hate and terror, you get whats coming to you, when you live by the bullet, you die by it. He is not English so it wasnt our problem, he should have thought about the consequences before he spread his poison. I dont give a monkeys about his rights quite frankly, I wouldnt wish he was tortured, but he was in our country for 10 years taking the piss and laughing at us while he took all the benefits he could. its despicable. that goes for anyone spreading hate, they should be muzzled by any means necessary. hate spreading is not the same as free speech, free speech is being able to voice ones own opinion, even if others dont like it, in freedom, hate merchants speak to incite and bully people, they provoke violence and murder, mad minorities should not be allowed to threaten innocent citizens, end of story.
I dont believe we live in an Orwellian Big Brother society full of gvt people out to get us, that kind of mentality results in people building bunkers and stockpiling arms and food like the survivalists do because they are driven by paranoia. I believe we are the most free society that has ever lived. if you compare our lives to those in the past, where there were feudal strangleholds and women were chattels. I dont believe politicians are part of a Conspiracy to turn us into drones, they are ordinary people with kids to take to school and the dog to take for walkies. we have the internet which has helped to spread the Arab Spring as people are aware of democracy in a way their parents were not. people are more aware of whats going on and are more likely to rebel if secretive or subtle laws start getting passed. we are in a position to cotton on to it as never before. and we are not stupid enough to let things pass without comment.

[Pettytyrant101]

I personally hope he gets the death penalty. Its one less arsehole in the world- Mrs Figg

Thing is we live in a country where we have developed laws which are supposed to live to a higher standard than our petty individual desires for revenge- thats the point of the law.
And our law says we do not repay death with death. And we do not torture prisoners for confessions. And we dont send prisoners to people who do either.

"Not even the very wise can see all ends, some who live deserve death and some who die deserve life, can you give it to them? Then do not be so hasty to deal out death in judgement."

I happen to believe that is a genuine principle worth holding on to- regardless of how we feel about the individual concerned. And frightens me that folks like you and Lance can be whipped into a blood frenzy over someone like him, whose best punishment would have been to starve him of the oxygen of publicity, not use him as a symbol for a Tory political rally point.

[Mrs Figg]

its nothing to do with Tory ranting, its about the laws of karma, if you spread hate, you take whats coming. its nothing to do with blood lust or revenge, if theres a mad dog biting people you put it down, its better for the innocent people around you. By your reckoning we wouldnt have had the Neuremberg trials either. and 90 year old war criminals wouldnt face courts of law because after 60 years its just revenge right? He is a criminal, he gets treated like a criminal in his OWN country, if there is the death penalty, like in the US, its tough, he took that step he did it to himself, for his cause, he sent others to die, now its karmic payback time.

[Pettytyrant101]

And if they torture the confession from you on which they base the trial on which they sentence you to death- is that justice?
And if we knowingly send him to that what separates us from him?

[Mrs Figg]

but they are not sending him back to get tortured are they? they have had 10 years of wrangling to assure everyone thats not going to happen. he is being tried by a non military jury and a human rights Group will be monitoring the Whole proceedure. if at the end of the trail he gets put down I wont be at all sorry.

[Lancebloke]

Me neither. I dont pay taxes for someone to come over here and soak up all my money while inciting other people to come and blow me up. We let him in to the country ad an asylum seeker and he repays us with turning vulnerable people in to crazy fanatics.

Is that right?

[Lancebloke]

Also... I dont think our laws have developed to not put our own petty desires above justice. When a child killer gets 8 years, released early only to be jailed again for distributing child sex images and then is released again... all at our cost so he can live a comfortable life....?

No, I think our laws have become bastardised by 'human rights' dictated by people sat in a room miles away from anything that goes on while completely forgetting about the murder and rape and assault victims who either HAVE to live with it their whole lives or no longer have a choice because they got hacked up.

[Pettytyrant101]

When a child killer gets 8 years, released early only to be jailed again for distributing child sex images and then is released again... all at our cost so he can live a comfortable life....- Lance

I believe life should mean life and it should be fully served. I dont understand why its not quite frankly
But if someone takes a life, and we as society say that is wrong, you cant do that, then how are we justified in taking their life in return? We make ourselves no less guilty of the same crime.
And for me there is massive gulf of difference between a judicial system that punishes crime, and a judicial system that has the power to grant or take life.