UK Election Thread

[trencheel303]

So again... what do you propose for these British citizens? Where are you going to put them? Just ship them off to another country, one that they don't belong in?

If they are British citizens (and not all are) and there is sufficient evidence that they wish harm on or plan to harm this country and/or its people then they should be trialled for their crimes as appropriate and remanded while this is in progress. The fact remains that at the moment you can wish ungodly amount of ills on this country, on our governments and even on our Royal Family and you can't be touched. Several of the recent ones have all been "on the list" and even under investigation - one of them was on a muslim documentary recently and didn't even hide his face while hanging up a jihad flag - but the laws in this country that are more than happy to harbour criminals says no action can be taken against them because they haven't committed actual acts of terror. Oh oh, too late, they have now!

If you don't have a British citizen or have a dual citizenship it should be renounced and you get hoofed off back to wherever you're a resident.

The fact that you can have police turn up at your door for posting on twitter that you don't like someone, and yet terrorists get away scot free with their plotting is a major fault that needs sorting. this isn't an issue of free speech at all, this is an issue of bowing to pressure from religious groups that cry "discrimination" every time attempts are made to bring them to justice.

If you have ill will towards this country and its people, screw you and your rights, and you have that in writing from me.

I don't think you're horrible, but I'm amazed and worried at how many people I'm seeing that are so willing top support the removal of their human rights and freedoms because of a few terrorists.

Like I said above I'm not currently giving up any of my human rights. It helps that I'm not a terrorist.

How long before we start locking people up without trial just because of their beliefs?

Well, it depends what those beliefs are. If they are that western values are to be destroyed and that it's OK to kill and maim innocent citizens, and that this thought is communicated to others then harbouring the thought alone is an act of terror and should be acted on as such. I don't care about free speech at this point if you are thinking like that and openly communicating that to your buddies then that signals intent to harm. Did you know that you can be found guilty and convicted of assault without ever touching someone? Assault ranges from causing actual physical harm all the way up to the threat of an intent to harm. Harbouring such thoughts in groups and showing willingness to carry them out is as much an act of terror as is strapping a bomb to your body and detonating it.

I can only assume that you do not believe this is a problem and that people resident in the UK should be allowed to openly discuss their hate for us, citing your previous comment:

"Create a new law that makes whatever their doing a crime, even if it's just expressing radical ideas?"

To clarify, yes, I think "expressing radical ideas" where "radical ideas" are genuine threats to humankind in the country you are resident should be a crime.

I should imagine, then, given you bear this viewpoint that you're also OK with people "expressing radical ideas" on some of these other subjects, including but not limited to:-

Neo-Nazis on how they hate Jews and Zionism
Male Chauvenists on their views and beliefs of women in society
Homo***uality and views on same-*** marriage
Religious Zeal including scientology

How long before we start locking people up without trial because of who they happen to know or are related to? How long before we start locking people up without trial because they disagree with the Government?

Three words: slippery slope theory.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Yes, I can do quotes too. I made this one all by myself: Those who harbour criminals and allow their mindsets to grow and be reborn should be given no quarter when they themselves are turned upon.

 

[RedCowboy]

The liberals want peaceful citizens to tolerant the intolerance of violent terrorist refugees, it's insanity, of course they attack our freedom of speech by calling us racist if we don't tolerate the beliefs of radical zealots brainwashed to carry out our destruction and accusing us of hate speech if we protest children being murdered by religious zealots who preach killing the infidel.

Thank God for President Donald Trump, hopefully the UK empower the Tories to clean up their mess.

 

[diachi]

EXIT POLLS:

Con: 314
Lab: 266
SNP: 34
LDem: 14

Big if true.

 

[paul1598419]

That's unfortunate. I guess it will depend on how many Cons are in Parliament. Hate to see May actually do what she's been saying.

 

[diachi]

That's unfortunate. I guess it will depend on how many Cons are in Parliament. Hate to see May actually do what she's been saying.

Keep in mind 314 isn't a majority, so if that's accurate they'll either need to form a coalition with ... DUP? Or try and run as a minority. If it's accurate May will most likely have to resign.

326 required for a majority.

 

[Benm]

Remains to see what the final count tells, but if it is as reported that would be problematic for the uk and brexit indeed.

Did you know that you can be found guilty and convicted of assault without ever touching someone? Assault ranges from causing actual physical harm all the way up to the threat of an intent to harm. Harbouring such thoughts in groups and showing willingness to carry them out is as much an act of terror as is strapping a bomb to your body and detonating it.

This is a matter of definition: If i come running at you, yelling i'm going to stab you, but do not actually do so, that'd technically be assault. If i give no warning but just smack you in the face that'd be battery. If i came running at you with a knive, yelling i'll stab you and actually do so that'd be battery too.

All of these things are actual actions though, at when it comes to only ideas it's quite different. If I merely state i would -like- to kill you that not illegal at all. If i state i -intent- to kill you it probably is, unless considered not to be sincere (someone yelling "i'll kill you for that" at one of their buddies that just pulled a prank or something).

This is problematic when it comes to extremist ideas really.

Someone saying "i want all non-muslims to be murdered" is currently not doing against the law as they do not say they intend to kill them personally. But even "i want to kill all non-muslims" would not be, since it expresses merely a desire, not an concrete plan of actions. The point where it goes illegal is stating "i will kill a non-muslim", which would be an intention commit manslaughter or murder depending on if the target is a specific person.

Legally very difficult, but important, as we don't want though-police either. I imagine a fair number of americans would not mind Trump having a fatal mishap, though few to none of them are prepared to shoot him personally.

 

[paul1598419]

Keep in mind 314 isn't a majority, so if that's accurate they'll either need to form a coalition with ... DUP? Or try and run as a minority. If it's accurate May will most likely have to resign.

326 required for a majority.

Didn't know that. I haven't actually spent enough time learning that system as well as I should. Well, that's good news. Too many idiots trying to curtail our long history of human rights because of a few terrorist attacks by sidestepping either the constitution or laws because they feel they have a mandate. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[grainde]

I'll leave this here:

"Critical questions - such as why the security service MI5 maintained terrorist "assets" in Manchester and why the government did not warn the public of the threat in their midst - remain unanswered, deflected by the promise of an internal "review".

The alleged suicide bomber, Salman Abedi, was part of an extremist group, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, that thrived in Manchester and was cultivated and used by MI5 for more than 20 years."

Full article here::beer:
TERROR IN BRITAIN: WHAT DID THE PRIME MINISTER KNOW?

 

[CurtisOliver]

Well, bad day for the UK regardless of who gets in.
I've had terror arrests made in my local area to do with all of this. London and Manchester related. Someone was also found preparing another by what I have heard.
Not a good time ATM.

 

[trencheel303]

Whatever happens labour taking the helm looks an impossibility. The cons aren't going to work with them and since they still have the most seats it's them who decide who they go into coalition with. At the moment it looks like the DUP. So that's a godsend at least, because excluding left and right for a minute, Jeremy Corbyn' crackpot policy of wanting to adopt a 1970s socialist approach would be disastrous. No country ever prospered under socialism but we've become too close for my liking. It's not even as if Tory monetary policy is a shining example of how to make bank either; but it's better than it was in the thatcher era when they privatised the lot and sold it off. As usual a case of voting for the lesser evil.

 

[diachi]

Soooo ... Tory minority government with confidence and supply from the DUP? This election has been and continues to be a wild ride.

 

[3DLaSeRBuiLDeR]

Well, bad day for the UK regardless of who gets in.
I've had terror arrests made in my local area to do with all of this. London and Manchester related. Someone was also found preparing another by what I have heard.
Not a good time ATM.

I'm defending you Curtis! Do not be afraid, I'm the Devil :eg:

 

[CurtisOliver]

lol, Thanks 3D.

 

[3DLaSeRBuiLDeR]

DWG = Dont' Worry Guy

 

[paul1598419]

Soooo ... Tory minority government with confidence and supply from the DUP? This election has been and continues to be a wild ride.

I agree. Just finished an article last night about May's backfiring call for an election now. Looks like she not only didn't get any more seats but lost quite a few to Labour. Some are saying her time as Cons leader is short. If not Labour, who will Conservatives work with to make a majority government?

 

[diachi]

I agree. Just finished an article last night about May's backfiring call for an election now. Looks like she not only didn't get any more seats but lost quite a few to Labour. Some are saying her time as Cons leader is short. If not Labour, who will Conservatives work with to make a majority government?

They're going to work with the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party) from Ireland ... i.e. a bunch of right wing, Protestant fundamentalist, terrorist sympathizers... They are against abortions and same *** marriage. They also deny climate change.

Funny, after all the complaining from the media and the Tories about Corbyn being a terrorist sympathizer the Tories decided to form a government with ... terrorist sympathizers?

Couldn't make this up.

The DUP is a right-wing populist[5] party. It is characterized by its Ulster loyalist position, which it has staunchly held since its inception. Ulster loyalism, with its aim for continued inclusion of Northern Ireland in the UK, has been identified as a type of ethnic nationalism.[42] The DUP has historically been associated with paramilitarism and in recent years has been supported by paramilitary Ulster loyalist groups such as the Ulster Defence Association, the Ulster Volunteer Force and the Red Hand Commando, which have been proscribed terrorist organisations.[43]