|
|
Post by aubrey on May 3, 2012 16:04:59 GMT
The Romans had the same kind of repressive state as the anti Muslims seem to want here - arbitrary arrest with conviction without trial for anyone suspected of undermining the state. They'd probably go as far as execution as well - maybe not as far as human (Christian: read Muslim) torches lining the Appenine way, was it? what are you on about Aubrey? i wonder why muslims from all over the world want to come to Britain? probably because it's not as repressive as the states they come from? We're less repressive than some Muslim states, yes; but that's not really anything to put on side about, considering what some Muslim states are like. But we have people here locked up for years without even being charged. We are stopped from taking photographs of public buildings (maybe that's stopping now; but I've seen Police representatives say that before, and then there's another instance of it). Arbitrary arrests and deportation, without evidence of any law-breaking at all. A lot of people seem to imagine that as these things don't happen to people like them then they aren't really happening at all. |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on May 3, 2012 19:34:08 GMT
It's a logical fallacy, aubrey, to pretend that a democracy is not permitted to defend itself from totalitarian attack from both within and without.
|
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on May 5, 2012 9:33:00 GMT
The question is how it defends itself.
You might be pleased to have facial recognition stuff all around where you live, or you might be sanguine about raids on houses that come to nothing (not even when the victims are locked up for a few days, and then deported, even when no evidence of wrongdoing has been found, or when the police "Find" CP on a computer - again, it came to nothing, though it was "Information" that the police were happy to leak all the same).
Or you might be pleased that the Govt wants to see who you're talking to online.
And obviously, these measures are only ever going to be used in cases of terrorism, or really serious crime, as this is always what has happened in the past.
And computer software never ever goes wrong, does it?
And as long as you're not the one who is locked up for years without charge...
|
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on May 5, 2012 9:40:07 GMT
Marchesa, say that there is a mad anti AGW group who start hacking into scientists' computers to destroy evidence of AGW, and blowing up wind turbines. Terrorism, yes?
So, if this happened - and it isn't that far fetched, is it? Similar things have happened before - who is the kind of person who the Police and intelligence services would be interested in, the kind of person whose internet use they would monitor, whose face they would be looking out for on their traffic light cameras? Supporters of terrorism, obviously: which in this case would be the kind of people who post a lot of anti-AGW stuff.
|
|
jean
Madrigal Member 
Posts: 8,546
|
Post by jean on May 5, 2012 13:59:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ciggie stardust on May 5, 2012 14:02:51 GMT
...it turns out it's yet another thread about Islam... Amazing. |
|
|
|
Post by ciggie stardust on May 5, 2012 14:04:10 GMT
...Is that why they make women wear the veil?
|
|
jean
Madrigal Member
Posts: 8,546
|
Post by jean on May 5, 2012 14:11:49 GMT
Quite seriously, ciggie, Muslim women have said to me that they like not having to be 'on show' all the time, and fair game for the likes of A A Gill and Samantha Brick.
And you can see their point, can't you?
|
|
|
|
Post by ciggie stardust on May 5, 2012 14:42:48 GMT
Yes, I can.
I have read an article (can't remember where - possibly The Grauniad) where a western woman tried it for a time and reported that she felt an unexpected freedom and found it oddly (and also unexpectedly) liberating!
I think she said that the abuse from some chavs was the only nasty bit.
I wish I could find the piece - I'll try.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pink Betty on May 5, 2012 15:38:34 GMT
I have read an article (can't remember where - possibly The Grauniad) where a western woman tried it for a time and reported that she felt an unexpected freedom and found it oddly (and also unexpectedly) liberating! i can understand this. i normally wear slightly eccentric flowing garments that most Imams would think appropriately modest for a western bint: i.e. covered from neck to ankle. i have always been comfortable with this style, even when a slim teenager, much to my mum's bewilderment (but darling! people will think you're pregnant)! as a blossoming old lady i can dress as i please. and yes, i do wear purple! i would be horrified if i wasn't able to dress this way out of personal choice. but if the law required it, or required me to cover my hair and face i'd feel the need to rebel. possibly violently. |
|
