johnnyboy - Property of Her Majesty's Government (ID Cards)

Jamez
Banned
Posts: 2587
Joined: Sun 30 May, 2004 23.02
Location: Bristol

tillyoshea wrote:
Jamez wrote:...bring the establishment to it's knees and a general election called immediately...
So Labour can be re-elected by the public, as they were less than 12 months ago?
Hold a GE in a year or 18 months time.

We wouldn't have a Labour government.
User Removed
User avatar
Finn
Posts: 614
Joined: Sun 06 Nov, 2005 17.02
Location: Manchester

James Martin wrote:It amazes me people vote for this shitty Government.

Why did nobody vote Tory and put it all to bed?
You do realise that the whole ID card debate was first started in 1995 by Michael Howard, as Home Secretary of a Tory Government, don't you?
User avatar
Sput
Posts: 7547
Joined: Wed 20 Aug, 2003 19.57

Indeed. I know Dave Cameron is publicly against it, but weren't the Tories on the record as supporting the idea as recently as in the last 12 months?
Knight knight
User avatar
Sput
Posts: 7547
Joined: Wed 20 Aug, 2003 19.57

nodnirG kraM wrote:
Sput wrote:Indeed. I know Dave Cameron is publicly against it, but weren't the Tories on the record as supporting the idea as recently as in the last 12 months?
I think Howard and Duncan Cough were in favour of it.
I wonder if Cameron spoke out against ID cards whilst allowing the rest of his party to continue their support. That way he appears as compassionate and a viable prime minister whilst his party quietly support this particular policy.
Knight knight
Dr Lobster*
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sat 30 Aug, 2003 20.14

i do worry about our eroding freedoms, i found this on the bbc news website quite interesting: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4713018.stm
MarkN
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 19.39
Location: South Wales

Sput wrote:I wonder if Cameron spoke out against ID cards whilst allowing the rest of his party to continue their support. That way he appears as compassionate and a viable prime minister whilst his party quietly support this particular policy.
Looking at the recent divisions on Public Whip, only one Tory MP has dared rebel and vote Aye in two of the five votes: Ann Widdecombe. The number of abstentions were fewer than predicted as well.

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.p ... number=162
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.p ... number=161
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.p ... number=160
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.p ... number=159
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.p ... number=158
GNiel
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat 27 Sep, 2003 16.20

ID Cards are yet another infringement on decent, law abiding people. As if criminals are going to get them anyway!!

For the record rh. Michael Howard has voted against ID Cards. The cards he proposed in '95 were more like photo driving licences, no need for them now, as the driving licences exist.

As Jamez said, I have also been completely arse-raped by this government, as has every other law abiding British citizen.
Jenny
Posts: 242
Joined: Wed 20 Aug, 2003 23.29

MarkN wrote:
Sput wrote:I wonder if Cameron spoke out against ID cards whilst allowing the rest of his party to continue their support. That way he appears as compassionate and a viable prime minister whilst his party quietly support this particular policy.
Looking at the recent divisions on Public Whip, only one Tory MP has dared rebel and vote Aye in two of the five votes: Ann Widdecombe. The number of abstentions were fewer than predicted as well.
The MP for my constituency is a tory, but is also a very strong supporter of identity cards. Fortunately he also happens to be a lazy sod who can't be bothered to turn up to vote.
GNiel
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat 27 Sep, 2003 16.20

Perhaps you would like to tell me which constituency this is in a PM... I may be able to swing a few axes for you!!!
User avatar
Nick Harvey
God
Posts: 4161
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 22.26
Location: Deepest Wiltshire
Contact:

He can't be worse than dear old Dennis Walters, I think his name was, who used to sit for Westbury, Wiltshire, before the ultimately boring Doctor Murrison took over.

Reports had it, that Dennis sat in four parliamentary sessions and managed a whole four afternoons in the house.

I might be wrong, but I don't think he ever got round to making his maiden speech before retiring.
Joe Public
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat 16 Aug, 2003 18.43

F**k me. Before I read this thread I was pretty much for ID cards but not now after reading more information about them.
Matrix wrote:I'm fucking furious with this, really.

Those AOL ad's really seem to be right about now and I'm not talking about the "Orwell was wrong" ones.

I really do worry were walking into an authoritian state and like some have already mentioned hope this becomes a poll tax 2. Although with incitement coming up soon I better watch that one.

Whats next? And enabling act?
With it being 14yrs since I was at school I did a search on The Enabling Act.
This is what I found:

Hitler's Enabling Act

On March 23, 1933, the newly elected members of the German Parliament (the Reichstag) met in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin to consider passing Hitler's Enabling Act. It was officially called the 'Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich.' If passed, it would effectively mean the end of democracy in Germany and establish the legal dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.

The 'distress' had been secretly caused by the Nazis themselves in order to create a crisis atmosphere that would make the law seem necessary to restore order. On February 27, 1933, they had burned the Reichstag building, seat of the German government, causing panic and outrage. The Nazis successfully blamed the fire on the Communists and claimed it marked the beginning of a widespread uprising.

On the day of the vote, Nazi storm troopers gathered in a show of force around the opera house chanting, "Full powers - or else! We want the bill - or fire and murder!!" They also stood inside in the hallways, and even lined the aisles where the vote would take place, glaring menacingly at anyone who might oppose Hitler's will.

Just before the vote, Hitler made a speech to the Reichstag in which he pledged to use restraint.

"The government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures...The number of cases in which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is in itself a limited one." - Hitler told the Reichstag.

He also promised an end to unemployment and pledged to promote peace with France, Great Britain and the Soviet Union. But in order to do all this, Hitler said, he first needed the Enabling Act.

A two thirds majority was needed, since the law would actually alter the German constitution. Hitler needed 31 non-Nazi votes to pass it. He got those votes from the Center Party after making a false promise to restore some basic rights already taken away by decree.

However, one man arose amid the overwhelming might. Otto Wells, leader of the Social Democrats stood up and spoke quietly to Hitler.

"We German Social Democrats pledge ourselves solemnly in this historic hour to the principles of humanity and justice, of freedom and socialism. No enabling act can give you power to destroy ideas which are eternal and indestructible."

This enraged Hitler and he jumped up to respond.

"You are no longer needed! - The star of Germany will rise and yours will sink! Your death knell has sounded!"

The vote was taken - 441 for, only 84, the Social Democrats, against. The Nazis leapt to their feet clapping, stamping and shouting, then broke into the Nazi anthem, the Hörst Wessel song.

They achieved what Hitler had wanted for years - to tear down the German Democratic Republic legally and end democracy, thus paving the way for a complete Nazi takeover of Germany.

From this day on, the Reichstag would be just a sounding board, a cheering section for Hitler's pronouncements.


Any of this sound familier?
In connection with my cr*p spelling I would like to anotate all my posts with (sp?)
Please Respond