UK: The Freedom Bill

[JG271]

Here is something that I came across, I thought you might find it interesting - or agree with it!

Its a shame it probably won't get very far - for many reasons, but I think it contains very important measures and ideas. What do you think?

[leekohler]

Whoa! There's some crazy scary stuff on that list!

Yeah- if I lived there, I'd be all for this bill.

[Queso]

Nice one. And now can someone from the party please go on television and state that those in positions of power with nothing to hide have nothing to fear from this Bill. Let's turn that argument round on the establishment for a change. See what their response is.

[toontra]

As a long-term Labour voter (I actually voted for Bliar - the first time!) who was so repulsed by the Iraq war, I've since been voting Lib Dem. Almost every single policy reflects my views, and is a lot closer to the original Labour ideals than the current shower.

They have the best position on the economy, global warming, defence and just about everything else. I just wish people would vote for policies rather than who they think stands a chance of being elected. That way we'll never get radical change in this country, just more of the same bo!!ocks.

[kastenbrust]

Originally Posted by toontra

As a long-term Labour voter (I actually voted for Bliar - the first time!) who was so repulsed by the Iraq war, I've since been voting Lib Dem. Almost every single policy reflects my views, and is a lot closer to the original Labour ideals than the current shower.

They have the best position on the economy, global warming, defence and just about everything else. I just wish people would vote for policies rather than who they think stands a chance of being elected. That way we'll never get radical change in this country, just more of the same bo!!ocks.

Thats because Lib Dems have been more Socialist then Labour for a number of decades now, Labour have to occupy the political middle ground if they want to get lots of votes. Whichever party occupies the middle ground usually gets the votes to get into power.

What i find scary is the the BNP are actually winning constituencies now, like they recently won Sevenoaks. I personally find it repulsive how small minded and uncaring people can be apart from themselves, people don't seem to understand they were just very very lucky to have been born in a first world country. The whole world will be one country someday anyway. I mean two of the BNP's policies is to leave Nato, and leave the EU, i mean what the hell, how well thought out is that

I do like the look of this proposed Lib Dem Freedom Bill, but power corrups, and if the Lib Dems ever get into power and made it a reality, they wouldn't use it for our good, because as i said, power corrupts, the only real way to ensure we live in a free society would be to change the form of our democracy to a more open style of government, and a more open style of voting.

[Queso]

Originally Posted by kastenbrust

What i find scary is the the BNP are actually winning constituencies now, like they recently won Sevenoaks.

The BNP are winning Council wards, not Parliamentary constituencies. Still worrying, but nowhere near as bad as you think.

[kastenbrust]

Originally Posted by Queso

The BNP are winning Council wards, not Parliamentary constituencies. Still worrying, but nowhere near as bad as you think.

Your right, sorry, but what if this sets the trend for the next General Election? I know people dont always vote the same in council elections as they do in General Elections, but its still very worrying.

[Willis]

I'm pure Lib Dem so they have my vote anyway

[JG271]

Originally Posted by kastenbrust

I do like the look of this proposed Lib Dem Freedom Bill, but power corrups, and if the Lib Dems ever get into power and made it a reality, they wouldn't use it for our good, because as i said, power corrupts, the only real way to ensure we live in a free society would be to change the form of our democracy to a more open style of government, and a more open style of voting.

I think that in part, you are right. It does seem all to easy to just create laws with a massive effect here. But reform will take time, and some kind of party will have to initiate that reform.

I think personally I would trust the Lib Dems to carry out their policies if or when they get into power - power corrupts in the end, but I would so much rather a fresh type of government than two parties that have been swinging in and out of power for almost 100 years now.

[kastenbrust]

Originally Posted by JG271

I think that in part, you are right. It does seem all to easy to just create laws with a massive effect here. But reform will take time, and some kind of party will have to initiate that reform.

I think personally I would trust the Lib Dems to carry out their policies if or when they get into power - power corrupts in the end, but I would so much rather a fresh type of government than two parties that have been swinging in and out of power for almost 100 years now.

Well the Lib Dems did invent modern populous based democracy, and they did invent modern socialism, if you look back in history, you'll see the Lib Dem's were the first socialist party, not Labour. However in my dictionary the definition of the word Politician is 'Liar' so i don't trust any of them.

Human nature is to crave power, from owning to latest gadgets to show off to your friends to having the best job in your company so you can tell other people what to do, all life exists on this planet for two reasons, to reproduce, and to gain power, so until the role of politicians is refocused away from attaining power, then they will all be untrustworthy.

[bobber205]

Originally Posted by JG271

Here is something that I came across, I thought you might find it interesting - or agree with it!

Its a shame it probably won't get very far - for many reasons, but I think it contains very important measures and ideas. What do you think?

Awesome bill. I would vote for it if I was a Brit.

[yojitani]

Wow. I remember a number of those acts reducing civil liberties going into effect. Those of us who were against them were thought of as trouble makers and now a mainstream-ish party is being vocal about them. Actually, to be fair, the lib dems have been a bit more vocal than the other two... Now, if only the lib dems could be taken seriously.

[ravenvii]

This Freedom Bill is a bill to give people back the rights they had?

So you're telling me the British willingly gave up the right to assembly?

That just seems amazing to me.

[toontra]

Originally Posted by ravenvii

So you're telling me the British willingly gave up the right to assembly?
.

No. Almost all of this legislation has been brought in under the radar, a lot of it in recent years under the guise of The War on Terrorism. Unusual times call for unusual actions, or so the mantra goes. The problem is, this stuff is cumulative and sticks around forever unless time constrained.

Believe me, without public protest (read outrage) things would be one hell of a lot worse - 96 day detention without charge, ID cards, etc.

The worst excesses get publicised and the public have a chance to tell their elected representatives where to get off. It's the smaller, seemingly benign things that end up being passed into legislation that in hindsight are just as corrosive.

[arkitect]

Originally Posted by ravenvii

So you're telling me the British willingly gave up the right to assembly?

[ravenvii]

Originally Posted by toontra

No. Almost all of this legislation has been brought in under the radar, a lot of it in recent years under the guise of The War on Terrorism. Unusual times call for unusual actions, or so the mantra goes. The problem is, this stuff is cumulative and sticks around forever unless time constrained.

Believe me, without public protest (read outrage) things would be one hell of a lot worse - 96 day detention without charge, ID cards, etc.

The worst excesses get publicised and the public have a chance to tell their elected representatives where to get off. It's the smaller, seemingly benign things that end up being passed into legislation that in hindsight are just as corrosive.

But that's the thing, the right to assembly isn't a "benign, little thing"!

But you're right, the same is happening here in the United States. Fortunately we have the Courts that upholds the Constitution (most of the time).

[Saladinos]

Don't agree with this. The lib dems are populists with no experience of the problems of government. It's been such a long time since they stood a chance that they no longer remember what it's about. They hope that if they just say what people want to hear, they can win an election. It's not about the election, it's about the governing afterwards.

Labour have been in government so long they have the confidence needed to make unpopular decisions. Many of the things in this bill which the lib dems want to remove are measures that make perfect sense if you're at danger of imminent attack.

I would rather the law assume I (and everybody else) was a terrorist, because it means attacks are easier to defuse. These aren't major civil liberties, and most of us have never been personally affected by things such as detention without charge. Yes, we're still giving up liberties, but that's true of everybody that's ever been involved in any sort of conflict throughout history. We're staying inside until it's safe to come out, and that's the way it should be.

Oh, and I was (and still am) in favour of the war in Iraq. It was a good thing to do, even if the reasons were false/lies/fan fiction/whatever. We didn't find any WMD, but that's no reason to let a dictator keep going. Results don't make a decision right (morally). Otherwise I'd be allowed to drink and drive as long as I didn't hit anybody.

[Cromulent]

Originally Posted by Saladinos

Labour have been in government so long they have the confidence needed to make unpopular decisions. Many of the things in this bill which the lib dems want to remove are measures that make perfect sense if you're at danger of imminent attack.

Sorry I disagree with this. I'd rather an increased risk of being attacked than a reduction of civil liberties.

[kastenbrust]

Originally Posted by Cromulent

Sorry I disagree with this. I'd rather an increased risk of being attacked than a reduction of civil liberties.

i agree with you

[skunk]

Originally Posted by Saladinos

Many of the things in this bill which the lib dems want to remove are measures that make perfect sense if you're at danger of imminent attack.

Not one of them has been proven necessary to ensure our safety.

I would rather the law assume I (and everybody else) was a terrorist, because it means attacks are easier to defuse. These aren't major civil liberties, and most of us have never been personally affected by things such as detention without charge. Yes, we're still giving up liberties, but that's true of everybody that's ever been involved in any sort of conflict throughout history. We're staying inside until it's safe to come out, and that's the way it should be.

I would rather take my chances in a free society than cower under the table while my liberties are taken away. The reason we are involved in a conflict is because our Dear Leader chose to conspire with his faux cowboy Texan friend to tear up the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions. Our country would not be under threat at all had we not engaged in that unprincipled piece of international banditry.

Oh, and I was (and still am) in favour of the war in Iraq. It was a good thing to do, even if the reasons were false/lies/fan fiction/whatever. We didn't find any WMD, but that's no reason to let a dictator keep going. Results don't make a decision right (morally). Otherwise I'd be allowed to drink and drive as long as I didn't hit anybody.

See above. Your argument about drink-driving, incidentally, makes no sense whatever and is entirely irrelevant.

[Queso]

Originally Posted by Saladinos

Labour have been in government so long they have the confidence needed to make unpopular decisions. Many of the things in this bill which the lib dems want to remove are measures that make perfect sense if you're at danger of imminent attack.

I would rather the law assume I (and everybody else) was a terrorist, because it means attacks are easier to defuse. These aren't major civil liberties, and most of us have never been personally affected by things such as detention without charge. Yes, we're still giving up liberties, but that's true of everybody that's ever been involved in any sort of conflict throughout history. We're staying inside until it's safe to come out, and that's the way it should be.

You can always spot the ones that haven't read Orwell....

[SactoGuy18]

Originally Posted by Queso

You can always spot the ones that haven't read Orwell....

I would almost agree with the idea of the Freedom Bill but since London has been a target of many serious terrorist attacks from the days of "The Troubles" and the 2005 terrorist attack that killed 50 and injured 750, trying to get the Freedom Bill passed will be quite hard indeed.

[Queso]

Originally Posted by SactoGuy18

I would almost agree with the idea of the Freedom Bill but since London has been a target of many serious terrorist attacks from the days of "The Troubles" and the 2005 terrorist attack that killed 50 and injured 750, trying to get the Freedom Bill passed will be quite hard indeed.

As stated by skunk the 7/7 attack was a direct response to our illegal invasion of an Arab country. My only regret was that the attack was on the people of London rather than the scum that were at that time inhabiting Gleneagles. Had they blown up Bliar and Bush I certainly wouldn't have shed any tears.

As for the IRA, that's done with. What remains of "the troubles" is confined to Ulster. Why should the entire British population have their rights curtailed because of a few idiots acting locally in the countryside around Armagh or Antrim? Are we that insecure? I think not.

[Cromulent]

Originally Posted by SactoGuy18

I would almost agree with the idea of the Freedom Bill but since London has been a target of many serious terrorist attacks from the days of "The Troubles" and the 2005 terrorist attack that killed 50 and injured 750, trying to get the Freedom Bill passed will be quite hard indeed.

Nonsense. Britain was quite resilient to terrorism until we were infected with the scaremongering the US media decided to use after September 11th. Don't forget we managed to deal with terrorism in the form of the IRA in London for the better half of the 20th century and never needed to enact such draconian measures as we have in recent years.

[neiltc13]

Why does almost every topic I see on this site relating to the UK get reduced to "London"?

I think some of you are forgetting that Northern Ireland is in the United Kingdom and forgetting that some of the IRA's attacks were on areas outside of London. Oh, and there was the Lockerbie bombing too.