If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Tony Blair defeated in Commons for the first time over 90-day detention
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Yes!!!
Congratulations to all MPs concerned, especially those who defied their whips.
Could this be the beginning of the end for Blair? (yes please yes please!)
Congratulations to all MPs concerned, especially those who defied their whips.
Could this be the beginning of the end for Blair? (yes please yes please!)
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
why would the pound drop agains the dollar because of this?
So investors are already deserting ship like rats.
Well, thank god for that. Although perhaps now he will make some Emergency. And then give himself powers for such terrible emergencies?
I wouldn't put it past him, im sure he can secretley arange a terrorist attack.
Brown should not have come out in support of Blair, he must realise the end is nigh and associating himself with Blairs shit won't do him any good..........
Never harmed anyone else. Even the worst Labour guys are doing well, despite the scandals...
Brown will, I hope, get hte leadership... it'll be interesting to see what he does.
Although Prescott would be cooler.
*two fingers for Tony*
The Tories have been quite disgraceful, most of their MPs who voted against this did not do so because they disagreed with it but simply to try and score political points against Blair and the government. Obviously, that’s what politics is all about but I’d hope on an issue of national security the Tories would have enough integrity not to attempt to capitalise politically at the expense of the country’s safety. Of course Labour would act no differently if in Opposition…and politicians wonder why they’re unpopular.
We lost by beig free from (worse) imprisonment without reason for three months?
I doubt it.
People would not be randomly imprisoned without trial or charge for as long as 90 days. This would have been used in rare, extreme cases where somebody is a real danger. I felt there were sufficient safeguards one being:
It makes me uncomfortable, I don’t like the idea but I think we need to take further measures to protect ourselves from terrorism. The police and security services believed there was genuine justification for it. Some people have still not yet realised that we are faced with something quite different to the IRA.
I don’t want to live like the Israelis where because of the terrorist threat armed guards, x-ray/baggage checkers/etc are routine going to a shopping mall, a club, buses, trains etc. But if we don’t beat terrorist networks now it wouldn’t surprise me if gradually we start living like that over here. A small sacrifice of civil liberties now with this defeated measure could prevent having to make bigger sacrifices in how we all live our daily lives in the future. And that’s ignoring the simple fact of the govt’s measure and the need to prevent another terrorist attack.
Funny you should mention the IRA, internment was a great recruiting tool for them.
:yes:
This is what is of greater concern - the police shouldn't be making political statements, they should be just enacting the will of Parliament - whatever it is.
I'm still of the opinion that terrorism is not particularly a huge threat.
'nuff said
-goes off to open a bottle of champagne.-
Interesting really considering that the police have not yet needed more that these 14 days. The only people who have been detained under that rule have all been charged at the end of this period.
Also interesting was Blair's attempt to justiofy his position during PMQ. He was using the London attacks - ignoring the fact that none of those responsible would have been detained under this legislation - and said that during the follow up ionvestigation the Leeds "bomb making" house took two weeks to make safe.
Now, if that house was so dangerous, contained so many explosives, wouldn't that actually be enough to generate a charge?
I'm please that, for once, the Commons has seen fit to protect us all from our security services.
The war on terrorism is supposed to be a fight to retain our freedoms. It's isn't the terrorists who are trying to restrict them, it's our own services.
Interesting I have yet to see any justification for the 90 days figure. It seems as aritary as the 28 days which the Tories wanted...
Intelligence will beat terrorism, not the removal of our rights and freedoms.
A small sacrifice here and a small one there and soon you won't have any left to worry about.
ID Cards, CCTV, Trial without jury, detention without trial, no right to protest... how many more are left?
Still, nice to see Tony being defeated (despite his intense lobbying and dramatic intervention in the Commons) as well as the odious S*n, who's been blackmailiing everyone against the proposal.
So, for once, and even though they probably did it only for political gain, hooray for the two Davids, and everyone else concerned from all parties who voted it down!
the back bench tories were bloody good imo though - i actually rate them, one was an ex serving army soldier in NI and basically spouted loads of reasons why when they had interment in NI, the investigations stopped and they turned heavy handed because they could - which he found attrocious
the "processing evidence" reason was absolute bollocks because thats what investigating before you arrest is supposed to do, and theres computer encryption that would take 2years of brute of force to hack so thats a pointless reason also
Disillusioned, we'll never be like Israel, Israel have a specific "enemy" and an enemy that lives next door to it to. Any future attack here would be a random attack on the west or whatever...not a constant barrage of suicide bombers.
And Blagstas right, look what Internment did for us.
oh wait i suggested that last week