Blair hitting the nail on the head!

[storm1977 0]

LONDON, England (CNN) -- British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Tuesday that much of the world had dropped its guard to the threat of terrorism after the "wake-up call" of the 9/11 attacks of 2001.

Blair was speaking after meeting opposition leaders to discuss anti-terror legislation set to be introduced in the wake of this month's London bombings.

He said Britain would not give "one inch" to terrorists and said it was time to confront them "on every single level."

"September 11 for me was a wake up call. Do you know what I think the problem is? That a lot of the world woke up for a short time and then turned over and went back to sleep again," he said.

"We are not going to deal with this problem, with the roots as deep as they are, until we confront these people at every single level. And not just their methods but their ideas," Blair said.

While rejecting suggestions he had claimed the London bombings had nothing to do with Iraq, Blair said there was no justification for terrorism.

"Let us expose the obscenity of these people saying it is concern for Iraq that drives them to terrorism," Blair said.

"If it is concern for Iraq then why are they driving a car bomb into the middle of a group of children and killing them?" Blair said.

"They will always have a reason and I am not saying any of these things don't affect their warped reasoning and warped logic.

"But I do say we shouldn't compromise with it. Whatever justification these people use, I do not believe we should give one inch to them."

"There is no justification for suicide bombing whether in Palestine, Iraq, in Egypt, in Turkey, anywhere."

Blair once again praised Londoners for their behavior in the aftermath of the July 7 attacks on the London transit system that killed 52 people plus the four bombers, and the failed bomb attacks of July 21.

"I'm not standing here and being absurd about it in the sense of saying people should not be concerned; of course they are going to be concerned and worried," he said.

"But I do think the way Londoners have responded has been magnificent ... because they have not allowed their worry and concern to overcome their determination to carry on with their lives. I think that's the best attitude."

Following his talks with Conservative Party leader Michael Howard and Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy, Blair said he hoped final details of the anti-terror proposals would be presented to opposition parties in September.

Proposals under discussion included measures that would allow authorities to close down extremist Web sites and extend the period for holding terror suspects.

"I am very pleased that the cross-party consensus on the way forward is continuing," Blair said.

"I think when the main political parties present a united front then you send an important signal to the terrorists of our strength, our determination, our unity to defeat them."

Howard said that whatever measures are put before the House of Commons when it reconvenes in the autumn, they must be consensual proposals.

"There's a great desire, at a time when the country faces such great danger, to work together. We're all in this together, and we all believe it's very important to show that the country is united in response to the danger we face, and we hope that it will be possible to reach agreement on further measures that will enable us to deal with this threat more effectively," Howard told reporters.

"One of the principle objectives of the terrorists is to divide us, one from another. So far ... they have failed in that objective. It's important that they continue to fail in that objective. That's why we believe it is so important that we approach these difficult issues in a spirit of consensus, with the objective of reaching agreement wherever we possibly can," Howard said.

The opposition leader said his party is concerned about the proposal to increase the period of detention for suspects related to terror investigations from the current two weeks to three months.

"We see very considerable difficulties in that; that's a long time to hold someone without charge," Howard said.

He said that other items discussed were a proposal that would make intercept evidence admissible at trials and authorities ability to close down extremist Web sites.

Kennedy voiced concern that basic civil liberties might be compromised in the push to pass new anti-terror legislation, and also questioned the extension of detention proposal.

"How far that extension might or might not go, I think is something that will require further evidence," Kennedy said.

Proposed legislation put forth by the government also includes outlawing indirect incitement or the glorifying of terrorism, and making it illegal to prepare to commit terror acts and provide or receive terror training.

Other measures, including increased use of phone taps and other intercept evidence in court, are being considered.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[storm1977 0]

Sounds to me like the Patriot Act....
I think it is a great Idea.

In a time of war sometimes liberties need to shrink a bit in order to protect Lives.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Sounds to me like the Patriot Act....

Yep. Much like it. I think the rest of Europe will follow suit in the coming years. I don't have a problem if Europe or the rest of the world makes a Patriot Act. I still don't like ours.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

In a time of war sometimes liberties need to shrink a bit in order to protect Lives.

I don't like that statement a bit. Make the act accountable for when (if) it does infronge on liberties. Then we get something that doesn't compromise what's important. It also takes the teeth out of the knee jerk anti-everything responders.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,131]

>In a time of war sometimes liberties need to shrink a bit in order to
>protect Lives.

Wasn't that one of Palpatine's lines from the latest Star Wars?

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

In a time of war sometimes liberties need to shrink a bit in order to protect Lives.

Many would disagree with you and I am one of them. Samual Adams best summed it up:

"The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men."

If we start giving up some of our civil liberties, the ones these terrorist despise, then they have already won.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

In a time of war sometimes liberties need to shrink a bit in order to protect Lives.

Looks like the terrorists are accomplishing exactly what they want.

[storm1977 0]

Quote

>In a time of war sometimes liberties need to shrink a bit in order to
>protect Lives.

Wasn't that one of Palpatine's lines from the latest Star Wars?

I don't know if you believe this bill, but I have never seen any star wars movie.... I loved ET though :-)

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[storm1977 0]

Quote

Quote

In a time of war sometimes liberties need to shrink a bit in order to protect Lives.

Looks like the terrorists are accomplishing exactly what they want.

Are they?
Lincoln Changed Liberties during the Civil war.
Woodrow Wilson Criminalized Free speech if it was negative toward the US during WWI.

In times when the Government needs to protect the LIVES of its people, sometimes Liberties may be infringed.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

In times when the Government needs to protect the LIVES of its people, sometimes Liberties may be infringed.

Patrick Henry famously said, "Give me liberty or give me death." Now it's been shifted 180, "We'll take your liberty or you'll be dead."

Somehow, it seems to me to be anathema to the American ethos...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[storm1977 0]

Quote

Quote

In times when the Government needs to protect the LIVES of its people, sometimes Liberties may be infringed.

Patrick Henry famously said, "Give me liberty or give me death." Now it's been shifted 180, "We'll take your liberty or you'll be dead."

Somehow, it seems to me to be anathema to the American ethos...

I disagree.... Put a gun to someones head and ask them what they want?
Say.... I will not kill you, but you have to give up some of your liberties.
Or you can choose to die right now.

I have money on the fact that more than 95% of americans given that choice will choose life.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

In times when the Government needs to protect the LIVES of its people, sometimes Liberties may be infringed.

Patrick Henry famously said, "Give me liberty or give me death." Now it's been shifted 180, "We'll take your liberty or you'll be dead."

Somehow, it seems to me to be anathema to the American ethos...

I disagree.... Put a gun to someones head and ask them what they want?
Say.... I will not kill you, but you have to give up some of your liberties.
Or you can choose to die right now.

I have money on the fact that more than 95% of americans given that choice will choose life.

My. What a nice little argument you have made for the government banning skydiving. Let's not have you risk death, people. You are no longer free to do it.

Towards the end of "Spies Like Us" when the missile was on its way and General Sline would not recall, there was the following exchange:

Keyes, "By your actions, sir, you are risking the future of the human race!"
General Sline: "To guarantee the American way of life? I'm willing to take that risk."

Flip that on its side. What you are arguing is not consistent with the American way of life. I may die if I am given more freedom? "I'm willing to take that risk."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

I disagree.... Put a gun to someones head and ask them what they want?
Say.... I will not kill you, but you have to give up some of your liberties.
Or you can choose to die right now.

Kind of what Saddam did. Tell people to think like him or get killed......

[storm1977 0]

Maybe you missed my earlier statements that this would be OK during times of War... Or maybe you just forgot.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[storm1977 0]

Quote

Quote

I disagree.... Put a gun to someones head and ask them what they want?
Say.... I will not kill you, but you have to give up some of your liberties.
Or you can choose to die right now.

Kind of what Saddam did. Tell people to think like him or get killed......

Well let me ask you this.
Do you think the Cops in England who shot
a guy in the back of the Head 5 times were
Justified?

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Do you think the Cops in England who shot
a guy in the back of the Head 5 times were
Justified?

To be honest, I have very mixed opinions about it. I can understand their action, though the end result makes me very uneasy. Now the question for me is: Am I uneasy because of the end result or because of the action.

[Zep 0]

Quote

>In a time of war sometimes liberties need to shrink a bit in order to
>protect Lives.

Wasn't that one of Palpatine's lines from the latest Star Wars?

I was going to come back with........

" The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few "

But if I did I'm shure someone would shood it down.


Spock rocks.

Gone fishing

[billvon 3,131]

>but I have never seen any star wars movie....

Palpatine was a senator who used a manufactured crisis to take over a government and seat himself as emperor. Let's see if I can find that quote -

Palpatine - "In order to insure security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire … for a safe and secure society!" [applause]

Amidala - "So this is how liberty dies … with thunderous applause."

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>but I have never seen any star wars movie....

Palpatine was a senator who used a manufactured crisis to take over a government and seat himself as emperor. Let's see if I can find that quote -

Palpatine - "In order to insure security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire … for a safe and secure society!" [applause]

Amidala - "So this is how liberty dies … with thunderous applause."

The obvious analogy is apparent, but it's still a couple of years before Hillary has to create some kind of mess to overwhelm the real stuff happening today. Even so, the continuous calls for a 'vote of no confidence' continues - scary isn't it.

Plus, Senator Palpatine couldn't store as many nuts in his cheeks - even with the dark side of the force. It would take a village to do that.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,131]

> it's still a couple of years before Hillary has to create some kind of mess . . . .

Is it my imagination, or is the right wing absolutely terrified of this woman? GOP groups have already started their attacks.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

> it's still a couple of years before Hillary has to create some kind of mess . . . .

Is it my imagination, or is the right wing absolutely terrified of this woman? GOP groups have already started their attacks.

Uh, yeah. Thats what it is. Simple, right?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

> it's still a couple of years before Hillary has to create some kind of mess . . . .

Is it my imagination, or is the right wing absolutely terrified of this woman? GOP groups have already started their attacks.

I think that one left winger (William Jefferson Clinton) is terrified too. How'd you like to wake up to that in the morning?

As far as attack groups, both sides are mobilizing on all potential candidates. So no real terror, just the pissant political machines of both sides doing their regular, immoral, jobs as usual.

Personally, I don't like her. Bill seemed pretty charismatic and had some ideas or two - so it's not a family thing or anything. I wouldn't mind hitting the pubs with him. I think Hillary is a bad (or at least very insincere) woman. But, if she get the nomination, I have one vote. I'll use it as I see best.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Rebecca 0]

Quote

I think that one left winger (William Jefferson Clinton) is terrified too. How'd you like to wake up to that in the morning?

You think they actually sleep together???

you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

I think that one left winger (William Jefferson Clinton) is terrified too. How'd you like to wake up to that in the morning?

You think they actually sleep together???

They used to, but when they spooned, Hillary's penis kept prodding Bill in the lower back.

It made him uncomfortable.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wmw999 2,600]

I like her better than a lot of folks do; she's very very smart, and seems to think things out. I think you're right about being insecure, and wanting to be recognized for her competence -- that'll be tough for a president.

That said, I think she'd be a terrible president just because of who she is, who she's married to, and the general divisive nature of her being Hillary. Nothing would get done, in the most destructive possible manner.

I'd much rather see her as undersecretary of something, where we'd have the benefit of her intelligence without the baggage. But that's not real high on the likely tree, is it.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)