David Davis is an idiot.

quote:

My instinct is DD is genuine

No he's not - I understood he was a Droid.

quote:

quote:
Still think the best guy ever to enter the Houses of Parliament was Guido Fawkes.

What about John Smith?

He seemed OK, but I'm still sticking with Guido as he be the only guy who we have a national celebration in honour of every 5th of November.

quote:

Originally posted by KenM:

quote:

Originally posted by TomK:
"If Labour had had the guts to put up a candidate we would have had an open debate on the 42-day issue."

"the failure of Labour to engage effectively prevented a meaningful debate"

You sound as though you think Labour made a mistake here but they and the Lib Dems played it exactly right. There was no failure. By denying him the opportunity for debate they left him high and dry and looking rather silly. He was indeed out-manoeuvred and he and his advisors should have known better.

I have to work quite hard to imagine how you can misinterpret what I wrote. You should perhaps become a politician. Who knows?, maybe you are.
Ken

Not sure I understand. Guts don't come into it. They played it perfectly by blanking him and he's ended up looking silly.

But Labour is shown as morally bankrupt. If Davis looks silly it is no loss, so long as the horrendous Labour administration is revealed as pathetic.

George

OK George, so what has he achieved?

Dear Ken,

I suspect Davis has achieved nothing apart from of course alerting a few observant people such as you and me, and others of similar ilk, to consider the question of British Civil Liberties.

He seems to have misjudged the possibility that the morally bankrupt Labour leadership [ie. Blair, then Brown and their coat-tail-hangers] would easily fall into his plan for a debate during a bi-election campaign, so one must question his political judgement. But I do think his motivation is a case or being completely determined to bring the debate forward even if he may not have expected to have convinced a majority. No doubt when he feels a majority can no longer be convinced he will quit politics.

ATB from George

quote:

No he's not - I understood he was a Droid.

See what you've done ROTF?

quote:

I'm still sticking with Guido

John Smith was genuine, but you've won me over as I much prefer fireworks to politics!

George,
Niemoeller said it all, in perhaps the saddest poem I know:

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

The civil liberties which Davis supports were painfully won. They need to be retained and cherished. Or soon "they" will be coming for us.

Well said.

Thanks Ken and Howard, for supporting the defence of civil liberties in this way.

Whatever the exact motivations and course of action that resulted from them, I think Mr Davis will be in a very strong position to be a thorn in the side of those [of whatever stripe] who would see them gradually eroded.

If he has an outsized ego, which is possible [I don't know the man of course], then this set of recent events will have cut it back in size somewhat, I expect, and if he is genuine in his position on civil liberties, then this will only have strengthened his resolve. He can become a very strong Parliamentarian on the issue now, which for anyone who cares to see a deeper way of debating than easy sound bites, can only be a pleasing thing. The cost of a bi-election will be a cheap price to pay for this baptism of fire in the world of Westminster politics for Davis. I foresee a few "wilderness years" followed by a significant contribution in "high Ministerial Office" for him yet.

He may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but he has valuable and perhaps unfashionable things to contribute. I prefer a thorny character who can speak the truth to any number of sweetly easy people who mouth inane platitudes to gain power.

George

Anyone would think Davis had done something worthwhile, all he did was waste tax payers money - so no change there, he and his cronies have been doing that for years. Why do MPs get paid so much?

Still much better to have a few drinks and forget about him. When something else happens he'll be yesterday's news.

BTW great few day for England at Lords against SA - now to me that is something worthwhile

Dear ROTF,

Sadly, I would say that cricket is a pleasant diversion of next to no importance at all compared to what Davis seems to think really is important, but then we are all different.

You call it a waste of money to have this by-election, but I would say that the traffic chaos caused by the arrival and departure of cricket fans at Lords is also a complete waste of non-cricket fans time [and therefore money], but I do not go round denigrating cricket! I enjoy it in a mild sort of way. I have even been to Lords on two occasions, and therefore helped clog up the roads round the pitch at the time!

I suspect the cost of holding a bi-election, is perhaps neatly contextualised by the great and largely wasted cost of hosting the Olympics in four years time, but there we go!

George

quote:

I would say that cricket is a pleasant diversion of next to no importance at all compared to what Davis seems to think really is important,

Dear George

Now I know you are joking when you say this. Surely, cricket, music and such are the reasons we carry on in this world - they are the really important things. I see politics and the business world that distract me from enjoying the real reason that we carry on. We can't compare the actions of an egotist like Davis with the great things that Kevin Pietersen and Ian Bell did in the first test.

I, too, show my liberalism in that I have not asked for non-cricket fans to be locked away during test matches, but I really don't think politics is that important in the scheme of things. I can better explain this by plagiarising, if you'll allow, from Mr Keating.

We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion. And medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for. - Mr Keating from Dead Poets Society

With amendments from Rotf

We listen to music because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion. And medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But music, beauty, romance, love and cricket, these are what we stay alive for.

ATB Rotf

PS: I don't think there are any real problems with civil liberties in the UK, but there are serious problems with knife crimes and I'd support anybody who could put a stop to gangs of thugs. All people should be able to walk the streets without being attacked or threatened IMHO.

Dear ROTF,

I will definately agree that music is the reason why I carry on, and I am not going to grind the axe further with you about Mr Davis! Life is too short ...

Now back to the Beethoven!

ATB from George

PS: I walked over to our nearest petrol station earlier to get some Golden Virginia, and was seriously verbally abused by some yooffs, and therefore took the trouble to walk the extra hundred yards round the car park where these not so nice people were hanging about. I wonder if they were kitted out with knives. I would bet on it actually ...

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
Thanks Ken and Howard, for supporting the defence of civil liberties in this way.

Whatever the exact motivations and course of action that resulted from them, I think Mr Davis will be in a very strong position to be a thorn in the side of those [of whatever stripe] who would see them gradually eroded.

If he has an outsized ego, which is possible [I don't know the man of course], then this set of recent events will have cut it back in size somewhat, I expect, and if he is genuine in his position on civil liberties, then this will only have strengthened his resolve. He can become a very strong Parliamentarian on the issue now, which for anyone who cares to see a deeper way of debating than easy sound bites, can only be a pleasing thing. The cost of a bi-election will be a cheap price to pay for this baptism of fire in the world of Westminster politics for Davis. I foresee a few "wilderness years" followed by a significant contribution in "high Ministerial Office" for him yet.

He may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but he has valuable and perhaps unfashionable things to contribute. I prefer a thorny character who can speak the truth to any number of sweetly easy people who mouth inane platitudes to gain power.

George

Oh George I love reading your posts, because they're generally interesting, knowledgeable, and informative. Sometimes I just love the way you say things because you use a beautifully colourful, old fashioned form of language but I feel in this case you're being naive. It would be nice to think he'd made a difference and perhaps in a past life that would have been the case but not now. So far it's achieved nothing (You said it yourself "I suspect Davis has achieved nothing apart from of course alerting a few observant people such as you and me, and others of similar ilk, to consider the question of British Civil Liberties.") It was either a meaningless gesture or a bit of political opportunism. Sorry to be so negative but as a youngster I often fought the good fight and too many times had it thrown back in my face.
Maybe we should revisit this in a year or two to see what eventually happened.

Dear Tom,

I hope some good comes of it. I have my doubts as I suggested earlier, and if no good comes of it then Davis may well be left looking to have used poor judgement. On the other hand, I have fewer doubts about his motivation.

Certainly the Labour Government outmanoeuvred him by not standing a candidate. I think that is sad, as we need to watch civil liberties. I am struck by the general lack of appreciation among the general public of these "taken for granted" freedoms, and perhaps the biggest enemy of theses freedoms is the fact of their existence for so long.

The subject is rather important I think. My feeling is that this was the motivation for Davis's actions, but time will tell whether I am correct in that, and much more importantly, whether this leaves him as a sort of "wilderness parliamentarian" who can keep this subject going in spite of all the general apathy.

George

PS: I entirely agree that you can call me naive. I think it one of my better traits! I make a promise and keep it at any cost. [The only reason I have not scrapped my car is the promise of an honoury taxi job on the 5th of August made about Easter time. The last use I made use of the old car was on the 2nd July on a similar promise, for which I put her back on the road. I did not foresee the circumstance when I made the promises, before I initially took the car off the road].

Those who know me will soon say that my promise is cast iron, but I also, and this is rather naive I am sure, tend to believe that someone else's promise is as my own, a question of complete honour, so I often see goodness, where only self-interest is the real motivation. I am out of my time for certain. Perhaps there was never a time for me.

quote:

I don't think there are any real problems with civil liberties in the UK

quote:

Originally posted by 555:

quote:

I don't think there are any real problems with civil liberties in the UK

What are the problems with civil liberties then?

Suspected terrorists can only be held for 42 days.

Bob,

Are you a terrorist? It would be terrible if you were mistaken for one by the authorities and arrested for 42 days, but that is how it can go once the law is changed in this deplorable fashion!

George

What about real terrorists who are let out and blow up innocent people?

Please cite an example of any terrorist who was released because they could not be detained longer without charge, and went on to commit terrorist crime. When you have shown me this, then I would be prepared to at least confess that you might have a case. If even senior Labour Law men like Lord Goldsmith cannot support 42-day detention, then I view this proposition with the disdain it disserves.

The bigger problem is detection in the first place.

When we adopt a curtailment of the freedoms gained over the last thousand years, the terrorist will have succeeded in their aim of wrecking our system of administration, both Judicial and Executive.

George

"*"

quote:

What are the problems with civil liberties then?

Now you are frightening me ROTF! I suggest you start here.

quote:

What about real terrorists who are let out and blow up innocent people?

It's the balance between security & liberty.
The problem is as with any form of potential injustice,
what happens when things go wrong?
Considering the competence of the U.K. government & authorities regarding terrorism
(e.g. capable of executing a Brazilian plumber because of mistaken identity)
I think we need to be very careful of what liberties we surrender.

The Ex-MI5 chief is against the 42-day plan on both a "practical basis as well as a principled one", so those in the know see this as a bad idea.

I would think that the atmosphere of erosion of civil liberties has already gone too far, as the JC Meneses case shows all too graphically.

This is not a road we want to travel. I would prefer that the Billions spent on the morally bankrupt War in, and Occupation of Iraq were spent on better security and the correct administration of Justice and implementation of the Law within the confines that have served us well for about a thousand years.

That terrorists will occasionally succeed is not something that will be altered by throwing civil liberties out of the window. This course merely gives politicians an ever greater hold over all our fates, which seems to be the agenda of our current government.

George