@AC re. Peter Fielden-Weston
Not that it's all about you, you you....
70 publicly visible posts • joined 19 Oct 2007
A read of pretty much any Reg comment thread will reveal what many have long suspected - that there is far more hydrophobic fanboy behaviour from the anti-mac contingent than the ones that are actually being accused of fanboy-ism.
And really, mario - *no-one* weeps with envy for penguintards. Really, um, no-one.
Get yourself out the house a bit more.
I saw an excellent poster at the Gaza counterdemo on Sunday, which for me sums up the situation perfectly.
It depicted a HAMAS-hole, standing behind a baby in a pram pointing a gun at an IDF soldier - who was standing in FRONT of a baby in a pram; pointing his rifle back.
Some typical pig-ignorant antisemitism here as usual, from people who get their facts from the Jew-hating Socialist Workers party and Al Beeb - and who have a grasp on neither history nor present facts.
The Qassams stop. The IDF goes home - it really is as simple as that.
"Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us." Golda Meir
Authoritarian behaviour more redolent of our disgraceful Government than a group of private telecoms companies
This appalling Government are the most authoritarian, fascistic mob that have ever ruled over us - and these cowardly, lying ISPs are its enablers. China-style censorship is now reality in the Shittish Isles.
The technique of sneaking creeping surveillance and censorship through the back door whilst waving the false flag of kiddy fiddling is now well-established practice in a country that used to stand for free speech and democracy.
Shame on Be O2 for signing up to that fat cow Smith's control and surveillance agenda. I see boom times ahead for 3rd party paid proxies.
Is when utterly worthless scrotes like this not only try to enter this country fraudulently, but then travel on to Jihadistan to get trained in how to blow it up.
And who, once having been caught, jump at the chance to litigate when there's a chance that those stupid, useful idiots in Kuffar Britain can get them out of Gitmo - and at our expense too. This isn't Justice - this is taking the piss on a epic scale.
"Why not just go the whole hog and say there are dying little old grannies whose lives might be saved if it weren't for this filthy towelhead and his money-grubbing lawyer?"
Well I'd remove the nasty invective that you're falsely trying to ascribe to me, but basically yes. Which would of course leave in the 'money grubbing lawyers' bit. ;)
The 'tripe' I am talking about (British Justice) is distinct from American Justice because it takes place in a different jurisdiction, with different legislation, procedures and rules.
You may be referring to natural justice, I am referring to the legislative kind. This may be a difficult concept for you to grasp.
My point is that I don't believe that we have any further responsibility to Mo - he is a proven fraudulent asylum seeker, so shouldn't be coming back here. Yet by the time Stafford-Smith has finished with this frivolous and self-serving litigation, we would have probably have been able to open a small hospital wing with the fat fees he and other avaricious litigators will inevitably be trousering at our expense.
I see this as fundamentally, morally wrong.
So I would answer yes - I *do* believe he is less entitled to due process in Britain than I am because:
• He is neither British nor resident in Britain
• He has attempted to enter this country by fraudulent means.
• He is a dangerous Jihadist that wishes to kill us.
• As you so delightfully and eloquently pointed out - 'he wasn't even fucking arrested in Britain or America'.
I think these are reasons aplenty, myself. I say again - keep him in Gitmo and let the Americans deal with the tosser.
Typical 'liberal' discourse - laced as usual with that most moonbat of DNA - little argumentative logic, shrieking emotion and ugly, hateful ad hominem:
• Fucking ignorant shite
• you ignorant pillock
• odious, regurgitated platitudes
• credulous seeping cock-end
• racist cunt - by the way nana, this was your very own piece of post-hoc logic!
• muppet brained stain
Nice. Amazing what soft-arses like this will utter from their filthy mouths when they've go no chance of being twatted.
This vile specimen is not even in the UK and has no right to be either - ergo he should not be subject to British Justice. We have no responsibility for him, so no need to apply any assumptions - guilt or otherwise. Keep him in Gitmo and let the Americans deal with him.
"The _real_ terrorists here are the bloody security service"
Now that's what I *call* moral equivalence. Or worse.
Dodgy asylum seeker (and subsequent self-confessed terrorist) enters Britain on a fake passport, is given leave to remain, to God knows what end. Goes to Pakistan (Big Clue One), then to Afghanistan (Huge Red Flashing Clue Lights Now). Gets caught.
I'd say this guy deserves everything he gets. What baffles me is just why some of you care-bears are wringing your hands? Why should we apply our own standards of democracy, due process and decency to a known terrorist explosives operative and illegal alien who wants to kill us? Mo's a vile enemy combatant, who shouldn't even have the right of access to British justice in my view. We certainly don't owe him anything.
This most certainly is a war and dirty things happen in wars.
When are you people going to realise the true nature and intentions of the vipers you wish to clasp to your collective bosom? Will it take more smouldering buses and trains to wake you up?
I'd certainly agree that if it IS bad law then that would be wrong. Seems to me though, that it's catching some interesting fish at the moment.
Where the potential harm lies of course (and I think this is the point you're making) is in its interpretation - and this is where close scrutiny is required. I'm still not quite cynical enough to believe that our creaking, fusty old democracy (together with the Police and Judiciary) isn't up to the job of doing this reasonably well.
The corollary to your argument, of course, is not to legislate at all. This would work, if your assertion that the people we are arresting and incarcerating really are harmless innocents, merely 'talking the talk'.
And that's where you and I must agree to differ. I'm afraid I don't buy the incompetence argument. For every Richard Reid, there is at least one Mohammed Siddique Khan - and there are structured, fully-funded networks in place to provide training and competency in the terrorists' art to new recruits.
So yes, whilst we have to rely on legislators, the Police and our Justice system to be able to tell the difference (and they have definitely been found wanting on occasion - particularly in the 70s IRA period), I just don't see the alternative.
I guess a much more interesting debate would centre around just what would constitute 'good' law in this regard?
Thank you for being the only one to make an attempt to discuss the issue intelligently with me. We may differ in our views, but despite what others have said - I wholeheartedly welcome a discussion.
I too am concerned about the increasing illiberality and authoritarianism of this awful Government, but not in this case. I think by and large, they are acting correctly and using intelligence-led policing to stop some 'real' nutters who wish us extreme harm. The amount of people in utter denial about this latter point staggers me.
Andreas - I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'radical', or 'no better than those arrested muslim guys'. If you infer that I wish people that plan terrorist actions against my country and fellow citizens, to be incarcerated and/or removed in the process of Justice within a democracy; then guilty as charged - pass me the Che T-shirt.
If, however you are trying to infer something more sinister, you would be wrong and you would have to provide evidence in what I have said to prove otherwise.
Don't understand a word of your posts. Indecipherable ranting and babble. You don't even understand the meaning of the phrase 'critical faculties', so where do you suppose that leaves someone who would wish to debate with you?
And for those who attack me, because all they see is some people being imprisoned for what literature they had in their possession, a few salient facts from the case:
The 'napalm' instructions, along with much of the other information, was held on private, secure sites.
Defendants used code names to communicate with each other
Names, addresses, maps and photographs of officials and their residential addresses - along with opening hours in the case of official residences
Maps and photographs of potential targets in New York and London
One of the criminals, Abid Khan, is known to be in communication with suspected terrorists in both Europe and the US and also known AQ operatives in the UK. He is also connected to another group of men who are currently awaiting trial for plotting an attack. Yes a real one.
Quote from the Head of Leeds Anti Terrorism Unit:
"Let there be no doubt, these are dangerous individuals. These men were not simply in possession of material which expressed extremist views. They were also in possession of material that was operationally useful to anyone wishing to carry out an act of violence or terrorism."
Still think this was a case of a group of lively young lads flicking excitedly through a copy of the Anarchist's Cookbook?
I'll leave you with just one of many quotes from one of our Abid's communiqués - "If you can find a big target and take it out, like a military base in the UK, then praise be to Allah."
Please tell me why you think I'm trolling - is it because what I write isn't chiming with what you think, or with the usual El Reg Comments Agree-O-Thon?
Substantiate your assertions - and please define 'vile' within the context of anything I wrote. Or is the reason you feel unable to 'address the vile crap' I wrote, simply because you are, er, unable to?
Your post is entirely without a point. If you feel that we are not threatened by Islamic fundamentalism, then explain why. If you feel that we are and it's all HMG's fault (although this would reveal a total lack of context and historical perspective) - then again, explain why that isn't moral equivalence.
Otherwise it is you, "sir", who is the troll. To call someone 'clueless' then fill the remainder of your post with hot air is the very definition of trolling in my book.
I'll get me tin foil hat.
You nutters really think this is our fault don't you? Whipping yourself up about some non-existent Orwellian campaign to harass schoolboys (note for when you've finished hyperventilating - only ONE of the convicted criminals was 16 when arrested); when in reality this country is under a very real threat from people you would give a free pass to - people who hate you with a passion.
What you misunderstand (or simply don't wish to understand), you trivialise and reduce to the ridiculous; in order to ease your wooly liberal consciences - or perhaps to avoid debating the facts.
Thought Crimes my arse. Free speech isn't free speech when the speaker plans also to act on it. - as these miscreants clearly did. I hope they each get a nice long stretch in which to reflect on the links between how to manufacture napalm and its place in the 'Religion of Peace'.
Good post, but you're wasting your words on here mate. The amazing thing about El Reg Win/Lin/comment/ards is that they consistently and reflexively wheel out the (by now rather old and tired) *fanboi* accusations at Mac users every time there's an article with the slightest whiff of Macintosh content - when it seems to me that they're the hysterical ones. Oh well.
The ElReg Winbois and Linuxtards are out to play again I see. And the thing that really gets them steaming is the fact that as well as being a superb machine running a superb OS designed for people that *actually do stuff* - for those that need it - they also run Windows quicker than most Windows machines... Phreaky!
"For the record, Apple has not apologised to ANY customers of .Mac who had MobileMe shoved up their @#$% this past week"
Perhaps you haven't checked your email then. I got an apology and a 30-say extension. I don't think that's too bad.
Projects cock up sometimes - yes even big ones. Anyone would think listening to the wailing Elreg Winbois that other companies had never fucked up a roll-out before. Get over yourselves.
My God - and I was wondering whether we Brits could possibly think up anything else to bleat about? We're clearly world class when it comes to Victimology!
Hasn't it occurred to any of these buxom lovelies that, effectively, it's their lesser-endowed sisters that are actually subsidising the extra engineering and fabric for the bras they buy elsewhere?.
M&S are merely operating a more efficient market.
Paris? Because she's one of the real victims here..
Unfortunately Richard has a point... up to a point. The condition of the JBVC will no doubt (I haven't been) reflect the derisory attitude and low regard the British Establishment have to scientific and technological achievement vs. the humanities. It's ancient, class-based and summed up in the old insult... 'Northern Chemist'.
I bet you wouldn't find a visitor centre any facility in the US looking like a 50's throwback rubbish tip.
Paris... because she's, er, such a dish....
Utter Bollocks alert:
"they [Apple] have LITERALLY been forcing people to buy new computers every two-three years."
My elderly parents are happily running Leopard on a 6-year old iMac G4 (runs impressively quickly, too).
"the mac has REQUIRED firewire and a G3 processor since OS 9"
Er, the G3 processor was launched in 1997 and Apple launched OS 9 in 1999, ditching it in 2002.
I find it difficult to see how you can substantiate your rather rash 'Apple screws its users into upgrading hardware to accommodate its bloatware OS every 2-3 years' claim with the evidence you present.
So on exactly what, LITERALLY, do you base it?
But then again, that kind of mastubatory blind devotion probably makes me a 'fanboi'?
"It would be equally simple to create a film of so-called Christians who feel that assassinating doctors or blowing up health clinics is justified by their holy text and an equally unjust broad-brush..."
Except that's not really true is it, Sean?... very poor attempt at moral equivalence that failed at the first hurdle - scale.
The fact that every time Moslems encounter criticism or hear something they don't like, death threats/assasinations/rape/violence/murder/beheadings tend to ensue - is really failing to form patterns for some of you lot, isn't it?