-
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
How David Kidney voted on Iraq
- Thread starter Markbin
- Start date
My Name is URL
Well-Known Forumite
Ditto, FPMSLODB_69 said:
Ah GK, you're back, with nothing to add but insults. Fair enough. You say more about yourself than you do of me.
Can you explain how using whatever peaceful means possible to pressure (as is our right in a parliamentary democracy) an elected representative into answering for his actions?
Apathy is one of the biggest reasons the UK has problems.
Can you explain how using whatever peaceful means possible to pressure (as is our right in a parliamentary democracy) an elected representative into answering for his actions?
Apathy is one of the biggest reasons the UK has problems.
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
After a quick read of this thread, I have deduced that you either won't listen or can't read. There is a definate 'you either agree with me entirely or you're wrong' attitude, and TBH it seems like media brainwashing is indeed working, albeit on you. Were you in Iraq before the war? Did you see what went on? Have you been back since? Have you seen what goes on now?
If you have, fine, I bow down to your superior knowledge. I suspect however that you also rely on news sources to get your information, just like everyone else. And just like everyone else, you choose the sources which best fit your idea of what is happeneing, and think of the others as spin or hype. We all do it, I'll happily admit to it. I won't try to tell people they're wrong for not believing what I do though, that makes me as bad as the church*
*Any church, but especially jovos or mormons.
If you have, fine, I bow down to your superior knowledge. I suspect however that you also rely on news sources to get your information, just like everyone else. And just like everyone else, you choose the sources which best fit your idea of what is happeneing, and think of the others as spin or hype. We all do it, I'll happily admit to it. I won't try to tell people they're wrong for not believing what I do though, that makes me as bad as the church*
*Any church, but especially jovos or mormons.
My Name is URL
Well-Known Forumite
Thanks Tori....
Markbin, we previously had quite a good debate on the subject which ended in a stale mate. It also became quite boring to me at the end as its obvious we have very different views but at the end of the day we base those views on what we see and hear in the media, we can never know the full truth.
That is why I have nothing to add to this thread, it is boring and we have covered most everything there is to cover....
However as Tori said, I think you will find that I did not insult anyone in post 42, I suppose you could accuse me of being childish for laughing at Tori's post but to be honest I don't care, laughter makes my day go quicker.
Markbin, we previously had quite a good debate on the subject which ended in a stale mate. It also became quite boring to me at the end as its obvious we have very different views but at the end of the day we base those views on what we see and hear in the media, we can never know the full truth.
That is why I have nothing to add to this thread, it is boring and we have covered most everything there is to cover....
However as Tori said, I think you will find that I did not insult anyone in post 42, I suppose you could accuse me of being childish for laughing at Tori's post but to be honest I don't care, laughter makes my day go quicker.
tek-monkey, GK
You both say that we are incapable of knowing what really went on in Iraq. To me that is a very good case for a full inquiry into the war.
A lot of lives have been lost in (and outside of) Iraq as a result of the invasion. That is a statement of fact. Please tell me how expecting accountability for that is the result of media brainwashing.
Other statements of fact on Iraq:
1. We were told we needed to eliminate Saddam's WMD before he used them against us. None were found.
2. We were told we would be welcomed as liberators. We are still there six years later.
I don't want to sound arrogant and condescending but the only explanation I can arrive at for your indifference to the loss of life is because it happened to foreigners. That is not to imply any racism on your part, just an inability to empathise with people not of our tribe.
Having lived for nearly four years in Asia, it is obvious when you step outside the realm of British naionalism/patriotism that the invasion of Iraq and wider so-called war on terror has done huge damage to our reputation and influence in the world.
Authoritarian governments have welcomed and exploited the West's, or home of democracy's, disregard for human rights (Guantanamo, restrictions on protest, ID cards etc) over the past seven or eight years. Instead of strengthening democracy, we have actually weakened it. Oppressed peoples used to look to us for hope, but now we are discredited in their eyes.
You both say that we are incapable of knowing what really went on in Iraq. To me that is a very good case for a full inquiry into the war.
A lot of lives have been lost in (and outside of) Iraq as a result of the invasion. That is a statement of fact. Please tell me how expecting accountability for that is the result of media brainwashing.
Other statements of fact on Iraq:
1. We were told we needed to eliminate Saddam's WMD before he used them against us. None were found.
2. We were told we would be welcomed as liberators. We are still there six years later.
I don't want to sound arrogant and condescending but the only explanation I can arrive at for your indifference to the loss of life is because it happened to foreigners. That is not to imply any racism on your part, just an inability to empathise with people not of our tribe.
Having lived for nearly four years in Asia, it is obvious when you step outside the realm of British naionalism/patriotism that the invasion of Iraq and wider so-called war on terror has done huge damage to our reputation and influence in the world.
Authoritarian governments have welcomed and exploited the West's, or home of democracy's, disregard for human rights (Guantanamo, restrictions on protest, ID cards etc) over the past seven or eight years. Instead of strengthening democracy, we have actually weakened it. Oppressed peoples used to look to us for hope, but now we are discredited in their eyes.
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
You assume wrong, I'm indifferent because I'm bored of it all frankly. Maybe its because the only people I know directly involved are our own troops, and the stories they bring home are essentialy WTF are we doing here anyway. Now Afghanistan, thats a different matter, thats an actual fight still. Iraq is just NI 15 years ago, which I remember well enough.
Can't remember what I posted on this forum, only been here 2 years, but anyone who knows me on thedvdforums knows I was completely against the war from the start, and have never supported it. I think if we'd killed Saddam the first time round, we would have been justified. Round 2 was complete bollox, it was just money and finishing daddys business (for monkey boy, obviously)
You think I'm not aware what this has done to our international image? We're Americas puppy, follow them around with our tongue hanging out and a glazed look in our eye. We used to be respected, despite our past (which, lets face it, is worse than most countries), now we're a joke. However, you can't really start spouting about our disregard of human rights when it is well documented that Saddam had people killed cos he felt like it. I agree we shouldn't have gone in there, the military budget would have sorted a HUGE number of our own issues out instead, but don't start pretending he wasn't a murderer at the end of it. Just like in Rwanda, but they have no oil
Can't remember what I posted on this forum, only been here 2 years, but anyone who knows me on thedvdforums knows I was completely against the war from the start, and have never supported it. I think if we'd killed Saddam the first time round, we would have been justified. Round 2 was complete bollox, it was just money and finishing daddys business (for monkey boy, obviously)
You think I'm not aware what this has done to our international image? We're Americas puppy, follow them around with our tongue hanging out and a glazed look in our eye. We used to be respected, despite our past (which, lets face it, is worse than most countries), now we're a joke. However, you can't really start spouting about our disregard of human rights when it is well documented that Saddam had people killed cos he felt like it. I agree we shouldn't have gone in there, the military budget would have sorted a HUGE number of our own issues out instead, but don't start pretending he wasn't a murderer at the end of it. Just like in Rwanda, but they have no oil
Markerat
I'm no gynaecologist...
I was in Iraq as a civillian during the conflict (2003) and take it from someone who has eat slept and pooped in the same portable pottys as the locals and soldiers....Iraq is a bloody awful place, the only redeaming feature of it is that nearly everywhere you look oil is bubbling out of the ground in puddles of stinky gloop.
I know my wife is going to chime in and say "you were only there for 8 days" but trust me it felt like longer.
58 Degrees C daytime, 35'C in the night (136F/95). Sand Flies, camel spiders and the great unwashed locals.
The only reason we got involved there was to bring stability to the region by knocking out any threat of WMD and a genocide mad leader. Well thats the excuse, the real reason was crude oil plain and simple.
I know my wife is going to chime in and say "you were only there for 8 days" but trust me it felt like longer.
58 Degrees C daytime, 35'C in the night (136F/95). Sand Flies, camel spiders and the great unwashed locals.
The only reason we got involved there was to bring stability to the region by knocking out any threat of WMD and a genocide mad leader. Well thats the excuse, the real reason was crude oil plain and simple.
Thank you, Markerat. We and our politicians need to have this debate: is projecting military power overseas to secure and protect mineral resources a sensible foreign policy? Is it inflaming extremism? Who exactly is benefiting from it - oil companies or motorists or both? Do the problems created by these policies outweigh the benefits? What kind of pressures will be created as the rising economies of China, India, Brazil start to demand their cut of these resources (they already are really)?
tek-monkey
Thank you for your post, too. Iraq is immensely boring, but the battle for accountability over this is arguably one of the most important political struggles the UK has faced since the English Civil War. You may think I'm nuts, but if we allow politicians to sweep Iraq under the carpet forever, it will represent a large shift in democratic power from the electorate to the executive. You can see that this current government is trying its hardest to do that by resisting an inquiry, by going against public opinion on Heathrow, ID cards, 42 days etc.
The Tories pledge to undo all this if they come to power, and they probably say that with a degree of sincerity now. But the pressure from Establishment inner circle vested interests and the irrestistability of the power ID cards would give them as a government would probably mean things would turn out differently after election day.
If your only reaction is to shrug your shoulders, well, that's very sad. But if I've reignited in you a modicm of rage over the war, put fingers to keyboard and send the Newsletter an email and call on Stafford's MP to pressure the govt to ensure the Iraq inquiry is carried out in good faith and for him to stop supporting those other authoritarian policies mentioned above.
tek-monkey
Thank you for your post, too. Iraq is immensely boring, but the battle for accountability over this is arguably one of the most important political struggles the UK has faced since the English Civil War. You may think I'm nuts, but if we allow politicians to sweep Iraq under the carpet forever, it will represent a large shift in democratic power from the electorate to the executive. You can see that this current government is trying its hardest to do that by resisting an inquiry, by going against public opinion on Heathrow, ID cards, 42 days etc.
The Tories pledge to undo all this if they come to power, and they probably say that with a degree of sincerity now. But the pressure from Establishment inner circle vested interests and the irrestistability of the power ID cards would give them as a government would probably mean things would turn out differently after election day.
If your only reaction is to shrug your shoulders, well, that's very sad. But if I've reignited in you a modicm of rage over the war, put fingers to keyboard and send the Newsletter an email and call on Stafford's MP to pressure the govt to ensure the Iraq inquiry is carried out in good faith and for him to stop supporting those other authoritarian policies mentioned above.
My Name is URL
Well-Known Forumite
Markbin, when David Kidney undoubtedly gets here to answer your questions, can you ask him about this too:
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/foiorder2009/
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/foiorder2009/
My Name is URL
Well-Known Forumite
Hate to rub salt in the wounds (honest 
) but shortly after posting the above I e-mailed our friend Mr Kidney about this.
I have just got a personal reply back
gk141054,
I'm quite annoyed by the scurrilous reporting of this issue. Nothing has
been "sneaked out" as some are claiming. Last Thursday, the Government's
Motion for this Thursday's debate was published in the usual way in the
Notice of Future Business. On this Thursday, this motion will be debated
and voted upon. MPs can table amendments to the Motion if they wish, and
I am sure there will be some amendments.
As for the effect of the Motion as drafted by the Government, it doubles
from 13 to 26 the categories under which all expenses claimed by MPs
will be published from now on (and also MPs' expenses since 2005 will be
re-published under the 26 categories). Why are some people saying this
isn't good enough? Because some newspapers and campaign groups have been
pursuing cases through the courts to make the House authorities publish
every individual expense of any MP they ask about.
Personally, I have no problem with individual publication of every
single expense I claim but I think the scheme the Government has come up
with is good enough to make sure there is full disclosure - and more
disclosure than currently, not less.
Regards, David
I wonder if it helps that I cc'd in the local newspapers?
) but shortly after posting the above I e-mailed our friend Mr Kidney about this.I have just got a personal reply back
gk141054,
I'm quite annoyed by the scurrilous reporting of this issue. Nothing has
been "sneaked out" as some are claiming. Last Thursday, the Government's
Motion for this Thursday's debate was published in the usual way in the
Notice of Future Business. On this Thursday, this motion will be debated
and voted upon. MPs can table amendments to the Motion if they wish, and
I am sure there will be some amendments.
As for the effect of the Motion as drafted by the Government, it doubles
from 13 to 26 the categories under which all expenses claimed by MPs
will be published from now on (and also MPs' expenses since 2005 will be
re-published under the 26 categories). Why are some people saying this
isn't good enough? Because some newspapers and campaign groups have been
pursuing cases through the courts to make the House authorities publish
every individual expense of any MP they ask about.
Personally, I have no problem with individual publication of every
single expense I claim but I think the scheme the Government has come up
with is good enough to make sure there is full disclosure - and more
disclosure than currently, not less.
Regards, David
I wonder if it helps that I cc'd in the local newspapers?
GK
Thanks for that. Could this develop into a longterm holding-David Kidney-(or any local MP)-to-account thread? I hope so. No one in the local media really pushes him. It's nothing personal, David. It's just that you're a politician and you're accountable to us, like it or not.
What I'd like to to know is (if I've understood it correctly), if there are 26 categories of MPs' expenses that are open to public scrutiny, does that mean there are further categories that cannot be published?
Personally, I think absolutely every single penny of my, sorry MY (just so you understand David), money spent by politicians should be open to scrutiny.
Can someone tell me if this is true. I'm under the impression that MPs can buy things on expenses and then keep them after they leave Parliament. Is that right? If so, should that be changed? After all, if I get a company car I don't get to keep it after I resign, or certainly wouldn't if I get sacked, which is what politicians get when they are voted out, as David Kidney is going to be soon!
Thanks for that. Could this develop into a longterm holding-David Kidney-(or any local MP)-to-account thread? I hope so. No one in the local media really pushes him. It's nothing personal, David. It's just that you're a politician and you're accountable to us, like it or not.
What I'd like to to know is (if I've understood it correctly), if there are 26 categories of MPs' expenses that are open to public scrutiny, does that mean there are further categories that cannot be published?
Personally, I think absolutely every single penny of my, sorry MY (just so you understand David), money spent by politicians should be open to scrutiny.
Can someone tell me if this is true. I'm under the impression that MPs can buy things on expenses and then keep them after they leave Parliament. Is that right? If so, should that be changed? After all, if I get a company car I don't get to keep it after I resign, or certainly wouldn't if I get sacked, which is what politicians get when they are voted out, as David Kidney is going to be soon!
Fine, then if David Kidney succeeds in forcing me to possess an ID card (which by the way I will take to one of his surgeries and set on fire or cut up in front of invited media) then the only details I will permit the state to keep on said card will be first name and gender. One rule for them, one rule for us.
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
Do you drive? Cos thats an ID card right there.
Wookie
Official Forum Linker
Are driving licenses biometric? Cos, you know, the ID cards are going to have *fingerprints* on them! They'll be able to check them and everything! And fingerprints can't be faked!
No, wait...
No, wait...
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
So the cops will carry portable fingerprint scanners? Then what, visually compare them, or does it 'talk' to the ID card in some way? Cos if so, mine goes straight on a boil wash wrapped in magnets...