F*cking stupidity

hoomish · Post by **hoomish** » 14/08/2006 - 17:37

Personally, whether we believe our governments or not, I think it's fair play to restrict this and that on planes etc... far better than the POTENTIAL consequences.

FunkyM · Post by **FunkyM** » 15/08/2006 - 20:59

Well the good news is that we can take small hand luggage on the planes. Also we can take books. Terrorists lose.

But would life be any better under another PM? Cameron? Campbell? Kennedy? George Galloway? Robert Kilroy-silk, even?

I'm just sayin' is all.

And don't ask me what "FHS" Stands for, you might find out soon enough...

merman · Post by **merman** » 15/08/2006 - 22:05

You mean David Cameron, whose party supported sending troops into Iraq, whose party gave us the "which cricket team do you support" test for immigrants, whose party was in power when arms were exported to Afghanistan to help the muhjahadeen fight the Russians?

FunkyM · Post by **FunkyM** » 16/08/2006 - 10:10

merman wrote:You mean David Cameron, whose party supported sending troops into Iraq, whose party gave us the "which cricket team do you support" test for immigrants, whose party was in power when arms were exported to Afghanistan to help the muhjahadeen fight the Russians?

So he's no better than the other fella!

Now I like the Idea of the LibDems, an unpopular party in a Populist world. But would they be too liberal on Terrorism?

Post by **tas** » 16/08/2006 - 11:02

hoomish wrote:Personally, whether we believe our governments or not, I think it's fair play to restrict this and that on planes etc... far better than the POTENTIAL consequences.

Thats a fair coment. I'd rather be slightly put out than dead!

May seem over the top at first look but Better to be safe than sorry eh?

Tonka · Post by **Tonka** » 16/08/2006 - 12:32

FunkyM wrote:
merman wrote:You mean David Cameron, whose party supported sending troops into Iraq, whose party gave us the "which cricket team do you support" test for immigrants, whose party was in power when arms were exported to Afghanistan to help the muhjahadeen fight the Russians?
So he's no better than the other fella!

Now I like the Idea of the LibDems, an unpopular party in a Populist world. But would they be too liberal on Terrorism?

Whatever party that gets voted in will eventually become corrupt. Being elected brings power and wealth to many people within a party and power and wealth corrupts - always has done, always will...

What we need is a cyborg party made up of laterally thinking, un-corruptible robots and computers - you know, like that 'Skynet' system in the Terminator films...

Tonka

FunkyM · Post by **FunkyM** » 16/08/2006 - 13:14

Tonka wrote:Whatever party that gets voted in will eventually become corrupt. Being elected brings power and wealth to many people within a party and power and wealth corrupts - always has done, always will...

What we need is a cyborg party made up of laterally thinking, un-corruptible robots and computers - you know, like that 'Skynet' system in the Terminator films...

Tonka

...Or, Better Idea, Get the cyborgs and robots to do the Gruntwork, And elt ultimate power and responsibility for our own lives to fall to us. Then we could represent ourselves in a sort of e-Parliament, which would be where things got done.

Tonka · Post by **Tonka** » 16/08/2006 - 13:46

"Yahoo - I'm President at last! I'll start by getting my dick sucked, invading a random country in the Middle East and taking a 2 month holiday on tax payers money"...

Vosla · Post by **Vosla** » 22/08/2006 - 13:03

All politicians could suck my dick...
Oh No, wait!!! They could actually enjoy that!
Ok, first I'll dig out [fill in dead politician of your choice] and fuck his ass and then they could suck my dick...

Well, I think, this wasn't politically correct

Hmm... maybe a line of politicians, a chainsaw and thirty seconds of scot free mayhem... GNIHIHIHARRRR!!!
Who scores the most?