British government trolls Col. Gaddafi

[Kudistos Megistos]

I imagine that this thread will be buried by the lulz emanating from that other thread, but I found this amusing:

British Foreign Secretary tells Gaddafi to GTFO and revokes his diplomatic immunity

Chancellor George Osborne takes Gaddafi's gold

Lulzy Daily Mail article with lots of pictures of guns and British soldiers not giving a f*ck

 

[DLPB_]

My government needs to keep its face out of other countries, that includes aid to all and sundry and it includes butting in to foreign problems, mainly Islamic, that I couldn't care less for and hope their populations die off soon from their overwhelming stupidity and evil.

We have no business telling other countries what to do or interfering, and Cameron et al can hardly be called whiter than white; they have thousands of Iraqi deaths on their hands through an illegal and unjust war.  So do people who vote for them.

More interfering.

 

[Kudistos Megistos]

We have no business telling other countries what to do or interfering, and Cameron et al can hardly be called whiter than white; they have thousands of Iraqi deaths on their hands through an illegal and unjust war.  So do people who vote for them.

So whom did you vote for?

 

[DLPB_]

The British National Party, who, whilst I am sure have a few racists among their ranks, are against what happened in in Iraq and if have enough power can force change in the establishments 1 party state and disastrous laws ranging from the EU, Human rights act, criminal justice, transport, islamic appeasement right through to crap education.

True, I don't want BNP in power, but they don't need to be in power to force change and scare these con men to death.  See   I don't usually go into my political opinions because I am sick of being called racist and nazi when I am far from either.

 

[Kudistos Megistos]

The British National Party, who, whilst I am sure have a few racists among their ranks, are against what happened in in Iraq and if have enough power can force change in the establishments 1 party state and disastrous laws ranging from the EU, Human rights act, criminal justice, transport, islamic appeasement right through to crap education.

True, I don't want BNP in power, but they don't need to be in power to force change and scare these con men to death.  See   I don't usually go into my political opinions because I am sick of being called racist and nazi when I am far from either.

If you want to vote for a party that opposes the EU and PC nonsense, why don't you vote for a mildly respectable one, like UKIP? They're slightly less racist than the BNP. Only slightly. Or maybe you like the BNP's socialist side? Economically, they're the most left-wing out of all the mildly influential parties in Britain.

I also recommend that you listen to Dan Hannan. I think you'd like him; here, he tells Gordon Brown to GTFO.

 

[DLPB_]

The establishment does not fear UKIP and it is my assertion that UKIP was created with the soul intention of taking away any kind of political threat in the form of the BNP.  I think their actions and words are more of the same rubbish that the big 3 parties make and are a convenient distraction.

A vote for UKIP is a vote that has been fooled.  They deal in rhetoric that can be seen 2 ways and often has a deliberate degree of interpretation.  The BNP say it simply.  Islam is an evil ideology, we need to stop sending all aid to foreign countries etc etc etc.

 

[Kudistos Megistos]

The establishment does not fear UKIP and it is my assertion that UKIP was created with the soul intention of taking away any kind of political threat in the form of the BNP.  I think their actions and words are more of the same rubbish that the big 3 parties make and are a convenient distraction.

A vote for UKIP is a vote that has been fooled.

And some might assert that the BNP was created with the sole intention of creating a caricature that could be used to mock and make strawmen of those who oppose the policies of the big three in regards to national sovereignty. They do nothing but delegitimise any position they hold because their blatant racism and the thuggish nature of many of their members allows a classic reductio ad hitlerum. As far as I can see, they just split the vote and create a stick that Guardian readers can beat the right with.

UKIP actually has some people who resemble politicians rather than hatemongers, and as such would pose a much bigger threat than the BNP would ever be able to do if only one of these two parties existed. They, unlike the BNP, could actually be a legitimate party if they had a little more support, and that should be very scary to the big three.

They can also split the conservative vote and thereby put pressure on them to adopt some UKIP-esque policies. The BNP can split the Labour vote, which is a good thing, but not in any constituencies that Labour has a chance of losing and not in any way that could influence Labour (since Labour would never adapt their policies to be more like those of the BNP).

 

[DLPB_]

The vote system needs to change either way, and not to AV which is just as bad and another con.  Needs to be proper PR, like STV.  FPTP and AV are undemocratic which is why the big parties love it.

 

[Kudistos Megistos]

The vote system needs to change either way, and not to AV which is just as bad and another con.  Needs to be proper PR, like STV.  FPTP and AV are undemocratic which is why the big parties love it.

Indeed they are.

The only problem is that PR would mean every election would result in a coalition government, and I get the feeling that this coalition would be between Labour and the Liberal Democrats every time.

 

[Jaitsu]

from what i can tell, Gaddafi has gone completely insane in these recent days

 

[Kudistos Megistos]

from what i can tell, Gaddafi has gone completely insane in these recent days

He's been insane for a very long time. In fact, I'm not sure whether he has ever been sane.

The only difference is that no-one has ever challenged him the way he's been challenged over the past few days; we're now seeing how low he can go.

 

[DLPB_]

He is power mad and completely paranoid.  It is typical of an Islamic dictatorship to end up with this type of leader.

Libya is a dead loss.  Like all power mad people, gadaffi will hold onto power by any and all means for as long as he can.

 

[Jaitsu]

the problem is he's got some uneasy allies and Russia has been against the No-Fly Zone some countries have been considering

 

[Kudistos Megistos]

He is power mad and completely paranoid.  It is typical of an Islamic dictatorship to end up with this type of leader.

Libya is a dead loss.  Like all power mad people, gadaffi will hold onto power by any and all means for as long as he can.

And the biggest problem is that his replacement will probably be worse than he is. The same with Egypt.

Traditional dictators may have a cold war mentality, it's true, but that's better than the 7th century mentality we've seen in Iran since their revolution.

the problem is he's got some uneasy allies and Russia has been against the No-Fly Zone some countries have been considering

The Russians won't do anything; they never do. I think it's only a matter of time before he goes

 

[DLPB_]

That is true....  his replacement probably will be worse.  People have this idea that an Islamic revolution is like a western style revolution, but as long as they adhere to strict Islamic law, there can be no real democracy.

 

[Bosola]

Iran's not a likely model for a post-Egypt Mubarak. Disregarding how Iran never had a truly democratic election, the Muslim Brotherhood's (they're Sufi, so aren't friends of Al-Queda anyway) attempt to influence the revolution fell flat even when discontent was in full swing, and the ordinary Egyptian supports the army. If half-hearted Sufis can't commandeer a revolution in the midst of violence, Al-Queda won't grip a nation in peace. This movement has been, if anything, far more nationalist than theocratic.

Ordinary Egyptians support the army, and the military is far too conservative to abandon their allegiance with the pliant and passive Turkey. Ordinary Egyptian democracy will, of course, probably remain socially conservative in practice (with pockets of liberty in the city, and corruption at the top), but then again, this is the case for most nations of the world.