NationStates Jolt Archive

Imagine the scene: -

Live in the House of Commons at PMQ's .

Michael Howard asks a question and Blair stands to answer, suddenly yell from the VIP box.

The Prime Minister turns and suddenly a paint bomb flies through the air with purple powder in it, causing a smoke to appear in the air, and hitting the PM on the back then landing on the floor.

The House was suspended and the people left.

"The Prime Minister look shaken....withdrawn within himself"

Image:

http://www.itv.com/news/story920223.jpg

What if it had not been just paint powder?

Absolute madness. Firstly, the group who carried out this assault aren't terrorists, but rather than being called 'Fathers 4 Justice' ought to be better called 'Wife-Beaters 4 Revenge', given the 'colourful' history of many of its most prominent members that cause their wives to seek divorces in the first place. The vast majority of fathers in this country- whether they're seperated from the mothers of their children or not- have no sympathy with these morons. Why on earth Baroness Castle appears to is beyond me, but she'll have to apologise.

On a further note, this incident will just mean more restictions on people who legitimately want to visit the public gallery and watch British democracy as it's being made- bullet-proof glass is already being installed, but as a result of this we can expect to have to wait for months on end before having a request to visit accepted- by which time the question you'd want your MP to ask might be no longer relevant, and even if you do make it to the commons, expect a heavy search by armed officers before you're allowed to make your way upstairs.

And yes, it could so easily have been worse- chemicals, corrosives, even explosives... even if you're no fan of Tony Blair's policies an action like this is totally unjustifiable. If it had happened in the USA the assailants would probably have been shot dead on the spot... the thought of a protestor of any sort being shot here is too ugly to think about, which is why security isn't as tight as it might have been- today will change all that. Hopefully the papers will give the bunch of muppets who abused the trust of a member of the Lords none of the publicity they crave.

I think they'll get publicity though. I'm quite happy that Peter Hain's idea that a screen wasn't needed around the VIP area has been proved wrong.

It is interesting how this happened on a day when Palistian diplomats were here to see democracy in action.

Maybe it'll give the mealy-mouthed little God-botherer some faint inkling of what it must be like to live in fear for your life; maybe it might just make him think that little bit harder before waving his hand and sending the sons and daughters of the nation's poor off to shoot at more poor people somewhere far away.

I think we need less protection for our politicians, not more. If they didn't go around doing things that made people want to kill them, then maybe they wouldn't need to be shuttled everywhere in bulletproof cars at vast expense. They're the ones making the bloody bed; I say let them lie in it.

Maybe it'll give the mealy-mouthed little God-botherer some faint inkling of what it must be like to live in fear for your life; maybe it might just make him think that little bit harder before waving his hand and sending the sons and daughters of the nation's poor off to shoot at more poor people somewhere far away.

I think we need less protection for our politicians, not more. If they didn't go around doing things that made people want to kill them, then maybe they wouldn't need to be shuttled everywhere in bulletproof cars at vast expense. They're the ones making the bloody bed; I say let them lie in it.

Not the reason for the attack.

I do not support Blair, although I support the war, but I still think he, and the rest of the MP's should be protected. Unfortunate as it is for democracy what would be worse is if someone could, easily, wipe out the major members of Her Majesty's Government and Her Majesty's Opposition.

I forget what comedian it was--maybe Dennis Miller back when he was funny--who said "if you want real gun control in the US, get rid of all the bulletproof glass in Washington DC. You'll have gun control so fast that the worst anyone will suffer from is a drive-by shouting, which, coincidentally, is protected by the First Amendment." Just thought I'd share. :lol:

I forget what comedian it was--maybe Dennis Miller back when he was funny--who said "if you want real gun control in the US, get rid of all the bulletproof glass in Washington DC. You'll have gun control so fast that the worst anyone will suffer from is a drive-by shouting, which, coincidentally, is protected by the First Amendment." Just thought I'd share. :lol:

Lol, same idea that to improve the NHS make MP's have operation at those hospitals.

Wait *cluelessness* so this actually happened? lol..

Wait *cluelessness* so this actually happened? lol..I've seen the footage a dozen times on my local news this morning. It's probably on a continuous loop on CNN. :lol:

Wait *cluelessness* so this actually happened? lol..

Yeah, I saw it live at noonish.

Am I the only one here that remembers the abseiling lesbians incident in the House of Lords?

Am I the only one here that remembers the abseiling lesbians incident in the House of Lords?

Are you sure that didnt happen in your dreams?

Do we have a link to the Tony story? I'm just having a hard time beleiving it. More imortantly do we have a picture of what he looked like after the attack?

http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/s/117/117126_blair_hit_by_purple_powder_in_commons_attack.html

http://www.itv.com/news/story920223.jpg

There was a dust cloud over Labour MPs too, that picture doesn't show it in a very dramatic way.

doesn't matter who did it, they missed! Do it again! And get yer aim right this time!

Absolute madness. Firstly, the group who carried out this assault aren't terrorists, but rather than being called 'Fathers 4 Justice' ought to be better called 'Wife-Beaters 4 Revenge', given the 'colourful' history of many of its most prominent members that cause their wives to seek divorces in the first place. The vast majority of fathers in this country- whether they're seperated from the mothers of their children or not- have no sympathy with these morons. Why on earth Baroness Castle appears to is beyond me, but she'll have to apologise.

Yeh, of course you have a source for this claim that "the vast majority" of fathers dont support fathers 4 justice? Thought not. Fact is, it seems a very stupid protest to make, but i have plenty of sympathy with them, as do most of the other people ive had conversations with about parental rights, etc. Implying that fathers who arent allowed to see their children are all "wife-beater" is seriously vying for the most completely moronic, puerile and offensive b*ll*cks ive heard in quite a while.

Not the reason for the attack.

I do not support Blair, although I support the war, but I still think he, and the rest of the MP's should be protected. Unfortunate as it is for democracy what would be worse is if someone could, easily, wipe out the major members of Her Majesty's Government and Her Majesty's Opposition.

Yeah, I know, I know... but still, if we want our "leaders" to try to achieve world peace, wrapping them in an ever-thicker bulletproof cocoon isn't the way to go about it.

The corpses continue to pile up all over the world. I can't bring myself to feel bad that Tony and all the other self-inflated oxygen thieves and parasites smelt some faint whiff of the same fear they're both directly and indirectly responsible for dishing out all over the planet.

Am I the only one here that remembers the abseiling lesbians incident in the House of Lords?

Are you sure that didnt happen in your dreams?


Try Googling for "abseiling lesbians"...

...even more bizarre a few days later was the national news being read on BBC 1 by the newsreader whilst sitting on a lesbian...

http://members.madasafish.com/~jimbotw/sixles.ra

(unfortunately it was the other presenter who was sitting on the lesbian, not the one in the clip)

Still how would you feel if a minority, maybe even one, could say we don't like the leader you have democratically elected we're going to kill him/her.

Am I the only one here that remembers the abseiling lesbians incident in the House of Lords?

Are you sure that didnt happen in your dreams?


Try Googling for "abseiling lesbians"...

...I'm not crazy...

Just give us a link, I don't want to soil google. :lol:

Just give us a link, I don't want to soil google. :lol:

Mentioned in passing here:

http://badger.ussu.info/features/v8i19_hate.shtml

edit: better coverage here...

Click me (http://www.rainbownetwork.co.uk/Features/detail.asp?iData=14773&iCat=32&iChannel=25&nChannel=Features)

perhaps we should've just paint-bombed Saddam Hussein. I'd've giggled!

On a related note, here is an interesting article on the Belgian anarchist responsible for custard pieing the rich and famous...

http://www.parascope.com/mx/articles/godin.htm


Bill Gates remains one of his best targets:
http://www.parascope.com/mx/articles/gatespie.jpg

I'll bet his computer works well.

On a related note, here is an interesting article on the Belgian anarchist responsible for custard pieing the rich and famous...

http://www.parascope.com/mx/articles/godin.htm


Bill Gates remains one of his best targets:
http://www.parascope.com/mx/articles/gatespie.jpgYay! Custard Pies ... wait ... are we back in Forum 7?

No

Don't get ideas..
:lol:

Anyway, anyone else see this happen.

No

Don't get ideas..
:lol:

Anyway, anyone else see this happen. Aww, yr no fun.

*steals thread and runs off*

No

Don't get ideas..
:lol:

Anyway, anyone else see this happen. Aww, yr no fun.

*steals thread and runs off*

*bashes head against wall*

This is going to be a hostile takeover of everyones thread in general isn't it?

No

Don't get ideas..
:lol:

Anyway, anyone else see this happen. Aww, yr no fun.

*steals thread and runs off*

*bashes head against wall*

This is going to be a hostile takeover of everyones thread in general isn't it? 8)

that'll teach 'em to steal our homes!

No

Don't get ideas..
:lol:

Anyway, anyone else see this happen. Aww, yr no fun.

*steals thread and runs off*

*bashes head against wall*

This is going to be a hostile takeover of everyones thread in general isn't it? 8)

that'll teach 'em to steal our homes!

*scrapes Enerica's blood off the wall before the Mods see it and ground everone*

Leave now.

Smithers release the Hounds.

Now he is being slaughtered, is it too much to hope that this discussion could turn back into something sensible.

I agree it's worrying that the prime minister can be such an easy target. The protest group have been very active recently (in my city they spent a day dressed as superheroes standing on top of the county court building). But i never expected them to do this. and you know they're going to be locked up for it. assaulting a prime minister has to be a million times worse than assaulting a police officer.

one thing to bear in mind is that although we electen his party we did not choose him directly. someone said that no one has the right to remove the person we democratically elected. well we didn't democratically elect him as pm, his constituency elected him as their minister, he just also happens to be the leader of the party.

not sure whether i agree with the attack or not. just putting up my thoughts

This just goes to show the inadequeices of our security. Last year some bozo waltzs up to the Queen..., and then of course there was the Greenpeace demo that occupied RAF Fairford and showed their inadequate defense system.

What is the ****ing point of sending our troops do die in Iraq because "You know it'll like help stop terrorism and I say to you this, if we stop terrorism I might win the Nobel Peace prize) when we can't even defend our leaders in our own country. It's perhaps through luck that thus far it has only been mostly benign crack pots who have got through.

I don't really care about Mr. Blair or the Queen but if we can't even protect them what chance have is there for me and a bunch of Japanese tourists if Al'Queda tries something in central London.

It's a bloody joke.

True, like I said, I'm am not a Blair fan, but I think someone who we elect democratically should be protected, we cannot let terrorists dictate the rulers of our country. It doesn't say a lot about this nation when, presumably, the most secure places in it can be entered by a powder thrower, and a comedy terrorist (The palace). Also that, the person who should be the most protected in the country can have this happen to him.

Exactly, I mean I'm not a paranoid and I've lived through the IRA and terrorism in my own country and try to live on a "if it's gonna happen there's nothing I can do to stop it so why panic" kinda philosophy... but when you see people gaining easy access to the PM and the Queen... kinda makes you wonder what chance there is for the average Joe on the street.

Then again, if it's that easy to go after the Queen, the PM, etc etc, why would a terrorist want to go after the regular Joe in the street? I'd rather we were hiding behind them, than have them hiding behind us.

Maybe it'll give the mealy-mouthed little God-botherer some faint inkling of what it must be like to live in fear for your life; maybe it might just make him think that little bit harder before waving his hand and sending the sons and daughters of the nation's poor off to shoot at more poor people somewhere far away.

I think we need less protection for our politicians, not more. If they didn't go around doing things that made people want to kill them, then maybe they wouldn't need to be shuttled everywhere in bulletproof cars at vast expense. They're the ones making the bloody bed; I say let them lie in it.

That's interesting, so you think that if Tony Blair was perceived to be doing a better job, groups like Al-Qaeda might think, hey, that Tony fellow seems like a decent chap, how about if we don't try to assassinate him.

Politicians will always attract criticism regardless of what they do, Martin Luther king and Mahatma Gandhi went around "doing things that made people want to kill them" - would you take issue with them too. It's a shame that such a large portion of the British publics political perspective has been completely eliminated by Iraq and that people would rather that their elected representatives by held accountable, not by the ballot box, but by terrorism.

Maybe it'll give the mealy-mouthed little God-botherer some faint inkling of what it must be like to live in fear for your life; maybe it might just make him think that little bit harder before waving his hand and sending the sons and daughters of the nation's poor off to shoot at more poor people somewhere far away.

I think we need less protection for our politicians, not more. If they didn't go around doing things that made people want to kill them, then maybe they wouldn't need to be shuttled everywhere in bulletproof cars at vast expense. They're the ones making the bloody bed; I say let them lie in it.

That's interesting, so you think that if Tony Blair was perceived to be doing a better job, groups like Al-Qaeda might think, hey, that Tony fellow seems like a decent chap, how about if we don't try to assassinate him.

Politicians will always attract criticism regardless of what they do, Martin Luther king and Mahatma Gandhi went around "doing things that made people want to kill them" - would you take issue with them too. It's a shame that such a large portion of the British publics political perspective has been completely eliminated by Iraq and that people would rather that their elected representatives by held accountable, not by the ballot box, but by terrorism.

Maybe it'll give the mealy-mouthed little God-botherer some faint inkling of what it must be like to live in fear for your life; maybe it might just make him think that little bit harder before waving his hand and sending the sons and daughters of the nation's poor off to shoot at more poor people somewhere far away.

I think we need less protection for our politicians, not more. If they didn't go around doing things that made people want to kill them, then maybe they wouldn't need to be shuttled everywhere in bulletproof cars at vast expense. They're the ones making the bloody bed; I say let them lie in it.

That's interesting, so you think that if Tony Blair was perceived to be doing a better job, groups like Al-Qaeda might think, hey, that Tony fellow seems like a decent chap, how about if we don't try to assassinate him.

Politicians will always attract criticism regardless of what they do, Martin Luther king and Mahatma Gandhi went around "doing things that made people want to kill them" - would you take issue with them too. It's a shame that such a large portion of the British publics political perspective has been completely eliminated by Iraq and that people would rather that their elected representatives by held accountable, not by the ballot box, but by terrorism.

The accountability of the ballot box might have more appeal if we didn't have a system rigged to return one of two essentially identical parties, both of whom supported an illegal and unjustified war even though a majority of the nation opposed it. But you make a good and fair point. I withdraw my post. I still hope the grinning little creep felt just one fleeting moment of real mortal terror, though.

we cannot let terrorists dictate the rulers of our country.

but it's okay for us to dictate the rulers of theirs?

I honestly thought it was funny when he got pelted.

Politicians in this country don't live in the real world, I say they shouldn't be protected. They need to realise just how dangerous our streets and roads have become. Kids driving round on scooters and smashing up town centers (as they did with my home town, normally a peaceful place), road rage, dangerous driving, robberies and attacks. Things that effect most people don't effect them as much because they're sheilded from them. They need a wake up call not more bubble wrap.

Maybe then Tony Blair and our local councils would spend more money getting the police back on the streets and not painting our fecking roads with red stuff for no apparent reason.

It's time to tackle the real issues in society and make Criminals afraid to break the law.

:|

we cannot let terrorists dictate the rulers of our country.

but it's okay for us to dictate the rulers of theirs?

I honestly thought it was funny when he got pelted.

Politicians in this country don't live in the real world, I say they shouldn't be protected. They need to realise just how dangerous our streets and roads have become. Kids driving round on scooters and smashing up town centers (as they did with my home town, normally a peaceful place), road rage, dangerous driving, robberies and attacks. Things that effect most people don't effect them as much because they're sheilded from them. They need a wake up call not more bubble wrap.

Maybe then Tony Blair and our local councils would spend more money getting the police back on the streets and not painting our fecking roads with red stuff for no apparent reason.

It's time to tackle the real issues in society and make Criminals afraid to break the law.

:|

Actually we do not "dictate" the rulers of another country, we provide the conditions whereby they can actually make their own choice.

The difference is that most people on the streets are not likely to be specifically chosen for a terrorist attack, that cannot be said of politicians.
Furthermore they are also democratically accountable, if you do not think they are doing a good job then you can vote for someone else.

Whilst some politicians are undoubtedly shielded from the effects of crime to a large extent I think that to argue that none of them can understand or empathise with it is an unfair generalisation, nor do I believe that throwing them all 'into the lions den' if you will, is going to achieve anything.

Actually we do not "dictate" the rulers of another country, we provide the conditions whereby they can actually make their own choice.

So they can have who ever they want to rule their country as long as we agree they're okay. Hmmm


The difference is that most people on the streets are not likely to be specifically chosen for a terrorist attack, that cannot be said of politicians.
Furthermore they are also democratically accountable, if you do not think they are doing a good job then you can vote for someone else.

Tell that to the families of the few thousand people who died in the twin towers, or maybe the hundreds that were gassed in the Japanese subway, hell why not even tell all the palestinians that die by suicide bombers on buses, maybe even the holiday makers that died in the club in bali? Terrorists target us every day, far more than politicians.

I don't vote Labour and never will, anyone old enough to remember their promises when they came into power will know that they've acheived nothing. I can honestly say this country has got worse in the last few years. Anyway, I could go on for ages about how theres less police now and all they do is add spin and change procedures so they can fiddle figures AND how they make the south of england subsidise the north so they can keep their core voters happy.

Hopefully people will wake up before the next elections and realise just how crap and expensive Labour are.

Actually we do not "dictate" the rulers of another country, we provide the conditions whereby they can actually make their own choice.

So they can have who ever they want to rule their country as long as we agree they're okay. Hmmm


The difference is that most people on the streets are not likely to be specifically chosen for a terrorist attack, that cannot be said of politicians.
Furthermore they are also democratically accountable, if you do not think they are doing a good job then you can vote for someone else.

Tell that to the families of the few thousand people who died in the twin towers, or maybe the hundreds that were gassed in the Japanese subway, hell why not even tell all the palestinians that die by suicide bombers on buses, maybe even the holiday makers that died in the club in bali? Terrorists target us every day, far more than politicians.

I don't vote Labour and never will, anyone old enough to remember their promises when they came into power will know that they've acheived nothing. I can honestly say this country has got worse in the last few years. Anyway, I could go on for ages about how theres less police now and all they do is add spin and change procedures so they can fiddle figures AND how they make the south of england subsidise the north so they can keep their core voters happy.

Hopefully people will wake up before the next elections and realise just how crap and expensive Labour are.

Actually the idea is that they have elections and can choose whoever they want to govern them. My point is not that people on the streets are immune to terrorist attacks but rather than "Joe Public" is unlikely to be SPECIFICALLY chosen for an attack, unlike the leader of our country who is clearly more likely to be chosen as a target.

As for Labour, I think that all in all they've done a good job since coming to office and that most of the bad press they receive is fallout from Iraq.

Lets make a list:

Strong economy,
Low unemployment (4.5%)
An improving health and education system (according to most independent studies).
Taxes may have increased but as a percentage of income in real terms they have fallen for most people.
More police officers now than ever before.

Furthermore I agree with the general Labour ideology of using market forces, targets, and private sector management to deliver improvements in the public services, I support the idea of closer integration with Europe and generally tend to think of Blair as a good Prime Minister character wise. There are many things that I disagree profoundly with him on (his foreign policy for one), but I see the positives as vastly outweighing the negatives.

Am I the only one here that remembers the abseiling lesbians incident in the House of Lords?

Nope:)

Am I the only one here that remembers the abseiling lesbians incident in the House of Lords?

Nope:)

No I remember that :P

Nice to see that Howard and Blair can stay calm in a crisis though when TB joked to MH that he didn't arrange the distraction and MH replied that for once he believed him!

:twisted:

Nice to see that Howard and Blair can stay calm in a crisis though when TB joked to MH that he didn't arrange the distraction and MH replied that for once he believed him!

:twisted:

Funnier by far was watching MPs galloping incontinently out the exits -- depsite the security protocols stating that they all had to remain inside for possible decontamination. What if it had been anthrax? I'm used to being nauseated by our politicians, but I draw the line at being infected by them.

My point is not that people on the streets are immune to terrorist attacks but rather than "Joe Public" is unlikely to be SPECIFICALLY chosen for an attack, unlike the leader of our country who is clearly more likely to be chosen as a target.

Have we forgotten the IRA already?

Actually the idea is that they have elections and can choose whoever they want to govern them.

No, they can't. They can choose between people who want to be in a democratic, pro-western government. None of the radical clerics or anti-western leaders have a chance of getting into power while America and Britain are in the background.

Good! Blair is a prat

My point is not that people on the streets are immune to terrorist attacks but rather than "Joe Public" is unlikely to be SPECIFICALLY chosen for an attack, unlike the leader of our country who is clearly more likely to be chosen as a target.

Have we forgotten the IRA already?

I don't see what you're getting at, are you agreeing with me and referring to the fact that the IRA attempted to assassinate Margaret Thatcher or are you getting at something else?

My point is not that people on the streets are immune to terrorist attacks but rather than "Joe Public" is unlikely to be SPECIFICALLY chosen for an attack, unlike the leader of our country who is clearly more likely to be chosen as a target.

Have we forgotten the IRA already?

I don't see what you're getting at, are you agreeing with me and referring to the fact that the IRA attempted to assassinate Margaret Thatcher or are you getting at something else?

Actually the idea is that they have elections and can choose whoever they want to govern them.

No, they can't. They can choose between people who want to be in a democratic, pro-western government. None of the radical clerics or anti-western leaders have a chance of getting into power while America and Britain are in the background.


Lol - well obviously they can only choose between people who favour democracy, otherwise they would not be taking part in a democratic election and no such choice would be available. For me the only legitimate government is one that is consented to by the people whom it will rule, otherwise the power of government has no moral or legal basis by which it can operate.

As for an anti-western government being unavailable, I suppose it is possible that the UK and the US will prevent such a situation from coming about, but the purpose of democracy and one of the benefits of us being there is that the Iraqi people get to decide who governs them and even if that process is slightly undermine it is still a significant change for the better.

Which is not an attempt to justify the war per se but to acknowledge that some good will come out of it.