Obama Thread

All countries kill people who are or are likely to become a problem.

In France, they usually have a car accident.
In Germany they often fall under a train (everyone has their preference).

Ian Fleming created James Bond from his days working in British Counter Intellegence. Bond may have been fictional, but the "Licence to Kill" was not. Fleming knew many of the British operatives who worked in "Wet Affairs" as it was called then.

When Bin Laden was first starting to go nuts, a little cyanide in his Hummus would have done everyone (including Bin Laden) a world of good.
 
Thanks Sum Guy, at least there is someone else here with some brains.

Hussein upset a whole lot more people than H.W. Bush back then and I'm sorry we didn't finish the job that we initially started at that time.

I agree, our media sucks, for more reasons than I can count. But that doesn't make Aljazeera (however you spell it) or the BBC any better. As a matter of fact, BBC is worse than most US media in my opinion. You get the liberal BS about how much harm and how many innocent people are dying, but they actually don't tell you how many were dying daily before then. You are never going to get all the facts from any source of media and you apparently think that whatever media you are getting gives you all and exact factual evidence of the things you are claiming and your apparent hate for America.
 
...Bush decided to invade the country because Hussein upset his daddy
In all fairness to Bush Jr - and there's a phrase I never thought I'd write ;) - there were also the mitigating factors that:
A) Bin Laden was - and is - proving unfortunately difficult to capture. Somebody needed to be attacked, or Bush would have been seen as a failure by any voters who wanted revenge on someone and weren't too bothered it if was the correct person as long as they were from approximately the same area of the world. Note: I'm not criticizing people for wanting revenge, just the idiots who want it indiscriminately.
B) The last invasion of Iraq went fairly well, so there was no reason to suspect it wouldn't this time. If you're going to invade somewhere, why not go for somewhere that's proven relatively easy in the past?
C) Who knows, that black stuff they have under the ground in Iraq might come in useful.
Don't forget, the whole 'they have WMD' lie and pretending Iraq was the next big threat worked on an awful lot of people, at least for a while.

I watched one of those lazy man-on-the-street segments on a news program from New York last week. I don't know how many people they had to interview before they found them, but at least two of those stopped thought that Sadam Hussein was the one who planned the Twin Towers attack and another one thought that Hussein and Bin Laden were working together, as opposed to having drastically conflicting beliefs. If people believe either of those things, then the invasion of Iraq must seem perfectly logical.
 
So that's K..E..N..H..I..G..G

Oh, you'll be sorry when the secret BBC police come a'knocking :D

Do they ride in the tv detector vans ; :p

Licence fee enforcement
TV Detector vans have in the past featured heavily in TV Licensing advertising and literature, implying that secret technology capable of detecting signals from operating TV sets is employed[21]. Such technology used in conjunction with targeted advertising acts as a deterrent: its use may make it easier for TV Licensing agents to establish that an offence is likely to be taking place but they would still need to secure further evidence for successful prosecution[22]. Furthermore, the use of detection equipment is restricted by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act of 2000[23].

The main method of detecting evaders is through the use of a database system known as LASSY, which contains 28 million[23] addresses in the UK. Letters and agents from Capita, referred to as "enforcement officers" or "enquiry officers", are routinely sent to every address in the database that is recorded as not having a TV licence.

The initial contact with occupants of addresses for which a current licence has not been issued is by letter. The only methods by which an occupant can reply is in writing or by telephone. If a business or household does not require a TV licence, TV Licensing will request written confirmation of this, even though the information is not required in law.[24]

If no licence is purchased then "enforcement officers" will make unannounced visits to the address on a somewhat periodic basis. Approximately three million such visits were made during the year 2005-6[23]. TV Licensing's agents have no special rights and, like any other member of the public, rely on an implied right of access to reach the front door. The occupants of a visited property may deny an agent entry to the premises without cause and are under no obligation to answer any questions or enter into any conversation. If an agent has reason to believe that a television receiver is being used to receive broadcasts without a licence but is denied entry by the occupants so that (s)he cannot verify this suspicion without trespassing, then (s)he may apply to a magistrate for a search warrant, and in order to obtain one (s)he must have "reasonable grounds" as per UK law.

The law allows a fine of up to £1,000 be imposed on those successfully prosecuted. This figure is frequently quoted in TV Licensing advertising campaigns to maximise deterrence. In reality, magistrates rarely impose the maximum fines allowed to them by law. In 2001, the average fine including costs was £140.83 (slightly more than the cost of a licence).[22] However, in addition to the fine the guilty party will be obliged to purchase a licence at the usual cost.

Capita's approach of paying TV Licensing officers commission for catching evaders has caused scandal in recent years. In 2005, a TV licensing officer was found guilty of forging after he deliberately falsified the confessions of four people to obtain commission payments.[25]

TV Licensing claim that during the year 2005-6, they "reduced estimated evasion to a record low of 4.7%".[23]
 
Yep, so you'll have to make sure it's not one of your days in women's clothing. ;)

Have you been riding shotgun with them and taking a peek as well - :(
 
What the heck is a TV license? Well I suppose that a stupid question, but how about this one: Who's stupid idea was such a thing? Are there any other westponders who find this notion to be absurd?
 
Have you been riding shotgun with them and taking a peek as well - :(
Riding 'truncheon and stern talking-to', you mean?
We have no need for shotguns in the UK.
 
What the heck is a TV license? Well I suppose that a stupid question, but how about this one: Who's stupid idea was such a thing? Are there any other westponders who find this notion to be absurd?


Just another fallacy our cousins have been duped into... like the whole royal thing - :)

If we turn the country over to the left wing long enough we'll be in a similar predicament - :p
 
If we turn the country over to the left wing long enough we'll be in a similar predicament - :p

I agree, but the ensuing privacy infringement seems more in line with the other side. Dem's over-regulate then the Right swoops in to take advantage of the loopholes and r@pe the mobb.

Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was.
 
I agree, but the ensuing privacy infringement seems more in line with the other side. Dem's over-regulate then the Right swoops in to take advantage of the loopholes and r@pe the mobb.

Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was.

The cops can't carry a gun to fight crime but they'll sneak up your street at night and pounce on you for watching leave it to beaver without a license...:P
 
The cops can't carry a gun to fight crime but they'll sneak up your street at night and pounce on you for watching leave it to beaver without a license...:P
Having spent a few years with access to shows like that, I can certainly understand why you'd object to the idea of paying for it.

Strictly speaking, it's only the BBC you pay for access to. The various other channels run commercials - albeit not with the same determination to ruin the flow of a storyline that you get on US channels, so there are a lot less of them.

The ones I object to - there as well as here - are on cable or satellite, where you pay to receive the channel plus you have to put up with commercials.
 
but can i have a TV without accessing the BBC? or am i paying for it whether i use it or not. (unless i submit waiver 666SOB-69 signed and notorized with a stamp of my kidney)
 
but can i have a TV without accessing the BBC? or am i paying for it whether i use it or not.
Supposedly, if you can prove that your TV is unable to receive BBC signals - say, you just use it to watch DVDs or play computer games - you aren't liable for the fee, but that may just be an urban myth (and I have no idea how you'd prove it, anyway :confused:).
 
so your TV must be broken in order to avoid the public television tax. I think I prefer Pledge Week... taxation through guilt...
 
What about cable or dish? Do I still have to pay the bbc bloodsuckers to watch those as well?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom