The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
OK, here in Scotland we have our very own toy parliament. Yesterday it had two votes on Iraq. The first was a motion supporting Tony Blair's line: no need for UN endorsement, Saddam evil etc etc. It was passed by 67 votes to 51 with three abstensions. Pretty close, especially compared to Westminster. The second motion was proposed by the Scottish Socialist Party - it condemned war altogether, saying there was no moral, military or humanitarian justification for a military campaign. That motion was defeated by 112 votes to 6, with three abstensions.
Now I've just watched the Scottish news which featured a public opinion poll: only 13% of people would support a war without UN backing; 34% oppose war altogether.
I'm not arguing for or against war on Iraq here - I just want to know why politicians seem utterly incapable of representing public opinion. Isn't it supposed to be their job?
Now I've just watched the Scottish news which featured a public opinion poll: only 13% of people would support a war without UN backing; 34% oppose war altogether.
I'm not arguing for or against war on Iraq here - I just want to know why politicians seem utterly incapable of representing public opinion. Isn't it supposed to be their job?
My local paper is the wonder 'East Kilbride News'.
Half of it involves adverts, most of which are for cars. The front page usually consists of a stupid old woman complaining about a fence. It's so obvious when taking the picture they tell them to look as angry as possible.
I've sent a few letters in... some consist of me attacking the editors whilst others attack the people in our town. None have been in it... I was devastated when I was beaten by:
" If I see one more broken bin... by Old Betty Evans "
Half of it involves adverts, most of which are for cars. The front page usually consists of a stupid old woman complaining about a fence. It's so obvious when taking the picture they tell them to look as angry as possible.
I've sent a few letters in... some consist of me attacking the editors whilst others attack the people in our town. None have been in it... I was devastated when I was beaten by:
" If I see one more broken bin... by Old Betty Evans "
Your local rag sounds like an intellectual paradise compared to mine. The last letter I read in that particular 'newspaper' was some deranged rant about the terrible dangers that cats pose to babies. Apparently there is some feline plot to gobble up infants the moment their parents turn their back. Had this halfwit thought of replcaing the word 'cat' with 'refugee' then I'm sure the Daily Mail would have paid a handsome fee for a full length article.
Say what you like about Rupert Murdoch: at least he keeps loons like that away from his letters pages.
Say what you like about Rupert Murdoch: at least he keeps loons like that away from his letters pages.
I think the problem is that the public's opinion is, generally ;
*based on what sections of the media tell them, prime candidates are The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express and The Mirror.
*like the wind - changeable at any given moment.
*not always right, and motivated by the wrong reasons - last years "death sentence for peadophiles" is just one example of that, as is the furore around Matthew Kelly, with typical opinions being that he's guilty - yet he received public support at his performance last night. Talking generally, public opinion usually has crap reasons for believing what it does on SOME subjects, in particular, armed conflict. Of the 34% mentioned who opposed war, I wonder how many could have found Iraq on a map without a newspaper graphic ? I read one letter in the local rag today, stating that the USA started the first Gulf War. A prime example this, I believe the Gulf War was initiated by Iraq invading Kuwait, then Iraq's refusal to withdraw. People can argue endlessly about Iraq's weapons being supplied to it by the west, but it comes down to a refusal to withdraw !
*only about 50% of the public, if that, actually vote anyway.
And lastly another person in the local rag pointed out that, as I'm sure many here know, Churchill received the same opposition in the run up to WW2 as Bush and Blair had done now. If the UK had not honoured it's treaty with Poland, then we'd never have found out about Germany manufacturing heavy water, and we all know what failure to destroy that resource could have led to.... as it was, we honoured the treaty, fought, and had to retreat, but we tried, and learned about the heavy water.
I seriously do not think that anyone of the public can truly sit back and say whether war on Iraq is wrong or right, history will determine that. We can only offer our opinions, based on what we know, think we know, guess, and personally believe.
Me ? I think we need to act against Iraq now, but I'm not saying that means bombing everything in sight.
~~Belldandy~~
*based on what sections of the media tell them, prime candidates are The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express and The Mirror.
*like the wind - changeable at any given moment.
*not always right, and motivated by the wrong reasons - last years "death sentence for peadophiles" is just one example of that, as is the furore around Matthew Kelly, with typical opinions being that he's guilty - yet he received public support at his performance last night. Talking generally, public opinion usually has crap reasons for believing what it does on SOME subjects, in particular, armed conflict. Of the 34% mentioned who opposed war, I wonder how many could have found Iraq on a map without a newspaper graphic ? I read one letter in the local rag today, stating that the USA started the first Gulf War. A prime example this, I believe the Gulf War was initiated by Iraq invading Kuwait, then Iraq's refusal to withdraw. People can argue endlessly about Iraq's weapons being supplied to it by the west, but it comes down to a refusal to withdraw !
*only about 50% of the public, if that, actually vote anyway.
And lastly another person in the local rag pointed out that, as I'm sure many here know, Churchill received the same opposition in the run up to WW2 as Bush and Blair had done now. If the UK had not honoured it's treaty with Poland, then we'd never have found out about Germany manufacturing heavy water, and we all know what failure to destroy that resource could have led to.... as it was, we honoured the treaty, fought, and had to retreat, but we tried, and learned about the heavy water.
I seriously do not think that anyone of the public can truly sit back and say whether war on Iraq is wrong or right, history will determine that. We can only offer our opinions, based on what we know, think we know, guess, and personally believe.
Me ? I think we need to act against Iraq now, but I'm not saying that means bombing everything in sight.
~~Belldandy~~
SUNBEDS FOR ALL! PALLID SKIN IS A CAPITALIST RUSE! etc etc
I like Tommy Sheridan so much that I joined his party. I saw him at a debate once, where he almost had some new labour lickspittle in tears. He's like Tony Benn crossed with a foghorn.
I like Tommy Sheridan so much that I joined his party. I saw him at a debate once, where he almost had some new labour lickspittle in tears. He's like Tony Benn crossed with a foghorn.
Tommy Sheriden rules... I watched the news yesterday
SNP... John Swiney the most boring man ever... blah blah
Labour... we're mental... we're going to war... we say the same thing... all of us... clones arrggh
Tory... we're going to support Labour because we're priicks
Lib Dems... we're also boring but don't support Labour which is nice
SSP... WAKE UP AND SMELL THE OIL... etc etc
Nice
SNP... John Swiney the most boring man ever... blah blah
Labour... we're mental... we're going to war... we say the same thing... all of us... clones arrggh
Tory... we're going to support Labour because we're priicks
Lib Dems... we're also boring but don't support Labour which is nice
SSP... WAKE UP AND SMELL THE OIL... etc etc
Nice
It said a lot of things it was going to do but hasn't. Until a decent opposition shows up can't really do anything about it except emmigrate like i will be in August
But when we voted there was nothing in any of the manifestos that said, 'We will follow America into whatever war it starts, regardless of what the public think.'
Mr Lover Man wrote:
give us THE PEOPLE the vote!
You voted in 97 when the people brought New Labour into power and then in 2001 i think it was when they kept them in power. Now we have to live with that decision until the next election.
give us THE PEOPLE the vote!
You voted in 97 when the people brought New Labour into power and then in 2001 i think it was when they kept them in power. Now we have to live with that decision until the next election.
I agree 100%, at the end of the day what ever Tony Blair decides to do, he'll probably be hiding in a bunker somewhere whilst we get blown up by terroists for attacking Iraq. What Tony Blair is forgetting is that we voted him in to do what we want him to do...not what he wants to do, give us THE PEOPLE the vote!
OK, here in Scotland we have our very own toy parliament. Yesterday it had two votes on Iraq. The first was a motion supporting Tony Blair's line: no need for UN endorsement, Saddam evil etc etc. It was passed by 67 votes to 51 with three abstensions. Pretty close, especially compared to Westminster. The second motion was proposed by the Scottish Socialist Party - it condemned war altogether, saying there was no moral, military or humanitarian justification for a military campaign. That motion was defeated by 112 votes to 6, with three abstensions.
Now I've just watched the Scottish news which featured a public opinion poll: only 13% of people would support a war without UN backing; 34% oppose war altogether.
I'm not arguing for or against war on Iraq here - I just want to know why politicians seem utterly incapable of representing public opinion. Isn't it supposed to be their job?
Now I've just watched the Scottish news which featured a public opinion poll: only 13% of people would support a war without UN backing; 34% oppose war altogether.
I'm not arguing for or against war on Iraq here - I just want to know why politicians seem utterly incapable of representing public opinion. Isn't it supposed to be their job?