Id Cards

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phil Waters
  • Start date Start date
P

Phil Waters

Guest
There hasn't been a good all-out forum war for a few weeks, so I thought I'd light a wee fire.

If there is so much opposition to these ID Cards, why are Labour still going ahead with the idea? I know Blair got a good result last week, but surely there is enough opposition to warrant a complete review?

Is it worth the proposed amount of money that is being speculated as the cost of bringing them in?

If Labour believe having them will reduce the threat of a terrorist attack, didn't the 9/11 terrorists have their own identities etc? Or even the Madrid bombers?
 
Originally posted by Phil Waters@Jul 4 2005, 12:40 PM
If there is so much opposition to these ID Cards, why are Labour still going ahead with the idea?
Why wouldn't they? Massive opposition didn't stop them going to war under false pretences or banging people up without trial.
 
Oh, I forgot about that.

Why do Labour want the ID Cards? What is the real reason?
 
Why are against the id cards?



Brian
I think people didnt want to go to war in 1939...... :rolleyes:
,in fact when a country want to go to war?
 
We didn't HAVE to invade Iraq, suny, but we did have to honour our agreement to fight Germany if they invaded Poland. Which they did, so we went to war, eventually beating off Teutonic attempts to invade us, too.

We wouldn't be debating ID cards in 2005 if we had not succeeded in keeping the Nazis out, that's for sure. They'd have been mandatory from the moment they tore down the Union Jacks, took over No.10, and imposed martial law for the next decade. They would have identified the country's Jews, homosexuals and other 'deviants', the mad, and the disabled, by shipping them over to Birkenau for termination. The notion of free speech and other forms of self-expression would be viewed as unpatriotic, and we'd all now be marching like good little North Koreans, waving swastikas out of our windows, and singing 'Deutschland Uber Alles'. No-one 'likes' to go to war, but sometimes there really is no choice.

With Iraq, the basis for the invasion, as given out by the USA, the UK, and the few other supporting countries, was a lie. At least with Herr Hitler, you knew why you were fighting.
 
Originally posted by sunybay@Jul 4 2005, 02:31 PM
I think people didnt want to go to war in 1939
A very big majority in the UK did. At that time the Americans didn't as they were a bit isolationist. Spain decided to remain neutral as well.
 
Originally posted by Irish Stamp@Jul 4 2005, 04:16 PM
Why are people all that bothered about it?

If you've nothing to hide then you've nothing to fear.
I'm pretty sure the 9/11 terrorists had perfectly legimate identification documents.

And if it was possible to know, in advance, what they were about to do that day many people had loads to fear...
 
Krizon

I dont have anything against England in the war in 1939, in fact I am in this side against the nazis.


Brian
There were many people in England against Churchill, they didnt want to go to war but in the end common sense prevail and you went.
About Spain, it was not a neutral postion, we had no position after the country destroyed after a civil war.



I agree with Irish Stamp, I dont have a problem when the police stop me and look for drugs or arms in my card, or when going in the street and asked for documentation.


I dont know what is bad for someone for have the Id card.
 
There were many people in England against Churchill, they didnt want to go to war but in the end common sense prevail and you went.

OK, if you want to discuss the history of World War II then we will. Yes, there were appeasers in parliament and in the country as a whole. The first world war had only been over for twenty years and many people had it fresh in their memories. But the majority of British people were uncertain when Chamberlain came back from Munich after Germany's invasion of Czechoslovakia. As krizon says, we had a treaty with the Poles and when Hitler invaded Poland there was massive support behind the government's delivery of an ultimatum to Hitler and, when it was ignored, the declaration of war.

About Spain, it was not a neutral postion, we had no position after the country destroyed after a civil war.

Technically neutral but during the Spanish Civil War Franco's army was often assisted by Germany. Hermann Goering's policy was to use the Spanish Civil War as an arena for trying out the airmen and planes of his new Luftwaffe . The Condor Legion was headed by Wolfram Von Richthofen, the cousin of the near mythical Red Baron of the First World War.

On April 26, 1937, German bombers, operating on behalf of Franco's government, attacked the Basque village of Guernica, which was an open town. The unprovoked attack began at 4:30 pm, the busiest hour of a market day. The streets were jammed with townspeople and peasants from the countryside. Never before in modern warfare had non-combatants been slaughtered in such numbers, and by such means.

The Condor Legion had had many successful missions to prove their accuracy. For example, they succeeded in dropping provisions squarely into the courtyard of the besieged Nationalist city of Alcazar. For the Guernica mission the Condor Legion was equipped with airplanes consisting of three German types, Junkers and Heinkel bombers and Heinkel fighters which were loaded with 3,000 pounds of bombs weighing up to 550 pounds each along with more than 3,000 two-pounder aluminum incendiary projectiles.

From 4:30 pm to 7:45 pm the squadron poured an uncontested, continuous rain of bombs and gun fire on Guernica. Normal procedure would have been to observe the fall of the bombs and record the exact location of their explosion, yet there are no reports of accuracy for this mission. Villagers who were not immediately killed fled to the fields to take refuge, only to be ravaged by plunging machine gun fighters. Approximately 1,700 of Guernica's 5,000 inhabitants were killed or wounded. The fires that engulfed the city burned for three days. Isolated farms as far away as four miles were bombed.

Ostensibly the goal of the assault was hitting a bridge near an important road junction that possibly could be used in the future by Republican forces. Given that the intent was only to hit the bridge, Von Richthofen would have used his Stuka dive bombers, capable of carrying a single bomb weighing 1,000 pounds. Equipped with the latest bomb sights, a Stuka had a high chance of taking out the bridge with one direct hit. Even a near miss would have made a powerful shock wave that, if it did not cause the bridge the bridge to collapse, would doubtless have made it unsafe for traffic.

Although the Condor Legionnaires were the best trained and most experienced airmen of the Luftwaffe, they failed to score a single hit on the bridge, the presumed target. The dubious intent of the mission is evident; it was wanton, man-made holocaust. In 1945 in an American hospital Von Richtofen's diary was recovered. In his diary he states that the "concentrated attack" on Guernica "was the greatest success".

The destruction of Guernica was immortalised in Picasso's painting of the subject.

Now we come to Franco's neutrality during the war. On June 14th 1940, Spanish troops occupied the Tangier in Morocco, hitherto a free city under international control. Franco offered Hitler a Spanish entry into the war, if he would agree to an expansion of the Spanish colonial holdings in Africa (Spain demanded all of French Morocco, parts of Algeria and an expansion of Spanish Guinea). Hitler did not accept these terms.

Then Hitler and Franco met at Hendaye on October 23rd 1940. Here plans were made for a German-Spanish campaign against Gibraltar - code-name "Operation Felix". In February 1941 the Germans suggested that the operation be started but Franco hesitated, pointing out that Spain was not yet ready. Germany soon after launched the Balkans and North Africa campaigns.

When Germany launched the invasion of Russia in June 1941, Franco identified himself with the German cause. He promoted the formation of a volunteer force, the Blue Division (Division Azul), later renamed the Blue Legion (recalled in August 1944). Spain also sent an estimated 100,000 workers to Germany to help keep up her industrial production.

Spain thus obtained a position "neutral" toward Britain and the US, while in an (undeclared) war with the USSR. Stalin decided to accept the situation and not to declare war on Spain. German-Spanish relations were friendly. Vichy France repatriated tens of thousands of Spanish republicans who had sought refuge in France, many of whom went straight to Franco's Labour Camps. A trail of refugees beginning in Vichy France crossed the Pyrenees and Northern Spain, leading to Lisbon, from there the refugees hoped to cross the Atlantic. Spanish authorities did little to interrupt this trail.

In November 1941 US forces landed in French-held North Africa, then late in 1942 the Axis lost the Battle of El Alamein, early in 1943 the Battle of Stalingrad; the invasion of Italy and the Italian armistice followed later that year. Franco's Spain, staunchly pro-German, now moved toward stressing neutrality.

Luckily, neither side was willing to press Spain too much, as Germany was more than busy holding on to it's positions in North Africa and at Stalingrad, and the Allies did not want to see a pressured Spain join the ranks of the Axis. However, the western Allies had no love for Falangist Spain, and the stronger their position became, the more they dictated conditions to Spain.

Spanish losses in World War II are estimated at 12,000 military and 10,000 civilians. After the Civil War had ended early in 1939, the Spanish economy recovered very slowly. Food shortage lasted throughout the war. While the authorities blamed outside factors such as damage caused during the civil war and an extended drought, the main reasons were mismanagement of the economy by a military bureaucracy ignorant of and disinterested in economics, by an ambitious, yet irrealistic policy aiming at autarchy (in imitation of Italy and Germany). The contribution of about 100,000 Spanish workers to fill the gaps in Germany's industrial workforce, in combination with the men enlisted in the Blue Division, may have had an impact, too. Many of the industrial workers with special skills, the technicians and engineers, had been among the supporters of the republic and were regarded with extreme suspicion, and excluded from the decision making process. Thus, the management of Spain's economy was extraordinarily inefficient. Exports suffered from an overvalued Peseta and imports were tightly regulated.

The Franco period was undemocratic with a regime similar to the Italy of Mussolini or the Argentina and Chile of the Generals. There were political prisoners, concentration camps, executions and torture (more at the beginning, fewer at the end). He escaped invasion by the allies in 1945 but was not welcomed as an ally until the height of the Cold War in 1959, when Eisenhower visited and gained American bases in exchange for money and a degree of recognition (like many American allies, his lack of democracy was overlooked).

King Juan Carlos became head of state since 1974, when Franco fell ill. On the death of Franco in 1975 the king, his designated successor, brought about a return to democracy and a parliamentary regime with a constitutional monarchy, one of the most astonishing transitions in European history.

For which we are all grateful, because Spain is a great country.
 
Brian

Very boring subject to be posted here the talking about our civil war.


Most of you write is correct but not complete and the civil war is a very complex theme here.


About our transition,some years ago looked better than does now.
 
My father used to fly Boeing Clippers for BOAC during the war, Lisbon being one of the stopping off places on the tortuous route across the Atlantic.

He's always said that from the treatment he received, and from what other airline's staff (including Germans) told him, the situation was that Portugal was neutral on our side, while Spain was neutral on the Germans' side.
 
ID Cards? Not for me thanks. It is far too Thought Police for me. Not that I am planning on it but I would like the freedom to go into an "Adult" store without the knowledge that that information would then be stored on computer.
 
Do we have to actually pay for the ID Cards? I don't mean indirectly via taxes etc. but I mean literally have to pay upfront for them?
 
And are we supposed to carry these ID Cards on our person at all times? I don't know how to express how strongly I won't be doing that, on this forum.
 
Yes, but that won't be compulsory. You won't get banged up for not carrying your card. Well, unless you look like an arab or, in certain parts of the country, are black...

An interesting thought on the sidelines - there are approximately 4000,000 Irish nationals in the UK (down from over half a million since Charlie Haughey removed tax from thoroughbred breeding and also the Republic started getting hold of EU money - good luck to them) and they are not required by their government to carry identity cards, nor are there any plans for them to do so.
 
Indeed, freedom of movement across the EU will make a mockery of any 'security' benefits brought about by country-specific ID cards.
 
So by the time ID Cards are in effect, there will be people living in Britain, non-British nationals, who will enjoy (in theory) a more liberal existence than I will?
 
I've pretty much cut & pasted my response to the FF thread about ID cards, here. Essentially, I think that ID cards are a good idea but I'm not sure the government have thought through things properly, or given the right reasons for them. I also think that the general feelings against them in Britain are largely because it is such an alien idea to Britons - in most countries in Europe ID cards are mandatory and have been for some time.

I certainly think that the fees that are being speculated upon are utterly ludicrous - it costs £5 to get the mandatory ID card here!! Listing all addresses is also utterly ridiculous - it's clear that the reasons Tony's cronies want to introduce them don't appear to be the right ones - sounds like a big brother, nanny state to me.

Here in Gib & Spain ID cards are mandatory (as they are in many European countries) and they can be used in the same way as passports, in general. I can't use my ID card as a passport though as I'm not a Gib National, otherwise I could. I reckon they could be a good idea (as seen throughout the rest of Europe) IF they were introduced for the right reasons & implemented in the right way. For example, you generally need to produce a Gib card to do a lot of things out here. Before you can register a car in your name or register your kids for school you must have a Gib card (mainly so the Guardia in Spain don't fine you or tow your car off) and many jobs require you to have a Gib card. As the situation is somewha strange here (ie many people live in Spain but work in Gib) you don't need one to register at the doctors BUT you do have to provide proof that you are working in Gib & paying your taxes before you can register. In Spain you can't so much as walk down the street without a Residencia!! (ok, so that's an exaggeration!!) You certainly can't work, buy a car, register at a doctors, go to school or any multitide of other things unless you have a Residencia. As a non-national the Residencia works in much the same way as the ID cards the nationals have but cannot be used in place of a passport. If ID cards were to be used for these reasons I think it would be a good idea - it should take some of the pressure off the NHS for starters if people had to prove they had the right to an operation first by producing an ID card. The same would go for education and similar areas, too.

Unfortunately, this poxy government only seem to be interested in introducing them so they can monitor people's whereabouts & generate some cash for themselves by charging extortionate amounts for them.
 
I agree. What bothers me is how the introduction of ID cards will affect stop and search powers of the police.

If they are allowed to stop and search anyone at anytime and demand to see your ID card, there will be full-scale riot in Scotland.
 
I certainly think that the fees that are being speculated upon are utterly ludicrous - it costs £5 to get the mandatory ID card here!!
The reason for the cost is that they will have fingerprinting and biometric optical reading. As usual the government has been underestimating the cost of this.

Here in Gib & Spain ID cards are mandatory (as they are in many European countries) and they can be used in the same way as passports.
Not if you want to travel outside the EU...
 
Back
Top