Off Topic The Politics Thread

Send in the drones.

 

For Farrago? Seconded.

 

Not that I have any sympathy for the scum that were taken out recently (if only there were a hell for them to be dispatched to), but it's a sinister turn for our government to to be taking out its own citizens. Summary execution.

Suicide bombers are often called cowards, but is there anything more cowardly than killing by remote control.

 

Frankly, doesn't bother me at all. The alternative would be to put real people at risk to do it. The cock up is leaving a gap for a legal attack on the decision. I am delighted that we are exporting our jihadis and hope none of them come back unless fully convinced of the catastrophic error of their ways. If some of them get killed, by the British or anyone else, I suppose they still win. It's a death cult after all.

 

It's hard to see a legal justification.

Son of Chilcot.

 

Random bite size chunks of offal from the daily trough of news feed:

- the IRA exists but it doesn't do naughty things. Perhaps. Depending on who you ask.
- A Professor has discovered that the top 10% of people by wealth live longer, better quality lives than everyone else. The gap is smallest in Sweden. He's written a book about it. Groundbreaking!
- the band REM have requested Donald Trump to '**** himself' for using one of their songs on his campaign without asking first. Neil Young has already been forced to make the same request. I suspect there is nothing Trump would like better than to **** himself, if it were physically possible.
- the Archbishop of Canterbury would prefer dying people in pain and huge mental distress struggle on to die an undignified death rather than have the choice of clean, simple, controlled alternative. Interestingly one of his predecessors disagrees. So God hasn't told them the answer. They have been doing this in Oregon since 1997, with none of the fears of the anti crowd realised.
- No Humphreys or Naughtie on the Today programme, I haven't got cross once!

Weather - perhaps rain tomorrow, let's hope Armand Traore doesn't slip and pull a muscle on his way to his car!

 

.

Had this debate at my parents last week. My position is as stated by Stan. They would not have any qualms about killing hundreds if not thousands of innocents. One view put forward was the question of proof. In the case of the so-called poor innocent from Cardiff, he provided it himself by participating in the propaganda video exhorting his brothers to join him. End of debate. The one thing I disagree about is that he has won because he is a follower of a death cult. Really? The propagators of this vile philosophy are not the ones who blow themselves up.

Take that shining example, Jihadi John. Full of bravery cutting up a defenceless prisoner on camera as long as his face is masked. Now that we all know who he is? Has gone into hiding to save his miserable life.

 

Yeah, I threw the death cult thing in without much thought. I suppose it could be argued that their bizarre fixation on martyrdom and the alleged rewards attached to it would make them welcome death, or at least not avoid it.

Probably not a good idea to try to get into their psyche too deeply.

 

Assisted Suicide Deserves a thread of it's own, but out of respect for the mods and drivel proliferation avoidance let's keep it here. Debate in Parliament tomorrow. Let's hope for an overwhelmingly positive hearing, and that the idiotic 'only for the terminally ill with less than 6 months to go' clause is dumped.

what reasons should be allowed other than terminal illness sb

 

Case by case Kiwi, progressive disease that kills you over a lot longer than 6 months being an obvious example, paralysis/loss of function after an accident/stroke that you wouldn't necessarily die from etc etc. The thing is having a choice (and obviously having to satisfy some criteria before exercising it). More tricky, but there is also a group of people who have simply had enough (not through mental illness) and simply want to die while in control - an ex nurse killed herself a few months ago at the age of 70, relatively healthy, entirely rational, having told her friends and family that she was going to do this at a certain time for years , after having cared for the terminally ill professionally.

A very small porportion of people will take the option - the estimate is about 1500 a year in the UK.

The thing is, assisted suicide/'managed death' does take place now in the NHS, but in a messy and covert way. My father had a huge stroke and it was clear immediately that he would not live long (the doctors told us after the brain scan). There was no active treatment, no chance of recovery. But they still tried to get a feeding tube into him. He could not communicate in any way, but had enough about him to tear the tube out whenever they tried to put it in (I think this was an unconscious response to discomfort rather than a real decision). We (his family) all knew he would not have wanted even a partial recovery (any thought of dependence on others horrified him). So tacitly (i.e. nothing was said) he starved to death/dehydrated while the medics made him 'comfortable' (i.e morphine). Took over a week, and was distressing to watch (though that week has to be put in the context of 76 years of a good life, a tiny proportion). I am absolutely certain we would have said yes to a large dose of barbituates for him on day 2 or 3 if it was available.

If even this half cut version gets through I'll be making my 'living will', and might get it tattooed on me somehwere to avoid confusion.

 

not anti or pro myself sb
although things would become clearer should I or a loved 1 be struck down with an illness
but I do remember stories of depressed people heading off to Switzerland to die
fact or fiction I don't know but I hope the proper checks are put in place

 

Big group of people opposite Westminster this morning both on the no and yes side of the debate. Of course most of the no supporters were God botherers but, as SB says, not even they can make their minds up. There is the slippery slope argument and I must admit to having concerns about it being abused. But, at the end of the day, anyone who has had to nurse relatives through terminal illness is likely to have sympathy for the yes cause.

The main thing, of course is that nobody ever wants to have to make such a decision, but on balance provided the relevant safeguards are in place then I don't think you can really argue. You can't subject people to unnecessary suffering - and if there's no chance of a full recovery then it's, by definition, unneccessary in my book.

 

Andy, I think I've found your dream girl

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/wa...tripping-fleeing-refugees-694994.html?ref=yfp

 

There was a very good interview on the news last night with the wife and daughter of a man who went to Dignitas at age 54, because he had a tumour on his spine that could, at any moment, have paralysed him totally. Because the option of making his wishes clear and having a dignified end at or near home as soon as the paralysis struck was not open to him, he decided to go to Switzerland while still able. His family were 'at peace' with his decision, but pointed out that he had potentially lost years of relatively healthy life because of the situation in the UK.

 

On Assisted Dying, I congratulate Lord Falconer and the Labour MP for putting this bill forward. This is something Labour is particularly good at, putting forward a tricky single-issue proposal based on their genuine belief, and then running with it in the face of play-safe conservatism. Minimum wage, and smoking ban were others. Cameron and Osbourne have already come out against the bill. I'm coming to the conclusion that Cameron wants to slide through his premiership with his reputation unblemished from any angle. He didn't want to be the PM to lose Scotland or take Britain out of the EU. He doesn't want assisted dying on his record either.

Of course people should be able to take control of their deaths, as they do with their lives. It's not enough for the "no" campaigners to say that those who want to, can commit suicide by jumping off a bridge or under a tube train. Some are not in the position to do this, and anyway, if someone's life is coming fast to its conclusion or has completely lost it's quality with no chance recovering it, what's wrong with going out on a heavenly cloud of morphine instead of the other sordid alternatives? If the present bill could come in, in its present form, the law will find its own level in preceding years based upon what the public feel happy with.

Finally, on a day when the Catholic church (even under a progressive Pope) finally announces that members of the Catholic Church may divorce rather than annul their marriages... but only if a second marriage does not involve sex , I find it incredibly unhelpful that the Archbishop of Canterbury is urging all MP's to reject the Assisted Dying Bill, despite huge public opinion in favour. It just goes to show what an antiquated and out of touch institution the church is. As for my support for the church, Archbishop's Welby's intervention may be the final nail in the coffin (apologies for the analogy)

 

Rejected by over 200 votes.

Arse. As Goldie says overwhelming public support, even if they thought this bill has technical problems a horrible ivory tower, patronising, 'we will protect you from yourselves' message to send out.

 

And those campaigners I mentioned this morning will probably be celebrating as we type . Great - you are allowed to put your cat, dog or horse down to save it unnecessary suffering yet have to sit and watch your granny, mum, dad or even child suffer horiffically without you, or of course them, having the choice to end it.

 

If someone doesn't want to live they shouldn't have to. Simple as that for me.

 

Yep you are well and truly brain washed … You believe the UK has a foundation I recommend you look at exactly what that foundation is.
The fear you have is programmed. There are terrorists in most places on this planet. Do i care? I take people as who they are when i meet them face to face … the rest is IMO just speculation. I am proud to help anyone if i can, I would never ever use a charity in the UK having worked for many of them in the last 15 years
I believe the powerful governments cause and develop these problems. Cameron is a puppet that's all.
The UK has had very little historically to worry about because we have never faced the hardship that other nations have.

 

Just seen the ugly, twisted faces of some MPs speaking against this in Parliament, the very same ones who will bang on about 'freedom' and 'values'. The vile Fiona Bruce especially prominent with her bile and intolerance (for balance Crispin Blunt, another Tory, was very good speaking for the Bill). They all seem to assume that 2 doctors and a High Court judge will collude with evil family members in 'bullying' people of sound mind with 6 months or less to live into ending their lives a few weeks early.

Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, 5 US states can manage to do this without this bullshit. Of course the objections are a smokescreen, most of the opposition are motivated by a need to impose their version of morality on others.

As assisted suicide/euthanasia remains a criminal act in the UK I look forward to seeing doctors prosecuted for turning of life support systems for those in a persistent vegetative state.

Of course the biggest losers in this are the many Labour MPs who will be looking for a way out later today.