BS: UK closer to 'police state'

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Paul Burke
Date: 17 Oct 06 - 05:28 AM

They government have more credibility if they'd ever charged them with anything beyond being generally bad sorts, and hadn't been caught out lying about the whole affair so many times that we've got fed up of counting.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Oct 06 - 04:02 AM

It seems that two of those foreign national terrorist suspects released from prison under control orders have disappeared into the community.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Mar 05 - 02:15 PM

I think that may be the answer, Ake. If we can get enough coverage, We'll use OUR WMDs (Weapons of Mass Derision), and laugh the b******s out of power.


"Hahahahaha! Tony couldn't find a gun in an armoury.........Migh just work.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 05 - 03:44 PM

"I don't see the connection between "police state" and Capitalism"


Now there IS a guy with a good sense of humour!!


Not much to laugh about in UK politics at the moment...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Mar 05 - 03:21 PM

I don't see the connection between capitalism and police state. Is it a European thing? ;-)

Robo, who never met a Communist with a good sense of humor. They tended to get executed by their leaders.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Mar 05 - 12:23 PM

The problem I think lies in two things: the "dictatorship of the majority" and the "yah-boo" mentality of modern politics where it is seen as despicable weakness to recognise that an opponent may have a valid point, and even worse to appear to be affected by it.

These are political reflections of a social malaise. But whence that social malaise? Does it seem to be supported by the values lauded in mass entertainment?

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Mar 05 - 11:12 AM

I suppose a piece of crap legislation like this could only ooze on to the statute book at a time when voters have (by lack of political choice) been stunned into a state of total apathy.

I could start a new party tomorrow which was exactly middle of the road (I have always been on the extreme left wing of the Tory Party),
and I would be so far left of Blair & Co, as to be out of their sight. I'd only have Tony Benn to talk to, and, God help me, that seems less of a bad thing every day. At least he knows his left from his right.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 05 - 06:13 PM

Well I dont know Don, the politicians from other parties seem to be acting like politicians....with their eyes firmly on the coming election.

I dont feel that their actions represent any trust in the New Labour Govt

I'm totally amazed by the poor range of opinions on this thread.
One of the most disturbing pieces of legislation in my lifetime, and we only get a handful of posts on the subject.

Its good to see that you and I as representatives of left and right are agreed that this legislation is bad for all of us...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Mar 05 - 05:40 PM

Sorry Ake, but I tend toward the opposite view. The fact that they talked all those (from all parties, including New Labour) who opposed the bill into dropping their objections, based on their promise to review (without any commitment to change) the act, makes me think that there are still too many fools who DO trust them, and believe their lies.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 05 - 08:06 AM

Good post Don....But at least this legislation shows the govt is under pressure on all fronts, and people no longer trust them or believe their lies...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Mar 05 - 05:42 AM

Well, there it is folks, UK IS now a police state. The law has been passed, making it possible for the home secretary, at the stroke of a pen, to remove a person from communication with the rest of the world. He can cut off our phones, send police to search our houses and remove mobile phones, cut us off from the internet (no more posts in that subversive Mudcat forum), electronically tag us to check our movements, place us under curfew, or confine us to our houses.

All this he can do without:- producing evidence, telling us of what we are suspected, or giving us a hearing before a judge. He does not have to caution, charge, try, or convict us.

All of this can be applied for in indefinite period, at the whim of the government.

They tell us that they need these powers for our safety, and that they will be reviewed in a year. That makes me feel so much better, to know that they must look at the act, one year on, say "Seems O.K. to us", and carry on.

Undoubtedly they WILL use this power to target those genuinely suspected of terrorist intentions, and that doesn't particularly bother me. But they COULD use them to suppress UK citizens who openly disagree with their policies, and that bothers me very much.

I seem to remember my father, and my uncles, spending six years of their lives, and in one case giving a life, to prevent this kind of thing becoming a permanent feature of European, and Asian, life.

History holds many examples of what happens when human rights are suppressed, and few, if any, of them suggest that those in power will use that power to benefit any but themselves.

Which country is most likely to welcome political asylum seekers from th UK? I think the time has come when I need to know the answer to that one.

Must go now; someone is knocking loudly on my front door.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: EagleWing
Date: 11 Mar 05 - 11:51 AM

"Surely the use of metaphor is not so uncommon in writing, or here on the literary wastes of mudcat, that it requires explanation even to a couple of latent conservatives."

I understood the metaphor. I had misunderstood what Piers' had said about the electoral method. You misunderstood my motives and, I suspect, will continue to do so.

I am not a conservative (latent or otherwise)- but I can concede that sometimes an apparently conservative view may have some truth. I wish I could believe that Piers' vision of a non-capitalist world could be true because it is similar to my own dream. I'm just a little skeptical about it's coming to pass because I believe that mankind has too many vested interests and because there is always a Stalin or a Thatcher around the corner ready to subvert such a movement.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Mar 05 - 04:27 AM

Surely the use of metaphor is not so uncommon in writing, or here on the literary wastes of mudcat, that it requires explanation even to a couple of latent conservatives.

I have no time at present to illustrate the niceties of metaphor, but suffice to say that the point in question refers to some peoples' desire to destroy their own credibility by attempting to make a pedantic point.

Piers is correct in stating that Capitalism is the major cause of conflict in the world.
I disagree with piers only in the means we use to rid ourselves of this horrendous burden, but siting as you do the failures of the Communist system as an answer to Piers's extremely valid arguments, is at the least disingenuous or at the worst on a par with anything taking place in Tel aviv or Bagdad......Metaphorically speaking.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: EagleWing
Date: 10 Mar 05 - 06:29 PM

The "suicide bombers" on this thread are the usual suspects ....Keith and Frank.

I'd love to know why I am singled out in this way by Akenaton. On this thread I have not particularly taken any side. I queried what appeared to be Piers' particular stand and he has clarified his position. How does this make me a suicide bomber?

Keith was questioned about his assertion that being murdered by terrorists was worse than house arrest by the police. No-one has successfully shown otherwise. I said that on this point I had to agree with him. How does that make me a suicide bomber, Ake?

I also have said that I didn't think that arrest or imprisonment without trial can never be right. Is that where you have a problem with me? Or am I not toeing someone's party line?

How am I a "usual suspect"? Suspected of what? Kindly elucidate!

Frank L.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Mar 05 - 09:00 AM

Speaking on the American so am quite ignorant of just how the UK works (as if I know how the US REALLY works!). Anyhow.

Democracy is always under threat in one way or another. Serves us right for allowing the PEOPLE a voice.

I'm not thrilled with the US administration and all the flagrantly named Patriot Act and Clean Air Initiative. I feel as if I'm being asked to bend over in the name of Jesus. But having said that, our authorities need to look as if they're doing something. It's up to us and our FRIENDs the media to determine if they're really doing that. So far it looks to me as if we had initial weaknesses not on the parts of our laws and existing regulations, but on the role played by our agencies in properly administering those laws, in particular the FBI. Our administration has also seen fit, in the name of ease of communication and rapid response, to create additional organizations of government and layers of bureacracy.

The Patriot Act as I have seen it does not limit our freedoms, it invades our privacy, which is nowhere near as well protected by our (US) written Constitution as a lot of other rights, (such as that of a terrorist to own firearms).

My perception is not that government is going to have too much power, but that the additional databanks of information will be more easily abused by criminals over time.

The English Constitution rests on a body of laws and usages rather than a particular document. Both our societies rely on a kind of momentum of habit and custom.

So I see problems, but not police state problems. I see us all becoming more vulnerable to the very things we are supposed to be guarding against.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Mar 05 - 06:17 AM

Piers...What you say makes excellent sense.

The "suicide bombers" on this thread are the usual suspects ....Keith and Frank.
Sorry about brevity ....Treadmill has to be turned!!...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Den
Date: 09 Mar 05 - 11:42 AM

Wrinkles just wondered why you chose these two examples:

"As to the Irish terrorists always giving warning and not going for as many random casualties as possible; two words; Enniskillin and Omah. No-warning bombs, placed in localites that would only harm random civilians, have been a feature of the NI Troubles since the 70s."

Was it because of the number of people killed as in the Omagh bombing? Or was it becaude these bombs were carried out by Republicans. The PIRA in the former and the Real IRA in the other.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Peace
Date: 09 Mar 05 - 11:07 AM

"RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'"

I just wondered if the British Isles are moving geographically closer to the United States. (And it's early here.)

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Piers
Date: 09 Mar 05 - 11:05 AM

Hi Frank, I am afraid I didn't make myself clear. I do not deprecate democratic means of abolishing capitalism, in fact I am committed to it (and it is a principle of the party I am a member of). What I was trying to say is that political representative democracy doesn't count much toward basic freedom as the majority of the world are without the means of living and thus enslaved to the few that do possess the means of living. The state regulates the capitalist economy on behalf of the capitalists - political parties are dependent on the rich for their funding and the state is dependent on the rich to borrow money from. Parties that try to run capitalism can only ever do this in the interests of capital, this is a true in the west as it was in the USSR or China. Real democracy is about having an equal standing in relation to the means of living.

I do believe in the democratic abolition of capitalism and its state through the existing apparatus, despite it being stacked against us, and I believe, just as capitalism is an integrated world wide system, socialism can be achieved worldwide in, more or less, twinkling of the eye, in historical terms.

I hope thats cleared up my position

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: EagleWing
Date: 09 Mar 05 - 10:00 AM

Piers,

You, of all people, mention brain-washing yet you spout propaganda straight from the system that produced several of the worst police states in modern history. You advocate setting up a non-capitalist society but you deprecate peaceful election as the means. Although you have not stated how it is to be done, it would seem to me that, having rejected elections the only means left are war and terrorism. You also give the impression that you think that the Islamic terrorists would all lay down their arms if the west rejected capitalism. How naive.

Frank L.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: EagleWing
Date: 09 Mar 05 - 09:50 AM

"Which means world peace, which will never exist as long as we have capitalism, so we will have to dismantle capitalism and build a social economy on our own interests.

Let's do it!"

How? By terrorist activity, obviously, since doing it by democratic means will involve persuading a hell of a lot of people who are unconvinced having seen experiments of the kind in the USSR and China.

Frank L.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: EagleWing
Date: 09 Mar 05 - 09:41 AM

"So, Keith, that's "our bad guys are nicer than their bad guys", is it?. I can see how that might be thought to be prejudging the issue."

If "our bad guys" confine suspects to their own homes and "their bad guys" kill their suspects then it would appear to me that Keith is not so far wrong.

Whether being treated as guilty without a trial can ever be right I very much doubt. But house arrest is not quite so nasty as assassination, IMHO.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Piers
Date: 09 Mar 05 - 08:31 AM

Dear Keith, in the real world the police, at the state's behest, prevent hungry people having food, homeless people from having homes and peaceful people from living peacefully. You would rather they did this without the possibility of an open and 'fair' trial which most people, even those reprobates in the Lords, think is indecent.

I can understand that after years of being brainwashed by the capitalist media many people think that the UK parliamentary system is as good as democracy gets, and they may even be grateful that they get to choose whether tweedledum, tweedledee or tweedledoh administers the state.

To me democracy has always been about basic freedom, which is governed by where one stands in relation to not only the necessities of life (food, clothing, shelter, etc) but to economic security and access to those things that enrich life. Compare this to your 'democracy'. The fact is that a very small number of very rich people, people who do not perform any socially-necessary function, own and control the means whereby the rest of the people live and thus those who control the means whereby I live controls my life.

Where's the opportunity to even consider an alternative to this in 'your' democracy?

You may say that if there are people who want to present an alternative to capitalism they have the right to offer their ideas at a general election. In the real world, capitalism and its politicians negate the formula through the cash nexus and their control of the processes of information and opinion forming. To contest a general election in the UK roughly on a par with the big parties of capitalism would need about 25 million pounds

To me democracy is about the necessities of life being under our own control.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Mar 05 - 07:20 AM

Interesting idea Piers, but getting back to the real world;
Yes Richard the second chamber is one of the safeguards in our democratic system. No self respecting Police State would put up with that.
Don, Blair may have lost the trust of many, but he IS out in 2 months unless he wins.
Every voter will have a LibDem candidate who opposed the war and the anti terror laws.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 06:16 PM

Er- it is the unelected House of Lords that is at present protecting us from undemocratic forces.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Piers
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 06:02 PM

Keith said: Fair comment, but still I would like my children to be spared.

Right then, the best way of doing that is obviously to remove the reason that anyone would want to blow up your kids. Which means world peace, which will never exist as long as we have capitalism, so we will have to dismantle capitalism and build a social economy on our own interests.

Let's do it!

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 02:50 PM

Keith,

Toady Blair lost our trust a long time ago, but he's not out, nor likely to be for the next five years.

You might be surprised at how much damage he can do in that time, both here in the UK, and, if he continues his attachment to Dubya's butt, in other countries as well. Safeguards?.......Where?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 01:28 PM

Returning to the premise of the thread, the UK government's plans to extend the powers of detention have today failed to pass the democratic process.
Some Police State !

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 01:23 PM

Fair comment, but still I would like my children to be spared.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Piers
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 11:18 AM

Keith, if you don't want anybody to blow your kids up perhaps you should stop supporting that which might make people want to blow your kids up. You seem to be indignant that after the UK military has blown up children in Arabia, Arabs might want to blow up children in the UK. I'm not taking sides, but the number of deaths caused by UK/USA forces are far in excess of those caused by the arabs.

This is the politics of fear and jingoism created about 'democracy' (patriotic jingoism doesn't have quite the effect these days) which supposedly means that all is as fair as can be. The purpose of which is to keep the working class (on both sides) down. It's effect is that people are taken in by the logic of taking democratic rights away in order to 'save democracy'. It's madness.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 09:23 AM

Oh, and your statement that anyone who takes direct action or protests could be defined as a terrorist is just silly.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 08:23 AM

Ake,
I share much of your contempt for career politicians.
You mention Greenpeace and Friends Of The Earth. I am a member of both.
I believe in democracy and recognise its fragility. I have faith in the people of this country not to allow it to be stolen from us.
We have safeguards. Our media can and do not just criticise but ridicule our leaders. And when they lose our trust they are out.
You talk as if it was lost.
Imagine for a moment that there really are people who would fly planes into buildings, or blow up 200 youngsters at a club, or 200 commuters on a train. Suppose they are well resourced and have knowledge of explosives, poison gas and lethal bacteria. How should our politicians earn their pay? I expect them to take steps to protect my kids. (Do you have kids?) Where there is uncertainty I want them to err on the side of caution.
It is not being made easy for them, nor should it be.
This is new territory. Some change is necessary.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Mar 05 - 07:40 AM

That bloody corpse has been dug up more times on Mudcat,than it was in the graveyard.

What happens to dead bodies dosen't worry me too much.....I'v seen plenty of them....just a bag o' bones.

When I die, I'd be quite happy to be turned into dog food.
         (Fair Trade   dog food of course) .....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Mar 05 - 06:47 PM

But when direct action involves the digging up of the corpse of the mother of the man you're protesting about the lines become blurred surely?

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Mar 05 - 05:30 PM

Keith ....The problem is ,how will they define "terror".

You obviously see the G8 protesters as terrorists.
What about animal cruelty? Genetically modified food? Pro hunting protesters? Anti hunting protesters? Greenpeace? Friends of the Earth

In fact anyone who believes in taking direct action can be labelled a terrorist.

"Democracy" is a wonderful thing so long the people have no chance of influencing government.

When we get uppity and make the bastards squeal thats when the trouble starts
From your posts it seems that a more authoritarian regime will suit you just fine , never mind the lies, the illegal war, the high level corruption, the drug problems, privatisation disasters,ect ect.

Gods in his heaven and alls well with Keith.
Your faith in politicians would be endearing, if it wasn,t so pathetic.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Mar 05 - 03:33 PM

Well, The House of Lords has today done a great deal to justify unelected politicians. Since they don't have to rely on Tony's patronage any more, they can stand up on matters of principle. Nice to see Derry Irvine going into the not content lobby too.

Two to one!

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 05 - 02:57 PM

Wrinkles, I think that you are right about Enniskillen.
There was a warning of the Omah blast, but it was so inaccurate and misleading that police shepherded people towards the device.
I guess that it was thought inflamatory to single out Islamic terror, but it has to be a threat of terror, not just an illegal activity.
Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Wrinkles
Date: 07 Mar 05 - 07:19 AM

The new law also defines Animal Rights and Pro-Life activists as Terrorists, so it's not just aimed at islamic suicide bombers but anyone known to oppose the status quo. All the police have to do is claim they suspect the protester is planing an illegal activity to get an order slapped on them.

As to the Irish terrorists always giving warning and not going for as many random casualties as possible; two words; Enniskillin and Omah.
No-warning bombs, placed in localites that would only harm random civilians, have been a feature of the NI Troubles since the 70s.

Wrinkles

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Mar 05 - 03:34 AM

So, Keith, that's "our bad guys are nicer than their bad guys", is it?. I can see how that might be thought to be prejudging the issue.

I suppose some sort of protective mechanism is necessary. The issue is "What sort"? But I am really quite keen to preserve the distinction between the executive and the judiciary.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Mar 05 - 07:46 PM

well no, you're still not disenfrachised.

Sometimes it seems like that. The Miners. the catholics in Northern Ireland.

You have all the things they would love to have in more repressive regimes.

I think you would be surprised if you started your liberal alliance how many people would join, and how soon you would be taken note of.

there ia a lot of discontent at the moment. Personally speaking I saw too much of Thatcher and her works to want to risk weakening Blair who seems clearly to me the best available in an imperfect world.

however you do have the choice to do something or do nowt

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 05 - 01:55 PM

Richard, I would hate to be wrongly thought to be a terrorist by our security forces. Hopefully my friends would campaign for me and my legal aid lawyers would work for my release from my home.
I would be in a state of terror if accused of being a threat to Islam.
Those guys take no prisoners

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:58 PM

So, Keith, why do we trust the authorities correctly to judge (behind closed doors and without trial) whether someone is a dangerous Islamist, but not the Islamic religious leaders not to decide (behind closed doors and without trail) whether someone has committed an offence against Islam?

Is it simply that religious leaders are more likely to be bad or mad than allegedly non-religious ones, and if so why are we not more worrried about the god-bothering tendencies of the Shrub and Mr B. Liar?

Or should we consider that those who serve capitalism (like those who serve the beliefs usually called religions) may contribute to the reactions against those belief systems?

Some decisions of the Human Rights industry seem pretty potty, but a lot of them seem to be more sense than trusting politicians. What the government(s) are trying to do is to find a way to outflank the rule of law. That is unacceptable.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:47 PM

Oh yes, and the reason it was ruled unlawful to hold foreign nationals in prison with a right to ask at any time to be put on a plane to anywhere, was because it discriminated against foreign nationals.
The government had to either release dangerous people, or extend the power of house arrest to British nationals.

Again, hardly a police state.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:23 PM

Before this thread dies, non UK readers should know this.
This came about because foreign nationals known to the security forces were being held without trial.
This was held to be legal because they were free to leave the country at any time if they chose to.
They did not choose to go because the only countries that would accept them were the ones where they were wanted for terrorist crimes.
Britain will not extradite to countries (including US) where criminals may face death penalty or torture.
Our judiciary (not politicians) ruled this unlawful and the government would have had to release them.
Hardly a police state!

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 01:57 PM

Piers and Akeneaton,
Suppose we agree on how we got here.
The here and now is that my sons, who commute by train to london, are vulnerable to an attack like the train bombs in Milan just before that election.
I hate the idea of internment without trial, and remember that it was counterproductive in NI, but I accept that it has to be done.
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Blissfully Ignorant
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 12:43 PM

He who is willing to sacrifice freedom for security deserves neither freedom nor security....who was it that said that? He was right, anyway...

No, none of this totalitarian bullshit will do anything to stop terrorism. In fact, it may be something of an encouragement...shows it's working, doesn't it? Show's we're all good and scared. Yes, it's being introduced in the interests of population control. Why? Who knows. It's the endless pursuit of power....sane folks like us will never understand it...and no, a large proportion of the population don't give two flying f**ks, because they're too busy watching TV and whinging about irrelevances...and anyway, it's not nice white folks like them who're going to be locked up, is it? Not yet, anyway...

A lot of new legislation, from anti-terrorism to child protection, reads like an Orwellian nightmare. See for yourself...but don't expect to be able to do anything about it. I think it's a little late for that...

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: Piers
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 07:25 AM

"What ever you think of politicians, they do not seek an opportunity to slaughter your children."

Keep repeating: What the enemy do is evil, what we do is not. Four legs good, two legs bad. Baaaaaa!

Whether it's bombs from planes or bombs under cars, the politicians behind them are pursuing the material interest of the class they represent. In this case Bush and Blair on behalf of the western industrial capitalists, Osama bin Laden on behalf of feudal middle eastern oil barons. The Western powers have a long history of slaughtering children, I saw them on TV during the Iraq invasion. To the military of either side slaughtering children is a by product of achieving a political goal, ultimately that is expanding or maintaining the privileged position of a minority of either society.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: EagleWing
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 07:03 AM

"And not only a police state but racist. The papers today have a labour minister telling us that anyone of an islamic appearance will just have to accept that they will be stopped and searched in disproportionate numbers."

Is that really racist? The major threats of international terrorism at the moment seem to be coming from Islamic groups. Are you suggesting that other groups should be stopped and searched just to even things up? The MP, whoever he was, was surely being realistic.

Frank L.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: EagleWing
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 06:58 AM

Howls of rage are all very well if you really are disenfranchised, but you're not . Are you?

You are if you support any party other than the two tory ones.

Our system of voting (first past the post) disenfranchises all other parties.

Frank L.

Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state'
From: EagleWing
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 06:55 AM

Democratic pressures have led the Tories to agree to the proposed measures.

Actually, they are tory measures that were opposed by the Labour party when it was in opposition.

Since we no longer have a labour party, it is not surprising to see the pink tories putting forward blue tory policies.

Frank L.