|
28 Feb 05 - 09:15 PM (#1423480) Subject: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton Uk moved even closerto a police state yesterday when Blairs' home sec, Charles Clarke, pushed through new "anti- terror" laws in the House of Commons. These laws , reminiscent of the discredited "internment without trial" in Northern Ireland, mean that people suspected of terrorism can be tagged, subjected to "control orders",or placed under "house arrest". All without any required proof of guilt, or access to charges. These laws are completely at odds with the UK justice system, and the human rights commission. They will undoubtedly be used in the future by UK politicians to stifle protest of any kind , either against foreign warmongering ,or domestic manipulation. Only fools can still believe that we stand for democracy, the illusion is fading by the day...Ake |
|
28 Feb 05 - 09:34 PM (#1423489) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Barry Finn Sorry, it had to be you. Been there & still doing that. Now, welcome to the International Association of Humans Without Rights. Here in the US we can lay claim to starting this up as a world club & not just merely a simple neighborhooded back street gangbanger's garden version of an under organized national crime syndicate. Please, we are far more sophisticated than one would think. We still play that same illusion & it's still tops the charts, go figure. Barry |
|
01 Mar 05 - 09:51 AM (#1423813) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford Trouble is, our system requires very convincing evidence to make a conviction. Many real criminals are not brought to trials by CPS and we accept the additional robberies and even murders as a necessary price to pay. It may be impossible to convict someone of planning a crime in the future. But the future crime is random mass murder. An entirely new threat that our system does not deal with. |
|
01 Mar 05 - 11:00 AM (#1423869) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST "Conspiracy" is a very large umbrella, Keith |
|
01 Mar 05 - 11:11 AM (#1423877) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST The UK has fast been becoming a "Nanny State" for years. Now you reap what you sow when they can implent laws that completely ignore human rights. I suggest a return to being bulldogs instead of poodles. Fight back for a change... |
|
01 Mar 05 - 11:13 AM (#1423880) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST,Fred..., but that's not important The ERA. That would be an interesting concept! |
|
01 Mar 05 - 01:01 PM (#1424000) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton So Keith...You contend that "democracy" is over? |
|
01 Mar 05 - 01:53 PM (#1424082) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Richard Bridge Let's put it this way. Imagine you are subject to a "control order". You are not allowed to know what you are accused of, nor what evidence there may be against you, nor may you choose your own lawyer. Can this possibly be right? While the things you may be suffering may not be as bad as those suffered in Guantanamo bay, the fact that not only are you not presumed innocent until proven guilty but, worse, you are denied the very basics of being able to prove that you are innocent is pretty similar. |
|
01 Mar 05 - 05:12 PM (#1424268) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: MuddleC dear guest, fight back with what exactly? we don't have 'the right to bear arms' and pitch forks aren't easy to come by nowadays... perhaps the 'criminals' can lend us some guns for the day.......... |
|
01 Mar 05 - 05:50 PM (#1424306) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST Try some letters to politicians and newspapers showing you do not support such legislation. If enough of you can stop watching football and Coronation street long enough. Or you could continue the age old tradition of bitching at the local pub and letting them do as they please with your country.... There are many ways to fight without sharp weapons or guns; try a pen first, and votes second. |
|
01 Mar 05 - 06:28 PM (#1424343) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Shanghaiceltic On the bright side, those people under house arrest will be able to claim lower house insurance premiums as there will always be someone at home ;-) I do find it disturbing though that powers could be handed over to the police not the courts to hold someone under house arrest. It is a power that can be easily abused. In countries like Malaysia and Singpore, both democracies (in their way), have the National Security Law which can hold someone under hosue arrest indefinately or in prison indefinately without trial. It has been used by polcitians of those countries to silence opposition. |
|
01 Mar 05 - 06:54 PM (#1424374) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST They did it in Ireland for long enough. It will be interesting to see the reaction here in Blighty, if the shoe is put on the other foot. Be safe everyone |
|
01 Mar 05 - 07:00 PM (#1424379) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: The Shambles My (Labour MP) conducted a survey on ID cards. 1303 were in favour and 199 were not. He sums up his letter. Weighing up your responses and the argument on both side I decided to support this measure. We need to carefully monitor cost and effectiveness. I agree with those who say it won't stop all the determined criminals and terrorists. But it will help stop some crime and it will make it easier to find those that abuse our immigration and asylum laws. On that basis I hope that you will join me in supporting the introduction of ID cards. I have decided to inform him and the local party - that if I wished to support Tory policies I would have voted for the Tories... As I would appear to have done the last time that I voted for him.... I will not make the same mistake again. |
|
01 Mar 05 - 07:14 PM (#1424391) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Richard Bridge I am also alarmed about ID cards. |
|
01 Mar 05 - 08:37 PM (#1424477) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST "We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." -- Ayn Rand- The Nature of Government' |
|
02 Mar 05 - 03:04 AM (#1424636) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford Ake, Democracy is not over, just under threat. Our legal system, balanced as it is to give the benefit of any doubt to the accused, will not be able to convict very often for conspiracy. Some tightening is necessary because of the entirely new circumstances. Democratic pressures have led the Tories to agree to the proposed measures. Remember, there really are people who want to slaughter your loved ones, and are happy to die doing it. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 03:54 AM (#1424660) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Big Al Whittle Lot of strange rhetoric going on here. The darkest period of our history..... My parents grew up on streets where evry single house had someone die of TB, where the major newspapers thought maybe Hitler and Mussolini had about the right idea, if you were born in the forties it was more or less taken for granted that at some time you would have to go and fight in a war as your dad and grandad had to....and as for non conformity reading a poetry book on the bus would have been regarded as a certain sign of being a homosexual, which was illegal. Politicians have to be watched vigilantly. And as guest says organise, promote your views and fight within the democratic system, but lets leave hysteria to the ones who need recruits to fly planes into buildings. It always seems strange to me that there is all this hysterical name calling of politicians on Mudcat. Yet there is never a concrete suggestion for forming some sort of liberal coalition. If you're not sure how its done , check out Woody Guthrie's talking Union Blues, there is a very full description of how to go about it. always the classics have the answer. Howls of rage are all very well if you really are disenfranchised, but you're not . Are you? |
|
02 Mar 05 - 04:15 AM (#1424672) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Lanfranc We have faced threats before, the IRA for example, but without forfeiting our democratic freedoms (in mainland Britain, at least). NI was different, with two armed bunches of criminal thugs facing each other across the sectarian divide. We haven't (yet) got to that stage, and your average white Christian or whatever is not the target (again, yet). But if you're a Muslim or of dusky hue - be afraid, be very afraid! Thin edge of wedge dept. Alan |
|
02 Mar 05 - 04:46 AM (#1424696) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Davetnova 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. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 04:52 AM (#1424702) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Folkiedave Trouble is, our system requires very convincing evidence to make a conviction Try telling that to the Irish people who served long prison sentences whilst completely innocent, or the people who have been wrongly convicted of murder. We can in fact convict people on the flimsiest of evidence - when the police, ths state or in Christie's case the real murderer want to convict them and are prepared to lie, cheat and withhold evidence. I don't trust the judges much but I trust the state even less. Dave Eyre |
|
02 Mar 05 - 04:55 AM (#1424705) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: The Shambles "The Home Office practice now is to bring forward new legislation which is absolutely abhorrent and totally disgraceful in its abuse of civil liberties and then, when there is uproar, relace it with something only slightly less abhorrent and tell us a major concession has been made. The concession being made should provide this House with no comfort". Baroness Kennedy, Labour, human rights barrister. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 05:02 AM (#1424709) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: The Shambles Muslims can expect more 'stop and search'. http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1428402,00.html |
|
02 Mar 05 - 06:09 AM (#1424763) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford Lanfranc, Irish terrorism always sought to minimise casualties and give warnings of bombings. Also they, like criminals were deterred by the likelyhood of being prosecuted after the event, with unlimited time to investigate, and the benefit of evidence from the scene and their movements to and from the scene. None of this applies to the new terrorists who expect to die with their victims. Folkiedave, if the authorities could get away with falsifying evidence, they would not need the new powers. Keith |
|
02 Mar 05 - 06:30 AM (#1424772) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Fibula Mattock Irish terrorism always sought to minimise casualties and give warnings of bombings. wtf...? Tell that to anyone who's lost someone just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. On either side. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 07:11 AM (#1424795) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford Sorry Fibula. you are right of course. My partner's daughter was slightly hurt and deeply affected by the Manchester bomb. Undeniably, the IRA were careless and reckless for the lives of ordinary people. Shame on them. Still, the Islamic terrorists are different in that they seek as many random deaths as possible, and never even try to give a warning. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 08:08 AM (#1424843) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST "your average white Christian or whatever is not the target" tell that to the victims of 9 11 and 3 11 Some of you have your heads firmly up your arses.... or at least buried firmly in the sand Either way, you'll never miss the water till the Thames runs dry |
|
02 Mar 05 - 08:13 AM (#1424848) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST Society is complex. There's problems. There's solutions. Then there's safeguards, so the solutions don't become problems. Sine the rise of international terrorism etc., we've got new problems. This law is a new solution. Now we need a new safegusrd. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 08:25 AM (#1424855) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST,Redhorse at work It's not a new solution, it's an old one. No different to South Africa's "banning orders" and the same justification from the government. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 09:31 AM (#1424919) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford No, that was an undemocratic state with an oppressed majority denied the vote on racial grounds. Our ministers lose their job if they lose the consent of the people. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 01:43 PM (#1425094) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton Personally, I'm more afraid of the machinations of our leaders, than the thought of an attack by Osama or Al Zarkawi. The threat of terrorism was created to a large extent by this goverment by the Iraq debachle, and is now being used as a scare tactic to push through anti human rights legislation, which will be used by future governments to increase their power over the "underclass". The big conflict in the future will be the haves against the have-nots, and ever action taken by Blair and his accomplices should be scrutinised carefully. As has been said many times before, If the Musim fundamentalists wished to attack Britain, either physically or through our economic institutions, no amount of phony legislation would stop them. Neither ID cards or control orders would make any difference at all, the measures are intended for control of you and I ...Ake |
|
02 Mar 05 - 02:48 PM (#1425150) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford Islamic terrorism is a reality and goes back to the early 90's and the first attempt on the WTC, continuing with the embassy bombings, Bali and so on. Does anyone think it would have stopped but for Iraq? There really were training camps in Afghanistan. At least they are no longer churning out infidel killers. What ever you think of politicians, they do not seek an opportunity to slaughter your children. There really are people out there who would. |
|
02 Mar 05 - 03:52 PM (#1425195) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton What Afghanistan is churning out *now*,will kill more of our children than the fundamentalists will!! Herion production has rocketed since the fall of the Taliban. The trail to the West leads through the home of one of our supposed allies, undemocratic Pakistan, until it ends up in the hands of our "democratic" drug barons. If the West was not intent on spreading our idea of democracy, and the worthless culture that goes with it, Muslim fundamentalism would not exist. |
|
03 Mar 05 - 06:51 AM (#1425772) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing They did it in Ireland for long enough. Yup - it didn't work then and it won't work now. Frank L. |
|
03 Mar 05 - 06:55 AM (#1425774) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing 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. |
|
03 Mar 05 - 06:58 AM (#1425775) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing 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. |
|
03 Mar 05 - 07:03 AM (#1425778) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing "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. |
|
03 Mar 05 - 07:25 AM (#1425796) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Piers "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. |
|
03 Mar 05 - 12:43 PM (#1426053) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Blissfully Ignorant 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... |
|
03 Mar 05 - 01:57 PM (#1426105) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford 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 |
|
03 Mar 05 - 05:23 PM (#1426282) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford 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! |
|
03 Mar 05 - 05:47 PM (#1426310) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford 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. |
|
03 Mar 05 - 05:58 PM (#1426325) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Richard Bridge 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. |
|
06 Mar 05 - 01:55 PM (#1428191) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford 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 |
|
06 Mar 05 - 07:46 PM (#1428420) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Big Al Whittle 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 |
|
07 Mar 05 - 03:34 AM (#1428577) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Richard Bridge 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. |
|
07 Mar 05 - 07:19 AM (#1428682) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Wrinkles 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 |
|
07 Mar 05 - 02:57 PM (#1429052) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford 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. |
|
07 Mar 05 - 03:33 PM (#1429078) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Richard Bridge 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! |
|
07 Mar 05 - 05:30 PM (#1429196) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton 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. |
|
07 Mar 05 - 06:47 PM (#1429257) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: GUEST 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? |
|
08 Mar 05 - 07:40 AM (#1429581) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton 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 |
|
08 Mar 05 - 08:23 AM (#1429608) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford 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. |
|
08 Mar 05 - 09:23 AM (#1429655) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford Oh, and your statement that anyone who takes direct action or protests could be defined as a terrorist is just silly. |
|
08 Mar 05 - 11:18 AM (#1429722) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Piers 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. |
|
08 Mar 05 - 01:23 PM (#1429848) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford Fair comment, but still I would like my children to be spared. |
|
08 Mar 05 - 01:28 PM (#1429852) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford 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 ! |
|
08 Mar 05 - 02:50 PM (#1429926) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T 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. |
|
08 Mar 05 - 06:02 PM (#1430042) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Piers 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! |
|
08 Mar 05 - 06:16 PM (#1430047) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Richard Bridge Er- it is the unelected House of Lords that is at present protecting us from undemocratic forces. |
|
09 Mar 05 - 07:20 AM (#1430412) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford 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. |
|
09 Mar 05 - 08:31 AM (#1430475) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Piers 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. |
|
09 Mar 05 - 09:41 AM (#1430538) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing "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 |
|
09 Mar 05 - 09:50 AM (#1430546) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing "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. |
|
09 Mar 05 - 10:00 AM (#1430557) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing 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. |
|
09 Mar 05 - 11:05 AM (#1430625) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Piers 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 |
|
09 Mar 05 - 11:07 AM (#1430629) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Peace "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.) |
|
09 Mar 05 - 11:42 AM (#1430664) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Den 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. |
|
10 Mar 05 - 06:17 AM (#1431413) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton 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 |
|
10 Mar 05 - 09:00 AM (#1431484) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: robomatic 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. |
|
10 Mar 05 - 06:29 PM (#1431892) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing 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. |
|
11 Mar 05 - 04:27 AM (#1432089) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton 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. |
|
11 Mar 05 - 11:51 AM (#1432290) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: EagleWing "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 |
|
12 Mar 05 - 05:42 AM (#1432910) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T 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. |
|
12 Mar 05 - 08:06 AM (#1432962) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton 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 |
|
12 Mar 05 - 05:40 PM (#1433282) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T 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. |
|
12 Mar 05 - 06:13 PM (#1433308) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton 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 |
|
13 Mar 05 - 11:12 AM (#1433652) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T 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. |
|
13 Mar 05 - 12:23 PM (#1433688) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Richard Bridge 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? |
|
13 Mar 05 - 03:21 PM (#1433780) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: robomatic 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. |
|
13 Mar 05 - 03:44 PM (#1433791) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: akenaton "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 |
|
14 Mar 05 - 02:15 PM (#1434536) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T 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. |
|
17 Oct 06 - 04:02 AM (#1861064) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Keith A of Hertford It seems that two of those foreign national terrorist suspects released from prison under control orders have disappeared into the community. |
|
17 Oct 06 - 05:28 AM (#1861108) Subject: RE: BS: UK closer to 'police state' From: Paul Burke 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. |