UK to shift anti-terror strategy? - Panorama

[Dr Jon]

Crikey!
Even the ex-head of MI5 is saying the government are going to create a police state:

The former head of MI5 has warned the government it risks creating a "police state" by exploiting fears over terrorism to erode civil liberties.

Dame Stella Rimington said in an interview with the Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia that interfering with people's privacy played straight into the hands of terrorists.

"It would be better that the government recognise that there are risks, rather than frightening people in order to be able to pass laws which restrict civil liberties," she said.

link

 

[CyberRose]

Crikey!
Even the ex-head of MI5 is saying the government are going to create a police state: link

I know, while I agree with what she says, it's bloody strange coming from her!

 

[ymu]

More on this from the Guardian.

According to documents seen by the Guardian, the government is planning to move its counterextremism "prevent" strategy from targeting those that promote violent extremism to those that endorse extremist ideas in general but condemn violence. The idea being that there is a "conveyer belt" from people finding extremist ideas appealing to then becoming violent extremists themselves, and that by the government working with non-violent extremists (which the government has apparently been doing) to tackle violent extremists simply legitimises and emboldens the world view of said extremists and hence makes their followers easier prey for the violent extremists. Got it?

But who is an extremist? To provide us with the answer, the state will do your thinking for you and will apparently provide a checklist against which you can tick off the various criteria. Anyone calling for an Islamic state, who believes in Jihad, who thinks sharia law is important or who considers homosexuality to be a sin becomes an extremist. What about just going all the way and extending it to anyone who believes God is the sovereign of the heavens and the earth, and that Islam is his chosen religion? Or maybe it would be easier to just get al-Qaida to draft the manual on "How to categorise every Muslim as an extremist".

 

[danny la rouge]

I think there are limits on free speech, yes.

State imposed? I don't. As Chomsky would say, even Goebbels believed in that kind of 'free speech'.

Anyway, I've now watched the Panorama, and the only two new things in it were very insubstantial and unsubstantiated claims by a "contact". Those claims don't surprise me if true, but actually the journalist couldn't hang a hankie on them, never mind a donkey jacket.

 

[winjer]

Which ironically is when the Confidential Intelligence Unit was set up (1999).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Public_Order_Intelligence_Unit

 

[ymu]

So, we can conclusively see that protesters aren't the major recipients of this legislation!

I just came across this.

It was reported last week that terrorism laws are more used for local government and crowd control than national security.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/01/jacqui-smith-expenses

But I can't track down the report he's referring to. Anyone know?

 

[likesfish]

Why cant we just live and let live?

7/7 some of those fuckwits want to kill and arn't to bothered about living themselves

but the ira killed more and could keep up a sustained campign. fortunatly for us islamic bombers want to pull off bigger and bigger mass killings which are harder to achive than samll bombs all over the shop.
unfortunatly if they do get through the results will be much worse.
the ira would never have contomplated using a dirty bomb or chemical weapons. these guys would.

 

[Barking_Mad]

From the BBC article

"We want to move away from just challenging violent extremism. We now believe that we should challenge people who are against democracy and state institutions",

I keep posting this piece up...........

Over and above the use of violence for a political cause, this framework addresses any action that ‘seeks to change the mind of government’. This significantly widens the definition of ‘terrorism'.

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act 2000 creates a legal framework for the use of surveillance and human operatives to monitor and infiltrate the activities of groups subject to ‘investigation’. It is directed towards those involved with ‘serious crime’ and ‘terrorism’.

Actions, or threats of action, by a group or person are classed as ‘terrorism’ under Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 if:

• the action falls within subsection (2); and
• the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause; and
• the use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public.
• Terrorist action is defined under subsection (2) as action that:

• involves serious violence against a person, or
• involves serious damage to property, or
• endangers a person's life, other than that of the person committing the action, or
• creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
• is designed to seriously interfere with or to seriously disrupt an electronic system.

 

[ymu]

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

Terrorist Scare No. 372 Bollocks

So now the government are training a Stasi of 60,000 selected nutters to spy on potential terrorists. The government is still trailing in the opinion polls, so we have Home Secretary Jacqui Smith taking a break from filling in expense claims on her sister's home, to warn us a terror attack is "Very likely".

Listen up everybody. You have more chance of winning first prize in the National Lottery than you have of being killed by a terrorist. On average, each year in the past decade approximately 150 people drown in their own bath in the UK. On average, each year in the past decade approximately eight people are killed in the UK by terrorists. One death is too many, but it is one of the very least likely ways you might die. Gordon Brown and Jacqui Smith are trying to panic you for political reasons. Your kettle, your stepladder, a kitchen cupboard falling on your head, all much more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Terrorists do exist, but they are much, much less dangerous than your staircase.

Two excellent comments, one from Gerard Mulholland posted on the BBC website:

For 30 years we -under both Labour and Tory governments- combated serious, organised US-financed Irish terrorism.
We lost 3000 civilians and 2000 soldiers.
We had car bombs.
We had truck bombs.
We had pub bombs.
We had shopping-centre bombs.
We had letter-box bombs.
We had shoot-outs.
We had sieges.
We were mortared.
We didn't panic.
Nu-Labour are panic-stricken wimps, stampeded into unbelievable panic.
They stir up fear and dread.
Stupid Al Qa'ida nutters aren't the enemy.
Nu-Labour is.

One from Anticant on this website

I'm old enough to remember the Blitz in WW2, when 40,000 people were killed in a single year. They [my parents' generation] just got on with their lives and said "sod it" when a bomb fell. They didn't scare themselves witless with phantom plots and plotters like this daft lot, who resemble kids at hallowe'en giving themselves cheap thrills with pumpkin bogies.

Yes, there IS a threat - but this government doesn't seem to have the least clue as to what it actually is. They can't see that they are a large part of the problem, not the answer. That is what really scares me.

.