UK is safer from al-Qaeda 'bastards', says security minister The minister responsible for counter-terrorism has said that despite "some very nasty bastards out there who aim to do us harm", government security initiatives have made the UK safer from attacks in recent years. Lord West, the Parliamentary under-secretary for security and counter-terrorism, made the claim in a speech to …
You say, "if we were in a true police state we would not be able to criticise the goverment as openly as many of us are currrently doing."
But even sheep are free to bleat on their way into the abattoir.
Most totalitarian states, police states, etc, have some sort of special freedom, touted as proof that the regime is benign, that they're not tyrannical, etc.
In the Soviet Union, it was the freedom from imperialist and capitalist exploitation. Workers, their families and communities, were free to work for themselves (collectively, of course), rather than having to work for their imperial or capitalist masters. How could it be wrong for the Soviet state to strongly defend that vital freedom from counter-revolutionaries and the like?
In Nazi Germany, it was the simple freedom for the German people to simply be German. What could be wrong with that? It would surely be racist to deny the German people their right to be German! So of course the Nazi state had to defend that right, that freedom to be German from those who would deny the German people their rights, such as Communists and Jews.
There are plenty of other examples, even now, such as North Korea, where the people aren't oppressed, but free from tyranny, capitalist exploitation, etc, so common elsewhere in the world. They even have multi-party elections - how can anyone deny North Korea's democratic?
Here, in the UK, we're obviously free. Unlike in real, proper police states, totalitarian dictatorships, etc, we're free to express disagreement with the government, voice opposition to government policy, vote in elections, form and join political parties, etc, etc.
It's only extremists, terrorists, etc, who have anything to fear. As long as you're not one of them, you have nothing to worry about.
In other words: as long as you stay more or less in line with the mainstream, follow the herd, conform rather than dissent, and remain part of the so-called "law-abiding majority", you're free.
But what counts as "extremism"? "Terrorism"? What comes under "etc"? Icelandic bankers come under at least one of those categories (how useful "etc" is in counter-terror legislation!). And peaceful protesters and journalists have been treated as "domestic extremists" by the police - sorry, I mean ACPO. How much can you deviate from the mainstream before you're regarded as a threat to law and order (just to be on the safe side)?
Letting people continue to exercise enough freedom of political speech to be able to post the many comments above is a very clever way, by the State, of subverting opposition to the emerging totalitarian police state. It means that those who voice warnings about where we're heading are then used as "proof" that the warnings are simply wrong. How very New Labour! How very Orwellian.
Even sheep are free to bleat on their way into the abattoir.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin
I don't want to be 'safe', if that means sacrificing my liberty.
Terrorism is as great a threat to my life as falling out of a tree, or being struck by lightning.
The Home Office are completely, dangerously, mad.
Incidentally to add to the list of people arrested for thought crime, Damian Green. I don't recall a Member of Parliament being arrested in similar circumstances in my life, or in fact, ever in UK history.
"Terrorism is as great a threat to my life as falling out of a tree, or being struck by lightning."
And considerably less of a threat than me being killed by a dangerous driver whilst commuting to work on my motorbike. Maybe we should press the government to enforce greater controls and surveillance upon drivers of Audis and BMWs?
What do you mean, 'not politically expedient?'
I have one (unrestricted, evil grin), which ought to be enough reason. Besides, I have also had a bike for years so I'm the guy who will give you plenty space to pass and who will actually use his mirrors before changing lanes.
However, I think it could be justified to increase controls on Toyotas. You know, the ones that suddenly accelerate for no other reason that not being subject to a congestion charge in central London. What? Did I say anything wrong?
Mine's the one with the S4 keys in the pocket and the large amount of fuel bills..
(and yes, I enjoy being an evil bastard).
They are *not* part of the Police at *all*.
As has been pointed out ACPO is a private limited company.
That being the case if they are *not* an arm of the government then they must file details to be in compliance with the DPA. Which should be subject to FIA request.
ACPO have been the deniable arm of every authoritarian Home Office ministers wet dreams since at least the UK Miners Strike (which by an ironic coincidence *was* in 1984). It's *past* time their legal (or illegal) status was resolved. In detail.
A country isn't either a "police state" or "not a police state". Police state-ness is a matter of degree. There are various tests you can use to measure that degree; and on almost every measure, Britain is much more of a police state than it was in 1999.
i' from Zimbabwe, and i can tell you that living here in england, i have far less freedom and are far more likley to be harassed by authorities for any reason they feel like (or no reason, except for wanting to assert their 'precieved' authority).
for example, i have no plant passports, and my carbon emissions (from breathing) are not licensed...
why the 5% title ?
because of this: (which echoes my sentiments on this whole ridiculous mess).
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/jeremy_clarkson/article7052392.ece
What a daft way to stop your spaniel eating the milkman.
PS. i understand if you can't put this message up, due to the link. but i'll have my say either way.
"That being the case if they are *not* an arm of the government then they must file details to be in compliance with the DPA. Which should be subject to FIA request."
http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch.asp ACPO's registration number is Z127313X
So yeah, they've registered with ICO as data controllers. Look at purposes from 4 onwards.
But the point is that since they are a Ltd CO, they aren't subject to FOI at all, and you can't file a subject access request for your criminal intel data, because it's exempt - it might prejudice the outcome of an investigation, this handy exemption applies to HMRC as well.
Besides, what if it wasn't ? Do you think ACPO really care ? What's ICO going to do about it. Cry ? And they could just say they have nothing on file about an individual. Who's going to know ?
Above the law, but obviously not in any way like the Stasi.
"http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch.asp ACPO's registration number is Z127313X"
Thanks for that. It was exactly what I had in mind.
I note "Family, Lifestyle and Social Circumstances" comes up quite a bit, and presumably the suspect files they are keeping on people would come under "RECIPIENTS OF POLICE SERVICES" no doubt including surveillance and dumping their phone and email records.
I note that the ICO did take action against that nasty blacklisting company in the construction industry a while back.
As to who cares that depends if you think it right that what is basically a private services and consultancy firm is advising (and in some cases setting) Home Office policy is the right way to run a democracy.
"Britain has no equivalent to the Stasi. "
Special Reconnaissance Regiment - excellent shots, it's not easy to shoot somebody in the back of the head without making a hole in the balaclava they were wearing.
"We do not grab people out of their homes in the middle of the night and lock them away indefinitely. "
Internment - Civil Authorities (Special Powers) Act (Northern Ireland)
"No one in Britain gets locked away for thought crimes, only for things they actually do"
Like displaying the wrong kind of flag? - Flags and Emblems (Display) Act (Northern Ireland)
And of course the idea of the army patrolling the streets of a British city to keep people of one religion under control is ridiculous.
-Deep packet inspection of UK internet traffic
-something like 600,000 or 1 million CCTV cameras in Great Britain
-detention for 28 days without charges as long as you can be passed off as a terrorism suspect
-increasing government databases
-retention of DNA evidence belonging to suspects cleared of all charges
-related to DNA retention, the use of the term "yet to be convicted" (instead of "innocent") by high ranking police and Home Office officials in connection with those people in the DNA database but cleared of all charges.
-willingness of the Government to abuse/overreach with terrorism laws. For example, using terrorism legislation to freeze Icelandic bank fundsafter over Icesave accounts (Yeah, you've got to watch out for those sneaky Icelandic banker jihadis!)
-Willingness of local councils and other non-security bureacracies to access those proliferating counter-extremism databases to try to detect various offences that have nothing to do with terrorism and extremism
-Attempts to criminalize "hate speech" directed at religious minorities
That sounds suspiciously like creeping police statism to me!!
...they have to keep most of us alive because we are the slaves that keep their economy moving and the money pouring in.
It's easier to make sure we're all serving the system if they can keep total control over us.
I'm ashamed to say that when looking at a so called terrorist event, i dont think peoples lives are at the forefront of their concerns No, the damage to the economy from the London public transportation bombings that those 5 or 6 misguided fools undertook alone in 2007 were horrible, horrific indeed, but a mere 50 odd people were killed. Not even a dent in a population of our size.
The real damage (in their eyes) was that London's economy ground to a halt for days. People were not going in to work for fear of the asian chap sitting next to him detonating himself.
It's all too much but the thing that bothers me the most is that i dont appear to be able to halt this unstopable train to Police-states-ville.
How do we let them know that we want our freedom back thankyou very much and i'll take me chances with the handfull of terrorists?
You cant do that by voting since you only have two parties to choose from and they both want the same thing- complete power.
It's almost time for a bit of Guy Fawkes style action here i think.
We could do with a constitution as well, only country in the world that does not have one. THat way at least we could do what the americans do and start quoting the constitution every time this nonsense is bought up.
I am surprised there is no mention of the organ grinder that makes the UK monkey dance to this 'Fear the Terrorist' tune. It has:
A police force with guns, diplomatic immunity, and the right to imprison you indefinitely without trial.
A justice system with no presumption of innocence, no right to a jury, and no habeus corpus.
A supreme court which rules that criticism of itself or its bosses is both illegal and blasphemous.
A ruling body that is unelected, unaccountable and effectively hidden from the people.
A sham parliament, whose members have less power than the waiters in a Mafia boss's cafe.
A legal structure that makes the State master of its 500 million people, not the servant that it should be. And it is now in absolute control of Britain.
Yet very few folk seem to grasp the danger posed by the EU; perhaps because the 'Monster" - as Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky calls it - still slumbers, quietly waiting and manipulating until not a shred of legal obstacle remains on its path to the latest manifestation of European totalitarianism.
When a man with Bukovsky's experience sounds the alarm about an authoritarian EU Super-State with an untouchable police force, we should listen. This sort of dictatorship does not suddenly arrive in a flurry of bombs, it creeps out of the shadows, sniffing for prey. First it takes those who threaten it; then those who disobey; then those who oppose; then their families; each step subtly raising the level of what must be accepted 'for the good of the people'.
The British can no longer evict their rulers; they now live in a de facto European dictatorship, whose powerful State Police, with staggering insensitivity, occupy an old Nazi Gestapo HQ. If that was a Freudian Slip rather than a bureaucratic bungle, then I fear we 'ain't seen nuthin' yet'.
Perhaps I should have been more specific. Although we might be heading in that direction I don't think we are a police state in the same mould as say East Germany, North Korea or China. Obviously you can argue this faint praise is in itself damning. It may even be the start of an even more insidious kind of police state.
And I agree with you that the state will often try to maintain at least n veneer of respectability. I do genuinely think (maybe wrongly granted) that we have not reached that level yet and its not too late for us to do something about it. Yes we live in a surveillance society and many of the rights we take for granted are being steadily eroded (e.g. by anti terror laws ripe for abuse). Most of us however are still able to go about our daily lives unmolested. Being free to express disagreement with the government, voice opposition to government policy, vote in elections, form and join political parties is nothing to scoff at when people in other countries are still dying for want of the same.
That is not to say there are no injustices or that its fine because they only happen to marginalised groups. But these should be wake up calls, not an excuse to spread FUD like the media and government do already. Otherwise we're still sheep, just following a different shepherd...
Gaz 2, I agree with both you and your critic. Freedom is relative to what you perceive as free, and that is the problem. A dissident in China may be pleased to reach bedtime with his fingernails intact, but should the British accept that as 'freedom'? Or should they demand vociferously that the authorities be their servants, not their masters? The danger of the EU (and Britain is now just various fragments of some of its regions) is that it is very effective at pretending to be everyone's 'kindly old uncle', busily handing out sweeties to any child that smiles at it. By the time you realise 'kindly old Uncle Euro' is in the toilet with your small son it is a bit late.
And by the time you realise that your freedoms have gone, insidiously eroded by small, emotive increments 'for the safety of our community' it is too late. The Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky said in 2006: "If one million people march on Brussels today these guys will run away to the Bahamas. ... But I do not know what the situation will be tomorrow with a fully fledged Europol staffed by former Stasi ...".
Is it still Bukovsky's today or are we already in his tomorrow? With his experience he knows, perhaps better than most, what a small step it is for an authoritarian state to go from persecuting the 'politically incorrect' (as is now done in the EU) to removing them. It is not the Police in this State we should fear, but their carefully concealed masters.
It may interest you to know that a small training exercise was going on at the same time of the 7/7 bombings. The exercise simulated bombings at the exact three stations hit. At the exact same time.
Reported on Radio 5 Live on the day in an interview with emergency management consultant Peter Power. All this can be looked up & verified. There's even audio of the report.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
