"Errol Flynn was quite right about the detention camps being erected in the US. Though they are largely secretive, it is believed that in the event of a 'national emergency' hundreds, possibly thousands of Americans who are a 'threat' will be rounded up. It would be like the internment of the Japanese during WWII. Something similar could easily happen here as the government can already extend pre-charge detention under the Civil Contigencies Act of 2004, also in the event of a 'national emergency'. By the way, I'm in no doubt the Communications Data Bill would be an effective tool to monitor political dissent in this country. Contrary to what Miss Smith says I think that the system would be able capture content. There would be no judicial oversight, with GCHQ doing live monitoring. It would be very likely that the information is searched for keywords, NSA-style. We the public are now truly the enemy within.
Posted by Michael | 15.10.08, 14:35 GMT
The sheer contempt with which this government treats the population is staggering. Does Smith seriously think we can't see this for what it is? Does she think that mentioning the word "terrorism" will make us all toe the line? It might work in America, but it DOESN'T work in the UK.
This is a government that is hell-bent on gaining absolute control over the lives of its citizens. The barrage of blatantly Orwellian measures in endless.
We have two choices: stay and fight or get as far away as possible. I'm still undecided, but the rage I feel welling up inside me when these morally-bankrupt, lying, wannabe dictators try to patronise me into giving up my freedoms "because its for my own safety" is quite considerable.
Don't forget people - these f**kers WORK FOR US.
When the state fears its citizens, there is liberty. When citizens fear the state, there is tyranny.
Posted by Tom | 15.10.08, 14:29 GMT
Unlike Dodgy 08:53 GMT, I believe it is the Labour politicians who are pushing for the reductions in our hard earned liberty. This government is the most statist we have had to endure since WW2 and Brown is the most statist PM of all times. He and his henchmen and women really do believe they need to control our lives in every way and Jackboot Smith is one of the most statist. She could have refused to acquiesce in the 42 days detention without charge soon after her appointment, without losing her portfolio, but in stead she revelled in the idea. Every part of the so called counter terrorism legislation can and has been used to enforce the law on non terrorist suspects. Hence Iceland’s funds are impounded, a woman is arrested for reciting the names of dead serviceman and an old man is manhandled out of the Labour Party conference, all using these laws. And I don’t care if other countries have such laws, we don't want them.
Posted by P Stroud | 15.10.08, 10:57 GMT"
Not a happy bunch and those were just some of the latest comments.
1 comment:
Quelling significant opposition is a pre-requisite for any totalitarian State. Put the other way, any country that behaves that way is, by definition, a totalitarian State.
My answer to the question of trust that this article's title poses is: no, I do not trust Labour with my freedoms, never have and never will. Socialists are always totalitarian in the end. Give them time and that's where they end up, just about every time.
Post a Comment