New anti-terror plans

Blair has said that "There is no greater civil liberty than to live free from terrorist attack" in defence of these new plans to let MPs (rather than judges) determine who is a terror suspect and limit their freedoms; do people agree with this statement and have any more general thoughts?

I'll add mine after a few of yours, though this quote by Benjamin Franklin seems relevant: "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"

No, this is the mis-use of fear. Westeners like us are in the
grip of fear. Here in USA have the terror alert color
chart. It is always on orange, there may be an attack, some time,
some place...

Now goverment is slipping things like this under the radar. The
patriot act gives the government a back door into every american's
life. If you join a pro islam foundation you are placed on 'the
list' if you are on the list the government can freeze funds, tap your
house, imprison you indefenatly. I knew a man who was part of a
gay rights foundation and he was placed on the list.

That quote says it all. As we allow ourselfs to feel safe by
giving up liberty we open a back door for other evils to sneak in
through.

sometimes you just have to wait for at least one bad incident to occur,
to prove its going to happen. /me pokes iraq war.... & the "WMD" -
I think I would have felt safer waiting for something to happen lol...

its all just electoral crap basically, fair 'uff in some places like
the US it works, taking a tough stance and all that, I dont think its
doing blair any favours though.

No, this is the mis-use of fear. Westeners like us are in the
grip of fear. Here in USA have the terror alert color
chart. It is always on orange, there may be an attack, some time,
some place...

Now goverment is slipping things like this under the radar. The
patriot act gives the government a back door into every american's
life. If you join a pro islam foundation you are placed on 'the
list' if you are on the list the government can freeze funds, tap your
house, imprison you indefenatly. I knew a man who was part of a
gay rights foundation and he was placed on the list.

That quote says it all. As we allow ourselfs to feel safe by
giving up liberty we open a back door for other evils to sneak in
through.

I agree, the irrational fear makes goverments take fatal decisions and
the ppl don't complain becouse their all winded up by fear. "It doesn't
matter that i have 4 security cameras in my kitchen, as long as im
safe..."

Don't let yourself get blinded by the media's fear!!

Gahhh!!! LIVE FROM NATIONAL THREAT WARNING SYSTEM!!!



:razz:

Blair can stay out of my life. Terrorists thrive on fear, Blair is handing the entire nation to them.

I find it incredibly disturbing that the Americans who gloat over everyone else about their "freedoms" and their "rights" are having them stripped daily yet don't care because it's "to fight terror". Uhuh. Scaring people into bending over and taking it up the arse from the government is completely different to having a few bomb threats every now and again.

As far as I understood it, hasn't The House of Lords and Attorney Generals (etc etc) put a stop to the worst of the liberty breaking powers they were employing before.

That's put really badly, but yesterday I was watching the PMQ's live, and it seems the Govt. has had to make a bit of a climb down over their anti terror stance they were pushing before. The length of time they can detain a suspect without trial/"real" charges has been reduced or axed altogether.

TBH, anything that pertains to this won't be an infringement of our civil liberties. This particular "Labour" Government is too soft hearted to detain even real criminals for fear of breaking THEIR rights, so I don't think a 5 minute hash out of laws used to detain suspected foreign militants is even going to touch our lives in the slightest. Sometimes it's hard to see what's really IMPORTANT for over the top wooly minded liberalism.

The whole counter arguments smack of the ID card debate and attached fiasco - people cry about losing their civil liberties when in reality they'll only lose them if they're canvassing for Ansar Al Islam or running a militant mosque out of whatsit Green in London.

The whole exercise into anti-terror measures/ID cards smacks of wasting money and time, and scaremongering voters with a deep rooted fear of Islam in turning out to vote. The likelihood of an attack on Britain is minimal considering we're a hotbed for fund raising activities and distribution of radical "jihad" ideas throughout Europe.

We should place more trust in our security services, they managed to thwart most of the IRA attacks and get hold of the more prolific members and have bucketloads more experience than similar organisations in the USA. For me, the threat of terrorism just doesn't wash. It's Blair taking the official lapdog line to appease Bush and use fear to win himself another term in totalitarianesque power.

Bleh, incoherent ramble but I think you see what i'm driving at. Oh, and agreed - it shouldn't an MP's decision (ie Charles Clarke - have you seen his ears?!) to detain people if they decide to go ahead with the new rules.

The principle is good (immediate decision rather than attempt the chocked courts), but these dealings should be left to MI5/Mi6/other spooks. They know what to do, not the stuffed suit rhetoric machine of Blair and his c**kend cronies.

(Oh, for your answer - Yes, I agree with curtailing peoples freedoms if theyre a suspected terrorist. Same goes for the social underclasses, they should all be interned and put into forced labour or something equally fitting for their apparent lack of respect for the law and social responsibility)

Being hard line is sometimes necessary.

i dunno if this is off topic or not.

as far as us little people are concerned, the only noticeable difference between "before the trade towers" and "after" is the prices of domestic products such as petrol and foods.

this whole business about terrorism only effect my pocketbook, my life in general is absolutely the same as it was prior to the TT incident.

if i didn't know better, i would swear it was just a ploy to squeeze more from my wallet. :sad:

Sounds like a crufew to me. There was some tension here aswell when the
posibility of an NBC weapon to be detonated here was brought to public
attention. Pretty soon, they'll do something like that over here too.

But Gwil, you don't seem to justify why it should be down to MPs who's arrested without trial.

Anyway, I do not see how these rules will help in anyway. If the Government is aware that someone is up to something, they should do what they've had to do for the last thousand years- gather the evidence, and then arrest them before they do something based on that evidence. Fine, if we need 'closed courts' or to be able to use phone taps in trials, go for it, but I think putting this in the hands of MPs is wrong. This, along with ID cards, will not prevent terrorism in any kind of way and is simply short-sighted and stupid (typical of the Labour government)

I don't think it should be, that's why :biggrin: It should realistically be down to a dedicated panel (not the full Crown Court) or undercover "police" organisation.

In all honesty I don't think issues like this should be aired in public TBH - as it incites fear for normal people, and good excuses for racists to attack Asians, or terrorists to attack us. This view however doesn't fit into democratic ideas, and "accountability" (read - culture of passing the buck/blaming someone/thing else).

MP's shouldn't be allowed anywhere near decisions like that - ESPECIALLY based on the fact that the current guy doing it (Home Secretary) was just a few months ago, Education Secretary. That touches on a bigger issue of people being put in positions theyre unqualified for/out of touch with reality, but MP's should most definately NOT be allowed to take the decision.

Freedom, free speech and liberty are IMPORTANT elements of society, but when they cause problems like this to become choked up in a world of bureacracy, panels, boards, review boards, clearance officers etc etc, then we are looking at new problems.

Can't see the woods for red tape. Democracy and freedom is far from infallible for creating an efficient and effective society and government.

It's the culture of politics though Lep, sadly - we have stagnated with change because knee jerk reactions like this, along with the attitude of "SOCIAL PROBLEM SIR, SHALL WE THROW MONEY AT IT?!" just means that problems and issues are left to fester and get worse, because people are afraid of change, or the ramifications of implementing bold new ideas into our country, our world.

it's little more than rhetoric for the sake of being seen to be doing something, and catching the average Joe who doesn't really understand how society works but still bumbles on.

Playing on fear and racism to extend their worthless terms in Government is dirty tricks indeed..

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Gwil</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>It's the culture of politics though Lep, sadly - we have stagnated with change because knee jerk reactions like this, along with the attitude of "SOCIAL PROBLEM SIR, SHALL WE THROW MONEY AT IT?!" just means that problems and issues are left to fester and get worse, because people are afraid of change, or the ramifications of implementing bold new ideas into our country, our world.

it's little more than rhetoric for the sake of being seen to be doing something, and catching the average Joe who doesn't really understand how society works but still bumbles on.

Playing on fear and racism to extend their worthless terms in Government is dirty tricks indeed.. </DIV></DIV>
i agree. It's like putting a band-aid on a malignant tumor.
+orph, I agree. in my town gas prices rose to $3.50 the day of the TT incident.

If you would just let the goverment extract the info needed and then
let them spend 28 cents on everyone at gitmo with out crying about the
rights the prisoners have under the constitution or geneva convention...

(they are protected by neither)

... some of this crap would just go away. :smile:

(guess who i voted for)

After the 9-11 attack americans relized that they were not as secure as they thought they were. This is the perfect time for any government to take power. I don't agree with the patriot act at all. If anyone has seen the will smith movie about the government being after him then you know what im talking about (although the senario is highly unlikely). The question is who really has the right to choose who is a potential terrorist or not? The answer is simple: No one. The real way to tell is like lep said:

they should do what they've had to do for the last thousand years- gather the evidence, and then arrest them before they do something based on that evidence.

They should gather evidence without invading peoples lives, rather than basing that someone is a potential terrorist based on what group they are in.

Ahh yes the terror alert system, it seems like it should always be on red due to the fact that our american government is sticking their noses in everyones business (eg: the world police "Team America". It is even projected that one day the government will have glass in everyones houses that changes color when a terrorist attack takes place.....what exactly will we do when we see the red? turn on the TV and watch a bunch of clueless reporters report that a car bomb blew up somewhere (its not like we wont do that already :sad: ??), or that a building is on fire....ohhh no stay away....well duh!!

in my town gas prices rose to $3.50 the day of the TT incident.

shesh when gas prices go above 2.00 here people moan and groan

I think the real crime is the use of these new laws to hurt the very
people who vote for them. The patriot act is being used to
squelch any group the government is afraid of. Minority groups
are watched and punished. Its not only Muslim groups either, like
I said before, Gay rights, black rights, etc. They all fall under
the governments microscope.

I think that the top rung of society fears the very people they are
ment to protect with these bills. Actions like this will make
people think twice about supporting gays or muslims. I dont think
there is any excuse for placing some one from the gay rights movment on
a suspected terrorist list...

Ahh yes the terror alert system, it seems like it should always be
on red due to the fact that our american government is sticking their
noses in everyones business (eg: the world police "Team America". It is
even projected that one day the government will have glass in everyones
houses that changes color when a terrorist attack takes place.....what
exactly will we do when we see the red? turn on the TV and watch a
bunch of clueless reporters report that a car bomb blew up somewhere
(its not like we wont do that already :sad: ??), or that a building is on fire....ohhh no stay away....well duh!!

Well, if that's how you want it... :razz:

Ahh yes the terror alert system, it seems like it should always be
on red due to the fact that our american government is sticking their
noses in everyones business (eg: the world police "Team America". It is
even projected that one day the government will have glass in everyones
houses that changes color when a terrorist attack takes place.....what
exactly will we do when we see the red? turn on the TV and watch a
bunch of clueless reporters report that a car bomb blew up somewhere
(its not like we wont do that already :sad: ??), or that a building is on fire....ohhh no stay away....well duh!!

Well, if that's how you want it... :razz:

[pic]

Oh I want it...

<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span>

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting DrGlass</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Westeners like us are in the grip of fear.
</DIV></DIV>
The general public is afraid of a terrorist attack; liberals are afraid of being afraid. Michael Moore paints a nightmare vision of current affairs, and liberals love it, just as they criticize Americans for living in the 'culture of fear' that Moore talks about.

There have been 4 major terror attacks in the past 15 years (correct me
if I'm wrong) One was commited by a man who lived in the woods.
Two were on the same target (early 90's and 2001 attack on the WTC).

For the past 3 years we have been told that an attack will happen some
where at some time (ok I'll admit that is pushing it). The public
is being over loaded with information. We should let law
enforcment do its job like it has been doing for the past however many
years.

I think there is a problem with fear when small towns demand the same
kind of terror pervention money as big cities like New York and Chicago.

And as much as I hate Moore, he has very good points about fear in the
media. Like how murders have gone down in the past 10 years while
reporting of murders has gone up.

funny. terrorist attacks have been happening for eons. only now has it drifted into the 1st world areas enough to be note worthy.

how come no one got all upset when it was happening in Zimbabwe?

anywho's.. i am tired of all this "terror this, and terror that.." :/

I didn't read all the other posts in this topic, however I will apply directly to Leperous.

I very much agree with the statement, however, when a administrative
body (see government) tries to step in and protect it's peoples from
these "terrorists" it causes nothing by problems. If you look at
us here in the United States, 45 days after 9-11 happended, a 318 Page
Law was miraculously passed through our congress attached to 5 or 6
other bills, called the Patriot Act. In the United States, we
have never seen a larger raping of civil liberties then we have with
the Patriot Act.

Thanks to the PA (Patriot Act from here on), law enforcement agencies
have more juristiction then they should ever have. The FBI,
Police, whoever can now get your PRIVATE Medical Records without having
a warrant. I very much agree with Ben Franklins quote, if people
are willing to sell out their Civil Liberties that were given to them
by our forefathers, they deserve NOTHING.

Fact is, no one will ever stop terrorism, no matter what is done.
Trying to throw out a broad umbrella of legislation that covers
everyone, is perhaps the worse thing that can be done.

Here's another quote for ya:

""... God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a
rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The
part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the
importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under
such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the
public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's
rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the
spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them
right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives
lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural
manure."
-- Thomas Jefferson

funny. terrorist attacks have been happening for eons. only now has it drifted into the 1st world areas enough to be note worthy.
how come no one got all upset when it was happening in Zimbabwe?
anywho's.. i am tired of all this "terror this, and terror that.." :/

Orph, more like - without wanting to push the "anti US" sentiment, terrorism has only mattered since it hit the US.

IRA sympathisers in the USA have been funding indiscriminate bombings in Britain and NI for years and years, for another sore point with the American attitude to terrorism

Not to mention the groups in Germany (Red Front), France, Spain (ETA), Greece (November 17th), Israel/Palestine/Lebanon/Syria etc etc that have wreaked havoc sporadically across Europe, Asia and Mesopotamia for the best part of the 20th century.

As for your point about Zimbabwe - hear hear! I note with scorn that the US/UK coalition chalk up their invasion of Iraq as a noble cause to topple Saddam (er, guys, we thought it was WMD and Bin Laden (LMAO - even though they LOATHE! each other). So if you have the time to remove one tyrant, why not one less well armed and perpetrating far worse crimes and with far more arrogance and aloofness.

Robert Mugabe and his crooked racist regime are laughing at us.
We claim that we're on a mission to free opressed peoples everywhere and anywhere, yet tinpot regimes started and initially supported by the US/EU countries across South America and Africa still routinely carry out genocide, opression and so forth.

Sudan, Zimbabwe, Somalia (this place doesn't even HAVE a Government). And hell - we can't label people terrorists with one hand and use the other to offer peace to Gadaffi and the "ex-terrorists" in Tripoli. The whole thing reflects the way US foreign policy operates - do whatever is needed at the time without any way of accounting for how it's going to affect the future.

Shambles, all of it.

Well, I for one have hope for the future- hopefully the internet can be developed into something that can facilitate proper democracy, instead of this silly system we live by now where leaders that perhaps less than half the population actually voted in do pretty much what they want to do in the face of opposition (until election time comes round again). Education and "fairness" is what's needed to sort out what causes terrorism. /nebulous, garbled thoughts

Speaking of the future. :smile:

Personally, I'm not entirely in favour of the new terror plans. They
just seem fairly pointless in places to me: e.g. A suspected terrorist
will have to submit to a search of their house by officials whenever
requested - but don't the police have the ability to issue search
warrants anyway? That's not to say that we shouldn't have any means of
stopping terrorists, but the idea that MPs rather than judges should
handle cases just seems to be breaching the necessary historic divide
between legislative and judiciary.

/2 cents

It's the over centralisation and nanny state approach that "New Labour" seems to thrive on -

"Do as we say, not as we do" and all that jazz.