If you publicly protest anything in the nation that was formerly regarded as Great Britain, you are a "domestic extremist." Don't matter if you have not done anything wrong, for at the cops take the view that you might, someday. And you bear watching. If you attend protests, or even if your car happens to be near one, you will be tracked. And watched by the British secret police.
So be a good little subject, go eat your fish & chips, have a pint and don't worry your little head about anything.
And do be a good little chap and try not to recall that you once were free to speak your mind and to protest. For those days are gone in Britain.
A blog by a "sucker" and a "loser" who served her country in the Navy.
If you're one of the Covidiots who believe that COVID-19 is "just the flu",
that the 2020 election was stolen, or
especially if you supported the 1/6/21 insurrection,
leave now.
Slava Ukraini!
Sunday, October 25, 2009
6 comments:
House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.
In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.
All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.
(Please don't feed the trolls.)
中國詞不評論，冒抹除的風險。僅英語。
COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.
England was such an inspiration to me during the war. ( Well, after the fact, to me. ) A country that could go through the Blitz, and now this.... How sad.
ReplyDeleteNot to sound too much like a conspiracy nut, but how much do we know about the information about any of us in this country? Banks and credit companies have all your finical info. How many secret police type organizations are there in the US? Is anyone listening to your phone calls?
ReplyDeleteHow does the Secret Service know about, follow and detain those who threaten the people they protect? And how do they know you are not one of those people?
Here in this country we are supposed to feel and be free. But there are always limits to freedom. One doesn't get to do just anything they want or might think of. There is social order, an expectation of living in a non violent world. So how far do the police go? I think in the UK and probably here as well, we have gone too far.
Didn't used to be if you have done no wrong you have nothing to worry about? Now just being an actual good citizen can get one in deep shit.
George Orwell may have gotten the date wrong by 25 years, but not the concept.
What a nice balanced view, not.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is true that some sections of the UK Police have overstepped their bounds in policing demonstrations, it is also true to say that many of the demonstrations targetted for surveillance have had elements of extremism involved, often attempting to hijack or take advantage of legitimate peaceful protest.
The Guardian piece barely covers the extreme action taken by animal rights demonstrators against Huntingdon Life Sciences and similar organisations, or the historical use of CND protests as cover for FIS activity (for example Cruisewatch in the 1980s).
There certainly is scope for legitimate environmental protests to be used as an opportunity for more extreme action, and this warrants appropriate Police intervention.
I agree there is scope for better oversight of such activities, but I don't feel that they constitute a Police state nor that the best option would be to abandon surveillance of protests completely.
It's always nice to hear from the "But if you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear" contingent. Pardon my eyeroll.
ReplyDeleteThat kind of shit is coming here, post haste. It started with the Patriot Act, and it's only going to get worse. It doesn't matter which party is in control -- who ever heard of a government giving BACK power once it's been garnered?
Nick, if you haven't realized that blogs are the Internet equivalent of the proverbial stand-on-a-soapbox-and- rant-in-the-town-square, then you truly are unclear on the concept of what a blog is. This blog is my soapbox, I make no pretense at being even-handed.
ReplyDeletePolice forces regard any dissent as dangerous. That seems to come with the job. The UK is taking it to a new level. Attend a protest or park a few times near one and the cops plug you into their computer and start watching you?
Of course, there is the "if you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear" argument that is implicit in your defense. Every police force uses that line, from the NYPD to the FSB. It is the favorite justification of police states.
@misfit I know it's a soapbox, so was surprised to see complaints about my soapbox style riposte; I guess it's true what they say about transatlantic irony :-)
ReplyDeleteTo be clear, I'm not in the "if you've done nothing wrong" contingent, far from it. But I'm equally not in the "all protestors are lovely people who do not warrant any Police attention" contingent. Getting the balance right is difficult.
Huntingdon Life Sciences is a good example. The vast majority of the protestors were reasonable, relatively peaceful and not worthy of investigation. A very small number were directly involved in viscious acts of violence against HLS's staff. Photographic evidence legally collected at the peaceful protests was useful in later prosecutions.
I do agree, as I said, that the UK police have overstepped their bounds, and I also agree that better regulation of such surveillance units may be warranted. But I disagree strongly that the UK is a police state (based on direct personal experience, having lived here nearly forty years, and having attended plenty of protests over the years, and personally been the subject of Police attention)
I stand by my original comments that abandoning such surveillance completely would not be prudent. I agree (as I said in the original comment, but apparently not clearly enough) better oversight would be a good thing.
There's no "nothing to fear" implicit in my comment, I was trying to point out that the situation is not so black and white as the Guardian and your comments make out. Picking the best balance point on the sliding scale is admittedly tricky though.
@crankylitprof: roll your eyes all you want, but please don't try to put words in my mouth