Repealing The Magna Charta pt. II

#1
From the Associated Press:

Home Secretary Charles Clarke announced that the government will be seeking legislation to issue "control orders" restricting the movements and activities of persons within the UK, citizens or aliens, as to whom it professes that there exist "reasonable grounds" to suspect participation in terrorist activity.

It was not clear to me, from the linked report, whether the power to issue these "control orders" is to be conferred upon the criminal courts, the Crown Prosecution Service, or the Home Office.

The enactment could authorize the competent authority, whoever that might be, to order that the putative terrorist:

** is restricted from access to the Internet or other telecommunications.

** is subject to a curfew.

** is electronically "tagged." (With a subcutaneous microprocessor and miniaturized antenna, a la "Digital Angel," perhaps?)

** is subject to house arrest.

"Britain Seeks New Powers In Terror Fight" 26 January 2005

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationw...02110.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines
 
#2
Tell you what....

Why dont we just tag the whole population?

If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear.

:roll:
 
#3
The Magna Charta? Written under duress anyway, You a septic? They like all that bolocks, bits of agreements on bits of paper.
 
#4
Cpl_ripper said:
The Magna Charta? Written under duress anyway, You a septic? They like all that bolocks, bits of agreements on bits of paper.
Just like the Neue Arbeit thievery you love so much - bits of agreements on bits of paper.

Am currently listening to Genesis - Selling England by the Pound. Ironic, eh?
 
#5
I am please that I am not the only person who finds this worrying.

This bunch are turning this country into more of a dictatorship by the day.

If these rules are passed then anyone can be subjected to the "Control Order", with out trial and without evidence that will stand up in court.

Today its terror suspects, tomorrow its the fox hunters , the day after its you.

The problem with laws like these is that they are so easy to expand once on the statute books, with out a vote, and without public consultation.

In my opinion there is no threat that can justify the loss of freedom that is being proposed. :x
 
#6
Why be surprised? Neue Arbeit have shown a consistent line in control-freakery ever since they were elected. Sadly, for lack of a credible alternative, the to**ers are a stick-on certainty for re-election, despite everything. Where are you now, Guy Fawkes, when we need you most? :twisted:
 
#7
yeoman said:
The problem with laws like these is that they are so easy to expand once on the statute books, with out a vote, and without public consultation.

In my opinion there is no threat that can justify the loss of freedom that is being proposed. :x
Amen to that Yeoman. And ultimately of course, it'll rest on the soldiery to enforce this oppressive legislation.
 
#8
yeoman said:
I am please that I am not the only person who finds this worrying.

This bunch are turning this country into more of a dictatorship by the day.

If these rules are passed then anyone can be subjected to the "Control Order", with out trial and without evidence that will stand up in court.

Today its terror suspects, tomorrow its the fox hunters , the day after its you.

The problem with laws like these is that they are so easy to expand once on the statute books, with out a vote, and without public consultation.

In my opinion there is no threat that can justify the loss of freedom that is being proposed. :x
A well known quote referring to the Holocaust:

'First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me.'
Martin Niemöller
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#10
Another quote Yeoman, this one is sadly apt in present day Britain:

"Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
 
#11
Surely the reason for this leglislation is that it is an alternative to indefinite detention for terrorist suspects after the govt were forced to change the law?

If I was Abdullah-The-Terrorist, being tagged at home in front of the TV sounds a lot more liberal than Belmarsh.
 
#12
Unfortunatly the ones telling them who the terrorists are our are beloved secret intelligence services . who when not being infiltred by the russians running off to the media when someone suggests killing gaddfi
and then failing to do it .Messing up the whole wmd thing .getting pissed and lossing laptops . And when anyone sugests they are not doing a good job hide behind official secrets act .They make mod procurment
look competant oh well thats me locked up as a subversive :)
 
#13
Awol

The point is that they are being punished without being tried, regardless of what the punishment is.

I may be old fashioned, but one of the reasons that I joined up was so that things like that did not happen in this country. It seems that we have defeated the Nazis and the Soviets only to throw those hard won freedoms away so that we can be safe.

Safe from who? the terrorists or the state?
 
#14
Hi. have been away for a little while. I feel moved on this topic to point out that the reason these sh1t measures are being proposed is that we as a country cannot return unwanted "citizens" to thier respective countries without falling foul of the good old human rights legislation now in place (you can't send me back I might be killed) [/i]who actually gives a fcuk

If thse people are "held" the circumstances should be investigated then. Suspect means exactly that Suspected of something.

I do not condon what was done to thse people neither do I condone spending millions on keeping them in belmarsh. I is a lot cheaper to put them on a plane back to their country, revoke any visa/citizenship whether full or otherwise, have incontrivertable(?spelling) proof that they are suspect and make it public.

At the end, introduce a more restrictive entry policy similar in nature to Oz/Canada/USA. And instead of just waving the red passport carrier through customs, check every one (increase in employment is a good thing)

RANT,RANT,RANT
STUFF IT ALL BOMB EVERYONE
 
#15
[quote="Oracle
A well known quote referring to the Holocaust:

'First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me.'
Martin Niemöller[/quote]

During GULAG in the Soviet Union's criminal element had a phrase they used with regularity against the "political prisoners" - it was "You Today, Me Tomorrow".

This nonsense must be stopped. The 4 AQ terrorists appear not to be so after their lengthy stay at Guantanamo but for the others in UK at the moment...what happens to them? I'm certainly no milk and water liberal, vote Tory etc etc but where does it stop? With the defeat of Bliar and his gang of sycophantic cronies.
 
#16
Awol said:
Surely the reason for this leglislation is that it is an alternative to indefinite detention for terrorist suspects after the govt were forced to change the law?

If I was Abdullah-The-Terrorist, being tagged at home in front of the TV sounds a lot more liberal than Belmarsh.
Yes. Without having time to get into the rights and wrongs which have been expressed so well by other posters, from the Government's perspective it's a brilliant dual solution both to the legal problem with the original Belmarsh detainees, and in respect of any British citizens recently returned from Guantanamo who, after screening, are considered worthy of further controls on a long-term basis.
 
#17
johnojohnson said:
Hi. have been away for a little while. I feel moved on this topic to point out that the reason these sh1t measures are being proposed is that we as a country cannot return unwanted "citizens" to thier respective countries without falling foul of the good old human rights legislation now in place (you can't send me back I might be killed) [/i]who actually gives a fcuk

If thse people are "held" the circumstances should be investigated then. Suspect means exactly that Suspected of something.

I do not condon what was done to thse people neither do I condone spending millions on keeping them in belmarsh. I is a lot cheaper to put them on a plane back to their country, revoke any visa/citizenship whether full or otherwise, have incontrivertable(?spelling) proof that they are suspect and make it public.

At the end, introduce a more restrictive entry policy similar in nature to Oz/Canada/USA. And instead of just waving the red passport carrier through customs, check every one (increase in employment is a good thing)

RANT,RANT,RANT
STUFF IT ALL BOMB EVERYONE

All well and good Johno, but what do you do when they were (as most of these were) born in the UK? Where do you send them then?
 
#18
Awol said:
johnojohnson said:
Hi. have been away for a little while. I feel moved on this topic to point out that the reason these sh1t measures are being proposed is that we as a country cannot return unwanted "citizens" to thier respective countries without falling foul of the good old human rights legislation now in place (you can't send me back I might be killed) [/i]who actually gives a fcuk

If thse people are "held" the circumstances should be investigated then. Suspect means exactly that Suspected of something.

I do not condon what was done to thse people neither do I condone spending millions on keeping them in belmarsh. I is a lot cheaper to put them on a plane back to their country, revoke any visa/citizenship whether full or otherwise, have incontrivertable(?spelling) proof that they are suspect and make it public.

At the end, introduce a more restrictive entry policy similar in nature to Oz/Canada/USA. And instead of just waving the red passport carrier through customs, check every one (increase in employment is a good thing)

RANT,RANT,RANT
STUFF IT ALL BOMB EVERYONE

All well and good Johno, but what do you do when they were (as most of these were) born in the UK? Where do you send them then?
Chatham,Gillingham,Strood,Aldershot,Camberley If you had to choose between these and slow torture and death in Bongo-Bongo land,you would be on the plane in a shot!!!
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top