Last week, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner addressed the Reform Club Media Group. Nothing like the 'establishment' sticking together is there? The meeting was conducted under Chatham House rules, which mean that no one attending is supposed to divulge what is said. But one person present was so appalled at Sir Ian's attitude and authoritarian stance that he has revealed to me an alarming - and seemingly off the cuff - remark made by Sir Ian at the event.Sir Ian said the British people should 'brace themselves for a truly appalling act of terror'. He said that following this act of barbarism 'people would be talking quite openly about internment', giving the impression that he would be leading the pro-internment lobby. No doubt he will find a willing supplicant in the tougher than tough Home Secretary John Reid.
My informant thought at first that it really was a throwaway remark but on reflection felt that it couldn't have been made by accident. Well, either that or the Reform Club claret had loosened his tongue.
I haven't even bothered to ring the Met Press Office because I know what they will say. But if this really is the stance Sir Ian is taking then we should be even more worried about our civil liberties than we already are. I'm now even more convinced that the Conservative stance against 90 days detention was right.
93 comments:
Yes, I notice that whenever they want a pat on the back crime is getting better and whenever they want more powers crime is getting worse. Terrorism is a very handy way out of this continuing lie .David Cameron described them as the last unreformed Public Service and I could go on at great length about the many failings of the Met
PLEA ?
Iain I don`t know if you`d take pity but I have started a blog for local Conservatives . Its http://iznewmania.blogspot.com/
I have been playing with it all night.
It is a bit stoneage but can only get better .I don`t do computers.Just mentioning it. If thats ok .. or not ?
What "conspiracy theorists" have been talking about for five years of course. But appalling nonetheless.
"I'm now even more convinced that the Conservative stance against 90 days detention was right."
Let's hope the Tories have the guts to stick with it, even after a "truly appalling act of terror". Certainly internment in Northern Ireland did precious little to prevent 30 years of conflict. I think Sir Ian Blair is about the worst and most dangerous police officer in recent British history. And John Reid is a dismal home secretary. I understand they've dropped any hope of accounting for many of the prisoners who should have been deported and weren't. What a clown show of a government. Why the press and the Opposition aren't holding them accountable on that one beats me.
If there were such an act of "barbarism" there would beno structure for "internment". the Army is too small and the police "service" too weak..............there would be burning mosques and nothing the PC elite could do about it as the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 would be nigh on impossible to enforce............
Men like Blair would be out on their ear - no way will they stay in charge having created much of this shambles in the first place
In other words, I am so crap at leading my police force that although we can shoot an innocent Brazilian electrician seven times in the head, we can't stop a major atrocity so I'll get my defence in first. Wanker.
Just to clarify a popular misapprehension; there is only ONE Chatham House Rule. It is (in full);
"When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed."
So your source is perfectly at liberty to say that internment was discussed, but should have stopped short of saying that the Commissioner was the person discussing it.
The whole point of the Chatham House Rule is to encourage loose tongues, and the discussion of forbidden things, but to give some individual protection to people actually speaking their minds.
A similar convention operates in this blog, under the button marked "Anonymous".
To be sure, the Commissioner was flying a kite. What is unclear from your source (and would have been rather more interesting) is how his audience responded.
With less outrage than we might have hoped, perhaps.
I do wonder if, for example, Jack Straw were to be attacked by people opposed to his views in the same way the Dutch filmmaker and politican were, the government would use the incident to call for the introduction of emeregency powers and the suspension of political and judicial process. I agree wholeheartedly with you that we are at the edge of a very worrying political precipice, with terrorism being used to engineer the overthrow of our democractic society.
On the subject of civil Liberties something that bothers me are the new problems that developing technologies present. I have seen some scary new kit with astonishing capabilities to chat with computers in ways I don’t understand. In medicine we are used to the question “should we” accompanying “could we”. The people that ask these questions about state surveillance are doing an important job for us all .
I think
If theres a threat to this country it comes from people like Sir Ian and his political masters removing our liberties.
I'm not worried about "terrorists" I'm worried about slipping into an authoritarian regime.
Surely these people understand that by changing OUR rights they are giving in to whatever threat they think there is?
When will people wake up to this?
Do you remember Sir David Frost's controversial tv interview with Sir Ian Blair, right in the middle of the May 2005 General Election campaign when he wittered on about the alleged terrorist threat of bubonic plague ?
Of course there will be internment - English people will be interned for getting too excited about being slaughtered by minorities who must always be protected by PC pcs. This is entirely expected.
According to your post Iain, Blair didn't say a new attack could lead to internment, but that it could lead to people openly talking about it.
I doubt we're competent enough to do internment.
Any chance of interning 'Sir' Ian Blair?
Hang on, is this the same Sir Ian that apologises to all and sundry for cops doing their jobs- the PC (and not the PCs') Met Commissioner?!
So the New World Order rolls on.
They must think we're stupid.
Bliar is an idiot who will last preciely five minutes as soon as Bliar has gone.
He is populist an will spout any old drivel that he thinks people will listen to.
Take no notice.
The 90 day thing is an EU derived policy, as I remember. Once Habeas Corpus is sidelined, they will arrest and keep whoever they like as long as they like. Even after 90 days they don't need to bring charges under Corpus Juris, but can go to a Court Hearing and request a longer detention. People have been held for literally years without charge. When charges are brought, there is no assumption of innocence, but the opposite.
Well when the opposition start opposing rather wanting to be part of a ruling elite, the checks and balances can start working again against dangerous insiders like 'Sir' Ian. These titles are not only ridiculous but give the possesor strange ideas
Sir Ian Blair; Sir John Scarlett; the DPP, Ken Macdonald QC (no experience as a prosecutor but a founder of Matrix Chambers): courtiers all. And all will be looking at the latest polls and preparing to spend more time with their roses.
I'm starting an employment agency for New Labour placemen and Jacks-in-office. My business-plan is predicated on there being a huge surge in demand in 2008 or 2009.
Team 'Anyone But Ken' should start another blog - 'Anyone But Sir Ian Blair'.
vlad the impala, how right you are,
this government intends to remain in office, so expect to see more postal (fraudulent) voting and increased powers of arrest and detention (without trial, of course) given to the Stasi police.
They are desperate, have no shame or honour and if this lot is representative democracy then Guy Fawkes was right!!
Well i think it would be a good thing if it brings it all to a head.Lets have it out in the open and sort it out.
It would have been interesting to know from the meeting who they felt would be the ones to be interned, could be rather difficult what with all this "Human Rights" stuff, could prove to be a "nice little earner" for the legal fraternity though, if it ever came about.
Blair should go and go now, preferably on a two for the price of one deal.
Interesting.
There is a difference between arrest on reasonable suspicion and detention without trial. In the latter there may not be any condition precedent for detention. We have of course been here before and so this is nothing new. We interned suspicious Germans during WW2 under the notorious Regulation 18B. A state of affairs that Churchill described as "in the highest degree odious". Then there was the unhappy episode in Northern Ireland where the policy badly backfired, and really did act as the mythical recruiting sergeant for the Republicans. At the same time, we should not overlook how widespread the use of detention without trial was in the dying days of Empire. Arguably the use of internment was instrumental in cracking the Malay rebellion. The problem is that as Singapore shows Acts such as the Internal Security Act remain in use long after the original emergency has passed.
More recently we had the so called 'jail with three walls' under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 for foreign nationals suspected of terrorism but who cannot be deported because of the Soering doctrine. In A v. Home Secretary (2004) the Law Lords 8-1 found that Part IV of the ATCSA was incompatible with Article 5 ECHR (right to liberty) when read with Article 14 (right to equality). Lord Hoffmann went further in an obiter remark and indicated that any form of internment would be incompatible with the ECHR. The Blair government has indicated that it would like to revisit the Soering doctrine. This prevents the deportation or extradition of fugitives or those whose presence is deemed as not conducive to the public good, to jurisdictions where they face the real risk of torture, inhuman treatment or loss of life. HMG intervened recently in the Strasbourg Court arguing that the Soering principle should be departed from. Frankly I can't see the Court being persuaded. It has reaffirmed the principle on numerous occasions including in Chalal where the applicant was a terrorist suspect. Blair has mooted the possibility of repudiating the ECHR and withdrawing from the Council of Europe, only to reapply for membership with a reservation against Article 3 in the immigration context. Quite apart from the political difficulty in doing this, at least in the European context, it is unlikely that such a course of action would be allowed by the Council given that the prohibition on torture is in fact a compelling norm of international law and thus trumps treaties. Of course domestically there is nothing to stop Parliament passing whatever security measures it pleases. Even now Parliament is supreme. Acts specifically stated to applying notwithstanding the HRA or the ECA will do so. If Parliament passes a law which drives a coach and horse through the ECHR then in the UK it is law. Period. Unless, of course, the judiciary have been thinking out loud of late when they question this principle. (eg. Lord Steyn in Jackson: " Nevertheless, the supremacy of Parliament is still the general principle of our constitution. It is a construct of the common law. The judges created this principle. If that is so, it is not unthinkable that circumstances could arise where the courts may have to qualify a principle established on a different hypothesis of constitutionalism." at para 102.)
Yet we know that there are individuals out there with murderous intent. No doubt there will be another attack. (Bio weapons are unlikely, but it is conceivable that a dirty bomb could be manufactured by a third party for a group and then smuggled into the UK.) The problem is for democracies how do we deal with people who a) want to die attacking us b) want to cause maximum damage and death in the process and c) are impossible to detect because they are 'clean skins'. The American solution is Gitmo. Are we ready for that here? Personally, I think that the provisions of the POTA 2005 that impose Control Order are currently the best solution. When coupled to good intelligence lead policing they should be as effective as internment. The problem here is that the High Court has ruled that these are incompatible with the ECHR. Its on appeal so we shall see. But if they are in the end held to be incompatible what can we do with people we suspect are a danger but cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are so? We cannot deport them. We cannot restrict their freedom of movement. We cannot detain them. What can we do? Answers on a postcard please!
Iain - this story is certainly doing its merry away across the blogs and web. You do a great service in publishing it, and I trust I am allowed to place a link onto my blog...
This story demonstrates more clearly than most the danger of this new world of unspoken threats and vague future attacks in which we supposedly live. I am no owl worshipping conspiriloon, but "they" do not make living in this age easy, do they?
"Sir Ian said the British people should 'brace themselves for a truly appalling act of terror'."
What a chilling turn of phrase. If they know something on this scale is being planned (as it indeed was with the multiple-plane bombings recently thwarted) then it should be stopped. Unless perhaps it is not Muslim extremists planning the vile spectacular but some other force? Someone perhaps in high circles in our beloved security establishment? Before you doubt, check out history. Pearl Harbour. The US govt knew and permitted it to ensure entry into the second world war. The Vietnam War. Escalated following the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which is now widely accepted to have been a CIA plot. The Argentine invasion of the Falklands. Followed a meeting between British diplomats and the Argentinians at which they were (falsely and manipulatively) informed we no longer cared about Las Malvinas. Iraq entering Kuwait. Following a meeting between Madelaine Albright and Saddam in which she indicated the US would not intervene if Iraq were to invade.
Now tell us our leaders do not get up to this sort of cynical murderous game playing.
I may be hitting this one out of the stadium, but what really worries me is, what if, because of utter hatred of the lying Blairs, the BBC and a pusillanimous Parliament, and a deep distrust of boy Dave, the Brits voted UKIP or BNP in sufficient numbers to get into office? Would Blair refuse to relinquish office under some imaginative new formula invented by Alastair Campbell?
He'd have to go if the Tories got in. But if people he can present as a "threat to democracy" win the election, would he refuse to go?
If he refused to go, would the Queen sack him?
To everyone who has watched Blair operate in the slimy tunnels of deceit,lies and opportunism which beggars belief for the last 10 years, this is not beyond him. Going on TV to address the nation on "this state of emergency in our democracy" in short, urgent sentences ... God, it is a nightmare scenario and I honestly believe it could happen.
Verity,
If HM believes that Blair no longer commands the confidence of the H of C she will dismiss him. End of story. Blair et al work for the Crown. It is Her Majesty's Government afterall.
By constitutional convention she has to send for the party leader who is likely to command the confidence of the House. In the case of a hung Parliament the incumbent will have first bite. If no one can be appointed she would dismiss the House and issue fresh writs for an election.
A more plausible scenario is an attack of some sort which "demands" Tone to form a national government and thus stay on. Shades of 1931, albeit it with a threat to security rather than prosperity. Blair could end up like McDonald in those circs effectively being PM on the back of Tory MPs.
I'm not worried about "terrorists" I'm worried about slipping into an authoritarian regime.
Well I am concerned about "terrorists" and want to know when we deal with them as M. Thatcher had the SAS deal with them on Gibraltar ?
Druid - thank you very much. So Blair couldn't just refuse to leave because of a "threat to democracy" posed by, let's say UKIP or the BNP winning a democratic election? He is a slithy tove with a deep hatred of Britain and a deep urge to destroy it. Who commands the military? The PM or the Queen?
I have the same terrible feeling about the next election as I had about the election when Blair won. I just felt a tremendous, lowering sense of evil.
Anonymous 4:01 - I am not so worried about terrorism as I am about incredible civil disorder perpetrated not by the native British, but by the muslims. And the Blairs will be interning indigenes who report them.
I agree with Dizzy, that the Police seem incompetent in catching criminals, our criminal justice system seems incapable of imprisoning them if caught, our government seems to want to release those that do get imprisoned because they have failed to build prison capacity....and on top of this the met wants to intern dodgy looking bearded muslims....simply incredible. I suggest you all read V for Vendatta to get a feeling for waht is going on. Remember it is all for "your protection".
if you read through the civil contigencies bill , internment is actually in there - although worded craftily.
"Well I am concerned about "terrorists" and want to know when we deal with them as M. Thatcher had the SAS deal with them on Gibraltar ?"
-Anon, don't you think your fear and that of the media and government is entrely disproportionate to the actual threat?
I certainly do.
It's one thing to claim that Extreme Islamists would have committed these acts - depsite what the West has done.
It's entirely contradictory to have allow an unchecked influx of muslims believing this to be the case.
How can a multi-cultural society ever go to war without large scale internment.
Forget civil liberties Iain, the major concern is this pratt does not seem to have learnt from when we last tried it.
It made the situation so much worse.
Mind you the don't lock up illegal immigrants when the catch them so I should not be surprised what this bunch of dangerous idiots do.
For how they handle illegal immigrants see:
See http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
-Anon, don't you think your fear and that of the media and government is entrely disproportionate to the actual threat?
No. I also find it strange that Khan could leave £120.000 in his Estate and it was not sequestrated to the benefit of victims of 7/7 - why should his father get Letters of Administration for this unexplained sum ?
I don't see why people should be banged up in Belmarsh without trial. If they are a clear and present danger deport them or liqudate them but don't imprison them without trial as if Belmarsh was the Bastille.
What we need is a paramilitary police like the French CRS and a militarised border/immigration control with powers to deny entry.
I have no "fear" of terrorism to answer your question. I want terrorists to fear my retribution, that is all.
"I have no "fear" of terrorism to answer your question. I want terrorists to fear my retribution, that is all."
-Anon
If they're prepared to die for their "cause", will they fear your retribution?
Verity - If UKIP or God forbid the BNP won a general election then the Queen would have to call on the appropriate leader to form a government. I think there would be long queues at Heathrow never mind internment....
Anon 8:09 - Why is it strange that Tanweer left 120k? Islamist cells are trained in social security and credit card fraud. That's how they raise the money for their ops. Given that he had no visible income the presumption must be that this is how he came by it. Surely Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act applies? It should have been investigated with a view to civil recovery. But no doubt PC reasons have stopped this. Instead we are fed cock and bull about him being an entrepreneur.
Iain, your post was interesting and relevant. But reading the comments, you really do attract a load of nutters...
Does anyone else see a strong resemblance between Ian Blair and Paul McCartney?
If we really want to break Blair, maybe we could introduce him to Heather Mills.
jock coats said "What "conspiracy theorists" have been talking about for five years of course."
Ever thought they might actually be right about 'them'.
Druid
Verity - If UKIP or God forbid the BNP won a general election then the Queen would have to call on the appropriate leader to form a government. I think there would be long queues at Heathrow never mind internment....
Dont let the door hit you on the arse!
When the day arrives , please let me know if you need any help with your ticket.
we should not be talking about internment, but about how to stop future attacks on this country.
The extremists plan these acts with no regards for our human rights. so we should accept that dealing with them from a moral high groound is not going to stop them. Instead hit them where it hurts. Target the things that they care most about.
In other words fight dirty.
When a suicide bomber kills people on the tube punish his family. let him know that he may get to paradise but his family will be going through hell.
There is no nice way to fight against terorism and the sooner we realise this the sooner we will start to make these people think twice about attacking us.
If The boy david wins next time, will his home secretary david davies be able to make us all safe & cosy. I think NOT!! I'm off to sort out this global warming fiasco.
Well, I would think that Davis, being an ex-SAS officer, 23 mind, but an SAS officer all the same, will do a far better job than that nasty little commie-never-done-fuck-all-in-his-life shite Reid.
Druid thinks there would be long queues at Heathrow if one of the alternative parties won, but I don't agree.
With the exception of the EU, one has to get visas to settle in other countries, and I don't see a flood of sociology graduates, human resources practitioners, real nappy facilitators and street football coordinators being welcome in most desirable countries. (I see some local council was advertising for a compost coordinator last week. I think Britain is the world's capital of toy jobs.)
I think if the three major parties were kicked out, there would be street parties, knees-ups and toasts to the Queen.
Let's just go ahead and turn it all over to the Moslems then, shall we? At least we KNOW they want to take away our freedoms and there won't be any of this fiddling about with 'will they or won't they'! We can just 'intern' ourselves, become nice little dhimmis. Blair and Reid in sackcloth and ashes...hectoring them around the camp fire! I feel better already!
A prime example of how we deal with those who support terrorism is the honorary degree being given to Mohammad Khatami former Iranian President that likend Hezbollah to a shinning sun for opressed Muslims.
This will be presented by Ming Campbell.
Check it out
http://liverpooltalks.blogspot.com/
anonymous 11:25 - An interesting point. Of course, the one advantage islamic terrorists have is, they intend to die, so don't fear the consequences of being nailed for mass murder/genocide.
I think the notion that the whole immediate family would be billed for the damage to public property and forced to put their homes and their goods and chattels on the block to pay for some of it and then be deported skint, and worse, might make a strong point.
Buster George, I was so shocked by this when I saw it on LGF that I had to read it twice. Is Ming Campbell suffering from dementia? How could he be complicit in this monstrous act? And what is the matter with St Andrew's - an ancient and much respected seat of learning?
Verity
I can imagine Khatami sitting in Iran having a good laugh over this.
As for Ming he is probably looking for another rich donor now that the Lib Dems have had one thrown in prison.
The problem with so many of you on this board is that you fail to understand that if there is truly an act of terror of the magnitude that would lead to widespread talk of internment among the public (an act that would have to be utterly devastating), and Ian Blair is insinuating the police may not be able to stop it, it means your approach to stopping terrorism has already become so politically correct, so cautious, and so unwilling to go against prevailing multiculturalism, that you can't stop it. Seeing as how your country's police force has acquiesced to notifying Muslim leaders of upcoming police actions, it wouldn't surprise me. (Wow ever heard of such a stupid policy?) Your country is a long way down the wrong road in its approach to terrorism.
If there is no attack of this magnitude you have little to fear. Any politician coming forward and calling for internment short of something horrendous would look ridiculous. On the other hand, if he has some inside information and yet cannot learn enough particulars to do anything about it because of existing policies and practices, your country is in serious jeopardy.
I see from the responses here that many Brits have already been dhimmified. Appease, capitulate and be politically correct is the new mantra of this modern western man.
A few more 9/11s and 7/7s committed by Islamofascists might bring you face-to-face with the cruel harsh reality about a political ideology masquerading as a religion ... but then again it would probably drive you to your knees before your new Islamic overlords. Eurabia be thy name.
If they're prepared to die for their "cause", will they fear your retribution?
No, but their families will. But I fear the western man has been so neutered by the trappings of nihilist materialism that he has neither the will nor the resolve to do what is necessary to secure the safety of their nation or their own families. Shirkers be thy name.
If the enemy is willing to die for their cause, then its incumbent upon you to live for yours using overwhelming force. Anon
I think the Japanese in World War II eventually saw the wisdom of that truth and capitulated.
buster george - If you think Khatami is having "a good laugh over this" you are ethnocentric to a dangerous degree. A Brit would put his feet up and have a good laugh. A muslim will feel a quiet thrill of satisfaction of a point earned against powerful people and toast his mates in mint tea - extra sugar. What the hell! Why not push the boat out.
I feel uneasy that so many British people think their way of thinking applies to the whole world. This is dangerous and tells me you don't understand these people living in your midst, although you have had 30 years to learn.
Did he mention anything about the Police discovery of "a record haul of chemicals used in making home-made bombs" in one Lancashire house last week and "rocket launchers, chemicals, and a nuclear or biological suit" in another?
http://neurocentric.blogspot.com
/2006/10/interestingly-enough.html
Or is the media blackout deliberate?
If UKIP or God forbid the BNP won a general election then the Queen would have to call on the appropriate leader to form a government. I think there would be long queues at Heathrow never mind internment....
I don't see what's so objectionable about this comment. If the UKIP or BNP ever formed a government there probably would be queues at Heathtrow -- queues of Muslims leaving, that is.
If they're prepared to die for their "cause", will they fear your retribution?
8:41 PM
Oh yes.........because their corpses will be cremated; their survivors deproved of social security support, and their affairs scrutinised by Her Majesty's Customs & Revenue inspectors..............they will find life less comfortable
I dont think you quite get it - if there is a terrible terrorist act commintted by "british" muslims - the pressure from ordinary people to do something to stop it will be unbearable and the only other thing that could be done is Internment. We had it during the IRA campaign which now looks, witt hindsight, in comparison to muslim terror - positively peacefull,
I dont think you quite get it - if there is a terrible terrorist act commintted by "british" muslims - the pressure from ordinary people to do something to stop it will be unbearable and the only other thing that could be done is Internment. We had it during the IRA campaign which now looks, witt hindsight, in comparison to muslim terror - positively peacefull,
I dont think you quite get it - if there is a terrible terrorist act commintted by "british" muslims - the pressure from ordinary people to do something to stop it will be unbearable and the only other thing that could be done is Internment. We had it during the IRA campaign which now looks, witt hindsight, in comparison to muslim terror - positively peacefull,
If you're dead by a terrorist act you won't need "liberties".
Those who will be detained will Muslims and they should be. I fully support having them deported and stripped of all rights of citizenship. The Quran is a book of violence and Islam is not a religion of peace. The West and Islam can not coincide with one another. One must win and one must lose. I prefer to win and LIVE...a life NOT under submission to Islam or the fear generated by Islam.
Let Muslims enjoy their "freedoms" under Sharia law in Iran or Saudi Arabia, for Sharia law and Islam has no place in the West.
So don't just lock them up, but ship them out and if they won't leave then wage real war against them until they retreat from the country or are dead.
I dont think you quite get it - if there is a terrible terrorist act commintted by "british" muslims - the pressure from ordinary people to do something to stop it will be unbearable and the only other thing that could be done is Internment. We had it during the IRA campaign which now looks, witt hindsight, in comparison to muslim terror - positively peacefull,
Veriy
Khatami probalby is having a good laugh at our expense, the reason I said he is doing so is that he probably sees the fractured and inconsistent ways we attempt to deal with the threat of extremists threatening this country.
we fight the terrorist on one hand, and reward them on the other.
As for being ethnocentric, if you mean do I appreciate some of the traditions and cultural differences form other nationalities that have influenced this country for the better then yes I am.
After all the Greeks Brought democracy to the world, should we do away wihth that because it wasn't a British idea?
This does not mean how ever that I am willing to let extremists take control, maim and kill with out speaking up, and as I have done in the past fighting it.
If anyone thinks that far right parties are the answer then you should read your history. Try The Coming of the Third Reich by Richard J. Evans to see what happens when you go down that road. Who wants to live in a horrid hate ridden society like that?
Incidentally you shouldn't bunch all Muslims together. The majority are decent honorable people. We need their help to root out the bad guys.
The more I read these ridiculous comments the more I long for internment. Looks like I'll have to vote for the BNP.
INTERNMENT?
We have not got any prison places left!
They may well take over Butlins but Blair (PC Plod) is a YOB...he denies his men and women the right to free speech, I have that right let us ALL refer to PC Blair as
YOBBO BLAIR from now on!
Free speech is here via Mr Dale.
This video showing a possible internment camp in the USA scared the hell out of me -
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=277826260716604258
"If anyone thinks that far right parties are the answer then you should read your history. Try The Coming of the Third Reich by Richard J. Evans to see what happens when you go down that road. Who wants to live in a horrid hate ridden society like that?"
Well, that might be bad, but still infinitely preferable to the Islamic servitude we are headed to thanks to the cowardice and treason of the liblabcon parties who have created this mess.
The Druid and Anonymous 1:39 - Hitler was far left, sweeties. Not far right. Read your history. Similarly, the BNP is very far left; it isn't a right wing party. If it were, I'd vote for it. Substitute the word "whites" for the word "workers" and you have a communist manifesto.
Again, The Druid, speaking of muslims, says: "Incidentally you shouldn't bunch all Muslims together. The majority are decent honorable people. We need their help to root out the bad guys."
Well, you're certainly an easy fellow to convince. How do you reach a place where you're so willing to ignore the evidence before you and choose instead to believe Tony Blair's propaganda?
In survey, over a third of them said they thought Britain should have sharia law. (More, if you count the 'don't knows' who were quick-witted enough not to commit themselves.) Eighteen percent said they "could understand" why those self-detonators committed mass murder on London Transport. More of them - can't remember the figures - think 9/11 was organised by George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld.
Look at it this way: if "the vast majority" were moderate, and were the jihadis and jihadi sympathisers and enablers really "a tiny minority", that mythical vast majority would have no trouble controlling this "tiny minority".
Why do they not control them? Because in their heart of hearts, they believe the self-detonators are right.
Do not take comfort from Tony Blair, who seems to have had an uneasy relationship with the truth for his entire life. It suits him to keep civil order not by rooting out the terrorists, but by telling soothing lies to 58m ethnic Brits and well-integrated immigrants.
Don't look for Tony Blair to tell you the truth. There is no balm in Gilead.
Buster George - You have failed to get my point and I don't think the fault lies with me.
You write: "As for being ethnocentric, if you mean do I appreciate some of the traditions and cultural differences form other nationalities that have influenced this country for the better then yes I am. After all the Greeks Brought democracy to the world, should we do away wihth that because it wasn't a British idea?" We are the same ethnicity as the Greeks, so what is your problem? We are all Caucasians. What you do not understand is the Middle East mentality.
It is a canard in any case. Whether or not you like people of other races doesn't depend on the race; it depends on the person.
What I, and quite a few others here, are objecting to is the cowardly appeasement of the Blair régime and their eagerness to allow primitive, aggressive immigrants who are followers of a violent religion/cult to gain ascendancy and rights over the indigenous people who have had ownership of this country for 2,000 years. (And the conquerors who came were the same race as us and had the same religion as us, so let's not rehearse that old argument). The wanted our land, but they didn't want to deliver us up to an alien, violent, aggressive diety.
@Verity:
Quite right - the whole 'left' 'right' distinction is meaningless when really we're only talking about the difference between national socialism and international socialism.
I think the ground is being prepared for a backlash against muslim immigrants. The overreactions and airtime given to 'offended'/oppressed' muslims seems to me to be calculated to provoke such a reaction from 'non-muslims' (as they like to call the rest of us). Even the Guardian reader I know is extremely pissed off about all the coverage (ok so he's a Hindu ...). I wonder If they're just agents provocateurs? I mean I can't imagine anyone being sympathetic to the constant whining - that is why I say it's a calculated provocation.
Do you people ever pull your heads out and just, well, look around? You've already been attacked by Muslims and taken significant civilian casualties, your security services have thwarted other major attacks, you've had all sorts of demonstrations featuring signs that read "Behead all who insult Islam," clashes all over the country most recently in Westminster, a largely self-censored press that dares not utter the words terrorist or Muslim together, you've got increasing numbers of unassimilable Muslims pressing for all sorts of special priveleges--a sort of creeping Sharia--and many Muslims in Britain, when polled, think that the Muslim terrorist attacks were justtified. Yet, some of your posters are waiting for the overwhelming numbers of "moderate Muslims" akin to the fabled unicorn, to handle this problem caused by a tiny minority of extremists in their midst.
Do any of you ever actually read the Koran, study what Muhammad, regarded by Muslims as the "Perfect Man" to be emulated in all things, actually did to and said about non-muslims during his lifetime, or try to find out how Islam has treated Christians and Jews during these last 1,300 plus years?
You have an enormous and deadly problem which, if unsolved, will result in your destruction and enslavement.
Seeing all that has transpired as a plot by the fascist government to steal your rights, or as a focus for self-congratulatory "understanding," "sensitivity" and politically correct multiculuralism is wasted effort--just convert to Islam now and you can get in on the ground floor.
No mention of Marshall law?
We had an FLQ killing, [government minister in a car boot/trunk], and a bomb blast in a mailbox.
Prime Minister at the time, Trudeau, invoked Marshall Law.
That seemed to have a quenching effect. = TG
snow on pine - This is what I have been arguing, and have been castigated for arguing, for the past year. People in general know nothing about islam. They think it's another form of Christianity.
This is Brits who believe "We all worship the same God." No. We don't. This is people who believe the Blair propaganda, that the "vast majority are as shocked as we are". No. They're not. They may not commit these atrocities themselves - jihad is a stupid young man's game - but they do not disapprove. This is why (with a few very honourable and very brave exceptions) they don't report what they know.
They don't report that mohammad at No. 42 down the street has suddenly grown a beard and is walking around dressed for the Arabian Nights and has taken up with a very tight little group. Or that their son has developed a sudden interest in his chemistry lessons.
They are not in the West to live in peace. They are here as aggressors, to conquer.
Blair's government has appeased and appeased and appeased because Blair is a genuine coward. Yellow streak down his back a mile wide. After the July mass murder, the first thing he did was not condemn the terrorists. Instead, he warned the British not to seek reprisals as these deeds were committed by "a tiny minority". Either he is a deeply stupid man (and it wouldn't take much more to convince me of this) or deeply evil. I can be convinced on that, too.
You're right. They've never read the koran. They've never read anything about the koran. They don't know that it commands them to make the whole world into Dar es-Islam, at the point of a sword if necessary. To make others live by islamic law is their "holy" mission. They get this pumped into their heads from childhood, five times a day.
I do think there's a groundswell beginning for a violent backlash. I am afraid that it is what it will take. Either that or a strong government, and we are not likely to have a strong government in Britain any time in the foreseeable future.
We should stockpile laws for such an eventuality, just as we stockpile vaccines, just as Professor Philip Bobbitt has said.
Let us NOW debate what we will do if a catastrophe should come to pass. If laws are rushed through in the wake of an attack, then the legitimacy of such laws will be under severe strain, indeed the very basis of the State could come under severe stress after a large scale attack. With debate now about the extent of the change in the scope of the law after such an event, then I think we have an excellent chance of getting through these attacks with systems of consent in place. It might also act as a deterrence to those who might committ mass murder with a politcal objective, and provide reassurance to the public. That would be a sign of a maturing UK response to a changing world.
Has it never occured to anybody that there have been no "moderate Muslim" demonstrations, thousands or even hundreds-strong, protesting against terrorism, terrorists or the much discussed haijacking of the "peaceful" words of the Koran?
The core documents of Islam--The Koran, the Hadith and the jurisprudence flowing from them teaches Muslims that non-believers are inferior, deluded beings destined to burn forever in fire, that Muslims are not to make friends with an unbeliever and, indeed, can lie to and deceive an unbeliever if in doing so they advance the cause of Islam, which is, ultimately, the subjugation of all unbelievers and all countries under Islam and Sharia law. Furthrmore, Muslim practice is that all treaties or cease fires they might sign are only temporary; a time for Muslims to regroup and rearm for the next battle.
This is why there have been no "moderate Muslim" anti-terrorist deomonstrations and why there will be none. The "moderate Muslims" may not be active terrorists--although they are enjoined by their religion to give donations for jihad if they can't themselves participate-- but they, with the terrorists, believe what the Koran teaches about infidels. These moderates may, indeed, believe that were all deluded infidels cleansed of their delusions by being forceably converted into Muslims, it would be a blessing for those so converted; Muslims see forced conversion to Islam as just as legitimate as conversion by choice.
This is not an enemy that you can accomodate or negotiate with but rather one that needs to be fought on every front and on every level.
Snow on Pine - bravo!
The British who claim that the jihadis are aberrant and the Muslim "community" disapproves of them are whistling in the dark.
Just remember all those videos of kidnap victims eventually being beheaded. Remember that poor Margaret someone, married to an Iraqi for 20 years or more, who spoke flawless Arabic and helped disadvantaged Iraqi children all her life - who was kidnapped by jihadis? Why? She had already converted to islam years ago. And after they beheaded her, which they eventually did, they disembowelled her because she was a woman. They despise women.
Do you think these hordes of notional "moderate" (sic) muslims disapproved of this?
The other side of the coin is that there are enlightened, thoughtful, modern-minded muslims who do want to see a reformation in islam, but they are very few. One of the most prominent is a young Torontonian, Irshad Manjit, a Suni, witty, fashionable, outrageous. (When someone in the audience at a talk she was giving asked her if the Israelis had paid her to write her book, she shot back, "No. A shekel doesn't buy what it used to.") She has a website and you can Google her.
But she and half a dozen others are rarities. /They are the "tiny minority".
This is horrifying. Already we are more than halfway down the road to a police state and this black-uniformed control freak is practically jumping for joy at the prospect of another bloodbath and the "emergency powers" he will gain in the aftermath.
Agree with you entirely Stuart - it is obvious from the comments read here that the populace "are primed" to encourage the disintegration of their civil liberties under the guise of a pre-planned "islamic terrorist attack". Thinking it will only be applied to Muslims, they will not be prepared when those very same internment laws are used against them. And frankly speaking, they deserve it because they encouraged it by letting themselves be manipulated by their government. The recent stories of not enough prison places should be viewed ominously - it this a pretext for detention camps here as the ones being currently built in the U.S?
Thanks be to God he has given some of us the wisdom to foresee these things.I for one will be long gone from here as the repercussions of a fraudulent fiat money system designed to enslave people take it's inevitable ugly course.
Most of all, I pray for the deluded, may the truth come to them sooner rather than later.
Its called distraction. Some of you are so focused on what you view as the fascist government and its reactions that you completely ignore the Muslim actions which have caused your government to react, if only weakly and half-heartedly, as it has. I suggest that you are not looking at the hand that holds the ball and will be all too astounded when the empty hand opens to disclose precisely nothing at which point it will be far too late.
Meantime, your country is under attack by Muslims from within, your Media, Government and upper class are captives of political correctness, and the BBC and most of your newspapers and other media are censoring some news, misrepresenting other news and generally turning roadsigns to the benefit of the Muslim cause. Increasingly the rights of native born citizens, many pushed out of neighborhoods they have lived in for generations by unassimilable Muslim "immigrants," are trumped on a daily basis by the special needs and privileges demanded by and given to Muslims; Muslims who want Islam and Sharia to rule all of you that are left after the Muslims get done with you.
And you worry about the government stealing your rights! For God's sake man, look at the other hand that really holds the ball.
"I suggest that you are not looking at the hand that holds the ball and will be all too astounded when the empty hand opens to disclose precisely nothing at which point it will be far too late." - err, well, that's my point exactly, you prove it in manner you couldn't possibly conceive.
A case in point; as someone actually living in "your" country as you put it, I can categorically say that Muslims are not being given favourable treatment in the media as you claim, quite the opposite! Yet you know more and you don't even live here!
Further evidence is that 2 supposed "ex-BNP" whites caught with chemical weapons in Burnley recently didn't get a mention in the national press. Yet I find tons of attention paid to "veils" (pun intended)and Muslims mini-cab drivers who refuse to take guide dogs in their cars (did they suddenly start doing this or rather have they been doing this since they were here but now it's an issue that can be used to bash them further with?. I suggest, my friend, it may be you are the one who is distracted. And yes, this is for God's sake and your sake that I say this. If you live in the US, just google "FEMA concentration camps" and you'll find your nearest local detention centre happily being built for something that hasn't happened already! I'd love for you, if you live anywhere near these places, to go and check them out and confirm me wrong, seldom have I ever wished to be wrong about something as I am now about this.
Anonymous--First let me congratulate you on the courage of your anonymous convictions.
Funny that you should bring up the old "FEMA concentration camp" meme because, as a matter of fact, I just recently retired from a research position in Washington, D.C. in which I spent some 25 years researching just such questions as your "FEMA concentration camps" question.
Have you ever read executive orders, studied the texts of Congressional debates, read committee hearings, looked at legislation, talked to government experts, scanned internet websites and read journal, legal and newspaper articles covering the issues surrounding such purported U.S. concentration camps, because I spent many days doing just that.
As far as I could determine, buried among the massive quantities of emergency legislation passed by Congress during WWII, the U.S. government designated certain physical locations as sites for temporary holding areas in case of a large scale civil disturbance in Washington, D. C. Such locations never were used nor were there any structures built on them, they remained just notional. There were many laws passed in WWII giving the government expanded powers that did not automatically expire with the end of WWII, so when the U.S. congress got around to it, many decades later, legislation was passed to end a whole legion of such disparate laws and included in this legislation was language eliminating even these notional locations.
As of a few years ago, there was a least one website that had put up what at first glance looked like pretty convincing descriptions of what their "civilian scouts" had found when they checked what they thought were "concentration camp" sites supposedly being constructed on former U.S. military bases. The "citizen scouts" surveillence and scouting reports looked pretty professional until you actually started to read them in detail. When you did you found something like this--"scouts report that they observed (with binoculars from outside the perimeter fence) two new pipes, that weren't there six months ago, protruding out of the parking lot on a supposedly abandoned U.S. military base, also spotted new fencing and some truck activity. The observed diameter of these pipes indicates that they may be part of a ventilation system for a newly constructed underground holding facility."
Now,if you were so inclined, you could go all X-FILES and also view these things as actually part of the MAJESTIC-12 program but, bottom line, no concentration camps.
"...it this a pretext for detention camps here as the ones being currently built in the U.S?"
The camps already exist in GB! Rollestone and Alma-Detingen camps on Salisbury plain were set up in the mid 1980's on just that pretext.
Source: http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/jt200203/jtselect/jtdcc/184/18422.htm
The facilities are already in place, the 'enabling act' has been passed, and the British people still think it only happens in 'barbaric' foreign countries like the US!
Well said on both posts above, Snow on Pine! The first one was especially apt - from a British point of view.
That the British are so easily distracted is disquieting. Talk of special government emergency powers to arrest people, and the muslim problem, which is being experienced all over the world wherever there are muslim immigrants, fades into the background and people jump up and down about the very civil rights they are about to hand the muslims on a platter without a whimper.
Admittedly, tony blair is a very dangerous piece of work - partly because he isn't very bright and is easily controlled by appeals to his ego - and certainly having ceded so much of his authority to the muslim special pleading groups makes him even more hazardous to the health of Britain - but the citizens can wrest control from him through the ballot box.
But - inexplicably in my eyes - they voted him in the first time, and then for two more elections, they failed to see the damage he had wrought - and was intent on wreaking - to our civil society, our Constitution, our Bill of Rights. He had organised it that people became afraid to speak out in defence of their own country.
In this, he was ably assisted by the British media - Special Lifetime Achievement Oscar to the BBC, of course - but also those we had thought were warriors for freedom on all fronts. Not one British paper published the Motoons. I would have expected The Telegraph and The Times to take the bit between their teeth ... but instead they handed a grand victory to the islamists with puerile editorials on how "responsible" they felt it to be not to address the question.
So the islamists assumed, and not incorrectly, that had won two major battles in Britain: they had committed mass murder and maiming on London Transport and had deflected the blame from themselves to a notional "Islamophobia". This took some fancy footwork, but the aggressive muslim lobby proved to be a nimble-footed Fred Astaire and Tony was their willing Ginger.
The second victory was the iron- fisted fear instilled in the British press. No Motoons. Spain, France, Sweden and Germany (those sad continentals we always assumed weren't quite up to British standards in the liberty tables) published them. As did Jordan. As did Mexico.
Meditate on it, folks. The roadmap is staring you in the face.
To the people posting here who are obviously extremists and filled with hate I would say to demonise a whole people such as you do leads down only one possible path.
Which is the slippery slope to murder we have unfortunately seen before too many times in the Holocaust, Rwanda and Bosnia.
No one in their sane mind would believe all or most British Muslims are “the enemy”. When I hear such hateful rhetoric it reminds me of this poem:
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
verity said...
"Talk of special government emergency powers to arrest people, and the muslim problem, which is being experienced all over the world wherever there are muslim immigrants.."
Wow Verity.."the Muslim problem", your starting to sound like Hitler when he used to talk about the "Jewish problem"
To the people posting here who are obviously extremists and filled with hate I would say to demonise a whole people such as you do leads down only one possible path.
Which is the slippery slope to murder we have unfortunately seen before too many times in the Holocaust, Rwanda and Bosnia.
No one in their sane mind would believe all or most British Muslims are “the enemy”. When I hear such hateful rhetoric it reminds me of this poem:
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Ananymous, whoever you are--Show me the masses of moderate Muslims demonstrating against terror, terrorists and jihad and maybe I'll think that Muslims in general are not the problem. Until they declare themselves against jihad by their concrete actions, they are part of the problem.
You seem to be awfully adept at throwing that "hate" label around. Seems to me if some person or group wants to takeover your country, subject you to their domination and wants you and yours dead, says so incessantly and demonstrates that it is not an idle threat by actually killing, defending against them or him is a very rational and understandable act.
I point out here that there are no gangs of masked Christians or Jews killing people all over the world tonight, that Chrisians and Jews do not make signs asking that those who they feel have slighted Jesus or Adonai be beheaded and that no Christians or Jews or, people of any other faith for that matter, have kidnapped people and beheaded them in religious snuff films.
If you wish to "turn the other cheek" by all means, do so.
anonymous is a fool.
Europe is a dead man walking.
You fear the loss of civil liberties? You've already lost that. Your police held a 14 year old girl in custody for 6 hours for allegedly making a racist remark in school. I bet you don't even blink an eye at that.
Wake up! Within 20 years there will be NO BRITAIN! The Muslims are having more babies than you are and they will destroy your culture and your society. This is a chilling post from a Muslim woman crowing over it:
Assalamau-Laikum American Crusader,
You say "Muslims will be the majority in Russia during our lifetime and over 40% of today's Russian conscripts are of Muslim identity".
Ofcourse the situation is stacked even better for muslims that this prediction. The important statistic I think you will find is the ratio numbers of the "15 to 25" age group between the polluted Kaffur and the pure muslims.
Almost in each and every european country muslims have about a 10% (or more) positive margin of this age group over the Kaffur.
These youngersters and their childrens will form the majority of populations in Europe and the Russ too..and ofcourse will run the government/economy and the defence too.
As to feeding/education/housing etc....the infedel governments do no discrimination... muslims WILL be fed, housed and clothed thanks you very much.
In effect the Kaffur scientists of today are developing WMD for the muslim of tomorrow...all at the cost of the Kafur...Allah SWT truly works in mysterious ways.
American crusader...the 21st Centuary IS for the muslim and he shall spread the light of Islam to you too via the Koran...hopefully you will see this wonderful change in your lifetime.
As to the Russ...it looks like he understands the situation very well...he knows that his future is lost to Islam....Putin and his generation want to enjoy thier life as Kafur while they can....the kids can look after themselves
...after all they will be muslim anyway.
Posted by: Naseem at September 25, 2006 10:49
Go to Jihadwatch.org. Educate yourself. Get your head out of the sand!
http://icssa.org/uk_internment.html
Reading the comments here makes me realise I have to emigrate a little sooner that I had planned. For crying out loud, Muslims make up 3% of the population. They're going to breed us out of the country? You people sound like Nazis talking about Jews. I am aghast that nobody ever mentions that Germany's juridprudence, and its transition from republic into dictatorship was fuelled largely by inflated hysteria over terrorism and deliberately stoked fear of the Other. Blair has played his hand in an very similar way to that of Hitler in Germany.
Iain Dale does some excellent work. Unfortunately it seems to attract totalitarian warmongers.
This explains everything to do with the third Blair (after Tony & Jewish George Orwell) and the war on terra
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5948263607579389947
Everything posted above skirts the issue
Snow on Pine - thousands and thousands if not millions of Muslims in the UK marched against the war in Iraq before it was launched, in what was the largest demonstration I have ever personally participated in. That illegal war continues to bring shame on all those who seek to exclusively blame Muslims for the terror threat.
Anyone else who feels that Islam is an inherently warmongering or intolerant faith needs to look at their history books. For example: it's a fact that Islamic scholars protected the seeds of Western philosophy and democracy by rescuing and translating the texts of the Ancient Greeks in the Dark Ages, when Europe was in the throes of superstitious, religious conflict.
Post a Comment