UK Stop and Search by Police, Snoops, Teachers and Children in Your Pubs, Schools, Streets, Homes and Virtual Reality - Printable Version
+- ConCen (http://concen.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Main (/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Big Brother (/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: UK Stop and Search by Police, Snoops, Teachers and Children in Your Pubs, Schools, Streets, Homes and Virtual Reality (/thread-19075.html)
UK Stop and Search by Police, Snoops, Teachers and Children in Your Pubs, Schools, Streets, Homes and Virtual Reality - MrBS - 05-27-2007 03:14 AM
The government is considering giving police officers across the UK "stop and question" powers under new anti-terror laws, says the Home Office.
The proposal, allowing police to ask people about their identity and movement, is among measures being considered by Home Secretary John Reid.
The measure is so far used only in Northern Ireland.
Police elsewhere have to have "reasonable suspicion" a crime has been committed before they can stop people.
Anyone who refuses to co-operate could be charged with obstructing the police and fined up to £5,000, according to the Sunday Times.
A Home Office spokeswoman said: "We are considering a range of measures for the Bill and 'stop and question' is one of them."
Political correspondent Norman Smith said the proposals were likely to be "hugely controversial".
When it emerged on Thursday that three men suspected of wanting to kill UK troops had disappeared, Mr Reid criticised his political opponents and judges for stopping the use of tougher measures against terror suspects.
He promised new anti-terror measures within weeks which he said he hoped there would be "less party politics" and more about the concern "for national security".
The Home Office would not comment on suggestions the new laws were to be rushed through before Tony Blair steps down as prime minister on 27 June.
Greater powers to remove vehicles and paperwork for inspection are also believed to be part of the measures.
Writing separately in the Daily Telegraph, Mr Blair said the disappearance of the three suspects under control orders was a symptom of a society which put civil liberties before fighting terror.
The prime minister described this as "misguided and wrong" and said prioritising a terror suspect's right to traditional civil liberties was "a dangerous misjudgement".
The Sunday Times claims police minister Tony McNulty told Mr Blair the new "stop and question" measures would be "very useful UK wide".
It quoted a letter sent to the prime minister which said the measures would be "a less intrusive power" than stop and search, which are widely seen as unpopular with the public.
However, campaign group Liberty criticised the proposals saying the police should not have powers to question people "willy-nilly".
Director Shami Chakrabarti said: "This looks like political machismo, a legacy moment.
"Stopping and questioning anyone you like will backfire because people will be being criminalised."
Jane Winter, director of British-Irish Rights Watch, told the Sunday Times the government was using "a sledgehammer to crack a nut".
Source: BBC News
Stop And Quiz Powers Considered - Shinobi - 05-27-2007 03:27 AM
Let me just laugh incredibly insane about this for 1 second
They have already been doing this for like 100 fucking years LOL
so what does this say, they already were and have been abusing
their authority, our fucking freedom more like.
Illegally stopping and searching people for possibly over 100 years
yet were passed a cock and bull piece of shit legislation now permitting
it to be O.K .. WTF
If like me you grew up on the streets of the U.K you knew that this
has been happening and going on for so long that it is no wonder
people are so pissed off with police that when they are stopped
they purposely annoy the pigs because of the very stupid reason
for being pulled up and questioned for entirely NO FUCKING REASON!
fucking cunts pigs scum fuckofff !!!!!
Uk - Police To Get Tough New Terror Powers - Fixation - 05-27-2007 10:27 AM
Police to get tough new terror powers
David Cracknell, Political Editor
NEW anti-terrorism laws are to be pushed through before Tony Blair leaves office giving wartime powers to the police to stop and question people.
John Reid, the home secretary, who is also quitting next month, intends to extend Northern Irelands draconian police powers to interrogate individuals about who they are, where they have been and where they are going.
Under the new laws, police will not need to suspect that a crime has taken place and can use the power to gain information about matters relevant to terror investigations.
If suspects fail to stop or refuse to answer questions, they could be charged with a criminal offence and fined up to £5,000. Police already have the power to stop and search people but they have no right to ask for their identity and movements.
No general police power to stop and question has ever been introduced in mainland Britain except during wartime.
Civil liberties campaigners last night branded the proposed measures one of the most significant moves on civil liberties since the second world war.
Ironically, the stop and question power is soon to be repealed in Northern Ireland as part of the peace agreement. Home Office officials admitted, however, that the final wording of the new power to stop and question in the rest of the UK might have to include a requirement for reasonable suspicion.
The disclosure coincides with a rare attack by Blair on Britains judges for emasculating his antiterrorism legislation. In an article for The Sunday Times, he condemns those who say civil liberties come first before the security of the population. I believe this is a dangerous misjudgment, the prime minister writes.
Blair also takes a tilt at critics of military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that pandering to a sense of grievance among Muslims will only encourage it.
The prime ministers article, and the new terrorism powers, come after last week it was revealed that three terror suspects who were subject to control orders have absconded.
Ministers will seek to justify the new powers on the grounds that they will be useful for the police and less intrusive than the current measure to stop and search, which they will not need to use so often. Officers often have to spend hours filling out paperwork after making stops and searches.
Reid is planning to push through a counter-terrorism bill next month before he and Blair leave office. As well as the power to stop and question individuals, the home secretary also wants to introduce two new police powers in the name of of combating Islamic terrorism: the power to take documents away for examination even if their value as evidence is not immediately obvious; and the power to remove vehicles in order to examine them.
Tony McNulty, the minister for counter-terrorism, outlined the plans on Reids behalf in a letter to the prime minister last week.
I believe that these powers will be very useful UK-wide, he wrote. For example, one of the public criticisms of [stop and search] has been that it is overused.
Arguably one of the weaknesses of [stop and search] is that although it enables a search of an individual, it does not enable a police officer to ask that individual who they are or where they are going.
Therefore a less intrusive power of stop and question that could be used by the police in the first instance would be useful. The effect of this power should therefore be to reduce the number of times stop and search is used.
Jane Winter, director of British Irish Rights Watch, said: This is one of the most significant moves on civil liberties since the second world war, a sledgehammer to crack a nut. This looks like a return to the sus laws, except even then the police needed to have some suspicion.
Shami Chakrabati, director of the civil rights group Liberty, said: The police should not have powers to run around questioning people willy-nilly.
Liberty also raised concerns that a unit set up last year to identify individuals who pose a security threat to VIPs, including the cabinet and royal family, could use the Mental Health Act to detain people without trial.
The Fixated Threat Assessment Centre, which is run by Scotland Yard and whose staff includes psychiatrists and police, can authorise the indefinite detention of people it identifies as mentally unstable and potentially dangerous.
There is a grave danger of this being used to deal with people where there is insufficient evidence for a criminal prosecution, said Libertys Gareth Crossman. This blurs the line between medical decisions and police actions.
Uk - Police To Get Tough New Terror Powers - Guest - 05-28-2007 02:13 AM
These are very dangerous times we live in.
Uk - Police To Get Tough New Terror Powers - Hei Hu Quan - 05-28-2007 06:25 AM
The UK is the field test arena for the finest in Orwellian police-state tactics and equipment meant for subjugating the world.
Uk - Police To Get Tough New Terror Powers - psilocybin - 05-28-2007 07:19 AM
Quote:The UK is the field test arena for the finest in Orwellian police-state tactics and equipment meant for subjugating the world.
Uk - Police To Get Tough New Terror Powers - Shinobi - 05-28-2007 01:38 PM
Quote:Quote: The UK is the field test arena for the finest in Orwellian police-state tactics and equipment meant for subjugating the world.
Indeed, whats most annoying is the lies and deciet they use on the general public implementing
these draconian totalitarian measures as if its something we need and want and how it will benefit us
and protect us. The only thing it protects are those very lizards at the top of the chain in power.
(dont worry im not saying we're ruled by lizards.) The article below explains what I just said....
I mean have a look at this:
Revealed: Blair's secret stalker squad
Fears that doctors could be used to lock up terror suspects without trail
The Government has established a shadowy new national anti-terrorist unit to protect VIPs, with the power to detain suspects indefinitely using mental health laws.
The revelation is set to reignite the row over the Government's use of draconian measures to deal with terror suspects amid accusations they are abusing human rights.
The Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) was quietly set up last year to identify individuals who pose a direct threat to VIPs including the Prime Minister, the Cabinet and the Royal Family.
It was given sweeping powers to check more than 10,000 suspects' files to identify mentally unstable potential killers and stalkers with a fixation against public figures.
The team's psychiatrists and psychologists then have the power to order treatment - including forcibly detaining suspects in secure psychiatric units.
Using these powers, the unit can legally detain people for an indefinite period without trial, criminal charges or even evidence of a crime being committed and with very limited rights of appeal.
Until now it has been the exclusive decision of doctors and mental health professionals to determine if someone should be forcibly detained.
But the new unit uses the police to identify suspects - increasing fears the line is being blurred between criminal investigation and doctors' clinical decisions.
It also raises questions about why thousands of mentally ill individuals have been allowed back into the community - including some who have attacked and killed members of the public - while VIPs are being given special protection.
Scotland Yard, which runs the shadowy unit, refuses to discuss how many suspects have been forcibly hospitalised by the team because of "patient confidentiality".
But at least one terror suspect - allegedly linked to the 7/7 bomb plot and a suicide bombing in Israel - has already been held under the Mental Health Act.
The suspect, who was subject of a control order and cannot be named for legal reasons, later absconded from the hospital and his whereabouts are unknown.
The existence of FTAC, part of the Metropolitan Police's specialist operations department which oversees anti-terrorist investigations and royal and diplomatic protection, slipped out in the fine print of a Home Office report.
The report makes it clear FTAC is a counter-terrorism unit and says: "We aim to make the UK a harder target for terrorists by maintaining effective and efficient protective security for public figures."
NHS documents obtained by The Mail on Sunday reveal the unit's role "concerns the identification and diversion into psychiatric care of mentally ill people fixated on the prominent".
The purpose of the centre is "to evaluate and manage the risk posed to prominent people by...those who engage in inappropriate or threatening communications or behaviours in the context of abnormally intense preoccupations, many of which arise from psychotic illness."
The Mental Health Act requires two doctors or psychiatrists to approve someone's forcible detention for treatment.
So-called 'sectioning' allows a patient to be held for up to six months before a further psychological assessment. Patients are then reviewed every year to determine if they can be released.
FTAC's senior forensic psychiatrist Dr David James, who has made a study of attacks on British and European politicians by people suffering pathological fixations, is qualified to order such a detention, as are other members of his team.
Also on the staff is Robert Halsey, a consultant forensic clinical psychologist who is a specialist in risk assessment.
The centre, which is based at a secret Central London location, has a staff of four police officers, two civilian researchers, a forensic psychiatrist, a forensic psychologist and a forensic community mental health nurse. Job descriptions make it clear they implement "interventions".
Human rights activists fear the team, whose existence has never been publicised, may be being used as a way to detain suspected terrorists without having to put evidence before the courts.
It also comes amid a continuing row over proposed mental health legislation which will make it easier to 'section' someone deemed a threat to the public.
Last night human rights group Liberty said the secret unit represented a new threat to civil liberties.
Policy director Gareth Crossman said: "There is a grave danger of this being used to deal with people where there is insufficient evidence for a criminal prosecution.
"This blurs the line between medical decisions and police actions. If you are going to allow doctors to take people's liberty away, they have to be independent. That credibility is undermined when the doctors are part of the same team as the police.
"This raises serious concerns. First that you have a unit that allows police investigation to lead directly to people being sectioned without any kind of criminal proceedings.
"Secondly, it is being done under the umbrella of anti-terrorism at a time when the Government is looking at ways to detain terrorists without putting them on trial."
FTAC was set up following an NHS research programme based at Chase Farm Hospital in Enfield, Middlesex, which looked at the threat to prominent figures from "fixated" people.
The team examined thousands of cases and liaised with the FBI, the US Secret Service, the Capitol Hill Police, which protects Congressmen and Senators, and the Swedish and Norwegian secret services.
The Swedish authorities gave the team access to files on the murder of foreign minister Anna Lindh who died from multiple stab wounds after being attacked by a stalker in a Stockholm store in 2003.
The research led to FTAC being set up with a £500,000-a-year budget from the Home Office and Department of Health. NHS documents say: "It is a prototype for future joint services."
No one from FTAC was willing to talk to The Mail on Sunday last week and few Whitehall officials seemed aware of the Centre's existence.
Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley said: "The Government is trying to bring in a wider definition of mental disorder and is resisting exclusions which ensure that people cannot be treated as mentally disordered on the grounds of their cultural, political or religious beliefs.
"When you hear they are also setting up something like this police unit, it raises questions about quite what their intentions are.
"The use of mental health powers of detention should be confined to the purposes of treatment. But the Government wants to be able to detain someone who is mentally disordered even when the treatment would have no benefit.
"Combined with the idea that someone could be classed as mentally ill on the grounds of their religious beliefs, it is a very worrying scenario."
Last night a Home Office spokeswoman said there was "nothing sinister" about the unit or its role in counter-terrorism.
She said: "It comes under the remit of royal and diplomatic protection and is administered by that part of the Home Office.
"Psychiatric investigations are undertaken by psychiatric professionals only. Police officers do not assess people with mental health issues. The police provide the intelligence to ensure that psychiatrists have all the information available to make an assessment.
"This is done not only to protect public figures but also to protect the person fixated with the public figure."
Details of FTAC are revealed as the Government faces a new row over its terrorist control orders after three suspects, supposedly under house arrest, absconded last week.
The suspects, who it is feared may have fled the country, include the brothers of Anthony Garcia, who was jailed last month for his role in a plot to bomb London nightclubs and shopping centres.
Yep the U.K sure is the field test arena.
UK Stop and Search by Police, Snoops, Teachers and Children in Your Pubs, Schools, Streets, Homes and Virtual Reality - drummer - 05-31-2007 10:13 AM
Teachers or security guards will be able to search pupils for knives and other offensive weapons without their consent, under a new law which comes into force today.
It follows the introduction of powers allowing schools to use screening devices such as metal detectors in a bid to protect students from knife crime.
However, teachers leaders have raised concerns about the reforms, warning that the strategy for schools in England could have "dangerous or fatal consequences".
One union suggested that ministers should advise headteachers to consider offering protective clothing when asking staff to search potentially dangerous pupils.
The moves takes place against a backdrop of mounting concern about the carrying of knives by students and a number of stabbing deaths of young people.
Luke Walmsley, 14, was stabbed through the heart during a break in lessons at Birkbeck College in North Somercotes, Lincolnshire, in November 2003.
Kiyan Prince, a schoolboy footballer with Queens Park Rangers, was stabbed in the heart outside his school gates in Edgware, north London, on May 18 last year.
In March, Kodjo Yenga, 16, was stabbed in Hammersmith, west London, while Adam Regis, 15, was murdered days later in the east of the city.
Guidance accompanying the introduction of new regulations says staff should call police if they are concerned about safety risks, and schools can use professionally trained security staff to conduct screening and searching.
It says that staff can only carry out searches with the authorisation of the headteacher and includes advice on how to screen pupils, suggesting that a randomly selected group of pupils, such as a class, could be screened in order to send out a strong deterrent message.
Two members of staff must be present at every search, and the guidance recommends that both should have received appropriate training. Searches must by conducted by a staff member who is the same sex as the pupil and, where possible, they should take place out of public view. Pupils can be refused entry to schools if they refuse to be screened.
Alan Johnson, the Education Secretary, said that the new power had been called for by teachers, adding: "Our guidance makes clear that a search should never take place where there is any risk to staff or pupils. In those circumstances the police should be called."
He said: "The main way to keep knives out of our schools is to continue educating young people about the dangers associated with illegally carrying a knife.
"I think parents will welcome the clear message that bringing a weapon into school is a criminal offence and will not be tolerated."
However, the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) said it was the job of police to search individuals for weapons. It said that it would advise members to call for help from police, who were trained and had the appropriate body armour, if they suspected a pupil had a weapon.
The association said metal detectors and other screening devices would be "somewhat impractical" given the size of most secondary schools and the number of entrances and exits.
NAHT spokeswoman Jan Myles said: "This is a high-risk strategy which could have dangerous or fatal consequences."
The Professional Association of Teachers (PAT) welcomed the reforms, but said that ministers should advise heads to consider offering protective clothing when asking staff to search "potentially dangerous pupils for knives or guns."
"Heads should consider purchasing protective clothing for the schools security office so it is available when necessary," he added.
Uk Schools Get Power To Search Pupils For Knives - hardboiled11 - 05-31-2007 11:03 AM
You think after five or six soccer game riots people would get tired of being shanked.
Increase In Anti-terror Targets - TriWooOx - 05-31-2007 04:46 PM
Quote:Counter-terror police have recorded a 37% increase in "suspicious reconnaissance" of potential targets in the first four months of 2007.
Police State: A Chilling Glimpse Of stop And Search Britain - drummer - 06-08-2007 03:56 PM
Government ministers and police chiefs are demanding new powers to allow the police to stop and search people in the streets if they suspect them of terrorism. These powers echo the notorious sus laws of the 1970s. Then the laws created an atmosphere of fear as police targeted young black men. Those laws were abandoned after widespread rioting in the early 1980s.
A glimpse of what these new laws would mean was shown last week when two foreign students were arrested for terrorism after taking snapshots of Tower Bridge.
Salam Abdulrahman is a politics student at Swansea university. On 14 May he and a friend travelled to London to arrange funding for a PhD.
After their meeting they decided to visit tourist attractions and walked around the capital taking pictures.
Salam told Socialist Worker, We went to Tower Bridge and then to Big Ben.
I took pictures of many beautiful views. The final one I took, minutes before being arrested, was a building belonging to the MI5 security services which I only discovered was an MI5 building when in jail.
We did not realise we were being watched. As we approached Scotland Yard we were stopped by police.
They questioned us, took our student IDs and searched us.
They radioed other police who arrived in two cars and they too questioned us, searched our bags and frisked us.
They told us we were being arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. We were handcuffed and taken to a police station.
There we were strip-searched, fingerprinted, photographed, swabbed for our DNA and put in separate cells.
While I was in jail the police raided my room at the university. The broke down the door and seized my laptop, my other camera, CDs, books, passport and clothes.
The next day I was interviewed by police. I was told that I would be charged for possessing a book called Future Jihad, Terrorist Strategies Against The West by Walid Phares, possessing a press ID, using the term Al Qaida in my emails and essays, visiting a number of places in Britain, taking photos of Tower Bridge which show the structure of the bridge, and having pictures of military people.
They concluded that I was acting suspiciously and collecting information for terrorism. I was told that my Iraqi passport I am a Kurd from Irbil added to their suspicion of me. But these charges are unbelievable. I bought the book from my university bookstore for academic reasons it is widely available.
I was issued a press card before coming to Britain because I worked for the Kurdish Globe newspaper. The accusation that they found the term Al Qaida in my writings and emails is not a surprise.
I am studying international relations and for one of my essays I had to collect a lot of articles related to radical Islam and terrorist groups.
I also have relatives throughout Britain, and wanted to visit the places I had read about. There are thousands of tourists taking photos of Tower Bridge, and every photo shows the structure of the bridge.
I do have pictures with officers and soldiers of the South Korean Army who were based in Irbil in Iraqi Kurdistan. I worked as an interpreter for the Korean troops.
I have been released on bail. I have to return to the police station on 26 June. What happened was a great shock. I recently wrote an essay on multiculturalism in Britain saying that the police do not discriminate on race.
Police State: A Chilling Glimpse Of stop And Search Britain - triplesix - 06-08-2007 08:47 PM
So that's why there aren't more Muslims educating themselves and condemning the radical acts of their countrymen... they're being arrested for terrorism first. Nice.
Tony Blair Has Turned Britain Into A Land Where We Are All Prisoners - drummer - 06-13-2007 03:02 PM
by CHRIS ATKINS -» Last updated at 10:20am on 13th June 2007
Even George Orwell would be shocked. He described the sinister machinations of a totalitarian police state in his novel, 1984, and laid bare the danger of eroding our basic civil liberties, including the right to freedom of speech and the right to privacy.
Although he famously coined the phrase 'Big Brother is watching you', even Orwell cannot have foreseen just how prescient those words would prove to be.
Today, in Tony Blair's Britain - which I naively voted into power ten years ago - we have witnessed a breath-taking erosion of civil liberties.
The truth is we are fast becoming an Orwellian state, our every movement watched, our behaviour monitored, and our freedoms curtailed.
Between May 1997 and August 2006, New Labour created 3,023 new criminal offences - taking in everything from a law against Polish potatoes (the Polish Potatoes Order 2004) to one which made the creation of a nuclear explosion in Britain officially illegal.
Then there has been the incredible number of CCTV cameras - a total of 4.2 million, more than in the rest of Europe put together.
And, yesterday, we learnt that the Government has agreed to let the EU have automatic access to databases of DNA (containing samples of people's hair, sperm or fingernails) in order to help track down criminals, even though many thousands of those on record are totally innocent
How did all this happen? Who allowed it? To try to answer these questions, I have made a film, Talking Liberties, about the attack on our freedoms.
I uncovered a disturbing roll call of ancient basic rights which have been systematically destroyed in the self- serving climate of fear this government has perpetuated since the 9/11 attack.
First there was the Act which banned the age- old right of protest within half-a-mile of Parliament without special police authorisation.
And who can forget Walter Wolfgang, the pensioner who was dragged out of the Labour Party Conference for daring to heckle the Home Secretary? He was detained under the Terrorism Act 2000, which gives the police unprecedented stop and search powers.
In 2005 alone, this law was used to stop 35,000 people - none of whom was a terrorist.
But this is only the thin end of the wedge - our civil liberties, enshrined in British law since the Magna Carta, are being whittled away.
There has been an unprecedented shift of power away from the individual towards the state - but now this power is being used not to defeat terrorism, but to keep tabs on ordinary citizens. As well as a raft of repressive anti-terror legislation, there are the more insidious infringements of our freedom and privacy.
We will soon see the introduction of the vast National Identity Register, linking all databases such as the DNA database to which the EU will soon have access.
The tentacles of these networks will intertwine until they form a vast state surveillance mechanism, which can track every detail of your life: what books you borrowed from the library as a student, your sexual health, your DNA profile, your spending and your whereabouts at any given moment in time.
Ministers are even creating a children's database, which will record truancy, diet, and medical history.
And, of course, ID cards will be issued in 2009 - to be used every time we carry out routine tasks such as visiting the dentist. Soon, biometric data - your iris scan, fingerprints and DNA, will help to identify you further.
And, all the time, there are those CCTV cameras - 20 per cent of the global total, even though Britain only has 0.2 per cent of the world's population.
New Labour has an absolute obsession with these devices. Soon, more sophisticated cameras will be able to recognise your face and the information matched to one of the national databases.
All cars will eventually be fitted with a GPS chip, officially to simplify road tax payments but they will also allow government agencies to track every vehicle in the country.
There are, of course, more alarming implications to being constantly monitored - as Orwell understood. Soon, we will be living in an open-air prison.
Some may ask: why does all this matter? The answer is that to surrender our identity and privacy so comprehensively is to give up something we will never get back.
Although New Labour says its mania for data-gathering is all part of its plan to protect us, there's no guarantee that future governments (who will be inheriting a nationwide surveillance machine and the National Identity Register) won't use it to more malign ends.
Totalitarian regimes have, after all, always collected information on their citizens. Hitler pioneered the use of ID cards as a means of repression. The Belgians left Rwanda with a bloody legacy by implementing an ID card system which divided the population into Hutu and Tutsi.
When the 1994 genocide began, these cards proved a device for horrific ethnic cleansing, with one million people dying in 100 days. The Stasi secret police in Soviet East Germany kept millions of files in order to keep track of everyone in the country.
Of course these examples are the extremes - but basic liberties such as privacy and free speech have been hard-won over centuries and history shows that we should not allow them to be brushed aside.
This shift away from individual freedom towards state power has happened slowly, and almost without us noticing.
Like so many others, I was proud to put a cross against the box next to New Labour in 1997 as a first-time voter. But now I have become shocked at the vast swathe of new laws which had been introduced, most of them in response to terrorism.
We are told that this is all for the good - these laws, and the surveillance cameras and ID cards will stop terrorists. Is that the case? Sadly not.
The London bombers carried ID and were observed on CCTV - of course it did not stop them committing their terrible crime.
Intelligence experts say that most information leading to genuine breakthroughs come from informants, not through random tracking or surveillance of the general population.
In any case, liberty and security aren't balanced on some delicate equilibrium, as John Reid, the Home Secretary, and Tony Blair would have us believe. History has shown us that it is precisely when you undermine people's basic rights that they mobilise towards radical groups.
After all, one of the greatest recruiters for the IRA in Northern Ireland was the policy of internment, under which people were imprisoned without trial. Have we learnt nothing from our past?
Stop and search laws applied to Britain's Muslim communities will simply polarise those groups. Instead, we need them to help us protect the country from terrorism.
It's not all doom and gloom, of course - as I hope my film reflects. The sheer absurdity of the bewildering array of idiotic new laws has given us an abundance of bizarre and hilarious situations for our documentary.
But behind this dark comedy is something much more disturbing. Faced with the threat of terrorism, the Government has told us that we must lay down our freedoms for our lives.
Perhaps it has forgotten the millions of people from past generations who have laid down their lives for our freedom. I think we owe it to those people to turn this tide.
Taking Liberties is on show in cinemas across the country. Visit http://www.noliberties.com
Tony Blair Has Turned Britain Into A Land Where We Are All Prisoners - MrBS - 06-13-2007 03:20 PM
I have noticed this has been a recent thing of The Daily Mail....almost like a policy..... it is the most linked British paper on Alex Jones' sites I'd say. Yeah The Daily Mail has a bad reputation in Britain, but I know if I still lived there and bought a daily paper I would be buying this one just to support them on their anti-Police State/Big Brother articles that seem to appear daily.
P.S. The Movie looks promising too... anyone here have the balls to go and see it this weekend with a video-camera for all of us :wink:
Some computer taps don't need search warrants - TriWooOx - 07-09-2007 01:29 PM
Quote:Federal agents do not need a search warrant to monitor a suspect's computer use and determine the e-mail addresses and Web pages the suspect is contacting, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.