h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

When New Labour proposed jacking up the Anti-Terror Laws in this country the majority said - OK, if it is necessary so be it.

I was one of those voices in the wilderness who exclaimed "they will use them against the ordinary citizen who disagrees with them, have you fools not read 1984? Newspeak = Political Correctness, the war against those without and within, there is no love but love of New Labour?".

I was accused of being an alarmist and even unpatriotic (often by people who had not served their country as my family has for three generations).

Now the gloves are finally coming off. For those who don't listen religiously to Radio 4 as I do the plot goes thus:

An 82 year old man heckled the Foreign Secretary - Jack Straw - during a speech about bringing democracy to Iraq at the New Labour Conference. He said, once, "Nonsense", and then, horror or horrors, "Rubbish".

Directed by the New Labour Chairman, Ian McCartney, three burly security men bundled the old gentleman not only out of the hall, but out of the centre and onto the street.

Later, when he had regained his composure, the gentleman (who had the appropriate credentials) tried to re-enter the conference venue. He was promptly arrested by Police under the Anti-Terror laws and detained. One must assume that they were waiting for him under direction from the Home Secretary - why else would they single him out? He was later released without charge. After all what could they have charged him with? Carrying an unapproved opinion?

Now they are doing this is under the present Anti-Terror Laws, wait until the proposed regulations vis-a-vis "glorifying or promoting terrorism" come into force. Where shall we be then?

If, in a public place, I state I support the campaign against vivisection, or perhaps that I think we should bring our troops back from Iraq, I could be arrested. I'm not saying it is likely, but hand me a megaphone and I'm on my way to Belmarsh High Security Prison and the Old Bailey.

Where then free speech my lovelies, where then?

Be careful what you write here friends, it may soon be illegal.

And don't say I didn't warn you.

Blessings,
Matholwch the Discordian /|\

I didn't realize things like that were happening in the UK. Back when I was subscribed to the ACLU newslist I recall reading an article about something simialar happening in the US a year or three ago, but I'm not sure it was either (a) the result of new anti-terror laws or (b) quite so clearly wrong.

The President said "sorry" for this on Radio 4 this morning ... and it wasn't the lead story! He doesn't say "sorry" very often...!

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Pssst...I have two tickets out of Oceania if anyone's interested...

We get very similar things in the US under the Patriot Act. I've read stories about people who have been detained in a similar matter.

Here in the airports it's pretty common to be detained. One time when we were travelling, my sister, who was nine years old at the time, was taken away from the rest of us and searched in a separate room. It's ridiculous to think that they have the right to do that to little kids.

Wasn't there an issue over there with asking libraries to turn over reading/borrowing information on customers? This was apparently being used to profile "potential terrorists".

I seem to remember some libraries saying "No way" and people being fired.

They'll be burning books next.

I think a lot of libraries responded by refusing to keep records. Don't know what the feds can do about that without an extention to the law.

I think it was John Ashcroft himself who stressed that the Patriot Act does not go far enough, and that the second version should be rushed through to correct this. It looks like that has stymied for the moment.

Good for the libraries for refusing to co-operate!

I can appreciate your concern and warnings Matholwch.
My post is aboout the US so I hope it does not irritate folks.

What really upset most about our Patriot ACt is that we had protections in place. The information was available but ignored!
They did not need more information in most cases. They needed to have people to do their jobs with the proper communications.

The US needs an immigration and workers program that makes sense.
The worst thing they did is combine the agencies that are most important and most expensive without asking for accountability.
How the money was spent was able to be kept a National Security secret! There should have been Security priorities given! The first being tele-communications between agencies and updated computers. Many areas still do not have an emergency number and if they do are not on the same wavelength(whatever) as the other agencies.

(US)I will never forget Columbine school shootings and how the sheriff could not talk to the police who could not talk to the FBI or the hospitals. The news came through "the news" reporters and students calling in for hours - HOURS! I am not sure they can do this now even though it was a blatant example of a huge hole. Same thing with a woman who bleed to death needlessly because the operator forgot the call or was not at their deskand there was no direct automatic communication to any medical help.

They combined terrorism watch -defense (war)-immigration and FEMA (natural disasters)into one gigantic field. They all need more attention and their own space and an accountable budget. It is repeatedly emphasized the worst security risks have still not been adressed.

More laws and spying are not needed, action and common sense and communications are needed. With the tele communications being in the top ten money makers worldwide this is a travesty of the wealth. Iraq had cell phones the first month!
They did not use the technology they had before because of lack of personel or directions, so why get more information only to be ignored? Sure they can use it after the fact, but not in time to help